cc-.-x cai
^v*
CC ^~<
er > <
Ml
,
r*
.
':*...
-V'^o <
^.c tar c *-.<. ,,
EX'I: ;
. ,
' f
< r~ ' '
-
>f
< - <(
-<- < ^ > <
THE LIBRARY
OF
THE UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA
LOS ANGELES
^
' <,<> ^r;
<
C<L
L. ex <
vc; <
(^ <sj^. ( c
'.
'
3SS
cc^^-^a^E^
' "
JOE*
' <
<
-i;"c <ICKJ
^SS5*S^Cr^
^<^s?r" e ^^>J
^fSWKSc? r 4
f &
*-.' ' <ct
; : '<c i <5 ;
'. ^-
- ,
/~ ^"" """""^ ' /
i/l/Yuc
THE
SENTIMENTS
OF
PHILO JUDEUS
CONCERNING THE
AOFOZ, OR WORD OF GOD;
TOGETHER WITH
LARGE EXTRACTS FROM HIS WRITINGS
COMPARED WITH THE SCRIPTURES
ON MANY OTHER
PARTICULAR AND ESSENTIAL DOCTRINES
OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION.
BY JACOB BRYANT.
CAMBRIDGE,
PRINTED BY JOHN SURGES PRINTER TO THI
UNIVERSITY;
AND SOLD BY j. DEIGHTON, CAMBRIDGE;
MESSRS. CADELL & DAVIES, P. ELMSIETj
AND T. PAYNE, LONDON,
MDCCXCVH.
PREFACE.
a variety of prejudices prevail in the
world in refpedt to the Chriftian Religion,
fome againil it in general, and others
againft it's particular doctrines, it is very
providential, that we have on the other
hand an equal variety of evidences to
counteract the Evil, and remedy it's
confequences. The early Fathers fhew
plainly, what was in their time the Doc-
trine and Faith of the Church. Nor have
there been wanting in our own nation
excellent Writers* by whom our Holy
Religion has been vindicated, and it's
Doctrines maintained. Yet the common-
place argument is ft ill urged, that they,
who have embraced a fyftem, will fupport
itj and thofe, who get by the Image, will
certainly uphold the fhrine.
3 2 The
85084.9
iv PREFACE.
The moft unexceptionable affurances
muft therefore be thofe, which are afforded
by a perfon perfeclly neutral: one, who
has no predilection, and who is open to
no other influence, but that of Truth.
Philo, the learned Jew, with whom I (hall
be principally concerned, (lands precifely
in this happy predicament. He lived in
the time of our Saviour, and furvived him
long : he was converfant with many of his
Difciplesj and, as we are informed, with
fome of the Apoftles. From his fituation
he had an opportunity of feeing the early
progrefs of Chriftianity, and of being ac-
quainted with it's Doctrines : and of this
knowledge he gives us abundant proof, as
will be hereafter (hewn. At the fame time
the Religion, in which he had been edu-
cated, and to which he was firmly devoted,
takes off all fufpicion of prejudice from
every thing, which he advances. Indeed,
he may be looked upon, not merely as
neutral
PREFACE, v
neutral, but in fome degree as hoftile. For
though he appears to be fo far affected, by
what he had learned of Chriftianity, as to
adopt many of it's principal Articles, yet he
was far from having any regard to it, as a
Syftem ; nor did he fhew any refpecl: to it's
Author. He never once makes mention of
either of them. His evidence therefore in
refpecl: to the Doctrines, which he has
tranfmitted, is the moft unexceptionable,
that can poflibly be required ; and obviates
all the imputations of prejudice, which
caprice and folly have framed. This argu-
ment is fo clear, and of fuch confequence,
that, I hope, I (hall be excufed, if in the
courfe of this Treatife I prefent it more
than once to the Reader, that it may be
continually in his view. In whatever Philo
has advanced to our prefent purpofe, he
was influenced folely by the force of reafon
and truth. And wonderful muft thofe
Truths have been, which could procure the
afTent
vi PREFACE.
afTent of one, who has taken not the leafl:
notice of their Author, and probably held
him in contempt.
It muft be confefled, that this Platonic
Philofopher was in general addicted to
myftery and refinement. But in the Arti-
cles, which he borrowed from Chriftianity,
he is perfectly clear and precife, and his
teftimony is paft controverfy valid.. Great
advantage may therefore be obtained from
his Evidence; as fome very learned and
ingenious Writers have lately obferved, and
indeed fo far proved, that any farther pro-
fecution of the Subject might be deemed
unneceflary. But as there is a path, I
think, ftill left open and unexplored, I
have ventured to follow it's direction?
ftriving, if poffible, to add to thofe advan-
tages, whxh accrue from thofe learned
Writers.
As
PREFACE. vii
As the moil curious and interefting
Article, upon which Philo dwells, is the
nature of the LOGOS, or DIVINE WORD, I
lhall commence with his Evidence upon
that head; only premifmg the notions of
the firft Innovators in Religion, who were
of his time, or immediately followed.
I cannot conclude this Preface without
returning my fmcereft Thanks to the
Gentlemen of the Syndicate at Cambridge,
for their repeated goodnefs in permitting
this Treatife, after a former, to be printed at
the Univerfity prefs.
J. B.
CTPENHAM, January 3, 1797,
PHILO JUDEUS.
PART I.
P R O & M.
Saviour, while he was upon earth,
gave an account of himfelf, and of his
miflionj and difplayed the high character,
which he bore : and this after his death was
confirmed by his Apoftles. From thefe
evidences we find, that he was the Son of
God, both God, and Man ; confequently of
two natures, human, and divine. He ac-
cordingly juft before his afcenfion gave his
laft mandate to his Apoftles, that they
fhould go, and inftruft all nations,
A baptizing
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and
of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoft? Hence we
find, that he introduced himfelf, and con-
fequently ranked himfelf with God, the
Creator, and Lord of the univerfe ; a degree
of eminence, which no man, nor any created
being, however high and excellent, could
have dared to aflume. At the fame time we
are told, that he was born of a Virgin, and
appeared in the humble form of a man;
and was, as we are taught, and commanded
to believe, perfect God, and perfect Man.
Thefe arguments, and many more to the
fame purpofe, have been ufed by pious and
learned men, by which the faith of the
world in general has been confirmed: and
they may feem unnecefTary to be introduced
again. But I have been obliged to repeat,
what has been faid above; as many have
fallen off: and it is my purpofe to (hew the
mode of their deviation ; and the extremes
into which they have run.
1 Matth. xxviit. 19.
OF
C 3 )
OF THE CONTRARIETY AND INCONSISTENCE
WHICH HAS PREVAILED.
Hence we may perceive, how wayward
and excentrick men are at different times;
and how inconfiflent in their opinions.
We now try to fet afide the divinity of
Chriftj and he is by fome reduced to the
ftate of an angel, by others he is efteemed
a prophet, by others he is rated as a mere
man. But it was not fo of old, in the firft
ages of Chriftianity. Many of thofe, who
ieceded from the infant church, deviated the
contrary way. They allowed the divine
nature, but denyed the human. For the
miracles of Chrift were fo well attefted, and
at the fame time fo wonderfully difplayed,
that they could not believe, that they were
the operation of man, Some of thefe lived
in the days of the very Apoftles ; and others
in the enfuing century : fo that they had
no doubt about the operations. But they
abufed their faith ; and would not allow that
they were effected by any human power.
A 2 Thus
( 4 )
Thus the manhood of Chrift was denyed
then, as his divinity is now.
This falling off was not unforefeen ; and
feems to have been continually obviated by
our Saviour. Though he declared to the
world, that he was the Son of God, and
came from his Father j yet he ftrongly and
repeatedly inculcates, that he was alfo the
Son of man. It is accordingly faid, I The
fon of man goeth. * The fon of man flail come
in his glory. 3 The fon of man flail be three
days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
4 The fon of man mujl be lifted up. The fon
of man muft fuffer. s The Jon of man is deli-
vered into the hands of wicked men. 6 The
Joxes have boles, and the birds of the air nefls j
but the fon of man hath not where to lay his
head. 7 Judas, betray eft thou the fon of man
with a kifs?
It is remarkable, that after the death of
Our
1 Matt. xxvi. 24. 2 Matt. xxv. 31. 3 Matt. xii. 40.
John iii. 14. 5 Mark ix, 31. Luke ix. 58^
' Luke xxii. 48.
( 5 )
our Saviour, the Apoftles never make ufe of
thefe terms, nor call him any longer the
1 Son of man. As he was now received
into glory, and become the Lord of life,
they fpeak of him in a different manner.
However, when there is occafion, they never
fail to infift upon his human nature. It is
therefore ftrongly inculcated that 2 Chrift
came in the flejh. 3 God 'was manifejled in the
flejh. 4 The Word was made flejli. s Chrift
fuffered in the flejh. 6 Chrift put to death in
the flejh. 7 In him (Chrift) dwelleth all the
fulnefs of the Godhead bodily.
There was reafon for fuch precaution,
and this particular mode of fpeaking. For
herefies-arofe in the church very early ; and
St. Paul in his own time feems to allude to
apoftacies of this fort, when he fpeaks of
a falling
1 We muft except the words of St. Stephen I fee
the fon of man jlanding en the right hand of God. Acts
vii. 56.
2 i John iv. 2, 3. &v. 6. 2 John 7. 3 i Tim. iii. 16.
John i. 14. $ i Pet. iv. i . 6 i Pet. iii. : 8. 7 Colof. ii. 9.
A 3
( 6 )
1 a falling off> and many errors likely to take
place, or already prevalent in the church.
And of thefe herefies one was the denying
of the humanity of Chrift, and in confe-
quence of it, the refurrection of his body,
which is taken notice of by the Apoftle
2 above.
OF THE FIRST, WHO DEPARTED FROM THE
DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH.
One of the firft of thofe, who thus feceded
from the Gofpel truth, was Nicolaus; whofe
followers received from him the name of
Nicolaitse, and were afterwards incorporated
in the multifarious body of the Gnoftics.
He was contemporary with the Apoftles, and
is mentioned as an apoftate by Saint 3 John.
He led the way to this falfe doctrine by
faying, that Chrift did not fuffer, nor ever
. appear
1 2 Thcfl". ii. 3. i Tim. iv. j. 2 i Cor. xv. 12, 13.
3 Rev. ii. 6. and 15. The do&rine of the Nicolai-
ans which thing I bate.
( 7 )
appear in the flefh. 1 Qui Chriftum ne-
garent in carne venhTe. Another perfon,
Menander, a difciple of Simon Magus, to-
gether with Saturninus, infifted, that Chrift
was not gifted with any human fubftance ;
and though he might feem to fuffer upon
the crofs; yet he never fuffered, at leaft only
in appearance. In confequence of this, he
denyed any final refurreclion. 2 Chriftum
in fubftantia corporis non fuiffe: et phan-
tafmate tantum quail paflum fuifle. Re-
furreftionem carnis nullo modo futurarn.
Thefe were followed by 3 Bafilides : who like
them affirmed that the appearance of Chrift
was ideal, and that he was a mere phantafm :
confequendy that he had no human frame - y
nor
1 Tertullian de Praefcript. Hasreticorum, p. 214.6.
Chriftum impaffibilem. Irenaeus,L. iii. C. xi. p. 218.
2 Tertullian, p. 219.
EV rut <pctmrQa,i) pv
rtvoi/QevcH. Epiphanius, V. i. L. i. p. 70. See
Irenaeus, L. i. C. 23. p. 98. alii putative eum paflum.
Ibid. L. 3. C. 17. p. 238.
A 4
( 8. )
nor did he ever fuffer. According to him,
Simon, the fame who bore the crofs of Chrift,
was fubftituted in his room, and fufFered for
him. 'vice ipfms Simonem crucifixum efle.
The Valentinians of the fecond century en-
tertained the like notions about our Saviour.
They maintained, that 2 Chrift received no-
thing from the Virgin Mary : that his body
was a heavenly fubftance, which he brought
with him from above. This was likewife
the opinion of the heretics ftiled Marcionites.
Chriftum non veram, fed 3 QewTcurrntw folum
carnem induifle ; nee revera paflum efle, cum
pati vifus fuerit. Hence they would not
allow, that he was born of the Virgin. In
this they agreed with the Gnoftics. For the
do<5trine, which they fupported, was, that
Chrift
1 Tertull. p. 219. Epiph. L. i. p. 74. Irenams,
L. i.C. xxiii. p. 98.
w. Epiphan. Vol. i. L. i. p. jyi.
3 Cave's Hift. Lit. p. 35.
( 9 )
1 Chrift had no communication with the
Virgin, his reputed mother; and never took
upon him a human body. Cerdo of the
fame age held the like opinion : that 2 Chrift
never appeared in the flefh, nor was he the
fon of the Virgin ; and that he (hewed him-
felf under a mere ideal appearance, without
any thing 3 real.
Tertullian accordingly fays, that by the
fubtilty of their difquifitions they formed
fuch devices about the body of Chrift, that
they made it either none at all, or any thing
but a 4 human body. To obviate thefe
ft range
>aj. Epiphanius, L. i. p. 91.
Mj ewoLt 3e TOV X^iro" ytyewYifAtvov
XXa ^oxn<7i ovra, xj ^OJCUO-EI mtywoTCi. Ibid p. 300.
OvJe yf 6 Aoyof xar' a^raj crot,^ yiywt. IrenseuS, L. I.
C. i. p. 42.
3 Chriftus (panTaov-ca. Marcion apud Tertull. L. 3.
P. 401. p. 460. Non verbum caro fatum eft. Ire-
nasus, L. i. C. i, p. 42.
4 Chrifti carnem quaeftionibus diftrahunt, tanquam aut
nullamomninp, aut quoquo modo aliam praeterhumanam.
P- 307-
ftrange notions this learned Father wrote
his treatife de ' Refurrectione Carnis ; and
another diflertation de a Carne Chrifli, in
which he oppofed thofe four principal here-
ticks of the fecond century, Bafilides, Mar-
cion, Valentinus and Apelles : who denyed
that Chrift was in any degree a man.
COROLLARY.
It may feem extraordinaiy, that fuch an
opinion mould have taken place fo very
early : yet that it did take place is mod cer-
tain. The reafon for it's thus prevailing
may, I think, be eafily difcovered. It aroie
from a caufe, which though contrary to the
evidence of the Gofpel, and calculated rather
to injure the truth, than to promote it, yet
indirectly, and ultimately tended to do ho-
nour to the divine character of our Saviour.
For it arofe from an high opinion of his
virtues, and excellence j and a firm belief
of
1 Page 325. 2 Page 307.
( II )
of the miracles, which he performed j and
which in thofe early days, and long after,
were never controverted. Thefe virtues, and
thefe works, were fo amazing, and fo much
beyond what could be expected from mere
man, that they would not allow, there was
any thing human either in the character or
the operations. Hence they admitted the
truth -, but referred the whole to Chrift as
God, without allowing his humanity. For
they could not conceive, that any fuch fub-
lime and heavenly qualities, and fuch fuper-
natural powers, could be the portion of any
fon of Adam. Thus they erred, through a
mifconception of the true nature of Chrift.
They acted however more excufably than
many in the days of our Saviour, and in the
fucceeding times, who attributed his miracles
either to magick, or to the Powers of dark-
nefs. We find, that both acknowledged
thefe wonderful works ; and faw, and were
affured, that no mortal unaflifled could per-
form them. But they erred in the extreme:
the one by denying the intervention of the
Deity, the other the operation of man. Yet
we
we find each co-operating obliquely toward
the maintenance of thefe evangelical truths,
which, however misjudged and mifapplied,
were in thofe days acknowledged by the
worft enemies of the Gofpel. The fuper-
natural powers of Chrift were allowed>
though his humanity was fometimes denyedj
the allowing of which truth was an article
of great confequence.
OF CHRIST PERFECT MAN.
Hence we find a juft reafon for the
Apoflles dwelling fo flrongly upon this ar-
ticle, that Chrift came in the fejh ; and that
he fuffered In the flejh : and this reafon is
particularly given by Saint John, on
TS-XOLVQI euryXQov tig TOV xoo-pov, ot fty
lycrxv Xgifov s^opei/ov ev ragici. For
many deceivers are entered into the world, who
conjefs not that Jefus Chrift is come in the
And he brings this knowledge and
this
' 2 John v. 7.
( '3 )
this confefllon, as one teft of Chriftianity.
Hereby know ye, the Spirit of God. Every
fpirit, that confejjeth, that Jefus Chrift is come
in the flejh, is of God. And every fpirit,
that confejjeth not, that Jefus Chrift is come in
thefejh, is not of God: and this is that fpirit
of Antichrift, whereof ye have heard, that it
foould come ; and even now already it is in the
world. 1
This truth, we find, was of fuch confe-
quence, and thefe herefies fo dangerous, that
Saint John, who lived to fee their com-
mencement and increafe, took this particular
care to warn his difciples of the mifchief.
He therefore in another place brings pofitive
proof from his own knowledge, and expe-
rience j and infifts, that the Son of God was
perfect man. This he (hews in the fol-
lowing words. 'That, which was from the
beginning, which we have heard, which we have
feen with our eyes, which we have looked upon
(or contemplated) and our hands have handled
of the (Logos) Word of life. For the life
(that
T I John iv. 2, 3.
( 14 )
(that is the Lord of life), was manifefted, and
we have feen it y and bear witnefs, and Jhew
unto you eternal life, which was with the Fa-
ther, and was manifejied unto us. T^hat which
we have feen, and heard \ declare we unto you' 1 .
We may therefore fafely fubfcribe to the
words of Saint Paul, when he tells us
without controverfy great is the myftery of god-
linefs. God was manifefl in the flejh j jujlified
in the fpirit -, feen of angels-, preached unto the
Gentiles ; believed in the world > received up into
glory?
OF PHILO JUDEUS OF ALEXANDRIA.
To thefe difciples of Bafilides and the
Gnoftics may be joined one of a more feri-
ous, and philofophical turn, and of a far
fuperior character, Philo of Alexandria, a
Platonick philofopher. He was a Jew by
race, and highly refpected by thofe of his
own
1 i John i. i. " i Tim. iii. 16.
( '5 )
own l nation, and community. Upon this
account he was fent ambaffador to Rome
upon a fpecial occafion in the fourth year
of the emperour Caligula. This was in the
year of Chrift 42 : fo that if we fuppofe
Philo at this time to have been about forty
years of age, he muft have been contemporary
with our Saviour all through his life; and
nearly of the fame age as many of his
Apoftles and Difciples. If he were older,
than I have ftated, as fome think, ftill he
muft have been throughout contemporary
with Chrift j for he furvived him, and, as
there is reafon. to believe, lived after him
many years. We have indeed a confirma-
tion of it from his own words, as will be
{hewn hereafter.
He fpeaks at large in many places of the
Word of God, the fecond Perfon ; which he
mentions, as (fevrsgos so$) the fecond Divinity,
the great Caufe of all things, and ftyles him
as
See Jofephus Ant. L. 18. c. 10.
( 16 )
as Plato, as well as the Jews, had done be-
fore, the Logos. His thoughts upon this
fubject are very jult and fublime: fuch as
would do honour to a Chriftian. But
though the Jews in his time expected the
Mefliah Prince, and flattered themfelves,
that he would arife among their brethren,
and exalt their nation : yet he fupprefles
every thought to this purpofe; and intimates
plainly, that, in his opinion, nothing human
or corporal could be annexed to the Son of
God. This prejudice was the great obftacle
to his becoming a Chriftian: though he
muft have been convinced of the miracles
of our Saviour; alfo of the fanctity of his
manners, as well as of his goodnefs and
wifdom. He muft likewife have known
many of the firft profelytes, which were very
numerous at Alexandria; and probably was
not unacquainted with fome of the Apoftles.
But notwith (landing thefe advantages, he
could not bring himfelf to believe, that th e
Word could be made Jlejh: and a fufFering
Mefliah, and Chrift crucified, was paft his
comprehenfion. As to the operations of
5 our
( '7 )
our Saviour upon earth, they were too
notorious to be denyed. He therefore fays
nothing in oppofition : but paries over the
whole in myflerious filence. Hence not a
word is to be found in him about Chrift
Jefus the Median, nor of his mighty ope-
rations : which is extraordinary.
But of the divine Logos, or Word, he
fpeaks in many places : and maintains at
large the divinity of the fecond Perfon, and
defcribes his attributes in a very precife and
copious manner, flyling him, r ro\> fovregov
Seovy og e?iv GKIIVV (@ TreuTii) Ao-yoz, the fecond
Deity, who is the Word of the fupreme God.
Qv VIM, his jirft-begotten Son.
Image of God: and ^nptpyv r
The Shepherd of his holy flock*
In his Treatife upon Creation, he fpeaks
of the Word, as 5 the Divine Operator, by
whom
1 Philo. Fragm. V. ii. p. 625. z De Agricult V. i.
p. 308. 3 De Mundi Opif. V. i. p. 6. 4 De Agricult.
V. i. p. 308. 5 De Mundi Opif. V. i. p. 4.
B
whom all things were difpofed: and mentions
him as * fuperior to the Angels, and all cre-
ated beings y and the image and likencfs of God j
and fays, that this Image of the true God was
ejleemed the fame as God a w; avrov (0eo!/)
xaravoxcn. 3 1*1x5 Logos y the Word of Godt is
Juperiour to all the world, and more ancient ;
being the Produffior of all that was produced.
4 The eternal Word of the everlajling God i's
the fure and fixed foundation \ upon which all
things depend. He mentions man, as in need
of redemption, and fays, What intelligent
perfon, who views mankind engaged in un-
worthy and wicked purfuits, but 5 mujl be
grieved to the heart, and call upon that only
Saviour God, that thefe crimes may be exte-
nuated, and that, by a ranfom, and price of
redemption being given for his foul, it may
again obtain it's freedom. It pleafed God
therefore to appoint his Logos to be a
Medi-
1 De Profugis, V. i. p. 561. 7 De Somniis, V. i.
p. 656. 3 DC Leg. Alleg. V. i. p. 121.
4 De Plantatione Noe, V. i. p. 331. * DC Confuf.
Ling. V. i. p. 418. .1. 50.
( '9 )
Mediator. * 70 his Wordy the chief and moft
ancient of all in Heaven, the Great Author of
the world gave this efpecial gift, that he Jhould
ftand as a medium (or intercefibr) between the
Creator and the created. And be is accordingly
the Advocate for all mortals. 'The fame 2 Word
is the Inter ceffor for man, who is always tend-
ing to 3 corruption : and he is the appointed
MeJJenger of God, the Governour of all things,
to man in fubjeftion to him. 4 He therefore
exhorts every perfon, who is able to exert him-
felf in the race, which he is to run, to bend his
courje without s remijjion to the divine Word
above,
1 Quis Rerum Divin. Haeres. V. i. p. 501, 502.
a Ibid. p. 501. 1. 49.
3 For x^anwro? OT|o? TO a^9gTo, we mould certainly
read ro{ re
4 De Profugis. V. i. p. 560. 1. 31.
5 The prefent reading is a^x^r*, the meaning of which
I do not comprehend. The true reading is probably
wtT, from affvEuro? without remijjion, indefinenter,
without flopping to take breath.
B 2
( 2 )
above, who is the Fountain of all wiflom : that
by drinking at this facred Spring, he, inflead
of death, may obtain the reward of ever /a/ting
aft. ..:-.
repeats continually, that the Logos is
the exprefs image of God. * The Word, by
which the world was made, is the Image of the
fupreme Deity. *As we perceive thejuns light,
though the fun is not itfelffeen j and behold the
brightnefs of the moon, though it's orb may not
appear to the eye-, fo men lock up to, and
acknowledge, the likenefs of God in his minifter
the Logos, whom they efteem as God. He
attempts to defcribe his nature by repre-
fenting him, as 3 not uncreated, like God;
nor yet created, as man; but of a divine
fubftance.
1 De Monarchia, V. ii, L. ii. p. 225. T> ? aofaro*
K vorjTor o Aoyof uxofa Aiysi 0tw. De Mundi Opif.
V. i. p. 6.
De Somniis. V. i. p. 656. I. 33.
' Quis Rcr. Divin. Harrcs. V. i. p. 502.
( 21 )
fubftance. J For the Word of God, 'which is
above all the hoft of Heaven> cannot be com-
prehended by human vifion, having nothing in
his nature, that is perceptible to mortal fenfe.
For being the Image of God, and the eldeft of
all intelligent beings, he is feated immediately
next to the One God, 'without any interval of
feparation. This in the language of Scrip-
tures is fating on the right hand of God.
He adds * For not being liable to any vo-
luntary or involuntary change, or falling off,
he has God for his lof, and portion, and his
refidence is in God. The like is mentioned
in another place, where he is reprefented
again as finlefs, and as the great High Pried
of the world. 3 We maintain* that by the
(true) High Priejl is not meant a man j but the
divine Word j who is free from all voluntary ',
and involuntary tranfgrej/ions being of hea-
venly
1 De Profugis. V. i. p. 561. 1. 16.
a Ibid. 1. 24.
3 Ibid. p. 562. 1. 13.
CM)
venly parentage ; born of God, and of that
divine Wifdom^ by 'which all things were pro-
duced. He fpeaks to the fame purpofe in
another place, where he makes mention of
the word 1 v u K<X.I AwiepeuG, o Ttrouro'yovoi;
KVTIS (gfcr) sio$ Acyoq In which prejides that
High Prieft, the Holy Word, thefirJl-bornofGod;
at other times ftyled Ts-oeo-^vrxTog vio$ fx.
The Son of God, antecedent to all creation.
* TVTOV [tsv yap wo^r^vrtx.TOv vtov o ruv ovruv
ctvereiXe riarw, ov ersguQi Ty^uTcyovov uvopcurt.
It is manifeft, that every article, which the
Sacred Writers have given to Chrift in his
mediatorial capacity, Philo has attributed
to him in his divine character antecedent to
creation.
1 De Somniis, Vol. i. p. 653.
DeConfuf. Ling. V. i. p. 414.
OF
OF THE OPINION OF PHILO CONCERNING
THE LOGOS BEING REPRESENTED AS
HIGH PRIEST.
Such was the opinion of Philo Judeus in
refpeft to the Logos, or Word of God ;
whole divine nature he maintains, and his
origination from God, Yet, though the
Scriptures had declared, that this High Priefl
was the Mefliah appointed to come into the
world, and our Saviour by his doctrine and
miracles had proved himfelf to be that
Median, Philo by his filence mews, that
he could not accede to that opinion. He
could not admit of a crucified Saviour. It
was a Humbling block in the way of truth,
by which he was continually impeded.
When therefore he comes to his fourth
queftion de Profugis, (p. 561) where it is
faid from l Numbers xxxv. 25 28, that
the guilty perfon, who fled for his crimes
to a city of refuge, mould remain there to
the
1 Alfo Jofliua xx. 6.
B 4
24
the death of the High Prieft, who was anointed
with the holy oil ; he owns, that this embar-
rafled him greatly. T 'H wpQ&rpu*, TV Ag-
o Qavarog, -zzroXXiyv ev TU gyry pot -Ztrape^gff-a
T/6/J article, concerning the death of
the High Prieft, has, from the words* in which it
isjignified, a forded me much difficulty and trouble.
He perceived, that this was typical, and that
the Logos, or Word, whom he acknowledges
to be the great High Prieft, was ultimately
fignified. And though he refines greatly, and
mifapplies the intelligence afforded him, yet
he owns, that by the death of the High Prieft
fpiritual vafTalage and exile were to ceafe,
and the guilty perfon was to be fet free, and
return to the ftate, which he had forfeited.*
Thefe truths he certainly faw; but could
not conceive in what manner it was poffible
for the Logos, or great High Prieft, to
die. He did not confider, that, as the Word
had appeared, as he intimates, (KKT MKOVK
avQguTroi) in a human form to the Patriarchs,
he
1 De Profugis, V. i. p. 561. 1. 48.
Id. p. 563.1,27. p. 534. 1.44.
( 25 )
he might again fubmit to the fame form,
and as a man fuffer death. This he could
not conceive. It was a prejudice too ftrong
to be removed. He had undoubtedly con-
verfed with Chriftians at ' Alexandria , alfo
at Rome, when he went to that city at two
different intervals. He was probably con-
verfant with -them likewife at Jerufalem.
For this feems to have been the place of his
refidence in the early part of his life. He
it, leoct sroA*?, and fays, Au-ny,
egi -arara^, MyrooTroXii; OB V
ocXkot KXI ruv zzrAs^wj'. 2
city (Jerufalem) 'was the place of my birth:
which city is the metropolis not of Judea only,
but of many other regions. And this city he
feems to have vifited at the times of the
Paflbver in obedience to the law: and pro-
bably at other feafts. 3 From his intercourfe
with
1 The Chriftians were very early fo numerous at
Alexandria, that it was thought neceflary to have a
church founded, and a bifhop appointed.
* De Virtut. V. ii. p. 587.
3 See Philo Frag. Vol. ii. p. 646.
with the ChrifHans, he obtained this im-
proved knowledge concerning the Word of
God, whom he flyles the Son of God> his
firft-begotten : whofe divine nature he has
defcribed more truly by far, than any of the
Platonifts before him; or any of the Alex-
andrine fchool after him ; or even than any
of his own nation of old. But Chrift cru-
cified feems to have been to contrary to his
pre-conceived notions, that he never men-
tions him, nor alludes to him, though he
lived in his time, and muft have been well
acquainted with the hiftory of his holy life,
and doctrines, and all his wonderful works.
And there is fomething extraordinary in his
filence, which is worth obferving. For as
he had fo very often taken pains to declare,
what the Word of God was; we mould
naturally expect, that he would likewife
have (hewn, what it was not. And as our
Saviour gave out to all, that he was the Son
of God, the firfl-born of the world, who
came down from heaven to give his life a
ranfom for many ; and was pointed out by
Saint Paul as the High Pried mentioned by
the
( 27 )
the Prophets; it is extraordinary, that he
does not try to obviate this notion. The
fame and the pretenfions of Chrifr, the
Meffiah, were well known among the Jews
in the time of Philo. They could be no
fecret at Alexandria, which was the refideiice
of fome thoufands of his nation ; and which
was fo near to Judea : efpecially as Saint
Mark preached the Gofpel there very early ;
and as is generally fuppofed A. C. 49. Yet
he never attempts to fet afide thefe preten-
fions ; nor does he ever fpeak of Chrift, or
of Jefus, the Meffiah. His prejudices
would not ftiffer him to acknowledge Chrift
in the flefh : and at the fame he muft have
been affected by his holy life and miracles :
for thefe things were not done in a corner.
He had certainly canvafTed this article in
his own mind, and was brought over fo far
towards the truth, that he confefled, it was
more eafy to conceive a Deity partaking of
the human nature, than a man partaking
of divinity * Socrrov yy.^ cx,v tv; ot
1 De Virtuf. V. ii. p. 562.
( 28 )
ij en; Seov KV^OUTTOV peTaZaXsiv . He was, as
he confefles, under great doubts and diffi-
culties : and, as he could not accede, he
kept an awful diftance; maintaining a
religious filence: and what he could not be
brought through frailty to admit, he was
neither able nor willing to deny. He feerns
to have flood in a fearful medium ; which
was the cafe of Jofephus and of many of
the Jews at that feafon.
From the extracts produced above, we
may learn, what was the opinion of Philo,
and others of his nation, concerning ths
divinity of the fecond Perfon, the Logos,
or Word of God. And in him we find the
doctrine more improved, and more precifely
given, than it was ever afforded, before the
coming of Chrift.
Though I have introduced this learned
Writer with Bafilides and the Gnoftics, and
others of the firft and fecond century j yet
he differs from them in one refpec~l greatly.
They agree with him in not allowing, that
* Chrift
Chrift came in the flefh: but they grant,
that he did come in a fpiritual manner, and
that Chrift, the Median, was that Perfon.
But Philo fays nothing of his appearing
upon earth, and feems tacitly to deny it,
dwelling only upon the prior and heavenly
character of the Logos, or Word ; and de-
fcribing his divine nature, by fhewing that
he was the Son of God, and firft-born of the
world. Yet he feems fometimes to verge
towards the truth, when in mentioning the
different characters of the ar^uToyovog Aoya;,
the Jirft-begotten Word> he reprefents him, l o
in the likenefs of man.
He is faid by different writers to have
converfed with the firft Chriftians ; and to
have got much intelligence from them.
We find it mentioned by 2 Eufebius, that at
Rome he had accefs to Saint Peter ; and the
fame is faid by 3 Jerome. Thus much is cer-
tain,
1 De Confuf. Ling. Vol. i. p. 427.
* Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. L. ii. C. xvii. V. i. p. 65.
3 S. Hieron. de Script. Ecclef. Vol. iv. p. 106.
( 3 )
tain, that he has borrowed the fentiments
and do&rines of the Apoftles, and firft
Chriftians : in confequence of which he
mu'ft have had fome intercourfe, and cor-
refpondence with them.
CONCERNING THE AGE OF PHILO.
As I have fuppofed, that fuch excellent
knowledge could not have been obtained by
this early Jew, but by his accefs to fome of
the early Chriftians, it will be proper to
fliew, that the sera of his life correfponds
with the firft promulgation of the Gofpel.
This is denyed by the learned editor of his
Works, 1 who maintains that he was born
many years before Chrift, and could not
have had any correfpondence with Saint
Mark, and the firft Chriftians of Alexan-
dria. The reafons, which he gives, I mall
now examine.
He
1 Dr. Mangey.
He tells us, that many have undertaken
to ftate the time of Philo's birth: concerning
which however we have no determinate
intelligence. Some, he fays, who feem to
come neareft to the truth, make it to have
been about thirty years before the birth of
our Saviour. This was the opinion of
Bafnage: and the Editor of Philo agrees
with him; and gives the following reafon
for his determination ' Ille enim ipfe anno
Caii quarto, urbis conditae 793, fe fenem et
setate provecliorem plus una vice teflatur,
This is a great miftake, into which I won-
der, how the Editor could poflibly lapfe.
Philo at the beginning of his 2 Treatife,
where an account is given of his embafly,
undoubtedly fpeaks of himfelf, as old. But
by this he meant, at the time of his writing,
not at the time of the embafly to Caligula,
which was probably twenty years, or more,
antecedent. This is manifeft to any body,
who will examine the Treatife : and I won-
der,
1 Praefatio, p. ii.
* De Virtutibus, V. ii. 545.
der, how it could be miftaken. We find in
the account given a mod fevere mveUve
againft the emperour j fuch as no Jew, nor
any perfon of whatever country, would have
dared to have uttered. The Jewiih nation
had been in great dread of Caligula : who
had threatened to introduce his ftatue into
the temple at Jerufalem. Upon their re-
peated remon (trances he became hoflile to
the whole nation 5 and fhewed a particular
difaffe6Hon towards the Jews of Alexandria ;
which place he purpofed to vifit. To avert
his anger, it was thought proper to fend an
embafly to Rome : and Philo with fome
others was employed for this purpofe ; and
he faw the emperour at Rome and at
Puteoli : but he met with nothing favour-
able. On the contrary, he was ' infu'lted,
put in chains, and hardly efcaped with his
life. In confequence of this, he fome years
afterwards wrote the Trcatife De z Legatione :
in
1 Philo, V. ii. p. 597, 545.
* Styled alfo, n=-t AtT, or DC Virtutibu?, five De
Legatione.
( 33 ) ' .
in which he accufes Caligula of J folly,
madnefs, cruelty, and every vice. This he
is fuppofed by his Editor to have produced
in the very year of his embafTy; at the very
criiis, when the Jewifh nation was under
fuch apprehenfions. But this could not
have been the cafe. No perfon would have
published fuch a fatire in the reign of
Caligula, nor for fome time after. Hence
nothing concerning the age of Philo can be
collected from thefe data.
Eufebius however mentions a tradition,
that Philo read this Treatife before the
emperour Claudius, and the whole fenate;
and that it was received with great ap-
plaufe. 2 This is undoubtedly a Jewifli
figment. The author upon fuch an oc-
cafion would have introduced fome com-
pliments to the reigning prince, as well
as to the affembly, before whom he Mood.
But
Eufeb. Hift. Ecclcf. L. ii. C. v. V. i. p. 51.
* Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. L. ii. C. xviii. V. i. p. 72.
C
( 34 )
But not a word to this purpofe occurs j nor
are they ever mentioned. Befides, he fpeaks
of the Romans in general with much bit-
ternefs; and accufes them of cruelty, and
illiberality, towards him and his people.
How can we fuppofe, that fuch an invective
could have been permitted by the fenate;
or that they would at any rate have liftened
either to fatire or to encomium from a Jew ?
But what puts the matter out of all doubt,
he hiinfelf mews, that it could not be writ-
ten even in the time of Claudius, much lefs
in the time of Caligula: for he intimates
repeatedly in the courfe of his work, that
the former prince, Claudius, had been for
fbme time dead. One of the chief enemies
of the Jews was an Egyptian, named Heli-
con : who had employed every art to make
them odious to the emperour. l But this
Helicon, fays Philo, was at laft taken off\
being put to death by Claudius Cczfar for fome
other
* O & EhiKui vtro KXxv&u rifjuanxB K.aaao? av
i{ aM&K o (p.Jtv&tAaerjj wwnyti' ctX\oe, Tcti/fat fj.ui vr
De Virt. live de Legatione, V. ii. p. 576.
( 35 )
ether bafe aftions> of which he had been guilty.
But thefe things happened afterwards : that is,
after my embafly to Rome. This is in the
very Treatife de Legatione. He here inti-
mates plainly, that the reign of Claudius
was pad, when he wrote this document:
and Caligula confequently muft have been
for fome years dead. The like is to be found
in his oration againft Flaccus. 1 But why do I
mention this oration ? when in the very treatife
above-mentioned, 1 with which we are con-
cerned, it appears throughout, almoft from
every page, that Caligula was then dead : the
whole charaler given is of a perfon de-
parted. We muft not therefore take for
granted, that an event, and the hiftory of
an event, are necefTarily of the fame date.
The one may have been many years after
the other. The Treatife therefore could not
have been written till the reign of Nero:
and probably later; when the Caefarean fa-
mily was extinct j and no offence could be
given
1 Philo, Vol. ii. p. 517.
* De Virt,ut. five de Legatione.
c
v <^
( 36 )
given by the publication. For had it been
made known at the time fuppofed, Apion,
his great enemy, would foon have accufed
him to the prsefe6l of Egypt: and he would
have forfeited his life in a few hours.
It may feem unnecefTary after thefe proofs
to mention any more of the arguments,
which the Editor has introduced in fupport
of his opinion. But as there is one, upon
which he feems to lay great ftrefs, I will
not pafs it unnoticed. ' Philo incidently
mentions the fate of the Xanthians in
Lycia ; who were all deftroyed by the army
of Brutus A. U. C. 712, for their attach-
ment to Cadar. The hiftory is introduced
in the following manner 'no-ne^ Qao-tv, a TS-^O
zzrcAA*, X.T.A. As t key fay, not long ago, &c.
Hence he fuppofes, that the Author .{peaks
of the affair as a recent event ut fac~to re-
centi, loquitur. 2 But by the words not long
1 Vol. ii. p. 464. The event is alfo mentioned by
Dion Calliu , L. xlvii. C. xxxiv. V.i. p. 514.
1 Praef. ad Philonis Op. p. ii.
( 37 )
ago, and not hngjince* is fignified a very un-
limited (pace of time; which can only be
determined by the Author: for it depends
intirely upon his mode of judging, and the
termini, to which he tacitly alludes. If a
perfon were writing upon migrations and
difcoveries, he might fay, that it is not long
fmce, that America was difcovered. Yet it
has been known for above three centuries.
Nothing therefore can be precifely gathered
from the words above : nor can the year of
a man's life be determined by fuch evidence.
The very words 'D-G-TTB^ $a<nv, as they fay,
feem to intimate much uncertainty, and
that the fat was by no means recent. In
fhort, we may prove it from the Author's
own account of himfelf, and his writings j
before which all fuch fnrmifes muft va-
nim.
When therefore the birth of Philo is car-
ried up to the time of Julius Caefar, it is an
unwarrantable anticipation. There is reafon
to think, that he was nearly of the fame age
as the Apoftles ; with fome of whom he is (aid
c 3 to
to have converted. He was alive, we have
feen, fo late as the reign of Nero. And as
he refided at Alexandria, he could not fail
of knowing Saint Mark, who was the firft
biihop in that place, 1 and came thither (as
the Editor allows 2 ) about the year 48, or 49.
And, if St. Mark's Gofpel was publifhed
in that year, or, as many think, before that
year, then Philo had an opportunity of fee-
ing it alfo. Moreover, fmce he was living,
when Nero was emperour, it is not impro-
bable, that he had converfed with fome of
the difciples of Chrift, as well as of the
Apoftles, and that he was not a ft ranger to
the writings of fome of the other Evangelifts.
His fituation and time of life will warrant
this conjecture, and, above all, the truths,
which he has difclofed.
THIS
1 Tarov St Magxv TZQUTOI tyttew iiri T>J? AiytwrM
TI EvayyiXtor, o &i x trvusy^aij/aTO, xr.jf|i, ExxX^crt
ITT' at-7ij A>.:|aK^? crup5i7a76<zk. llufcb. Hlft. E
L. ii. C. xvi. V. i. p. 65.
7 Novcnnio poft Caii obitum, fell, anno Cluifli 49,
Marcus Alcxandriam vcnit. Prsfat. ail Philonis Opera,
p. iii.
( 39 )
THIS ARGUMENT CONTROVERTED.
The Editor is of a different opinion;
which he exprefTes in the following manner.
Verum merito dubitatur, anne quivis Foe-
dens Novi liber, dum Philo per aetatem pofTet
fcribere, editus fuerit in lucem. Certe nulla
ex Epiftolis Paulinis, et quod ad D. Marci
Evangelium attinet, Eufebius ejus promul-
gationem refert ad annum Claudii Csefaris
tertium .... verum fi Irenaeo fides, ifque
antiquior et potior Eufebio teftis, non edi-
tum eft Evangelium iftud, nifi poft obitum
Petri et Pauli, id eft anno ^Erse Chriftiange
64, quando Philo prope centenarius fue-
rat. 1 Though this date (A. C. 64) be
allowed in refpel to the promulgation of
the Gofpel ; yet all that I have maintained
may be ftill true. For at this period (A. C.
64), Philo, fo far from being near an hun-
dred years old, was probably not older than
many of the Apoftles. If we fuppofe him
to have been forty, or forty two years old,
when
1 Prsef. ad Philonis Op. p. iii.
c 4
( 40 )
when he was fent to Rome, he was but
fixty four, when Saint Peter and Saint Paul
fuffered martyrdom. He might therefore
very eafily have had, if not an intimacy,
yet an acquaintance, with them and their
difciples, and have read their Epiftles.
But the chief proof, that he had perufed
fome of the Books of the New Teltament,
or at leaft had converfed with fome of
the firfl converts to Chriftianity, is to
be drawn from his writings: in which, as
I have fhewn, are many articles of great
confequence to be found. A perfon,
who fpeaks of the Word of God, as the
Son of God, his Firjl- be gotten, the Shepherd
of his feck, thefecond Great Caufc, the Image
of God, the Mediator between God and man,
the Great High Priejl mentioned by the Pro-
phets, the Creator of all, that was created;
who fpeaks alfo of Redemption, and XVTOK
KCCI (rug-ox the Price of Redemption, and of
the Perlbn, by whom it was to be procured,
and by whom we are finally to attain to
(jCuvfl aitoov) evcrlajling life: I fay, who-
ever was acquainted with thcfc doctrines,
could
( 4' )
could be no ftranger to Chrift and Chriftia-
nity. Eufebius therefore very juftty obferves,
that Philo mufl have had in idea fome of
the firft preachers of the Gofpel, and the
doclrines tranfmitted by the Apoftles them-
felves, when he wrote thefe things. But
this is not fufficiently precife : for he had
not thefe truths tranfmitted. He lived in
the time of the Evangelifts and Apoftles ;
and obtained his knowledge from them, the
fountain head. And that he entertained a
favourable opinion of the Gofpel, we may
judge from his filence: for though a Jew>
and, as one in confequence of it would fup-
pofe, not a friend to Chriftianity ; yet, when
there are many opportunities afforded, he
never fpeaks again ft it. And we have feen,
that he borrows many efiential truths, which
could not have been obtained from any un-
converted people of his own nation. At
the fame time it is to be obferved, that
though he lived among Chriitians, and was
acquainted with their doclrines, yet he never
mentions them ; nor does he ever take notice
of Saint Mark, who prefided in his time
over the church at Alexandria.
Yet
( 42 )
Yet fo much was Philo beholden to them,
that we may read in him the opinion of the
Apoftles, and the doftrines of Chrift him-
felf, about this eflential article of our belief.
And that he had opportunities of informa-
tion is plain. For if he were, as the Editor
thinks, antecedent to Chrift in refpect to
his birth, it is very manifeft from his own
evidence, that he furvived him: for in his
Treatife, about which we are concerned,
he mentions, as I have fliewn, the death of
Claudius. He was therefore alix r e through
the whole courfe of our Saviour's refidence
upon earth ; and furvived him feveral years.
This fhews, what room there was for intel-
ligence; of which, it is plain, he availed
himfelf. He was a Jew, and a follower of
Plato. But what he fays of the firft-born
Son of God, the Creator of all things, the
Image of God, the Mediator, 5cc. was pad
the apprehenfion of man. Neither Plato,
nor the Stoicks, had any thing fimilar j and
even the Jews had nothing adequate to the
precife truths, which he difclofes. He cer-
tainly has adopted fo much from Chriftia-
nity,
( 43 )
riity, that Photius fuppofes, that he was a
profelyte, but relapfed. For this however
we have no evidence : on the contrary, Philo
intimates through all his works, that he
continued in the religion of his fathers.
Such is the atteftation of Philo Judeus;
which muft be efteemed of the greateft con-
fequence. For he lived in the time of our
Saviour, and of his Apoftles : and their
doctrines he has manifeftly borrowed. They
are not confined to any particular part of
his works ; but are to be found in different
treatifes: and I have produced them in his
own words to the readers and much more
I might have produced : but thefe, to which
I have applied, feem fufficient. His evidence
is plain: and though he was in general
much given to abftrufe and myftical notions,
yet in thefe inftances he is perfectly precife,
and clear; and fpeaks without difguife the
opinion of thofe, from whom he got his
information ; and affords us fometimes the
language, as well as the fentiments, of the
Apoftles. As he lived fo near to Judea, and
(hews
( 44 )
fhews in his writings, that he was born in
thofe parts, he may have borrowed fome of
thefe doctrines from a ftill higher fource.
As this, though probable, is not certain,
let us abide by that evidence, which he
gives, whether he obtained his knowledge
from one, or many. That it was borrowed
at the firjft promulgation of the Gofpel, is
manifed : and the great truth, which refults
from it, cannot, I think, be controverted.
THE ACCOUNT OF THE LOGOS, OR WORD
OF GOD, IN SAINT JOHN.
We have fcen, that the Hereticks above-
mentioned would not allow, that Chrift
came upon earth in a human ftate : and
Philo by his particular filence fcems to think,
that he did not appear at all. This denyal
of our Saviour in the ficfii I have iliewn to
have been of a very dangerous confequence;
and rendered the iufferings of Chrift, and
his death, and paflion, together with all the
bleflings which were to enfue, abortive and
ineffectual.
( 45- )
inefk&ual. Saint John therefore, in whofc
time thefe bafe notions began to fpread, took
early care to remedy this mifehief, and to
fhew the human, as well as the divine, na-
ture of the Median. And as Plato and his
difciples, and the Jews likewife, before the
time of Philo, ufed the term Logos to ex-
prefs the * Word of God-, Saint John adopts
the
1 The word Aoyo? in the original is
Dober and Malat: which the Helleniftic Jews very pro-
perly tranflated Aoyo?, the Verbum of the Romans. It
occurs as a Perfon, the Angel of the Covenant, in fe-
veral parts of the Greek Verfion. ^^ ?x i^n T
Atyov of.v?u t TO Atiyiox ra Kygy. Pfalm CV. IO.
Ton Aoyov ayrw, xu ixaetro ctVT&<;, Pf. CVll. 20.
Hefent bis Word and healed them.
E; TOV ouuyix, I Aoyo? o-y aitziAwti iv ru uga.-jy. Pf. CX1X. 80.
In Wifdom *O wavTo^raj^of era AO-/OJ a?r' H^CHUV iv. fi.jovwv
(lege jx0o^a.'v) fccifffaiiM - i; (AICM TT,$ oX^Oaiaj ;?.aTO 7^.
C. xviii. 15.
The Patriarch Jacob fpeaks of the Word under die
name of God's Angel. The Angel, which redeemed me
from all evil. Gen. xlviii. 16.
The Memra of the Chaldee Paraphrafts.
( 46 )
the fame: and by his fuperiour doctrine
tries to remedy their miftakes, and to enforce
the truth. This he performs moft clearly,
I think, and moil fatisfactorily, in the firft
chapter of his Gofpel.
SAINT JOHN S GOSPEL, CHAP.
<c
i . In the beginning was the Word, and
the Word was with God, and the Word
was God.
2. The fame (Word) was in the beginning
with God.
3. All things were made by * it (the Word)
and
1 Our verfion renders the word ur, /;/OT, and this is
the proper meaning. But I have ufed the word it ; be-
caufe feveral have rendered the original in this manner,
in order to get rid of a difficulty, which embarrafled
them : as they wanted to prove, that by the Word was
meant no Perfon. But fo plain is the text, that translate
the word either way, ftill a Perfon muft be fignified:
and the truth cannot be evaded by this artifice.
( 47 )
and without it (without the Word) was not
any thing made, that was made.
4. In it (in the Word) was life: and the
life was the Light of men.
5. And the Light (of the Word or Logos)
fhineth in darknefs, and the darknefs com-
prehended it not,"
The Apoftle then by an apoftrophe intro-
duces the perfon, who was the forerunner
of Chrift, and who firft declared him to the
world.
"6. There was a man fent from God,
whofe name was John.
7. The fame came for a witnefs, to bear
witnefs of the Light (the Word), that all
men through him might believe (in the
Word)."
Concerning the Perfon, of whom John
bare witnefs, there can be no doubt: and
con-
confequently it is very plain, who is meant
above by Life, and Light.
< 8. He (John) was not that Light (the
Word), but was fent to bear witnefs of that
Light (the Word)."
Had the Word, this Light of the world,
never appeared in the flefh, or had the
Word been the phantafm of Bafilides, and
the Valentinians, this caution about Saint
John would have been quite unneceflary.
The Baptift could never have been taken
for a phantom. It therefore muft be a
perfon, a human being here fpoken of, and
with whom he is contra fted.
' 9. That (Word) was the true Light,
which lighteth every man, that cometh into
the world.
10. It (the Word before mentioned; the
Light, of which John bare witnefs) was
in the world, and the world was made by
it (the Word), and the world knew it not:
( knew
( 49 )
(knew not the Logos, the Word of light,
and life)."
We have here the two natures of Chrift
plainly alluded to. His heavenly charafter,
as Creator, and his humanity are both fpe-
cified. And though I make ufe of the word
it, which is not properly applicable to a
perfon, yet we mail throughout find, that a
perfon is fpoken of.
n. "It (the Word, the Light of the
world) came unto it's own; and it's own
(in general) received it not.
12. But as many as received it, (the
Logos or Word) to them it gave the
power to become the fons of God, even to
them that believed in it's (the Word's)
name."
Who could give this power to become the
fons of God, but the Son of God, who was
with God, and was God, by whom all things
D were
( 5 )
were created? 1 I Sevres eo^ y og t$iv
koyog the fccond Divinity of Philo, which
is the Word of God 2 EIKUV 0e, K * a-vpnus
o Koa-fjiog t$yfjLivf> r ytTo that Image of God, by
whom the whole world was created the
fame, who forgave fins. It is therefore ma-
nifeft, that however the terms vroq and UTOJ
may be rendered by particular perfons, the
artifice will avail little ; for a Perfon is raa-
nifeftly fignified.
All this is furely very plain j and an ar-
ticle, to which every unprejudiced perfon
mull accede. But it is faid to be a myftery.
True. But what is this myftery, but a di-
vine truth, which we could not have known,
but by information ? Take away the fanctity
of the object, there will be found as much
myftery in the freezing of water, when told
to a perfon, who never beheld it j or in the pro-
perties of the magnet to one, who had never
before heard of them. Our faith upon thefe
occafions
' Philo apud Eufeb. Praep. Evang. L. vii. C. xiii, p. 323.
: Philo de Monarch. L. ii. V. ii. p. 225.
occafions depends upon the credibility of the
informer. If the intelligence comes from
the mouth of truth, we muft believe it -, or
we act contrary to reafon. And there would
be no difficulty in this cafe, were it not for
the pride, and prejudice of men. Therefore
this pofitive and determinate evidence, which
cannot be fet afide, they try to extenuate,
and foften; till by refinement they reduce
it to nothing. But ftill there are other
myfteries, or elfe the Gofpel muft be given
up. We have an inftance to this purpoie
afforded us by Saint Matthew, who gives it
in the very words of our Saviour. l All
things are delivered unto me of my Father:
and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father :
neither knoweth any man the Father, fave the
Son^ and he> to whomfoever the Son ivill reveal
him. We find, that the myftery of the Son
is like the myftery of the Father: which
myftery of the Father, however certain we
may be of his exiftence, muft be efteemed
the greateft that can bej far beyond our
conception. And to the knowledge of theie
myfteries
1 Matth. xi. 27.
D 2
myfteries no man can of himfelf arrive
Had Chrifl been merely a man upon earth,
there could have been no fuch myftery;
confequently no difficulty in obtaining an
immediate knowledge pf him. And he
accordingly, as a man, was known to all
about him. But additionally to this he had
in his nature fomething heavenly and fupe-
riour, his Divinity known to the Father
only; therefore not to be difcovered by man,
who can only know it by divine revelation.
In refpecl: to the Divinity of our Saviour^
there is one pafTage in Saint Paul, fo plain
and determinate, that I mould think every
reaforiable perfon mud neceflarily give it his
aflent. The Apoftle is mentioning his zeal
and beft wifhes for fome of the profelytes to
the Gofpel, and adds 'ivcx, sraoajcXij^W/v cei
<rv[Aia(r(jBVTuv tv ayctTry, KOU tig
ye wXvi^otpooiKg ryq (rvvereug, tt$
TX fAVfypiv TV #, KO.I IlartfOf, KOU TV
tfhat their hearts might be comforted,
being knit together In /ove, and unto all riches of
the
1 Colo/T. ii. 2.
( 53 )
the full ajurance of under/landing, to the ac-
knowledgement of the my fiery of God, and of the
Father, and of Chrift. This latter part is
neither here, nor in the Roman verfion,
properly tranflated. Hence the purport of
the Apoille's information is in great meafure
ruined. The words ryv eTnyvuirtv TV pus-y^y
TV e, KKI Uar^og KCU TV Xf <* mould be ren-
dered to the knowledge of the myftery of God,
BOTH OF THE FATHER AND OF THE SON;
or more fully BOTH OF GOD THE FATHER,
AND OF GOD THE SON. This is the true
purport of thefe fignificant terms, if there
be any certainty in language: and I mould
think, that upon due confutation it could
nojt be controverted. The Divinity of our
Saviour is here clearly afcertained : and his
connexion with God is very juftly called a
myflery : for it was a truth not to be dif-
covered by man. Flejh and blood could not
have revealed it. Chrift in this pafTage is
not only mentioned with God, but as God
that Chrift, who is over all, God blejjedfor
ever. ec euAoy^roj eig rxs OLIUVCU;*
OF
J Rom. ix, 5.
D 3
( 54 )
OF THE THIRD PERSOtf.
If the Divinity of our Saviour be fatis-
fa&orily proved, and we are aflured of the
fecond Perfon, the Son of God, the third
follows of courfe, and cannot but be ad-
mitted. When our Saviour gave his laft
command to his difciples, and ordered them
to teach all nation^ baptizing them in the
name of the Father ', and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghojl? we cannot fuppofe, that, on fo
folemn an occafion, after mentioning two
Perfons, he would thirdly mention along
with them, and exactly in the fame manner,
a mere mode, or attribute, and that too an
attribute of one of thofe perfons. The facred
Writers could never wifh to perplex the
world, much lefs to miflead thofe, to whom
they addrefTed themfelves. And therefore, if
the Holy Spirit did not, as a Perfon, exift,
they would not have made it a co-operating
agent, nor an agent at all. Yet they fpeak
of the Holy Ghofl as the Paraclete, or
Com-
1 Matth. xxviii. 19.
( 55 )
Comforter j and record it, as faid by
Chrift, that to fin againft the Holy
Ghoft is an unpardonable fin. It is men-
tioned, that the Apoftles were T prompted,
directed, and furthered by the Holy Ghoft :
and Saint Paul mentions his being con-
trouled by the Holy Ghoft 2 j and fays, /'/
feemed good to the Holy Ghojl? And our very
knowledge of Chrift is faid to be by the Holy
Ghoftt He is continually fpoken of as an
Agent, and Perfon: and his influence, gifts,
and power, are continually afcertained. 5 It
is not to be fuppofed, that the Apoftles
would have fpoken fo repeatedly of the
Holy Spirit and it's operations, if no fuch
operator had exifted. They could as eafily
have referred thefe bleffings, and this influ-
ence, immediately to the Father, and to the
Father alone 5 had there not been a third
Perfon,
1 I Cor. ii. 13. Which things alfo wefpeak, not In the
words, which man's wifdom teacheth, but which the Holy
Ghofl teacheth.
2 A&s xvi. 6, 7. * A&s xv. 28.
4 I Cor xii. 3. J Heb. ii. 4,
D 4
( 56 )
Perfon, through whom by the appointment
of the Father they were derived. Hence we
are ordered not to refift the Holy Spirit,
nor to grieve it, nor to fin againft it That
Spirit, the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghoft,
which was to come after Chrift's death, and
to teach the Difciples all things.' 1 Our Sa-
viour accordingly tells his Difciples z If I
go not away, the Comforter will not come : but
If I depart^ 1 will fend him unto you. Had
the Holy Spirit been merely the divine in-
fluence, and not a Perfon, our Saviour
would have expreffed himfelf accordingly;
and inftead of Comforter would have menti-
oned comfort. If I go not, you will receive
no comfort : but if I depart ', I will fend com-
fort unto you. But he manifeflly fpeaks of
a Perfon. 3
But flill doubts have prevailed; and it
has been thought extraordinary, that, as
thefe
1 John xiv. 26. * John xvi. 7.
1 The evidences to this purpofc in Scripture are very
numerous : but I fhall not apply to them any farther }
as
( 57 )
thefe articles are of fuch confequence, the
facred Writers have not dwelt more fully
upon them. To this it may be anfwered,
that they are fufficiently explicit, and intel-
ligible to any perfon, who will confider them
without prejudice. The Evangelifts fludied
to be brief and contracted. Hence we have
from them more matter in a fmall compafs,
than from any other writers in the world.
If there be any difficulties, they are to be
furmounted : and Divine Providence has
acted in this inftance, as in many others.
We muft dig in the mine to obtain the ore;
we
as they have been already colle&ed, and placed in a
proper light by perfons of much judgment and learn-
ing. There are alfo fome recent publications upon
thefe articles, which cannot but give the reader great
fatisfaclion. Among thefe are two very excellent
Sermons by Dr. Eveleigh, Provoft of Oriel College
Oxford ; alfo a Sermon by the Rev. Mr. Veyfie, Fellow
of the fame College ; and a learned Treatife by the Rev.
Mr. Hawtrey, of Bampton, Oxfordfhire. In the writ-
ings of thefe learned gentlemen will be found all the
material texts of Scripture, which relate to the prefent
fubjecT:. The Rev. Dr. Caefar Morgan alfo has written
a Treatife full of erudition upon Philo ; which, though
he differs from me, deferves to be well confidered.
( 58 )
we muft labour in the field to enjoy the
harveft. A heathen poet has delivered this
great truth in a very expreflive manner.
Pater ipfe colendi
Haud facilem efle viam voluit: primufque per artem
Movit agros, curis acuens mortalia corda:
Nee torpere gravi pafTus fua regna vetcrno.
A like labour of the mind, with a fimilar
exercife of our faculties, is requifite in order
to obtain knowledge, both human and di-
vine. And this is the very purpofe of that
Being, who confers the blefling. We muft
leek, to find; and knock, to have it opened.
From difcoveries hence made, we learn what
a number of latent truths are to be found
in the Scriptures. And when thefe upon
examination are obferved, they afford more
inward fatisfaclion, and are more conducive
to faith, than if they were fuperficial and
felf-evident. They likewife increafe our
regard for the Scriptures. For the more we
difcover of latent defign and wifdom in an
object, the greater will be our veneration,
and the ftronger our faith.
From
( 59 )
From the foregoing difquifition, we may
with grief perceive, how perverfe and fickle
the minds of men are ; and what contrariety
and inconfiftency appear in their feveral
opinions. Many of the principal innovators
in the firft age of the church would not
believe, that Chrift came in the flefhj and
denyed his humanity. In this age it is be-
come a fafhion to deny his divinity: and
many, we find, infift, that he was a mere
man, with all the frailties of the fons of
Adam. Hence his character of the Son of
God, and of God, of the Angel of the
Covenant, of the Interceffor, Mediator, and
Redeemer, are totally fet afide; and his
miraculous birth efteemed a fable.
THE EVIDENCE OF SOME OF THE MOST
EARLY FATHERS.
To the evidence of the Apoftles may be
added the authority of the Fathers, who
fucceeded them. An appeal however to
them, after fuch fuperiour evidence, may feem
5 unnecef-
( 60 )
unneceffary. But as it has been by fome
thought, that the writers in the firft aeras
O '
of Chriftianity have nothing to this purpofe,
I will proceed fomewhat farther, and fhew,
that they afford much intelligence upon
tliefe articles, and of the greateft confe-
quence. To this it has been urged, that, if
any coc~lrine is not to be found in the
apoftolick Writings, no authority of the
Fathers can give it a fanftion. This is very
true. But if a perfon through frailty and
mifconception fhould imagine, that any
article was of doubtful purport, and attended
with obfcurity, then the evidence of thofe,
who had converfed with the ApofUes and
their immediate difciples, muft have weight.
And thofe of the fecond century, who came
later, are ftill fufficiently early to have their
opinion admitted : more efpecially, if they are
unanimous, and wrote before any different
notion had taken place. To this we mould
add the fituation of thofe, who at that pe-
riod wrote upon this fubjecl:. For from this
circumftarice an argument of confequence
may be deduced, of which I have elfewhere
availed
( 6i )
availed myfelf. They are found to have lived
at fuch a diftance from each other, that, had
any error fo early crept into the church in
one region, it could not fo foon have reached
to another, much lefs to all. The church
of Alexandria had little communication with
that of Carthage, and was ftill farther fepa-
rated from Lyons. And the profelytes at
Lyons had as little correfpondence with
thofe at Edefla, Antioch, and Samaria. The
unanimity therefore of writers, thus uncon-
nected, mews the truth of the doctrine : and
if any further proof is wanting, they cer-
tainly afford it. The evidence of the Fa-
thers will afcertain this truth : which evidence
has been quoted more or lefs by various
writers under different arrangements. I will
however venture to introduce it again, and
at large. I will alfo add, what feems to have
been omitted; and place the whole in the
moft true and proper light to the very bed
of my power.
JUSTIN
OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE HOLY TRINITY.
JUSTIN MARTYR.
He fays, that the Chriftians were reputed
Atheifts ; and confefies, that they were really
fo in refpet to the gods of the Gentiles
"aAX* a^i TV aXyQegUTXy Kent TlxToog
xott <ru(pooaruv'^ KOU TUV aXXuv aperuv,
TB xuxi<z$ t 0#. AXX' txeivov re, KKI TOV
KVTX v'lOV B\QoVTOC, XXI Otdx'^OiVTOi yftOii; TCCVTUj KCU
TOV TUV OtXXuV iTTOptVUV, KOil %OfAOlXfJt,tVUV, CL
vtVfux, T TO
x.a.1 TS-povKWXfAEv, Xoyu KOLI otXvfiuu.
fjt,tx,9etv y uq t$i$a,% > 8y[j(.ev, et$-
But we are not Athetfts in
refpeft to the moft true God y the Father of all
right eoufncfs and ivifdom y and of every other virtue y
without the lea ft mixture of depravity. For we
reverence and worjhip both Him, and his Son,
who proceeded from Him \ and who afforded us
this knowledge (of Goo 1 and Cbrift), and a forded
the fame to the whole hojl of his excellent mej-
fengers,
1 Apologia prima, p. 47. B.
fengers, the good angels, 'who mlnljler to Him,
and are made like Him. We likewife reverence
and adore that Spirit, from which proceedeth
all prophecy, affording towards it a true and
rational worjhip. And ive are ready to impart
freely to all, who are willing to be inJlrucJed,
the fame information, that we have received.
I can give you (fays Juftin 1 ) another proof
from the Scriptures (concerning Chrift), that
God in the beginning, before all the worlds,
produced from himfelf a certain intellectual
power; which is by the Holy Spirit (in the
Scriptures) mentioned, as the Son (of God),
as Wijdom, as an Angel, as God; and feme*
times as the Lord, and the Logos, or Word.
MctgTVgiov os KUI uXXo Vftiv a.7ro TUV youQuv Su
on uyyiv tero zravruv TUV KTivoiTcav o eo<;
QVVKJAIV rtvos, e% twrv KoyiK^v, yrig
QO(X. JCUSf U7TO TV 'STVSUAOtTOi; TtS
73-OTS
TXTOTZ ^e 00, WOTS. ^6 KL/^Of, Kcu Aoyo$. Jllflin
Martyr was born in the beginning of the fe-
cond century foon after the death of St. John.
1 Dialog, cum Tryph. p. 159. E.
ATHE-
64
ATHENAGORAS.
Athenagoras complains of the fame unjufl
accufation: and he fays How mujl any body
be aflonifocd, when he hears us accufed of
Atheifm, who acknowledge God the Father,
and God the Son, together with the Holy Spirit-,
and maintain their power comprehended in
unity, and their difference in refpecJ to perfon-
ality and order. I give, what I think, is
the true purport, which fometimes cannot be
cxpreffed, but by a periphrafis. The original
is, as follows. x liq vv vx, cx.v aTfopytroii, Ae-
Qeov UarsooCy KOII vlcv SGI/, KOH
KU.I Tyv sv
KU.I ryv v rt\ TCC^SI fitocipeonv,
ptvus - y He had before faid e^-tv o ulog TV
Gets Ao'yog TV Ylxroog BV idea, KCU evepyeioc.
Ilfio? oivrv yoco Kent $1 otVTK 'srtx.vroe. eyMtro, Ivoq
cvrc; TX Uotr^oq nut TV vlx.* T^be Son of God
is
1 Lc^atio. p. 287. C. " Ibid, page 286.
( 65 )
fs the Word of the Father ; the fame in compre*
hen/ion, and operation. For through Him, and
by Him were all things created-, the Son and
the Father being one. He then mentions, that
it is the duty of man to confider this myf-
tery T;? y TV "sroct^og nrpog TOV Uocrspcx, Ivorys,
rtg y TV UoiTpog izrooq rov vlov KOIVUVIIX, n ro
rig i\ TUV TOFXTUV evutrig, xoti
TX nvsupotToi;, TV Tlcci^og, TX
What is that unity between the Son and the
Father - 3 and what the communion of the Father
with the Son : Alfo to fearch What is the
Spirit: and to confider The Union of thefe
wonderful Beings, and their difference, when
united, the Holy Spirit, the Son, and the
Father.
E THEOPHILUS,
THEOPHILUS OF ANTIOCH.
He mentions, that the Word proceeded
from God before the worlds; and that all
things were created by him. TXTOV rov
VTrxoyov TUV UTT' avrx yiytvyptvuv, KXI 01'
rex, Tffcw-ru. 'STBTrot^Ksv . x This learned Fa-
ther was, like many others, too much tinc-
tured with the Platonick philofophy, and
alfo with a degree of myilicifm, which began
very early to prevail in the church 3 yet he
fpeaks to the purpofe. Ka< cc! T^is ypegou
..... TVTTOI siffiv ryg T^a<5o^, r'd s%, xui rx
Acytf aiiT, y.ce.1 r^t; 2o<ptot avrv. I'befe three
days (of the creation) are types of the I'nas,
*fhe Father, the Son, and his Spirit ofWifdom.
Though he is in fome places much too
fanciful in his illuftrations, yet he affords
us the fenfe of the church in his time about
this great article of religion : and he wrote
about the middle of the fecond century.
1 Ad Autolyc. L. ii. p. 355. B,
5 Ibid. p. 360. E,
TATIANU?,
67
TATIANUS.
This learned Father was fomewhat ante-
cedent to Athenagoras, and a difciple of
Juftiri Martyr ; in whofe time he became a
convert to Chriftianity. He fpeaks of the
Word, as eoyov wowroroKov TV nar^cx; - the
jirft injiance of the productive power of God.
Tsyovs $s Kocrot, peoKrpov, KOLT ctTTCKO'Tryv. 4 his
*was effefted by a divifion^ but without fepara-
tioti. 1 Tvrov ta-pw TX Koa-fAV r^v u^yyiv. We
know that he was the head and origin of all
things. *O pev uv A.oyog wpo ryq ruv avfyuv
xotTa<rxewi$ AyyeXuv oy[4i%(> r yo$ yivsrai. The
Word before the formation of man created the
angels in heaven. *O Aoyot;, XOCT' eucova e 75-
the Word? which was the image of God*
1 Orat. cont. Grsecos, p. 247.
2 Ibid. p. 249.
E 2 IREN^US,
IREN^EUS.
He is faid to have been born in the
reign of Trajan, towards the beginning of
the fecond century. Some think, that he
was not quite fo early. It is certain that he
had been a difciple of Pothinus; and alfo of
Polycarp, who had been a difciple of Saint
John. The former he fucceeded as bifhop
of Lyons, where he afterwards fuffered
martyrdom.
He mentions the unity of the Holy Spirit
with Chrift, and at the fame time their
unity with the Father ryv -sr^ aXXqA*?
ct^tta, KCII rr t v ixrpog rov Uccrsooc, lvtc<riv. 1 He
fpeaks of Chrift as the Son of God Solus
vere Magifter Dominus nofter, et bonus
vere Filius Dei . . . Vcrbum Dei Patris * and
fays, that he always was with the Father
Filius Patris . . . qui ab initio eft cum Patre. 3
always
1 Adver. ILercf. L. i. p. 39. 1. 30.
- Ib. L. iii, p. 247. 3 Ib. L. iv. p. 333.
( 69 )
always one and the fame God Temper
eundum Deum * Deus, et Dominus, et
Rex seternus, et unigenitus.* Very nume-
rous are the proofs to this purpofe, which
may be obtained from this refpe6lable writer.
I mail only mention an obfervation, which
he very juftly made that neither Chrift
himfelf, nor the Holy Spirit, nor the Apof-
tles, would have declared a perfon, who had
no title to divinity, determinately and abfo-
lutely God, were it not founded in truth. 3
To thefe may be added his words in another
place. Vere igitur cum Pater fit Dominus,
et Filius vere fit Dominus, merito Spiritus
Sanftus Domini appellatione fignavit eos.
And he has fhewn, that the Spirit of wif-
dom, which gives this teftimony, was Lord
alfo. By their co-operation all things were
made. Unus igitur Deus, qui Verbo et
Sapientia fecit, et adaptavit, omnia. 4
1 Adv. Haeref. L. iv. p. 364. 2 Ib. L. iii. p. 249.
i Ib. L. iii. p, 208.
A Ib, L. Iv, p. 331, See alfo p. 380. I. 2*.
E 3 CLEMENS
( 7 )
CLEMENS OF ROME, AND CLEMENS OF
ALEXANDRIA.
Clemens Romanus was of the firft cen-
tury, and fo early in it, as to have converfed
with Saint Peter, and other of the firft Dif
ciples. He has tranfmitted a brief, but very
comprehenfive, account of his faith j the fame
undoubtedly, which he had from his great
Mafters. ov% lj/ ov e%opv, KOU wo, x^w,
KDU Iv "wvevpoc. ... r<? tK%v8ev E>' yi^oLq j Have *we
not One God, One Cbrift, and one Spirit,
whofe divine influence is poured upon us ? l
Clemens of Alexandria fucceeded in time
to thofe above, and preferved the fame doc-
trines : and he fpeaks of Chrift, as the Logos,
and lays *H p,ev yuo TX 0e EIKUV o
avrx, Ktxi vlog TX Na yvijcrioi; o 0e;oj Aoycz
the Word of God is the image of God: and
that Holy Word is the genuine offspring of the
Divine
1 Epift. ad Corinth, i. Sel. xlvi, p. 174.
' ( 7' )
Divine Intellect? He in another place men-
tions the Tf<ff 'Ay/a, the Sacred Trias, and
fpecifies the Father, Son, arid Holy Spirit.*
TERTULLIAN:
AND THE OPINIONS OF THE ANCIENT
PHILOSOPHERS.
Tertullian was later, than any of the writers
already mentioned; and is fuppofed to have
been converted to Chriftianity about the year
196. He corroborates their teftimony; and
ihews that the fame dodtrine, which prevailed
in the eaft and weft, and at Rome, was
maintained at Carthage, where he was born.
This is fhewn in the account, which he gives
of this myftery. Quod de Deo profeclum
eft, Deus eft, et Dei Filius, et Unus ambo :
ita et de Spiritu Spiritus, et de Deo Deus.i
Hie
* Cohort. V. i. p. 78, ' Strom. L. v. V. ii. p. 710,
' Apologet, p, 20,
r. 4,
( 72 )
Hie (Chriftus) acceptum a Patre munus
effudit Spiritum San&um, tertium nomen
Divinitatis, et tertium gradum Majeftatis . . .
et deductorem omnis veritatis, quae eft in
Patre, et Filio, et Spiritu San6to fecundum
Chriftianum facramentum. 1
Thefe truths, he fays, were in fome
degree known to the Grecian philofophers.
Apud veftros quoque Sapientes, Aoyov, id eft,
Sermonem, atque Rationem, conftat artifi-
cem videri univerfitatis.* They certainly were
pot totally ignorant of this truth, But they
refined upon it, and introduced Matter, as
part of the Trias, and as eternal. From the
account given by Diogenes Laertius of Plato,
one would imagine, that he allowed only
tWO firft principles. 3 Avo 5e TUV -srccvruv airs-
GW&V a-wag, Qtov KOC.I TX^v, ov x.at Nf -sroocra-
yo^tvti, xtx.1 Atnov. Plato declared, that the
two principles of all things were God and
Matter^ which he fyles the Mind, and the effi-
cient Caufe. But others give a better account
of
1 Adver. Prax. p. 518. z Apologct. p. 19.
- Diog. Lacrt. L. iii. V. i. p. 206.
( 73 )
of Plato's opinion. l Taura 01 rov
TtTsipuf^svoif ^nn rov Ttrpurov eov otvot,-
, STTI TS rov oevrpov Airtov, Koti rpirov ryv rv
%^. The fame was expreffed under
different names, of which Plutarch affords
an example. z SuKoarvig 'Zutpoovitrx
KOLI TlXaruv Aptfavos AOyvctios .... rpei$ a
rov eov, rv\v <f TXyv, ryv I$eav. We find that
Socrates^ as well as Plato, held three Princi-
ples j which are jlyled t God, Matter ', and Idea.
This laft is explained by Plato fomewhat
differently. 3 C H $z I$a t evvoijfta rv es, OTTSO
ci Bccp&aaoi Aoyov eipvjK<zo~i r% e. T'he Idea is
the Intellect) or Wifdom of the Deity > which
foreigners call the Logos, or Word of God f
Juftin
1 Eufeb. Praep. Evang. L. xi. C. xx. p. 541.
^'Korot.a'itiM Tr,v ra SsiS arpoEAOcii' ^cna.v^ HVOI.I o; TOV //.ev At/
TayaOov* i*.n' avroy $s xa.i oivregw rov o^ia^yov" rgirov $t xcu T-nv TS
KOO-/XS fyxpy. Cyril. Alex. cont. Jul. L. i. V. vi. p. 34,
~ De Placitis Philoi". L. i. p. 878.
? Clem. Alex. Strom. L. v, V. ii. p, 654.
( 74 )
Juftin Martyr makes the Trias of this
philofopher to contain x eov, KOU 'TA^, KOU
E5f God, Matter, and Image or Refemblance,
the fame as Idea. In moft of which exam-
ples, as I faid before, Matter is introduced
as a firfl principle, and eternal.
The doctrines, which we have been con-
fidering, were not the difcoveries of Plato,
but ORIGINAL TRUTHS, 2 differently modified
and mifapplied by him in his writings. He
intimates himfelf indeed, that they were not
his own ci fiupagoi etgyxua-t. Let us then
inquire, from what fource he derived them.
Now, there was no nation, to which he had
accefs, and from which alfo he could have
obtained them, excepting the Jews. It is
true,
* O yy> H?Mru> wore pi* Tf (t ?X, ac< > Ta waTs.j tt>ai
OX, Kl 'ftor, x* EISOJ. Cohort, p. 12.
Alex. Strom. L. i. V. i. p. 419. See alfop. 60, 176,355.
A^ac. c7oi ^oxet TO.VTH Xsywc o lllwrur TO{ E&a.ni c7r>!XoXaS>;>E(\z
j Eufeb, Prwp. Evang. L. xi. p. 534, and 5,10.
( 7S )
true, that even this people had no perfect:
and precife knowledge of thefe articles; yet
they had fufficient to improve heathenifm,
and to in/tract the divine Plato. And
whereas he fays, that, what he exprefied
EvvoyjAa, or Intelkfl^ foreigners (01 Eag&agoi)
ftyled Myog, or the Word, or Reafon, none
but the Helleniflick Jews could have given
it this appellation. For I imagine the mean-
ing of Plato to be, when he mentions ove^
ci "BapGuQQi Aoyov eigyKaon that the people, to
whom he alludes, expreffed it literally by this
name. No people, but the Jews, had any
knowledge of a fecond Divine Being of fo
high an order and character : and none but
the Jews in Egypt could have rendered in
this manner Aoyog. That they rendered it
in this manner may be feen by the Greek
verfion of the Bible. For though this veriion
was not made till after the time of Plato,
yet we may reasonably infer, that the term
Word, as a Perfon in Scripture, was ante-
cedently thus exprefied by the Helleniftick
Jews in thofe parts.
THEIR
THEIR EVIDENCE OF GREAT CONSEQUENCE.
The Platonifts, and other Philofophers,
who admitted thefe truths, were not uniform
in their defcription, nor confident in their
explanation. However, when they fpeak of
a Trias, which confided of Three /,
or original ruling principles; and when they
defcribe the Firft, as 0ec?, God, the Second
as Nf, Reafon, the fame as the Aoyog> or
divine Word; (which they fometimes do)
and when they add a ThLd co-exifting
Being, which they ftyle Zo$*a, J/i/%^ TV Koo-^y,
Divine Wifdom, tie Soul of the world, they
adopt articles of great confequence. We
Is now too well, how fuch a belief in thefe
times is oppofcd, and denyed, as impious,
and idolatrous, and contrary to religion,
and reafon. Yet the perfons, of whom I
have been fpeaking, embraced them, as foon
as they had any knowledge of them, and
favv their propriety and truth. And who
were they, who gave this function to the
3 doctrines
t 77 )
doctrines above? Some of the wifeft men,
that the world ever beheld; who laboured
moft after true fcience ; and made the greateft
advances towards virtue, and the knowledge
of God. We have no inftances of the
powers of man, unaffifled from above,
proceeding fo far. They faw a fitnefs and
propriety, where it is now denyed. Of this
illuftrious band I mail mention only four 5
Socrates, Plato, Ariftotle, and Zeno. If
Philo Judeus went beyond them, it was,
becaufe he applied to a more ample fource
of divine knowledge, afforded by a later
revelation.
We have feen, that, from the time that
this revelation took place, that is, from the
time of the Apoftles, to the end of the fe-
cond century, in whatever region a Chriftian
church was eftablifhed, a Sacred Trias was
univerfally admitted. Hence I make this
inference, that, if an error of this fort had
arifen fo early, yet it could not equally have
prevailed in fo many remote parts of the
world. And I proceed further, and am per-
fuaded,
( 78 )
fuacled, that this doftrine is fo little obvious
to the notions of mankind, that it could
fcarcely have been devifed by the fancy of man ;
and if deviled, flill, as I have before faid, it
could not have been fo univerfally propa-
gated. It has now prevailed for ages : and
we receive and maintain it, not in confequence
of any private and partial opinion ; but
becaufe it is accompanied with, and enforced
by, a divine fanclionj and has the uniform
fufFrage of the wifeft of men, who have alib
tranfmitted it to us. We may be certain,
that there is in it nothing contrary to reafon,
by thofe great matters of reafoning among
the Grecians fo readily adopting it. Philo
went far beyond them, as he had better
opportunities of information. Though no
friend to Chriftianity, he has admitted moft
of the principal doctrines, which relate to
the two characters of our Saviour. And
though he in fome refpecls mifapplies them ;
yet he plainly admits, and maintains
them. He was followed by thofe, who
fuccefiively belonged to the icliool of
Alexandria: fuch as Plotinus, Porphyry,
and
( 79 )
and Proclus. They were men of great
learning, and bitter enemies to Chriftianity j
yet maintained the doctrines above. Thefe
they borrowed, not from Plato, nor Pytha-
goras j whofe knowledge of them was
limited, imperfect, and diflimilar; but from
the Gofpel itfelf, where only they were
fo amply to be found. Thefe, though be-
yond human apprehenfion, they admitted,
becaufe they thought them divine truths,
and confident with reafon.
They have been likewife maintained by
fome of the mod learned among the Jews ;
however implacable enemies they might be
to Chriftianity. The doclrine of the Meffias
they admitted; and mentioned him, as the
Word of God, and as God, antecedent to
angels, and before creation. This appears
from their Targums, and other Rabbinical
writings : of which * P. Galatini gives a large
account.
1 P. Galatini de Arcanis Catholicas Veritatis, L. i.
C. iii. p. 8. L. ii. C. i. p. 41. E. L. iii. C. v. p. 118.
L. iii. p. 136. E. L. ii. p. 47. B, 49. F. For a fight
of
account. Hence we learn, that thofe myf-
terious truths concerning the fecond Perfon,
which in thefe times are rejected by many
Chriftians, as impious, and idolatrous, were
allowed by the very people, who were the
greateft enemies to idolatry, and who always
fhewed themfelves the mod hoftile to Chrif-
tianity and the Gofpel. They maintained
them, as being, when made known, confo-
nant to reafon, and as having the fan6lion
of the Scriptures.
of this Treatife, from whence I have made thefe infe-
rences, I am indebted to my moft learned and excellent
Friend, the Lord Bifliop of Salifbury.
PART
PART II.
PARTICULAR DOCTRINES MAINTAINED
BY PHILO.
FROM HIS OWN WORDS.
OF THE IMPURITY OF OUR NATURE.
JL H2 yxo ot,Kx9oiocriix,g yfAuv BV pziru (pvjTi ryv
io^v(rx<79xi TO Aoyiov, Ivcx, e^u^sv u KOL-
yotptvoi KCLI cc,7roX%(ra.{Avoi T/X.
YlfAUV TOV C&QXlOVy KOtl dUff"Xy
For
1 Quis Rer. Div. Hseres. Vol. i. p. 488. 1. 44.
F
For the Scripture informs us, that it pleafed
God to fix the tabernacle of his oracle in the
midjl of cur impurities ; that we might have
an opportunity of being cleanfed, by wajhing
away all thofe fordes, with which the wretched
and bafe conjlitution of man abounds.
He feems here to allude to a paflage of
Saint Paul, who mentions the High Prieft,
that is fet on the right hand of the throne of
the Majefty in the Heavens A Minljler of the
J ancillary, and of the true tabernacle^ which
the "Lord pitched^ and not man.' 1 . . . Which jlocd
only in meats, and drinks ^ and divers wajhings>
and carnal ordinances? and which in the
Book of Wifdom is ftyled a refemblance of
the Holy ^Tabernacle, which thou bajl prepared
from the beginning?
1 Ilcb. viii. I, 2. " Heb. ix. 10.
3 Wijucm ix. 8.
OF
OF THE INSUFFICIENCY OF MAN WITHOUT
DIVINE ASSISTANCE.
He had been fpeaking of
, the purification of the foul, and then.
U $U TO <f)KlOOVVlV t KOil
x.a,v%i; eivui eavrxg aveu Qeias
ruv Kyiouv ctvapefov EKviyoti KOCI OLTTO-
/3iov ' Which foul we muft leave to God
to brighten ; and by no means think, that we
of ourfefoes are able without the grace of God
to wafh and cleanfe our mortal frame from the
fpots and Jlaim, 'with winch it abounds.
He enumerates in another place fome of
the moft crying fins
The crimes of adultery, murder, theft, bearing
falfe witnefs, evil concupifcenfe offe?ices in
general.
1 De Somniis. V. i. p. 662. 1. 37.
2 Quis Rer. Divin. Hseres. V. i. p. 497. 1. 22.
F 2 OF
84
OF PROPITIATION.
He fpeaks of propitiation, which he flyles,
like ' St. John, ixeto-posi and feems to have
fome faint allufions, not only to original
fin, but alfo to our renovation through the
Word of God. Tar' eg-tv u.q>t<n<;, TXT
KU.I
Xa,[/.7roov eTrvti, KOCL TOO; ursoi TUV
yvQei, TOTS ya,o otVTyv TMV at
* < r ?
o Ispog Aoyog STipyve, ytpa.g e<
cfcff, KXmov aQa.vu.Tov, TK\V ev ottpQotpTu ysvzi ra^/v. x
This is remijjion (of fins), this the compleat
freedom of the foul: when it gets free from that
error, in which it was bewildered, and labours
after that blamclcfs nature, and that happy lot,
which
I John ii. 2. By Saint Paul it is called ixapi^oi-. 'Ov
tt^tlllTO (I EC.? IXdrV^bV (HOt, TfiC, d7S~W? IV TW CtVT>i UiU.CC.Tt . 0*
tt.i ar^C-iv TO.'* ^cyiyc.yoTfcK ^^T*;aaTfe-'y. R.OIT1. lil> 2$-
1 DC Congrcflu. V. i. p. 534, 535.
which it once had, when it breathed virtue,
and flour ijhed In good works. Then the Holy
Word of God, being highly pleafed with it's
noble endeavours, honours thefe efforts, and in
J *JJ
conference of them affords it a moji excellent
reward, a title to immortality, and a portion
among thofe beings, which are no longer cor-
ruptible. This in the language of Scripture
is Among the fouls of jujl men made perfect.
Such perfons are in another place defcribed
by Philo, as ruv aa-uftuTuv KOU Qeiuv tff^&y-
puTuv xXygovopot T Heirs of fpiritual and di*
vine advantages.
OF A MEDIATOR, AND OF FAITH.
An account is given in Numbers xvi. 46.
of a fearful plague, which enfued upon the
rebellion of Korah j when fourteen thoufand
and feven hundred of the people were con-
fumed ; and more were in danger. But
Mofes
? Philo, Vol. i. p. 482. 1. 3. Alfo p. 473,
F 3
( 86 )
Mofesfaid unto Aaron , fake a cenfer, and put
fre therein from off the a/far, and put en in-
cenfe, and go quickly unto the congregation, and
make an atonement for them. And he (Aaron,
the High Prieft) flovd between the dead and
the living, and the plague was flayed. Philo
faw clearly, that this iaterceffion of Aaron
was a type of the mediation of the Great
High Prieft, whom he acknowledges to be
the Logos, or Word of God. 1 He accord-
ingly in another place gives a very particular
character of the Divine Word, and his
mediatorial power, which he deduces from
the hiflory above. Tu & A^uyysXea xxt
'zroso'&VTtzTU Aoyu ouosotv E<X.IOZTOV BOUKZV o roc
ytvvri<Tou; srar'/w, tva ftBvopiog gag TO yevousvov
aivy r% TzreTTOtyKOTOs. O d aurog iKtryg uev
TV QVVJTV xyoouvovTog <xei tvaot; TO (pGapTov,
ds TV HytfAQvog TV/JOS TO
* rv
OB TT; TV ou^a,, xat <re[tvvvo(Aevog
(poiO~xuv KcHyu eizyxEtv KVCX.
KO.I vftuv' XT otytvv/iToq ug o Qeog uv,
twyros u; vueig } aAAa p<ro<; TUV CCKCUV,
' Philo. V. i. p. 562. 1. 13,
Tzraptz p,ev ru (pvrevcravri, "W
TX [Aty (TV^TTKV OtQcWKTCtl WOTS KCU <fc7TCf>JJ>a<
ro ywos, uKocrfuav own Koarpv eXopevov' -ara^a as
ru Qvvriy Tzrpog eutXTTifiotv T% py/roTE rov tXcuv
eov srsoiiasiv ro IQIOV spyov. Eyu yizs STriXYipu-
ra eioyvottoi, yevetrei srcx-ooc TV xotQcupeut
eyvuxorog, iayvo(pvXa)t.O ust gbr. 1 The
Great Father of all gave this extraordinary
gift to that moft ancient, and Principal, of all
Angeh^ his Holy Word-, that he ftould Jland
mid-way r , and feparate the creature from the
Creator. T^his Word (the Logos) is accord-
ingly the Inter cejjor for mortal man, <who is
always tending to corruption: and he is ap-
pointed a MeJJenger and Legate from the
Supreme Lord to his fubjeffs. rfhis office is
highly acceptable to him-, and he fhews the
dignity of it, when he is introduced* faying, (at
the rebellion of Korah) <c It was I, who flood
(a Mediator) between you, and the Lord" For
he is not unbegotten like God 3 nor created lib?
man-, but a medium between the extremes,
bardering
1 Quis Rer. Divin. Krsres. V. i. p. 501, 502^,
See alfo V. i. p. 689, 690.
? 4
( 88 )
bordering upon each. So that, in refpeft to the
Creator ', be is able to obtain aj/urance, that he
will never ruin, nor reject ^ the race of man-,
nor, in/lead of order, fuffer the 'world to lapfe
into anarchy: and in refpeft to the creature y
that he may by faith be certified of this truth >
that the God of all mercies will never neglect
the work of his hands. I therefore, (fays the
Word of God) proclaim peace to all the
world from that Power, who maketh wars
to ceafe ; from God, who is the guardian of
peace. In which paflage mention is made,
not only of a Mediator between God and
man, but alfo of a good hope, or confidence
in God TM^S ei/eATHf/av, K.T.X. of an afTu-
rance, of a FAITH, or truft in the Creator
argos TBT/gw, H.r.x. grounded on the Medi-
ator's- interceflion.
OF REPENTANCE, AND NEWNESS OF LIFE.
Thcfe, fays Philo, are confequent upon
Faith and Hope. Aeur^ai/ <Te%e* Ta<v,
r^v eXirtoa, '/) ZTTI roig aup
A
xcu (SsXriuns* In the next place,
after hope, comes repentance of all our fim,
and newnejs of life. The like occurs in
/ ^/ y
another place. Merc* <5e T^V eXiri$o$ vixyv, ayunv
fevrepog eiv, ev u [tSTotvoia, ofyuvi^BTctt 2 differ
the victory gained by hope, another conflict
comes on, in which repentance is engaged.
And he afterwards alludes to the feverity of
thefe conflicts pera, <Je rag r f /iq [tETotvoioc/;
3 thefe Jlruggles of a penitent heart.
In the Treatife de Execrationibus, he
mentions the curfes denounced upon the
wicked. But if there be fuch, who repent,
and will confefs their fins cpoXoyrpuvrtq-ca-ct,
ypa^rov and will endeavour after a better
way of life evpevsiag TV%OVTUI ryg SK r%
^urifi^oq KOC.I IXeu s* 4 they will obtain favour
from the Saviour, and God of all mercy. We
are
1 De Abrahamo. V. ii. p. 3. 1. 46.
2 De Praemiis et Poenis. V. ii. p. 410. 1. 36.
3 Ibid. p. 411. 1. 36.
* Ibid. V. ii. p. 435. 1. 35.
( 9 )
are then entitled to be the children of the
mo A High ; and our fins are forgiven
through him rov AyytXcv, 0$ Bg-i Aoyo<;>
toa-TTBQ IKT^OV xotxuv x - that Angel > the Word of
Go'd, who is the phyfaian and healer of all our
evils. For we cannot pleafe God of our-
felves : even our beft actions are not truly
acceptable pySe ryv a
ctvsv
sivai
virtue itfelf without the divine fanfticn can
have no merit > nor advantage. All thefe good
things are accomplifhed by the Word, fly led
the great High Prieft, the Son of God, rov
Aoyov Gstov. *O ^e avrog ixsrys TV QVYITX. And
he -is the Inter cejjbr for mortal man. Hence
he is mentioned as usa-ag, and Me^/cf, the
Mediator, and as bordering upon both-, by
whom we are made vtot Qev avQou'jroi fens
j y
of God', KOii Qeiuv 'nroocyfAtx.TUv KXyoovopoi and
heirs of heavenly advantages.
1 DC Leg. Allcg. V. i. p. 122. 1. 17.
" Ibid. p. 203. 1. 18.
OF
( 9< )
OF FREEDOM BY THE DEATH OF THE
HIGH PRIEST.
I have mentioned, that Philo was very
much embarraiTed about that part of the
Law, wherein it was faid, that the man of
guilt mould fly to an appointed city of
refuge ; and not be acquitted till the death
of the High Prieft. TST^TOV xoti XOITTOV VP
ruv TtrgorctQwTtov, y woofarfua rviq ruv ts-ttytvyoruv
xuQoox, rx Awteosus o ^avoiroq^ r uroX>^v sv red
gyry pot Turaat'xxara, ffucntohtuv* Avicroq yu^ $
KOLTCX, ruv roc. aUTOf, ooouravTUV
oo
siys 01 uev 'srXeiu %oovov
01 GB sXtxrru. MaxoofcitoTczToi y<x,p> ci os oXiyo-
TUV Awiepeuv ei<rt Ka; 01 pev vzo( }
1 as Tirpsir&VTai KudtguvTOtt, Kent ruv
01
01
01
^' v$il ptXXovroq rXvrav rx
The fourth remaining article of thefe
propofitiom, is the ordinance concerning the re-
turn of thofey 'who had fed for refuge^ 'which
was
1 De Piofugis. V. i. p, 561, 562.
( 92 )
'was to be at the death of the High Prieft.
tfhe confederation of this has given me a good
deal of trouble from the purport. For the pu-
mfoment appointed is not equally dijlributed ;
as feme muft have been confined for a longer ;
and feme for a Jhorter, feafen ; and as feme of
the High Priefts were of a longer, others of a
Jhorter, date-, and feme arrive at the dignity
when young, others when old. And thofe, who
were accidentally guilty of bloodfoed muft have
fought this Jhelter, feme at the beginning of the
priefthood, and others when the High Prleft
was near his death. Thefe were the diffi-
culties, which gave Philo fo much uneafi-
nefs, and which for a time he could not
folve. But he fays, that at laft he perceived
it to be typical, and a myftery.
yct() t rov A^ieoioc UK avQftUTrov, aXXoc, Aoycv
nva.i y 'sra.vruv %% wvtnuv povov, aXXa KOLI
. .. oiort) otpoti, yovsuv a(pQoc,a-
KOtl TUV (TVfATTQLVTUV E$l TffO(,Tlf\Q' MvjTOOg OS
K r t q rex. oXx yXQtv MS ytvtnv. 1 I maintain then,
that
1 De Profugis. V. i. p. 562. 1. 13.
( 93 )
that the High Prieft, alluded to, is not a man,
but the Sacred Logos, the Word of God: 'who
is incapable of either voluntary or involuntary
Jin. 1 therefore conclude, that he was born of
Parents the mojl pure and incorruptible -, having
for his Father, God, who is the Author of all
things ; and Divine Wifdom for his Mother,
by whom all things came into being. Ka; hart
Tfjv KtyaXyv IK.VXJHSOU eXatu* and upon this ac-
count he is faid to have his head anointed with
oil. Who would think, that, when he faw
fo much, he would not have feen more?
that he mould not have perceived the Mefliah
Chrift, the anointed of God, fo often men-
tioned in the Prophets, here clearly pointed
OUt? He concludes Taura $' UK UTTO (rxo7T%
fjLoi XeXcjcra;, aAX* VTreo TV $i$a% xl on q>u<rtKk)-
TUTT] "sr^scr^itx, Ka,9o% Quyotfiuv, o T% Apxtsoeus
e$-i avot,To$* c Tbefe things I have not mentioned
without good reafon: but to fhew, that the
natural and appointed return of the fugitives
was
z De Profugis. V. i. p. 562. 1. 22.
2 Ibid. p. 563. 1. 24.
( 94 )
was the death of the High Priefl: whom he
ftyles leguTKTOi; Aoyog the moft Holy Word of
God. But this death he allegorizes, and by
refinement ruins the whole.
THE SOURCE, FROM WHENCE HE
BORROWED HIS OPINIONS.
Such were the opinions of Philo Judeus
upon thefe very interefting fubjects : and we
have feen the reafons given by him, which
are very numerous, and at the fame time
equally fignincant. The only queftion is,
from whence he could obtain them. From
Plato and his difciples little to this purpofe
could have been derived : and many of thefe
truths could not have been obtained by him,
even from his brethren the Jews, and their
facred writings, excepting fome few inti-
mations. Thefe have fince been made ob-
vious and clear by a later revelation. There
was therefore no fource, to which he could
poflibly have applied, but to the Apoftles,
and Evangelifts, and other difciples of Chrift.
It
( 95 )
It has been aflerted, that he was born much
too early to be inftrufted by them. But
this is fpoken without fufficient grounds.
In the firft place, we know nothing precifely
concerning his birth. And fecondly, we are
certified by his own evidence of this, that
he went ambaffadour from Alexandria to
Rome in the fourth year of Caligula,
which was in the year of the Cbriftian
./Era 42. And if he were of this age at
the time of his embafTy, he muft have been
coseval with our Saviour x : and as he lived
to the reign of Nero, we may be afTured,
that he furvived Chrift many years. At all
rates he muft have been in a flate of man-
hood during the miniftry of Chrift; and
confequently faw numbers of his followers
for many years afterwards ; and, if we may
judge by his doftrines, was acquainted with
the Gofpels, and with the Epiftles of Saint
Paul.
1 If he were born forne years before the birth of
Chrift, as fome have infifted, ftill he muft have been
contemporary with Chrift during his whole refidence
on earth: for he certainly furvived him many years.
Paul. Saint Mark, the firft bifhop of
Alexandria, could not have been unknown
to him. Thefe things, I think, are in a
great degree evident from the internal evi-
dence of the doctrines, which he has tranf-
mitted. For there is only this alternative.
He muft either have borrowed thefe truths
from the fource mentioned; or he muft
have had them by infpiration. But to fo
great an indulgence he feems to have had
no pretence : he confequently received them
from the Apoftles, and the firft profelytes
to the Gofpel. The very words, in which
thofe doctrines are delivered, mew it.
INFERENCES.
Nor was it Philo only, who took thefe
advantages. He lit an early example. And
the Pagan world at large was foon improved
by the doctrines of Chriftianity. The wifeft
cf the Philofophers faw it's fuperiority. And
though they held the people in contempt,
from
( 97 )
from among whom it proceeded, and could
not be reconciled to it's great Author j yet
they borrowed their ethics from him, and
enriched their philofophy with truths un-
known before. Many of them admitted the
very myfteries: and though they tried to
explain them each according to his particular
fancy 3 yet, I fay, they were admitted; and :
not thought reprehenfible, nor contrary to
reafon. Theodoret takes notice, (gfawrewT. .)
that Plutarch, Numenius, and Piotinus,
borrowed from the facred writings. To
thefe might be added, Epic~letus, Antoninus,
Porphyrius, Maximus Tyrius, Hierocles,
Proclus, with many more. The emperour
Julian, that bitter enemy, copied largely
from the fyftem, which he tried to ruin.
The lump of leaven, mentioned by our
Saviour, began very foon to operate upon
the mafs, in which it was inclofedj and pro-
ceeds at this day in it's operation. The good
effects of Christianity are felt far beyond it's
limits i and will in time be univerfal. That
they are fo extenfive at prefent, is owing in
no fmall degree to the writings of Philo.
G FARTHER
FARTHER" INFERENCES.
If thefe arguments, which I have deduced
from Philo, be true, as I truft they are, we
have in conference of it the mod early
and decifive evidence in favour of the doc-
trine, with which we are engaged. And
we may be certified, if any proof be want-
ing, concerning the opinion of the firft
Chriftians and Apo files, in refpeft to this
myftery. The atteftation of the Fathers is
attended with great validity, and cannot be
fet afide. But this from Philo is dill more
forcible and convincing, as it is more early.
And though it may not proceed from an
enemy, yet it certainly comes not from a
friend: fo that there could have been no
prejudice nor partiality in favour of the
articles mentioned. It is certain, that the
words of the Apoftles, and more efpecially
thofe of our Saviour, ftand in no need of
any foreign evidence to be authenticated.
But when in thefe times the purport of
thofe words is difputcd, and the very doc-
trines
( 99 )
trines denied; and when the opinions of
the Fathers are efteemed either too late or
too indeterminate 5 then this prior evidence
of an Alien mufl have weight. For the
truths, which he has advanced, he could
ftot unaffifted have obtained. The wifdom
of man could not have arrived at fueh
knowledge. Heowas therefore beholden to
ether's for this intelligence; and I have
fhewn, to whom he was indebted : or rather
he has given a plain proof of it himfelf.
He drew from a noble fource: and the
famples, which he has produced, fliew, that
they are from the well of wifdom, from the
fpring of living waters, the fountain of life.
He drew indeed but partially j yet, what he
has afforded, is attended with great advan-
tage.
G 2 THE
THE MISAPPLICATION OF THESE GREAT
TRUTHS BY PHILO.
I have obierved, that Philo fpeaks only of
the divinity of the Logos, or Word of
God; and induftrioufly avoids taking no-
tice of the Median, the Anointed of God ;
by the Apoftlesand Evangelifts called Chrift.
But though he tacitly denies the humanity
of our Saviour; yet he has taken almoft
every attribute, which belongs to Chrifl,
the Son of man, and refers them to him in
his prior, and heavenly, ftate. But with
this part of his character they are not con-
fiftent. He therefore unduly adjudges to
the Logos, as reprefented in his Writings,
the feveral offices ' of High Prieil, to make
an atonement; * of Meifcngcr from the
Deity, to declare his will to mankind ;
1 rhllo. V. 1. p. 65}- 't- 1 a XOSY/COC, u v.ou aj
nro')'oo{ aur -dfjo; Acyi/,-.
id. V. j. p, ^OI. IJ ( -s7V>n -.*, r* r,ytfu>to( -CTJOJ TO
( 101 )
J of Mediator between God and man, to {up-
plicate in behalf of offenders and propitiate
an offended Sovereign j * of Surety to each
party ; and 3 of Shepherd, delegated by the
Mori High to take care of his iacred Flock.
Reflore thefe articles to the Mefliah, to
whom they particularly belong j and the
opinions of Philo will be found in moft
inftances very fimilar to thofe of the Apof-
tles j and oftentimes the very fame.
1 Philo. V. i. p. 501, 502. 'iKirr.s . . . TS $w. . .
To
a Ibid. a^
3 Id. V . i. p. 308. Iloi^e) ... of rue
G 3
UPON
( 102 )
UPON THE PASSAGE IN PHILO DE CONFU-
S10NE LING. V. I. P. 427. L. 3.
I have mentioned, that Philo fpeaks of
the Logos, or Word of God, as fometimes
bearing the likenefe of man Q Y.OLT eixovoe.
avfywros. ' The learned Editor thinks, that
this is not the right reading ; for which he
fubftitUtes KUT ciKovex, avfycaTros ivhofe
image man is. For he imagines, that Philo
never could have allowed, that any fuch
fimilitude fubfifled. But in this, I think,
he is mi (taken. In the firft place, we have
the authority of Eufebius for this reading,
who quotes the whole pafTage; a part of
which is o zccr twova uvQouTroi;. 2 In the next
place, it is warranted by the context: which
would be injured by the alteration. Philo
is mentioning feveral characters and titles of
the -sr^uro'ycvog vio; The Jirft begotten Son
1 De Confuf. Ling. V. i. p, 427. 1. 6.
* Pnep. Evangel. L, xi. c. 15. p. 533.
C 103 )
cf God> as the - * Ag
-*-i The Great Archangel under different
appellations : < a^ij> MM ovc^cc en, KU.I
Aoyo$, JCKI o K&T eiKQvct. avQguiroc, KOCI * oguv
I^ifX 'fbe beginning or Creator of all
t fangs, fie name of God (Jehovah), the
Word of God> the likenefs cf man^ and the
Guardian of Ifrael. If we tranfpofe this, as
our Editor advifes, there is an article intro-
duced in the moil improper place, and in
the moft unneceffary manner. The hiftory
relates to the different names and attributes
of God's Fir ft -born; and the likenefs of man
to Chrift has here no place, nor connexion.
The words are to be confidered, as relating
to one of the titles and attributes of the Son
of God. The Logos in the Scriptures is
defcribed as appearing to Abraham, and to
other Patriarchs, in a human form: and
to this, I imagine, Philo alludes,^ when he
fays, o KO.T BIKOVCX, avQguTTog. This reading has
the
1 De Confuf. Ling. V. i. p. 427. 1. 4 7.
4 He makes ufe of the word cgy in this fenfe im-
mediately afterwards T O^CTB? o <m?ms who obty
their overfitr. Ibid. 1, 14.
G 4
the fan&ion of l Origen, who tells us, that
Pllilo wrote, urt^ TV py ug avQouTrov teyttrQou
tivw rev ov. Philo in the page above-
mentioned (V. i. p. 427) fays, that man was
born after the image of the Word. There
mud therefore have been, however partial,
yet a reciprocal likenefs.*
1 Origen in Matt. p. 477.
* Philo fays, there are two portions of the Scripture,
which mention l ptv^ ST* x j OH^WTTOJ 5 loj, srteo* &,
or* u<; atywos. Quod Deus fit Iramut.V. i. p. 282, 283.
And Quod a Deo, c. p. 656.
RECAPITULATION
OF THE
CHARACTER AND ATTRIBUTES
OF THE
LOGOS,
WITH
THE COLLATERAL EVIDENCE FROM
SCRIPTURE.
, ALSO
SOME FARTHER PARTICULAR DOCTRINES
BORROWED BY PHILO
FROM THE APOSTOLIC WRITINGS,
BUT MISAPPLIED.
RECAPITULATION.
I.
THE LOGOS IS
JL HE Son of God TOY ocQov Aoyov e *
of a divine nature. 1 nar^? (0g) f ftos.
Father.
Mark i. I. Axy r EvayytXiv
beginning of the Go/pel of
Jefus Chrijl the Son of God.
Luke iv. 41. 2u si o x^ig-o^ , o utoj T* s .
*T^w ^r/ Cy&r//?, the Son of God.
A6ls viii. 37* n^euw rov utov r
/ believe, that Jefus Chrifl is the
Son of God.
John i. 34. 'ourcf c^w o uws 1 T .
T)6/j w the Son of God.
II. The
1 De Agric. V. i. p. 308. I. 27.
*De Profugls, V. i. p. 562. I. 20. p. 414. 427. 437.
,o8
II.
The Second Divinity. &$<>$ eo$ o Ao^. 1
He may be efleemed the God of us
imperfect beings 'OUTO? yoe.^ yttuv ruv
ec.v ew 10$-. z
John i. I. Kott eo yv o Aoyo?.
And the Word (the Logos) was
God.
/""* ?*
Chrift the power of God, and the
wifdom of God.
III.
The firft-begotten of God. npuroyovog
tio$ Aoyos. 3 And the mofl ancient of all
Heb.
a Fragm. Vol. ii. p. 625.
* DC Leg. Alleg. V. i. p. 128. 1. 43.
J De Somniis, V. i. p. 653. 1. 24.
4 De Conf. Ling. V. i. p. 414. 1. 29.
( 109 )
Hebt i. 6. 'Orav cs araAn/ eaToiyotyyi rev Uau-
And 'when he again bringeth hh
Fir jl -born into the world.
Colof. 1. 15. *Of sp ..... ixr^uroroKog
The Logos who . is - the firjl-
born of every creature.
IV.
The Image and Likenefs of God.
ColofT. i. 15. ' Emuv TX @?f ao^ocr^.
Chrifly the Image of the invi
God.
Heb.
1 De Mundi Opif. V. i. p. 6. 1. 42. p. 414. 419. 656.
a De Monarch. V. ii, p. 225. J. 26.
C no )
Heb. ! 3. ' Atrotvycurpot rys oo^r^ Y.OU yy,-
aura (TS
the brightnefs of his
(God's) glory, and the exprefe
image of bh perfon.
2 Cor. IV. 4. *Of (Xftig-oti) e$-iv eixuv rx .
Cbrtft, who is the Image of God.
V.
Superiour to the angels.
Heb. i. 4. KgsiTTuv yivofttvoi; TUV
Chrift made fuperi our to Angels.
Heb. i. 6. Ka* targoa'xvviqo'artofuv CLVTU 'sra.vres
Ayy&oi Qev.
Let all the Angth of God wcr-
Jhip- him.
VI. Su-
1 De Profugis, V. i. p. 561. 1. 15.
( -til )
VI.
Superiour to all things in the world. *o
Heb. il. 8. Uavrct, u
TUV
Thou haft put all things in fub-
jeftion under bis feet.
VII.
The Inftrument, by whom the world was
made. *O Avyog KVTV, u KaQocTT^ o^ycavu -ztr^otr-
(
It was the divine Word, by whom all
jhings were ordered and difpofed* Toy Quo*
Aoyov rev -fowTot
John i. 3. Havre* &' aura (rx Asyti) e^evsro, x.ou
%u(3i$ aunt tytvtro x$e Iv, c ytywzv.
AH things 'were made by him t (th^
Logos) and without Mm was not
Any thing made* that 'was made.
i Cor-
' De Leg. Allegor. V. i. p. 121. 1. 44.
* Ib. V. i. p. 106, 1. 29. p. 162. 1. i5p. 656. 1, 50.
3 De Mundi Opifieio, V. i. p. 4. 1. 43.
1 Cor. viii. 6. tyrx? X^j-oj, J*' rot aroi,vr&.
Jefus Chrijl t by whom are all
things.
Heb. 1. 2. 'Ov eQyxe Qeog KXypovoftov TSTKVTUV,
i xott
Chrift the Son of God whom
he hath appointed heir of all
things : by whom alfo he made
the worlds.
Hcb. i. 1 0. Epycc ruv "Xtwuv (rv eicrtv 01 Ouoavot.
*he Heavens are the work of
thy hands.
VIII.
The great Subftitute of God 'r-noc^o^
rx c^ upon whom all things depend. 1
ix.!/ KKI cMorpixy et$ rafciv jcott
xxi ro iffa-v VTreotuTou;, Ivoe,
ru xpxTcuto KCCI
I am the God, who y having reduced all things
from diforder and irregularity to harmony and
beauty t fixed them upon afure bafis y and eftablijhed
them under my all-powerful Word> the Logos.
Ephef.
1 De Agricult. V. i. p. 308. 1. 30.
1 De Somniis, V. i. p. 656. 1. 48.
Ephef. iii. 9. su ru TO. woarot, KTUTUVTI hoc,
God who created all things by
Jefus Chrijl.
Phil. ii. 7. Mogcp'/iv <5VA Xu&uv.
Who took upon him the form of
a fervant.
John xvii. 4. To eoyov sreXs;w<ra, c $$ux.otg pot,
I have fmifoed the 'work, which
thou gaveft me to do.
John i. 3. Xupi$ O.VTV syevero v$e Iv.
Without him was not any thing
made, that was made.
IX.
The Light of the world, and intelleftual
Sun. C O Aoyoq (pus '
John i.Q.. *O Aoyot; . ... TO (pug TO a
tfhe Word . . -. was the true light.
John i. 4. To $u<; TUV avQpuTruv.
*fhe life and light of men.
i Pet.
1 De Somniis, V. i. p. 6. 414. 632, 633.
II
( "4 )
I Pet. ii. 9. X/$-H, T* jc (ntorvg
crccvrog ei$ TO $aupa$-o
Chrifty who bath called you out
of darknefs into his marvellous
light.
John Vlii. 12. Eyu eipi TO (pus TX Koirpv' o etxo-
epoi v (AVI are^Trar^crfi; ev ry
totj aXX' e%ti TO (pug TIJJ uy$.
I am the light of the world : he
that folhweth me Jhall not walk
in darknefs y but Jhall have the
light of life.
X.
The Logos only can fee God. c n povu
TOV QEOV ee
John vi. 46. *O uv 7ra^a T eif, VTOI; lu
paxe
TOV
He that is of God (the Logos)
be hathfeen the Father.
John
* De Confufione Linguar, V. i. p. 418. 1. 39.
( us )
John i. 1 8. QBOV v$ts eupuxe TXTUTTOTB. 'o fto-
voyevyg tf Tiog, o uv Eig rov XO\TTOV
TV H.CITOO$) XlVO '>1 r yyO'MTO.
No man hath feen God at any
time. The only begotten Son,
which is in the bofom of the
Father, he hath declared him.
XI.
He has God for his portion and refides
in him. C O Aoyog .... avrov TOV G)ov xXypcv
S^UVj V OiVTU [AOVU K<X.TOlWfl(rl. T
imaai.
John xiv. II. Eyu (s^;) ev rca IIuTgi, xoti o
I am in the Father, and the
Father is in me.
John i. I. Ev apxy yv o Aoyog, KOU o Aoyo$
yv 7trpo$ TOV Qeov.
In the beginning was the W r ord >
and the Word was with God.
John 1. l8. 'O UV 1$ TOV KOXTTOV TV TlUT^Og.
1*be Logos, or Word, which is
in the bofom of the Father.
XII. He
1 Ds Prof. V. i, p. 561, 1. 27.
II 2
XII.
He is the mod ancient of God's works.
Tov AyyeXov rov uroerEvTctTov. 1
And was before all things. n
TUV ocr ot
John Xvii. 5. Nvv tio^owov JAZ <ru,
TOV Kotrpov e;va<, Tsraoa (rot.
Noiv, O Father, glorify then
me with thine own felf\ with
the glory, which 1 had with
thee> before the world was.
John i, 2. 'Curof yv ev u^'xy 'sroog TOV Qeov.
He was in the beginning with
God.
2 Tim. 1. 9. 7rc0 wovuv atuviuv.
before all worlds.
John
1 De Confuf. Ling. Vol. i. p. 427. 1. 3.
1 De Leg. Allegor. V. i. p. 121. 1. 45. Seealfo p. 562.
( "7 )
John xvii.24-
Father, thou lovedft me before
the foundation of the world.
Heb. i. 2. $i v xai rag uiuvtzg tTroiycrev.
By Whom (the Logos) he made
the worlds.
XIII.
The Logos e deemed the fame as God.
Aoyov, ug O.VTOV (eov) KO.TUV overt.*
Rom. ix. 5. 'o uv em WCWTWV Qeoi;
eig rag cuuva.g.
Chrift who is over ally God
blejjed for ever.
Mark ii. 7. Tig ^uv^rca atyitvcci apuoTiag, ti
py eig o Qeog ',
Who canforgivejins^ but God only?
Phil. ii. 6. *Of ev pogQy VTTx^uVy v% aq-
'Truypov yyvpotsrQ TO Bivat itra, ew.
Who, being in the form of God,
thought it no robbery to be equal
with God.
XIV. The
1 De Somniis, V. i. p. 656. 1. 37.
H 3
XIV.
The Logos eternal e o cc'
John xii, 24- Xptfog ptvsi et$ rov atuvoe..
Chrift abidethfor ever.
2 Tim. 1. Q,. Tsrpo wovuv Kiuvittv.
Who was before tie world
began.
2 Tim.1V. 1 8. u y $o& t? rag otiuvag ruv cuuvuv.
To whom be glory for ever and
ever.
Heb. i. 8. n^o? <5i= rov V/ov^Aeye;,) 'o 9
<Tfcr, o eof, t(g rov ctiuvcx. rv
But to the Son he faith Thy
throne, O God, is for ever am}
ever.
ApOC. X. 6. Ka* upocrev ev ru fyvrt ei$ rvq
uiuvoiq ruv ctiuvuv, eg K~i<re rov
cvpavcv. . . . K<XI rr,v yyv.
And he fware by him, that livetb
for ever and ever, who created
heaven . . . and the earth.
XV. He
* De Plant. Noa-. V. i. p. 332. 1, 32. Alfo V. ii.
p, 604.
( "9 )
XV.
He fees all things. Q&fywguTKi us
sfpooctv eivat licixvog. x
Heb. iv. 12. Zuv yap o Aoyos TV , ucu
13. Ka; x egi KTKTIS y.^ot,vi^q WUTTIOV
avris (jv Aoyv}' UOCVTOC
wxi Teroa%ijX<(rjU,6v Totg o
etVTIS, K.T. A.
For the Word of God is quick
and powerful . . .
Neither is there any thing ere-
ated, that is not manifejl in his
Jight : but all things are naked
and open to the eyes of him, &c.
ii. 23. Eyu eipt o tgevyuv v$()V$ xoci
xapatof.
/ am he, who fearcbeth the reins
and hearts.
XVI. He
1 De Leg. Alleg. V.i. p. 121. 1. 3. .
H 4
( 120 )
XVI.
He fupports the World, 'o re ya^ TV
oyo$j ot<T[jt,o<; uv ruv KTTKVTUV
TO. pegy -aravra, KXI (TQiyyei J - The
Logos is the connecting power, by which all
things are united. He makes all the
various parts of the univerfe unite, and he
prej erves them in thiit union.
*O $eio$ A.oyo<; Tfft^ityj.i ra oXa, KOC.I wzTrXypteKev ?
T'he divine Word furrounds and upholds all
things, and has brought them to perfection.
John ill. 35. *O Ilar^. . . . TS-CWTO. StQuxtv ev
TYI xsigi owns.
tfhe Father hath given all things
into his hands.
Heb. i. 3. Qsguv re rex, -srccvra, ru ^ypccri ryg
Svvapevs CCVTV.
Upholding all things by the
Word of his power.
ColoiT, i. lj. TO, TsrctvToc. ev oevru <rvve$-vi%.
By him all things confijl.
XVII. The
De Prof. V. i. p. 562. 1. 34.
* Frag. V. ii. p. 655. 1. 35. Alfo V. i. p. 330.
p. 499. V. ii. p. ^04, 6c6.
XVII.
The Logos neareft to God without any
reparation -, being as it were fixed and
founded upon the only true exifting Deity,
nothing coming between to difturb that
* -C c $*
unity. O Aoyog g;0f. . . . Ttov voyruv aTrag-
KTTotvTuv o sro<r^vra,rog, o eyyvTotTU, ftyo
ovrog peQooiv $ioc.$yp<x.Tos, ra pcvx, o
John X. 30, Eyu jcsn o
I and my Father are one.
John XVli. II. Ilars^ ayit, rvi^crov KUT^. . . lvc&
Holy Father, keep thofe, whom
thou haft given me: that they
may be one, as we are.
Johnxiv. II. Eyca ev ru Har^, KUI o Haryg
tV BfAOl.
I am in the Father, and the
Father in me.
John 1. 1 8. C O [tovoysvvig viog, o uv nig roy
KoXTrov TX FLotTpog.
rfhe only begotten Son, ivho is in
the bofom of the Father.
XVIII. The
1 De Profugis, V, i. p. 561, 1. 15.
( 122 )
XVIII.
The Logos free from all taint of fin,
either voluntary or involuntary. c o
cwev T(i07ri}$ Iwsrut .... xcct
Heb. IX. 14. 'Atpot, TV XftfV, o$
"srootrviveyxev a^ta^ov TU
The blood of Chrijl> who ....
offered bimfelf without fpot to
God.
John viii. 46. Tig e% vpuv
Which of you convinced me of
Jin?
I Pet. ii. 22. Xfifosj . . . o$ apotQTi&v vie ttrowtVy
x$e IvpeOtj ^oAoff ev ru ^o^oe,rt CCVTK.
Who did no fm, neither was
guile found in his mouth.
XIX. Of
J DC Profugis, V. i. p. 561. 1. 25.
XIX.
Of the Logos prefiding over the imperfect,
and God only over the perfect and wife.
'Ourof yoe,o (o Aoyof) ypuv ruv otrBXuv otv eiy sag 1 ,
ruv $ (ro(puv KOU, reXeiuv o Tl^rog For the
Logos may be ejleemed the God of us y who are
imperfeff : but of the wife and perfeffi ', Firfl
and Chief muji be looked upon as the God. *
i
Philo was not confiftent, when he made
this difference i and die} not confider, that
God's mercy is not limited, but " is over
all his works." Befides, in refpecl to the
Logos, he confeffes, as will be prefently
feen, that he diflributes his heavenly aflift-
ance equally to all, who feek it. And fo
far from his goodnefs being confined to the
imperfe6l only, Philo has juft before faid
X,l OS TUV (AV TBXIOTOUV V\ l^U%>J cAw TW
I'be foul of the more pure is nourifted
by the full influence of the Word or Logos.*
He
1 De Leg. Allegor. V. I, p, 128. 1. 43.
? Ibid. p. 122. 1. 6.
( "4 )
He was probably led to form this judgment,
concerning the weak and fimple being folely
delegated to the Logos, from the Chriftian
do6trines, with which he had gained ac-
quaintance, and which he did not perfectly
understand. The Logos in the character
of Chrift did extend his faving help peculi-
arly to thofe, who were in a ftate of fpiritual
debility, but not exclufively of others.
Matth. XI. 5.
The poor have the Gofpcl preached
unto them.
Luke V. 32. OVK eA?jXi)(5a
1 came not to call the rightcous t
butfinnen to repentance.
I Tim. i. 15. ni$-o$ o Aoyoq . . , on
ei$ TOV
(TUfTOil.
fbis is a faithful faying ...that
Chrift Jefus came into the world
to fave Jinners*
XX. The
XX.
e
The Logos is the fountain of wifdom; to
which all fhould moft diligently repair, that,
by drinking from that facred Spring, they
may inflead of death obtain everlafting life.
$e vv rov ptv uxv^popsiv IKOCVOV, (r
po$ rov ctvurccTtt) Aoyov etov t o
Iva, ctftvarotfASvos TV votpaTog, ocvn
At'diov aQxov svpyrcu. It is of the greateji
consequence to every perfon, that can make his
way in the courfe, which is fet before him, to
jlrive without remiffion to approach to the
divine Logos y the Word of God above , who is
the fountain of all wifdom ; that, by drinking
largely of that facred Spring, injlead of death
he may be hereafter rewarded with everlafting
life. 1 This I quote at large, it being fo very
remarkable, 'pa s& %a,i
TtTlZUSKZl KOii (TOtliZl OSUfflV
i Cor.
1 De Profugis. V. i. p. 560. 1. 31.
fe Ibid. p. 566. I. 9.
( 126 )
I Cor. i. 24* Xpigov ev Svvupiv KOU e*
Chrijl the power of God and the
wifdom of God. 9
ColofT. ii. 3 . gy u tin TsroMTeq 01 Syravg
In whom are hid all the treafures
of wifdom and knowledge*
John iv. 14. 'Of <Tav -sri-n ex. TV J<Jarof, iyu
Gti<ju OLVTU, a py oityycr'n ei; rov
oiiuvott aXXot, ro vdugj o Scotrta
CCUTU, yevyreTai ev avrca Tsri} r yri
iiotx.ro; ctXXopsvx en; Zuyv Atuvtov.
Wbofoever drinketh of the water ,
that I flail give him, Jhall never
thirft : but the water, that 1 Jhall
give him, flail be in him a well
of water ff ringing up into ever-
lajling life.
John vii. 38. *O "sri^uuv ei$ ipt ..... is-oTotfjLQi
IK rvjg KoiXias tzvrx (jevtrvfriv I>O&TO$
He that believe fh in me out
cf his belly flail fow rivers of
living waters*
XXI. The
XXI.
The Logos is a MefTenger fent by God to
man, his liege fubje6t. u^a-^urvig TV
rog TO VTTXOOV.
John viii. 42. Ou yag aTrtpowTV eXyXva t
exeivo; (o eoj) ^e cvTres-eiXe.
I came not of myfelf* but he
(Go$) fent me.
John V. 36. 'O UUTyg pt C67T5-XK.
The Father bath fent me.
I John IV. 9. Tov ulov O.VTX ....
Big TOV KoroVy Ivoe.
God fent his only begotten Son
into the world, that we might
live through him.
John viii. 29. K; o varepfyas pe pzr epx tfiv.
And he, that fent me, is with me.
XXII. He
1 Quis Rer. Div. Hseres. Vol. i. p. 501, 1. 49.
( 128 )
XXII.
He is the Advocate, and IntercefTor for
mortal man. *O <T O,VTOS (o Aoyoq) I
tgi TV
John xiv. 16. Eyu ourri<ru rov notregx, Y.OU
aXXov notpoMXyrov ou<Ti vptv.
I will pray the Father, and he
fiall give you another Comforter.
John XVli. 20. Gv Tzrepi raruv $e eguru povov,
KCCI -zzrep/ TUV
CCVTUV is epe.
Neither pray I for thefe alone ;
but for them alfo, which Jhall be-
lieve c?2 me through their word.
Heb. vii. 25. riavrore fyv ei; ro MTwyxotvetv
V7TSO CtUTUV.
Chrift ever living to make
interceffion for them.
Rom. viii. 34. 'c$- KOU s&v ev $e%iqt TV > <><;
xat evTwyxpvet wreg ypuv.
Who is even at the right hand
of God, who alfo maketh inter-
ceffionfor us.
XXIII. He
1 Quis Rcrum Divin. Kzercs. V. i. p. 501. 1. 48.
XXIII.
He ordered and difpofed all things. *o
;of Aoyog TO, sv TV (purei ciette KOU
,. ^fhe divine Logos feparated> and re-
gulated all things in the 'world. r
Topevs KTravTuv o 'lews *&' eio<; Aoyof. The
facred and divine Logos was the Perfon, that
dijlributed and appointed all things?
Heb. xi. 3. No*ty*ei/
We under/land* that the worlds
were framed by the Word of
God.
ColofT.
1 Quis Rer. Divin. Hffires. V. i. p. 506. 1. 10.
* Ibid. p. 504. 1. 31.
I
ColofT. 1.15, 16.
CTl V CCJTU SKTl(r9lf] TO,
rex, 6v ran; xgavoig, Kctt
roc. 7Ti rys yi$, rex, cpotrex., KCX.I
roe, aoptxrex, . ... roc 'srctvra, &
otvrx, KOU ti$ avrov,
Cbrift ...the firjl-born of every
creature. For by him were all
things created, that are in hea-
ven, and that are in earthy vifible
and invijible. . . All things 'were
created by him and for him.
XXIV.
He is the Shepherd of God's flock.
$ TffGi^L'f\v "Act 1 . @oi<nXvg o Q
oiKyv
, Ts-puroywQv mov, ot; rr,v
;; a^sX^jc, act. ri-- peyxAz @aciXzu<; YTTIZ
$i$e%eTcu. T'bs Deity, like afoepherd, and at
the fame time a monarch, arts ivitb the mofl con-
f ummaie order and reclitud*: ; and has appointed
his Firft-bcrn, tb? upright Logos, like the
Subfiitute of <7 mighty prince, to take the care
fj his f acred pick. l
Heb.
1 DC Agricalt. V. i. p. 308. 1. 27.
vo>Acv t -sroo^crxfuevc; rev occv ctvrx
Heb. Xlii. 20i noiftevu ruv arQoaruv rov
... rov Kuoiov ypuv lyrvv.
'The great Shepherd of the flock
. . . our "Lord Jefus.
John X. 14. Eyu ipi o Ttroipyv o notXog, xott
ytvu<rx.tt) roe. spot, xou yivuvKOfioti
VTTO rcav epuv.
I am the good Shepherd, and
know my fieep, and am known
of mine.
1 Pet. ii. 25. Xf>t$-ov . . . rov 'srotpsva KKI eTrur-
XOTTOV ruv 4 /u % &)l/ vpuv.
Chrift . . . . the Shepherd, and
Guardian of your fouls.
XXV.
Of the Power and Royalty of the Logos,
as defcribed by Phiio, who mentions him as
The great Gwernour cf the world, and fpeaks
of his creative and -princely power : for through
them the Leavens and the whole world were pro-
duced, 'o TX 'H^/Epcoj/of Aoyog, V.OLI r, "woiiiiriK'/l
KKI (3a.criXr,c.y CVVK^K; K.\JTZ. Txruv yxo o 'rs
Ovpon/og, K&I (TupTrag o xocruo/;. 1
i Cor.
1 De Profugis, V. i. p. 561. 1. 33.
I 2
I Cor. XV. 25. Ae< yctf* OWTOV
%< v ow $y wavrotg rag
VTTO rag -arc^af KVTV.
For Chrifl mujl reign till he bath
put alibis enemies under his feet.
Eph. i. 21, 22. X/s"0 .... VTreocwu
KOtl 'STOiVTOi;
iSj H fjiOVOV tV Tto OCIUVI
raru, AXa KXI ev ru
(o 0eo;) vTrtTottv VTTO
Chrift . . . above all principality ^
and might> and dominion* and
every name> that is named, not
only in this 'world but in the
world to come . . . and God hath
put all things under bis feet.
Heb. 1. 2, 3. A/ # KK.I (o eoc) T%
By iv bom aljo God made the
'worlds.
ApOC. XVli. 14. c Or< KVPIO; KVQIUV e$i y KCHI @ourt-
For be is Lord of lords,, and
King of kings.
XXVI. The
C 133 )
XXVI.
The Logos the Phyfician that heals all evil.
Tov AfyeXov (og eft Aoyog) ufnrso IXTOOV
Luke iv. 1 8, Hi/eu^a Ku^; 67r' S[A . . . ix<rK<rQ<x.i
rug <rvvTeTpippt.svvg ryv KKQ$IIZV.
*The Spirit of the Lord is upon
;<?, becaufe he hath anointed me
. . . . to heal the broken-hearted.
I Pet. li. 24. Tu fAuXuTTi O.VTX iaQijT&.
By whofe jlrlpes ye were healed.
Luke vii. 21. Ev avrvi <Je TV u^a. s
OtTTO VCHTUV KOil
In that fame hour he cured
many of their infirmities., and
plague -j, and of evil /pints.
James i. 21. Aea0-$ TOV eptpvrcv Xoyov, rev
ovvctftevov <ru(ra,i rug ^v^xg vpuv.
Receive with meeknefs the en-
grafted word, which is able to
fa^e your Jouh ,
XXVII. The
De Leg. Allegor. V. i. p. 122, 1. 17,
1 3
( 134 )
XXVII.
Tile Seal of God. *O <Je TV -zroivvros (jo
avrog tgiv vj (Ttyporyti;, y TOIV OVTUV
ci .... ars SKpcxytiov KO.I SIKUV
h.oyv. tfhe Logos j by 'whom the world
was framed, is the Seal, after the impreffion
cf which every thing is made . . . and is rendered
the fimilitnde y and image of the perfeft Word of
God.*
o ^ccooiKTvio e$"iv oiidiog Koyoq. ''The foul of
man is an imprejjlon of a Seal, of which the
proto-type, and original characlerijlick^ is the
cverlajling Logos.' 2 '
John vi. 27. Txrov ycx,^ (ljj<ry) o
Jcfus, the Son of man . . . him
hath the Father feakd.
Ephef,
1 DC Profugis, V. i. p. 547. 1. 49. p. 548. 1. 2.
2 DC Plantations Noc, V. i. p. 332. I. 31.
Ephef. i. 13. EfffPS^fir^fTS ru Txrvevptx.
TU>
In whom alfo, after that ye be~
h'eved, ye were fealed with that
holy Spirit of promife.
Heb. i. 3. Xpi?o$ . . . onrauyacrfta . . . .
Chrijly the brightness of his
(God's) glory, and the exprefs
image of his perfon.
XXVIII.
The Logos the fure refuge, to whom
before all others we ought to feek. c o 9-aog-
sty ov -srpcarov xctTatpewyeiv ut
Matt. XI. 28. Aevrs woog pB 'srxvrsg ot KOTTI-
Come to me, all ye, that labour ,
and are heavy laden, and I will
give you reft.
i Peter
1 De Profugis, V. i. p. 560. I. 14,
* 4
( 136 )
I Peter ii. 25. Hre y^ us TS^OLTOL
)
a\X eTreg-patyyTe vvv TTI rov woi-
tevOC, KOLl tTTHTKOTTOV TUV
Te were as Jheep going ajlray,
but are now returned unto the
Shepherd> and the guardian of
your fouls.
XXIX.
Of fpiritual food ryy VCOLVIOV rocQyv 4^%^?
the heavenly nutriment of the foul, equally
diftributed by the Logos to all, who want it,
and will make a good life of it. x
Mark Xlii. JO. E/^ -zzrai/ra roe, tQvy $st
TO EvxfysXiov.
'The Go/pel mujl be pubtlfied
among all nations.
Matt. XXIV. 14. Ka; K'/i^j-^Y^ron TVTO TO tuocy-
yeXiov . . . . ey oXy TV oiKVfASvri.
And this Go/pel of the kingdom
flail be preached in all the
world.
Mat.
* Quis Rerum. Divin. Haeres. V. i. p. 499. 1. 44.
( '37 )
JVTat.XXviii.I9' Sto^WUdwri troivra roe, eQvvj.
Go ye therefore, and teach all
nations.
John iii. 17, Ou ycx.^ ctTrtseitev o eog rov vlov
eig TOV Koarpov, Ivot, Kpivri rov
Iva, rad o
owns.
God fent not his Son into the
, world to condemn the world,
but that the world through him
might be fayed.
. X. 1 8. -<$ r sro(,<roLV rip yyv e^yXQev o
ctvruvj KOH eig TU "srs-
VJS cuvpevyi; rex. '^pctra.
uvruv.
tfheir found went into all the
earth, and their words to the
ends of the world.
Matt. vii. 7. Zjjrarj KCU lu^o-ere* JCflxers, xou
avoryycreroti vpiv.
Seek, and ye Jhall find ; knock^
and it foall be opened unto
you.
Matt.
( '38 )
Matt. V. 6. McMMlOt 01 TVetVUVTES KOil
on KVTOI
Blejfed are they, 'which do
hunger and thirft after righte-
cufnefs-, for they flail be fitted.
Rom. X. 12. *O yotfi auras Kvgio; "uruvruv
tig 'sravrxg rag BTTIKX-
oivrov. .
T^hefame Lord, who is over a/I 3
is neb unto all, that call upon
him.
XXX.
EAET0EPIA.
Of men's forfaking their fins, and return-
ing to their duty: by which they obtain
Aeu0< rye tyvxtfs freedom of the foul.' 1
Alfo of their being brought from a ftate
of vafialage, and exile, to fpiritual liberty by
the Logos. 1
2 Cor.
1 De C. Q. Erud. Gratia. V. i. p. 534. 1. 44.
" De Profugis. V. i. p. 561. 1. 33. p. 563. 1. 25.
( J 39
2 Cor. iii. 17. *O JE Ku^ TO -amu^a tftv. a J
TO arvevpa KvptHj exa Xeu^e^;a.
Now the Lord is that fpirit :
and 'where the fpirit of the Lord
is, there is liberty.
Galat. v. i. T'/j sXevQ&ici w,
Stand faft therefore in the
liberty ', wherewith Chrift hath
made us free.
Galat. V, 13. 'Tpen; yap STT' eXsuQeotoc, ejcA^re.
For, brethren* ye have been
called unto liberty.
I Cor. vii. 22. *O ya^ v Kv^iy
KTreXsvQsoo^ Kvpix
For he that is called in the
Lord, being a fervant, is the
Lord's freeman.
John viii. 36. Euv m o e Yias vf&& eXsuQepucrvi,
If the Son therefore Jhall make
you free, ye are free indeed.
XXXI. The
XXXI.
The happy confequences of men's bed
endeavours. They are by the fame Logos
freed from all corruption, and entitled to
immortality hereafter. TOTS ya
TUV avXuv ayapsvog o 'isoog Aoyog
ruipsTov oxg, xXypov aQavocroVj TV\V ev
uctpTu yevet -roe^iv, 1
5 > / ^
I Cor. XV. C2. *O; vexpoi (ev Xpigu
*J 5 \ a *
5
The dead (in Cbrijl) flail be
raifed incorruptible.
I Cor. XV. C7. Aa vao TO (bQupT
For this mortal mujl put on
immortality.
Rom, VI 11. 21. 'Or; XKI cnury jj KTHTIS
Td)V TIKVUV TV
Becaufe the creature itfelf alfo
ftall be delivered from the
bondage of corruption into the
glorious liberty of the children
of God.
i Peter
1 De C. Q. Erud. Gratia. V. i. p. 535. 1. i.
I Peter i. 3,4. EuXoyijTO? o so; . . . o KCLTO, T6
zzroAu UVTX sXeog a.votye.vvya'ctq
yu,a.g etg eA7n<5a ^uffav Qitx.voc.goi-
(rsug lf\<rv X^ffer ex vsxguv, eig
aovouuzv ottpQapTOV, KXI
xcu KfAaaavTov, TSTwypevyv sv Ou-
aocvoii; etg ypag.
Bleffed be God . . . who, accord-
ing to his abundant mercy, bath
begotten us again unto a lively
hope, by the refarreftion ofjefus
Chrljl from the dead; to an
Inheritance incorruptible ', and
undented, and that fadeth not
away, referred in heaven for
us.
XXXII.
Philo fpeaks of the Logos, not only as the
Son of God, and his firft begotten ; but alfo
Ityles him a-j/aTrjjroi/ TZMQV his beloved Son*
Matt. iii. 17. 'Ovrcg s$tv o ulo$ px o
tfbis is my beloved Son.
Luke
1 De Leg. Alleg. V. i. p. 129. 1. 4.
( H2 )
Luke ix. 35. <bwn eytvero K
, arpf s^/i/ o viog
And there came a 'voice out of
the cloudy faying y rfhis is my
beloved Son, bear him.
2 Pet. 1. 17* Ourof egiv o ulog px o ayotTryTOi;,
sig ov tyu svooxya'a.
tfhis is my beloved So?2, in
whom I am well pkafed.
ColofT, i.I3. 'o C T/0 TTjs 1 cvy&Trvig aura.
T'he Son cf his love.
XXXIII.
He afks, by what means a man may
amvc at pure incorporeal happinefsj or as
he expreiles it yeveirGou ruv uvte^uruv KOU
-jtiw trbayuofruv Khv^ovo^Gi; and aniwers
*O KUTOfsrvBVorQfir ctvuQ'v o KtzQapUTdTos vv<;
o Xv9ei$ ruv ds<r[/,ct)V, xczi eXeuSeow^e^ 1 IIs, who
is infpired from above 'who halb the pure/I
mind who is locfened from the fetters of this
li-orlJ, and hath gained his fyiritual freedom
he only can jjurtake of this happinefs.
Matthi
1 Qiiis Rer. Divin. Hcrcs. V. i. p. 482. 1. 230.
( 143 )
Matth. V. 8. Mot,xot(>ioi ci xuQagoi TV
on otvroi rov Qsov oyovrcu.
Bleffed are the pure in hearty
for they jhall fee God.
Rom. Vlii. 2. C O ycx,^ vopog TV
ev
CX.7TO TH VOfMS VqS KfAClOTlO&g XOU
TV %UVU.TV.
For the law ofthefpirit of life
in Chrift Jefus hath made me
free from the law of fin and
death.
2 Pet. 1. 4* Ta ftsytg-a, ypiv KXI ripix ttcty-
ytXfjLctTa. Aeoeao^reUf Ivot hoc, ra-
TUV yevytrQs 9"e;af KOIVUVOI <pv<reu$..
Wherefore are given to us
exceeding great > and precious
promifes ; that by thefe ye may be
partakers of the divine nature.
I Cor. XIV. I. AtuKere rvjv aycLTryv, fyXxre ^s
TO, 'GTVSVIMZTIKX.
Follow after charity^ and defire
Jpiritual gifts.
Ibid. 12. ZyXuTui sere -srvtvparuv (five
Tcfeek after i what is fyiritual.
XXXIV. Of
( 144 )
XXXIV.
Of good Men admitted to the aflembly
of Saints above. *O< <Jg UV^QUTTUV ptv \)$yyy<rii$
^OC^TOH Je ey EvQvsn; yeyovorei;
en; TO oL$cx,aTQv %oti TeXeuTUTOv ytvoq [teTot-
Thofe, 'who relinquish human doc-
trines^ and become the well difpofed difciples
of God, 'will be one day tranjlated to an in-
corruptible, and perfeff, order of beings. 1
Heb.Xli.22,23. AAXa 'zrootreXyiXvQix.Te Ziuv ogsi,
0ea 'jros .... Kent
. . zcci
GIKOLIUV TSTiXlU[AVtoV.
But ye are come unto mount
Si on, and to the city of the
living God, and to an innume-
rable company of angels, and
to the fpirits of juft men made
*/A J J J
perfccl.
Colofi;
1 De Sacrificiis, V. i. p. 164. 1. 40.
( '45 )
ColofT. i. 12. Ev%cq>tg'isvTef ru "sretr^i^ ru IK-
vutravri ypocs eig ryv peridot rts
K\yni ruv crytuv ev ru q>uri.
Giving t hanks unto the Father ;
which hath made us meet to be
partakers of the inheritance of
Saints in light.
XXXV.
Of the juft Man not being given over to
utter death, but raifed by the Word of God.
For through the Logos, by whom all things
were created, God will advance him to be
near himfelf in heaven.
Hvtxot, yxv reXevrccv
s-idsTcu, ucTTreo 01 "srooTSooi . . . aAAa dia. p
OilTliS fJl,iTOt.VlOt,TOCt t 01 \S KOCl
O Tea otvru Aoyu KKI TO 'zrtzv tpya.-
KUI rov T\eiov OCTTO ruv wegiyeiuv avctyuv
IUVTQV r iXovtrots TzrXycricv e&vrx.
For
1 De Sacrificiis, V. i. p. 165. 1. 7. Ibid. I. 5.
K
( H6 )
For when he is configmd to death, he
does not fail, nor is he added to the numbers,
who have gone before him : but be is tranjlated
to another Jiate by the Word of that great Caufe
of all things, (the Logos), by whom the world
was created For God, by bis f aid Word, by
which he made all things, will raife the perfect
man from the dregs of this world, and exalt
him near himfelf: he will place him near bis
own perfon.
John vi. 44. Oy^e/j dwurizt eXQtiv -STOG;
ectv py o n<zTi}(> o TzrEjttif/a
lAxi/OT? CCVTOV* xoti tyu
uurov TV scr^ary ^eoa.
A r <? man can come to me t except
the Father, which hath fent me,
draw him: and 1 will raife
him up at the lafl day.
John vi. 37. nav, o o/JWi poi o UKT^O, Tyoog
^ that tie Father giveth me,
Jlxill come to me.
John
( '47 )
John xiv. 6. OuJ^ e^erou 7r f^ rov
It fM] 01 [*%.
No man cometb to the Father,
but by me.
John xii. 26. c O^r eipi eyu, exet xut o
o epos tc;ott KUI
KVTOV o naTyg.
Where I am, there alfo Jhall
my feruant be ... him will my
Father honour.
XXXVI.
AOT02 APXIEPETS.
Of the Logos being the true High Prieft;
of his being without fin, and anointed with
oil. *O xojyAOf, ev u KU.I A^/s^eug 1 , o
Aoyos, 1 - Asyopsv yoe.o rov Apxtege
ocXXoc Aoyov s/ov sivai, TTOCVTUV
povov, AAa KKI ct.Kx<rtuv
1 De Somniis, V. i. p. 653. 1. 23.
K 2
wort ryv xeQotXyv xewtfctt
// is the world, in which the Logos, God's
Firjl-born, that great High Priejl, rejides.
And I aj/ert, that this High Prieft is no man,
but the Holy Word of God: who is not capable
of either voluntary, or involuntary Jin and
hence his head is anointed with oil.
Heb. IV. 14. EXOVT$ vv Affltegecc, peyav, c!;e-
XyXvQorce, Tvq vgavxs, lyvvv rov
vlov ra #, KKTUftev ryt; oto-
Seeing then, that we have a
great High Prieft^ that is
paj/ed into the heavens, Jefus
the Son of God, let us hold fafl
our profej/ion.
I Pet. 11. 22. 'Of ctftotDTiotv UK tTTOiyo-ev, v$e
evpQij $0X01; ev ru sopotn KVTV.
Who did no fm, neither was
guile found in his mouth.
John
1 De Profugis, V. i. p. 562. 1. 13. and 22.
John viii. 46. T<; ef vpuv
Which of you convinceth me of
fin?
A6ls iv. 27. TCI; a
holy Child Jefus, whom
thou haft anointed.
John i. 41. Ev(>yK<x.pev rev Mecr<r<av, o (ft
have found the Mejias,
which is, being interpreted^
the Chriji. (i. e. the anointed.)
Heb. Vll. 26. Awieoevs, etnas, <X,KXKO$, api-
ruv
For fuch an High Prieft be-
came us, who is holy, harmlefs,
undefiled, feparatefromjinnen.
K 3 XXXVII. Aoros
< 150 )
XXXVII.
AOFOS APXIEPETS ME0OPIO2, OR THE LOGOS
IN HIS MEDIATORIAL CAPACITY.
Philo mentions the Logos as the Great
High Prieft and Mediator for the fins of
the world. 1 And, fpeaking of the rebellion
of Korah, he introduces the Logos as faying
Ketyu tis-ijKew avex. ^<rov Kvpiv xai v[AUV. 2 -It
was 7, who Jlood in the middle between the
Lord and you. For this province was de*
legated to him by God the Father Ivoc,
ftzQoplO$ TO ySVOfteVQV XlCtJCglVVI Tit TtreTTOHJKOTOS 3
that by Jlanding as a mediator between both^
he might feparate the creature from the Creator.
He had before faid Qowpufy KM rov pera
ffwafiys a,7rvev& Sootftovrot (rvvrovug 'legov Aoyov,
Ivot, $y IAKTOI; TUV TeQvijxoTuv KOU ruv fyvruv.
I can-
1 DC Somniis, V. i. p. 653. 1. 14.
* Quis Rerum Divin. Hxres. V. i. p. 502. I. I.
J Ibid. p. 501. 1. 46.
/ cannot 'without admiration view the facred
Logos, pr effing with fuch zeal and without
remijion, that he may ft and between the dead
and the living. 1 The High Pried, who
went once in a year into the Holy of
Holies, was a type of one greater, who
was to come. Philo defcribes this facred
apartment as KTUTKTU TV 'lepit aura TU
tig K wrfot^ TV BvtotuTx o
i, rj vys-eiat yoftsvy, povov
KOC.TOC TO,
v TS Kcct eigyvyv otTrcuriv a
very innermoft recefs of the temple the holy
Santfuary, into which the High Prieft once in
a year upon the day of the faft entered, merely
to offer up incenfe, and to make Application
after the rites of his country for the produce of
all good things, and for plenty and peace to
the whole world.* In this account Philo
muft have been in fome refpec~ls wilfully
miftaken. He muft have known, that the
office
1 Quis Rer. Div. Hseres. Vol. i. p. 501. 1. 19.
* De Virtutibus, V. ii. 591. 1. 5.
K 4
office of the High Prieft at this feafon was
to perform an aft of atonement. It was
an everlafting jiatute to make atonement for
the children of Jfrael for all their Jins once *
year. 1 As to any prayers to obtain $0% <xv
ruv uytzQuv plenty or produce, no fuch were
made; much lefs for the univerfal peace and
happinefs of mankind. I do not believe,
that the word pray, or prayer, is to be
found in any one ordinance of Mofes.
He therefore impofed upon the emperour
Caligula, when he made this declaration
before him, What he fays, of the Logos
being the Interceflbr for man, a Mediator
for Sin, is true : but it was the Logos in a
capacity, which he could not be brought
to allow. The whole is very truly defcribed
by St. Paul, who mentions Chrift as both
High Prieft and Mediator a High Prieft,
who has once for all entered the true Holy
of Holies, Heaven ; and makes interceflion
for us.
Heb.
1 Lev. xvi. 34.
( '53 )
Heb.viii. I 6. T&xopev A^e^ea, og M.ot&uriv ev
$e%ict TV tyovv rye
v Toig vootvotSy TUV oiyitav
We have fuch an High Prieftj
. <who is fet on the right hand of
the throne of the Majefty in the
heavens-, a Minifler of the
fanftuary . . . a Mediator of a
better covenant.
Heb ix. 24. Ou ycq> tig %^07ro^ra aytoc.
X^fOf, UVTITUTTIX TUV
XX* tig UUTOV TOV
tsptxvov, vvv [jt,(pa.vi(r()ijvoci Tea
TX 0ea VTTBQ
For Chrift is not entered into
holy places made with hands,
which were types of the true;
but into heaven itfelf, now to
appear in the prefence of God
for us.
Heb.
( '54 )
Heb. ix. Ilj 12.
ruv
xou
ts rav-
KOU [MHTXUV, &UX, T l$l&
P ttpOLTFCHJr i TC6
uytot., ouuviov XvTpucrtv evpapevos.
But Chrift being come an High
Priejl of good things to come>
ly a greater and more ferfett
tabernacle^ not made with
hands, that is to fay, not of
this (worldly) building; nei-
ther by the blood of goats, and
calves, but by his own blood be
entered in once into the holy
place, having obtained eternal
redemption for us.
1 Tim. ii. 5. *E^ yoe.^ Qeog, sis KOLI pertTiis
avQouTroi;
For there is one God, and one
Mediator between God and
man, the man Jefus Chrift.
XXXVIII. Con-
( '55 )
XXXVIII.
Concerning the fix cities of refuge, to
which people guilty of accidental homicide
were to repair; and of their return from
exile upon the death of the High PriefL
And the Lord fpake unto Mofes. Ye flail
give three cities on this Jide Jordan, and three
cities Jhall ye give in the land of Canaan, 'which
Jhall be cities of refuge: that every one, that
kilkth another unawares may fee thither.
And he Jhall abide in it unto the death of the
High Prieft, 'which was anointed with the
holy oiL*
XXX.
Philo's opinion concerning thefe cities and
the death of the High Prieft.
Though he in general fuppofes, that the
ordinances concerning the Levites and the
High Prieft were limited to them, and had
no further meaning -, and is of the fame
opinion
1 Numbers xxxv. 10. 14. 25.
( 156 )
opinion in refpecl to the other folemn
appointments j yet he is forced in fome
inftarices to allow, that there was fomething
farther meant, and that the High Prieft
mentioned was a type of one far greater:
and he gives his reafons for his opinion. His
words I have before quoted : but I mail
repeat the purport of them, as they deferve
to be farther confidered.
He fays, 1 that he was for fometime in a
ftate of doubt and perplexity concerning the
nature of this ordinance, when he confidered
it literally. For the punifhment did not
feem to be equally impofed, as the perfons
were alike guilty. Some muft have fled away
at the commencement of the Priefthood ;
and others when the Pried was near his
difTolution. Hence, fome muft have been in
a flate of exile for years, and others poflibly
for only a few days. He therefore concludes
with faying, that the High Prieft ultimately
alluded
1 Sec p. 91, 92, 93. of this Treatifc.
( '57 )
alluded to was the divine 1 Logos: and the
ftate of exile was his withdrawing his influ-
ence from the foul of man.* We fee that
he came near the mark, but could not attain
to it. In confequence of this he has brought
himfelf into as great difficulties, as thole,
which he fought to avoid.
This great perfonage was certainly the
Logos j but the Logos in his human capacity,
Jefus Chrift the MefTiah; who was alluded
to under the character of the High Prieft
anointed 'with oil. He was to free the world
from a flate of exile, and fpiritual bondage ;
and procure liberty to the foul. This was
effected by the death of the Meffiah, 3
the true High Prieft j a circumftance,
which Philo could not comprehend. By
his wrong application of the truth, he is
obliged with much refinement to attribute
this death to a perfon incapable of dying;
and
yaj Toy Affiigea. sx auTrov, ata* Aoyo So EI*(.
V. i. p. 562. 1. 13.
a De Profugis, V. i. p. 563. I. 24.
I Cor. XV. 3. A7rtS**x vine run a^ajrii,'* r,p.ui*
2 Cor. V, I5 v-ini> r<ra.?Tu ~=8a;;y.
J
and in the end he makes it no death at all.
He accordingly fuppofes it to confift in the
falling off of man ; when the divine Logos,
the great High Prieft, withholds his falutaiy
influence, and man is quite deferted. x *Eug
o ltUTtt,TO<; vrog Koyoq fyi KOU wepeftv ev
$For as long as the divine Logos lives
and prejides in the human foul, there is no
guilt j no appearance of fin : but when he
withdraws himfelf, then commences fin and
corruption. But this is the fpiritual death
of the man, and not the death of the Logos,
who could neither fuffer, nor die. He is
reprefented by Philo himfelf, as the Son of
God, before the Angels, before all worlds, and
afitoft everlajling 1.^otyig sv y$ o %a^axr^
o otfitof Aoyo$. The Author in confequence
of it is forced to compromife the matter,
and fo to qualify his words, as fcarcely to
leave any fenfe. Z EV $e ctTroQuvri (o Af%iepvs
Aoyoi), UK, etvrog ^ioc(p9cx.^ When the Logos
Jball die, who is not fufceptible of death or cor-
ruption then, at this crifis of death without
dying,
1 De Profugis, V. i. p. 563. 1. 27.
* Ibid. 1. 31.
( '59 )
dying, the freedom of man is to commence.
But this way of reafoning is too vague and
inconliftent to be admitted. It is plain, that
Philo had accefs to a noble repofitory ; from
which he borrowed fome very excellent ma-
terials j but failed greatly in the application.
XL.
The neceflity of a Redeemer, and ranfom
for fin.
Though Philo could not admit of a cru-
cified Mefliah, yet he allows, and adopts,
moft of the falutary articles relating to Chrift
in his (late of manhood : by which we may
learn, how very reafonable they appeared to
him. But at the fame time he mifapplies
them, and refers them either to the Logos
in his heavenly (late, or elfe to the fupreme
Deity, to whom they cannot be applied. We
have feen, that he fpeaks of fin, and the
propitiation for Jin-, alfo of the forgo, KM
4rufQ*'t&e price and ranfom for iniquity
and the means of falvation, by which fpiri-
tual freedom is to be obtained here, and
ever-
( 160 )
everlafting life hereafter. But thefe bleflings
he fuppofes to arife from acts and ordi-
nances, which were not adequate; fuch as
the fin-offerings, and other oblations, which
were prefented in the Temple, but were not
fufficient for that great purpofe. He fome-
times feems to acknowledge, that thefe ob-
lations were types, and that the High Prieft
himfelf, who made interceflion, was merely
a reprefentative of a greater Perfonage, from
whom thefe bleflings were to be derived.
At other times he thinks, that mere repent-
ance without fatisfaction is fufficient :
e$-i. To repent affords remijjion of fins.
Humility produces propitiation. Still he ac-
knowledges, that there mud be additionally
fome oblations made, and fome victims
offered to divine juftice. On thefe he founds
our reconciliation with the offended Deity ;
alfo on the rectitude of the Priefts and
Levites, by whom the offerings were made.
He
1 De Congreflu, &c. V. i. p. 534.. 1. 43. See alfo p. 84.
* DC Leg. Allcg. V. i. p. 121. 1, 35.
He ftyles rhefe oblations ixu<rp%$', and the
altar l /Aac-r^cv, or the feat of mercy, and
propitiation: and mentions the Levites as
* Aurgat, TUV aXXuv aTTccvTuv a propitiation for
all the people. Both repentance and offerings
were requifite, and the miniftering of the
Priefts neceflary : but they were only figu-
rative, and of themfelves could not effect
atonement and reconciliation. Something
of more confequence was wanting.
Philo in thus profecuting his opinion
feems to approximate to the truth: but his
ftrong prejudices were a conftant obflacle;
and would not fuffer him to admit it in full
force. Yet he fometimes makes wonderful
conceflions, as may be feen in many extracts,
which I have produced from him j and efpe-
cially in the following inftance. He is fpeak-
ing of the neceffity of a Mediator, to whom
all in the fervice of God mould apply.
11 De Profugis, V. i. p. 561. 1. 13.
& De Sacrificiis, V. i. p. 186. 1. 25.
L
1 Ava.yx.ouov yct,(> yv rov legupwov ru r'd
Harpi notoaxXvjTfi) %oi>j<r9ou riXsioroe.ru rry
vlu, -zroog re a^uvt\giav u^tx.prr^cx.ruv, xai
a,q)Qovurc*,ruv ayoc&tav. For tt was necejfary for
a perjon-t who was performing his duty to the
great Father of the world, to apply to his Son
(the Logos) as an advocate 'the mofl perfett in
every virtue, both to have his fins forgotten**
and for the obtaining of every good gift. One
would imagine, that he had feen the Epiftles
of St. John, and alluded to them. 2 Texvia
pis, recur a. y^ct$to vpiv, ivtx, py apizaryrs. Kcu
EO.V rig Kpacry, nctgoMXyrov sxcpsv trgog rov Ucn-
repa, lyrxv Xcv, cixatov' KUI ocurog
^sot ruv ctpuftnuv ypwv. My little children,
thefe things I write unto you, that ye Jin not.
But if any man Jin, we have an advocate with
the Father, Jefus Chrift, the righteous (rsXeto-
rccrov rvp> aotr'/iv) : and he is the propitiation for
our fins. His words feem to be a comment
upon the Apoftle.
XLI. OF
1 De Mofe, V. ii. p. 155. 1. 25.
1 I John ii. i.
XLI.
OF PHILO'S GREAT MISTAKE,
He complains juftly of the degeneracy of
mankind, and prevalence of wickednefs ; and
adds r Ttg S* xx KV TUV ev (povvvreav roe. TUV
touv s
pycx,
TOV
voc rex. pev eTriKufyKry' Avrptx, <e KCX.I
q rv\q tyvxy/;, etg sXevQepi'tzv auryv
What man is there of true judgment > who^ when
he fees the deeds of moft men, is not ready to call
aloud to the great Saviour God, that he would
be pleafed to take off this load of Jin y and by
appointing a price and ranforn for the foul,
rejlore it to it's original liberty ?
This Xvrpov KOU crag-pav ranfbm and price
3 b J *
of redemption^ was paid by the Son^f God,
as had been foretold by Ifaiah, and other
Prophets 5 and he on that account was
efteemed
5 De Confufione Ling. V. i. p. 418. 1. 47.
L 2
( 164 )
efteemed the true Saviour of the world. He
offered himfelf for a propitiatory facrifice ;
arid by him the true freedom of the foul was
obtained. Surely cur infirmities he hath borne,
and our farrows he hath undergone. He was
wounded for our tranfgrejjions ; was fmltten
for our iniquities an d by his bruifes we are
healed. 1 This redemption was effected by
the Mefliah Chrift, who was a ftumbling
block to Philo and his nation, and unfor-
tunately rejected by them. Our Saviour
himfelf declared openly, that he came into
the world 2 <5W; ryv tywx7\v otVTV Xvrgov
avn 73-oXXuv to give his life as a ranfom
for many. And St. Paul fays
eavrov avTiXuTgov
Jefus Chrift, who gave himfelf a ranfom
for all. This was not properly the Logos,
as Philo feems to think : for the Word
of God in heaven cannot fuffer, nor be
facrificed. But it was *Avfyu7ros x^of
. . purtT'riq * Kcti avQguTruv the man
Jefus
* Iiliah liii. 5. ; Matt. xx. 28.
3 I Tim. ii. 6. 4 IbiJ. v. 5*
( 1 65 )
Jefus Chrifty the one Mediator between God
and men. Hence he is miflaken, when he
fays x Aeyopsv oe rov AwteoeK VY. uvQpuTrov
The High Priejl is not a man. For all that
was lofl by one man was to be repaired by
another. The heathen had fome traditional
knowledge of this, as appears by the oracle,
Ka; Kt$ot,\c(.q Koovify, KUI ru Utzrpt ar^t-Trere (purcc.
This by a miftake became the founda-
tion of human facrifices j of which cuftom
Philo himfelf takes notice. But he makes
all true expiation to center within the pre-
cincts of the Jewifh Temple, and to be
compleated in their rites and offerings;
through the interceflion of the High Prieft,
the reprefentative of the Logos. To Chrifl
the Redeemer, the Word of God in a ftate
of humanity, he paid no regard : nor could
he conceive, that there was 2 a fecond man,
the loft Adam, who was the Lord from heaven.
He trufted to the law, and the ordinances
eflablifhed by that law : not knowing that
the
1 V. i. p. 562. 1. 13. e i Corinth, xv. 43. 47,
( i66 )
law was only I <rx,iav TUV
v the foado-w of good things to come
It therefore could never make it's profelytes and
followers perfett. Neither the Levite, nor
the High Prieft of the Levites, could make
atonement for the fins of the world.
yoto aipix Tavguv KOU r^ocyuv ccQaip&v
The blood of bulls and goats had no fuch
efficacy. They were types of a greater offer-
ing to be one day made : and God himfelf
had fhewn their infufficiency, and that there
was no real dependence upon them. To
what purpcfe is the multitude of your facrifices
to me, faith the Lord. I am full of the burnt-
offerings of rams-, and the fat of fed beajls.
1 delight not in the blood of bullocks^ or of
lambs, or of he-goats: bring no more vain
oblations. 3 Philo did not confider, that the
daily facrifice was to be taken away, and the
ordinances of Mofes to ceafe ; when the
Meffiah
1 Hcb. x. r. = Ibid. v. 4.
1 Ifaiah i. u. and 1.
MefTiah Prince was to be cut off, and not
for himfelf, but for the fim of the whole
worlds To fuch evidence he was ,deaf;
and induftrioufly avoids ever mentioning the
Meffiah, whofe emblem the anointed High
Prieft was : and he feldom applies to the
Prophets, by whom the Meffiah was fore-
told.
PHILO S NOTION OF THE RETURN OF THE
DISPERSED JEWS.
He could not be perfuaded, that this
great Perfonage had appeared, and beea
rejected by the Jews: of whofe blindnels
he partook and was a tacit abettor of their
crime. Inftead of apprehending any evil,
that would enfue, he anticipates much
happinefs; and feems to think, that the
reftoration of his brethren, difperfed among
the Gentiles, was not far off, and that they
mould
1 Dan. ix. 26*
L 4
( '68 )
fhould experience the good will of the
Deity * Evpsveiots rev^ovTou ryq ex. TX
xott tAew e ..... Kav yao ev e<r%r;a;f u<rt
-aro^a roig oti^oiXura^ avrvg
u<nre(> aty* evog (ruv9ypaTo$ y
roiq
euoetrdevref Koeir]ovuv
They ivill experience the goodnefi of
the Saviour and merciful God. For though
they may be in ajlate ofjlavery, and have been
carried captive by their enemies to the farlheft
farts of the earthy yet they will all, as it were
upon a fignal given, be Jet free in one day.
For their general return to virtue will be
matter of univerfal wonder to their majiers.
etf%etv. 'They will fend them back free to their
country, and be afoamed any longer to rule over
perfons fo fuperiour to thcmfehes. He then
proceeds to mention their return from
Greece, and other places, and of their
being conducted by a divine Perfonage in
appearance far beyond any thing, that the
eye
r De Exccrat. V. ii. p. 435. J. 3^.
( 169 )
eye of mortal ever beheld : who would be
perceptible to them, but invifible to the reft
of the world. Then their land was to be
replenimed, and happinefs and honour to
be their portion : and a fuperabundance of
good things was to enfue ' KccQoc-sr^ aewauv
wqyuv TV 0ea xotgtruv gevcrai as flowing from
the everlafting fountain of God's grace and
goodnefs. In fhort he mentions his brethren
as the only future objects of God's loving -
kindnefs; and reprefents the reft of the
world as under a curfe * T^i ya.% o eos
rag ctpug CTT; TW; .... %$$ God 'Will turn
all his wrath againji their enemies. This
illufion prevailed, and thefe fair profpe6ls
were entertained, at the very time, when
the clouds were gathering, and a ftorm
impending, which foon burft upon this
devoted people, and terminated in their utter
ruin. So far from any return of the captive
tribes, the whole Jewifh nation faw their
city taken, their temple ruined, and their
land
1 De Execrat V. ii. p. 436. 1. 25.
* Ibid, 1. 28,
land made defolate. And they were them-
felves driven away, to join their apoftate
brethren in foreign lands, and to finait
under a long and painful captivity. Whe-
ther Philo lived fufficiently long to fee all
his views rendered abortive, and to have
fhared in thefe calamities, is uncertain.
He certainly approached towards the time
of this crifis.
SOME REMARKABLE DOCTRINES OF PHILO,
WITH PARALLEL PASSAGES FROM THE
EVANGELISTS AND APOSTLES.
XLIII.
Of natural impurity to be cleanfed and
wafhed away by divine influence only.
TO
vof/,i<ravTix,<; MCWM; eivoti cx-vrvg ctvsu
TiS TCtiV KyXlOUV OiVOC^OV MViai KOCt
It
1 DC Somniis, V. i. p. 662. 1. 37.
// is cur duty to trufl to God to cleanfe
and beautify our frame, and not to think*
that we are of ourfehes capable, without his
heavenly grace, to purge and wafi away
the fpots, with which our nature abounds.
John XV. 5. Xo*f jt* * ouv&(r6& Ttroisiv vasv.
Without me ye can do nothing.
John ill. 5. Eai/ py rig ysvvyQy e% uootros xa,t
wvotrett i<reXQeiv
tiq ry\v
Except a man be born of water
and of the fpirit, he cannot
enter into the kingdom of God.
I ThefT. V. 23. AVTOS <5s o og
ayiuvcu VfA<x,$
And the very God of peace
fanftify you wholly.
TitUS iii.^ -"5' Hftsv yotp -2TOTS Kent yjfAete; . .. da-
Xtvovrsg e7ri6'jfAi&ig KCCI
. . . aXXtx
Kara, rev avrx eXeov
ota Xzrav
For
For we ourfehes alfo were feme-
times . ... ferviag divers lujls
and pleafures .... but God our
Saviour .... according to his
mercy faved us by tbe wajhing
of regeneration, and renewing
of the Holy Ghojl.
I Cor. VI. II. AXAa 7rAiro-a0-0g, uXXoe, yyt-
atrQ^re, aXXa t&KoiiuiQyTe ev ra
TV Kvgix lyrx, KOU ev T<M
TX ypuv.
But ye are wafted, but ye are
fanftifady but ye are jufttfied
in the name of the Lord Jefus y
and by the fpirit of our God.
1 John i. Q, EOLV cfjioXoyupsv rocs
KOLI otxouog,
U.7TO
If we confefs our fins, he is
faithful and jujl to forgive us
our fins, and to cleanfe us
from all unrightcoufnefs.
I cannot
I cannot help fubjoining another paffage
from Philo, in which he takes notice of
fpiritual purification, and the neceflity of
having our fins wafhed away.
(o so$) xui ryg
i Ovpavv ryv emova STTI yyv
TV yev%$ r^tav^ Ivoe. ftvj arvxytrvi ryg
ryv egotv Zjcyvyv KOLI ret
sv CLMTV\
yap emu ctf)<r 10,5 r,^uv ev
TVJV Xxyvyv iopvircurQcU) TO Aoy/oi/, Ivtx. s^jttsv u
ot KOU aTroXvc-Kevoi rex.
rov a9
For, when it pleafed God to fend down from
heaven the likenefs of celejlial irirtue, out of
pity to mankind, that they might not hereafter
fail of a better lot, he thought proper to appoint
emblematically a facred tabernacle, and to
furnijh it with various articles : which taber-
nacle was a type and refemblance of divine
wifdom.
Quis Rer. Divin. Ffxres. V, i. p. 488. 1. 39.
wifdom. For he fells us, that he placed this
tabernacle, the feat of his oracle, in the midft
of our * impurities, that we might have wkere~
withal to cleanfe ourjehes, and wajlo away all
the jilth and pollution of our wretched, and
ignoble being*
Our infirmities are very truly described by
Philo, and the necefiity of purification.
But this was not to be effected by a worldly
tabernacle; but by a great High Prieft, of
whom he has elfewhere taken notice -, and
who has once for all entered into a heavenly
tabernacle, of which this was only an em-
blem. The High Prieft was Chrift himfelf
TUV ayiuv XeiTXo r yo$, KCU T*\q cxvivv;^ ry<;
ctXyQivy;, qv STT^&V o TLu^tog, xui UK oiv9ou7ros z
a minijler of the fantfuary, and of the
true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and
not man.
The
* Leviticus xvi. i5. The Editor interprets this
paflage otherwife.
* Heb. viii. 2.
The former ordinances were ineffectual,
ftovov STTI (3puftaari KOU Tpofiourt) KOU
{3<X,7TTt(rftOl$, KOit OlKUlUfACtVl (T
&7TMifJt,tva,. Xpifog os
rtsv pBXkovruv uyuQuv, ^toe. rye
nut TeXttorepag SKyvyi;, ss
ivhich flood only in meats and drinks, and
divers wajhings, and carnal ordinances, impofid
upon them to the time of reformation.
But-Chrift being come, an High Prlejl of
good things to come, by a greater and more
perfett tabernacle, not made with hands, that
is to fay, not of this building ..... hath
entered once into the holy place, having ob-
tained eternal redemption for us.
4 </
XLIV. Of
1 Heb. ix. 1C, ii, 12.
XLIV.
Of our beft works not being of themfelves
acceptable, nor of value, but through the
goodnefs of God My$e ryv aeryvj ccvev
Eve n virtue 'without God's fanflion can never
profit us.
Rom. Vlil. 8. *O< ev cocoxt wres Qeu ao(rai
OVVUVTUl.
y that are in the Jlejh,
cannot pleafe God.
I Peter ii. 5 ..... euTTgoa-XtKTKS TU Ssu ^a
.... acceptable to God through
Jefus Chrijl.
Heb. Xli. 28.
Let us have grace, whereby we
may fcrvc God acceptably.
Rom.
1 De Deteriore infidiaudo, V. i. p. 203. 1. 18.
Rom. iii. 24. . . Stxaivftevoi OUOSKV TV aura
%a0*r; hoe. TY\q ocTToXuroucrsu
iv Xoi^-u lyra, cv -zzrooe^ro o
Being juftified freely by his
grace, through the redemption,
that is in Jefas Chrift, whom
God hath fet forth to be a pro-
pitiation.
2 Tim. i. o. . 6e* TV
... XKTC*. TO, t^ytx,
ypuv, aXXa, KOC.T loiav wpoo&rtv
KKl 'XJX.QIV.
God, who hath faved us, and
called us, . . , not according to
cur works, but according to his
own purpofe, and grace.
Rom. XV. 1 6. ... UocrQoot, . .
sv TirvevpiXTi
An offering acceptable, being
fanttified by the Holy Gboft.
M XLV, Of
XLV.
Of Faith in God, the firft requifite.
o a7rotio%ys afc 10 ** avuGets rr t
KCX.I ug Kinu rye ysve<reu$ ctUTyg, Kxt uq
y.cK.i a.ioi(pQoQOV Ixotvu povu Sitx.QuXc&^ou.
rfhat man is only worthy of acceptation, ivbo
places his hope in God y as the Author of his
being ; and as the only one, who is able to keep
bim free from fm and corruption*
OV [Aydzvu, V
) eg ccv py STTI Qeov
Nobody foould be looked upon as at all human,
that does not place his trujl in God. 2
Tloog TO Ov Tsrig-iv . . . ryv (2<x.(riXidix, TUV ctotruv.
Faith in God> the mofl noble of all virtues.*
Heb.
* DC Praemiis, &c. V. ii. p. 410. 1. 24.
1 Ibid. 1. 34.
7 DC Abrahamo, V. ii. p. 39. 1. 18.
( '79 )
Heb. XI. 6. Xut>is Js -w^uq aSvvotTOV svagscr-
Without faith it is impofjible to
pleafe him.
Mark xi. 22. C O Iija-vs \iy& KVTOIS, E%sre
Je/us anfwering faith unto
them> Have faith in God.
Rom. ill. 28. AoyifypeQa, xv srig'et
uvQpuirov "XtUQis epyuv
therefore we judge t that a man
is juftified by faith without the
deeds of the law.
Rom. V. I. &uccuuQ6VT6$ vv SK
rov
'Therefore being jujlified by
faith) we have peace with God,
through our Lord Jefus Chrift.
M 2 XL VI. Of
XLVI.
Of the nature of Faith, and of it's very
falutary confequences according to Philo.
In the Old Teflamcnt we find a belief of
God, and a truft in his providence, with a
fubmiffion to his divine will, continually
recommended. But the duty of Faith, and
the bleflings, with which it is attended, were
never fo defcribed, and enforced, as we find
them to have been afterwards by the Evan-
gelifts and Apoflles. Thefe excellent perfons
have taught us, in what it confifts, and the
virtues, with which it Ihould be accompa-
nied; the peace alfo and comfort, with
which it is attended here; and the everlafU
ing happinefs, which it will produce here-
after. This happinefs depends on our Faith
in Chrift, THE WORD OF GOD: on him it is
exprefly founded. But concerning this we
have no fure light afforded either from the
Law,
Law, or from the Prophets. From the.
iacred Writers afterwards we learn, that
without faith, and faith in Chrifb aSwarov
wetotswm (jy e<y) if is impofjible to pleafe
God. 1 By faith we are juftified: 2 By faith
fan&ified: 3 By faith made wife to falvation: 4
Through faith we are faved : 5 The propi-
tiation for our fins obtained through faith. 6
o
By this faith in Chrift the difciples had
power to cart out devils gj
TK OOCipOVlX. 7 KVOl t KOil TOt, OKlfAOVUX. V
y^w ev ru ovopctri a~%. Lord, even the devils
are fubjeft to us in thy name* They were
likewife enabled to improve themfelves in
all that was good; and to preferve them-
felves ay in q, KOU apuftvg, KM tt.vtyK\v\TKq
holy y unblameable^ and unreproveable> if they
remained -nj wi$-i TtQepsXwpevot well efta-
blijhed
1 Heb. xi. 6. a Galat. ii. 16.
3 A&s xxvi. 18. 4 2 Tim. iii. 15.
5 Ephef. ii. 8. 6 Rom. iii. 25.
7 Mark iii. 15. 8 Luke x. 17.
M 3
( 182 )
blijhed in faith. 1 Whatever they alked in
faith, and in the name of Chrift, they were
to obtain. Eav ere Tuiw .... TxraiVTX, ctrx
CKM ce.iT'/i<rr t Tt ev TV\ 7er0C
If ye have faith . ... all things, ivhatfoever ye
ft all ajk in prayer^ believing , ye ft all receive?
Exv TI a;nj(T'/jr ev ru ovoptzTt pXy yu woiycru.
If ye flail ajk any thing in my name, I will do
it 2 St. Paul tells us 5-1
\)7ro$oi.<nq ' 'srocx.y^cx.ruv eXsy
Now faith is the foundation of things hoped for ,
the evidence of things not feen.*
When therefore I fee Philo alluding to any
of thefe doctrines, which were in a great
degree unknown to the Jewifh Church, and
to which the Gentiles were quite Grangers,
I know no fource, from which he could
poflibly obtain them, except from the firil
Chriftians of his time. His defcription of
Faith is very remarkable.
Movov
1 CoIofT. i. 22, 23. * Matt. xxi. 22.
3 John xiv. 14. 4 Heb. xi. i.
y isr^oq TOY
got/ Trig-it;. 'sroiGVj r yoo7![^(X, jtfrtf, 'srXvjpu^oc xgr
) ytx$uv os (pogoi.
eucre&eiK$
z V
ru TsrctyTuv
[Asvcd os ret
'T/je only f lire and wellfounded blejjing<> to 'which
we can trufi^ is faith in God. It is the
comfort of life, and comprehends every falu-
tary hope. It is the diminution of evil, and
productive of all good : the ruin oj demoniacal
influence,
1 Some interpret xaxoooMMwa, unhappinefi ; and it is
fometimes by the Author ufed in that acceptation. But
as it is here contrafted with tvffeut$ ywcrj, I ihould think,
that in this place it relates to foul illufions, and particu-
larly to the influence of demons.
Ariflophanes makes a perfon fay to another, TK * ax
jjyoir' vi [taiiiKv ', x&KwaufMnua re Tt ^.aXAoc ; rrbo would not
third, that this was madnefe ; or rather a diabolical frewy?
Plutus, v. 501.
In another place a man homouroufly fays
xEx.Ao(pa?, axx' ^nraxaj. You did not Jleal it : You only ran
away with it. The other anfwers xaxaJ'ajfwywj You
are frantick Anglice The devil's in you.
Plut. v, 372.
M 4
influence^ and the promoter of true godlinefs.
It affords a title to happinefs, and is the im-
provement of the human foul; when the foul
repofes itfelf, and confides, in the great Author
of it's being ; who can do all things, but wills
only* and deter mine s> what is.
XLVII.
k,
Of Repentance in confequence of Faith.
a^v, ^era ryv
The next duty in order after faith is repent-
ance of our Jins.
Mera, <5s TTJV eXiridog viwp uyuv Seursoos $iv y tv
When we have gained hope, the next conficJ,
in which we are engaged, is to eftablifo re-
pentance.
Luke
1 De Abrahamo, V. ii. p. 38. 1. 49, &c.
* Ibid. V. ii. p. 3. 1. 46.
1 De Praemiis et Pcenis, V. ii. p. 410, 1. 36.
( 1*5 )
Luke xlii. 3. Ou%;, Xtyu vpv' uXX euv py
utTctvoyrs, "zzrcwrsg ucr&vrut; otiro-
XettrQe.
I tell you nay : but except ye
repent, ye fiall all likewife
perijh.
ii. 38.
xat
) and be baptized every
one of you.
Luke Xxiv. 47. E<5 . . . ^L/%^a; TT* rw cvo-
KVTV [AeTCtVOl&V KtX,l fX.<f>S(TlV
iuv etg TvavTix. r<z sfay.
Repentance and remi/Jion of Jim
foould be preached in his name
among all nations.
Rom. ii. 4. To xgvis'ov TV 0* $ ^TMVOIXV
(re ayei.
tfbe goodnefe of God leadeth the?
to repentance.
XL VIII. Of
( 186 ).
XLVIII.
Of Righteoufnefs and good works, the
confequence of repentance.
Merx $ -rvq Tys teravoiKr ctyuvot^ roirix
After repentance the third conflitt is to
maintain righteoufnefs.
Mera TVJV eA-7r;<5a Sevreoav e^st rai
KOCI BsXribxris' o6ev efcys uvayocttyet rov UTTO
(3ix 'sroo^ rov ccpeivova [/,TctaXoiiTiz.*
After faith comes repentance and improve-
ment ; in confequence of 'which we read ofperfons t
who from a bad life are converted to a better.
XXv. 2O. . . . Etg 7zra<rai> re rr,v
j KKI rotg edvetnv,
[ASTctvoeiv, xott S
i rov Qtov, CC^IK ryq ptr avows
cya. TS'ooifro'ovrccg.
IJhewed
1 V. ii. p. 411, 1. 36. 2 Ibid, p. 3. I. 46.
5
I Jfxwed .... throughout all
the conjis of Judea, and then to
the. Gentiles, that they jhould
repent, and turn to God> and
ao works meet for repentance.
ll. 18. &etov poi ryv urigiv <rv EX ruv
Shew me thy faith by thy
works.
James ii. 17. . . . . y r un$i$-> eav py t^ya. fxfli
vsKoce, eg-i Ku9 SOEUT^V.
Faith, if it hath not works, is
of itfelf dead.
James ii. 24. 'Opare TOIVVV> on e% soyuv di
Kat XK ZK
fJLOVOV.
Ye fee then, how that by works
a man is jujlified, and not by
faith alone.
XLIX. Of
XLIX.
Of the mercies of the Saviour God, and
of men's relation and affinity to the divine
Word, through the goodnefs of God, upon
their repentance, and good deeds, and con-
feflion of their fins.
Eav fjitvToi ....... Ka,Tcuo6O"QevTe$ oXvj
ryg
oe x,ut oAoXoviruvTeg cxnx.
dia.voia, tcBKOidao^evy TO trpurov stg TO
TV (TUV&IOOTO$ ai|/i;^6f KOLt KVVTTVXOV, eTTSlTOt KOil
"srcoq fieXTiuo'iv TUV otKVOVTUVy evpi>tK$
TV]/; e% TV 2wT'/JOO KOil IXtU Elf, TU
rcuotTOV "5rce,Qct,G"X i O[JL
^oq TOV a,\)TV Aoyov
eo OCD^TUTTOV yeyovsv o
If then they have from their 'very fouls a
jujl contrition^ and are changed, and have
humbled themfefoes for their paft errors, ac-
knowledging
1 Pe Execrationibus, V. ii. p. 435. 1. 29.
kwwkdging and conf effing their Jim, having a
confcience purified firjl in fincerity and truth
to the power > who /mows thofe Jim, and after-
wards by confejjion to thofe, who may be thereby
edified-, fuch perjbns flail find pardon from the
Saviour and merciful God) and receive a mojl
choice and great advantage, of being made like
the Logos of God: who was originally the great
arche-type t after which the foul of man was
formed.
Rom. VI. jj. E; yup ruptpuroi yeyova-ftev TM
For if we have been planted
together in the Hkenefs of his
death , we Jhall be alfo in the
likenefs of his refurreftion.
John Xvii. 22. Ka; yu Tqv So^aV) yv $e$&Mot$
pot, oetiuKtx, ocvroiq ' Iva u<riv- ev y
r^sig sv etr^ev. Eyca ev
Koti <ru ev spoi.
And the glory, which thou
gaveft me, I have given them - y
that they may be one, even as we
are one. I in them % and thou in me.
I John
1 John iii. 2. AyaTnjrcu, vvv Ttxva.
<pavepuQri y r;
Je, OTI, ecw
Beloved, ive be new the fens of
Gody and it doth not yet ap-
pear ', what we flail be : but
we know, that) when he flail
appear, we flail be like him.
I Cor. XV. 49' K a/ natQu$ stpoaerxpsv ryv ZIKOVOC.
TV XOIKX, (pOQ(TOfJt,SV KUl T^V BiKOVX
And as we have borne the
image of the earthy , we flail
alfo bear the image of the
heavenly.
L. Man
L.
Man the Temple of God.
Philo fpeaks of perfons truly virtuous
and holy, as being the temples of God.
'OVTO$ (o vvi), u Qvpiv o "srpoQyTiii; TOV eov
efVTTSoiTToiTeiv, oioc QouriXstu.
God dwells, as faith the prophet, in the rational
part of man, the foul, as in a palace. *
$-t ru OVTI
For the palace and temple of the great felf-
exifling Deity is the intellectual portion of a
man of wifdom. 2
svae
Deity could never find upon earth a more
excellent temple, than the rational part of man ^
At/o
1 De Praemiis et Pcenis, V. ii. p. 428, 1. 10.
* Ib. 1. 12.
s DC Nobilitate, V. ii, p, 437. 1, n.
( 192 )
Auo ya.o .... leoa Qs'd' ev ftzv cJs o
.... erepov Je Xoywq $v%ij.
*Ihere are two temples of God: one of which
is this world-, the other is the rational foul.*
1 Cor. 111. l6. Cy& oidotrt) ori i/ocoq GBV $, itoti
TO T3-VU[MX, TV Ol%l V UfAW,
Know ye not y that ye are the
temple of God; and that the
fplrit of God dwelleth in you ?
2 Cor. VI. I 6. 'T^gif yot,(> vocoq 02 gfg ^uvrog.
Te are the temple cf the living
God.
Eph. ii. 22. Ev u
In whom ye alfo are builded to-
gether for an habitation oj God.
I Pet. 11. 5. Ka* CLUTCH ug XiQoi ^uvrsz OMOO-
avevsyxott
Te alfo, as lively Jlon$s> are
built up a fpiritual houfe ....
to offer up fpiritual facrifices.
LI. HIS
De Somniis, V. i. p. 653. 1. 22.
( '93 )
LI.
His account of the firft created Man.
Philo mentions man as formed after the
image of God XKT' eixova ev, and that he
was alfo to be efteemed the image of the
Logos aweriiTrcv T% KITIV Aoyv.*
He ftyles the firft man Adam, and fays,
that he was by God placed in Paradife; and
that he was in a ftate of perfection and
freedom Eipya.<rtx,TO yuo C&VTOV (c ec$-) atperov
Kent eXevQegov 2 For God created him to be at
large without comptroll^ in a Jlate of full
liberty. But he difobeyed and was expelled .
and forfeited his happinefs. 3 Here fin com-
menced j and a curfe was hence entailed
upon his poflerity. He fell from his origi-
nal brightnefs ; and loft that likenefs, which
he before held, of the Deity, who formed
him.
1 De Plantatione, V. i. p. 332. 1. 38.
* Quoa Deus fit immutab. V. i. p. 280. 1. 7.
3 De Legum Alleg. V. i. p. 61. 1. 38. p. 63. 1. 10,
N
BT avrov
.' 2 ' Hence he enjoyed little
advantage from his noble origin, having
brought a curje upon himfelf, and being the
author of unhappinefs to all, who came after
him.
Here we have a jufl account of the fall
of man, and original fin, and it's fatal
confequences to the world E<p' otg tiKorui;
tyvyrcv avr ' aQctvaris @tov a.vQvTryX'XotfcaTo 3
From this immortal Jlate he was juftly doomed
to death, and made a perijhabk being. After
Fhilo has mentioned this inherent evil in
the conftitution of man, one would expect,
that he would point out fome remedy, fome
proper atonement, by which God's favour
might be regained, and man juftified in his
fight. But, as we have feen, his recourfe
is only to confeflion, and repentance, and
the blood of victims, which can never of
themfelves
1 So the Editor very properly reads.
* De Nobilitate, V. ii. p. 440. 1. n. See note r.
Ibid. 1. 37.
( '95 )
themfelves be an adequate compenfation for
guilt. When a man has rifen in rebellion
againft his prince, has infringed the moft
falutary laws, and been guilty of theft,
murder, and accumulated wickednefs, he
may fay, that he is forry for it, and wifhes
it had not been done; and he may prefent a
bull or a goat for the perfons he has robbed
or flain. But this will not fuffice before aft
earthly prefident; much lefs before the great
judge of the world, the God of all juftice
and truth. Something more was therefore
requifite by way of pardon and atonement.
Philo could not, from his fituation, but
know the great article of the Chriftian
creed Salvation through Chrljl ; and that
he was the propitiation for fin. He mould
alfo have known, that all the offerings of
atonement, appointed by the law, were
unavailing 5 and only figurative of the great
atonement to come. His own Prophets
had told him fo ; and their words had been
fulfilled. He has however acknowledged
fome truths of great confequence, which are
well worth our obfervation.
N 2 LII. Of
( '96 )
LII.
Of the Holy Spirit.
We have feen, that Philo entertained a
very high opinion of the Logos, or Word of
God ; and has fallen very little fhort of the
truth. Whether he held the third perfon,
the Spirit of God, in the fame efteem, and
had as juft an idea of it, may demand fome
confideration. In his account of the crea-
tion, where it is faid, that the Spirit of God
moved upon the waters, he makes it only
coeval with light, and defcribes it as nothing
more than the element of air. 1 But in
other places he affords a very different def-
cription. For when he fpeaks of this divine
Spirit refting upon the Seventy Elders,* he
defcribes it as infinite, and indivifible j and
ftyles it TvotvcroQw nvVfJt,ot 3 the Jpirit of all
ivifdom. He afterwards proceeds, and fays,
Nw
1 De Mofe, V. i. p. 6. 1. 36. and p. 265. 1. 31,
* Numb. xi. 17.
' De Gigantibus, V. i. p. 266. 1. 2.
( 197 )
Nuv <5e TO 7T ' avru Uvevpo. ?i TO votyov, ro
Gstov, ro oiTftyTOV, TO ctoictioeTOVy TO cng-stov, TO
WOLVTVJ 01 iXuv tKTreTrXypupevov * OTTSO u
yv (rvvstnv, jctxt STnp^-nji/, KU.I <ro(pKx,v.
Aio Siy sn/iy* Seiov pevstv pev SUVXTOV ev 4' u %?>
xoiTtzpevsiv $e aovvetrov-) u$ etTropsv l Now
this Spirit of God is a being of wifdom and
of a divine nature ', indivijlble^ infeparable,
beautiful, in every refyeft throughout compleat*
When it profits, it is not impaired: when
given to another, it receives no lofs in percep-
tion, knowledge, or wifdom. Wherefore this
divine Spirit, though it may refide in the human
foul, yet cannot remain continually, as I have
mentioned. He gives a reafon for the Holy
Spirit not always abiding with men, on
account of their impurity ha TO etvoct
voi^Koe,^, yw\ dvvcurQou TO Setov TLvevpct KK
^*The divine Spirit cannot dwell with them
always, becaufe they are carnaL But the
moft
1 .De Gigantibus, V. i. p. 266. 1. 21.
* Ibid. 1. 35.
N 3
( '98 )
moft particular defcription of the Holy
Spirit is to be found in his obfervations up-
on the words of Mofes. 1 An account is
there given of three Angels appearing to
Abraham, which Philo mentions as the
facred Trias : and he defcribes the great
reverence of the Patriarch at the fight of
them -Ka; yap A^aaa^, [ABTU, (TTrvoyi; xat TOL^US
xoti 'zs'poQviMQLg T&owrys eXduv y 'srotpcx^KsX&ueTou TI^I
t\
Ko&r'n z.oifiou .... yvtxcz o eog copvtpopuuevog UTTO
ovetv TUV uvurotTU Awctftsuv, otp'Xys TS au xai
eig uv o f*,c<7o<; t TptTTug q>avTot<riot$
TT\ ocaTMy y^/Ct 7 ( Ti=r ACtfaa^) For
it was, with great earnejlnefs^ expedition, and
zeafy that AbraJiam went and gave directions
to bis, wife Sarai -r-<when God, ef cor ted on each
fide by two Perfonages from on high, whofe
attributes were Power and Goodnefs y (the Di*-
vmi'ty in ttot middle being in um/n with the
other two) impreffed a threefold appearance
upon the foul of Abraham, who beheld ;hem?
He has in fome degree impaired thefe
truths by his fophiftry, which I pafs over.
His
1 Gen. c. xviii.
* De Sacrifices, V. i. p. 173. 1. 12.
s
( 199 )
His opinion is however plain, that the
reprefentation of thefe divine Perfonages,
who attended upon the Deity, were two
Powers from heaven, whom he diflinguimes
for their rule and dominion, as well as for
their goodnefs. He farther adds $ uv o
perog: by which to me it appears manifest,
that he means the * unity of the third with
the two preceding. And though he ieems
to give the fupremacy to God, yet he fpeaks
of them all three, as aTrs^apo; ; by which
is meant unlimited, infinite ', confequently
not to be circumfcribed uv
KtZi
1 Otherwife, to fay that there were three perfons, and
that he in the middle was one of them, would appear
idle, and unnecefTary. His meaning may he known
from a palfage before quoted, concerning the Logos-
O a v/ngati-u TSrav Aoyo$ SEJOJ .... etvro<; sixuv \>itct^)(uy
TU'J vvtfruv u.'ftct.zct.tffot.rruv o i arpeavTeiTo$ t o syyuTaTW, [MIOIVQI;
Profugis, V. i. p. 561. 1. 16. For the divine Logos,
being the very Image of God, h above all other intelkftual
Beings ^vhatever. And he is placed the neareft^ -without the
leajl interval, to that great Monad, who can only be faid
trutyto exift, and be felf-exifting.
N 4
( 200 )
O.VTX. I He adds, that the
whole was a myftery, which was not to be
treated of lightly Ka* ruv rsXetuv
reXeruv, pySevi sr^oy^iaui; ejcAaAw TO.
' To,piuo[Avi] o aural, Kdi e^ejttu^oixra, ev
QvXctTTYi For when a prfon has
been, as it were* initiated ', and partaken of
thefe extraordinary myfteries, be Jkould not be
too forward to difclofe fuch f acred articles ;
but like a good Steward preferve them in
Jilence j and conceal them among the things,
which ought not to be divulged. 3 To the
latter part I cannot by any means fubfcnbe.
Whatever divine Truth is afforded, we must
admit it, and bear witnefs of it to the world.
Although it contains fomething above human
conception, ftill it muft be admitted, if deli-
vered from undoubted authority : otherwife
we act contrary to reafon, and to general
practice. For we allow thoufands of things,
for
1 De Sacrificiis, V. i. p. 173. 1. 18.
* He alludes to the myfteries of Greece, and to
perfons initiated in them j and makes ufe of their terms.
J Ibid. 1. 32.
( 201 ')
for which we cannot account ; and act, as
if their properties were well known. We
may therefore fafely proclaim our faith, and
maintain the doctrine afforded j though it
may in fome refpects be above our appre-
henfion.
CONCLUSION.
If then we admit thefe doctrines of Philo,
and excufe his prejudices and mifapplica-
tions, we mall find fome wonderful truths
afforded. And thefe could not be borrowed
from his brethren, the Jews ; for whatever
knowledge they had of thefe myfteries, it
was by no means adequate to the intelli-
gence, which he has given. This mufl have
been obtained from the fource, to which I
have referred it from the fountain of all
truth, the Gofpel ; and from thofe excellent
perfons, the immediate difciples of Chrifl,
in whofe time he lived; particularly from
thofe, by whom fome of the firft churches
were founded; and mofl particularly from
the
( 202 )
the founder of the church of Alexandria,
where he refided. I muft therefore repeat,
what cannot he too often urged, that in
him we read the fentiments of the mod
early Chriftians, and of the Apoftles them-
felves.
Whence elfe could he have obtained fo
many terms, which bear fuch an analogy
with the expreflions and doctrines in the
Apoftolical Writings ? Such are 'riog ,
Aoyog 'srpuToyovoSi 'srpetr&UTUTog, aiuog, Aoyog
TTJJ soixg ay&ySt TTrx^og 0,
etxuv e, <pwf, arvevfjt.ot , Ts-ysi/^a
We read farther concerning Re-
demption, and Aur^a KM a-u^ix. the price
and ranfom for the foul \ CCVTI SKVKTV fyyv eu$tov t
and vug avQpcMm vao$ . To thefe other
inftances might be added equally fignificant :
few of which are to be found in the Greek
Verfion, or in any Jevvifh doctrines, at lead
in the acceptation here given. They were
obtained either from the converfation, or
from the writings, of the firft Chriftians ; or
rather from both.
A LIST
A LIST OF SOME OF THE PARTICULAR
TERMS AND DOCTRINES FOUND IN PHILO.
1. The Logos is the Son of God.
2. The fecond divinity.
3 . The firft-begotten of God.
4. EMM, or Image of God.
5. Superiour to angels.
6. Superiour to all things.
7. By whom the world was created.
8. 'TTragxos Qett.
9. $&>$ Koo-fix, the Light of the world.
10. Who only can fee God.
11. Who refides in God.
12. The mod ancient of God's works.
13. Efleemedthe fame as God.
14. Aj'^, Eternal.
15. Beholds all things: O^U^KS^TOS.
1 6. He fupports the world.
17. Neareft to God without any feparation.
1 8. Free from all taint of fin.
19. Who prefides over the imperfect and
weak.
20. The Logos, the Fountain of Wifdom.
21. A
( 204 )
21. A Meflenger fent from God.
22. 'ixsTvig, or Advocate for man.
23. He ordered and difpofed all things.
24. The Shepherd of God's flock.
25. Of the power and royalty of the Logos.
26. The Phyfician, who heals all evil.
27. The (<npy/c> or) feal of God.
28. The fure refuge of thofe, who feek him.
29. Of heavenly food diftributed by the
Logos equally to all, who feek it.
30. Of men's forfaking their fins, and ob-
taining fpiritual freedom.
31. Of men's being freed by the Logos
from all corruption.
32. The Logos mentioned by Philo not
only as 'riog 0, but alfo ovyamiTw
rexvov hi s beloved Son.
33. By what means a man may attain to
fpiritual happinefs.
34. Of good men admitted to the aflembly
of perfons made perfect, and free from
corruption.
35. The juft man advanced by the Logos
to the prefence of his Creator.
36. The Logos the true High Prieft.
37.
( 205 )
37- Aoyo? Afptttgevg Me9o()iog The Logos in
his mediatorial capacity.
38. Concerning the fix cities of refuge.
39. Philo's opinion concerning the death of
the High Pried.
40. The neceflity of a Redeemer and ranfom
for fin.
41. Of Philo's great miftake.
42. His expectation of the dhperfed tribes
returning.
Some other remarkable doctrines in Philo.
43. Of natural impurity to be cleanfed away
by God only.
44. Of our bed works of themfelves not
acceptable.
45. Of Faith in God the firft requifite in
man.
46. Of the nature of Faith according to
Philo.
47. Of Repentance in confequence of Faith.
48. Of good Works in confequence of re-
pentance.
49- Of
( 206 )
49. Of men being made like to the divine
Word by repentance and good deeds.
50. Men truly virtuous are the Temples
of Cod.
51. Philo's account of the firft man, and his
difobedience.
52. Of the Holy Spirit, and facred Trias.
The account given by Philb of the
manna, mentioned by Mofes, x is extraordi-
nary. Our Saviour, the Word of God, has
taken notice of it, as a type of himfelf, and
endeavoured to explain to the Jews, what
was the latent meaning. / am that bread
of life. Tour fathers did eat manna In the
ivildernefs, and are dead, tfhh is the bread,
which cometh down from heaven -, that a man
may
1 Exodus xvi. 15,
( 207 )
may eat thereof ] and not die. I am the living
bread, which came down from heaven. If a
man eat of this bread, he Jhall live for .ever :
a fid the bread, that I will give, is my flejh ;
which I will give for the life of the world*
Philo fpeaks of it in the fame myfterious,
but Significant, manner *OVTO$
rgotpy, yv eoWev o eog TV tywxfl t
TO eotVTX Qypoi,, KM Tov ectVTts Aoyov'Tbis is the
bread, that nourishment, which God appointed
to be applied to the foul of man, even his
doctrine, and his word?
*O pev yao (oivQgcaTroi) rot.q otyeii; avctretvst
TO Motvvx, TOV Seiov Aoyov,
Man lifts his eyes to heaven, and beholds the
manna, which is a type of the Logos, or Word
of God-, and which affords heavenly, and im-
mortal, nutriment to the intelligent foul.*
Er*
1 John vi. 48, &c.
* De Leg. Alleg. V. i. p. 121. 1. 26.
3 Quis Rer. Divin. Haeres, V, i. p. 484. 1. 3
( 208 )
Ert TOIVVV ryv ugtzwov rpofpyv yv%yi;, r t v
havepsi "srcucri TOI$ xwa-oftevotG Aoyo$ eta;
urn. Bejides, this heavenly food of the foul r ,
called manna, is diftributed equally to all, who
will make a good ufe of it, by the Logos, or
Holy Word of God *
rv\q iu^? T^oQyv OIK e^i ; Aoyog
. Do you then fee> what is meant by
this nutriment of the foul, manna? Even the
never-failing Word of God* Taro TO fapa, t
C-WSTCX.^ Ku^oj' // is the doffrine, or word
ordained by the Lord. 1
Tr t v TpoQyv Tctvryv IreptoQt ..... xaXa Motvvas,
TOV srpsa&vTaTov ruv cvrcav Aoyov Qstov. 'This
heavenly food he elfewbere calls Manna j the
fame figuratively, as the Jirfl of all beings, the
divine Logos, or Wordf
Obfcrvations
1 Quis Rer. DIv. Hseres, V. i. p. 499. I. 44.
8 De Leg. Allcg. V. i. p. 120. 1. 34.
J Ibid. 1. 33. and De Profugis, V. i. p. 566. I. 22.
* De Deter. Potiori Infid. V. i. p. 213. 1. 45.
( 2 9 )
OBSERVATIONS UPON THE OPINION OP
PHILO. .<
We find, that Philo explains the purport
of this heavenly Manna, by faying it was
Bread 'OVTOS es-tv o KOTO? T^oqy And this
bread, he fays, is that divine food, which
God hath fent for the nourifhment of the
human foul, even TO eavrv ^a, Y.OU rov
Aoyov bis divine doflrine, and his
or Word. It is reprefcnted, as $vxy$
rv\v cKpQtxoroy -^o$v\v the incorruptible food cf
the foill ; which ''Ao-yog Qeto/; Siavsust -^oicri e|;
Krtt the heavenly Logos dtftributes impartially
to all. He in another place tells us in like
manner, that it was not only a doctrine,
but alfo a perfon, that was alluded to under
this fymbol of bread, and heavenly food
Muvvoc, .... rov WOSF&VTMTOV ruv OVTUV Aoyov
By this Manna was fignified the mojl
ancient of beings , the facred Legos : whom he
elfewhere has ftylcd I $wTsgo$ so$ the
fecond Divinity.
O Such
( 210 )
Such is the folution of the myftery con-
cerning the heavenly bread, the food of the
foul, which was afforded to the Ifraelites
in the wildernefs. From this interpretation,
I think, it is manifeft, that he was beholden
to the account given of our Saviour's words
by fome of the Difciples, and Apoftles ; the
fame, which occurs in * St. John, chap. vi.
The correfpondence of fentiment feems to
evince itj however he may in fome refpecls
have varied from the true fcope of the
doctrine. The following extracts will per-
haps illuftrate, what I fay ; and fhew, that
Philo
1 It may pofiibly be doubted, whether Philo had this
account from the Gofpel of St. John, as he might not
perhaps live long enough to have feen it. But though
this doctrine is only tranfmitted to us by St. John, yet
we muft not imagine, that it was known to him only.
They are the words of Chrift, which he fpake openly ;
and which muft have been known to all, who heard
him. And whoever applied to his Difciples and Apoftles,
might cafily be acquainted with them. Philo perhaps
had them from St. Mark. St. John's Gofpel was writ-
ten before the deftru&ioa of Jcrufalem ; at which time
Philo was probably about fixty-eight years old : and he
(peaks of himfelf, as living to be old and grey. It is
therefore not impofiible, but that he might have feen
even the Gofpel of St. John.
( 2" )
Philo came very near the mark, when he
called Manna rys tywxyg vccaiov, a^^Tov
Tfotpyv the heavenly, incorruptible, and ever-
lafting food of the foul, the bread from above.
THE WORDS, AS WE FIND THEM IN THE
GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN vi. 48.
O;
TO pawcc, sv TV epypu, KOLI
Ourog sg-iv o uproq o K TV xpocvv Koiru&ativuv, tvos,
rig tfc aura <botyy, xtxi py ciTroOavy. Eyca eipi o
a^rog, o fyv, o ex TX nootva KatTafcag. John
vi. 48, &c.
o ctprog, o ex r% %Qav% ua.Tix.&cx.g' v
scpotyov 01 'sroiTBp&g vpuv TO pavva, Ktxi
*O Touyuv TXTOV TOV KOTOV fycreTUt eig
rov oiiuvcc. V. 58.
py ry\v j^^ucriv TVJV ct
yv @QU<rtv Tyv psviHrav eig iCui/iv otiuviov, r t v
c ulog TV cx,v9pu7r% vpw ouo"et. v. 27.
02 <c I am
2I2
" I am the bread of life.
c< Your fathers did eat manna in the
wildernefs, and are dead .
<{ This is the bread, which cometh down
from heaven j that a man may eat thereof,
and not die.
" I am the living bread, which came
down from heaven.
< This is the bread, which came down
from heaven: not as your fathers did eat
manna, and are dead. He that eateth of
this bread mail live for ever.
<{ Labour not for the meat, which perifh-
eth ; but for that meat, which endureth to
everlafting life j which the fon of man fhall
give unto you."
THE
( 213 )
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DOC-
TRINES OF THE APOSTLES AND OF
PHILO BRIEFLY STATED.
It is manifeft, that Philo entertained the
fame high opinion of the fecond Perfon, the
deuTs^ sot, as the Apoftles, and Difciples of
Chrift, and allows him the fame attributes.
His only failing is, in not allowing, that
the Logos appeared in the flem, and con-
fequently had two natures, a divine and
human, and two characters, which fhould
not be confounded. But Philo takes all
the attributes of each character, and adapts
them to one only. Hence he makes the
Logos, not only the Image of God, and the
Creator of the world ; but alfo the Mediator
and Redeemer of mankind, by whom the
ranfom for fin, and price of redemption,
were paid : the fame, who afforded heavenly
food to the foul, and who was the Shepherd
of God's chofen flock. Laftly, he fuppofes
him to have been the great High Prieft,
by whom interceflion was made, and fin
o 3 expiated ',
expiated -, and of whom Aaron with his
cenfer was a type. He therefore, as we
have feen, tells US Aeyopw vv A^/e^ea ax,
caQguTTOV, ctXXu Aoyov Setov KVCU and adds
'sra.vruv a^ix^fMtrtav ot^ero^ov I maintain, that
this High Priefl is not a man,, but the divine
Word of God, the Logos, and that he is free
from all Jin. But he would more truly have
exprefled this do6lrine by faying, Aeyopsv w
7ov Awispeot, a Kvpiu$ rov Aoyov &etov etvoti, aAAa
rov vlov r% avQpUTrv, KGU rov Qeotv-
"sroivruv ceiwrifAO(.ruv a^ro^ov. I fay
then, that this High Priefl (of whom Aaron
is reprefented as a type) was not properly the
divine Logos, but Cbrift ytfus t the Son of man,
both God and man, who did no fin ; but finlefs,
as he was, died for the fins of the world.
The whole character of our Saviour is
admitted by Philo, but tranfpofed, and
mifapplied.
THE
THE GREAT CONSEQUENCE OF THE
EVIDENCE AFFORDED BY PHILO.
I have fhewn, that Philo was probably
born about the time of our Saviour's
coming into the world. It is certain, that
about eight years after the death of Chrift
he was fent from Alexandria ambaiTador to
Rome - 3 and furvived to the time of Nero.
I repeat this once for all to prove, that
he had opportunities of feeing, and con-
verfmg with fome of the firft difciples of
the Apoftles, and even with the Apoftles
themfelves. We may go fo far as to con-
ceive from his time of life and fituation,
(for he was born at Jerufalem) that he
might have had a fight of their great
Matter. I mould judge from many articles
in his writings, that he was not unac-
quainted with the three firft Gofpels : and
he either borrowed from them, or was
obliged for much knowledge to the Chrif-
tians of his time. It is not improbable, but
o 4 that
that he had accefs to both. Hence 'his
evidence in refpect to many great and
important articles is of much confequence :
for he fpeaks the language of the Apoftles,
and of the firfl teachers in the Church.
The teftimony of the fir ft Greek Fathers
has always been efteemed of great weight.
But the evidence of Philo is attended with
more efficacy, as well as certainty. For he
was more early, than they, by many years ;
and lived, and wrote many of his Treatifes,
before any errors had crept into the infant
Church. And as he was no friend to
Chriftianity, he could have no prejudices
in favour of it: and we have feen, that
thofe articles, which he has copied, and
which have been produced, are. agreeable to
the doctrines of the Apoftles, excepting
only fome mifapplications, of which men-
tion has been made. Hence we cannot have
a more fatisfactory proof of the purport of
thofe doctrines, with the truth and fubli-
mity of which he was captivated, and which
he adopted for his own. We receive them
through his hands, as we do the light of the
fun
fun reflected from a mirror though not
fo copious, nor ib powerful, as from the
original ; yet very genuine, and fufficient to
(hew. -the fountain of light, from which
they are derived.
CONCLUSION.
v_ *' tr * .**<.' '
Let me then conclude in the words of
the Apoftle St. Paul, when he gave fome
very fignincant advice to the people and
Church at ColofTe. 1
ft/zg ufcuag TV Kuptv Big
TU xavtotravTi ypizg tig ryv ftepwoL rx
' c 'e <
ruv ccyMV ev ru (ptori. Os toaua'cx.TQ y[/,a,g ex,
TV O-KOTKg, KOCl fJLZTt'/ItTV 1$ TV
vtv Tvjg atyotTrvig avTV. Ev u %G[ASV TIJV
OlOC. TV CtlfAOLTOq OtUTVy TV]V tX,(><r!V TUV
* TV ea TV
1 ColofT. i. 10 &c.
V UVTU
T& -sroa/roc, roc. ev roig ovgatvoig, KOC.I rex, em
rot. o^ara, KOC.I roe, aooara, eire Soovot,
ugioryrez, eire o&woti, eire e^atrixt. Ta
STKVTOI, & aunt, Kcci tiq otVTOv SKrKrrxt. Koet
jrc^o TS-OI.VTUV, KOC.I roe. t^ot-vroe, ev aura
Hiou ourcx; s^iv T\ xstpotXi] rts <rufj,aro$
oq eg-tv oc^vjy Tsr(>uroroKOi; ex ruv
wot yevyrui ev TS-KVLV <x.vro$ Tiraurevuv.
Ori ev oturu evooKytre TFOIV ro * trXypupoi, Kocrot-
"ii. That
1 I am perfuaded, from fome expreflions, of which
the Apoftle makes ufe, that in this very particular
defcription of the Second Perfon, he had an eye to the
Jewiih Platonifts, and their opinions, which he here
obviates. And I am equally perfuaded from the opinions
of Philo, and the terms, in which they are couched>
that he had feen St. Paul's Epiftles, efpecially that to the
Colofiians, from which this abftracfl is made. A great
part he adopted : and it would have been well, if he
had copied the whole.
* A particular term of the Platonick Jews, by which
they underftood and comprehended the whole hierarchy
of heaven, and fometimes the whole fenfible and intel-
lectual world.
( 219 )
tc ii. That we may walk worthy of the
Lord unto all pleafing, being fruitful in
every good work, and increafing in the
knowledge of God.
<c 12. Giving thanks unto the Father,
which hath made us meet to be partakers of
the inheritance of the Saints in light.
<{ 13. Who hath delivered us from the
power of darknefs ; and hath tranflated us
into the kingdom of his dear Son.
" 14. In whom we have redemption
through his blood, even the forgivenefs of
fins.
<f 15. Who is the image of the invifible
God ; the firfl-born of every creature.
<c 1 6. For by him were all things
created, that are in heaven, and that are
in earth, vifible and invifible : whether they
be
( 22O )
be thrones, or dominions, or principalities,
or powers : all things were created by him,
and for him.
<e 17. And he is before all things; and
by him all things confift.
" 1 8. And he is the head of the body,
the Church; who is the beginning, the
firfl-borri from the dead ; that in all things
he might have the pre-eminence.
s
<l 19. For it pleafed the Father, that in
him fhould all fulnefs dwell."
THE
( 221 )
THE SENTIMENTS OF DR. ALLIX
CONSIDERE D.
Since I wrote this Treatife I have found,
that, what has been faid by the learned
Editor of Philo, concerning the birth, and
age, of his Author, is entirely taken from
that work of Dr. Allix, called c ' The Judge-
ment of the ancient Jewifh Church again ft
the Unitarians." I am obliged to differ
from this very refpeclable Writer, as I have
before from the Editor above-mentioned,
who borrowed fo largely from him. His
endeavour is to make Philo very much
advanced in years in the reign of Caligula :
which is the very time, as Photius * tells
us, when he was in his prime. But to
this point I have faid fo much, that there
will be no occafion to make any addition.
He allows, that Philo could not have bor-
rowed his opinions from Plato, nor have
obtained them from reafon : for they were
beyond the wifdom of unafiifted Man. He
therefore
1 C. CV. p. 278. 1. 29. E TOI? X1 W ''< (<J>'>.*0 f^.'.y.yt
fa Tata TS Kaica^s.
5
( 222 )
therefore concludes, that they were derived
to him from the Jews ; and tries to prove,
that they were fully poflefTed of this treafure
of knowledge. He cannot believe, that
Philo had accefs to any of the Apoftles or
firfl Chriftians on account of his great age :
for he fuppofes him to have been feventy
years old at the time of his J embafly. But
I have
1 The Author's mode of argument.
" Jofephus in his Antiquities Lib. xviii. c. 10. aflures
us, that Philo was the chief, and moft confiderable of
the Jews employed by thofe of Alexandria in the Em-
bafly to Caligula. This man, faith he, eminent among
thofe of his nation, appeared before Caligula his death,
which was A.U.C. 793. that is to fay, in the fourtieth
year of our Lord. Now Philo, in the hiftory of his
legation to Caligula, fays of himfelf, that he was at that
time all grey with age, that is 70 years old, according
to the Jewifh notion of a man with grey hair, Pirke
Avoth. c. 5. Suppofe then, that he was 70 years old,
when he appeared before Caligula, it follows, that he
was born in the year of Rome 723. Suppofe alfo, that
he began to write at 30 years old, it will fall in with the
year of Rome 753 : that is to fay, 30 years before Chrift
preached in Judca. For Jefus Chrift began not to
preach till the year of Rome 783." Dr. Allix. p. 80.
The whole of this depends upon one article taken for
granted, that Philo was 70 years old, when he went
upon this Embafly : for which there is not the leaft
foundation.
( 223 )
I have fhewn before, that almoft every page
in the Treatife, upon which he founds his
argument, evinces the contrary.
Another reafon urged by him to prove,
that Philo was not beholden to Chriftians,
is, becaufe he never mentions the name of
Chrift. But why is this to be wondered at,
if, after all that he borrowed, he continued
ftill a Jew ? It mould be confidered, that
though he was of that .race, he never once
introduces the name of Jehovah, nor of the
Mefllah, who about that time was much
expecled by the Jews. Nor does he take
notice of feveral books, or writers, of the
Old Teftament. When he went firft to
Rome, it was to obviate all the calumnies,
with which Apion of Egypt had loaded the
Jewifh Nation. Yet in the hiftory of that
tranfaction he never once mentions his
name. We cannot therefore truft to in-
ferences made from the filence of Philo.
Juftus Tiberienfis was of Galilee, and in the
time of our Saviour j and yet made no
mention of Chrift or Chriftianity.
In
( 224 )
In confequence of this original miftake
about the age of Philo, Dr. Allix proceeds
throughout .to mew, that all thefe weighty
truths, found in this Author, were obtained
from his brethren the Jews, and are to be
feen in their Miiha, Targums, and other
books. In confequence of this he appeals
continually to the compilers of thofe Writ-
ings to prove, that they held the fame
opinions. But though he quotes largely
from his extenfive learning ; yet there are
many great truths in Philo, neither men-
tioned by that Author, nor to be found
among thofe Writers. Befides, the appeal
is not well directed, and of little moment.
For almoft every J Paraphrafe together with
the
1 The moft early of thefe Writings is the Chuldee
Paraphrafe of Onkelos, and the next is the Targum of
Jonathan ; which are fuppofcd to have been compofed a
few years before Chrift. But this refts merely upon
Jcwifli Traditions; which are not all uniform, and there-
fore very doubtful. The other Talmudim were much
kfer. Anr.o a Templi Secundi inccndio cxx Mifna.
Anno ccc Talmud Hierofolymitanum. Anno dcni-
quc ccccxxxvi Talmud Babylonicum. Galatini. 1. i.
c. v. p. 13. See alfo Walton's Polyglott. Prolegomena
p. 82, 83.
( 225 )
the Gemara, Mifna, Talmuds, and Tar-
gums, by whomfoever written, and under
whatever denomination, was later than
Philo. He was in great eftimation, and
they might copy from him ; but he could
not well borrow from them. With fome
truths of confequence, and to the prefent
purpofe, the Jews were certainly acquainted.
They are to be found in their Sacred Wri-
tings. But there are others of equal mo-
ment, which could only be known by a later
Revelation. Thefe to a great amount are to
be found in Philo. As to the objection , that
he could not have had any intercourfe with
St. Mark, or with any of the Difciples of
Chrift, on account of his early time of
life, it has been fhewn from his own
evidence to have been an ill-grounded
notion.
APPENDIX
TO
P H I L O.
P 2
ART III.
SOME OBSERVATIONS UPON PART OF
A TREATISE WRITTEN BY THE
REV. CHARLES HAWTREY, M.A;'
I HAVE, and I think very juftly, recom-
mended this Treatife. 1 But there is one
part, in which I cannot agree with the
Author. He there tries to prove, that
Chrifl in his ft ate of manhood was the
original Son of God j and that the Logos,
or Word, antecedently was not his Son. He
accordingly fays, Cc Therefore it appears to
be
1 This Treatife is entitled Qnn^'voi; T? x*isj &6nx9fj
and was publifhed in 1794.
* In p. 57 of this work.
P
( 23 )
be the exprefs doctrine of the Evangelifts,
however it may have been overlooked, that
the filiation confifted, and confifted only,.
in the Word's becoming flefh." 1 Again
" The Logos, alfo, in uniting himfelf with
man's nature became the Son of God ; 2 '
and was not the Son of God, as it is
intimated, prior to that union. For the
Author had faid before, (p. 40.) " That in
the birth of the Logos, in the union with
the o-aJ ocvuTnv^ confifted the filiation."
According to this doctrine, the Divine
or Word of God, muft not be
efteemed the Son of God, till his appear-
ance upon earth.
But how can we reconcile this with the
various paffages in the facred Writers,
wherein the contrary feems to be main-
tained? It is laid that Gcd fcnt his only-
Ic.goticn Son into the world, that ive might
P. 41. > Ibid.
( 231 )
/he by him. 1 If he was the only-begotten
Son of God, when he was fent, he muft
have been in that character, before he
arrived ; and his filiation was antecedent to
his appearance upon earth.
It is faid again And ive have feen t
and do tejlify^ that the Father Jent the Son
to be the Saviour of the World. 2 - I muft
therefore repeat the fame argument If
the Son of God was appointed, and fent s
for a particular purpofe, he muft have
exifted in that character, before that pur-
pofe took place. Whoever is fent, muft
be antecedent to the fending} as appears
from the words of our Saviour himfelf
I proceeded forth> and came from God: neither
came I of myfelf: but he fent me? And who
was the perfon fent ? We have feen before,
that it was the Son of God by his proceeding
from
1 I John iv. 9.
* Ibid. iv. 14,
* John viii. 42-
f 4
from the Father. The paflages in Scripture
to this purpofe are many. God fent his Son
in the likcnefs of finful feflj ; x that is, in a
new character. Jt is plainly intimated, that
there was a time, when the Son was not in
the fleih j but a divine Perfon without any
thing human. There is a remarkable in-
fiance in St. John,* where he mentions,
that they beheld the glory of Chrift - y and he
illuflrates this by repeating the word glory ^
and faying, as of the only-begotten Son of the
Father. The glory of Chrift, we find, was
like that of the only Son of God. Chrift
therefore in the flefli was far pofteriour to
the Perfonage, to whom he is likened. His
appearance was fuch, as one would expect
from the Logos, with whom he was united ;
whole brightnefs he participated, as far as
fleih and blood could partake. When it is
faid *All things, that the Father bath, are
mine *And now, Father, glorify thou tne y
with
1 Rom. viii. 3. 1 John i, 14.
! John xvi. 154 4 Ibid, xvii. 5.
( 233 )
'with thine own felf with the glory ^ which I
had with thee before the world was can we
fuppofe, that this paternity is to be dated
from Chrill at Bethlehem, or Nazareth;
or that it is to be limited to the age of
Auguftus ? As it was given by the Father
before the creation, and the gift was to
the Son, the filiation muft have commenced
at that early feafon, when the Logos pro-
ceeded from the Father; and being in the
form of God, thought it not robbery to be
equal with God; but made himfelf of no
reputation^ and took upon him the form of
a fervanf, and was made in the likenefs of
men. 1
1 Philip, ii. 6, 7.
OP
334
OF OUR SAVIOUR BEGOTTEN BEFORE ALL
WORLDS.
The Author fays in page 43, " I do not
fee, how the ysw^Q&ra i*rco -sravTUV rtav wuvuv
(begotten before all worlds) is to be ftipported
by any thing in the New Teftament." This
feems extraordinary ; becaufe it is faid, that
Chrift, in his divine character, was B-O&JTO-
roKog 'sravyt; KTKTBUI; * the firjl-born of every
creature ; and antecedent to all worlds : for by
him they were made. 2 He is alfo fry led povo-
yevy; t or only-begotten- Son. But Adam is called
by St. Luke, iii. 38. the Son of God. There-
fore this title of Son cannot be attributed to
Chrift folely in his ftate of humanity: for
there were others, as men, fo called before
him. It relates to the only-begotten before
all worlds. If therefore Chrift in the flerti is
ever alluded to, as the lirft-begotten, or
only-begotten, of God, it arifes merely from
his intimate union with the Logos, to whom
this Title primarily belonged.
The
' CV.dV, i. K. Hcb. i. 2.
( 235 )
The learned Author is fenfible, that the
pafiage in Coloflians i. 15. makes againft
his opinion: and he accordingly fays in
the Appendix, p. 184, that <f the words
povoytvYis and TtTouToroxog are never any
where in Scripture applied to the Aoyog,
but folely to the rlos." But if the Logos
and the Son are the fame, the objeftion
amounts to nothing. But how can -zs-^uro-
TOKOS 7zr<n?; x,Tt<ru$ the firft-born of every
creature be a character afcribed folely to
Chrift in the flefh; who was thus mani-
fefted fo long after that creation, in which
he had been the great agent ?
The Author ftill ftrives to rid himfelf of
the difficulty, by fuppofmg, that sr^roroKoq^
or firft-born, fignifies here the pre-eminence-,
but not the priority of bh birth, p. 185.
But the word -STQUTOTOXOS can be made to
fignify nothing more, nor lefs, than frft-
begotten, or firfl-produced. And when it is
faid of a perfon, that he was not only firfl>
begotten, but begotten before all created
things, it muft relate to priority of exigence,
as
( 236 )
as well as to pre-eminence. There is no
evading the force of the Apoftle's words.
But the Author adds : "If it fignifies
priority in point of time, or of existence,
will it not be to blend Jefus Chrift with
the mafs of creation ? to make him thereby
the firft created of the works of God ?"
Anfwer. The Author feems to fufpect, that
there is great uncertainty in his arguments :
and he therefore tries to force us into his
opinion by the dread of the confequences.
But the alarm is vain : and no fuch con-
fequences enfue. He mould recollect, that
the Logos, or Word of God, was not created.
He was the inurnment of the Deity, & v
KKI rag oiiuvccq sTroiya-ev. 1 He produced all
things both vifible, and invifible. Why is it
imagined, that this all-productive power
muft neceflarily be blended with the works
of his own hands? How does his priority
connect him with any fubfequcnt matter or
Being? lie proceeded from the Father >
but we muft not from hence fuppofc, that
he was firft created, or created at all. The
Author
1 Heb. i. 2.
( 237 )
Author does not reflect, that the Word was
united with the Deity only, and not with
any finite or perifhable Being, at this crea-
tion. He was not created, but begotten,
Surely this is wpo$ xwrcxx,
j
The Author goes great lengths towards
his conclufion, in order to fupport his
favourite notion. He accordingly fays
p. 1 84 " If the terms firft-begotten, or
only-begotten, had in Scripture been ap-
plied to the Aoyog, the doctrine of Arius, I
apprehend,, ought not to have been objected
to." This is furely faid with too little
caution. In the next page he gives a reafon
for his opinion, which is of a dangerous
tendency. cc 'The doftrine of the eternal gene-
ration , if I may be permitted to fpeak my own
opinion of it, jlrongly favours the caufe of
Arianifm" In refpecl: to eternal generation I
can fay nothing; as there is no fuch doctrine
in Scripture: nor could I ever comprehend
the notion. It feems to be an expedient
devifed to obviate fome fancied difficulties.
But fuppofe we were to grant, that fuch a
generation
generation has fubfifted, how does it at all
favour Arianifm ; in oppofition to which it
feems to have been introduced ? He tells us
by an hypothecs cc For, //'it is true, then
Chrifl was always, as being a Son, fubor-
dinate to the Father," &c. But why is it
fuppofed to be true, that, by being ftyled a
Son, he is fubordinate, or in fubjection ?
This however is more than once main-
tained : and it is accordingly faid, that
<c filiation implies inferiority." But in this
notion, I fear, that the Author attends
more to words, than to things. . It is true,
in this world a helplefs child from it's birth
depends upon it's parents from it's debility,
and the nature of it's exiftence ; and is for
a long time in fubfervience towards them.
But we muft not fuppofe, that this prevails
in heaven. For between the birth of a
child and the production of the Logos there
is not the lead analogy. Therefore no juft
comparifon can be made between the rela-
tion of the Logos to the Father, and their
union; and the relation of a child to it's
earthly parent, where there is no union,
nor bodily connexion.
THE
( 2 39
THE AUTHOR SEEMS TO RUIN HIS OWN
PURPOSE.
The Author through his whole Treatife
has been trying, with much learning, and
very fuccefsfully, to prove the union, and
unity of the Godhead, and at the fame
time the divinity of the Logos. But all
this, he thinks, mud be given up, if we
admit, that the original Logos, or Word,
was the Son of God. As if thefe approved
doctrines could be fet afide by a name, or
title, or a mode of defcription. When we
are told by the Evangelift In the beginning
was the Word, and the Word <wis with <jW,
and the Word was God. All things were made
by him, &c if after this he is called the Son
of God; his firft -begot ten j his only-begotten - f
wherein do we find any inconfiftence ? And
if there be any feeming difficulty arifmg from
our prejudices, yet how can it make void thofe
plain, and efTential, truths above ? We may
therefore allow Chrift in his divine nature
to be the Son of God, and be far removed
from the notions of Arius. We need not be
under any apprehenfions on that account.
SOME
( * 240 )
SOME PASSAGES OUT OF MANY IN THE
NEW TESTAMENT RELATING TO THE
SECOND PERSON, WHICH DESERVE
TO BE COLLATED AND WELL
CONSIDERED.
He that fent me is with me, the Father*
Neither came I of myfdf: but he fent me. z
And we know, that the Son of God is come,
and hath given us under/landing^ that we may
know him, that is true: and we are in him
which is true, even in his Son Jefus Chrift.
This is the true God, and eternal life}
For unto which of the angels faid he at any
time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten
thee*
And
1 John viii. 29. " Ibid. viii. 42.
J i John v. 20. - Hcb, i, 5,
( 241 )
And again when he (or, when he again)
bringeth his firft -be gotten into the world &c. x
For God fent not his Son into the world to
condemn it-, but that the world through him
might be faved?
In this was manifested the love of God
towards us^ becaufe that God fent his only-
begotten Son into the world, that we might live
through him. 1
Herein is love. Not that we loved God-,
but that he loved us^ and fent his Son to be the
propitiation for our Jim . 4
From thefe pafTages it appears to me
plain, that the Son of God, the only-
begotten, and firft-begotten of the Father,
came from one place to another; from a
ftate of glory before the worlds to a ftate of
humiliation and fubordination upon earth.
Saint
1 Heb i. 6. 2 John iii. 17.
3 I John iv. 9. 4 i John iv. ro.
Saint Paul, fpeaking of the infufficiency
of the law, tells us, that this failure was
made up in Chrift. For 'what the law could
not do, in that it was weak through the fofo,
God, fending his own Son in the Hkenefs ofjinful
fefo, and for Jin, condemned fin in the flefh. 1
We find, that Chrift in die flefh was only
a likenefs of the Son of God, who was fent
from heaven. Who being in the form of
God, thought it not robbery to be equal with
God-, but made himfelf of no reputation, and
took upon him the form of a fervant, and was
made in the likenefs of man. 1 The Son of
God therefore was in the form of God,
before he took upon him the likenefs of
man that is, before he was either fent, or
camej before he was conceived, and took
flefh. For God fo Icved the world, that he
fent his only-begotten Son, that whofocver be-
lievetb in him Jlmdd not perift, but have
everlajling life}
The
1 Rom. viii. 3.
* Philip, ii. 6, 7.
? John iii. 16.
( 243 )
*fhe Father fent the Son to be tie Saviour of
the world.*
For this purpofe the Son of God was mani-
fefted (made known to mankind), that he
might dejlroy the works of the devil? By
thefe words we may be allured, that he was
prior to his manifeftation. 3
Our Saviour is very copious upon this
fubje&, when he is trying to enforce upon
the Jews, that he was the Son of God, and
came down from heaven, and was in unity
with the Father. I am not alone, but I and
the Father, that fent me. Te neither know
me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye
would
1 i John iv. 14. a Ibid. iii. 8.
3 Our Saviour does not merely fay, that he was born,
raifed, appointed, and introduced into the world, like
other men ; but intimates plainly, that he was antece-
dently fent : and his commiffion mud have been before
his appearance. It is faid, that God fent his fervants,
prophets, and meflengers ; Mofes, Aaron, Elijah, and
others. But they all exifted, before they received the
order) and the execution was after the mandate.
( 244 )
would have known my Father alfo. I f peak
to the world thofe things, which I have heard
of him. The Jews feem to intimate, that
they, were fons of God through Abraham.
Our Saviour anfwers, I know, that ye are
Abrahams feed. I fpeak that ivhicb I have
fecn with my Father ; and ye do that which ye
have feen with your Father. 'They anfwered
and faid unto him, Abrabam is our Father.
We be not born of fornication : we have one
Father ; even God. Jefus faid unto them, If
God were your father, you would love me ; for
I proceeded forth, and came from God, (that
is, from God, my Father :) neither came I of
myfelf, but he fent me. I came forth from the
Father, and am come into the world: again I
leave the world, and go to the Father.' 1
If he came originally from his Father,
when he \vas fent, he muft have been the
Son of God, before his defcent upon earth
and appearance in the flefh. The filiation
therefore could not have commenced at that
time, when he was made man.
We
1 John viii. 16. 19, &c. and xvi. 28.
( 245 )
We fee in the above paflages, that our
Saviour acknowledges himfelf exprefsly to
be the Son of God : and he in other places
affords repeated intimations of it. The
people alfo from his wonderous works
continually gave him that title , which
he uniformly accepted and admitted. He
ipeaks of himfelf likewife as the fon of
man, even when he is mentioning his divine
nature, and his abode with the Father.
This may be feen in the following words.
And no man hath afc ended up to heaven, but
he that came down from heaven -, even the fon
of man, which is in heaven. 1 This may be
rendered paraphraftically in the following
manner. <{ No man, excepting myfelf,
(whom I call the fon of man) hath ever
vifited the realms of glory. For I came
down from thence j and at the fame time,
in refpe6l to my divine nature, am in heaven
at this time." 2
NOTHING
* I John iii. 13.
2 See alfo John vi. 37, 38, 44.
246
NOTHING IN THE DOCTRINE REPUGNANT
TO REASON.
I am perfuaded, and have for a long time
been of the opinion, that this do6trine,
though abftrufe and a myftery, may, from
the evidence of Scripture, be (hewn to be
perfeftly confonant to reafon, and by no
means incomprehenfible. In what manner
the operation was effefted, may furpafs
human apprehenfion ; but the great work
itfelf, as defcribed by the facred Writers, is,
I think, without difficulty to be appre-
hended.
I believe therefore, that there is one God
from everlafting to everlafting, that is,
of endlefs duration, without beginning or
end; from whom all things proceeded.
This is pad my comprehenfion ; becaufe I
cannot grafp eternity, nor have a precife
knowledge of any thing infinite. But my
reafon tells me moft afluredly, that there
muft
( 2 47 )
muft have been fomething through all
boundlefs duration. For (as I have elfe-
where faid) if there had been originally
nothing, there could have been no produce $
no derivative either good or evil. Nothing
could have been effected, if there were no
efficient caufe : for an effect: without a caufe
cannot be conceived. Being cannot proceed
from non-entity.
There muft therefore have been an ori-
ginal power, without beginning or end;
which was the caufe of all other beings.
The nrft production of the moft High was
his Son; who proceeded from him, and
who partakes of the divine nature; and is
fly led the firft-begotten of God, and of all
creation. By him all things were made,
that were made : all fubfequent beings were
the work of his hands, and teflify his divine
wifdom. Was then the fecond perfon co-
exiftent with the Deity ? Certainly in refpecl:
to effence, though not as to perfonality. For
this effence, which he had as Son, was of
the fame fpiritual and eternal fubflance as
the
( 248 )
the Father's, before the perfonality com-
menced. Was then this peribnality produced
in time ? Undoubtedly : for whatever is
effected, muft be brought about in time.
Some antecedent power muft produce it.
However difficult it may appear to man's
limited apprehenfion, every effect, however
remote, muft have a boundlefs duration each
way, both before, and after. An eternity
muft have pafled; and an eternity muft
enfue. Is not then the Logos to be efteemed
eternal ? Not in refpecl: to perfonality : for
that modification took place only before
creation. But the effence, from which he
proceeded, was certainly eternal. He is
eternal from his participation of the divine
nature, which had no beginning.
Here I am obliged to differ from Dr.
Eveleigh in his excellent Difcourfe upon
this fubjecl:, where he introduces the fol-
lowing words of our Saviour. l And now,
O Father, glorify me with thine ownfelf, i^ith
the
* Sec two Sermons publifhed by him in 1791. P. II.
( 249 )
the glory I had with thee before the world
began. Upon which it is faid, His exifting
as God with God, is here called the glory,
which he had with the Father: and the
time, when he had this glory, inftead of
in the beginning^ is faid to 'have been
before the world was. Both are expreffiom of
the fame extent : both imply from eternity. He
had before (page 10) faid very truly, that
the divine nature was eternally poflefled by
the Son. I do not diflent in refpect to the
purport, of what is here ultimately main-
tained: for we both ftrive to fhew, that
Chrifl, as begotten of God, was in refpect
to his divine effence eternal. I only pre-
fume to differ in refpecl; to the words, and
the argument, by which it is explained.
For I know not how to agree in refpecl to
perfonality, that in the beginning^ and before
the world was> imply eternity. On the con-
trary, they appear to me to relate to a
particular time; however remote that time
may have been. In confequence of this, the
Son of God, and only-begotten of his
Father, though of the fame fubftance with
the
( 2 5 )
the Father, was produced at a particular
period, and the perfonality had a commence-
ment. And I think, many errors and fatal
difputes have enfued from this truth not
being properly obferved. I therefore repeat,
that this modification of the divine nature
was not, nor could be, from all eternity.
When the facred Writers fpeak of the Word,
as the fecond perfon, they will, I believe,
be found, never to fpeak of him under that
character, as from everlafting ; nor fuppofe
him to have thus fubfifted from all eternity.
In the beginning 'was the Word, and the Word
was with God-y and the Word was God. T^he
fame was in the beginning with God. 1 Eternity
has no beginning. There is therefore no
reference to it here. Every commencement
muft be from a point j however remote and
unknown that point may be. Hence we
may be allured, that the Logos, or Word,
was only the firft-born in refpect to fub-
fequent creation. Our Saviour intimates as
much in his addrefs to God. And now, O
Father,
1 John i. i, 2.
Father > glorify me with thine cwnfelf, 'with
the glory, 1 had with thee (not from all
eternity, but) before the world was? In
conformity to this St. Paul mentions him,
as the image of the invijible God; the jirft-
born of every creature : for by him were all
things created? And he is ftyled by St. John
the beginning of the creation of God : and
the Lamb Jlain from the foundation of the
world.* A Lamb without blemijh, and without
fpot : who verify was fore-ordained before the
foundation of the world.* Who hath faved*
and called us with an holy calling 5 not accord"
ing to our own works ; but according to his
own purpofe and grace; which was given us in
Chrifl Jefus, before the world began.* Our
'Saviour, when he fupplicates for his own
Difciples, fays Father -, I will, or requeft,
that they may behold my glory, which thou haft
given me : for thou loved/I me before the foun-
dation
1 John xvii. 5. 2 ColofT. i. 15.
3 Revelat. iii. 14. and xiii. 8. 4 i Pet, i. 19, 20.
5 2 Tim, i, g.
datlon of the world. 1 This is the terminus,
to which the Logos, or fecond Perfon, feems
to be uniformly referred, as being antecedent
to all created beings ; and of a more exalted
nature, and divine origin; even from God
himfelf immediately, and confubftantial with
him.
But we find a different mode of expreflion
ufed, when the facred Writers fpeak of God ;
who is reprefented by them as through all
eternity, without beginning, as well as
without end. From everlajling to everlajling
thou art God? Thy throne is of old: thou art
from everlajiing? Art not thou from ever-
lajling, O Lord, my God?* The Prophet
Ifaiah alfo mentions the Deity in a very
fublime manner The lofty One, that in-
habiteth eternity.* The mode of addrefs is
remarkable; and Ihews, wherein the two
great
1 John xvii. 24. a Pfalm xc. 2.
3 Pfalm xciii. 2. 4 Habak. i. 12.
' Ifaiah Ivii. 15.
( 253 )
great objects differ. God is felf-exiftent,
independent, and has exifted through a
boundlefs duration. The Son, as a Perfon,
proceeded from the Father, and was pro-
duced in time ; yet is eternal, as a derivative
from God and a portion of the divine
Nature j and at all times in the bofom of the
Father, that is, in flri6l union with him.
/ and the Father are one.
THE NOTION OF ETERNAL GENERATION
AGAIN CONSIDERED.
They, who entertain the notion of an
eternal generation, feem to be milled by a
term, of which they can have no determi-
nate knowledge. It was introduced merely
as an help towards folving a fuppofed diffi-
culty, which, I think, never exifted. In
fliort it is a greater myftery, than that,
which it is brought to explain. A perfon
might juft as reafonably infill upon an
eternal creation: and it would appear to
many equally plaufible. But at this rate it
would
( 254 )
would be found, that the world was formed
by divine wifclom, and yet never had a be-
ginning : which is as abfurd, as it is untrue.
They remove the object, as far as they can,
out of fight, in order to have a better view.
But the whole is a fallacy. It is therefore
idle in them, like the fchoolmen formerly,
to make ufe of terms without any precife
purport, more efpecially words of no mean-
ing at all, to explain, what they do not
comprehend. We can never obtain light by
returning into darknefs : nor remedy one dif-
ficulty by introducing another much greater.
This is verified in the doctrine mentioned
above concerning eternal generation : which
feems calculated to perplex rather than
inftruct, and implies a contradiction. We
have feen, that the Logos proceeded from
God, and was begotten of the Father. But
how could he have been begotten, or have
proceeded, if he never had a beginning ?
Who firft produced this mode of argument,
I know not : but it feems to be founded in
mere metaphyfical fophiftry.
AN
( '55 )
AN OBJECTION STATED.
It may be alked, Why may not there be an
eternal generation of the Son, as well an ever-
lofting duration of the Father ? Has not God
exifted through all eternity ? The Deity moft
certainly has ever exifted, and will endure for
ever. But there is a great and irreconcile-
able difference between thefe two articles:
and we therefore cannot form any juft
analogy between them. The great, ever-
lafting, and felf-exifting God owes not his
being to any power, or to any antecedent
caufe: for it is to the laft degree abfurd
to fuppofe any thing antecedent to what is
eternal. There was therefore no operation
in his production; for he was not pro-
duced j being, as was before obferved, felf-
exiftent, and prior to all things. But in
refpecl to the Word of God, the Logos, in
his production there was an antecedent
purpofe, and an operation. He was begot-
ten of the Father j which intimates a fact :
and
and as I before aflerted, and I think paft
contradiction, every fa6l muft have been
compleated in time. Hence it is faid
this day have 1 begotten thee : which plainly
proves, that the operation could not be
otherwife than in time. This is farther inti-
mated in the addrefs of our Saviour to God,
when he fays And now , O Father, glorify
thou me 'with thine own felf 'with the glory,
which I had with thee, before the world was. *
He does not fay, the glory, which I had
always, through all eternity, but only
antecedent to Creation. When this was
accomplished, we know not : we only learn
thus far, that previous to all things created
Chrift was begotten of his Father ; and that
then began the filiation. Hence we may
accede to the words in the Nicene Creed,
where thefe doctrines are very juftly fet
forth, and demand our attention and belief.
<c I believe in God And in one Lord
Jefus Chrift, the only begotten Son of God:
Begotten of the Father before all worlds :
God
1 John xvii. 5.
( 257 )
God of God : Light of Light : Very God
of very God : Begotten, not made : Being of
One fubftance with the Father : By whom
all things were made." The fame as the
Father, and eternal, in refpecl: to efTence
and original divinity j but pofteriour in
refpect to filiation and adoption: which
adoption and filiation muft have been in
time.
I therefore think, that they, who apply to
an eternal generation, run into very unne-
ceffary difficulties, not to fay abfurdities.
For they fuppofe a fa6t to be accomplifhed
without a beginning; a wonderful operation
without any primary efficient caufe; that is,
without an operator: which is impoffible.
This trouble is, I fay, needlefsj as every
thing mentioned in Scripture about the
Logos, or Word of God, may be more
clearly proved upon much better principles.
R SOME
( 2J8 )
SOME WRONG NOTIONS STATED AND
CONFUTED.
A Writer of note 1 has afforded repeated
inftances of his difTent from the Church of
England in refpecl: to thefe articles. In his
addrefe to the difciples of Swedenborg, he
fpeaks of them with unwarrantable keennefs
and deteftation. He tells them, p. 2. that
he is of their opinion, and looks with
equal horror upon thefe doctrines of the
Trinity, as equally abfurd and blafphemous,
conftituting in faft three Gods. Yet he muft
have known, that, according to the articles
of the Church, which he condemns, one
God only is acknowledged. Of the pcr-
fonality and divine nature of our Saviour I
have fald a great deal ; and have particularly
dwelt upon that decifive declaration, when
he faid I and the Pal her are one. The
Jews
1 Or, Prieftl'M'. Sec T,e*ter^ tj the Members of ihs
New Ji.-;uflcm Church, publifhcd in 1791.
Jews immediately infifted, that he made
himfelf equal with God; and taxed him
with blafphemy. In his anfwer he admits
the words, and the character, which he
had affumed: but denies, that there was
either blafphemy, or prefumption. *
As to the Logos proceeding from God,
and partaking of his divine nature, I can-
not fee any thing in it more difficult to be
believed, than in the conception and gene-
ration of man, or in the production of the
fruits in the field. The operation, whether
in earth, or in heaven, is alike myflerious
to me, and paft my comprehenfion. Yet I
muft give up my fenles, if I believe not the
one ; and my reafon and religion, if I deny
the other : for it is tranfmitted to me
under the higheft fanclion, and the mod
unqueftionable authority. If there be any
difficulty, it arifes from wrong reafoning.
For,
1 John x. 36.
R 2
( 260 )
For, as I have before intimated, can it be
more extraordinary for God in his infinite
wifdom and power to produce from himfeif
a Divinity, the exprefs image of his perfan
and brightnefs, than for an animal by
blind inftinct to create the fimilitude of it-
felf, and produce it's own fpecies ? It may
be faid, that both the inftindl: and the pro-
duction are ultimately from God. It is
very true. Why then do we prefume in
any rcfpecl: to limit the Almighty; and
think, that to Omnipotence one operation
is more difficult than another ?
CONCERNING
CONCERNING MELCHIZEDEC KING OF
SALEM.
It is faid, upon the return of Abram
from the Jlaughter of Chedorlaomer, and the
four Kings in the valley of Shavah, that
Mekhizedek, King of Salem, who was the
prieft alfo of the mofl High God, brought forth
bread and wine, and bkjjed Abram, and faid:
BleJJed be Abram of the moft High God, pof-
feffor of Heaven and Earth : And hie/Ted be
> **/ */ */
the moft- High God, which hath delivered thine
enemies into thy hand And that he (Abram)
gave him tithes of all. 1
There have been a variety of conjeftures
concerning this pafTage and a diverfity of
opinions; which, I think, if we confider
the context, and the words of the Apoftle
St. Paul, will be found by no means ob-
fcure, and attended with no great difficulty.
It
1 Genefo xiv. 18, 19, 20,
R 3
( 262 )
It is well known, that it pleafed God to
manifeft himfelf to the Patriarchs, and Pro-
phets of old, by a perfonage, whom the
Jews looked upon as their Jehovah. He
was at times ftyled the Angel of God, the
Angel of the Lord, the Angel of the
prefence; the Angel, that redeemed Jacob
from evil - 3 the fame, whom God was pleafed
to promife, that he would fend before his
fervants j and who is by Malachi ftyled the
Angel of the Covenant. He is faid in the
paflage above to have been the Prieft of the
moft High God. And by his appearance
before Abram he gave the Patriarch an
intimation of Chrift, the High Prieft to
come; and of the myftic bread and wine,
which would one day be inftituted by him.
By the Apoftle St. Paul we are told, that
this great Perfonage was 'without father,
without mother ; without defcent ; having
neither beginning of days, nor end of life. 1
Hence it is manifeft, that this could be no
other, than the divine Logos; that is, a
representation
1 Hcb. vii. 3.
( 263 )
reprefentation of him under a human form :
and it is accordingly faid of him, that he was
made like unto the Son of GW, an image of
hrift to come. 1
All this would have appeared very plain,
had it not been for a miftake, which has
prevailed in almoft all the tranflations ; and
was firft introduced by the Authors of the
greek Verfion. The words in the original
are Melchi zedec, and Melech Salem. Thefe,
though two of them are fomewhat diverfi-
fied, fignify the King of right eoufncfs, and the
King of*peace. This is well known : and
we have the additional authority of St.
Paul, who was a good judge of their mean-
ing. a Now the two firil terms are retained
in the verfions without any interpretations ;
and the two other terms are partly tran-
flated, and partly left, as in the original.
The latter is in our Verfion rendered
*fhe King of Salem, j which Salem is generally
iuppofed
1 Heb. vii, - Ibid, viu 2,
fuppe>fed tojfignify Jerufalem. It is incon^
ceivable, what obfcurity has been brought
upon the hiftory by the words, which are
fufficiently plain in the original, being thus
left without an explication ; and by the
character and office of the perfon being
thus introduced, as a proper name. For
by thefe means one of his attributes is
reprefented, as a name of a Canaanitifh
place.
c
It may be worth while to take notice of
the falfe glofles, which have hence enfued ;
and the inconfifrences, which have been
maintained. In the firft place, as the words
Melchi zedec have been admitted as a proper
name of a man, many have taken much
pains to find out, who that man could
have been. Jerome fays, l that he was fup-
pofed to have been Shem the fon of Noah.
But who can believe, that the Patriarch
. Shem, if he were ever a King, mould have
reirned in the idolatrous region of Canaan ?
o o
According
In Tradit. Heb.
According to the Author of the Chronicon
Pafchale, l he was of the race of Ham. This
is equally incredible, that any body of the
line of Ham fhould be a Prieft of the moft
High God. Suidas goes upon the fame
principle, and tells us, that he was the
fon of Side, the fon of -/Egyptus, King
of Libya; that he was himfelf King of
Canaan, and reigned in Jerufalem, called
Salem. He fays farther, that he was King
of the Jews, and (** lubeuuv povov) not only
of the Jews, but of the Gentiles in general :
and all this in the time of Abram; and
before Abram had any child. There was
hardly ever fuch a complication of abfurdi-
ties. How could a fon of ; Side, or a fon of
Ham, or a fon of Noah, be a perfon, who
had neither father nor mother-, who was of
no defcent ; and had neither beginning of days,
nor end of life ? And how could he reign
over the Jews, before any of the family of
Judah, or of Jacob, were in being ?
The
1 P. 49> 5
( 266 )
The like miflakes occur concerning
Salem, which is reprefented, as a city.
Jofephus fays, that Melchizedec reigned
there > and that it was the fame as Solyma,
which was afterward called Jerufalem. 1
This is a great miftake; for it was called
Jerufalem, before the Ifraelites were in pof-
{effton of it : and the name is continually
repeated quite through the Scriptures. 2 And
what is very extraordinary, it was never
called Splyma : at leaft the name does not
once occur in the Sacred Writings, neither
in the Original, nor in the greek Verfion. It
was a name formed by the Greeks after-
wards j who changed 'le^o-aXyp to 'le^o-
c-oAi/^a; and who would perfuade the world >
that it was compounded, and formed from
the greek word 'legos and Solyma. The
fame is obfervable in the etymology of the
former name j which has been in like man-
ner by fome deduced from 'is^og and ?aA^.
It
1 Ant. Jib. i. c. viii. p. 32.
~ See Jofhua, x. i. and Judges, i. 21. It is called
Jerufalem all through the Old Teftament.
( 267 )
It is accordingly faid in the Etymologicum
Magnum Jerufalem was Jirft called Salem j
fotf, when Chrifl made his appearance there,
it was named '.'i^s-o-aAty*, the holy City of
Salem. Hence we learn, to what a degree
of abfurdity people will go.
But there is not an inftance in Scripture
of Salem being put for Jerufalem, excepting
in thofe paflages in Genefis, where it is fq
rendered by a great miflake. The only
place, where it feems to have been efleemed
a proper name, is in fome verfions of the
feventy fixth Pfalm, v. 2. where it is faid
In Judah is God known and his tabernacle
is in Salem. But here the ancient Greek
Verfion* differs, and gives the fenfe more
truly KOLI syevvyQvj ei/ Bipyvy o TOTTOS UVTX
And bis place (of reftdence) was made, or
founded
1 ' i^Swy o Xgiro? E? etvrw xXu6*j "lsg<yaX^. Theo-
philus has been guilty of the fame miftake. 'i^ntra^r,^
v la^u^^-im 'iigoaohvpa. Ad. Autol. L. ii. p. 372. Edit.
Benedid.
2 In this Verfion fee Pfalm Ixxv, 3r
( 268 )
founded in peace. Analogous to this are the
words in Job. Know, thy tabernacle flail be
in peace. 1 T'he kingdom of God is peace* J'be
very God of peace fanclify you wholly 2 The
Apoftle fpeaking concerning this very con-
troverted paflage in Genefis fays, the King
of Salem, that is, the King of peace. 4 And
this interpretation is allowed by Suidas, and
by every writer, who has given a folution
of it, however inconfiftent in other refpe6ls.
Jerome was aware, that by Salem could
not be meant Jerufalem : but he was ft ill
perfuaded, that it was the name of a city ;
and (flrange to tell) that Melchizedec
reigned there. He fuppofes it to have
been the fame as Salim near Bethfan, called
afterwards Scythopoiis: it was alfo thought
to be near ^Enon, where John baptized.
5 Salem oppidum eft juxta Scythopolim,
quod
1 Job v. 24 2 Rom. xiv. 17.
3 I ThefT. v. 23. 4 Heb. vii. 2.
* Epiftola ad Evagrium de Melchizedec. Vol. ii
p. 570.
quod ufque hodie appellatur Salem : et
oilenditur illic Palatium Melchizedec, ex
magnitudine ruinarum veteris operis often-
dens magnificentiam. Let this palace, which
mufl have exifted in the time of Abraham,
have been ever fo fplendid, and it's ruins as
magnificent, as Jerome would perfuade us,
yet we may be well affured, that Melchi-
zedec never reigned there. It is, I think,
manifeft, that there was never any man fo
called; nor was Salem a proper name.
This account of Jerome is void of all truth,
and fupported by no authority. What he
mentions of Salim, others refer to Sion,
juft as fancy directs E ru ogei TU
Suidas.
I have mentioned that Melchi zedec
fjgnifies the King of Righteoufnefs : and, I
believe, it is never in the Scriptures given
as a name to any earthly Monarch ; but to
God only. Hence it is faid by Jeremiah
is his name, rfhe Lord our righteoufnefi. *
The
* Jeremiah xxiii. 6.
The Lord of Hofts, the King of glory,
the -Sun of righteounefs, the Branch of
righteoufnefs, were all Sacred titles. It is
fometimes rendered JUSTICE. And it is
faid, A King jhall reign in juftice : And
God is continually reprefented as a God of
all juftice and truth. Hence Jeremiah fays,
The Lord is the God of truth. I
In like manner Melech Salem, the King
<f peace, was a title, which could not well
be given to any Prince of the earth. It
feems to be confined folely to the Deity.
He is accordingly ftyled the God of peace.*
The God of peace ..... make you perfect : 3
The very God of peace fancJify you 'wholly. 4
And of the Mefliah faith a Prophet His
name foall be called . . . The Prince of Peace. B
However
1 Jeremiah x. 10. a Rom. xv. 33.
Heb. xiii. 20. i Theft". V. 23.
* Ifaiah ix. 7.
However in refpecT: to Melchizedec, a
learned 'Friend fuggefted to me, that there
is an inftance of a man being called after
this manner. This is to be found in the
name Adorn- zedec, the Lord of jiiftlce-, by
which a King of Canaan in the days of
Jofhua was denominated. There is cer-
tainly a perfect analogy between them ; but
with fome difference. For w,e fee, that the
Perfon, with whom Abram had an inter-
view, was not only defcribed as the King
of jujlice, or righteoufnefs \ but alfo as the
Prince of Peace : which renders the charac-
ter more particular and extraordinary. I
believe therefore, that I. may ftill venture to
fay, that no mortal was fo highly diftin-
guifhed. Add to this, as I have obferved
before,: that rhefe marks of distinction, as
applied above, are not properly names, but
fignificant and prophetic titles. They be-
long to a divine Perfonage, and are peculiar
to his character, whofe kingdom was to be
founded in righteoufnefs and maintained
in peace.
We
* Rev. Mr. Peter Roberts of Eton,
We may therefore be aflured, that this
grand Perfonage, who appeared to Abram,
and who was 'without beginning of days, and
end of life, alfo without defcent, could be no
other than the Divine Logos, or Word of
God. They were therefore both the fame
divine Perfon under a fimilar appearance,
but at two different times. The former
reprefentation in a human form was intro-
duced to give Abram fome intimation of
the real everlafting High Prieft to come ;
of whom the former was merely a temporary
type: for, though antecedent, he is faid
expreffly to be made like unto the Son of God.
Hence he, as well as the latter, is faid -
to abide a Prieft continually ', or for ever. 1
I fliould therefore think, that the account
given by Mofes might be rendered in th6
following manner.
And the King of righteoufnefs, (the fame
as) the Prince of peace, brought forth bread
and wine-) and he 'was a Priejl of the moft
High God.
And
* Heb. vii.' 3.
( 2 73 )
And be blejjed him and faid^ Blejed be
Abram of the moft High God\ poflfjfor of
Heaven and Earth.
And lie Jed. be the moft High Goo', 'which
hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand:
and he (Abram) gave him tithes of all j that
is, of all his fpoil, which he had taken
from the four Kings.
St. Paul could have explained more
clearly this wonderful hiftory, if he had
thought proper to fpeak out, and to have
afforded the intelligence in his power. But
he had a prejudiced people to deal with ;
who had entertained a preconceived opi-
nion. And we may continually perceive a
very wife mode of proceeding, which the
Apoftles oblerved, and their great Matter
before them. This was, never to enter into
any cavil about the rendering of names;
nor about any popular notions of the Jews ;
when thefe notions did not interfere with
the truth ; and when the Gofpel, which
S they
( 274 )
they preached, was/ not injured by their
acquiefcence. They never regarded, whether
it was Balaam the fon of Beor, or of Bozar ;
whether it was Jofhua, or Jefus; Elijah or
Elias; Eleazar or Lazarus; .Quirinus, or
Cyrenius ; 'i^woXqp or 'legoa-oXupu. They
mentioned fuch names, as were in ufe
among the people, to whom they addrefTed
themfelves, and as were beft underftood.
Hence St. Paul acquiefces in Melchizedec
being admitted as a proper name, becaufe it
was fo eftermed by the Hebrews, to whom
he wrote. Yet he intimates plainly, that it
ought properly to be otherwite underftood :
for the purport of the hiitory depended
upon the true interpretation. And if fo,
the words, of which thofe pretended names
were compofed, mould be accordingly inter-
preted, and thus admitted for the fake of
edification.
As to the bread and wine, which were
brought forth to Abram by this Prieft of
God, they were not offered, as Jofephus,
and
( 275 )
and Philo maintained, and as Grotius, Le
Clerc, and others, have fince fuppofed, for
the refrefhment of his little army : for he
had enough, and to fuffice. He had refufed
to accept, what the King of Sodom had
tendered ; and had likewife given tithes of
all he had taken : which implies abundance.
The bread and wine, thus offered by this
great Prieft, were fignificant emblems of the
like offerings enjoined afterwards by Chrift ;
which he ordained as a myflerious refem-
blance of his body and blood. And this,
we may fuppofe, Abram was made to un-
derfland : as the whole was intended to give
' O
him an infight into the ble (lings to come.
I am not unfupported in what I fay ; for
this was an opinion of old Melchizedeck
in typo Chrifti panem et vinum obtulitj et
myfterium Chriftianum in Salvatoris fan-
guine et corpore dedicavit. T
Melchifedeck
1 Paulse et Euiloch. Epift. apud Hieron. Vol. iv,
P- 547-
S 2
Melchifedeck facrificio panis et vini
myfterium Dominici corporis et fanguinis
expreflit. *
j RatriXevg evy?, o 'issvs ns
ufyicis, o rov oivov KXI TOV exprov rrp yiyiu.tr-
rootyyv, 15 TVTTOV
As Melchi zedec, the King of Righteouf-
nefs was the forerunner, and type, of the
Lord of Right eoufnefsj the Holy one 3 and the
Juft one ; we fhall find all, that was faid of
his Prieflhood, fulfilled in Chrift We
learn particularly from St. Paul, that it was
accomplilhed. Hence it is faid We have
a great High Priejl^ who is pa/Jed into the
heavens, Jefus the Son of God. 3 Again
whither
* Incerti ad Demetriadem Virginem Epifl. apud
Hieron. Vol. v. p. 14.
" Clem. Alexand. Strom. Lib. iv. p. 637.
3 Htb, iv, 14,
( 277 )
'whither (into which heavens) the forerunner
is for us entered) even Jefus, made an High
Prieft after the order (not of Levi, nor of
any mortal, but) of Melchi zedec, the Prince
of Righteoufnefs. We have fuch an High
Prieft^ who is fct on the right hand of the
throne of the MajeJIy in the heavens. 2 He is
made an High Prieft for ever. 3 And the
former High Prieft, who was feen by
Abram, was formed after his likenefs. 4
Hence I think, that the pafTage in St.
Paul's Epiftle, where he is particularly de-
fcribing the Perfon, of whom we have been
treating, may be explained in the following
manner.
5 For this perfon, whom you call Mel-
dnfedeCy the King of Salem, Priefi of the moft
High Godj who met Abram returning from the
Jlaughter
1 Heb. vi. 20. = Ibid. viii. i.
* Heb. vi. 20, * Ibid. vii. 3.
'-- Heb, vii. I.
Jlaughter of the kings , and blejed him ; to 'whom
alfo Abram gave a tenth fart of all (his fpoils
and booty j) firft being by interpretation, the
King ofRighteoufnefs, and after that alfo King
of Salem, which is the King of peace, (two
fignificant titles, and not properly names)
being alfo without father, without mother,
without defcent, having neither beginning of
days, nor end cf life, (confequently not
mortal, nor having any relation to the fons
of men) but made like unto the Son of God ;
(the prior being made in conformity to the
latter, and therefore, alius et idem, the very
Logos in a human form, and a reprefenta-
tion of Chrift, who was to come in the
flem) This Perfon, I fey, like the Son of
God, and the very Son of God, abideth a
Prieft continually.' 1
It is from this defcription, that I have
been induced to affert, that this King of
Righteoufnefs, who appeared to Abram in a
human fhape, was the Word of God, called
alfo
1 Heb. vii. I, 2, 3.
( 2 79 )
alfo Jehovah, and the Angel of the Lord,
He was the fame in rcfpect to heavenly
eflence as the Logos, or Word of God ; and
his reprefentative in a bodily form. Hence
our Saviour is defcribecl by the Prophets, as
a righteous Branch : as a King who was to
reign ^ and pro/per ; and wbofe name ivas to be
the Lord cur Right eoufnefs* He was accord-
ingly in a more permanent manner manifefted
in the fieih 5 and maintained the character, to
which he was appointed. Thus we find,
that for the understanding of thefe truths it
is necefTary, that the terms, of which we
have been treating, fhould be literally
tranflated, and not left as proper 2 names
undefined,
1 Jerem. xxiii. 5, 6. Ifaiah xxxii. i
2 I am fenfible, that, to fubftitute titles or attributes
in the room of names, may appear uncouth, efpecialiy
to an ear, which has been otherwife habituated. But
to fay, that the King of Righteoufnefs met Abram is
not a whit more ftrange, than if we were to fay The
Lord of Righteoufnefs met Abrnm The Lord of
Juftice will avenge The God of Peace will comfort -
The Lord of H oils will go forth The Angels of the
Lord met him. Gen. xxxii. j.
S A.
( 280 )
undefined, though they are in fome degree,
and for good reafons, thus admitted by
St. Paul.
For I am perfuaded, as I have intimated
before, that the Apoftle in his account of
this pailage of the Mofaic hiftory was un-
willing to combat the popular opinion of
the Jews. He therefore uies a proper pre-
caution, that he may not give unneceffary
offence; and at the fame time difcovers
the truth. He accordingly affords a juft
character of the divine Perfon, who ap-
peared, at two intervals; and (hews, who
he was-) without declaring, who he was not :
which however is made apparent from his
precife and fignificant defcription.
CONCERNING
( 28! )
CONCERNING A MODE OF EXPLANATION
USED BY SOME MISSIONARIES.
It is faid of the Spanifh Miffionaries in
America, that, when they would explain the
divine hypoftafis, they for an emblem make
ufe of the figure of a tree with two branches,
to mew, that unity is confident with degrees
of partition, and perfonality. Hence by a
proper analogy they propofe, and afterwards
folve, all the objections, and difficulties, by
this defcription of the type, which have at
times been railed in refpect to the primary
object, alluded to under this reprefentation.
They therefore afk, if this itately Tree be
one or more : and it is anfwered, that there
are certainly three portions, divided, but
not feparated, being in (Iricl union, Three
in One. If it be objected by thofe, to whom
they addrefs thernfelves, that then the con-
verfe mufl like wife be true, and One muft
be Three, which implies a contradiction;
this is over-ruled by the object delineated
before
before their eyes, where they fee to a de-
monftration, that Unity may be dilated to
Plurality, and the connexion, and union
preferved. They are farther taught, that
two of the portions are derivatives, which
are thus in ftrit union with the Tree itfelf ;
and remain firmly connected, and in fome
degree embodied, though diverfified in re-
fpecl to order and deftination. They are
therefore co-exiftent with the parent Tree :
for they are of the fame original with the
body from the firfl, though pofterior in
refpect to their protrufion, and divifion,
and they form collectively one and the fame
object.
CONCERNING
CONCERNING SOME VERY CURIOUS DOC-
TRINES OF THE ANCIENT CHINESE,
i
TAKEN FROM
MEMOIRES CONCERNANT I/HISTOIRE, &C.
CHINOIS PAR LES MISSIONAIRES DE
PEKIN. 1776. TOM. I.
ALSO FROM
THE ANCIENT CHOU-KING. A PARIS 1770.
I have mentioned, that the Jews had
certainly traces of the Supreme Hypoftafis;
that their Jehovah, the Angel of the Cove-
nant, was no other than the fecond Perfon
in that Triad; that he under the Father
was the great operator in the work of
creation ; that he appeared to their Fathers - 3
and that they looked up to him as their
guardian Deity. They were likewife not
ignorant of the Holy Spirit, which co-
operated in all things, by which God garni/lied
the heavens, fhou fendeft forth thy Spirit, and
they are created: and t ho it renewefl the face of
the
the earth* With thefe firft principles of
divine knowledge the Jews were of old ac-
quainted : and thefe, together with other
intelligence from the Hiftory of Mofes, I
imagine, they brought into China, when
they at times were admitted into that
country, particularly into the province of
Honan. Their admiffion may have been
not long after their firft captivity. Though
fome of the articles may not be quite to my
prefent purpofe, yet I will not omit them ;
as they will, I believe, prove very fatisfactory
to the Reader.
Some of thefe extracts are taken from the
Chinefe hiftorian Lo-pi, who lived in the
Dynafty of Song, about eight hundred years
ago. But the books, to which he applied
for intelligence, and from which he quotes,
are of far more early date. They are of the
higheft antiquity, and are faid to have been
written many ages before the Chriftian ^Era.
Others
1 Pfalm civ. 30.
Others are taken from the Chou-king,
which is efteemed to be the mod facred
book among the Chinefe ; and is held in the
fame reverence, as the Pentateuch of Mofes
is among the Jews; and fuppofed to be of
greater antiquity. The book L' Y-king, and
Ta-tchouen are as old as Confucius, who
was five hundred years before Chrift.
What I have mentioned, that the Spanifli
Miflionaries exprefs by a tree with two
arms, the Chinefe of old reprefented by an
emblem which bears a ftrong analogy to it.
This was a figure like the Greek Upfilon, Y,
which they called u, or rather y. And the
book, in which the my fiery is explained,
has the name of L' Y-king the Book of Y :
which is extraordinary.
2 Lo-pi dit, qu' il a connu par L' Y-king
dans P article Ta-tchouen (L' Y -king eft le
nom du plus ancien, du plus obfcur,
et du plus eftime de tous les monuments,
qne
1 Chou-king. Difcours Preliminaire, p. XLV.
a Note 2. Ibid,
( 286 )
que le Chine nous ait conferves) que le del
et la forre ont un commencement. Et 11 ajoute,
que, Jt cela fe dit de la Terre et du del, a
phis forte raifon doit-il fe dire de f Homme.
Dans le chapitre 'Su-koua, (un autre
petit Traite, qu'on trouve dans le meme
livre) on parle forte clairement de 1' ori-
gine du monde. Apres quil y cut un
del et une forre, dit le texte, toutes les
chofes malcrieUes furent formees : Enfuit il y
cut le male et la femelle ; puts le marl et la
Jem me } &c.
- Dans le Hi-tfe (ce qui Lo-pi a appelle
ci deflu Ta-tchouen) on lit ces paroles.
L' Y poffede le Grand forme. Lo-pi
expliquant cet endroit du Hi-tfe dit, que le
Grand forme eft la Grande Unite et le
Grand Y : que /' Y n a ni corps ni fgure :
et que tout ce, qui a corps et figure ? a ete fait
far ce, qui n a ni figure ni corps.
La
1 Page XLV. Su-koua, un autre petit Traite, dont
on fait Confucius Auteur.
2 Ibid.
1 La tradition port, que le Grand T'erme
ou la Grand Unite comprends Trots : qu Un
eft tfrois; et que foots font Un.
z Le chara<5tere Y, dit Vang-chin, ne
marque poi?it id un livre nomine Y : mais
il fant fcavoir, que au commencement ', quand
il n y avoit point encore de Grand Terme,
des-lors exijloit une raifon agljjante et inepui-
fable, qui aucune image ne pent reprefenter,
qui aucun nom ne pent nommer, qui eft infnie
en toutes manieres, et a laquelle on ne peut
rien aj outer.
OF THE POWER STYLED TAO.
eft vie ; le premier a engendre le
fecondj les deux out produit le troijieme-,
les trois ont faites toutes chofes. Celui y qui
r efprit appercoit> et qui /' ail ne peut iwV, fe
nomme Y-
LETTRE
1 Chou-king. Difcours Preliminaire, p. XLVI.
2 Ibid. p. XLVII.
3 Memoires Chinois, Vol. i. p. 142.
3
( 288
LETTRE SUR LES CARACTERES CHINOIS.
A PEKIN. 1776.
'Parmi les anciens Caracteres Chinois,
qui ont ete conferves, on trouve celui-ci A .
Selon le Di6lionaire de Kang-hi, ce caraclere
ilgnifie Union. Ecoutons les Chinois fur fon
analyfe. Scion le Cholie-ouen, ce livre ft
vante, A eft trcis unis en un. Lieou-chou-
tfmg hoen, qui eft une explication rai-
fonee et fcavante des plus anciens Caracteres
s' exprime ainfi. A Jjgnifie union intime,
harmonic, le premier blen de /' hor/me, du
dely et de la terre. C eft /' union des trois
Tfai. (T'fai figmfie principe^ pui [fence-, habilite,
dam le 'Tao :) car unis> ih dlrigent enfemble,
creenty et munjjent. L* image + (iron unis
en une fade figure) n'eft pas fi obfcure en
elle mcmc : cependant il eft difficile d'en
raifonner fans fe tromper, il n'eft pas aise
d'en parler. Je connois la delicatelTe de
notrc
1 Memoires Chinois, V 't>l. i. p. 299.
n'otre fiecle, et la rigueur de plus fages
Critiques, des qu'il s'agit de Religion.
Malgre cela, J'ofe conjeclurer, que le
caractere A pouroit avoir ete chez les
anciens Chinois le fymbole de la tres-
adorable Trinite. On trouve dans les
anciens livres une foule de textes, qui font
croire, que les anciens Chinois connoiffoient
ce grand myftere. Le livre See-ki dit,
Autrefois I' Empereur facrifioit folemnellement
de trois en trots am a /' EJprit, Trinite en
unite Chin-San-ye.
* Hiu-chm a vecu fou la Dynaftie du
Han, entre Tan 209 avant J. C. et Fan 190
apres J. C. 3 Hiu-chin, expliquant le ca-
raclere Y, dit ces paroles. Au premier
commencement La Raifon (the Koyoq of Philo
and the Scriptures) fubfijloit dans I 'unite-,
cefl elle, qui ft et divifa le del et la
Terre, convert! f et perfeftionna toutes chofes.
I clofc
1 Memoires Chinois, V. i. p. 299, 300.
1 Note 3. Chou-king, p. XLIX.
3 Chou-king, ibid.
I clofe with one more reference to the
Memoires Chinois, V. i. p. 105.
1 La creation du Monde et de 1'Homme,
1'etat d'innocence, la chute d'Adam, et la
longue vie des premiers hommes, font arti-
cules auffi clairement, qu'on peut le defirer
dans nos anciennes Chroniques. Celui> qui
eft lui-meme fin principe> et fa ratine, dit
Tchouan-tfee, a fait le Ciet, et la
I have mentioned, that this intelligence
may have poffibly been obtained from fome
Jews of the difperfion. From whatever
fource it was derived, the hiftory is very
extraordinary.
T H K END.
ERRATA.
PAGE 15. note -N A^T ? O,- -\ r^^w
69. 1. 2. eundum I I eundci
>for{ >read< ^
73- 1- 3- I ^e "
I XXX -* V.XXX1X
University of California
SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY
405 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024-1388
Return this material to the library
from which it was borrowed.
< , c u
f < C <-'-
'
ict
C ^ v
< ( f
~
A 001 281 959 5
( V T
i<c& fl^v v^
^ V .:SV
* .
<
i .< * , <. - **
^4 : '*' C'^V
t>^L x . ^--^ , t * <
BT
210
",..v
<<r rsr <
fUTf^ C '^S '
5 '. 5fe
^ ' t <tSL
^:-<- ' , \
1
^" tC.E^
:c a^VV* -^
-^ ' 'i^Vci ^
C r ^
T<
^Tinr
<; ^
"cC
'VX
?!'; :'.
C ' ft
f :'
<: i r
< <
*_&: < cr$
..<ig<c. .^c.*-
...
J