by driving him nearly to despair, by working death in his foul. Death is also perfonified. But nothing is afferted of it, which must neceffarily be understood of a real perfon; as hath been proved with refpect to Wisdom.

That apocryphal book, the Wisdom of Solomon, affords many proofs that the ancient Jews confidered Wisdom as a perfon. I fhall refer to one only. "Wisdom is the worker "of all things, in whom is an understanding spirit, holy, "only-begotten, manifold, fubtle, lively,-quick,-who "cannot be letted,----the breath of the power of God," chap. vii. 22. These things cannot apply to the attribute of wisdom. For it is here reprefented as the immediate agent in creation, and as what cannot be letted, which expreffions more properly belong to power. It is faid to have a fpirit. This cannot, with any propriety, be afferted of an accident. It is only-begotten. To affert this of an attribute, would be a ridiculous ftretch of perfonification. When faid to be lively, quick, &c. it exactly correfponds with the account given, Heb. iv. 12. 13. of that Word with whom we have to do. It is called " the breath of the power of "God." This could never be meant by any reasonable perfon, however much addicted to figurative writing, as a defcription of the perfection of wisdom. For the reverse only could be afferted. Power, as an attribute, might, by a ftrong figure, be denominated "the breath of the wisdom of God;" as being its expreffion, and manifestation. But the propofition is abfurd, if inverted; unless it be meant of a person, whose generation might be expreffed in this manner.

Wisdom is evidently introduced, in the New Teftament, as a perfon. Not to infift on that paffage, Wisdom is juftified of her children, Mat. xi. 19. there are others about which there cannot reasonably be any difpute. Our Saviour uses this language; Therefore alfo faid the Wisdom of

God,

God, I will fend them prophets and apostles, Luke xi. 49. The pronoun I evidently refers to the Wisdom of God as the speaker. This Wisdom not only speaks, but fends. Here there is not a shadow of reafon for fuppofing a figurative personification. For Jefus is not delivering a parable or prophecy. The whole language of the context is strictly literal. But the Spirit of God eliewhere gives us a key for understanding this language, as used in both Teftaments; by informing us that the Wisdom of God is Chrift, 1 Cor. i. 24.

BOOK

VINDICATION

OF THE

DOCTRINE OF SCRIPTURE, &c.

BOOK II.

THE DOCTRINE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT CONCERNING JESUS CHRIST.

CHAP. I.

The Logos proved to be a Perfon, from the Introduction to the Gofpel of John.

AMONG the many pallages in the New Testament

which represent the Word as a person, the Introduction to John's Gospel appears with diftinguished hiftre. Therefore, in every age, the adverfaries of the Deity of Christ have laboured to involve it in darknefs. The fum of what is maintained by Dr P. feems to confift in these affertions : I. That John did not mean, by the Logos, a perfon, but an attribute.

II. That it is almost certain that his defign, in writing his Gofpel, was to correct those who believed that the Logos was a perfon.

VOL. I.

I

III. That

III. That, in the introduction to his Gospel, he alludes to the very fame fyftem as in his first Epistle, in which he blames those only who denied the reality of Christ's hu

man nature.

I. Dr. P. afferts, that John did not mean, by the Logos, a perfon. but an attribute. "The Chriftian philofophers," he fays, "having once got the idea that the Logos might "be interpreted of Chrift, proceeded to explain what John "fays of the Logos in the introduction of his Gofpel, to "mean the fame perfon, in direct oppofition to what he "really meant, which was, that the Logos by which all things were made was not a being distinct from God, "but God himself, being his attribute, his wisdom and power, dwelling in Chrift, speaking and acting by

66

"him *."

This, like the most of our author's pofitions, refts folely on his own affertion. But although the proof properly belongs to him, I fhall endeavour to bring pofitive proof to the contrary. It might be urged, as an argument of no inconfiderable weight againft this affertion, that those who make it cannot produce another inftance, from the New Teftament, of the word Logos being used to fignify the wisdom or power of God as an attribute: whereas it hath been proved, that the correfpondent term, in the Hebrew, is fo used in the Old, as neceffarily to denote a perfon and I hope to make it appear that Logos, in fome other paffages, must be understood in the fame fenfe. But I am willing to reft the whole controverfy with refpect to the meaning of the term as here used, on the evidence arising from the paffage itself. For if we attentively confider the Introduction to this Gospel, which includes the first eighteen verses, we shall find almost as many arguments against the Socinian explanation, as there are words.

Hift. Corrupt. vol. i. p. 31. Earl. Opin. vol.i. p. 68. 181.