P. 174. Justin Martyr, in his dialogue with Tripho, fays, I will endeavour to thew you from fcripture, that there is another God and Lord, and one who is fo called, befides the maker of all things, he is alfo called an angel, on account of his informing men of what he that made all things, above whom there is 'no God, wills that he fhould inform them.' Juftin Martyr is again quoted, Vol. ii. p. 53. faying,. Jefus Chrift is the only proper Son of God, being his Logos, firft born, and powerful.' A gain, p. 55. God produced from himself a rational power, called the Glory of God, fometimes the Son, Wifdom, Angel, God, Lord,, or Commander in Chief.

6

Vol. i. p. 306. Iranaus calls Christ our Lord and God, and Saviour and King, according to the will of the invifible Father.' Again, p. 308. Chrift, from his great love to his crea tures, fubmitted to be born of a virgin.'

P. 316. Tertullian fays, There is alfo a Son of this one God, his word which proceeded from him, by whom all things were made; "that he was by the Father fent into a virgin, and of her born a man.'

.

Vol. ii. p. 59. Athenagoras fays, If I were afked what the Son of God is, I would say that he is the production of the Father.

P. 130. Tatian fays, That at the Father's will the Logos came out of him, who was a fimple being, and he became the first production of his fpirit. This Logos was the (begin. ning) to the external world.'

N 3.

P. 131

1

E

C

P. 131. Clemens Alexandrinus fays, The Father fhewed that he was righteous by the Logos from of old, from the time he became a Father; the Logos deriving his origin from the will of the Father.'

P. 132. Hippolitus fays, God the Father generated whom he pleafed and as he pleafed.'

gener

P. 132. Athanafius fays, That God ated him spontaneously, and voluntarily." P. 132. Tertullian fays, God was not always a Father.'

P. 135. Eufebius, fpeaking of God intending to form the world, fays, He thought of making one to govern and direct the whole.'

P. 137. Hilary, fays, The Son was produced by the Father before all time, being created and founded before the ages. He is neither eternal nor co-eternal.'

Thefe are a few of many teftimonies that might be collected from the writings of Mr Lindsey and Dr Priestley, directly against the opinions they endeavour to eftablish; it may therefore appear ftrange, that in oppofition to fuch clear fcripture teftimony, and the most reputed chriftian writers of antiquity, they and others fhould deny that Chrift was before all things, and that all things were created by him.

As Dr Priestley has alfo, in his hiftory of opinions, given the opinions of fome Jewish writers to the fame effect, I fhall fet down

what

what he fays of Philo, vol. ii. from the 3d, to the 13th page inclufive.

C

C

Philo the Jew, (fays he) perfonifies the Logos more than the Platonic Philofophers.

His ideas are more clear and confiftent • than theirs.—Philo calls the Logos the image of God, the intermediate principle between God and the creation.-He calls the Logos the first begotten, the most ancient angel, the archangel with many names, the aid un'known image of God.- That the Divine Logos had his place between the cherubims, having no vifible form, but is the exprefs image of God, the oldeft of all intelligible things, and that there is no medium between it and the fupreme power. The Logos is the firft-begotten Son, fuperintending all things as an officer under God, and digni'fied with the appellation of God.'

It may here be obferved, that as the foregoing evidence from fcripture, and the opinions of men, establish, in the clearest manner, the existence of Jefus Chrift before his incarnation; fo his existence from the beginning, in a character inferior to that of the Father, is established by the fame evidence. And as Dr Priestley, the most noted champion for the Socinian cause, has furnished many refpectable names of antiquity, in favour of the doctrine of the pre-existence of Chrift; fo Dr Horsely, the most noted champion for the Athanafian fyftem, has given us fome very refpectable modern names in favour of the Son's fubordination to the Father,

i

ther, which fome on: his fide of the queft on will perhaps not so readily admit.

In his letters to Dr Priestley, page 145, he fays, 'You are, Sir, very pofitive in the affertion, that Dr Waterland in particular, and all the • ftri&t Athanafians of the last age, maintained, "That the Trinity confifts of three perfons, all truly independent of each other.' But, Sir, I deny of Dr Waterland in particular, and of the ftrict Athanafians of the laft age in general, that they fall under this cenfure.

.

Bishop Bull, in his defence of the Nicean faith, fpends a whole chapter, and a very long chapter it is, upon the fubject of the Son's fubordination which he maintains to be "branch of the true faith.

The fame thing is afferted by Pearson, in his expofition of the apoftles creed. He obferves, that in the very name Father there is "fomething of eminence, which is not in "that of Son, and fomething of priority we "muft afcribe unto the first in refpect of the "fecond perfon.We must not therefore fo "far endeavour to involve ourselves in the "darkness of this mystery, as to deny that "glory which is clearly due unto the Father.. "He is God, not of any other, but of him"felf; there is no other person who is God, "but is God of him. It is no diminution of "the Son to fay, he is of another, "were a diminution to the Father to speak fo "of him; and there must be some pre-emi"nence, where there is place for derogation..

but it

The

"The first perfon-is a Father indeed by "reafon of his Son, but he is not God by rea"fon of him; whereas the Son is not only Son "in regard to the Father, but also God by rea"fon of the fame.' Upon this pre-eminence

of the Father, the learned bishop founds the < congruity of the divine miffion; and he maintains, that the dignity of the Father appears "from the order of the perfons in the bleffed Trinity, of which he undoubtedly is the firft.' To the fame purpose the learned Mr William Stephens affirms, that, on the commu"nication of the God-head from the Father to "the Son-is founded and established all that "fubordination which we affert among the "perfons of the Trinity.' He adds, that unless fome fubordination be maintained, we run into Tritheifm.

The fame fentiments are acknowledged by Dr Waterland, in his commentary on the Athanafian creed. When it is faid, None is "afore or after another, we are not to under"fland it of order; for the Father is the first, "Neither are we to understand it of office; "for the Father is fupreme in office."

The existence of a perfon from the beginning, in the character of a mediator, which is clearly taught in the fcriptures of truth, was not only believed by the Jews and primitive Christians, but alfo by all the nations who retained the knowledge of that important branch of primitive revelation, though corrupted by their foolish inventions. Dr Priestley himself allows,

that