a genitive doth ever denote the final cause, but the efficient only. With an accusative for the most part it is as much as propter, signifying the final cause of the thing spoken of, and rarely in the New Testament is it otherwise used, dia to sana or, Rev. iv. 11. At thy will or pleasure; the efficient and disposing not the final cause seems to be denoted. And chap. xiii. 14. dia τa onμoia, by the signs that were given him to do, the formal cause is signified. But that joined with a genitive case it any where signifies the final cause, doth not appear. Beza, whom Grotius cites, says, on Rom. vi. 4. that dia değns argos, by the glory of the Father, may be taken for siç doğny, unto the glory. But the case is not the same, where things, as where persons are spoken of; here relates unto a person, and yet is dia joined with it asserted to denote the end of the things spoken of, which is insolent. Besides deža wargos, in that place, is indeed the glorious power of the Father, the efficient of the resurrection of Christ treated of. So that whereas dia is used six hundred times with a genitive case in the New Testament, no one instance can be given, where it may be rendered propter, for, and therefore cannot be so here.

2. On supposition that some such instance might be produced, yet being contrary to the constant use of the word, some cogent reason from the text wherein it is used, or the thing treated of, must be urged, to give that sense admittance. And nothing of that nature is, or can be here pleaded.

3. As di', and so, are distinguished, the one expressing the efficient, the other the final cause, Rom. xi. 36. so also are di' and di', in this very epistle, chap. ii. 10. d' iv ta warta, xar di's ta xavta, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things; and is it likely that the apostle would put one of them for the other, contrary to the proper use which he intended immediately to assign severally unto them?

4. As by whom here, is the same with di' avre, by him, John i. 3. which the same person interprets properly for the efficient

cause.

On these accounts the foundation of this gloss being removed, the superadded translation of wines, by condiderat, is altogether useless; and what the Jews grant that God did with respect to the Messiah, we shall afterwards consider.

2. The Socinians, generally lay no exception against the person making, whom they acknowledge to be Christ the Son, but to the worlds said to be made. These are not, say they, the things of the old, but of the new creation, not the fabric of heaven and earth, but the conversion of the souls of men; not the first institution and forming of all things, but the restoration of mankind, and translation into a new condition of life. This Schlictingius at large insists on, in his comment on this

place, bringing, in justification of his interpretation, the sum of what is pleaded by any of them, in answer not only to this testimony, but also to that of John i. 3. and that also of Col. i.. 16, 17.

1st, The old creation,' he says, is never said to be performed by any intermediate cause, as the Father is here said to make these worlds by the Son.' But 1. This is petitio principii, that this expression doth denote any such intermediate cause, as should interpose between the Father, and the creation of the world by an operation of its own, divers from that of the Father, Job xxvi. 13. God is said to adorn the heavens nina, by his Spirit,' which they will not contend to denote an intermediate cause, and dia here is but what the Hebrews express by 2. 2. In the creation of the world the Father wrought in and by the Son, the same creating act being the act of both persons, John v. 17. their will, wisdom, and power being essentially the

same.

2d. He adds, There is an allusion only in the words to the first creation, as in John i. 1-3. where the apostle sets out the beginning of the gospel in the terms whereby Moses reports the creation of the world. And therefore mentions light in particular, because of an allusion to the light at first created by God, when of all other things wherein there is no such allusion he maketh no mention.'

Answ. 1. The new creation granted by the men of this persua sion, being only a moral suasion of the minds of men by the outward doctrine of the gospel, I know not what allusion can be fancied in it, to the creation of the world out of nothing.

2. It is granted that the apostle speaks here of the same creation that John treats of in the beginning of his gospel, but that this is the creation of the whole world, and of all things contained in it, hath been elsewhere proved, and must be granted, or we may well despair of ever understanding one line in the Scripture, or what we ordinarily speak one to another.

3. John doth not mention any particular of the old creation, affirming only in general, that by the Word "all things were made," whereof he afterwards affirms, that it was the " light" of men, not assigning to him in particular, the creation of light, as is pretended.

3d, He tells us, the article proposed, Tous as, intimates that it is not the old creation that is intended, but some new special thing distinct from it and preferred above it.' Answ. 1. As the same article doth, used by the same apostle to the same purpose in another place, Acts xiv. 15. is exoTS TOY &qulov Kai Thy yay nai tay dudattav," who made the heaven, the earth and sea," which were certainly those created of old. 2. The same article is used with the same word again in this epistle, chap. xi. 3.

πιστεί νοῦμεν κατηρτίσθαι τας αιώνας, σ by faith we understand that the worlds were made," where this author acknowledgeth the old creation to be intended.

4. He adds, that the author of this epistle seems to allude to the Greek translation of Isa. ix. 6. wherein 7-8, the Father of eternity, or eternal Father, is rendered the Father of the world to come.' Answ. 1. There is no manner of relation between waʊng μexλorlos aiavos, ‘the Father of the world to come," and di' & Tous alwas wonder," by whom he made the worlds," unless it be that one word is used in both places in very distinct senses, which if it be sufficient to evince a cognation between various places, very strange and uncouth interpretations would quickly ensue. Nor 2. Doth that, which the apostle here treats of, any way respect that which the prophet in that place insists on, his name and nature being only declared by the prophet, and his works by the apostle. And 3. It is presumption to suppose the apostle to allude to a corrupt translation, as that of the LXX. in that place is, there being no ground for it in the original, for 8, is not warnę μexhorlos αiavos, but raing acarios, 'the eternal Father,' and what the Jews and LXX. intend by the world to come, we shall afterwards consider.

5. His last refuge is in Isa. li. 16. Where the work of God,' as he observes, in the reduction of the people of the Jews from the captivity of Babylon, is called his planting the heavens, and laying the foundations of the earth. And the Vulgar Latin translation,' as he farther observes, renders the word, ut colum plantes, ut terram fundes, ascribing that to the prophet which he did but declare, and in this sense he contends, that God the Father is said to make the worlds by his Son.' Answ. 1. The work mentioned is not that which God would do in the reduction of the people from Babylon, but that which he had done in their delivery from Egypt, recorded to strengthen the faith of believers in what for the future he would yet do for them. 2. The expressions of "planting the heavens, and laying the foundation of the earth," are in this place of the prophet plainly allegorical, land are in the very same place declared so to be. First, in the circumstance of time, when this work is said to be wrought, namely, at the coming of the Israelites out of Egypt, when the heavens and the earth properly so called, could not be made, planted, founded, or created. Secondly, By an adjoined exposition of the allegory, "I have put my words into thy mouth, and said unto Žion thou art my people." This was his planting of the heavens, and laying the foundation of the earth, even the erection of a church and political state amongst the Israelites. 3. It is not to the prophet, but to the church, that the words are spoken, and ro and 70, are not ut plantes et ut fundes, but ad plantandum, to plant' and ad fun

66

dandum, to lay the foundation,' and our author injures his cause, by making use of a translation to uphold it, which himself knows to be corrupt. 4. There is not then, any similitude between that place of the prophet, wherein words are used allegorically, (the allegory in them being instantly explained,) and this of the apostle, whose discourse is didactical, and the words used in it, proper, and suited to the things intended by him to be expressed. And this is the substance of what is pleaded to wrest from believers this illustrious testimony given to the eternal Deity of the Son of God. We may yet further consider the reasons that offer themselves from the context, for the removal of the interprpretation suggested.

1. It sinks under its own weakness and absurdity. The apostle, intending to set out the excellency of the Son of God, affirms, that "by him the worlds were made," that is, say they, Christ preaching the gospel converted some to the faith of it, and many more were converted by the apostles preaching the same doctrine, whereupon blessed times of light and salvation ensued.' Who, not overpowered with prejudice, could once imagine any such sense in these words? especially considering that it is as contrary to the design of the apostle, as it is to the import of the words themselves. This is that which Peter calls "men's wresting the Scripture to their own perdition."

2. The apostle, as we observed, writes didactically, plainly expressing the matter whereof he treats in words usual and proper. To what end then should he use so strained an allegory in a point of doctrine, yea, a fundamental article of the religion he taught, and that to express what he had immediately in the words foregoing properly expressed, for "by whom he made the worlds," is no more in these men's apprehensions, than "in him bath he spoken in these latter days." Nor is this expression any where used, no not in the most allegorical prophecies of the Old Testament, to denote that which here they would wrest it to. But making of the world, signifies making of the world, in the whole Scripture throughout, and nothing else.

3. The "making of the worlds" here intended, was a thing then past, sons, he made them,' that is, he did so of old. And the same word is used by the LXX. to express the old creation. But now that which the Jews called the world to come, or the blessed state of the church under the Messiah, the apostle speaks of, as of that which was not yet come, the present worldly state of the Judaical church yet continuing.

4. The word awy, and aves, or by and by, which are so rendered, taken absolutely as they are here used, do never in any one place of the Old or New Testament signify the new creation, or state of the church under the gospel, but the whole

world,' and all things therein contained, they do signify in this very epistle, chap. xi. 3.

5. Wherever the apostle in this epistle speaks in the Judaical idiom of the church state under the Messiah, he never calls it by the name of oixouμern, or diwy, but still with the limitation of, "to come," as chap. ii. 5. vi. 5. And where the word is used absolutely as in this place, and chap. xi. 3. it is the "whole world" that is intended.

That

6. The context utterly refuseth this gloss. The Son in the preceding words is said to be made heir or Lord of all; that is of all things absolutely and universally, as we have evinced, and is confessed. To that assertion he subjoins a reason of the equity of that transcendent grant made to him, namely, because" by him all things were made," whereunto he adds his upholding, ruling and disposing of them when so made by him; "he upholdeth all things by the word of his power." between the" all things" whereof he is Lord, and the "all things" that he upholds, there should be an interposition of words of the same import with them, expressing the reason of those that go before, and the foundation of that which follows, knitting both parts together, and yet indeed have a signification in them of things utterly heterogeneous to them, is most unreasonable to imagine.

We have now obtained liberty by removing the entanglements cast in our way, to proceed to the opening of the genuine sense and import of these words.

▲, by whom,' not as an instrument or an inferior intermediate created cause, for then also must he be created by himself, seeing all things that were made were made by him, John i. 3. but as his own eternal Word, wisdom and power, Prov. viii. 22-24. John i. 3. The same individual creating act, being the work of Father and Son, whose power and wisdom being one and the same undivided, so also are the works which outwardly proceed from them. And as the joint working of Father and Son doth not infer any other subordination but that of subsistence and order, so the preposition de doth not of itself intimate the subjection of an instrumental cause, being used sometimes to express the work of the Father himself, Gal. i. 1.

ENCE,,created,' so the apostle expresseth that word, Acts xvii. 24. 26. And the LXX. most commonly, as Gen. i. 1. though sometimes they use xw, as our apostle also doth, chap. He made, created, produced out of nothing, "by the things not seen," chap. xi. 3.

X.

THE KINOS, LINY, y, so that word is constantly rendered by the Greeks. by is to hide, or to be hid, kept secret, close, undiscovered.' Whence a virgin is called by, one not yet VOL. III.

G