IV. Mifcellanies of the late ingenious and celebrated M. Abauzit, on Hiftorical, Theclogical, and Critical Subjects. Tranflated from "the French, by E. Harwood, D. D. 8vo. 5s. Lewed. Becket. Concluded from vol. xxxviii. p. 442.

IN

N our Review for the last month we have given a fhort account of the life of M. Abauzit, and of fome of his theological effays; we fhall now proceed to lay before our readers a fummary view of the remaining articles in this volume.

Art. VI. Is a Reply to a Profeffor's Letter.-Profeffor B. had attempted to prove the divinity of Chrift from a paffage in the Epiftle to the Romans, ix. 5. He maintained, that it ought to be tranflated, as in in the common verfion, Of whom is Chrift according to the flesh, who is God over all, bleffed for ever;' becaufe, according to the ftyle of St. Paul, the expreffion according to the flesh,' is always in opposition to fome other thing, as to God; becaufe, moreover, the Syriac verfion has rendered this paffage in the fame fenfe; and, lastly, because this fenfe is agreeable to the defign of the apostle, which was to exalt the advantages, which God had conferred on the nation of the Jews, and to render their incredulity the more criminal, if they perfifted in it. The profeffor was not ignorant, that in the ancient copies, the reading was fimply this: Of whom is Chrift according to the flesh, who is bleffed above all for ever; and that other interpreters render this text agreeably to these ancient copies. But he rejectedthis way of rendering the paffage, becaufe it does not obviate. all difficulties; and the reafons, on which the first fenfe is founded, appeared to him the ftrongeft. To thefe difficul ties, and thefe reafons, M. Abauzit replies:

1. It has been obferved, that St. Cyprian, St. Hilary, and St. Chryfoftom, read the text without the word God. Now, fays he, the copies which thefe fathers followed, were without contradiction more ancient than thofe, from which our modern editions of the New Teftament were made; and confequently are better authorities.

2. To the objection, that the word God might have been omitted by the negligence of tranfcribers, or the fraud of heretics, he anfwers: that there is greater likelihood, that this word imperceptibly flipped into the text. Probably St. Paul, having only written, He who is over all be bleffed for ever," fome one, in order to mark the perfon, of whom this was to be understood, might write the word God in the margin, and a careless tranfcriber adopt it into the text.

3. St. Paul does not ufually give Jefus Chrift the appellation of God. It is not certain that he is called fo in the paf

fages, which are commonly produced for that purpose. Tit. ii. 13. may be thus tranflated: Looking for the blessed hope, and the appearance of the glory of our great God, and of the faviour Jefus Chrift.' The omiffion of 78 before σωτηρος is no objection; it is omitted in a fimilar paffage, z Theff. i, 12. As for the paffage in 1 Tim. iii. 16, besides that the word God is also wanting in feveral copies, Jefus Chrift is not there called God. The apoftle only tells us, that under the gospel God hath been manifefted in the flesh: meaning, that the Deity is here manifefted in a fenfible manner, in a man, or by means of a man, namely, Jefus Christ.

But let it be fuppofed, that the common manner. of reading the text is the beft. Some expofitors put a full ftop after thefe words, Of whom is Chrift according to the flesh;' and render the following words thus, God, who is over all, be bleffed for ever, Amen.' This verfion, our author thinks, is very conformable to the words of the original, and agrees very well with the arrangement of the apoftle's difcourfe. St. Paul had just made a long enumeration of the advantages with which God had indulged the Jewish nation. He had obferved, among other particulars, the felicity which this people had enjoyed, by having the Meffiah born amongst them, He had faid, Of whom is Chrift, according to the flesh.' After which, penetrated with gratitude for the fignal benefits God had conferred on his country, he pays him the grateful tribute of the profoundeft acknowledgments: God, fays he, who is over all, be bleffed for ever, Amen.' It is not unufual with St. Paul to break off his difcourfe abruptly in this man mer, to pay to the Deity praifes and thankfgivings. Thus, ch. xi, 36. he addresses himself to God in this doxology: To whom be glory for ever and ever, Amen,' See alfo ■ Tim. i, 17.

It is very poffible, fays the objector, that St. Paul, after having remarked, that Chrift defcended from the Jews, in one certain respect was willing to denote, that, with regard to an other part of his character, he was God. M. Abauzit replies, that the facred writers often ufe this expreffion, according to the flesh,' without any antithefis. Thus St. Peter fays, A&s ii. 30. that God had promised David to make the Meffiah descend from him, according to the flesh,' without indicating afterwards, that he was, in another respect, to derive his birth from the Deity.

6

Laftly, the authority of the Syriac' verfion is not of any great weight in this cafe; as it was made only about the fifth or fixth century, at a time when every quarter was ranfacked for weapons against the Arians.

When the Arians object, that Jefus Chrift reprefents himfelf as not knowing the day of judgment, and as inferior to the Father, the Trinitarians reply, that thefe paffages ought to be understood of Chrift as man. But Abauzit very properly observes, that there is no abfurdity which a person`might not advance, if he were allowed to employ fimilar reservation. He might fay, that he does not think; that he has not an idea of any one thing; that he remembers nothing; that he cannot reason, becaufe all thefe operations do not belong to his body. He might fay, in fpeaking of: Jefus Chrift, that he was not born; that he did not fuffer; that he was not crucified; that he did not die; that he was not raised again, or afcended into heaven, becaufe all this is not true of him with regard to his divinity. One easily fees, that this would be to introduce an egregious abuse of language: we ought, therefore, to be cautious of attributing it to Jefus Chrift, by fuppofing, that he adopted this mode of expreffing himself, when he declared to the world his ignorance of the day of judgment, because he knew it not as man, though at the fame time, he perfectly knew it as God.

VII. A Paraphrafe on fome Verfes in the first chapter of St. John. In this paraphrafe the author explains the logos, by reafon, intelligence, or wisdom; and fuppofes that the defign of the evangelift is to inform us, that the fame wisdom, which formed all creatures with so much skill, has not fhone with Jefs fplendor in the creation of the new world.

VIII. An Explanation of John xvii. 4, 5.-According to M. Abauzit, the glory which Jefus Chrift fays, he had with his Father before the world was created, was the glory which he had in the Divine mind or purpose from all eternity. Just as St. Paul speaks, when he mentions, the grace which was given to us in Christ Jefus before the world began.' 2 Tim. i. 9. In this fenfe only, our author thinks, Jefus Chrift existed before Abraham, and was in heaven before his appearance upon earth. But may not we fay on this occafion what M. Abau. zit observes on a former, that we ought to be cautious of attributing fuch an equivocal mode of expreffion to Jefus Chrift?

6

The author applies true God and eter

Thef. i. 9. Abraham re

IX. An Explanation of 1 John v. 20. the latter part of this verfe, He is the nal life,' to the Father: in conformity with the words of St. Paul, who ftyles him the living and true God.' X. An Explanation of John viii. 56-58. joiced, &c.-The author's paraphrafe is to this effect. before Abraham came into the world, I had been promised to men; I was ever prefent to the faith of believers; thus I

• Even

could

could be the object of the faith of this patriarch; he could fee this my day, and rejoice in the profpect of it.'

XI. An Illuftration of Heb. ch. i.-Upon the foregoing principles.

XII. An Explication of Phil. ii. 5, 6. Who being in the form of God, &c.-The author fhews, that the form of God, which the apostle fpeaks of, means nothing else, but that Jefus Chrift resembled, in fome refpe&ts, the Deity; and that the meaning of this much controverted paffage is this: Poffeffing the form of a God, he clothed it in a veil of infirm flesh. His likeness to God he did not repute as a rich prize, er fought with avidity; but he voluntarily divefted himself of it, affuming the form of a fervant, and in outward appearance was like a mere man.'

XIII. Of the Honour due to Jefus Chrift. M. Abauzit delivers his opinion on this point in the following terms: Every time the Scripture commands me to pay my homage to Jesus Christ, it always adds certain reftrictions; it faves fo evidently the rights of the Creator, that they cannot receive from it any derogation. I regard the former as my great and infallible teacher. I admire his power, his virtues, his extraordinary talents; I acknowledge him for my fuperior, and as the perfon who is one day to be my judge. I acknowledge, that after God, he is the author of my falvation. I am penetrated with gratitude towards him. I celebrate his memory; and the honours which I render him, keep pace with the meafure of my praises. I abafe myself before the king of kings, I respect in him the image and capital production of the Deity. Above all, I honour him, when I ftrive to obey him, and when I take his precepts for the rule of my life. This appears to me to be the true manner of honouring Jefus Christ.'

XIV. Of the Knowledge of Jefus Chrifl.-M. Abauzit en deavours to prove, that our Saviour's knowledge of the human heart was derived from God.

XV. Of the power of Jefus Chrift to forgive fins.-The author produces feveral arguments to fhew, that this power was likewife received from the Father. It is plain, he thinks, that he, who is our interceffor, cannot have originally and in himself the power of forgiving our fins.

XVI. Of the Holy Spirit.-The defign of this piece is to fhew, that the term Holy Spirit, or Spirit of God, fignifies in Scripture, the power and influence of the Deity, the Deity himfelf, the holy difpofition which the gospel requires, &c. but never denotes a perfon really diftinct from the Father.

XVII. Of baptizing in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghoft.- Thefe three, fays our author, con-. ftitute

C 4

ftitute but one and the fame authority. We Chriftians do not believe but only in one and the fame God, who firft spoke to us by Mofes and the prophets, afterwards by his Son, and laft of all by the apoftles.?

XVIII. A general Idea of the Eucharift.-Every thing in this inftitution, as M. Abauzit expreffes himfelf, is clear, fimple, and natural. Here is a person who takes leave of his friends, who eats with them for the laft time, and who gives them a token, that they may remember him.

XIX. A Letter to William Burnet, efq. Governor of New York, on fome of the Prophecies of Daniel.

XX. An Explication of the xith chapter of Daniel, by the event.

XXI. An Historical Difcourfe on the Apocalypfe. This is a learned enquiry into the authenticity of the Apocalypfe. The author has cited the fathers in a chronological feries, and given us view of their teftimonies on both fides of the quef

tion.

Juftin Martyr, about the year of Chrift 170, is the first of our divines who mentions the Apocalypfe; and, what is remarkable, he attributes it to the apostle St. John. But his authority is greatly invalidated by his credulity. In the fame Dialogue, he cites of his own head a false gospel, when he fays, that upon Jefus's going down into Jordan, a fire was kindled there, and they heard this voice from heaven: Thou art my fon, this day have I begotten thee!' He afferts, that these things were written by the apoftles; though they are only found in the gospel of the Ebionites. He addreffes the Chriftians in this grave admonition: O Greeks, give credit to the old and venerable Sibyl, whofe books are fpread throughout the world, and who was infpired in an extraordinary manner by the Almighty."

Irenæus, who flourished afterwards, often quotes the Apacalypfe, under the name of John, the difciple of our Lord. But to authenticate what he fays, he fcarce ever produces any thing but the tradition or teftimony of a certain old man, whom he never knew; whofe memory old age had certainly impaired; otherwife, among other fables, he would never have afferted, that Jefus Chrift lived till he was fifty years of age, in order that he might pafs through and fanctify all the various stages of life. Modern divines, however, highly value the teftimony of this father. He had feen, fay they, Papias and Polycarp, both difciples of St. John. But Papias died before Polycarp, who fuffered martyrdom in 167; and Irenæus fpeaks of the latter as of a perfon very ancient, whom he just remembers to have feen, when he was very young. Pa