fefs that Jefus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and be in God, ver. 15.

8. He is a Son, who could be appointed, or conftituted beir of all things, Heb. i. 2. When this language is used, our Lord is undoubtedly pointed out in his mediatorial character for in this refpect alone could he receive an appointment. But the appointment is fuch, as not merely to imply real poffeffion, but so extenfive a poffeffion as is totally incompatible with the state of a creature. All things, faith Chrift, are delivered unto me of my Father, Mat. xi. 27. All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth, chap. xxviii. 18. He is Lord, both of the dead and of the living, Rom. xiv. 9. Angels and devils, faints and finners, are under his dominion. The management of the church is wholly in his hand. All gifts and graces are at his difpofal. Glory itself muft be conferred by him. All the kingdoms of this world are put under his feet. Univerfal nature acknowledges his fovereignty. All judgment, whether in the present state or at the last day, is committed to him, John v. 22. And is a mere man, is any creature, capable of fuch a trust?

"It must be so;" replies the Socinian, "For the infpi"red writer affures us that all this power is delegated." Let us hear our author. "It is plain from this paffage," he says, “that whatever Chrift is, he is by divine appoint"ment;—whom he appointed heir of all things *. But Socinians are refolved to reckon it abfurd, that a person, to whom divine powers effentially belong, fhould on any account whatsoever voluntarily fubmit to an appointment to discharge these in an inferior nature affumed by him while they find no difficulty in conceiving, that one effentially poffeffing no other powers than the human fhould be exalted to the full exercise of those that are di

*Famil. Illuftr. p. 35.

vine.

creatures are, in their highest character, only messengers and minifters, ver. 7. He is begotten; but they are made. Although there is a repeated allufion to an inheritance, yet the language is different. In the first inftance, the Son is faid to be appointed or conftituted beir: but in the second, it is fimply affirmed that he xxxnpovoμnnev, bath inherited a more excellent name. The infpired writer seems to exhibit the Son, first as an appointed, and then as a natural heir; as he means to fhew that the latter is the foundation of the former. In this view, his language exactly correfponds with the teftimony of the Baptift, He that cometh after me is preferred before me, for he was before me, John i. 15.

9. Jefus is fo the Son of God, that he could be the Creator. God bath Spoken by the Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, by whom alfo be made the worlds, Heb. i. 1, 2. Dr P. observes, that “ the doctrine of Christ having made the "world, is not expreffed by any of the apostles in a man"ner fo definite and clear, or fo repeatedly, as its magni❝tude naturally required. For the paffages in their wri"tings from which it has been inferred that they held this “opinion, are very few *." Will our author please to inform us, how many paffages would have been neceffary, as a proper foundation for faith, on a subject of this kind? He grants that there are four which are understood in this sense. And these, if clear, are as good as four hundred. But this is the rub. They "are by no means clear and "exprefs to the purpose. Had this doctrine," he says, "been true, being of fo extraordinary a nature, and fo "much unlike to any thing that Jews or Chriftians "had been taught before, it would, no doubt, when it was "first promulgated, have been delivered with the greatest ❝ distinctness, so as to leave no uncertainty with respect to "itt." But our author begs one queftion in order to prove another.

Ear. Op. Vol. I. p. 63.

+ Ibid. p. 64.

in which this article is understood cannot alter its importance. This, it seems, must be judged of entirely by the manner of its introduction. And it is introduced merely as an incidental circumftance. If the affertion be of no confequence with refpect to the old, it can be of as little with respect to the new creation. It is equally incidental as to either. Whatever these worlds be, nothing more is faid of the making of them. What is the plain meaning of this, but that it is not of any confequence to the church whether Chrift made the worlds in any fenfe; that is, whether he was a Saviour or not? Here, indeed, we have a very honeft acknowledgment of the genuine spirit of the Socinian doctrine.

He adds; "Befides, nothing is here faid, or intimated, "about Chrift making the material worlds, for it is only "faid that he made the ages (aiava;) and the all things "here mentioned evidently means all things relating to a "particular object, viz. the miffion of Christ, and not all "the works of nature *." But it is to beg the question a fecond time, to say that by all things we are to understand only fome things. Although asavas were meant in our author's fenfe, this term could not limit the preceding declaration, but only denote a part of the all things previously mentioned. The Doctor gives his view of the phrase more clearly in another place. By ages he understands" the "prefent difpenfation of God's government over mankind, "which is established by the gospel, the administration of "which is committed to the Son †."

But if the ages mean a difpenfation only, and if the all things are to be restricted by this fenfe, Jefus is not an heir, but merely a steward. So far is he from being beir of all things, that he is not heir of any thing. This frivolous exception hath been removed an hundred times already. It hath been shewn, that the term av is never used absolutely,

* Ib. p. 67.

↑ Fam, Illuftr. p. 35.