state of humiliation, fets in a clear and ftriking point of view.

The explanation which Dr Lardner gives of John i. 1. is in fubftance the fame with those given by Mr Lindsey and Dr Priestley, so that what has been obferved on theirs applies equally to his.

Upon the whole, the existence of Jefus Chrift before any creature was made, that God the Father created all things by him, and that he upholds and governs all things by him; is most plain and evident from the teftimony of fcripture, the general opinion of mankind, particularly the Jews and primitive christians, as might be more fully shown by a collection of thefe teftimonies. Here I fhall only obferve, that what has been contended for in oppofition to Dr Priestley, &c. fecures the unity, the exclufive independence, and abfolute fupremacy of the Moft High God; and, at the fame time, fecures to Jefus Chrift, the priority, pre-eminence, and delegated dominion, before, above; and over all things, in a confiftency with the most plain and literal fense of the facred fcriptures. Whereas the doctrine which they contend for, though it fupports the unity of the Father, it deprives the Son of that priority, and pre-eminence which the fcriptures afcribe to him; and instead of allowing an univerfal dominion to Chrift as the fcriptures affert, they contract his dominion into a very small compafs. Their opinions being thus contrary to the fcriptures of truth, those who defend them are obliged to deny fome, and mifconftruct

misconstruct other paffages of fcripture, as is evident from the writings of Dr Pricftley and others.

Therefore, befides the obfcurity it throws on the plan of God's difpenfations, it appears to be pregnant with two great evils, namely, 1. The diminishing the glory and honour of the Son of God, whom he commanded all the angels to worship, and all men to honour even as they honour himself: 2. The depreciating the value and the importance of the word of God, which he hath magnified above all his name, and requires all men to receive without alteration, addition or diminution.

After

After writing the foregoing pages, Dr Prieftley's Defence of Unitarianifin for the year 1787, containing letters to Dr Geddes, Dr Price, and the candidates for orders in the two univerfities, came to my hand; and as thofe addreffed to Dr Price are chiefly intended to oppofe the exiftence of Chrift before his incarnation, I fhall make fome obfervations on what he has advanced in thefe letters, as his strongest reafons against the early exiftence of Chrift, and his univerfal knowMi folk off ledge and power.

IS firft agument feems to be founded on an inconsistency, he charges Dr Price with, and all who hold that God created, and upholds all things by Jefus Chrift. This argument he forms thus: If Christ Supports

all things by the word of his power; be always, and moft intimately prefent with us; and • having all power both in heaven and in earth; • his poffeffing all this by the gift of God,' can< not exclude him from being the proper object of our addreffes. If fo, fays he, a child ought never to have recourse to his own fa'ther, but to God only, on whom both himself and his father depend.' (Page 37, Letters to Dr Price.)

Here it may be obferved, that this fimilitude is far from anfwering the cafe it is intended to illuftrate; for the child fees his father prefent with him, has fome notion of the manner in which his father may answer his request, and

has

has no idea of his father being under any controul, if he only be willing to give what is afked. Whereas Chrift is no more visibly prefent with believers than the Father is; they have no idea of the manner in which Christ may anfwer their requests, and they know that all the agency of Chrift is exerted in exact correfpondence to the will of the Father. And as God the Father hath allowed us to make our requests known to him for what we want, and to give thanks to him for what we enjoy, we certainly ought to make use of this privilege: And being informed at the fame time that it is through Christ we have accefs to the Father by one Spirit, that he is the Way, the Truth, and the Life; that no man cometh to the Father but by him; that in him all fulness dwells, and that of his fulness we must receive every favour; when we pray to God the Father, and acknowledge Chrift as the medium of accefs to, and communication from God, we certainly worship Christ as mediator, or give a mediatory worship to him. And as precepts for, and examples of, praying to the Father, abound most in scripture, we are certainly very fafe in being most exercifed this way. (See page 88, and 89.) But Dr Priestley's argument recoils with equal force upon himself. For as he fays to Dr Price, Admitting the creation of the world by Christ, I do not fee how you can hesitate to admit that he upholds all things by the word of his power,' that he is the giver of life,' and that by him all things confift; and confequently

K

• that

<

.

that he is poffeffed of every attribute that is requifite to constitute him a proper object of religious worship, viz. omnifcience, and a capacity to fupply all our wants. He muft be able to hear and answer all our prayers.' P. 37. Let. So as he admits the new creation to be by Jefus Chrift, how can he hesitate, that Christ upholds all things by the word of his power, that he is the giver of life,' and by him all things confift' in the new creation; and confequently that he is poffeffed of every attribute that is requifite to constitute him a proper object of religious worship, viz. a perfect knowledge of the fpiritual or new nature, and all that relates thereto, and a capacity to fupply all wants of that kind. He must be able to hear and answer all our prayers, fo far, at leaft, as they respect religion or the new creation.

Accordingly, the propriety and obligation of worshiping Chrift has been actually felt, and acknowledged,' (Page 39. Letters to Dr Price, &c.) by the ancient Socinians; and it is a neceffary confequence of their principles, according to Dr Priestley's reafoning, though Mr Lindsey blames Socinius for ufing and enjoining the practice.

If Dr Priestley fhall fuppofe, that though all things in the new creation were made by Christ, yet he has no knowledge of what passes in the new creation now, nor any concern in their management; may not another suppose, that though all things in the natural world were made by Christ yet he has no knowledge of

what