to be the messenger of grace and peace to mankind. This was his chief glory, and to this high distinction of our exalted Master we were the personal and admiring wit

nesses.

II.

John i. 15. " John bare witness of him.

This is he

of whom I said, He who cometh after me has

got before

me 24, for he was my principal 25.”

John bore testimony to the superior character and dig. nity of Jesus. This, said he, is the person whose harbinger I was. I announced his approach, and have finished my career. He has now overtaken me, and has taken precedence of me, to which he is justly entitled, because he is the very person whose advent I was commissioned to proclaim.

III.

John iii. 13. "Now no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of Man, who is in heaven."

This is a text the right understanding of which is of

24 He who cometh after me,] i onow μs ερxoμevos, the comer after me, he who set out after me, whose harbinger I was, εμmρoober μs Yayover, has overtaken and passed me in the career. The idea is taken from "the relation of the harbinger to the prince whom he precedes.” See Cappe, p. 108. Eμπpoobεy is an adverb both of time and place. See Schleusner.

25 He was my principal,] πρwros us. The word is used in this sense, 1 Tim. i. 15, 16; Christ came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the chief." See Mark vi. 21. Luke xix. 47. Acts xiii. 50; xvii. 4.

The common interpretation of the text is: "He who cometh after me is preferred before me, for he was (in order of time) before me." And Hammond, Doddridge, Campbell, and others, contend that the latter clause must refer to antecedency in order of time, otherwise the sentence is tautological, and the evangelist is arguing idem per idem. But Mr. Cappe's interpretation sufficiently obviates this objection. The last clause is a good reason why the person who set out last took cedence of him who was originally first.

K pre

great

great importance for settling the controversy concerning the pre-existence of Christ.

The words in their primary signification express a local ascent of the Son of Man into heaven, a local descent from heaven, and a local existence in heaven while he was residing on earth.

In this primary sense the text is not received by any; but by some, one clause, by others, two, and by others, all the clauses are interpreted in a figurative sense.

1. The first clause, which expresses that the Son of Man had ascended into heaven, is understood in a literal sense by the Polish Socinians only, who believed that Christ was taken up into heaven after his baptism to receive his commission from God, and to be instructed in the divine counsels. In support of this interpretation they argue, that the verb is in the preter tense; that the subject of the affirmation is the Son of Man, who as such could have no existence before his birth; that the expression could not with propriety be used of a continued existence in heaven previous to a residence on earth; and that it is improper and unnecessary to have recourse to a figurative interpretation when the literal sense is obvious and probable 26.

Mr. John Palmer 27, improving upon this hypothesis of

26 Avabεbyxe.] "Loquitur non de ascensu suo futuro, sed de ascensu præterito: ut scilicet in cœlo cœlestia edoctus, ea deinde e cœlo remeans loqueretur et doceret in terris. Qui hic ad metaphoras et improprias locutiones confugiunt sine ulla necessitate id faciunt, &c." Slichtingius in loc. See also Wolzogenius in loc.: and Christ. Relig. Institut. apud Socini Opp., tom. i. p. 674, 675.

27 Mr. John Palmer was a man of abilities and learning, and an excellent Scripture critic. He was educated at the Warrington Academy, and for some years was settled with a congregation at Macclesfield. He afterwards retired to Birmingham, where he assisted Dr. Priestley in conducting the Theological Repository, in which he wrote some valuable articles, and had planned more, but was prevented by a stroke of the palsy, which put an end to his life in December 1787. Dr. Priestley published an interesting account of him in the Theological Repository, vol. vi. p. 217.

the

the older Socinians, supposes that our Lord while he was in the wilderness was favoured with divine communications, during which he was completely secluded from all connexion with the external world; and, like St. Paul, (2 Cor. xii.) he might imagine himself transported into heaven, and not be able to distinguish whether what he saw and heard was visionary or real. And Mr. Palmer thought that when Jesus spoke of himself as having been in heaven, and as coming down from heaven, it was in allusion to this divine vision.

This very ingenious and plausible hypothesis, which Dr. Priestley mentions in terms of great respect 28, appears liable to the following objections. That a fact of such high importance, and so honourable to the character of Jesus, should not have been mentioned or alluded to by any other of the evangelical historians or sacred writers; that the phrases of ascending up to heaven' and 'descending from heaven,' as applied to Christ, are peculiar to John, and therefore probably (like some other peculiarities of phraseology in this writer) mean nothing more than what the other writers have expressed in different

language; and, finally, that it does not appear that any of

the early christian sects or ecclesiastical writers ever heard of this supposed assumption of Christ into heaven, or ever attempted to explain the evangelist's phrases by that hy. pothesis.

As this personal ascent of Jesus into heaven previous to his entrance upon his public ministry, whether real or visionary, is not allowed by the bulk of christian divines, the first clause of this text is generally interpreted in a figurative sense.

98 After having stated Mr. Palmer's hypothesis, Dr. Priestley adds: "I acknowledge myself to be much pleased with Mr. Palmer's ideas upon this subject." Theol. Repos. ibid. p. 221.

Bishop Pearce, and after him Archbishop Newcome, render the words "No man goeth up to heaven," which they explain, No man is to go up thither. "The preter tense," say these learned prelates, "is used for the present, and this again for the future 29."

This, however, is not the interpretation generally adopted. The most common and best supported exposition of the phrase No man hath ascended up to heaven,' is this, No one is acquainted with the counsels and purposes

of God to mankind 30.

'To

See Pearce and Newcome in loc. So then the words 'No man hath ascended up to heaven' mean 'No man will ascend thither.' Let not the Unitarians be any longer reproached as the only expositors who warp the Scriptures from their plain and obvious sense to serve a hypothesis. The arguments, however, of these learned prelates will not support their conclusion. Bp. Pearce produces passages in which the preter tense may be and is translated in the present. John vi. 69; xi. 27; xx. 29, 17; iii. 18: He also quotes Iliad. a. 37. is Xpvory aμçıCennas. And the archbishop cites John iii. 18, in which the present tense has the force of a future. But no instance is produced in which the preter tense has the force of the future only; and it is apprehended that none such can be alleged. For the preter can only be translated in the present tense when it expresses the continuance of an action, I have been and continue to be,' Thou hast protected and dost continue to protect,' &c. And the present is only used as a future figuratively, to express the certainty of the event, or that it is very near at hand. See Wolzogenius in loc.

Campbell and Wakefield both translate the verb in the present tense, 'ascendeth;' but without sufficient attention to the connexion, which implies that the Son of Man had himself ascended, though others had Erasmus observes, "Græcis præt. temporis est, ne quis putet de futura ascensione intelligi."

not.

30 The agreement of the commentators in this interpretation is very

remarkable.

"Ascendere in cœlum dicitur qui arcana cœli penetrat. Quantum cœlum a terra distat, tantum consilia divina ab humanis." Grotius."Ascendit in cœlum: i. e. Spiritualis intelligentiæ luce præditus est. Beza." Ascendit in cœlum: i. e. Nemo novit res cœlestes præter me." Vatablus." Ascendere in cœlum, hoc loco, uti intuenti Christi scopum satis liquet, nihil aliud est quam inquirere, aut admitti in conscientiam consilii divini." Cameron. Il faut entendre ces paroles figurément de la connoissance des vérités célestes." Le Clerc." In cœlum ascendere hoc loco significat arcana atque mysteria cœlestia

scrutari,

• To ascend to heaven' is a Hebrew form of expression to denote the knowledge of things mysterious and remote

from common apprehension. Deut. xxx. 11, "This

commandment is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say Who will go up for us to heaven and bring it?" Prov. xxx. 4, "Who hath ascended into heaven or descended?" Rom. x. 6, "Say not in thy heart Who shall ascend into heaven," &c. Baruch iii. 29, "Who hath gone up into heaven and taken her, i. e. wisdom, and brought her down from the clouds?"

In the preceding verse Jesus says to Nicodemus, "If I have told you earthly things," i. e. things plain and intelligible, "and ye believe not, how shall ye believe if I tell you heavenly things?" i. e. things difficult and remote from your conceptions.

It is supposed that our Lord alludes to the ascent of Moses to the mount to receive the Law. This is not im

scrutari, ac nôsse." Wolzogenius." No man can acquaint you with these heavenly things, for no other person hath ascended into heaven to learn them there." Whitby.-"No one ever hath ascended into heaven to search into the secret counsels, and to obtain an intimate and perfect knowledge of the truths of God." Dr. Doddridge: who remarks that the phrase ascending up into heaven' is plainly used in this sense, Deut. xxx. 12. Rom. x. 6. Prov. xxx. 4.—Mr. Lindsey in his Sequel, p. 213 et seq. observes, that "in the strict literal sense it was by no means true, that no one had ascended up into heaven but the Son of Man; for Enoch in all probability, and Elijah the prophet had certainly been translated from earth to heaven. Neither is it true, in the direct sense of the words, that the Son of Man had ascended up into heaven. We have no account in Scripture that he ever ascended into heaven but once, when he took his final leave of this earth and of his disciples." Hence he infers that ascending up to heaven' signifies his being admitted to the knowledge of God's counsels.

Ludolphus Raphelius, in his preface to his father George Raphelius's Annotations upon the Scriptures, has given a learned and judicious dissertation upon this text; and after a very fair and impartial examination he concludes, "Ex his itaque satis constare arbitror, Christum nihil aliud velle, quam quod nemo consilia Dei sciat, nisi filius hominis, ipse deus, qui ex coelo ad nos descendit.” I add thesę words, to show that this is not the gloss of a prejudiced Unitarian.

probable,