all other places where the words are used absolutely. That nothing but absolute necessity will justify a departure from this usage. And though it cannot be denied that in some instances the present indicative, I am, has the sense of the preterperfect, I have been, it does not appear that it is ever used for I was 53. 4.) This interpretation connects well with the tenor of our Lord's discourse: Your father Abraham desired to see my day: he did see it, and rejoiced. "And verily I say, that the time for the accomplishment of what he foresaw is not yet arrived for before Abram shall be Abraham, i. e. become the father of many nations, according to the import of his name, I am the Christ your Messiah 54." 5.) This declaration of his superiority to Abraham best accounts for the violent rage of the Jews, who would rather have been disposed to treat our Lord with contempt, as a lunatic, if they had understood him as meaning nothing more than that he existed before Abraham was born.

To these arguments it is replied, 1.) That this solution is not necessary; for it is universally admitted that the common interpretation of the first clause is fully justifiable and it is generally agreed, that the authorities for giving a preterite signification to the latter clause are competent and satisfactory. 2.) If the proposed interpretation is just, the text ought to have stood thus: "before Abram shall become Abraham." The present ellipsis is too harsh, and the mode of supplying it quite arbitrary. 3.) The word Abraham always in the New Testament occurs

53 See Note 46, p. 49.

54 Theol. Repos. vol. iv. p. 351. See also Slichtingius and Wolzogenius in loc. The latter seems to give the preference to this interpretation, which the former does not. Both these learned critics state at large the two Unitarian interpretations of this text, and neither of them seems to feel any difficulty in assigning to as a preterite signification.

as a proper name, and is never used in a mystical sense 55. 4.) It is a trifling proposition, and unworthy of the solemnity with which it is introduced, that Christ existed as the Messiah before an event which it was known was not to happen till many years or ages afterwards 56. 5.) The connexion with the preceding context is not very obvious. It is no reply to the objection of the Jews. Nor does it at all illustrate or vindicate our Lord's own assertion, "that Abraham had seen his day." The declaration, "I am the Messiah before the promises are fulfilled to Abraham," seems both insulated and irrelevant. 6.) It is an interpretation altogether novel, and unheard of till it was proposed by the Polish Socinians 57.

4. "Before Abraham was born, I was he:" ie. the Christ.

5666

55"It being evident that the discourse is of Abraham's person, it is incongruous here to introduce a mystical sense of the word, which the Jews never thought of, and which had Christ intended, he would in all likelihood have said πριν Αβραμ γενεσθαι Αβρααμ.” Whitby. Ipsa Græca phrasis vel sola, satis refutat Socinianos, qui mirè torquent hæc verba, quasi Salvator id dicere voluerit, se jam esse antequam Abram factus sit Abraham, id est pater multarum gentium : quod contigit post ascensionem Christi. Solent isti homines valde ingeniosi et acuti haberi. Sed vere dicam in hujus loci explicationé ita versantur, ut acumen omne perdidisse, et obtusissimi esse videantur. Quid enim jejunius dici cogitarive potest, quam Salvatorem hoc sensisse, se jam esse, antequam ea fierent, quæ aliquot annis post futura erant? Nam quis sanus ita loquitur? Et quid hoc ad istud, propter quod Judæi Jesum, quasi blasphema locutum lapidibus obruere volebant." Raphel. Annot. tom. i. p. 651.

Now, without adopting the hard words of this learned and orthodox critic, it may surely be permitted to remark, that when our Lord thought fit publicly and plainly to announce to the Jews the offensive truth that he was himself their Messiah, it was hardly consistent with the dignity of his character, with the greatest solemnity of language to announce another fact, which every one present must have known as well as himself, viz. that if he really was the promised Messiah, he was such antecedently to an event which was then future. What would be thought of a certain great personage, if he should say, " I solemnly aver that even before the princess Charlotte becomes queen of England, I am now prince of Wales." Num quis sanus ita loquitur?

57 This interpretation is contrary to all antiquity, as their (the Socinian) expositions in these cases use to be." Whitby.

9. d. Before that eminent patriarch was brought into being, my existence and appearance under the character of the Messiah at this period, and in these circumstances, was so completely arranged, and so irrevocably fixed in the immutable counsels and purposes of God, that in this sense I may be said even then to have existed.

This is the interpretation proposed by the Unitarians. It is that which Dr. Clarke calls "languid and unnatural ;" which Dr. Harwood styles "forced and futile, inane and chimerical;" and at which Dr. Price "wonders." It remains to be considered whether it be scriptural and true.

1.) In the first place, this interpretation well accords with the connexion and context.

Our Lord declares, ver. 56, "Your father Abraham longed to see my day, and he did see it." The Jews, foolishly or perversely misrepresenting his language, ask, "Hast thou seen Abraham?" Our Lord never pretended that he had seen him and not deigning to rectify this silly mistake, he goes on to establish the reasonableness of his assertion: 9. d. Abraham did foresee my appearance, and the blessings of my kingdom. And this was possible: because though I was not then born, yet my appearance under the character of the Messiah, and all the happy consequences which flow from it, had been determined in the divine counsels long before that patriarch was in existence.

2.) The words I am (εyw eiμ) must be understood to mean, and should be translated, I was.

The connexion of the words renders this construction necessary to the sense. Before such an event I am,' is without meaning, unless the event be future: and in this instance, if the event referred to be future, it has been shown that the assertion would be trivial, and unworthy of our Lord's character.

3.) The ellipsis must be supplied by the word he, i. e.

'he

' he who cometh,' or, the Christ.' For it has been already stated that the verb μ is seldom if ever used to ειμι express simple existence. And wherever it occurs in this elliptical form, it is commonly, and very properly, supplied by the pronoun (avros) he. John iv. 26, "I who speak unto thee am he." John ix. 9, "The blind man said, I am he." John xviii. 5, "I am he," i. e. whom ye seek. Luke xxi. 8, "Many will come in my name, saying (εyw ε) I am he," or Christ. Compare Matt. xxiv. 5. Mark xiii. 6. Matt. xiv. 27. Mark vi. 50. John vi. 20.

The context in all cases easily determines the sense of the ellipsis. In the former part of this very discourse the phrase occurs twice, in a connexion in which the translators of the public version, being under no bias to the contrary, have supplied the ellipsis properly. Ver. 24, "If ye believe not that I am he, i. e. the Messiah, ye shall die in your sins." Ver. 28, "When ye have lifted up the Son of Man, then shall ye know that I am he." It is the very same phrase which occurs in ver. 58; which ought therefore to have been translated in the same form. "Before Abraham was born, I was he," i. e. the prophet who was to come, the Messiah.

4.) In the language of the sacred writers, a being, or a state of things, is said to EXIST, when it is the ETERNAL IMMUTABLE PURPOSE OF GOD THAT IT SHALL EXIST, at the time and in the circumstances which his infinite wisdom hath chosen and ordained.

The apostle Paul expressly teaches concerning God, that "he calleth those things which are not, as though they were;" Rom. iv. 17: an observation which he applies to the promise made to Abraham, Gen. xvii. 5, “ I have made thee a father of many nations," i. e. I have determined the future actual existence of this event.

1.] In the Old Testament nothing is more common than to express prophecy in the language of history, and

to

to state future events as present or even past. Thus Cyrus is addressed before his birth as though he were actually existing; Isaiah xlv. 1, "Thus saith the Lord to his anointed, even to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden." And Babylon is represented as captured seventy years before the event; Jer. li. 41, "How is Sheshach taken, and how is the praise of the whole earth surprised! How is Babylon become an astonishment among the nations!" These events at that time had no existence but in the Other future events are mentioned as Exod. xv. 12-17. 1 Sam. xv. 28; xxviii. 17, 18. And in Isa. xlvi. 10, 11, the Supreme Being, in very sublime language, declares the absolute certainty of the accomplishment of his eternal purposes: "I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass: I have purposed it, I will also do it. My counsel shall stand."

divine purpose. already past.

This prolepsis, this anticipation of future events, is particularly remarkable in the prophecies which relate to the Messiah, who is frequently represented as actually existing, and executing his divine commission, many ages before his public appearance and ministry. Isa. ix. 6, "Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given." Ch. xlii. 1, "Behold my servant, whom I uphold; my elect, in whom my soul delighteth: I have put my spirit upon him." And in that celebrated prophecy in the fifty-third chapter, the humiliation of the Messiah, his rejection and sufferings, are described throughout in the language of history. "He is despised and rejected of men. He hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows. He was wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities. He was brought as a lamb to the slaughter. He was cut off out of the land of the living 58." chap. xlix.

The argument from the prolepsis is not at all invalidated if, as the Jews and some modern writers (to whose opinion however I do not accede) suppose, this prophecy is not applicable to the Messiah, but to Jeremiah, or to the present state of the Jewish nation.