by him and for him. At the same time I must, in conformity to those very authorities, believe him as produced by the Supreme Deity among created beings. John, ch. v. ver. 26 : "For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself." Colossians, ch. i. ver. 15: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the first born of every creature."

CHAPTER III.

Separate Consideration of the Seven Positions of the Reviewer.

In attempting to support his first position, that Jesus was possessed of ubiquity, the Reverend Editor has quoted two passages. The first is, St. John, ch iii. ver. 13: "No man has ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man who is in heaven;" Wherein Jesus, as the Editor conceives, declares his location both in heaven and on the earth at one time. The Editor rests entirely the force of his argument upon the term " is," in the above phrase "who is in heaven," as signifying the presence of Jesus in heaven while he was conversing with Nicodemus on earth. This argument might perhaps carry some weight with it, were not the frequent use of the present tense in a preterite or future sense observed in the Sacred Writings, and were not a great number of other passages to determine that the term "is," in this instance, must be understood in the past sense. John, ch. viii. ver. 58 : "Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." Here the same verb, though found in the form of the present tense, must obviously be taken in a preterite sense. John, ch. ix. ver.

8:

" His disciples say unto him, Master, the Jews of late sought to stone thee," &c. ; that is, His disciples said unto him. Ver. 38: "Jesus therefore again groaning in himself cometh to the grave," i. c. he came to the grave. Matthew, ch. xxvi. ver. 2: "Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is bebetrayed to be crucified; that is, the Son of man is to be betrayed and to be crucified. Vide the remainder of the chapter. John, ch. xiii. ver. 6: "Then cometh he to Simon Peter, &c." that is, he came to Simon Peter, &c. Again, John, ch. xvi. ver. 32: "That ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone : yet I am not alone :" i. e. yet I shall not be alone. So in all the prophecies contained in the Old, as well as in the New Testament, the future tense must frequently be understood where the terms used are those grammatically appropriated to the preterite: as Matthew, ch. ii. ver. 18, " In Rama was there a voice heard," that is, will there be a voice heard. Ver. 15, "Out of Egypt have I called my Son," i. e. I will call my son. After a diligent attention to the following passage, no one will, I presume, scruple to conclude that the Son was actually absent from heaven during his locality on the earth, and consequently the phrase quoted by the Editor is applicable only to the past time. John, ch. vi. ver. 62: "What and if ye shall see the son of man ascend up where he was before." The verb was, accompanied with the term before in this passage, positively implies the absence of Jesus from heaven during his stay on the earth. Ch. xvi. ver.7: "Nevertheless I tell you the truth; it is expedient for you that I go away. If I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you." Ver.5: "But now I go my way to him that sent me." Ver. 28: " I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father." Ch. xiii. ver. 36: "Jesus answered him, Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now, but thou shalt follow me afterwards." Ch. xiii. ver. 1 : "Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father." For further conviction, I may safely refer even to the preceding terms of the verse relied on by the Editor :-" No man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man." For the attribute of omnipresence is quite inconsistent with the human notions of the ascent and descent effected by the Son of man. Is it possible to reconcile the contents of hundreds of such passages, consistent with reason and conformable to the established order of interpretation, to the apparent meaning of a single phrase, that, taken literally, is totally opposed to common sense? For to a being named the Son, or the created, (the one term implying the other,) and sent from one mansion to another, the attribute of ubiquity can never be justly ascribed.

Besides, in examining the original Greek Testament, we find in the phrase in question, "Who is in heaven," that the present partciple" being," is used in lieu of iori, “is," viz. Ὁ ὢν ἐν τῷ ἐρανῷ; a true translation of which should be " the ens" or "being in heaven;" and as the nominative case ὁ ν "the being," requires a verb to complete the sense, it should be connected with the nearest verb ἀναβίβηκεν, " hath ascended," no other verb in fact existing in the sentence.

The whole verse in the original runs thus : Καὶ ὐδεὶς ἀναβέβηκεν εἰς τὸν ἀρανὸν εἰ μὴ ὁ ἐκ] τοῦ ἐρανὰ καταβὰς, ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώσε ὁ ὧν ἐν τῷ ἐρανῷ Α verbal translation of the above would run thus : "And no one hath ascended into heaven, if not the out of heaven descender-the Son of man-the being in heaven;" which words, arranged according to the rules of English grammar, should run thus : "And no one, except the descender from heaven, the Son of man, the being in heaven, hath ascended into heaven." In this case, the presence of the Son in heaven must be understood as referring to the time of his ascent, and not to that of his addressing himself to Nicodemus-an explanation which, though it does not serve to establish the omnipresence of the Son urged by the Editor, ought to be satisfactory to an impartial mind.* The second passage which