and Rom. ix. 5, in reference to Christ. On this point, however, I have nothing to add to what has been already said by NOESSELT, (opusc. fasc. I. 1st ed. p. 158,) and Koppe, (N. T. Vol. IV. p. 194.)

NOTE GGG. (p. 41.)

Εγω Εν τω πατρι, και ο πατης ΕΝ εμοι, ὁ πατης ὁ ΕΝ εμοι μενων. That these expression do not indicate a mere resemblance or similitude, is evident from those used in connexion with them, I speak not of myself-he doeth the works; while their connexion with what goes before (He that hath seen me hath seen the Father,) proves clearly, that they must mean something more than that inspiration which was common to the prophets and apostles.

NOTE HHH. (p. 42.)

Faustus Socinus interprets the words πριν Αβρααμ γενεσθαι syu su thus: before Abraham is become Abraham—i, e. the father of many nations-I am already the Messiah, (See the works of F. Socinus: p. 379, and 504.) This interpretation is so evidently forced and repugnant to the context, that one cannot help wondering at the value set upon it by Socinus himself. In the passage of his works last cited, he goes so far as to say: "I have reason to think, that the person who first proposed it, [Lælius Socinus] obtained it, by fervent prayer, from Christ himself." This at least I will venture to assert, that among the many revelations made to that individual, of things unknown to his contemporaries, there is nothing more truly divine than this interpretation."

The hypothesis, that sy s has reference solely to the decree of God, is eqully at variance with the context. (See WHITBY'S Commentary on the passage; LIMBORCH'S Christian Theology, Amst. 1735, p. 100. WEISMANN'S

Specimina rabulismi exegetici partis Socinianæ. Tub. 1731. Storr, über den Zweck, &c. p. 425.

NOTE III. (p. 43.)

Steinbart, at all times too prolific in fanciful conjectures upon sacred subjects, maintains (in his Syst. der reinen Philosophie oder Glückseligkeitslehre des Christenthums, 3d ed. p. 273) that the words of Christ himself, discussed above, were used for the purpose of accommodating his language to the pythagorico-platonic notions of the Greek Jews. It follows of course, that Christ must have addressed himself solely to Greek Jews, or else that John must have fabricated the speeches, which he puts in his master's mouth. I am by no means prepared, however, to show such profound respect to Steinbart's authority, as to rank his conjectures, in relation to events which occurred in the first century, above the testimony of most credible contemporary witnesses.

NOTE JJJ. (p. 43.)

Hence, we may readily infer, what judgment should be formed respecting the rule of interpretation which is assumed as an axiom, not proved, in the tenth page of the little work called Kurze Revision der wichtigsten Christlichen Religionslehren in Aphorismen, 1875.

[END OF SECTION FIRST.]

K

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

DELIVERED IN THE

THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY,

PRINCETON, N. J. NOV. 7, 1828.

BY CHARLES HODGE.

NOTICE.

The following Lecture, was delivered by the writer, in the discharge of his regular duty in the Seminary. It is seldom that any thing prepared for one purpose, is adapted to another materially different. There is much, therefore, in the style and manner of this address, which may seem little suited to a publication of this kind. The reason of its appearance in the Repertory, is simply this. The students to whom it was addressed, under the impression that the statements which it contained might be useful, if more widely circulated, requested that a copy should be given to them for publication. The writer not feeling at liberty to comply with this request, thought that if any good would result from its publication, it might be effected, in a less assuming form, by its insertion in a periodical work.