It is, that it is meant that Christ was the author of the new dispensation, and disposed of and regulated every thing in the Christian church. When men are driven to such forced interpretations, it is a clear evidence that they cannot maintain their ground, by solid argument: it is a kind of reductio ad absurdum; and we should be satisfied to leave the matter there. There is no need of an elaborate refutation of what so plainly refutes itself.

Another remarkable testimony to the fact, that Christ is the creator of all things, is found in the first chapter of Paul's epistle to the Colossians. i. 15-17: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature. For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible; whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him and for him; and he is before all things, and by him all things consist."

Here, not only the creation of the visible universe is ascribed to the Son, but also all things invisible; and lest any should be disposed to confine this work to inanimate substances, the whole hierarchy of heaven is declared also to have been created by him. The most exalted of the celestial host are his creatures. And not only so, but all things are continually supported by Him. The expression, "first-born of every creature," has misled many to think that this scripture asserted that Christ was the first formed creature; but the most judicious crities have shown, that this is not the proper meaning of the original term; but the true sense is, "first begotten before all creation;" that is, from eternity. The same idea is expressed, in the last verse cited," and he is before all things." "From the foundation of the world"-"before the foundation of the

world"-"before all things," are the modes of speech by which an eternity past, is expressed in scripture. One would think, that none could resort to the forced interpretation which has been put on the passage in John; but what else can the Unitarian do? He has no other refuge from the convincing force of the testimony, unless he should have recourse to the supposition, that the whole passage is spurious; but there is no proof of any such thing. No text in the Bible is more certainly authentic. The Unitarian is therefore obliged, as before, to pretend that the apostle is not speaking of the creation of the world, but of the setting up the gospel kingdom. If absurdity were stamped on the face of this interpretation when applied to the passage in John, what shall we say of it here, where the heavens and the earth are expressly mentioned; and not only so, but things visible and invisible; and finally, the glorious hosts of heaven, angels, dominions, principalities and powers, are mentioned among his works. And all these he upholds by his power. Is there any passage in the Bible, where the creation of all things is more expressly and particularly ascribed to the Father, than here to the Son? To attempt to apply the language here used, in the midst of a plain didactic discourse, to the setting up of the Christian church, or introducing a new dispensation, is so unreasonable at first view, that there is really no need of a refutation. What could be meant by the heavens and the earth? What by things visible and invisible? What by the names of the celestial orders? If such an interpretation could be admitted, then the testimonies of the Holy Scriptures would be utterly useless. No text, on any subject could be brought forward in proof of the unity, or of any of the attributes of God, which might not be turned aside with as much show

of reason, as is exhibited in this interpretation. In the text in the gospel of John, they demurred, because the word used for made, was not the one commonly used to express a creation out of nothing, but here we have the very word, used by the Seventy to express the work of creation in the first chapter of Genesis. In the former case, the objection had no force, but in this there is no foundation for it. This wild notion, by which, in the foregoing testimonies, they would have us by the creation of all things in heaven and earth, to understand the setting up a new kingdom, or introducing a new dispensation after the advent of Christ, cannot possibly be applied to the text in the first chapter of the epistle to the Hebrews; for there it is declared, that the heaven and earth of which he spake, the creation of which he ascribed to the Son of God, should perish-and that they should wax old as doth a garment, and that as a vesture they should be folded up and changed. But surely this cannot apply to the kingdom of Christ, or the new creation, for this is everlasting.

If there is a doctrine plainly taught in the Bible, this is one, that Christ is the Creator of all things: and if so, he must be truly God: we have no higher idea of God than Creator of heaven and earth. If another besides the true God may be the Creator, then another besides God possesses those attributes by the manifestation of which in the works of nature, we know that there is a God, and by which his almighty power and infinite wisdom are made known.

It seems unnecessary to adduce other arguments, as this is of itself as demonstrative of the deity of Christ, as if we had a thousand. The mind which can resist this would resist any number. If it were necessary, we could adduce hundreds of texts in which the doc

trine is expressed or implied. We shall, therefore, conclude by observing, that Christ is called Jehovah-the great God-The mighty God, the true God. And arguments for his divinity might be derived from his miracles-from his glorious work of redemption-from the worship and obedience demanded, and from his being appointed the Judge of the quick and the dead-of angels and of men. But it is deemed unnecessary to deduce arguments from all these topics, as what has been said is sufficient.

THE Divinity of the Holy Spirit may be established by arguments of the same kind as have been adduced in support of the Deity of the Son; but it does not seem necessary to go over the same ground again; especially, as at the present there are none, as far as we know, who maintain that the Holy Spirit is a created being. Anti-trinitarians of the present day, admit that the Spirit is divine, but not a distinct person from the Father. As the spirit of a man is the man himself, so they think that the Spirit of God is God, or the wisdom or power of God. Another reason why it is not necessary now to enter into an elaborate argument to establish the divinity of the Spirit is, that reason makes no greater objection to a Trinity than a duality in the Godhead. If the proofs of the deity of the Son are conclusive, the same kind of evidence will readily be received in favour of a third person. We shall, therefore, occupy the space which can be allotted for this point, to a considera

tion of the proofs of the distinct personality of the Holy Spirit. And here the reader will recollect the observations made respecting the sense in which the word person is used, when applied to the divine essence. We do not pretend that we are able to form definite and clear conceptions on this subject. Among creatures, where we find an intelligent, voluntary agent, we call that being a person. · And such persons are spoken of by proper names, and by personal pronouns, which are used instead of the name. John is possessed of reason and will, and he pursues such objects as are agreeable to his taste. John is a person. Every one who is constituted like John, however he may differ from him in other respects, is also called a person. We find in Scripture three, to whom divine attributes and works are ascribed, and each of whom has an appropriate name, and is frequently represented as acting, feeling, and speaking; and to each of these the pronouns used in reference to persons are often applied. And they are not different names of the same person, because they are, in a number of cases, all mentioned in the same sentence; and they are represented as speaking to each other, and as sending or promising to send another. And there are appropriate acts ascribed to each. It cannot be supposed, that, if the Holy Spirit were not a distinct person, this mode of speaking of him, in the Holy Scriptures, would be kept up whenever he is mentioned. Sometimes, by a lively figure, that which is not a person is personified, and introduced as thinking, feeling, seeing, hearing, and speaking; but no one is ever deceived by this liberty of speech; but if this personification were kept up whenever this inanimate, unintelligent being was mentioned, it would tend only to confusion and error