with, that he who bowed to the visible man, bowed to the invifible God; and he who gave an account to the man, gave an account to God dwelling in him, and judging mankind by him. For otherwife, that is, on the fuppofition of Chrift's being a mere man, or a mere creature, how could the words of Jehovah, Every knee fhall bow to me, be a proof that we fhall all ftand before the judgment-feat of Chrift? Or, on the other hand, if Chrift were not GoD, how could our giving account to HIM, be properly termed by the Apoftle a giving an account to GOD? 7. Nor was the conduct of St. Paul, in applying paffages of the Old Teftament, manifeftly meant of the true God to Chrift, any way peculiar. We find other Apoftles doing the fame, St. John in particular. In the 12th of his Gof pel, he applies to the Lord Jefus that remarkable and well known defcription of the appearance of Jehovah to Ifaiah, recorded in the 6th Chapter of his Prophecy. In the year that Uzziah died (faya the Prophet) I faw alfo the Lord fitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the Temple. Above it flood the Seraphim: each one had fix wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly. And one cried unto another and faid, Holy, holy, holy, is Jehovah of Hofts, the whole earth is full of his glory. Then faid I, Woe is me, for I am undone becaufe I am a man of unclean lips, and dwell in the midft of a people of unclean lips, for mine eyes have feen the King, Jehovah of Hofts. Alfo I heard the voice of the Lord, faying, Whom fhall I fend, and who fhall go for us (Heb. in the plural, for us). Then faid I, Here am I, fend me. And he faid, Go and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not, and fee ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and fhut their eyes left they fee with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert and be healed. Now, in the 12th Chapter of John, and 37th verse, we read as fol lows: lows: Though he had done fo many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him: That the faying of Efaias the Prophet might be fulfilled, which he fpake. He hath blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts: that they should not fee with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I fhould heal them. THESE THINGS, SAID ESAIAS, WHEN HE SAW HIS GLORY, AND SPAKE OF HIM. In. St. John's opinion, therefore, it was the glory of Chrift which Ifaiah faw, and of Him that he fpake in the above mentioned paffage. 8. In like manner, what is manifeftly spoken of the true God in the 40th of Ifaiah, is, by all the Evangelifts, applied to Chrift. Prepare ye the way of the LORD (fays the voice of Him that crieth in the wilderness) make ftraight in the defart a high way for OUR GOD. Every valley fhall be exalted, c. And the glory of JEHOVAH fhall be revealed, and all flefh fhall fee it together: for the mouth of Jehovah hath fpoken it. Now, if the reader will be at the pains of examining Math. iii. 3. Mark i. 3. Luke i. 76. and iii. 4. and John i. 23. he will find all these Evangelifts understanding this voice crying in the wilderness, to be John the Baptift, and the God whofe way he prepared to be the Lord Chrift: in whom dwells the fulness of the Godhead bodily, and through whofe humanity the Deity fo fhone forth, that he could truly say, He that hath feen me, hath feen the Father. the words of the fame God by Zechariah, Ch. xi. 13. Jehovah faid unto me, Caft it unto the potter ; à goodly price that I was prized at of them: And Chap. xii. 13. They fhall look upon me whom they have pierced, are, it is well known, understood by St. Matthew and St. John, as fpoken of Chrift, and are applied to him accordingly. Hence 9. We have feen, then, that the Apostles made no difficulty of applying to Chrift thofe paffages of the Old Teftanient which contain the most effential characters of the Supreme God. "Now (as a French writer juftly afks) how would they have dared to do this, if Chrift were not the true and fupreme God? Had they been inftructed only in the School of Nature, they might have learned not to apply to any creature thofe things which had been fpoken of the Creator alone, exclufive of all creatures. If, then, we regard them as brought up in the School of the Prophets, we can never fufpect them of fuch madnels. For can any thing equal the circumfpection of the Prophets in this particular? They are continually apprehenfive of confounding the Creator with any creature. And this apprehenfion fufficiently guards them from applying to the one the moft effential characters of the other." 10. To illuftrate this, let it be observed, "The defcriptions which the Apoftles make of Chrift, are not more facred than those which the Prophets make of the Supreme God. As, then, one would not dare to apply to any other thofe defcriptions of Jefus Chrift,-neither would one. dare (were he not fuch) to apply to Jefus Chrift thefe defcriptions of the Supreme God. Should we not accufe him of impiety, who treated a man, fuppofe St. Peter, as the only begotten Son of God, the Lamb of God, our Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedec, the Father of eternity, the Prince of peace, Immanuel, God with us: The Word that was in the beginning with God, the Alpha and Omega, the firft and the laft?-Could we fuffer man to say of Peter, that he had bought the Church with his own blood? had made atonement for our fins, and borne them in his own body on the tree? That Peter dwells in our hearts by faith, and that there is no other name under heaven whereby we can be faved, neither is there falvation in any other. That he is made of God unto us, wifdom and righteoufnefs, fanctification and redemption? Would you not regard him who fpoke thus of St. Peter, as a moft impious blafphemer ? Although he had told you withal, that St. Peter was lefs than Chrift, this, would not fatisfy you. You would have reafon to fay, that this very acknowledgment left him without excufe: feeing hereby he flatly contradicted himself, and made his impiety more glaring. It would not excufe him to fay that he applied thefe characters to St. Peter only by way of allufion, or accommodation. You might jelly anfwer, If it is an allufion, it is an impious allufion;-if it is an accommodation, it is a profane accommodation: Be it an application of whatever kind it will, it is an application full of blafphemy. 11. But if you regard as blafphemous an application of the chief characters of Jefus Christ, to fo great an Apoftle as St. Peter, it must be a ftill greater blafphemy, to apply to Chrift if he is not the Moft High) the chief characters of the Supreme God. For not to urge that Peter was a Teacher fent of God, an infpired Prophet, and according to the Socinians, Chrift was no more; allowing that Chrift was a greater Prophet than St. Peter, and that "there was a greater dispro-. portion between him and his Apoftle, yet, if our adverfaries be right, there is a far greater difproportion between Chrift and the Supreme God: feeing the former, however great, is finite,whereas the latter is infinite. If, then, one cannot, without infinitely greater blafphemy, apply to St. Peter the most effential characters of Christ, one cannot, without infinitely greater blafphemy apply to Chrift the effential characters of God." "This will appear still more evident, if we fuppofe further, that he who made thefe applications to St. Peter, knew that it was already a point in debate, whether St. Peter were not equal to Chrift! And forefaw that this error would generally prevail, and that men, for feveral ages, would confound St. Peter with Jefus Chrift, the Saviour and Redeemer of mankind. Such a man, in this cafe, would be guilty of aftonishing impiety, to dare to make fuch an application of the characters of Jefus Chrift, as he knew would be attended with fo dangerous, fo fatal a confequence. There is nothing eafier, than to apply this to the Apoftles. They could not be ignorant that the queftion, whether Jefus Chrift was equal with God had been already started; yea, and that the 12. Jews Jews had perfecuted him under colour of this pretended blafphemy. They who foresaw, that in the last times, falfe Teachers would arife, and who characterized their doctrine, were not ignorant that Chriftians would fall into this error of confounding Chrift with the Moft High God. How, then, could they who knew both these things, without manifeft impiety, apply to Chrift thofe ancient Oracles, which exprefs the glory of the Moft High? Thofe in particular which exprefs the glory of God, exclufively of all his creatures ?" 13. From all this, it is plain, beyond a doubt, that the infpired writers of the New Teftament confidered the King of Ifrael and God of the Jews, who had anciently dwelt in their Tabernacle and Temple, and manifefted his prefence in divine glory in the Holy of holies, as being incarnated in the flesh of the holy Jefus. Hence` St. John, fpeaking of his incarnation, ufes the word onwσ he tabernacled,-The Word was made flefh, and tabernacled among us, alluding most manifeftly to his having dwelt of old in their Tabernacle and Temple. And hence it was foretold by Mal. Ch. 3. Behold, I will fend my meffenger, and he fhall prepare the way before me, and the Lord, whom ye feek, fhall fuddenly come to his Temple: Obferve, His Temple-for it had been his in all the ages of their Government,-only before the time of the Babylonifh Captivity he forfook it; and the glorious tokens of his prefence were feen no more, till he was manifefted in the flesh of Chrift Jefus: Then he appeared again in his Temple, and by speaking as never man fpake, and performing miracles fuch as no man had ever performed, he gave that latter house, built after their return from Babylon, a glory, fuch as even Solomon's Temple had never feen. But inasmuch as that was to be only for a very fhort time, and inafmuch as the human nature of Chrift was to be the true and everlafting dwelling place of the Deity, where he would be found by penitent, believing fouls, and from whence he would give forth Oracles |