PASSAGES WHICH PROVE THAT THE DISCIPLES OF CHRIST ADDRESSED RELIGIOUS WORSHIP TO GOD, THE FATHER, ONLY.

In reading those passages, I shall, in order to save your time and my own, omit words that are not necessary to the connexion. If, however, I leave out any expression which may appear to militate, in any degree, against the sense which I attribute to the phrase, or to give a different signification to the context, my reverend opponent will, doubtless, afford you the means of correcting any erroneous impression that may be thus made. This general observation I make now, once for all: The words which I omit, I leave out solely because they do not bear directly on the precise point which I have in view.

ACTS iv. 24-30. They lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, LORD, THOU ART GOD! ** And now ** grant * * that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.

The Apostles therefore prayed "to God," that signs and wonders might be done through the name "of his holy child Jesus." Words could not more expressly prove, that Jesus, the holy child, is not himself included in that address with which the prayer commences. In this solemn act of devotion, he is expressly distinguished from God.

ROM. i. 8, 9. I thank MY GOD, through Jesus Christ, for you all; that your faith is spoken of through the whole world: for GOD IS MY WITNESS, whom I serve with my spirit, in the Gospel of his Son, that, without ceasing, I make mention of you always IN MY PRAYERS.

In these words also there is a manifest distinction drawn between God and Jesus Christ; and a proof afforded that God was not that very Christ, through whom God was thanked. The Apostle does not say one word of thanking Christ by prayer. He thanks GOD, through Jesus Christ. He does not call the Son to witness his asseverations; but the God whom he serves, in the Gospel of his Son. The whole connexion shows, that Paul addressed his prayer to God alone, whom he expressly distinguishes from the Son of God.

ROM. XV. 6. That ye may with one mind and one voice glorify GOD, EVEN THE FATHER of our Lord Jesus Christ.

What God were the Roman Christians exhorted to glorify by mind and mouth? Let the words of Paul himself answer the question: God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!”

EPH. i. 16, 17. I cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers; that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, THE FATHER OF GLORY, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom.

Observe in this passage likewise, how the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, THE FATHER OF GLORY, and not our Lord Jesus Christ himself, is represented as the being addressed, and to be addressed, in prayer.

EPH. iii. 15, 16. For this cause I BOW MY KNEES UNTO THE FATHER OF Our LORD JESUS CHRIST, of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, that he would grant you, &c.

PHIL. iv. 6, 7. Be careful for nothing but in every thing, by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known UNTO GOD: and the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds, through Christ Jesus.

The mere reading of these passages is sufficient to prove the doctrine concerning the object of primitive Christian worship, which I am now engaged in establishing.

1 THESS. i. 2, 3. We give thanks to GOD * * for you, making mention of you in our prayers; remembering without ceasing your work of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, in the sight of OUR GOD AND FATHER.

In this text the same distinction is carefully preserved, which we have so often shown to exist, between "GOD THE FATHER," who was the object of prayer, and "our Lord Jesus Christ." Indeed the Apostles never fell into the absurdity of praying to any other than the one God.

2 TIM. i. 2, 3. Grace, mercy, and peace, from God, THE FATHER, and Christ Jesus our Lord. I thank GOD, [xágiv xw, I am grateful to God,] that without ceasing I have remembrance of thee in my prayers, night and day.

Here also Paul makes and marks the same distinction between the Supreme Being, to whom his gratitude was expressed, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

1 JOHN iii. 22. Whatsoever we ask, we receive of him (GOD), because we keep his commandments. * * [23.] And this is his commandment, that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us command

ment.

Upon this passage we might repeat the observation so frequently made before, that no distinction can be more clear than that which the early disciples uniformly drew between the God whom alone they worshipped, and his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.

As Mr. Bagot has relied so much on the honours paid to Christ,which he has, in perfect consistency with one part of his theory, and in perfect opposition to another portion of it, represented as Divine Worship, it seems to me, that I may usefully occupy a little of your time in giving a very brief outline of the doctrine of Scripture on that subject.

It is, I believe, admitted by divines and scholars of all sects and parties, that the term "worship," both in Scripture and in other compositions, is susceptible of various meanings.

In the first place, it indicates the presentation, by rational beings, of their adoration and homage to the Most High God. That the word has this sense, admits of no doubt, nor is it denied by any one. It is needless, therefore, to adduce passages in support of it.

But there is another sense, in some respects analogous, though in other respects distinct, in which the term is frequently employed in the Sacred Volume. It often means the outward manifestation of respect and deference to a fellow-creature, who is superior in rank, station, or endowments, to the party offering it.

Though this sense of the word is fully admitted among divines and theologians of every class, yet,-as Mr. Bagot has throughout this discussion shown a tendency to admit nothing, how plain soever, and how freely soever allowed elsewhere, that can by possibility militate against his second proposition-I shall adduce a few arguments in proof. I find such in

JOSHUA V. 14. * "As captain of the host of the LORD am I now come." And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and DID WORSHIP; and said unto him,

"What saith my Lord unto his servant ?" [15.] And the captain of the LORD'S host said, &c.

DANIEL ii. 46. Then the king, Nebuchadnezzar, fell on his face, and worshipped Daniel, and said unto him, &c.

MATT. xviii. 26. The servant, therefore, fell down, and worshipped him (the king), saying, "Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all "

LUKE xiv. 10. Then shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee.

This verse shows that King James' translators understood the term "worship" with the latitude for which I contend. In the original, the word is still stronger: it is "glory," dóğa; the same which is used in the song of the angels at the nativity, "Glory to God in the highest."

REV. iii. 7. And to the angel of the Church in Philadelphia write,

[9.] "Behold I will make them of the synagogue of Satan who say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie: behold, I will make them to come, and worship before thy feet."

By the angel of the church, most commentators agree that the pastor or bishop is designated.

1 CHRON. xxix. 20. And David said to all the congregation, Now bless the LORD your God; and all the congregation blessed the LORD God of their fathers, and bowed down their heads, and worshipped the LORD and the king (προσεκύνησαν, LXX.)

If this had been said of Christ, it would have been supposed to furnish an irrefragable proof of his proper Deity.

GEN. xxiii. 7. And Abraham stood up, and bowed himself (gooεxúvoƐ, LXX. worshipped) to the people of the land, even to the children of Heth.

GEN. xxiii. 12. And Abraham bowed down himself before the people of the land (gooεxúvnoev, LXX. worshipped.)

GEN. xlix. 8. Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise; thy father's children shall bow down before thee (gooxunovo, LXX. shall worship.) I think I have now established, by these examples, the secondary meaning of the term worship. If Mr. Bagot deny that it has this secondary meaning, he will have an opportunity of urging his objections in his reply. Now, the question is, Whether the worship which was several times paid to Christ, as we read in the New Testament, is of this secondary kind, or whether it is of that distinctly religious nature which is due only to the Supreme Being.

And upon this subject, I shall quote to you the opinion of Dr. WARDLAW, whose name, I suspect, will carry as much weight with it, in the minds of most Trinitarians, as that of Mr. Bagot's bishop. It is most true, as Mr. Bagot stated yesterday, that Dr. WARDLAW is not Lord Bishop of Dromore; but, simply, an Independent Minister in Glasgow; a Dissenter from a Presbyterian establishment; and, therefore, two degrees below the humblest member in the lowest rank of an episcopal hierarchy. Yet I imagine, that he is not less distinguished as a writer, than the Right Rev. Dr. Saurin; who, I believe, is my reverend opponent's diocesan; but of whose contributions to science, theology, or literature, not being a universal reader, I confess, I have yet to learn. Dr. WARDLAW admits, that,

in the instances of worship paid to Christ while on earth, "the kind and degree of the intended homage cannot with certainty be ascertained." If it cannot with certainty be ascertained, it cannot be made the foundation of an argument.

The passages which remain are those in HEB. i. 6; 2 Cor. xii. 8; and several in the book of REVELATIONS.-But be it observed, all these are instances of homage rendered when Christ was personally present.

66

In HEB. i. 6, God is represented as introducing the Son into the world, and saying, "Let all the angels worship him."-Here the Son is manifestly supposed to be one of the parties present. In 2 COR. xii. 8, the Apostle says, that "he besought the Lord thrice,” that the thorn might depart from him; and the context (verse 9) renders it highly probable, that the Lord Jesus Christ is intended; but it also gives us strong reason to believe, (verses, 2, 3, 4,) that the supplication was presented when the Apostle was caught up into the third heaven or paradise," and when he had the Lord Jesus standing manifest before him. It is perfectly plain, that the homage presented to the Lamb in the book of REVELATIONS, was presented in his presence. These incidents, therefore, come precisely under the description of those that Dr. WARDLAW designates as "of such a nature, that the kind and degree of the intended homage cannot with certainty be ascertained;" because, when he was personally present, worship such as that referred to in the texts I have quoted, -the outward testimony of respect and reverence-would naturally and properly be presented to him. Nor is there any Unitarian who would feel the least disinclination-nay, there is none who would not experience the most heart-felt delight and transport-in rendering to him this homage of their gratitude and reverence. And this, let me tell Mr. Bagot, and others who entertain Trinitarian views, is one of those sublime delights which we hope to enjoy in that heaven to which we humbly aspire, in firm reliance on God's mercy through Christ, and in total defiance of the denunciations of the Athanasian creed.

Mr. Bagot has adduced the expression applied to Christians in the received translation of several of the Apostolic Epistles, as "calling upon the name of the Lord," in proof that they were in the habit of worshipping Christ. But I pledge my reputation as a scholar, that the grammatical structure will just as readily admit of rendering these passages differently from the common version; which, being made by Trinitarians, naturally favours their doctrines in most doubtful cases. They may be translated so that they will read as follows; and thus, I think, they ought to be rendered:

ACTS ix. 14. And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that are called by thy name. Ver. 21. Is not this he who destroyed them that are called by this name in Jerusalem ?

Acts xxii. 16. Arise, and be baptised, and wash away thy sins, taking upon thyself his name.

1 COR. i. 2. Unto the Church of God at Corinth,-with all that in every place are called by the name of Jesus Christ our Lord.

I need not advert to ACTs ii. 21; because it is sufficiently clear

to the attentive reader, that the word "Lord" is there a synonyme for "God" and Mr. Bagot cannot assign it to Christ, without assuming the very point in question between him and me in this discussion.

The only other passage to which I think it necessary to refer at length, is the circumstance recorded respecting the martyrdom of STEPHEN :

ACTS vii. 59, 60. And they stoned Stephen, invoking [that is, invoking Jesus, whom he had just before beheld in a glorious vision, standing on the right hand of God, and whom he had thus ascertained to be within hearing of his prayer] and saying, O Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.

Upon this last clause, Mr. Bagot seems disposed to ask, as the Jews had done before, Who can forgive sins, but God only? To which I answer, as our Saviour did,-that his miracles attested that "the Son of man has (ouiav) a commission, or delegated authority, to forgive sins." I may mention, moreover, that some have rendered the terms Kugie Indou, not "O Lord Jesus," but "O Lord of Jesus;" and that there is nothing in the grammatical structure of the phrase to militate against that translation.

The Benedictions wherein the name of Christ is introduced, have been adduced as prayers presented to him by the Apostles. But they are not prayers at all. They are not addressed to him, nor to any one. They are spoken in the third person, and are merely pious and Christian wishes, expressed on behalf of the persons to whom the writings are addressed. That this is the case, is perfectly plain from 1 COR. xvi. 23, 24: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. My love be with you all in Christ Jesus ;"-and from REV. i. 4, 5: “ John, to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace from him who is, and who was, and who is to come; and from the seven spirits, which are before his throne; and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first-begotten from the dead, and the Prince of the kings of the earth. If, then, the benedictions in which the name of Christ occurs, are to be regarded as proofs of his proper Deity,-most unquestionably this last quoted passage will prove that the seven ministering spirits, which wait before the throne of God, are likewise to be regarded as persons of the Godhead. In fact, I have not the slightest doubt, that, had the writer of this book mentioned "the Holy Spirit," in place of "the seven spirits which are before the throne," the passage would have been adduced as a triumphant proof of the doctrine of the Trinity.-I have not time to enter upon a new argu

ment.

MR. BAGOT.-I will not refer to the notes which I have taken of Mr. Porter's last speech, until I have brought up my arrears, by answering the remainder of the arguments which he yesterday advanced. And I shall first allude to three or four points which I consider of little weight, but upon which some persons are frequently inclined to lay considerable stress. He alluded to a long catalogue