ceptance to people collected from all nations, at that festival: the latter had special revelations, after his miraculous conversion. By these were all the Epistles composed, except the short pieces of John and Jude. This last is not doctrinal; and John's must necessarily be interpreted conformably with his Gospel; as the Epistles of Peter and Paul must, agreeably to their preaching. Their discourses were addressed to Jews and Gentiles, and free from all local or temporary considerations: their Epistles relate to personal and congregational affairs, or controversies of inferior moment. Except, therefore, we suspect them of duplicity, their speeches and writings must be supposed to correspond; and the obscure be explained by what is clear.

No one can believe, that Peter had any suspicion of the Deity of his Master, during the life of Christ; or knew, that he was holding familiar converse, every day, with the Almighty; that it was God, whom he took aside, and rebuked for his intention of going up to Jerusalem; and the Supreme Being, who had washed his feet. Suppose, then, that this overwhelming truth, were, for the first time, suddenly poured upon his mind at Pentecost, while he was conscious of having recently denied and forsaken the God, who made him; while he recollected the endearing and afflicting events of the preceding week; was bursting with the emotions, which, on such a discovery, must necessarily have arisen in his ardent, affec

tionate and ingenuous mind; and found himself under the awful responsibility of declaring this amazing truth, this indispensable article of faith, without the knowledge and belief of which his hearers must," without doubt, perish everlastingly;" and what do you imagine would have been the strain of his discourse: would it have been in such language as this, "Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God, by miracles, which God did by him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have crucified and slain; whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death. Therefore, being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father, the promise of the Holy Ghost," [coeternal and co-equal with the Father and himself,] "he hath shed forth that, which ye now see and hear?" Is it possible, that this would have been the tenor of his address, when he was labouring to excite their horror at the atrocious murder they had perpetrated, if they had crucified the Supreme God?

The next opportunity of proclaiming this stupendous doctrine occurred, when he restored the lame man at the gate of the temple; and how did he express himself? "The God of our fathers hath glorified his Son Jesus, whom he hath raised from the dead." "For Moses truly said unto your fathers: A Prophet shall the Lord God of your fathers raise up unto you of your brethren like unto me." This was the whole of his doc

trine: for the Sadducees could bring no other charge against him, but this, "that he preached, through Jesus Christ, the resurrection of the dead."

When delivered from this persecution, his thanksgiving was addressed, not to Christ; but to God, and Jesus is only mentioned as his "holy Child." On the next occasion, he was only charged "with bringing his blood" on the high priests; not with asserting, that he was equal to the Creator, though the Angel had commanded him to preach "all the words of this life." Of these, therefore, the Deity of Christ made no part.

The most important transaction in Peter's ministry, was his throwing open the doors of the church to the Heathen world, in the person of Cornelius. The articles of faith, which he announced on this solemn occasion were, the acceptance with God of all, "who feared him and worked righteousness;" the divine mission of Jesus Christ; his death and resurrection; and the appointment of him to be the judge of quick and dead. The mystery of the Trinity is not even alluded to in any of Peter's sermons: and in all these transactions, except the last, he had also the company and concurrence of John.

In perfect harmony with this, is the doctrine of Paul, at Antioch in Pisidia; and at Thessalonica. Of all the cities in the world, Athens was that, in which Paul might most freely enlarge on mysterious subjects: here the people were ac

customed to different relations and offices in the Divine nature: the philosophers would have gladly listened to speculations on its essence and the persons, of which it was composed; and "all spent their time in telling or hearing some new thing." Yet the whole of Paul's doctrine was the resurrection and a judgment to come. From Athens he proceeded to Corinth. We are not informed by Luke of the subjects on which he chiefly insisted there: but in his first Epistle to that Church, he supplies that omission, by reminding them of the particulars of the Gospel, which he had preached to them, and by which they were saved. This was the death and resurrection of Christ. In his valedictory address to the elders of Ephesus, he confidently asserts, "that he had kept back nothing that was profitable to them; and took them to record, that he was pure from the blood of all men; for he had not shunned to declare unto them all the counsel of God, testifying both to the Jews and Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ." This was the sum and substance of his preaching: this included all "the counsel of God," and all that was "profitable to them:" this was "the Gospel, by which they were saved."

From the Acts, then, it appears, that the Apostles never preached a Trinity in unity, nor even alluded to the Deity of Christ or the Holy Spirit. Their converts were baptized, received the Holy Spirit, and were saved without the

knowledge of this mystery. Other particulars, relative to the nature and pre-existent state of Christ, it might be superfluous for them to reveal, But that as not being essential to salvation. Christ and his Apostles should withhold, suppress, or leave in doubt, a mystery, that formed the very essence of his religion, the only title to the name of Christian, the grand source of consolation, and confidence, the chief motive to holiness, and condition of acceptance, as some pretend; and thus leave all the primitive disciples "to die in their sins," is a most incredible and profane imagination.

Here is a complete harmony and concord among all the writers of the New Testament, on the whole of the doctrine of our blessed Lord. Can any thing, then, be more evident than this, that, if any passage can be found, which seems to dif fer from this representation, it must be misunderstood; and should either be interpreted in conformity to the general strain of Scripture, or left entirely out of the account, in judging of the analogy of faith? Is it not clear, that the authority of our Lord is paramount to every other; and that if any of his Apostles differ from him, their authority must be set aside? Is it not absurd to suppose, that they should; and most of all, that any of them should contradict their Master, and one another, and even themselves?

This, however, is not the case: there is no discordance among them, when rightly understood,

2 A