the way.

Is not this a strong prefumption that their gofpel, and their chriftianity, are very different from thofe which Paul preached and profeffed ?-Common fenfe and a moderate fhare of impartiality muft, furely, allow, that there are more difficulties and greater obfcu-. rity in those objects which the gospel reveals, than in thofe prefented to us in the works of creation. And yet, if the hypothefis which we oppofe be admitted, there are more myfteries in the fmalleft infect, in a spire of grafs, or in a grain of fand, than in all the Chriftian religion. There were many things under the ancient Jewish economy that were grand, fublime, and myfterious; yet they are not denominated mysteries, by the Holy Spirit, as those under the gofpel-difpenfation are. Nor were the objects of the law ever faid to be foolishness, on account of their being contrary to human prejudices; and yet, if our opponents be in the right, there were greater myfteries under the law, than any we have under the gofpel. God, for inftance, appearing in the burning, bufh, was a greater mystery, than "God manifefted " in the flesh."

The hypothefis which we oppofe, fuperfedes the neceffity and destroys the nature of true faith: the nature and excellence of which confift, in receiving fuch truths as lie beyond the powers of reafon to difcover; fuch truths, as we could not receive, but upon the teftimony of God who reveals them. Faith and fight are different things. By the latter we receive fuch truths as have a natural relation to our notions and light; by the former, fuch as are contrary to our prejudices, on the bare authority of God in the Scriptures. Whereas this diftin&tion is utterly deftroyed, if the gofpel reveal no objects, if the Chriftian religion contain no truths, but fuch as are level to our capacities, and as agreeable to them as natural truths. But we fhall have occafion to refume the confideration of these things hereafter.

CHAPTER III.

'The hypothesis of our adverfaries deprives JESUS CHRIST of his highest honour; by making him poffefs thofe Titles in a metaphorical fenfe, which the Scripture applies to him in one that is proper. This proved by two inftances.

GREATLY diverfified and truly fublime

are the titles of honour and grace, that are given by the Holy Spirit to the great Redeemer; but which, on the principles of our adverfaries, have little fignificancy in them. I fhall here make choice of two, as a fpecimen : one of which is most strongly adapted to exprefs his perfonal dignity and effential glory; the other, his grace and work as our Mediator. The titles I mean are, THE SON OF GOD, and THE SAVIOUR; both which are frequently applied to him in the Scripture.

Jefus Chrift, it is evident, is frequently and emphati cally called, "The Son of God-His own Son-The "begotten of the Father-His only begotten Son-And, "the Son of the Father in truth and love."—It must, therefore, be allowed, that God has a Son, who is, in the most emphatical fenfe, his own; who is his Son in a higher fenfe, than thofe who are fo called in virtue of adoption. It must alfo be acknowledged, that they who are the children of God by adoption, have a claim to the character of fons in a stronger fenfe, than they who are fo called only by a metaphor.

Eut our opponents invert this order. For, according to them, Chrift cannot be called THE SON OF GOD, but only by a figure: and, on the other hand, believers are the fons of God by adoption, though they be fo only in Jefus Chrift. But how can a metaphorical fon, be more truly a fon, than adopted fons? And how can adopted fons owe their adoption to a metaphorical fon? -For, either Chrift is himself adopted by the Father,

or he is not. If the former, how comes it that the Holy Spirit, though he often fpeaks of the adoption of believers, fhould never fay a word of his adoption? Why is this language unknown to the Bible; God has adopted his Son, Jefus Chrift? and fo unknown, that it would be looked upon as blafphemous. If the latter, he is only a metaphorical fon : for he is not fo by nature; our adverfaries cannot bear the expreffion. Nor is he fo by adoption; for the language of Scripture does not allow the thought. It follows, therefore, that he is fo only by a metaphor; and, confequently, the fonfhip of believers is of a fuperior kind to that of Jefus Chrift.

The title, "Sons of God," which believers bear, has ever been justly efteemed an eminent proof of their intereft in the Father's love. dr is a glorious and wonderful fruit of Divine grace, and as fuch they acknowledge it with gratitude and joy. But the character, Son, which Jefus bears, ought never to be confidered in that light. For it cannot be faid, He is the Son of God, because God loves him; but, God loves him because he is his Son. The beloved difciple fays, "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, "that we should be called the fons of God!" But we never hear any of the infpired writers fay, Behold, how God loves Jefus Chrift, that he should call him • his Son!' The reafon is, the exalted character is foreign and accidental to us; but proper and effential to him. In refpect of us, it is matter of mere favour; in regard of him, it is his eternal right.

Jefus, the Son of God, is faid to be "in the bofom "of the Father," and to "fit at the right hand of God." In the bofom of the Father-At the right hand of God. Of these two characteristics, the former is more peculiar to the Son of God, as fuch. It is a mark of fuperior honour to be feated at the right hand; but of the greatest affection to reft on the bofom. And as it is more natural to love, than to honour, a Son; so, to be" in the bofom of the Father," is a fituation more

peculiar to the Son of God, as fuch, than that of fitting at his right hand.-But we shall have occafion, when anfwering the objections of our oppofers, in the concluding Section of this work, to confider the Sonship of Jefus Christ more at large. I proceed, therefore, and briefly obferve,

That the character, SAVIOUR, fo frequently and fo diftinguishingly given to Jefus Chrift, entirely lofes its gracious and glorious import, on the principles of our opponents. For if he be a mere man; if the whole which he did for us be included, in preaching the gospel, in fuffering perfecution and death, to fet us an example of patience and to confirm the truth which he taught; he has done but little more for us than the apoftles and martyrs themfelves. On this fuppofition it is hard to lay, what benefit any of the human race, who died before he appeared in the world, could receive from his undertaking. If thefe were the only, or the principał benefits we receive from him, we may venture to affert, that Mofes was more truly the Saviour of the Ifraelites, than Jefus Chrift is of mankind. For Mofes himself did that, which Chrift does principally by his apoflles. The former delivered the chofen tribes out of flavery; the latter is only called a deliverer, while he leaves us to fave ourselves. Mofes, indeed, did not fuffer death as Chrift did; but then, as to a real and proper atonement, or as a price of redemption, the death of Jefus is as unprofitable to us, as the death of that ancient law. giver would have been to the pofterity of Jacob. But this particular must be the fubject of the next Chapter.

CHAPTER IV.

According to the fentiments of our adverfaries, the Death of CHRIST has no real Usefulness in it.

THEY who are acquainted with the gospel of divine grace cannot but know, that the death of Chrift is not only ufeful, but abfolutely neceffary to our falvation. His vicarious obedience and atoning death, are the grand fubject of the miniftry of reconciliation. Hence the determination of Paul, "to know nothing "but Jefus Chrift and him crucified;" and to glory only in the cross of his crucified Lord.

This interefting truth was clearly taught by the ancient prophets. Witnefs that famous oracle, in the fifty-third Chapter of Ifaiah; which contains fo many illuftrious characteristics of the Meffiah, depending upon his death; and that animated description of his fufferings and forrows, in the twenty-fecond Pfalm.-John the Baptift no fooner fees Jefus than he points him out, as an atoning facrifice. "Behold," fays that venerable teacher, "behold, the Lamb of God, which taketh away the fin of the world!"-Chrift himself, when difcourfing familiarly with his difciples, frequently foretels his own death. And when one of his apoftles endeavours to diffuade him from going up to Jerufalem there to fuffer, he sharply rebukes him for it: of fuch importance was it, in his efteem, to the falvation of man and the glory of God. And when he was expiring.on the cross he cried, with his last breath, "IT IS FINISHED;" plainly implying, that his death is of the last importance; that his death comprehends all.

The propitiatory death of our great High-prieft was foretold in the earliest promises, and prefigured in the ancient types. The dying Jefus was reprefented by the