CHAPTER VI.

The characters of JEHOVAH's glory in the ancient Oracles, applied to JESUS CHRIST; and the argument arifing from that application illustrated.

THE apostles and evangelists, when afferting

the dignity of their Divine Mafter, made no scruple of applying to him thofe oracles of the Old Teftament, which exprefs the characters of God's effential glory. Of this various inftances have been already produced, which we fhall examine more particularly hereafter: and our adverfaries themfelves do not deny it, fince they pretend that those oracles are applied to Christ, by way of allufion, or accommodation. But it is very furprising and abfolutely unaccountable, that the apostles should make fuch applications to him, if he be not the true God. For common fenfe, one would have thought, was fufficient to inform them, that fuch things as were fpoken only of the Creator, ought not to be applied to a mere creature. For it was never known that fuch applications were made without being cenfured, by those that feared God, of impiety and blafphemy. The ancient Heathens, indeed, were not very fcrupulous in this refpect for it was common with them to debase God and to exalt creatures, by attributing to them the glories of the Deity; and in this the prodigious excess of their fuperitition principally confifted. Their example, however, ought to have no weight with us; as it was, we may affure ourselves, detefted by the apostles. For they had been inftructed in the school of the prophets; they, therefore, were incapable of falling into fuch a miltake. The care of the prophets, in that refpect, is very remarkable. Always jealous for the glory of God, they are perpetually cautious that the Creator fhould not be confounded with any of his

:

creatures. And being thus constantly upon their guard, they never apply the characteristics of Jehovah's glory

to any mere creature.

It cannot, I think, be fuppofed, that thofe exalted and descriptive characters, which the apottles give of Jefus Chrift, are more facred, or more peculiar to him,' than those which the prophets gave of the God of Ifrael. As, therefore, we should not dare to apply the peculiar characters of Christ, to any of his apoftles; fo a fimilar reafon ought to hinder us, ought to have hindered all, from applying the diftinguishing characters of Jehovah to Jefus Chrift, if he be not the true God.-A man would be justly charged with blafphemy, were he to apply to Peter, for inftance, the following names. characters, and works of Jefus Chrift. Were he to call him, "The Lamb of God, which taketh away the fin "of the world-Our king, prophet, and prieft; the "high-priest of our profeffion, and a priest for ever after ❝ the order of Melchifedeck-The Prince of peace"Immanuel-The Word-The Alpha and Omega, "the First and the Laft-The Lion of the tribe of "Judah-The Saviour and Redeemer-The Son of "God, his own Son, and his only begotten Son”— Were he to proceed and affert, That Peter" redeemed "the church with his own blood-That he bare our "fins in his own body on the tree-That we have "redemption through his blood, and are reconciled to "God by his death-That there is no name but that of "Peter, by which we must be faved-That Peter is "made unto us of God, wifdom and righteousness, "fanctification and redemption-That Peter dwelleth "in our hearts by faith-And, that there is no condem"nation to them that are in Peter"-Were any one thus to fpeak of that great apoftle, what would the Christian world fay of him? They would certainly call him, either a madman, or a blafphemer.-Nor would their indignation against his conduct be much abated, were they to hear him once and again acknowledge;

<

That Jefus Chrift is greater than Peter.' For they would boldly tell him, that, by fuch a declaration, he only contradicted himself, and tacitly confeffed his blafphemy.-Nor would it avail fuch an one to fay, That the application he makes of the characters and attributes, the grace and works, of Jefus Chrift to Peter, is only by way of allufion and accommodation. For it would quickly be replied; Such allufions and accommodations are impious; are abfolutely unwarrantable; are pregnant with blafphemy.

If, then, an application of the principal characters, attributes, and works of our Lord to Peter, would be confidered and treated by Chriftians, as abominable blafphemy; it must be a much higher degree of that malignant crime, to apply the names and titles, the attributes and works of the Supreme Being, to Jefus Chrift, if he be not a Divine Perfon. Nor is it any wonder that the Jews fhould fo confider it. For if the difproportion between Jefus and Peter be great, that which is between Chrift and God is inconceivably greater, according to the principles of our opponents; the former being finite, the latter unbounded. Confequently, the blafphemy, in one cafe, is infinitely greater

than that in the other.

The impiety of applying the characters of Christ to Peter, will appear in a ftill ftronger light, if, in the cafe fuppofed, he who makes the application be confidered as knowing, that this question, Is Peter equal to Jefus Chrift? had been debated on very important occafions; and that he forefaw this error would become general in the world; fo that, for many ages, Peter would bear the names and receive the honours of Jefus Chrift. In fuch a cafe, he would be guilty of prodigious impiety indeed; the confequences forefeen being fo injurious to the honour of Chrift, and fo fatal to the fouls of men. This, it is obvious, is applicable to the apostles. For they were not ignorant that this queftion, Is Jefus Chrift equal with God? had been debated.

Nay, they well knew, that it was under a charge of pretented blafphemy, for claiming an equality with God, that the Jews had perfecuted their Malter and procured his death. And as they forefaw that falfe teachers would arife in future ages, and were able to describe their heretical doctrines; they could not be ignorant, that vast multitudes profeffing Christianity would fo apoftatize, as to put Jefus Chrift, a mere creature, in the place of God. But if they knew and forefaw these things, ought not a zealous regard for the honour of God, and a tender concern for the fouls of men; to have prevented their applying thofe oracles of the Old Teftament, which exprefs the glory of JEHOVAH, in contradiftinction to that of his creatures, to Jefus Chrift? -Who, then, on the principles of them we oppofe, can' juftify the conduct of the apoftles, in fo doing; Who can exculpate Jefus himfelf, by whofe command and infpiration they wrote? Who can justly condemn the conduct of the Sanhedrim, who arraigned him for blafphemy and caufed him to end his life on the cross, as an enemy to God and a deceiver of men? Or who can blame the modern Jews for continuing in their infidelity.

и 3

90

SECTION III.

If JESUS CHRIST be not the true God, of the fame effence with his Father, He and his apoftles have led us into a complicated and pernicious error.

CHAPTER I.

The principles which we oppofe, obfcure, depreciate, deftroy, thofe exalted ideas which JEsus gives us of his Father's Love, and of his own Compaffion to finful men.

THE general reafon of the leading propofition

in this Section, is, The facred writers of the New Teftament have not fpoken of Chrift, as of a mere creature; though they were perfectly well informed, as to his true dignity and real character.-But it is neceffary that I fhould be more particular. In order, therefore, to prove and illustrate the propofition, I fhall endeavour to fhew, That the Socinian hypothefis obfcures, depreciates, and deftroys, thofe exalted ideas which Jefus Chrift gives us of his Father's love, and of his own compaffion to finful men-' -That it fo weakens the idea, which is given us in the New Testament, of the greatnefs of the mystery of godlinefs, that one cannot help fufpecting the apoftles of a defign to deceive us, by bombaftic expreffions-That it deprives Jefus Chrift of his honour, by making him poffefs, in a metaphorical fenfe, thofe titles which are given him in one that is proper That it fuperfedes the neceffity and vacates