for which, if the person were present, might or might not be proper according to circumstances; but to pray to him for it when he is absent, with an expectation that he will hear and grant the request, would be downright idolatry.. Paul and the other sacred writers commonly begin and end their epistles with devout wishes for evangelical blessings from God and Christ, upon those to whom their epistles are addressed. These have been regarded by many as equivalent to prayers and acts of religious worship of Christ equally with God, from which they have inferred that Christ is truly God, and the proper object of divine worship. But this conclusion is certainly erroneous. Otherwise it would follow from the benediction, Rev. i. 4, "Grace be to you, and peace from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits who are before his throne," that these seven spirits also are proper objects of divine worship.

.

The Gospel is often called grace or favour,' because it is a free, unmerited, unsolicited, unpurchased gift. Sometimes it is called the grace or favour,' or 'free gift of God,' because it comes originally from God,-sometimes, as Philipp. iv. 23, it is called the favour of Christ,' because Christ was the authorized publisher of these glad tidings. And the purport of the benevolent wish so often repeated in the apostolic writings, is, that those who are the object of it may enjoy all the blessings of the Gospel dispensation, which is the free gift of God through Jesus

• Melancthon, in a letter to Camerarius, in 1532, after predicting the disputes and disturbances which would some time or other arise about the Trinity, adds, "I take refuge in those plain declarations of Scripture, which enjoin prayer to Christ, which is to ascribe the proper honour of divinity to him, and is full of consolation."--See Mr. Lindsey's Apol. p. 150. So Crellius argues in his Note upon 1 Thess. iii. 11, "Insigne ut curæ et providentiæ circa nos Domini Jesu argumentum, ita invocati ipsius exemplum. Votum enim ejusmodi, quod eum a quo aliquid voveo audire sum persuasus, precationis vim habet, atque adeo ipsa, licet indirecta, precatio est."

R

Christ,

Christ, by whom these glad tidings were communicated to the world.

1.

Rom. i. 7. "Grace be to you, and peace from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ." q. d. May that peace be yours which is the fruit of the Gospel, the free gift of God by Jesus Christ. See chap. xvi. 20. 1 Cor. i. 3; xvi. 23. 2 Cor. i. 2.

2. 2 Cor. xiii. 14. "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the communion" or partici pation "of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.” q. d. May you all enjoy the inestimable blessings of the gospel of Christ, the favour of God, and the gift of the Holy Spirit.

3. 2 Thess. ii. 16, 17. "Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God even our Father, who hath loved us, and given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace, comfort your hearts." 9. d. May your hearts be comforted by the love of God revealed in the gospel of Christ.

4.

1 Tim. i. 2. "Grace, mercy, and peace from God our Father, and from Jesus Christ our Lord." .g. d. May you obtain forgiveness of sin and reconciliation with God, which are the privileges of the Gospel dispensation. Here, grace, mercy, and peace are put for the mercy and peace of the Gospel, as the way, the truth, and the life are put, John xiv. 16, for the true way to life.

In the same manner other similar expressions of devout and benevolent wishes may be explained. And upon the whole, we have abundant reason to conclude, that there is neither precept nor example in the New Testament to war. rant the addressing of prayers or any other kind of religious worship to Christ. To one who forms his judge. ment from the New Testament, the Father only is God, and the proper and sole object of religious worship.

SECTION

SECTION XII.

ARGUMENTS TO PROVE THE PROPER HUMANITY OF JESUS CHRIST.

Ir is not necessary to the establishment of the proper humanity of Jesus Christ to produce specific arguments for this purpose. For who would require proof that one who appears in all respects as a man, is in fact a proper human being? If Christ had, as is universally allowed, all the external appearance of a man, he must in all reason be considered as a man, in no other way distinguished from his brethren than as being invested with an extraordinary divine commission. Whoever maintains that Christ is a being of superior order, an angel, a super-angelic Logos, or a God, it is incumbent upon him to substantiate his assertion by clear and satisfactory evidence. If these arguments, after being carefully examined, are found to be insufficient, it is not at all necessary to produce proof that Christ is a mere man. The conclusion follows irresistibly, and of course. In the preceding sections, all the evidence in favour of the pre-existence and superior nature of Christ has been produced and investigated; and if we are satisfied that these texts, neither singly nor collectively, contain any valid proof of this important point, the assumption falls to the ground, and the proper humanity of Christ remains as a plain indisputable fact. As, however, the contrary opinion has for many ages been the prevailing belief of the christian world, it may be of use to annex a concise view of the arguments which tend more immediately to establish and confirm the doctrine that Jesus Christ was a man in all respects like other men, except in

having been selected by divine wisdom to be the messenger of truth and mercy to mankind.

I. The total silence of the evangelists Matthew, Mark, and Luke concerning our Lord's pre-existence and divinity is utterly unaccountable, if these stupendous facts are true, and were known to those writers. This plain and unanswerable argument has been stated before1.

1

II. The

the

See above, Sect. III. p. 10. Also, Letters upon Arianism, in Reply to Mr. B. Carpenter, Lett. 8. Modern theologians pay little attention to this difficulty, which appears to have created, as it well might, very considerable embarrassment to the ancient ecclesiastical writers, who ascribe the silence of the evangelists to their great pru. dence in avoiding to shock the prejudices of their hearers, by divulging the obnoxious doctrine of Christ's divinity. Athanasius says, Jews of that age thought that Christ was a mere man, resembling other descendants of David, and did not believe either that he was God, or that the Word was made flesh. On this account the blessed apostles, with great prudence, in the first place taught what related to the humanity of our Saviour to the Jews, that they might afterwards bring them to the belief of his divinity." Athanas. Opp. vol. i. p. 553. Dr. Priestley's Early Opinions, vol. iii. p. 89.

Chrysostom says, "In the beginning was the Word.' This doctrine was not published at first, for the world would not receive it. Wherefore Matthew, Mark, and Luke began at a distance :-they did not immediately say what was becoming his dignity, but what would suit the hearers. John, the son of thunder, advanced to the doctrine of the divinity. As the lightning precedes the thunder, they flashed the economy (i. e. the humanity) of Christ: but he thundered out the divinity." Chrysost. de Sig. Opp. vol. vi. p. 171.-Priestley, ibid. p. 130. This writer also represents the apostle John as holding a soliloquy with himself when he was about to write his history. Why do I delay? Why do I not publish what angels are ignorant of? Why do I not write what Matthew, and Mark, and Luke, through a wise and praiseworthy timidity, passed over in silence, according to the orders which were given them? I will write a book which will stop the mouths of all who speak unjustly of God. Leaving all things that come to pass from time, and in time, I will speak of that which is without all time, and is uncreated, the Logos of God." Chrys. ibid. vol. vi. p. 600. Dr. Priestley, ibid. p. 134.

66

Epiphanius says, "the blessed John, coming and finding men employed about the humanity of Christ, and the Ebionites in an error about the genealogy, and the Cerinthians and Merinthians maintaining that he was a mere man, descended of human parents, as coming last he began to call back the wanderers, and those who were employed about the humanity of Christ." Epiphan. Opp. vol. i. p. 747. Dr. Priestley, ibid. p. 140.

Jerome

II. The pre-existence and divinity of Christ are no where taught as doctrines of revelation, but are left to be inferred from indirect arguments, obscure phraseology, and ambiguous hints.

The doctrine of a future life, which is truly a doctrine of revelation, is taught in the most explicit language, so that no believer in the mission of Christ can possibly entertain a doubt of it. And if Christ were God, or the Maker and Supporter of the world under God, this doctrine being of such high importance would, no doubt, have been taught with equal clearness and precision. That it is not so taught, is abundantly evident from the numerous controversies which have subsisted, and which continue to subsist upon that subject, and that not only among the ignorant and prejudiced, but among persons equally honest, and learned, and inquisitive, and equally desirous of knowing the truth.

III. The apostles either did or did not know of the preexistent state and dignity of Christ during his personal ministry, and while they were personally conversant with him.

Jerome says, John the apostle, whom Jesus loved, wrote his gospel last of all, at the intreaty of the bishops of Asia, against Cerinthus and other heretics, and especially against the doctrine of the Ebionites, then gaining ground, who said that Christ had no existence before he was born of Mary." Hieronym. Opp. vol. i. p. 273. Dr. Priestley, ibid. p. 142.

The prudent timidity and reserve which, by these early writers, is ascribed to the evangelists, is utterly unworthy of their character, and has no foundation in fact. Nor would it be adınitted by modern advocates of the pre-existence and divinity of Christ. The truth is, that the sacred writers never mention these extraordinary facts, because they had never heard of them. Otherwise silence would have been impossible. To write the life of Cæsar, and forget the battle of Pharsalia, or to publish the history of Nelson, and to omit the victories of the Nile and of Trafalgar, would be nothing in comparison with three historians undertaking to write the life of Christ, and one of them carrying on the history of the promulgation of christianity to thirty years after our Lord's ascension, without giving one single hint that the subject of their narrative was the Maker of the world himself in an incarnate form, if they had known this extraordinary fact.

If