of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father." And further, that he acknowledges a fuperior, even in his risen glory, may be proved from his own words to his servant John, on the Iile of Patmos, fee Rev. iii. 12, "Him that overcometh, will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out; and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerufalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God, and I will write upon him my new name." Four times, in the above paffage, he acknowledges a being whom he worships. Again, see Pfalm xlv. 7, "Thou lovest righteousness and hatest wickedness, because God, thy God hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows." The reader will observe, I have ventured to put the word because, in room of the word therefore, in this quotation; but I have not done it, without the authority of a former tranflation. The difference is so essential, I cannot difpenfe with it. Observe, the writer of the Pfalm addresses one God, and speaks in his address of another, see verse 6, "Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever." This God is dependant on another, expreffed in the 7th verse, Because God, thy God hath anointed thee, &c. 'That the names, God, Lord, and everlafting Futher, are applied to Christ, I shall not difpute; neither shall I difpute the propriety of it: But I do not admit, that they mean the self-exiftent Jehovah, when applied to the Mediator. In the quotation from the Pfalm, Chrift is faid to be anointed above his fellows. Fellows are equals. Who are Christ's equals ? Perhaps the reader may fay, they are the Father and the Holy Spirit; but I can hardly believe, that Christ was anointed with the oil of gladness above his Father, neither do I believe any one will contend for it. I am sensible, that God speaks, by the prophet, of smiting the man who is his fellow, but this fellowship must be different from the one just spoken of, and stands only in an official fenfe. The reader will then ask, if I would confider the Mediator no more than equal with men? I answer, yes, were it not, that our Father and his Father, our God and his God, hath anointed him above his fellows. See Phillippians ii. 9, "Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name," For this exaltation and name, he was dependant on his Father, and received them from him. This name, which is above every name, is the name of God, named on Jefus. It will be faid, Chrift taught the people, that he and his Father were one. I grant he did, and if that proves him to be essentially God, the argument muft run farther than the objector would with to have it. See St. John xvii. 11, Christ prays that his difciples may be one, even as he and the Father are one. The oneness of the Father and Son, is their union and agreement in the great work which he has undertaken; and he prayed that his difciples might be as well agreed in the gospel of falvation, as he and his Father were, see verse 18, " As thou hast fent me into the world, so have I also sent them into the world." The Father of all mercies fent his Son Jefus into the world, for a certain purpose; and there was a perfect agreement between them, in all things. He says, he came not to do his own will, but the will of him who sent him. And again, My meat and drink, is to do the will of him who fent me, and to finish his work.

The Prefident of the United States sends a minister to negociate a peace at a foreign court; this minifter must con duct according to the authority which he derives from him, by whom he is sent; and as far as he does, he is, in his official character, the power that sent him It is evident, Chrift received the power which he exercises in the work which he hath undertaken, and that his kingdom was given to him,

which goes to prove, he did not eternally possess them; fee Dan. vii. 14, " And there was given him dominion and glory, and a kingdom." According to the prophecy here quoted, the dominion, glory and kingdom of Christ were given him. The people whom he is to rule are given him, fee Pfalm ii. 8. " Afk of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy poffeffion." St. Matthew xxviii. 18, Jefus faith, "All porver is given unto me in heaven and earth." Chap. xi. 27, "All things are delivered unto me of my Father." These and many more passages are found in facred writ, in support of the dependance of the Mediator on the Supreme Eternal, and that he derives his power and glory from him. But if Christ be effentially God, all those scriptures seem without just fignification.

A

Christ is faid to be the " image of the invisible God, and the first born of every creature." His being the first born of every creature, agrees with his being the beginning of the creation of God. It is plain to me, from scripture, that the Mediator is the first human foul which was created, as Adam was the first man that was formed; and that he is, in fpirit, the Father of every human creature, as much as Adam is in the Aesh. Therefore, Christ faith, as it is written, " Behold I and the children that thou hast given me."

It is written, that man was created in the image of God; and, by the light of the gospel, St. Paul ventured to affert, that Christ was this image. The reader will do well to observe, that the image of a person and the perfon are not effentially one, but some knowledge of a person may be obtained by his true image. Christ being the image of God, it is by him we learn the nature of the Father. Chrift faith, "“No man knoweth the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son revealeth him." Again, "No man cometh unto the Father, but by me." St. Paul is particular, on this subject, in his 1st Epistle to Timothy, see chap. ii. verse 5, "For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jefus." It seems, by this testimony, that St. Paul was a stranger to the notion of Christ's being effentially God, as it would be improper to call him a man, were that the cafe. If it be argued, that Christ is God and man both, I ask, was it the whole divine nature which constituted the divinity of Chrift? If this question be answered in the affirmative, I defire to know where that divinity is which conftitutes the other two perfons in the Godhead. If the question be answered in the negative, and it be argued, that the divinity which Chrift poffeffed was an emanation from Jehovah, it is coming directly to what I contend for, viz. that he is a created being.

As we have seen, from the prophecy of Daniel, that Chrift received his kingdom; so we are taught, by St. Paul, that he will deliver up his kingdom to the Father, when he has accomplished the grand object of his reign, see 1 Cor. xv. 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, "Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father: when he shall have put down all rule, and all authority, and power. For he must reign, until he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he faith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted which did put all things under him. And when all things fhall be fubdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be fubject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Enough, perhaps, is written, on this part of my query, to make the matter plain to the reader, although much more

113

might be quoted from the scriptures, in fupport of what I have argued.

4

I next inquire, has the Mediator power, or ability, to perform the great work of atonement, which is the reconciliation of the world to God? Those scriptures, with their connexions, which I have quoted to prove the Mediator's dependancy, abundantly prove the sufficiency of his power to accomplish the work in which he is engaged. If all power in heaven and earth is committed to Chrift, no doubt can be entertained of its fufficiency. If the whole system of law in moral nature is subservient to the designs of the Redeemer, and if he holds in his hands the power of moral government, it certainly must be at his option, whether men shall be reconciled to God or not.

It may not be amifs to inquire, in this place, whether men, in their individual capacity, have the power of moral government ? If they have, the great work of reconciliation might be performed by them, which would render the mifsion of Christ unnecessary. We ought not to suppose the Almighty ever purposed more than one way, to produce the fame event; if he has given ability to each individual to effect a complete reconciliation in himself, it is not confiftent to believe that this work of reconciliation will be done by a Mediator; but if the work of reconciling all things to God is configned to Christ, it is not reasonable to believe we have power to perform it ourselves. And I think it will not be deemed admiffible, that we have power to hinder this work of reconciliation, as that would, in effect, deny the truth of all power being given to Christ. We ought to confider, that Chrift was by no means ignorant of man; that he needed none to testify of man, as he knew what was in man. knew the moral distance which man had wandered from

P

He