considered, it must be utterly unaccountable, that he did not do it; and, more surpassingly so, that he would suffer himself to be put to death for the infamous crime of blasphemy. It must, therefore, be manifest, that, by styling himself the Son of God, he meant to claim an equality with God. And not

with God. Thus, when he said to them, John x. 30, "I and my Father are one," they took up stones to stone him. Christ answered them, many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me. The Jews answered him saying, For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy; and be-less unaccountable is it, if his Sonship, cause that thou, being a man, makest consisted wholly in his humanity, that thyself God." In the reply which he should think of asserting his own Christ made, he is so far from accusing equality with God, by applying to himthem of making a false inference from self the title of his Son. his expressions, that, certainly in their view, and undoubtedly in reality, he vindicates the claim, which they supposed him to make, of an equality with God. "Therefore they sought again to take him but he escaped out of their hand." If this was the understanding, which Christ knew, both his friends and his enemies had, of his calling himself the Son of God; why did not he correct the error, if it were one, of supposing that he meant, by styling himself God's Son, to claim any thing above what may be found in a mere creature? Will it be said, that as he was supernaturally begotten by the power of the Highest coming on his mother, he was really God as well as man; and, as the Son of God, partook of the essence of divinity; -and thence he urged, that his calling himself the Son of God will not imply that he was a Son antecedently to his being born into the world? It is to be noted, that this admits Christ to be a Son in his divine, as well as human nature.

But we proceed to attend to some other passages of Scripture relative to the subject before us. Christ tells the Jews, John v. 21, 22. "As the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Sɔn quickeneth whom he will. For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son. That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father." Every one will see, that Christ here claims powers and prerogatives, which are peculiar to God; and that worship, and honor, which are due only to the one living and true God. And yet all these claims he founds on his being the Son of God. Can it be believed, that the Lord Jesus would claim all this honor as a man, even though miraculously brought into the world? Yet, on the impleaded hypothesis, he is styled the Son of God in no other character than that of a man. Christ proceeds in his discourse with the Jews; "verily, verily, I say unto you, the hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear shall live. For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he

To suppose that the Lord Jesus never claimed to be the Son of God in any other respect than as man, will imply, that he was unjustly charged with blas-given to the Son to have life in himself. phemy ;-yea, that he died under the And hath given him authority to exeignominy of being a blasphemer, when, cute judgment, also, because he is the by a word's speaking, he could have re- Son of man." It may here be noted, moved the whole ground on which the that they, who urge that Christ is the charge was made. The whole pretext, Son of God only as man, say, that "a which the Jews had for charging him dependance and subjection incompatiwith blasphemy, was,that by styling him-ble with divinity, are ascribed to him as self the Son of God, he in fact, made himself God. Had he meant by so of ten taking to himself this title, to claim nothing higher than what may belong to mere man, he could at once have satisfied the Jews of it. These things, being

Son. The Son can do nothing of himself-Of that day and hour knoweth no man, no not the Son. This Son was ignorant of future events." These are the expressions of an ingenious writer on the subject; and are urged as a proof,

that Sonship is predicable of Christ only thought to be truly God, as well as man, as man. Now, then, it may be asked, to be ignorant of any thing whatever? whether it be, in any measure, supposa-On a certain occasion they say to him, bie, that Christ should ascribe a power, "Lo, now speakest thou plainly, and to raise from death to life, to one, whom speakest no proverb. Now we are sure, is ascribed a dependance and subjection that thou knowest all things, and needincompatible with Divinity to one, who est not that any man should ask thee." was ignorant of future events—and who John xvi, 29, 30. And can any one, could do nothing of himself? Yet the hy-who believes Christ to be really God, pothesis, that Jesus Christ is the Son of as well as man, admit, at the same time, God merely as man cannot be supported that he could be really ignorent of the without admitting this extraordinary day of judgment? Nor need we resort supposition. Still further, on this hypoth-to the unsupported opinion, that he esis, it must be admitted, that " to a de- spake merely as man. Who could ever pendant, ignorant subject," all judgment imagine, that merely as man, he could is committed that this Son, to whom know, either the day, or the hour, of such dependence, ignorance and subjection are attributed, we are to honor with divine honors. Not only so; but it is the voice of such a Son, that the dead shail hear, and come forth, some to the resurrection of life, and some to the resurrection of damnation.

is only God. The Lord as supreme God appoints the day and hour of the last judgment. This was no part of the business of the Mediator. It was what

the last judgment. But that Jesus, who delivered these words-who is judge of quick and dead-who has the direction and management of all the affairs of that great and awful day➡ should yet be really ignorant of any thing, which related to it, cannot be adIt may be pertinent to the present ar- mitted. But it is to be remembered, gument to observe that Christ directs that Christ in his whole mediatorial charthe ordinance of baptism to be adminis-acter is subject to the Father. The Fatered in the name of the Son, as wellther sent him--and, in the whole busias that of the Father, and the Holyness, on which he came into the world, Ghost. Jesus thus directs his apos- he acted in subordination to Him, who tles, Matt. xxviii. 19. "Go ye, there fore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Here, we observe, the same divine hon-did not belong to him-being no part of or and worship are paid to the Son, as his mediatorial work. Therefore, when, to the Father, and to the Holy Ghost. after his resurrection, his disciples said Nor will it avail on the other side, to to him, "Wilt thou at this time restore say, this is because the Son is truly God again the kingdom to Israel ?" He replias well as man; For, as a Son, it is de-ed, "it is not for you to know the times nied, that any thing of Divinity belongs or the seasons, which the Father hath to him. When we see, that such pre-put in his own power. Acts, i. 6, 7. rogatives and powers-such honor and Christ spake concerning that day and worship, as are spoken of, in the prece-hour, as we often speak respecting ding passages, are ascribed to the Son things, which do not at all concern or of God, how can we otherwise than be-belong to us. We know nothing at all lieve, that Jesus Christ, in his divine na-about them." Unless a more satisfacture, is the Son of God. given to the argument Divinity of the Son of still suppose, that such

tory answer be
in favor of the
God; we shall

But, it is said, on the other side of the question, that a difficulty, which seems unsurmountable, remains yet to be re-modes of expression as are often found moved. Christ himself says, Mark xiii. in the gospel "God sent his Son into 32. "But of that day, & that hour, know the world-gave his only begotten Son," eth no man, no, not the angels which and the like, strongly favor the opinion, are in heaven, neither the Son, but the that God had a Son before Jesus was Father." Can it be supposed, that his || born. The God of Israe! himself uses disciples believed him, whom they || language very similar to the manner in

bove the angels-they being to adore and worship him.

which Jesus did, when he said, that the Son knew neither the day, nor the hour, &c. Thus he says concerning that peo-the proceeds to mention the ple, Hosea viii. 4. "They have set up and terms, in which God addı kings, but not by me; they have made Son. Thou, Lord, in the b princes, and I knew it not.” hast laid the foundation of the It ought further to be remarked, that, the heavens are the works whenever Christ spake of God as his hamls. They shall perish, but Father of his coming forth from the mainest, and they all shall w Father-being sent by the Father-do- doth a garment, and as a yes ing the works of his Father, &e. hethou fold them up, and they speaks of himself in the character of changed; but thou art the sa the Son of God. Thus, in his discourse thy years shall not fail.” with the Jews, John 8th, He told them, This whole address, it is to be that, if any kept his sayings, he should bered, is from the Father to the never see death. On this they charged that God says, is said to the Son him with having a devil, and said, dignity, the prerogatives, and th "Art thou greater than our Father A- tions here spoken of, are, by G braham, which is dead? and the proph-bed to the Son. Here, then, it ets arc dead; whom makest thou thy-inquired, whether it can be sup self?" On which Jesus said, "Your fa that these divine prerogatives ther Abraham rejoiced to see my day:fections should be, by God him he saw it, and was glad." The Jews, cribed to one, to whom is attrib then said, "thou art not yet fifty years dependence and subjection, in old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Je-ible with divinity-to one, who sus replied, "Verily, verily, I say unto nothing of himself; and who wa you, before Abraham was, I AM." The ant of future events?" For, bein same glorious I AM, who spake to Mo- other sense, it is insisted, a Sọn, ses in the Mount, and gave him direc- man, such dependence, subjects tions to bring the people of Israel out of ignorance necessarily belongi Egypt. A striking evidence, both of How absurd to suppose, that God the real Divinity of Christ, and that, in attribute such divine powers to his divine nature, he is the Son of man, as be here ascribes to li God. Is such an one, as the advocates impleaded seatinont suppose J be as a Son, the brightness of th ther's glory, and the express im his person? Was it by a depende

Few passages of scripture, however, if any, are more full to the purpose, or more pertinent to the present argument, than the words of the apostle, in the first chapter of his epistle to the Henorant creature, that God ma brews. fle begins thus, "God, who at worlds; or, by the word of whose aundry times, and in diverse manners, er he upholds all things? How & spoke in time past unto the fathers by to avoid the absurdity of attribut the prophets, Hath in these last days vine perfections to a creature, spoken unto us by his Son, whom he we admit that Jesus, to whom thes hath appointed heir of all things, by fections are ascribed, is the San whom also he made the worlds; who in his divine, as well as human na being the brightness of his glory, and e express image of his person, and pholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged sing, sat down on the right hand of

But it is objected, that this So whom God hath spoken to us, in last days, was the medium, or age which God made this revelation must be distinct from God, who ty on high." He then goes on it." Yet, it is fully admitted, the llingcrate the grandeur and glory of Son is truly God, as well as man: chacter of that Son, by whom he sequently, he can be no otherwise these foal days, spoken to us ; tinct from God, than one person, i riting him being exalted far a-adorable Trinity, is distinct from a

er. But it is asked, "If this Son, by | Son of God in his divine nature? To whom God spake, in these last days, were a Son in his divine nature, why is it said, that God hath appointed him heir theof all things-He must, of necessity have thebeen heir by nature and inherent right

consider the brightness of divine glory as manifesting itself only in the human nature of Christ, very naturally shuts out from the urind the idea of Trinity in the Godhead. To acknowledge Jenot receiving this honor from any supe- sus to be God as well as man, and thus rior?" To this it may be replied, that, admit the brightness of Divinity to apsalm in the subordinate character, in which pear in him, will still, give no idea at all The condescended to act,—the character of any other person in the Godhead, of Mediator and Redeemer, he was far than that, which inhabits the human nafrom being necessarily the heir of all ture of Christ. So that, in the passage things. He now heirs all things as a re- || under consideration, we not only, on ard for the work he accomplished in that construction run into the absurdity his mediatorial character. This is the of supposing divine honors to be attribulight in which the apostle represents ted to a creature, but exclude the idea the matter, Philip, ii. 6-10. Here he of there being more than one person in tells us, that he, who was in the form of that God, who, in these last days, has God, and thought it no robbery to be spoken to us by his Son. equal with God, humbled himself, and It is submitted, whether the sentibecame obedient unto death: "Wherement that Jesus is the Son of God only fore God hath highly exalted him, and in his human nature, do not tend greatgiven him a name which is above everyty to obscure the evidence of a Trini name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow-and every tongue confesst hat Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."

M

7

ty in the Godhead. If he be a Scn only in his humanity, in all the great works which are attributed to the Son, he is but a mere instrument-the power When it is urged, that the Divinity of is all of God. There is not a Father, Christ is as truly exhibited under the Son and Holy Ghost in the Godhead :title son of man, as it is by the title Son And if not, where is the evidence of a t of God, (as this has been urged,) why Trinity? It is admitted and believed, may it not thence be inferred, that he by the advortes of the opinion, that was the heir of all things by nature and Christ only as man is the Son of God, inherent right, with as much justice, as that divine nature was united with the it can be inferred from his dicine Son-human in the person of Jesus. But, as ship, on supposition he is indeed the this divine nature was not the Son, the Son of God in his divine as well as hu-evidence fails of their being a Son in man nature? But it is represented,on the the self existent God. Though divine other side of the question, as being un-nature be so united to the Son as to connatural, if not absurd, to suppose, that stitute one person, the evidence seems Divinity in one person, was the bright-to fail, of there being any other divine ness of the glory of Divinity in another nature or person, than that, which is persor. Consequently, that Son, by thus united to the man Jesus. Thus, it jwhom God spake,and who was the bright is apprehended, that the sentiment, ness of his glory, could be no other than that Jesus is the Son of God only as a, the man Jesus. On this it may be ob-man, is, both of dangerous tendency, served that, if the term Son, when ap and without divine authority for its supplied in scripture to the Lord Jesus, al-|| ways implies Divinity as well as humani- How, and in what way, Jesus became ty, which is conceded by those, who ad the Son of God in his divine nature, we mit him to be the Son of God no other may be unable to comprehend. No wise than as man, will it not thence as idea of his being so derived from the clearly follow, that Divinity in one di Father as to imply. either inferiority, or vine person, was the brightness of the beginning of existence, is to be admitglory of Divinity in another divine per-ted. That he should be a Son, is, howsun, as though he be admitted to be the lever, no more incomprehensible, than

port.

which Jesus did, when he said, that the bove the angels-they being required Son knew neither the day, nor the hour, to adore and worship him. The apos&c. Thus he says concerning that peo- || tle proceeds to mention the language ple, Hosea viii. 4. "They have set up and terms, in which God addresses this kings, but not by me; they have made Son. princes, and I knew it not."

Thou, Lord, in the beginning, hast laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of thine hamls: They shall perish, but thou remainest, and they all shall wax old as doth a garment, and as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed; but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail."

It ought further to be remarked, that, whenever Christ spake of God as his Father-of his coming forth from the Father-being sent by the Father-doing the works of his Father, &e. he speaks of himself in the character of the Son of God. Thus, in his discourse with the Jews, John 8th, He told them, This whole address, it is to be rememthat, if any kept his sayings, he should bered, is from the Father to the Son-all never see death. On this they charged that God says, is said to the Son-all the him with having a devil, and said, dignity, the prerogatives, and the perfec "Art thou greater than our Father A-tions here spoken of, are, by God, ascri. braham, which is dead? and the proph-bed to the Son. Here, then, it may be ets arc dead; whom makest thou thy-inquired, whether it can be supposable, self?" On which Jesus said, "Your fa that these divine prerogatives and perther Abraham rejoiced to see my day:fections should be, by God himself, as, he saw it, and was glad." The Jews, cribed to one, to whom is attributed “ a then said, "thou art not yet fifty years dependence and subjection, incompatold, and hast thou seen Abraham? Je-ible with divinity-to one, who can do sus replied, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, before Abraham was, I AM." The same glorious I AM, who spake to Moses in the Mount, and gave him directions to bring the people of Israel out of Egypt. A striking evidence, both of the real Divinity of Christ, and that, in his divine nature, he is the Son of God.

nothing of himself; and who was ignorant of future events?" For, being in no other sense, it is insisted, a Son, than as man, such dependence, subjection and ignorance necessarily belong to him. How absurd to suppose, that God should attribute such divine powers to a mere man, as he here ascribes to the Son! Is such an one, as the advocates of the impleaded sentiunont suppose Jesus to be as a Son, the brightness of the Faher's glory, and the express image of his person? Was it by a dependent, ig

worlds; or, by the word of whose power he upholds all things? How are we to avoid the absurdity of attributing divine perfections to a creature, unless we admit that Jesus, to whom these perfections are ascribed, is the Son of God in his divine, as well as human nature ?

Few passages of scripture, however, if any, are more full to the purpose, or more pertinent to the present argument, than the words of the apostle, in the first chapter of his epistle to the He-norant creature, that God made the brews. fle begins thus, "God, who at sundry times, and in diverse manners, spoke in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high." He then goes on to illustrate the grandeur and glory of the character of that Son, by whom he bath, in these fast days, spoken to us; representing him as being exalted far a

But it is objected, that this Son, by whom God hath spoken to us, in "these last days, was the medium, or agent, by which God made this revelation, and must be distinct from God, who made it." Yet, it is fully admitted, that this Son is truly God, as well as man: Consequently, he can be no otherwise distinct from God, than one person, in the adorable Trinity, is distinct from anoth