fifth and tenth chapters. In the former, they interpret our Lord's claim to this title, as

making himself equal with God ;”* verse 18 ; and in the latter, they call it still more plainly the "making himself God;" verse 33. We have therefore the greatest reason for believing this to be their meaning in their answer to Pilate. Besides, the Jews had no law to condemn our Lord for claiming this title in its ordinary signification. God had often declared himself the Father of all that trusted in, and obeyed him; and had repeatedly called such his sons. The Jews therefore could not say, By our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God," if they used this appellation in its ordinary signification. But their law did condemn him to death for using such language concerning himself as they understood it, which was, "that he

* Our Author renders this expression," like unto God," and supposes, that the Jews only meant hereby to charge our Lord with "assuming so much of God's prerogative, as to claim the privilege of working on the Sabbath-day:" whereas the text plainly refers this charge to our Lord's, saying, that God was his Father; and not to his working on the Sabbath. "Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the Sabbath, but said also, that God was his Father, making himself equal with God."

being a man" only, made himself God: and therefore it is plain, that "Christ had not satisfied the Jews that he did not mean to make himself equal with God," because they produced it against him at his trial, when he was condemned as a blasphemer."

66

29. I have now taken notice, I think, of every material observation made in the "Illustration" upon those passages of Scripture which I have quoted in my "Short Defence." My plan would not allow me to transcribe all that the illustrator says upon each of those passages: what I have transscribed, conveys, in my apprehension, the force of his objections; however, the reader may easily satisfy himself, by comparing these remarks with the "Illustration."

66

The following texts of Scripture, urged in my Defence" of the Divinity of Christ, are not taken notice of in the "Illustration." Revelations i. 17, page 11. Hebrews vii. 3, page 13. Revelations xxii. 16, ib. Matthew xxii. 45, ib. Isaiah xl. 3, page 14. Hebrews ii. 18, page 16. John x. 28, ib. Revelations ii.

24, page 17. Luke xvii. 5, page 18. Romans x. 13-15, page 20. 2 Thessalonians ii. 16, page 21. 2 Corinthians xii. 8, 9, ib. Revelations v. 8-11, &c. page 22. 2 Corinthians

viii. 9, page 25. 1 Peter i. 10, page 28. John xvi. 7, 14, 15, ib. Jude 25, page 29. Revelations vii. 17, chapter xxi. 22, 23, page 31.

30. Before I conclude, I shall take some notice of two other texts which our Author has illustrated, though they are not mentioned in my "Defence." The first is Colossians ii. 9." In him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." To suppose, as the illustrator does, page 22, that this text implies no more than that "the wisdom and power of God were manifest in, and acted by Christ," is doing great injustice to it. It expresses, in the strongest manner, that incomprehensible indwelling of the Deity in the human nature of Christ, which no mere man can partake of, and which renders him the proper object of worship to all intelligent creatures. The great privileges of true christians, though spoken of in terms, which at first sight appear similar to this, are found widely different, when attentively considered. God dwelleth in the saints, but it is only by a communication of divine grace, or holy love, as the Apostle declares, 1 John iv. 12. "If we love one another, God dwelleth in us:" and again, verse 16. "He that dwelleth in love, dwelleth in God, and God in him." So the being

"filled with the fulness of God," mentioned in Ephesians iii. 19. is explained in the same passage to be, "Christ's dwelling in their hearts by faith, knowing the love of God," and " being rooted and grounded in love." Besides, it is from Christ we receive these divine benefits, as is intimated in the words immediately following the text under consideration; "Ye are complete in him," and still more plainly in other passages, as John i. 16. "Of his fulness have we all received, and grace for grace:" and Ephesians iv. 7. "Unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ." But how different is all this from what is here said of Christ: That the Godhead, or Deity itself, yea all the fulness of Deity dwelleth in him bodily. "This expression," say's our Author, "that the fulness of the Godhead dwelled or resided in him, seems to imply that it did not naturally belong to him."* page 23. It implies no more, I think, than

* The illustrator likewise says, page 46. "To signify that the authority of Christ is not underived, like that of God; and at the same time to inform us from whence it does proceed, the Apostle says, that it pleased the Father, that in him should all fulness dwell.'" Colossians i. 19. Our Author might have added, that the word

that the Godhead and manhood of Christ, though united in one person, are not confounded; which is intimated in the phrase "dwelleth in him bodily." The word "bodily" fixes the sense of the passage, since it could not have been used with propriety if Christ was but a mere man; for, in this case, it must either convey a false idea, or none at all; it must mean, that wisdom dwelt in his flesh and bones, or mean nothing. We should judge a writer to give a very improper and insignificant description of a wise or learned man by saying, that a great deal of wisdom or learning dwelt in him bodily: with still greater impropriety would the Apostle have spoken of the Godhead" dwelling in Christ "bodily,” if he had only meant that Christ was possessed of a great measure of divine wisdom. Whereas, allowing the divine and human nature to be united in our Lord, the Apostle's language has the greatest propriety, being descriptive of such an union.

46

"Father" is not in the original of this text, as the English reader may observe by the character in which it is printed in our Bibles. It pleased the Father without doubt, that the fulness of the Godhead should dwell in Christ bodily; but how does this prove that Christ has no underived authority?