as favourably attended to, as though he himself were perfonally present with them. Or more probably he might intend, that he would be with them in a figurative fenfe, by means of thofe divine powers, which by his prayers he was to procure for them from the Father. This interpretation is confirmed by his own words on another occafion. John xiv. 16-18. And I will pray the Father, and he fhall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, becaufe it feeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him, for he dwelleth with you, and fhall be in you. I will not leave you comfortlefs, I will come to you, that is, I will come to you by means of those powers which I am about to procure for you.

Grotius has a note on this place deferving attention. "In Latin," he fays "he is faid to be present with any one who favours and affifts him; and that this faying of Chrift's is very much like a proverb among the Jews, Where two perfons meet together and difcourfe concerning the law, the fhechinah is among them." (r)

John

(r) Latine adeffe alicui dicitur qui ei favet auxiliumque præbet. Eft autem hoc Chrifti dictum fimillimum tritæ inter Hebræos fententiæ Ubi duo confident fermonem habentes de lege, Shechinah eft inter ipfos. Grotius in loc.

John xiv. 23. If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. Matt. xxviii. 20. And lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the world. Both thefe paffages may be explained by John xiv. 16--18, above referred to; where Chrift represents himself as coming to the difciples, by means of the holy fpirit which they were to receive from heaven after his afcenfion. The laft paffage ought to have been rendered, Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age, which reftricts it to the apoftolick age, as long as miraculous powers were continued in the church.

2. Omniscience.

But none of the paffages Mr. Hawker has produced prove our Lord to have been poffeffed of this attribute. All they prove is, that he had such a knowledge of the hearts and characters of men communicated to him by God, as was neceffary to the fulfilment of the ends of his miffion. The fame kind of knowledge was communicated, at times, to others, though not in fo eminent a degree; to Elifha, in the case of Gehazi, and to Peter, in the cafe of Annanias and Sapphira. That our faviour was not omnifcient in the proper fenfe of the word, is evident from his own declaration, Mark xiii. 32. But of that day and that hour knownot the angels which are in heaven,

eth no man, no

neither

1. Jehovah.

For the most part he observes, "that the word Jehovah in the Old Teftament, is the fame as Lord in the New." To this it may be answered, that the Greek word Kupios, Lord, is far from being appropriate to the fupreme Being. The LXX ufe it very frequently for mafter. And in the New Teftament it is applied to other perfons, as well as to Jefus Chrift and to God. Nothing, therefore, can be argued from it, to prove that Jefus Chrift is called by the name Jehovah.

Mr. Hawker farther obferves upon this fubject, that in the Old Teftament Jehovah is said to be the only Saviour over all the earth; but that in the New Testament falvation is faid to be by Jefus Chrift from this he concludes, that Jefus Chrift must be Jehovah. But by the fame method of argument it might be proved that Mofes was Jehovah for it is faid, Ex. xxxii. 7, that Mofes brought the children of Ifrael out of Egypt, and Ex. xx. 2, that Jehovah their God, brought them out of Egypt. The truth is, that God is a Saviour in the highest sense, and that Jefus Chrift is a faviour in an inferior fenfe; being made fo by God as others also were. Neh. ix. 27, Thou gavest them Javiours who faved them. I will produce a few paffages from the New Teftament to prove, that it is

in this inferior fenfe only, that Jefus is a faviour. Acts v. 31. Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a prince and a Saviour. Ats xiii. 23. Of this man's feed hath God, according to his promife, raised up unto Ifrael a faviour, Jefus. I John iv. 14. We have feen and do testify, that the Father fent the Son to be the faviour of the world.

The paffages Mr. Hawker has produced from the Old Testament, to prove that Jefus Chrift is distinguished by the name Jehovah, have all been examined in the feventh chapter, except Zech. xii. 10. They fhall look upon me whom they have pierced. The apostle John, in quoting this paffage, has it, They fhall look on him whom they pierced. See John xix. 37. We seem therefore warranted in concluding, that there has been some mistake, and that the original reading was they fhall look on him &c. as John has quoted it. This conjecture is confirmed by what immediately follows in the prophet, and they fhall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only Jon, and fhall be in bitterness for him. It is furely much better for us to have recourfe to this interpretation, than to believe the shocking doctrine, that the great Jehovah himself was pierced by his own creatures on a cross,

From what has now been obferved, I hope it appears, that the name Jehovah, inftead of being repeatedly

neither the Son, but the Father. With respect to our Lord's prefcience concerning future events, on which Mr. Hawker lays fo much ftrefs, (s) it no more proves him to have been poffeffed of omnifcience, than it would prove any other prophet to have been poffeffed of it. That it was derived in him, as well as in them, is evident from Rev. i. 1. The revelation of Jefus Chrift, which God gave unto him. The declaration of Peter, John xxi. 17. Lord, thou knoweft all things, proves nothing; for the apoftle John fays the fame concerning thofe to whom he wrote his epiftle. I John ii. 20. But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.

3. Eternity.

(s) Trinitarians in general explain this paffage by faying, that our Lord did not speak in his divine, but in his human nature. How it is that Mr. Hawker will explain it, confidering the conceffion he has made (p. 177, note,) I am at a lofs to conceive. His words are, "For to suppose that our Lord in one paffage alludes to his divinity, and in another to his humanity, this would be to make Chrift fpeak and act as two diftin&t beings; which would be an abfurdity. And if this were made the standard for explaining the difficulties of Scripture, to what errors would it lead!" After fuch a conceffion, I think I may venture to fay, Mr. Hawker is not far from Unitarianism. It may be obferved also, that there are many other paffages which he will find equally difficult to reconcile, particularly thofe in which God is declared to be the God of Jesus Christ, which will be noticed in their proper place.