Apostles by his miraculous interferences". After this introduction, which was well calculated to secure the attention of Jewish readers, and impress them with a sense of the high dignity of the Son, the Writer proceeds to show, that it was requisite for the Saviour of men, to be himself a man, in all things like his brethren; and his assertions on this point are so strong, that if we were certain that they possessed apostolical authority, nothing but equally express assertions that he was not in all things like his brethren, but was possessed of a nature superior, nay infinitely superior to theirs, could in any degree justify the language which is used by those who maintain " that two whole and perfect natures, that is to say, the Godhead and Manhood, were joined together in one Person, never to be divided, whereof is one Christ, very God, and very man, who truly suffered, &c." I

Ch. ii. 9-18. iv. 14-v. 10. The expression in ch. ii. 14-18, is remarkable. Since then the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also in like manner partook of the same; that through death he might destroy him who hath the power of death (that is, the devil;) and might deliver those who through fear of death, were all their life time subject to bondage. For verily he helpeth not angels, but he helpeth the seed of Abraham; wherefore it behoved him to be like his brethren in all things, that he might be a compassionate and faithful high-priest in things relating to God to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour those that are tempted. See Impr. Vers. This is Archb. Newcome's rendering, except in the part in italics, when he has "to be made like": the original is down.

▾ Article II.

look in vain for this doctrine in the Scriptures; and I believe that most others would too, if they had never learnt it from human Creeds and Articles2.

I have taken the books of the New Testament in the order which seemed most natural for my examination; and as two only remain besides the writings of the Apostle John, I shall consider the evidence afforded by them as to the supposed superiority of our Lord's nature, before I proceed to ascertain whether any information on this point is afforded by that Apostle, which, if his writings had not been preserved, would not have been known to the Christian church, or at most would have been derived from remote and obscure inference.

Evidence of JAmes.

19. The Epistle of JAMES, cannot reasonably be expected to give much information on the point before us; as its object is almost solely practicala. But though, from the purport of the Epistle, I should expect no explicit avowal of the Apostle's belief in the supposed superiority of our Saviour in nature to what he, with the rest of the Apostles,

In the subsequent part of the Epistle, we find some obscure passages, which have by many been supposed to refer to the pre-existence or superíor nature of Jesus; but as they admit of a just interpretation, in perfect consistence with the Writer's own assertions, I feel no doubt to which to give the preference. These I shall notice in my next Part; (see Chap. VII.)

The supposed opposition between the views of faith given in this Epistle and those given in the Epistles of Paul, seems to have been the chief cause of the doubts which were early entertained of its genuineness; and the evidence for its having been written by James the Younger, though not complete, is far from being unsatisfactory.

indisputably once believed, yet I can scarcely conceive it to be possible, that one who was the nephew of our Lord's mother, and who after our Lord's resurrection was spoken of as the Lord's brother, and who must have therefore been peculiarly accustomed to think of Jesus as man, should content himself with calling him the Lord Jesus Christ, or even the Lord of glory (if that he the true translation of ch. ii. 1,) if he really believed that he was the very and eternal God, or even the Creator of all things, himself God. Surely these men must have had minds very differently constructed from ordinary minds, to have allowed such astonishing knowledge to be totally unemployed on any occasion suitable for the manifestation of it. Not only are we incapable of fixing upon a time when they first acquired it, but even after it must be supposed that they already had acquired it, or that they never did acquire it, we perceive no difference in their language respecting their glorified Lord, except what necessarily arose from the state of exaltation to which he had been raised. We can fix upon the time when the Jewish prejudices of the Apostles were removed, when they were taught the grand mystery of the Gospel that the new covenant belonged equally to the Gentiles; is

* The original is την πισιν του κυρίου ἡμων Ιησου Χρισου της δόξης: The last word may refer either to wis or to xugio. Wakefield refers it to the former, glorious belief:' if it be referred to the latter, the clause should probably be rendered, agree ably to the Hebrew idiom, the faith of our glorious Lord Jesus Christ. See Chap. VI. §3.

it conceivable, is it possible, that the infinitely greater mystery, that he with whom they had been accustomed to live in habits of friendly, though respectful intimacy, and whom they had treated in all respects as a human being, was in reality the eternal and omnipresent God,-that this should, when revealed to them, have excited no surprise, should have made no æra in their proceedings, should have produced no change in their language? Till these things are clearly explained, I must maintain that the plain and obvious sense of Scripture is most decidedly against the orthodox doctrines on this point; and that if any person of common understanding, uninstructed in human creeds and articles, were to sit down to form his opinions from the Scriptures alone, he never could derive, even from the common translation of them, that incomprehensible doctrine which is sometimes called the Christian doctrine of Trinity in Unity.

Evidence of Jude.

20. The Epistle of JUDE is ascribed to Judas the brother of James the Younger. If I were not aware that the evidence for the genuineness of this Epistle is very incomplete, I should maintain that of itself it contains abundant proof that the doctrine of a "Tri-une Deity,' "three persons and one God," is totally unscriptural. At any rate, it may be considered as an evidence of the faith of the Christian church where and when it was written. Passing by the 4th verse, which has lately been made to speak a language which I am satisfied the <Griesbach's text is xa To Mavoy derworny xai xugiov ĥμwr

writer never intended, at the conclusion of his Epistle he says, 'to the ONLY GOD, our Saviour, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and for ever. Amen.'

Recapitulation of the Evidence of MATTHEW, MARK, LUKE, PETER, PAUL, JAMES, and JUDE.

I have now briefly stated what I believe to be a just view of the evidence of all the writers of the New Testament, except that of the Apostle John; and I feel no hesitation in asserting, that no one of them in any way teaches the proper Deity of the Son of God, still less that he is, "the very and eternal God," "of one substance, power, and eter

Ιησούν Χρισον αρνουμένοι The Received Text has sov after δεσποτην ; and Mr. Sharp, I believe, renders it, Denying our only Master, God, and Lord, Jesus Christ.' That this rendering is unscriptural has been shown in the excellent little pamphlet of the Rev. Calvin Winstanley, entitled 'A Vindication of Certain Passages in the common English Version of the New Testament; (1805.) Mr. W clearly shews, that Mr. Sharp's renderings are unnecessary as well as unscriptural. I have not heard that any notice has been taken of his arguments; but Mr. Sharp's learned supporter, Dr. Middleton (1808,) would have done well to refute them, before he ventured some of his unfounded and unjustifiable censures upon Gregory Blunt The last mentioned writer has not discussed the subject in the manner which one would wish; but his learning, and his keen sense, are indisputable, and should have preserved him from the sarcasm and superciliousness of Dr. Middleton.

a The Received Text has, to the only wise God, our Saviour, be glory and majesty,' &c. Griesbach rejects "wise," upon abundant authority; and upon at least equal authority, inserts, through Jesus Christ our Lord,' as above, though he only prefixes to these words the mark of probable insers

tion.

6