comes forward in self-defence, and assures them that they have mistaken his meaning-that he did not intend to be so understood. He explains himself in a sense wholly different from that which they had conceived, and the offensive doctrine entirely disappears. They admit the explanation, and never after accuse him of preaching the offensive doctrine.

Now what should we think of such a missionary? Should we not think that he had violated the high trust reposed in him, in the most unjustifiable manner? Should we not think, and justly too, that he had made complete shipwreck of his mission? Yet such a Missionary, according to the doctrine. of Trinitarians, was the Lord Jesus Christ. He came from heaven to earth to publish a revelation from God. The most important part of this revelation, says the Trinitarian, is the doctrine of the Trinity. Jesus came, then, to preach the doctrine of the Trinity. He proclaimed the object of his mission, and entered upon his work. He preached the doctrine of the Trinity. He made himself God. His hearers clearly comprehended his meaning, but they disliked the doctrine. They accused him of blasphemy; and finally they threatened to stone him. The situation in which Jesus now appears is full of the most thrilling interest. He has published the fundamental doctrine of his mission; and it is rejected. For preaching the truth his life is threatened. Now what ought he to do? What can he do? That he should dissemble is incredible. That he should be intimidated, if he is God, is impossible. If he answers for himself at all, he must, unquestionably, confirm the doctrine of his mission. If he preached what his hearers accused him of preaching, he must now confirm them in the belief they had expressed. He must leave them fully impressed with the following sentiments. "You understand me to say that I am God. In this you are correct. This is the true doc

trine of my mission. I shall, therefore, continue to publish it, whatever be the consequences. You may call me a blasphemer; or you may stone me. All this, and more than this, I expected before I came into the world. I knew, from the beginning, what was in man; and what opposition I should excite by telling you the truth. You may never have another opportunity, so favorable, of hearing this great and important doctrine from my lips." But how essentially different was the course Jesus pursued. He confuted them absolutely. He answered them in such a manner that the doctrine of the Trinity entirely disappeared. He left his captious hearers so fully convinced that he had not made himself God, that they never again accused him of it; notwithstanding they were urged to do so by the most powerful motives, connected with the circumstances of his trial already mentioned.

In reviewing this subject it appears that the Jews had no just cause to accuse Jesus of making himself God. He had said, I and my Father are one. He did not say one nature, one essence, one being, or one God. A Father and Son are two distinct beings. Christ is assuring his disciples of their safety. He calls them his sheep; and says, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. As additional security he adds, My Father who gave them me is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. He here declares the Father to be greater than all, consequently, greater than himself. If the sheep had not belonged to the Father before they belonged to Christ, the Father could not have given them to him. If the Father were not greater than the Son, his care of the sheep would have added nothing to their safety. I and my Father are one, means one in the business of watching over and protecting the sheep. Paul and Apollos are one. The husband and wife are one. All Christians are one. Jesus

66

prayed that all his disciples might be one in the same sense that he and his Father are one. even as we are one." John xvii. 22.

That they may be one,

The same unfairness, on the part of the Jews, appears in the fifth chapter, where they accused Jesus of making himself equal with God, only for saying that God was his Father. A charge which Jesus immediately refuted by saying, Verily, verily, I say unto you, the Son can do nothing of himself. If Jesus were God's equal he could do every thing himself.

If any are disposed to insist, as did the unbelieving Jews, that Jesus made himself God, or equal with God, they ought, in order to be consistent with themselves, to insist, also, that he was a blasphemer, and that he had broken the Sabbath: For they were the same witnesses that testified to the whole.

It is worthy of remark that Jesus was not accused of making himself equal with the Father, the supposed first person in the Trinity. There is no more allusion to persons in God, than there is of oceans or continents in him. Jesus is called "the express image of his person," not persons. There is but one other passage in the Bible where the word equal is found in such connexion with God, or Christ, or Spirit, or Ghost, as to be thought to relate to persons in God. "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God."-Phil. ii. 6. But here is no allusion to persons in God· an idea which does not appear to have been conceived by any writer in the Bible. On the other hand the Scriptures plainly teach that the one God has no equal. "To whom then will ye liken me, or shall I be equal? saith the HOLY ONE."-Isa. xl. 25. Dr. Doddridge, on Phil. ii. 6, says, " To be and appear as God." So ioa ew is most exactly rendered, agreeable to the force of coa in many places in the Septuagint, which Dr.

Whitby has collected in his note on this place. The proper Greek phrase equal to God, is too to Oεw, which is used, John v. 18."* There is but one instance, then, in the Bible, in which Jesus was accused of making himself equal with God; and his answer, as we have already shown, implied that the charge was false.

If Christ was God he must have been possessed of the essential attributes of God. He must have been unoriginated, self-existent, immortal, invisible, unchangeable, omniscient, all-wise, all-good, all-powerful, and omnipresent. But Jesus disclaimed the possession of every one of these properties. He was not unoriginated-for he said, 'As the Father hath life in himself, so hath he GIVEN to the Son to have life in himself.' He is not self-existent - for he said, 'I live By the Father! He was not immortal-for he was once dead; and the Apostle says, that 'He only, who is the only Potentate, hath immortality.' He was not invisible

- for he was seen of all; but no one hath seen GOD at ang time. Jesus said of God, 'Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.' He was not unchangeable for he experienced many of the most affecting changes to which man is liable. He increased in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and man. He was

hungry, and thirsty, and weary. He died and revived again. He was not omniscient—for he knew not the day, nor the hour of a certain event. He was not all-wise— for an Apostle ascribes glory to the FATHER as the only wise GOD. He was not all-good-for when the young nobleman called him Good Master,' he declined the appellation saying, Why callest thee me good? there is none good but one, that is GOD.' He was not all-powerful-for of him. self he could do nothing. The mighty works which he did, he did not of himself. And he expressly said 'The Fa

*See Family Expositor.

ther is greater than I.' He was not omnipresent — for he said to his disciples, in relation to the family at Bethany, where Lazarus died, 'I am glad for your sakes that I was not there. And when he went to see the afflicted family, Martha and Mary both said to him, 'Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died.'

66

Finally, if Jesus is God there must be, according to the Scriptures, a Mediator between Jesus and men. There is ONE GOD and ONE MEDIATOR between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." Is not the Trinitarian, who asserts that

the man Christ Jesus is the ONE GOD, under obligation to point out the ONE MEDIATOR between him and men? Will it be pretended that there is "one Mediator" between Jesus and men? If Jesus is God, he must have "so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son." Can the Trinitarian point us to "the only begotten Son" of Jesus Christ? He certainly cannot.

*The basis of this argument [Section VII.] was suggested by an excellent article written four or five years ago, by a much esteemed friend in Portland. The article, with the signature I. N." was first published in a newspaper, but subsequently copied into the Christian Register, I read it at that time, but have never seen it since. I have only to regret that my copy no more resembles the original. I have followed my worthy friend non æquis pedibus.