SECTION VIII.

OF WORSHIP ADDRESSED TO CHRIST.

To worship is to adore, to reverence, to honor, to submit to; and this homage differs as much in nature and degree, as the beings to whom it is rendered differ in nature, character, or dignity. Therefore to infer that all objects of worship are equal, is, in the highest degree, absurd. It is maintained by Trinitarians, that worship being ascribed to Christ, in the Scriptures, proves him to be GOD. That Christ is to be worshiped according to a scriptural use of the term, is admitted by all. But the only question is, in what sense is he to be worshipped? Inattention to the true import of words has been the source of many errors, and of much animosity among christians. The word worship is now generally used to express the religious homage due to God. But this is not the only sense in which the word is used in the Bible. Illustration: "And all the congregation bowed down their heads, and worshiped the LORD and the king." I Chron. xxix. 30. That is, they worshiped the LORD as GOD, and David as their King. "Then the King Nebuchadnezzar fell upon his face and worshiped Daniel." Dan. ii. 46. Had the king worshiped Daniel as God, he would have been guilty of idolatry; and Daniel would, unquestionably, have reproved him. But no reproof was intimated. Cornelius, when Peter first came into his house, "fell down at his feet, and worshiped him."—Acts x. 25. Yet Cornelius knew that Peter was not God. Nor did Peter reprove him; which he would have done, had Corne

lius been guilty of an act of idolatry. Peter only declined the homage, saying, "I myself also am a man." As if he had said, "I pretend to no superiority or dominion over others, which can entitle me to such homage." Thus it is evident that the word worship is used in the Scriptures to denote that reverence and submission which an inferior owes to a superior; as well as to denote that supreme adoration which is due to God only. That Christ used the term in this sense, is obvious from the following passages. "But when thou art bidden, go and sit down in the lowest room; that when he that bade thee cometh, he may say unto thee, ‘Friend, go up higher:' Then thou shalt have worship, in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee." -Luke, xiv. 10. Speaking of the conduct of a servant towards an earthly benefactor, Christ says, The servant fell down and worshiped him." These passages show that we are not to build our faith upon the mere sound of words; but on the broad basis of unequivocal Scripture testimony.

66

That this kind of worship should never have been offered to Jesus, by any of the hundreds and thousands on whom he bestowed special favors, is incredible. That they should have worshiped him as GoD, is also incredible for we have already seen, (page 7) that those who saw and enjoyed the miraculous displays of his grace and mercy, never inferred that he was God. The worship offered by those who were the happy subjects of these blessings, must have been such as to comport with the character they conceived him to bear. Did they believe him to be " a Teacher come from GoD," they worshiped him as such. Did they believe "GOD was with him," they worshiped him as such. Did they regard him as "a man approved of God, by miracles, and wonders, and signs, which God did by him," they worshiped him as such. Did they believe him to be the "Son of God," whom God had sanctified and sent into the world,

E

they worshiped as such. When he stilled the winds and the waves, his disciples worshiped him, not as God, but as the Son of God: for they said in just so many words, “Of a truth thou art the Son of God."-Matt. xiv. 33. The man born blind, whose eyes Jesus opened, worshiped him, not as God, but as the Son of God. For Jesus "said unto him, 'Dost thou believe of the Son of God?' He answered and said, 'Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him?' And Jesus said unto him, 'Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee.' And he said, Lord, I believe.' And he worshiped him."—John, ix. 35–38. This, I think, is the only instance recorded by John in which 'worship" is ascribed to Christ. How is this to be reconciled with the belief that John wrote particularly to prove that Christ is God? Besides the two just quoted, I think there are but nine passages recorded by all the four Evan gelists, in which persons who came to Christ as suppliants for favors, or who had been witnesses of his miraculous works, are said to have worshiped him.* Ha there been an hundred times as many, it would not have been surprising. If the reader will carefully examine those passages, he will perceive that there is no circumstance connected with them which intimates that Christ was worshiped as GOD. Seven out of the eleven are recorded by Matthew, who informs us that Jesus instructed his disciples, “ After this manner pray ye, 'Our FATHER,'" &c., and who as sures us that he restricted supreme worship to JEHOVAB.

* Matt. viii. 2, the leper: ix. 18, the ruler: xv. 25, the woman of Canaan: xx. 20, the wife of Zebedee: xxviii. 9, the woman who had been at the sepulchre verse 17, the eleven disciples. Mark, v. 6—xv. 19. Luke, xxiv. 52, where we find the eleven, on the ascension of Christ, worshiped him, and, returning to Jerusalem, 'were continually in the Temple praising and blessing GOD.' In all these instances, let the reader substitute, for 'worshiped him,' did him homage or obeisance, and then judge whether Jesus was worshiped as Gop, or as the Christ, the Son of God, whom the Father had sanctified and sent into the world.

(See page 42.) There is nothing but the mere sound of the English word worship, that favors the idea that Jesus was worshiped as GOD. Had the translators rendered it did him obeisance, as Archbishop Newcome has done, in Matt. viii. 2, there would be nothing to favor the belief that supreme adoration was intended. It was the constant practice of our blessed Saviour, whenever his discourses or miracles had excited the astonishment of the people, to lead their minds away from himself, to the invisible Father, as the original source of all his wisdom and power, and consequently the only proper object of supreme adoration and praise. And we know that, sometimes at least, the people entertained these just sentiments. (See page 7.) There is no evidence that worship was ever offered to, or accepted by, Jesus Christ, without a higher reference to the glory of GOD the FATHER.

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. He that honoreth not the Son, honoreth not the Father which hath sent him.". John, v. 22, 23. It has been often insisted upon, by Trinitarians, that the word honor here means worship, and that the passage requires that Jesus should be worshiped as God. This, I think, is not correct. If honor here means worship, we may substitute the latter for the former, without altering the sense. Verse 23 would then read thus-" He that worshipeth not the Son, worshipeth not the Father which hath sent him." But this would not be true. the Father who do not worship the Son.

Many worship
Jesus, himself,

always worshiped the Father, but he never worshiped the Son. He taught his disciples to worship the Father, but he forbade them to worship the Son. "In that day, (that is, after the resurrection) ye shall ask ME nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall ask the FATHER,

It

in my name, he will give it you."-John xvi. 23. How very careful was Jesus to remove all possibility of mistake in this matter. Again, Jesus here claims honor for the Son, not on account of any supposed equality with the Father, but simply on the ground of his having received a commission from him, and having been sent by him. will not be pretended that the Father hath committed all judgment unto God, or that the Father hath sent GOD. Whatever may be the meaning of the word honor in this passage, it must be admitted, I think, that, as it is claimed by the Son only on the ground of such relations as demonstrate his dependence on the Father, it cannot mean supreme worship. If honor is due to the Son because the Father hath commissioned and sent him, it must be received by the Son with higher reference to the glory of God the Father. Hence all men are to honor the Son as the authorized ambassador of God, to reveal his will to men. Finally, why are we required either to worship God, or to honor the Son? We are required to worship God primarily and chiefly on the ground of his moral attributes, and his relations to us. Though these depend on his natural attributes, and cannot exist without them, yet those are not the principal grounds on which God claims from men the homage of adoration and praise. We love God because he first loved us, and gave his Son to die for us.' 'Who shall not fear thee, O LORD, and magnify thy name? For thou art HOLY.' Praise the LORD, for he is GOOD, for his MERCY endureth forever.' 'A son honoreth his father, and a servant his master: if then, I be a Father, where is my honor? and if I be a Master, where is my fear?' If it were possible to conceive of an eternal, independent being of a malignant character, no honor would be due him from men. If Satan were almighty, he would have no claims upon our love or homage. If, then, we are to honor the Father on account