(p. 11.) Rom. ix. 5.

and others, by the Holy Spirit, or third person of the Trinity!

66

XII.

"Of whom, as concerning the flesh, CHRIST (came) who is over all, GOD BLESSED FOR "EVER."

This text is strongly insisted upon by Athanasian writers, as proving the supreme Divinity of our Lord; but a different turn has, I find, been given to the concluding words by some commentators. May not this difference of opinion arise from a misconstruction of the text on all sides? It is well known that St. Paul frequently expresses his sentiments by way of ellipsis, that is, by omitting words which must be supplied in order to make out the sense of the passage. This appears to me to be the case in the text now quoted; I will, therefore, though with much diffidence, attempt an exposition of it. In the first place, I must beg that the text be read without the word "came," which is not in the original. The Apostle, after expressing his deep solicitude for his brethren, the Jews, proceeds in his courteous manner to recount the marks of Divine favour, and the high privileges that were conferred upon them; "To whom per

"taineth the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the

66

giving of the law, the service and the promises." Then at the 5th verse, "Whose are the Father's, "and of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ

who is over all" these; for their duration was

limited, and only preparatory to his coming :-He, to whom the title "God" is given in Holy Scripture, is blessed for ever;" of his kingdom there shall be no end.

66

66

I may be mistaken, but to my understanding this appears to be the meaning of the words: Christ, who is over all." That the title God is given in Scripture to our blessed Lord, cannot, I think, be denied; but that of "God over all" is no where ascribed to him.

The same idea seems to be expressed, though in other words, in the 7th chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews. After showing that "the Law "made nothing perfect," but was only "the

66

66

66

bringing in of a better hope;" the Apostle, at the 28th v., says " For the Law maketh men High Priests which have infirmity, but the "word of the oath, which was since the Law, "maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore."

66

XIII.

"Through the righteousness of OUR GOD and "Saviour JESUS CHRIST." So Mr. Jones considers the text ought to have been translated. In our version, it stands "God and our Saviour "Jesus Christ."

It appears that this, and another text referred to by Mr. Jones (2nd ch. 13th v. of the Epistle to Titus), may bear the construction which he contends for but it cannot be reasonably supposed,

C

(p. 11.) 1 Pet. i. 1.

(p. 13.)

2 Cor. v. 19.

John xiv. 11.

that these two texts were purposely made by the writers to differ from the expressions used in every other part of the epistles; in the course of which, the name of God and of Christ occur, I believe, more than fifty times in the same sentence, and, where they so occur, are invariably applied to the Father and the Son. In this sense, the words are used in both the epistles mentioned above. In the verse immediately following Mr. Jones's quotation from St. Peter, we read his salutation, "Grace " and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord." And in the epistle to Titus, St. Paul's expression is, "Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father, " and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour." (Tit. 1. 4.) It is unnecessary to multiply quotations: Iconceive that the passages here selected, coming from the pens of the two Apostles, whose authority Mr. Jones claims, are conclusive upon the point. Mr. Jones now desires that the two following texts may be compared.

XIV.

"GOD was in CHRIST, reconciling the world to " HIMSELF."

XV.

"I am in the Father, and the Father IN ME." Mr. Jones's reasoning upon his first text, appears to me to be completely Sabellian: he makes the person to whom, and the person by whom, we are

reconciled, to be one and the same. He continually perplexes himself and his readers with incomplete or unfair quotations. The passage begins thus: "All things are of God, who hath recon"ciled us to Himself by Jesus Christ." Can words be more plain? That the latter text has no reference to person, substance, essence, &c. but to the gift of the Spirit, is perfectly clear from the passage which follows it. At the 20th v. we read, "At that day ye shall know that I am "in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you." "And again, at the 17th ch. 21st. v., That they "all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me, and "I in thee; that they also may be one in us." To use this text in Mr. Jones's way, would absolutely go to incorporate the Apostles into the Trinity!

"We are ambassadors for CHRIST, as though 2 Cor. v. 20. "GOD did BESEECH you by us: we PRAY you " in CHRIST'S STEAD, be ye reconciled to GOD." This text appears to me to be decidedly opposed to the doctrine Mr. Jones means to support. By the name of God, the Apostle clearly refers to the Father, who hath reconciled us to himself by our Lord Jesus Christ. Mr. Jones's argument is very strange. He says, "The interchanging of the names of God and Christ, shows the same person to be entitled to both." Now, admitting that the title God may be applied to Christ, it

66

66

(p. 16.)

1 John v. 20.

does not follow, that the

be applied to the Father.

name of Christ may

The very next verse

overthrows Mr. Jones's argument, for the Apostle continues thus, God made him "to be sin (that is a sin-offering) for us."

66

XVII.

"We are in him, that is true (even), in his Son "JESUS CHRIST: THIS IS the TRUE GOD, and "eternal life."

Expositors differ in opinion upon the concluding words of this text, some supposing the pronoun this relates to the proximate antecedent," Jesus "Christ," others to the more remote one, "God." For my own part, I cannot but think that the passage has been generally misunderstood, and that it is purely declarative of the fulfilment of our Lord's promise to the Apostles, that he would enlighten their understandings, and guide them into all truth, by his Holy Spirit, after his departure from them. At the 14th ch. 18th and 20th v. of St. John's Gospel, our Lord saith, "I will not leave "you comfortless, I will come to you." Then follow the words which I quoted before: "At "that day ye shall know, that I am in the Father, "and ye in me, and I in you."

Mr. Jones ought, in fairness, to have given the whole passage, it stands thus: "We know that "the Son of God is come, and hath given us

66

an understanding, that we may know Him that