P. 188." He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all,' &c. Rom. viii. 32. There is no scriptural ground for referring the appellation to any peculiarity of nature, in Christ.” There really is, Doctor, there is a strong scriptural ground: for verse 3, we read, God sending SATOU VOV his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh. The Apostle uses here the emphatic pronoun, Son of himself.' Now God has no flesh and bones; therefore the Son must be, according to the Nicene creed, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God.' There is equally a rational ground for referring the appellation to peculiar excellence of nature; for if Jesus, as you and Dr. Priestley agree, was the Son of Joseph, why should St. Paul, who is generally allowed to have had common sense, make it the wonder of heaven and earth, that God should immolate his own Son for our redemption! This verse forms one of the most brilliant syllogisms that logic can boast.

P. 193. "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last.' Rev. i. 8. These words are spurious, and are left out by Griesbach." The repetition of the same words at the 11th verse, may have occasioned the omission in some copies; but Haggai, speaking of the blessings of the Messiah's kingdom, adds four times," Thus saith the Lord." No matter, your Arian editor admits them at the 11th verse; and there a Trinity stares us in the face. God signified to John, ver. 1.; the Son says, Alpha and Omega;" ver. 11, as iii. 14. John says, "I was in the spirit," ver. 10.

"I am

P.197. "Phil. ii.5—8.” Here, Doctor, on the two natures of Christ, "The form of a servant-the form of God," you work hard through 16 pages. My judgment is, that a thousand times that number would not shake those two grand pillars, the Jachin and Boaz, of the Christian faith.

P. 212. "He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father.' John xiv. 9. These words are to be understood metaphorically." How so, Sir; I can see neither metaphor nor simile in the assertion. The sense is plain enough. He who has seen the emanations of my wisdom, and power, and love, has seen the wisdom, and power, and love of the Father. The God of the Hebrews" searches the heart, and tries the reins to give to every one according to the fruit of their doings," Jer. xvii. 10. The God of the Christians uses the same language, Rev. ii. 23. The God of the Hebrews fills "the glorious high throne, which is the place of our sanctuary from the beginning." Jer. xvii. 12. The God of the Christians takes his glorified humanity into the midst of the throne, and sits on the throne of his glory. Matt. xxv. 31. Rev. v. 6. The Father calls Israel his people, for they are the sheep of his pasture: the Son says, that he is owner of the sheep; he adopts, he sanctifies them. The God of the Hebrews promises "an everlasting covenant of peace to Israel, and to set his tabernacle in the midst of them; and that David should be their prince for ever." Ezek. xxxvii. 25. 26, 27. The God of the Christians says that he will be in all places where two or three are gathered together in his name, " and be

with his disciples to the end of the world." Matt. xviii. 20; xxviii. 20. You read, "to the end of the ages." Yes, Sir; if there be a far-fetched acceptation, it is usual with Unitarianism to prefer it. The God of the Hebrews is from everlasting to everlasting; for this reason St. Paul exhorts the Hebrew Christians not to exchange their doctrine, because their God and Christ is "the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever." The " Alpha and Omega, who is, who was, who is to come; the Almighty." Heb. xiii. 7, 8, 9; Rev. i. 8.

P. 227. "I live for ever and ever, and have the keys of death and the grave.' Rev. i. 18. I have authority to call the dead from the grave."

Why, Doctor, do you here suppress the verb ειμι,

I am it is the verb understood in all verbs. There is a strong threat uttered against those who take away an iota from the prophecy of this book, xxii. 19. The reading of the authorized version is perfectly correct. But why should you, and the Unitarians, always render the word adns by the word grave: you are the only people who do this; it deceives the reader. If the soul be material, and you hugely recommend the book which affirms it, what difference is there between

death and the grave? Do you reply, that Chorazin and Bethsaida should be cast down to hades ; i. e. their houses to the dust; but, Sir, what would become of their souls? The Greek of the New Testament uses the word μνημείον, for grave, sepulchre, monument, &c.; but hadès properly signifies the state of the dead, though it be often used for the grave. Thus Isaiah xiv. 9-23. " Hell,

J

(sheol, or hades) from beneath is moved to meet thee at thy coming; it stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations. All they shall speak and say unto thee, Art thou also become weak as we? Art thou become like unto us?" Thou, O king of Babylon, who didst so lately receive divine honours; and the unlawful acclamation, "O King, live for ever;" wouldst thou be so weak and foolish as to die? Now, as good kings, as well as bad, are here said to be in hell, the gloss of the Rabbins is, "that in hades there are two roads, the one for good men, and the other for bad." The words which David put into the mouth of the Messiah, are in perfect accordance with this idea," Thou will not leave my soul in hadès," the state of the dead, "nor suffer thine Holy One to see corruption" in the tomb. Psalm. xvi. 10. Our Saviour, Mark ix. 47, speaks only of that separate state to men, who will not pluck out their eye, I would say, part with their bosom sin. "It is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes, to be cast into the fire of Gehenna, where the worm dieth not, and where the fire is not quenched." The etymon of the word illustrates the passage; N gia, a gill or valley; Hinnon, the man's name from which the name of the valley was derived, which was adjacent to Jerusalem. Here stood the brazen idol Moloch, with a fire in its belly, into which the apostate Israelites cast one of their children

under the delusion that the God would peculiarly bless all the others.

If you appeal Doctor, to the Greek and Roman poets, whose verses treat of the earliest antiquity of men, Unitarian literature cuts but a sorrowful figure at their bar. You there also find two roads in hadès, the one to the Elysian fields, and the other to the Shades, Stygs, Tartarus, and the Black river. You find Pluto judge of Hell, and Rhadamanthus, and Erēbus, in full powers. Shades is but another word for Hell, equivalent to covered or hid. Hence the fossil ardesia (blue slate or hilling stone;) and the northern word hilma, a shield, or covering. Hence there really is a grave for the body, and a separate state for the soul, which justifies the authorised, and condemns the Unitarian version.

P. 230." Whether Jesus has at present any direct and personal concern in the regulation of his spiritual kingdom, or in any way, or at any time, directly influences the minds of his disciples, we have no certain information." This Doctor is really speaking out; and at full issue with your former assertions that he reigns to the end of the ages. It was policy to keep the above opinion out of sight till you had fully proselyted the reader. On reading these words, I am confident St. John would once more have run out of the bath. Oh! how some men must secretly laugh at the piety of their hearers, who sometimes when they think of their sins, and of the goodness of God, will raise their watery eyes to Heaven!