X.

John III. 29. He that hath the Bride,

is THE BRIDEGROOM

Christ.)

(meaning

* Another title of Eminence, that shews Christ to be upon an equality with God the Father, is to be collected from the following Scriptures.

Psal. XXIII. 1. The LORD (Heb, Jehovah) is my SHEP

HERD.

John X. 16. There shall be one fold, and ONE SHEPHERD.

If Christ be not the Lord, in Unity with the Father, there must of course be two distinct beings, to whom the Scripture has appropriated this Character of a Shepherd; and that would make two Shepherds. But Christ has affirmed there is but one Shepherd, that is himself, THE SHEPHERD of the the Sheep, v. 2. whom St. Peter calls the chief Shepherd. 1 Pet. V. 4. So again→→→

Psal. C, 3. Know ye that the LORD he Is GOD-we are His people, and the SHEEP of His Pasture.

John X. 3. He (that is Christ himself) calleth HIS OWN SHEEP,

And again

John XXI. 16. Feed My Sheep

said

Christ to St. Peter: which in the Language of St. Peter himself, 1 Pet. V. 2, is-Feed the Flock of God.

But

But according to the Prophet,

Isai. LIV. 5. Thy Maker is thine HUSBAND, the LORD OF HOSTS is his Name

And the Church, which is the Bride of Christ, can no more have two distinct husbands, than Christ can have two distinct Churches. As the Church is the Bride, the Body, the Building of God; and as there is one Bride, one body, one building; so is there on the other hand, one God, who is the husband or Bridegroom; one Christ, who is the Head; one God with the Lamb, who is the Light of it. Compare also,

>

Jer. III. 1, and 31, 32. Ezek.

XVI, Hos. II,

Matth. IX. 15.-XXV. 1. 2 Cor. II. 2. Eph. V. 23. Rev, XIX, 7. and XXI, 2, 9.

XI.

Here follow some single Texts, to which I add no parallels; there being no danger of mistaking their application,

John XX. 28. And Thomas answered and said, MY LORD, and MY GOD.

XII,

Rom, IX. 5. Of whom as concerning the Flesh CHRIST came, who is over all, GOD BLESSED for EVER.

Amen,

XIII,

2 Pet. I. 1.

Through the righteousness of OUR GOD and Saviour JESUS CHRIST.

The Greek isτε θεα ημων και Σωτηρο Inoa Xgis-the very same, as to the order and Grammar of the words, with the last verse of this Epistle το Κυρίε ημών και Σωτήρος Ιησε

Χριστ which is thus rendered in our English version of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. And so, without doubt, it should be in the other passage: there being no possible reason why, T8 Je nμw, should not signify, our God, as well as Te Kupie nuwv, our Lord. It is not my design to cast any reflection upon the wisdom of our excellent and orthodox Translators (whose version, taken altogether, is without exception the best extant in the world) or to advance this as any discovery of my own for the Translators themselves have preserved the true rendering in the Mar

gin; declaring it, by their customary Note, to be the literal sense of the Greek.

There is another expression, Tit. II. 13. that ought to be classed with the foregoing, Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing, τε μεγαλο θες και Σωτήρος ημών Ιησε Χρισε, of our Great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ. Of which a great man, deep in the Arian Scheme, gives this desponding Account. "Many understand this whole sentence to 66 belong to one and the same Person, viz. "Christ: as if the words should have been "rendered, The appearing of our great God "and Saviour Jesus Christ. Which Con"struction, the words will indeed bear; as "do also those in 2 Pet. I. 1. But it is "much more reasonable, and more agreeable "to the whole Tenor of Scripture, to under"stand the former part of the words, to relate to the Father "". As for the whole Tenor of Scripture, it is a weighty phrase, but very easily made use of in any cause good or bad: so I shall leave the reader to judge of that, after it has been exhibited to him in the following pages. And as for the reasonableness of the thing itself, let any serious

a

person con

a Clarke's Doctr. of the Trin. C. 2, §. 1.

541.

sider, whether the Doctrine of the Scripture is not more rational under the orthodox application of these words, than under that of this Author. For to allow, as he does, that Christ is God, but not the Great God, is to make two Gods, a greater and a lesser; which is no very rational principle. And I make not the least doubt but this Author, had he been dressing up a System of natural religion, would have protested against a notion so absurd and impious. But when the Scripture was to be dealt with, he chose it as the lesser of two evils, the greater of which, was the Doctrine he had subscribed to.

XIV.

2 Cor. V. 19. GOD was IN CHRIST, reconciling the world to HIMSELF.

It is allowed on all hands, that the world was reconciled by Christ Jesus to the one, only, great and supreme God, But, this very same God (for the word is but once used in the whole sentence) was in Christ; manifest in the flesh, and reconciling the world to himself. And were there no other passage of Scripture to be found, this alone is sufficient to over

throw