correctness of this position, and consider the fact as . confirming the opinion maintained by me, and by numerous other followers of Christ, as to the Son's total dependence on the commission of God for his power in administering such judgment. I agree also with the Reverend Editor, in esteeming the nature of this office most important; and that nothing but the gift of supernatural wisdom can qualify a being to judge the conduct of thousands of millions of individuals, living at different times from the beginning of the world to the day of resurrection. It is however perfectly consistent with the omnipotence and wisdom of God, who is declared by revelation to be "able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham," (Matthew, ch. iii. ver. 9,) and with whom all things are possible, (Luke, ch. i. ver. 37,) to bestow wisdom equal to the important nature of this office on the first-born of every creature, whom he has anointed and exalted even above his angels. But the Editor goes much further than I am willing to follow him, in concluding the omniscience of the Son, from the circumstance of his distributing final judgment; since Jesus not only disclaimed that attribute, but even expressly avowed that he received his qualifications for exercising judgment from God. With respect to his disclaiming omniscience, see Mark, ch. xiii. ver. 32: "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father." Omniscience, as the Editor must be well aware, has no limit; but

here Jesus expressly declares, that he is ignorant of the day appointed by the Father for the resurrection and judgment. What words can be more expressly declaratory than these of the finite nature of the knowledge granted to Jesus, however its extent may actually surpass our limited capacity? As a proof that his judicial authority is derived from God, see John, ch. v. vers. 26 and 27: "For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; and hath given him authority to execute judgment also." 30: "I can of mine ownself do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me." Is it possible to misunderstand the assertion contained in these words, that both the authority and the ability to judge are gifts bestowed on the Son by the omnipotent Father?

The sixth position is, that in several instances Jesus accepted worship "due to no man, but to God alone;" and instances of his receiving worship from a blind man, a leper, from mariners, and from his disciples, are adduced from the evangelical writings.

-Every one must admit that the word "worship," both in common acceptation and in the Scriptural writings, is used sometimes as implying an external mark of religious reverence paid to God, and at other times, as signifying merely the token of civil respect due to superiors; and that concurrent circumstances in every instance determine the real sense in which

the word should be taken. Among the Prophets of God, Jesus was not the only one that permitted himself to be worshipped, as we find Daniel the Prophet allowing himself such worship. Daniel, ch. ii. ver. 46: "Then the king Nebuchadnezzar fell upon his face, and worshipped Daniel." Daniel, like Jesus, neither rebuked the man who worshipped him, nor did he feel indignant at such a tribute of respect; yet we cannot find any subsequent assertion that he had offended God by suffering himself to be the object of the king's worship in this instance. Besides, Jesus himself uses the word worship in the latter sense, (I mean that of civil reverence,) in one of the evangelical parables, where he represents a servant as worshipping his master. Matthew, ch. xviii. ver. 26: "The servant therefore fell down and worshipped him." From the circumstance of Jesus positively commanding human beings to worship God alone in spirit, and not in any form or shape, either human or angelic; as John, ch. iv. ver. 24: is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." Matthew, ch. iv. ver. 10: "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." And from the circumstance of his rebuking the man who called him "good master," on the ground that the term "good" should be peculiarly applied to God alone, (Matt. ch. xix. ver. 17,) we necessarily conclude that Jesus accepted worship only as a mark of human respect and acknowledgment of gratitude. Let us moreover

"God

ascertain from the context, the sentiments which the blind man, the leper, the mariners, and the disciples of Jesus, entertained of his nature; and we can no longer hesitate to believe, that they meant by the worship they offered, only the manifestation of their reverence for him as a superior indeed, yet still as a created being. The question is, Did those that offered worship to Jesus evince that they believed him to be God, or one of the three persons of the Godhead, and equal to God? Nothing of the kindthe blind man after his cure, spoke of Jesus as a prophet, and a righteous man, and believed him when he said he was the Son of God. John, ch. ix. ver. 31: "Now we know," (says the blind man,) "that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth. Ver. 33: "If this man were not of God, he could do nothing." And in answer to the question of Jesus, "Dost thou believe on the Son of God?" he answers, "Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him," ver. 38, The unclean spirit which is said in Mark to have worshipped Jesus, "Cried with a loud voice, and said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not." Mark, ch. v. ver. 7. This adjuration would have been absurd if Jesus were himself addressed as God; and clearly shews, that the worship offered, was to deprecate the power of a being whose nature was subordinate to that of God, by

whose name he was adjured. The leper, too, glorified God, while to Jesus he gave only thanks for being the instrument of his cure. Luke, ch. xvii. vers. 15, 16: "And one of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God, and fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks." The mariners who worshipped Jesus, declared at the same instant, "Of a truth thou art the Son of God." Matthew, eh. xiv. ver. 33. The woman of Canaan, who is also stated in Matthew, ch. xv. ver. 25, to have worshipped Jesus, addressed him, ver. 22, as "the son of David," by which term she certainly would not have designated a being whom she worshipped as God. Peter, the most celebrated of his disciples, shewed his faith in acknowledging Jesus merely as the Christ, or in other words with the same exact sense, the anointed of God-which is certainly far from implying "very God." Mark, ch. viii. ver. 29. Even after the crucifixion we find the disciples conversing of Jesus only as "a prophet, mighty in deed and in word before God and all the people." Luke, ch. xxiv. ver. 19. It was Jesus himself risen from the dead whom they addressed, yet throughout the remainder of the chapter, which concludes with the account of his being carried up to heaven, they are only further taught that this prophet was the promised Messiah, but by no means that it was their duty to worship him as God. Peter in the name of all the disciples de