1

you have to produce, he oppofes his texts, and his proofs, fuch as they are; or perhaps one general affertion, which no body can deny, viz. that there is but "one living and true God." Where now is the judge of controverfy? What is become of ecclefiaftical authority? Or what have we to fay to thofe who caft it in our teeth, that the Church of England hath erred as well as the Church of Rome? In short, where is herefy? And what is fchifm?

With a view to the folution of this difficulty, and by way of Supplement to the contents of the foregoing fheets, let us fee whether a little enquiry will not enable us fufficiently to ascertain what herefy of the worst fort was in the days of the Apostles themselves, and according to the conception they muft by fair construction be understood to have entertained of it.

- In his 2d general Epiftle St. Peter foretells that there would be falfe teachers among Christians, who fhould privily bring in damnable herefies, EVEN denying the Lord that bought them. (ch. 2. v. 1.) From which paffage we can do no less than infer, that the denial of the Lord that bought us is of all berefies the most damnable.

Now whether we do, or do not abide by Dr. Whitby's interpretation, who apprehends we are to understand God the Father by the word Lord in this paffage, "Chrift being never styled decorns (the "original word) in the New Teftament," the in

ference

ference will inevitably be one and the fame, Jefus Christ was confeffedly the purchaser of the Church with his own blood. In point of nature, or attribute, there can therefore be no difference betwixt these two Perfons; the herefy which denies either will be equally damnable, according to Dr. W's fentiment. But if we reject it, the Divinity of our Saviour is not lefs implied in the text before us. For in moft evident allufion to this very purchase, Ye are bought with a price, fays St. Paul to the Corinthians; therefore, continues he, glorify God, i. e., out of all question, Jefus Christ who bought you, in your body and in your Spirit, which are God's; i. e., which are Chrift's. (1 Cor. 6. 20.) It may be a fatisfaction to the reader to compare this paffage with the following in the next Chapter. He that is called being free, is Christ's fervant. Ye are bought with a price; be not ye the fervants of men. (v. 22, &c.)

In his last and farewell addrefs to the Children of Ifrael, which is called his Song, their great Legiflator puts this question to them, is not he thy father that bath bought thee? * God is faid to have bought his people by his deliverance of them from the bondage of Egypt; which was only a type, but indifputably a type of the eternal redemption obtained for us by the precious blood of Chrift. And is it

not just to infer the equality of these Divine purchafers from the nature and value of their refpec. tive purchases? The denial of the Lord that bought us is therefore in effect the denial of the Divinity of our Saviour.

There is a paffage in St. Jude, parallel to this which we have had in confideration, that will not be found confiftent with it, or with its context, without fuppofing the fame equality. This Apoftle complains of certain ungodly men, who denied the only Lord God, and our Lord Jefus Chrift. They denied our Lord Jefus Chrift, as one with the Father, not as in effence diftinct from him. I fay, the affinity of this paffage to the other, and its own context, not barely warrant, but demand this sense. Jude the Servant of Jefus Chrift, &c, to them that are fantified by God the Father, and preferved By Jefus Chrift, and called. We are very fufficiently authorised to read by for in,* in this paffage; and if fo, it is most undoubtedly as much the attribute, or property of the Supreme God to preserve, and to call, as it is to fanctify; which indeed is the difcriminative office of the Holy Ghoft: whofe Divinity, by the way, is here plainly afferted by implication. But we are under no neceffity of disturbing the present verfion. In the 3d verfe, the Apoftle exhorts Christians to contend earnestly for the faith which was once delivered unto the Saints. That from the beginning fome should depart from the faith, or See Hammond, &c, &c. a belief

a belief in Jefus Chrift, as the Son of God by eternal generation, on principles, and for reafons, by which infidels and fceptics are influenced at this day, is by no means matter of aftonishment. But fuppofing the faith of the primitive Chriftians, the faith which was once delivered unto the Saints, to have been merely a faith in Jefus Christ as a prophet, or as the Meffiab, or as a creature of a more or lefs excellent name, there would, I prefume, have been little room for contention about it, or danger of its being denied.

If we take into examination that impious and ftrange doctrine of which St. John speaks in terms of strong cenfure and refentment, in his first and fecond general Epiftle, this refearch will likewife terminate in an unquestionable proof of our Lord's Divinity and convince us, that in the denial of it the error confifted. Every Spirit that confeffeth not that Jefus Chrift is come in the flesh, is not of God: and this is that Spirit of anti-chrift, whereof ye have beard, &c. Many deceivers are entered into the world, who confefs not that Jefus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an anti-chrift. (1 John. 4. v. 3. 2 John. v. 7.) Or, as some read these paffages, that confefs not Jefus Chrift which is come in the flesh. The import of thefe texts will not be in the least affected by this variation. That the man Christ Jesus, the person who was known by the name of Jefus Chrift, lived and converfed in the world, did many won

derful works, was contumeliously treated, and at length put to a painful and ignominious death, were facts too recent, and too generally known, to be difputed by any at the time when our Apostle wrote thefe Epiftles. That the Jefus Christ of these Epiftles was the very identical perfon whom the Apoftle ftyles in his Gofpel the Son of God, the Word that was in the beginning with God, and really and truly was God, cannot with the least appearance of reafon be queftioned. But that God was indeed manifeft in the flesh, took our nature upon him, and bare our fins in his own body on the tree, this was a faying too hard for the acceptation of thofe deceivers, false prophets, and anti-chrifts, as St. John calls them, and whom, at the 6th v. of Chap. 4. he reprefents as poffeft with the Spirit of error. Accordingly they were weak, and at the fame time bold enough to refolve this great truth into mere femblance and deception; and to affirm that the human perfon of Jefus Chrift was a phantom, and lived, and fuffered, and died, not really, but in appearance only which abominably ridiculous notion was, as has been obferved, in a great measure adopted afterwards by Mahomet, who was offended at those indignities and fufferings which he confidered as altogether unworthy of that prophetic character which he acknowleged Jefus Chrift, as his predeceffor, to have been vefted with. This doctrine is delivered in the Koran in general terms; but the followers