You will remember that Mr. Bagot, after showing that the term Saviour is applied to Christ in Scripture, referred to Isa. xliii. 11, "I am the Lord, and beside me there is no Saviour." The inference, -or deduction, or conclusion is, that Christ is Jehovah: of course he has a proper Deity. But in NEHEM. ix. 27, we read— And in the time of their trouble, when they (the children of Israel) cried unto thee, thou heardest them from heaven; and, according to thy manifold mercies, thou gavest them SAVIOURS, who saved them out of the hand of their enemies. If there be any force or cogency in the former argument, all the persons who were SAVIOURS to the children of Israel, must have been divine incarnations, and each possessed of a proper Deity of his own! Again, in GEN. xlviii. 21, Joseph says, "God will bring you out of this land."-But in Exod. xxxii. 7, "The LORD said unto Moses, Go! get thee down! for thy people which тHOU broughtest out of the land of Egypt have corrupted themselves." The same work is thus ascribed to Moses and to God; and therefore MOSES is perfect God and perfect man. The same inference follows much more strongly from Exod. xv. 26;-a passage which, I fearlessly assert, is more conclusive of the DIVINITY OF MOSES, than any that has been adduced in proof of the proper Deity of the Word: And HE [i.e. MOSES] SAID, If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, and wilt do that which is right in his sight, and wilt give ear to his commandments, and keep all his statutes, I will put none of these diseases upon thee which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I AM THE LORD THY GOD! Had such a declaration as this proceeded from the lips of Christ, how convincing a proof of his Supreme Deity it would have been held to be! Again we read in MATT. xix. 4, 5. He who made them in the beginning, made them male and female; and said, "For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they twain shall be one flesh." "He who made them in the beginning" undoubtedly was God; and to him most distinctly is the sentiment ascribed by our Saviour. But we find in GEN. ii. 23, 24. And Adam said, * * Therefore shall a man leave his father, and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife; and they shall be one flesh. In this passage, the words are with equal distinctness attributed to Adam. Hence, by this "syllogism," as Mr. Bagot would call it, ADAM is identified with THE SUPREME BEING! I leave it to yourselves to decide, whether this argument does not prove the proper Deity of Adam, as forcibly as many of those passages adduced by Mr. Bagot prove the proper Deity of the Word. 66 In EXOD. iii. 14, God said unto Moses, "I AM THAT I AM!" and in 1 COR. xv. 10, the Apostle Paul says of himself, By the grace of God, I AM THAT I AM." Thus the same thing is asserted of Paul, which is elsewhere spoken of Deity; the clear inference being, that he is God, if Mr. Bagot's mode of making out doctrines becorrect. “All power is given unto me," says Christ: and this we are required to receive as a proof of his omnipotence. "I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me," says St. Paul, in PHIL. iv. 13;a manifest confirmation of the former argument. 66 THOU KNOWEST ALL THINGS: thou knowest that I love thee!" said Peter to our Saviour; thus, as Mr. Bagot tells us, ascribing to him omniscience. And the Apostle John says, in his general Epistle to all Christians, "Ye have an unction from the Holy One, AND KNOW ALL THINGS" (1 JOHN ii. 20); so that all the members of the Church of Christ in the time of the Apostle, were incarnations of the Deity. 'Christ will judge the world; therefore, says Mr. Bagot, he is God. But the twelve Apostles are to judge the twelve tribes of Israel, according to our Saviour's own words in MATT. xix. 28. And the Apostle Paul declares, with express reference to the Church at Corinth, "The saints shall judge the world:" therefore they have also a proper Deity of their own! Thus by Mr. Bagot's sublime logic, we find that the city of Jerusalem is God, and Adam is God, and Moses is God, and the Prophet Isaiah is God,-and the many Saviours of the people of Israel are God, and the twelve Apostles are God,-and the members of the Church at Corinth are God,—and all the Christians in the days of the Apostle John are God! Mr. Bagot will, no doubt, be greatly obliged to me, for supplying whatever desire he might feel for additional persons in the Godhead. If I have not found out the two whom he named in that capacity, I have discovered one of them; and I hope he will allow, that I have done my best to furnish him with a respectable number of substitutes for the other. Let Mr. Bagot go on: let him produce some more of his wire-drawn inferences; increase the number of these most logical deductions ad infinitum; and then either admit, that all the persons referred to have each a proper Deity of his own; or else have the openness and manliness to avow, that all his scriptural allusions, and inferences, and fine-spun deductions, are but empty, flimsy sophisms,-NOT WORTH A RUSH! MR. BAGOT.-I wish to put to Mr. Porter two questions. MR. PORTER.-The rules only allow the privilege of asking one, and I will answer no more. MR. BAGOT.-Then I will propose my two questions in the form of one. MR. PORTER.-If so, I shall answer only one of them. MR. BAGOT.-I wish to ask Mr. Porter, whether I did not yesterday, at the close of the meeting, offer him a list of all the texts quoted in my address, which he declined? MR. PORTER.-Most unquestionably you did: and I declined your offer, simply because it would have taken all the time between the close of yesterday's proceedings, and the commencement of today's, to hunt out and compare so many references; even without deducting any portion for sleep, and other necessary refreshment. MR. BAGOT.-You may have them still, if you please. THIRD DAY. MR. PORTER.-My friends, suci. of you as were present yesterday, will recollect that I brought forward several texts, embodying the main points of the Scripture doctrine of religious worship. The first class of texts to which I adverted, as supporting my views on the subject, were those in which GOD, THE FATHER, is represented by Jesus Christ as the only object of religious adoration. After adducing a number of examples containing the express declarations of our Saviour to this effect, I next adverted to a class of passages which proved that our Saviour addressed his own prayers to God, the Father, only. From the influence which the precept and example of Christ ought always to have upon every person who is a member of his church, and professes to be his disciple, I argued that we are also bound to address our worship to God, the Father, only; since we overstep his express command, and go beyond his repeated and intelligible example, when we offer up prayers to any other person or being than God, the Father. When we do so, we deviate from our adherence to that authority with which, as Christians, we are bound to comply. Upon these two classes of texts, therefore, I might rest the whole of my argument relative to the proper object of religious worship under the Christian dispensation. I am quite sure, that, to any well-regulated mind, the reasons already adduced would be decisive on the subject. If men were not unfortunately under the influence of feelings imbibed in early education; if they were not imbued from their childhood with prejudices and prepossessions which have grown with their growth, and strengthened with their strength, until they have become part and parcel of their mental constitution; if it were not that, in many cases, they regard those opinions which they have long cherished as so sacred and venerable, that even to question them, and to bring them to the test of the declarations of Scripture, is often contemplated as something that is impious and awful;-I am satisfied, that the express teaching of Christ-the doctrine of our Lord and Saviour, sanctioned by his uniform example, would be, as it ought to be, decisive on the point. But I have not yet done with my argument on this part of the subject. It is now my duty to lay before you a number of texts, which will show what was the influence of Christ's language and uniform example upon those persons with whom that teaching and example would carry the most religious weight. I allude to his own immediate disciples, who were inspired by the Spirit of God; and who were raised up and qualified for the situation of teachers and expounders of that Gospel which Christ came to promulgate. I shall now, therefore, advert to a number of N PASSAGES WHICH PROVE THAT THE DISCIPLES OF CHRIST ADDRESSED RELIGIOUS WORSHIP TO GOD, THE Father, only. In reading those passages, I shall, in order to save your time and my own, omit words that are not necessary to the connexion. If, however, I leave out any expression which may appear to militate, in any degree, against the sense which I attribute to the phrase, or to give a different signification to the context, my reverend opponent will, doubtless, afford you the means of correcting any erroneous impression that may be thus made. This general observation I make now, once for all: The words which I omit, I leave out solely because they do not bear directly on the precise point which I have in view. ACTS iv. 24-30. They lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, LORD, THOU ART GOD! ** And now * * grant that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus. The Apostles therefore prayed "to God," that signs and wonders might be done through the name of his holy child Jesus." Words could not more expressly prove, that Jesus, the holy child, is not himself included in that address with which the prayer commences. In this solemn act of devotion, he is expressly distinguished from God. ROM. i. 8, 9. I thank MY GOD, through Jesus Christ, for you all; that your faith is spoken of through the whole world: for GOD IS MY WITNESS, whom I serve with my spirit, in the Gospel of his Son, that, without ceasing, I make mention of you always IN MY PRAYERS. In these words also there is a manifest distinction drawn between God and Jesus Christ; and a proof afforded that God was not that very Christ, through whom God was thanked. The Apostle does not say one word of thanking Christ by prayer. He thanks God, through Jesus Christ. He does not call the Son to witness his asseverations; but the God whom he serves, in the Gospel of his Son. The whole connexion shows, that Paul addressed his prayer to God alone, whom he expressly distinguishes from the Son of God. ROM. XV. 6. ** That ye may with one mind and one voice glorify God, EVEN THE FATHER of our Lord Jesus Christ. What God were the Roman Christians exhorted to glorify by mind and mouth? Let the words of Paul himself answer the question: God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!" 66 EPH. i. 16, 17. I cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers; that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, THE FATHER OF GLORY, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom. Observe in this passage likewise, how the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, THE FATHER OF GLORY, and not our Lord Jesus Christ himself, is represented as the being addressed, and to be addressed, in prayer. EPH. iii. 15, 16. For this cause I BOW MY KNEES UNTO THE FATHER OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST, of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, that he would grant you, &c. PHIL. iv. 6, 7. Be careful for nothing: but in every thing, by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known UNTO GOD: and the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds, through Christ Jesus. The mere reading of these passages is sufficient to prove the doctrine concerning the object of primitive Christian worship, which I am now engaged in establishing. 1 THESS. i. 2, 3. We give thanks to GOD ** for you, making mention of you in our prayers; remembering without ceasing your work of faith * * in our Lord Jesus Christ, in the sight of OUR GOD AND FATHER. 66 In this text the same distinction is carefully preserved, which we have so often shown to exist, between "GOD THE FATHER," who was the object of prayer, and our Lord Jesus Christ." Indeed the Apostles never fell into the absurdity of praying to any other than the one God. 2 TIM. i. 2, 3. Grace, mercy, and peace, from GOD, THE FATHER, and Christ Jesus our Lord. I thank GOD, [ági xw, I am grateful to God,] that without ceasing I have remembrance of thee in my prayers, night and day. Here also Paul makes and marks the same distinction between the Supreme Being, to whom his gratitude was expressed, and the Lord Jesus Christ. I JOHN iii. 22. Whatsoever we ask, we receive of him (GOD), because we keep his commandments. ** [23.] And this is his commandment, that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment. Upon this passage we might repeat the observation so frequently made before, that no distinction can be more clear than that which the early disciples uniformly drew between the God whom alone they worshipped, and his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. As Mr. Bagot has relied so much on the honours paid to Christ,which he has, in perfect consistency with one part of his theory, and in perfect opposition to another portion of it, represented as Divine Worship, it seems to me, that I may usefully occupy a little of your time in giving a very brief outline of the doctrine of Scripture on that subject. It is, I believe, admitted by divines and scholars of all sects and parties, that the term "worship," both in Scripture and in other compositions, is susceptible of various meanings. In the first place, it indicates the presentation, by rational beings, of their adoration and homage to the Most High God. That the word has this sense, admits of no doubt, nor is it denied by any one. It is needless, therefore, to adduce passages in support of it. But there is another sense, in some respects analogous, though in other respects distinct, in which the term is frequently employed in the Sacred Volume. It often means the outward manifestation of respect and deference to a fellow-creature, who is superior in rank, station, or endowments, to the party offering it. Though this sense of the word is fully admitted among divines and theologians of every class, yet as Mr. Bagot has throughout this discussion shown a tendency to admit nothing, how plain soever, and how freely soever allowed elsewhere, that can by possibility militate against his second proposition-I shall adduce a few arguments in proof. I find such in JOSHUA V. 14. * ** "As captain of the host of the LORD am I now come." And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and DID WORSHIP; and said unto him, |