say that this word in the singular means God, and in the plural means Persons. Jehovah is the term exclusively applied to the one God; Alehim is applied to other beings, and to these beings singly.

In Exodus iv. 16, it is applied to one man, Moses, and "he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of (Alehim) God." Ex. vii. 1. "And the Lord said unto Moses, See I have made thee (Alehim) a God to Pharoah."

It is applied to the golden calf by Moses, Ex. xxxii. 31. "Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them, (Alehim; they had made only one calf, but it is translated) gods of gold."

It is applied to Dagon, Judges xvi. 23. "Then the Lords of the Philistines gathered them together, for to offer a great sacrifice unto Dagon, their (Alehim) God, and to rejoice; for they said, our (Alehim) God hath delivered Samson, our enemy, into our hand."

It is applied to one angel, Judges xiii. 21, 22. "Then Manoah knew that he was an angel of the Lord. And Manoah said

unto his wife, We shall surely die, because we have seen (Alehim) God."

It is applied to one judge, 1 Sam. ii. 25. "If one man shall sin against another the (Alehim) judge shall judge him."

One other passage to shew the promiscuous use of this word in the singular and plural number, will be sufficient for our purpose. Ezekiel xxviii. 2, 9. “Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, thus saith the Lord thy God (Adoni-Jehovah); Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God (Al.), I sit in the seat of God (Alehim), in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not God (Al.), though thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God (Alehim). 9th, Wilt thou yet say before him that slayeth thee, I am God (Alehim); but thou shalt be a man and no god” (Al.)

"The proper meaning of the word is Judge, whence it is ascribed to the true God, to angels, and to men worthy of admiration, especially to such as preside over others. By communication also to false gods, because their worshippers attribute to them divine authority."

"Observe that the word Alehim, although plural, is spoken of the true and only God; and then, although the adjective connected with it be plural, yet is the verb, or pronoun in the place of the verb with which it is construed, generally, with few exceptions, in the singular number."

"There are some who think that this construction indicates the mystery of the Trinity. But it is to be attributed to the custom of the language; for in this language, even in profane names, which signify power and dominion, by way of giving additional honour, the plural number is used instead of the singular, as in Adonim and Baalim, Lord; which, although plural, you will generally find connected with a singular verb.'

A third passage upon which great stress is laid, is Isaiah ix. 6. "And his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace." Upon this my remarks shall be brief. You yourselves deny that Jesus Christ was the everlasting Fa

Pagnini Thesaurus, Art. x.

ther. The term would be utterly inconsistent with the beginning of the verse, "a child born." Of the two phrases upon which you most depend, one, "the mighty God," may with equal propriety be translated, "a mighty Lord," or, "counsellor of God, mighty;" the other, "the everlasting Father," may with equal propriety be translated, "the Father of the age to come." In this sense they are beautifully applicable to Jesus Christ. But after all, they are only names, as 66 "Elihu," 66 my God himself," Elijah," "God Jehovah."*

I now proceed to some of the principal

* As I shall probably have occasion to refer to this verse again, in a Supplement to No. 8, I now avoid making any other observation upon it than this. Let us suppose that this last appellation, Elijah, had been given to Jesus Christ—Eli-Jah, My God, Jehovah! What an insuperable argument would this have been deemed in proof of his divinity! Would it not have been ever most triumphantly adduced as absolute demon. stration? Nor could we have given any other reply, than, that the general tenor of the scriptures was in opposition to such an inference, and that it was but a Hebrew name. This would have been carnal reasoning; nothing less than an attempt to fritter away all the scriptures. Now, as it is applied to another person, it passes sub silentio-it means nothing-it is but a

name.

passages in the New Testament; and for the sake of clearness and method it may be well to arrange them under some general heads. Let the first be the term God. These passages may be divided into two classes, First, where the Father is the person intended, though the passage is commonly ascribed to Christ. Second, passages where Jesus Christ is really the subject of the expression.

To the first class, I refer the expressions in the first chapter of John. " In the beginning was the Word," &c. From the term Logos, translated Word, you suppose that Jesus Christ was meant. I know not whether you understand by it, the whole Christ as he appeared, or merely his divine nature, the second person in the Trinity. Whichever it be, have not I as much right to suppose Logos the Word, to mean wisdom? Divine wisdom, or power, reason or intelligence?

Again, what do you understand by the term beginning. Does it mean before all time, from eternity? This you will allow cannot accord with the whole nature of Christ; and if it may accord with his di