mere man should claim, or accept, this kind of worship, he would greatly difhonour God.-And though the character of Peter, as an ambassador of God, deserved extraordinary honours; though it was under this notion that Cornelius confidered him, and under this idea that he attempted to worship him; yet he rejected it with deteftation, as an impious infringement on the rights of JEHOVAH, without affigning any reafon but this, "I also am a man.' It is evident, therefore, and by the conduct of Peter, it is established as a general principle; That no man, though a meffenger of God; that no mere man, whatever title he may bear, ought to be honoured with religious worship.-In a word, If the regard which Peter has for Jefus Chrift, hinder him from fharing in that worship which belongs to the great Redeemer; the refpect which Jefus ought to have for the Supreme Being, fhould prevent him from partaking in the honours of religion with the true God.

Nor did the angels know of any fubordinate worship, when John had his prophetic vifions in the ile of Patmos. If they had been acquainted with it, at leaft, if they had confidered it as lawful; that holy intelligence, who converfed with the beloved difciple and fhewed him fo many wonderful objects, would either not have refused thofe honours which the apoftle was, once and again, defirous of giving to him; or have rejected them on different principles. For none can suppose that the amazed, delighted, and revering apoftle, miftook the angel for the Great Supreme. He would have worshipped his celeftial informant, because he was the angel of God; not because he took the fervant for the eternal Sovereign. The angel, however, not knowing of any religious worship which might

be addressed to a mere creature, fays; "See thou "do it not!-Worship GoD." Afferting, in the clearest manner, that all worship must be paid to God, and to him only.

Once more: JESUS CHRIST himself was not acquainted with this diftinction, nor knew any thing of fubordinate worship, when he was tempted of the devil. Satan, when he tempted our Lord to worship him, did not pretend to be the true God; confequently, he did not folicit Jefus to worship him, as fuch. For he plainly intimated, that there was one fuperior to him; one from whom he had received the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them. The devil, then, defired to be honoured with fubordinate worship. But Chrift rejects with abhorrence his blafphemous attempt, and fhews the iniquity of it, by adducing that precept out of the law; "Thou fhalt worship the LORD THY GOD, and "Him ONLY fhalt thou ferve." It follows, therefore, that this command forbids us to worfhip any one befides the God of Ifrael, either with a fupreme, or a fubordinate worship: or, rather, that this distinction has no foundation in Scripture; but is calculated to disguise blafphemy, and vindicate idolatry.

CH A P. VI.

The Characters of JEHOVAH's glory, in the ancient Oracles, applied to JESUS CHRIST; and the argument arising from that application illuftrated.

THE

'HE apoftles and evangelifts, when afferting the dignity of their Divine Mafter, made no fcruple of applying to him those oracles of the Old Teftament, which exprefs the characters of God's effential glory. Of this various inftances

have been already produced, which we shall examine more particularly hereafter : and our adverfaries themselves do not deny it, fince they pretend that thofe oracles are applied to Chrift, by way of allufion, or accommodation.-But it is very surprising and abfolutely unaccountable, that the apoftles fhould make fuch applications to him, if he be not the true God. For common fenfe, one would have thought, was fufficient to inform them, that fuch things as were fpoken only of the Creator, ought not to be applied to a mere creature. For it was never known that fuch applications were made without being cenfured, by thofe that feared God, of impiety and blafphemy. The ancient Heathens, indeed, were not very fcrupulous in this refpect: for it was common with them to debase God and to exalt creatures, by attributing to them the glories of the Deity; and in this the prodigious excels of their superstition principally confifted. Their ex-ample, however, ought to have no weight with us; as it was, we may affure ourselves, detefted by the apoftles. For they had been instructed in the school of the prophets; they, therefore, were incapable of falling into fuch a mistake.. The care of the prophets, in that refpect, is very re-markable. Always jealous for the glory of God, they are perpetually cautious that the Creator fhould not be confounded with any of his crea tures. And being thus conftantly upon their guard, they never apply the characteristics of Jehovah's glory to any mere creature..

It cannot, I think, be fuppofed, that those exalted and defcriptive characters, which the apoftles give of Jefus Chrift, are more facred, or more peculiar to him, than those which the pro-phets gave of the God of Ifrael. As, therefore,

we should not dare to apply the peculiar characters of Chrift, to any of his apostles; so a fimilar reafon ought to hinder us, ought to have hindered all, from applying the diftinguishing characters of Jehovah to Jefus Chrift, if he be not the true God. A man would be juftly charged with blafphemy, were he to apply to Peter, for instance, the following names, characters, and works of Jefus Chrift. Were he to call him, "The Lamb of God, which taketh "away the fin of the world-Our king, prophet, " and prieft; the high-prieft of our profeffion, " and a priest for ever after the order of Mel"chifedeck-The Prince of peace-Immanuel"The Word-The Alpha and Omega, the "Firft and the Laft-The Lion of the tribe of

Judah--The Saviour and Redeemer-The Son "of God, his own Son, and his only begotten "Son"-Were he to proceed and affert, That Peter" redeemed the church with his own blood "That he bare our fins in his own body on

the tree-That we have redemption through "his blood, and are reconciled to God by his "death-That there is no name but that of "Peter, by which we must be faved-That "Peter is made unto us of God, wisdom and

righteousness, fanctification and redemption"That Peter dwelleth in our hearts by faith"And, that there is no condemnation to them "that are in Peter"-Were any one thus to Speak of that great apoftle, what would the Chriftian world fay of him? They would certainly call him, either a madman, or a blafphemer.-Nor would their indignation against his conduct be much abated, were they to hear him once and again acknowledge; That Jefus ⚫ Chrift is greater than Peter. For they would

boldly

boldly tell him, that, by fuch a declaration, he only contradicted himself, and tacitly confeffed his blafphemy.-Nor would it avail fuch an one to fay, That the application he makes of the characters and attributes, the grace and works, of Jefus Chrift to Peter, is only by way of allufion and accommodation. For it would quickly be replied; Such allufions and accommodations are impious; are abfolutely unwarrantable; are pregnant with blafphemy.

If, then, an application of the principal characters, attributes, and works of our Lord to Peter, would be confidered and treated by Chriftians, as abominable blafphemy; it must be a much higher degree of that malignant crime, to. apply the names and titles, the attributes and works of the Supreme Being, to Jesus Christ, if he be not a Divine Perfon. Nor is it any wonder that the Jews fhould fo confider it. For if the difproportion between Jefus and Peter be great,. that which is between Chrift and God is ineonceivably greater, according to the principles of our opponents; the former being finite, the latter. unbounded. Confequently, the blafphemy, in the one cafe, is infinitely greater than that in the

other.

The impiety of applying the characters of Chrift to Peter, will appear in a ftill ftronger light, if, in the cafe fuppofed, he who makes the application be confidered as knowing, that this question, Is Peter equal to Jefus Chrift. had! been debated on very important occafions; and that he forefaw this error would become general? in the world; fo that, for many ages, Peter would bear the names and receive the honours of Jefus Chrift. In fuch a cafe, he would be guilty af prodigious impiety indeed; the confequences, förefeen being so injurious to the honour of