wife inferior was the character of this Angel. For he was celebrated as encamping around them that feared him, and delivering them, Pfal. xxxiv. 7. Had the Meffiah a right to fend forth meffengers in his Name, to preach the gospel to others? It was the Angel of the Lord who fent Mofes to the Ifraelites in Egypt, Ex. iii. 2. 14. and other prophets to their posterity, 1 Chro. xxi. 18. Did Jefus communicate the Spirit to church members? This glorious Meffenger, in former times, put his Spirit in them, Ifa. Ixiii. 11. Is the whole administration of providence in the hand of Chrift? Equally important was the truft of this Angel, Gen. xxi. 18. xxii. 17. Are angels employed by Jefus, as his minifters, for making known his will, Rev, xxii. 16. and for accomplishing the purposes, both of providence and grace? Heb. i. 14. They occupied the fame ftation under the Angel of JEHOVAH, Zech. ii. 3, 4. i. 11. vi. 8. Does Jefus fmite the nations with his sharp fword, and rule them with a rod of iron? Rev. xix. 15. He carries on the fame work with that Angel of the Lord who fmote the Affyrians, Ifa. xxxvii. 36. Does our Saviour vifit his church with afflictive difpenfations because of fin, and kill her children with death? Rev. ii. 22, 23. The fame Angel appeared with a drawn fword in his band, and smote the Ifraelites, fo that David was afraid becaufe of the Sword of the Angel of the Lord, 1 Chro. xxi. 14.—16. 30. Both Jefus and this Angel claim that divine character, 1 AM. Jefus being reprefented as Speaking from beaven, Heb. xii. 25. he appears in the fame light with this Angel who called to Hagar, and to Abraham, out of heaven, Gen. xxi. 17. xxii. 11. 15. Is it Jefus whom we must now bear? The Ifraelites were under the fame obligation with respect to this Angel, Ex. xxiii. 21. Is there no escape, if we turn away from him that fpeaketh from heaven? Heb. xii. 25. Concerning this Angel it was declared, He will

not

1

not pardon your tranfgreffions. If, therefore, Jefus be not effentially the fame as this Angel, the unity of the church is loft. The patriarchs and their posterity had one Saviour; and Chriftians have another. We are not bleffed with faithful Abraham, nor are we under the fame covenant. But as the fcripture affures us that the whole administration of the ancient church was committed to this Angel, we have, as has formerly been seen, the fame incontestable evidence of the identity of this Angel and the Meffiah *.

Our author obferves that "it even appears to have been "the great object of the Jewish religion, as contained in "the books of Mofes, to preserve in the world the worship "of the one true God, notwithstanding the universal ten"dency to polytheifin among all nations in the early ages +." Therefore, it may naturally be imagined that God, in his infinite wisdom, would use the most proper means for attaining this end; particularly, that if he made himself known under certain defignations, he would either confine all these entirely to himself, or if not all, yet some of them, especially fuch as might be expreffive of his effence; and that, if he ever used any of the rest in speaking of creatures, he would ufe them evidently in an inferior fenfe. That he has acted in this very manner, is evident from the revelation which he gave to his peculiar people. Here we find him not only applying to himself, with a ftriking peculiarity, fome of thofe defignations which are occafionally given to creatures; but appropriating others, as abfolutely incommunicable to them in any sense whatsoever.

All idolatry confifts in giving that glory to the creature which belongs to the Creator. One great fource of this, especially to the more ignorant part of mankind, has been the mistaking of the creature for the Creator. It must, therefore, be supposed that, if God hath ever employed

mere

See p. 273, 274.

Ear. Opin. vol. iii. p. 2.

mere creatures as inftruments in delivering his will to their fellow-creatures, he hath, in the profecution of his great end, used the most effectual means to prevent the objects of the Revelation from apprehending that they immediately heard the voice of God. We can fuppofe no mean fo obvious, nor one that would fo directly tend to prevent this mistake, as that of prohibiting those whom he employed from perfonating their great employer, ufing any of his names as if they might occafionally be given to them, or expreffing themselves in fuch terms as might lead the hearers to imagine that God himself was the immediate Speaker. If, on the contrary, this neceffary precaution hath been neglected; if God hath permitted a creature to fay to his fellow, I am JEHOVAH, I AM THAT I AM; if he hath also directed those who were under the Spirit of inspiration, to record these Revelations in this very manner; so far hath he been from using those means that were moft confiftent with infinite wisdom, for the prevention of idolatry, that we cannot conceive that he could have taken more direct or effectual methods for establishing it, although this had been his avowed defign in the whole of that Revelation contained in the Old Teftament. Could I believe all that is fuppofed, and all this must be believed by every one who denies the Supreme Deity of the Son, the God of Abraham fhould never be my God.

CHA P. X.

Of the Caution which fome Fathers are faid to afcribe to the Apofiles, in divulging the Doctrine of the Divinity of Chrift; and of the abfolute filence afcribed to them, on this fubject, by Dr Priestley.

OUR author, in his firft work on this fubject, endea

voured to prove, that the primitive church was

known

known to be properly Unitarian, from the conduct of Athanafius in afcribing to the Apostles "great caution in di"vulging the doctrine of the proper divinity of Christ *." It was replied by Dr Horsley, that Athanafius, in the pafsage referred to, speaks of unbelieving Jews only, and commends the wisdom of the apostles in chufing the most proper method of instruction †. A great deal has been advanced on both fides, in the progress of this controverfy : and it must appear to any impartia reader, that Dr Horfley has established his point. But as our author has that peculiar happiness of not being eafily put out of conceit with any thing he has once advanced, this is again brought forward in due form, in his large work.

I do not mean properly to enter into the question with respect to the disputed paffage, as it has been fo fully agitated already; and would have said nothing on the subject, had it not seemed a piece of justice to Athanafius, and to the truth, to produce a few extracts from his writings, which plainly fhew that he had a very different opinion of the conduct of the apostles from that ascribed to him, and which, as far as I can recollect, have not been introduced in the course of the difpute. This may be the more proper, as, according to Dr P. " the teftimony of Athanafius, "on account of his known orthodoxy, and of course, his unwillingness to make any needlefs conceffions to his ad"versaries, may be thought to have more weight than any "other ‡”.

For the fake of those who have not feen what has been already published on this subject, it may be previously neceffary to quote the paffage which has occafioned fo much litigation. I fhall give it according to our author's version: "Will they affirm, that the apostles held the doctrine of "Arius,

66

“ Arius, becaufe they fay that Chrift was a man of Nazareth, and fuffered on the cross? or because they used these "words, were the apoftles of opinion that Chrift was only

66

a man, and nothing else? By no means: this is not to be “ imagined. But this they did as wife mafter-builders, "and stewards of the myfteries of God; and they had this “good reafon for it. For the Jews of that age, being de“ ceived themfelves, and having deceived the Gentiles, "thought that Christ was a mere man, only that he came ❤of the feed of David, refembling other defcendants of “ David, and did not believe either that he was God, or "that the Word was made flesh. On this account, the "bleffed apostles, with great prudence, in the first place, 66 taught what related to the humanity of our Saviour to " the Jews, that having fully perfuaded them, from his mi“ raculous works, that Chrift was come, they might after"wards bring them to the belief of his divinity, fhewing " that his works were not thofe of a man, but of God. "For example, Peter having faid that Chrift was a man "who had fuffered, immediately added, He is the Prince of "life. In the Gospel, he confeffes, Thou art the Chrift, "the Son of the living God; and in his Epiftle, he calls "him the Bishop of fouls *."

Dr

* Ουδέν γαρ αυτοις ατολμητον" οτι και αυτοί οι αποςολοι τα Αρένα εφρονων ανθρωπον γας αυτόν απο Ναζαρέτ, και παθητον τον Χρισον απαγέλλεσιν, εκείνων τοινυν τοιαύτα φανταζομένων, αφ' επειδη τους βήματι τέτοις εχρήσαντο, μονον ανθρωπον ήδεισαν τον Χρισον οι απο φυλοι, και πλέον εδέν ; μη γενοιτο εκ εστιν υδε εις ναν ποτέ τέτο λαβάν αλλά και τετο ως αρχιτεκτονες σωφοί, και οικονομοι μυστηρίων Θεε πεποιηκασι, και την αιτίαν είχεσιν ευλογον επειδή γαρ οι τοτε Ιεδαίοι πλανηθέντες, και πλανήσαντες Έλληνας, ονομίζον τον Χριστον ψιλον ανθρωπον, μονον εκ σπέρματΘ. Δ βιδ αχρεσθαι, καθ' ομοιότη τα των εκ τε Δαβιδ άλλων γενωμένων τέκνων· ὅτε δὲ Θίον αυτόν, εδε

E