present subject. By the evangelists and apostles he is very frequently, and by way of eminence, denominated, the Lord; and the apostle Paul in particular, who has employed this term upwards of three hundred times, so appropriates it to our Saviour, thereby to distinguish him from the Father on the one hand, and from all the creatures of God on the other. Now, although the substantive Lord, when used as a common appellative, may designate any person who rules over others, yet, when it is thus applied in an absolute manner, with a force closely assimilated to that of a proper name, it is usually understood to signify God. In the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, it constantly represents the Hebrew name Jehovah. It is well known that the Greek style of the writers of the New Testament was, in many respects, formed upon that of the Septuagint. The Scripture of that version was the Scripture which they read, and from which they generally quoted. Since, then, in the Septuagint, this very word Lord is the most frequent name of the Almighty-a name which could not fail to bring God to the remembrance of every Hellenistic Jew-it appears most probable, that the apostolic use of this title, as the name of Jesus Christ, was grounded on the doctrine of his real divinity.

That this was, in fact, the principle on which the apostle Paul so employed the title Lord, may indeed be concluded, not only from this general argument, but from the force of several particular passages in his writings. Thus, when, in speaking of the Lord Jesus Christ, he commands servants to perform their duty "as to the Lord and not to men ;” (Col. iii, 23, 24; Eph. vi, 7;) this pointed antithesis between the Lord and men affords no obscure indication that, to the former term, the apostle attached the notion of divinity. Nor can we avoid deducing the same inference from his application of this divine title, when he illustrates his doctrine of faith in the Lord Jesus, as an object of prayer and invocation, by the declaration of Joel, that all who call on the name of the Lord (Jehovah) shall be saved;" and when, on another occasion, after reproving the Corinthians because they ate meats offered to idols, although they were also partakers of the cup of the Lord, and the table of the Lord, (that is, of the cup and table of the Lord Jesus) he immediately adds, "Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?" and, soon afterwards, completes his discourse on the subject, in the sublime words of the Psalmist:-"The earth is the Lord's and the fulness thereof:" Rom. x, 13: comp. Joel ii, 32: 1 Cor. x, 21-28: comp. Ps. xxiv, 1,

But the title Lord is not the only divine name which Paul has applied to Jesus Christ: twice incidentally, and once by a positive assertion, has this apostle confessed that Jesus is GOD.

In our common English version of the Epistle to the Ephesians, we read that no "covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God:" v, 5. Now, according to a common rule of Greek construction, which, within its true limits, is constantly observed by the writers of the New Testament, and amongst the rest by the apostle Paul, the words here translated "the kingdom of Christ and of God," ought clearly to be rendered, "the kingdom of him who is Christ and God;" and in this sense the passage appears to have been uniformly understood by the persons who were the most competent to form, in such a case, an accurate estimate of the apostle's meaning-I mean those early ecclesiastical writers, to whom Greek was both a living and a native language.

Another passage, to the same effect, forms a very striking part of the Epistle of Paul to Titus: "For the grace of God, that bringeth salvation, hath appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world: looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour, Jesus Christ:" ii, 11—13. Whether it was the intention of our translators, in this passage, to separate the titles God and Saviour, or to introduce them as the joint epithets of Jesus Christ, is quite doubtful; but, in the original Greek, there does not appear to be any ambiguity; for, according to the same rule of construction, and the known customary phraseology of this apostle, both terms must be considered as applying to Jesus Christ; and the passage ought therefore to be rendered, "the glorious appearing of our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ." In the present instance, this version of the apostle's words is confirmed, not only by the concurrent and unhesitating testimony of both the Greek and Latin fathers, but also by the words "glorious appearing."* It would, I think, be plainly at variance with the harmony of Christian doctrine, as it is revealed in the New Testament, and particularly in the Epistles of Paul, to speak of the "glorious appearing" of the Father, that "blessed and only

* éπiqávuav rûc dogs. That this phrase is rightly rendered "glorious appearing," is evinced by the comparison of Rom. viii, 21: 2 Cor. iv, 4: Phil. iii, 22: Col. i, 11: 1 Tim. i, 11.

Potentate," whom no man hath seen, nor can see: 1 Tim. vi, 15, 16. The Father is made manifest to mankind only in the Son, who is the "Image of the invisible God ;” (Col. i, 15;) and, as it is the Son alone who hath already "appeared," to bring "life and immortality to light through the Gospel," and "to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself;" (2 Tim. i, 10; Heb. ix, 26;) so, from various passages of Scripture, are we led to conclude, that it is the Son alone who, in the great day of retribution," shall appear the second time without sin (i. e. without a sin-offering*) unto salvation:" ver. 28. Accordingly, the word here rendered "appearing," is uniformly employed by this apostle, (who alone, of all the writers of the New Testament, has made use of it) to denote either the first or the second coming of Jesus Christ: and the comparison of 2 Thess. ii, 8; 1 Tim. vi, 14; and 2 Tim. iv, 1, in particular, with the passage now before us, will be found to afford a strong confirming evidence, that by "the glorious appearing of our great God and Saviour," is here intended the visible coming of the Lord Jesus Christ in glory, for the salvation of his people, and for the judgment of all mankind.†

* xagis auagrías, sine victimâ pro peccatis: Schleusner in voc., No. 11: comp. 2 Cor. v, 21.

†The rule of Greek construction, above referred to, may be stated as follows:-When two or more nouns of personal description, (whether substantives, adjectives, or participles) of the singular number, and of the same gender and case, are connected by a conjunction or conjunctions; if the article is prefixed to the first of them, and not to the other, or others, they both or all relate to the same person. The rule, as it is thus stated, does not apply to proper names, but is, I believe, limited by no other exception. Sharpe and Wordsworth assert, that there is no instance of the infraction of the rule (within the above limits) in the Greek Testament; and if any examples of the kind exist in the works of profane authors, they must have arisen from great carelessness in composition, (or more probably from error in transcription) and are, on all hands, allowed to be extremely rare. That the apostle Paul, in particular, constantly and naturally observed this rule, is evident from very many passages in his Epistles: see, for example, Rom, xv, 6: 2 Cor. i, 3: Phil. iv, 20: Col. iv, 9: Eph. vi, 21. See Remarks on Greek Art. by G. Sharpe; Six Letters to G. Sharpe, by C. Wordsworth, D. D.; and the Doctrine of the Greek Art. by Bishop Middleton. Wordsworth's Six Letters contain references to those passages in the works of the fathers, in which the texts adduced by G. Sharpe are cited. As Greek authorities for the proposed interpretation of Eph. v, 5, he quotes Chrysostom, Cyril Alex. Theodoret, Anastasius, Euthymius, and Pseud. Athanasius; and, for that of Tit. ii, 13, Clemens Alex. Hyppolytus, Athanasius, Cryil Hieros. Epiphanius, Basil, Gregory Nyssen, Chrysostom, Cyril Alex. Theodoret, and Ecumenius. Another example of the application to Jesus Christ of the attributive Osos, may be found in 2 Pet.

Thus we find that, according to the doctrine of the apostle Paul, Jesus, who now reigns supreme over his own church, and who will come again in great power and glory for her final salvation, is not only Christ, but God-is the great God and Saviour of his people; and now it only remains for me to adduce a memorable passage from the Epistle to the Romans, in which the same truth is directly asserted: "I could wish,' says the apostle, "that myself were accursed (or laid aside) from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh who are Israelites, to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service, (of God) and the promises; whose are the fathers, and of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, GOD BLESSED FOR EVER, Amen :" Rom. ix, 3-5.*

i, 1, where the words ἐν δικαιοσύνη τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Xgorou ought, on the same principles, to be rendered, "Though the righteousness of our God and Saviour, Jesus Christ:" comp. ver. 11. Sharpe also adduces 2 Thess. i, 12; 1 Tim. v, 21; in which we have the phrase τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ Κύριου and Jude 4, where we read Θεὸν καὶ Kúgiov; but, as Kúgios, when applied to our Saviour, has very much the force of a proper name, these examples are of a somewhat doubtful character.

* Rom. ix, 35. ὧν οἱ πατέρες, καὶ ἐξ ὧν ὁ Χριστὸς τὸ κατὰ σάρκα, ων ἐπὶ παντὸν Θεὸς εὐλογητος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. "Whose are the fathers, and of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever." It must, I think, be allowed by the careful and impartial critic, that the apostle's words are capable of no other meaning than that which our translators have attributed to them, and which appears to have been universally adopted by such of the early fathers as have cited the passage: see for example, Irenæus Adv. Hær. iii, 16, Ed. Ben., p. 205; Hyppolyt. Adv. Natum, sect. 2 and 6; Origen, (teste Ruffino) Com. in loc.; Tertullian, adv. Prax. bis, Ed. Seml. ii, 218, 225; Novatian de reg. fid, Ed. Jackson, p. 99; Athanasius contra Arian. orat. 2, Ed. Colon. i, 317; Chrysostom, de Dei nat. Ed. Ben. i, 483; Basil, adv. Eunom., lib. iv, Ed. Ben. i, 282; Jerom, Theodoret, Theophylact, in loc. The attempt which has been made by the Socinians, to place a full stop at rágua, and to render the remainder of the verse, "God who is over all (be) blessed for ever!" is not only contrary to all authority, (for MSS., versions, and fathers, unite in proving, that the verse was never so divided in ancient times) but is totally at variance also with the rules of grammatical construction; for had such a blessing been intended to be expressed, the words must have been arranged in quite a different order, as is evinced by a great number of examples in the Greek Scriptures, including the Septuagint: vide Trommii et Schmidii Concc. In such case the word uxores must have stood first in the series. The apostle's sentence obviously presents to us a climax of ideas, very analogous to the frequent train of this writer's thoughts. After having enumerated a variety of particulars, in which the Jews

I may now invite the reader to a brief review of our whole argument.

The Old Testament abounds with prophetical descriptions of the joyful, righteous, and eternal, reign of a mighty monarch, who was destined to arise according to the flesh from the family of David, and to rule with absolute authority, not only over the house of Israel, but over the world at large.

As these prophecies were, in general, understood by the ancient Jews to relate to a person whom they denominated the Messiah, and whose coming in temporal glory they fondly expected, so the New Testament affords abundant evidence that he of whom they testify is indeed the Messiah, the anointed one of God-the Lord Jesus Christ; and their accomplishment properly belongs to that division of his revealed history, which commenced when he ascended up into heaven, and was enthroned in glory at the right hand of the Father.

In tracing the light which is reflected from the scriptural account of the Messiah's reign of glory, on the offices, character, and nature, of Christ himself, we observe, in the first place, that God governs his people through Christ, and that Jesus, the King of Israel, the Mediator between God and man, is subject to the Father, from whom alone his dominion is derived.

This statement is in full accordance with the explicit doctrine of Scripture, that the risen and ascended Jesus is man, the glorified brother, and sympathising master and friend, of his unworthy followers.

On the other hand, the reign of Jesus Christ is in various respects, of such a description, that the impartial inquirer after scriptural truth is constrained to confess, that this "king of glory," by whom it is conducted, is not only man but GOD. For, in the first place, as the Heir and legitimate Possessor of all things, he reigns without control, not only over the church which he has himself "builded," but over all the creatures of God. And, secondly, his dominion is not earthly, but divine:

were preeminently favored and honored, he concludes with a statement of their highest glory and privilege, viz., that, according to the flesh, he was descended from them, who is over all, God blessed for ever. The antithesis here observed between the human and divine nature of Christ is also perfectly natural, and, in point of style, as well as doctrine, corresponds with Rom. i, 3, 4, where we read of Jesus Christ, "which was made of the seed of David, according to the flesh, (xarà vágna) and was declared (or proved) to be, the SON OF GOD with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead."