we read that God is a spirit, the reference by our Lord was to the Father; and also, that Jesus invariably acknowledged the Father as God. The passage referred to is John iv. 23, 24. “The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth, for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a spirit, and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." But as the Father is a spirit, if the Holy Ghost is a spirit distinct from the Father, unless it can be proved that two or more spirits are necessary to make one God, it is evident that there must be two Gods. Hitherto, no attempt has been made to prove this from scripture, although we have often heard it maintained that there are three persons in the Godhead.

The unitarian can appeal to the language of his master, and in confirmation of his faith in the spirituality of the one God and Father of all, can point to passages which speak of the spirit of the Father. He is not driven to seek shelter in mystery. He seeks not to fortify himself by an appeal to antiquity, to synods, or to councils; nor is it necessary for the advancement of his cause, that he should attempt to inflame the passions, or to excite the fears of those who differ from him in opinion. Fortified, as he conceives himself to be, by scripture authority, he is solicitous that his brethren may have a clear and an accurate perception of that revelation, which he regards as the basis of his faith, the rule of his conduct, and the charter of his hopes; but it is by meekness of wisdom, not by confidence of manner, much less by bitterness of denunciation, that he would extend the knowledge, and promote the love of truth.

11*

Z.

Illustration of the Sixth Chapter of the Gospel of St. John..

(Continued from page 95.)

THE Jews committed the error, in which they have been followed by many in succeeding ages, of applying to the person of our Saviour, language which he had metaphorically used in relation to his doctrine, and the authority by which he taught. They were at once surprised and displeased, that a man whose father and mother they knew, should say of himself, "I came down from heaven." Jesus did not chuse to explain his language; he perhaps saw that the mistake was rather of the will than of the understanding; and repeated with greater force what he had already said. "No man can come to me, except the father who hath sent me draw him.""Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me." "To be drawn of the Father," is a phrase which we should explain in a similar manner, with the expression, "to be given of the Father," and we understand our Saviour to say, in these verses, that every one would believe on him, who was properly influenced, who was drawn of God, by the motives and the reasons that were set before him, which are the means by which God operates upon the minds of men; means, that far from destroying their free agency, appeal to it, and imply its existence. He added the following very obscure expression. "Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God; he hath seen the Father." Here the same phrase, "to see the Father," is obviously used in two different significations. In the first clause it is said, no man hath corporeally seen God, who is a spirit, and neither hath been, nor can be seen at any time; but in the latter clause, "to see the

Father," according to the best commentators, signifies to be intimately acquainted with the will of God, to understand the doctrines of pure religion; in the same manner in which "to see the Son," is used to signify the understanding and receiving of his instructions. Thus, in the fortieth verse of this chapter, "Every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life;" it is clear that Christ could not have intended to confine the promise of eternal life to those believers, who were so happy as to enjoy personal communion with him while he was on earth, but he promises it to those in all ages who should see him and believe in him; that is, who should understand and heartily embrace his doctrines. Again, in the fourteenth chapter of John, ninth verse, Jesus addressing Philip, says, "He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father." Here the expression must mean something to this effect, he that has received my instructions, and believed what I have taught, has seen the Father, in the only sense in which he can be said to be seen; he has been taught of God.*

After again declaring himself the bread which came down from heaven, our Saviour proceeds. "And the

*The commentators seem generally to have thought, that the mid. dle clause of the forty-sixth verse of John vi. "He that is of God," or, as Wakefield, Newcome, and the Improved Version have it, "he that is from God," refers to our Saviour himself. We would not rashly differ from authority, and would merely suggest the following interpretation, which seems to us to be recommended by its appropriateness and beauty. The Greek words in this place admit of the translation, "he that is the friend of God." Vide Schleusn. in verb. Tapa, and Wetstein on Mark iii. 21.

We think, if the interpretation which we have given of the preceding verses be admitted, and the passage be read in connexion, the rendering we have suggested will not be judged irrelevant.

bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world." Whitby and Macknight understand this of the expiation for sin made by his death on the cross; but the exposition of Grotius seems to us preferable. He explains it thus; "Not only is my doctrine the bread of life, but my death also will conduce to your eternal felicity. For the same instructions, which my teaching affords, may be drawn also from my death, which, while it will give evidence of my truth, will also afford an example of the virtues I inculcate, obedience, patience, humility, and love."* The Jews were astonished and disgusted at such expressions from one, who made claims to the Messiahship, but Jesus without regarding their prejudiced feelings continued to use the same language. "Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.-This is that bread, which came down from heaven, not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead; he that eateth of this bread, shall live for ever." These verses on the same principle may be thus paraphrased; "Unless ye admit the truth of my doctrine, and regard my death and its consequences as the seal of my Mes-iahship, ye cannot obtain eternal life; but if ye eat of this bread, if ye believe and obey me, an open entrance will be ministered to you abundantly into the kingdom of heaven."

To speak to Jews of the death of their Messiah must have been strangely offensive to them. They seem to have understood his language as referring to that; and

"Non tantum sermo meus est pabulum ad vitam æternam, (quod supra tractatum) sed hoc erit et mors mea. Nam idem quod sermo docet, docet et mors, tum sermonis veritati testimonium præbens, tum exemplum eorum quæ sermo præcipit, obedientiæ, patientiæ, humilitatis, dilectionis." Grotii Com. in loc.

in allusion to their feelings, our Saviour says to them, "Doth this offend you?" Do ye revolt at this? "What

if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where he was before?" This verse has been supposed to declare explicitly the pre-existence of our Lord. Some have imagined, however, that it refers to the forty days of temptation, prayer, and communication with God, immediately after his baptism. We think neither mode of interpretation satisfactory. Our Lord speaks of a bodily ascension, for the Jews were to see it; and in that sense it was not true, that he had been in heaven before; and we know not in what sense his ascension was going where he had been before, if he refers to the forty days immediately after his baptism. And on either supposition, it may be asked, how could the Jews know that by his ascension to heaven he was going where he had been before? They certainly had no idea of his pre-existence, and after his resurrection, an ascension to heaven could be regarded as little additional proof of his divine character. It seems then not probable, that Jesus should speak of what could not be considered as the strongest proof, and neglect to refer to what was always urged both by himself and his apostles, as the best and most convincing of all demonstrations of his divine commission and authority, his resurrection from the dead. It is not surprising, that the Jews should be offended at what was and is to them a stumbling block. Our Saviour then says to them, "Does this doctrine of a dying Messiah offend against your notions of his character? What if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? Perhaps even your obstinate prejudices might give way, if ye had faith enough to believe that the Lord's anointed should rise again from the grave, and appear where he was before." Thus it will be per