created being; and the idea of a delegation of a creative power to a nonentity is wildly preposterous. And now, secondly, as to the worship due to the Son of God. Were not the inspired writers of the Old and New Testament able to decide whether we ought or ought not to pray to and adore Him, and have they not decided the question by their example?

Did not Paul pray to Christ? "Now (saith he) God himself, and our Father, and our LORD JESUS CHRIST, direct our way unto you. And the Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward another, and towards all men, even as we do towards you." And were not the primitive Christians characterised as "those that call on the name of Jesus Christ our Lord ?"-Acts ix. 14-21; 1 Cor. i. 2; 2 Tim. ii. 22; Rom. x. 12.

Does not Pliny inform us, A. D. 103, that they addressed themselves in a form of prayer to Christ, as to some God. Nay, did not the protomartyr, Stephen, he who set the first example to Christians of faith persevering even to the death, adore and worship Christ, at the very moment when he was yielding up his soul to its Creator? Yes, and under the influence of the HOLY GHOST, as the Scriptures themselves inform us, he prayed, "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit; Lord, lay not this sin to their charge." Under such divine direction would he have supplicated Christ, if he had deemed him to be a creature? No. This would have been idolatry; and who will presume to say, that the HOLY GHOST, who here opened the heavens to his view, would have permitted him to close his life, and sully his martyrdom with so foul an act of mortal sin?

It is written of our Redeemer, "Let all the angels of God worship Him." (Heb. i. 6.) And that they do worship Him, we learn from Rev. v. 11-14. The Apostle Paul prayed to Him thrice, that the messenger of Satan might depart from him.-2 Cor. xii. 8. We are to honour Him as we honour the Father.-John v. 23; but we cannot do that, unless we adore Him, and pray to Him.

The patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and Moses the lawgiver of the Jews, and the whole Hebrew Church, adored the Son of God. It is admitted by Unitarians, that God the Father never appears to mortal man. "No man hath seen God the Father at any time." He is the "King eternal, immortal, invisible." But the Logos the Son of God, was frequently visible to Abraham and his descen

dants. "And Jehovah appeared unto Abraham, and said: Unto thy seed will I give this land; and there builded he an altar unto the LORD who appeared unto him. And he removed thence unto a mountain on the coast of Bethel, and pitched his tent, having Bethel on the west, and Hai on the east, and there he builded an altar unto the LORD, and called upon the name of THE LORD."-Gen. xii. 7, 8. And here I beg leave to observe, that in our common version of the Scriptures, the word LORD, when printed in capital letters, is substituted for JEHOVAH, the incommunicable name of the Deity. It is JEHOVAH in the original. Now this name, the peculiar appellation of GoD, is repeatedly applied in Holy Writ to the LoGos, the SAVIOUR. The LORD appeared to Isaac, who built an altar to Him, and called upon his name, (Gen. xxvi. 24, 25.) He appeared also unto Jacob, (Gen. xxxv. i. 7,) who recognized him as GOD, and built an altar to Him, because he was commanded by HIM to do so, and he called the place Elbethel. Why? "Because there God appeared unto him

when he fled from the face of his brother." It is remarkable that the Personage who commanded Jacob to erect this altar to Him, styled himself GOD." GOD (says Moses) said unto Jacob, Arise, go up to Bethel, and dwell there, and make there an altar unto God, that appeared unto thee when thou fleddest from the face of Esau thy brother." Now would a created being have presumed to act thus?

In the 6th chapter of Exodus, we read that God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the LORD; and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of GOD ALMIGHTY, but by my name of Jehovah, was I not known unto them."-Exod. vi. 3. From the 7th verse, and from sundry other passages in Scripture, we learn that it was the same personage who is here styled GOD ALMIGHTY, that conducted the Hebrews from the land of Egypt. It is clear that it was not God the FATHER, for He never appears-He is invisible. The same Almighty Being, however, appeared to Moses, and propounded to the chosen people the law and the ten commandments; by the very first of which they are authoritatively directed to have no other gods before Him.Exod. xx. He it was who commanded them to build an altar to Him, and to make sacrifices thereon.-Exod. xx. 24 In the 24th chapter of Exodus we read, that Moses and

Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the Elders of Israel, saw the GOD of Israel; and the subsequent chapters inform us, that the God of Israel, who styled himself, as we have already proved, The ALMIGHTY, commanded them to erect altars, and offer sacrifices to Him, and promised, that if they would obey Him, they "should know that I am the LORD their GOD that brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, that I may dwell amongst them; I am the LORD their GOD." Accordingly we find Solomon, in a most impressive form of prayer and adoration, addressing Him as the LORD GOD of Israel, (1 Kings viii.) and recognizing Him as the Deity who had brought the people from the land of Egypt.

The LORD GOD of Israel,-He who visibly appeared to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses, filled under the Jewish economy the tabernacle and the temple with this glory. He was the Shechinah, a fact admitted by H. Taylor, the author of Ben Mordecai, and by Dr. Bruce, two strenuous advocates of Arianism.-(Ben Mordecai, p. 292-Bruce's Sermons on the Study of the Bible, p. 298.) In the holy place, enthroned above the mercy-seat, between the cherubim, He was adored by the Jewish Church. Here He appeared within the cloud above the mercy-seat, as we learn from Leviticus xvi. 2: and it is well remarked, by the author of Ben Mordecai, that St. John has decided this question beyond all dispute, by declaring the glory which Isaiah saw, and which was undeniably the glory of the visible Jehovah, to be the glory of Christ himself; an observation which Dr. Bruce repeats. What then are we to think of Erasmus's assertion, that Christ forbids prayer to be offered to him? Solomon prayed to Him, and He received his prayer; Stephen prayed to Him when inspired by the Holy Ghost. The whole host of heaven worship Him,-altars have been built, and sacrifices offered to Him, in obedience to His own express commandment; but, as a counterbalance to all this, we have the ipse dixit of Erasmus, that He is not to be addressed in prayer!!

Christ is JEHOVAH visible. He it was who claimed the appellation I AM. "I AM hath sent me unto you."Exod. iii. 16. And again, in the New Testament, he uses the same term: "Before Abraham was I AM;" thus claiming an existence commensurate in duration with eternity itself. The very close of St. John's prophetic labours

contain a solemn prayer to Christ: "He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly; Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen."-Rev. xxii. 20, 21.

Erasmus tells us, that our Lord disclaims the appellations, "Omnipotent and Almighty." But what says Christ, the LORD GOD of Israel himself? "The LORD appeared to Abraham, and said unto him, I am the ALMIGHTY GOD, (Gen. xvii. 1,) walk before me, and be thou perfect. From Exodus vi. 2, 3, we learn that he appeared and was known to the patriarchs by the appellation GOD ALMIGHTY.— "And Jacob said unto Joseph, GOD ALMIGHTY appeared unto me at Luz, in the land of Canaan, and blessed me.". Gen. xlviii. 3. It is not necessary to multiply proofs on this point, enough has been adduced to show that Erasmus is, on this subject, completely at issue with Holy Writ.

But Erasmus, as if it were not sufficient for him to contradict both Holy Writ, and the Rev. Henry Montgomery, whose cause he advocates, has most distinctly contradicted himself. In the commencement of his observations, he says, that the Member of the Established Church "has ventured to limit the power of the Almighty (proh pudor atque nefas,) in communicating his attributes, and to define the degree in which they were conferred on our Lord.” Now in total opposition to this charge, he again asserts that I ascribe to the Son, in their full extent and of his own right, omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipotence. A contradiction so flagrantly palpable as this requires no

comment.

Erasmus alleges that I "infer from the exercise of divine power by Jesus, that he is the Supreme God. He may say the same of Moses and all the prophets, for they were all endued with delegated power." I answer that it was from the admitted omnipresence of Christ I inferred, that in Him we live, and move, and have our being, which is one of the characteristics of Deity distinctly specified in Scripture. On this, connected with the fact that He was the Creator of all things visible and invisible, I grounded my argument, that He ought to be adored. Are Moses and the prophets omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent ? Did they create the worlds? Did they create any one thing in the universe? Did GOD command that altars should be built and sacrifices made to Moses? Do the whole host of heaven worship Moses? Is he styled GOD ALMIGHTY—

JEHOVAH-I AM-THE LORD OF HOSTS-THE EVERLASTING FATHER-THE PRINCE OF PEACE-THE GOD OF ISRAEL? Did Solomon-did the Hebrew Church pray to Moses as the God of Israel? Did Stephen and the primitive church adore Moses and the prophets?

God has said, "I will not give my glory to another, nor my praise to graven images." Erasmus brings a serious charge against me for omitting the latter clause of this text, in referring to it in my first letter; and he alleges that the whole passage imports no more than this, "I will not allow the glory and praise which are due to me, to be given to idols." Now, in omitting the clause respecting images, I could have had no sinister object in view, for that clause neither diminishes nor increases the strength of my argument. The text obviously consists of two parts corresponding pretty nearly to the first and second com.. mandments. In the former clause, God intimates that He will not give his glory to any other being in the universe; in the latter, He declares that He will not allow the praises due to Him only to be conferred on graven images. When, however, Erasmus states that my argument is grounded on that text, he greatly misrepresents my meaning. In the course of the discussion, I did indeed make use of that text, but it did not constitute the basis of my argument, as I have already shown. It furnished me, however, with a collateral support of it.

Whilst Erasmus accuses me of mutilating the text, he has himself omitted a part of it, which, if I had more minutely adverted to the subject, I would have quoted, because it materially strengthens my argument. The whole passage runs thus: "I am JEHOVAH, that is my name; and my glory I will not give to another; neither my praise to graven images."-Isa. xlii. 8. If Erasmus had quoted the whole of the text, it would have proved its affinity to the first and second commandment in the decalogue, together with the introductory declaration of the Almighty prefixed thereto,-" I am THE LORD thy GOD which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, and out of the house of bondage," &c. And here I beg leave again to observe, that when, in the common English translation of the Bible, THE LORD is printed in capital letters, the word in the original is JEHOVAH. It appears then that the Almighty, so far from communicating the essential attributes of DEITY, such as omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipo

P