from every suffering; for all sufferings are inflicted by a just Being, either as chastisements, or the more severe legal punishments. He was entitled to all that felicity which the moral governor will communicate to perfect beings; but he waved these claims, in obedience to his Father, and in love to mankind. He voluntarily suffered the afflictions of life, submitted to a painful and ignominious death, and was made under the law of condemnation, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons; and thus, for his voluntary humiliation and sufferings, was he crowned with glory and honour. He was the image of God in his moral perfections; and, as the natural heir of his Father, had he a right to enter immediately upon the inheritance of the perfect sons of God. Yet he was not eager, or precipitate to seize so great an honour, but be divested himself of every enjoyment, and took upon himself the form of a servant;" wherefore has God highly exalted him above his fellow immortals, and given him a name which is above every name."

Note K.

After, "revere him as our future judge." Page 330.

The exalted character sustained by the Messiah, the power and authority with which he is invested, the great benefits received, and which are farther expected from him, will naturally prompt grateful and affectionate hearts to present their petitions to him; and those who consider him as being equal to the Father, must deem him to be equally entitled to the acts of supplication,

1

adoration, and praise. But this mode of testifying our confidence, gratitude and veneration, has not the stamp of authority, either from precept or example. Notwithstanding he had declared when upon earth, that "the Son of Man has power to forgive sins;" that "all power is given to me in heaven and earth," yet he uniformly directs his disciples to pray to the Father exclusively. "When ye pray, say our Father who is in heaven." "Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name he shall give it you." His whole life was a life of prayer to the Father. To him did he ascribe all the eminent powers with which he was endowed; to him he applied for consolation and support, in his arduous conflicts; and to him did he commit his spirit when he expired on the He incessantly directed the attention of his followers to the Source of all good. "When one came running to him saying, good master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life; he transferred the title of good to the Lord of life. Jesus said unto him, "why callest thou me good, there is none good, but one, that is God."

cross.

Thus, although he has declared that "the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment to the Son; that all men should honour the Son as they honour the father," this honour cannot consist in presenting unto him divine worship.

All the apostles obeyed his precepts and imitated his example. After he was exalted at the right hand of God, to be a Prince and a Saviour, and to give repentance and remission of Sin, they invariably prayed to the Father in his name, without venturing to draw an infeence apparently so honourable to him; but which

would have been a deviation both from his precepts and practice.

These are facts which surpass every inference, and ought to suppress all those which are in direct opposition to them.

The Father is constantly represented as the fountain of all Good. He is universally present; he is always willing to bestow. Why then should the natural course of supplication be changed, and petitions be presented to the Son, as if the Father was reluctant to hear us? Christ is not the vicegerent of an absent God; and does it not appear to be both indecent, and irreverent, to give him the preference, in the presence of his Father? He has pointed out a more acceptable way of showing our respect, reverence, and gratitude. "If ye love me, keep my commandments."

NOTE L.

After "to the age, and beyond it." Page 356.

Our readers must perceive that in this series of disquisitions, it is impracticable to treat each subject to any great extent. Our principal object has been to point out the important relation which these subjects bear to each other; to investigate the principles by which a concatenation is maintained; and to adduce arguments in support of them. We must therefore refer to other authors for amplification. No polemical question can be of equal importance with the question now before us. In its two extremes it stands thus: will a God of infinite goodness, possessing infinite power, and infinite wisdom, act in every respect in a manner

conformable with the character of a kind Parent, in which he has condescended to represent himself, and finally render all his intelligent offspring happy? Or does this dispensation of Grace, of which the apostles always speak with raptures, consist in the election of a few to eternal happiness, announcing the condemnation of myriads and myriads to eternal misery, because it has not pleased the Father of mercies, and the God of all consolation, to elect them also? The arguments, upon which this horrid doctrine of eternal misery is founded, are deduced from three or four equivocal expressions, to which our opponents are determined to give their own interpretation; notwithstanding they have been vigorously attacked on every side ;-on the side of reason ;— the preponderancy of scriptural expressions of a contrary import ;-and the most judicious criticisms upon such passages which seemed to be involved in obscurity. We might refer to numberless authors who have written satisfactorily upon this interesting subject. But we shall refer to three alone, as being sufficiently ample to supply our own deficiency. See Thoughts on the divine Goodness relative to the government of moral agents, particularly displayed in future rewards and punishments. Translated from the French of Ferdinand Olivier Petitpierre. 1788. This author chiefly deduces his arguments from the moral perfections of God, but without omitting various other considerations.

See also an Essay on the duration of a Future State of Punishments and Rewards: in essays on the language of Scripture. By J. Simpson, Bath. 1806.

This accurate biblical critic has collected together

all the passages in which the terms, aw awros, age applied to future punishments, and has minutely examined the same terms, when applied to various other subjects; by which mode he has clearly evinced the extreme absurdity of confounding these words with absolute eternity. His observations confirm our assertion, that the signification of everlasting, must, in every case, be ascertained by the nature of the subject to' which it is immediately applied. He has also examined, with similar attention, every other word which is applied to the wicked; and the result of his examination is, that such expressions are so diversified in their significations, according to the subjects with which they are connected, that they cannot constitute the basis of any system whatever.

In a Vindication of the honour of God; or a Scriptural refutation of eternal Misery, and universal Salvation, published 1792, the learned author has proved, in a most satisfactory manner, that the terms death, destruction, perdition, &c. cannot signify a life of eternal misery! He considers them, also, as equally opposing the doctrine of universal redemption. This obviously arises from his inattention to the undeniable fact, that there will be a resuscitation of the wicked also, in opposition to the current opinion, that death, destruction, &c. are synonymous with total annihilation.

Respecting the controversy concerning an interiediate state, the natural immortality of the soul; the sleep of the soul, &c. &c. See the works of Archdeacon Blackburn, vol. ii. iii.

It is with no small degree of satisfaction to the author