Now we ask; Did Jesus Christ decline the appellation, GOD? Did he deny being GOD? Not

at all. But when one of his disciples looks on him, and says to him, "My Lord and my GOD," he seemed to incur the approbation of the blessed Savior.

Never did he satisfy the Jews that he did not intend to be understood as making himself equal with God.

5. It is stated by Mr. Morgridge and Mr. Barr, as well as other Unitarian writers, that our Lord Jesus is not omniscient, because there was one thing that he said he did not know. Mr. Barr thinks it was the "day of judgment." The text they use to show him not omniscient is as follows. "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son but the Father." Mark 13:32. Another evangelist has it thus. "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." Mat. 24:36. The expressions contained in these texts we acknowledge to be of the same, or nearly the same, import. Matthew, however, the "Son" is omitted. We will now endeavor to come at the sense of the text quoted from Mark.

In

Says the Savior to the Pharisees, "Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man." John 8:15. Again he says, "The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son." John 5:22. In the first of these texts, he was asked to pass his

He informed

judgment upon a certain woman. them that that was not his present business. Not that he had no power to judge, for long before this he had told them that "all judgment was committed to the Son;" but he wished to inform them that in his present employment he could not judge in that matter. One thing is clear, he had the power or ability of knowing that day he spoke of, or he had not. The "day and hour," the Savior spoke of, was not the "day of judgment;" but he spoke of the desolation of the Holy City.* All the preceding and attending circumstances he described, and the result of the day. He told his disciples, that of the temple, there should not "be left one stone upon another that should not be thrown down." He also knew that "her enemies would cast a

trench" around the city. Daniel fixed the year of the destruction of Jerusalem more than five hun

* 1. It is evident that Christ was here speaking of his coming again to visit Jerusalem, not in mercy as at present, but in dreadful vengeance. 2. The text says: "But of that day and that hour." It only remains to show what day and hour he refers to. He says, verse 33, "Take ye heed, watch and pray, for ye know not when the time is, for the Son of man is as a man taking a far journey," &c. Verse 27, he says "Watch ye, therefore, for ye know not when the master of the house cometh." It will not be doubted, that when he speaks of the coming of the master of the house, he means his own coming, and he declares, verse 26, that they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds, and, verse 30, he says, "This generation shall not pass away, till all these things be done." But it does not affect our argument in favor of our Lord's omniscience, to admit that he here had some reference to the final coming of the Son of man at the last day.

hundred years before this. "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people, and upon thy holy city, to finish transgression and make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the MOST HOLY." Dan. 9:24. It is evident Daniel was informed when it was. Who gave him this information? We answer, "The spirit of Christ." "Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you, searching what or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify." 1 Pet. 1:10, 11. Now with

these facts before us shall we conclude that Christ had not the power of knowing when that day should arrive?

"Knoweth no man," &c. The word, oiden is the 2d per of eido, "to know," and is variously rendered. "To know" is its obvious meaning.

But the next question is, in what sense the Savior used it? "If this passage signifies that the knowledge of Christ was limited, it plainly contradicts those already quoted, which prove he is omniscient. But considering the word know to have the same meaning here that it has in 1 Cor. 2:2. "For I determine not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ and him crucified," it involves no obscurity, for it there has the causative sense. "I determine not to cause to know, or make

known."* If Jesus by his spirit gave Daniel information when this should take place five hundred and seventy years before this, is it not strange that he had not the power of knowing it, when the event was nigh, even at the doors?" We think the undoubted sense in which the Savior used the word "to know," was as above stated; for says one, "Hast thou not heard, hast thou not known, that the everlasting God the Lord, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding." Isa. 40:28.

6. Mr. Morgridge devotes one chapter of his work to a search for the " supposed second person of the Trinity," and says, "God the Son does not

exist," ," "there is nothing for him to do," and tells us that "God the Son," is the creature of human creeds." He bases his argument mainly on the following passage of holy writ. "Then cometh the end when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father, when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power; for he must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, All things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted that did put all things under him. And when all things shall be sub

* See the Faith of the F. Baptists, page 44, 45, and the remarks there made on Mark 13:32.

dued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject to him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." 1 Cor. 15:24-28. "Here," says Mr. Morgridge, "We see the same dependent Son, giving up the kingdom to the Father."

We will make a few brief remarks on this pas sage.

First. The kingdom the Son is to give up. The "end" the apostle spoke of was the end of the present world, the grand close of human affairs. Christ during this period acts as our Mediator and Intercessor, but at the end of the world this office must cease, there being no more need of a Mediator. It is, then, the Mediatorial kingdom that is given up.

Second. To whom the kingdom, or reign, is given. It is evident that the reign is given up to the Father. But is it to be supposed that the Father was inert, and had nothing to do with the reign all this time, and now the Son is to be inactive? Certainly not. Man's probation being closed, the distinction in the persons of the Holy Trinity, in atoning for, sanctifying, and pardoning men, and preparing them for heaven, now ceases. The divine nature of the Savior being superior to his human nature, is now the all-controlling, all-absorbing Deity, and now

Third.

"The God shines gracious through the man,

And sheds sweet glories on them all."

Who is all in all. The apostle informs us that "God shall be all in all." In Col. 8:11, he