DISSERTATION III. 243 danger ; but it must not be supposed, that God ever designed by such language to exclude from religious worship so glorious a being as his own Son, who can hardly be called a creature, though he be a distinct being, produced by the will and power of God, and of a nature inferior to the Father. Answer I. The languageof this prohibition is very general, it excludes all Elohim, God, or gods, which thou hast not known. Now it does not appear from scripture, that the Jews knew any true God besides the Godof Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, their only Jehovah : So that the word plainly excluding all gods that theyhad not known, seems for ever to exclude Christ from their worship, if he be not the same God with Jehovah, the God of Abraham, whom the Jews knew. II. How could the Jews ever imagine that there was such a limitation intended and implied in the general prohibition, when there is not any intimation of it in the books of Moses, nor, in- deed, in any of the prophets ? And since Jesus Christ, in the Arian sense, was an unknown god to them, how could they ever come to the knowledge of him, or be assured that he is so glo- rious a being as the Son of God, and that he is appointed by the Father to be called God, and to be worshipped, except by the divine tokens of prophecy and miracle ? How should they ever know that this supposed limitation of the general and solemnpro. hibition of worship did not reach to exclude this person but by some such divine testimonies ? Now the force of these very divine testimonies, miracles and prophecy, seem to be enervated and precluded in this single case, viz. the receiving any other God, or having any other object of worship. In all other cases, as Grotius well observes, deveritate religionis christianæ, prophecy and miracle were constituted the criteria of an inspired person, and the Jews were bound to receivehim ; but in this one case of worshipping another god, these criteria were excluded by this very law or statute : So that this law of having no other God seems to be confirmed to the Jews for ever. If the objector should persist and say, that " there are in- timations given us in the Oltl Testament that the Messiah must be worshipped, when he cotnes and that therefore the Jews would not be so much surprized at the proposal of another ob- feet of worship in the days of the Messiah." To this I answer two ways : Answer I. This taking t for granted, that theMessiah isgnonot the one true Godrin any sense which is the present matter of debate. IL It should be observed, that in most of those places, wherein it is foretold that the Messiah should be worshipped with religious worship, his godhead is also intimated ; Ps. xcvii. 1. Jehovah reigneth let the earth rejoice ; verse 6. 411 the people 4 2
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=