DISSERTATION III. 245 as well as supreme ; For the devil does not tempt him to pay supreme worship to himself, since he acknowledges that he is not the maker, nor supreme possessor of the kingdoms of the world ; but he says only that these were delivered into his hands, and therefore he was capable of bestowing them upon Christ. As he therefore was but a subordinate possessor, he could de- mand but subordinate worship, which our Lord forbids by a citation out of the Mosaic law ; Luke iv. 3, 6, 7, 8. Now in disputes on this subject, and this text the Unitari- ans seem to have found out but these two refuges, for which they have any colour or pretence : 4. That notwithstanding the devil's own expression, that he received his kingdoms and powers from another hand, and that they were not originally his own, by supreme right, yet that he Was so impudent and unreasonable in thesame breath asto desire divine worship. To which I answer, that as impudent and un- reasonableas his requests may be at some times, yet in this place, the Unitarians have no manner of proof that he requested su= preme worship : and there is a rational probability of the con- trary. It is most likely, that he desired such worship as the heathens were wont to pay to any of their deities, besides the supreme, that is, those deities into whose hands their supreme God had delivered the government of particular parts of the creation. 2. It is pretended that Christ's prohibition of worshipping any thing besidesthe true God at this time of his temptation, was of no force after his own exaltation ; and though God only Was to be worshipped at that time, yet in three or four years afterwards Jesus. ,Christ also being exalted, might have religious Worship paid to him, though he were but an inferior being. To this it is answered, that our blessed Lord not onlynow, but afterwards, preaches the same doctrine ; he takes other occa- sions, in the course of his ministry, to confirm that solid found- ation of all religion, that there is but one God, one object of worship." Now if he himself, or his apostles immediately after Isis resurrection, had , been appointed to set áp -the worship of himself as a mere inferior being, and another God, it is not to be supposed that our Lord Jesus should have introduced his own ministry upon earth with so sacred aconfirmation of the one only object of worship in his repelling the temptation of the devil : Nor can we think he wouldhave taken frequent occasion tomain- tain that doctrine and practice inviolable, and that without the least hint of any repeal of it. Sovery important and considerablea change of religion as this, which repeals the first commandment, and admits another God to be owned and worshipped, would certainly have required a very particular and express account of it to be given to the e. 3
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=