believe that (the man) Jesus is the Christ, (the anointed) the Son of God." John xx. 31.*

* It cannot be unknown to most of the readers into whose hands these Lectures will fall, that the ascription of the term Logos to Jesus Christ is perfectly consistent with Unitarian principles, and that by many Unitarians this construction is adopted. (See the notes to the Improved Version on this Introduction.) The following reasons have induced me to prefer the other construction.

1st, The whole paragraph appears to me much more clear, connected, and consistent.

2nd, If by Logos was meant Jesus Christ, the first clause would appear to contain a self-evident proposition, such as it is not probable an apostle would use; "In the beginning of the Christian dispensation, was Jesus Christ."

3rd, Though the word God might with the greatest propriety be applied to Jesus Christ, as it was applied to Moses, to magistrates, and to prophets; yet our Saviour always carefully avoided its use, and his apostles appear to have imitated his example.

4th, The supposition that John used the expression, God, in the same verse in two such different senses, seems highly improbable. Mr. Simpson's learned dissertation upon the probability of this supposition, because to one the article is prefixed and the other is without the article, does not satisfy my mind, because in the sixth verse of the same chapter, the article is not prefixed, and no one doubts that the word there relates to the true God.

5th, Though it is possible Jews might understand this use of the word 60s by their own scriptures, yet it is probable Gentiles would not.

6th, The proofs adduced by Mr. Wakefield, of the common

The second passage is John xx. 28, And Thomas answered and said unto

use of the word Logos for wisdom, or some of the perfections of the Deity, appear perfectly unanswerable. See Wakefield's notes in loc.

7th, Mr. Simpson's arguments opposite to Mr. Wakefield's, appear to be founded on the presumption that John wrote his gospel for the Jews; if the later date of this gospel be adopted, this could not have been the case; if the earlier, it is highly improbable, it being generally allowed that it was written in opposition to the Gnostics.

8th, The passages referred to by Mr. Simpson, Mr. Belsham and others, as parallel, do not appear to me to confirm the opinion. In 1 John i. 1, 2, the construction, I should imagine, does not refer the "handling," &c. to the word Logos, as a person. "Concerning (g) the word (or doctrine) of life, that which was from the beginning, which we heard, which we saw with our eyes, which we have looked upon, which our hands have handled; (for the life was manifested and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested unto us) that which we have seen and heard declare we unto you." In the highly figurative language of the prophetic vision in Rev. xix. 11, &c. may not the expression Word of God, denote the Christian religion, "whose mantle was dipped in blood?"

9th, Clement, of Alexandria, gives the following definition, "The Logos of the universal Father is wisdom and goodness, most conspicuously displayed from himself; it is power irresistible and truly divine," p. 547, quoted in Jones's Illustrations, p. 12.

10th, The following passages of scripture seem to confirm the opinion that Logos means the divine perfections, Ps. xxxiii. 6,"By the word of the Lord were the heavens made.". Acts

him, my Lord, and my God." Here, it has been triumphantly exclaimed, is an irrefragable proof of the divinity of Jesus Christ! Here, (almost in the very last page of all the gospels) for the very first time, an apostle addresses Jesus as God! Let us pause a moment, and judge of the probabilities of this case. Thomas had received almost every evidence of testimony that a reasonable being could de

x. 36, "The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ." John x. 35, Our Saviour himself confirms this signification, when he asks, "If he called them gods unto whom the word of God (divine inspiration) came." 1 Kings xii. 22. "But the word of God came unto Shemaiah, the man of God" (the prophet). 1 Chron. xvii. 3, "And it came to pass the same night, that the word of God came to Nathan." 1 Cor. xiv. 36, 37, "What, came the word of God out from you? or, came it unto you only? If any man think himself to be a prophet," &c. 2 Pet. iii. 5. “For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God, the heavens were of old." Isaiah ii. 1. "The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz, saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem." Jeremiah v. 13. "And the prophets shall become wind, and the Word is not in them." Jeremiah xi. 1, "The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord." xviii. 1. xxi. 1. xxv. 1. xxx. 1. xxxii. 1. xxxiv. 1. xxxv. 1. xl. 1. xxxvii. 17, "Is there any word from the Lord?"

In all these instances the term Logos is used; and they all denote divine wisdom, inspiration, information, power, or other perfection bestowed upon man.

sire, that Jesus was raised from the dead; his ten companions, most intimate friends, and the women, assured him that they had absolutely seen Jesus. So fully assured was he, that his late master was a dead man, that he would not give the "I will slightest credit to their evidence. not believe, though I should see him and touch him, and put my fingers into the print of the nails." Yet, according to your hypothesis, no sooner does he see him, than he hails him as the great Jehovah! In one instant he would not believe it possible that he was raised from the dead (though he had seen Lazarus), and the next instant (though again he had often been with Lazarus and drew no such inference), because he sees him, sees him flesh and blood, touches him, puts his finger into his side, he believes, and affirms him to be God!

How much more natural that this phrase should consist of two distinct exclamations, connected by the evangelist's introduction of the word, "and." Thomas sees Jesus, and exclaimed, "O my Master! or, O my Lord!"-and heal so ex

claimed—perhaps with uplifted hands"O my God!" This is consistent, and fully accords with the hasty temper and generous character of Thomas.*

I now pass on to a third passage in this class, frequently adduced. (Rom. ix. 5.) "Whose are the fathers, and of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, God, blessed for ever. Amen." With this passage I shall contrast only

* I copy the following from Mr. Wakefield's note in loc. "This exclamation is in the vocative case; for so these writers often express themselves: see Matt. xi. 26, and many other places. And I look upon the full construction of the passage to be this: Και είπεν αυτώ. Ο Κύριος μου και είπεν. Ο Θεός μου: so that the xa (and) is put in by the evangelist to distinguish the two exclamations, and is no part of what Thomas said. Of this also we have already met with a variety of specimens. See Acts i. 20.”

The passage here referred to is this, "For it is written in the Book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no one dwell therein; and his bishopric let another take."

This stands as a single quotation; but they are two quotations from different Psalms. Ps. lxix. 25, "Let their habitation be desolate; and let none dwell in their tents." Ps. cix. 8, "Let his days be few; and let another take his office, (bishopric, Sepgt.)."

It is therefore evident that the connecting particle, and, must be the evangelist's, and no part of the quotations. "For it is written, Let his habitation, &c.-and it is also written-His bishopric, &c."