Jesus appealed to the works which he wrought, as affording manifest proof that he was in the Father, and the Father in him; or that they were one. If F do not the works of my Father, believe me not : but if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works, that ye may know, and believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in me.*

Here he declared himself to be the agent in the same sense, as was the Father.

When the woman came behind him, in the press, and touched the hem of his garment, it is said, a cure was effected in her, by virtue having gone out of him. He expressed his au- · thority in the language of rebuke. He rebuked the wind; and said to the sea, Peace, be still, and the wind ceased and there was a great calm t

The opposers of Christ's divinity attempt to evade the argument which results from those divine works that he performed, by alledging that he acted in a subordinate capacity, and by a delegated authority.

But if he acted by a derived power, it seems extraordinary that he could confer this power on others. If he were dependent upon God for the power to work miracles, as well as his diséiples, it seems proper that, whenever â mirade was to be wrought by them, they should receive the power immediately from God, and

* John x. 37, 38 † Mark iv, 39.

not from a subordinate agent. Then they would not be exposed to mistake. They would know on whom they depended, and to whom they were to give the honour. Jesus Christ himself claimed the prerogative of conferring this power upon his disciples. I give unto you power to tread on serpents, and over all the power of the enemy. In correspondence with this, we read of Paul, and Barnabas, that they spake boldly in the Lord, who gave testimony to the word of his grace and granted signs and wonders to be done by their hands.† Could he confer such power unless it were in him, as its proper subject? If he could not, it is undeniable that he is God, as well as man.

3. Sin is an offence against God, and it be Tongs to him alone to forgive the offender. If any creature should presume to exercise this prerogative, it will amount, at least, to a claim of partnership in the divine sovereignty; for the forgiveness of sin is, in a peculiar sense, as sovereign act.

The Jewish scribes were right, when they: called it blasphemy for a creature to claim the exercise of this divine prerogative. If Jesus Christ were but a creature, as they conceived, it was with justice that they charged him with blasphemy, when he claimed the right to forgive sins. And behold, they brought unto him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed. And Jesus, seeing their faith, said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, be of good cheer, thy sins be

Luke x. 19. Acts xiv. 3.'

forgiven thee.* And behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth. It is said, Jesus knew their thoughts. If so, he knew on what ground they charged him with blasphemy in their own minds; that, supposing him to be a man only, he claimed a prerogative of God. This was the ground of their charge for in the parallel passage of St. Mark, we read of their reasoning farther, Who can forgive sins, but God only? But what was the method which he took to repel this high charge? He did not reason with them, to shew that a creature, without being justly chargable with blasphemy, might claim the right to forgive sins; but he proceeded to prove, by a miracle, that he possessed this power, of himself; and that even in his humiliation. whether is easier to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk. But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power, on earth, to forgive sins, then said he to the sick of the palcy, Arise, take up thy bed, and go into thine house. It must appear very evident, that the miracle was wrought, not to prove that a creature might forgive sins; but that he possessed this power, as God; and that he was not justly charged with blasphemy.

For

St. Paul speaks of it as the common faith of believers, that they have forgiveness of sins, in or by Christ. Even as Christ forgave you, so do ye.t

Some will perhaps say, that the power to + Col. iv. 13.

Matt. ix. 2.

forgive sins, was committed to him as a sub-ordinate agent, seeing it is said, God hath exalted him to be a Prince, and Savior, to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.

It may be observed in reply, that a power may be said to be delegated to Christas Mediator, or to the human nature united to the second Person in the Godhead, which he possessed independently as God. And without doubt the human nature was highly exalted, to be personally united to the Godhead, so as to perform divine works.

4. It is unnecessary to enumerate the places of Scripture, in which Christ is called the Son of God, as well as the Son of man; or where he claimed equality with the Father. The Jews, it appears, considered his claim of being the Son of God, as amounting to a claim of equality with the Father. Especially when they heard him say, I and my Father are one. They considered the declaration to be an asser tion of his divinity. It is evident, from the issue, that they did not misconceive his meaning. If they misunderstood him, he was bound, by the plainest principles of honesty and faithfulness, to rectify their mistake, and give them correct impressions, respecting his character.

On a certain occasion, the Jews took up stones to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from the Father. For which of these works do ye stone

me? They answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy: and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. It is evident, that they understood, from his own declaration, that he meant to claim a divine nature, or equality with God.

If they received wrong impressions, from what he had said, it was a duty, which he owed to God, to them, and himself, to rectify the mistake. Their charge rested on this one point, that he being, as they supposed, a man, made himself God. If it were a mistake, it might have been easily rectified. He had only to say, you misconceived my meaning, I would not be understood, by any thing that I have said or done, as claiming equality with God.

But he gave them no other impressions, than those which they had already received; unless it were the more to confirm them in the belief that he rested his claim on the divine nature. He proceeded to reason from the less, to the greater. Is it not written in your law, I said ye or gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came; and the Scriptures cannot be broken; say ye of him whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest, because I said,. I am the Son of God? Immediately, he appeals to those divine works which he had performed to prove the justness of his claim to divinity. If I do not the works of my Father, believe me