will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? I have said, Ye are gods, and all of you children," literally sons, " of the Most High; but ye shall die like men, and perish as one of the people."

In the eighty-ninth Psalm, David, in his capacity of the king of Israel, is thus spoken of in his relation to God: "I have found David my servant; with my holy oil have I anointed him; with whom my hand shall be established; mine arm also shall strengthen him...... He shall cry unto me, Thou art my Father, my God, and the Rock of my salvation. Also I will make him my first-born, higher than the kings of the earth."

Here it is readily perceived that all kings are considered, by their office, to be "sons of God," and David has a pre-eminence over them in God's regard, as the first-born son has in those countries where the rights of primogeniture are maintained.

After this explanation, it is easy to see the bearing of the second Psalm, as having been composed primarily concerning David in relation to surrounding kings. "Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession."

... • •

Such is the phraseology of the Old Testament in

relation to kings, and the kings of Israel especially. In after ages, this Psalm was interpreted to relate to the expected Messiah, and hence he was called, previous to his advent, not only "King of Israel," but "Son of God," in virtue of being king of Israel. In this relation, it had no reference to the metaphysical rank or nature of the person to whom it was applied, but it only related to the kingly office. The same species of phraseology is used by the prophet Nathan to David, concerning Solomon. David desired to build a temple to God, but was forbidden by the prophet Nathan, with a promise that his son should accomplish what he was not allowed to undertake. "And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men; but my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before me." that the title "Son of God" is applied both to David and Solomon, in virtue of their being kings of Israel.

Thus we perceive,

With these facts, we come down to the actual history of the New Testament. Immediately after the inauguration of Jesus as the Messiah by John, in the Jordan, by his baptism and the descent of the Holy Ghost, Jesus commenced his ministry by calling his disciples. The call of Philip is thus recorded:

"The day following, Jesus would go forth into Galilee, and findeth Philip, and saith unto him, Follow me. Now Philip was of Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter. Philip findeth Nathaniel, and saith unto him, We have found him of whom Moses in the Law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. And Nathaniel said unto him, Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth? Philip saith unto him, Come and see. Jesus saw Nathaniel coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile! Nathaniel saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig-tree, I saw thee. Nathaniel answered and said unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel. Jesus answered and said unto him, Because I said, I saw thee under the figtree, believest thou? Thou shalt see greater things than these. And he saith unto him, Hereafter ye shall see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.”

It is easy to perceive from this extract, that the Jews of that age expected a Messiah; that Philip, after he had been called by Jesus, considered him to be that personage, still supposing him to be the son of Joseph; and that two of the epithets applied to him were "Son of God" and "King of Israel," and that in the mind of Nathaniel the epithet "Son of God" had no relation to Christ's metaphysical nature.

During the ministry of Christ and his Apostles, the same views seem to have been entertained.

After Christ had exercised his ministry for a considerable time, and had exhibited to his disciples and to the world his credentials, he one day asked them whom they took him to be. Peter answered, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." That these phrases are synonymous, and both were epithets of the Messiah and nothing more, is evident from the manner in which the same declaration is recorded by the other two Evangelists, Mark and Luke, who have likewise introduced it. They have both omitted the phrase "Son of God" altogether. Mark reports that he simply said, "Thou art the Christ," and Luke, "Thou art the Christ of God." Now, if these phrases had not been synonymous, and especially if the epithet "Son of God" had added anything, or contained a meaning not expressed in the other epithet, "the Christ," or the Christ of God," Mark and Luke would certainly not have omitted it. The Gospels were used at first by different churches, and it was long before they were collected into a volume. If there were any difference in the meaning of these phrases, there would have been a difference of doctrine in the different churches. One would have been taught that Jesus was simply the Messiah, and the other, that he was something more.

The same conclusion is to be drawn from the account which Luke gives of the trial of Jesus before the Sanhedrim. "And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people and the chief priests and the scribes came together, and led him into their council, saying, Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not be

lieve; and if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let me go. Hereafter shall the Son of Man sit on the right hand of the power of God." The phrase "Son of Man" was likewise an epithet of the Messiah, derived from the seventh chapter of Daniel, in which it is said: "I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of Man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him; and there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom," &c. To this passage, which was interpreted by the Jews of their expected Messiah, Christ intended to allude, and to apply it to himself. He was understood to do so by the council, as will appear by what follows. "Then said they all, Art -thou then the Son of God?

Ye say truth, for I am."

And he said unto them,

On one occasion he was accused of applying this epithet to himself on other grounds, grounds touching his metaphysical nature. He repudiated the idea, and placed the use of the term on the basis of his official character, and not of his essential nature. "The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy, and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods unto whom the word of God came,... 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? If I 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