Moses and Christ to destroy idolatry. "And I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire, and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God. And they sing the song of Moses, the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvellous are thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints. Who shall not fear thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name? for thou only art holy for all nations shall come and worship before thee; for thy judgments are made manifest." Now, if the Lamb were a Person of the Trinity, would he not rather be placed as a person worshipped, instead of a person worshipping? Is not his being left out of Deity, and associated with Moses, sufficient evidence that the writer did not consider him as God in any sense?

ment.

Not only so; the theocratic ideas of the Old Testament are maintained through the whole book. Christ is represented as reigning, but it is only under God, as the supreme Sovereign, and by his power and appoint"And the seventh angel sounded, and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever. And the four and twenty elders, which sat before God on their seats, fell upon their faces and worshipped God, saying, We give thee thanks, O Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come, because thou hast taken to thee thy great power and hast reigned." In another place: "And I heard a loud voice, saying in heaven,

Now is come salvation and strength and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ."

All these things certainly look very different from a modern form of worship, which has been stereotyped, as it were, for the use of all ages. "O holy, blessed, and glorious Trinity, three Persons and one God."

There are two passages near the close of the book, which, when brought together, are thought to constitute a strong argument for the supreme Divinity of Jesus Christ. In the sixth verse of the last chapter, the angel who had just shown John the heavenly Jerusalem, and seems to have been the expositor of the symbolic images which had passed before the vision of the Revelator, says to him, "These sayings are faithful and true, and the Lord God of the holy prophets hath sent his angel to show unto his servants the things which must shortly be done. Behold, I come quickly; blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book." Then in the sixteenth verse, "I, Jesus, have sent mine angel to testify these things in the churches."

Now it is argued, from the fact that the angel says, that the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel," and Jesus says, "I, Jesus, have sent mine angel," that Jesus is the Lord God of the holy prophets, and as the Lord God of the holy prophets is Jehovah, Jesus mnst be Jehovah.

But in order to settle this, it will be necessary to determine whether, throughout the book, Jesus acts in an original and independent, or only in a subordinate and ministerial capacity. Does he give the revelation himself, or does he merely transmit it from God to men, or,

what amounts to the same thing, does not God, in promotion of his cause, send an angel to make certain disclosures to John? Christ speaks, in the Gospel of John, of his sending that which God sends in his name. "And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son." He means to say, of course, that he will give it through the Father. The Father, to whom all prayer is to be made, would give it on his account, as he afterwards explains "In that day, ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, He will give it you." It is not necessary that what is asked in the name of Christ, and given by God, should come through the agency of Christ, in order to be said to be given by him; but only to be given for his sake, and in promotion of his cause. This mode of representation enables us to understand what is meant by the first sentence of the book of Revelation, and all similar passages in the whole composition. The revelation of Jesus Christ, which GOD gave unto him, to show unto his (God's) servants the things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it to his servant John." Now it is immaterial whether the word "he," in this sentence, refers to God or Christ; it will ultimately amount to the same thing. If God sent the angel directly to John, then the angel was the angel both of God and Jesus, according to the representation we have quoted from the Gospel of John, by which Jesus is said to do that, which God does on his account, or in furtherance of his cause. Or if Christ sent the angel to John, he was

still the angel of God as well as of Christ, for he delivers a message, which Christ received from God, for the purpose of communicating it to mankind. Besides, the angels, though subjected to Christ, as we read, "principalities and powers being made subject to him," they are no less the angels of God than before.

It would seem, that the writer intended to represent that the angel came immediately from God, by a comparison of the first verse of the first chapter with the sixth verse of the last. "The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel to his servant John." In the last chapter; "The Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to show unto his servants the things which must shortly come to pass." If the last verse may be permitted to interpret the first, then the person referred to in the first, in the clause, " and he sent and signified it to his servant John," must refer to God, and not to Christ immediately, though an angel, sent by God to reveal anything to the church for the sake of Christ, and in furtherance of his cause, according to the representations I have quoted from the Gospel of John, might be said to be sent by Christ.

When these things are taken into consideration, the fact, that in one case it is said, "the Lord God of the holy prophets hath sent his angel," and in another, "I, Jesus, have sent mine angel," does not prove them to be identical and the same, or prove that Jesus claimed to be the Lord God of the holy prophets, for the book commences with making them distinct beings.

from each other. One is God, both by name and by what he does; and the other is not God, both by name and by what he does not do. "The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him."

Many persons are led into mistake, in the interpretation of the close of this book, by considering, "Behold, I come quickly," in the seventh and twelveth verses, to have been spoken by Jesus; whereas they are spoken by the angel in the name of God. The angel personates God in the seventh verse, and from the tenth to the sixteenth. In the sixth verse the angels speaks : "These saying are faithful and true; and the Lord God of the holy prophets hath sent his angel to show unto his servants the things which must shortly be done," and says, that is, God says through him, "Behold, I come quickly; blessed is he that keepeth the words of the prophecy of this book." Then the angel speaks again in the name of God, in the tenth verse: "Seal not the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand. Behold I come quickly, and my reward is with me, to give to every man according as his work shall be." This is partly a quotation from the tenth verse of the fortieth chapter of Isaiah. "Behold, the Lord God will come with a strong hand, and his arm shall rule for him; behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him." The angel goes on to speak in the name of God: “I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end."

This is all agreeable to the Messianic idea, to which the whole structure of the book is conformed. Christ