harmony are tests of truth-but not on subjects which we do not

understand-such especially as the nature of God, 13—Illustrated

by the efforts of a blind man to reason of light and colours.-

Revelation necessarily incomplete, 14-and in the terms of

human language.-A process of reasoning requires many inter-

mediate truths, 15-these on divine subjects supplied by revela-

tion alone, 16-Perceptible harmony here therefore is no test of

truth, unless it can be shown that revelation is incapable of addi-

tion, 17-The argument in question susceptible of pernicious

application-against all the peculiarities of revelation, 18-and

even the natural attributes of God.-Such a test unavailable to

the mass of men, 20-An objection answered.-The Eternal

Sonship of Christ said not to be expressly revealed, 21—The

blending of the two arguments inadmissible.-Is the doctrine at

all revealed? 22-On the principles of the objectors, express tes-

timony not to be expected.-It could not be so revealed as to

preclude objection, 23-We must take revelation alone, or leave

it altogether out of the question, 25—The popular argument is

unsound, 26-Filiation implies inferiority of relation only,—

not of fact and nature, 27-Remarks on analogy and resem-

blance. The character of God made known by analogies only, 28

-Precise limitation necessary-the idea of imperfection in all

human analogies, 29-The doctrine of Christ's Deity antagonist

and restrictive to that of his Sonship, 31-Further illustrations

of analogy.-Sonship does not necessarily imply beginning, 35.

NOTE (A). Citations, with additional Remarks, illustrative of

the argument against the Eternal Sonship of our Lord, 38.

Citations from Volkelius, 38-Roëll-Notes on the Creed of St.

Athanasius, 39-Antiquity no certain guide in religion-Gil.

Wakefield-H. Taylor-Dr. A. Clarke, 40-S. Drew, 41-Moses

Stuart.-Generation and creation to be discriminated, 42-So

also existence necessary, and existence independent and sepa-

rate, 43-Can God be an eternal fountain of existence, or can

he not? 44.

SECTION III.-PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURE OF THE FOL-

LOWING ARGUMENT, 45.

Preliminary remarks, 45-Distinction between a process of rea-

soning and a question of testimony-faith and science, 46—

Rules and cautions in respect of the former, 47-An objection

founded on the various applications of the title "Son of God," 49

-The proper easily distinguishable from an improper use.—

The appellation must have a sense of its own, 50-remarks on

the contrary opinion-hence it is joined with exclusive epithets,

53-The plan of the work stated, 54.

CHAPTER II.

JEWISH THEOLOGY.

SECTION I.—ILLUSTRATIONS OF JEWISH OPINIONS FROM

THE APOCRYPHA, THE TARGUMS, AND THE WORKS OF PHILO

JUDEUS, 56.

Peculiarities of New Testament phraseology, 56-Few Jewish re-

cords extant of the New Testament era, 57-The Apocrypha-

Targums-Onkelos, 58-Philo, 59-The Logos, 60-various

opinions on. -Citations from the Apocrypha, 61-from the Targum

of Onkelos, 62-from the works of Philo, 63-Inferences, 71-

Divine generation further illustrated, 72.

NOTE (B). On the Character and Writings of Philo Judæus, 73.

Several opinions stated, 73-The chronology of Philo.-His con-

version incredible, 75-The spirit of his writings, 76.

SECTION II.—THE JEWISH DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE MES-

SIAH AND THE SON OF GOD, 80.

Traces of this distinction in the writings of Philo and Onkelos, 80-

clearly maintained by the Targums of Jonathan and by the Jeru-

salem Targum, 82-The mere humanity of the Messiah urged by

Trypho, 83-The Pharisees of the age of our Lord equally un-

informed, as may be gathered from Matt. xxii. 42-45, 85-

Jesus often acknowledged as the Christ, 86-The expectation of

the age, 87-The character of John the Baptist, 88-The ene-

mies of our Lord feared to encounter his popularity, 89-The

assertion of his Deity led to personal violence, 90-so did that of

his divine Sonship, 91-John v. 16-18; x. 28-39-The Jewish

law had no provision against his claim to be the Messiah, 94-

Christ before the Sanhedrim, 95-refuses to plead to his Messiah-

ship, 96-but confesses his divine Sonship, 97—is condemned

for blasphemy-and execrated by the populace.-Christ before

Pilate, 98-confesses himself King of the Jews, 99-is at length

accused of calling himself "Son of God."-The effect on Pilate,

100-No false Christ ever accused of blasphemy, 101-In-

ferences, 102.

SECTION III.-PERSONAL CONFESSIONS OF JESUS AS THE

SON OF GOD, 103.

These confessions made by Jews, and therefore to be interpreted

according to the Jewish sense of the terms, 103-Of the divine

Sonship alone-from the guards at the crucifixion-from the

blind man upon whom sight had been bestowed by Jesus, 105-

from the disciples, after the storm on the lake of Gennesaret, 106

-Confessions both of the divine Sonship and of the Messiah-

ship, 107-These rare-from disciples only-being the sole

acknowledgments of our Lord's Deity before his resurrection,

108-That of Nathanael, 109-of Peter, 111—of Martha, 114.

NOTE (C). On Matt. xiv. 33, and on the use of the Greek article

in the title "Son of God," 117.

It is doubted if this confession were from the disciples, 117—but it is

incredible that they alone would remain unaffected by the power

of Christ.-No evidence that any other persons were present, 118

-Dr. A. Clarke's canons on the Greek article, 119-Classification

of the passages where the title "Son of God" occurs.-Dr. C.

transgresses his own canons, 120-The law of the article stated

and illustrated, 121.

SECTION IV.-PRETERNATURAL TESTIMONIES TO JESUS AS

THE SON OF God, 125.

These addressed to the Jewish auditors, and therefore come under

the same laws of exposition as the before cited, 125-almost ex-

clusively to the divine Sonship.-Hence the appropriateness of

the title in question may be inferred, 126-The annunciation,

Luke i. 30-35, examined at large, 127-The testimonies of God

the Father at the baptism and transfiguration of Christ—with the

commentaries of John the Baptist and St. Peter, 138-Confes-

sions of impure spirits, 145-Their ejection evidence of the

power of Christ-hence they acknowledge him, not as the Mes-

siah, but as the Son of God, 146, 147.

NOTE (D). On the expression, " The Power of the Highest," 148.

The term "Power" several times used personally in the New
Testament, 148-also by Philo-and the Rabbins-applied to
Simon Magus, 149-Power a designation of our Lord's divine
nature common among early ecclesiastical writers.

NOTE (E). On the temptation of Christ, and the ejection of im-

pure spirits, 151.

The temptation an acknowledgment of the divine Sonship, 151-

Several examples of the ejection of impure spirits, 153.

SECTION V.-REMARKS UPON SEVERAL PASSAGES OF OLD

TESTAMENT SCRIPTURE, 155.

The origin of the ascertained Jewish opinions a question of in-

terest, 155-Prophecy intentionally obscure.-Spiritual generation

in man might plausibly be thought to have its type in the Deity,

156-This conjecture countenanced by the Mosaic account of the

human race.-Remarks on Psalm ii. 7, 159-and Prov. xxx. 3, 4

-Prov. viii. 22-26 examined, 160-and Micah v. 2, 163.

SECTION VI.-RECAPITULATION OF THE FOREGOING ARGU-

MENT, WITH REMARKS ON ITS VALUE, 165.

Opinions properly Jewish, 165—these probably correct, 166-as may

be inferred in part from the Jewish idiom.-Opinions of the better

informed on our Lord's person and character, 167-Christ him-

self countenances the Jewish use of the title "Son of God"-so

also spiritual intelligences.-Hence is derived at least a conclu-

sive argument for the Deity of Jesus, 168-Does the New Testa-

ment render the Jewish opinions on the subject at all questionable?

169-
9-or does it recognise and amplify them? 170.

NOTE (F). On the sense of the appellation, "Son of man," 171.

The usages of the Hebrew Scriptures, 171- of the Targums-of
the Syriac version of the New Testament-go to prove "Son of
man to have been the emphatic synonyme for man, 172-This
shows the idiomatic sense of the title "Son of God"-and is not
less applicable to the New than to the Old Testament.

CHAPTER III.

GENERAL EVANGELICAL ILLUSTRATIONS. 173.

SECTION I.-THE NEW TESTAMENT MODE OF EMPLOYING

OUR LORD'S TITLES, ESPECIALLY THE TITLE, "SON OF God,"

173.

Our Lord's names and titles not employed indiscriminately, 173—

Reasons for the contrary impression, 174-The title "Son of

God" often in apposition with our Lord's personal or officiał
designations, 175-Examples cited, 176-Hence "Son of God"
cannot be synonymous with "Messiah," 177-this combination
necessary to the then state of Jewish theology, 178-Pas-
sages in which our Lord, as the Creator, is described as the Word
and the Son of God.-Passages where, in the character of the Son,
he is designated to the mediatorial work, 179-Christ in the
actual execution of the mediatorship is not usually called "the
Son," 180-Inferences, 181.

NOTE (G). On the apparent Exceptions to the foregoing Rules,
183.

1 Cor. viii. 5, 6. Here "Lord" has the peculiar sense of supreme

Divinity, 183-Eph. iii. 9, 10. Here the text corrupted, 184-

John xvii. 3. Here a transposition by our translators.-The

title in question liable to the ordinary laws of interchange, 185.

SECTION II.-CONSIDERATIONS ON THE RESURRECTION OF

JESUS, 186.

Miracles, 186-The miracle of the resurrection-its importance-

and peculiarity-indicate the singular eminence of Christ's person

and character, 187-Justice cannot be done to it without admitting

his Deity, 188-The crucifixion of Christ was the result of a

controversy—the speedy decision of which was absolutely neces-

sary, 189-this determined by his resurrection. The precise

question at issue was his claim to a divine Sonship.-Accordingly

he assumed absolute authority in the temple, because it was the

house of his Father.-Matt. xvii. 24-26, 190-John ii. 16, &c.,

192-Hence the resurrection is the convincing proof that Jesus is

the Son of God-Rom. i. 1, 3, 4, 193.

NOTE (H). On Rom. i. 3, 4, 196.

Preliminary remarks, 196—son of David, and Son of God cannot be

identical in sense, 197-The former notes the Messiah's royalty-

the latter occurs without the articles, 198-Christ is Son of God

"in power"-this phrase not used adverbially-nor as indicative

of the mediatorial authority-but of an attribute properly divine,

199 The antithesis of the passage rendered certain by the

expressions "according to the flesh," and "according to the

Spirit," &c., the former denoting the humanity-the latter, the

Divinity of our Lord, 200-Hence he is said to be "made of the