saw the Lord sitting on a throne high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple: if therefore Christ was his Lord, as St. John affirms, it is certain, from these words, that it was he who sate upon the throne in the temple, and had his train or retinue of angels there.

Fifthly, and lastly, That Christ also was that Jehovah and divine Lord and King, who, under the most high Father, presided over the Jewish church, is evident from several places of the New Testament, compared with the Old, from whence they are cited. I shall only instance in two, the first of which is Eph. v. 14. Wherefore he saith, that is, the prophet Isaiah, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light; which words are a paraphrastical reference to Isaiah lx. 1. Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee. But now, unless we suppose Christ to be this Lord or Jehovah, the prophet is so far from saying here that Christ shall give thee light, as St. Paul affirms, that he makes no mention at all of him. Either therefore Isaiah says no such thing as Christ shall give thee light, which is to give the lie to St. Paul; or else the true sense of that saying of Isaiah, the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee, must be, that Christ shall give thee light; which it cannot be, if Christ and that Lord were two distinct persons: but that they are one and the same is evident from Isaiah xliv. 6. Thus saith Jehovah the King of Israel, and his Redeemer the Lord of hosts, I am the first, and I am the last, and besides me there is no God: which divine character of I am the first, and I am the last, he elsewhere gives himself in chapters xli. 4. and xlviii. 12. of this

pro phecy. Now this very character ofthe God of Israel Christ assumes to himself, Rev. i. 11. I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last; so again, ver. 17. and chap. ii. 8. and chap. xxii. 13. Now how can we, with any reverence to our Saviour, suppose that he would ever have assumed to himself this distinguishing character of the God of Israel, and that in the very same words, and without ever explaining them into a different sense, had he not been the very same person? since he could not but foresee that he should hereby endanger the misleading of his church, and tempting her into a false opinion of his person. For what man, that was not prepossessed with a contrary opinion, would ever have thought that our Saviour did not mean himself to be the God of Israel, when he thus verbatim applies to himself his personal character, without any kind of restriction or explication? Should any man hear a voice from an invisible person seriously pronouncing, I am William the Conqueror, (as St. John did this voice from Christ, I am the first and the last,) would he not presently conclude either that this person was the ghost of that victorious prince, or that that voice was a designed delusion? Since therefore our Saviour declares that he is the first and the last, which is the essential character by which Jehovah the King of Israel describes himself, and doth no where intimate a different sense of this character as applied to himself, from what it signified as applied to the Jehovah, it necessarily follows, that either he meant not sincerely, or that himself and that Jehovah the King of Israel were the same person. And accordingly, Zech. ix. 9. which all agree is a prophecy of our Saviour, he is expressly called the King of Israel;

Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem; behold, thy King cometh unto thee: the most natural sense of which phrase, thy King, is, he that is now thy King, not he that is hereafter to be so: and if then, when this prophecy was delivered, he was King of the daughter of Zion, or people of Israel, to be sure he was always so: and therefore the prophet Malachi calls the temple, which was the palace of the divine King of Israel, the temple of Christ, Mal. iii. 1. Behold, I will send my messenger, i. e. John Baptist, and he shall prepare my way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the angel of the covenant, whom ye delight in : behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts. From whence I infer, first, that this Lord of hosts, which is the ordinary style of the God of Israel, was Christ, whose messenger and forerunner John Baptist was, vide Luke i. 76. and secondly, that the temple, which was the abode of this Lord of hosts, was the temple of Christ; the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple; which cannot be meant of God the Father, because in the next words he is called the angel of the covenant, which all agree is Christ. If then the temple of Jerusalem was the temple of Christ, and he was that Lord of hosts that dwelt in it, it necessarily follows, that he was that divine King of Israel, who under God the Father governed the Jewish church. And now, having proved at large this fourth proposition, which is the principal hinge upon which the whole argument turns, I proceed,

Fifthly, That after his coming into the world he still retained this his right and title of King of

Israel in particular, till they finally rejected him, and apostatized from that covenant on which his kingdom is founded. For he did not at all divest himself, by his incarnation, of that royal authority he was vested with, as he was the eternal Word, and Son of God, hereafter to be incarnate. For this his royal authority, as I shewed before, is necessarily implied in his mediatorship of the new covenant, of which, as I have also shewed, he was always Mediator without any discontinuance or interruption. So long therefore as the new covenant continued in force with the Jews in particular, so long he was their mediatorial king in particular, under God the Father. Now it is certain that the new covenant continued in force with them so long as they continued to be the church of God, because it was the new covenant that made them so; and it is certain they continued the church of God many years after the incarnation of our Saviour, even till such time as by their obstinate rejecting of our Saviour, and incurable apostasy from that covenant which made them the church and people of God, they had finally incensed him to reject them, to break off his covenant-relation to them, and utterly to dispark and unchurch them. And therefore we find that for several years both our Saviour and his apostles continued in close communion with the Jewish church, frequented their temple and synagogues, and joined with them in all the solemnities of their public worship: by which they owned them to be the true church of God, and consequently to be yet in covenant with him. Since therefore they continued in the new covenant after Christ's incarnation, Christ must also continue the Mediator of that covenant to

them, and consequently their mediatorial king. And hence he is styled the King of the Jews in particular, after his incarnation; for so the wise men in their inquiry after him, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? Matt. ii. 2. And that he was born King of the Jews, not merely as he was descended from the loins of David, but by a title that he had antecedent to his birth, viz. as he was the Son of God, hereafter to be incarnate, is evident by that confession of Nathanael, John i. 49. Rabbi, thou art the Son of God, thou art the King of Israel; where his being the King of Israel is consequent to his being the Son of God; and so John xii. 13. they who attended him in his progress to Jerusalem salute him with a, Blessed is the King of Israel that cometh in the name of the Lord; which St. John makes the accomplishment of that forementioned prophecy, Zech. ix. 9. Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion-Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, sitting on an ass's colt, John xii. 14, 15. And this title our Saviour assumes to himself in that good confession he made before Pontius Pilate, who asking him, Art thou King of the Jews? he answered him, Sayest thou this of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me? And when Pilate presses him for a more explicit answer, he tells him, My kingdom is not of this world: as much as if he had said, I know the Jews, mine enemies, have insinuated to thee, that by assuming to myself this title of King of the Jews, I design to usurp the temporal dominion of Cæsar thy master: but let not that trouble thee; for though it is most certain that I am King of the Jews, yet my kingship and Cæsar's are of a quite different nature, and do no way clash or interfere with one an