"below, which is the city of God," and "heaven "above, which is a city of God's preparation and "building also." In this most valuable Baptist Commentary, we learn that the commonwealth of Israel means the church of God, to which the Jews once belonged, and from which the Gentiles were once strangers and foreigners: but the New Testament administration has naturalized them in the city of God, which is his church below, even that church of which the Jews were once members.

VIII. MAN. "But now, in Christ Jesus, ye [Gen"tiles] who sometimes were far off, are made nigh "[even as the Jews,] by the blood of Christ. For he ❝is our peace, who hath made both [Jews and Gentiles]

one, and hath broken down the middle wall of parti❝tion between us; having abolished in his flesh the "enmity, even the law of commandments contained in "ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace."(z)

66

IX. BODY. "And that he might reconcile both [Jews and Gentiles] unto God in one body by the cross, hav❝ing slain the enmity thereby."(a) The connexion of this and the last particular, and the 7th also, shews that man and body, as well as commonwealth, relate to the visible church. It is not said that they relate to that exclusively; nor is it necessary that they should.

X. BRETHREN. In Ps. xxii. 22, Christ calls the Jewish church his brethren: in Hebr. ii. 11. 12, this is quoted as intended for Christians. They must there

(z) Eph. ii. 13-15.

(a) Eph. ii. 16.

fore be one in some sense. The connexion shews that they are ecclesiastically one.

XI. BRIDE. Jeremiah says that Jehovah is married to the Jewish church ;(b) John tells us that the Christian church is the bride, the Lamb's wife ;(c) yet God says, by the pen of Solomon, "My dove, my undefiled, ❝is but one; she is the only one of her mother; she is "the choice one of her that bare her."(d) It seems then that Christ has but one bride or church; but the Jewish and Christian societies are both that church; therefore they are one church. That this passage relates to ecclesiastical unity, Gill himself is inclined to believe.

XII. CHILDREN. The scriptures represent Jewish and Gentile professors as the children of the church. When the Jews are cut off, the church is represented as a widow but she is comforted by the accession of Gentile children. "The [Gentile] children which thou “shalt have, after thou hast lost the other [the Jewish], "shall say again in thine ears, the place is too strait for "me: give place to me that I may dwell. Then shalt "thou say in thine heart, Who hath begotten me these, "seeing I have lost my children, and am desolate, a cap❝tive, and removing to and fro? and who hath brought 66 up these? Behold I was left alone; these, where had 66 they been? Thus saith the Lord God, behold, I will "lift up mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my stand"ard to the people: and they shall bring thy sons in "their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon "their shoulders."(e) Some who admit the identity of

(b) Jer. iii. 14.
(d) Cant, vi. 9.

(c) Rev. xxi. 9.
(e) Isa. xlix. 20—22.

the Jewish and Christian societies are inclined to doubt that the former is intended by either of these classes of children. Their mistake ought to be corrected by the preceding context, in which "Zion said, The Lord "hath forsaken me, and my Lord hath forgotten me.” Messiah says, "Though Israel be not gathered, yet "shall I be glorious in the eyes of the Lord, and my "God shall be my strength." The Father says to him, "It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant, "to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the pre"served of Israel; I will also give thee for a light to the "Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the "end of the earth."(f) I do not deny that the ultimate accomplishment of these prophecies is yet future: yet that their primary fulfilment was in the Apostolic day, is too plain to admit of a doubt. Can any one suppose that Zion, Jacob, and Israel, have no reference to the Jews, even when they are expressly contrasted with the Gentiles? Here, then, are two distinct sets of ecclesiastical children, sent before and after the affliction of their mother; just as Job had two sets of children sent before and after his affliction. These Patriarchal decades form a good illustration of the subject, and were probably intended to do so; and this opinion may have weighed with the Jews in considering the number ten, as forming a congregation. But Job's two congregations had only one father, and thus formed one family: so the Jews and Gentiles had only one ecclesiastical mother; that is, they were one church.

(f) Isa, xlix. 14. 5. 6.

If not very much mistaken, the evidence which has been laid before you, goes clearly to the establishment of the point in question; that is, that the Scriptures give to the Jewish and Christian Societies the same names, in such a manner as plainly to prove that they are the same church. This evidence my Opponent endeavours to rebut in the following words, viz. "Mr. M'Calla (for "we must now look back a little,) yesterday entertained "you for a long time, by telling you of the different 66 names applied to the Jewish society, and also to the "Christian, as expressive of their identity; as their be"ing equally called the house, bride, people, vineyard, "kingdom, &c. of God. To all this argument we would "in the mass reply. That suppose I might be so fortu"nate as to have a house in Washington and one in Lex❝ington, each of them might with the greatest propriety "be called my house; the same might be said concerning "barn, vineyard, floor, kingdom, &c. But who would

argue thence that because they were both called my "house, vineyard, barn, &c. they were one and the same "house, vineyard, barn, &c. This would shock common 66 sense. But it may be objected that the Lord, meta"phorically speaking, had but one bride, that he could "not be said to have had two. To such an objection I "would reply by saying that he always had but one "bride, one house, one vineyard, one kingdom, &c. at one time; but that Israel having broken the marriage 66 covenant was divorced, and ceased to be his married

66

"wife, in the metaphorical style; and that in their stead "another bride was chosen, another house was built, "another vineyard was planted, another kingdom was "constituted, to which the same figurative names were "applied. And after all that Mr. M'Calla has said on "this subject, it amounts to precisely the same thing; "for he will not say, with all his fortitude and zeal, he "cannot say, that the Jewish and Christian societies are "identically the very same-no, he will say, he has "said, they are under different dispensations, and this ❝is saying a great deal, if he is aware of the import of "it, for, in fact, a different dispensation is tantamount to "a different covenant. At all events, he makes the two "societies different in some respects, and thus esta"blishes my views and saps the very basis of his own "system."(g)

The question whether the two societies are under different covenants or not, will, with divine permission, soon be tried. It is true that a difference of administration, and a difference in many other respects, has been admitted. I never undertook to prove their personal or political, their chronological or geographical identity. In my explication of the 2d proposition, I expressly declared that "it says nothing more than that 66 they are the same church, and nothing more than ec"clesiastical identity is intended." While this can be shewn, they may differ in ten thousand respects, without sapping the foundation of my system. But if I mistake not, my Opponent considers his own system not perfect

(g) Spurious Debate with me, p. 186.