Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

form, and acting in the capacity of a servant, they are not startled at finding this representation consistently supported throughout." After illustrating this point, he, in the second place, states an excellent distinction between the "effect of delegation as conferring a right to exercise any office, and the capacities and qualifications to discharge the functions of that office." "If, then, (says Mr. Wardlaw,) Jesus Christ be Lord of all, and Judge of all, what, I ask, are the qualifications essential to the Being who governs, and who is to judge the world? And to this I answer, without fear of contradiction by any reasonable and unprejudiced mind, OMNISCIENCE, OMNIPOTENCE, and INDEPENDENCE; and if this be so, since the Scriptures testify, that the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son,' does it not follow, of immediate and irresistible consequence, that the Son is such a being.""

And if so, he must be God of God; to suppose, as Mr. Wardlaw after remarks, an omniscient and omnipotent creature, is an irreconcilable contradiction.

This argument of Mr. Wardlaw's appears to me unanswerable; and it gratifies me to find, that it perfectly harmonises with the conclusions I have drawn from different passages in Scripture-vide supra, pp. 33, 34, 38, 45, 48, and 58; and particularly the answer to the objection appearing to arise from John v. 16 to 32, contained in p. 65 to 68; also p. 73, 76, 80, 81, and 82. In all these inferences from Scripture, the principle so clearly stated by Mr. Wardlaw is adopted, and the conclusions founded upon it.

On the facts and reasonings contained in this third discourse, there is little occasion for illustration, or room for dispute. The facts are plain and undeniable; the passages of the New Testament, which relate them, clear in their meaning, and undisputed as to their authenticity. The only question is, do these facts prove that our Saviour possessed the powers ascribed to him? and, if he did, is not the possession of such powers a decisive proof of his divinity? These are inferences from the facts; and whether they are just and conclusive, must be left to the plain sense of every rational and candid mind. The steps of the argument are so few and so plain, any attempt to explain them further would only accumulate words without necessity.

I shall, however, add a few additional testimonies of Scripture I had overlooked, and obviate some of the most important apparent objections, from circumstances recorded in Scripture, which at first seem to have a contrary bearing.

There are two remarkable prophecies of Isaiah, which I have not adverted to, referred to by the Evangelists, as accomplished in Christ, which most distinctly identify him with the great Jehovah. The first occurs, Isaiah vi. 1, when the Prophet describes the majesty of the LORD Jehovah: “ I saw," said he, "the LORD (Jehovah) sitting upon a throne high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple : above it (stood the seraphims, and one cried to another, and said, holy, holy, holy, is the LORD Jehovah1) God of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory."

The prophet proceeds to describe this divine Being, as commanding him, "Go and tell this people: hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy; and shut their eyes, lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert and be healed." Now the apostle John directly refers to this glory and this denunciation, and appropriates them to Christ, as his glory and his denunciation: "But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him, that the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report, and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? Therefore they could not believe, because Esaias saith again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart, that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them (the apostle adds) these things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him:" thus clearly identifying Christ with Jehovah, and the glory of Christ with the glory of the Holy One of Israel.

Thus again, Isaiah, xli. 21 to 25, introduces the God of Israel, declaring,

1 Vide Lowth's tranlation.

2 John, xii. 37-41.

me.

"There is no God else besides me, a just God and a Saviour; there is none besides Look unto me, and be ye saved all the ends of the earth, for I am God, and there is none else. I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return: that unto me every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall swear.'

Certainly, if ever any character exclusively designated the supreme God, the Ruler of the world, here that character is found. Yet this character the great apostle of the Gentiles applies directly to Christ: "whether we live, (says he, Rom. xi. 6 to 12,) we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord. Whether we live, therefore, or die, we are the Lord's: for to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and the living. But why dost thou judge thy brother, or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ; for it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God: so then every one of us shall give account of himself to God."

Thus, according to Isaiah, every knee shall bow to God the Saviour: according to St. Paul, it is Christ the Saviour to whom every knee shall bow. In the Old Tes

tament, God is the judge of all the earth, in the New also it is declared, that all men shall give an account of themselves to God; but this is to take place, "when we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ." Can we, after this, question the identity of Christ and God?"

Thus clearly does this prophecy, and its accomplishment by Christ, accord with the declaration of St. Paul in another Scripture, when he describes the humiliation of Christ," Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God; but made himself of no reputation, and took upon himself the form of a ser vant, and was made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." Thus evidently applying the declaration of Jehovah, "that every knee should bow to him," as fulfilled by the homage being paid to Christ.

The application of the name and dignity of Jehovah to Christ, so clear in the two last prophecies from Isaiah, is equally so in another prediction of the same prophet, which Mr. Wardlaw, and indeed, almost every writer on the subject, notices, but which I perceive I have omitted: "The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, prepare ye the way of Jehovah; make straight in the desert a highway for our God:" a passage directly applied to John the Baptist, as the forerunner of Christ, by the Evangelist. Thus St. Luke: "And many of the children of Israel shall he (John the Baptist) turn to the Lord their God; and he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord."

Omniscience also is attributed to Christ in a remarkable passage of the Revelation, which I had not noticed: "All the churches shall know that I (Jesus Christ) am he that searcheth the reins and the heart, and I will give unto every one of you according to your works."4 Compare this with the prayer of Solomon to the God of Israel, "Give to every man according to his ways, whose heart thou knowest: for thou, even thou only knowest the hearts of all the children of men."5 And that of Jeremiah "The heart is deceitful above all things, who can know it; I, Jehovah, search the heart, I try the reins, to give to every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings." How clearly are the knowledge and the authority of Christ as judge of man, thus identified in Scripture with the knowledge and the authority of Jehovah.

:

1 Philippians, ii. 6—12.

3 Luke, i. 16, 17.

4 Revelation, ij. 23.

Compare also John i. 2,
51 Kings, viii. 39.

2 Isaiah, xl 3.
and Matt. iii. 1-5.

6 Jeremiah, xvii. 9, 10,

NOTE XV. PAGE 70.

A striking example of our Saviour's miracles impressing the apostles, and all the spectators in general, with the idea that in his own person resided the power and majesty of God, appears on the miraculous draught of fishes, recorded by Št. Luke: "When they filled both the ships, so that they began to sink;" it is added, "When Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus' knees, saying, Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord." This was a feeling of terror, like that which the presence of the Lord, on Mount Sinai, impressed upon the people of Israel: " When they said unto Moses, speak thou with us, and we will hear; but let not God speak with us, lest we die." 112

Thus also the ark of the Lord, the frequent seat of his presence, inspired a similar terror into David; and the homage then paid by St. Peter was an act, not of civil obeisance, but of religious reverence, impressed by the greatness of Christ's power, extending to every creature, and marking the presence of a divinity.

NOTE XVI. PAGE 76.

On the divinity of Christ as following, "from his knowing the hearts of all men."

On this argument Dr. Carpenter observes, "If St Peter's saying, Lord, thou knowest all things,' proves the omniscience of Jesus, why should it not respecting his disciples in the apostolic age, when John (i. Epistle ii. 20,) says, Ye have an unction from the Holy One, and know all things?" "4

[ocr errors]

Answer-Because the context, and the very expressions of the apostle, in verse 27, explains this all things to mean all necessary Christian truths. The apostle declares, "Ye need not that any man teach you; but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him."

Is this parallel to the knowledge ascribed to our Lord, "knowing what was in man," universally? Dr. Carpenter adds, "In Rev. ii. 23, our Lord is represented as saying, 'and all the churches shall know that I am he who searcheth the reins and the heart;' and at first sight the expression seems decidedly to favour the common system. But on turning to the first verse of the chapter, the revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him, to show to his servants things which must come to pass,' we see at once that his knowledge was limited, and that he derived it, whatever was its extent and object, from God."

Now, of this assertion one part is clearly true, that Jesus Christ, considered as man, derived all his knowledge from God, from the divine nature united with the human. Nay, if we dare presume to speak on a mystery so unfathomable to human faculties, we might say, that as the Father was the fountain of Godhead to the Son, he might also be said to be the fountain of knowledge. But if he has imparted to the Son his own nature and his Godhead, does it not follow that the knowledge of the Son is unlimited? And is not every assertion of Scripture, proving that any of the attributes of the Divinity are possessed by Christ in an unlimited degree, (as is here said of knowledge,) a decided proof that Christ partakes of the divine nature? Thus Dr. Carpenter's argument, as usual, plainly takes for granted the question in

debate.

But Dr. Carpenter adds in a note, "even the prophets occasionally knew the secret thoughts of men at a distance." Most true, the prophets occasionally, as the Spirit of God communicated to them, in each particular instance, that knowledge; whereas, at all other times, they were ignorant as any other men: but Christ knew what was in man, (universally,) displayed this knowledge constantly, and in the Revelation as quoted above, challenges this knowledge as belonging constantly to himself, consistently with the declaration in another place, "that in him dwelleth the fulness of the

1 Luke, v. 8.

2 Exod, xx, 19.

32 Samuel, vi, 9,
4 Carpenter on Unitarianism, p. 188.
Taken from a Mr. James, vide Unitarianism, &c. page 189.

Godhead bodily, "and the Father gave not the Spirit by measure to him." The instances Dr. Carpenter would insinuate, as parallel to the knowledge ascribed to Christ, are, Ahijah's knowing the thoughts of Jeroboam's wife; (1 Kings, xiv. 5, 6.) Of this it is said, " The Lord said unto Ahijah, Behold the wife of Jeroboam cometh to ask a thing of thee for her son, for he is sick: thus and thus shalt thou say unto her; for it shall be, when she cometh in, that she shall feign herself to be another woman. Does Dr. Carpenter really think this knowledge, thus conveyed, a parallel to the knowledge ascribed to Christ?

[ocr errors]

Again, Elisha knew the conduct of Gehazi at a distance from him, and the secret counsels of the Assyrian king, (2 Kings, v. 25, 26; vi. 12.) True; and the same God, which gave this knowledge to Elisha, gave him, in the one case, power miraculously to inflict Gehazi with leprosy; and, in the other, miraculously to lead the army of the king of Syria to Samaria, into the power of the king of Israel.

Does Dr. Carpenter really think the knowledge or the power, in either case, lasted a moment beyond the particular instance when it was given; and will he affirm this of the knowledge and power of Jesus Christ?

Again, Daniel knew the thoughts of the king of Babylon upon his bed, (Dan. ii. 29.) True; Daniel declares, "There is a God in heaven which revealeth secrets, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar, what shall be in the latter days.” Is this parallel to the knowledge ascribed to Christ?

Last comes the instance of Peter, who knew the secret transactions of Ananias, (Acts, v. 4.) True: Peter was enabled to detect the crime of Ananias, who attempted to defraud the assembled congregation of the apostolic church; and who thus, as Peter charges him," had lied not unto men, but unto God." And Peter, as then presiding in the Church, was enabled not only to detect, but to punish, this falsehood and fraud miraculously with instant death; but does Peter claim an inherent power of searching the heart, or of taking away or restoring life, whenever he will? In a word, are not all these instances contrasted, as strongly as possible, with the permanent, inherent, and unlimited knowledge and power ascribed to Jesus Christ? Why, then, would Dr. Carpenter lend his name, or give the appearance of his approbation, to sophistry so weak and delusive as this?

NOTE XVII. PAGE 81.

"The power of Christ, as Judge of Mankind, irrefutably establishes his Divinity." The force of this argument is strongly felt by the Socinians, and their efforts to repel it are feeble and desponding.

Mr. Belsham confesses, "That this office of judge of mankind is of such transcendent dignity and importance, and requires powers so far superior to any thing we can conceive to belong to a mere human being, however meritorious and exalted, that it seems to many utterly incredible, that such an office should be assigned to one who was himself at one time a peccable and fallible man, and, as such, liable to appear at the tribunal of Eternal Justice. The righteous Judge of the whole earth, the unerring arbiter of the destinies of all the innumerable generations of mankind, must surely be a personage of rank, far superior to any who shall then be summoned to his tribunal. This reasoning has appeared so forcible to some persons of much learning and reflection, that this consideration alone has prevented them from acceding to the Unitarian hypothesis, though they have acknowledged that particular texts might admit of a satisfactory explication upon Unitarian principles."

Mr. Yates, in his answer to Mr. Wardlaw, declares, "The argument relates to a subject most sublime and awful, and far removed from our knowledge and experience. That he is therefore convinced that the Scriptures alone can afford us information on this subject; and, with great reluctance to argue the point at all, on the grounds of mere human reason, I shall venture to say, that the qualifications of omniscience, omnipresence and independence, do not appear to me essential to the office

1 Vide the quotation from him, in the Notes to Dr. Wardlaw's Discourses, page 426,

of the delegated Governor and Judge of mankind." As to this opinion, I am satisfied to let the reader judge between it and that maintained in these pages, without adding here any additional reasons. If he wishes to see the subject fully and ably treated, I would refer him to Mr. Wardlaw's Answer to Mr. Yates, from page 236 to 246.

Dr. Carpenter shrinks from the question: he says, "It is probably impossible for us to know precisely what will be the nature of the awful proceedings of the day of judgment, and the agency which Jesus will employ on that all-important occasion. But one thing is clear from the Scriptures, that the office was assigned to him as man. (John, v. 27.) God hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. But (says the Doctor) this reason may be regarded as of somewhat a doubtful nature. But St. Paul (Acts, xvii. 31) expressly proves this assertion, for he says, That God hath fixed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness, by the man whom he hath appointed.' This I regard as a complete proof that the MAN Christ Jesus is to be our Judge; and, of course, whatever is requisite to enable him to be the agent of God in judging the world, will be communicated to him by the almighty power of God."

[ocr errors]

Assuredly it will: the MAN Christ Jesus will be competent to act as judge of all mankind, because with the nature of man, he unites the nature of GOD. This, and this only, can solve the difficulty, and this, I trust, the above Discourse brings scriptural proofs, is the real truth. No, says Dr. Carpenter, if he be man, that is enough to prove he is man only.

Here again the question is granted, and, affirming the Doctor's opinion is supposed to be all-powerful, against every proof to the contrary. In truth, this petitio principii is the Doctor's stronghold in reasoning. But as it was no where more necessary, than in this most pressing urgency, it is no where employed with more undisguised frankness and commanding brevity.

NOTE XVIII. PAGE 85.

"The union of the human with the divine nature in Christ, his inferiority to the Father as touching his manhood, though he was notwithstanding truly God, for in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily; this may, and must produce many passages, speaking of Christ in his human nature, which may appear difficult to reconcile with those which speak of him as God; but yet that union of nature does and must reconcile them."

In these words I am far from asserting, that this principle will leave no difficulties in the Scripture unsolved. This very union of natures in Christ is undoubtedly a mystery which no human faculties can adequately comprehend. But we can distinctly see that the reality of this union is so expressly revealed in Scripture, that we must believe it, or must reject the authority of Scripture altogether, and thus reject the clear evidence, and the important truths of divine revelation. Or, if we attempt still to acknowledge that authority, rejecting this doctrine, we shall be involved in inextricable confusion and perplexity, and must abandon all rational rules of interpretation, and represent the different parts of divine revelation as irreconcileably opposed to each other. While admitting this union of natures in Christ, we see the whole scheme to be consistent and uniform, though, at the same time, to a certain extent mysterious, and such as our faculties cannot adequately comprehend. But in proof that Christianity being a scheme imperfectly comprehended, forms no valid objection to it, I would refer to Butler's Analogy, Part II. Chapter IV. in which this question is discussed by that admirable reasoner, so, as I conceive, fully to satisfy every candid and reflecting mind. I shall not attempt here to injure this excellent writer's arguments, by stating them in a mutilated extract, or attempting to condense what I should thus only obscure. I must refer my reader to the work itself; and, if his mind is strongly affected by the objection, he cannot in candour refuse to examine the

1 Dr. Carpenter on Unitarianism, p, 202,

« FöregåendeFortsätt »