Page images
PDF
EPUB

10. Was the Being who alone is omnipresent, and who filleth heaven and earth with his presence, once con fined in a mortal body, removable from place to place?

11. If Christ be the omniscient God, to whom are perfectly known all times and all events, past, present and to come, with what truth could he say, “Of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father," Mark xiii. 32 ?

much soooer than any other form. Thus Jehovah hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows, sec Isaiah liii. It is true we did indeed esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted, but this was our ignorance, for Jehovah himself was the supporter of his own external form, and appointed and provided all the means necessary for its support and the accomplishment of the end in view.

10. No! not confined in a mortal body; for we cannot attach the idea of confinement to an omnipresent Being. If the Being who is alone omnipresent, filleth heaven and earth with his presence, what ground is there for excluding this presence from Jesus Christ? The Divine presence was in Christ in a supereminent degree; "For it pleased the Father that in him (Christ) should ALL fulness dwell." Col. i. 19. Observe not a part of the fulness, but all fulness; it is different with man, for it is written; of his (Christ's) fulness have all we received, and grace for grace." John i. 16,

The

11. Christ is not the Omniscient God, if he be viewed separately from the Father. Truth, or the Son, is nothing of itself, knoweth nothing; for the very life and soul of Truth is the Divine Love or Father. very spring of Life is the will, in this spring all knowledge originates, and is instantly passed to the understanding. Divine Good or the Father, alone knoweth the proper time or state, when judgment should be accomplished. The knowledge of the proper time and state for judgment is perceived by Divine Truth or the Son, and by the Truth all judgment is ultimately effected. Hence it is said, "the Father judgeth no man, but has committed all judgment to the Son." Indeed there is such an indissoluble conjunction between the Divine Love and the Divine Wisdom, the Father and Son, that Jesus Christ in describing it, says, "All things that the Father hath are mine." John xvi. 15. xvii. 10. We know that the things which the Father hath are Omniscience, Omnipresence, and Omnipotence, and if Jesus Christ be a mere man, as the fooleries of Unitarianism would have us believe; we ask, with what propriety could Christ say to the Father, "All mine are

12. Can it be true in any sense whatever, that the very same Being could be ignorant of that day and at the same time know it; and what language could Christ have used, which would more clearly have expressed both his own ignorance, and that of all other beings whatever, but the Father concerning that day?

13. If Christ be God, the everliving God, who only hath life and immortality in himself, who was it that expired on the cross, after praying, Luke xxiii. 46. "Father into thy hands I commend my spirit." (or deliver up my breath) ?

14. Did Christ know that he and his Father were one Being, when he said to the Jews, John viii. 17, 18, "It is written in your law, the testimony of two men is true, I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father who sent me beareth witness of me"?

15. If that saying of Christ's, John x. 30, "I and my Father are one," prove Christ and his Father to be one Being, will not that other saying of His, also prove his Father, himself and his disciples to be all but one Being, where he prays to his Father, John xvii. 11, 21, 22, 23, "That they all may be one, as thou Father art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us; that they may be one, as we are one; I in them and thou in me, that they may be perfected in one"?

thine! and thine are mine!" either these words are true, or they are false: if they are false, Christianity is a cheat;-if they are true, Unitarianism is a cheat.

12. Already answered. Let us go on, as tempus fugit.

16. Did Christ know, or mean others to understand that he was God, when he said to the Jews, John viii. 40, "Ye seek to kill me a man that

13. The material body, or, Son of Mary, expired on the cross "And when the Son of Mary died, The Lord of Life arose !"

14. The passage in John viii. 17, 18, treats of two distinct testimonies, not the testimony of two distinct beings; Christ or the Truth always beareth witness of itself, because it carries with it its own internal evidence, and the Father or Divine Love, which is in the Truth, as the soul in the body, also beareth witness of the Truth: thus it is most true that the Father is in the Son, not out of him; God in Christ reconciles the world unto Himself.

15. No. The words, "I and the Father are one," do not treat of unity of person, for the word ONE in this passage is expressed by Ey not εις, it is in the neuter gender, and means unity of work or operation; Now this unity of operation can only proceed from unity of person. With respect to the supposed inference that the disciples may all be considered as one person, if Christ and the Father are so considered, nothing can be more silly, for of the disciples it is said, "that they may be one in us" and "that they may be perfected in one." i. e. that their works should be all advancing in perfection, being grounded in the love and acknowledgement of the One Infinite and eternal God. But if it should be contended that the words "I and the Father are One," do not mean one Person, it is most certain that they cannot mean two. 16. Most certainly; for God is a Divine Man.

!

[blocks in formation]

18. It may be said that the doctrine is a mystery to be believed though not to be understood; but may not the same be said with equal reason of the popish doctrine of transubstantiation?

19. Did the apostle Peter know that Christ was God; when he called upon the assembled multitude to hear his words, and told them Acts ii. 22 to 36 verse, that Jesus of Nazareth was a man approved of God by miracles, &c. which God did by him, and that after the Jews had crucified and slain him, God raised him from the dead, and that the same Jesus whom they had crucified was made by God both Lord and Christ?

20. If Christ be God, is he not Lord in and of himself, there being in this case no one superior to him to make him Lord? How is he then a made Lord, made by God both Lord and Christ, and Lord not to his own glory but to the glory of God the Father? Philipp. ii. 11.

21. Was he God, or a superangelic being, or a crucified man, who was made Lord and Christ?

22. Was he God, or a superangelic being, or a crucified man, whom the Jews slew, but whom God exalted to be a prince (or leader) and a Saviour, Acts. v. 30, 31. xiii. 23?

23. If he were a crucified man, does it not follow that Christ the Saviour was a man and not God?

ANSWERS.

17. The doctrine of the Godhead of Jesus Christ so far from involving the Scriptures in absurdity, that it supports, establishes, and confirms them. And if the Deity of Christ be not true, then guile was found in the mouth of Christ, and his veracity may be fairly questioned.

18. There is no mystery in the true doctrine of the Deity of Christ; but the doctrine of His simple humanity, is indeed simple enough, and as mysterious as the popish transubstantiation.

19. We cannot tell what Peter thought, or what was his distinct knowledge upon this subject: but he must have been a very inconsistent man to baptize his brethren into the name of Jesus only, if he considered him but a mere human creature. The apostles were commanded to baptize in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Matt. xxviii. 19. and yet Peter baptized in the name of Jesus, Acts ii. 38, this he would not have done, if he had not considered that in Jesus Christ dwelt all the fulness of the Godhead, and that He was the only true God and eternal life.

20. Observe the distinction between God and Christ, as set forth in the answer to the fourth question, and the present one will be sufficiently answered.

21. Sufficiently replied to.

22. Neither. The Jews slew the Son of Mary, (see answer to question 13) but the Son of God, the Divine Truth, Christ, and the Anointed, was, by the power of Divine Love, or the Father, exalted to be a Prince and a Saviour. Until Unitarians shall be able to prove, not say, that Joseph, who is said to be the supposed father of Christ, is the real father, their quibbling questions will have no weight.

23. Yes: but as he was not a crucified man, it follows that Christ the Saviour was God, and not merely man.

QUESTIONS.

24. Did the apostle Paul understand Christ to be God, when he said, 1 Cor. xv. 21, "By man came (or cometh) the resurrection from the dead;" and Acts xvii. 31, "God hath appointed a day in the which he will judge the world by that man whom he hath ordained, and raised from the dead;" and I Cor. viii. 6, "to us there is but one God, the Father;" and again, Eph. iv. 5, 6, "One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, &c." and again 1 Tim. ii. 5, "There is one God, and one mcditator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus ;" and again, 1 Cor. xv. 24, 28, "that Christ must deliver up the kingdom to God even the Father, and be subject to him that put all things under him, that God may be all in (or among) all," even that God whom the apostle Paul, and the other apostles so frequently denominate, "the God and Father of our Lord Jeaus Christ?" See 2 Cor, xi, 31. Eph, i. 3. 1 Pet. i. 3.

ANSWERS.

66 no one

24. All the points in this question are the same sort of objectious which have been made before; all of which vanish away, when the true distinction between God and Christ is attended to. Certainly the apostle Paul understood Christ to be God, or he could not have said that, "in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." We say with the apostle, that, "there is one God and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus," but what is this meditator between God and man but the Divine Truth, the Christ-the anointed? Can one mere man be a mediator between the infinite God and another mere man?__preposterous! it is the Divine Truth-the Very Christ, which is the medium of all conjunction with God, and the source through which we derive all life and blessing. Hence our Lord says, "no man cometh to the Father but by me," and again, cometh unto me except the Father draw him." Thus Love or the Father, draws us to the Truth, or Son, and the latter introduces us to all the glories and delights of the former. The objector thinks that Christ cannot be God, because the apostle says, "that Christ must deliver up the kingdom to God even the Father!" But we ask,-what kingdom! it must be the kingdom of heaven, because Jesus says, 66 my kingdom is not of this world," John xviii. 36. We ask then, was the kingdom of God ever under the government of a mere man? and did the Almighty give his glory to a human creature, contrary to his own sacred declaration, "I am Jehovah that is my name, and my glory will I not give to another?" Is. xlii. 8. No one in his senses will suppose this. The Unitarians, although they profess not to believe in mysteries, nevertheless resort to the greatest absurdities, when their object is to promulgate their darling doctrine, the simple humanity of Christ, It is certainly simple enough to be sure, and in divine things, simple it will keep us. Observe the distinction between God and Christ, and then we shall see how the latter is to give up the kingdom to the former. Every true christian is a heaven in its least form; this cannot be objected to,

QUESTIONS.

25. Did the Apostle Paul understand Christ to be God, when he says, 1 Cor. iii. 21, 22, 23, "all things are yours, and ye are Christ's, and Christ is God's." (not God, but God's), and in 1 Cor. xi. 13, "the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

26. Did the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews know that Christ was God, or indeed more than a man, when he said that Christ was made like his brethren in all things, tempted in all points as we are, and made perfect through sufferings, Heb. ii. 10, 17, 18. iv. 15?

27. Did the Apostle John (who is generally supposed to be the author of the book of Revelation) understand Christ to be God, or more than a man, when in the book of Revelation, Christ is described as the Lamb that was slain; and when in Rev. i. 1, it is said that God gave the revelation to Jesus Christ, who must have been previously ignorant of it, else how could it have been a revelation to -him?

[ocr errors]

28. If Christ be not a man, truly and properly, and no more than a man, how could he be born by natural descent from David, according to Acts ii. 30. iii. 22. xiii. 23. Rom. i. 3. 2 Tim. ii. 8, and agreeably to the genealogy of Mathew's Gospel?

ANSWERS.

because our Lord says, "the kingdom of God is within you." Luke xvii. 21. When man, as this spiritual kingdom, is under the influence of Divine Truth-when Truth is the ground of all his actions and religious worship, then this kingdom is the kingdom of Christ, but as he advances in the regenerate life, he will, in process of time, come into a more internal state. He will be more under the influence of Divine Good than of Truth. Love will then take the precedence, and be the ground of all his actions and religious wor ship; then it is said that Christ will deliver up the kingdom to God even the Father, that God may be all in all.

25. Plainly answered before. The Divine Truth is God's, not God. Christ is God's.

26. It is evident that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews considered Christ to be something more than man, or he never would have said, "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever." Heb. xiii. 8.

27. More quibbles! To be sure he understood Christ to be more than a mere man! for he says, that he saw in his vision, one like unto the Son of man, that is Christ, and that such was his splendour and glory that John fell down at his feet as dead. He also says that this Son of Man laid his right hand upon him and said, "Fear not; I am the FIRST and the LAST!" If Christ be the First and the Last, the conclusion is easily drawn.

28. Why not take Luke's genealogy? this would not answer the purpose of a true and honourable discovery. Compare the genealogy of Mathew with that of Luke, and any man whose mind is not warped by prejudice will see, that as far as the earthly body of our Lord is concerned the descent was from David; but the Divine descent is not of or from David, but of God, see Luke iii. 23 to 38. "That which is born of

« PreviousContinue »