Page images
PDF
EPUB

Concurring with the voice of sound reason and philosophy, the sacred Scriptures universally testify the same grand and important truth: for not only do they declare that there is a God, but at the same time, assert the Divine Unity of God, unity being the most simple and universal idea of the human intellect, applicable to all beings and things which do or can exist; and, as such, applies itself primarily to God, as his peculiar characteristic; and hence those oracles of Divine truth declare to us, that the Lord our God is one Lord; that there is one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and is in us all* "In this sacred record of himself, strictly preserving the idea of his Divine Unity, God is pleased to designate himself by a great variety of names and titles, all of which are designed to express or describe the various Divine qualities, peculiar to an infinitely glorious and Almighty Being: not that, in his Divine operations, we are to imagine him circumscribed by any particular appellative; but as being one, and eternally the same, the names by which he is thus distinguished, can only bear an affinity with his infinite attributes and perfections; names, indeed, borrowed from the vocabulary of human language, and concep tions in accommodation to our weakness, yet intended transcendantly to display, in various radii of celestial splendour, his Divine omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence, with every corresponding attribute and perfection, which unite to reveal his eternal power and Godhead.'

"Hence we may discover, that the Scriptures of truth are decidedly unanimous in declaring the Divine Unity of Jehovah as a primary axiom in Theology. But as well as subsisting in Unity, JEHOVAH Our GOD is also described by a Trinity, viz. a Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; not a Trinity of persons according to the general received notion of orthodoxy, each of whom is supposed to be perfectly distinct from the other; but a Trinity subsisting in Unity, in the Divine person of JESUS CHRIST, the manifested JEHOVAH who,' in the language of inspiration, is over all, GOD, blessed for ever.

6

"With a view of elucidating and establishing this most essential truth of doctrine from the sacred pages, as the chief corner stone,' of the true Christian Church, in contradistinction to that abomination of

[ocr errors]

"It may be assumed as an indisputable fact, that theism, or the worship of one God, was the most ancient mode of religion among men; though it has been erroneously contended that there is an innate tendency in mankind to polytheism and idolatry, and that in reality, men were originally idolaters. But, in examining the subject, it will appear that, amongst people of the most savage and barbarous species, they never entirely lost sight of the one supreme Being; for even in the most celebrated of the heathen writers, a belief and acknowledgment of GOD is discoverable, which had unquestionably been preserved by successive traditions, amidst the multitude of Divinities established among them.

"The sacred name by which GOD was distinguished by the Jews, and was held by them in the highest veneration, was JEHOVAH.

"It is therefore highly probable, that the name Jovis and Jovis Pater, which was abbreviated into Jupiter, was derived from JEHOVAH. But afterwards this venerable name, which was originally intended to designate the ONE TRUE GOD, became trans-> ferred to the chief of the Idol Deities, to whom Divine attributes and worship were ascribed."

6

desolation now standing in the holy place;' and at the same time labouring to counteract those unscriptural dogmas now so lamentably and so generally promulgated by the vain disputers of this world,' namely that the Lord Jesus is a mere man only, a great Prophet like unto Moses, but simply and properly human. Some of the most prominent passages of the New Testament are here presented to the reader's attention, which, it is hoped, will, in some measure, tend to remove the dense clouds which obstruct the healing beams of the Sun of Righteousness, and, in defiance of human sophistry and metaphysical subtilty, substan tiate the solemn and incontrovertible truth, that the Divine Trinity centers in JESUS CHRIST alone, who, in his glorified person, is at once Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; analogous, in a degree, to the human Trinity in man, of which, that may be considered a faint similitude, as consisting of soul, body, and operation; and that, by parity of reasoning, as these three essentials are constituent of every individual man, so the three essentials of Deity form and constitute ONE GOD *.

"If the author of the following brief reflections, (whose sole aim and object is truth,) should, in any small degree, prove successful in identifying the Father and the Son as one and the same glorified being, he humbly flatters himself, that he may prove no less so, in demonstrating, that the Holy Spirit, so far from any thing like personality, can only be recognized by the truly illuminated and spiritual mind, as a proceeding operation, from that same glorified Redeemer, whose high and holy name is JESUS CHRIST." P. iv.

This is plain and authoritative language, certainly that of conviction: and therefore we ought to expect, if not positive evidence of the truth of the doctrine which it declares, at least something very much resembling it. To us it seems little short of blasphemy to call the ancient and universal doctrine of the Christian Church respecting the Trinity in Unity "the abomination of desolation standing in the Holy Place;" and such language would have appeared to Dr. Churchill somewhat precipitate, had he entertained the slightest doubt of the falsehood of the received opinion. But where an individual possesses so perfect a conviction of the correctness of his views as to presume to set them against the consent of generations, with the same

"It has been contentiously demanded by objectors to this truly orthodox creed, why the doctrine of the Trinity be not as explicitly taught in the New Testament, as the Divine Unity is inculcated, both in the Old and in the New. To this it may be replied, that although the Scriptures are silent as to the metaphysical Unity of the Divine nature, yet they exhibit throughout, that JEHOVAH, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, is the ONE True God. But what is of infinite importance, these scriptures clearly teach what the Unity is not; namely, that it is not personal; but that, as the redemption of fallen man could only be effected by an omnipotent power, so JEHOVAH himself, invested his invisible essence with a visible body; which, having fully glorified, or 'made perfect through suffering,' he ever liveth, as the ONE only God, both of angels and men.'

[ocr errors]

means of investigation and the same inducements to employ them as himself, there ought to be a shew of argument in his favour: however, we must declare (and in doing so we think we shall have the suffrages of all his readers and our own) that he does not appear to have made out even the probability that his doctrine is true. When he comes to argument, he appears to forget that his proposition is not the divinity of the Son, but his identity with the Father as a person; his reasoning proves abundantly the former position, but rarely goes to touch the latter. Out of one hundred and thirty-four passages of Scripture selected for this purpose and commented on at considerable length, only thirteen have any thing like a bearing on the professed subject; and those which have, are often directly contradictory to the hypothesis which they were intended to confirm. One of each kind we shall select, as being the best means we can devise of giving our readers a compendious, yet accurate view of this book; as well as the most commodious for expressing our own opinion upon it.

The following passage is from the more numerous class; and when we state that it is as much to the purpose as any one of its fellows, we feel no alarm for our credit.

"And they prayed, and said, Lord, thou knowest the hearts of all men,' &c. Acts i. 24.

"This prayer is evidently addressed to the Lord Jesus, for the following reasons; first, because the Apostle had just before addressed him as his LORD, at least, prior to this invocation. Secondly, in the subsequent election of Presbyters, which took place in the several Churches, after prayer and fasting, the Apostles commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed; which Lord, was evidently the LORD JESUS CHRIST a title which he had previously announced as his just due; and who has superadded, "All the Churches that shall know, that I am he which searcheth the reins and the heart." From this unquestionable authority, as believers, we feel it our warrant and duty to address our prayers and supplications to JESUS CHRIST, as GOD over all; at the same time, commiserating those of our brethren, who, whilst they assume the name of Christians, deny their Lord that homage to which he is so eminently entitled." P. 88.

This short passage undeniably proves the divinity of Christ; but beyond this it proves nothing. The few texts which seem to bear upon the question shall now be examined in their order. So little are we afraid of Dr. Churchill's hypothesis, that, in the first of these, we shall not scruple to give him an advantage of which he may avail himself if he please. He cites Matth. i. 23, "Behold a Virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and shall call his name Immanuel, which is, being inter

preted, God with us." In discussing this text, he only slightly glances at one which might, with much greater propriety, have occupied its place, viz. Is. ix. 5. "Unto us a child is born! unto us a son is given! and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, THE EVERLASTING FATHER, the Prince of Peace." Did the whole of Scripture go to prove the personal identity of the Father and the Son,-which, on the contrary, it manifestly opposes, this expression might have some weight: but no doctrine is to be established on a single text; and, as facts stand, some other interpretation must be sought, nor shall we be long in finding one perfectly satisfactory. The original expression is, TN the proper and literal translation of which is "Father of Eternity;" and this expression, agreeable to a very well known oriental idiom, implies the giver or possessor of eternity: both of which phrases are perfectly accordant with the character of Christ, as the author of salvation, ("the Life," as it is emphatically said by himself) and as "God over all, blessed, FOR EVER.' That this is an admissible interpretation, may be confirmed from several passages both of the Old and New Testaments. Or, it may mean Father or Author of the age to come, head of a new dispensation, in which sense it appears to have been taken by the LXX and the Vulgate:

[ocr errors]

אֲבִי כָל־חֹפֶשׁ כִּנּוֹר וְעוּגָב thus also, Jubal is said to have been

66

"the father of all that handle the harp and organ;" and thus God is called raτηρ Tŵv prv“ Father of lights," (James i. 17.) and the devil is called Tarp rou yeúdovs, "the father of falsehood," (John viii. 44.) But whatever the expression may mean, we think we shall be enabled satisfactorily to shew that it cannot possibly imply an identity of person in the Father and Son, by proving that such an identity is negatived by the whole tenor of Scripture.

From the first Text cited until the forty-sixth, there is absolutely nothing which in any degree countenances Dr. Churchill's hypothesis. The text here adduced is that celebrated declaration of our Lord, which could not, of course, escape our author's notice, "I and the Father are one." Now this passage, while it expressly states the individuality of essence in the Father and Son, and was so understood by the Jews, is one of those which most distinctly indicate difference of person. For the original words are “ Ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ΕΝ ἐσμεν.” a most remarkable mode of speech, and one certainly not to be explained on any other hypothesis. For any person acquainted in the slightest degree with the most elementary principles of the structure of language, cannot be ignorant that, had Christ meant to say, "I and the

Father are the same Person," the expression would have been sis, and not iv, which implies, "the same thing," or "the same nature." Besides, the same language is used concerning the apostles, (John xvii. 11.) "iva wow Ev katws yμs," that "they may be one even as we;" and Dr. Churchill surely will not contend for identity of person among the apostles. And thus (1 Cor. iii.) St. Paul, speaking of himself and Apollos, observes σε ὁ φυτέυων καὶ ὁ ποτίζων ἓν εἰσιν, ," "the planter and the waterer are one;" which certainly they were not, in Dr. Churchill's sense. Thus, by reverting to the Greek, we overturn all the advantages which Dr. Churchill may appear to have derived from the assistance of a text which nothing but absence of nicety in translation could render equivocal.

The next passage which occurs at all apparently favourable to our author's theory is the following: "Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father ?... Believe me that F am in the Father, and the Father in me; or else, believe me for the very works' sake." John xiv. 8. That a very close identity of nature is implied in these words, is what must be admitted: but that this does not extend to identification of person is evident from the rest of this very chapter, especially the 28th verse, in which he not only speaks of "going to the Father," but states, in express words, "my Father is greater than I." Now, for a person to speak of going to himself, and being greater than himself, would be absolute nonsense; and we shall presently adduce abundance of passages of similar bearing. The truth is, this chapter is a remarkable testimony both to the divinity and humanity of our Lord, and distinctly proves that he was "equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead, but inferior to the Father, as touching his manhood."

Dr. Churchill shall introduce the next passage which bears on the question himself.

"When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Acts xix. 5.

"When the disciples were commissioned by our Lord to go forth teaching and baptizing all nations, they were commanded so to do, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. But surely this mode of expression could never be intended to describe the three persons in the Trinity, as commonly understood, each of them distinguished from the other; for the name is evidently something in which they all agree, as being spoken of in reference to ONE, even that JESUS in whom they all harmonize and combine. The same idea at

« PreviousContinue »