Page images

the death of the cross. Can any one imagine, that he is to prove to us by such passages as these, that the being to whom they relate is the Infinite Spirit?

There is no part of the New Testament in which the language concerning Christ is more figurative and difficult, than that of the first four verses of the Epistle to the Hebrews. But do these verses prove that the writer of the Epistle believed Christ to be God? Let us take the common version, certainly as favorable as any to this supposition, and consider how the person spoken of is described. He is one appointed by God to be heir of all things, one by whom God made the worlds, the image of his person, one who hath sat down at the right hand of God, one who hath obtained a more excellent name than the angels. Is it not wonderful that the person here spoken of has been believed to be God? And, if the one thing could be more strange than the other, would it not be still more wonderful that this passage has been regarded as a main proof of the doctrine?

Look next at Hebrews i. 8, 9, in which passage we find these words: "Therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows." Will any one maintain that this language is used concerning a being who possessed essential divinity? If passages of this sort are brought by any one to establish the doctrine, by what use of language, by what possible statements, would he expect it to be disproved?

There are few arguments on which more stress

Yet one

has been laid by Trinitarians, than on the application of the title "Son of God" to Christ. who had for the first time heard of the doctrine would doubt, I think, whether a disputant who urged this argument were himself unable to understand the meaning of language, or presumed on the incapacity of those whom he addressed. To prove Christ to be God, a title is adduced which clearly distinguishes him from God. To suppose the contrary, is to suppose that Christ is at once God and the Son of God, that is, his own son, unless there be more than one God.

I think it evident, that the conclusion of the fifth verse of the ninth chapter of Romans, and the quotation, Heb. i. 10-12, do not relate to Christ. I conceive that they relate to God, the Father. Putting these, for the present, out of the question, the passages on which I have remarked are among the principal adduced in support of the doctrine. They stand in the very first class of proof texts. Let any man put it to his conscience what they do


Again, it is inferred that Christ is God, because it is said that he will judge the world. To do this, it is maintained, requires omniscience, and omniscience is the attribute of divinity alone. I answer, that, whatever we may think of the judgment of the world spoken of in the New Testament, St. Paul declares that God will judge the world by a MAN* (not a God) whom HE has APPOinted.

* "A man," so the original should be rendered, not "that man":

Again, it is argued that Christ is God, because supreme dominion is ascribed to him. I do not now inquire what is meant by this supreme dominion; but I answer, that it is nowhere ascribed to him in stronger language than in the following passage. "Then will be the end, when he will deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father; after destroying all dominion, and all authority and power. For he must reign till He [that is, God] has put all his enemies under his feet. . . . . And when all things are put under him, then will the Son himself be subject to Him who put all things under him, that God may be all in all."

No words, one would think, could more clearly discriminate Christ from God, and declare his dependence and inferiority; and, of necessity, his infinite inferiority. I say, as I have said before, infinite inferiority; because an inferior and de

év ảvôpì ų ☎piσe. Acts xvii. 31. [Compare Acts x. 42; John v. 22, 27; Rom. ii. 16.]

* 1 Cor. xv. 24-28. [Compare Matthew xxviii. 18; Ephesians i. 17-23; Philippians ii. 9-11; John iii. 35; Acts ii. 36. As an illustration of the sort of reasoning which we often find in Trinitarian writings, it may, perhaps, be worth while to mention, that the first three passages just referred to, or rather fragments of them, are quoted in a publication of the American Tract Society, as incontrovertible proofs that Christ is GOD. See Tract No. 214, entitled "More than One Hundred Scriptural and Incontrovertible Arguments for believing in the Supreme Divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." The 21st of these " Arguments," for example, runs thus:Christ is God, "because it is said he has a name that is above every name. Phil. ii. 9." The whole verse, of which a few words are thus quoted, reads: "Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and GIVEN him a name which is above every name." See also Arg. 1, 40, 72.]

pendent must be a finite being, and finite and infinite do not admit of comparison.

It appears, then, that the doctrine under consideration is overthrown by the very arguments brought in its support.

II. BUT further; it contradicts the express and reiterated declarations of our Saviour. According to the doctrine in question, it was THE SON, or the second person in the Trinity, who was united to the human nature of Christ. It was HIS words, therefore, that Christ, as a divine teacher, spoke; and it was through HIS power that he performed his wonderful works. But this is in direct contradiction to the declarations of Christ. He always refers the divine powers which he exercised, and the divine knowledge which he discovered, to the Father, and never to any other person, or to the Deity considered under any other relation or distinction. Of himself, AS THE SON, he always speaks as of a being entirely dependent upon the Father.

"If of myself I assume glory, my glory is nothing; it is my Father who glorifies me." John viii. 54.

"As the Father has life in himself, so HAS HE GRANTED to the Son also to have life in himself." John v. 26.

This is a verbal translation. A more intelligible rendering would be: "As the Father is the source of life, so has he granted to the Son also to be the source of life."

"The works which the Father HAS GIVEN ME TO PERFORM [i.e. has enabled me to perform], the very works which I am doing, testify of me, that the Father has sent me." John v. 36.

"As the living Father has sent me, and I LIVE BY THE FATHER," &c. John vi. 57.*

"I have not spoken from myself; but He who sent me, the Father himself, has given me in charge what I should enjoin, and what I should teach. What, therefore, I teach, I teach as the Father has directed me." John xii. 49, 50. "The words which you hear are not mine, but the Father's who sent me." John xiv. 24.


"If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not." John x. 37.

"The words which I speak to you, I speak not from myself; and the Father, who dwells in me, himself does the works." John xiv. 10.

"THE SON can do NOTHING OF HIMSELF, but only what he sees his Father doing." John v. 19.

"When you have raised on high the Son of Man [i. e. crucified him], then you will know that I am He [i. e. the Messiah], and that I do nothing of myself, but speak thus as the Father has taught me. And He who sent me is with me." John viii. 28, 29. I do not multiply passages, because they must


"In quoting the words as given above, I have followed the Common Version; but the verse should be rendered thus: the ever-blessed Father sent me, and I am blessed through the Father, so he, whose food I am, , shall be blessed through me." Záw, in this verse, is used in the secondary signification which it so often has, denoting, I am blessed, I am happy.

« EelmineJätka »