it;il & Classical | ^
ooksdler, s ,
S. Fourth St. ; I
ila<lelj)hia. i (
C^
c (^^Lj
//^.
iTIiEOLCGlCALSEMlMRY.I
PriiiGeton, N; J. yj
^s>
BX 9847 .H3 1821 c.l Hare, Edward, 1774-1818. A preservative against the errors of Socinianism
• ♦
;v\
PRESERVATIVE
A<>A)NkT THE
ERRORS OF SOCINIANISM:
3n ^tt^fajtr
THE REV. JOHN GRUNDY'S LECTURES ON THE PRINCIPAL DOCTRINES OF CHRISTIANITY.
BY THE LATE REV. EDWARD HARE.
«* ALL TRUTH IS FROM THE SEMPITERNAL SOURCE '• OF LIGHT DIVINE." Cowper.
SECOND EDITION.
LONDON:
PRINTED AND SOLD BY JAMES NICHOLS,
22, fVarwick Square, Paternoster Row ;
SOLD ALSO BY SIMPKIN AND MARSHALL, 14, STATIOKERS' COURT J
BLANSHARD, 14, CITY-ROAD; AND OTHER BOOKSELLERS.
1821.
ENTERED AT STATIONERS' HALL.
PREFACE.
IN a prefatory address, it is not uncommon for the Author to assign reasons for his under- taking, to advertise the substance of his work, to obviate vulgar prejudices, and to apologize for his defect in the execution of his design, or con- ciliate the candour of the Public. But when, as in the present instance, a book has been published in periodical parts, and the principal parts have been some time in the hands of the Purchasers before the Preface is actually written, such an address would be merely formal.
It is already known that the Lectures re- cently delivered and published by the Rev. John Grundy, comprise, with some original matter, the arguments and objections commonly urged by the Socinians against what he justly, but in- consistently, calls " the principal doctrines of Christianity :" and that this work was originally intended to be a preservative against the errors which he has zealously and industriously laboured to disseminate. The manner in which this defence is conducted, is now before the religious Public, who have rendered all apologies unnecessary by exercising that candour to which the Author wished to appeal, and which he now feels it his duty gratefully to acknowledge.
This acknowledgment is not, however, in- tended to be made to those who have adopted Mr. G.'s creed, without imitating his candour: some of whom will probably confess that it would not be very appropriate. "• Liberality of senti- ment" is sometimes only another name for Bi- gotry: and " calm inquiry" is often confined to
a'2
Vf PREFACE.
one side of a question. The Author does not need to be informed that many of them regard his opposition to their prejudices as a sufficient proof of his " illiberality ;" — that others of them condemn him without a hearing, because he has attempted to vindicate what they '' never will believe;" — that some of them lay aside the Pre- servative, after five minutes' examination, be- cause " he sets out on principles very different from theirs;" — or that they know beforehand, from his denomination, that " he is one of those fanatics." As these are not the men who are "willing to become fools, that they may be made wise," he confesses that to them he has no apo- logy to offer. He can only pray, that " God, who commanded light to shine out of darkness, may shine in their hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ."
There is one subject on which he thinks it providential that he has this opportunity for ex- plaining himself. According to credible report, at a provincial meeting of Unitarian Ministers, recently held at Monton Green, in the vicinity of Manchester, Mr. G. was pleased to announce that " his main arguments are left untouched." — The arguments which he has adduced in his Lectures, may be separated into two classes. Many of them bear upon the statements here in- tended to be vindicated. To these, it is hoped, the Reader will find in the work before him, a direct answer. But others of them are levelled against such statements of the doctrines in ques- tion, as the Author did not feel himself under any obligation to defend. These are probably what Mr. G. calls his " main arguments." Every man who is not a volunteer in faith, entertains his own opinion on the scriptural truths which he
PREFACE.
holds ill coiniiiou with his brethren : and while ho modestly declines to dictate to others, he may reasonably be allowed to vindicate the general doctrines according to his own modification of them, without being made responsible for the precision of those statements from which his opponent imagines himself to deriv^e considerable advantage. To answer directly this class of Mr. G.'s arguments, would be to vindicate those hu- man systems which he has selected as the most vulnerable, instead of that divine system of" truth which abideth for ever." The only legitimate method, in the present case, therefore, was to state the doctrines under discussion in what the Author thought the most scriptural manner; and to support his own statement. If by such a state- ment his opponent's objections be fairly obviated or evaded, they are answered effectually though not formally ; for the light of truth alone is suffi- cient to dispel the shades of error. In this way Mr. G.'s main arguments are really " touched ;" and some people think that the touch is like that of Ithuriel's spear.
E. H.
Manchester, Apiil 29, 1814.
ADVERTISEMENT,
The first edition of this useful work was soon out of print, in core- sequence of the very able manner in which it exhibited Mr. Hare's defence of the grand doctrines of Christianity against the sophistries of SociNiANiSM, urged as the latter were by one of the most virulent advocates of that shifting, low, and desecrating system. The perusal- of this Preservative has been attended with a Divine blessing, to the conviction of several persons who had no previous relish for the hum- bling doctrines of the cross, — neither acknowledging the proper Divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, nor perceiving the necessity of his efficacious atonement. It has likewise been blessed to the reclaiming of others, who had embraced Deism in its most general and modish form — that of " UnilarianisnJ," as it is jomctimcs
VI ADVERTI3EMEXT.
most cunningly called. The republication of it is now undertaken, at the pressing request of several friends, and especially of those who for- merly derived benefit from it, and who are commendably anxious that the instruction which it contains should be still more extensively diffused.
In an interesting conversation which I had with my late friend the author, a few months prior to his decease, he very justly observed, that, in the composition of the work, had he not considered himself bound to give a formal answer to the most prominent of Mr. Grundy's obser- vations, he would in several instances have selected for himself a smoother and less sinuous path, than that which his adversary, an avow- ed enemy to the cross of Christ, had formed for him; and that he would have displayed the distinguishing doctrines of Primitive Christianity in a connection better suited to their dignity and importance. He possessed all the abilities requisite for the execution of such a design; yet, perhaps, it is more advantageous to the Church of Christ, that Mr. Hare did not feel himself thus at liberty, but was compelled to dislodge, by the force of sound and scriptural reasoning, the plausible and sinister objections of his adversary. In doing this, he has avoided in a manner the most exemplary that personality which is one of the chief modes of Socinian attack, and which is marked in deep and strong lines in all their recent controversial writings. Such conduct, in Socinians, is natural and in character. It is no marvel, that a system of religious belief, ostentatiously raised on the slight foundation of shallow and unhumbled reason, should require the aid of ' that luisdom which de- scendeth not from above, hut which is earthly, sensual, and devilish.'
Numerous and excellent are the publications that treat, professedly and at large, on the Socinian controversy ; in which the authors, unrestrained in the exercise of their choice in the selection of topics, have entertained different views of the relative importance of different scriptural doctrines, and have dilated on some of them in a manner much too general, without descending to what may be deemed several of the needful particulars : other writers, on the contrary, have com- posed, at the call of duty, able answers to single objections, without glancing at any of those strong and general arguments which are to be found in larger treatises. This volume embraces the excellences of both the methods to which allusion is here made, without partaking of their characteristic deficiencies. In the brevity discernible in some of its parts, there is a fulness sufficient to render the arguments there propounded intelligible to the meanest understanding; and in the more enlarged dis- cussions there is a terseness of expression, which precludes every appear- ance of verbosity in the style, and such spirit is infused into the com- position as prevents the reader from imbibing any feeling allied to tsedium. Seldom indeed has the whole of the unchristian scheme of modern Socinianism been so completely dissected in all its parts, and so suc- cessfully exposed, as it is in this Preservative. The nature of the
ADVERTISEMENT.
work rc(iuirc(l, that tlic author should occasionally state the c;ciicral argumeins uuder each division, as a kind of strong ibuiulation on which to raise the particular arguments which, in the course of the discussion, the objections of his opponent might demand. While answering one of these, Mr. Hare has frequently stated, in an abridged form but with much clearness, the chief arguments which had been framed by his learned predecessors in this line of controversy, and has added to them some of his own just views of the same subjects. In this light, the Preservative against Socinianism may be regarded as a summary of the main reasons on which the great doctrines of the gospel revelation are supported, and by which they may be defended.
It is a circumstance common to almost all the answers to Socinian writers, that the same texts of scripture arc repeated in different parts of the work. They are so adduced, because while one ^vord or clause in a single quotation from the Bible stands as a proof for one doctrine, other words or clauses in the same passage are proofs, equally necessary to be afterwards stated, for the confirmation of other doctrines.
The relict of my deceased friend having done me the honour to confide to my care the republication of this volume, I have been careful to make it an exact reprint of the first edition, which, I scarcely need to add, was found to be very accurately executed, since it had undergone the scrutinizing revision of the lamented author. In this new edition, there is no alteration in any word or form of expression ; but, through- out the volume, the language of the author is most scrupulously preserved. Mr. Hare was a man who had greatly endeared himself to me, by the masterly productions of his genius, by his ministerial exertions, his unaffected manners, the depth of his piety, his acts of disinterested kindness to me on a very trying occasion, and by the most tender and convincing proofs of real friendship. Having enter- tained a strong attachment to him while I had the happiness of enjoy- ing the benefit of his converse, 1 am naturally anxious that he should live in the grateful regards of the present generation and in the good opinion of posterity. It affords me therefore a high gratification to see such ample justice done to his excellent memory by the Rev. Joseph Benson, that eminently pious and venerable friend, who knew him from his boyhood, and who, since writing the edifying Memoir which is prefixed to the volume of Mr. Hare's Pulpit Remains, has himself been taken to his great and eternal reward, after a life of immense labour and extensive usefulness.
I have yet to fulfil another (and that not the least important) part of my duty as editor, which is, to implore the Divine Blessing on this treatise. May, therefore, this good work, by the blessing of God, be made yet more eminently successful in confirming believers and in convincing gainsayers !
London, May 1, 1S21. THE EDITOR.
CONTENTS.
%-«j%^%^^««^^ «
PREFACE 3
CHAPTER I.
Of the Impossibility of attaining to the Knowledge of Divine Things, by Reason without Revelation . . -9
CHAPTER II. Of the Impropriety of malving Human Reason the Test of the Doctrines of Divine Revelation ... 25
CHAPTER III. Of the Existence of the Devil . . . .40
CHAPTER IV. Of the Unity of God . . . , . 64
CHAPTER V. Of the Pre-existence and Divinity of Jesus Christ . . 67
CHAPTER VI. Of the Personality and Divinity of the Holy Spirit . 102
CHAPTER VII. Of the Scriptural Doctrine of the Trinity , . . 123
CHAPTER VIII. Of the Origin of the doctrine of the Trinity. . . 133
CHAPTER IX. Of the Scriptural Use of the Doctrine of the Trinity. . .168
CHAPTER X. Of the Propitiatory Sacrifice of the Death of Jesus Christ . 174
CHAPTER XI. Of the Eternity of the Future Punishment of the Wicked . 213
CHAPTER XII. Of the Divine Inspiration of the Sacred Writings • 257
CHAPTER XIII.
Of the Fallen State of Mankind . . . .285
CHAPTER XIV. Of the Miraculous Conception of Jesus Christ. . . 331
CHAPTER XV. Of the Ordinary Influence of the Holy Spirit . . . 368
CHAPTER XVI.
The Conclusion . . . . . . -I09
PRESERVATIVE
ACATNST THE
#rriir^ uf S^^wiirwi^w.
CHAPTER I.
Of tlie hnposfiihiliirj of attaining to the hioidedge of Divine Things by Reason zoiihout Revelation.
It is one of tlie disadvantages to be encountered in the present discussion, that while the evangelical party take 07ili/ the scriptures for their guide, the Socinians claim it as a pri- vilege to appeal fromthe sacred \vritcrs to the dictates of unas- sisted reason. The latter will submit their opinions to the test of scripture, only when the scriptures will stand the ordeal of their opinions. Or, to speak with greater propriety, they choose to try rather the scriptures by their creed, than their creed by the scriptures. When the language of the Evangelists and Apostles appears to favour their hypothesis, they are prepared to make the utmost use of its authority ; but when the contrary is the case, and the plainest declara^ tions of the sacred writers can, by no " cogging of the dice," be transformed into metaphor, allegory, or figurative representation, — when the primitive Teachers of Christian truth obstinately refuse to become Socinians, or even to be neutral, our opponents are prepared to pronounce against them a sentence of excommunication, and to erase their testimony from the record, as an interpolation, a corruption of the sacred text, or an inconclusive argument.
B
10 THE KNOWLEDGE OF DIVIXE THINGS
On this important subject, Mr. G. has fully delivered liimsclf. His language is as follows : " Grant only (what none I imagine Mill deny) that the bestowment of reason upon man was, in itself., a partial revelation of the nature, attributes, and will of God, and then say, whether it be possible that a subsequent more complete revelation should contradict the first."*
The advocates of the iivfallihility of human reason in things divine, would do well to acquaint themselves more exactly with the power and the province of the faculty which they so unreasonably exalt. The doctrine of innate ideas has been long and justly exploded. But, if the mind (or reason) of man possesses no innate ideas, from whence does it collect the first principles of knowledge ? From sensation, experience, and instruction. Infants obtain their first and imperfect ideas from what they perceive by their external senses. These first ideas are rectified by experi- ence. Having in this way received a variety of ideas, and having learnt to distinguish the different sounds which they hear, they are next taiig-ht to imitate those sounds, and to make each of them the sign of a distinct idea. They are thus prepared for further instruction ; and by instructio'n, tliey obtain all their additional knowledge. They are in- structed in the knowledge of first principles. They are taught even the use of reason ; and by instruction are led on to those further degrees of knowledge which are acquired by rational deduction. Why do we appoint i7istructors to our children, if they have the rudiments of all needful know- ledge within themselves ? The universal practice of man- kind, founded on universal experience, yea even the practice and experience of Mr. G. who, in his way, is taking so much pains to instruct and to guide our reason, amounts to a demonstration of what is here asserted. The perscmal experience of every man speaks the same language. Let any one make the experiment, whether he can, by the utmost exertion of his reason, create one new idea in addition to those which he has received by sensation and instruction.
* Sermon on Christianity, an Intellectual and Individual Religion.
\0T attaixabt.l: rv rf.asok. ' II
Every man may be conscious that he at first relied on the ti.st'nnonij of others, and was then tni(<j^ht to reason on those principles which he had thus imbibed. The eye of reason, like the eye of the body, is by its Maker formed capable of perceiving and distinguishing the objects which are suited to its nature, lohcn they are laid before it in a proper light. But until those objects are so proposed to it, it can no more }>erceivc or distinguish them, tlian the bodily eye can see what is not presented to it, or, which is the same thing, what is presented in midnight darkness. As the mind can- not reason without ideas, it has no more power to create them than to create an atom. ]\Ian is a dependent being. God only is his own instructor, (if there be no impropriety in applying that expression to the eternal mind,) and he only lias the ideas and archetypes of all things in himself.
The vanity of all the en^juiries of mankind after wis- dom, divine wisdom, and spiritual understanding, until God is pleased to reveal it, is finely exemplified in Job xxviii. Exactly similar to the doctrine of that beautiful chapter, is the uniform doctrine of the scriptures. They declare that, as to the thino-s of God, mankind are in a state of entire ignorance until they are taught by divine revelation ; and always impute the knowledge which mankind receive, to instruction from above. Take the following passages as a sufficient specimen. — " Every man is brutish in his hnoza- h'dge* — He that tcacheth man hnozdedge. — The Lord knoweth the tJunights of man, that they are vanity. — Blessed is tlie man whom thou chastenest, O Lorb, and tcachest him out of thy law. -f* — But there is a spirit in man, and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding. \ — Eye hath not seen nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit. \\ — The day-spring from on high hath visited us, to give light to them that sit in darkness, and in the shadow of death.§ — I had not l-nozon sin, but by the laxo : for I had not hnown lust, except the lazo had said,
* Jer.x. 14. + P'snimxciv. 10—12. ♦ .Toh xxxii. 8.
II 1 Cor. ii. y, lU. § Luke i. 78, 7"J.
12 THE KNOWLEDGE OF DIVINE THINGS
Thou shalt not covet. * — How sliall they call on him in whom they have not believed ? And how shall they believe in him of Avhom they have not heard ? And how shall they liear without a preacher ? So xhenjuith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. — I was found of them that sought me not, I was made manifest unto them that asJced not after me." -^
However unwilling modern philosophers, who have received all their true wisdom from the Bible, may be to confess the insufficiency of human reason in things divine, the sages of antiquity were honest enough to acknowledge the uncertainty of its researches.
Pythagoras changed the name of wise men into lovers of wisdom, as believing it not to be attained by human means, Socrates often repeated, " That he knew but one thing Avith certainty, and that was his ignorance of all things.'" Plato frequently reminds his pupils, that in religious sub- jects they were not to expect proof, but only probability from them. Aristotle condemns his predecessors as the most foolish and vain-glorious persons in the world, from a conviction of their igiiorance, and the vanity of imagining that he had carried philosophy to the utmost perfection it was capable of ; though no one said or believed less of divine things than he did. TuUy complains that we are blind in the discernment of wisdom ; that some unaccount- able error, and miserable ignorance of the truth, has got possession of us. The Stoics pretended to know all things ; yet Plutarch says, " That there neither had been, nor was a wise man on the face of the earth." Lactantius observes, " They could not exceed the powers of nature, nor speak truth on these (sacred) subjects, having never learned it of him who alone could instruct them ; nor ever came so near it, as when they confessed their ignorance of it." Epictetus found so much uncertainty in divine things, that like many other heathen philosophers, he advised every one to follow the custom of his country. \
* Rom. vii. 7. t Rom. x. 14, 17, 20. + Dr.EIlison the Knowledge of Divine Things.
XOT ATTAIKABLi; BY Ut;ASO^^ 13
Socrates told Alcibiades, "It is necessary you should zcait for some person to teaeli you liow you ought to behave yourself, towards both the gods and men. lie (says he) will do it who takes a true care of you. But methinks as we read in Homer, that as INIinerva dissipated the mist that covered Diomedes, and hindered him from distinguishing God and man, so it is necessary that he should, in the first place, scatter the dai'kness that covers your soul, and after- wards give you those remedies that are necessary to put you in a condition of discerning good and evil ; for, at present, you know not how to make a difference." * " Plato wished for a prophet to reveal the will of God to us, without which we cannot know it. And Plutarch says the same, that the knowledge of the gods can be had only from them." Thus did they plainly attribute whatever they knew of the gods, or of divine things, to no principle but the gods, j-
The prospect of finding divine truth by the exertions of unassisted reason, will now appear gloomy. But the confi- dence of rational Christians is not so easily abashed, as is that of rational heathens. That we may enter into a more minute examination of the pretensions of this boasted power, let us enquire :
1. Can we by the exertions of unassisted reason find out the being and perfections of God ?
When Hiero, tyrant of Syracuse, asked the philosopher Simonides that important question, " What is God .'^" the prudent philosopher required a day to consider it, and doid)]ed his request, whenever he Avas called upon to give in his answer. When Hiero was weary of procrastination, and enquired the reason of this delay ; — "because,"" said the philosopher, " the longer I consider the subject, the more I am at a loss for a reply."
Such were the modesty and diffidence of Simonides ! One who was much more justly reputed for wisdom, exclaimed, " O the depth of the riches both of the wis- dom and of the knowledge of God ! How unsearchable are his judgments, and his xcaijs ytvd Jinding out ! I — Canst
* Stanley's Lives. f Dr. Ellis on the Kiiowltdgc of Uiviuc Things. t Rum. xi. 33.
b3
14 THE KNOWLEDGE OF UIVIXK THINGS
thou by searching find out God ? canst thou find out the Ahnighty to perfection ? It is as high as heaven : what canst thou do ? deeper than hell, what canst thou know ? The measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea. But vain man would be wise, though man be born Uke a wild ass's colt."* The labour, however, has always been useless: " the world hy ■wisdmn hiew not God.^-f* Amonff those who have not seen the dawn of divine revela^ tion, " there is no7ie that tmderstandeth, that seeketh after, God. :|: — For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of a man which is in him ? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God." ||
Suppose a person whose powers of argumentation are improved to the utmost pitch of human capacity, but who has received no idea of the existence or attributes of God by any revelation, whether from tradition, scripture, or inspira- tion ; how is he to convince himself that God is ? and from whence is he to learn xvhat God is .'* That of which, as yet, he knows notklng, cannot be a subject of his thought, his reasonings, or his conversation. " He that answereth a matter, before he heareth it, it is folly and shame to him." He can neither affirm nor deny, till he know what is to be affirmed or denied. It never will, it never can, enter into his mind to enquire whether there be a God, till he have heard of such a being, or have formed some conception of him. *' The mind," says Mr. Locke, " in all its thoughts and reasonings, hath no other immediate object but its own ideas : so that all our knowledge is conversant about them. § Wherever we want ideas our reasoning stops : We are at the end of our reckoning."^ The question then is. From whence must our supposed philosopher derive, in the Jirst instance, his idea of the infinite Being, concerning the reality of wiiose existence he is, in the second instance, to decide ? Will a close inspection of every part of the visible creation inspire him with the vast idea of an incor^orcaly invisible, imheginni/ng, everlasting, immidahle, and infinitely •perfect Spirit ?
* Job xi. 7. !). 12, t 1 Cor. i. 21. + Rom. iii. 11.
II 1 Cor. ii, U. § Lib. 4. chap. i. sec. I. ^| Lib. 4. cha[>. 17. sec.'J.
XOT ATTAlNAin.K BY Kl'.ASON'. 15
Will the idea of matter sufj^est an idea of hiimaU'n- nl'ity ? Not unless to one who is in the habit of reasoning by the rule of contraries. And when the idea of hnviatcri- al'ity is struck out of matter^ what is it but a negative idea : that is, an idea of nothing? T\\e positive xdiea. oi spirit is still wantinor.
Will the idea of one''s self suggest the idea of spirit ? This question scarcely needs to be proposed to a Socinian who holds the doctrine of Materialism. Neither the idea of body, nor the consciousness which he has of thinking, reason- ing, comparing, judging and deciding — in a word, neither his intellect nor his will, conveys to him the idea of spirit. Those who know that " there is a spirit in man," might pardon this ignorance of the Socinians, if the latter had no opportunity of reading the Bible, when the great metaphy- sician Locke could attain no idea of spirit but from revela- tion. " For he who will give himself leave to consider free- ly, (says he,) will scarce find his reason able to determine him fixedly for or against the souPs immateriality : it being impossible for us, by the contemplation of our own ideas xcifJtout revelation, to discover whether omnipotence has not given to some systems of matter, fitly disposed, a power to perceive and think. "*
But if we suppose it possible for a person who is a perfect stranger to every part of divine revelation, and to all tradi- tional notices of truths originally discovered by revelation, to infer from his own experience that he is himself a spirit, united with a certain portion of matter, and perceiving and acting by bodily organs ; how can this inference suggest the idea of a spirit wholly unconnected with matter, and having no bodily organs whereby to perceive or act ? Cicero affirms, that " a piu'e mind, thinking, intelligent, andj'ree from body, was altogether inconceivable.'''' -f- Created spirits, separate from body, are supposed not to be known ; and indeed, if they do exist, do not come under our notice.
The whole visible world, with the myriads of ideas with which it furnishes us, however those various ideas may l)e
* Lib, 10. chap, ?. ,cc-. «. t Na>. Dcor.
16 THE KNOWLEDGE OF DIVINE THINGS
compounded, can never suggest one idea of what is in Its nature invisible. Ten thousand beings, beginning and ending, existing by succession and succeeding each otJier, could never lead to the idea of a being who is '-'■from ever- lasting to everlasting,^ and "with whom is no variableness, neither shadow qfturningy To see impe'rfection and muta- bility, in every thing around, could never lead us, by any train of thinking, to the idea of a being who is absolutely perfect, and to whom no change is possible. In a word : — ^' Every thing about us hemg Jinite, we have none hnt Jinitc ideas, and it would be an act of omnipotence to stretch them to iiifinite,'"
2. If, unaided by revelation, we can trace neither God nor separate spirit, is it possible for us to trace the Devil ? If the Devil be a ^'deceiver,'''' no wonder that mankind should be deceived with respect to his existence and opera- tions. If Satan be " the prince of darkness,'''' he will not make himself manifest. It is no more wonder that Mr. G. cannot see a devil, than that he cannot see darkness ; for *' that which maketh manifest is light.''''
3. But suppose the existence of a God, the author of all good, and of a Devil, the author of evil, to be already known ; how, without divine revelation, can reason assure us that, when a man has rebelled against God, and yielded himself to the influence of the Devil, God will pardon his rebellion and rescue him from the tyranny of that usurper ? It cannot be argued as the necessary result of the divine perfections ; for such a svipposition would prove too much. If God must ofnecess'tty pardon the criminal; for precisely the same reason, he cannot possibly have been ever dis- pleased. If he must of necessity remit the punishment of the crime ; for the same reason, no punishment was ever due. In a word : If he must of necessity rescue the prisoner, and restore him to himself ; for the same reason, he 7iever could permit him to depart, or the Devil to gain any advan- tage against him.
The pardon and salvation of a sinner must depend en- tirely on the '■' good pleasure of the w'dl of God," who " will have mercy on whom he w'dl have mercy, aad w'dl hay a
NOT ATTAINABLE BY REASON. 17
(Compassion on whom he will have compassion."'' They can- not be niTCSsarij ; they 7)U(.st be arbitrary. If they are not necessaiy, they cannot be positively proved from his perfections; and if they are arbitrart/, they cannot be known to us, unless he be pleased to reveal them. " For who hath known the mind of the Lord ; or who hath been his counsellor ? Or who hath first given to him ? and it shall be recompensed to him again." *
We cannot, from tlie experience which we have of his goodness in supplying our wants, and in providing anti- dotes to many of the evils of human life, conclusively ai'guc, that he is willing to Jbrgive our s'lns^ and to heal our mental diseases. To reason thus, is to found an uni- versal proposition upon a particular one. It is to argue from the less to the greater. This is not properly argument, but presumption. " These," we might rather say, " are parts of his ways, but Jiow little a portion is heard of him ? but the thunder of his power icho can understand F " -f- Beside this : a man might, with greater precision, argue, that he who lives in the wilful commission of sin, in so doing abuses all the benefits which he receives, and ag- gravates his sin in proportion to the goodness which he abuses; and that thus he may possibly throw all the Aveight of the argument which is adduced to prove God's pardoning mer- cy, into the scale of divine justice. Mercies abused can never shew the probability of the forgiveness of the abuse. Again : It is not true that God has provided antidotes to all our bodily diseases: or, which is the same, thing, we do not know of such provision. Many of the disorders of the hu- man body are incurable and mortal ; and therefore it follov/s analogically, that it is at least possible, for any thing that reason can find to the contrary, that some of our mental diseases have no antidote, and may prove destructive.
If reason cannot assure us that God will shew mercy to the transgressors of his law, it must be impossible for us, without a delaration of his ^vill, to ascertain on what terms he will forgive and save us. The terms of his mercy will
* Rom. xi. 31; 35. f Job .\x\i. 14.
18 THE KNOWLKDCIE OV UIVIXE TiriN(;s
not be such as a criminal would sup-gest or chuse. The wickedness of such a one is proof that he has but mean ideas of the divine perfections, and that he has not a proper sense of the honour which is due to the Most High. The offended^ and not the offender^ must fix on the terms of reconciliation. Here, therefore, reason will again be at a loss. Repentance and reformation may appear to the eye of reason to be neces- .^ary to this end ; but it cannot, without unreasonable parti- ality, be assumed that they will certainly be accepted. In a thousand cases repentance does not repair the damage which has been done by sin» When a man has ruined his fortune and his constitution by his profligacy, can he repair them by mere repentance and reformation ? When a man has hurt the reputation, the property, die body, or the mind, of his neighbour, what atonement can he make by repentance and reformation .'' In like manner, when a man has, by his transgressions, robbed, dishonoured, and grieved the Almighty, what recompense does he render to his Maker by a discontinuance of his former practices .'' Is it beyond contradiction clear, that God is honoured by oiu' amendment as much as he was dishonoured by our sin ? that reforma- tion restores to Mm the benefits which we have abused ? that repentance is pleasing to him in the full proportion in which wickedness is displeasing ? Can a penitent sinner do more than give to God all his heart, and devote to him all the residue of his life ? and wovdd not thus much have been due from him, if he had never revolted ? Repentance and reformation then, can, by no form of argumentation, be proved to be all that is demanded in order to our being for- given and restored. " The word of reconciliation,'" alone, can inform us how God can "be just and the justifier"" of a penitent sinner. " His thoughts are not our thoughts, neither are his ways our ways : for as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are his ways higher than our ways, and his thoughts than our thoughts." * The " way of the Lord " can only be understood from divine revelation, in which he *' has made known unto us the mysterij of his will, accord-
* Isa. Iv. 8,!>.
\0T ATTAIN'AUI.K UV lll.ASON. 10
ing to his good pleamrc ichkh he hud jyurposcd in lihii-
^ci/r *
4. There is still another subject connected with the present controversy, on which reason is utterly silent : the duration of future punishment.
Reason cannot as.s'urc us of a J'ldurc state of existence. It cannot ascertain the immortality of the soul. The great reasoncrs of heathen anticpiity tliought the innnortality of man only jyrohuble. Socrates stands the foremost as its ad- vocate. But was he able to convince his friends of the truth of it .'* Nay, was he himself thoroughly convinced .'* We appeal to the famous conclusion of his speech to his judges: " But now, it is true, we should all retire to cur respective offices, you to live, and I to die. But whether you or I are going upon the better expedition, is known to none but God." An attentive reader of Plato's Dialogues may discover in them a great deal of inconclusive reasoning on this subject. " I have," says Cicero, " perused Plato, with the greatest diligence and exactness, over and over again : but know not how it is, whilst I read him I am convinced; when I lay the book aside, and begin to consider by myself of the soul's immortality, all the conviction instantly ceases." -f* " If, after all, I am mistaken in my belief of the soul's immortality, I am pleased with my error.'" I Such was the uncertainty in which, on this Important sub- ject, the strongest minds were held !
Human reason, when the question is agitated, may suggest many arguments which render it probable, that this is not our final state ; but certainty from that source is im- possible. That which had a hegmning may probably have an end. " Had the soul a natural immortality, the origin of life in itself, it could never cease to be ; it would be God.'''' But, like all created beings, it is dependent on its Creator, " in whom it lives, and moves, and has its being." It is therefore dependent on the sovereign xc'dl of him who sees the possibility " that the spirit should fail before him, and the souls which he has made." ||
* EpL. i. !,'. t Tusc. 2. lib. 1. n. 11. + Df Sciu-ct. ll Isa. hii. 10,
^0 THE KNOWLEDGE OF DIVINE THINGS
And from whence can reason infer how long it is the will of God to prolong the existence of the human soul ? That he has designed it for an eternal, or even for a future state of existence, cannot be inferred from its Jiature, the growth of its Jciculties, its abhorretice of an7iihilation, or its desire of existence. By the nature of the soul, I mean its immateriality. But reason does not uniformly perceive that it is immaterial. Who can argue with greater precision than the Socinians ? Yet many of them are thoroughly con- vinced that their souls are no other than mere matter. These cannot argue, that because the human soul is imma- terial, it is immortal. All their hope is the resurrection of the body. But suppose the soul to be a spirit, and that some philosophers are aware that a spirit is immaterial ; can it be fairly and confidently affirmed that it is therefore immor- tal ? Its immateriality renders it impossible that it should be destroyed by a dissolution of its parts ; for that which is immaterial has no parts. But how does it appear that there is no method of annihilation, but dissolution ? Because the soul cannot perish by the same means by Avhich the body dies ; does it follow that it is immortal ? — The immor- tality of the soul cannot be inferred from the grototh of its J'aculties. We see human bodies in a state of progressive improvement till they arrive at a certain point, beyond which they speedily decline, and sooner or later perish. And how shall we ascertain that there is not a fixed point beyond which the human mind is incapable of improvement : a zenith which it passes, and then makes haste to set in dark- ness ? — Its abhorrence of annihilation^ and its desire of per- petual existence, cannot prove to us its endless duration. In truth, the abhorrence of annihilation, and the desire of immortality, are neither so universal, nor so uniform, as those who triumph in the argument adduced from them, assume. But if they were universal and uniform, they, in this case, prove nothing. How many evils which we abhor, befall us ! and how few of our desires are gratified ! Who would infer that he shall never want, because he shrinks at the thought of poverty ? or that he shall one day be a king, because his head itches for a diadem ? This argument
NOT ATTATXART.E RY REASOX. 21
would just as well convince us of the immortality of the bodij, as of that of the sord.
Ajrain : Reason cannot assure us of the future resurrec- t'lon of' the hodij. The heathens did not place this hope of the Christian even among- probabilities : nay some of them tliought it impossible. " God," says Pliny, " cannot do all things, neither recall the dead, nor make mortal crea- tures innnortal." Hence, -when St. Paul preached to the Stoics and Epicureans at Athens, they treated him as " a setter forth of nexc Gods, because he preached to them Jesus and the resurrection ; " and would hear no more from one who could be guilty of mentioning such an absin-dity. And who can wonder at the error of those who " knew not the Scriptures, neither the power of God .'' " Which of us has seen a dead body revive .'' What is there left in a rotten carcase, the dust of which is scattered before the winds of heaven, to lead us to look for a resuscitation ? " Can these dry bones live .'* Lord, thou knowest."' And who besides knows, unless the Lord of life have been pleased to give some intimation of his purpose ? We can indeed reason on this subject from analogy. We see that day uniformly follows night ; and therefore argue that the night of death mav be followed by the morning of a resurrection. Very true ; it may ; but is it evident from hence that it shall ? Miglit not one, with equal propriety, attempt, in this way, to provean endless succession of sleepingand waking, of dyingand reviving .'* Again : every spring produces a resurrection in the vegetable Avorld, from whence some men of great name infer that there will at length be a resurrection in the animal world : and the Apostle's allusion to a grain of wheat, which "is not quickened except itdie,'*'' is thought to' give coun- tenance to the argument and to prove its validity. Now, not to say that it is but a lame argument which wants a proof to support it, is it not plain that St. Paul makes use of that allusion, not to demonstrate, but to illustrate, a future resurrection ? If it be an argument, the following is well adapted to destroy it. " There is hope of a tree, if it be cut dowTi, that it will sprout again, and that the tender branch thereof will not cease : though the root thereof was
S2 THE KNOWLEDGE OF DIVIXE THIXCS
okl in the earth, and the stock thereof die in the ground : yet through the scent of water it will bud, and bring forth boughs like a plant. But man dieth, and wasteth away : yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he ?"
Now if it is impossible for human reason to decide on a future state of existence, or to point out the term of that existence, it cannot determine the duration of the Jicture punishment of the wicJced. To say nothing of the partiality of a man in his own cause, or of the unwilling- ness of a criminal to sign his own death-warrant, it is not possible for hira, however he may be disposed, to assign the nature and duration of the punishment which he has deserved. To do this, he must " know the Almighty to perfection.'" He must be able to discern, as well as willing to acknowledge, what is' due from the intelligent and ac- countable creatures of God, to the divine majesty, purity, justice, and goodness. Unless he can comprehend thus nuich, he has no data on which to ground his decision of this important question, and must therefoi-e refer it to that gospel in which " the wrath of God is revealed against all ungodliness, and unrighteousness."
Should that knowledge of divine things, which, after all, the wiser heathens confessedly possessed, render it doubtful whether reason be so inadequate to the attainment of it, as has been represented ; it will be necessary to add that they enjoyed the partial and imperfect light of a remote revelation. The Patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, had frequent divine commvmications ; and Joseph, who indubitably learned much from his progenitors, was no stran- ger to them. While the latter reigned in Egypt, much valu- able light would be diffused among the inhabitants of that country. The Egyptians v/ould make considerable improve- ment in divine knowledge during the captivity of Israel, and not a little by the miraculous deliverance. The Greeks studied wisdom in Egypt ; and afterwards imparted it to the Romans. As the Israelites were appointed the " wit- nesses"" of Jehovah, some small measure of divine know- ledge emanated from them, and was shed on the nations more immediately surrounding them. Thus it was that the
XOT ATT.MKABI.i: BY RF.ASOX. 23
sages of antiquity obtained, not from reason, but from revelation, tlieir best maxims, and tlieir most valuable knowle(l<:^e. And thus " every good and perfect gift*" may be traced up to " the Father of lights.^''
It will very probably be objected, that the scriptvires refer us to the ivorks of God, that from those works we may learn the knowledge of God, and be led by the creatures to the Creator.
AVhen God lias declared himself to men, he justly appeals to his works as vouchers for the character which he lias given of himself, and of the wisdom, power, and good- ness in which he would teach them to trust. But unless the idea of a God lead mankind to consider the creatures as the woj-ks of his hanch, his works would never lead them to him. It is not by reason, but " hyjaith, we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God.'' * To make appeals to the works of God, as independent proofs of his existence, among those to whom a verbal revelation was addressed, were unnecessary. That the Old Testa- ment is full of appeals to the works of God, is too obvious to be called in questi(m. But on close examination, the true reason for those appeals will be found to be this : The na- tions who surrounded the Israelites were, without exception, worshippers of idols ; and the God of Israel wished to be distinguished from all the objects of their worship as " Je- Jurcah, who made the heavens, and the earth, and all things therein." On this account, the Jews were taught 'to sing, " The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament shewetii his Iw.ndy-ivorl:!'''
It may be worth while, however, to spend a moment in the consideration of one part of the New Testament, in which it is generally supposed that St. Paul appeals to the works of God as proofs of the being of God. The passage alluded to, which Ave will examine as we proceed, is the following : " That wliich may be known of God is manifest in (or among) them (the Gentiles) ; for God hath sheiced it unto them."" Here we see that God had given to them some knowledge of himself. He had not left them to the
* Heb. xi. i.
24? THE KNOWLEDCE OF DIVINE THINGS &C.
instructions of unassisted reason. " For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world, (i. e. from the begin- ning) are clearly seen, being nmiersfood (not deinonstrated) by the things that are made, even (not his existence, but) liis eternal power and Godhead ; so that they are without excuse. Because that (instead of finding out God when they knew him not,) when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. — Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools ; and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things." And thus the things that are made, and from which the eternal power and Godhead of Him who had shewed himself to them, might have been reflected, were, by these professors of wisdom, made the objects of their worship. Instead of leading them to him, they had led them wholly away from him.
( '^o )
CHAPTER II.
On tJie Impropriety of making Human Rcasmi the Test of titc Doctrines of Divine Revelation.
Having removed the rotten foundation of Socinianism, we may now, at our leisure, pile up and burn the " wood, hay, and stubble," which have been built upon it. The un- reasonable pretensions which are erected on Mr. G.'s first position, are as follow :
" To what end was reason given ? precisely, that it- might be the rule of life ; the helm by Avhich we must steer our course across the tempestuous billows of mortality ; the touchstone of every doctrine ; the supreme umpire in every " difficulty and doubt. ' Try the spirits,' says the apostle John, ti-y their doctrines, ' whether they be of God."* By what are they to be tried, unless reason in every instance is to be their judge 'i"" *
When Mr. G. says that reason is the helm by which we are to steer, the supreme nmpire in every difficulty and doubt, and the Judge in every trial, he has hit the truth more '^precisely " than he perhaps intended. But this grave judge wants a touchstone ; this supreme iimpire wants a rule by which infallibly to decide. A helm is certainly a neces- sary thing for steering a shiji, whether " across the tempes- tuous l)illows," or before them. But surely something more than a helm is necessary to those who would cross the path- less desarts of the deep. If Mr. G. Avere turned adrift, a liundred leagues from land, when neither sun nor stars ap- })ear, without a chart, without a comj)ass, and without a pilot, lie would find that a helm alone is but a useless thing; and would well enough exemplify the folly and madness of those philosopliical theologians who make divine revelation
* Scni».)ii un Christianity an iutclicttual and iiiUividuul Relig-ion, j>. 10.
c
26 REASOX XOT THE TEST
bow before human reason. Or, if he would condescend to embark with those who understand the art of spiritual navigation a little better than himself, he might probably learn, that while Socinian Landmen throw their charts over- board, and nail their compass down to the point on which they have resolved to steer, because their helms-man is a lubber ; the Ortlwdox Mariners learn the course which they arc to steer, only from their charts use their compass to direct them on the course which is thus prescribed, and oblige their helms-man, though " a Seaman every inch of him,'''' to steer, not according to his own wJdms, but accord- ing to the directions of their Pilot.
It is not ^^ precisely''' \he: same thing to assert that reason is the " ride'''' by which reason, the " judge^'' must " try the spirits;" or, that it is the '■'' touchstone of every doctrine^'' by which this " supreme umpire'''' is " in every difficulty and doubf to decide. Mr. G. has made a gross mistake in calling St. John as an evidence of the propriety of making reason " the touchstone of every doctrine.'''' " Eeloved,"" says the Apostle, " believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God : because many false pro- phets are gone out into the world.''' Thus he makes reason the ^^ judge''"' in this question, but by no means the " toucJi- stone''"' by which it is to be tried. He gives us a scriptural test, and teaches us to bring every doctrine to the touch^ stone of revealed trutlt. " Hereby know ye the Spirit of God. Every spii'it that conj'csseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God ; and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the Jlesh, is mot of God.''''*
That " neither Jesus Christ nor his Apostles rejected reason" as the judge, we readily grant. And this, as the slightest examination of Mr, G.'s quotations will shew, is all that he has proved. Who but himself would have thought that Jesus Christ taught us to appeaiy)-o«i the scriptures to the " touchstone'''' of reason, when, on a subject of pu7-c revelation, he said to the Jews, " Search the scriptures ; for in them ye think ye have eternal life ; and they (not ;-eason) are they which testify of me ?'" -f- Equally distant
* .1 J-.hn iv. 1—3. t John v, o9,
OF TUb: nOCTKIKKS 01- REVELATIOK. 27
from the point to be proved, is the text whieh he has cited from St. Paul, and which, taken in connection with the con- text, runs thus : " Wlierefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to wise men, Jfu^gc ye what I say. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ .'' The bread which we break, is it not the comnuuiion of the body of Christ .''''"' * Here the Apostle appeals, not to reason, but to the institution and desiorii of the I.ord"'s supper, whieh is a doctrine of pure re- velation. Unless therefore I\Ir. G. can prove, that grounding an argument on the infalhble testimony of divine revelatiouy is the same thing as to submit the doctrine of revelation to the " touchstone''' of reason, he will gain notliing. Once more, however, let us hear him on this point. He seems to think the question decided by that saying of St. Paul, " Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." ^Vithout sup- posing it necessary to make any alteration in the translation, may it not be asked, How does it appear from hence, that the Apostle teaches the Corinthians to try the doctrines of scripture l)y the " touchstone"''' of human reason ? or that he would have the full persuasion which he recommends, to be the result of argumentation, rather than of a more perfect knowledge of what is required by the xcord of God? While Mr. G. answers this question, we proceed to remark that St. Paul is speaking of the observance of Jewish festivals : A point this, on which revelation only could decide. And the Apostle chose rather to inculcate brotherly affection, than to encounter the harmless prejudices of either- of the parties in this dispute. Some persons, in conformity with the context, make a slight alteration in the translation, and read the whole passage thus : " Who art thou tliat judgest another man's servant .'* to his own master he stan'deth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up ; for God is able to make him stand. One man estcemeth one day above another : another esteemeth every day alike. Let every one (av xu toiM •yoi zsy.Ytpoi^'jpiii'hx) abound in Ms oxen sense C for it is a matter of pure indifference. " He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord ; and he that regardeth not the dav, to the Lord he doth not regard it." -|*
» 1 Cor. X. 14—16. t Ri.iii. \iv. 1—6,
^ heason not the test
The fallacy of this common Socinian argument lies in the confusion of the terms. Mr. G. has heaped together the words '•'■ judge''' and ^'-rule^'' '■^umpire'''' and '■Houchstoiie^'' and fancies that because he has proved reason to be the proper '•^judge^'' he has equally proved, that, in opposition to the divine testimony, reason is also the " touchstone^ of truth. Such is the infallibility of Socinian reason !
It is now our turn to appeal to the authority of the sacred writers. The following citations will be more than enow to prove that, in matters of religion, mere human xvis- dom is Jiill// ; — that it is an obstacle to the wisdom which Cometh from above ; — that the wisdom taught by reason, ought to give place to that which is taught by revelation ; — and that to mingle human wisdom with the wisdom of God, is like blending darhness with light, or poiscm \f\\hJbod.
*' Christ sent me to preach the gospel ; not with luisdom of zvords, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish, foolishness ; but unto us which are saved, it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise ? where is the scribe ? where is the disputer of this world ? hath not God made Joolish the wisdom of this world ? For after that, in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom hnew not God, it pleased God, by the foolishnesss of preaching, to save them that believe. For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after zvis- dom : but we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling-block, and unto the Greeks, foolishness ; but unto ■them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because XheJboUsli- ncss of God is zoiser than men ; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many raise men after the flesh ; — but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world, to confound the zaise, — that no flesh should glory in his presence. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus who of God is made unto us wisdom, &:c. that according as it is written, lie that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. And I brethren, when I came to you,
OF Tlir. DOCTllIXCS OK RKVKLATIOK. 20
came not with excellency of speech, or of wisdom,^ declarinn; unto you the testimony/ of' God. For I determined md to k7W70 any thing among 7joh^ save Je^us Christ, and him cru- cified. And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of mans zoisdom, but in demonstration of tlie Spirit and of power. That your faith should not stand in the icisdom of' men, but in the power of God. Howbeit, we speak wisdom among them that are perfect, yet Jiot tfte "ivisdom of this world, nor of the princes of th'is world, that come to nought. But we speak tlie w'l^dom of God, in a mys~ tcry, even the hidden w'lsdxwi which God ordained before the world unto our glory : which none of the pr'mces of this world knew ; for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. But as it is written, Ef/e hath •not seen, nor ear Jieard, nc'ither have entered into the heart erf man the things v>^hich God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit. — T/ie things of God knowcth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we l»ave received, not tlie Spirit of the xvorld, but tJie Spirit which is of God; that we might knoio the things that arc freely g'lven to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which marCs wisdom, teaclieth ; but which the Holy Ghost teaclieth ; comparing spiritucd things with spiri- tual. But the natural num receiveih not tlie things of the Spirit of God; for they arefbol'ishness unto him, neitlier can he knozu them, because they are spiritually discerned. For wlu) luith known tJie mind of tlie Lord ; that he may instruct him f but we have the mind of Christ. *- — Do not err, my beloved brethren. Every good gift and every perfect g'ft is from above, and cometh down from tlie Father cf LIGHTS. Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be sw'ft to hear, slow to speak, -f- — Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be w'lse in this world, let him become a fool that he may be zoise. For the wisdom of this world is JboUshjiess with God ; for it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. And again, The Lord knowcth the tlioug-hts of the wise that they are vain. Therefore let no man glory in mc7i. I — Let God be true, but
* 1 Cor. i. and u. f James i. Ifi, 17, 19. : 1 Cor. iii. 13.— 21, .
C 3
30 EEASON NOT THK TEST
every man a liar : as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy my'ings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. * — To tlie laze, and to the testimony : if tlicy speak not according to this icord, it is because there is no light in them, -f — Foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes, t — Charge them before the Lord, that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, riglitly dividing the laord of trutli. But shun profane and vain babblings, for they v/ill increase unto more ungodHness. And their xoord will eat as doth a canker. || — Charge some that they teach no other doctrine. § If any man teach otherzvise, and consent not to wlwlesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; h.Q is proud, knoicing no- thing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof come perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth : — from such withdraw thyself. ^ — O Timothy, keep that zvhich is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science, falsely so called, which some professing, have erred concerning the faith, ** — Because that when they kncxo God, they glorified liim not as God, neither were thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened : professing themselves to be xcise, they became fools. -f"f — For I would that ye knew what great conflict I liave for you, and for them at Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh ; that their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the ac- knowledgrnent of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ, in xcliom are hid all the treasures of xvisdom and knowledge. And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words. For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the Spirit, Joyi//^v and beholding
* Rom. iii. -1. f Isiiiali viii.20. + 2 Tim. ii. 2[\.
II 2X1111. ii. 11—17. § ITiiii. i. .V ^[ 1 'l-jm. vi. :;_:,.
** 1 Tim. vi. 20. f f Rom. i. 21, 22.
01' THE DUCTKINKS OK REVELATION. 31
your order, and the stedfastncss of your Jaith in Christ. As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so tcalli ye in him ; rooted and built up in him, and stahlishcd in the Jaith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving. Beware lest any man spoil you through- philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the xoorld, and not ciftcr Christ. * — The laze of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul ; the testimo- ny of the Lord is su7-e, making zoise the simple ; the statutes of the Lord ai-e right, rejoicing the heart; the command- ment of the Lord is pure, enlightening \he eyes ; the Judg- ments of the Lord are true, and righicous altogctiier. "1-— Mine heart within me is broken because of the prophets ; all my bones shake : I am like a drunken man, and like A man whom wine hath overcome, because of the Lord, and because of the words of his holiness. Thus saith the Lord of hosts. Hearken not unto tlie words of the prophets that prophesy unto you ; they malce you vain : they speak a uision of tJteir ozcm heart, and not out of the mouth of the Lord. They say still unto them that despise me, the Lord hath said ye shall have peace ; and they say unto every one that walketh after the imagination of his ow7i heart. No evil shall come upon you. For zcho hath stood in the counsel of the Lord, and hath perceived and heard, his icoj'd ? who hath marked his word, and heard it .'' — I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran ; I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied. But if they had stood in my counsel, and had caused my people to hear my xcords, then they should have turned them from their evil way, and from the evil of .their doings. — I have heard what the prophets said, that prophesy lies in my name, saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed. How long shall this be in the hearts of the pro- phets that prophesy lies ? yea, they are prophets of the de- ceit of their oxen heart. — The prophet that hatli a dream, let him tell a dream ; and he that hath 7ny word, let him speak my word faithfully. "W'hat is the clwff to tlie wheat ? saith the Lord. Is not my xcnrd like as a fire ? saitli the Lord ; and hke a lunnmcr that breaketh the rocks in
• Col. ii. 1—3. f Psalm xi\. 7—9.
S2 REASON NOT THE TEST
pieces ? * — For I testify unto every man that hcareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall aM unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book ; and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away Ms part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.'t
The language of these passages is so far from being equi- vocal, that the reader, without the assistance of a commen- tator, will easily understand them, and make the proper application.
How much cause there is for these warnings, has been exemplified from the times of the Apostles to the present. *' The Christian church was scarcely formed, when, in different places, there started up certain pretended reform- ers, who, not satisfied with the simplicity of that religion which was taught by the Apostles, set up a nezo religion drawn from their own licentious imag-inations. Several of these are mentioned by the Apostles, such as Hymenosus, and Alexander. The influence of these new teachers was but inconsiderable at first. During the lives of the Apostles, their attempts towards the perversion of Christianity were attended with little success. They, however, acquired credit and strength by degrees ; and even from the first dawn of the gospel, laid imperceptibly the foundation of those sects which produced afterwards such trouble in the Christian church.
" Among the various sects that troubled the Christian church, the leading one was that of the Gnostics. These self-sufficient pMhso^ihers boasted of their being able to restore mankind to the knowledge (gnosis) of the Supreme Being, which had been lost in the world. Under the gene- ral appellation of Gnostics are comprehended all those who, in the first ages of Christianity, corrupted the doctrine of the gospel by a profane mixture of the tenets of the orien- tal philosophy^ with its divine truths."' :j: From these " knoxv-
* Jer. xxiii. 9, &c. f Rev. xxii. IK, 1!). + Moslieim, Hook 1, Part
11, Chap. r>.
OF Tlir. 1)0(TUIN'F.S OF R F.VF.L ATION. f},'?
itiff Oftics " arose, in the first and second century, a rich harvest of heretics and heresies, of which, not to mention them in detail, the reader may find an ample account in the first volume of Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History. A few specimens would shew that the Apostles acted wisely when they cautioned their disciples against every thing destructive to the simplicity of the gospel, and that they were not mistaken in the results of this unnatural coalition of philosophy and revelation, which they predicted. " There is no observation capable of fuller proof, than that religion, throujxh all affes of the Christian church, was more or less pure according to the alloy of philomph// or human reason mixed up with it. There was scarcely an heresy in the primitive church that was not imbibed from Plato'^s acade- my, Zeno's portico, or some vain reasonings of the Pagan wise men. In latter ages the schoolmen rejected Plato, and exalted Aristotle into the chair of Christ, says Tiienus ; * esteeming him the God of wisdom who could not err. And the controversy long subsisted to which of them an appeal lay for the determination of truth. Such is the vain arro- gance of human reason, as to have puffed up some in every age, to promise they would shew us the truth by the mere Ught of it, and maintain it as the only rule of faith. * Plii- losophy and vain deceit ' have always proved highly inju- rious to the purity of religion, and the great objects oi faith which are supernaturally revealed.'' -j-
Since philosophy has fallen into the hands of sincere and devout Christians^ who valued above all learning "tlie faith delivered to the saints," and " contended " for that faith as the truest wisdom, it has been much reformed. But so long as it is human wisdom, it will never be fit to take the lead of revelation. Modern philosophers, as well as those of antiquity, whenever they attempt to model their creed by the rule of their reason, shew themselves ca})able of the greatest absurdities. With our Unitarian Divines, (as they are pleased exclusively to denominate themselves,) it is a first principle that " reason directs to "whatever is true in speculation."" To set Reason free from the fetters of
* Til. Syiit-.gni. Part !I. Di^p. Hi. Thcs. .U. fDr. Ellis.
34
KKASOX XOT Tllli TKST
education, they have renounced the doctrine of human depravity, and of eternal punishment. Thus inspired with unhmited confidence in their own understanding, and divested of all apprehension of eternal consequences, they are " induced to reason cautiously and Jrequently, and to learn to reason tceliy So says one of themselves. * And what can be more reasonably expected from them, than that they should all reason alike ? But their one, perfect, infallible, and unchangeable guide, which " directs to what- ever is true in speculation^'' is far from leading them all in the same path. A few lines from the Author just men- tioned will amply illustrate their agreements and their differences.
*' In order to convey a just idea of the constitution of Unitarian Societies, it is necessary to premise, that, whilst we are united by a few great principles, there are numerous topics of inferior consequence, respecting which we differ in opinion among ourselves. All Unitarians agree in denying that Jesus Christ was the eternal God ; and that lie is the object of religious worship. Some of them, liowever, believe that he was employed, as an instrument in the hands of the Deity, to create the material world, though not possessed of underived wisdom and independent power : others believe only in his pre-existence. Some go still farther, maintaining that he was simply a human being, but conceived in the womb of the Virgin according to the introductory chapters of Matthew and Lid<e^s gospels : others see reason to believe that those chapters are inter- polations, and therefore deny the doctrine of the miraculous conception. In like manner, all Unitarians agree, that the death of Christ was an incalculable blessing to man- kind : some, however, do not presume to determine the exact manner in which it conduces to the good of men, while others think that the mode of its beneficial operation may be distinctly pointed out ; but all reject the Trinitarian doctrines of satisfaction and vicarious atonement, believing, not that Jesus saves his followers from the everla,sting
* Mr. James Vates, in a Sermon on the grounds ol' Unitarian Dissent, prcaclied at Glusjow, pp. IC, 17, 22, 23.
or Tin: doctimms oi uln i'.j.atios. 'S'i
misery to whicli thev are su])po-'ifd to h.i\c been tlijoiiied in consequence of the sin of tlieir first ])arents, but that he saves them, by liie force of his doctrines, ])reeepts, antl example, from vice, i'lnorance, and superstition, and from the )5nserv wliicli is iheir Jiatural result. The ordinance of baptism is a subject on v.hich we entertain various opinions: some of us practise the baptism of itiflwt.s, olheis of aduli.s\ and some think that the use of water niay be omitted entirely. C'oncernino- tiie <{uesti(m of an Intermediate State, and the philosophical doctrines of Materialism and Necessity, we either remain in doubt, or espouse opposite sides. On these and other points, which have been debated by orthodo.\ Christians A\ith rancorous animosity, v,e a^ree to differ." *
Mr. Yates ought to have tlie thanks of the Christian world for speaking the truth. This curious passage shews that Eca-son as well as Nature has her frolicks. The " few great princi})les " in which the Unitarians agree, ]\Ir. Y. has carefully laid down : viz. 1. " The free and unbiassed use of the luiderstanding on religious subjects. — 2. They ought to offer prayer and adoration to God, the Father^ onhj. — 3. They regard holiness of heart, and excellence of conduct, as the only means of obtaining salvation."
These three great Unitarian principles will not prevent the effect of our observations on the passage which we have cited.
There is one part of this exposition of Unitarianlsm on which Ave may ]:)roperly enough remark, before we enter into the heart of it. Mr. Y. has shewn that his friends are not vet agreed on " the philosophical doctrines of Matcriali.siii and Nccrssit//.'''' But ought they not to know from whence they take their dejjoriiar^ when they set out on their voyage of discovery ? When Thales, while con- templating the stars, fell into a ditch, " How," said a woman, " should you know what passes in the heavejis, when you see not what is just at your feet .''"''' — Again : ought they not to determine whether or not there is a fsph'it in them, before they assure themselves that they can, without
* Mr. ^'alps's Sciiiion, i>i>. \.\ — l.i.
86 liEASON NOT THE TEST
assistance from above, find out God who is a Spirit ? An Apostle thought, that none but the spirit of a man can know what is in man. But they think, that without a spirit they can know the things of God. If all the phenomena of perception, reason, memory, will, and various affections, joined with the unequivocal and uniform testimony of divine Revelation, cannot assure an Unitarian that he has a sjnrit distinct from his body, how can his reason prove to itself that there is a God v/ho is a Spirit ? Where then is the reason, which is " a partial revelation of God, his nature, attributes, and will ? " If a man's reason be not satisfied on this point, how can he, on Socinian principles, believe the testimony of a revelation which contradicts his reason ? Or, if a contradiction be not admitted, how can his reason be a fit rule by which to judge whether that doctrine of revelation be true ? — This one concession is subversive of the whole fabric of Socinianism, which is like a kingdom divided against itself. — Once more : ought they not to be assured that their (what name should it have?) spirit v&freCy has liberty, and is not bound down by the chains of irre- sistible necessity, before they assure themselves that they are entering on SLjree enquiry ?
Leaving them to consider how far it is proper to begin their reasonings where they now end them, let us examine the points in which they agree, and those in which they differ.
1. Their agreement is all in negatives. They are only agreed about what is Tiot. They agree in denying that Jesus Christ is the eternal God, or the object of reli- gious worship ; and in rejecting the doctrines of satis- faction and vicarious atonement, as well as the doctrine of original sin, and everlasting punishment. Tliat is, they agree in renouncing these doctrines of the bible.
2. But in things positive, though led by the same inj'al- lihle guide, "which directs to whatever is true in speculation," they agree not at all. They are not agreed whether Jesus Christ was the " instrumental " Creator of the zvorld, or a mere 7nan. They are not agreed in what manner the world is benefited bv the death of Christ. Thev arc not aerccd
OF TTTF DOdTlIXrr. OF r.FVF.T. ATTOX. 37
wliethcr baptism (i. c w(i.sh'mg) slioukl be nd ministered with or without xoatcr ! Khsmn tencatis ? They arc not agreed whether tliey have an immortal soul ; or whether they have any soul at all ; — whether they are walking in glorious liberty, or are bound in the adamantine chains of inexorable necessity ! — Such are tlie consistencies of all- searching, all-discerning, all-knowing, reason ! When men, instead of ascending to heaven on a ladder let down /ram above, agree to build a tower of which the Joumlation shall be on earth, and the summit shall reach the sMcs ; no wonder that God confoumU their lang-uugv !
To bring to light this (liwgreement among themselves, was the design with which Mr. Yates was cited. The citation is intended to shew, first, — that as the heathen j)hilosophers without the aid of revelation could discover and detect error, but could not find out truth, or agree among themselves on that great question, What is truth ? and therefore could never enlighten the world by their in- . structions ; so, when philosophical divines bring the doc- trines of revelation to the test of human reason, and make their own conceptions the rule by which they are to judge, they can easily agree to discard many points of doctrine which in their own opinion ought not to be taught, because they are false, but have among themselves no positive re- vealed truth on which they are agreed, and therefore are as unfit to instruct mankind as their elder brethren : And secondly — that as by the philosophy which some of the first ChrlHian teachers adopted, Christianity-was neutralized; so by the negative and sceptical philosophy of modern teachers Christianity is destroyed. — It is true indeed, while the Socinians differ among themselves in matters which they deem of " inferior importance," they agree in " a few great principles ; "" and it is equally true, that Herod and Pontius Pilate " agreed to differ " in smaller matters, but to unite in the important affair of " crucifying the Lord of glory."
If then, for creatures of such acknowledged ignorance to profess themselves able to discover the truths of God, is arroijance ; to determine them bv their own reason, is
88 RE A SOX XOT TJIE TEST
profaneness. To do eitlier tlic one or tlie otlier, is more than man is fitted for, or called to : and none has attempted it who has not failed. The gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, it is agreed on both sides, is a revelaton from God. It is suited, especially in those parts which most immediately concern us, to the capacity of tlie meanest. " To the poor^"* who are generally illiterate, "thegospelispreached;"" yet these " God has chosen, rich '\n faith.'''' Even " a cMld may know the Holy scriptures, and be made xc'hse vvto salved /on.'''' It is not a veil thrown over the truth, by forced allegories and strain- ed metaphors ; but a revelation of the truth, delivered in proper terms, where proper terms are most intelligible; and in which figures are used only where fig-ures are absolutely necessary, or will give it greater perspicuity and force. "We use," says the Apostle Paul, ^^ great plain ne.^s of speech: and not as Moses, wliich put a veil over his face. — But have renounced the hidden tMnsrs of dishonesty., not xcnlMng in craj'tiness., nor handling the rcord of God dcce'itfidly ; but by manifestation of the truth commending ovr. selves to every maris conscience in the sight of God. But if our gos- pel be hid (veiled) it is hid to them that are lost : in whom the god of this ivorldhath blinded the m'lnds of them, which believe not, lest the light erf the glo7-imts gospel of Christ, wlw is the image of God, should .shine tin to them.'''' *
It is true, the Gospel has its mysteries. It has its mysteries revealed : truths which were once kept sec7'et, " but now are made manijest.'''' These are properly my.^- teries no longer, and are called so only with respect to what they once were. It has its mysteries yet unrevealed. There are things M'hich we " know not now ; but shall know hereafter.'''' And it has its mysteries imperfectly revealed : revealed so far as rce are able to comprehend a revelation of them. These are mysteries still. " AVe see them through a glass darMy : — we know them but i?i part.''"' "f* The gospel does not in every case enable us to answer those questions, — why? how? tcherefore? but it teaches us to s\ibmit our understandings to tlie xvisdom of God, and our hearts to his xv'ill. How can a revelation of
* 2 Tor. iii. 12, 13. cS: iv. 2—1. f I Cor. xiii. 12.
OK THk: DOCTCIN'LS or I! i:\ ELATION'. 39
the being, perfections, aiul wavs of llie 'injin'iiv (loil, be made to a finifc creature, without involving mysteriex? That which is infinite cannot be comprehended by that wliich is finite. 'Vo suppose that it could, is to suppose that either the former is no longer infinite, or the latter is no longer finite. In whatever measure, therefore, God is made known to us, that which is known to us must imply something which is unknozcn, that is a mysterij. It is the part of christian humility to acknowledge, that " secret things belong unto the Lord our God ;" and it is the part of Christian docility to receive with meekness "those thin<js which are revealed " as belonffinjj " to us and to our children for ever."' *
In an examination, like the present, of those things which once were mysteries, and of those which are now "in parV revealed, while we abstain from all vain and curious inquiries into the kv??/, the hoxc, and the •wherefore, which are not revealed ; our business is, not to suppose that in the imaginary deductions of human i-eason we have an infallible standard of judgment already fixed, — which is perfectly incompatible with the idea of those things having been, or being now, mysteries ; but, to sit, without preju- dice or prepossession, at the feet of Christ and of his Apostles, and to learn from thein what are ^'- the principal doctrines of Christianity.''''
♦ Deut. xxis. 29.
( 'M )
CHAPTER III.
Of the Existence of the Devil.
Thoucii the mere abstract, philosophical question of the existence (>f the Devil, is rather curious than useful ; to know that we have an invisible and inveterate foe, who makes the seduction of mankind his business, and their destruction his aim, is of great importance.
It is not o\ir purpose to prove that there is an omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent, prescient, and irrfimtelr/ malicious fiend.* Mr. G., for aught we know, may have heard ignorant persons speak as if there were ; and it must be confessed, that he has "made the best use of their misrepresentations. His attack on this " castle in the air " has afforded him a triumph to which he is heartily welcome. If he can prove nothing else, he can prove that there is not an infinite Devil. But all his arguments on this topic are mere waste of words. He has manufactured a man out of the straw of vulgar inaccuracy, and has innocently set it on fire. Leaving him to warm himself by the flame which he has kindled, we proceed to point out what we have learnt on this subject, from the sacred scriptures.
By those divine oracles we are taught, that there are beings celestial as well as terrestrial: He who created " hea- ven '"" and " earth," created all things " in " them, " visible and invisible,"" even " thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers.'''' -f- These invisible inhabitants of heaven are intelligent beings ; for they " do always behold the face of the Father which is in heaven : " I and moral agents ; for they not only know, but do his will, and are set forth as an example to us, who are taught to pray, that his " will
* Lect. Vol. I. pp. 18, 73, 74, U, 'Jl, 92, 102. f Col. i. 16. + Matt, xviii. 10.
THE EXISTENCE OF THE DEVII,. 41
may be done on earth, as it is done in heaven^ They are spiritual substances : not clothed with flesh Uke us ; for " he maketh his angels spirits.'''' *
These celestial spirits are called Angels or Messengers, because they have been known to mankind chiefly in the character of messengers J'rmn God.
From St. Peter and St. Jude, we learn that some of these inhabitants of heaven " abode not in the truth," but fell from their rectitude and bHss, To disturb our enjoy- ment of the testimony of St. Jude, Mr. G. has given us a specimen of Soc'mian reasoning. " I cannot enter into a critical explanation of every passage. I will refer you to Si7/ipsmi's Essay on the words Satan and Devil, where the subject is thoroughly investigated. Suffice it now to say that it refers to human beings and the punishment temporal. It relates to the journey of the Israelites through the wilder- ness, to their rebellion and their subsequent punishment." -f*
Let us hear by what means Mr. Simpson has perverted the sense of the words of the Apostle. In the first place, he has taken the utmost freedom, in giving a new version of the passage. We shall not, however, object to this ; except in the case of one word, viz, atJiojf, which our translators have properly rendered, " everlasting^ It is from aei " always," and is the word which St. Paul uses in Rom. i. 20. where again it is, and must be, rendered " eternal C (" eternal power and Godhead.") It is used by Ignatius, in his epistle to the Magnesians (sec. 8.) to point out the eternity of Jesus Christ, whom he denominates, \n\\\ respect to God, avTH Xoyos at^ios, his eternal Word- But Mr. S. to get rid of a word which indicates eternal, instead of tem- poral, punishment, has translated it, in connection with the word hT/Mif, without assigning any reason, and contrary to all authority, " the chains of Hades."" — In this case, then, we have a. false translation.
With this exception, the utmost freedom of translation being allowed, the passage stands thus : " And the (Angels, or) Messengers, who watched not over their principality, but deserted their proper station, he hath reserved imtil the
* Heb. i. 7. f Vol. I. p. /3.
42 THE EXISTENCE OF THE DEVIL.
judgment of the great day, in everlasting chains, under darkness." Such, with the exception which we have noted, is Mr. S.'s translation, on which we will remark :
1. That the passage is still 'perfectly applicable to our purpose.
2. That the application of it to Mr. G's purpose, is be- yond all measure^orc^rf. (1.) How are the spies said to be messengers ? The word ayysKos means a messenger who bears tidings. But the spies were not sent with any message, news, or tidings. They were sent to spy out the land. (2.) Was it the sin of the spies that they did not zvatch over their principality, but deserted their proper .station ? Was it not that they brought an evil report of the land ? (3.) Is being reserved in chains to the judgment of the great day, and in everlasting chains, merely a " temporal punishment ?''"' (4.) How can the sin of the spies refer to the jmirney of the Israelites throiigh the wilderness, to their rebellion and their subsequent punishment ?
Thus, after the utmost latitude is allowed to Mr. G. in his translation, he is obliged to make a most arbitrary appli- cation of the passage ; and misses the mark at last. The passage from St. Peter'^s epistle reinains untouched, for it would not admit of a similar application, and is therefore fully in our possession. It stands thus : " God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and deli- vered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment." *
It is probable that the sin of these angelic beings was pride. Hence St. Paul directs, that a Bishop should not be a " novice (or young convert) lest being lifted up with pride, he fall into the condemnation of the DeviV -f How that p?-ide was manifested, is not explained. But there may possibly be an ollusiwi to their sin in that passage : " How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning ! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations ! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God : I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation,
* 2 Peter ii. 4. f • 'Jl'in>. i'i- Ih'.
T>rF F.XTSTF.N('K OF THE DF.VII.. 43
in the sides of tlie north : I will ascend above the heights of the clouds : I will be like the Most High."*
At the time of our Lord's appearance, these fallen spirits were permitted, in many instances, to take possession of the bodies of mankind. Mr. G. readily grants, " that it was a common opinion am(mgst all the heathen nations, that the spirts of departed men and heroes were permitted, after their death, to enter the bodies of human beings." -f- A similar notion, he admits, obtained among the Jezas, Avho, he says, " gave the name of demons to those sj)ints which were permitted to enter the human frame to do evil."" | Tliis notion is, however, deemed by him perfectly erro- neous, II and the demonology of the Jews is treated by him, as in no way connected with the scripture account of the Devil, or with the design of the mission of Jesus Christ.'''' § It Avill therefore be necessary to examine it.
The demoniacs, of whom we have so many accounts in the New Testament, were persons really possessed by demons. Such is the account which the Evmigdists give of them. They do not speak of them as sxipposed to be pos- sessed, but as being really so. *' There met him two possessed with demons.'''' ^ Such is their uniform language. — These demons were w'lcked spirits. " And they that were vexed with unclean spirits (came :) and they were healed." ** " When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he w'alketh through dry places, seeking rest ; and finding none, he saith, I will return unto my house whence I came out. — Then goeth he, and taketh to him seve'n other spirits more wicked than himself; and they enter in, and dwell there : and the last state of that man is v/orse than the first." ■[••}- Hence, their uniform language is, " He was caMing out a demon." W The circumstances of these cases admit of no other supposition than of real possessions. Wliile the men said to be possessed, were cut off from all intercourse with persons who might give rneni any informa- tion respecting Jcstis Christ, and therefore knew nothing
* Isa. xiv. 12—14. f Vol. I. p. 73. : Vol. I. p. 74.
II Vol. I. p. 101. § Vol. I. p. 'JR. «I Matt. viii. 28.
** Luke vi. 1«. tt Luke xi. 24— 2ti. U Luke xi. 14.
44 THE EXISTENCE OF THE DEVIL.
of him, what were they who said, " What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?" Who in answer to the question, " What is thy name ?" said, " Legion: because many demons were entered into him ?" * Who besought him to " suffer them to go away into the herd of swine r Who went into the herd of swine, and drove them, in spite of their keepers, into the sea ? f What is that but a spirit, that seelcs rest but can find none ? that resolves to return to his first abode ? and that taketh with him seven other spirits, more wiclced than himself ?
Mr. G. grants that such were the opinions of the Jews, and supposes that "it was no part of the office of Jesus to controvert them;" \ but rather that " he adopted the phrase- ology" of those " to whom his instructions were addressed." || He makes, indeed, some apology for this, by supposing the doctrines of demonology to be merely philosophical: and " our Saviour (says he) was not sent to teach philosophy:" § But will this be a sufficient vindication of him who came " to bear witness of the Truth ?" Did Jesus Christ, not only overlook the superstitions of the age in which he lived, but confirm them ? Mr. Yates says, it is the opinion of the Unitarians that Jesus Christ, " by the force of his doctrines and example, saves men from ignorance and siiperstition.'" (See p. 35.) Was it then for this purpose Jesus Christ falsely declared that the demons he cast out were " unclean spirits:'' ^ Nay, v> not this to charge the Son of God with imposture ? Did he not represent his actually " casting out demons by the finger of God," as a proof that " the king- dom of God was come ?" ** Was he not then, on Mr. G.'s hypothesis, ajldse and uncommissioned teacher ? If so, it is time to give up our appeals to the doctrine of Jesus Christ, and to receive as the only true Apostles of God, the Sodni- cms, who now teach that " whatsoever was written of old time was (jiot) written for our learning,'" but in conformity to the superstitions of the times ! Happily for us, however, Mr. G. has lucid intervals ; and at one of those seasons,
« Luke viii. 1^0. t Mat\ viii. 28-32. + Vol I. p <!8. II Vol. I. y. 73. § Vol. I. p. J)8. f Luke xi. 24. •* Luke x«. 20.
THE EXISTENCE OF THE DEVIL. 45
tnorc favourable to truth, he says, in proof that he ou£Tht not to be afraid of attacking popular prejudices, *' that Jesus and his Apostles pursued one direct course, in vpposition to long-established opinions^ and regardless and
J'earless of consequences, leaving them to God " * Such is Mr. G"'s consistency !
On the supposition that Jesus Christ was a " teacher sent from God," and that what Mr. G. calls "his instructiwts'''* were not, like those of the Jewish Scribes, the " doctrines of men,'' but the truth of God, with what propriety could he ■say " we hare nothing to do with all those passages in the New Testament, where persons are spoken of as being pos- sessed ; they have no reference to our subject.'*" •[•—except that those passages are an insuperable bar to the progress of Socimajiism. To shew that they have the most direct " reference" to our subject, we will observe that,
1. Of these demons the Jews deemed Beelzebub the chief. Mr. G. has granted this proposition : | and St. Luke relates, that " some of them said, He easteth out demons through Beelzebub the chief oi the demons. " ||
'2. luhis Bedzebub, the chief of the demons, our Lord called Satan. For when the Jews thus accused him of cast- ing out demons by Beelzebub, he said unto them, " If Satan
' be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand ? because ye say, that I cast out demons by Beelzebub.'''' '§
3. The name Satan is that which our Lord generally used in speaking of him; but he whom our Lord calls Satan, is by the Evangelist, speaking his own language, called the Devil. In the account which St. Matthew has given of our Lord's temptation, he relates that Jesus said : " Get thee hence, Satan.'''' ^ But the Evangelist says, " the Devil taketh him up into the holy city :— ^^A^ Devil taketh him up into ^n exceeding high mountain :" and — " then the Devil leaveth him." **
4. This Satan, the Devil, Beelzebub, is called the chief of demons ; and in perfect accord with this notion, our Lord attributed to him a k'mgdom. " If Satan be divided against
» VoLl.p..l08. t Vol. 1. |). 74. :Vol. l.p. 74. || Luke xi. 15.
§ Luke xi. \6. H Matt. iv. 10. ** Malt. iv. a, «, 11.
d3
46
THE EXISTENCE OF THE DEVIL.
himself, how shall his kingdom stand?'" * Hence, we read so often of " the Devil and his angels.'"
5. These demons, the subjects of Beelzebub, the Devil's angels, are also called Satan. Our Lord supposes, that for Beelzebub to cast out demons, would be for " Satan to cast out Satan.'" f Thus mie demon or mati?/, is Satari. — In like manner, as the operations of an army are attributed to their general, because it moves under his direction : so the opera- tions of the demons, under the direction of their chief, are attributed to him. " Put on," says the Apostle Paul, « the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the w'iles of the Devil. For we wrestle against principali- ties, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world." + Thus the Devil, in the s'mgidar number, is equivalent to principalities, powers, and rulers, in the l)lural.
6. These '^ principalities, powers, and rulers'" are said to be, " not flesh and blood;'' not men, but spiritual wickedness in high (heavenly) places." ||
7. And lastly, This chief of demons, the Devil and Satan, is called the Tempter. — And when " the Tempter came to him, &c. § — That Satan tempt you not." ^
Thus, instead of finding that the passages in which demons are mentioned " have no reference to our subject," we find them a most useful key, to open the doctrine on which Mr. G. has so rashly and injudiciously made an attack. — We will now consider some of those passages which still further illustrate and confirm the truths which we have developed.
The first case which we shall consider, is the seduction of Eve. The Mosaic account of that transaction, Mr. G. has attempted to puzzle by a dilemma. He supposes that we must interpret it either literally, and so make nonsense of it, or allegor'ically, and make nearly nothing of it.— And is this really the case .? Must every thing which is said or written, be interpreted as " perfectly VderaT or entirely alle- gorical? Is there no medium ? Let us try.
*Lukcxi. 18. tMalt.xii.26. : Eph. vi. 11, 12
llEph.vi. 12. §Matt.iv.3. ^[ 1 Cor. vii. 5.
THE EXISTEXCE OF THE DKVir,. 47
There is no impropriety whatever in supposing that the whole transaction is related ^yy/^y^ as it ajypcared. " The ser- pent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made." The serpent then was a real ser- pent, a beast of the field, and a creature which God had made. " And he said unto the woman," &c. So it was. He actually spoke. And this circumstance leads us to enquire whether, in this transaction, the serpent were a principal, or merely the tool of another. The reasoning and speech were not his own, and we are warranted to say, that they were of the Devil. " Little children, let no man deceive you : He that committeth sin is of the Devil ; for the Devil sinneth Jrom the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the Devil.'''' * Here we learn that sin is of the Devil from the beginning, and that he that came to " bruise the serpent''s head," came to destroy the works of the Devil. Nor is this interpretation in any measure forced, but perfectly consonant with the general tenor of Scripture. " The old Serpent " is said to be " the Devil, and Satan.'''' -f- Our Lord said to the Jews, " Ye are of your father, the Devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the bcg'in- ning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he spcaketh a lie, he speakcth of his own : for he is a luir, and the father of it." j Who then can doubt that he was the Jcither of that lie by which our Parent was deceived ; and by the effect of it, a murderer Jrom, the beginning?
We do not, however, say, as Mr. G. supposes, " that there grew a tree whose fruit was capalile of imparting a kno-icledge of good and evil ;" || but of which the prohib'ition taught man to know what was ^oo(^, viz. to abstain from that fruit, — and what was evil, viz. to eat of it. We say " that God zoalked in the garden to seek for Adam,'''' not because we forget that God is a Sp'irit: but because we believe that if we had witnessed the transaction, we could not have described it in more a]>propriatc terms. We do not say " that Adam called to 'xuform the Deity of his hiding place ;"
^ J John iii. 7. y. f Rtv. \x. 2. J Julia viii. 41. || \ul. 1. p. hO.
48 THE EXISTENCE OF THE DEVIL.
but that Mr. G. should read the passage on which he com^ merits. We say, that the serpent " was cursed above all cattle," because we believe that Mr. G. cannot contradict that saying, any more than he can deny that it "was compelled to crawl upon the ground and eat the dust " with its food. As Mr. G.'s prejudice has raised these, to him, insuper- able difficulties in the common interpretation of this passage, his ingenuity, with a little assistance, has found out another which he imagines to be more easy. He has learned from Philo the Jew, that " it is an allegory expressive of what really happened, under feigned images, and the serpent, says he, is an emblem of vicious pleasure." * But here we must pay a just tribute to Mr. G.'s prudence ! He does not say that it is so ; but makes use of' this Jewish fable, to get rid of the difficulty ; and then leaves poor Philo to answer for it. But until Mr. G. honestly disclaim, what he dare not ven- ture to maintain, it will not be unfair to say, that he ought to be sure that he has not multiplied, instead of lessening, our difficulties.^^— 1. This half-adopted comment, is a mere gratuitous assumption, without the smallest particle of proof. But then, to a Sodnian, proof is not always necessary for the support of his own hypothesis. To get rid of the testi- mony of scripture is the task, and the means are not to be scrupulously examined. — 2. If the whole be an allegory, and Mr. G. loudly insists upon consistency, then we have not only an allegorical serpent, but an allegorical tree, bearing allegorical fruit, and an allegorical garden ; an allegorical woman, formed allegorically out of an allegorical man ; in a word, an allegorical creation. But Mr. G. has brought us into a labyrinth, from which it will puzzle both him and the " learned Jew "" to extricate us. — 3. The serpent is indirectly said to be one of the beasts of the field, which the Lord God had made ; whereas, vicious pleasure, however beastly, is neither a beast nor a creature of' God. — 4. " Vicious pleasure"" had no existence, in the woman, until she had been guilty of sin by tasting of a forbidden plea- sure. Could she know any thing of the pleasure of sin before she had sinned? — 5. Moses describes the
* Vol. 1. p.ei.
THE EXISTENCE OF THE DEVIL. 49
reasonings of tlie tempter as ])recedlng the ttiotight of the plemnrc of eating- the forbidden fruit. The woman Jirst heard the tempter, and qftcrxvards saw '♦ that the tree was good for ^food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one Avise.'" The tempter was tlierefore distinet from tlie tfwught of any pleasure in the sin. — 6. How is " rJctoiw j9fca*?/r<; '"* cursed .'' Is there any curse attached to it notv^ more than hcjore the fall.'' And how is " vicious pleasure"" cursed above all cattle? — 7. What enmity Is there now put between the woman and vicious pleasure ? Was there not greater enmity between them be/ore than since the commission of sin .'' — 8. How is vicious pleasure to eat the dust ?
No absurdities are too great for those who refuse to take the plain letter of scripture for their guide; who " strain out a gnat, and swallow a camel ! " When an Atheist speaks of the phenomena around him, because he cannot do so without allowing a great, universal, free, and active, first- cause, he imagines a being whom he calls Nature, to whom he attributes the designs and operations of a real being, whose existence he is disposed to deny. Thus, they who wish to drive the Devil out of the universe, cannot help observing how many of his works remain ; and feel themselves under the neces- sity of finding him a substitute, who, during his absence, may manage his affairs with as much discretion, and do his work with as much ability, as he himself. To effect this, a well-imagined being is poetically created, which, lest it should seem to be nothing for want of a name, is dubbed " tlie evil principle^'' or " vicious pleasure.'''' It must not be supposed that this is a Devil, any more than that Nature is a God. It has neither a body nor a soul. It is a mere acci- dent, without any substance in which to inhere. It was not a God ; for " God is light, and in him is no darkness at all."''* It was not in man, before the fall; "for in the image of 'God made he him." It did not exist in the Serpent, for that is .supposed to be a nonentity, and in Jact was a mere animal, and therefore inca])able of nwrcd principles either good or evil. It was an c/f'ect without a cause. It had a beginning without an author. And it had an cuistence when, as yet.
50 THE EXISTENCE OF THE DEVIL.
it was notlihig. It was an ahsiirdity, fit only to nestle in the brains of wmdd-be philosophers, and to cast its spawn in those works which are intended to supplant the Bible. — It is the property of error to be inconsistent. When the degene- racy of human nature is to be denied, no evil principle is acknowledged. But when the Devil is to be destroyed, his Ghost haunts his murderers in the shape of " the evil principle,'''' and is left sufficiently alive and substantial to find a way into the heart of Eve, and to tempt even Jesus Christ. What Devil that was ever invented, could be worse than this ^^ evil principle?''''
The book of Job, which records the manifold tempta- tions of that " upright man,'"' imputes them all to Satan, and was probably written to make known to God's people the AutJwr of mischief, and to guard them against his temptations. Mr. G. grants, that " this great doctrine (the being of Satan) is more explicitly taught in that, than in any other book," * and therefore needed not to suppose that it was " borrowed from the Persian theology, or con- jured up by philosophers, at a non-plus to account for the origin of evil." -f* We, on the other hand, may be excused if we have imbibed our opinions from that book, for those opinions cannot now be said to be unscriptural. What then is to be done.f* Why,with the utmost effrontery, he calls it "an eastern fable, a poetical effusion, not improbably a drama.'''' \ Thus, with a Socinian, those parts of scripture which do not give countenance to his creed, are any tJmig, or nothing : a legendary tale, or an old ballad. Instead of granting that " whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning;'''' he will (some would say, blasphemously) suppose that they were written when the Author was in a merry mood, for the entertainment of boys and girls on a holyday.
" The first chapter," says Mr. G., " will furnish us with a key to the term {Satan) in every other part of the book ;" |] but he might as well have called it a Jire in which to burn the whole. The difficulties with which he meets in that ■chapter, are converted into some kind of proof that the
* Vol. I. p. 81. fVol. I. p. 76. jVol. l.p. al. II Vol. l.).. 81.
THE EXrSTENCF. OF THE DEVIL. 51
whole must be jin alh'ffortj. Now we must observe two thino-s. — 1. That the allusions witli whieh we meet in sci'ipture, are allusions to 7Trt/ facts, and to rm/ beings. The sacred m riters do not " conjure up " hnag'marij bcino;s " at a non-plus," either for the exercise of their genius, or the amusement of their readers. Such a conduct would but ill become those who are commissioned to instruct mankind in things spiritual. If therefore we should grant that the first chapter of Job is an allfgorij, still we should maintain that all its allusions are founded in Jcicts, and that the poetical mention of Satan, in such a book, would be proof of his existence. Mankind have invented superstitions enow, without receiving any addition to them from those scriptures which are intended for the destruction of error, and the diffusion of divine truth. So far is the book of Job from ^* darkening" counsel by words witlwut knowledge^'' that, in that book the practice is reproved. See Job xxx. 8. — 2. That there is no ground for the supposition that the book of Job is an allegoi'y. It is an exposition of what actually took place, couched in such terms as will best convey the truth to human minds. In wluit terms would Mr. G. describe the transactions of the invisible world, if he reject such as are used in the chapter in question ? Have those Socinians, who suppose their own souls to be nothing but orga7iized matter, refined and spiritualized their ideas, so as to be able to speak of spiritual things in any other lan- guage than " after the manner of men ? "
To answer Mr. G.''s objections to the literal interpretation of this book, is rather to instruct igiwrance, than to combat argument. " Satan,'''' says he, " comes nnawed, unabashed, into the presence of the Almighty ! The great Jelvovah condescends to hold a conversation with liim, upon terms of the utmost familiarity. With the most perfect conjidcnce he gives an account to God what he has been doing. The Almighty points out a being to him as having escaped his notice ! "" * — Now is this ajgnment ? Is it any thing more than flourish ? The words printed in Italics are the cm- pJuitical words, and in them the strength of the supposed
* \ .)1. I. !>. 83.
•52 THE EXISTENCE OF THE SDETIL.
argument consists. But they are the continent, not the text. One of them is entirely j^z^g, and the rest are mere conjee^ ture, — Again, " He begs of God to afflict this man ? " — What wonder? — " God gi^ves^him permission to afflict him." — And does not God permit all our afflictions ? Does not Mr. G. know iha^ blessed is the man that endureth temp- tation ; for wiien he is tried he shall receive the crown of life? — "Was it necessary that he should first go and^^»/«ori the Almighty ? " — He could not afflict Job without permis- sion ; for after all the Devil \s not Almighty. — " In every sense of the word was not the Devil his (God's) agent ? " — No. He acted not Jbr God, at the divine commajid, but under permission. — " Were not the Sabeans, the Chaldeans, the lightning, the hurricane, sufficient agents of the Deity ?" — Now Mr. G. has answered his own question. Why might not Satan be permitted to do apparent mischief, as well as the Sabeans and the Chaldeans ? — " But were not the latter sufficient? "" — They did not fight against Job, till Satan had obtained permission, and then they acted their part under his influence and management. — "But Job imputes the whole to God." — 'He did so, and justly ; for all Job's trials had by him been wisely permitted and overruled. If this argument prove the nonentity of Satan, it will equally prove the nonentity of tl e Sabeans and Chaldeans.
But how does Mr. G.'s interpretation consist with the text ? " The sons of God were the holy men who came to worship in the <(?7n^/^ of the Lord. Their wicked adver- saries, their Satan, assembled with them, opposed them to the utmost of their .power, and were permitted by God to be successful in their schemes of hostility." — This is the way to make every thing simple aindi clear. Now what becomes of the conversation between God and Satan ? It is unphiloso- phicali What raised the hurricane? What caused the lightning to descend? Who afflicted Job's body with boUs? Mr. G. has left you to find out all that as you may. He does not wish to be responsible for the difficulties of which he is the Author.
Our " great High-Priest was tempted in all things, like the children of men." His temptations arc, by the Evan-
THE KXISTKXCE OF THK DETIL. 53
gefist, imputed to a diabolical agency- The whole account of this transaction is to be found in Matt. iv. But Mr. G. again objects to the literal interpretation. Without repeat- ing, that the whole account is couched in terms the most proper for conveying the truth of the facts to mankind, we will hear and answer his objections.
" Jesus was led by the spirit, into the wilderness, on purpose to be tempted by the Devil." ♦ Just so. He came to bruise the serpent's head ; and there must be a coiijlict, before there could be a conquest. " I will put enmity (said God himself) between thee and the woman,, and between thy seed and her seed, -f — He had iasXedJorty days, when he began to be hungry." | That he was hungry after a fast of forty days, is no great wonder. And that he should fast forty days without being hungry till then, is as passible as that he should live forty days without food ; or that Moses and Elijah should hold a fast of the same duration. " All things are possible with God. — Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God :''*' by any means which God is pleased to ordain. — " He Tcnew the Devil as soon as he appeared to him " || What then ? — " The Devil walked with him, through the city of Jerusalem^ to a pinnacle of the temple."" — Suppose the Devil to have assumed a human appearance, and where is the difficulty ? — " He next accompanied him to a high mountain where he could see all the kingdoms of the world; a thing naturally impossible !" § — Perhaps it was a visionary representation. Or, the expression may possibly have a limited meaning, as in Luke ii. 1. "And then the Devil, knowing he was speaking to the Son of God, who was aware who lie was, had the presumption to ask, that he would fall do^vn and worship him, instead of God the Father."" ^ — Mr. G. is very much concerned that the Devil should speak and act with great propriety and decorum, and in a manner worthy of the 07nniscience which he imputes to him. Satan has not, however, on this occasion manifested so much presumption as Mr. G."'s jealousy has led him to
• Vol. I. p. 87. t Gen. iii. 15. ♦ Vol. 1. p. 87.
II Vol. I. p. 87. § Vol. I. p. 87. H Vol. 1. p. 88.
54 THE EXISTENCE OE THE DEVIT,.
.suspect. He did not ask the Son of God to worship him instead of God the Father ; but since the contest between tliem was for the dominion of the world, he, with sufficient subtlety and impudence, proposed to cede to him the whole on condition that he would do him religious homage for it. " Upon suspicion that all these inconsistencies [an unlucky word !] still gain credit, I add one more, that if Jesus Christ were a deity, this was no temptation at all, for he knew him from the first, it required no effort to resist him, and nothing was to be gained, but every thing lost by obeying him." * — All the " inconsistency^'' as Mr. G. calls it, arises from a false supposition, that, if Jesiis Christ was God, he was not man ; that if he was almighty, he had no human infirmity. Suppose him human, as well as divine, and the difficulty vanishes. On Mr. G.'s hypothesis, Jesus Christ had then "received miraculous powers;" "I- if so, what effiart was necessary to him in withstanding temptation ? The power which afterwards cast out demons, was sufficient to withstand this temptation. The answer in one case serves equally in the other. In either case, " nothing was to be gained, but every thing (was to be) lost, by obeying" the tempter.
Let us now attend to Mr. G's comment on the history of our Lord"'s temptation. — " Contrast with this interpreta- tion the following, which the very expression of, being led hy the Spirit," seems at once to denote. As soon as Jesus had received, from God, all the miraculous powers conferred upon him at his baptism, his mind was occupied with the thought, how he might be able to use these powers. Worldly tlwughts first arose ; worldly objects presented them- selves to his view. This adversary to divine things, this Satan, suggested to him the use of his miraculous powers. How he might gratify his palate, by spiSaking only to the stones ; how he might command universal admiration and obedience, by publicly throwing himself from the temple ; how he might gain universal dominion by the corrupt use of his power." |
We may observe that in his own comments, Mr. G. meets with no difficulty. He never applies his key to try
*VoI. l,p. 88. fVol. l.p. 88. :Vol. I. p. 89.
THE EXISTEN'Cr. OF THE DEVII.. 55
Avliother it be fittetl to all the wards of tlic lock. Wo will point out its (hjiditw'ws, its contradiction to the text, and its glarino- hnpropnct'ics.
1. There are in his hypothesis many great deficiencies. It aflbrds no explanation, eitlier proper or figurative, of most of the circumstances of the history. It includes no account of the " xcilderiicsi'' into which Jesus was led ; of the pur- j)o.sc for which he was led thither; of the leader wlio brought him thither; of the time which he spent there; oi \\\q fast which he held; of the *■*■ coming" of the tempter; of Christ"'s
journey from the wilderness to the lioly city ; of his being set on a pinnacle of the temple ; of his Journey from thence to an exceeding high mountain ; of the view which he had of the kingdoms of the world ; of the xcorship which some person requested ; or of xha pj-oviise which that person made to him.
2. The comment contradicts the text. St. Matthew says, that Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness. Mr. G. grants that he had received the Spirit ; and cites the words " led by the Spirit ,•*" but supposes him to be led only by his OTvn tJtoug-hts : thoughts which coidd not be suggested by the Holy Spirit. . The text names Jour times the Devil as the tempter. Now this word was perfectly unmanage- able. IVIr. G. knows that it means a slanderer, and lie has not been able to find a place where the word is used, except where it is applied to some real being. As this word, therefore, would not bend to his purpose, he takes hold rather of the word Satan, which our Lord has mice used, as v[iorc Jlexible. He could not make icorldly iluyughts into a slanderer, but he could suppose them an adversai'y.
8. Mr. G/s " interpretation" has in it some glaring im- proprieties. According to him, the ^'- first tlimights''' which arose in the mind of Jesus after he had received the Holy Spirit, and when he was under the special guidance of that Spirit, were " worldly thoughts." * Here is the abstract " evil principle r The accident without a substance ! " The cloven foot walking about without the Devil .'" We do not misunderstand Mr. G. " The word devil, (he says,) seems
* Vol. I. p. 88.
56 THE EXISTEXCK OF THE DEVIL.
in general acceptation to signify nothing more than that propensity to ill, observable in the human mind ; * and, like many occult qualities, isjbund of great use in the solution of various difficulties.'''' -f Thus all Mr. G.'s diffiadt'ies are solved by applying this " occt/Z^ quality," this ^^ propensity to ill,'''' to him " who was/ioZy, harmless, undcfiled, and separate from sinners.'''' The Socinians have now attached the " cloven Jhof to the Saviour ofmmilcind ! No wonder that Jesus, no real Devil being with him, putting this^o^ fore- most, found his way to the pinnacle of the temple, that he might cast himself down ; or to the mountain from which he might see the glorious kingdoms of the world, and wor- ship— nothing. — Who are they now, who crucify the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame ? Who are they who count the blood of the covenant an unlioly thing ? There is a passage in St. Jude to which Mr. G. has replied in a Note ; but which might have deserved some notice in the body of his work. " It may be well, says he, to mention a tradition which will serve to elucidate Jude 9, respecting Michael the archangel and the Devil. Among the Talmudists there is something like the relics of such a matter, namely, of Michael and \\\e angel of death disputing, or discoursing about fetching away the soul of Moses. This Messenger of death, therefore, is called the Devil or adver- sary." J — So the words " disputing,'''' and " discoursing,'''' — the " body of Moses" and the " soul of Moses," — " devil" and " adversary," are here made convertible terms. So much for Socinian precision ! This, to imitate it, is " to elucidate,'''' or " to put darkness Jbr light P"* — The passage is, however, a very ingenious contrivance ! To get rid of the Devil, another being, created by the fertile imagination of the Jews, is permitted by the Soc'mians to occupy his place. And this " elucidation''' is supposed to be a satisfactory
* Query. Would Mr. G. and his consistent brethren of the Socinian unbelief, find " th?it propensity to ill, (so) observable in the human mind," if they were discussing the question of the depravity of human nature? Here, they find it " observable" in Jesus CJtrist himself. Is this more like a ♦' free enquiry " after truth, or a contest for victory, in which even troth itself, with its inseparable companion, consistency, is to be immolated? t Vol. l.p.76. ♦ Vol. .Ip. 94.
THE EXISTENCE OF THE DEVIL. 57
answer to all who urge the testimony of St. Jude, as evidence of the i\i'iste7icc of tJie Devil Such are the arguments of these great IMasters of reason ! Here is a being, whose real existence, without a shadow of proof from the scriptures, is taken for granted : " the angel of death /" And yet, after all, this " angel of death"" may be " he that lias thepoivcr of death, that is the Devil!" A good angel would not " dispute with MieJuiii and contend about the body of Moses." To a good angel, Micliael would not say, "The Lord rebuJce thee.*" And lastly a g-ood angel would not be the '■'- adversaj-y'''' (as Mr. G. call this) either of Moses or of Micluiel. In fact, these words of Jude afford a direct and positive proof of the existence of a fallen angel, who is called by him " the Devil.''''
When Jesus had sent out the " seventy, they returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the demons are subject to us through thy name. And he said unto them, I beheld Satan, as lightning, fall from heaven." * — Satan, we have learnt, is the prince of demons, of whom our Lord, by a strong figure, thus predicts the final and entire overthrow. Mr. G. after a little flourish about the absurdity of a literal interpretation, supposes Satan here to mean "the adversaries of the Christian cause." To this we must add, that they were, as the words of our Lord demonstrate, especially the spiritual adversaries which were intended, " Notwithstand- ing," he subjoins, " in this rejoice not, that the spirits are subject unto you." -f*
As we have found, in the facts which have been ex- amined, ample reason to acknowledge the existence of the Devil ; we shall find, in the general language of the New Testament, sufficient reason to suppose him the Tempter of mankind. — We are exhorted to " stand against the zoiles of the Devil.'''' J — We are represented to be in danger " lest Satan should get an advantage against us ;" because of his " devices.'''' \\ — The prince ofthepoicer of the air,''"' is a " spirit which icorketh in the children of disobedience.'''' § Thus " Cain who sleiv his by-other, was of that xcicTced one.''^ ^ — Is any man ignorant of the gospel which has been preached to
* Luke X. 17, 18. f Luke v. 20. : Eph. vi. 11.
II 2 Cor. ii. 11. § Eph. i. 2. H 1 John iii. 12.
£
58 THE EXISTE^NCE OF THE DEVIL.
him ? — " the God of this wwld hath bhnded his mind.'" * Does any man live in the commission of sin ? — " he is of the DeviV f "Ye are of your father the Devil, (said our Lord to his wicked countrymen,) and the lusts of yourjather ye will dor I
To conclude this part of the argument ; the scriptures speak of the judgment, the condemnation and the punishment of the Devil.
1. Of \he judgment of the Devil. " Know ye not,"" says St. Paul, " that we shall judge angels V By angels, we here understandyaZ/^/i angels ; for the hily angels, will be minis- ters in the judgment of men. " When the Son of Man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him." |1 — " The Son of Man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity, and shall cast them into a furnace of fire."'"'§ — Now the Apostle''s argument would lose all its weight, unless he meant to distinguish between fallen men and fallen angels.
2. Of the condemnation and punishment of the Devil. When our Lord alludes to the final punishment of wicked men, he says, " Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the Devil and his angels^ ^ Thus has he marked the antecedent sin of the Devil and his angels, and the punishment prepared for them, as distinguished from the wicked men who are doomed to share it with them.
Thus we find that there is a wicked Devil, the tempter of mankind, who is distinguished from men on the one hand, and from mere abstract principles on the other. — We must now proceed to answer Mr. G.''s incidental objections.
I. When it is so plain a fact that there is an irvfernal Devil, and spiritual Satan, it can answer no purpose for Mr. G. to quote a hundred texts of scripture to prove that men, or women are sometimes called devils, (i. e. calumniators) or satans (i. e. adversaries.) The existence of ten thousand human devils, and earthly satans, brings no evidence that there is no chief of demons, no spiritual Devil, or hellish Sat£in.
* 2 Cor. iv. 4. t 1 John iii. 8. % John viii. 44.
II Matt. XXV. 6\. § Matt. xiii. 41, 42. \\ Matt. xxv. 41.
TIIR EXISTEX( i: OI- IlIK DF.VTT.. 59
II. It will not answer Mr. G.'s purpose to shew that " nearly every office^ which is usually ascribed to the DcvU, is in some part of the scriptures ascribed cither to God or to aiigch.'''' * This assertion, as far as it relates to angels, he has not attempted to prove, and therefore that part of it goes for nothing. If he mean to impute tlie same things to God, in the same sense as to the Devil, then — 1. He must ex- culj)ate Judas who betrayed, and the chief' priests who cruci- fied, our Lord ; for '* being dehvcred by the detcj'minalc counsel and Jbrelinowledge of God, they by wicked hands crucified and slew him.'"' -f- — 2. He makes God the author of sin. Nothing; can be more obvious than this ; for if what is •wickedness in Satan, be ascribed in the same sense to God, it is zcielrdness still. Nor is this the only argument by which JVIr. G. in support of his system, certainly with no other design, makes God the Author of all sin, and lays on him the blame of all the mischiefin the universe. " If the Almighty," says he, " can retain this infernal being in fetters whenever he pleases, and suffer him to roam at large only when he wills, — this permission of the Almighty is the same as if it were his oxen act and deed. For to permit what you can prevent is the same as to perform.'''' Now cannot God equally prevent all the wickedness of mankind ? But does he prevent it ? No : In the sense of Mr. G. he permits it : that is, though he forbids it, he does not absolutely prrvent it. Is then all the sin of mankind to be charged on the Almighty, as his oxen act and deed ? — 3. He rather proves, than disproves, the existence of the Devil;. for if the works which are attributed to God, are in the same sense attributed to tlie Devil, the latter must have a real existence, as well as the former. — If, on the other hand, he impute similar works to the best and to the xvorst of beings, but not to each in the same sense, his argument proves only that txvo beings, with different designs, and therefore both intelligent, are employed among mankind.
But to prevent the mischief which his observation may in another way effect, it will be necessary to shew : — 1. That Satan tempts men, by soliciting tJtem to sin ; but that God,
♦ Vol. 1. p. 108- t Acts ii. 23.
b2
60 THE EXISTENCE OF THE DEVIL.
in this sense, " tempteth no man." God tempts them, as he tempted Abraham, by putting their faith to a severe trial ; that " the trial of their faith, might be found unto praise and lionour and glory, at the appearing of Jesus Christ."" — 2. Bodily disorders may have been inflicted on men by the Devil, as in the case of Job, with intent that those men may " curse God and die." But God inflicts them often as a salutary chastisement ; that, like Job, those men may bless God and live. — 3. The wicked dispositions and conduct of men are imputed to the Devil, because he delights in wickedness ; but God is said to harden their hearts, that is, to give them up to judicial hardness, because their wicked- ness is incorrigible. — 4. God is said to send on some " a strong delusion, that they should believe a lie, that they all might be damned ;" and thus, not " to promote the deceit of Satan,'''' but, to give up to him, as incurable, those " who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."" For what purpose, any man, calling himself a Christian Minister, could make such a comparison between God and the Devil without any explanation, is left to the Searcher of hearts to determine. It could not possibly serve his hypo- thesis ; while it tends to undermine the credit of divine re- velation. Thus do some men " sport themselves with their own deceivings."'"'
III. Mankind have undoubtedly other sources of temp- tation. " Our animal passions and bodily appetites expose us to innumerable temptations."'"' * But Mr. G."'s appeal to the mercy, or to \he justice, of God, is by no means a proof that these are the omly means of our probation. In the pre- sent case such an appeal is, in fact, only an appeal from sacred scripture to \he passions of mankind. If Mr. G. grant that, in the dispensations of divine providence, we meet with many trials, and that, unless it be our own fault, those trials are salutary, he will find it difficult to prove that temptations from Satan may not be, in general, equally beneficial. The effects which the scriptures attribute to diabolical agency, he attributes to other causes. What then has he gained ? If the effects, viz. the number and weight of our trials, be
« Vol. I. p. 71,
THE EXISTENCE OF THE DEVIL. 61
the same ; what difference will it make in our views of either the justice or the mercy of God, that the causes are many or few, tliat they are great or diminutive ? — Where is the injustice of calling a moral agent to a combat, in which he may be " more than conqueror ?" And where is the unmer- cifulness of calling him to endure temptations, in the con- quest of which he is supereminently " blessed^'''' and after which he shall " receive the crozcn of life ?"
IV. There is as much danger from the breech as from the mouth of Mr. G.''s cannon. Its recoil is as destructive as its shot. He has just been complaining of the injustice and cruelty of the divine dispensations, in exposing us to the temptations of the Devil ; and yet if you do not grant omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipotence, to the Devil, Satan falls beneath his contempt. Then, " all his super- human powers axej'utile. A malicious human agent would answer every purpose."" * This argument may serve for an answer to the preceding. They destroy each other. In the mean time, Mr. G. and his readers are requested once more to consider whether, with Jinite creatures, every thing be matter of indifference, which is not absolutely infinite.
Should the impossibility of a finite being tempting many persons, in different places, at one time, leave an apparent difficulty on this subject, it must be noticed, — 1. That the Devil has many demons under his direction. — 2. That we do not precisely know what relation a spirit has to place. — 3. That though the power of Satan is not infinite, it may be very great. — 4. That we are not sure that evil spirits may not produce effects which often remain when those spirits are no longer immediately present. We know that a moral principle, once imbibed, often produces effects for a long period after the departure of the person from whom it has been imbibed.
V. Mr. G. thinks, however, that the doctrine of the ex- istence of the Devil, cannot be a '•'■ fundamental article in the Christian religion.*" ■(- — What is meant by " di fundamental article," has not yet been agreed. It is enough that this doctrine enters so far intotlie essence of Chri,<itianitij, that all
* Vol. l.p. 21. t Vol.1. 1..%.
E 3
62 THE EXISTENCE OF THE DEVIL.
who deny the existence of the Dev'd^ must (as they actually do,) deny all the peculiar and prominent doctrines of the New Testament. No man is properly acquainted with the condition of human nature, until he know that " the whole world lieth in (tw wovvipu) the wicked one.'''' * Only the existence, operations, and success of the Devil, can properly account for the incarnatian and death of the Son of God, who came to bruise the serpenfs head. " For ihx^ purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the DeviV -f* " When the children were partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself took part of the same, that, through death, he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the Devil.'''' ^ We cannot pray as we ought, unless we make it one of our petitions, " Deliver us from (t« zjovnpa) the wicked, or evil one.'''' |( The preachers of the gospel do not execute their commission, unless they turn men '-^Jrom the power of Satan, to God." § The encoui'aging promise of the gospel is that " the God of peace shall bruise Satan under our feet, shortly." ^ And it is the glory of a Christian to " have overcome (tov ?3ov»)/3ov) the wicked one.'''' **
VI. " What ! does virtue depend upon the belief of a Devil f'' -f"f- — Not Socinian virtue ; but Christian virtue depends much upon it.. Christian virtue includes the duties — of " believing''' the truths and warnings of God ; — of " watcJifulness and prayer, that we enter not into temptation ;" — of " resisting the Devil, that he may flee from us ;" — and of " overcoming the wicked one.'''' — Be- cause of the wiles of the Devil, — because we are opposed, not merely by " flesh and blood," but also by " principalities and powers, and by the rulers of the darkness of this world, by spiritual wickedness in high places."" — Chi'istian virtue consists much in being " strong i7i the Lord andi?« the power of his might," — in " withstanding in the evil day," — in having our loins girt about with truth, — in having on the breast-plate of righteousness, — 'm having our feet shod wdth the preparation of the gospel of peace, — above all, in taking the shield oiju'dh, wherewith we shall be able to quench all
* 1 John V. 19. t 1 John iii.8. + Heb. ii. 14. H Matt. vi. 1.3.
§ Acts xxvi. 18. ^1 Roiu. xvi. 20. ** IJoliu ii. H. ft Vol. 1. p. 101.
TIIK EXISTENCE OF THE DEVIL. 63
the fiery darts (th zjovnptt) of the wicked one, — in taking the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit which is the word of God ; — and in praying always, with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit^ and watching thereunto with all perseverance." *
VII. Nor does this doctrine, which teaches many Chris- tian duties unknown to those who deny it, take off from man his responsibility. We, as well as Mr. G. " warn thee, Christian, not to ascribe thy crimes to the injlucncc of an injinitely malignant, irresistible, omnipotent being, because we tell thee, no such being exists in the universe." i* And we say more than Mr. G. will care to say : viz. that man- kind may overcome " that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world :" but only " by the blood of the Lamb." " Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, and hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David : as he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began : that we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that liate us ; to perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his ho^y covenant, the oath which he sware to our father Ahraha.m, that he would grant unto us, that we, being delivered out of the hands of our enemies, might serve him witliout fear, in holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life."
* Eph. vi, 10—18. t Vol. 1. p. 102.
( 64 )
CHAPTER IV
Of the Unity of God.
The fitst chapter of this work will serve to shew how little dependance is to be placed on the deductions of human reason, unaided by divine revelation. Mr. G.'*s arguments on the divine Untiy, amply confirm those which have been there adduced. Through every paragraph of his Lecture on that subject, while he professes to deduce his doctrine from the light of nature, he either takes for granted the thing to be proved, or borrows his doctrine from the scrip- tures : and sometimes he does both at once. An examin- ation of his ridiculous reasonings will, however, answer no purpose; since we are ready to grant what he contends for — that there is but one God. But we place this great truth oil the ground of revelation only. The following passages may suffice to demonstrate it.
" Thou shalt have no other Gods before me, * — The Lord, he is God, there is none else besides him. — The Lord he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath, there is none else. *f* — Is there a God besides me .'' yea there is no God, I know not any. They that make a graven image are all of them vanity. — Before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the Lord ; and hcside me there is no Saviour. I have saved, and I have shewed, when there was no strange God among you. X — The Lord thy God is one Lord." ||
Such are the declarations of scripture that there is but wie God. The candid reader will observe, however, that these testimonies uniformly go to evince the oneness of God in contradistinction from the jduraltty of the Gods of the
* Exod. XX. 3. t Dcut. iv. 35, 3I>. I Isa. xliv. 8, 10—12. 1| Dcut. vi. 4,
THE UNITY OF COD. t»
heathen. But the ynctaphymal unity oi Go<\, a nnay which exchides the possibiUty of any kind of distinction in the divine nature, is not, in any of them, or in any other part of the sacred books, asserted.
As we do not look into the book of nature for the proof of the Divine Unity ; we do not expect to learn from thence the doctrine of the Trinity. We confess to Mr. G. that we have no " plea from reason for the supposition that one must direct, a second execute, and a third influence.*" * All that fre know of God, we know (mly from his own revela- tion : and from that very source from whence we learn that God is one^ we learn also that God is three : one in one sense, three in another^ not incompatible vnXh. the first. While therefore we agree with Mr. G. in that ^Tand proposition, that there is one God, we differ from his metaphysical doctrine of divine unity. Thinking that he perfectly com- prehends that unity, and that, without the aid of revelation, from which, in point of fact, he has learned it, he can argue conclusively upon it, he accordingly sets himself to the me- taphysical task. We are aware that we do not perfectly apprehend the metaphysical ideas of spirit and its unity : and as we cannot be sure that we reason conclusively on a proposition which we do not distinctly and perfectly appre- hend, like children under the instruction of a teacher, we submit ourselves to the direction of our infallible guide, and learn the doctrine of the Trinity., from the same source from whence we have learned the Divine Unity. It is from thence we gather that the one God is — the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit.
It is enough, in this place, to state that our Lord, in giving a commission to his disciples, commanded them, " Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Gliostr t
The baptism of Christian believers is an ordinance ob- viously designed to initiate them into the church of Christ, and intended, like circumcision, as a dedication of their persons to God. It implies on the part of the person bap-
* Lcct. Vol. 1. p. 11. t xMatt. xxviii. li'. .
66
THE UNITY OF GOD.
tized, that he take the Christian God for his God, and that he devote himself to that God as his servant : and thus that he enter into covenant with him.
When the Apostles of Christ baptized the Jews, who, dedicated to Jehovah by Jewish baptism and circumcision, had already been initiated into the Church of God, and had received from the Old Testament " the promise of the Fa^ ther," viz. the promise of the gift of his Holy Spirit, they baptized them in the naxae of Jesus. In vain therefore does Mr. G, cite the cases of Cornelius, and of the believers at Ephesus, to prove that the Apostles did not baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holi/ Ghost, but in the name of Jesus ; for Cornelius was probably a Jewish proselyte, (see Acts x. 22.) and the Ephesians had already been baptized "unto Jb/m"'* baptism.'' (See Actsxix. 3.) The commission which our Lord gave to his Apostles, was " to all nations^'' i. e. to the Gentiles, to whom the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, had been equally unknown. These were to be baptized according to the commission which Jesus Christ had given : and the Apos- tles undoubtedly observed the charge which had been com- mitted to them.
This form of baptism was connected with the first in- structions which the Gentile converts were to receive ; and therefore implies the doctrine which they were to learn. That they whom the Apostles had called from the worship of idols, to th§ worship of the one God who made heaven and earth, should, by a religious act, a reception of the seal of the covenant of grace, be dedicated to any being less than God, would, the Socinians being judges, have been only a change from one form of idolatry to another. But this was not the case. They were baptized, not in the names, but in the one name of the Father, tlie Son, and the Holy Ghost ; from which we infer, that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, are the one God to whom we are to be devoted, and on whom all our Christian hopes are to be fixed.
( «T )
CHAPTER V.
Of tlie Pre-existencc, and Divinity of Jesus Christ.
That Jesus Christ was truly and properly a viun^ and that the doctrine of his proper humanity may be traced through all the New Testament, is undeniable. The *SV cijiians invariably take advantage of this truth, and argue from it that he is a mere man. This, in a controversy with Trinitarians, is flatly begging the question, which is not, Is Jesus Christ a man ? but, Is he a man only ? That he is a man, we grant ; but we contend that he is also more than man — that he is the one eternal God.
To separate the question of his proper Divinity from the doctrine of his hrimanity, let it first be understood, that, according to the nni form testimony of scripture, lie had an existence previous to his incarnation.. Such a. pre-existent state, Mr. G. positively denies, and daringly asserts, that " we no where meet with any express declaration of it."* With what degree of truth this assertion is made, the fol- lowing citations will shew.
1. " He was made flesh, -f- — As the children are par- takers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise toolv part part of the same. — For verily he took not on (him the na- ture) of angels ; but he took on (him) the seed of Abraham. "| These expressions involve the idea, that there was a pre- existent something, which was made flesh, and which took part of human nature.
2. Jesus Christ says — that "he came down from heaven," that " he came from above ; "" || that he was came from God, and went to God ; " § that he " came forth from the Father,
* Led. Vol. I.|). 4r).i. t .John I. 1 J. ♦ Ikh. ii 1 J, Ki.
II Jolm iii. I.i, ;il. § .(oliii \iii. .'>.
68
THE DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST.
and carne into the world; and would leave the world, and go to the Father."* He is therefore said to be, not "of the earth, earthy," but " the Lordfrom heaven:' f Mr. G. with all his efforts, has not been able to invalidate this evidence, j John the Baptist was a man "sent from God"" tonten, (as he observes) but he was not sent from heaven to earth. What Jesus Christ asserts of himself, he denies of all others : " No man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven^ even the Son of man, which is in heaven." And John conceded to Jesus his exclusive claim : " He that Cometh from ahove (said he) is ahove all: he that is of the earth is earthly^ and spealieth of the earth" || The baptism of John is said to be from heaven, because he baptized by divine authority ; but it is no where said that John came down from heaven. Again : the coming of Jesus Christ from heaven, is compared with his return thither. To this Mr. G. objects, " If our Saviour by descending from heaven literally meant a personal descent, by ascending into heaven he meant a personal ascent, and by being in heaven he meant Si personal presence there, at the same time that he was talking with Nicodemus upon earth:'' § This argument, by which Mr. G. if he mean to prove any thing, endeavours to prove that our Lord contradicted himself is the very argument by which one would prove the doctrine in ques- tion. The pre-existent and divine nature of Jesus Christ solves the difficulty which he has imagined, and unties the knot which he finds it more convenient to cut.
3. When Jesus Christ came into the world, he came " voluntarily." " When he conuth into the world, he saith. Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me. Lo, I come to do thy xoill, O God." ^ This proves that he existed before he came into the world, and before he took on him the body prepared for him, and that he took on him that body with his own previous consent.
4. Jesus Christ prayed, " And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self, with the glory which I had with tliee before the world was.'''' ** Here Mr. G. has two strings
* Johti xvi. 28, t 1 Cor. xv. 47. + Vol. 1. p. 342. 1| John iii. 13, 31. § Vol. 1. p. 343. <j Heb. x. b—7. ** John xvii. 5.
THE DIVIXTTY OF JEST'S CTIRTST. U»
to his bow. (1.) He cites, by way of contrast, tlie following- passages : " The lamb $\simfrom the foimdution of the loorUl. — AVho hath saved us — according to liis own purpose and grace which was given us in Christ Jesus, before the xcorld began. — He hath chosen us in him before the foundat'um cf the xoorliV * Now every one of these passages proves, indirectly, the pre-existence of Jesus Christ. If Jesus Christ was, in the purpose of God, " slain from the founda- tion of the xoorJd^' and yet came voluntarilij into the world, to " do the will of God" by "offering his body once for all,"-f- and therefore was not slain without his own consent, — he consented, from the foundation of the world, to be slain. If, before the world began, when we had no personal existence, we wQve chosen in Christ Jesus, and had grace given us in Mm, — he tlien existed in wJiom, as our representative and head, we were chosen, and in whom grace was given to us. — But he will try again : (2.) " Whatever be the glory of which Jesus speaks as applicable to himself, in the very same . chapter he ascribes to his disciples.'' J Thus Jesus Christ is robbed of the pecidiarHy of his future, as well as of his past, glory. But, first : It is not true that the Apostles have now a glory equal to that of him who has " a name that is above evert/ name." Secondly : If they have it now, had they, like him, this glory with the Father " before the world was ?' How then did Jesm Christ give it to them before the world was, unless he then possessed it ? (See John xvii. 24.)
5. Jesus Christ said, " Before Abraham was, / am.^^ || The force of this passage Mr. G. has completely evaded by attempting to shew, that, on similar occasions, our translators have fixed the pronoun he, and to persuade us that there is the same reason for it here. But, in the present case, the questimi which Jesiis answered, was precisely the question of his pre-existence. The Jews said unto him, " Thou art not yet jifty years old, and hast tlwu seen Abraham ? Jesus said unto them. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." To render it, I am he, would only incumber the answer, while the difficulty is the same, and
* Vol. 1. p. 345. t Heb. x. 10. J Vol. 1. p. 346. |1 John viii. 58.
70 THE DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST.
can only be solved by the supposition of his pre-existence. How could Jesus have seen Abraham^ if he were not cotempo- rary with Abraham? Why does he speak in the present tense of himself, and in the past of Abraham ? And, once more: if, when Jesus said, I am^ he spoke of his pre-deter- mined existence, how could a mere pre-determination of his existence render him capable of seeing Abraham ?
6. We cannot do justice to this subject, without subjoin- ing the testimony of the Evangelist John. " In the begin- ning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was hi the beginning with God."* Mr. G. has conceded, that if we " understand by the term beginning,'''' — "the beginning of the creation,'''' this " accords with his interpretation of the Logos (the Word)."" -|- Thus all is granted for which we contend : with this proviso, how- ever, that we do not say. In the beginning the Word began, but In the beginning was the Word. To prevent all mis- chief to the Proteus, Socinianism, Mr. G. has taken care to give a second interpretation of the term, — beginning. He holds that he " may be allozved to understand by it, the beginning of the new creation." But St. John does not allow it. He says, that " he was in the beginning with God : — that he was the light, which Ughteth every man that cometh into the xoorld ; — that he was madejlesh,'^ and therefore ex- isted, befcyre he was made flesh : and that " he was before him," (John), \ though born after him. Now all this is perfectly inconsistent with the application of this expression to the new creation.
The distinct question now to be answered is, Wiio, and what is he, xvlw, independent of all humanity, existed before his incarnation 9
The scriptures expressly state, that, in his pre-existent nature, he was " the Word of God, the brightness of the giory of God, and the express image of his person." Under these high names and titles, which it is not necessary here to explain, he is represented as the Creator of the world. There is, it is acknowledged, a new creation, the regeneration of mankind : of which, under the Christ'ian dispensation, he is
* John i. 12. t Vol 1. pp. 195, 196. ♦ John i. 2, 9, 14, 15, 30.
THE DIVIXITV OF JESUS CHRIST. 71
the Author. Mr. G. thinks that if we " keep tliis in view in those passages which refer creation to our Saviour, we shall find that a spiritual creation is iiwariahly meant." * — We will make the experiment.
1. St. John says, "the Word was made /?«•//, and dwelt among us."-f- Of this Wordhe says, ^^All things were tiiadehy him; and without him was not any thing made thatrt'flf^waJr." Again : " He was in the world, and the world (eyevero) was made by him, even the world which knew him not."+ To surmount this difficulty, Mr. G. appeals to the '-'-new ver- sion,'' in which the Socinians, to exemplify the versatility of their talents, and their expertness in the art of interpolatnon, render the same word, in the former passage "done," and in the latter " was," adding the word enlightened. We need not a better example of the manner in which they set aside the plainest declarations of scripture, by foisting in any word which will answer their purpose ! A translation may be made, which will admit such a Socinian interpolation ; but the original Greek, untranslated, absolutely forbids it. The verb, to he, when it means to exist, may be a translation of yiMOfxxi. But ytvo/xai, like the English verb, to exist, is not the auxiliary verb by which the passive verb is formed. Ac- cording to the proper meaning of St. John's words, "All things 7cere (existed) by him, and the world zcas (existed) by him.
2. The Apostle to the Hebrews, speaks of him as " being the brightness of the glory (of God,) and the express image of his person; and attributes to him the creation.^ — By whom also he made the world.'''' § Will Mr. G. say, tliat the Christian world is meant ? Let him read the following verses. " But unto the Son he saith, — Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the fovmdation of the earth ; and the heavens are the work of thy hands. They shall ^;^m7i, but thou remainest ; and they shall all wax old as doth a garment ; and as a ves- ture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed."" •[[ Here are two plain proofs that the literal creation is meant. (1.) The Apostle declares that the worlds which he created are " the earth," and " the heavens.""^ (2.) He declares that
*VoI. I. p. 341. t John i. 14. J John i. 3, 10.
li Heb. i. 3. § V. 2. ^ Heb. i. 2, 3, 8, 12.
7^ THE DIVINITY OF .TESUS CHRIST.
the worlds which he made shall " wax old, — he changed, and ^'■perish." All this is perfectly true of the material worlds ; but the new creation abidethjbr ever.
3. Let us hear the Apostle to the Colossians. — " His dear Son, — who is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of every creature : For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers ; all things were created by him, and Jbr him : and he is before all things." * — Mr, G. says, " A thought has been suggested by the late Dr. W. Harris, that the word zspoTox-os, by a change in the accent, is sometimes used by profane writers, not in a passive, but an active sense. Thus some would render it, not the Jirst-born, but the beginner, or the first bringer-forth, the immediate cause of all things in the nexo creation." -f- So Mr. G. has answered the argu- ment which he has elsewhere (Vol. I. p. 354) drawn from this word, ^'-jirst-born" But why apply the words only to the new creation ? The Apostle says, " all things were created by him." If we understand that passage literally, we have some idea of what is meant by " heaven and earth^'' and " all things that are in them.'* We can distinguish between things " visible and invisible: and can suppose that the rest of the Apostle's expressions relate to the heavenly hierarchies. But if all this be said of what Mr. G. calls " a spiritual creation," or of the regeneration of the Christian world, how are we to apply these terms ? Are we to under- stand by things in heaven, and on earth, the spiritualities, and the temporalities of the church .'' Then he is the author of the good livings. Do the things visible and invisible mean the bodies, and the souls, of mankind ? Then, at least, mankind are not all matter : nor is this creation all *' spiritual." But what are the thrones, dominions, princi- palities, and powers ? Are they metropolitans, bislwps, deans, and vicars ? Some such explanation will follow. But why then do the Unitarians set themselves as violently against the episcopalian hierarchy, as against the Divinity of him from whom they suppose it to have originated .''
* Col. i. 13—17. t Vol. I. p. 340.
THE DIVINITY OF JKSIS tHKUsT. 73
The creation of the world by Jesus Christ, as it is an unanswerable Y^roo^ oi \\\^ pre-cxiatence., is equally a demon- stration of his supreme Godlwad. The Soci>iian.s themselves grant, that he is the " Author, and the Finisher, of a new creation."" But if, with the Apostle Peter, while we expect that the day of the Lord will come, in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat ; the earth also, and the v.'orks that are therein, shall be burnt up — we also, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth ; * if we look for a 7iew creation of our souls in the imagr of' God, and of our bodies, which shall be fashioned like unto his glorious body ; we must allow, that wisdom, and power, no less than were employed in the old creation, will be necessary to realize our expectations. Whether, therefore, he be the Author of the old or of the 7iew creation ; or, as we believe, of both ; — " he that built all things,"" whether the edifice of the universe, or that of the Christian church, — " is GOD."'"' -f*
Takintr Mr. G. for our guide to truth as far as he is willing to go, we shall now embrace the full advantage of his own important concession. In explaining St. John's doctrine on the incarnation of " the Word of God,^'' he says, " he (St. John) introduces the Messenger of the covenant, the Messiah, by saying, That the perfections of Deity became Jlesh ; were imparted to a real man. To this mmi he proceeds to ascribe the possession of lig'ht, and li/l', and
DIVINE PERFECTIONS. "■' I
" Great is truth, and xoill prevail ! """" To grant divine jjerfcctions to the Son of God, is to confess, in spite of Soci- nianism, his proper and supreme Divinity. Before we argue this point, however, let us enquire, What are the Divine Perfections which " are ascribed"" to him .''
1. Unbeginning existence, or proper eternity. " But thou, Bethleliem Ephratath, out of thee .shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel ; whose goings Jbrth (have been)yrowi of old, from everlasting."'"' |]
• 2 Pet. iii. 10— J:;. f Heb. iii. 4.
X Vul. 1. p. 200. II Mic. 5. 2
F
74 THK DIVINITY Ol' JESUS CHIIIST.
2- Omnipresence. " Lo, I am ivith you alzoaij, even unto the end of the world. * — For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. ■)- — That Christ may duoell in your hearts^ X — Mr. G . argues concerning the Devil, that if he is every where, at all times present with you, he is possest of " the Divine attri- bute of onmipresence.'"'' || The inference is equally just, with respect to Jesus Christ.
S. Omniscience. " He Tcnew all ; and needed not that any should testify of man ; for "7«g Jc7iew what was in man. § — ^Lord, thou Tcnowest all things.'"^ Mr. G. when the Devil is the subject of his argument, asks, " Does he not dive into your most secret thoughts ? Has he not access to your hearts ? What is this hut the Divine attribute of om- niscience ?''"' **
4. Omnipotence. " Who sliall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, accord- ing to the v/orking v/licreby he is able even to subdue all tilings unto himself?'' •f"|- — " Omnipotence (Mr. G. says) is a power of control over all other beings." ;J::J:
5. Immutability. " Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever." ||||
6. All the Divine perfections. " All things that the Father hath, are mine.'" §§
Such are the Divine perfections which the sacred writers attribute to the Son of God. The Socinians suppose him to possess these Divine pei^ctions, Mathout possessing the Divine nature. It may serve an hypothesis, for a theologian to make a mental abstraction of the one from the other, and to imagine them disposable at his discretion ; but in so doing he ought to know, that his imagination has created what has no real existence.
1. What idea have we of God, but of his perfections? The complex idea which we have of any being, is the ag- gregate of our ideas of its known qualities. What is eter-
* Matt, xxviii. 20. f Matt, xviii. 20. ♦ Eph. iii. 17.
II Vol. 1. |). 19. § John ii. 21, 25. ^ John xxi. 17.
** Vol. 1. p. 19. tt l^h'l- i'i- -f- IX Vol. 1. p. 12,
II II Heh. xiii.8. §§ John xvi. I.').
THK UIVIXITY OF JESIS CHRIST. 76
mil, ottniiprcscnf, ornniscicnty omnipotent, immutable, and all- pcrfirf. Being, but God ? Remove these attributes, and the word being', and the idea which it conveys, if any, is appU- cable to reahties or non-entities, to any thing or nothing; and depends entirely on the ideas we attach to it. Being; without attributes, is nothing : and wherever the attributes are, there the being is. God is his perfections ; and his per- Jictions arc God.
2. If God be supposed to ddeg-ate his pcf^cctioiis to another being, what is supposed to become of his Godhead? Is he any longer God, when he has so disposed of his cfernifij, onimpresencc, omniscience, omnipotence, immutability, and all his perfections ? — Thus the Socinians rob the Father of his Divinity I
3. If God give his perjectiatis to another being, then that being is God. As the Socinians suppose that the Father gave his perfections to the human nature of Jesus Christ, they thus suppose the human nature converted into the Divine ! Let them then take to themselves the absurdity which they falsely impute to us.
4. If the Divine perfections can be divided between the FatJier and the Son, then they are Divine perfections no longer ; because the line of division describes a boundary, and a boundary is inconsistent with injinitude. Then, nei- ther the Father, nor the Son, is God ; for neither of them has infinite perfections. The Socinians thus rob both the Father, and the Son !
5. If they suppose that Divine perfections are not dimi- nished by division, and that the Father g-ives to the human nature of Jesus Christ, his own perfections, and yet retains them ; then they make tico Gods instead of one.
6. But the Divine perjcctions cannot be possessed without the Divine Nature. To men, who are but finite beings, God can give a beginning', deperulent, finite, and stable, ex- istence. He can make them Jcnoxcing', icise, and poxccrful. But (with reverence) he cannot give to them his infinite j)er- fections. Their minds ai'c finite, and therefore incapable of infinitude. If Jesus Christ were a mere man, he could not })ossess the Divine jxirfections, because, as a mere man, he
f2
76 THE DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST.
is a mere Jinite being. To possess the infinite perfections of Deity, he must possess his infinite nattire. Can a being who began to exist, be without beginning? Can a being who is necessarily limited, be omnipresent 9 Can any thing- less than an infinite mind know all things ? Can any but an " uncontrolled and all-controlling mind" be omnipotent ? Or can any thing but an all-perfect mind be immutable ? — In attributing Divine perfections to the Son of God, the Soci- nians do therefore, implicitly, if not explicitly, attribute to him proper Divinity ; for there can be no Divinity more proper than that which possesses Divi?ie perfections.
7. When the Socinians are not immediately engaged in im- pugning the Divinity of Jesus Christ, they can perceive the truth of these observations. Thus Mr. G. after enumerating the supposed infinite attributes of the Devil, says, " These attributes are all divine. And if there actually be a being possessing these attributes, that being ought to be a
Deity." *
8. The sacred writers, while they attribute to the Son of G od the Divine perfections, are consistent, and confirm our argument by attributing to him the Divine Nature. " For it pleased (the Father) that in him should all fulness dwell." -f- " For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the GodA^acZ bodily :" \ (or, as Dr. Doddridge says, substantially: the word being used figuratively, and including all the Deity, as the word, bodily, implies the whole corporeal part of man.) To this Mr. G. objects. (1.) " It pleased the Father." || — He does not speak out. Does he mean to object, that the dwelling of the Godhead in the human nature, was dependent on the will of the Father ? We grant it. But this does not disprove thej^c^. (2.) He urges, that " what- ever this fulness means, it is evident that it was not peculiar to Christ, but might be possessed by the disciples of Jesus ; * that ye might be^&^ with all Xhejidness of God .'''''"' — To this we answer, that the fulness of the Deity does dwell in Christ, in a manner peculiar to him. First, the Scriptures every where make an important distinction, the purport of which is, that the Deity dwells primarily in Christ, but only
* Vol. I p. 20. t Col. I. 19. : Col. ii. P. 1| Vol. p. "44.
Tilt: DIVINITY OF JESUS CHUIST. 77
in a sccomliiiy sense in us : i. e. that whereas God dwells ?W7/?(Y//rt'/<7// inhini, lie dwells in us mcdiatclij,throvgh Christy and by virtue of our union with Christ. Thus, we are made " an habitation of God, through the Spirit," by being " bttilt on Je.sus Christ, the chief corner stone." * We are " filled Eli into f all the fulness of God," when ^^ Christ d'lvellsin our hearts hyjiiithr \ Wc are but the members of his mystical body, the church, of M'hich he is the head. " Now ye are tlie body of Christ, and members in particular." || But God hath "given him (to be) the head over all (things) to the church, which is his body, (who is) the fulness of him that filleth all in all." § As the spirit of man is supposed to be immediately united with the head, the Deity is immediately united with him. He is, in his human nature, " the head,''"' who is, in his Divine Nature, at the same time, " ihe^ulness of him that JiJlcth all in alV As the spirit of man dwells mediately and in a secondary sense in the members, which are thereby vi\'ified, and actuated, by virtue of their union with the head in which it primarily and immediately dwells ; so ■" of /sM'fulness have we all received, and grace for grace.'"' ^ Secondly, The Jidness of the Godhead dwells in him. " Tlmt in all things he might have the pre-eminence, it pleased the Father that in him should all J'ulness dwell." So says Mr. G. as w^ell St. Paul. " In Jesus Christ," says the former, " bodily, as a num, the J'ulness of Deity did re- side. He possessed the Spirit xvithout measure.'''' ** (It is true, he endeavours to contradict this position, by calling the fulness of the Deity, " J'ull and complete divine powers^ Such is the effect of Socirdan bondage ! But the confession was extorted by the severity of truth.) — We, on the other hand, on\y participate (so to speak) the Divine fulness, as it jjleases Jesus Christ to impart it. " Unto every one of us is given grace according to the m£asure of the gift of Christ."-f-f-
* Eph. ii. 20, 22. f The Greek reads, EILckxvto irXripujui.a ra @ta : into all the fulness of God. So the Socinia/is have rendered it in the marj^jn of their " improved version." The allusion niay possibly be to a vessel plunged into the ocean, and which is at once filled and immersed; it is filled into the fulness of iLe sea.
% Eph. iii. 17, 19. II 1 Cor. xiii. 27. § Eph. i. 22, 23.
% John i. 16. *• Vol. I. p. 344. ff Eph. iv. 7.
f3
78 THE DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST.
" In Mm dwelt sW the fulness o^i\\eGodA\edii}i substantially ^ We are '■'^Jilled with him :" ^' filed,''' according to our capacity, not with but sjj, " irito all the fulness of God." *
9. In connection with this doctrine of the plenitude of the Godhead in Christ, we are now to consider their union with each other. " I and the Father," said Jesus Christ, " are o?i^." -f- This union of the Father and the Son, Mr. G. affects to place on a level with " the oneness of Christ and the apostles." \. The sacred writers will settle this point.
" The head of every man is Christ ; and the head of the woman is the man ; and the head of Christ is God." |1 By one figure, viz. the relation of the human head to the human body, three subjects are here illustrated. (1.) In matrimonial union, " the man is the head of the woman!''' (2.) In the myst'icalhody of Christ, of which every believer is a member, Jesus Christ is the head. " The head of every man is Christ^ (3.) There is an ineffable union between God and his Christ : " his Son Jesus whom he has anointed with the Holy Gliost above his J'ellotos.'''' In this union, " the head of Christ is God:'''' the human nature is subordinate, the Divine is supreme.
The union of a man with his wife, and that of Christ with his church are compared with each other. — " The husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church." § Mr. G. may say, that the one is an explanation of the other. ^ Be it so. The explanation does not reduce them to a level. The man and his wife ^^ are one Jlesh ;"* but " he that is joined to the Lord is one spirit.''''** — In like manner, the union of God with his Christ, and that of
* Mr. G. has a note on 2 Pet. i. 4. ** That by these ye might be par- takers of the Divine Nature." With Mr. Belsham, he thinks that " this ex- pression is stronger than any which are used of Christ, and which, if it had been applied to him, would have been held forth as an irrefragable proof of his proper deity." (Vol. 1. p. 418} We ask their pardon. Such an ex- pression would have proved the contrary. St. Peter's words assert only that Christians partake the divine nature. If Jesus Christ merely partook the divine nature, " the/w/rtess of the Godhead" would not then "dwell in him bodily."
t John X. .30. ♦ Vol. I. p. 329. |1 I. Cor. xi. 3.
§ Eph. V. 23. ^ Vol.1, p. 328. ** 1 Cor. vi. 17.
TlIK DIVIXITV or .TF.Sl\s CirUIST. 79
Christ with his cliurch aiv coinpaivd : — " that they also may
be one with us : — that they may be one, even 0,9 we are one."
This Mr. G. calls an " crphi nation.'''' But, as in the former
case, though the union of the members of Christ with each
other and with him, is explained by the union of Christ with
God, the explanation does not reduce the things compared
to a level with each other. No man could ever produce
such proofs of his intimate union with Christ, as Christ
produced of his intimate union with God. " If ye had
known me^ ye should liave known my Fatlwr also: and
from lienceforth ye linoxc him, and have seen him. Have
I been so long time ^vith you, ami yet hist thou not known
me ? He that has seen me^ hath seen the Fatlier ; and how
sayest thou then. Shew us the Father ! Believest thou not
that / am in the Father, and the Father in me ? — The
words that I speak unto you, I speak not of myself: but
the Fatlicr, that dxvellcth in me, he doeth tlie works.'''' * We
cannot represent the union of the body and mind of man,
by stronger terms than these. Mr. G.''s objections (Vol. I.
■p. 337.) are aimed against a different application of this
passage. The reader must be cautious, however, not to
mistake the present application of it. It is designed to shew,
not that the Divine and the human nature, are one nature ;
but that the Divine perfections manifested in Christ, proved
his union, not mcr^'ly with the abst?riet Divine perfections,
but with the Divine Nature. And this last is what, in
referring to the proofs of his oneness with God, Jesus
Christ has taught us to infer. " If I do not the works of
my Father, believe me not," when I say, " I and the Father
are one ; — ^but if I do, though ye believe not me, believe
the works [in which omnipotence is exerted;] that ye may
know and believe, that tlie Father is in me, and / in
him." t
10. As the scriptures attribute to the Son of God the fulness of the Deity, and an intimate union with the God- head ; so they ascribe to his pre-existent natiu'e, an eijnti/it// with God. " Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God." I
* John xiv. 0—10. t John x. 37, 38. : Phil. ii. 6.
80 THE DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST.
(1.) Our first business here, is with the meaning of the terms. Mr. G. says, the word " equal,'''' being used ad- verhially, should have been translated " ZiAre." * Waving the want of precision in this statement, the word " I'lke "" is either an adjective or an adverb. Mr. G. shuffles it in as an adverb, and yet uses it adjectively. Why then does he prefer an improper to a proper translation ? For the sake of ambiguity. The word, lilce, may imply either equality or similarity. He adopts it under the pretence of its being synonymous with equal, and then takes advantage of its ambiguity. We, therefore, retain the word " equal,''"' for the sake of the genuine sense of the Apostle. Mr. G. next observes, that the passage should be rendered, " he did not esteem it a prey or plunder, the circumstance of being like {equal with) God ! " -f- Permit, then, the word plunder, to be substituted for the word robbery ; the words still mean that the circumstance of equality with God, was properly h'is own. — Conscious that nothing is yet gained, Mr. G. now practises the art oi interpolat'ion. " Who, being in the form of God, did not esteem the circumstance of his being like (equal with) God, a prey for his own private grati- fication." This is genuine Socinianism! After all, however, he grants that Jesus Christ was equal with God, (or like God, if that word convey the same meaning ;) although, according to him, the Saviour of men did not turn that circumstance to his own private account.
(2.) To make a way for these criticisms, Mr. G. has contrasted with this apostolic declaration, those passages which set forth the iriferiority and subordhmt'ion of the Son to the Father. As he has in his Supplements to No. VI. and No. VII. several passages of similar import, which he has often repeated, and all of which are levelled at this equality, we will here give to them all a general answer.
When St Paul speaks of " Christ Jesus, who, being in the Jbrm of' God, thought it not robbery to be equal ivith God,''"' he speaks distinctly of his pre-ex'istent nature ; for he pro- ceeds to say, that he (subsequently) " made himself of no
* Vol. I. p. 333. t Vol. I. p. 333.
THE DIVINITY 01" JESTS CHRIST. 81
reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the hkeness of men." *
If, opir his being made in the likeness of men, we find
him in a state very different from that wliich preceded, we no longer wonder. To the human nature, which he thus took upon him, we do not, like our opponents, ascribe those Divine perfections which we attribute to \(\?>pre-existent nature. His liuman nature had a beginnhig; and therefore was not '■^J'rom cverln.sting\'' It ^as not hidcpcndcnt^ but dependent^ and therefore " lived by the Father,'''' died, and was raised again by the Father. This nature therefore
prayed, and gave thanlis, to the Father. It was not omm- present, and therefore could be " exalted to God's right hamV It was not omniscient, and therefore " increased in xcisdom,'''' and " knew 7iot that day and that hour." It was not omnipotent, and therefore it could of itself'-'' do nothing;" for all the power it had was ^^ given by the Father^ It was not immutable, and therefore died, revived, and was
. exalted. But all this does not hinder that these perfections, which Mr. G. absurdly attributes to his human nature, should still be attributed to his pre-cxistent and Divine Nature.
In his state of humiUation, he who was be/ore in th^
form of God, and counted it not robbery to be equal with God, was now in th^ form of a servant, and in the likeness of men. Tliis assumed nature stood in a subordinate and inferior relation. Hence he spoke of God as his God, and his Father, and of himself as the Servant and Son, and acknowledged " the Father is greater than I ; " for the D'lv'ine Nature is superior to the human. Hence he spoke of himself as sent by the Father, taught by the Father, commanded by the Father, obeying the Father, not honour- ing himself but the Fatlier, having a kingdom appointed by the Father, and being glorified by the Father. This infe- rior and subordinate nature must finally '■^give tip to the Father the kingdom "" which he has received from him, " that God may be all in all." IJut all this does not prove that his pre-cxistent nature was md in the form of God, and
• Phil. ii. 7.
82 THE DIVINITY 01^ JESUS CHRIST.
equal xvith God ; or that it ever will be hiferior or subor- dinate.*
As Je.ms Christ possesses the Divine Nature, and the Divine perfections, he is frequently denominated God.
1. We have already seen that the pre-existent nature of Christ is what is called the Word. St. John says, " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.'''' f This passage, Mr. G. observes, " was written in opposition to the Gnostic doctrine of cemis, of the separate existences of wisdom, and life, and light ; and to maintain, that they were one and the same being., all God himself. " \ In his comment therefore he has these words: " and the Word was no other than Qo'Dhimself.''''^ This Word^ then, which he here says " was no other than God himself^'' " was made flesh, and dwelt among us ; and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only ])egotten of the Father, full of grace and truth."'"' — Where then is Mr. G.'s modesty., when he asserts, " that even John does not ie)l w?> jjlainly Siwd positively, — that there vf ere two natures in Jesus Christ, a divine, and a human ? "" §
2. Hence, after his incarnation, he was called " Emma- nuel; which being interpreted, is, God with us : ''"' %^ '\. c. " no other than God himself^'' dwelling among us in human
fiesh.
3. Thomas, therefore, might well exclaim to him, " My Lord, and my God."** If the Word incarnate " K^a* wo oilier than God himself'' in human flesh, this exclamation was the result of conviction. But Mr. G. dexterously
* Mr. G. objects to the Divinity of our Lord, that " Jesus Christ must be dependent upon God, and inferior to him, because he declares that he had not the disposal of the highest places in his own kingdom." Matt. xx. 23. (Vol. I. p. 355.) Some men would have felt a little uneasy, in urgni^ an objection which contradicts itself, by supposing a sovereign not to be supreme " in his own kingdom." If Mr. G. feel any thing of this, he may soon be relieved, by being informed, that the words " it shall he given to them" are supplied by the translators, and that the meaning of the passage
is " to sit on my right hand and on my left, is not mine to give, except to
them for whom it is prepared of my Father."
t John i. 1. X Vol. I. p. 200. || Vol. I. p. 197.
§ Vol. I. p. ^?>?>. H Matt. i. 23. ** John xx. 28.
THE DIVINITY OF JESTS niUIST. 83
divides tlic exclamation into turt, the first part was addressed to Jesus, '^O my Master ! or, O my Lord ! " * the second, (in which, to assist the reader's imagination, he supposes Thomas to lift up his JmucIs,) addressed to the Father, " O my God ! "'"' He tlien admires his own ingenuity- — Kut if this had been the meaning of the Evangehst, he must have said, " And Tlminas answered and said unto him. My Lord ! and he said unto the Father, My God ! "" But unlinppily for the honour of Soeinianism, St. Jolui dis- tinctly states, that the whole exclamation was addressed to Jesus. "And Thomas answered, and said unto him. My Lord, and my God ! "
4. Nor could Thomas be blameable in using a term which God hhnself has used. — " But unto the Smi (he saith) Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever."" -f- — The first difficulty which Mr. G. imagines in this passage, is, that we suppose " Jehovah to be addressing Jehovah.'''' It is just as easy as for God to say, " Let us make man.""' — The second is, that the Son is here compared with his ^'■Jellows^'' viz. manhind. — We grant that he who is here called God, is also the '■^J'ellow'''' of meii. But Jehovah calls him also a man who is his ^'■Jellow.'''' " Awake, O my sword, against my Shepherd, and against the man (that is) my JiUoxi'." ^ To help us over these difficulties, Mr. G. proposes a new translation. We are always on our guard against Socinian translations; but quote them for their absurdities. He would translate it, " God is thy throne." || In another place, Mr G. has quoted these words, "Am that sat on the throne,'''^ as descriptive of " God with a peculiarly high title or epi- thet." § He had then forgotten that " the Lamb is in the midst of the throne.'"'' ^ Here, he is absurd enough to sup- pose that God is the throne in the midst of which he sits. But he that sits upon the throne is greater than the throne. So rather than the Son shall be called God, he shall be even greater than God. After all this, Mr. G. objects, " It is only a quotation, and is uttered of Solomon," ** in answer to whicli, the Author of the Epistle, who understood the
• Vol. I. p. 204. t Heb. i. 8. * Zech. xiii. 7. H Vol. I. p. 210.
§ \ol. l.p.276. «i Rev. vii.l7. «» Vol. I.n.210.
84 THE DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST.
matter better than Mr. G., says that they are the words of God^ addressed " to the Sonr
5. It is therefore a scriptural truth, that, when " the Word of God,"' who according to Mr. G. is " no other than God himself, — was made flesh, — God was manifest in \\\e fleshy * The learned are not agreed whether the genu- ine reading of this passage be Or, or ©r, xoho, or GocL As Mr. G. appeals to the " Eclectic Reviewers, who admit that ©cof, God, is not the genuine reading," -f- it will not be improper on this occasion to submit the subject to their au- thority. " We confess," say they, " that our judgment is in favour of os, (who). But we object strongly to the render- ing in the Improved Version, (which Mr. G. follows,) ' He toJio was manifested in the flesh, was justified by the Spirit,'' &c. The editors have followed Abp. Newcome, in sup- posing that or may be put elliptically for ovtos or. This supposition, we apprehend, is quite unauthorized and erro- neous. Till some better support is adduced for this assumed ellipsis, we must reject it a,fi Julse Greek. In the place before us, ui is undoubtedly a relative ; and its natural and proper antecedent has been pointed out by the learned Pro- fessor Cramer, distinguished thus : — fins san-v syixXnrjix ©EOT l^covros (arvXos koci s^pxicoixoc rrts a'kribsia.s, xaj oy^oKoya- (ji,svcijs pt-^ya, fan ro tios suas^sioa ixuaTnpiov) os B(pxvipcd^'nj x. t. X. " Which is the church of the living Gon (the pillar and sup- port of the truth, and confessedly great, is the mystery of godliness) who was manifested," &c. j Leaving out the parenthesis, we have the proposition, " God, zaho was mani- fest in the flesh."
" But do you mean that the invisible God was actually visible to mortal eyes .?" No : we do not mean that He was manifested to bodily eyes, but that the Divine Nature was manifested to the mental eyes of those who knew Jesus Christ aright. He that thus " saw the Son, saxo the Father also," even as Moses " saxv him that is invisible ;"" for " the Father was in him, and he was in the Father." Oh, says Mr. G., " then I firmly believe the passage. I believe
• 1 Tim. iii. 16". f Vol. I. p. 2J7 : Eel. Rev. Vol. V. Part 1. p. 248.
THE UIVIMTY OK .1 KSl'S CHKlST. 8-5
that God 2cajf manifest in the Jh\s-h, in the man .Icsus Christ." *
non immcmor artis,
Omnia iransformat sese in miracula rerum.
6. Our Saviour is repeatedly called God. l\)rcxainj)le : " The doctrine of God our Saviour." -f- — Again: "The kind- ness of God our Saviour;" who is inniiediately denominated " Jesus Christ our Saviour." ^ Let it be observed, once for all, that " neither is there .salvation in any other" than " Je- sus Christ of Nazareth ; — for there is none other name under lieaven, given among men xcherehy we must he saved.'''' || — Again :5ixaio(Tyvn TOT @iov riij,uv nai aajrnpoi ri/xcov, ly/Ta Jipiarn, the righteousness of our God and Saviour, (viz.) Jesus Christ." § As this construction will frequently fall in our way, it must be here considered. (1.) When tzco persons are intended, the demonstrative article is repeated. Thus : Kara TOT Kypa, xxi xocrst TOT X§j!TToy aurou, " against the Lord, and against his Christ." ^ O 0£oj xai TO apviov " God, and the Lamb." ** Ex tou ^po'jov TOT 9cou,y<.oci rou oc^viou : " from the throne of God, and of the Lamb." ff (2.) When the demonstrative article is not repeated, one person onli/ is intended. Thus: BoLc^tXiiu-vTOYY^vpiounixco-u x.01.1 ffcorri^os^flriaou Xpiarou " the kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.'*' J;|; Lvwaei TOT Kf/;»oy r/xwv x^i acorripos^^lrinau^piorou " the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." || || TCl h @Bco XM warpi nfjicjv : " to God and our Father." §§ Tfl @Eoj, xdi zsa-rpi " to God, even the Father." ^^ " Mr. Words-worth avers, " I have observed more, I am persuaded, than a thousand instances of the form O X/jjutos- xa» ©eoy, (Eph. v. 5.) some hundredsof instancesof 0 /xsyaj ©eoj- xaj aoj- T7)§, (Tit. ii. 13.) and not fewer than several thousands of the form 0 Seof xxi 'jcurnp, (2 Pet i. 1.) While in no single case have I seen, where the sense could be determined, any one of them used, but only of one person.' " *** — Thus, as in the passage under consideration the article is not repeated, only
* Vol. I. p. 216. t Titus ii. 10. I Tit. iii. 4, 6. ll Acts iv. 10, 12, 1.^ §2Pet. i. 1. If Acts iv. 26. ** Rev. xxi. 22. ff Rev. xxii. 1.
♦♦2 Pet 1.11. nil 2 Pet. iii. IH. §§ Phil. 4.20. ^^1 1 Cor. xv.24.
***Middlelou on the Greek Article.
86 THE DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST.
ojie person is spoken of : " our God,"" and " our Saviour," is one person, viz. " Jesus Christ." — For the same reason in Eph. v. 5. the orig-inal affords another proof of the Divinity of Christ. The words are, sv raj BocaiXeKx. TOT X^j^Toy xai &cov^ in the kingdom of the Christ and God,
But Mr. G. repeatedhj objects that " J esus Christ was once charged with making himself God, when he positively denied the charge." * The fact is this ; Jesus Christ had spoken of God as his Father ; implying that he was the Son i)fGod. By this expression the Jeios understood him as making himself a divine person, i. e. God ; and were about to stone him. Now Jesits did not deny that his expression implied that he is God; which, as he never gave unnecessary offence, he undoubtedly would have done^ if truth had per- mitted it. But he vindicated what he had said, by an argumentum ad homines^ and by an appeal to the works of the Father which were done by himself; and deduced the inference, that the Father is in him, and he in the Father : i. e. that they were intimately one. See John x. SO — S8. -f*
When angels or men are called gods, the appellation is used with such qnaliftjing circuTnstances as sufficiently indi- cate a sitbordln ate sense. To the angels it is said, " Worshij^ him;' (viz. the Son of God) "all ye gods^ \ "God standeth in the congregation of the mighty ; he judgeth among the gods. — I have said, ye are gods ; hut ye shall die like men.''' \\ " I have made thee a god to Pharaoh.'" § — Now if it can be made to appear that the pre-existent nature of Christ is called God under similar qualifying circumstances, we will give up the doctrine of his Divinity. But this is impossible. Who can more properly he God, or be called Crod, than he who has all the Divine perfections, and the
* Vol. I. p. 220. f Mr. G. says, Jesus Christ expressly denies that he was God, when he exclaims, " Why callest thou me good ? There is uoiie good but one, that is God. Matt. xix. 17." Vol. I. p. 356. — This passage is cited repeatedly by Mr. G. and his coadjutors, and generally with an air of triumph. Do they know that Griesbach has the words, " Why askest thou me concerning good ? One only is good." And that this is the translation given by their great supporters, the Authors of the " New and improved Version .'" If these Critics be iu the right, Mr. G. must be very much in the wrong. X Psalm, xcvii. 7. || Psalm Ixxxii. 1, &c. § Ex. vii. 1.
THK DIVINITY (H- JKMs (IIIMST. 87
Divhw Nature ? Under such circumstances, wlicn Jc-'na- Chrift is denominated God, it is not necessary to seek such palHatives as are called for when the same appellation is given to angels or to men. But, to place it l)eyond all rea- sonable doubt tliat the name of God is not a})plied to Jesus Christ in a subordmute sense, the sacred writers frequently ap])ly it in connecticm with such epithets as confine their meaning to the one, supreme, and eternal God. He is styled the ^n^^", the^?-m^, the rwi/^/ re w, Xhc vugh'y, i\\Q supreme^ and ever-blessed God.
1. He is denominated the i!/7/r God. This is an epithet which when joined with the word God, Mr. G. contends, is descriptive of the proper Divinity of God the Father. * Yet the very passage which he quotes is written in reference to Jesus Christ. " And we know that the Sou of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know the t7-ue one. And we are in the true one, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.'' t— Mr. G. renders it, " bi/ his Son Jesus Christ." The word, however, is the same which is translated, " in the true one :"" they must therefore both be translated, w. Tliis unwarranted alteration being withdrav.'n, the passage asserts as clearly and decisively as possible: First, that Jesus Christ is the true one ; and, Secondly, that he is the true God.
2. He is denominated the great God. *' Looking (says St. Paul,) for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God, and our Saviour, Jesus Christ." J
This passage obviously speaks of Jesus Christ. But Mr. G. has attempted to prove the contrary, by prefixing the sign of the genitive case before the words, " our Saviour." This, however, is one of those passages in which the article is no^ repeated: See p. 85. Thewords are, TOT/w-syaXoy ©soy xai ffWTTi^or y/pcwv, and might be translated, with the utmost precision, "of our^rm^ God, and Saviour, Jesus Christ."
3. He is denominated the only -wise God. " Now unto liim that is able to keej) you from falling, and to present you fauhless before the presence of his glory with exceeding
• Vol. 1. p. 274. t 1 Joliu V. 20. : Tit. ii. 18.
88t THK DIVINITY 01' JKSUS CHRIST.
joy, to the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever." * The reasons to be assigned for applying this doxology to Jesus Christ, are the following: (1.) Jesus Christ is ouv only Saviour. " There is iione other name under heaven, given among men, whereby we must be saved.'" But if Jesus Christ be our only Saviour, he must be "the 07ily wise God, our Saviour."' (2.) It is he " that is able to present u^ faultless before the presence of Ids glory. — Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it ; — that he might present it to himself a. glorious church, not having spot or wrinUe, or any such thing ; but that it should be holy., and witJwut blemish:' He, therefore, is " the only wise God our Saviour:''
4. He is denominated the mighty God. Isaiah predicts the coming of the Messiah, and says, "his name shall be called, the Mighty God."f In this verse the prophet speaks of both the human, and the divine, nature of Jesus Christ. *' Unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given." These words unquestionably refer to the human nature which he should " take on himself." But the following words, " his name shall be called the Mighty God,'' evidently refer to the divine nature. " The Word of God," which, Mr. G. says, is " 710 other than God himself," was to be " made fesh," or to take upon him the human nature ; and on account of that union of the divine nature with the human, the " child born," the " Son given," should be called " the Mighty God.''
It is curious to attend to the palpable Inconsistency of Mr. G.'s efforts to attach to the original words some other interpretation than that given by our translators. After a variety o^ contradictory criticisms, he candidly avows that he "feels no anxiety as to which of the interpretations be adopted."! We give him full credit for his perfect in- d'lfference, as we know that the work of a Socinian is not to explain, but to confound. " The phrase," he says, " might be translated — ' a mighty Lord,' or ' counsellor of God, mighty: \\ That is : (1.) The word (el) should mt be
*Jude24,25. f ^^a. ix. 6. J Vol. I. p. 501. H Vol. 1. p. 1P4.
THE DIVINITY OF .) KSUS t'HKIST. 89
translated, God, but, I.ouu. (2.) It 7naij be translated, Goi), if you will permit him to derange the whole passage. In another page, the terms, " Wonderful^ Coun- cilor^ Mighty God,'''' are all permitted to stand as a just translation, and are applied by him " ^o the great Jehovah.''''''^ To use Mr. G.'s own words, " Is not this mying a thing, and then nn^sny'ing it again, which is saying nothing at all ^ If the last clause is to be believed, thej^';-."?^ cannot, because the last is a negation of the first ; and if the first is to be believed, for that very reason the last cannot."" -f- It would liave been well if this had been the only proof w hich Mr. G. has given, that his business is not to attend to the voice of scripture, but to invalidate its testimony.
The reader will now^ be prepared to enquire, Why these laborious efforts to set aside the common translation, by a variety of contradictory criticisms ? The answer is ready. Not because the common translation, which has the authori- ty of Bp. Lowth, is not as proper as any other which has been given ; but because the Socinlans meet with many dif- ficulties in the application of it. Those difficulties we shall now examine.
" With what propriety can the great Jehovah be the sub- ject of a iwopliecy, as about to become something which he is not? Can an imnudable being be subject to change ? Can the Omnipotent Cirator become a creature ? Can the Self- existent Jehovah, become a child, an iiif'ant-born ? What is to be understood when it is said that Jehovah is a Son ^i^'pw.^"!
These are enow for a specimen of Mr. G.'s difficulties. They are mere repetitions of the same idea couched in diffe- rent terms. We cannot have a more clear demonstration than this that the Socinians, when they call for pi'oof of the proper Divinity of Christ, expect us to attempt, at least, to prove that the Divine nature was changed into human, and that that human was still divine. This is precisely what they would insinuate to be our opinion. From hence they draw all the supposed absurdities of our system, and on this hypo- thesis they ground their principal objections. These queries may serve to convict of error, any who have formed'
* Vol. 1. p. 409. t Vol. I. p. 360. : Vol. 1. p. 495.
90 THE DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST.
such an opinion ; but they are not pointed at the doctrine of judickms Trinitarians. We do not believe that Jehovah became what he was not hefoi-e : or that he underwent any change contrary to his essential immutability. We do not believe that the Creator became a creature : or that the Se^- existent became a child. If Mr. G. ask us what we do believe, we answer in his own words, We believe that " the Word, which was no other than God himself., was made flesh,"" * or took upon him the human nature. What can he object to this ? This human nature was the subject of prophecy ; was the child born ; was the Son given by Je- hovah ; was advanced to power and doviinimi : and his union with the Divine Nature rendered appropriate that ap- pellation, " the Mighty God,"" which belonged to the Divine Nature before that union.
Mr. G. is so sensible that he has not fixed any impro- priety upon our translation, that he adopts one additional measure to get rid of it. " After all," says he, " they are only navnes, as Elihu, — Gabriel,'"' &c So, at length, we find that Jesus Christ is called the Mighty God. If Mr. G. can find the place where this is made the proper name of Christ, he will not have proved what he aims at, till he has proved, that our Lord was not in character all that he was called by name : that he was not a Saviour who was called Jesus, and that he was not anointed who was called Christ. One more objection of a different cast, deserves attention. " Can the Almighty Father of all, with any propriety, be called a Son ?"" That is, how can Jesus Christ be a So7i, and be his own Father ? Not at all. But let Mr. G. rather ask, whether Jesus Christ may not be a Son in one sense, and a Father in another : " the Son of God,'''' and " the Father of the everlasting age .^'"
5. He is denominated the supreme and ever-blessed God. — " Christ, who is over all, God, blessed Jbr ever,''"' f These words always did, and ever will, stand in the way of the Socinians. But their motto is. Nil desperandum. The first thing to be done is, to bring this docti-ine under suspi- cion by contrasting with it a passage which appears to them
* Vul. I. p. 197, 200. t Roni. ix. 5.
Tllh; DIVINITV UK JI.SLS ClIKlST. i)!
to contradict it. The elect passage is this: " When all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that Goil may be all in all."" Here is the ap})arent contra- diction. The difficulty, however, is easily solved by apj)ly- ing the doctrine of the hco^bld nature of Christ. Here is a human nature which was "o/*the /iva^Z/Vt *,'''' which, after being " obedient unto death, even the death of the cross, was highly exalted, and received a name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee .should bow, of (things) in heaven, and in earth, and under the earth ; and that every tongue .should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father." When all these things shall be subdued, this human nature shall also become subject to the Divine. On the other hand, here is, in the same person, a Divine Nature which existed before the incarnation, which had glory xcifli the Father before tiie icorld zcaSy and which shall be " all in all,"" when all shall have been subdued. — The next thing to be done is to supply the word giro/ be. The passage then becomes a pious ejacula- tion : " God who is over all, be blessed for ever !"' But who gave to the Socinians this authority to add words of their own, wherebv to pei'vert entirely the meaning of *he words of God .'' The interpolation of a word is not, how- ever, all that is necessary for the perversion . of the meaning of this passage : the construction of it must also be altered. In an ejaculatory sentence, the participle is always put before the substantive." EyXoynros- o ^ir>s, is then tlie form, as in 1 Pet. i. 3. Eph. i. 3. Luke xix. 38. But, in a deelarative sentence, the substantive or pronoun is put first. The form then is, os sutjv sv\oyrtros.f as in Rom. i. 25. o 03o.<-, o a/v ivKoyr,- roi, as in 2 Cor. xi. 31, or, o uv Sjoj- EuXoynros, as in the passage under examination. Jesus Christ, therefore, is not only the blessed God, but also the supreme God : " who is over all for evermore."
As Mr. G. has generously assisted us by several import- ant concessions, he will now afford us further assistance by a large collection of passages which we shall quote from his Supj)lement. Having arranged them under different heads,
/• o
92 THK DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST.
he has thereby stampt them with a peeuHar character which will spare us a great deal of argumentation. The reader wui please to observe, that the first passage of each of the following sections, is cited by Mr. G. in the place referred to, as properly descriptive of the Divine Glory of God the Father.
I. " Jehovah the one or only God.'"''
" Jude 4. Denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ."" * — This is one of those passages in which the article is not repeated, and which we have already shewn (p. 85.) speak only of one person. Our (^Bazyornv) governor God, and our Lord Jesus Christ, are therefore the same. But beside this, it is to be observed, that in a parallel pas- sage Jesus Christ is spoken of as our (Se^otottjv) governor. Tov ayopa.(javrx ocvrovs ^saT^oTw ocpvovfj.a'voi : " denying the go- vernor that bought them."-!- This passage, Mr. G. has placed among those which distinguish the supreme God, by pecu- liar high titles and epithets. J But Jesus Christ is he that bought them : " Thou wast slain and (rjyop^stj) hast bought us to God by thy blood!''' \\ Now, if he that bought us is our governor, and there is but one governor, God ; it follows that Jesus Christ, who bought us with his blood, is our one governor, God.
" 1 Tim. vi, 15. Who is the blessed and 07?Z2/ Potentate, the King of Kings, and Lord of Lords.'''' § — The same titles are given to Jesus Christ. " These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them ; for he is Lord of Lords, and King of Kings." ^ " His name is called the Word of God. — And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name wiitten. King of k'mgs, and Lord of lords."" * * If therefore the King of kings, and Lord of lords, is " the blessed and only Potentate ; Jesus Christ is that blessed and only Potentate.
11. " God absolutely and by way of eminence.''''
" Luke xxii. 69- Hereafter shall the Son of Man sit on the right hand of the power ofGod.''''-\"\- — " Christ the poxccr of God." it
» Vol. I. p. 227. t2Pet.ii.l. ♦ Vol. I. p. 275.
II Rev. V. 9. § Vol. I. p. 227. ^ Rev. xvii. 14,
** Rev. xix. 13.— 16 ft Vol. I. p. 229. ++ 1 Cor. i. 24.
THK UIVIXITV OK JKSUS CIIUIST. 93
" Mark ii. 7. Who can forgive sins but God only." * — So Mr. G. quotes, as good authority for a Socinian^ the eneu)ies of our Lord. — " When Jesus pereeived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts ? Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy. Thy sins be forgiven thee : or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk ? But that ye may know that the Son of Man hath poxvcr on earth tojbrg'ive sins, (he saith to tiie sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee. Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house." -f-
" Heb. xii. 23. God the judge of all." +— " The Father jitdgeth wo mail, but hath committed all judgment unto the Sonr II
III. " God zcith peculiarlt/ high titles and epithets."'
" Matt. xxvi. 63. The living God. § — The xvord was God. In him was life""^ And IMr. G. grants, that " zoisdom, and life, and light, are all one and the same being, all God himself **
" 1 John ii. 20. Ye have an unction from the Holy One. -f"|- — Ye denied the Holy One,'' Jesus Christ. H
'' Rev. i. 8. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, wliich is, and which zc'O*, and whicli is to come, the Almightij.'" \\\\ — This passage, which ]\Ir. G. has cited as speaking, like the rest, of God with peculiar high titles and epithets, refers to Jesus Christ." It is the Lord that speaks of himself, and we are to remem- ber that " to us there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom arc all things."", §§ The same " pecidiar high titles and epithets " are given to him in other places. " I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the Jirst and the last, — I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things." ^^ — I am the Jirst and the last : I am he that liveth and w as dead ; and behold I am alive for ever- more. *** — These things saith the Jirst and the la^t, which was dead and is alive. " ■f*i**f'
• Vol. I. p. 229. t Mark ii. 7—11. + Vol. I. p. 26.1. || John v. 22. § Vol. I.p.2fi9. Ij.Iohni. 1,4. *• Vol. l.p.274. ffVol. l.p.2;.i.
::Actsiii.U. nil Vol. 1 p. .^7.5. §§ 1 Cor. viii. (i. ♦;*] Rev. xxii. 13, 1(^. *•» Rev. i. 17. 1« ttt R^'\- '"• '<*■
(;3
94 THE DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST.
"Rev. iv. 11. Thou art worthy, O LorJ, to receive glory, and honour, and power: for thou hast created all things, and yor thy pleasure they are and xvere created^ * — We repeat, that " there is 07ie Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things ;" to zvhom, therefore, these words are ad- dressed. " All things were created by him, and^or him." •!* " Matt. xi. 25. I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth." J — Preaching peace by Jesus Christ : he is Lord of all" II
" James v. 4. The Lord of Sabaoth : i. e. of Iiosts."' § — This very title is given to Jesus Christ. " These things said Esaias, when he saie his glory and spake of him?' ^ Now, in the account which Esaias gives of his vision, and from whicli the Evangelist made his quotation, the prophet calls him whose glory lie had seen, the Lord of hosts. " Mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts." **
" 1 Thess. ii. 4. God which trieth our hearts.'''' ff And *« Rom. viii. 27. He that searchcth the hearts, W — These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire : — all the churches shall know that / am he that searcheth the re'ms and hearts?'' {{||
" Acts iii. 13. God, which hnoxveth the hearts.'''' §§ — " But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he hneiv all men. And needed not that any should testify of man : for he Iciuw what was i7i man." ^^
" 1 Tim. iv. 10. God who gtiickmeth all things,"" *** — " For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quicleneth them ; even so the Son qmchcneth whom he M'ill," -f-f-f-
" Rom. XV. 33. The God of peace be with you all,
— " My peace I give unto you,*" said Jesus Christ, |||||| *' The Lord of peace, (the *' one Lord?'') himself give you pea£e always by all means." §§§
IV. " God Jehovah the sole object of religiozis adoration.''''
It is not said, m any part of the sacred scriptures, that the Father only is the object of worship ; but rather, " that
* Vol. 1. p. 276. t Col. i. 16. J Vol. I. p. 269. 1| Acts x. .35.
6 Vol. 1. p. 274. ^ John xii. 41. ** Isa. vi. 5. ff Vol. I. p. 27X
*t Vol. l.p.274. II I! Rev. 11.18,2.3. §§ Vol. I. p. 271. ^f If John ii, 24, 2.5.
»**Vol.l.p.2r4. tttJohnv.21. ^t Vol. I. p. 272. l|||l| John xiv.27. §§§ Thess. iii, 16.
THE iilVlNlTV Ut JLSIS CUKlST. 95
all men should honour the San, even as they honour the Father ; and he that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father." * But let us hear.
" John iv. 23. The true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth ; for the Father secketh such to worship him. -f* — When he bringeth in the Jirst-begotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God wor- ship him.'' \ So the true worshippers worship the Son, as well as the Father ! The wise men, a leper, a ruler, the woman of Canaan, the men in tfie ship, the disciples, the man out of the tombs, and the blind men, ail, in their turns, *' -worshipped'^ Jesus Christ. See Matt. ii. 11. viii. 2. ix. 18. XV. 25. xiv. 33. xxviii. 9. Mark v. 6. Luke xxiv. 52. John ix. 38. In all these places, we have the same word (■iaposKuvcOj,) which is used by our Lord in the passage Mr. G. has quoted as definitive of tliat worship which the tj-ue worshippers render to the Father. It is the word which Luke uses in speaking of the ze'o?-i'/(7/9 which Peter, " because he also was a (mere) man," refused to accept from Cornelius. Acts X. 25. It is the same word which St. John uses when he speaks of the xcorship he was about to offer at the feet of the angel ; and which tlie angel uses, when he fox'bids it, and savs, Worship God. — So scriptural it is " that all men should honour the So7i, even as they honour the For- ther r II
" Matt. vi. G. When thou pray est, pi*ay to thy Fatlier which is in secret." § — " And they stoned Stephen, invoking, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit : And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice. Lord, lay not this sin to their charge." ^ — What can be an act of higher adoration from the lips of a man, than this in which the proto-martyr at once committed to Christ his depai'ting spirit, and prayed to him for the forgiveness of his enemies .'' " Who (say Mr. G. and the perverse Jews) can forgive sins, but God only ?"" — W^e proceed ; — " The same Loi'd is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call on tlie name of the Loi-d, shall be saved!" ** — " And the Apostles said
• John V. 23. t Vol. I . p. 231 . ♦ Heb. i. 6. 1| John v. 23.
§ Vol. I-r- 279. % Acts viii.. 50, 60. •» Rom. x. 12, 13.
96 thp: divinity of jesus christ.
unto the Lord., Increase our faith r * Mr. G. has cited a passage in which St. Paul prays to both the Father and the So7i : " Now God himself, and our Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, direct our way unto you ?'''' -f* In these three passages, Jesus Christ is invoked as the God of providence, grace, and salvation : and that salvation is absolutely pro- mised to them that call ^ipon him. — Again : " When Jesus departed, two blind men followed him, saying, " Thou Son of David, have mercy on us !" \ — This prayer Jesus gra- ciously heard and answered. But Mr. G. and his coadju- tors, having found these words in the Litany and not recog- nizing them as a quotation from scripture, but supposing them to be the words of some " Creed Maker," have con- demned them as idolatrous, and " exhort all Christian peo- ple to abstain from such worship.'''' || From hence we learn, (1.) That such a prayer is an act of worship. (2.) That offered to a mere creature it Avould be idolatrous. (3.) That Jesus Christ is tlot a mere creature, since the scriptures speak of such worship with approbation. — This is an unde- signed, but striking proof, that the sentiments of a Chris- tian agree very ill with a Sociiiian.
To all this Mr. G. objects, that " we are not justified in paying adoration to any other being, than that Being to whom our Saviour prayed, and whom he styles the only true God." § — This may be very just, when rightly applied. But, in answer to it. They who " know what they worship," " no longer know Jesus Christ after the flesh."" As " in him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead," or, " the only true God ;" to that fulness of the Godhead, their prayer is addressed, through him in whom he resides.
♦• We worship toward that Holy Place, " In which he does his name record ; " Does make his gracious nature known, " That living Temple of his Son."
" Col. i. 12. Giving tha)7l-s to the Father."' ^— The very next passage, which Mr. G. gives, is, " Singing with
* Luke xvii. .5. f Vol. I. p. 285. + Matt. ix. 27.
II Vol. 1. p. 397. § Vol. 1. p. 213. % Vol. p. 285.
Tin; DiviNiiv ov jKsrs (iirist. 07
grace in your hearts to the Lord T * vi/. to Jesus Christ, the *' mie Lord. — I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for tliatlie counted nie faithful, putting nic into the ministry. " -f-
" 2. Thess. i. 2. Grace unto you, and peace from God our Father."" I — This text is to prove that Jeliovah is tlie .voZf object of religious worship. Then Jesus Christ is Jehovah : for among many other passages which might be quoted, mirahile dktu, Mr. G. has himself quoted, for the same purpose, the following : — " Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father, and Christ Jesus our Lord."" \\
Mr. G. grants, that the term, " Jehovah^'' is the tenn cxehisively applied to the oiie God.'' § "I am Jeliovah ; that is mv name; and my glory will I not give to another."^! If therefore the Son be denominated Jehovah, he is the one supreme God.
1. In the following passages, the name, Jehovah, is given to the Son.
(1.) " The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness. Prepare ye the way of Jehovah.'' **
(2.) " Behold, / will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before Tne ,• and the Lord, whom ye seek, shail suddenhj come to his temple, even the messengrr of the covenant, whom ye delight in, behold he shall come, saith Jeliovah of hosts."'' -f-f"
These passages, according to the Evangelists, refer to John the Baptist, who was the harbinger of Christ, " the Messenger of' the covenant," and prepared- the way before him. But the prophet predicts his crying. Prepare the wav of Jehovah. And " Jehovah of hosts" says, " he shall prepare the way before me.'''' Jesus Christ is therefore Jeho- vah, who w^as preceded in his visit to mankind by John the Baptist.
(3.) " I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King sliall reign and prosper. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell .safely ; and this is his
* Col. iii. Ifi. t 1 Tim. i. 12. + Vol. I. p. 287. || Vol. i. p. 2«r).
§ Vol. I. p. 1!J1. H Isa, xlii. 8. •* Isa. xl. :?, .''). ft Mai. iii. 4.
98 TIIK DIVINITY 01' JKSLS CHRIST.
name whereby he shall be called, Jehovah our righteous-
ness
» ^^t
To the common application of this passage INIr. G. has objected, that in Jer. xxxiii. 14, 16, the same appellation is given to Jerusalem. (See Vol. I, p. 508.) That it is so in our translation, is granted ; and if that be correct, the objec- tion has some strength in it. Whoever compares the two passages, will observe at once the utmost probability that the writer intended them to be parallels. [1.] In both of them, the Branch of Righteousness, or the righteous branch is the subject. [2.] In both passages, the predicates are all the same. This is presumptive evidence that they ought to be parallel throughout. When we consider Jer. xxxiii. 15, 16. alone, we observe, [1.] That the Branch is the subject, and therefore the name ought to be predicated of it. [2.] As a person, tlie name is more properly attributed to him, than to SL place, Jerusalem. [3.] As a branch of righteoiis- ness, it is natural to suppose that it is he who must be called the Lord our righteousness. [4.] And lastly, as he " shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land'' of Israel, and in those days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely, it is natural that the inhabitants should regard him as the author of righteousness to tliem, and call him " our righteousness.""
This presumptive evidence, is corroborated by facts : — A few manuscripts have the masculine lb, lo, for n^ ^cih; and in this way most of the versions have understood it. The Chaldee, the Syriac, and the vulgar Latin read, "This is the name whereby they shall call him.'" Thus the objec- tion falls to the ground, and both passages prove the Divini- ty of the " Branch of Righteousness."
2. By comparing the following passages, it will further appear that Jesus Christ is Jehovah incarnate.
(1.) " The burden of the word of Jehovah — they shall look upon wf; whom they have pierced.'"' -^ — This passage is applied to Jesus Christ : " They shall look on him whom they have pierced."" X
(2.) " Thus saith Jehovah that created the heavens, there
» Jer. xxiii. 5, 6. f Zee. xii. 1, 10. X John xix. 37.
THb; DIVINITY Ol JKSts ClIKIS'I'. 99
is no God else beside me ; a just (iod and a Saviour : there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the eartli ; for I am God, and there is none else. I have sworn by mvsclf, That unto me even/ \-uec shnll bore, every tongxic shall sxcear!"* — " We shall all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ, For it is written, As I live, Baith the Lord, cveni Jcnec s/uill bOw to me, and ever?/ tong'ue shall confess to Go(L"j-
(3.) " Thy Maker is thine husband ; Jehovah of hosts is his name ; and thy redeemer, the Holy One of Israel. X — The bride, the Lamb's it-z/r." || Beside this, aeeordinor to St. John, Avhen Isaiah saw the glory of Jehovah of hosts he saw the glory of Jesus Christ, and spake of him.
(4.) " Sanctify Jehovah of hosts himself; and he shall be for a sanctuarv ; but for a stone of stumbling, and for a rock of oftence, to both the houses of Israel. § — Unto you therefore, which believe, he (Christ) is precious : but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, and a stone of stumbling, and a rock of q/fcncc."^ Christ there- fore is not merely the Jehovah of the Old Testament ; but Jehovah of hosts.
IVfr. G. has exhibited a large number of scriptures to prove that the Son of God is subordinate to God the Fat her."" ** — With all these we might conti-asi those passages which we have already examined. But it is not our method to destroy one passage of scripture by another. AVe attempt, at least, to reconcile them. The passages which ]\Ir. G. has quoted, are intended to shew that Christ Jesus was man. Either they prove this, or they do not. If any of them do not prove it, they do not ansicer his pni-posc. If they do ])rove it, ice are right in cipplying them to his human nature. To all this Mr. G. has consented. " You agree with us,"" says he, " as far as ice go, only you go much farther. You ac- knowledge that Jesus Christ possessed a human nature. This ive believe. If then, in additicm to this, you also assert that he was a Deity, the lahole of the /)?-oo/' rests with you.'"-f"f- Thus Mr. G. has granted that the proof of his human niu
* Isa.xlv. 1«, 21—2.'). t Ro"i- "i^'- 10, 11. X Isa. liv. 6. |1 Rev. xxi. 9. § Ua. viii. 13, 11. •! 1 Pet. ii. /', 8. •• Vol. 1. p. 2i)l. ft Vol. 1. \y. ;V27.
100 THE DIVINITY OF .IKSl'S CHRIST.
ture, is no proof that he is not also Divine ; and that toe acknowledge all he can positively assert. But he calls for '''■proof'' that Jesus Christ has a nature which is not human* We have already produced it from his own Lectures, (1.) where he has granted that the Divine perfections were given to Christ. These were not human : (2.) where he has said that " the Word'"'' which was made flesh, '■^was7io other than God himself: " (3.) where he asserts that St. John wrote his gospel to maintain that the wisdom, and life, and light, attributed to " the word made flesh," were all one and the same being, all God himself: " (4.) where he says, that, " in Jesus Christ as a man, Xhe fulness of the Deity did reside :"-f- (5.) where he says, that " God was manifest in the flesh ; " \ (6.) where he has cited many passages which relate to abso- lute Deity, some of which relate to Jesus Christ : and others of which have their parallel passages which relate to Jesus Christ. We have produced it also, from the language of both the Old and the New Testament, in which the Divine perfections, nature, and name, are ascribed to Jesus Christ ; and on the result we rest the question. Mr. G. and his brethren may afl*ect to overlook, these proofs, or pretend they have overturned them : but the candid reader will per- ceive that they are neither so few, nor so trivial, as our opponents represent them. The state of the controversy then, is simply this : Jesus Christ is represented to us as God and Man. Mr. G. denies the former, because lie ac- knowledges the latter. We acknowledge the former, but by no means deny the latter. The scriptures speak of him as "the Prince of life,''' who was ^'■hilled; \\ — The Lord cf glory ^'' who was irifamously " crnc'ijied ; § — the 7-oot of Jesse, and a 7vd out of the stem of Jesse ; ^ — the Loud," and the " Son," the " root and the offspring of David ; " ** — the *' Lord of all" and the servant of men ; ff — " the Word, which was God, and was maidejlesh ; J| who was in the Jbrm of God, and was made in the likeness of men; |||| — the Son of God, and the Son of man : — the Jclloxo of Jehovah
« Vol. I. p. 356. t Vol. I. p. 344. + Vol. I. p. 2ir>. || Acts iii. 15. § I Cor. ii. 8. \\ Isa. xi. 1, 10. *» Matl. xxii. 4.''i. Rev. x\i, 16.
tt Acts x. .".6. MaU. xx. 28. JJ-'ohn i. 1, 14. |||| Phil. ii. (i, 7.
TIIK DIVIKirV OF JESUS CHRIST. 101
and of mm ; * — rtcnial, and yet beghimng' ; ■[■ — " having- life in hiinsc1f\^' \ and yet bein^ dcpcndcut ; — '■'•JiUiiig all in ali,"" and l/jinff in a vutiigcr ; || — " knozcing- all things,'" and yet ignorant of some; ^ — '•'•ahnightij^'' and yet "cru- cified throiioh '.ccakncss ;'^ ^ — always '■'- \\\c savie,"' and yet luidergoinnf many changes; ** — ^^reigning for ever,"" anA yet resigning the kingdom ; •f"|" " equal witli God,'"' and yet suh- ordinate ; \\ — " one"' with God, and yet a Mediator between God and men. |||| — Such sayino^s are a/^7a?Y«< contradictions, and can be reconciled only on the scripture hypothesis which ascribes to h'lm the ^\fulness of Godhead,"' and tlie '•'■ likeness ofsinJ)d Jfesh."" If the Socinians cannot see the txcofold truth, the eanse of their blindness is not to be sought in the ambiguity of revelation, but in the pride of reason, and some fatal perverseness of human nature.
•Zech. xiii. 7. Heb. ii. 9. f M'C- v. 2. + Jolm i. 4.
II Eph. i. 2."}. § John xxi. 17. 1[ Rev. i.8. 2 Cor. xiii. 4.
«• Heb. i. 12. tt Isa, ix. 7. 1 Cor. xv. 24. ♦♦ Phil. ii. C &c.
nil John X. 30. rri)n.ii5-
in
( 102 )
CHAPTER VI.
Of the Personality and Divinity of the Holy Spirit.
When the doctrine of the Holy Spirit is considered in its connection with the doctrine of the Trinity, there are two points, nearly related to each other, which claim our attention : viz. I. Whether the Holy Spirit be a mere energy, or a real person ? II. Whether he be a creature, or God.?
I- In entering upon the first of these enquiries, it is ne- cessary to state distinctly, that we are not at present enquii- ing, whether the Holy Spirit be a third person in the God- head. With that question we have here nothing to do. Our object is to ascertain whether the Holy Spirit be, on the one hand, the mere operation of God, or, on the other hand, an intelligent and voluntary agent, i. e. a person.
W^e are not about to deny that the Holy Spirit is that by which, however distinguished, the Father, through the Son, operates on all created beings, whether material or immaterial. We grant that the power of the Holy Spirit is " the power of the highest — the finger of God ; " but not that the Holy Spirit is merely an attribute of the Divine Nature.* That it is something more, is what is now to be proved.
Mr. G. has generously conceded that the sacred wTiters did personify the Holy Spirit, -j- He even says " that it would have been next to an impossibility not to have repeat-
* VVith the utmost propriety, Mr. G. has adopted the words of Simon the Sorcerer for a motto to his Lecture on this subject. The agreement between them is admirable; but it belonged to Mr. G. to be the first to perceive
and acknowledge it.
t Vol. I. p. 152.
THE PKRSON'AMTV OK THK HOLY Sl'IRlT.
lOii
vd\y have person i/tcd " him. * This is a concession \\ hlch truth has forcetl from him, wlien lie was attcmptin<^ to prove the contrary. That the sacred writers did speak of the Holy Spirit as a jxrsoiu is granted by our opponent, and therefore need not be proved. But then, according to Mr. G., personnUty is ascribed to the Holy Spirit, not because he is a proper person, but according to a connnon rhetorieal Jiff-ure^hy which " other aceideuf.s, qualities or (tff'eetions " are personified, -f- Here then Mr. G. and we are at issue. He avers that the Holy Spirit is only ajigiirativc person ; we say that he is a proper persoTi.
That the unlearned reader may not be deceived by Mr. G.'s flourish about fig^iires of speech, it is necessary briefly to state the nature of those which are likely to come under our notice. When a writer attinbutes to body properties which belong only to spirit, or attributes to spirit properties which belong only to body ; he then speaks, not properly, hxxijigtiratively. When a writer attributes the properties of a real being to mere abstract qualities, and speaks of those qualities as persons ; while they have no real persona- lity : then also he speaks, not properly, hxxi figuratively . But when a writer attributes to body, only the properties of body ; and to spirit, only the properties of spirit ; and when he speaks of qualities, not as of real beings, but as of quali- ties, and of real beings, as of real beings — then he speaks, 7wt figuratively, but propei-ly.
The supposition that the Holy Spirit is, by the sacred writers, improperly personified, if it have any foundation in truth, must be grounded on the impossibility of his being a proper person, or of \\\i^ possessing any pierscynal qualities. If mere abstract xcisdom, poicer, or goodness be personified, we see immediately that the writer is sT[>eakmgJiguratively ; because these attributes have no real existence but in the spirits in which they inhere. But when we find a spi?'it per- sonified,— that very kind of real being in which alone those personal qualities can inhere, we are sure that the words of the writer are not figurative, but that they are used witl. the utmost p}-opriety. Now such bv name, as well as bv nature,
* Vol. I. p. 17:!. t \ol. I. p. Ij.'.
104 THE PERSOXALITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.
is the Holy Spiuit : who, therefore, of all other beings, is most properly spoken of as a person.
To puzzle the reader, after the Socinian manner, Mr. G. Iias told him that " the primary signification of ■m^wy.a., which is commonly translated spirit, is the breath of the mouth." * The reader must be told also, that it is the only word which the sacred writers of the New Testament use, and, in fact, the only term which the language afforded them, by which to convey the idea of immaterial substance. II V e t/ jw. « Gxpytxycaioanx ova s^^ei : " A Spirit hath not flesh and bones." -f- But does Mr. G. mean to insinuate that breath is its proper signification when it is applied to the Deity ? Rather than relinquish a favourite error, while he is perpetually declaiming against the literal interpretation of scriptural figures, will he be guilty of a most gross and palpable absurdity, XhsX oi literally applying to God, who is a Spirit, one of the meanest properties of an animal body ? Has God a mouth ? And does he actually breathe from it ? God is, zsMVJixa, a Spirit. Is God then a breath ? Must not breath, if attributed to God, be attributed to him figu- ratively .'' And if figuratively^ what is the meaning of the word ? Can it be any thing corporeal ? Or, is it not rather properly translated spirit ? What then is the Holy *S^m^, but a Spii'it? Is not God properly a Sjnrit ? What then is the Spirit of God, but a Spirit ? If the Holy Spirit be neither a Spirit, nor matter, it is nothing. If the Spirit of God be not a Spirit, there is no spirit in the universe.
But if the Spii'it of God be a Spirit, what is the reason to be assigned for the supposition that personality is figura- tively ascribed to him ? What can he jji'operly a person, if a spii'it be not .'' This is not the way, however, in which the Socinians reason. They have adopted an idea of the nature of spirit, altogether different from that which is sug- gested by the scriptures. Mr. G. says, " from this very name (Spirit) I should draw precisely the opposite inference, that because it is a spirit, it is not a substance or person.^'' * If, in this confession, he have not evinced much understand- ing, he has given a strong proof of his candour. It is at
* Vol. I. p. 150. fLuke xxiv. 39. : Vol. I. p. 12.5.
THK I'KIiSDXAl.n ^ (»!• Till': IIOI.V M'lKll'. 1 0.'*
least an honest confession, and may serve as a /jcacon to " zcarn o^"' tlie unwary reader from the rocks of Atheism. Mr. G. acknowledoes that " God is a Spi7-it.'''' This is a branch of his nittural rehgion. " But " because it (Jie) is a Spirit, it (he) is not a .mbstmicc or y;rr.vo/;." Now, to say nollTing of the crudities of iMr. G.'s philosophical notions of spirit, AVho could demonstrate more eflectually than he has done, that Socinianism, Deism, and Atheism, are nearly allied ? God either is a person, or he is not. If he be not a person, he is not an hitelUgcnt and voluntary agent : that is, there is no God. If he be a person, and spirit have no personality, no intellect or will, then God is 7iot Spirit but Matter. As the essential property of matter is extension, and extension necessarily implies liviits, matter cannot be infinite. A material God cannot be an infinite God : and a finite God is no God at all. Again : All attributes or acci- dents must have a substance in which to inhere. If " God is a Spirit," and Spirit is not a substance., then God is not a substance. If God be not a substance, he can have no accidents or attributes. God, therefore, is neither substance nor accident, he has neither being nor atti'ibutes, i. e. he is nothing. — If the " unskilful " will not take the alarm when Mr. G.'s trumpet gives no " uncertain sound," their case is hopeless. AVe appeal from the speculative Atheism of Mr. G. to the better understanding of })lain, unlettered men, who read their ])ibles. Let the absurdity, not to say blasphemy, into which his " precisely opposite inference" would lead us, serve as the best argument that could be produced, to con- vince us, that a spirit is a substance, and a person.
So far is it from being true that the Spirit of God is a mere attribute of spirit, that the proper attrihutes of spirit are ascribed to him ! Goodness is an attribute of spirit, and is ascribed to him. " Thou art my God, thy Spirit is g-ood.''''* Hence that Iwliness which belongs only to intelligent and voluntary agents is made peculiarly characteristic of hin), and is not so often attributed to any oilier being : He is called emphatically the Holy Spirit. Mr. G. supposes the Spirit of God to be the mere poxccr of God. But poiccr and
* Psalm, cxliii. 10. H
106 THi: I'EllSONALITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.
energy are attributed to the Spirit of God. St Paul speaks of " the power of the Spirit of God." * Now either the Apostle means to speak of the power of a power, the attri- bute of an attribute, which is an absurdity ; or he must mean to attribute these personal qualities to the Spirit as to a spirit, a substance, and a real person.
To pursue this subject further. — If the Holy Spirit be a spirit, how can it be a mere energy which has no personality? Our ideas of a person are those of an intelligent and volun- tary agent ; and such are the ideas which the scriptures give us of the Spirit of God.
1. He is axi intelligent agent. " The things which God hath prepared for them that love him, (says St. Paul) he hath revealed unto us by his Spirit : for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea tJie deep things lyf God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him ? even so the things of God knoweth no man but the Spirit of God." f Here we have a plain and unequivo- cal declaration that " the Spirit of God searcheth and knoweth all things, even the deep thhigs of God." How then will Mr. G. get over it ? Nothing is more easy. He will raise a dust, and escape in the cloud. Let us hear him, and examine his comment at full length. — " Here are," says he, '' the following positive assertions, — that the knowledge they (the Apostles) possessed, was revealed to them by the Spirit of God himself, (query, himself!) or by divine inspi- ration."— Very true ! — " that there was nothing too great to be thus made known to them ; even the deep counsels of the Almighty." — Not so. This " assertion" is not St. Paid's, but Mr. G.'s. St. Paul asserts that " the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God:"" and Mr. G., to get rid of this troublesome " assertion," substitutes one of his own, which is not true. Infinite things are " too greaf to be made fully known to Jlnite minds. " The love of Christ," with the good leave of the Socinians, ^^ passeth knowledge :''"' even the knowledge of those who " are strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man."" \ — " And then," Mr G. ^dds, as if for fear he should not be understood, " the
* Rom. XV. ly. t 1 <^or- ii.'J— H X Eph. iii. 10, ly.
THK I'KUSOXAI.nV OK TIIK Un\.\ Sl'IUlT. 107
Apostle explains what lie meant by the Spirit of God, by saying, it was exactlij the same in God, as the spirit of' a man is in a human bcinir.''^ That is, if Mr. G. please, as there is an intelligent spirit in man, which knozcs the things of a man ; so the Spirit of God is an intelligent Spirit, which knoweth the things of God. Q. E. D. — Thus has Mr. G. led us, \ni- dcsignedly and unexpectedly, to the very conclusion which we wished. Fas est et ab Iioste doecri.
2. The Holy Spirit is a x'oluntary agent : he has a xcill. " It seemed good, to the Holij Ghost,''^ say the Apostles, " and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things," * &c. — Again : " He that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to (the will of) God '"■ f — But Mr. G. is disposed to controvert the meaning of this last passage, and to deny that it is of the Spirit of God the Apostle is speaking. We will examine his para- phrase. " Our spiritual desires," says he, " come in aid of our bodily weakness." — So our " not knowing what we should pray for as we ought," is a bodily weakness, and not a mental " infirmity." All the absurdity of this connnent is only that of substituting lodi/ for sjnrit : an easy thing with one who knows no difference ! We proceed : — " For we know not what we should pray for as we ought, but our inward spiritual desires intercede for us, though we cannot express them in appropriate language." — So, after all, this " bodily Tceakness'''' is only the want of grammatical know- ledge ! Our poor Aveak bodies ai'e not masters-of Rhetoric : we cannot express ourselves propcrhj I Nay, that is not the entire sum of our bodily weakness: Our bodies "^v.'orc not what we should pray for as Ave ought." They are ignorant bodies ! Hence " our inxcard spiritual desires intercede for us." Our spirit takes pity on the weakness of our body, and since the latter cannot know, desire, and ask, as the Socinians think it ought, the former undertakes its cause, and performs these necessary duties much to the advantage of its dull companion. And then, says IVIr. G., " He, that searcheth the heart, knoweth the desires of our spirit, that, agreeably to the will
» .\tti XV. 28. t Rom. viii. 27.
XT o
108 Till', PKKSONALITY OF THK HOLY SPIRIT.
of God, it pleadeth in behalf of the hoIi/r *— That is, We do not know wliat we ought to ask, but our sjnrif, which though it was but this moment our very selves, is now another thing, knows all about it, hits upon " the will of God" exactly, and by its " desires^'' the only language it can, on such an occa- sion, use, pleads successfully the cause of the Iwly : that is, of our h()l?j body !
The palpable contradictions, and gross absurdities of this comment, sufficiently separate it from the text. This is another glaring instance of the arbitrary and irrational man- ner in which Socinians explain the scriptures. If, after this strong opiate, we can recover the use of our reason, let us examine the text itself.
" We know not what we should pray for as we ought." — It is but just now we have seen, that the spirit of man, is that in man which knoweth the things of a man. But this spirit in man, knoweth not, of' itself', what we ought to pray for. If it knew independently what to pray for as wc ought, its own unaided desires would be according to the will of God. This ignorance is, therefore, our infirmity. But " the Spirit helpeth our infirmities.'''' If the Spirit helpeth our infirmities, and our infirmites are those of ignorance, which is an infirmity of our spirit ; it cannot be our oron spirit that helpeth itself. The Apostle*'s words are not -syvEvixa. nixuv, our spirit, but To-sjvsf/w-a, the Spirit. The question then is, W/iat spirit is that by which we are thus assisted ? (1.) We know of no Spirit by which we can be thus " helped," but the Spirit of him " that searcheth the hearts," who alone can perfectly know what we want, and what we may have, and who can " make intercession for the saints according to the will of God." (2.) To suppose any other spirit which maketh intercession for the saints, is to vindicate the idolatries against which we have allprotested. (3.) The Apostle is speaking of those " who have the first- fruits of the Spirit, (viz. of the Spirit of God) and who groan within themselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of their body." (4.) This is what the Apostles teach as being at cmce the privilege and
* Vol. l.p. 122.
THK I'liRsoyAi.nv or thl; holy SIMIUI'. 109
tlie tluty of all Chrislians — " praying- iu the Holij Ghostr * ^ .
St. Paul, s])eakin<T of the "diversity of spiritual gifts,*^ says, " all these worketh that one and the self-same Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he wiLL/'i' To evade the force of this clear and })ositive declaration, Mr. G. com- pares it with the following passage : " Know ye not that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ve obey, whether of sin unto death, or of obe- dience unto righteousness P" — " Here,'" says he, " sbi is a person," and the personal pronoim laJiom applied to it And not only has it raill, but also keeps servants and pays rcag-cs.^''^ — AV^ho does not see, that, at this rate, the proper personalitv of God and man may easily be disproved ? Sin, we know, is onlv an abstract quality. AVhen, therefore, it is jiersonified, Ave know that a figure is used, because properties and actions are ascribed to it, which do not belong to it. To prove, that volition is improperlij ascribed to the Spirit of God on the same ground, it is thicrefore necessary first to prove, that the Holy Spirit also is a mere abstract quality, and that there is a glaring absurdity in ascribing to it volition. But this Mr. G. has not even attempted to prove. And no wonder : for to attempt to prove that volition is improperly attributed to a Sjnrit, is equivalent to an attempt to prove that volition is improperly attributed to man, to angels, and to God.
To what has been advanced in proof of the personality of the Holy Spirit, it is unnecessary to subjoin those proofs, the validity of which must depend on that of those which precede. The scriptures attribute to the Holy Spirit the personal affections of grief and vexaticm ; — the personal faculties of hearing and speeeh, — and the personal offices of a teaeher, a guide, a. monitor, a xcitness, an ambassador, and a comforter. In attempting to set aside these scriptural proofs of tue doctrine in question, IMr. G. on one occasion shews that similar affections are attributed to (;ther beings, which are really persons ; and thus, "w hile he denies that those affections prove that distinct personality which we have not
' Jude 20. t 1 Cor. xii. 11. : Vol. 1. p. IM.
H 3
110 THE PERSONALTTY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.
yet examined, lie grants iliat personality for which we now contend. * Thus, of one class of those proofs, he has left us the entire possession. — To the rest he answers, by shewing that the ^eYso\\a\J'actilties and offices of which we speak, are often attributed to other beings, and even to things inani- mate, t His argument is not drawn out at length, lest it should break. The drift of it we suppose to be this : The personal faculties and offices are by a figure attributed to l)eings which manifestly have no personality, and therefore they axe Jiguratively attributed to the Spirit of God. But here, again, his proof is at once confused and defective. Sense and speech are properly ascribed only to animated bodies. To inanimate bodies, or to incorporeal spirits, they can only be ascribed by a jigure. Again : To inanimate matter, or irrational animals, because of their want of reason which is necessary to the proper performance of the functions of a moral teacher, a spiritual guide, &c., — those offices can only be ascribed figuratively. But to spirits, which are naturally endowed with intellect and volition, whether those spiritsbe corporeal, or incorporeal, such functions are ascribed with the utmost propriety ; because they, and only they, are capable of the performance of them. Mr. G. cannot therefore fairly take from us the proofs arising from hence, w ithout proving that the Holy Spirit is not a Spirit, and that he is incapable of understanding and will. Nor can we, on the other hand, support those proofs against his objec- tions, without a reference to the spirituality of the Spirit of God, and to that spirit's understanding and will. On the latter, therefore, the personality of the Holy Spirit does and must depend. But when that spirituality is once proved, our possession of all the proofs arising from the personal offices ascribed by the sacred writers to the Holy Spirit, is confirmed.
It is now time to pay some attention to the objections which Mr. G. has raised to this doctrine,
1. " The neuter pronoun, it, is in no oilier insitince in the Scriptures, ever applied to a person."
Gender is only properly attributed to animal bodies ; but God is of 710 gender, and therefore the sacred Avriters were
* Vol. I. p. 130. t Vol. I. pp. 127., 128, 131.
THE I'EUSONAl.ITV OI- TlIK IIOI.V SPIRIT. Ill
left at liberty to .speak grammatically, and to put their articles and pronouns in the same gender with the nouns with whicii tiiey should agree. To ^f»ov, the word used in Acts xvii. 29. and translated, the Godhead., is neuter^ and has a neuter article. Tlie word wveyju-a is of the neuter gender, and tlierefore requires that the article which is pre- fixed to it, and the pronoun to which it is the antecedent, should be put in the neuter gender. Had the Evangelists and Apostles WTitten in Latin, they would have used the masculine noun, spiritus, and, according tothe above rule of grannnar, their pronouns had then been put in the ma.sculine gender. But when a word is used whicli is 7iot of tlie neuter gender, the masculine article, and the masculine pronoun, are used with it. O zsQcpa.xXftros, "/<6' the conifortcr^ is in the ma^scuUne gender. In this case, therefore, our I^ord uses the masculine pronoun: — " If I go, I will send aurov nm ; — " and when sxsivoi he is come." * But this is not all. Even when tlie noun zywuixx is used, and the construction of the sentence is such that the rules of grammar do require tlie pronoun to be put in the neuter gender, it is put in the masculine. Thus : " But w^hen ex^jvoj- he, to zsvsvfjia the Spirit, is come." t Again: Exstvoy " A^ shall glorify me." j Here again, Mr. G. lias led us to a strong argument in favour of the personality of the Holy Spirit : for what reason can be assigned for the use of masculine pronouns, which have a neuter antecedent, or precede a neuter noun, but the proper personality of the Spirit ? When, on the other hand, Jesus Christ, who is unquestionably a person, is spoken of, cither the masculine or the neuter article is used, as the noun may require. O ^5 Y^vpios to Ilvjy/xa. says St. Paul : "The Lord is the Spirit."" Here, that the articles may each agree with the noun to whicli it is prefixed, both the masculine and the neuter article are used. If what Mr. G. says be true, he will now " start with astonishment'''' to find that both the Lord, and the Spirit, are at once masculine and neuter : and that, according to his mode of reasoning, they both are at once persons, and " things witlwut life or sense f""
* John xvi. 7, 8. t v. 13. ; v. 14.
lV,i THE PEESON.AI.ITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.
^2. " Notwitlistancling the promises of our Saviour to send a Comforter, and the personal offices he ascribed to it, no such person ever appeared to the Apostles, — nor do they appear to have expected it." *
Mr. G.'s head is running on a corporeal appearance, ra- ther than on a purely spiritual being. That no such ap- pearance was expected or seen by the Apostles, is granted. Mr. G. says, he has heard of the Apostles " receiving the Ploly Spirit," but it appears that, with him, an animated hody is necessary to constitute a person. Such ai"e the dis- tinctions, and such the arguments, on which Socinianism is founded !
3. " In the Epistles of the New Testament," Mr. G. says, " there are, at the beginning and elsev/here, wishes of peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, but none from the Spirit distinctly. ''''•\-
Tlie reader will learn from the drift of this argument that if the sacred writers had wished peace " from the Spi- rit disiinctly,'''' Mr. G. would grant, not only that the Holy Spirit is a person, but that he is a tldrd person in the Di- vine nature. Now let us try whether his heart will bow to the word of truth. " John to the seven churches in Asia : Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come ; and from the seven Spi- rits which are before his throne, viz. the seven Spirits of God, (chap. iii. l.)| and from Jesus Christ."" || Mr. G. must now be converted.
4. " St. Paul wishes to the Corinthians the communion, JiUozcship, or particij)ation of the Holv Spirit, which can
with no propriety be spoken of a person.''''§
So Mr. G. may suppose, when he first formed the most confused ideas of the Spirit of God, and has imagined, as we have just seen, that a body is necessary to constitute a person. But let us for a moment consider the subject. In his second epistle to the Corinthians, the Apostle wishes y) y.oivojvioc rou or/iH rovsf/xaTos-, " the fellowsliip of the Holy Spirit to be with all of them." Now, very providentially, the
* Vol. I. pp. I.i5, !56. t Vol. I. p. I5fi.
\ The number *ez't'?i is used in the Apocalvp'^e as a number iiidicatiug per- fection. II Rev. i. It. § Vol. 1. p. i:>r.
THE PERSON'AI.ITV OK THt; HOT.Y Sl'IRIT. 11 JJ
same Apostle, adtlivss'nio; his llrst epistle to the oaine eliurc!i, says also, " God is faithful, by whom ye are called eimoivu- vixv Tou viov izuTou, to tile fellowship o/" his Son.''^* St. Peter says, " you might be Qsixs xojvwvoi (pvjscoi, partakers of the di- vine nature."''' t And (mce more: " We are made />(.6tox,o» tm Xpi>^Tou partakers of Christ." j Mr. G. must have formed some erroneous idea of the subject ; for the Father and the Son are imdoubtedly persons, and it appears from St. Peter, and St. Paul, that we maij have the same conmiunion, fellowship, or participation of the Divine nature, and of Christ. Let him therefore translate the words as he pleases, he cannot consistently object to the personality of the Hoi)/ Spirit, without objecting also to the personality of " the Divine nature" and of Jesus Christ.
5. Mr. G. has found, in the scriptures, certain expres- sions applied to the Father and the Son, which are not, in his opinion, used concerning the Holy Spirit. From hence he infers, that personality cannot be attributed to the latter as to the former. His Argument may be set aside by ob- serving, that if there be any distinction between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, some things may well be attributed to one and not to another of them. The sup- posed Jltct on which his argument is foiuided, may be set aside by comparing other passages of scrij)ture with those which Mr. G. has quoted. For instance : With respect to the Father and the Son, Mr. G. quotes the following : " Now God himself, even our Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, direct our icay unto you.|| — Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God even our Father, who hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope, through grace, covifort your hearts, and stablish you in every good work.§ — Paul an Apostle of Jesus Christ, by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Chi'ist."^ — On the other hand, the sacred wri- ters use similar, though not the same expressions concerning the Hohj Spirit. For instance : " He shall lead you into all truth. — Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wildernebs.**
•lCor.i.9. t2fet.i.4. ♦ Hcb. iii. 14. iilThess.iii.il.
§ 2 The^s. ii. 16. % 1 Tim. i. 1. *• Malt, iv. 1.
114 THE PF.RSONAIJTY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.
— Then the Spirit said unto PJiilip, gv near atidjoin thyself to this cJiariof.* — They essayed to go into Bithynia, but tlie S|)irit silvered them not.t — The Comforter, which is tlie Holi/ GJtost.l — And walking in the fear of God, and in the comfort, (or consolation) of the Holy Ghost."]! — That ye may abound in liope by the power of the Holy Ghost.§ — To be strengthened with might by his Spirit. ^ The Ploly Ghost said. Separate me Barnabas and Saul, Jbr the worh "wliereunto Iliave called them?''** — Thus, we find that what Mr. G. thinks to be ascribed exclusively to the Father and the Son, is equally ascribed to the Holy Spirit.
6. "If the Holy Spirit be a distinct person in the God- head, then he was the parent of Jesus Christ. -f-f-
To this we answer: It was not the divine, but the hu- man nature of Jesus Christ which was conceived of the virgin ; and, for obvious reasons, it is enough to say, that that was not produced by the Holy Spirit as a Father, but witlwut a Father. It was a creation. All the absurdities, therefore, which Mr. G. has imagined to follow, fall to the ground. — It appears however, that the accounts which St. Luke and St. Matthew give of the miraculous conception, when they can be converted into a battery against the doc- trine of the Trinity, are not spurious! When the mira- culous conception is to be disproved, the Socinians cannot allow them to be genuine.
7. Mr. G.*'s argument in page 165, is not levelled against the doctrine of this Chapter. His objections, num- bered 5, 6, 7 and 8, may be put together as specimens of the depth of his metaphysical reasonings. — " The Holy Spirit is said to be given by measure ; to be poured out ; the disciples are said to be ^lled and baptized with it ; it is said to be quenched ; and in several instances it is said to be divided. How do these sayings agree with the idea of his personality T'' \\
This is a literary curiosity ! How is it that Mr. G., who is perpetually dreaming about metaphors^ can see none
* Acts viii. 29. f Acts xvi. 7. X John xiv. 26.
II Acts ix. 31. § Rom. xv. 13. ^ Eph. iii. 16.
** Acts. xiii. 2. ff Vol. 1 . p. 160. W Vol. I. pp. 1C6. 168.
THE PERSOXAMTY OV THE HOLY SMUIT. 11.^
here ? And why, when he was dctermineil to interpret all tliese .seriptnral expressions lUcrally, did he not «eize tlic lonjT-souglit oj^portunitv to prove that the Spirit is not .spirit^ but matter ? What but matter, \vhieh is an ex- tended substance, can be measured, divided, poured out ? AVhat but fire which is matter, can be eaii/iffuisfu'd ? And wherewith can any man (except a Socinian, see p. 37.) be xca.shed, but with zcater, which is anotlier species of matter P And lastly, what is spirit but breath or zci/td, that is a/r, whicli is also material ? Thus the demonstration is com- plete, and the favourite system of materialism is tri- umphant. But a man who is compos mentis, will at once see that all these are figurative expressions, by which the properties of matter are predicated of spirit ; and therefore, that every argument founded upon the literal interpretation of them must fall to the ground. Unless Mr. G. seriously intend to denv all spirituality to the Spirit, he will find tliat his objection is levelled against his own, as much as at the conmion, hypothesis. He thinks it " perfectly rati- onal to suppose, that divine poxccrs were divided, measured, and poured out, or that persons were baptized with them, or quenclied them." Now let Mr. G. be asked, What is the cubic measure of the di\'ine poxcer ? Into liow many parts is it divisible ? What quantity of it will fill a man of ordi- nary stature.'' After a division of it into maxvy parts, do those parts attract each other again, or does division anni- hilate some of them .'' How is it used, when Socinians bap- tize with it, instead of ordinary zcater? What becomes of it when it IS queyiched? — "Oh," says Mr. G., " these are all figurative expressions." The answer is satisfactory. But it is equally so, as a reply to his objections to the peronality of the Holy Spirit.
8. j\Ir. G.''s next o])jection is founded on the supposed Ignorance of the Holy Spirit. Because our Lord has said, *' No one knoweth the Son but the Father, neither knoweth any one the P'ather save the Son," Mr. G. infers, that the Holy Spirit knew neither the Father nor tlie Son, without a special revelation. From hence he argues, that " the
116 THE PKRSOXAI.ITY 01' TITK HOI.Y siPIRTT.
Holy Spirit cannot possibly l)e a person in the Godhead tlistinct from the Father." *
This argument is founded on a gross mistake. For, as Ave have already seen, " the Spirit searchcth all thing's, yea tlie ikep things of God." What is here said of the Father and the Son, is therefore asserted also of the Holy Ghost. " No one, ov^eis, knoweth the things of God, but the Spi- rit of God, and he to whom the Spirit of God, shall reveal tliem.'''* Will Mr. G. now draw the same inference con- cerning the Father and the Son ?
9. Lastly : " The expressions of the Holy Spirit being given by the Father, and sent by Jesus Christ, are incom- patible with the idea of its being a person."'!'
What an argument ! So the Son of' God was not a per- scm, because, forsooth, " God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son ;"'"'| and because the Father " sent him into the world." But Mr. G. has an answer ready. We are informed that Jesus Christ " came volun- tarily.'''' So then the Son of God was a person, had a will, before he came i7ito the zoorld, and came voluntarilij ! Thus does a Socinian establish, at one time, what at another he pulls down. But if it had not been expressly said, that Jesus Christ came voluntarily into the world, Mr. G. would have denied him the honour of personality. And yet every person of us came into the world invohmtarily.
II. Having found the Holy Spirit to be, not a mere en- ergy, an abstract attribute, but a substance, a real being, and a,perso7i, we now enquire whether he be a creature or God.
If the Holy Spirit be, as we have shewn, a Spirit, he must be either created or uncreated. It is not consistent with Mr. G.''s hypothesis to assert that he is created ; nor could such an assertion find any support from the authority of scripture. But if he be not a creature, and yet be a ircd being, he must be God.
The Holy Spirit is frequently denominated the Spirit of God. If then, as our Lord has asserted,
» Vol. 1. p. 169. t Vol. T. p. 165. J John iil. 16.
TIIL DIVINIIY Ol rilK IIOI.V Sl'IUlT. TIT
and i\Ir. Ci. has repeatedly granted, *"■ Gud be a Sp'n'/f,'"' tlie Spirit of God is Gou. There is no way of evadin<r tliis conchision but by supposing that God is one Spirit which is himself, and Afl.v another wliicli is the Spirit of God. But bv this supposition we run into two absurdi- ties: viz. First that there are tico Divine spikits, and there- fore two Gods ; and, Secondly, that these two Spirits are one Spirit, and these tico Gods, one God.
Doctor Lardner, wlioni Mr. G. has thought proper to cite, " thinks that in many places the Spirit, or the Spirit of God, or the -Hol/j G/io.st, is equivalent to God hiiusclf?'' * AVhe- ther Mr. G. agrees with the Doctor or not, it is difficult to judge ; for, in the present instance, the question cannot be decided by the contradiction which that agreement woidd in- volve. Be that as it may, we shall find that he cannot fairly interpret many parts of scripture w ithout implicitly sliding into the Doctor"'s position.
When, therefore, Mr. G. finds himself hemmed in by such scriptures as denominate the Holy Ghost the Spirit of God, he is obliged to grant, that " by the Spirit of God is meant the same thing, in reference to God, as the spirit of man in relation to man. f — Now, I think, for consistency's sake, (says he,) you must allow, that if, by the Spirit of GoiZ is meant a distinct being, hy the sjjirit of man, must also be meant a being distinct from the man. :|: — Only, (he adds,) do not say that, in one instance the words nuist be figurative, and in another they must be literal, just as best suits the system you have adopted. [Saul^mong the pro- phets !] Upon fair reasoning then on scripture grounds, if your arguments prove the Spirit of God to be a being distinct from God, from precisely similar premises we may draw the following inferences, that the Spirit of Jesus was a being distinct from Jesus ; the spirit of Paul, a being distinct from Paul ; and the spirit of every man distinct from the man himself." ||
" How forcible are right words I" Who could have argued more conclusively, that the Spirit of God is God, than, in these few lines, Mr. G. has done.'' We believe that
• Vol. 1. p. 162. t Vol. I. p. 162. : Vol 1. p. 122. 1| Vol. I. p. 1215.
118 THE DIVINITY OF THE HOLY Sl'lltlT,
the spirit of man, though distinct from the bod?/ of man, is ma/n, and not a being distinct from man. With Dr. Lard- ner, and Mr. G. who quotes (query, believes P) him, we say that it is " the incorruptible jmH of man, which survives after (the) death (of the body.) And we join with them in their judicious appeal to Solomon, who says, " And the spirit shall return to God who gave it." * God, however, has no body, but is all incorruptible spirit. We are, there- fore, violently driven, by Mr. G."'s most conclusive argu- mentation, to confess, that " the Spirit of God is not a being distinct yrom God, but God himself'.''''
We may now, without fear of contradiction, and in hope of further occasional assistance from Mr. G., proceed to adduce some additional proofs of what he has so liberally granted.
1, The Spirit of God is frequently called God. Not that the sacred writers formally announce the Divinity of the Holy Spirit, as, when they say " the Word was God,"" they announce the Divinity of the Son. In the latter case, the truth v/as, and must be, unknown, until it were revealed. But in the former case, ti'eating the subject as already known where the Holy Spirit was understood to be the Sp'irit of God, and supposing his proper divinity to be as obvious to all men, as it is to Mr. G., they only mention it incidentally and, as it were, without design. This method, however, rather strengthens than weakens their testimony. In this way, St. Peter, having charged Ananias with " lying to the Holy Ghost," immediately subjoins, "Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God." t " So that," to use the words of Athanasius, approved by Dr. Lardner, and cited by Mr. G. in confirmation of his own argument, " he who lied to the Holy Spirit, lied unto God, who dwells in men by his Spirit^ I St. Paul speaks in the same manner ; for having made that appeal to the Corinthians, " What ! know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God ?"" \\ he, in another place, tells them, " Ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dtoell in them, and walk in them.'''' § To the
* Ecclcs. xii. 7, f Act^ v. 3, 4. J Vol. 1. p. 1G2. H 1 Cor. vi. VJ. § 2 Cor. n i. 16.
THK DIVINITY OK llli; HOI.Y SIMKIT. 110
Ephcsians, the same Apostle writes, " You are huikled to- gether, for an Jtab'ttatkm of God through the Spirif.'" * — And lastly : St. John suys, " He tJiat keepeth his couimand- nients dicrlli'th in iiini, and he in Mm. And hereby we know that he ah'uhth in u.s, by the Spirit whieh fie hath ^ivcn
2. As the name of God is thus applied to the Holy Spirit, the argument adduced from thence is much confirmed by the a})plication to him, which we find the sacred writers make, of those pci^eettons which are exelusively Divine.
(1.) He is represented as eternal. — " Christ through the Eternal Spirit, offered himself without spot to God." +
(2.) He is represented as a//m/pr^*^«^. '■^ Whither sluill I go from thy Spirit.'* or whither shall I flee from thy presence ? If I ascend uji into heaven^ thou art there ; if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art the7-e. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea ; even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me.'" jj In this passage the Psalmist speaks of the presence, and of the Spirit, of God, as syno- nymous, and attributes to the Spirit of God the proper omnipresence of God.
(3.) He is represented as omniscient. " Who hath directed the Spirit of the Lord, or, being his counsellor, hath taught him .'' With whom took he counsel, and who instructed him, and taught him in the path of judgment, and taught him knowledge, and shewed to him tlie way of understanding ?" § — It is remarkable that in this passage, compared with the context, the prophet speaks indifferently of Jehovah, and of the Spirit of Jehovah ; — and that the Apostle Paul applies it to God himself, when, speaking of the infinite knowledge of the wisdom of G(xl, he exclaims, " O the dej)th of the riches both of the xoisdom and K'nowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out ! For who hath K'noxcn t/te mind of the
* Ei>h. ii. 22. t 1 John iii. 21. + Ileb. ix. 14-
II Psalm c^xxix. 7—10. 5 Iba. xl. 1.3, 11.
120 rin; divinity of tmk hoi.v si'inrr.
Lord ? or who hath been his counsellor ?"" * — The drift of the passage is, to assert that pecuhar attribute of the Holy Spirit, — original, iinderived knoxvledge. Of the extcid of that knowledge we have already seen the strongest testimony in those words : " The Spirit searclietli all things, yea, the deep things of God. — The things of God knoweth ovlns, no one, but the Spirit of' God.'''' f
(4.) He is represented as omnipotent. In the passage just cited, Avithout changing the person, the prophet pro- ceeds, " Behold, the nations are as a drop of a bucket, and are counted as the small dust of the balance : behold, he taketh up the isles as a very little thing.'" j " AU tliese worketh that one and the self-same Spirit."" Should it be asked. What are all these ? the answer is, " Wisdom, — knowledge, — faith, — gifts of healing, — working of miracles, prophecy, — discerning of spirits, — divers kinds of tongues," and " the interpretation of tongues :" j| — gifts which imply omniscience, prescience, and omnipotence, in the donor. So the angel declared to Mary the Mother of Jesus ; " The Holy Ghost shall come ujx)n thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee :" § thus declaring the power of the Holy Spirit to be the power of the Highest.
(5.) He is represented as supreme. The gifts just now mentioned, the donation of which requires the exertion of prescience, omniscience, and omnipotence, are said to be by the Spirit, " divided to every man severally as he will.'''' ^ Even Mr. G. acknowledges his supiremacy : " That its (the Holy Spirit's) commands are to be obeyed, we Tcnozo, be- cause they are the commands of God."" **
3. The word of God is said to be the word of the Holy Spirit. " God," says the writer to the Hebrews, " at sundry times, and in divers manners, spake in time past unto the fathers by the 'prophets.'''' j"}- They said, " Thus saith Jehovah. JJ — All scripture is given by inspiration of God." nil On the other hand, " No prophecy of the scrip- ture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy
* Rom. xi. 33, 34. f 1 Cor. ii. 10. 11. + fsa. xl. 1.5.
II I Cor. xii. 8—11, § Luke. i. 35. ij 1 Cor. xi. 11.
*» Vol. I. p. 131. tt Heb. i. 1. ++ Isa. xlii. 5. nil 2 Tim. iii. 16.
THK UIVINITY Ol-" TULl HOl.Y SI'IIMT. l'2l
came not in old time bv the will of man : but lioly men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." * ",For David himself said by tlie Holy Ghost," -f- &c. " The Holy (^host also is a witness unto us : for after that he had said before, This is the covenant that I will make with them," I &c. — It would be easy to nudtiply passages to the same purpose. But these are eiiow. It is an important observation, that, in the latter passage, the Holy Ghost is re- presented as the God who had made a covenant with Israel. Let the reader compare with it the following : " BehoUl the days come, saith Jkhovah, when / will make a new covenant witii the house of Israel," || &c.
4. The xoorlcs of God are ascribed to the Spirit of God. " He that built all things is God." § — " Thus saith Jkhovah, thy Redeemer, and he xhni^ formed thee from the womb, I am Jehovah that maketh all things ; that stretclteth forth the heavens alone ; that spreadetli abroad the earth bij myself?'' ^ Yet these works, which Jehovah hath wrought alone, and by himself, were wrought by the Spirit of God. " The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." ** " By his Spirit he hath garnished the heavens.'''' -f"f-
Such are the testimonies of the sacred writers to the proper Divinity of the Holy Spirit. If any addition to them be wanting, it is the testimony of Mr. G., whose arguments will clear u}) whatever remains of difficulty, thus :
" Omnipresence is exclusively a divine attribute. Yet I appeal to you to say, what are the representations you have commonly received from" Christ and his Apostles concern- ing the Holy Spirit ? " Are they not, that he is every whor, at all times present with you ? What is this but the divine attribute of omnipresence ?
" Is he not also represented to you as omniscient ? Does he not dive into your most secret thoughts ? Has he not access to your hearts ? Does he not suggest to you motives of action .'' What is this but tlie divine attribute of omniscience ^
* 2 Pet. i. 20, 21. t Mark xii. .JC. * Heb. x. 1.1. || Heh. viii. 8.
§ Heb. iii. 4. ^ Isa. xliv. 24. ** Geu. i. 2. ff Job xxvj, 13.
I
122 THE DIVINITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.
" Does he not possess the power of changmg the laws of nature, by the operation of a miracle ? Has he not also the power oi prescience ? This being is represented a&Jbreknow- ing the counsels of God.
" These attributes are all divine. And if there actually be a being possessing these attributes, that being ought to he a deity. If he be a deity, he ought to he worshipped.'''' *
Thanks to Mr. G. for thus saving us the trouble of proving that divine worship ought to be rendered to the Holy Spirit. " He which persecuted us in times past, now preacheth ihejaith which once he destroyed C
* Vol. I. pp. 19, 20.
( 1^'.') )
CHAPTER VII.
Oftlie Scriptural Doctrine oftJie Trinity.
To a being like man, who knows nothing of the essence of any of the creatures of God, it is absolutely impossible to entertain precise and adequate ideas of the Most High. God has therefore been pleased to make himself known to us by Anahgij. Tliis method is to be distinguished from that which the Socinians call metaphorieal. Meta}>hor in their hands is a mere figure of rhetoric : a form of speech in which, for the sake of either beauty or force, any (juality not proper to the subject is attributed to it, and in the ex- plication of which, that the subject may be viewed in its own light, the hory'Oiced idea is to be exchanged for the jjroper one which it represents. In this case the sid)ject is supposed, when stript of its ornament, to be well understood. It is only an artificial method of dressing up an idea of which we have already some conception. — The aualogical method of teaching is very different. It is founded in a certain resemblance in circunistances, between two things, which are, in their nature , different. That resemblance is supposed to be distinctly perceived by the teacher, though not by the learner. In this case, ideas are borrowed from such things as are known to the learner, and applied to the thing unknozon to him ; and these horrourd ideas, whidi are sufficiently plain and intelligible, are made to stand for the precise idea, which the learner is incapable of entertaining. To receive instruction in this manner, the figure is not to be zcithdrazcn, that the subject may be understood ; for the subject can be understood only by retaining it. The idea thus communicated, is not, however, to be entertained as tlie precise idea (i. e. the altogether proper and perfect picture) of the thing in questitm, (for it is " a shadozc, and not the
124 THE DOCTHIXE OF THE TRINITY.
very image of ihe tiling ;") but as the heat idea of it of which we are capable.
It is by this analogical method God has been pleased to make to mankind the brightest discoveries of himself. " We know only inj^flT/. — We see, li kanTJsrpou ev atvi^/xan, through a mirror in an enigma.'''' * For instance :
" God is light!''' The idea suggested by this assertion is, that there is a certain analogy between God, and llgfit. What light is to the natural world, God is to the spiritual. But light is matter, and is divisible, and movable. Is God then divisible and movable matter ? No ; God is spiritual lio-ht. But what consistency is there between spirituality and matter ? None at all. The idea is " not the very image ;"" it is but, as it were, " a shadow" of God. But we must not lay it aside, for it is one of the best we can have. We speak as the oracles of God, when we say, " God is lio-ht," though the idea is not strictly compatible with the sp'irituality which we attribute to him. The spirituality of God is not, however, contradictory to his real nature, but to our imperfect idea of him. If oiu' idea of iiim were perfect, there would not be even the appearance of inconsistency. — Again :
" God is a Sjvrit." That is, God is something analo- o-ous to the human spirit. Of the nature of our own spirit we have no precise idea ; although we have some idea of its properties. But if we had the most definite idea of our own spirit, that idea would be injinitely short of him who is a Spirit vej'y different from ourselves. The idea then con- veyed by these words, is not the precise and perfect idea of God. Must we then relinquish it ? No : for we have no substitute for it. It is the idea which God himself has sug- gested. Yet the same difficulty occurs here which we meet in the doctrine of the Trinity : To this imperfect and finite idea, we attribute infinite perfections. There is something in the idea, contradictory to what we ascribe to him whom it is supposed to represent. But all the apparent contradic- tion arises from the imperfection of our idea. We have no alternative, however, but 'imperfect knoidedge, or perfect ignorance.
* 1. Cor. xiii. \2
I'HK DOCTUINU OK IHK lUlNlTY. 125
As by analogy Gotl lias discovered to us his nature in general, so, by analogy, he has discovered to us that great mystery of his nature, the distinction between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and the respective relation of each of them to the other.
1. The first analogy which we trace is that of Matter, Fortn, and Motion. — It is not asserted that God is any where said to be a material Being. Tlie passage to which we refer, is that in which, speaking of Jesus Christ, the Apostle says, he " was €v i^optp-n 0aoy, in the^rw of God." * Now it is granted that '* God is a Spirit.''"' He is not an eaiended, solid substance ; and, properly speaking, he has no external
form. Moses therefore reminded the children of Israel, " Ye saw no similitude '' -f- Form is predicated of God im- jyroperly, and under the borroiccd idea of matter. Here then we have the idea of matter and its form. The Holy Spirit is spoken of as of matter in motion. " The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." j It is spoken of as " descending-, — coming," and " g'oing-.'''' || Motion, however, does not properly belong to spirit, especially to the omnipresent Spirit. It is therefore attributed to immaterial substance, under the borrowed idea of matter in motion. — We have then the ideas of matter, of the form of matter, and of matter in motion. What the internal, unknown, essence of matter is to material substance, that the unknown Father is in the Divine nature. What ihcform of matter is to the internal, unknown, essence of matter, that the Son is to the Father. As the unknown essence of matter \'i perceived and distinguished only by its external form, so the Father is perceived and known, only through the Son. As matter operates upon matter only by motion, so God operates on his creatures, only by the Spirit.
2. The next analogy on which we shall remark, is that of the Sun, its Light, and its vital Influence. The sacred writers, in speaking of God, often allude to the Sun, which is
Of this great world both Eye and Soul.
*'Unto you that fear my name, shall the Sun of righteousness arise." § — lAHiat the internal, unJinozcn substance is in the
• Phil. ii. fi. t Dent. iv. 12. + Gen. i. 2. || Luke iii. 22. Jolin i. .■^2, &c. 1 Chron. xii. 18. 1 Kings xxii. 24. 2 Chron. wiii. 23. § Mai. i\ . 2.
i3
126 THE 1K)(.TK1XK ()]• TliK TIUKITV.
Sun, ihat the Father is in the Godhead. As from llic former rll natural Hght proceeds, the latter is " the Father of lights." What perceptible light is to the internal, un- known substance of the Sun, that the Son is to the Father : " the aTzavyoLGy^a. r%s ^o^ris, brightness of his glory." The Son is therefore " the Light of the world." As the Sun is Ami only by the light of his beams, and his beams impress on all nature an image of the Sun ; so the Father is seen only in the Son ; and in the Son, all, who have eyes to see, behold the Fatlier. — In like manner, wliat the vital hifluence of the Sun and of its beams is to the Sun, and to its beams, that the Holij Spirit is to the Father, and to the Son. As the vital i)ifluence flows from the Sun through its beams, so the Spirit proceeds from the Fathek, through the Son. And as the injlueiice of the Sun is the material origin and supiJort of vegetable and animal life, so the Spirit of God is the spiritual cause of life, to animals and to spirits. " With thee is the Jbnntain of life ; in tliy light shall we sec light.''''* " If he gather unto himself his Spirit and his breath, all flesh shall perish together, and man shall turn again unto dust." t
3. Let us next examine tlie analogy of Being, its Image, and its Operatian. God is Being itself: " I AM" is his name. Of that Being the Father is the wiknown, invisi- ble essence. " No man hath seen God at any time ; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." Of that unknown Being, the Son is the visible Image. " Who is the Image of the invisible God : X — the 'JLxpxx.r'np t/k vTjoax'xasojs, character of his sub- stance.'' II The Holy Spirit is that Being operating on all created being. — " There are diversities of operations : but it is the same God which ivorVeth all in all. — All these worJceth that one and the self-same Spirit^ § — The Father is God hidden from us : the Son is God revealed to us : the Holi/ Spirit is God zuorhing in us.
4. There is also an allusion to Alitul, Discourse, and Breath, or Wisdom. Mr. G. says, " our most sublime con- ception of God is as the all-j^evvading Min'd."^ — This
* I'salui xxxvi.!*. t -'o'^ xxxiv. 14, 15. + Col. i. \h.
II Hub. i..^. § 1 Cor.xii. fi— 11. ^| Vol. 1. p. 1:5.
THE DOCTltlNli OF THE TUINITV. 127
Mind lias its Xoyos^ tcordy discourse^ or reason; " His name is called 0X070J, the Word of God."* As the K'ord or discourse of man is conceived by his mind, — is originally in his mind, — is an image of his mind, — when uttered, displays his mind, — and his mind is displayed only^ by that discourse ; so the Wokd of God is conceived by the Father, — is originally in the Father, — is an image of the Father, — in coming forth from the Father displays the Father — and the Father is displayed only by him. — Again, discourse is both internal and external. \i \?, ratio vel oratio : "reason or speech." Considered in the first point of view, zoisdom is the support of reason : and the Holy Spirit is the Wisdom of God. "Therefore also said the Wisdom of God."'t' &c. Considered in the latter point of view, breath is the support of speech: and the Son spalr by the Holy Spirit, or breath. " Through the Holy Ghost he gave commandments unto the Apostles." J Hence when the Father, whom no man hath known, sent the AVord to declare him, he sent upon him, for that purpose, the Spirit without measure.
5. The last analogy which we shall examine, and that which is most generally referred to in scripture, is that of the Father, the Sox, and one who, sent by the Father and the Son, is, on account of the offices which he sustains, called the CoaiFORTER. The allusions by which this distinction is made, are verv obvious. We have a suflficiently clear idea of the relation of a Son to a Father. We equally under- stand what it is for one to be sent by a second in the name of a third, to execute the purposes of both. Such are the mission, and the circumstances of the mission, of the Holy Spirit.
Let any one read without prejudice the following pas- sages, and make up his mind as to the nature of the dis- tinction which is there made between the three. — " / will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter?'' — " But the Comforter, wliich is the Holy Ghost, whom the Fatlwr will send in my name, sxuns, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to vour remembrance, whatso- ever/have said unto yoii.'" — " When the Comforter is come,
•Rev.xix. 13. Joliu i. 1. f Luke \i. 49. jActbi.2.
128 THE DOCTKINK OK THK TKIXITY.
whom / will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, exstvor, he shall testify of mey — " / have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when sKSJvoy, he the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth; for he shall not speak of himself, but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak ; and he shall shew you things to come. ExEJvoj-, He shall glorify me ; for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you."
Every one who reads these verses, will acknowledg-e that the distinction here made is the distinction of three persons. Mr. G. himself has granted it. While he uniformly acknowledges a personal distinction between the Father and the Son, — of the Spirit he even says, " It would have been next to an impossibility not to have repeatedly personified this divine influence." * This is all that at present we ask. It is enough that the Socinians themselves authorize us thus to denominate the ideas which, by these foniis of speech, are conveyed. Let it then be clearly understood that precisely in this sense we make use of the word person, and its deri- vatives ; viz. to fix an idea, which, in the use of the same tei-ms, equally strikes the mind of a Socinian, and of a Christian Believer. This idea is one of those analogies by which the sacred writers set forth the distinction which exists between the three.
Now since the sacred writers have, in every case, tauglit us how to view this subject by analogy, we have no proper and precise ideas of it. We have no criterion to which to bring any one of these similitudes, but by comparing one with another. To oppose one to another of them, (the common practice,) is not the A\ay to receive instruction; because they all stand upon the same authority, and nothing but partiality to one's own opinion can assign a reason why this, rather than that, shall be relinquished. The only plan that can be vindicated, is, to assign to each of them its proper department, — to compare them together, for the correction of each other, — and to adopt a system which comprehends them all.
* Vol. I. J). \T^.
TllK DOCrUINK or THK IKINllV. 1^9
In attempting to lay down such a plan, it must hf observed, that of the five analogies which have been exa- mined, every one gives us some idea of the doctrine of the Trinity; but one part of that doctrine is more perfectly taught by one of them, and another }>art by another.
1. Some of them more ])erfectly elucidate the %initij of the three. That iniitv would never be inferred from the analogy of Father, Son, and Comforter. The idea which we have of three persons, is that of three distinct beings. But, matter, Jbrm, and mothm, include only one being. The ideas of Jire^ light, and vital injiueiice, imply no more than 07ie Sun.
2. Some of them shew, much better tiian the rest, that the distinction is essential, nccessarij, and eternal. Matter may possibly be rcithout motion : but light and heat are essential to the Sun, which cannot be supposed for a moment to exist, as tlie Sun, without them : and energy is insepara- ble from a living, spiritual, and perfect Being. — There is not a perfeet agreement between human paternity and Jiliatioii, and the doctrine of God and his eternal Word. The gene- ration of him " whose goings forth have been^row of old,
from everlasting^'' * is not, like human generation, a proeess which has a beginning. — It is not the generation of an hfant, which must be nourished that it may grow up to manhood ; but of one who is " the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever." It is not the generation of one being by another being ; for " the Word xcas God.'''' It is not the generation of one who may again be annihilated ; for " the Son abideth for ever.''"' In all these points the analogy is lost. But here, the scriptures afford us another source of ideas : an analogy which takes up the subject where the preceding seems only to contradict what the scriptures have clearly revealed. When the ideas of a Father and his Soft no longer serve, the ideas of a Being, and his Image con- ceived by himself, are to be substituted. Hei'e then avc have a new order of ideas. We lay aside the relation of paternity and filiation, and consider God as an eternal, ever perfect Mind, — always capable of knoicing himself; —
• Micah V. 2.
VdO THE DOt'TltlNE ()1< THE TKIXITV.
always actually knowing himself ;— always conceiving an image of himself: — to whom it is never jxmible that he should be ivithout an image of himself, conceived by himself; — whose image of himself, so conceived, must be always ■perfect CIS himself, because he ahvays perfectly knows him- self, and contemplates himself with a capacity to comprehend all his own perfection ; — who, because he is perfect, must perfectly conceive his own image ; — whose image can never \im\6h,hecsM.se\ie cannot forget himself, and because he must love that image which, like himself, is perfect ; — and lastly, who can, by that image of himself, which he has conceived, discover himself to any intelligent being, in proportion to the capacity of the recipient. — It is equally obvious that an all-perfect and eternal Mind can never have existed without its Xoyos reason or discourse, and the toisdom by which that reason is sustained. — These comparisons illustrate the essen- tial necessity of the distinctions of the Trinity.
3. The nature of the distinction, under the Christian ^economy, is best illustrated by the personal distinction of Father, Sou, and Conforter. — In prosecuting the allusion to human paternity and jiliation, the sacred writers have taken a scope that could not have been alloxoed by any other of those comparisons which, on other occasions, they have so much improved. As a son is begotten of his father, the Son of God is called " the only -begotten Son."" * As a father conveys to his son perfect humanity, " it pleased the Pather that in him (his dear Son) should cdl fulness dwell C even " all the fulness of the GodheadT f As a son has all the members, senses, ax\A faculties which his father has, ^'■All tliat the Father hath (said the Son) is mine.'''' I Even Mr. G. ascribes to him the " divine perfections." || As a father lovcth his son, so the Father says, " This is my beloved Son, in whom I delight." § As a father entrusts his affairs with his confidential son, and makes him the heir of his property, so " the Father loveth the Son, — hath g'lven all things into his hand ^ and hath appointed him he'ir of all things." ** And lastly. As a son obeys, serves, and honours his father,
*JoliU iii. 16, &c. t Col. 1. 10. ii. ;>. J Johiixvi. 15. || \'ol, I. p. COO. §MliU. wii. 5. ^1 John iij. 35. *» Heb. i. 2.
tiil: DoiTKiM^ oi' Tin-: ruisriY. I;J1
so the Son of God obeys, serves, and lumours the I^ailur. How little of this could with propriety be said under any other of those lieads of distinction by which the sacred writers have on other occasions illustrated the subject ! — In like manner, no other than the personal distinction could have warranted the Holy Spirit's being spoken of as " search^ ing all things even the deep things of God,'''' as " hwicingthe things of God," as " hearing what he shoidd speak,'''' as " taking of the things of the Son and shcxo'ing tliem to us/' as instntef'ing, ic'itness'ing, admonishing, reproving, eom- Jbrting, xc'ilUng, calling men to the ministry, commanding, and interceding. — And further : — ^Ve could not speak with apparent propriety, of tlie ^orm praying the essence to send the motion : — of a vital injiiicnce shewing to mankind the things of the light wliich is returned to the Snn ;— K)f an image which is resorbed by its original, and an energy which is come to its place : — or of a xcord, which knoxvs, and loves, and obeys the Mind from which it proceeds, which is returned to the bosom from whence it came, and which has left its breath behind to execute its commands, and to com- fort mankind during its absence. These scriptural distinc- tions, it is evident, are, in such cases, of no use : and to applv them to such doctrines of scripture, would only be to give to truth the colour of absurdity. The ^JC7-.so»aZ distinc- tion is, in such cases, absolutely necessary. And this dis- tinction, the most perfect we have found, applied, as the sacred ^vi-iters have applied it, makes all these truths plain, natural, and easy.
On the whole. We have learned : — 1. Thatthe Trinitarian dist'inetion is 7-evealed, and consequently can be knozon, only by analogy ; and therefore, as being revealed only by imper- fect sliado-iVS, is still a mystery. — 2. That without compre- hending the exact truth, Ave cannot judge of the analogy be- tween that truth and any other mean of elucidation ; and therefore it is presumptuous to attempt to explain that dis- tinction, in any other way than that in which it is explained by divine revelation. — 3. That since the Divine Author of the Christian revelation best knows in what degree, and under what form, we are capable of receiving the truth, and
132 THE DOCTRINE OF THE TIUNITY.
which of all possible views of that truth are likely to be most advantageous to us, it becomes us to adopt such opinions, and to hold such language, as the scriptures have suggested. Or, in the more appropriate expressions of St. Paul : We should speak of the things of God, " not in words which inan''s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth." — 4. That the Scriptures teach the doctrine of the Trinity, not only when they make a personal distinction between the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, but also when they make a distinction which is not personal. — 5. That our best conceptions of the subject are very imperfect, and there- fore, unless we adopt all those modes of elucidation which are used by the sacred writers, we cannot, in the explana- tion of the scriptures, avoid falling into many absurdities. — 6. That none of those allusions by which the scriptures illustrate the Trinity, should be pursued beyond the line of analogy. — 7. That when we perceive ourselves to be led, by the abuse of scriptural terms, into any absurdity, or into any doctrine contrary to the plain letter of scrip)ture, we ought to remember that we have another order of scriptural ideas, which should serve as a clue to guide us out of the labyrinth. — 8. That Christianity requires every one of its disciples, whether he embrace or reject the terms which are in connuon use, to maintain the doctrine of a Trinity in Unity : — to place it on its proper basis, divine revelation ; — and to impute whatever of difficulty or apparent contradiction he meets, not to the unreasonableness of the doctrine, but to the imperfection of his own conceptions.
Si quid novisti rcctius istis.
Candidus imperii : si noii, his uterc mecuni.
( I'^y )
CHAPTER VIII.
Of the cr'igin of the Doctrine of the Tr'm'tty.
SixcE the preceding pages were written, and some of them were already printed, Mr. G. has published his 9th, 10th, and 11th Lectures, in which he has adopted the opi- nion, that the Doctrine of the Trinity is the result of a gradual corruption of the doctrine of the gospel. Having zealously endeavoured, through one whole vohune of Lec- tures, to expunge from the scriptures all the prominent evidence of what he denominates " the principal doctrines of Christianity ;" on the supposition that he has perfectly • succeeded, he proceeds to maintain this opinion by multi- plied references to the Fathers of the primitive church.
If they who profess to maintain the doctrines which he has impugned, are prepared to surrender to him the well- fortified citadel of scripture, they must either grant to him the victorv, or meet him, to finish the contest, in the exten- sive fields of ecclesiastical history.
While the reader hesitates, and hopes to find some al- ternative, IVIr. G. peremptorily summons him to surrender. " Look, my Trinitarian friend, at the ground on which you stand, at the year sixty-six. The Apostles, you say, entertained the same views of Christianity as yourself. Well ; for thirty-three years they travel into different parts of the world, for the sole purpose of making converts to the Christian religion ; the zcholc of that time is exclusively occupied in this important work ; and midtitudes actually become their disciples. An account of their transactions is given by one of their own body ; but he totallij omits to state that this doctrine of a Trinity was one of the doctrines ichich ihcy iavght. — Further ; in the course of these thirty- three years, the men thus employed, publish ticcnty-txca
134 TTIF. ORIOTX OF TITF
oliier works; ycH, strano;e as it may appear, in none cyfthciC "icorkfi in any one of these peculiar phrases to bc^found^ Tri- n'ltij in Umty, Three Persons in one God., God the Son, and God the Holy Ghosts*
If the reader be a genuine " Trinitarian friend," and have the lieart of a Christian soldier, he will not be alarm- ed by the lofty tone which Mr. G. has assumed. He will perceive, that to give some degree of plausibility to the sup- position that the doctrines in question have no support from scripture, this Socinian herald has adopted the contrivance of his predecessors, by substituting the peculiar phrases of human invention for the doctrines taught by divine revela- tion.
Without any implied censure on those who deem it their duty to vindicate the phrases to which Mr. G. has ob- jected, and who think themselves adequate to the task, — throughout the whole of this discussion, no vindication of any set of phrases, except those of scripture, has been at- tempted. Lest the truth of God should be exposed to con- tempt by being identified with tlte inventions of men, it has been designed to extract from the scriptvu'es the genuine Christian doctrine, as much as may be, in the language of the sacred writers : to " speak of spiritual things in spiri- tual words,"" and to leave the judicious reader at liberty to make choice of what he deems the most appropriate terms. The contest is not on our part, about words, but things. When therefore Mr. G. speaks of " this phraseology,'''' as beino- thouo-ht " so essential to salvation,'''' wliom does his arguing reprove .''f- When he triumphantly asks, " Should one of your missionaries, whether to the east or to the west, preach one single year, make one single convert, publish &)ie single book upon the doctrines he was sent to teach, and not once ment'ion th'is impoj'tant subject, (in the phraseology so strongly objected to) how would 3'ou think he had executed his commission P"! — we are under no diffi- culty ; for we readily and sincerely answer, that we shoidd not, on this account, as Mr. G. supposes, " designate him a. ^faithless servant, who had neglected his duty, had con-
* Vol. II. p. i. t Vol. II. p. !'. : Vol. II. 1). 8.
DOCTRTXF. OF THE TRIXITY. 1 35
ccalal the word of God." " The j)hra,<{eolog-?/^ of ihe schools is not the jcord of God, but the word of man. And if he " had not shunned to declare all the counsel of God,'''' but had '■\fidlij preached" the " nnadultcrataV gos- pel : if he had been successful in making converts (not So- cinian converts, conx'crts to a mere opinion, but) such as St. Paul was sent to make : — if he had " turned men from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they might receive remission of sins, and an inheri- tance amono- all them that are sanctified through faith in Christ Jesus ;" — we should approve his labours, and re- joice in his success.*
The Socinians themselves use many phrases which are not strictly scriptural : but they are not to be " made offenders for a wordy If, in the language of scripture, they can vindicate their metaphysical explanation of that truth, " there is one God ;" they ai*e perfectly at liberty to use the phrase, " the Unity of God." If they can thvs prove that Jesus Christ is no other than a man, they will not be forbidden to insert in their creed the words, " simple humanity^ And if they can demonstrate, yro7» the same source, that the Holy Spirit is only the abstract power of God, we will hold no contest with tlicm on account of their denominating him " the Divine energy,'''' or " an attribute of God." We will leave the " strife of words" to those who admire and love it. What is there then unreasonable in our conduct, if, while we believe the doctrine of the preceding- chapters to be the doctrine of the Bible, w,e find it conve-
* " I dare not," says the Rev. John Wesley, " insist upon any one' s using the word Trinity or Persan. 1 use them myself without any scruple,, because I know of none better. But if any man has any scruple concern- ing them, who shall constrain him to use them ? 1 cannot ; much less would I burn a man alive, and that with moist, green wood, for saying, " Though I believe the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God, yet I scruple using the words Trinity and Persons, because 1 do not find those terms in the Bible." Sermons, Vol. V. p. M.
The Rev. John Fletcher says, in like manner, " if by renouncing that comprehensive word (Trinity,) we could remove the prejudices of Deists against the truth contended for, we would give it up, and always say. The Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghnst, which is what we mean by the Trinity." Rat. Vin. of the Calh. Faith, p. 30.
13G THE ORIGIN' OF THE
iiient to avoid circumlocution, by expressing our opinion in .such terms, as, we are aware, are not used by the sacred writers ?
Having thus replied to the insidious insinuation of Mr. G.'s summons, we now declare, more directly, that no force which he has at his connnand shall cause us to sur- render the strong fortress of Scripture authority. Let him " walk about our Zion, and go round about her ;" let him *' tell her towers, mark well her bulwarks, and consider her palaces."
Having in the four preceding chapters, stated our opi- nion of the doctrines under discussion, and having exhi- bited and established \^'hat we deem the most direct and positive proofs that that opinion is scriptviral, we are now to shew that those doctrines, so far from being, as Mr. G. liolds, the invention of latter ages, have been gradually discovered from the dawn of divine revelation to the perfect (lay. — This argument does not rest on any single text, but on the general tenor of scripture.
" In the besinnino; God created the heavens and the earth."* " The original word, dtiVn, EloMm, God, is certainly the plural form of bx, d, or nSx, eloah r^ and therefore indicates, to a Hebrew reader, a plurality.
" And God said, Let us make man in our image, after OUR likeness.";!: The use of the plural pronouns in this passage, is a confirmation of the inference deduced from the preceding : and the pronouns, being personal, convey the idea of personality as well as of plurality.
It does not appear that any created beings wei*e em- ployed in the creation of man ; but it is unequivocally de- clared that, Eloh'im, " God created man in his (own) image."||
When man was fallen from his original rectitude, " the Lord God said, Behold the man is become as ojie of w<y."§ This distribittive manner of speaking indicates, that the distinction already made is not merely verbal but real.
When the Lord God cursed the author of the sin of our first parents, and promised them deliverance, he pro-
* Gen. i. 1. f Dr. Clarke, in loc. + Gen. i. 26. || Gen. i. 27. § Gen. iii. 22.
DOClIUXt OF THi; TKINITV. 137
niiscd tliat tlelivcrancc bv one wlio should be ihtlr ftccd. " I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and be- tween thy seed and her seed : he shall bruise thy head, and thou shait bruise his heel."*
Of tile fulfdment of this great promise, God gave fre- C|uent pledges, by the .appearance of a Divine Person to the Patriarehs, and to the Jewish Chiefs. This Person at first appeared under the human form ; but, before his de- parture, his Divinity was generally known and acknow- ledged by those to whom he appeared, and with whom he conversed. By being denominated the Word or the Angel of JeJu)vuhy or the Captain of JcliovalCs host, the distinction already discovered is exhibited : but by being also styled Jchovali, his Divinitij is maintained.
••' The Word of the Lord came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram : I am thy shield, and thy ex- ceeding great reward." This Word of the Lord, Abham addressed as Jehovah. " And Abram said, Jeliovali, God," &c. Gen. XV. 1. 2. Compare also v. 4. 7. 8. 18.
" Jehovah appeared to Abraham in the plains of Mamre. As Abraham sat in the tent-door in the heat of the day, he lift up his eyes and looked, and lo, three men stood by him."f One of these is called Jehovah. " And Jehovah said unto Abraham, ^Vherefore did Sarah laugh .''"
Of these men, two proceeded towards Sodom. (Com- pare Gen. xviii. 22. xix. 1.) But the one who w'as called Jc'/zorfl/i , remained and conmiuned with Abraham. Of him it is related : " And Jehovah said. Shall I hide from Abra- ham that thing which / do .'^ :|: And Jehovah said. Be- cause the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great," &c. (v. 20.) — See also verses 22. 26. &c.. — In the next chapter, still keeping up the distinction which we have observed, and yet maintaining the proper Divinity of him who destroyed the devoted cities, it is said, " Then Jehovah rained, upon So- dom and upon Gomorrali, brimstone and fire from Jeliovah out of heaven."!!
" And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him. Take now thy son,
* Gcu. iii. 15. t Gen. xviii 1,2. J Gen. xviii. I". || Geu. xix. 24.
188 THE ORIGIN OF THE
thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah, and offer him there for a burnt-offer- ing upon one of the mountains Avhich I will tell thee of."* When Abraham had perfectly manifested his faith and obe- dience, " The Angel of Jehovah, (or the Angel Jehovah,) called unto him out of heaven, and said. Now I know that thou fearcst God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from ME."-f- — Here we see that the Angel Jehovah, was the " God" who " did tempt Abraham."
It is still more remarkable that on this occasion, the " Angel Jeliovah,'''' who had required Abraham to offer up his son, and to offer him up to himself, as to God, " called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time, and said. By MYSELF have I sworn, saith Jehovah, [he could swear by no greater ;] for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not with-held thy son, thine only son ; that in blessing / will bless thee, — because thou hast obeyed my voice."| — Here we see that the Angel who appeared to Abraham, was the God who commanded this sacrifice ; to whom it was in purpose offered ; who accepted it as offered to himself ; who made the greaX, promise to Abraham ; and who sware by HIMSELF : — in a word, Jehovah.
" The Angel of God spake unto Jacob in a dream, say- ing, Jacob. And he said, / am the God qf Bethel, where thou anointedst the pillar, and where thou vowedst a vow unto ME." 1 1 Now the God of Bethel is he of whom it is said, " And behold Jehovah stood above it (the mysterious ladder) and said, I am Jehovah the God of Abraham thy Father, and the God pf Isaac."§ And the vow Avhich Ja- cob vowed to him was this : " If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on, so that I come again to my father's house in peace : then shall Jehovah be my God. And this stone which I have set for a pillar, shall be God's house : and of all that thou shalt give me, I will surely give the tenth unto thee."^ To Jacob, therefore, it was ob- vious that " the A^igel of God" was Jehovah, God
HIMSELF.
* Gen. xxii.1,2, f Gen. xxii. 12. + Gen xxii. l.'S— If!.
II Gen. xxxi. 11. 13. § Gen. xxviii. l."?. <i| Gen. xxviii. 20, 22.
norTHixi; or iiii; tiun'ity. 139
Wlicn Jacob was returning to liis father"'s house, he " was left alone : and there wrestled a man with him until tlie breakinir of the day." AVhen this man had j)ut fortli his power, and l)v a toueh had disjointed Jacob's thigh, Jacob discerned his divine visitant, and said, " I will not let thee go, exce})t fltou hicfis inc. And lie said, Thy name shall be called no nu)re Jacob, but Israel ; for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and liast prevailed. And Jacob asked him, and said, Tell me, I pray thee, thy name; and he said, AV' herefore is it, that thou dost ask after my name .'' And he blessed him there. And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel : Jur I have seen God fuee to face, (said he) and my life is preserved." * — Whatever others may think, it was obvious to Jacob, that this man was no other than God himself.
" The angel of Jehovah appeared to Moses, in Horeb, in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush." This angel is called Jehovah, — God, — the God of Abraham, the God of' Isaac, and the God of Jacob, — Jehovah, God of the Hebrews, — I AM, — and I AM THAT I AM, — throughout the chapter. Exodus iii. See also chap. iv. et seq.
When Jehovah sent Moses to lead his people Israel to the land of Canaan, he was pleased to promise, " Behold, I send an angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the ])lace which I have prepared." "|* But of this angel, Jehovah said, " Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not ; for he will not pardon your trans- gressions, for my name is in him,.'''' ^ This angel then had the poxver, authority, and name of Jehovah.
" When Joshua was by Jericho, behold there stood a man over against him, with his sword drawn in his hand : and Joshua went unto him, and said unto him. Art thou for us, or for our adversaries .'' And he said, Nay, but as captain (or prince ) of the host of Jehovah am I now come. And Joshua, (well understanding this language,) fell on his face to the earth, and did zcorship, and said unto him, What saith my Lord unto his servant ? And the captain of Jehovah's host, (approving this,) said unto Joshua, (in the
* Gen. xxxii. 2!, — MO. f Kxod. xxiii. 20. t Kxoil. \xiii. 21.
k9.
140 THE ORIGIN OF THE
language of Jehovah to Moses,) Loose thy shoe from off thy Joot, for the place whereon thou standest is Itoly!''' * — This captain of Jehovah's host is immediately called Jehovah. " And Jeliovah said unto Joshua," -f- &c.
" The angel of Jelmvah appeared unto Gideon, and said unto him, Jehovah is with thee, thou mighty man of valour."" I Here also the angel is styled Jelwvah. " And Jehovah looked upon him, and said, Go in this thy might, and thou shalt save Israel from the hand of the Midianites : have not I sent thee .?" See Judges vi. 14. 16. 23.
" The migel of Jehovah appeared to Manoah and his wife. And Manoah said unto his wife, We ^lall surely die, because we have seen God." See Judges xiii.
Such were the manifestations which God gave to liis people, till the time of the Judges of Israel.
We may now perceive on what authority Job was enabled to say, " I know that my Redeemer (now) livethy and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earths \\
The knowledge of the Redeemer of mankind was still further imparted to David, who spake of him as the Son and the (Messiah) anointed of Jehovah. " Jehovah hath said unto me, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee." § — What were David's views of his person, ^ve may understand from his subjoining, " Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little : blessed are all they that put their tj'ust in him ;"" ^ — For the saints of the Old Testament were not ignorant that " cursed is the man that trusteth in (mere) man;''"' and that, ^'■blessed is the man that trusteth in Jehovah!''' **
That David wrote the forty-fifth Psalm with reference to the expected Messiah, and not to Solomon, is abundantly proved from the Psalm itself. The language of the Psalm is not at all applicable to Solomon. He was not the man of war, who " girded his sword upon his thigh :" (v. 3.) — whose " right hand taught him ter7-ihle things :" (v. 4.) — whose " arrows were sharp in the hearts of the king's
* Jos. V. 13—15. t Jos. vi. 2. + Jud, vi. 12. || Job. xix. 26.
§ Psalm ii. 7. % Psalm ii. 12. ** Jer. xvii. 5.7.
DOCTUIN'E OF Tilt; TRINITY. 141
enemies :" or, " under whom the people fell." (v. 5.) — He was not remarkable for " loving righteousness," or, " hating iniquity." (v. 7.) — His " throne is (not) for ever and ever.' ('.-. G.) — His children were not " made princes in all the earth.""' (v. 16.) — Nor do " the people praise" him or his spouse, " for ever and ever." (v. 17.) — Yet these ai-e the terms in which David speaks of the subject of this Psahn. On the other hand, these terms are applicable to the Messiah. He is the " king," (v. 1.) set upon the holy hill of Zion. Compare Psal. ii. 6. He is " fairer than the chil- dren of men, grace is poured into his lips." (v. 2.) He is ^^ anointed with the oil of gladness above his fellows." Hhn " God hath blessed for ever and ever." (v. 2.) — Now in this Psahn, of which the Messiah is so clearly the subject, the writer, who had called the "king," the Son ()fGod, in his address to this " Ai»^'-," says, " Thy throne, O Gon, is for ever and ever." *
The IMcssiah Avas now known as the So)i of God, and his name was deemed a mystery. If the " angel Jehovah" said to Jacob, " Wherefore dost thou ask after my name .^" and to Manoali, " Why askest thou thus after my 7iame, seeing it is secret? (or wonderful,) Agur, perhaps with equal reference to the mystery of the incarnati07i, asks, " AVho hath ascended up into heaven, or descended .'' Who hath gathered the wind in his fists .'* Who hath bound the Avaters in a garment .'' Who hath established all the ends of the earth ? What is his name, and what is his Son's name, if thou canst tell .'^" "j* — Both are equally mysterious.
Isaiah, so often and so justly styled " the evangelical prophet," in prospect of the coming of the Messiah, breaks out, " Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and the government shall be upon his shoulder : and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, Tlie Father of the everlasting age. The Prince of' peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be
* Our arjumeut does not admit of our quoting, in tliis place, the tesli- luoiiy of the Author of the epistle to the Hehrews, who, however, cites the words of thib Psalui, as the words of God to ihe Son. f Prov. xxx. 4.
K 3
&
142 THK OllUnX OF THE
no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to estabhsh it with judgment and with justice, from henceforth even for ever ! The zeal of Jehovah of hosts will perform this." * Having spoken thus of the humiliation and exaltation, the humanity and the divi- nity of the Messiah, he returns to the same subject, in dif- ferent lanffuage. " There shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots, and the Spirit of Jehovah shall rest upon him. "h And in that day (says he) there shall be a root of Jesse which shall stand for an ensign of the people ; to it shall the Gentiles seek, and his rest shall be glorious. :j: — In that day thou shalt say, behold God is my salvation, I will trust (in such a Saviour) and not be afraid ; for the Lord Jehovah is my strength and my song, he also is become my salvation." \\ " It was impossible for a spiritual Jew to read this descrip- tion of the Messiah's peaceful kingdom, without seeing that this Root of Jesse, this Holy One of Israel, so great in the midst of Zion, was the same xoonderful Person whom the prophet had just before called the Son given and the mighty God;'"§ that he was that Jehovah who should become their Saviour.
The same prophet, introducing the liarbinger of the Messiah, exclaims, " 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. — And the glory of Jehovah shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together." ^
Again : " O Zion, that bringest good tidings — say unto the cities of Judah, Behold your God. Behold the Lord God will come with strong hand, and his arm shall rule for him : behold his reward is with him, and his work before him. He fihaWJeed his Jlock like a shepherd.^'' ** Who this Shepherd is, the Jews, without the New Testament, could understand. The prophet Ezekiel would inform them, " I will set one Shepherd over them, and he shall ^^(7 them,
* Isa. ix. (), 7. f Isa. xi. 1,2. J Isa. \i. 10. Ulsa.xii.
§ Fletcher's Rat. Viu. \ Isa. xl. ;5, f). ** isa. xl. •)— 11.
DUCTKiXE OK THE TIUNITY.
even my servant David, he shall ^'^d! them, and he shall be their Shephcrdr *
Jeremiah is the author of that direct testimony to the Divinity of the Messiah : — " Behold the days come, saith Jehovah, that I will raise unto David a righteous branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. In liisdays Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely : and this is his name whereby lie shall be called, Jehovah our Rightcousm'ss." •\- See page 97.
Zcchariah, speaking prophetically of the Messiah as the Shepherd of Israel, says, " Awake, O sword, against my Shepherd, and against the man that is my Fellow, saith the Lord ofJiosts.'''' \
Such are the testimonies which the writers of the Old Testament afford of the person and character of the Messiah. — If we enquire what they taught concerning the Holy Spirit, we shall find the outlines of the doctrine which we have already derived from the New Testament.
That in the Old Testament there is frequent notice of the Holy Spirit, is too obvious to need any proof. — As he is there denominated the Spirit of God, an enlightened Jew could entertain no doubt of his proper Divinity. Mr. G. has granted that it is as obvious that the Spirit of God is God, as that the spirit rfman is yuan. (See Lect. Vol. I. p. 123.) The Old Testament is not, however, witliout further proof of this. " The hand of the Lord God fell there upon me — and he (the Lord God) put forth the form of an hand, and tool' me by a lock of mine head, and the Spirit lift me up, between the earth and the heaven." || Here the same Being, who is denominated the Lord God, is also denominated the Spirit. Thus, in Judges xv. 14, it is expressly said, " The Spirit of the Loj-d came mightily upon him."" (Samson.) Yet when the Spirit departed from him, it is said, " He wist not that the Lord was departed from him." (v. 16. 20.) The Spirit of Jehovah, and Jehovah, are therefore one and the same Being.
To the Spirit of God the writers of the Old Testament,
* Ezck. xxxiv. t Jer. 23. h, 6. X Zech. xiii. 7. || Ezek. vii . 13.
144 THE OUIGIX OF THE
therefore, attribute the Divine perfections of omnipre- sence, omniscience, ax\A omnipotence. See pages 119, 120,121.
Hence, even the Old Testament introduces the Spirit of God as one of the Elohim to whom creation is ascribed. — " And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." * — " By his Spirit he hath garnished the hea~ vens^'' -f* — " The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life." \ — " Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, they are created : and thou re- newest the face of the earth." ||
We have now the true explanation of the Elohim wlio in the beginning made the heavens and the earth. " By the Word of the Lord were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the breath (Hcb. Spirit) of his mouth." §
This great subject is still further illustrated in the pur- posed work of redemption, as in the following passages : — " Hearken unto me, O Jacob, and Israel my called : — / am he ; I am Xhejiost, I also am the last. Mine hand also hath laid the foundatien of the earth, and my right hand hath spanned the heavens : Avhen / call unto them, they stand up together. — And now the Lord God and his Spirit hath sent ME." ^ The Jewish reader would perceive, not only the Divine character of the Speaker, but his mission by God and by his Spirit. In this passage, the distinction is, like what we have found in the New Testament, a per- sonal distinction. One person is the Speaker, Two others have sent him. — Again : " The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, (the Messiah, the anointed ;) because the Lord has anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek," &c. ** — Once more : " Seek ye out of the book of the Lord, and read — for my mouth it hath commanded, and his Spirit it hath gathered them." -f-f — " In these words, (savs Mr. Jones j there is one person speaking of the Spirit of another person."
Such are some of the many passages contained in the Old Testament, by which the doctrines under discussion have been gradually discovered. It is true, the Socinians have
* Gen. i. 2. f Job. xx. 30. tJobxxx.4. 1| Psalm civ. .30.
§ Psalm xxxiii. (i. f Isa. xlviii. 12— 16 **Isa. Ixi.l. f f Isa. xxxiv. 16".
i)0( TiiixK OK riih: TUiNiTr. 145
much to object ; and, in the course of this devehipcment, we have taken but httle notice of them. And it is equally true, that we also have much to say in confirmation of our own comments on these passages. Much useful light might have been cast on the subject of this chapter by comparing the Old Testament with the New. But sucli a measure, what- ever good purpose it might have answered, would have been a deviation from our present design. The preceding quota- tions have been made by way of appeal to the candour of the unprejudiced reader, in proof, that the doctrine, though not the ])hrajic, of the Trinit/j originated with Moses and the Prophets, and that the very doctrine of the preceding chap- ters is nearly, if not fully, maintained by a dispensation pre- ceding the Christian. The question now to be examined, is not, " What will a prejudiced Socinian object to the lan- guage of the Old Testament .?" or, " How will an enlight- ened Christian comment u})on it ?" But, " What was the light in which this part of divine revelation would strike a studious and unprejudiced Jew .'''"
" The Hebrew doctors supposed the first verse of Ge- nesis to contain some latent mystery. The Rabbi Ibba in- deed expressly says it does, and adds, This mystery is not to be revealed till the coming of the Messiah." *
" An eminent Jewish Rabbi, Simeon ben Joachi, in his comment on the sixth section of Leviticus, has these re- markable words : ' Come and see the mystery of the word Eloh'nn : there are three degrees, and each degree by itself alone, and yet notwithstanding they are all one, and joined together in one, and are not divided from each otlier.' *" -f-
" The Jewish Rabbi, Limborch, tells us, that in the word Elohim there are three degrees, each distinct hy itself, vet all one. Joined in one, and not divided from one another." I
" R. Bechai, a celebrated aiUhor among the Jews, dis- coursing of the w^ord Elohim, has these words : ' According to the Cabbalistical way, this name Elohim, is two words, namely, El him, that is, They are God. But the explana-
* Simpson on the Deity of Jesus, p. 352. f Dr. A. Clarke in loc. J Leslie's Short Method with the Deists.
146 THE ORIGIN OF THK
tion of the Jod is to be fetched from Eccles. xii. 1. Remem- ber thy Creators. He that is prudent will understand
it; " *
" The author of Midras Tillim, on Exodus xx. 5. says,
* I am the Lord, thy God, a. jealous God.'' Three aiiswering to the three by whom the world was made.'" -j-
The Chaldee paraphrase does undoubtedly represent the sense of the Jews in general, as it is their public interpreta- tion of scripture. What we find common and frequent in it, we must suppose to be the general opinion of that people. " Now it is certain that this Paraphrast doth often use memra, the Word of God, for Jehovah, God himself, and that especially with relation to the creation of the world. As Isa. xlv. 12. ' I made the earth,' the Chaldee tran- slateth, ' I by my Word made the earth.' And Gen. i. 27. we read, Et Creavit Deus hominem. ' And God created man;"* the Jerusalem Targum, Verhum Domini creavit hominem : ' The Word of God created man ;■" And most clearly. Gen. iii. 8. Audierunt vocem Domini Dei : ' They heard the voice of the Lord God;"" the Chaldee Para- phrase, Et audierunt vocem Verbi Domini Dei : And they heard the voice of t?ie Word of the Lord God.' " |
On the celebrated prophecy of Isaiah, (chap. ix. 6.) imiversally applied to the Messiah, the Chaldee Paraphrase says, " His name shall be called — God, a man enduring to eternity, Christ." — The Syriac says, " His name is called Admiration, and Counsellor, the most Mighty God of Ages.'''' — The Arabic : — " His name shall be called — the strong God." II In the Vatican copy of the Septuagint, this passage is evidently mutilated. There the Messiah is abridged of all his high titles, and is simply called, MeyaX'/is- 'Qov'kns txyyiXo^,
* the angel of the great counsel.' This is a comment, rather than a translation. There ai'e, however, several reasons for supposing that the Seventy originally translated this verse. " Eusebius (D. E. p. 336.) gives the Greek Version uncor- rupted, ' Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God."" " §
* Kidder's Demonstration of the Messiah, Part III. p. 81. f Ibid. p. 84.
J Tearson on the Creed, p. 117. || Simpson on the Deity of Jesus, p. %.
§ Simpson on the Deity of Jesus, p. I'S.
DOCTIUNK <)l-' THE TlllNn V. 1 -IT
The Jews attribute also the name Jehovah to the Mes- siah. " In tlie Scphcr Jkkarim, L. ii. c. 8. ' The Scrip- ture calleth the nanieof tlie Messias, Jehovah our nghicoua- Tiess.'' And Midrasch TilUm on Psahn xxi, ' God calleth the Messias by his oxen name, and his name is Jehovah ; as is said (Exod. xv. 3.) ' The Lord is a man of war, Jeho- vah is his name.'' And it is written of the Messias, (Jer. xxiii. 6.) ' And this is the name which they shall call him, Jehovah our righteousness.' Thus Echa Rabati, (Lam. i. 6.) ' AVhat is the name of the Messias ? R. Abba said, Jehovah is his name, as it is said, (Jer. xxiii. 6.) And this is the name wliich they shall call him, Jehovah our righte- ousness."' The same he reports of Rabbi Levi.''*' *
Such were the opinions of the Jews. Whether they were founded in truth, is not the present question. It is enough that they held such opinions, and that they derived them from Moses and the Prophets. — We proceed to the New Testament.
When Jesus had been baptized by John in Jordan, he " went up straightway out of the water: and lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him. And lo, a voice from heaven, saying, This is mij beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.''' t Having witnessed this introductory revelation of the Son of God, the Baptist " bare witness of him and proclaimed, saying, This was he of whom I spake. He that cometh after me is preferred before me, for he rcas before me. And of his fulness have all we (already) re- ceived, and grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came (always) by Jesus Christ. No man hath seen God at any time; the only-hegoiten San, •which is in the bosom qftlw- Father, he hath (always hitherto) declared him. — And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. And I knew him not : but that he that sent me to baptize with water, the .?ame said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit deseeding, and remaining on him, the
* rcai-ion on the Crccrl, p. 11?!. f M'ltt' •"• 1''j 1''-
148 THE ORU;iN OF THE
same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of Gocir *
The meaning of this phrase, " the Son of God,"" we must now examine. — Under the Christian dispensation, mere men, because they are " the offspring of God," and are " made in the hkeness of God," and because they are restored to the paternal favour and holy image of God, in Christ Jesus, are denominated " the sons ofGocV In the appellation given to Jesus Christ, there is, however, something by which he is distinguished from all others.
1. The sons of men are constituted the sons of God, through Mm. " As many as received h'lm^ to \hQxn.gavehe pozcer to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name, -f For ye are all the children of God, by faith in Christ Jesus."" J
2. They are made the sons of God by adoption : " pre- destinated to the adoption of children by Jesus Christ."" || He is begotten of the Father : " Jehovah hath said unto me. Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee."""* § He is therefore called God's ozvn or proper Son. " He that spared not rou iliw uiov, his ozo?i or proper Son."'"'
3. To distinguish him still further from all others, he is repeatedly styled the only-begotten Son. " God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son."" In Mr. G."'s opinion, this expression only means " well or best-beloved '^ in proof of which he observ^es, tliat " Isaac is called the " only-begotten Son of Abraham, who had an older son living at the time.'''' 5[ This answer is plausible, but not solid. " The promises"" which Abraham " had received," related to a son whom Sarah should bear to him. — " And God said (to Abraham), Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed ; — ^and I will establish my covenant with Mm for an everlasting covenant, and with Jiis seed after Mm.'''' ** In the Apostle's sense, therefore, Isaac was Abraham's oidy- begotten son : the only one in whom the promises could be fulfilled : the oidy son of his mother. And just so, the
* John i. 15—18, 32— IH. f John i. 12. J Gal. iii. 2f;. || Eph. i. 5. § Psalm ii. 7. ^ Vol. I. p. 339. ** Ccn. xvii. 15— I'J.
DO(^TniXE OF THE TRIXITV. It9
" on1i/J)Cgotten Son of God" is a Son su'i gcncr'is : the only one of that kind.
4. This truth our Lord has iUustrated, and this inter- pretation he has eouHrnied, when in alkision to himself he says, " Having yet therefore 07ie Son, liis well-beloved, he sent him also last unto them, saying. They will reverence my Son." *
5. He is therefore distino-uished from Moses and the prophets, as tlie Son of God. " God who spake unto the fathers by the prophctfi, hath in these last days spoken to us by his Son. f — Moses, verily, was faithful in all his liouse, as a servant ; but Christ as a Son over his own house." I
6. God's giving his Son, is made the measure of the divine benevolence and beneficence. " God so loved the world, that lie gave his only-begotten Son. || — He that spared not his own Son but delivered him up for us all, how sliall he not with him also freely give us all things P" § But if Jesus Christ be the Son of God, only in a sense in which mankind in general may become the sons of God, what illustration or proof does such a gift afford of the infinite benevolence or beneficence of the Father ?
7. The greatest possible blessings depend on our hclicv- ing that he is the Son of God. " AVho is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God ? ^ — Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God." ** Is it pro- bable that such privileges should be attached- to an acknow- ledgment that Jesus Christ was, in the common sense of the word, a child of the IMost High ?
8. Something extraordinary must be intended by the phrase, because he himself says, " No one knoweth the Son, but the Father." •f-f- And when Simon Peter ccmfessed, " Thou ai-t Christ, the Son of the living God, Jesus answered and said, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona ; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.'''' '!^l
*.Markxii.6. tHeh.i.1,2. ♦ Ilch. iii.5. fi.
II John lii. 16. § Rom. viii. .H2. ^ 1 John v. 8.
** 1 Juliii iv. 15. ft Alatt. xi. 27. XI Matt. xvi. 17.
150 THK ORI(;lN OF THK
These observations may at least authorize us to institute an enquiry into the particular meaning of this phrase.
Tlie Socinians uniformly take advantage of this appel- lation, and of many things which are affirmed concerning Jesus Christ, as "the Son of God," to point out and prove his " inferiority and subordination to the Father." After the manner of most Trinitarians, we have as uniformly an- swered their arguments by applying it to his human nature. (See pp. 76 — 82.) This reply is not an evasion, but is founded in truth, and accords with the declaration of the Angel to Mary : " that holy thing which shall be horn of thee shall be called the Son of God." * We now contend, that " that holy thing" which was " born of the vir- gin, was called " the Son of God,"" because it was united with the Divine Nature ; for after it was announced by John the Baptist, that Jesus is " the Son of God," it was always demonstrated by the manifestation of his Divine Perfections, and was the uniform inference which was drawn by believers from such manifestations.
When John had declared Jesus Christ to be the Son of God, the next day he pointed out " the Lamb of God" to Andrew and another of his disciples. — Andrew brought to Jesus his brother Simon Peter ; and Jesus, by shewing to Simon how perfectly he knew him, confirmed to him the testimony of Andrew. The day following, Jesus found Philip, who, being of the city of Andrew and Peter, had probably learned these things from them, and called him to be one of his immediate followers. Thus made acquainted with the character of Jesus, " Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph." When Nathanael's prejudice was vanquished, and he was coming " to see," Jesus confirmed the testimony of Philip, by demonstrating his omniscience. And Nathanael, " believing" because Jesus said unto him, I saw thee under the fig-tree, " answered and saith unto him. Rabbi, Thou art the Son of God, thou art the King of Israel." f — Thus, the faith of the Apostles was founded on
* Luke i. 35. f John i. 35 — 51.
DOt'TRIXK OK THE TKIXITV. 1.51
the testimony of John tlie Baptist, and confirmed, not by the testimony of Jesus, but by the evidence of his omnis- cience.
The next day lie confirmed tlieir faith by a manifestation of his omnipotence, when he turned the water into wine. " This beginnino- of miracles," says the Evangelist, " did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory [the glory of his omnipotence, and of his Divine Nature,] and his disciples believed on him :"* that is, they believed more firmly the testimony of John concerning him.
The man who was born blind, and whose eves our Lord had opened, had previously heard nothing of Jesus'* being the Son of God ; but having been the subject of so great a miracle, and hearing this great truth from Jesus himself, he believed the tcst'imoniij on the evidence of the miracle. In what sense he believed it, is obvious from the account Avhich the Evangelist John has given of him : " He said, Lord I believe, and xcorshlppcd him.^'-}- . The same inference was drawn from the same premises, and in the same manner, by the men who witnessed another of his miracles. " When they (Jesus and Peter) were come into the ship, the wind ceased. Then they that were in the ship came, and xcorsMpped him, saying. Of a truth tlioii art the Son of God^l
When Jesus said to Mary, the sister of Lazarus, " I am the resurrection and the life : [I raise the dead and support the living :] — Believest thou this .'*" — Mary answered, " Yea, Lord, I believe that thou art the CJirist, the Son of God."!! Thus, if others inferred that he is the Son of God from the manifestation of his omnipotence, Mary in- ferred his omnipotence from his being the Son of God.
The numberless miracles which Jesus wrouarht are re- corded in confirmation of this truth. " And many otlier signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, whicli •are not written in this book. But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God."§
* John ii. 11. t John ix. .38. J Matt. xiv. 32, .I'l. || John xi. 23—27. § John XX. 30, 31.
152 THE ORIGIX OF THE
From all these passages, it is obvious in what sense this phrase was understood in the days of our Lord's ministry. No one thought of his being the Son of God, until it was revealed. When his disciples witnessed his divine perfec- tions of omniscience or omnipotence, they accepted them as proofs of his Divinity, and consequently believed and ac- knowledged liim to be the Son of God. And when they acknowledged him to be the Son of God, as a proof that in so doing they acknowledged his Divinity, they wor- shipped him.
If further proof, that this phrase was then used to sig- nify proper Divinity, be necessary, we have it from the ad- versaries of Jesus, who plainly shew that in this sense it was generally understood.
1. " When the Tempter came to Jesus, he said. If thou be a Son of God, command that these stones be made bread."* He expected it should be proved that Jesus is the Son of God, by the manifestation of Divine perfections. And he received such evidence of the hnowledge of Jesus who called him by his name, and of the power of Jesus by whom he was perfectly discomfited, that the demons were forced to cry out, saying, " Thou art Christ, the Son of God."t
2. The Jews uniformly shew, that this was the idea which the phrase in question conveyed to them. — When, on one occasion, they persecuted Jesus, and sought to slay him because he had healed a man on the sabbath-day, he " answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also, that God was his jSiov, proper Father, making himself equal with God.'''\ It is scarcely necessary to observe, (1.) that, as Father and Son are correlative terms, by calling God his Father, (in connection with the assertion, that his works were such as the works of the Father,) he led the Jews to suppose that he meant to call God iS'jov zsar^a, his proper Father, and thereby made himself equal with God : — or (2.) that our Lord did not treat them as if they misunder- stood him, but went on to confirm the statement which he had already given.
* Matt. iv. ;^. t Luke iv, 41, + John v. 17, 18.
DOCTRINK OK THE TKINITY. 153
At another time, they said unto him, " Thou blas- pheniest,'''' and were about to stone him, " because lie said, / am the Son erf Gody * — They construed this expression into blasphemy, "because (said they) that thou, being a man, makcst thyself God." t — At a subsequent time, the Sanhe- drim were united in the same opinion. When Jesus had confessed himself to be " tJu; So7i ofGody"" the High Priest rent his clothes, saying. He hath spoken blasphemy : " and the scribes and elders said. He is guilty of death." J — And lastly, When he was crucified, they expected that if he were the Son of God he was omnipotent. Hence they said, " If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross." ||
Thus we find that the Divine perfections were manifested in Jesus Christ, as demonstrations of his being a Divine person. Mr. G. and his Socinian brethren affect to overlook tliis kind of e^ddence, and perpetually call for clear and posi- tive declarations of the Divinity of our Lord, from his omti mouth. By this manoeuvre a thovrmml witnesses are silenced, in the many divine miracles which he daily wrought among the people, and by which he " shewed forth his glory." Yet the manifestation of his Divine perfections was the most proper mean of establishing the belief of his Deity. Without such evidence the assertion of Jesus Christ must have passed for nothing. An impostor may give out, like Simon jNIagus, that he is " the great power of God ;" but he only who manifests the Divini' perfections, and does " the works of God," gives satisfactory proof of his Divinity. When " the Jews sought to kill our Lord, because — he said that God Avas his Father, making himself equal with God, — Jesus answered and said unto them. Verily, verily, I say unto you. The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do : for what things soever he doth, these also doth the Son likewise. — If I bear witness of my self, my witness is not true. There is another that beareth witness of me, and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true. Ye sent unto John, and he bare Avitness unto the truth. But I have greater witness than that of John, for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the
* John X. 32. 36. f v. 33. ♦ Malt. xxvi. 63—36. || Matt, xxvii. 40.
L
154 THE ORIGIN OF THE
same works that I do, bear witness of me. — And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me."" *
That we have not reasoned falsely on these premises, we have a decisive proof in the argument which Jesus Christ himself used. " Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanc- tified, and sent into the world. Thou blasphemest ; because I said, / am the Smi of God ? If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works ; that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.'''' -f- Here we see, that, in our Lord's opinion, his miraculous works evinced his union with the Godhead, and his union with the Godhead was what he alluded to in denominating himself the Son of God. The multiplied evidences of our Lord's divinity, derived from the miracles which, with Divine power, he wrought during the years of his public ministry, are supposed by the Socinians to be unsatisfactory, because the disciples them- selves were not thereby immoveably fixed in the belief of that doctrine. " When he was seized by men," says our op- ponent, " they all forsook hina and fled ; a demonstration as decisive as can possibly be given of the opinion they enter- tained of his person," :j: — This argument is the most futile that one could wish an adversary to advance. We know that the faith of the disciples, till the descent of the Holy Spirit, was exceedingly weak and unsteady. Their cowardice on this occasion was not " a decisive demonstra- tion" of their faith, but of their unbelief.
Whatever they had believed concerning him, whether, that he was equal with God, that he was the Son of God, or that he was the Messiah, — they now doubted. Hence, when, after a long conversation with him, they said, " Now we ar« sure that thou knowest all things, and needest not that any man should ask thee : by this we believe that thou earnest forth from God : — Jesus answered them. Do ye now believe ? Behold the hour cometh, that ye shall be scat- tered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone." || — But notwithstanding this their unbelief, and their desertion
« John V. 18, 19, 31—33; 36, 37. f John x. 36—38,
J Vol. II. p. 9. ' II John xvi. 30—32.
BOlTRINE Ol'- THE TKINITY. 155
of their Master, they had previously " trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel.''''
When he " who was made of the seed of David accord- ing to the flesh, was declared to be the Son of God with power, according' to tlie Sjm-it ofhoUness, by the resurrection from the dead," * then their faith became victorious, they openly acknowledged his Divinity, and no more deserted him or his cause.
Thomas, though the most obstinate in his unbelief, was the first to make confession of his subsequent faith. The demonstration of our Lord's Divinity was now complete, and constrained him to exclaim, " jMv Lord, and my God !"
Eut especially when they had received that Spirit whom Jesus had promised to them, who " spake not of himself but glorified "" the Saviour ; who should " guide them into all truth;" who should "take of the things" of Christ, and " shew them unto them :" and who should demonstrate to them that " all the Father hath'''' is his, — that the Fatlicr is in tlie Son and the Son in the Father, — then they did not, as Mr. G. has rashly asserted, " invariably stijle Mm a man : " -j- but unanimously declared his Divinity. Matthew announced him to be " God with us."" I Peter denommated him " Lord of all." |] Paul asserted, to the Romans, that he " is over all, God blessed for evermore ;" § — to the Corinthians, that " to us there is one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things,^ — and that God zcas in Christ recon- ciling the world unto himself;" ** — to the Ephesians, that he is " the fulness of him that fiUeth all in all, that he is Christ and God ;" -f-f- — to the Philippians, that " he was in the form of God, and thought it not robbery to be equal with God ;" H — to the Colossians, that " it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell ; || || that in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily ; §§ that by him were all things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers :
•Rom. i., 3,1. t Vol. II. p. 9. t Matt. i. 28. || Acts x. .36. §Rom.ix. 5. 1[ 1 Cor. viii. G. ** 2 Cor. V, 19. ft l^ph. i.2:i. Eph. v. 5. :+ Phil. ii. 6. till Col. i. 19. §§ Col. ii. y.
156 THE ORIGIN OF THE
all things were created by him and for him ; and (that) he is before all things, and by him all things consist ;" * — to Timothy, that God was manifest in the flesh;" t — to Titus, that " the great God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ, gave himself for us ;" J — ^to the Hebrews, that " by him God made the worlds, that he is upholding all things by the word of his power, \\ that unto the Son he (the Father) saith. Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever, § and that outos he was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house. For every house is builded vsso rtvos, by some one, but he that built all things is God." ^ John asserted, that he " was God, and that all things xvere made hy hiniy and without him was not any thing made that laas made ; ** that he is the true God, and eternal life-'^f f Jude spake of him as " the only wise God, our Saviour ; — the a>?2y Governor God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.^iJ::}:
While they thus unanimously speak of his Godhead, they attribute to him those infinite perfections which belong to no being but the Deity. They represent him as being *' before all things ;"|||1 as having " all power, in heaven and on earth ;"§§ and therefore being in heaven and on earth : as having in him " all the treasures of wisdom and of know- ledge ;" and as " able to save and to destroy." ^^ See p. 73. His Godhead, therefore, can be denied, only on prin- ciples which separate between the Divine perfections, and the Divine nature. See pp. 74, 75.
On this ascription of Divinity and Divine perfections to Jesus Christ, the whole system of apostolic doctrine is founded : and the latter so necessarily implies the former, that all must stand or fall together. — For instance :
1. According to the apostles, we are to behold " the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ."" *** But how can God be seen in him, if God be not in him ? or how can Jesus Christ display to us the glory of the Divine perfec- tions, unless he possess them ?
«Col. i. 16, 17. 1 1 Tim. iii- 16- X Tit. iL 13. 1| Heb. i. 2. 3, § Heb. i. 8.
^ Heb. iii. 3, 14. **Johu i. 1. 3. ft 1 John i- 20. H Jude 4. 25. nil Col. i. 17. §§ Matt.xxviii.28. U^ James iv. 12. *«* 2 Cor. iv. 6.
DOCTHIN'E OF THE TnI^•ITr. 157
2. The Apostles refer us to hiin for pardon, assuring us that he is " exalted a Prince and a Saviour to give forgive- ness of sins." * Who can forgive sins but God only ? How then can Jesus forgive sins if he be not God ? Must not he who dispenses pardons, be supreme ? Must not God be in Christ, to reconcile the world to himself?
3. The apostles attribute to him the new creation. Of this new creation man is the principal subject. He is created " after God, in righteousness and true holiness." -f- But are not wisdom, power, and goodness, equal to what were exerted in making man in the Divine image, necessary to this purpose ? Who but God can re-produce what once was the perfection of the work of God .''
4. The Apostles inform us that " whoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved ;":[ and address them- selves to the Christian world as to " those that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord." || But to what purpose is he invoked, unless he be omnipresent, .and can in every place hear and answer, — omniscient, and can discern all our wants, — omnipotent, and therefore able to remove or prevent all the evils which we deprecate, and to bestow all the divine blessings which we supplicate ?
5. The Apostles teach us to expect that he " shall change our vile bodies, and fashion them like unto his own glorious body.'" How can he effect this, with power less than that which at first " created man out of the dust of the earth ;"" or unless he were "able to subdue even all things to himself .?"§
6. The Apostles assert that it is he " who shall judge both the quick and the dead." ^ But how can he judge mankind, unless he have that power which God exclusively asserts, ** the power to search the human heart ; unless he be " he that searcheth the heart and trieth the reins of tlie children of men, to give unto every one as his work shall be .?■" How can he judge between God and man, unless he know, what none but God can know, — the infinite perfec- tions of the divine nature ? Without this, how can he know what is due to those perfections, or what is due from them ?
• Acts V. 31. fEph. iv. 24. ♦ Rom. x. 13. || 1 Cor. i. 2.
§ Phil. iii. 21. ^ 2 Tim. iv. 1. •• Jer. xvii, 10.
l3
158 THE ORIGIN or THE
Thus is the Divinity of Jesus Christ everywhere inter- woven with the apostohc system of doctrine.
But Mr. G. confidently affirms, that St. John, who " was left to censure whatever opinions arose contrary to those taught by Jesus and his Apostles," * has censured none but those of the Gnostics who denied the proper humanity of Jesus Christ. The question of the true origin and charac- ter of the Ebionites, at whose errors also, both the Gospel and the first Epistle of St. John are generally supposed to have been levelled, we leave for the Ecclesiastical Histo- rians to determine. On this subject the reader will do well to consult Bishop Horsley's Letters to Dr. Priestley. Whatever the Ebionites were, St. John's Gospel begins with the eternity and Divinity of the Word ; which he asserts in such plain terms that Mr. G. is forced to concede, pro tempore, that " the Word was no other ihan God him- self." -f* As the pre-existence and Divinity of Jesus Christ are thus asserted in the beginning of that book, the proofs of those doctrines make up the substance of it. The Evangelist having thus asserted that the Eternal and Divine *' Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us," he subjoins, " And we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only-begot- ten of the Father." ;j: He then proceeds to shew how his glory was seen, in all the testimonies concerning him, and in all his sayings and miracles, by which his Divine nature or his Divine perfections were manifested. All these, he pro- fesses, he wrote, " that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.'''' || This declaration of his purpose is immediately connected with the confession of faith which Thomas made, (My Lord and My God I) our Lord's appro- bation of it, and his benediction on those who should believe, like him, on the testimony of his Apostles. It is true, a So- cinian can see no Divinity implied in that phrase, " the Son of God.''' When his prejudice is removed, he will see that St. John in his first Epistle, has not censured the Gnostics only, who denied our Lord's humanity, but those also who denied his Messiahship and his Divinity. On the one hand he has indeed said, " Every spirit that confesseth not that
* Vol. II. p. 10. t Vol. I. p. 197. : John i. 14. |lJolmxx.3I.
nOCTRIXF. Cl^ TITK TIUXITY. 159
Jesus Christ is coino in tiie Hesh is not of Gotl, and tliis is that spirit of aut'ichnst, whereof you have heard, tliat it should come." * But, on tlie other hand, lie has also said, " Now are there man// antichr'tsfs. — They went out from us, — that they might be made manifest, that they were not all of us. — Who is a liar, but he that denicth tliat Jcsns is tlw Christ ? he is ani'ichnst that denieth the Father and the Son.'''' -f- " WhosoeA'er shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwellcth in him and he in God. J — Who is he that overcomoth the world, but he that belicveth that Jesus is the Son of God.? II — These things have I written unto you, [not merely to shew that Jesus Christ was a real man, but] that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God." § And that this design might not be misinterpreted, he con- cludes that Epistle with these words, in which he declares the true Deity of the Son of God : " We know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding that we may know him that is true ; and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life." %
The Holy Spii'it is never in the sacred scriptures deno- minated either di person, or God the Holy Gliost. Our Lord, however, in speaking of him, often gave him the strongest distinct and personal characters ; and to his authority, on this subject, we have made our appeal. (See pp. 127, 128.) He also denominated the Holy Spirit, " the Spirit of God," (Matt. xii. 28.) and by that appellation indicated his proper Divinity. Now this is precisely the doctrine on which we insist.
On the whole : After Thomas had addressed Jesus Christ as his Lord and his God, and had been commended in the presence of his brethren for thi.= confession of his faith, our Lord gave commandment to his disciples to "teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."** This was the sum- mit of what our Lord taught to his disciples, and this insti- tution was a summary of the instruction which he had pre-
* 1 John iv. 3. f 1 John ii. 18—22. J 1 John iv. 15. || 1 John v. 5. § 1 John V. 13. •]' 1 John v. 20. *• Matt, xxviii. 19.
16.0 THE ORIGIN OF THE
viously given to them. He did not say that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are three; but he did not make it impiety for us to count them. It was not necessary to teach that three are three. He did not say, " These three are one ;"" or that the Father, the Son, or the Holy Ghost, is God ; but he appointed that, by a religious rite, the faithful shall be devoted to them, though he had also taught that " the Lord our God is one Lord, and that him only we should serv e."
According to this institution, by which the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, are held forth as the one object of the Jfiith and obedience of the Christian Church, the Apostles initiated every believer into this doctrine. And this doctrine, as well as the baptismal vow which was found- ed on it, they perpetuated by a form of benediction which is a counterpart of the form of baptism : " The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the commu- nion of the Holy Ghost be with you all."
In this simple form, this great subject was left by Christ and his Apostles. It would be arrogance to suppose, that any addition which has been made to it is an improvement. The religious controversies of some of the first ages, intro- duced a phraseology to which the sacred writers, we find, were perfect strangers. Such an unscriptural phraseology, a Bible Christian might easily be persuaded to relinquish, if the sacrifice were to be made in favour of " the truth as it is in Jesus." But the Socinians prohibit a recantation of the former, by identifying it with the latter ; and almost vindicate the propriety of the phraseology, by using the same weapons against both. The cause of truth would not have stood on a firmer basis, if the technical terms of the schools had turned out to be those of Christ and his Apos- tles. To the word Trinity it would then be objected, that " it does not convey the idea of three persons.'''' To the phrase Trinity in Unity, — that " it may express a threefold distinction in one Being, very different from the personal distinction which Trinitarians maintain." Had the Apostles spoken of three persons in one God, it would have been re- presented, " that these words, literally understood, suggest
DOCTRIXE OF THE TRIN'TTV. 161
a contradiction ; that three persons are three beings ; that three beings cannot subsist in one being ; and that, therefore, the language of the writer must be understood as ' highly ^figurative.'''''' If the sacred writers had appUed to Jesus Christ tlie scholastic appellation, " God the iS'on," — it would have been very shrewdly observed, " that the word Son in- dicates a subordinate relation, and that therefore the phrase is a denial, rather than an assertiim, of his supreme God- head." And lastly, Had the phrase God the Holy Ghost been used in scripture, to any argument founded upon it it could easily have been answered, either (1.) " that this is a rhetorical figure, by which only the abstract porcer, energif^ or operation of God is meant :" in proof of which the follow- ing passage would be cited, " the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the pozcer of the Highest shall overshadow thee." Or, (2.) " that by this periphrasis, God simply is meant ; for " God is a Spirit," and he is a Holy Spirit. ' By God the Holy Ghost, therefore, is meant, God tcho is a Holy Spirit.'' " At this rate, no terms of human invention will serve to silence a thorough Unitarian. But Mr. G. knows that, if the plain, direct, and obvious meaning of the sacred writers be allowed to be their true meaning, the doctrine of the preceding pages will want no scholastic terms for its support.
Having shewn that the language of sacred scripture is such as sufficiently accounts for the origin of the Trinitarian doctrines, it is not very necessary to seek their origin in the volumes of Ecclesiastical History. After this, to enter, with the Socinians, into a discussion of the opinions of the early Christians, cannot justly be demanded ; and, if not done with caution, would be to betray the cause of truth, by removing it from its proper foundation. In this discussion, the question is. What is the doctrine of the Old, and of the New Testament .'' The sacred writers lie open to all ; whereas the Christian Fathers are known to comparatively few. Hence, an appeal to the former may be generally considered in the light of an argument which carries convic- tion to every honest mind ; but an appeal to the latter is, in most cases, little better than a naked assertion, to ascertain
162
THE ORIGIN OF THE
the truth of which the reader must depend on the judgment and integrity of the writer. The former are incomparably the best authorities. Their credit is justly established on the basis of divine inspiration ; while that of the latter is often at the -best but dubious. The first age of the Chris- tian Church produced but few writers whose works have descended with unquestionable proof of their genuineness ; and of those few none have written professedly on the sub- jects now under discussion. The consequence is, that little satisfaction is to be derived from their testimony ; and every man feels himself at liberty to accommodate their language to his own pre-conceived opinion. This fact is confirmed by Mr. G.'s Lectures, in which, to prove, that the mere hu- manity of Jesus Christ was maintained by them, he has been able only to cull a few passages such as the writings of any modern Trinitarian would plentifully afford, to prove that they believed his proper humanity : in which he has cited certain expressions indicative of the distinction and relation between the Father and the Son, such as Athanasius him- self would not have rejected : * but in which he has exhi- bited, from those Fathers, nothing which has the most dis- tant appearance of a denial of supreme Divinity to Jesus Christ. The few passages of those early writers, which give countenance to a doctrine on which they were not pro- fessedly writing, either are torn in pieces on the rack of criticism, or, because other passages of a similar kind have been interpolated, are cancelled as interpolations. If the scriptures themselves do not afford satisfactory evidence of the doctrines which they contain, the case is therefore des- perate. When we descend to later ages, we meet with wri- ters enow on these subjects ; but their testimony is not ad- mitted, because they were not the immediate disciples of the Apostles. But if their testimony were admitted, and their scholastic terms were canonized, the men who can set aside the testimony of the Apostles, and make the more appropri- ate terms of Scripture speak their own language, can, with equal ease, enlist the metaphysical Fathers of the fourth
* The answers already given to his citations from scripture on the humanity of Christ, are equally applicable to those from the Christian Fathers.
DOCTRIXK OF THF. TUTNITY. ICS
century under the banner of Socinus, and convert the Nicene, and even the Athanasian creed into evidence in favour of their cause. But if we, on the other hand, could defend the doctrines of the Trinity by hicid and appropri- ate quotations drawn from the writings of all the Christian Fathers from Clement to Athanasius, unless we coidd prove tliem from Christ and his Apostles, all our authors must rank in the list of heretics.
These reasons for not resting the question on any but scriptiu'al authority, may suffice. It is not designed, how- ever, to insinuate that the primitive church was either Unitarian or neutral. While we dislinguisli between the words of human wisdom, and the truth of God, we may have sufficient proof that the primitive church was what we call Trinitarian.
Clemens, bishop of Rome, was an eminent Christian writer of the first century, and one who had conversed with the Apostles. Mr. G. has quoted from him the principal passages, among which are the following : — 1. One in which he calls Jesus, the Son of God. " Thus saith the Lord, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee." * — 2. Another, in which, speaking of Jacob, he says, " From him (sprang) the Lord Jesus according to the jlesh ;" f words which, without a Socinian comment, imply, that in another respect, Jesus Christ did not spring from Jacob. This scriptural phrase (according to the flesh) indicates that Jesus Christ was not merely human : for, (1.) Where is it applied, in a similar manner, to any mere man .^ (2.) In the above passage, Clemens speaksof the Priests andLevites assprino-- ing from Jacob; but does not add, as in the case of our Lord, " according to the jleshT (3-) St. Paul has pointed out the true sense of this pliB&se in that antithesis in which he says, " Jesus Christ was made of the seed of David, according to the flesh ; but the Son of God, according to the Spirit of holiness.'" | — 3. A third, in which, speaking of Jesus Christ, he says, " He came not in the pomp of pr'de and arrogance, although he had it in his po:cer, but in humi- lity.*'"'— " ]\Iore ancient copies (those which Jerome used,)
* Vol. II. p. 47. t Vol. II. p. 48. : Rom. i. 3, 4.
164
THE ORIGIN OF THE
instead of xxizsip ^uvocyawi, ' although he had in his power,' had xaizjep zjavrac Styva/x-evor, 'although he had aZZ thing's in his power.' The expressions clearly imply that, ere he came, he had the potver to choose, and that all things were in his power :"" * i. e. both his pre-existence and his omnipotence.
Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, was a disciple and familiar friend of the Apostles. His short Epistles are replete with testimonies of the pre-existence and Divinity of Jesus Christ. It is not necessary for us to attempt a vindication of their genuineness against the cavils of Socinians. The reader may consult, on this subject, Dr. Horsley's Letters to Dr. Priestley. If those Epistles are not genuine, they cannot be produced against us. If they are genuine, they are evidence in our favour. The following passages may suffice to illustrate their general tenor. — (1.) On the pre- existence of Christ. " Who was with the Father before all ages, and appeared at the end of the world." •}- — (2.) On the two-fold nature of Christ. " Of the race of David accord- irig to tliejlesh, but the Son of God according to the will and power of God." t— (3.) Of the Divinity of Christ. " I glorify God, even Jesus Christ.'''' || — (4.) Of the xoorship of Christ. " Praf/ to Christ for me, that by the beasts I may be found a sacrifice to God." § — (5.) Of the Trinity. " Be ye strengthened in the concord of God, enjoying his insepa- rable Spirit which is Jesiis Christ?'' ^
Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, was a disciple of St. John. In his Epistle to the Philippians, speaking of Jesus Christ, he says, " Whom every living creature shall worship." ** The following passage, in which he prays to Jesus Christ, and calls him the Son of God, (a term which, as we have shewn, indicated a Divine Person,) is quoted by Mr. G. : "The Son of God, Jesus Christ, build you up in faith," -f-f* &c. — " When he was at the stake, he finished his prayer with these words : — ' For this, and for all other things, I praise thee, I bless thee, I glorify thee, by the eternal and heavenly High Priest, Jesus Christ, thy beloved Son ; with
* Horsley's Letter, p. 131. f Ad. Mag. sec. 5. J Ad. Smyr. sec. 5.
II Ad. Smyr. sec. 1. § Ad. Rom. sec. 4. ^ Ad. Mag. sec. 13.
•» Sect. 2. ft Epis, to Phil. Sect. 12.
DOCTBINK OK THE TRINITY. 165
wluym, to thee, and the Hol^ Spirit, be glory both now, and to aU succeeding ages. Amen." *
Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons, was a disciple of Poly carp. He says, " We shew that the Word, existing in the begin- ning zvith God, united himself to tfte work of his axon haftdb; when he became a man capable of suffering :" "f — Again : " To this purpose our Lord came to us, not so as lie might have come, but so as we might be able to behold him ; for he might have come to us vii his own unspeakable glory, but we should not have been able to endure the magnitude of hig glory. ^ — The scripture (says he) is full of the Son of God's appearing, sometimes to talk and eat with Abraham ; at another time t« seek Adam ; at another time to bring down judgment upon Sodom ; then again to direct Jacob in the way ; and again to converse with IMoses out of the bush. II — The Father of our Lord Jesus manifests and reveals himself to all, to whom he is at all revealed, by his Word who is his Son. For they know the Father, to whom- soever the Son will reveal him. Now the Son, co-existing always with the Father, reveals the Father of old, even always Ji-om tJie beginning, to angels and archangels, and powers and dominions, and to men :"" § — He adds, " Every knee should bow to Christ Jesus, our Lord and God, and Saviour and King, according to the good pleasure of the invisible Father. ^ — The Father — by his own Word and Spirit, makes, governs, and gives being to all things." ** — " For his Word and his Wisdom, the Son and the Holy Spirit, are always with him ; by whom, and with whom, he made all things freely, and of his own accord, to whom also he spake in these words, Let us make man in oicr image and likeness.''' -j-f"
. Justin Martyr, a Christian Apologist, wrote about tlie year 140. He says, " But the Son of the Father, even he who alone is properly called his Son, the Word which was with him before the creation, because by him he in the be- ginning made and disposed all things."JJ &c. — And again :
• Martyr, of Poljc. sec. 14. f Lib. iii.cap.20. J Adv.HaBret. lib.iv.cap.74. II Lib. iv. cap. 23. § Lib. ii. cap. 55. H Lib. I cap. 2.
••Lib.i.cap.22.scc.l. ft Lib. i. cap. 37. JjApol.
166 THE ORIGIN OF THE
*' But this Being who was really begotten of the Father, and proceeded from him, did, before all creatures were made, exist with the Father, and the Father conversed zoith /Mm-^t Once more : " God, and his only-begotten Son, together with the Spirit, we worship and adore.";}:
Athenagoras was another Christian Apologist, who wrote in the second century. Speaking of the Son, he says, ** he is to the Father as the first offspring : not as something made. For God, being an eternal intelligence, himself from the beginning had the Logos in himself, being eter- nally rational."||
Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, was also a Writer, of the second century, in the defence of Christianity. Ad- dressing himself to Autolycus, he says, " It was to no other that he said, ' Let us make, than to his own Word, and to his own Wisdom."" Again : " The three days which pre- ceded the creation of the luminaries, were types of the Trinity, r^izSos:, of God, and of his Word, and of his WisD0M.'"§ — The passage just quoted from Irenseus, shews that by " his Word and his Wisdom," the writers of this age meant " the Son, and the Holy Spirit."
Clemens of Alexandria, an eminent writer of the second century, says, " The Son of God — ^is always every where, and contained no where : all mind, all light, all eye of his Father, beholding aU things, hearing all things, knowing all things." And again : " Ignorance cannot affect God, him that was the Father's counsellor before the founda- tion of the world."^
Tertullian is the last writer of this century to whom we appeal. The following passage is translated from his Trea- tise de Prosscriptiane, by Dr. Priestley, and acknowledged by him to contain the Catholic Faith. The Rule of faith *' by which we are taught to believe, that there is but one <jOD, and this no other than the Maker of the world, who produced every thing out of nothing, by his own Word then first sent down : that that Word was called his Son : that he appeared variously in the name of God, (i. e.
t Dial, cum Tryph. + Apol. || Ilorsley's LeUers, p. 59. § Ad Autolyc. p. 114. ^ Stom. lib. vii. cap. 2.
DOCTRIXE OF THE TRINITY. 107
being called Jeliovah) to the Patriarchs : that he was after- wards conveyed, by the Si'irit and power of God the Fa- ther, into the Virgin Mary : that he was made flesh in her womb, and from her appeared in the person of Jksus Christ.''"'*
That some should be dissatisfied with the terms Trinity, Economy, &c. which began to be invented and adopted in the times of Tertullian, as Mr. G., quoting that Author, has specified,*!" is not matter of wonder. The frequent dis- cussion of these subjects led to the adoption of compendious terms and phrases, which, however proper, might easily give offence, especially as Theodotus the tanner of Byzan- tium was then preaching at Rome the Unitarian doctrine of the mere humanity of Jesus Chnst.;|: We have not, how- ever, undertaken to vindicate these scholastic terms, but the scriptural truth, with which, therefore, they are not to be identified.
* Remarks on Mr. Badcock's Review, p. 18. -f- Vol. II. p. 76. X Dr. Horsley to Dr. Priestley, Let. xiv. sec. 6.
( 168 )
CHArTER IX.
Of the scriptural n^e of the Doctrine of the Trinity.
However the prying curiosity of speculative minds may wish to extract from the scriptures a theory of the Trinity, the sacred books will afford them no satisfactory instruction on that mysterious subject, abstracted from its practical use. A careful perusal of the Old and the New Testament may soon convince the reader, that those books are intended to humble the pride of the human understanding, and to amend the heart. Let no one therefore imagine that his views of the subject are correct and scriptural, if he do not enter into the spirit and design of the sacred writers, and study the mysterious relation of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, in the light of that practical use with which it is always connected, from which it can never, with- out detriment, be disjoined, and for the sake of which it is revealed. The following may serve to exemplify the use which the sacred writers make of it.
" God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting hfe." * To produce and " prepare a body" for the Son, " the Holy Spirit came upon the virgin, and the power of the Highest overshadowed her." The Son obediently accepted the Father''s commission, and said, " A body hast thou prepared me. Lo, I come to do thy will, O God !" f He " came forth from the Father, and came into the world." J Thus, " when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons."" ||
• John iii .16. f Heb. x. 5, 7. J John xvi.28. || Gal. iv.o, 6.
DOCTRINE OF THE TRTXTTV. 169
The Father acknowlcd^vd tlie Sox, and while " the Holy Ghost descended upon '■■ the latter, " a voice came from heaven which said, Thou art wy Son, in thkk / am well })k'ased.'"* The attention of the human race was called, by the Father, to the Son, when a voice proceeded from the excellent glory, " This is my beloved Son, hear ye him.f — It pleased the Father that in his dear Son should all fulness" of the Spirit " dwell.''J When therefore " the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten [Son] of the Fa- tlier, full of grace and truth.""]! Anointed with all the ful- ness of the Holy Ghost, the Son went forth, declaring to mankind the Father. He, whom God had sent, spake the words of God ; for " God gave not the Spirit by mea- sure to him.§ The Spirit of the Lord (said he,) is upon ME, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor : he hath sent me to heal the broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord."^ Speaking the words of the Father, and delivering the Father's command- ments, the Son,** by the Spirit of God, wrought divine miracles, and confirmed the Father's word, by doing the works of the Father ; " that the Father might be glorified in the Son. — My Father worketh hitherto, (said he,) and I work. — The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seetli the Father do ; for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. For as the Father raiseth up the dead, even so the Son quickeneth whom he will ; that all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Fa- ther ; for he that honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father."tt
To " redeem us to God by his blood, the Son, by the eternal Spirit, offered himself without spot to God,''^ll thus ' making " himself an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelhng savour fJlH And the Father by the
* Luk iii. 21, 22. t Luke i:;.35. + Col. i. If). || John i. 14.
§ Johu iii. M. ^\ Luke iv. 18. «» John xii. 4!). ff John v. 17—23.
;:Heb. ix. 14. |||I Eph. iv. 2.
M
170 THE SCIllPTURAL USE OF THE
Spirit (Rom. v, 24. viii. 11.) " raised the Son from the dead, for our justification."
The Father " exalted the Son to his own right hand, and glorified him with his own self, with the glory which he had with him before the world was."* The Son " ever liveth to make intercession, and is able to save to the utter- most all that come to God by him."-|* He " prays the Fa- ther that he may give us another Comforter, even the Spirit of truth. ";[: He has ascended up on high, and received gifts for men, that the Lord God (by the Spirit) may dwell among them.|| " Behold I (says the Son) send [the Spirit] the promise of my Father upon you.§ — This Jesus hath God raised up. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the pro- mise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this."^
" The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son. For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself, and hath given him authority to execute judgment also.** — God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ.-f-t" — When therefore the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, taking ven- geance on them that know not God,"j:[: and shall have pro- nounced the sentence of final acquittal, " Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you ;'' when the off'ering up of the nations shall be accepted, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost : when he shall have put all enemies under his feet ; — he " shall deliver up the king- dom to God, even the Father, and the Son also himself shall be subject unto him that put all things under him, that GoD may be all in all."|]||
From the various combinations of this mysterious eco- nomy, all our blessings, but especially the blessings of our redemption and salvation, flow.
1. Mankind are ignorant of their Maker. " Verily he is a God who hideth himself.§§ — No man hath seen God
* John xvii. 5. f Heb. vii. 26. + Joho xiv. 17. || Psalm Ixviii. 18.
Eph. iv.7,8. § Luke xxiv. 49. ^Acts ii. 3.3. ** John v. 22, 27.
tt Rom. ii. 16. ++ 1 Thess. 1. 8. |||| 1 Cor. xv. 24—28. §§ Isa. xlv. 15.
DOCTRIXr. Ill' TIIK TItlXtTV. 171
at any time ; but tlie only-hegottcn Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. * — Xo man knoweth the Son but the Father ; neither knoweth any man the Father save the Son ; and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him." f Again, on the other hand : " The things of God knoweth no man but the Spirit of God. ^ — No man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. || — But when the Comforter is come, (says the Son of God,) whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me. § — I will pray the Father ; and he shall give you another Comforter, even the Spirit of truth. — At that day, ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you."^ — When " the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, gives unto them the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, in the knowledge of him, so that the eyes of their understanding may be enlightened ; " ** then they see the Son, who is the express image of the Father's person, and " seeing the Son, they see the Father :" -f-f* then they " know the Son, and know the Father also." H Thus, " God who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, shineth in theu' hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ :" || || And thus, " with open face, beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, they are changed into the same image, from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord."§§
2. " All have sinned, and come short' of the glory of God, ^^ and are by nature the children of Avrath." *** But the Son has, " by the grace of God, tasted death for every man.-f-f-f* — He was delivered [todeath] for our offences, and raised again from the dead, by the glory of the Father, for our justification. :]::I::|:^ — God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself. |{{{|| — By him we believe in God, who raised him up from the dead, that our faith and hope might be in God. §§§ — Therefore being j ustified by faith, we have
* John i. IH. fJohuxi. 27. + 1 Cor. ii. 14. || 1 Cor. xii. 3.
§ John XV. 26. ^ John xiv. 16, 20. «♦ E|.h. i. 18. ft Ji>hii xiv.y.
+ + John xiv. 7. |||| 2 Cor. iv. 6. §§2 Lor. iii. 18. %*i\ Roni.iii.2:5.
**ȣph.ii.3. ttt Heb. ii. 1). U: Rom.iv.2:).vi.4. ||||||2Cor.v. I'J.
§§§ 1 Pet. i.21.
m2
172 THE SCRIPTURAL USE OF THE
peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ ; and the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given to us. * — They are to the praise of his [the Father's] glory, who trust in Christ ; in whom, after having believed, they are sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise, -f* — They are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus ; and because they are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into their hearts, crying Abba, Father ! Wherefore they are no more servants, but sons ; and if sons, then heirs of God through Christ, | — The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, according to his abundant mercy, hath now begotten them again unto a lively hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away. || — The God of hope fills them with all joy and peace in believing, that they may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost." §
3. " Without Christ, mankind are without God in the world. ^ — If we draw nigh unto God, he will draw nigh to vis. ** — Now no man cometh unto the Father, but by the Son. -f-f — Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father. H — No man, however, can come to the Son, except the Father, who hath sent him, draw him :" || || but drawn by the Father to the Son, " through him [the Son] we have an access by the Spirit unto the Father-"" §§ — The Father communicates himself to us through the Son, and by the Holy Spirit. " By one Spirit, we are all baptized into one body, and have been all made to drink into one Spirit." ^ ^ Then are we the mystical " body of Christ, and members in particular. *** — The Father of glory hath made him [the Son] the head over all to the church, which is the body of him, [who is] the fulness of him that fiUeth all in all." -|"f"f- Mystically united with this glorious head, in whom as his " dear Son, it pleased the Father that all fulness should dwell, HI of his fulness all we receive, and grace for grace." |] || || Now therefore, " There is one body,
* Rom. V. 1.5. t Eph. i. 12, 13. + Gal. iii. 26.iv. 6, 7. 1| 1 Pet. i. 3,4.
§ Rom. XV. 13. ^ Eph. ii. 12. «* James iv. 8. f f John xiv.6.
++lJohnii.23. 1111 John vi. 44. §§Eph. ii. 18. ^1[ I Coi-.xii.l3.
•**lCor.xii.27. ftt Kph-i- 17,22,23. JU Col. i. 10. 111||| Jolin i. lb'.
DOCTHINF. OK THK TltlN'lTY. 173
and one Spirit, even as we arc called in one hope of our calling. One Lord, one faith, one baptism. One God and Father of all, who is above all, and throiigli all, and in you all. * — Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ : f — to whom coming, as unto a living- stone, ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house. I — Jesus Christ himself being the cliief corner-stone, on whom ye are builded together for an habitation of God, through the Spirit. |] — For this cause, (savs St. Paul,) I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jksus Ciiuist, that he would grant you to be strengthened with might by the Spirit in the inner man, that Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith : that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend, with all saints, what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height ; and to knovv- the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God. § — Our Fellowship is with the Father, and Avith his Son Jesus Christ," ^ by the . communion of that Spirit. " I "vvill pray the Father, (says the Son,) and he shall give you the Spirit of truth ; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. At that day, ye shall know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you. ** — Tluis, the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, are with us.''"' ft
Such is the manner in which the sacred writers have de- livered to us the doctrine of the Trinity. That doctrine is never abstracted from the plan of human redemption, but inextricably interwoven with it. As the foundation cannot be destroyed without the ruin of the whole superstructure, it is consistent enough in the Socinians, to attempt at once the destruction of the whole fabric.
* Eph. iv. 4— G. t 1 Cor. iii. II. J 1 Pet. i, 4, 5. I! Eph. ii. 20, 22.
§ Ej.b. iii. 14— 19. ^ IJohu i. 3. •»Jolmxiv. 16— 20. tt2Cor.xiii.l4.
M O
( 174 )
CHAPTER X.
Of the Propitiatory Sacrifice of the Death of Jesus Christ.
To place this important subject on its proper basis, and to exhibit it in that hght in which it appears in the book of revelation, we must consider the Old and the New Testa^ ment as the history of human redemption. The Old Testa- ment was designed to suggest those ideas, and to establish those principles which should prepare the minds of God's people for the reception of that method of salvation which was to be more perfectly developed by the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this purpose its institutions were " a shadow of good things to come, but not the very image of the things." *
That the legal institutions might answer this great and necessary end, the government erected in Israel was a theocracy. Jehovah was their chief Magistrate. " The Lord was their king : the Lord was their lawgiver ; the Lord was their Judge."" Hence, when " the elders of Israel came to Samuel, and said. Make us a king to judge us like all the nations, — the Lord said unto Samuel, They have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should oiot reign over them.'''' '\
As God was to them in the place of a secular king, he dwelt in the midst of them, " The Lord his God was with him, and the shout of a King was among them." X The tabernacle was the place where he held his court, and the holy of holies was his pavilion. There the king of Israel resided, and manifested his royal presence, by the Shechinah. There, as their Lawgiver, he was consulted; and, as their Judge, he administered justice.
* Heb. X. 1. t 1 Sam. viii. 4, 7. J Num. xxiii. 21.
or JESUS CHRIST. 175
He not only gave them political and civil laws, but also instituted a ceremonial^ by wliich, in consideration of his dwelling among them, and to habituate them to a profound reverence for the presence of his truly gracious Majesty, he enforced on them an extraordinary degree of external purity. To preserve the honour of the Jewish ritual, and to promote the reverence which was due to Israel's king, the Priest and Levites were appointed as servants in waiting. Through them only, the people could have access to their Sovereign, and by them all their offerings were to be pre- sented to him. Those offerings were of two kinds : some were cucharistical, and were offered in aclno-icledgment of benefits received ; others were piacular, and were offered to avert impending cvil^ or to regain forfeited blessings. This is an important distinction, which is preserved through the whole of the Levitical law, and is particularly noticed by an apostle. " For every High Priest taken from among men, is ordained for men in things [pertaining] to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins.'''' *
The g'lfts which the Apostle here mentions, were un- doubtedly the Twm^-offerings the f/ri;?A--offerings, the offer- ing of the first^firuits, the thank-oWerrngs, the frec-xcill- offerings, and the ^cac^-offerings. From these gifts, the " sacrifices for s'lns" are always to be particularly distin- guished : as their nature and design were essentially differ- ent. And this difference renders that comparison which (for the sake of reducing the " sin-offering''' to the standard of their own opinion,) the Socinians make between them, altogether inadmissible. No proof of what was, or what was not, the design of the ^^ gifts^'' can afford any decisive evi- dence concerning the design of the " sacrifices for sin."
" A sacrifice for sin is a sacrifice to exp'iate the guilt of sin, in such a manner as to avert the punishment from the offender.'''' -f* Such were the sin-offerings instituted by the Levitical law.
The ceremonial enjoined by the King of Israel, was such that it was unavoidable in many cases that persons should, on account of some impurity, or the neglect of some of its
« Hcb. V. I. t Ma^ec.
176 THE PROPITIATORY SACRIFICE
ordinances, be excluded by it from the congregation, and from all its privileges. That impurity might be contracted by accident, ignorance, inattention, or natural or constitu- tional infirmity. A breach of the civil code was followed by the same consequences ; for, however as an offence against a brother it might be pardonable when restitution was made, as it was an offence against the legislator, the offender (as in the preceding case,) was not permitted to appear in the congregation, till the performance of certain expiations and ablutions. (See Lev. xvii. 20, 21.) In such cases, " all things under the law were purged with blood, and without shedding of blood was no remission.'''' * For these purposes, were appointed the variovis s'ln-qfferings, by which, when the impure were absolved and purified, they were admitted into his courts, and their worship was accepted.
Of these sin-offerings the nature, occasion, and design, are fully exhibited in the Levitical law of sacrifices. The following passage, instead of many, will set this subject be- fore the reader at one view. — " If the whole congresation of Israel sin through ignorance, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly, and they have done [somewhat against] any of the commandments of the Lord, [concerning thingrs] which should not be done, and are guilty ; when the sin, which they have sinned against it, is known, then the con- gregation shall offer a young bullock yor the sin, and bring him before the tabernacle of the consreffation. And the elders of the congregation shall lay their hands npon the head of the bullock before the Lord ; and the bullock shall be hilled before the Lord. And the priest that is anointed shall bring of the bullock's hlood to the tabernacle of the congregation, and the priest shall dip his finger in [some] of the blood, and spyinMe it seven times before the Lord, even before the veil. And he shall put [some] of the blood upon the horns of the altar which is before the Lord, that is in the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall pour out 6'// the blood at the bottom of the altar of tlie burnt-off'ering, which is at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation : And he shall take all his fat from him, and burn it upon the altar.
* lieb. ix. 22.
OF JESUS CHIIIST. 177
And he shall do widi the bullock, as he did with the bullock for a sin-qffcrinff, so shall he do with this : and the priest shall make an aUmcmcnt for them, and it .sliall he fnri>'ivcti them. And he shall carry forth the bullock without the camp, and burn him as he burned the first bullock : it is a sin-offering for the congregation." *
Here we have a full account of the nature, occasion, de- sign, and effect, of a sin-offering.
1. The sin of the congregation is so distinctly marked, that to write one sentence to convince the reader, that that sin is the occasion of the offering, and thaty^r which it was offered, would be an insult on his understanding,
2. The Jewish lawgiver plainly says, " the life of the flesh is in the blood : and I have given it to you upon the altar ^ to make an atonement for your souls; for it is ihehlood that maketh an atonement for the soul." "f* Now, in the pre- ceding appointment of a sin-offering, it is particularly re- quired that " the blood in which is the life of the flesh,"'' shall be sprinkled before the Lord, and put on the horns of the altar xcithin the tabernacle, — that all the rest of the blood shall be poured out at the foot of tlie altar of burnt-offering, — and that thus an atonement shall be made, that the sin may be forgiven.
All this the Socinians will grant, if they may be permit- ted to put their own construction on the word atonement. ^Vhat that construction is, ]\Ir. G. will now inform us. " The word translated atone^ (he says) signifies to cover, hide, conceal some blemish." :|: Very true :-and its applica- tion may be seen at once in those words, " Blessed arc they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose si)is are covered:'''' by which is described " the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works." || An atonement is, therefore, that which, as it were, hideth the sin from him who is " of purer eyes than to behold iniquity." This is its ideal meaning. — He proceeds : " With tlie mean- ing of reconciliat'ion., the English word atonement perfectly accords. It is derived from the two words, at one, with the termination 7ncnf, at-one-ment. It signifies to bring together
* Lev. iv. i;i_21. t Lev. xvii. 11. t Vol. II. p. 143. || Rom. iv. 6, 7.
178 THE PROI'ITIATOKV SACRIFICE
to terms of amity two persons that were before alienated from — each other. This is precisely the meaning of to re- concile.— In this reconciliation the change is never said to be in God^ but always in man.'''' * We cannot, on this occa- sion, do justice to the subject without remarking: (1.) That Mr. G. has made a transition from the ideal meaning of the original word, to that of the English, and thus has relin- quished the former : and (2.) That he has made pretty free with the meaning of words, when, proceeding by gradations, he assumes that the word atonement, as used in the Old Testament, perfectly accords with the word reconciliation. It is true they are sometimes, by a figure, as cause and effect, substituted for each other. Atonement is the mean, reconciliation the end effected by that mean. What is the nature of that reconciliation which is the effect of atonement, we will now enquire.
We are aware that in contradicting Mr. G.'s statement, it would sound rather harsh to say roundly. The change was in God. We acknowledge the immutability of the nature and perfections of God : but dare not attribute to him the immutability of a stone. Without any change in what he is, God can undoubtedly change in what he does. He can at one time be angry with us, and at another time turn away his anger. That as a secular governor, he did thus change when atonement was made, we prove thus:
(1.) It was not because God had offended the men, but because the men had offended God, that the sin-offering was to be offered. And because God was offended^ God was to be conciliated.
(2.) It was not God who presented the sin-offering to the congregation : but the congregation who presented it to God. The offering was therefore made, not to " bring the men to terms of amity," but to " bring" Goci " to terms of amity : " or, to speak with more propriety, it was the condition on which God proposed to be propitious to them.
(3.) In the case of 'peace-qffer'ings, which were tokens of an existing mutual friendship, the offerer was allowed
* Vol. II. p. 146.
OF JEsirs ciiaisT. 179
to eat a part of the offering, in the presence of the Lord. See Lev. vii. 11 — 19- But " no sbir-offcr'mg^ whereof any of the blood was brought into the tabernacle of the congre- gation, to reconcile withal in the holy place jshuU be eaten : it shall be burnt in the fire." * A clear proof that God in the holy place was to be conciliated by it ; and not the men, who were not permitted to participate it.
(4.) When the congregation had sinned, GoA jjermitted them not to enjoy " the privileges of his peculiar people ; " whereas when the sin-offering had been presented, he did permit them. In other words : The forgiveness was not on the part of the congregation ; but God (as their secular governor) forgave their sin. " He shall make an atonement for them, and it shall he forgiven them."
To this application of the word atonement, Mr. G. has, however, several objections which demand our at- tention.
(1.) The first to which we shall attend are those which are taken from the persons or things for which atonement is said to be made.
He thinks that atonement can only imply "a consecration or dedication to God,"" because atonement is said to have been made "at the consecration of Aaron and his sons to the priest's office ; at the dedication of the Levites to their mi- nistry ; at the first act of worship, in which the people of Israel joined under the new high-priest ; at solenm festivals; and as a voluntary donation."" t — He has quite forgotten that the Jews were not so " holy, harmless,, undefiled, and separate from sinners," but that the " High Priest needed daily to offer up sacrifice, FiRsx^r/w* oxen sins, and then for the people's.'''' \ Let him prove that they had no sin to expiate, and then he may infer that these atonements were not for their sins. — As to the " voluntary donation," Job offered burnt-offerings for his sons, because, said he, " It may be that my sons have sinned." || And why might not God allow a conscientious Jew, for a similar reason, to make a voluntary offering as an atonement ? It is not clear, how- ever, that the passage to which Mr, G. alludes, (Lev. i. 3)
• Lev. vi, 30. t Vol. II. p. Ul. : Heb. vii. 26, 27. 1| Job i. 5.
180
THE PROPITIATOllY SACRIFICE
does speak of a voluntary atonement. The word is " iji'iS, leretsono, — to gain himself acceptance before the Lord. In this way all the versions appear to have understood the ori- ginal words; and the connection in which they stand obvious- ly requires this meaning." *
But " a great part of the atonements had no reference to character whatever, but were appointed for things inani- mate, as altars, tabernacles, &c." f — This is some proof that an atonement was not made to conciliate that^r which it was made. How could an altar or tabei'uacle be concili- ated .'' The truth is, that in atoning for the altar and the tabernacle, the atonement was made for the peo^jle who were to present themselves before the door of the latter, and their offerings on the former. Thus it was ordained that the High-priest " shall make atonement for the holij place, be- cause of the unclcanness of the children of Israel, and be- cause of their transgressions in all their sins : and so shall he do for the tabernacle of the cong-reo-ation that remaineth among them in the midst of their uncleanness^'' \
(2.) The second class of objections are taken from the nature of the sins for which atonement was made. " The term atonement is used in reference to bodily diseases and infirmities, the commission of sins of ignorance, and only in two cases are sacrificial atonements appointed to be made for wilful violations of the moral law." ||
That is, in plain terms, the legal atonements were not made for transgressions of the universal law of rio-hteous- ness, but for transgressions of some of the ceremonial and civil laws, which God had given to them as their chief Magistrate. The impurities contracted by certain " diseases, and infirmities," and the " sins of ignorance," were trans- gressions of the ceremonial law. The former were considered as attendants on some sin, and were in fact the consequences of the fallen state of human nature. The latter were sins committed in the misapplication of the sacred things through avoidable ignorance. The " wilful violations" for which atonements were appointed, were cases of " dishonest deal-
* Dr. A. Clarke iu loc. f Vol. II. p. 143. J Lev. xvi. 16.
II Vol. 11. p. 141,142.
OF JF.SrS CHRIST. 181
ing,"' and " the treatment of slaves," which were breaches of the c'wil law. They all referred to the Jewish polity, and the atonement was made to restore the men to the privile<jjes of that polity which, by these transgressions, they forfeited. It was an atonement suited to the nature of the sin, of the evils to be averted, and of the benefits to be recovered. But still it was an atonement for sin. In the case of dishonest dealing, the dishonest person was obliged, first, to make an atonement to the man whom he had injured, by restoring the ])roperly em- bezzled, and one fifth part more ; and then to make also an atonement to the legislator, whose law^s hehad wilfully violated.
(3.) The third class of objections are taken from the efect of the atonement to be made. " The atonement only referred to ?Tlig'ious j^rivlleges.'''^ *
jMr. G. might have said civil and religions privileges ; for the civil and ritual law were blended together. There is some truth in this. The sins for which atonement was made, were such as excluded the sinner from the congrega- tion of Israel, and, if not atoned when known, procured a sentence of anathema. This sentence was revoked when the proper atonement was made ; and the person previously deemed " gniltij,'''' was now ^^ forgiven,'''' and was admitted to the peculiar privileges which he had forfeited. But still the atonement is always called an atonement for his sin.
(4.) The fourth class of objections are taken from those passages which declare, that sacrifices could not supply the place of repentance, reformation, and obedience. " Thou desirest not sacrifice ; thou delightest not in burnt-offerings ; the sacrifice of God is a broken spirit,"'"' &c.&;p. -\
The question is not, " Would the Jewislt sacrifices stand instead of morality and piety, or of repentance and reform- ation P"" but, " Were they appointed for the ceremonial expiation of certain sins, of a penitent sinner, against the Jewish law f^ We have found that they were.
3. In order, however, that the sin-offering by which atone- ment was made, might be effectual to procure the forgive- ness of the sin for which it was offered, the sinner must con- fess his sin, and acknowledge the sacrifice as Ids oxen, and
• Vol. n. p. 143. t Vol. II. p. 147.
182 THF PROPITIATORY SACRIFICE
that he offered it as an atonement for his sin.— The confession of his sin is sometimes mentioned. " He shall confess that he hath, sinned in that thing ; and he shall bring his trespass- offering unto the Lord." * See Num. v. 7. This is also particularly enjoined on the great day of atonement, and the meaning of it is distinctly stated. " And Aaron [as the representative of all the people,] shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live-goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goatP •\ In the passage more immediately under consideration, as well as in the institution of sin-offerings in general, the off"- erers were required, either personally or by their representa- tives, to " bring"" the victim " before the tabernacle of the congregation," and to " lay their hands upon its head before the Lord." By this act they designated it as their offering to make atonement for their sin : and their sin was conse- quently forgiven.
As this economy was intended to adumbrate the dispen- sation of the gospel, the principles on which it was founded, and the doctrines which it holds forth, are to be applied for the illustration of our subject : these being the shadows, of which Christ is the substance.
In the Christian economy, and under the government of Him who is a great king in all the earth, Jesus Christ is ordained " the High-priest of our profession." | In him we have one infinitely greater than Aaron or his sons. "We have a great High -priest, that is passed into [or through] the heavens, Jesus the Son of God.|| — We have such an High-priest, who is set on the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true taber- nacle which the Lord pitched, and not man.§ — For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true ; but into lieaven itself, now to ap- pear in the presence of God for us.^ — And no man cometh to the Father but by him." **
*Lev.v. 5. fLev. xvi. 21. +Heb.iii. 2. l|Heb.iv. 14. § Heb. viii. 1, 2. f Heb. Ls. 24. »* John xiv. 6.
OF JESCS CIIRTST. 18S
As " every High-priest is ordained to offer gifts and sa- crifices, it is of necessity that this man have somewliat to offer." Tlie Priests who " offered gifts according to the law, serv'ed only unto the exani})le and shadow of heavenly thinffs. — But now hath he obtained a more excellent minis- try, by how much also he is the mediator of a better cove- nant, which is established upon better promises. * — The way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing : which was ajignrc for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service jierfect as pertaining to the conscience. — But Christ being come an High-priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building : neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained etei-nal redemption for us." "f*
In these interesting passages the reader will perceive .a continued comparison between the priesthood, ministry, and sacrifices of the Jewish institution, and those of Jesus Christ : the design of which is to shew, that the former was figurative of the latter, and that the latter resembles, but infinitely excels, the former.
The oblations of the Jewish high-priest, we have found, were "gifts and sacrifices for sins." That which our great High- Priest offered was of the latter kind, a sin-offering; as is suffi- ciently obvious from the following passages. " When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin. J — He hath made him to be aixaprioLv, a sin-qjfering for us. || " Who needeth not daily, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for thepeople's: forthis he did oncewhenheoffereduphimself.§ — Now once he hath appeared, to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.^— Christ was once offered to bear the *i«*of many.** — But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins,&c.-ft~And there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins."JJ
What then is the meaning of these phrases ? Mr. G. explains them thus : — " In every sacrifice, the victim is sup-
* Ileb. viii.3-6. t Heb. ix. 8— 12. + Isa. liii. 10. || 2 Cor. v. 21. § Heb. vii. 27. ^ Hcb. ix. 25. *• Heb. ix. 28. ft Hcb. x. 12. XX Heb. x. 26.
184 THE PROriTTATORY SACRIFICE'
posed to die for the good and benefit [not for the sins, it seems,] of the persons on whose account it is offered ; so Christ dying in the cause of virtue, and to bestow the greatest of all blessings upon the human race, a proof of a future state, is beautifully represented as having given his life a sacrifice for us. The resemblance between the death of Christ, according to this account of the nature and object of it, and the sin-offerings spoken of in the Old Tes- tament, appears to me to be a sufficient foundation for its being called by that name, and would abundantly justify the metaphor,"" &c.* What striking resemblance Mr. G. sees between a nuirtyr dying in the cause of virtue and a victim bleedins for sin ; or between an animal which died and was no more, and a person who died to give a proof of a future state by his 7'csurrection, — we confess our inability to conjecture. If the advocates of proper atonement were obliged to interpret the scriptures which relate to that sub- ject in this vague manner, and could give no more rational or scriptural proof of the justness of their opinions, than is contained in this unmeaning cant of Mr. G., and the editor of the Theological Repository, how would the Soci- nians triumph ! But leaving this explanation to its un- avoidable fate, we appeal to the scriptures, in proof, that the application of the phrase, " sacrifice for sin," to the death of Christ, is not a " metaphor,"" as Mr. G. calls it, in which all discernible analogy is lost ; but that in all the cir- cumstances essential to a sin-offering; that of Jesus Christ aorees with those which were ofPered under the law.
1. We have seen, that the sacrifices for sins were offered, by the Jewish priests, on account of the sins of the people. The following passages will distinctly shew that Jesus Christ offered up himself for the sins of mankind. " He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our in- iquities.— All we, like sheep, have gone astray ; Ave have turned every one to his own way ; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. — For the transgression of my people was he stricken. — He shall bear their iniquities. — He hath poured out his soul unto death ; and he was num-
* Vol. II. p. 148.
OK .lEsrs ( intisT. 185
bered with the transgressors : and he bare the sin of many.* — Who was deUvered for our offences, f — I dcUvered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins, according to the scriptures, :J: — Who gave himself for our sins. || — Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree." §
2. The Jewish sin-offerings made an atonement for the persons for whom they were offered, in consequence of which their sins were forgiven. (See page 177.) — It has been remarked that the bloody which is the life, is that which made atonement for the soul. Now, as under the law the blood of the victim was shed, so the " blood of Christ was shed for many, for the remission of sins," ^ and as in the former case the High Priest went into the most holy place with the " blood which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people," ** so " Christ, by his own blood, en- tered once mto the holy place (not made with hands) having obtained eternal redemption for us." -f-]- Thus, as the Jewish High Priest made atonement, by the shedding and .s])rinkling of blood, Jesus Christ has made atonement by the shedding and " sprinkling" of his blood.
The words used on this subject, by the sacred writers, are the same which are used by the LXX. viz. the deriva- tives of iKoLu, I am projntious. Those interpreters render Lev. iv. 20, 26, 35, &c. " the priest shall make atonement^ by s^iXaa^Txi. In Ezek. xliv. 27, where it is said " the priest shall bring his s'i?i Ojff'er'ing;'" they use the word »X»(t/xov. — Thus, in like manner, the prophet Daniel, predicting the death of the Messiah, declares it to be one part of the design of it, according to the LXX. £^tXx<7x(j9xi, to 7nal'e atonement or propitiation for iniquity. H The Apostle to the Hebrews says, " It behoved" Christ as our " mcre'iful High Priest, »Xa7X£aOai, to make atonement or propitiation for the sins of the people." || || Hence Jesus Christ is said to be a propiti- ation or atonement for our sins. " God loved us, and sent his Son iX»<T/xov, Vi propitiation or atonement for our sins." §§
* Isa.liii..5, 6, 8, 11,12. f Rom. iv. 25. ♦ 1 Cor. xv. 3. || Gal. i. 4.
§lPet. ii.24. ^ Matt. xxvi. 28. •« Hcb. ix. 7. ttHeb.ix.l2.
;: Dan. ix. 24. || || Heb. ii. 17. §§ 1 John iv. 10.
N
186
THE PROPITIATORY SACRIFICE
" If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous, and he is ikaaixos, the propitiation or atonement for our sins."" * — In his unguarded effort to get rid of this word, (Vol. II. p. 151,) Mr. G. has con- founded it with iXctarnpiov, which means a propitiatory. It is not improbable that St. Paul meant by it a propitiatory sacrifice. But we found no argument upon it, because, though it cannot be disproved, it may be disputed. To .serve an hypothesis, Mr. G. translates it, "a mercy-seat." But this shifting of the terms destroys his argument, -t- The Reader will do well to keep in mind that the one proper word, which in the original means propitiation or atonement, remains vmanswered, and is unanswerable.
The purpose of atonement or propitiation, is reconcilia- tion. It is not denied, but asserted by Mr. G., that " we are reconciled to God by the death of his Son.'''' \ " But in this reconciliation, (he says) the change is never said to be in God, but always in man." || The phrase, " to be reconciled to God," is certainly ambiguous, and may be interpreted as meaning either to be conciliated by him, or to be ad- mitted to his friendship. It becomes, therefore, an import- ant question, What is the sense in which it is used in the scriptures ?
When the Philistines suspected that David, who was then with them, would appease the anger of Saul by be-
* 1 John ii. 2. f Dr. Priestley, in the conclusion of his History of the Doctrine of Atone- ment, has explicitly granted that the Socinians had not yet been able *' to explain all particular expressions in the apostolical epistles, &c. in a man- ner perfectly consistent with (what they deem) the general strain of their own writings." Hist, of Cor. Vol. I. p. 280. It would have been candid to have told the public which are all those "particular expressions." The word iXa(j/j.os, propitinfmi, seems to be one of them, which therefore he has passed over by just observing that 1 John ii. 2. and iv. 10. << are the only places in which the word propitiation iX(Xij/u.os, occurs in the New Testa- ment." P. 183. He had overlooked the prophecy of Daniel and the epistle to the Hebrews. This one word was too hard for him : and well it might, for it is directly to the point. But Mr. G. is a little more hardj', and ventures (since Dr. Priestley could not " explain" this " particular expression in the apostolic epistles without any effort or straining,") to make a mighty " effort," and to " strain" very much to explain it according to his own hypothesis. But his " straining effort" tends only to his own «iiscomfiture. J Vol. n. p. 144. Rom. v. 10. |1 Vol. II, p. 146.
OF .TFsrs CTinTST. 1S7
coming their adversary, they said, '' Wherewith should he rccomilc himself unto Ills IVIaster ? should it not be with the heads of these men ?"* Here, to reconcile one'^s .self to anotJier, is obviously to appease his xcrath, or conciliate his Javour. — " If thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee, — first be reconciled to thy brother.'''' -f Here, the case is that of a brother offended ; and to be reconciled to him, is to appease or conciliate him. — The next passage is still more in point, because it refers to the case in hand — " God was in Christ, reco7iciUngihe world to himself, not imputing to them their trespasses.'''' J Here, for God to reconcile the world to himself, is to forgive their trespasses. — From these passages, the meaning of the phrase is plain, and no ambiguity re- mains.— It is in this sense, " we are reconciled to God, by the death of his Son."" ||
The effect of the Jewish atonements was, that the sins of the persons for whom they were off'ered, were forgiven. (See p. 179.) Such precisely is the consequence of the death of Christ, as the following passages will sufficiently prove. — " My righteous servant shall justify many, for he shall bear their iniquities. § — This is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.^ We have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins."" ** See also Col. i. 14. " Being now justified by his blood." ft Thus, " God, for Chrisfs sake, (says St. Paul) hath forgiven you."*"* \\
3. The benefit of the sin-offering was appropriated by the person for whom an atonement Avas to be made, by his con- J'ess'ion of his s'ln, and his acknozoledgment of the sacrifice as offered for Mm. Just so, to appropriate the benefit of the sacrifice of the death of Christ, it is necessary that men should confess their sin with a penitent heart, and depend on the propitiation which he has made. He that thus appro- priates the benefit of his sacrifice, obtains mercy. " If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive our sins,
* 1 Sam. xxix. 4. f Matt. v. 23, 24. + 2 Cor. v. 13. || Rom. v. 10.
§Isa. liii. U. ^ Matt. xxvi. 28. **Eph.i.7. ttRom.v.l).
XI Eph. iv. 32.
n2
188
THE PROriTIATORY SACRIFICE
and to cleanse us from all unrio-hteousness. * — All have sinned and come short of the glory of God : being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ ; whom God hath set forth a propitiatory through faith in bis blood, to declare his righteousness for the remis- sion of sins that are past — that he might be just and the justifier of him that belie veth in Jesus." -f
Thus we find that between the Levitical sacrifices and the great Christian Sacrifice, the resemblance is exact and striking; and that the latter answers to the former, as the antitype to its typical representative. Whatever there is of difference between them, consists chiefly in the superiority of the Christian atonement, the consideration of which will greatly confirm the truths which have been stated.
The Jewish sacrifices were but " a shadow of good things to come :" the Christian sacrifice is the " substance.'''' Those were offered for mere ceremonial or civil purposes : this for moral guilt and pollution. Those were mere animals: Christ " offered up himself.'" " It was impossible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins ;" but Jesus has " put away sin by the sacrifice of himself:*" | The former " could not make him that did the service per- fect as pertaining to the conscience :" || but " the blood of Christ, who by the Eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, can purge our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. § — The blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, could only sanctify to the purifying of the flesh,""^ and therefore only gained admission into the visible tabernacle ; but we, " having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, — have boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus.** — Every \^Levit'icaT\ Priest stood daily in the temple, offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, for ever sat down on the right hand of God ; for by one offering, he hath perfected for ever them that are sanc- tified." — And therefore, " where remission of sins is,
*lJohni.9. t Rom. V. 23, 2fi. J Heb. x. 4. ix.2G. |1 Heb. ix. 9.
§ Heb. ix. 14. ^ Heb. ix. 13. ** Heb. x. 19, 22.
OF JESUS CHRIST. 189
[such as lie has obtained] there is no more offering for sins." *
To this statement, Mr. G. finds many objections, against which we must vindicate it.
1. " The term priest , is applied to Christians in general,"" •}* who are said to offer themselves or otlier gifts as sacrifices. | " If (these terms) prove an atonement, then the atonement is in part effected by all Christians." ||
The short answer is, that " Christians in general"''' are not denominated " .H^?^7i-Priests," nor their sacrifices " j9/o- pitiatort/,'''' or " sacrifices for */;?."'"' Their sacrifices are eiicluiristic sacrifices, or ^/ta??^-offerings. " I beseech you by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice." § Again : " Let us offer the sacrifice oi praise to God continually, that is, ihej'ruit of our lips, giving thanks to his name." ^ In offering these sacrifices, " Christians in generaf act as priests. " Ye also [are] an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices." ** The priesthood of " Christians in general"" is, however, subordinate, and ac- ceptable only through the peculiar and peerless priesthood of Jesus Christ. " By him (says the Apostle) let us offer the sacrifice of jjraise to God."'"' f f And again : Our " spiritual sacrifices are acceptable to God, [only] by Jesus Christ." II We have therefore but one Great High- Priest, the Son of God ; and " there remaineth 7W more sacrifice Jur si?!,''"' since " by one offering he hath perfected for e\'er them that are sanctified."
2. But " Jesus Christ is said to have been a atrse for us."'"' " A curse, (says Mr. G.) and an acceptable sacrifice, are totally inconsistent. For to render a sacrifice acceptable, it was absolutely requisite that it sliould be pure."'"' || ||
Mr. G. has only taken for granted, that to be " made a curse^ and to be impure, are identically the same. Does he mean to assert that Jesus Christ's " hanging on a tree"'"' was a " blemish"" on his moral character .''
*Heb.x. 11,12, n, 18. t Vol. II. p. 146. ♦ Vol. II. p. 141).
H Vol. II. p. 14G. §Rom.xii. 1. ^ Heb. xiii. l.i.
•* 1 Pet. ii. 5. tt H*-"b. xiii. 15. IX 1 I'ct. ii. 5. ll II Vol. II. p. UiO, 152.
190 THE PnOPITIATOr.Y SACllinCE
3. " Again : Christ was a priest, a victim, and the mer- cy-seat. — How are these things to be reconciled, if all are to be taken literally ?" *
He was both the priest and the victim, by " offering up himself?'' But the word iXacarnqiov (Rom. iii. 25.) is not properly " a mercy-seat," but a, propitiatory. The mercy- seat*" was called iXaarnpiov, a po'opitiatory, because there the blood of atonement was sprinkled, in conseqvience of which, God, who was supposed to sit on the mercy-seat, was ^ro- pitioiLS. Through the atoning blood of Christ, God is pro- pitious to us ; and therefore Christ also may be called iT^aa- rrtpm, a propitiatory. " God is in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing to them their trespasses."
Before this subject is dismissed, a train of important re- flections, arising out of the preceding observations, demand the Reader^'s most serious attention. — The immolation of victims for the expiation of sin, is justly supposed to have been originally of divine institution. When God taught our first parents to clothe themselves with the skins of beasts, he undoubtedly taught them first to slay those beasts that were to be flayed, certainly not ioxjbod, and therefore most probably in sacrifice. The proof that Abel offered a sacri- fice to God, is, however, much more clear and positive : and the respect which God had- to his offering, makes it nearly certain that it was presented according to a previous divine appointment. Abel could not know that the life of an unoffending animal would be an acceptable offering, so as to offer it, as it is said he did, hjjaith, unless he had first received some intimation of it from above : for '■'■faith com- eth by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." -|- In the days of Noah, it is still more obvious, from the distinc- tion then observed between clean and unclean animals, the more ample provision which was made of the former, the offering which he made of them, and the grateful accept- ance of that offering, — that sacrifice made an important part of the institution of religious worship. (Gen. vii. and viii.) The sacrifices which Abram offered, were, we are assured,
* Vol. II. p. 153. t Rom. x 17.
01' JESirs CHRIST. 191
of divine appointment. (Gen. xv. 9.) When the wrath of God was kindled against the friends of Job, God said, " Take unto you seven bullocks and seven rams, and go to my servant Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt- offering ; and my servant Job shall pray for you ; for him will I accept, lest I deal with you after your folly." * — These divine institutions were, under the Levitical dispen- sation, made, by the same authority, the basis of a more extended and particular sacrificial institution, which agreed in every respect with that which preceded, both as to the quality of the sacrifices to be offered, and the manner of offering them. This agreement is a confirmation of the di- vine authority of the former. The extension of the law of sacrifice, we learn from the inspired writers, was intended to be a more perfect figure of good things to come. No human invention, no common transaction of mankind with each other, was sufficient to elucidate the method of salva- tion by Jesus Christ. The relations of mankind to each other, differ widely from the relations which exist between God and his creatures : Nothing, therefore, but transactions between God and men, can properly illustrate transactions between God and men. Hence He, who alone Avas ac- quainted with " the mystery of his will which he had pur- posed in himself," adapted all the circumstances of these institutions to this one great purpose. Hence the Apostles, when treating on the grand topic of their ministry, " Christ CRUCIFIED," derive their principal ideas and phrases from this preceding economy, and make the institutions of the Patriarchal and Mosaic ages a key to the new dispensation. The sacrifices for sin, which were offered from the primitive times according to the divine appointment, and were regu- lated by the wisdom of Him who knew the end from tlie beginning, are the volume from which they derive their most luminous lessons of instruction. And what shall we infer from this, but that God has intended, by the whole sacrificial code, to give to mankind the most just and the most appropriate ideas of the sacrifice and propitiation of
* Job xlii. 1. — A most important illustration of the dusit^n of sacrilicci as well as of their divine iiistitulwu.
192 THE PROPITIATORY SACRIFICE
" the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world ;"'"' — that his own previous institutions are an infallible guide to our understanding : and that every allusion which is made to mere human affairs, is very imperfect^ and neither can be, nor ought to be, applied in the same unqual\jied manner, for the illustration of the objects of the death of Christ?
The Divine Author of revelation has, however, been pleased, for our instruction on this most important subject, to introduce allusions to the ordinary transactions of man- kind with each other. Among these, the terms of emanci- pation, as redemption^ ransom^ with others of the same class, hold a conspicuous place.
With the Socinians it is a common practice, to insist that scriptural terms be always interpreted in the same sense : and while they themselves are often completely at a loss to affix to a word such a meaning as will admit of an universal appli- cation, they are perpetually bawling for consistency. They have, however, prudence enough not to try whether the meaning which they prefer, will bear them out in their ima- ginary consistency, without leading them into the most glar- ing absurdities.
That the terms already alluded to, are sometimes used hy the sacred writers improperly, we do not deny. To re- deem, or to ransom, is, as Mr. G. says, " to buy again." * Now the proper mean of redemption is a price : and that price is a ransom. But the scriptures sometimes speak of a thing being " bought without money and without price ; *" and of a jyeople being " redeemed without money."" Thus God paid no price for the redemption of Israel out of Egypt, Every man of common sense sees, that this is what Rheto- ricians call, in their technical sense, an impropriety in speech ; and that the impropriety is marked by the terms, *' without price." Mr. G. takes for granted that the same terms must always be used in the same improper sense. If it shcadd appear, however, that the scriptures often make specific mention of the price by which redemption is accom- phshed, it will be obvious, that the terms in question are often used properly : and if this proper way of speaking be
* Vol. II. p. 136.
OF jEsns cnKisT. 193
found to be applied to our redemption by Jesus Christ, it will follow that the scriptural idea of our redemption by his death, is that of a redemption by price.
The word redemption is often used in the Old Testament, in sucli a manner as can only be interpreted of ajjrice paid : and sometimes that price is particularly specified. For instance ; " If thy brother sell himself unto the stranger, after that lie is sold he may be redeemed again ; one of his brethren may redeem him. — And he shall reckon with him that bought him, from the year that he was sold to him, unto the year of jubilee : and the prkc of his sale shall be according unto the number of years. If there be yet many years behind, according unto them he shall give again the price of his redemption, out of the money that he was bought for." See Lev. xxv. 47—52. Ex. xiii. 13, 15. Lev. xxv. 25. xxvii. 13, 15, 20. lluth iv. 4. Num. xviii. 15. &c- &c.
The word ransom is used in the same manner. "If there be laid on him a sum of money ^ then he shall give, for the ransom of his life, zahatsoever is laid iipon him.'''' Exod. xxi. 30. See also Psalm xlix. 7. Prov. vi. 35. xxi. 18. Isa. xliii. 3. &c. &c.
The use made of these terms, when, in the New Testa- ment, they are applied to the death of Christ, is exactly similar to that already examined. It is true indeed that the word redemption^ is somet'imes used in a different sense. Thus we read— of " the redemption of our body ; * — of the day of redemption ;*" ■}- — and of *' Christ who of God is made unto us redemption." ^ In these passages, no price is alluded to : our bodies especially are said to be " redeemed from death,"" to be " ransomed from the power of the grave," by the poicer of hira who " is able to subdue all things to himself:"'"' But not without a previous redemption by price.
This last is most frequently meant, when we are said to be redeemed by Jesus Christ. Thus : — " Ye are bought with a price. |1 — Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from
• Rom. viii. 23. f Eph. iv. 30. ♦ 1 Cor. i. 30. || 1 Cor. vi. 20.
194 THE PROPITIATOUY SACRIFICE
your vain conversation ; — but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. * — Who gave himself [as the price] for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, -f- — Thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood. I — We have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins." || — According to the doctrine of these passages, we are redeemed, or bought back, by a price; — that price is the precious blood of Christ ; — and the forgiveness of sins is the effect of our being so redeemed.
The meaning of the word, ransom, is the same as a 2)rice of redemption, and is applied to the death of Christ, precisely as we apply it to the price paid for the redemption of a captive. *' The Son of man came, not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to g-ive his life a ransom for many. § — There is one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus ; who gave himself a ransom for all."^
The second order of terms taken from the transactions of mankind with each other, for the illustration of this sub- ject, are jiidicial. In the examination of these, Mr. G. will render us some assistance.
" The Almighty is described as a Judge, taking cogni- zance of the behaviour of mankind, and enquiring how far their actions had accorded with the laws which he had given to man. The trial could not but have the most unfavourable issue."" ** " What things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law.; that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. (Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh is justified in his sight : for by the law is the knowledge of sin.)" -|"f- But the sinner whose " mouth is stopped,"" and who cannot put in a iplea, of '^ not guilty,'''' "has an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous." |J An advocate, as Mr. G. grants, is one who " makes intercession." |||| As an Advo- cate then, Jesus Christ " ever liveth to make intercession
* 1 Pet. i. 18, 19. t Tit. ii. 14. X Rev. v. 9. 1| Col. i. 14. Eph. i. 7.
§ Matt. XX. 28. Mark x. 45. ^ 1 Tim. ii. 5, (i. ** Vol. II. p. 166.
tt Ry"i- iii- 19. 20. ::iJohuii. 1. 1||| Vol. II. p. 169.
OF JESUS CliniST. 19-'5
for us."* An Advocate, or Intercessor, h one who pleads tlie cause of another. Here again Mr. G. conies forward, in his usual style, demanding the same uniform applieatit)n of the same terms. According to him, because God is sometimes said to jylcad in behalf of a people by delivering them, or against them by punishing them, the same ex- pressions must always be interpreted in the same manner, f It has been often repeated, that the occasional improper use of any phrase is no argument that that phrase is always used in the same sense. When Mr. G. has put his own interpretation on the passages he has cited, and shewn how " the Almighty is spoken of as pleading' a cause," J he will not be able to adapt the same interpretation to the following passages : — " O that one might plead for a man with God, as a man pleadeth for his neighbour ! — Hear now my reasoning, and hearken to the pleadings of my lips.'" II Nor will his explication of the pleadings of the Almighty, serve to neutralize the intercession of Christ, our Advocate with the Father. In vain does he inform us that an " Intercessor is merely one who acts as a medium between two parties : " or that the word intercession " is synonymous Avith mediation.''''^ All this may be true : but the mediation of Jesus Christ is exercised not only with men in helialf of God^ but with God in behalf of men. " He is our Advocate with the Father. He ever liveth to make in- tercessionyo/- us.'"' And will any Socinian be hardy enough to speak out, and to say that as God Almighty pleads for his people, by executing judgment on their enemies with whom he pleads, so Jesus Christ pleads for a sinner by executing judgment on him with whom he pleads.'' One would hope that even a " rational Divine " would shrink from such blasphemy.
But if " Jesus Christ the righteous " be properly our " Advocate with the Father,'' he must have some iilca to put in, in behalf of him whose " mouth is stopped," and who stands " guilty before God." He cannot advocate his cause by pleading his innocence. What he does plead, we
*Hcb.vii. 25. t Vol. 1!. 11.170. + Vol. IJ. p. 170.
II Johxiii. C. .\vi.21 § Vol, U. p. 170,
196 THE rUOHTIATORY SACllIFICE
learn from the authority by which we are assured that he is our Advocate. " If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: and he is the propiti- ation for our sins : and not for our's only, but also for the sins of the whole world. * — There is one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus ; who gave himself a ransc«n for all. "f — For this cause he is the Mediator of the new covenant, that by means of death for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. :|: — He is able to save to the uttermost them that come to God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. For such an High Priest [an intercessor] became us — who needeth not daily to offer up sacrifice — for this he did once when he offered up himself." || Thus we see that the mediation, advocation, or intercession of Christ, is uniform- ly connected with the sacrifice which he has offered, the propitiation which he has made, the ransom which he has paid : in a word, with his death for our transgressions. This therefore is the ground of his intercession, and the plea which he urares as our Advocate. " He bare the sin of many, and makes intercession for the transgressors." §
This doctrine is best illustrated by the Levitical law, under which " the High Priest alone [as the advocate of the people] entered into the second tabernacle once every year, not without blood, which he offered for the errors of the people." ^
In this light we are to consider those scriptural expres- sions concerning Christ dying for our sins. ** "The wages
* 1 John ii. 1, 2. f 1 Tim. ii. 5, 6. + Heb. ix. 15.
tl Heb. vii. 25—27. § Isa. liii. 12. ^ Heb. ix. 7.
** We have not quoted here those scriptures which speak of the Saviour dying for men. Such are Rom. v. 6, 8. xiv. 15. 1 Cor. viii. 11. 2 Cor. v. 15. Gal. ii. 20. I Thess. v. 10. The leason for this omission is, that these scriptures come under the class of the terms oi e^nancipation. He •' gave himself/or m*, that he might redeem us." — " Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of thelaw,being made a curse [dying a death pronounced accursed] for us ; for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree." Gal. iii. 13. He gave " Ids life a ransom for many." In all these passages, therefore, Christ is considered as having given himself a^nce for us. The scriptures quoted above belong to the class of judicial terms. In them Jesus Christ is considered as having borne a 'penalty in lieu of that which mankind have incurred. — The ideal meaning of these two classes of terms, is therefore somewhat different, though their ductriual meaning is precisely the same.
OF JF.Srs CHRIST. 107
of sin Is (hnthr * 'Yhixi punishment lie is represented as havino- borne for ?/,v. " Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows : he was wounded for our trans- gressions ; he was bruised for our iniquities : the chastise- ment of our peace was upon him, and witli his stripes we are liealcd. All we like slieep have gone astray, and turned every one to his own way ; and the Lord hath laid upon him the iniquity of us all. For tlie transgression of my people was he stricken. He hath poured out his soul unto death : and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors, -f* — Who was delivered [viz. to death] for our offences, and was raised again for out justification. \ — AVho gave himself fx>r our sins. || — For Christ hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust. § — Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree "^
Such is the plea of our " Advocate with the Father :" and when the sinner " comes to God through him " who " ever liveth to make intercession " for him, — when he takes hold on the plea of his Advocate, — he is Justified. That is, says Mr. G., "all his previous faults axejoj-giveny*^ The same act of God being aAleAjiist'ification, when considered as the act of a righteous Judge, and pardon w^hen ccmsidei*- ed as the act of a gracious Father. That, according to the scriptures, he is justified or forgiven on the plea of Jesus Christ, his Advocate, the following passages will testify. " By his knowledge [the knowledge of himself] shall my righteous servant justify many ; for he shall hear their iniquities, -ff — All have sinned and come short of the glory of God : being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ: whom God hath set forth a propitiation through faith in his blood. \\ — Who was delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justi- fication, nil — Being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him."§§
As this is the plea on which the sinner is justified, it is the subject of his subsequent glorying. He can now say,
* Rom. vi. 2.'}. t Isa. liii. 4—12. % Rom. iv. 2.5. || Gal. i. 4.
§ 1 Pot. iii. V>',. ^ 1 Pet. ii. 24. ** Vol. IF. p. 167. ft Isa. liii. II.
:: Rom. iii. 23—25. || || Rom. iv.25. §§ Rom. v. 'J.
198 TITK PnoriTTATonV SACUIFICE
" Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect ? It is God that jiistifieth. Who is he that condemneth ? It is Christ that died ; yea rather, that is risen again : who is even at the rieht hand of God : who also maketh intercession for
us
■>•> *
Having taken a general survey of what the sacred writers have taught, we now examine what weight there is in Mr. G.'s objections.
1. " He insinuates that the Prophets, John the Bap- tist, our Lord, and his Apostles, were silent on this sub-
ject."t
The whole strength of this argument consists in Mr. G.'s having substituted the phraseology of theologists for that of the scriptures. He requires us to prove, that the sacred writers speak of Jesus Christ as " satisfying hifimte justice^ or appeasing the wrath of an offended God." \ We here enter our protest against this perpetual shifting of the terms. The question to be discussed is, whether the sacri- fice of Christ be propitiatory .'' If this should be decided in the affirmative, we may leave to speculative men to enquire whether a projntiatory sacrifice can in any sense be said to " satisfy irifinite Justice,'''' or to " appease the wrath of an offended God .''" But, however this last question may be decided, the first is not all affected by the decision. To give solidity to his reasoning, Mr. G. ought to prove that the Old and the New Testament do not speak of the death of Jesus Christ as a sacrifice for sins, a ransom or price of redemption, and the plea on which a sinner is justified. Hie labor ; hoc opus est ! The reader will scarcely need to be informed that this is beyond the power of Socinian magic.
We have seen already, that the sacrificial code of the Levitical institution is replete with types of the sacrifice for sin, which Jesus Christ should offer. The fifty-third chap- ter of the prophecy of Isaiah, almost the whole of which we have already quoted, speaks of the death of Christ as the consequence of our iniquity being laid on him, as the chas- tisement of our peace, as an offering for our sin, and as the plea on which we are justified. — John the Baptist, with an
* Rom. viii, 33, 34. f Vol II. pp. 171, 175, 180. + Vol. II. p. 171.
OF .TKsrs niRTST. ion
obvious allusion to the lamb offered as a sin-offering, (Lev. iv. 32,) called the attention of the Jews to Jesus Christ, as " the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." * — Our Lord said, " The Son of man came to give his life a ransom for many, f — The bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. I — This is [the sign of] my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins :" || And before he was parted from " his Apostles," he said unto them, " These are the words which I spake unto you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me — [the things to which we have now alluded.] Then opened he their under- standing, that they might understand the scriptures, [which before they did not understand,] and said unto them, Tims it is zoritten, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day : and that repeirtance and remission of sins should be preached i7t his name.'''' § — Thus instructed, and thus understanding the scriptures, the Apostles went forth and ipreached forg-ivc- ncssqfs'ins through him. " Repent, (said they,) and be bap- tized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, [be " baptized into his death ;" Rom. vi. 3.] for the remission of sins. ^ — They that dwell at Jerusalem desired Pilate that he should be slain. And when they had fulfilled all that "icas written of him^ (See Isa. liii.) they laid him in a sepul- chre. But God raised him from the dead. Be it known unto you therefore, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins : and by him, all that believe Tire justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses."** When Philip joined the Ethiopian Eunuch, and found him reading the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah, he " began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus."-f-}- This subject, however, like every other Christian doctrine, is not so fully recorded in that book which contains rather the Acts, than the Doctrine,
*.Iohni.29. tMaU.xx.28. tJohnvi.51. || I\Iatt.xxvi.28.
5 Luke xxiv. 14— 47. f Acts ii. 38. ** Acts xiii. 27—30, M,3'J.
tt Acts viii.35.
200 THE rrtOPiTiAtoRY sacrifick
of the Apostles, as in their Epistles, from which we have already adduced various specimens. *
2. Mr. G. thinks there are " two main points upon which this question rests. (1st.) Do you believe that a great and material change took place in the nature, attri- butes, character, of the One Supreme ?'''' -f No: we do not. We believe only that change was wrought by the atonement, which Mr. G. attributes to the mere i-epentance of a criminal : and that God, having set forth Christ a pro- pitiatory through faith in his blood, could he just and yet the J usti/ier of him that believeth in Jesus. — (2.) " Do you believe that this change took place in consequence of the death of a God ? " | — No. We believe that " God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and toe/j» aptaprjay, a sacrifice for sin, || condemned sin in the flesh ;"" § that the Christian atonement was made by " the offering of the bod?/ of Jesus Christ." From these " two main points upon which (according to Mr. G.) this question rests," it appears that he is only pursuing a phantom, the creature of his own imagination, and controverting a doctrine which no man in his sober senses believes.
If that was the case, (says Mr. G.) " then it could have been a man only who accomplished the atonement." •jj — We answer : The human natui-e was the sacrifice, which *' by the Eternal Spirit he offered without spot to God : " and therefore " his blood can purge our consciences from dead works. — God (therefore) was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing to them their tres- passes."
3. You must, however, says Mr. G., be reduced to the following dilemma ; either that the mercy of the Father
* Mr. G., as usual, has referred to the unhelieving Jews, who " did not even expect a suffering Messiah." (Vol. II. p. 174.) This is not the only proof that the unbelief oi the Jews is the standard of Socinian faith. He is perfectly welcome to all the support which he can derive from their testi- mony, t Vol. II. p. IfjB. : Vol. II. p. 158.
II SotheLXXuse thatphrase in Isaiah liii. 10: and so the Apostle uses it in Heb. X. 6. OxojcauTW^aTflt x«i m t p i a /u,a pr t at uk ivBoxixxas : which our translators render, " In burut-otterings and 5«c>y?6'e« /ov «m*, thou hast had no pleasure."
t Rom. viii. 3. 1[ Vol. II. p. 191.
OK JESUS CHRIST. 201
was not equal to the mercy of the Son, or that the justice of the Son was not etjiial to the justice of the Father.'"*
Before we answer this objection, it is necessary to under- stand an obvious and common distinction with respect to divine justice. " Justice, as it respects moral character, has with propriety been distinguished into distributive and jntb- lic." As we may hereafter find it necessary to recur to this distinction, it will be well to explain what we mean by it. *' Distributive justice consists in a due administration of rewards and punishments according to personal desert. Public justice has respect to the well-being of the whole. Its province is to guard the rights of moral government, and take care that the divine authority be not impaired." -f-
Any doctrine may be made to appear absurd by being misrepresented. According to INIr. G.'s representation of our doctrine, there are two Gods, — the Father and the Son. The Father is just and unmerciful. The Son is merciful but regardless of justice. The Son, one of these Gods, sacrifices his Divinity to the justice of the Father, the other God. Appeased by this sacrifice, the Father forgives the criminal, not in mercy but in mere justice ! — This may be absurd enough ! But whose doctrine is it ? Not ours. — Let the scriptural doctrine be stated, and Mr. G.''s dilemma vanishes. " God so loved the zoorld (was so meixiful) that he gave his only-begotten Son," that human person " in whom dwelt all the fulness of the Godhead." This human person, " by the Eternal Spu'it," which dwelt in him without mea- sure, " offered himself without spot to God, an offering and a sacrifice, for a sweet-smelling savour." By this display of public justice in " condemning sin in the flesh," this human person is " set forth a propitiatory through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God ; to declare his righ- teousness, that he might be just, as to his public character, and yet surrender the claims of distributive justice as the (merciful) justificr of him that believeth in Jesus." Thus the mercy of the Father is exercised, and distributive justice is waved, without any infringement on public justice. Tiie
* Vol. II. p. 188. t Jerrain oji the Atouemerii, Let. JV. ji. fc2, O
202 THE PROPITIATORY SACRIFICE
Father Is merciful in providing and accepting the sacrifice, and just in requiring it. The Son is merciful in offering the sacrifice in our behalf; and just in his concern for the main- tenance of public justice, in thus preserving the sanction of the righteous law inviolate, in " magnifying the law, and making it honourable." — Where is now this formidable dilemma ? If Mr. G. still think that on our principles the Son as well as the Father, if he were just, must have de- manded a similar atonement, the opinion can only arise out of the same mistaken notion of our real principles. It was the Divine, and not the human nature which was to be pro- pitiated.
4. " Will it be said that God \m\\&e\i^ promded the atone- ment to be made to himself .'* Then it renders the whole doctrine a complete nullity. If a person owe me a sum of money, is it not the same thing whether I remit the debt at once, or supply another person with money to pay me again in the debtor"'s name .'' If satisfaction be made to any pur- pose, it must be in some manner in which the offender may be a sufferer, and the offended person a gainer." *
This argument is rather specious than solid, and all its apparent weight arises, partly out of the confusion of the various terms which are used, and partly out of the change of their application. (1.) Mr. G. sets out with speaking of an atonement, and then changes that term for the word, satisfaction. Now many persons use the word atonement in its proper sense, who do not think that the term, satis/action, is perfectly synonimous. Mr. G. should remember, that, like Dr. Priestley, he undertakes to controvert " the whole doctrine of atonement, with every modification of it."i' Whatever he may have to urge against the term satisfaction, will therefore make nothing against a proper atonement or j}ropitiation. (2.) He uses the term satisfaction, in a sense which those judicious men who think proper to make use of it, will not acknowledge. And then (3.) To make out his objection, he changes the sense of the term, from the satis- faction required by amoral governor — the exaction of a legal penalty, to that required by a creditor — the payment of a
* Vol. II. p. 191. t Hist, of Con-up. Vol. I. p. 154.
OF JKSUS CHRIST. 203
debt. — Tims this unscriptural word has, in one argument, no less than three different applications, not one of which we should admit, if we admit the use of the term.
Now as (1.) this term is not scriptural, and (2.) it is ajH to be so variously and improperly applied, we shall not con- tend a moment for the use of it. But as it may still be objected that we retain the idea, while we decline to contend for the word, we will explain ourselves. We have already distinguished between the several classes of terms by w hich the design of the death of Christ is illustrated in the New Testament ; we will now enquire, to which of those classes the idea of satisfaction may be attached, if attached at all ; and in what sense it is attached.
(1.) We conceive that it cannot properly be attached to the " terras of emancipation" — It is true, when Jesus Christ is said to " give his life a ransom for many," the idea con- veyed by those terms is that of the redemption of a captive, who has been sold or imprisoned for his debt. It is, there- fore, only another way of speaking of the payment of a debt. Now the payment of a debt is a satisfaction to the creditor. We do not suppose, however, that the death of Christ is represented as a ransom, because it was positively the i^afjment of a debt, but because it answers a purpose with respect to the sinner, similar to that which the payment of a debt answers with respect to the debtor. The debtor is ac- quitted in the one case; the sinner in the other. Beyond this point the analogy vanishes. Hence the scriptures no Avhere say, that Christ gave himself a ransom to God : but, that he gave himself a ransom Jbr us ; and that " he gave himself an offering and a sacrifice to God."
(2.) We conceive that it cannot properly be attached to the sacrificial terms. — On making the experiment, we find that we cannot attach it, naturally and easily, without adopting
(3.) ^he Judicial terms, to which therefore, if at all, it must be attached. — We have already observed, that justice is t.Mtlier distributive or j^^'bUc. The first question then, is : " Are we to regard the death of Christ as a penalty exacted by distributive, or pulAic, justice ?"" Certainly, not by distri-
204 THE PllOl'lTlATOllY SACKII'ICE
hdive '^nsiice, because [1.] the penalty exacted by distribu- tive justice is, the death of the offender ; and [2.] the design of the death of Christ is, to obtain mercy for the offender ; or, in other words, to provide that distributive justice may rehnquish its demands. It must then be public justice which exacted the penaky, and on account of which he ** was dehvered for our offences." " PubUc justice has regard to the well-being of the whole. Its province is to guard the rights of moral government, and to take care that the divine authority be not impaired." (See p. 201.) To secure this end of public justice — " God hath set forth Jesus Christ a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins, through the forbearance of God ; that he might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus."
If the reader think that that which supports the autho- rity of moral government, when distributive '^\i?,iice is sur- rendered, and thereby answers the demands of public justice, be a satisfactimi to public justice, he will not ask Mr. G."'s leave to call it so. But we choose rather to abide by the scriptural terms, which are not liable tothe same exceptions as those which are of human invention.
After this explanation we contend, that, although to *' supply another person with money to pay me again in the debtor"'8 name," is much the same thing as to " remit the debt at once;" — for God to provide that ^wiZic justice may not be impaired by the surrender of distributive justice, is not the same thing as to remit the claims of distributive justice without such a provision. In the one case the tone of authority is relaxed ; in the other it is strictly maintained. Or, to return to the point from which Mr. G. set out, and to which he ought to have adhered : The end of an atone- ment may equally be answered, whoever may provide the sa- crifice. Thus all the sin-offerings which, under the Old Testament, were offered to God as atonements for sin, were provided by him to Avhom they were offered, whose are " the cattle upon a thousand hills."
5. " But this doctrine converts justice into vengeance. It first plunges its sword into the soul of the innocent ; it
OF TKsnS CHKTST. 205
afterwards pursues multitudes of those whose punishment lie bore, and relentlessly plun<:;es them into the flames of hell, beeause they cannot satisfy its demands, which were all satisfied bv his suffering in their stead." * — This objection is levelled, point-blank, at the doctrine of divine revelation, and therefore requires a serious answer.
(1.) It is from the book of God we learn that the Lord of hosts said, " Awake, O sword, against my Shepherd, and against the man [that is] my fellow ; smite the shepherd." -f Mr. G. will not find it easy, on the Socinian scheme, to ac- count for justice " plunging its sword into the soul of the in- nocent." This can be done only according to that evangeli- cal system, which teaches that " it pleased the Lord to bruise him ; that he was wounded for our transgressions ; that he was bruised for our iniqtilties ; and that the chastisement of our peace was upon him." — From the same source of in- struction, we have learned that they who " deny the Lord that bought them, bring on themselves swift destruction." | Nor is it our doctrine that thus " converts \he justice of God into vengeance^'' h\\i\\\aX. of him who hath said, "Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord." ||
(2.) There is no injustice in the final punishment of obstinate sinners, although Jesus Christ have died for their sins. If the death of Christ had been intended to procure absoluteJy the forgiveness of the sins for which he died, justice might then require even the forgiveness of the impe- nitent and unbelieving. But if the blood of Christ be the blood of the new covenant, a covenant which demands " repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ," " for the remission of sins," — the " faithful- ness and justice" which require the absolution of those who, with a proper reference to the propitiatory saci'ifice, " con- fess their sins," do not require the absolution of those who obstinately continue in their sin and unbelief. " God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that wliosoever believeth in him, might not perish, but Iiave ever- lasti7ig Vifey § They, therefore, who obstinately refuse to
* Vol. II. p. \Hi. t Zech. xiii. 7. +2 Pet. ii. 1.
II Heb. X. ."'.0. § .loliii iii. l(i.
o3
206 THE PROPITIATORY SACRIFICE
believe in him^ are justly left to " die in their iniquity." " If we sin wilfully [by rejecting reconciliation] after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a fearful looking for of judgment, and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. '''' The sinner, then, is justly charged, not only with the sins the pardon of which he has obstinately refused, but with that of " treading; under foot the Son of God,'''' and of "counting the blood of the covenant a common thing." — In other words : The end of pithlic justice is not answered by the death of Christ, in those who live and die impenitent, and, therefore, must be answered by the exercise of distributive justice.
6. The next objection to be considered, is that which is taken from the necessity of repentance, of forgiveness of injuries, and of good works, in order to eternal salvation. From hence Mr. G. boldly infers that there is no room for any other atonement. *
(1.) Repentance is undoubtedly necessary for the forgive- ness of sins ; but it does not follow that repentance only is necessary. It has been already proved by many scriptural arguments, that we are justified by the blood of Christ. — It is also a well-known fact, that St. Peter exhorted the Jews not only to repent, but to " be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for i\\Q forgiveness of sins.'''' -f* As " enemies to God in their minds by wicked works,"" mankind are properly exhorted to renounce that enmity by genuine repentance ; but the Apostles, who thus beseech them, " Be ye reconciled to God,""" state the medium of that reconciliation to be, that God " hath made him (Christ) to be afjiapnav, a sin-offer- ing for us, who knew no sin : that we might be made the righteousness of God in him :" and that thus " God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them.'" |
Should the Socinians still urge, that, under the Old Testament, genuine penitents were pardoned, although they knew nothing of the Christian atonement, — we answer, that they applied to the promised mercy of God :
*Vol I . p. 1 72, r7H, 179, 187. f Acts ii. .iS. * 2 Cor. v. IJ)— 21.
OF .TF.srs run 1ST. 207
but that inerov, thounh llioy uiulersto«d not perfectly tlie nit'dium tlirough which it was exercised, was extended through the predicted atonement of Christ. This is supposed to be the meaning of those words : " Whom God has set forth a propitiatory, to declare his righteousness for the remission o( sbis that arc past.''''*
(2.) Our Lord has undoubtedly enforced the forgiveness of injuries on pain of the divine displeasure, and made it one of the terms of our forgiveness, and consequently of our salvation. But this is no way inconsistent with our beinjr forgiven, for the sake of what Christ has suf- fered. If a Socinian cannot reconcile them, he may submit to be instructed by an Apostle who said, " Be kind one to another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Chrises sake hath forgiven
(3.) On the subject of justification by good works, 1. e. by universal holiness, it will be necessary to make some distinction. Mr. G. has distinguished between the justifi- cation of a sinner on earth, and what he calls a " future justification," when " we must all stand before the judg- ment-seat of Christ, and give an account of ourselves to God." I Of the former he observes, " the Apostle Paul, in his epistle to the Romans, says, Being justified by faith, we have peace with God ;" and of the latter, that " the sentence to be pronounced at the day of judgment is invariably stated to be pronounced according to the works of the individual."|| To all this we agree. It is a little curious, however, that after making this distinction, and after stating that the jus- tification of a sinner is " by faith," he should " rest the case upon this striking fact alone," § viz. that mankind are Jinallij to be judged according to their works. If the dis- tinction which he has made be just, the proof that " the DOERS of the law shall be justified, in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ," ^ is no argument against that scriptural truth, " that (in the day
*Rom.iii. 25. fEph.iv. 32. J Vol. II. p. 168.
II Vol. II. p. 192. § Vol. II. p. 193. «I Rom. ii. 13, 16.
208 THF PROPITIATORY SACRIFICE
of grace) a man is justified by Jalth, without the deeds of the law." *
Here we might quote a number of passages to shew, that " to him that xoorketh not but helieveth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his Jaith is counted to him for righteousness.'''' -f- But Mr. G., aware how numerous such passages are, has evaded them all by stating that, " when the Apostle Paul speaks of faith and works, as in contrast with each other, by works, he means the ceremonies of the Jewish law.'"' I With what propriety this bold assertion is made, we will examine.
*' Whatsoever things the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law ; that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world become guilty before God." — Is it the cere- monial law, by which every mouth is stopped, and which proves all the world to be guilty ? — " Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight ; for by the law is the knowledge of sin.?" Is it the ceremonial law by which is the knowledge of sin ? The Apostle says, " I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said. Thou shall not covet.'''' || Is it then the ceremonial law which has said, " Thou shalt not covet .^" Every one knows that this is the language of the moral law. Continuing to speak of that, the Apostle proceeds to point out the pi'oper mean of justification. — " But now the righteousness of God without the laxv, is manifested, even the righteousness of God which is hy Jaith of Jesus Christ, unto all and upoif all them that believe : being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus : whom God hath set forth a propitiatory through faith in his blood. Therefore we conclude that a man is Justijied by faith without the deeds of the law.''"' Hence he subjoins, " Do we then make void the law through faith ? God forbid : yea we establish the law." § — Certainly not the ceremonial, but the moral, law is established by faith.
This subject might be prosecuted much further; but this is enough in reply to Mr. G.'s mere assertion.
* Rom. iii. 28. f Rom. iv. 5. + Vol. II. p. 169.
II Rom. viii. 7. § Rom. iii. ly.— 31.
OF JESUS CHUrsT. 209
There is no more inconsistency between a sinner's bein<> "justified (in the (lav of grace,) by the blood of Christ," and his being rewarded in the day of judgment, according to the deeds (subsequently) done in the body," tiian there is between a rebel's being pardoned by the clemency of his prince, and his being afterwards rewarded for his subse- quent faithful services. Nor is the doctrine of Justj/ication, b/j the (hath of Christ, unfavourable to obedience. It is the only mean by which piety and morality can be established among men. The love of God, and of our neighbour, is the sum of the law, which, therefore, he that lovetli hath fulfilled. But "• herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. We love him because he first loved us. And if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another. * — What the law could not do,, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and a sacrifice for sin, (see p. 200.) condemned sin in the flesh : that the risrhteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."!
The sacrifice of Christ is not only an expiation ; it is also an ablution. The Reader will perhaps remember, that under the Levitical dispensation, the red heifer was ap- pointed as a representation of both these purposes, but principally of the latter. This animal was " brought forth witJwut the camp " and slain. Her blood was then sprinkled " seven times before the tabernacle of the congre- gation." The whole carcase was then burned, and her ashes preserved to make " a water of separation, a puri^ jication for sin." + In allusion to this institution, the Apos- tle to the Hebrews says : " For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary for sin, are burned without the camp. Wherefore Jesus also, that \\Qm\^\\. sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered witJiout the gate." \\ There is the same allusion in those words : " If the blood of bulls and of goats, [as expiations]
• 1 John iv. 10, 11, 19. t Rom- v"'- ^i 4.
: \um. xix. 1, 3, 4, 9. || Heb. xiii. II, 12.
210
THE PnOPITIATOr.Y SArRTFICE
and the ashes of an heifer [as a piirification for sin] sprink- ling the unclean, sanct'ifietli to the purifi/ing of the flesh ; how much more shall the blood of Christ purge your conscience f.'om dead works [as an expiation, and thereby sanctify to thepurifying of the soul] to serve the living God,"" and thus answer all the purpose of an ablution ? * On earth " the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth from all sin,'"* and therefore in heaven, the moral purity of glorified saints is ascribed to the efficacy of this great sacrifice . " These are they that have come out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb."" f And hence, all their salvation is attribvited " to him that hath loved us savA washed us from our sins in his own blood." |
For the sake of meeting these difficulties in a scriptural manner, we have already distinguished three classes of ideas and terms, by which the subject before us is revealed. To these we may add another class which we may denominate domestic. Of all these it is worth while to observe, that each of them is used for particular purposes. (1.) The domes- tic terms are used to point out the aggravated nature aud ruinous consequences of' sin, \\\e nature a\\A propriety of re- pentance, and the readiness with which God forgives the penitent. Of this observation the parable of the prodigal Son is the best illustration. They are used also to shew that God will forgive sin, only on terms which are consistent with the good order of his family. Hence we are taught to pray, " Our Father which art in heaven — forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us !" — (2.) The sacrijicial terms are used to give us the most pro- per views of the design of the death of Christ, as the object of our faith, the meditim of our access to God, and the meritorious caitse of our pardon and acceptance. (3.) The Jtidicial terms are used to shew how the forgiveness of offending man is rendered consistent with the public justice of the offended God : how " mercy and ti'uth meet together, and righteousness and peace have kissed each other." (4.) The terms of emancipation are to shew, that our redemption
* Heb. X. 13, 14. f Rev. vii. 14. X Rev. i. 3.
OF .TESrS rTTTlIST. 211
oblic^cs ua to serve and obey our lledccmcr, "Ye are not your own, (savs St. Paul) for ye are bought with a pr'ui>, therefore ^7o///2/ God in your body and in your spirit, which arc God's.""
But no one class of terms will perfectly answer every purpose of divine revelation. It is not by a partial view, that we can form just ideas of this subject in all its beanngs, but bv a comprehensive view of the whole. Jehovah is not to be regarded merely as a Father^ but as a Redeemer, a Moral Governor, and a God. Hence the sacred writers, for the complicated purposes already specified, sometimes mingle in one sentence all the various classes of terms which we have enumerated. The two following passages will af- ford the most perfect specimens.— " If ye call on the Father, Avho without respect of persons jndgrth according to every mail's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear ; forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corrup- tible things, as silver and gold, but with Xhe precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb loitliout blemish ami loitlioiit spot.* — All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; he'mgjusiifi- ed freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: ^vhom God hath set forth a. propitiation i\\vo\\^\ faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remis- sion of sins that arc past, through ihej'orbearance of God : — that he might he just, and the Justijier of him which be- lieveth in Jesus."-f- — If the Reader observe that the terms " the blood of a lamb without blemish and without spot,"" are sfcrifcial : and the terms " remission of sins through the
Jbrbearance of God," are used in allusion to paternal kind- ness and mercy, and are domestic, he will see that the
Jour classes of terms are distinctly adopted in both these passages.
(T.) "But it is evident from several of our Lord'.s discourses, that he considered that the Apostles, by their death, w^ere to accomplish the same object as he by his
death.":;:
This objection furnishes a strong argument in fovour of the doctrine which we have endeavoured to establish. The
* 1 Fct. i. 17—1!). t Roin. iii. 23—26. : Vol. II. p. 192.
212 THE PROPITIATORY SACRIFICE &C.
Apostles suffered in the cause of truth as well as their Mas- ter. " They drank of his cup, and were baptized with his baptism ;"" and they call on us to follow their example as they followed his. But was Paul " crucified for us ?"" or were any " baptized in his name for the remission of sins.?" Were they " made a sm-offerhig for us ?" Did they " re- deem any of us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us .'''" Are we "justified by their blood ?'^ These are, however, the objects which are said to be accomplished by the death of Christ : objects which the Apostles never imagined would be accomplished by theirs : — This vast su- periority of the design and efficacy of the death of Christ will be eternally celebrated, when all the sprinkled race shall join in the anti-Socinian song, " TJiou xvast slain, and hast redeemed us to God, hy thy blood, out of every lindred, and tongue, and people, and nation.'^
( 213 )
CHArXER XL
Of tlie Eternity of the future Punishment of tlie Wichcd.
It is a strong indication of the badness of a cause, when its Advocate, at the opening of his plea, assails the ear of the Judge with appeals to his passions rather than to his reason. Mr. G. has not, however, been prudent enough to lull our suspicions by avoiding this manoeuvre. To prepossess the mind of the reader, he has represented the God of his own system as uniting in himself every thing which he deems amiable, while the God of his opponents is caricatured as a hideous assemblage of every thing terriffic. Like one who can suit his friends with Gods accoi'ding to their own heart, he then calls upon them to make their choice.
Before the reader fix his choice in a matter so impor- tant, it will be well for him to review the drawings which Mr. G. has sketched. The God whom we are supposed to worship, he caricatures thus : — " He is a monarch, a small proportion of whose subjects are his aNoweAJavouritcs and friends. These he crowns with the highest honours, and loads with the greatest dignities ; they sit around his throne and enjoy his smiles and favours ; but at least nine-tenths of the subjects of this monarch are immersed in gloomy dun- geons ; ' shut from the common air, and common use of their own limbs,'' enchained in the blachness of darkness^ exposed to repeated and increasing racks and tortures of every kind ; their deep horrific groans continually as- sail his ear, their distorted limbs and Avrithing agonies meet his eye in every direction, whilst he, well-j)lcascd, looks on and smiles in calm complaisance."" *
*Yol. I. p. 201.
214
THE ETERNITY OF
Perhaps some shrewd men will think they behold here a distorted hkeness of the God who has been worshipped in some parts of Christendom. For our part, we think that if Moloch can " smile," he must be the true original. At any rate, this is not the God who has revealed himself in the Bible, and whom we adore. We worship a God " with whom there is no respect ofperscms : * — who is good to all, and whose tender mercies are over all his worTis .-f- — who so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have ever- lasting life : J — who SsXej, wisheth all men to be saved and to come unto the knowledge of the truth : || — who is long- suffering to usward, pt-o) /SaXo/txEvor, not willing- that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance : § — who has no pleasure in the death of the wicked ; but that the wicked turn from his way and live : ^ — and who even beseeches the rebellious to be reconciled to him. **
But if we reject this hideous devil-god, whom Mr. G. has presented to our imagination, in order to drive us to the worship of another of his own making, let us examine whether this latter be more like the true God. " You shall [now] be introduced to a monarch who reigns over his sub- jects with parental kindness ; he considers all as his children ; he feels a tender concern and love for all; his laws are equi- table and impartial ; his grand object is to make all hajjpy ; the ob^inate, the wayward, the rebellious, he is compelled to punish ; but his punishment is proportioned to the degree of their guilt, and the object of it still is to guide them to reformation, and to happiness." •f"f-
This Being is something more like " the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." But, however amiable he may appear, we have reason to complain that, to serve an hypothesis, he is robbed of an essential part of his real character. That our God is a Father, we acknowledge with filial gratitude ; but not, that he is as Mr. G. has represented him, a Fa- ther only. If the character of a Father would have per- fectly represented to us " the God of judgment," why,
* Riin. ii. 11. t Psalm cxlv. I). + John iii. 16. || 1 Tim. ii. 4. §2rct. iii. y. II Eztk. xxxiii. 11. ** 2 Cor. v. 20. ff Vol.ll.i).200.
FUTUEE PUNISHMENT. 215
in making him known to us, are other characters, very different from this, though not opposed to it, used by the sacred writers? Mr. G., it is true, makes mention of him as a " Monarch," and speaks of "his laws,"" and of the "j)u- nishment" of the " rebelhous," but he takes care to lose the Monarch in the Father, and his judkial punishments in 2Hirctital chastisements. The character of a moral governor is thus entirely blotted out, and the name only is left ; while all the unmingled affection of a parent remains. Such a character as Mr. G. lias drawn may suit the mere father of a family, and in him would be truly amiable, but it does not exactly suit the " Governor of all the earth." However proper it may be for a moral governor to chastise corrigible offenders for their amendment, it is also his part " not to bear the sword in vain [by which daring rebels and incor- rigible offenders are cut off']; — for he is a revenger to ex- ecute xcrath upon him that doeth evil."" *
The nature of the divine government as described in the scriptures, is of such importance to the present subject, that it demands our particular consideration. God is not a Go- vernor who merely gives rules of conduct to his subjects, and cliastises the transgressors for their amendment ; but who maintains his authority by declaring himself that "one Lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy.'''' -f- — The penalties by which his laws are enforced, are not such as do not touch the life of the criminal ; they are cap'ital punish- ments. The language of his law is, "The soul that sinneth, it shall dk."" :|: — That penalty is not designed for the Jiiad benejit of the offender. The divine authority has indeed appointed it, apr'iori, for the benefit of the governed, by the jjrevention of crimes ; but it is not inj/icted, a jjostej'iori, for the final benefit of those who disregard that authority. *' Cursed,"" therefore, " is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them."" 11 His offending subjects who axejinalltj impenitent, are no longer regarded by him vi'\\\\ paterncd affection. " It is a people of no understanding : therefore he that made them will not have mercy on them, and he that formed them
•Rom. xiii. 4. f Jauics v. 12. J Ezek. xviii. 4. || Gal. iii. 10.
216 THE ETERNITY OF
will shew them no favour, * — For our God is a consuming fire, f — The Lord trieth the righteous : but the wicked, and him that loveth violence, his soul hateth. Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone, and an hor- rible tempest : this shall be the portion of their cup. J — He [the sinner] shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation." ||
From this distinction between the^ar^wto? and the regal character of the Most High, arises another distinction equal- ly obliterated by the Socinians, and yet equally scriptural : that between the lolwlesome chastisement which is intended for the amendment of the offender, and the judicial punis/i- ment which is inflicted on the incorrigible. This distinction is marked by circumstances which are specifically attributed to the one, and are positively denied of the other. Thus : " Whom the Lord loveth, he chasteneth, and scourgctli every son whom he receiveth.'''' § But it cannot be a proof of his love to the disobedient, that " he will render unto them in- dignation and wrath ; " ^ for " the wicked his soul hateth ; "" ** nor can God be said to receive those to whom he says, " I never knew you ! Depart from me, ye that work iniquity !"" f-j- — "If we endure chaste^iing, Goddealeth with us as with sons ; and if we be witliout chastisement, then ai'e we bastards and not sonsP'' W But it is not equally true that " we are bastards and not sons," if we be without the damnation of hell, and if Christ say, " Come, ye blessed of my Father. |||| — Blessed is the man whom the Lord chasten- eth ; " §§ but they are not blessed to whom the King shall say " Depart from me, oi xarajpa/w-evoj, ye cursed, into the everlasting fire, prepared for the Devil and his angels." <[[^ So essential is the difference between the chastisement of God's children, and the punishment of his rebellious subjects !
But Mr. G. positively asserts, that when our Lord says, " These shall go away into everlasting punishment;'''' he
* Isa. xxvii. II, f Heb. xii. 29. t Psalm xi. 5, «. || Rev. xiv. 10. §Heb. xii.6". ^ Rom. ii. 8. ** Psalm xi. 5. ff MaU. vii. 23.
XX Heb. xii. 7, 8, || || Matt. xxv. 34. §§ Psalm xciv. 12. ^\\ MaU. xxv. 41.
FUTIinE PUNISHMF.XT. 217
means " corrective cluistlscment.'''' * To prove tliis, he exliiblts tlie usual criticism on the word xoXautr, wliich our translators render piinhhtncnt^ and which he thinks decisive in favour of the opinion, that to " go accursed into csyer- IcLst'ing firi\'^ \?, to receive "the benefit" of a *^ corrective chastisement^ While we take the liberty to contradict his statement, the Reader will keep in mind that Mr. G. rests the question on tfte meaning of this word, and undertakes to prove that it does and must mean " corrective chastisement." — Now for the proof.
1. " In this sense it was used by heathen Greek writers and philosophers." -f* — But not one of them is quoted, so that this stands for — nothing. Besides, if they were quot- ed, and the passages should be found to prove that xoXajtr is sometimes used in this sense ; how is it proved that it is never used in any other sense .''
2. " Grotius states it to be one of the words used by them, in reference to such punishments as were intended for the benefit of him who offended, or irfhim to whom it was of importance that the offence shoidd not have been committed, or in short, Jbr the benefit of some one.''' + — So it appears from Grotius, that xoXxms does not always mean a punish- ment inflicted for the benefit of the offender, but sometimes
Jur the benejit of him wlto is injured b?^ the offence!
3. " The two passages in the New Testament in which the verb, xoXx^u, is used, perfectly accord with, if they do not require, the same construction. Acts iv. 21. 2 Pet.ii.O.""!] — To make good Mr. G.'s argument, the word must abso^ Jutcly " require'^ this construction. But as he has not con- descended to examine those texts, that task devolves upon us. — The first of these passages is as follows : " When they [the Jewish rulers] had further threatened them [Peter and John] they let them go, finding nothing how x'^Kxiuiirixiy they might punish them, because of the people." These rulers dared not, at one time, to lay their hands on .Tesus Christ, for Jear of tlie people ; but when that fear was re- moved they put him to death. The fear of the people, in like manner, restrained them, in the present casi-, from
* Vol II. p. 2.»(;. f Vol. II. p. 20«. : Vol. II. p. 20r.. II V..1. II. p. 208.
218 THE ETERXITY OF
putting Peter and John to death. But how will it be made to appear, that if they had dared to slay thera, they Avould have inflicted that punishment as a salutary chastisement? — The other passage runs thus : " The Lord knoweth how to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment, Kokoi.aoi/.zwvs, to be punished.'''' — The punishment here referred to, is that to be inflicted in " the day of jiidgmentr To suppose then that the word here means a corrective chastisement, is to tahe for granted the very thing which should be proved.
4. " The word, xoXaffjy, occurs in only one other place in the New Testament, and there it relates to the effects produced upon th« body and mind by the operation oij'ear. 1 John iv. 18."* — The words are, "Fear hath xoXaeriv, tormenty — But how does it appear that here it means " corrective chastisement ? "
We do not find then that Mr. G. has made out his case: viz. that "this term so far from encouraging, directly oppos- es, the supposition of never-ending torments." -f*
After this examination, that the meaning of the word may not be left in any degree of uncertainty, it becomes necessary to shew that xcXaffir is a very proper word to ex- press a vindictive punishment.
1. Andreas Caesar, in his commentary on Rev. xiv. 11, observes : " ' It is said that their smoke ascendeth up for ever and ever, that we may learn that xoXaajv, the punish- ment of the wicked is arzkivmrov, endless, as also the rest of the righteous is jwvjov, everlasting.'' — Here we have the word in dispute, connected with an adjective which ex- pressly fixes its meaning to endless ; and consequently here it must mean more than a corrective, limited punish- ment.
2. " The next example shall be taken from Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, who was cotemporary with, and the disciple of, John. He answered the pro-consul who threat- ened to burn him, 'You threaten me with a fire that burns for an hour, and shall shortly be extinguished, but are ig- norant that there is a fire of future judgment, and everlasting
»Vol. II. p. '205. fVol. II. )). 20a.
FITTURF. rUXrslIMF.S'T.
sig
xoXauewf, pxmishment^ reserved lor the ungodly."' * The antitheses^ in this passage, evidently point out a punish- ment endless in its duration : and as this venerable martyr has used this word in a sense entirely unlimited, we have a proof that xoXaair is a proper word for expressing a future, vindietive punishment.
3. " The next example is from Germanus, Patriarch of Constantinople, who, in his defence of Gregory Nyssene, shewed from scripture, ' That as the rest of the righteous is unspeakable, so also xoXaujv, the punishment of the wicked is aTsXsLiTryTov, endless and most intolerable.' f Here again the adjective connected with it, fixing its meaning to endless^ shews that more is meant than a limited and corrective pu- nishment.
4. " The last example shall be from Lucian. Tantalus, deploring his dreadful state in the infernal regions, as being ready to perish with thirst in the midst of abundance of water, says to Menippus, ' This is the very nature of my y) y-okxais punishment^ that my soul should thirst, as though it were a body."" This punishment is called, in a line or two below, xaraSiHrj, vindictive.'" ^
Hitherto, we have been proving that the future punish- ment of the wicked is not designed for their collection. It was necessary first to settle this point, because if that pu- nishment were intended for their correction, it probably would sooner or later have an end. — We now come to that part of the evidence which goes to prove that that punish- ment will be jDositively eternal.
The English Reader will very easily advert to the fol- lowing passages of Holy Writ : — " Then shall he say unto them on the left hand. Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. || — And these shall go away into everlasting punishment. § — Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off*, and cast them from thee ; it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into the everlasting fire. *[[ — The Lord
* Epis. Smyr. Eccles. f Photius, Cod. 233. ♦ Scrutator, p. W), !)0. II Matt. XXV. 41. § Matt. XXV. 46. •' Matt. xvii. 8.
p2
220
THE ETERNITY OF
Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ ; who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power. * — He that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, is in dan- ger of eternal damnation.-f- — These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest, to whom the mist of darkness is reserved Jbr ever. \ — These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding them- selves without fear ; clouds without water, carried about with winds ; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots ; raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame ; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness^r ever. || — If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation ; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of his holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb ; and the smoke of their torment a^cendeth up Jbr ever and ever.'''' §
Mr. G is well aware how this last passage will over- turn his whole hypothesis, and therefore he has taken some pains to expunge it. (1.) To shew that this passage relates to temporal events, he cites the eighth verse : " Babylon is fallen." ^ But Babylon may fall on earth first, and the Bahyhnians may be punished in hell afterwards. (2.) He objects that " the passage does not assert that the persons should be tortured for this length of time, but that the smolr thereof should ascend." ** This is curious enough, and may serve to shew to what shifts some men will condes- cend. How can the smoke of their torment ascend, when they are no longer tormented ? Whatever smoke may as- cend, cannot be the smoke of their torment.^ when their torment it at an end. (3.) To secure this point, however,
* 2 Thess. i. 7—9. f Mark iii. 2<J. % 2 Pet. ii. 17.
II Jude 12, 13. ^ Rev. xix. 9—11. ^I Vol. 11. p. 235.
** Vol. U. p. 235.
FUTUKE PUNISHMENT. 221
that the smoke of their torment may ascend when they are no lon<Tcr tormented, Mr. G. ventures to say that " the phrase is taken from Isa. xiv. 10." where it is said, " And the streams thereof shall be turned to pitch, and the dust thereof to brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch. It shall not be quenched day nor night : tlie smoke thereof shall go up for ever, &c. * — Now what is is there in all this passage to shew that a smoke can ascend which can properly be called the smoke (rf their torment^ when their torment has long ago ceased ?
The English Reader can have no doubt, whether, if the preceding translations be just, the doctrine of eternal punishment be true. But the premises are not allowed by our opponents. It is in vain to urge that our Translators understood something of Greek ; neither their learning nor their integrity can be relied on by a Socinian. It is there- fore a matter of absolute necessity to re-examine the subject.
The word aim is derived from two words olfi m which signify, cdways being. This etymology points out the ideal meaning of the word ojwv: which properly signifies the whole duration of that being to which it is applied, in that respect in which it is applied. It cannot reasonably be denied that Aristotle understood the meaning of it, and the use which was made of it by his cotemporaries and prede- cessors in Grecian literature. Speaking of God and celes- tial intelligences, he says, " They neither inhabit place, nor wax old by time, nor are subject to changes or passions, but living the best and most satisfying life Si^teXej tov azja-nrat aiuMoi^ they continue through all etermty. And this tJie ancients properli/ expressed by the word itself ; for the con- summation which contains the time of every one''s life, not supernatural, is called his xium. For the very same reason, the consummation of the whole heaven, and that which contains the whole infinite duration and infinity of all things, is floo/v, eternity, cfno m air.i sivxt i.O\.n^us mv bttcowixixv aS'avaTos x«i ^£ios, taking its name from always being, immortal and divine.'''' -f*
• Vol. 11. p. 23G. t Aris. dc caely, lib. 1. cap. 11.
p3
THE ETK UNITY OF
When this word is applied to the present stage of hu- man existence, it incKides the whole term of the natural life of the individual of whom it is predicated. Thus, accord- ing to Mr. G., " The Apostle Paul says, I will not eat flesh Ejf Tov oLimoi, for ever : " * that is during my natural life. But when it is applied to any beings as unconnected with the present limited duration, it is then used in speaking of beings whose duration is endless : and that state of those beings, the duration of which it is intended to mark, it indicates to be endless as their existence. This is the case in the following passages : — " If any one eat of this bread, he shall live [hereafter] ay rov aift;va,for ever. "I-— We have heard out of the law, that the Christ remaineth eiy tov aift;v«,for ever. J --His righteousness remaineth eis rov aiuvx, for ever. || — Being born again not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, of the word of God which liveth and abideth us rov aiuvx, for ever. § — The truth which shall be with us £is rov aicova, for ever." ^ — Now we call upon the Socinians to point out one single passage in which this phrase is applied to any being unconnected with this changing scene, in which it evidently defines a limited duration.
When this word is put in the plural with the same pre- position,e»y ms aicovxs, it does not imply " two eternities or two for-evers,*" as Mr. G. shrewdly objects, in Vol. II. p. 220. ; but includes both the present temporary and the future endless state. Let the Reader consider the following passa- ges ; — " The Creator who is blessed ejj- ms aiuvas, now and Jbr ever ; *" ** i. e. who is blessed by his creatures through
their present temporary, and their future eternal state
"Jesus Christ, who is over all God blessed sis rss aiuvas, now and for ever.^-j-i* But as this use of the word implies both the present measured^ and the future immeasurable dura- tion, it is never used in speaking of the punishment of the wicked. Yet from the use made of it in the places referred to, we may perceive that we have given the true meaning of the term, and that, as applied to ^J'nture duration, it still implies eternity.
* 1 Cor. viii. 13. f John vi. .51, 58. J John xii. 34.
II 2 Cor. \\. !». § 1 Pet. i. 23. % 2 John 2.
** Iloni. i. 25. f f Rum. ix. 25.
I'UTUUE PUNISHMENT. 223
Tlicre is a third phrase, liowever, which differs from both these : it is, sis tb? aiajvxs ruv atuvcov, whieh is generally translated, " /or ever and ft'rr," and might perhaps be rendered, " through the durations of durations." This form of speech is very intelligible, and may be properly called the superlative. What is " the holy of holies," but the most holy ^ What is " the heaven of heavens," but the highest heaven ? And what are " the durations of dura- tions," or, as some Socinians call them, " the ages of ages," but that duration which is \\\e g7xatest of all, that \s pr()j)cr eternity ? This phrase is used only on the most important occasions, and to indicate an unhmited duration. It is used : (1.) To point out the eternity of the Most High : " He that sat on the throne who liveth us ras aicuMocs ruv aiuvuv, for ever and ever." See Rev. iv. 9, 10. v. 14. x. 6. xv. 7. (2.) To mark the endless duration of his government : " He sliall reign £is rus (Hco-vas rcuv ociuvuv, forever and ever." See Rev. xi. 15. (3.) To indicate the everlasting praise which shall be rendered to him : " Blessing, honour, glory, and jiower, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb, usTHs aicjvas rcvv cxiuvcov, for ever and. ever." See Rev. v. 13. vii. 12. (4.) To describe the endless duration of the bless- edness of the righteous : " And they shall reign e»y rus uiwvas rcuv aiwvwv, for ever and ever." See Rev. xxii. 5. (5.) And finally, to describe the duration of the punishment of the wicked: " And her smoke rose up, sis ths onuvocs rcuv olmvuv, for ever and ever." See Rev. xiv. 11. xix. 3. xx. 10.
It is for the Socinians to shew where the Apostles have used this phrase, in a sense manifestly limited.
The adjective, aiuvios^ derives from the substantive, omv., its abstract meaning, and therefore admits and requires a similar application. This word Mr. G. thinks should be rendered lasting^ in conformity with what he deems the indefinite duration of an ajwv. Had the word «(a;vioy, been, in the view of the sacred writers, as indefinite as the word lasting, it could not have served their purpose. Notliing could be of greater importance in enforcing religion on the minds of mankind, than the difi'erence between time and eternit//. Nothing was more necessary to them, thcrcioie,
224 THE ETERNITY OF
than a definite term by which they might decisively distin- guish between things temporal and things eternal. Any periphrasis had been better than a word the meaning of which was indefinite- But the meaning of the word lasting is perfectly indefinite, and may include either a long or a short period of time, and therefore it does not at all distin- guish between those things which have an end, and those which Imve no end.
As the word aiwv has a definite meaning, and, when ap- plied to duration, always includes the whole period of that duration to which it refers, — and as when it refers to existence beyond this world, it always includes unmeasured duration, — the adjective also must have a definite meaning. With liberty, therefore, to make the same use of the transla- tion which is made of the original, we cannot render it bet- ter than by the word eternal.
This is precisely and distinctly the sense in which it is used by the sacred writers, and it is therefore the very word which they have adopted to distinguish interminable dura- tion from that which has an end. For instance: "Our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh out for us a far more exceeding and aiwviov, eternal weight of glory."" Again : " For the things which are seen are zspoaxaipa, tem- poral, but the things which are not seen are ajwv««, eternal!"* In these two places we find that aiuvioi is used to distinguish the things which h^ve no end, from those which are indeed " lasting,''^ but not everlasting. If the word had not an in- dependent power to make this distinction, it could not have answered the Apostle's purpose.
This word, then, is used to announce the unlimited dura- tion of things undoubtedly without limit. (1 .) It is put for the endless duration of God himself. He is called aiuvios 0£ov *' the everlasting God." f (2.) The endless life and blessed- ness of the righteous is thereby defined. " When yejuil they may receive you eis ras aiuvius ax.nvas, into everlasting habitations." \ This passage is cited rather than m any others, because it is obviously designed to distinguish be- tween that which Jails, and that Avhich shall not fail.
* 2 Cor. iv. 17, 18. ^ Rom. xvi. 20. * Luke xvi. 9.
FUTURE PUNISHMENT. 226
Again : " The God of all grace, who hath called us into his aicLviov^ eternal glory, after tliat ye have suffered, oXiyov, for a short season." * Here also the -word is used to dis- tinguish between that which is of short duration, and that which has no end. (3.) It is used to point out the duration of the punishment of the wicked, viz. in the passages already quoted, where it is translated, of course, eternal or everlasting. See Matt, xviii. 8. xxv. 41, 46, &c.
Mr. G. is aware that when these phrases are applied to God, and to the future blessedness of his saints, they mean an eternity. His opinion, however, is, that they " imply an indefinite duration which borrows its length from the subject to which they are applied." •{- If this were the case where is the sense of speaking so constantly of " lasting judgment, — " lasting damnation," " lasting fire," and " lasting punish- ment .''" Here is an obvious design always to attach to these important things the idea of their duration. But the word, it seems by which this is done, is a word which makes no distinction between a moment and eternity. " It means endless^ (says Mr. G.) only when the subject absolutely re- quires^ and evidently demonstrates^ that this undefined time, has not, and cannot have, any limit." % The length of that duration is, according to him, to be learned from the sub- ject to which the epithet is applied. But what can we learn of the duration implied in the indefinite word lasting^ from the subjects to which it is applied in the cases just now mentioned ? What duration is to be understood from the snh^QcX.?,, judgment y damnation, Jlre^ or punishment ? None at all. So Jesus Christ and his Apostles are to be supposed to speak frequently of the duration of future punishment without giving us any idea whether it continue one day, a thousand years, or through eternal ages. — We have, how- ever, abundant proof that the terms and phrases in question have a definite meaning, and that, roithout eternal aid, they have an intrinsic power to convey the idea oi proper eternity. We appeal to the following passages.
(1.) Of the phrase us rov aicovx, for ever. — " We have heard out of the law that Christ abidcth sis tov aiuva, for
* 1 Pet. V. 10. t Vol. II. p. 224. : Vol. ii. p. 224.
S26 THE ETEllXITY OF
ever ; and how sayest thou, The Son of man must be lift up ? * — And the servant abideth not in the house en ro v a icj\a^ for ever : but the Son abideth ejr tov ajwva, for ever, -j- — And the world pa^seth wway^ and the hist thereof : but he that doeth the will of God abideth ^is tov ajwva, for ever." \ — These passages need no comment. In each of them the phrase is used, independently of all circumstances, to decide the question of the eternity of the subject, in direct opposition to a limited duration.
(2.) Of the phrase eis ms aicovas ruv mcovcov, for ever and ever. — " And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth £»$• tbs- aiuvcis ra>v aicovuv, for ever and ever." || — Here we have no mean of ascertaining who it is whom they worshipped, but that he Uveth for ever and ever. The phrase must therefore contain in itself a, declara- tion of a proper eternity, independent of the subject.
(3.) Of the epithet a^coMtos, eternal. — " The things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen, are aimta^ eteriiaV^ — Here again the word in question is used, independently to distinguish a proper eternity^ from a limited duration. Will Mr. G. say, ' But the things whicli are not seen are naturally endless 'f Then why all this dis- pute .? Are not the future punishments of the wicked unseen, and are not they too eternal ?
The above remarks are confirmed by the authori- ties, which Mr. G. has produced for a very different purpose.
'* Parkhurst observes that rcow, in the Septuagint, gene- rally answers to the Hebrew olam, Avhich denotes ' time hid- den from man,' whether definite or indefinite, whether past or future." — He then quotes Leigh upon the Hebrew term olam^ — 1. " The Hebrew word gnolam, which interpreters sometimes render sternum, sometimes perpetuum, sometimes SiECtdum, designs an absolute perpetuity, eternity, when it is affirmed of God, or other eternal things.'''' •[[ — Here then it is granted, that when these words are applied to men in the world to come, where men are eternsl, it implies " an aJjso-
* John xii. 34. -f- John viii. 35. * 1 John ii. 17
II Rev. V. 14. § 2 Cor. iv. 18. ^\ Vol. H. p. 215. 216,
rCTlTKE I'lNMSIIMENT. 227
lute eternity.'''' — 2. " A periodical or circumscribed perpetui- ty, for the condition of the thing, when it is affirmed of things mutable in their own nature." * — This is precisely Avhat we contend for : (1.) That when these phrases are used concerning present things, they comprehend the loholc of their present existence : (2.) That when they are used concerning things future, they comprehend the zoliolc of their future existence.
We now attend to IMr. G.'s objections :
1. All his arguments drawn from the application of these terms io present things, prove nothing with respect to their application to the zaorld to come. A volume of quota- tions, therefore, of this kind, answer no purpose. The Reader will best understand this reply, if he consider that the phrase " as long as you live^'' when applied to any in- dividual, is equivalent to the term a/wv. Now this phrase when applied to the present life, means a limited period; but this does not hinder that when applied to the future state of human existence, it should imply an unlimited period, an eternity.
2. There is no weight in the objection taken from the use of the plural, -j* It is true, there can only be one eter- nity ; but there have been, and there may still be, many jEONs in time. Every divine dispensation is an aon, and every man's natural life is his aon ; but the dispensation of rewards and punishments, and the future life of all men, is but one a?on, — an eternity.
3. Nor is there any strength in the objection, that " the words in the original admit of a preposition ; as zspo "/^poMuv «»- <yvj«v;"'''+ because the word ojwvjor, we havealready granted, does not, when it is applied to things in this world, properly mean eternal. Our translators have, therefore, very justly translated that phrase, " before the world began." On this this answer we rely. The preposition 'jipo, is, however, sometimes put for napa, which with b. genitive case, means
Jrom.
4. " But the words in the original admit of a particle Jblhicing them, which denotes a time aj'tcr that denomina-
* Vol. II. p. 216. t Vol. II. p. 220. : Vol. II. p. 221.
228 THE ETERNITY OF
ted everlasting. * The Lord shall reign for ever and ever ;' literally according to the Septuagint, ' from (Bon to <eon and farther.''''''* To this we answer; (1.) That the words do not need any particle to add to their meaning ; as we have already shewn, (2.) The writers of the New Testament do not make use of any such particle, even when their purpose is to speak of eternity in the most absolute manner. (3.) The use of such a particle does not prove, that a proper eter- nity is not expressed without it. We often say 'for evermore,-' but this does not prove that we mean by *for ever,' a limited duration.
5. Lastly, — "The very strongest expressions," for ever and ever, " are used to denote limited duration." -f — We will examine the passages which Mr. G. has cited in proof of this.
(1.) " So shall I keep thy law continually, for ever and ever, during my life. Psalm cxix. 44.""
Now, how is it proved that the Psalmist does not keep the law of God, literally,^r ever and ever ?
(2.) " He hath also stablished them [the heavens] for ever and ever. Psalm cxlviii. 6. Yet, says the Apostle Peter, are the heavens ' reserved unto fire, and shall pass away with a great noise.' 2 Peter iii. 7, 10." +
The question is, *' Does the Psalmist speak this of the visible or of the invisible heavens ? Which soever way this question is answered, it will not make against the pre- ceding statement. But the difficulty of answering this ques- tion, renders this passage a very improper one for determin- ing another question on either side.
The attentive and judicious Reader will observe, that throughout the whole of this examination, we have found the words in dispute to be uniformly used according to the rule at first laid down, without one exception. It remains therefore that our Translators, who were not so ignorant of
* Vol, II. p. 221, t Vol. II. p. 222.
X Thanks to Mr. G. for this concession ! So the heavens which are to be destroyed and renewed, are the visible heavens. Jesus Christ then, who •' maketk all things new," v/i\l ereate a. " neu) heaven and d^new earth." He is therefore dt proper, and not merely a moral. Creator. See p. 70 — 73.
FUTURE PUNISHMENT. 229
Greek as the Socinians insinuate, have given the proper meaning of them, and that wliencver those words are appHcd to the invisible world, or to the world to come, they uni- formly express a proper etcnuty.
That this is equally true in respect to future ptinisli- mcnts, as in respect to future racards^wiW be further obvious from the antithetical connection of the one with the other. *' Some shall awake to everlastiiig life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.'''' * " These shall go away into everlasting- punishment, but the righteous into everlast'ing li/e.'''' -f- These ant'Ulieses would be very improper, unless the word were allowed to mean the same duration in both parts of the sentence.
But Mr. G. translates the word aio^vior, lasting; and maintains, that, in both parts of the passage, this is its proper meaning. The I'rfe of the righteous he believes to be everlast'ing, not because it is termed cEonian ; but because, in other passages he meets \vith assertions, such as the fol- lomng : — " Neither can they die any more : — It (the body) is raised in incorruption : — This mortal must put on immor- tal'ity : — So shall we be wavrore, ever witli the Lord : — An inheritance that fadeth not away :"" &c. % — We do not in- tend to argue precisely in the same manner. It has been proved that the word here means everlast'ing. We shall now shew, That the doctrine of eternal punishment agrees with the general scope of Divine revelation. This argument divides itself into several parts, each of which will be found to bear on this general truth.
1. According to the uniform tenor of scripture, the present life is the time of probation, and the time for Avork- ing out our salvation. — The following passages will serve to prove this.
" To-day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your heart, as in the provocation, and in the day of temptation in the wilderness : when your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works. |] — Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no
♦Dan. xii.2. f Matt. xxv. 46. J Vol. II. p. 217.
11 I'balin. xcv. 7—11 • Heb. iii. 7—11
S30
THE ETERNITY OF
work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the
grave wliitlier thou goest. * — Seek ye tlie Lord while
he may he founds call ye upon him while he is near.f
We then, as workers together v/ith him, beseech you
also, that ye receive not the grace of God in vain : For
he saitli, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and
in the day of salvation have I succoured thee : behold,
now is the accepted time : behold now is the day of salvation. \
—Come, for all things are now ready. |1 — Be not deceived,
God is not mocked ; for whatsoever a man soweth [here]
that shall he reap [hereafter.] For he that soweth to his
Jlesh [which he can do only while he is here, in thejlesh,] shall
of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the
Spirit, shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting. And let us
not be weary in well-doing ; for in due season, [in the time
of harvest] we shall reap, if we faint not [in seed-time.] As
we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men
[before the opportunity slip,] especially unto them who are
of the household of faith."" § A clear proof that this is the
time to sow to the Spirit, while yet we are connected,
not only with " the household of faith,"" but with " all
men.''''
2. As this is the time to work out our salvation, it is the only time ; and they who neglect it will be excluded from the kingdom of heaven. Such is the language of the follow- ing passages :
" So I sware in my wrath. They shall not enter into my rest. — And to whom sware he, that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not ? So we see they could not enter in because of unbelief. Let us therefore fear, lest a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to [should actually] come short of it. ^ — And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came, and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage : and the door was shut. Afterward came also the other virgins, say- ing. Lord, Lord, open to us. But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not. ** — Then said one
* Eccles. ix. 10. f Isa. Iv. fi. +2 Cor. vi. 1, 2.
il Lukexiv. 17. § Gal. vi.7— 10. If Heb. iii. 11, 18, ID. iv. 1.
»* Matt. x.wi. 11, 12.
FUTURE PlVtSTIMF.KT. 231
unto him, Are there few that be sa^ed ? And he said unto them, Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. Wlien once the Master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying. Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not wlicnce ye are : Depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out. * — Looking diligently, lest any man Jail of tlie grace of God, lest there be any for- nicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birth-right. For ye know how that afterward, when he zcvidd have inherited the blessing; he was rejected : for he found no yj/ac^ of rejjentance, though he sought it carefully with tears, f — He that beheveth not the Son shall not see life ; but the wrath of God abideth on him. | — I say unto you. That none of those men which were bidden [and refused to come] shall taste of my supper. [| — I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins : whither I go, ye cannot come. § — If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace, but now they are hid from thine eyes. ^ — KnoAV ye not that
the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God 'f
But who are these " unrighteous" persons ? They whose sins are such as can only be committed in this life, and whom the Apostle proceeds to describe thus : " Be not de- ceived ; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor ex- tortioners, shaD inherit the kingdom of God." ** — " He that is unjust, let him be unjust still ; and he which is filthy, let liim be filthy still." ft
Now the Socinian doctrine with which these passages are contrasted, supposes that there is another season of pro- bation, when the present shall be at an end, and that they
* Luke xiii. 23—28. f Heb, xii. IC, 17. + John iii. .Ifi. || Luke xiv.24. § .Tuhu viii.2L % Lukcxi.\,42. *« 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10. ft liev. xxii. 11,
232 THE ETERKITY OF
who neglect the present, and die in their sins, shall after all find place for repentance ; — that they shall be able to enter in ; — that they shall taste of the supper; — that they sJmllsee life ; — and that they shall Jlnall^ inherit the hingdom of God. So true it is that Christianity is one thing, and Socinianism another. *
3. The punishment of the wicked is often described in such a manner as is altogether inconsistent with their " final restoration to virtue and happiness.""
(1.) The following passages describe their punishment under the idea of burning.
" Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into his garner ; but will burn up the chaiF with unquenchable fire, -j* — Gather ye to- gether first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them ; but gather the wheat into ray barn. X — For it is im- possible for them who were once enlightened, and shall fall away, to renew them again to repentance, seeing they cru- cify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. For the earth which drinketh in the rain that Cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God ; but that which beareth thorns and briars is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing, whose end is to be burned." ||
These appropriate representations of the nature and de- sign of future punishment, are very unfavourable to the Socinian system. The burning of chaff or of tares, is the way to destroy them ; but not to convert them into wheat. In like manner, the burning of barren and " rejected" o-round with the scorching heat of the sun, and cursing it with more than the want of that " blessing from God," is not the way to render it fruitful. And this is the very case which the Apostle has described, the giving up to perpetual
* To these might properly be subjoined those passages which declare that the wicked have their portion in this life. See Psalm xvii. 14. Luke vi. 24. xvi. 25.
There are certain passages which speak of some sins which cannot l)e
for"-iven ; but as these are not directly opposed to Mr. G.'s hypothesis, they
are not here quoted under that head. The following are of the number.
Heb. vi.4. X.26, 27. Luke xii. 10. Mark iii. 28, 29. Matt. xii. iU, 32.
f Matt. iii. 12, + Matt. xiii. .".0. 1| Heb. vi. 4— 8.
rr:Ti'i;r. itxisttmkvt. 888
barrenness, a tract of land wliidi has been cultivated to no purpose ; or, in other words, the givinj^ up to destruction, and to a curse, tliose whom it is " impossible to renew again to repentance.""
(2.) The following passages describe the punisiuncnt of the wicked, under the ulvaoi' dcstriicf'ton.
" Wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction. * — The vessels of wrath fitted for destruc- ti(m. -f- — Who shall be punished with everlasting destruc- tion." I
It is easy to see that the idea of dcstrud'ton is perfectlv irreconcilable with the idea of everlasting hlesscdnesn, and tliat destruction is a very unlikelv mean to restore mankind to virtue and bliss. Yet this is the doctrine which we op- pose, viz. " that the object of punishment is still to guide them to reformation and happiness." || Destruction is as likely to restore the sick to health, as the sinner to holiness.
(3.) The following passages describe the punishment of the wicked, under the idea of perdition.
" None of them is lost, but the son of perdition. § — For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul ? ^ — If our gospel be hid, it is hid to them which are lost." **
Now if the wicked in hell endure only di futherlij ehas- tisemcnt, they are no more loist than those whose diseases are not incurable, and who have fallen into the hands of a skil- ful and affectionate physician : they are rather ^^uttd tlian lost. At this rate, lo fall is to rise ; rain is recovery ; dain- tmtion is salvation ; and perdition is restoration. It is true, " The Son of man came to seek and to save that which Avas lost."" " A man may be lost in desert, and yet saved mjlict : or he may suffer loss, and yet himsel/'he saved : but he can- not be lost (mjltct) so as to be east away, and yet be finally saved; for these are perfect contraries." -|"}- It is also true, that " he that loses his life shall find it ;" that is, he that loses his natural life for the sake of Christ, shall not, in the
* Matt. vii. i;?. tRoin.ix.22. ♦ 2 Thess. i. ».
If Vol. U. p. 200. § .loliii wii. 12. \ Alatt. xvi. 2(i.
'* 2 ("or. iv. :; tt I'lillii's 1th LtMti r to Vitllcr.
U
234 THE ETERNITY OF
end, be a loser ; because an eternal life shall be his reward. But is it not equally true that " whosoever will save his life shall lose it ? "" in other words, that whoever preserves his natural life by the neglect of his duty, shall lose it, and shall find no reward in the life to come, but shall lose eternal life ?
(4.) The following passages describe future punishment under the idea of death.
" The wages of sin is death. * — Knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, -f- — Sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death, j — He that converteth the sinner from the error of his way, shall save a soul from death. || — The lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life, was cast into the lake of fire."" §
By what mode of argumentation is it to be proved that death is the mean of life ? It is true, there is a Jirst death which is followed by di first resurrection, and over those who partake that resurrection, " the second death hath no power."" But Mr. G. stands engaged to prove, not only that death shall be followed by life — that there will be a second resur- rection of those who are cast into the lake of fire, which is the second death, — ^but that the second death is the mean by which that resurrection shall be accomplished. If there be any meaning in words, if burning-, destruction, perdition, and death, mean any thing, they cannot mean a salutary and temporary chastisement.
Upon these, and such terms as these, Mr. G, thinks no enlargement necessary. " If these terms are to be taken literally, (he says) they are directly opposite to eternal dura- tion in torture : nor can any hyperbole of figure make them accord with it." ^
(1.) Mr. G. evidently thinks that these terms involve the idea of annihilation. This is a gross mistake. Combustion may dissolve the present construction of any combustible matter, but does not annihilate it. A building may be destroyed ; but the materials of it are not thereby annihilatea.
* Rom. vi. 23. f Rom. i. 32. + James i. 15.
II James v. 20. § Rev. xx. 14, 15. 1[ Vol. Il.p.210.
FrTtnr. imn't^^iimkkt. 2,'}5
The lo.'i.i of any tlilno- is not tlio cjiniliUation of it. A man may be lost in a wilderness, in a pit, or in the country of an enemy, and be extremely wretched, who does not therefoiv lose his existence. Death is not iumihilution : it may put an end to the beauty, the vigour, the enjoyment of the body, but cannot reduce it to notlting.
(2.) Mr. G. must either ajjply these terms to the nature of the punishment of the wicked, or to the remit and comlii- siun of it. If he apply them to the nature of it, let it be remembered that according to him it is a lasting punish- ment ; but on Avhatever principles he supjioses the meaning of them to be reconciled with ani/ duration, on the same principles it is reconcilable with endless duration. If a lasting punishment may with propriety be termed a lasting burning, a lasting destruction, a lasting 2>^'}'(litio)i, or a lasting death, — an " everlasting punishment " may with equal propriety be termed an " everlasting burning,^'' an " everlasting destruction^'' an everlasting ^^erdition, or an .everlasting death. — If, on the other hand, Mr. G. apply these terms to the residt and conclusion of future punish- ment, * he cannot reconcile them with '•'■ final reformation and happiness ;" because to be burned in hell is not to be blessed in heaven ; — destruction is not restoration ; — perdi- tion is not salvation ; — and death h not everlasting- life.
4. The future punishment of the wicked is frequently- represented as xcithout remedij.
" He that being often reproved hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy, -f- — Because there is wrath, beware, lest he take thee away witli his stroke, then a great ransom cannot deliver thee. ^ — He shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no
* It is not easy to say which of these opinions he adopts. Perhaps he adopts either, /)ro tempme, just as serves a present purpose. On one occa- sion, he says. When " it is most peremptorily aiHrmed that the wicked shall reap corruption, perish, be destroyed, and die a second time," these expressions " fix the sense of tlie word lasting-, limiting its meaning: to an age." Vol. II. p. 22^. In another place he says, •' The second deatli is to constitute their state of sufferhig." Vol. II. p. 27.'?. But inconsistcncj' is the necessary result of want of system, and of ojiposition to the doctrines of the gospel.
-f- Vfo\. \\\\. 1. * .li)l> xxxvi. \'6.
u2
SS6
THE ETERKITY OF
mercy * — Because I have called, and ye refused, I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded ; but ye have set at nouglit all my counsel, and would none of my reproof; I also will laugh at your calamity, I will mock when your fear cometh. When your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind ; when distress and anguish cometh upon you ; then shall they call upon me, hut I zo'ill not answer : they shall seek me early, but they sliall not find me. f — And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulph fixed : so that they which would pass from hence cannot ; neither cmi they pass to ns that would come from thence.^'' \
The following passages of the same order will need a little examination.
" He will burn up the chaff Avith unquenchable fire. || — If thy hand offend thee, cut it off : it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than, having two hands, to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched : where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."" § The same words are twice repeated. Here are two strong ex- pressions, the one asserting that the fire is unquenchable '; the other that it is not quenched. — Now let us hear Mr. G.
(1.) " Here it is obvious to remark, that the duration is asserted not of the s^ifferer^ but of the instruments of his suffering or punishment. It is not said that the person of the culprit shall never perish, but that the Jire and the zoorm died not, being ever in constant readiness to seize their victim." ^
" Here it is obvious to remark :" [1.] That when Mr. G. states, " It is not said that the person of the culprit shall oiever perish,'''' he speaks ambiguously. Does he mean to say that " the person of the culprit shall be annihilated F" Then what becomes of his " final reformation and happi- ness." [2.] That he grants, " the Jire and the worm died not." [3.] That he grants, " they are ever in constant readiness to se'ize their victim :" but to what purpose when
* James ii. l.-?. f Prov. i, 24—28. J Luke xvi. 26.
II Mat. iii. 12. § Mark ix. 43, 44, &c. ^ Vol. II. p. 232.
FUTURE PUNISHMENT. 237
they have no victim to seize ? [4.] That the worm and the fire remain for no purpose, if " the culprit'" do not continue to feel them. Tliev m'e no longer " the instruments of punishment," when no one is punished by them ; nor can they be any longer terrible than while the " culprit is likely to suffer by them. At this rate, the ncvcr-dijing worm, and the nnqucnchahJc fire, are but a chimera. [5.] That our Lord denominated the worm, their worm. But it cannot be denominated their worm, any longer than it preys upon them. [C] That the analogy between the representative and the thing represented, is lost, unless the worm die soon after it has devoured or lost its prey, and unless the fire be quenched when its fuel is consumed. Now our Lord indu- bitably intended to represent the culprit as the prey of the worm, and the chaff as the fuel of the fire. If, therefore, the worm die not, the sinner will continue its prey ; and if the fii'e be not quenched, the chaff will continue to be its fuel.
(2.) " It should be kept in mind, (Mr. G. subjoins) that ■ the duration even of these instruments of punishment was not eternal, but only for a length of ages, for the worm is dead, and the fire has actually been quenched." *
Then let the transgressors rejoice and be exceeding glad ! There is now no danger of everlasting fire ; for " the length of ages" is already past. — But stop ! Has not Mr. G. just been saying that " the fire and the worm died not, being ever in constant readiness to seize their victim.?" What wonder then, that he should boldly contradict Jesus Christ, when he does not even reverence himself? Our Lord has said, " When the Son of man shall come in his glory, he shall sit upon the throne of his glory, and shall say imto them on his left hand. Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire." That fire therefore is not yet quenched.
(3.) " But hell-fire (ysevva rou zyupo?, the hell of fire) is the fire in the valley of Hinnom.'''' -f-
No, it is not. The phrase may be used in allusion to that fire, but hell-fire is " the lake of fire which is the
• Vol. 11. !>. 2;J2. t Vol.11. |.. Jll.
238 THE ETEllNITY OF
second death :"" " the fire prepared for the devil and his angels." The fire of that valley is long ago quenched ; but our Lord threatens the wicked with another hell of fire. "Whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of rnv ysEvvav t» 'nupos, the hell oijirey * See also Matt. v. 29- X. 28. Luke xii. 5. Luke xxiii. 33. — And that is the fire which our Lord declares shall not he quenclied.
(4.) "But the expression is taken from the last verseof the prophecy of Isaiah, where the prophet predicts the dispersion of the Jews, and the new aera, or Christian dispensation, into which the Gentiles were to be admitted. "-f-
That the words of Isaiah have no deeper meaning than the temporal destruction of the unbelieving Jews, wants some proof. It is generally more proper to interpret the language of theProphetsby that of our Lord, than to interpret the words of our Lord by those of the Prophets. But whatever the Prophet meant, the meaning of our Lord is obvious. The latter, when he speaks of the never-dying worm, and the unquenchable fire, makes a contrast between " entering into life" or, as he afterwards speaks, " entering into the . kingdom of God," and being " cast into hell-fire : where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.'"' — We need not add, that the unquenchable fire," in which the chaff shall be burned, is not a temporal but ajuture punish- ment.— We proceed to the consideration of the next :
" The Son of man goeth, as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed ! It had been good for that man if he had not been born." |
The argument commonly founded on these words, is plain and conclusive. If Judas should, at any future pe- riod, be restored to "virtue and eternal happiness," as there is no assignable proportion between time and eternity, it would be good for him that he was born. The words of our Lord are, therefore, perfectly inconsistent wi'h such a restoration.
Mr. G. is aware of this, and therefore does not deny that the argument is conclusive, but attempts to remove the foundation of it by a new tran.sljition of the passage. The
«• Malt. V. 22. fVol. I!. 2X\. + Mall. xxvi. 21.
FUTURE PUNISHMENT. 239
literal translation, he says, is, " Good were it for hhtiy if that man had notheen born." — He then applies the expres- sion, " that man,"" not to Judas but " to Jesus." * If this be just, the argument falls of course. But it falls ahne. We beg leave, however, to demur.
(1.) Our Lord begins with speaking of hii^self, as " the Son of man ; " but of Judas he speaks in the first instance, as " that man." When he speaks of himself a second time, he still styles himself " the Son of man." When therefore he speaks of " that man" a second time, he means not him- self whom throughout he styles " the Son of man," but of Judas, of whom he had begun to speak as " that man."
(2.) When Mr. G. began to translate the passage litcraUi/, he oujjht to have done so altogether. It would then stand thus : — " Good it were auru, for himself^ if that man had not been born." The sense is then precisely what our Translators have given. They have changed only the idiom. So true it is that those men once understood Greek.
5. Lastly, The state of pumsliment is rej)resented as the Jinul state of impenitent sinners.
" Ye have obeyed from the heart (says St. Paul to the Romans) that form of doctrine which was delivered you. — Now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness ; and the end, ever- lasting life.*" -f- But " what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God ? " | The answers are ready : Their end shall " be according to their works. || — Whose end is to be burned. § — Whose end is destruction. ^ — For the end of these things is death." ** — No argument is neces- sary here but that of Mr. G., who says, " We are absolutely obliged, if the next state is final, as we would not set the scripture at odds with itself, to understand the word aonhui,
* everlasting,' when joined with the life of the righteous, [or the death of the wicked,] in the endless sense." -f-f
The result of all this reasoning is, that the future pu- nishment of the wicked, according to the uniform language of scripture, will be eternal. To this result, though not
* Vol. II. p. 231. t Rom. vi. 17,22. X 1 I'et. iv. 17. H 2 Cor. xi. 15. § Ilcb. vi. '6. <: PiiU. jii. U'. *»Roni.vi.21. ft Vol. II. p. 227.
240 THE ETEKXITY OF
only fairly deduced from scripture, but directly and repeat- edly affirmed by Jesus Christ and his Apostles, Mr. G. and the Socinians have many objections. However we may be persuaded that it is founded in truth, we must examine how far it is affected by his assault. His objections are of two kinds : the first are philosophical, the second are scriptural. As we do not allow to abstract reasonings on divine subjects that importance which Mr. G. attaches to them, we shall consider,
I. His scriptural objections.
1. In examining what the scriptures teach concerning a future state, Mr. G. pursues the subject much at length, and with considerable propriety, until he finds the wicked finally separated from the righteous, and " cast into a lake of fire, which is the second death."" * He then with vast, but fruitless, labour endeavours to prove, that as the first death is followed by a resurrection, there will also be a second resurrection .^ of those who are " hurt by the second death." Now for the proof, which must be clear and co- gent. We follow him step by step.
" The terms used relating to this second death, are pre- cisely the same [as are used concerning the death of the body] and many of them imply another resurrection.'''' t — The proof ! — " The principal term used is ^JireJ Now the effect of fire- as generally used in comparison, is to pui'ify." \ — Sometimes it is ; but not always. It depends upon the nature of the subject to be burned. " Gold, silver, and precious stones'" are purified in the fire; but "wood, hay, and stubble"" are consumed by it. The question therefore is, Do the scriptures ever borrow their ideas oi the pumshments qf'hell from the purification of any thing by fire .'' Mr. G. will find the passage if possible. — " When therefore the wicked are compared to 'fuel for fire,"* to chaff', tares, wither- ed branches, &c., it should be kept in mind, that such fuel neither continues burning without end, nor is annihilated. Its state is changed by the action of the fire." || — Sensible men know that a proof derived form a scriptural metaphor, i)ursued beyond the line to which tlic scriptures pursue it,
* Vol. II. p. 27-', 27;5. t Vol. 11. p. 27;!. + Vul. II. i..27i. || Vul.II. }..271.
FUTURK rrXlSHMEXT. 241
is always at best but of a dubious kind. It is an universal rule that the metaphor, however far pursued, must not he changed. For this reason we ask. Did any man ever think of making worthless wood " fuel for fire," to render it fit for building a temple ? of burning chaff or tares, to convert them into wheat .'* or of casting " withered branches" into the fire, to make them fruitful ? Yet on such a distortion of scriptural metaphors, hangs all the hope which Mr. G. administers to the damned !
But he proceeds : " The very expression of a first resur- rection, implies a second resurrection of those over whom the second death hath power.*" * — The book of Revelation does speak of a second resurrection ; but not of a reeurrec- tion of the damned from hell. In Rev. xx. 6. it is said, "Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrec- tion, they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years." After these thousand years are expired comes the second resurrection : verses 13, 14, 15. " And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and Hades delivered up the dead Avhich were in them : and they were judged every man according to their works. And whosoever was not written in the book of life, was cast into the lake of fire. — This is the second death." — So the second death follows the second resurrection, — the resurrection of all the dead. Where now is the rcsurrecticm from the second death to be found ? — But " the state also in which they are placed, is to undergo a similar change."" "f- — Not so. The state from icliicli they are brought to judgment — " death and hades" which deliver up tlie dead, " are cast into the lake of Jire, which is the second death.'''' But when is the lalve of fire to be cast into the lahc of fire ? AVhen is the second death to die ? Rev. xx. 13 — 15. — " This will constitute the supreme and last victory of Jesus Christ." | — Not the destruction of the lake of fire, but of the^'/-,v^ deaths and of hades. Mr. G. alludes to 1 Cor. xv. Now the whole of that chapter speaks of the resurrection of the bodies of " those zcho are Chrisfs at his coming.'''' " When this mortal [body] shall have put on immortality, then shall be
*\<)1. II. i>. 274. t Vol. 11. p. 275. ; Vol. II. i>. 27f;.
242 THE ETERNITY OF
brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallow- ed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting ? O a^n, Jmdes, where is thy victory" * — This chapter therefore shuts up the damned in despair, for " the last enemy that shall be destroyed is [the^r*^] death." But the lake of fire into
which that is cast, the second death, still remains Now Mr.
G. may " know how these positive assurances are parried, and the argument evaded ;''-f- and that this defeat decides the fate of Socinianism.
2. He does not think it necessary to argue much from scripture authority, on the divine attributes of wisdom, justice, and goodness, because he is so much more at home in arguing jyJiilosoijMcan?/ on such topics. He condescends, however, to remind us that it is an eminent Christian duty to " imitate the imconjined benevolence of Deity." \ — We will take for granted that by " unconfined benevolence," he means benevolence to all men. But why no mention of the imitation of his justice ? We acknowledge that Jesus Christ has said, " Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father is merciful. Judge not, and ye shall not be judged." Mr. G. certainly does not suppose that all judgment of each other is to be avoided, any more than that God promises that we shall in no sense be judged. We are forbidden to judge and condemn each other, (1.) because we cannot always judge aright, and may possibly condemn the innocent . (2.) because we have not authority to judge and condemn, but ought to refer many things to the Judge of all. " Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath, for it is written. Vengeance is mine, I will repay."" || Our being forbidden to take ven- geance, does not imply that God will not, but rather that he will, take vengeance. There are, however, proper persons, who ought to imitate, in their sphere, even the justice of God : " the ministers of God, who bear not the sword in vain ; revengers to (execute) wrath upon him that doeth evil.'''§ These are taught to administer retributive justice, in distant imitation of "the Judge of all the earth.""
* 1 Cor. XV. 54—57. f Vol. H. p. 278. : Vol. 11. p. 279, 280.
II Rom. 12. xix. § Roiu. xiii. i.
FUTUHE PUNISHMENT. 24^
3. Mr. G. next " considers some of the parables of our Saviour." — "The person who is not reconciled to his bro- ther, shall not be discharged till he ha^ paid the last far- thing." * — Certainly a debtor cannot in justice be imprison- ed any longer than while his debt is paid. When therefore our sins are spoken of under the idea of debts, such language must be held. But then the imprisonment of a debtor, how- ever long it may continue, does nothing tOAvards the pay- ment of his debt. It therefore lies upon Mr. G., if he argue thus, to shew by what means a debtor in the prison of hell, is to pay the debt of sin. The truth is, that his inference is only the abuse of a metaphor. Our Lord has nowhere spoken of the actual payment of the debt of sinners, nor of their release from punishment ; but has, in this metaphorical language, assured us that a sinner shall receive the punishment due to his crimes. Of the duration or end of that punishment, he has here said nothing.
" Dives is represented as immediately beginning to im- prove as soon as his punishment commences." f — Is this ■perfectly clear from his wishing "hisbrethren to be warned .^"" Not unless it can be made to appear, that before that time he tcished them to go to that place of torment. Might not this wish proceed, as is generally supposed, from an appre- hension that the perdition of his brethren would increase his misery.'' But if Mr. G.'s hyjoothesis be just, Dives must by this time be so much improved as to have passed the impas- sable gulf. The truth is, that the conclusion is perfectly arbitrary, and that Mr. G. administers to Dives a consola- lation which father Abraham refused. That which Mr. G. administers, would have been more than a drop of water to cool his tongue.
4. Again : " The punishments of the Jews are represent- ed as evils tending to produce greater good in themselves.""! — One example, at least, might have been given, that we might judge whether they were punishments or chastise- ments. We give one of an opposite kind : " And men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name of God, which hath power over these plagues ; and repented not to
' Vol. II. p. 280. t \\A. II. p. 281. : Vul, JI. p. 281. II Kcv. xvi. !».
244
THE ETEKXITY OF
give him glory," || — Nay, we can find such an example among the Jews : " Why should ye be stricken any more ? Ye will revolt more and more."* — But if, on the other hand, a thousand instances could be given, of the benefits accruing from the chastisement of those who are in a state of probation, they would prove just nothing with respect to the effects of the punishment of those who are gone to the place of retribution.
5. Mr. G. has quoted Rom. v. 12 — 21. the sum of which is, " Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound : That as sin reigned unto death, so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ." — He has deduced no argument from it, but undoubtedly expects the Reader to infer from it, that every soul must be finally re- stored. The Reader will draw his inference just according to his previous opinion. We observe, however : (1.) That as all the blessings mentioned in this passage depend upon " Jesus Christ," they cannot belong to those who " deny the Lord that bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction." (2.) That the blessings here described belong to those who " receive abundance of grace, and of the gift of righteousness." (verse 17.) But what does this prove concerning those who "receive the grace of God in vain f-^- and who " have not submitted to the righteoesness [which is the gift] of God ?" \ (3.) That one of the blessings here mentioned, is, " of many offences into justification," (verse 16.) or '\justijicati07i oflifeP (verse 18.) But what does that prove concerning those who die in their sins, and are finally condemned to the second death ; who " shall not see life ,-"|| in a word, whom Mr. G. supposes not to he Justified, but to be finally condemned ? (4.) That one of the blessings here mentioned is, that certain persons " shall much more reign in life by one, Jesus Christ," (verse 17.) whereas, Mr. G. himself grants that the wicked, at the best, shall much less reign in life : that they will be '•^Jbr ever exclud- ed Jrom the society of the rig-hteous."" § — So much easier was it for Mr. G. to quote this passage, than to extract from it his doctrine !
* Isa. i. .5. t 2 Coi. vi. 1. + Rom. x. 3.
i| John iii. 36. § Vol. II. i>. 27».
FUTURE PUNISHMF.XT.
6. Mr. G. next attempts to establish the doctrine of uni- versal restoration. For this purpose he quotes tlie following scriptures.
(1.) Rom. viii. 12 — 23. — St. Paul say.':, that " the crea- ture itself shall be delivered from the bondage of corrup- tion, into the glorioufi liberty of the children of God." These are the words which Mr. G. marks as eviphatical. Now lie says that " the wicked will be Jbr ever excluded from the society of the righteous, the Christian society.*"* If so, they cannot be restored to " the glorious liberty of the children of Godr The passage does not, therefore, and cannot refer to them. Nor can it, by any fair means, be made to support any scheme of universal salvation or restoration. The Apostle speaks of the accomplishment of this deliverance, as taking place on " the manifestation of the sons of God."" (verse 19.) This manifestation he calls " the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body." (verse 23.) Now the time of the redemption of the bodies of the saints, is pre- vious to the universal judgment; and therefore cannot be justly supposed to be the time of universal restoration. — Perhaps the passage is best explained by the words of St. Peter, where he speaks of " the production of new lieavens, and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteous- ness." f
(2.) " That all things might be gathered in one Christ."" \ — For the reason just mentioned, this passage cannot answer Mr. G."'s purpose. The wacked are not to be made one society (body,) with the righteous. Besides this, St. Paul's w^ords are, " That in the fulness of times, avaxe^aXai- u'^x'j'^M, he may bring all things again under a head, or sum up all things, in Christ, whether things in heaven, or things on carth.''''\\ Now the fulness qf times are the times of the gospel dispensation. " When the fulness qf time was come, God sent forth his Son." § Again : The Apostle makes no mention of things in hell ; but only of things in heaven, and on earth.
* Vol. II. p. 278. t 2 Pet. iii. l.i. ♦ Vol. II. p. 281. || Kph. i. 10. § Gal.iv.4.
246
THE KTERXTTY OF
(3.) " I saw every creature in heaven, in earth, undei the earth, and in the sea, and all that were in them, praising God." * — Is this to prove that instead of " weeping, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth," both men and devils will praise God in hell ? This would be an innovation in the kingdom of darkness ! But creatures in hell are not men- tioned. If this be not the design with which it is cited, it cannot answer Mr. G.'s purpose.
Before we proceed, the Reader will remark that the ad- vocates for the limitation of future punishment, generally distinguish between universal restoration, and universal sal- vation. Mr. G. has now declared himself for restoration. We must not, however, look for consistency. He endea- vours to take every advantage of those scriptures which speak of the salvation of mankind. The scriptural term, salvation, has a meaning very different from that which Mr. G. wishes to attach to it. To be saved, in scripture, is the reverse of being condenmed. " He that believeth shall be saved ; but he that believeth not shall be damned.'''' -f- But our opponent means by it a perfectly different thing, — a re- storation to virtue and happiness, subsequent to the execution of a sentence of righteous condemnation. After this ob- servation we proceed :
(4.) " God our Saviour who will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth." | — How does it appear that this passage relates to the damned in hell ? Are they saved or damned ? Does not St. Paul explain himself, when, in the context^ he calls on his brethren to " pray for all men (on earth,) that they may be saved," and declares that " for this purpose he was appointed a preacher and an apostle, a teacher of the Gentiles, in faith and truth ;" viz. that they might be brought to the knowledge of the truth ? — But if Mr. G.'s works correspond with his faith, he has undoubtedly revived the 'prayers Jbr the dead, and labours incessantly to obtain for his departed friends a de- liverance from purgatory.
(5.) " The glad tidings are proclaimed to every creature which is under heaven." || — True: and " he that believeth
* Vol. 11. p. 285, t Mark xvi. IG. + Vol. II. p. 282. |1 Vol. II. p. 234.
FUTURE PUNISHMF.NT. 347
and is baptized shall be saved, and he that beUeveth not shall bo damned." *
(6.) " To make all men see the fellowship o{ the mys- tery, which had been hidden.'"-f' — For this purpose, Paul says, " This grace was given to him, to preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ :"" j but certainly not in hell. Where is that written ?
(7.) " To reconcile all things to himself." ||— The Apostle continues, " whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven;" § but of things in hell he says nothing.
(8.) " The grace of God, which bringeth salvation, hath appeared to all men." ^ — This passage would much better prove that all men will be saved on earth, than that they will be restored from hell ; for on earth the Apostle's words have their accomplishment. Witness those which follow : " Teaching that denying loorldly lusts, we should live sohcrhj.'''' And again : " Looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God," &c. In a word, "the Apostle says, " the grace of God [not shall appear, but] hath appeared to all men." **
(9.) " Clu'ist is declared able to subdue all things to himself." f-f — He is. But Avhere is the pi'oof, [1.] that the Apostle speaks of willing subjection ? and [2.] that he xc'ill do all that he is able to do .'' When God hath judged the great whore, and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand, — " a great multitude as the voice of many waters, say. Alleluia; for the Lord God Omnipotent re'igncth.''^\\
(10.) " It is not the will of your Father that one of these little ones perish!''' \\\\ — To this it is enough to answer: " Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise /)£"?• wA." §§
(11.) " Who gave himself a ransom for«Z/."^^ — We have a little curiosity to know how a Socinian will argue from these words. But lest it should not be gratified, we prevent his argument by reminding him of those who " deny
♦Markxvi.lG. f Vol. II. p. 285. J Eph. ii. 8. || Vol. II. p. 28.5.
§ Col. i. 28. \ Vol. II. p. 285. »*Tit.ii. 11— 13. ft Vol. 11 p.285.
:: Rev. xix. 2, 6. |||1 Vol. n.p.285. §§ Luke xiii. 3. ^^Volll.p.285.
248
THE ETERNITY OF
the Lord that benight tliem, and bring on themselves swift destruction.'''' *
(12.) ^" The living God, who is the Saviour of all meny -j- — Whatever be the meaning of this passage, it relates to the present time, rather than to the future. He is the Saviour of all men. Besides, the unbelieving are not saved, but damjied.
(13.) " His tender mercies are over all his works." j • — But "he shall \\3i\e judgment zoithout mere?/, who hath shewed no mercy." \\ Mr. G. is very apt to forget him- self. He grants that no mercy will be shewn to the finally impenitent, and contends that they must " pay the last farthing." He may speak of goodness if he please, but miercy, as appears from liis own concession, is out of the question. — Such, however, are the superficial arguments on which Socinianism is founded.
II. His philosophical objections.
When an Advocate of natural religion, and of the suffi- ciency of the power of human reason in divine things, un- dertakes to inquire what are " the fair conclusions of i-eason, from the perfections of the Deity," § the Reader will per- haps expect a fine specimen of clear, close, and cogent, metaphysical argumentation. He supposes that Mr. G. has precisely defined, and distinctly proved, those divine perfections which are the basis of his arguments : and that, without any reference to other sources of knowledge, and without any appeal to the passions of his Readers, he argues as coolly and almost as demonstratively as a Mathematician. An examination of Mr. G.'s arguments fovmded on each of the divine perfections, will at least prove to the Reader that he is to be disappointed.
I. "Let us begin with X\\& justice of God." ^ — But what is the justice of God .? Mr G. has not been pleased to inform us. He leaves us to adopt any idea of it which we think proper, and to change the idea as circumstances require. How then shall we ascertain what is to be expected
*2I'et, ii. 1. t Vol. II. p. 285. J Vol. II. p. 28.5.
11 James ii. i;5. § Vol. II. p. im. "1[ Vol, II. p. 2:5y.
IITUHK PI XISUMENT. 249
from divine justice, when we do not know what that justice is ? Thus all Mr. G.''s argument is a castle in the air. — Divine Justice is that attribute by which God renders to everv one that which is clue. But how does this discover to us in every case xchat is due .'' Not at all. How then are we to ascertain what is due to a transgressor of the divine law ? From that law itself, by which God has at once pro- hibited the sin, and pointed out its demerit : that is, from divine revelation. " It is a rlghU'cms thing with God to re- compence tribulation to them that trouble you, — when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven — taking vengeance on them that know not God, and obey not the gospel : who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the pre- sence of the Lord." * Here we rest the question : and who- ever professes to believe the scripture, must meet us only on scriptural ground. If a thousand objections be adduced to which we can give no other answer, we have always this re- ply at hand, " Thus saith the Lord :" and the cause of truth will suffer nothing from our inability to give any other. But we will try.
(1.) Mr. G. urges "the infirmity of human nature, and the temptations to which it is exposed, in extenuation of the crimes of mankind." -f* — We do not hesitate to say, that, in judgment, God will undoubtedly make Just allowance for every disadvantage of our condition. But will he not also take into the account the light, the succour, and the encouragement which have been provided, offered, and afforded, and by a proper use of which the disorder of our nature might have been cured, and every temptation might have been overcome .'* And who can calculate the result, in contradiction to him who has predicted it .'*
(2.) He urges, that the advocates of eternal punishment " contend that every sin is liable to it." ;|: — We contend that " whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one (point,) is guilty of all.'"' || But we do not suppose that when "God shall judge the world in righteousness," the judg- ment will turn upon this or that jxirlicular action, considered singly and exclusively, but ujxni a review of the whole state
•iThcis.i.e— 1». t ^••'l-I'''-^'- :\ol. Il.p.in. llJamcsii. jo.
11
350 THE KTEUXITV OF
of probation of each individual. When any man shall stand before the judgment-seat of Christ, his whole time of probation will be completed, and his character will be per- fectly formed. On that character will turn his acquittal or condemnation.
(3.) He urges the shortness of the time spent in sin, which, " compared with eternity, is as a drop of water to the ocean." * — And will any man in his senses contend that the malignity of sin is to be calculated from the space of time in which it is committed ? Whence has that man derived his ideas of justice, who contends that it is unjust to inflict a seven years' punishment, on one who has robbed his neighbour in seven minutes ; or to cut oSJhr ever from human society, one who in a moment has stabbed his neigh- bour to the heart .'' Is any man fit to write on the jurispru- dence of heaven, who does not take into his account — the dignity and authority of the Lawgiver, — the reasonableness, justness, and goodness of his laws, — the adaptation of those laws to the prosperity and happiness of the individual sub- ject and of the whole community, — the nature and value of the benefits which the governed derive from the governor and from his government, — the extent of the obligation to be obedient, — the necessity which there is for every government, for its own preservation, to maintain its dignity and to keep up the tone of its authority, (especially when that government is supreme, and there is no appeal from its decisions,) — the nature and effect of different crimes, — the degree of injury, dishonour, and displeasure done to the lawgiver, by the transgressions of his subjects, — and both the near and the remote consequences of a breach of social order ? We do not pretend to make a cal- culation of such vast extent ; but we venture to assert that no man can, independently of scripture, pronounce a just verdict until he has made it.
(4.) He urges that " some shall be beaten with many stripes, and some withy^rce;-."" -|- — Mr. G.'s argument should be founded merely in reason. — That punishment will be exactly proportioned to the sins of the criminal, we do not
* Vol, II. J). 212. t \ol. J I, i,.2J:?.
lUTURE PUNISHMENT. 251
deny. But it is equally possible for a liglrt or a heavier punishment to be eternal. On this supposition, therefore, " tlie lca,st crime will {not) be upon an equality with the greatest." *
(5.) He urges that " the actions of a Jlnitc being can never merit injinite punishment.''"' -I* — If by infinite be meant eternal, this is the thing not to be asserted, but to be proved.
(6.) He adds : " But a Just God must have some end in view, in eternally punishing his creatures." '^ — Undoubtedly. But it is not wisdom to pretend to enter into the counsels of the Almighty. " Who hath known the mind of the Lord .'''" We could follow some of our predecessors in their ingenious conjectures concerning the ends to be answered by the unli- mited punishment of the wicked ; but " who liath required this at our hands .'*'" It is enough, that though " clouds and darkness are round about him, righteousness and judg- ment are the habitation of his throne ;" || and that the ends of infinite justice will thereby be answered.
(7.) He proceeds : " To suppose that God will everlast- ingly torture (punish) his creatures, merely because his own majesty is offended, makes him a mere God of vengeance." § — By supposing him to punish his rebellious and incorrigi- ble creatures for ever, we suppose that " to him belongeth vengeance.'''' But we do not " make him a mere God of vengeance," while we suppose him first to have ten- dered to them his infinite mercy, and " the riches of his grace ;" and while we suppose that he may have other rea^ sons for it beside that " his majesty is ofFended."
Of Mr. G.'s impassioned comparison (Vol. II. p. 246* — 248.) we take no notice. He must reason and not declaim : not play the orator but the philosopher.
2. Mr. G.'s attention is engaged next by " the icisdom of the Deity." ^ His argument on this topic is very brief. You niaintain that mankind were " destined to be for ever happy." " Eternal torture (punishment) was not at first intended." " Is not (then) the original design of God de- feated .^" ** — Mr. G. forms but an awkward guess at wliat
* Vol. II. p. 244. t Vol. II. p. 211. : Vol. II. p. 244. || Psalm xcvii. 2.
§Vul. II. p.241, 21.3. <[ Vol. II. p. 21^. **^ol.ii. p.248, 211».
11 2
252 THE ETEUMTV OF
we maintain ; and thei'efore we must inform him. We maintain that God made man to be a probationer, in- tending to " set before him life and death, blessing and cursing," but to enjoin him to "chiise life that he might live,'' * and to reward his voluntary obedience with eternal life or to punish his final disobedience with eternal fire. With such purposes, how could God's original design be defeated .'*
8. jNIr. G. makes an awkward transition from the wis- dom, to "• the goodness, benevolence, and mercy of God. Of this glorious attribute of the Deity, finite beings (he thinks) can never form an adequate conception." ^ — No, nor of his Justice. Wb.y, then, did he presume to argue from premises which he did not comprehend, and that even in the face of HIM who does comprehend them ? Why did he presume to argue that God cajinot do that which, as a just God, he declares that he will; and that he must do that, as a merciful God, which he has not promised .'* Or rather. Why does he not relinquish this inconclusive mode of argumentation, and, on a question which only the scriptures can determine, ap- peal only to the scriptures ?
As Mr. G. cannot comprehend infinite goodness, he argues from human goodness. Thus Moses, Paul, and (goodly associate !) Mr. White the Universalist, are cited, as men of such benevolence that they could willingly have suffered for their fellow creatures. Is it necessary to re- mind the Reader that such is the benevolence of God to man, that " he gave his only-begotten Son ?" That such is the benevolence of Christ, that he was '^ made a curse for us ?" Whatever of benevolence may be found in Moses, Paul, or Mr. White, the Saviour of men has done more for their salvation than any of these men thoiiglit of doing. The argument drawn from the benevolence of man to man, can therefore conclude nothing further. What these men wished or proposed to do, Jesus Christ has actually done. Again: God is more wise and just than either Moses or Paul. W^hen, therefore, the former said, " Yet now, if thou wilt, forgive their sin ; and, if not, blot me, I pray thee, out of
* Dcut. XXX. I?. t Vol. II. p. L'!9.
FUTIRE T'UXI.snMr..VT. S.'ji^
thy book," — the Loud said unto him, " Whosoever hath sinned against nie, him will I blot out of my book." And when the latter " could have wished himself accursed for his brethren's sake," it was not permitted.
" What ! shall benevolence 'd.nlf'\)\\Y^v\c a course of con- duct, at which imperfect human goodness would absolutely shudder .?" — God will do that at which ]\Ir. G. affects to shudder ; and has often done that, " the hearing of which would make a man's ears to tingle." * Yes : and many who really shudder at the thought of it now, will hereafter approve it. When " the smoke" of them that are judged '' shall rise up for ever and ever," they will imitate the heavenly hosts, and sing, " Alleluia ; Salvation, and glory, and honour, and power unto the Lord our God: for true and riirliteous are his jitdg-mcnts:'''' f
'• But God does not look upon mankind as enemies." X — So says Mr. G. And what say the scriptures ? " But these mine enemies ^ which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither and slay them before me." |j
4. He aigues from the Divine prescience. — " He that before the beginning of inwejbrcsaw every thing that would come to pass, would he have created such beings 't — created to destroy .^" — The ^w'me p7-escicnce is a subject a little too difficult for a human mind to scan : especially as there is nothing in nature by which it can be illustrated. All the arguments founded upon it, are therefore founded on what we do not understand. It is not impossible, however, to give them a rational answer.
(1.) The scriptures declare that " known unto God are all his works, from the beginning of the world ;" § and yet the same scriptures declare that the wicked " shall go away into everlasting fire." ^ But the scriptures cannot be in- consistent with themselves. (2.) If there be no impropriety in the manner in which God treats mankind as Jinoicn, no man can fix upon it any impropriety as Jbrelcnoicn. — (3.) AVe have already shewn that, in our opinion, the design with which man was created was, that he might be placed in
* I Sam. iii. 1. 2 Kinjrsxxi. 12. Jer. xix. ?>. t Rev. xix. 1— .3.
;Vol. H.p. 2o2. II Luke xix. 27. § Acts xv. 18. ^| MaU. xxv.41.
11 3
254 THE ETERXITY OF
a state of probation. In that case, God created mankind with a positive design, neither that they should be eternally hap- py, nor that they should be eternally miserable. That man should chuse death rather than life, is not therefore the fault of him that made him, but his own. It is not God''s, because he affectionately forewarned him of the danger, earnestly entreated him to be happy, and amply provided for him all the means requisite to his happiness. (4.) If there were any weight in the argument from the Divine prescience, it would disprove the possibility of any measure of human mi- sery, as well as of eternal misery.
5. His last philosophical argument is deduced from the divine immutahility. " All the natural evils which are suf- fered to befal us (Jiere) tend to the production of good.'''' — Mr. G. therefore presumes that " unless the nature of the immutable Jehovah should change, — the punishment of a future world will be of a similar nature/' *
Just so, we might presume that because good men are afflicted here, they will also be afflicted hereafter. But " pre- sumptions'" are not arguments. It must be proved that such is the design of future punishment ; for the immutability of the Divine Nature will not change his purpose or his word. The truth is, it is one of Mr. G.'s first presumptions, that to make all his creatures finally happy, is God's absolute design. Setting out on this unfounded theory, he proceeds from one error to another, and fills his book with presump- tions. That the present is the time of probation, and the future the time of retribution, he cannot see, or will not acknowledge. Hence he supposes earth and hell to be much alike, and the end of suffering in both states to be the same. Even while he describes the present state of human exist- ence, as " chequered with pleasure and pain," f he can- not advert to the fact, that in hell the damned have not " a drop of water to cool their tongue ;"" nor, while he argues that " love is strongest, and in its own nature most power- ful to attract and to persuade," \ can he infer that if that infinite goodness which here pierces the clouds of affliction, do not win the hearts of rebels, there is but little probability
* Vol. II. p. 255, 256. f Vol. II. p. 255. + Vol. II. p. 294.
FrrriiK itn-ishmknt. 255
that all tlic woio-lit of ilivlnc w ruth will teach thcni to love their Maker. He has not iis yet proved the salutary nature of "• the damnation of hell," and he eannot prove it from the divine immutability, unless he can first prove, that from tlie beginning it ;vas the absolute purpose of God that every man shall be final ly happy.
There is one species of Soeinian argumentation which Mr. G. has not brought JbrvmlJij before us, though his lec- ture abounds with it. AVe have one specimen of it where he says, " V'mdktive passions cannot exist in God.'* This remark contains a fundamental principle of Socinianism; and yet it is itself a mere assumption: a dogma by which an important part of Divine Revelation is contradicted. In revealing himself to mankind, God has often vised a figure called anthropopaihy^ by whieh human passions are attribut- ed to the Divine Mind. The ideas conveyed by those allu- sions, certainly are not the precise and proper ideas of the Divine attributes ; but, rightly understood, and divested of every thing which is weak and sinful in man, they suggest the most appropriate ideas of the ways of God which we can conceive. The ways and the thoughts of God are high above ours, as the licaven is above the earth. But if we do not imitate himself, in imputing to him something like hu- man passions, we exchange revealed knowledge for philoso- phical ignorance. How often does God speak of his desire^ compassion, pity^ mercy, and love .^ The Socinians seldom dream that these are human passions, and that as human passions they " cannot exist in God," Whatever can be fairly, or even speciously, inferred from these passions in men, they presume that they may equally infer from them in God. No pains are then taken, even to shew that all idea of //?/7??a« zceakness must be removed from them. But when God speaks of his anger, v>rath, indignation. Jury, and vengeance, then we are not only taught that these pas- sions are not such in God as they are in man, but are bare- facedly told that they " cannot exist in God," and that in such qualified terms as leave us no substitute for those ideas of tile wavs of God wiiich he himself has suggested. — To
*\ol. lI.p.'ZlC.
256 THE ETERXITY OF &C.
remedy this, we demand, in the name of scripture and com- mon sense, that the Socinians either desist from reasoning according to their present practice, on the former class of passions, or that they do us the justice to reason in the same manner on the latter, in which they now reason on the former.
One word on Mr. G/s concluding reflections. " The first is, that the system of universal restitution contains no tenets which present the slightest drawback to the practice of any Christian duty." " The second is, that the doctrine of universal restitution presents the strongest incentive to the practice of any Christian duty, by giving a double effi- cacy to the motives of gratitude and love." — We think otherwise. Humble fear, and holy love, give life to all genuine piety. He that beheves the eternal punishment of the wicked, and embraces the Christian salvation, will have the greatest reason to fear and love. We do not, however, found our doctrine on a mere opinion concerning what is most conducive to virtue and piety, but on the ex,pres3 de- clarations of the word of God.
( 257 )
CHAPTER XII.
Of the Divine Inspiration of the Sacred Writings. *
The divine inspiration of the sacred writings is of the utmost importance to their establishment as the faithful re- cords of religion, and the standard of the principles and practice of piety. This may not be the opinion of those who, with unlimited confidence in the powers of their own reason, profess to demonstrate a priori^ the existence, the nature, the attributes, and the will of God ; but it may be easily and consistently granted by those who believe that ." the things of God knoweth no one, but the Spirit of God." If all knowledge of divine things is from divine revelation, and if there is no divine revelation, but from the Spirit of God, the Bible can be established as a divine revelation of God, his perfections, and his will, only on the supposition that the Writers of it have been divinely inspired: — and to ascertain that they were so inspired, is necessary before their writings can be received with that entire ac- quiescence of our understanding, and that perfect submis- sion of our will, which a divine revelation demands.
When once a man has got rid of the inspiration of the Old and the New Testament, he feels himself perfectly at liberty to adapt his Bible to his creed, and to reject as false, if not absurd, whatever in the former contradicts the latter. It is thus the Socinians, to keep themselves in countenance under an entire opposition to " the principal doctrines of Christianity," undermine the divine authority of every Christian document.
* The Author has not been able to insert this chapter and the three fol- lowing, in what he judges to be their proper place, in consequence of beings necessarily governed, partly, by the order which Mr. G. has observed.
258 THE DIVIXE IXSPIRATIOX
However easy it may be to surmount the difTiculties of scriptural doctrine, after disposing of the inspiration of scripture, the latter required some management. But Mr. G. knows how to take an advantage. He is not so little versed in the polemic art, as not to know by frequent expe- rience, that every doctrine has some votaries who have not formed habits of nice distinction, and who therefore state their opinions in such general terms as to expose them im- necessarily to the attacks of an opponent : nor is he incapa- ble of making choice of such a statement as is most excep- tionable. In the present instance, though not in this only, he has given proof of his discretion, by taking the utmost advantage, as will appear from the two inquiries which con- tain the opinion which he supposes it his business to contro- vert. (1.) " Whether the Jucts they (the sacred writers) re- corded, the sentiments they occasionally expressed, the 7'easonings they adduced, the particular dh-ect'tons given, requests made, and intentions specified, all took place under the immediate superintendence, communication, direction, and controul of the Spirit of God. (2.) Whether their very •words were dictated by inspiration." * — Such are the opinions which Mr. G. controverts, from which he derives all his ad- vantages, and through the sides of which he attempts to wound the inspiration of the scriptures. — We shall not meet him on this ground.
Before we proceed to mark the ground which we pro- pose to defend, a few words may be necessary on the use of the phrase, " the inspiration of the scriptures." Mr. G. is of opinion that " an excessive and blind attachment to this phrase has been the cause of indefinite mischief in the Christian world :" he therefore recommends that " instead of the terms ' inspired writings,' the expressions, ' heavenly doctrines,' ' divine precepts,' 'sacred principles,' &c. of Christianity, be substituted." -f- — This is the Opponent of scholastic phrases, the Advocate of scriptural terms ! — Ask- ino" pardon for our presumption, Ave prefer the word inspi- tion, as applied to the scriptures, because it is scj'iptural, and is equally determinate with any of those which he has
* Vol. II. p. 320. t Vol. II. p. 314.
OF THE SACRED WRITIKCS. 259
recommended. It is as difficult to define in what dcgi-ee the doctrines of scripture are hcavc/ilt/, divine, or *a- cred, as to define in what >vay the scriptures were in- spired.
The truth of tlie inspiration of the Old and New Testa- ment, does not depend on ourstating, with perfect precision, the manner, and the measure, in Avhich the immediate Authors of tliose books w^ere inspired at the time of writing them. We should not deny that we are the workmanship of God, because we cannot exactly point out the difference, between the creation of Adam out of the dust of the ground, and the production of a man by the ordinary process of generation. Without distinguishing the manner of the divine operations, we know the simple fact, that it is " he that made us and not we ourselves :" and we piously adore him as our Creator. Just so, without know ing distinctly the manner of the divine communication, we may know and acknowledge the divine wisdom and authority with which the Bible teaches and commands us, and with equal piety w'e may believe and obey. If therefore, we now attempt to trace the footsteps of the Deity, in the revelation of himself, with which he has favoured us, it will not be done under a presumption that we shall point out the precise method, and measure, in which each of the sacred writers received the divine inspiration ; — but merely to shew how it was possible for them to have written under a divine influence, without their inspiration being liable to Mr. G.'s objections.
The Bible is a book purporting to be a revelation of God, his works, and his will. It contains every thing suited to the purpose of a divine revelation, every thing that is " profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness : that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good w orks." * It is designed, not only for those among whom it was first pub- lished, but for all men in ever?/ age of the world. It is " to make all men see, what is the felloAvship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God ;"" -f- " that in the ages to come, lie might shew the
* 2 Tim. iii. 16, 17. f Eph. iii. 9.
2G0 THK DIVIXE INSPIRATIOX
exceeding riches of his grace." * It pronounces a blessing on " him that readeth, and on them that hear the words" Avhich it contains, " and who keep those things whicli are written therein." -f- — It was therefore necessary that proper means should be used, to secure its being delivered in such a manner as to answer the vast purpose for which it was given. And since that purpose could be conceived only by the all-comprehending mind of God who knows no distance of time or place, from him only it could originate, and by him it must be directed to its design.
1. It contains a number of important facts which form the basis on which the rest of scripture is erected. Of these facts it was necessary that the sacred writers should transmit to us a true and just narrative. The account which Moses gives of the creation, must be such as not only to agree with the real state of things, but to represent God doing his great work in a manner worthy of himself and to mani- fest his perfections as the Creator. The fall of Adam must be so described, as sufficiently to account for the present state of human nature, and to form a sufficient basis for the whole system of human redemption, with which, without inspiration, Moses must have been very imperfectly ac- quainted. The behaviour of the Israelites, and the deal- ings of God with them, must be so delineated as to illustrate properly the divine perfections, and the ways of God with the children of men. The history of Jesus Christ must be a genuine portrait of his character, a true copy of his doc- trine, and a foundation for the whole Christian system.
Of some of these facts the narrators were not immediate witnesses. It is not necessary to suppose that they made no use of any written document to which they had access, of any undoubted tradition with which they might be ac- quainted, or of the credible testimony of immediate wit- nesses. Moses might learn many parts of his history from the traditions which he collected among the Israelites, and other parts from those of his cotemporaries who related what they had seen and heard. Matthew and Luke might take their genealogies, partly from the Old Testament, and
* Eph. ii. 7. t Rev. i. 3.
oi THK sa(1!i;d \vmTiNt;s. 261
partly from other Jewish records, lioth of them mi<rht re- ceive the account of the birth of Jesus from the holy family. Or the latter might receive the contents of his gospel from those who were "eye witnesses"* of what he recorded. — All this is possible, and even probable : and some part of it is certain. But on the other hand, it Avas necessary that the Writer should be assured of the truth of what he had thus learned, and of the propriety of making it a part of the Record, and that he should relate the facts in such a manner, as was fit to answer the divine purpose. For this end a divine afflatus was necessary. — But beside this, some of those facts, and some circumstances of others of those facts, could not be known but by divine inspiration. Such are — the manner and order in which the world was created; — that when God saw the wickedness of mankind, " it repented him that he had made man, and grieved him at his heart ; "" -f- — and that Jesus Christ " sat on the riglit hand of God." The accounts which they give of such facts, and their mingling them with those which might otherwise be ascertained, shew that they were under a divine inspiration at the time of writing.
Of others of the facts which they record, they were themselves immediate witnesses. To doubt whether in pub- lishing those facts, they made use of their best understand- ing and memory, would be very unreasonable. But here again was to be a. choice of topics and of circumstances. It was impossible for them to judge accurately what facts, and what incidents it was the mind of God to make known. No- thing was to be wanting which could convey to the Reader the necessary instruction concerning the ways and dispen- tions of God. Nothing was to be inserted which would be a needless encumbrance to the sacred volume. The manner of relation was to be not only faithful, but judicious, and fit for the illustration of the grand topic, the perfections of that God, who was but partially known to the writer. How was all this to be done without a divine inspiration .'* If a mere unassisted human understanding was insufficient for this work, an unassisted human memory was still more so.
* Luke i. 2. t Cicii. vi. fi.
262 THE DIVINE INSPIRATION
The human memory inherits the imperfection of the vmder- standing. When we do not rightly apprehend a tiling, we cannot rightly remember it ; but our misconceptions often render our reproductions monstrous. Prejudice or passion sometimes makes us misconstrue the plainest things. Mr. G. says, that Moses with the highest degree of inspiration was not free from faults. The fault to which he alludes, seems to be of that very kind which would have rendered him a very improper person to wi'ite a divine record, without immediate inspiration. " The Lord spake unto Moses, saying. Take the rod, and gather thou the assembly together, thou and Aaron thy brother, and speak ye unto the rock before their eyes, and it shall give forth his water, and thou shalt bring forth to them water out of the rock : so thou shalt give the congregation and their beasts drink. And Moses took the rod from before the Lord as he commanded him. And Moses and Aaron gathered the congregation together before the rock, and he said unto them, ' Hear now, ye rebels ; must zoe fetch you water out of this rock .'*"' And Moses lifted up his hand, and with his rod he snwte the rock twice ; and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their beasts also." * If Moses through prejudice and passion mistook the divine command, and so far misrepresented it as to smite the rock when God had bidden him only speak to it ; and to take the glory to himself instead of rendering it to God, and that immedi- ately after he had received that command, how unfit must he have been to represent the mind of God to all succeeding generations without a present divine inspiration ! — But this is not the only case in point. The Apostles of our Lord " went in and out with him, beginning at the baptism of John unto that same day that he was taken up."" They saw his works, and heard his doctrine, and were intended to be witnesses of " what they had heard and seen." But how little did they understand of what they had heard ! What they did not understand they easily forgot. And if they had remembered something of it, how erroneous must have been their misrepresentations of it under so many mistakes !
* Num . XX. 7 — 12.
OK TTIK SACKl'.U VI! I TINGS, 263
for men generally repeat their own comnu'nts rather than the text, and retail their own construction of what they have heard. What possibility was there then, that after the lapse of a number of years, they should remember and record with circumstantial exactness, the many discourses, didactic and prophetic, which are now contained in the four gospels ? AVhen they could not conceive the meaning of their divine Teacher, he promised that " the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father would send in his name should teach them all things, and bring- all things to their remembrance, whatsoever he had said unto them." * Such were their understanding and memory, that they could not be witnesses of what they had seen and heard, until they " received power, after that the Holy Ghost was come upon them."-!- To this, therefore, we are indebted for authentic histories of the life and docti'ine of Jesus Christ.
2. They have not only related facts; their writings afford many tredictioxs of future events. As no man can natu- rally have any certain foresight of future contingencies, it is Impossible that the sacred writers should utter their pre- dictions without divine inspiration. Prophecy is therefore on all occasions attributed to the Spirit of God. " Would God," said Moses, " that all the Lord's people were pro~ pliets, and that the Lord would put his Spirit upon them !";{: — I will pour out my Spirit, and your sons and your daugh- ters shall prophesy. || — To one is given, by the Spirit, tlie word of wisdom, to another prophecy." § — In a word ; " the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but the holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost." ^ It is not necessary to prove this against Mr. G. who also maintains, " that all the iiropheeies in the scriptures were communicated bv the Almighty." ** But if prophecy came by the Spirit of God, all who uttered pix- dictions, by so doing, gave proof that they received the breath of divine inspiration.
3. The DOCTRINES of the Bible come next under our consideration. These were founded on the facts which are
* John xiv. 2(i. fActsLK. ♦ Num. xi. 2!). ||Joclii.2«.
§lCor. xii.ii, 10. <[ 2 Pel. i. 20, 21. •» Vol. II. p. .iliJ.
S64 THK DIVINE IXf^PlRATlOX
recorded by the sacred writers, or on the prophecies which they delivered. They consist of those speculative and saving truths which it was a principal object of the Book of Revelation to make known to mankind, the things of God which no man knoweth but the Spirit of God, and therefore were communicated by inspiration. As our Lord promised that the Spirit of truth should teach his Apostles, and remind them of all things whatsoever he had said unto them, — he promised also, that the same Spirit should make known to them whatever was further necessary for the fulfilment of their ministry. " I have yet many things to say unto you, (he observed) but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, (that) shall he speak : and he will shew you things to come." * — Mr. G.f need not be afraid that we shall seek any undue advantage from the expression, " all things.'''' We include only "all" those "things" which Jesus had yet to say unto them, but which they could not yet bear.
The Apostle Paul had not heard the instructions, or seen the miracles, of Jesus Christ, and therefore received the whole system of Christian doctrine by immediate inspira- tion. Hence he says to the Galatians, " I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." f This revelation to St. Paul, included both the xcords and the deeds of Jesus Christ. He therefore mentions to the Corinthians, his having " received that Christ died for our sins, accord- ing to the scriptures ; and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day : that he was seen of Cejshas, of the twelve, and of above five hundred brethren at once," &c. | Again : "I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread : and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take eat ; this is my body, which is broken for you : this do in remembrance of me.
* John XV. 13, 11. t ^^1- i- H, 12. * 1 (.or. xv. :i— 8.
OF THt: iACRKl) WUITIXCS.
After the same manner he took also the cup, vlicn he had supped, saving. This cup is the New Testament in my blood ; this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me." * Hence we learn that this Apostle had both the 7cord,<i and the deals of Jesus Christ revealed to him.
Mr. G. has conceded " that all the peculiar doctrines of Christianity were of heavenly origin ; that they were not the deductions of reason in the minds of their first promul- gators, but were imparted to them by God."t Thus far then is clear, that the Apostles originally received the doc- trines of the gospel by divine inspiration. It is now our business to enquire in what manner those doctrines were de- livered. We know that the Prophets and Apostles often delivered their doctrines viva voce, in their public discourses. But of those public discourses we know nothing, except from the xcntten documents which they have bequeathed to the world. The question therefore is, Do the original documents contain those very doctrines which the Prophets and Apostles received immediately from God ? If they do not, then have we no doctrines of which we are assured that they are of heavenly origin. The scriptxires, then, are none of them divinely Inspired. But if the original scrip- tures do contain the precise doctrines Avhlch were " imparted by God to the first pronudgators of them," and those doc- trines are " all the peculiar doctrines of Christianity," then those scriptures which contain the peculiar doctrines of Christianity are divinely inspired.
4. The sacred writers have pronudged not only doc- trines of which they speak as being of divine origin, but precepts and prohibitions, which they attribute to the same authority. — AVe cannot deny that these were received from above, without denying the authciiticitu, as well as the inspU ration, of scripture. Moses, as the Jewish mediatorial legislator, received his precepts immediately from God. The tables of stone, containing the ten commandments writ- ten by the finger of God, were delivered to him on the mount. With him God spake " mouth to moutli." \ The Apostles received their precepts, princij^ally from Jesus
* 1 Cor. xi. 23— 2.5. f Vol. U. p. .■?21. J Num. xii. 8.
s
266 THE DIVIXE IN'SPIRATIOX
Christ, to whom the Spmt was given not by measure, and therefore promulged them as the commandments of the Lord. The moral or ecclesiastical regulations which they had not received from him during his ministry, were made known to them by a vision, as in the case of Peter, to whom it was thus revealed that the gospel should be preached to the uncircumcised ; (Acts x.) or were revealed to them by the Holy Ghost, as when the Apostolic council decreed, that the Jewish yoke should not be imposed on the Gentile converts ; (Acts xv. 28.) and when the whole gospel, precep- tive, as well as doctrinal, was made known to St. Paul. (Gal. i. 12.) — Thus all their pi ecepts originated from the Spirit of God.
If we suppose that in recording these divine doctrines and commands, the writers were directed and assisted by divine inspiration, it is not necessary to suppose that the exercise of their natural poAvers was suspended. It is enough if their minds were enlightened, their judgments cleared, and their memory assisted, so as to secure a faith- ful record of what had been delivered to them for the bene- fit of mankind. All we have to ascertain therefore, is, that the Holy Spirit is the voucher for the divine truth of the doctrines, and the divine authority of the commands.
5. There are several things which now make an essential part of the divine revelation, but which probably did not constitute a formal part of the first revelation given to the Apostles. Their inspiration with respect to these, also de- mands our serious consideration.
(1.) The Apostles frequently quote from the Old Tes- tament. It was not necessary that in making these quota- tions, they should have the words suggested to them ; but it was necessary that they should be taught to make a pro- per application of them, that they might not corrupt, instead of contending for, the faith delivered to the saints, and to guard them against the false glosses of those who had perverted them.
(2.) They in many places argue against those who devi- ated from the truth of the gospel. If we suppose the truth of the gospel to have been communicated to them from
OK THi; SA<'RKD WRITIXtiS. 267
above, it is not lu'ccssary to suppose tliat all their arguments were connnunicated in the same manner. But as every man is in (lanoer of drawing wrong conclusions from the truth itself, it was necessary that in delivering the system of Christianity to the world, they should be guided to reason justly from the divine principles which they had received. If we admit that they were left merely to exercise the powers of their imassisted reason, we are immediately left without any thing which w^c can ascertain to be a divine revelation ; because we cannot distinguish between their own reasonings, and those truths which were made known to them without the deductions of their own mind.
(3.) They sometimes made prudential rcg'ulations in the Christian church. For instance : The Apostle Paul recom- mended celibacy to the Corinthians. He acknowledges that he had " no commandment from the Lord*" on this head. Jesus Christ had not commanded celibacy, though he liad recommended it under given circumstances. It was not per- haps necessary that it should be immediately suggested to the Apostle to recommend this measure to the unmarried, as " good for the present distress C but it was necessary that he should be under such a divine influence as would lead him to give his judgment in a manner Avorthy of the Chris- tian cause. And it is remarkable, that he did deliver it, *' as one who liad obtained mercy of the Lord to be faitli- ful," and concluded it with what stamped his advice with divine wisdom, by observing, " I think also that I have the Spirit of God." *
6. There are several things in the Apostolic epistles which are not essential parts of the revelation of God, and some which have no necessary connection with religion. There are " facts recorded, sentiments expressed, directions given, requests made, and intentions specified," which it is not necessary to suppose " took place under the communica- tion of the Spirit of God." -f* Yet it is not unreasonable, as the record of these is connected with the divine revelation, to suppose that they were, for special purposes, recorded under the '^' supcrhifefidmicc arn] cnntroid of that Spirit."
» 1 Cor. vii. J.')— 40. | \ ol. 11. p. .i-'O.
268 THE DIVIN^E INSPIRATION
St. Paul mjghtintend to " take a journey into Spain," * and to pass by way of Corinth into Macedonia, *f* to propagate the gospel in those parts ; and yet he might be frustrated. The intention was not the fruit of divine direction ; but the record of that intention might proceed from the Spirit of God, to shew that a minister ought to live and die, forming and prosecuting plans for the spread of Messiah's kingdom. It may be recorded that St. Paul recommended to Timothy to "take a little wine for his stomach's sake," to shew that God requires good men to take care of their health : — that he requested him " to bring his cloke and books," to shew that a good man may be poor, and ought to take care of what little property he has ; and that a great man may pro- perly make use of the ordinary means of knowledge and of learning : — that he informed him that " he had left Trophimus sick," to remind us that afflictions befal the best of men : that he " desired Philemon to prepare him a lodging," to shew that the greatest concerns ought not to make us negligent of those which are of less moment, and that proper conveniences ought, if possible, to be provided for the itinerant servants of Christ : — and that " Alexander the coppersmith had behaved ill to him," to warn mankind of the danger of treating with unkindness the ministers of the gospel. Now if these incidental circvunstanccs afford such useful lessons, without " supposing the sentiment and style of them to be dictated by the Spirit of God," we may justly believe them to be written under his " snperintendance and controul ;''"' for if they are not essential parts of the divine revelation, they are at least useful appendages to it, and therefore not unworthy of his notice.
Hitherto we have attended only to the matter of divine revelation ; we shall now pay some attention to the language in which it has been delivered. — But this part of the subject is by no means of the same importance with the preceding. If it be supposed that the sacred writers have delivered the truths of God in appropriate and unexceptionable terms, it will perhaps make no great difference, Avhether or not we
* Rora. XV. 24, 28. f 1 tor. xvi. 5.
OK Till': SACIfKl) Wit IT IN US.
believe the words to be immediately and distinctly suggested by tlie Holy Ghost.
1. Son)e of the revelations which the sacred writers received, were delivered to them in words. Such were those which IMoses rcH-eived, " God spake all these words, saying," &c. * Such were many of those communicated to the Pro- phets. Such were all those which the Apostles received from Jesus Christ, during his stay on earth. And sucli was a very considerable part of wiiat St. John has related hi tlic Apocalypse. All these, and such as these, are therefore pi'opcrlv couched in the icorch of God.
2. INIany of then' revelations appear to have been com- municated by suggestion to their minds. When the ideas suggested to them were si'n,s'ible ideas, those ideas by a natural association would undoubtedly lead to the words which in common language are made the signs of them ; and no other Avords were necessary. On the other hand, some of those ideas were abstract ideas. Now abstract ideas can be entertained by the human mind only as connected with words. To prove this, let any man make the experiment, w hcthcr he can form in his mind one single abstract propo- sition without words. If he cannot, he must allow that the in.spired writers were led to conceive all such revelations in -iconh: Those words may w idi projiriety be said to be the words of God, as being connected with the ideas which the Divine Spirit suggested ; and yet the arrangement of them might take the mould of the mind which conceived them. Thus the sacred writers might on, these occasions " speak the words which the Holy Ghost teacheth,"" and yet each one might speak in hi* own characteristic style.
3. If the inspired Avriters were thus taught to expiH?ss themselves on divine subjects, in a proper manner, by the immediate revelations which they received, their genci-a! style on the same subjects would be formed on this model. ^V henever they spoke or wrote on a topic purely religious, though they might not use terms imniechatelv suggested at the time, they spoke, as St. I'aul exjiresslv asserts, " iu
* Exod. XX, 1. sJJ
270 tup: jnvixi-, ixmmkatiox
words whicli the Holy Ghost teaclicth ;" for from him they had learned them.
4. On subjects not religious, it was best that they should express themselves in common language.
After this explanation, the distinct and only question which remains to be discussed is, Did the sacred penmen •write their several books under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost ? With a hope that our meaning will not noAv be mis- taken, we decidedly take the affirmative side of the question.
To shorten the dispute, and to clear the argument, as much as may be, of all encumbrances, let it here be noted, that what we seek is not proof merely that the writers were inspired, for that will not answer our specific purpose : but that they were inspired as writers. And if it should appear from the sci'iptures themselves that divine inspiration is ascribed to their xcr'it'mgs, it will sufficiently appear that they were inspired in writing.
1. We will first enquire into the inspiration of the writings of the Old Testament.
(1.) Our Lord speaks of the xoritings of the Old Testa- ment as inspired. — " David himself said by the Holy Ghost., The Lord said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.'' * — This is a citation from the cxth Psalm. — Now the Psalms are not orations which were first delivered viva voce, but W7'itten composi- tions. It follows that they were loritten by inspiration.
(2.) The Apostle Peter, speaking of Judas, says, "This scripture must needs have been fulfilled which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before ; — for it is writ- ten in the book of Psalms," &c. -|- Here the Apostle ])lainly attributes the Psalms of David to the Holy Ghost, when he is speaking of them as scriptures, (that is writings) and of what is zcritten in them.
(3.) The Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, citing the xcvth Psalm, makes no mention of the amanuensis, but introduces his citation with the words, " As the Holy Ghost saith," J — and citing the xxxist of Jeremiah, he begins, " The Holy Ghost also is a witness to us; for after that he had siiid before,"" &c. ||
* Mark x)i.;i(i. f Ac-Is i. K-V-O. t Heh. lii. 7. i| lltb. x. 1.").
or THE SACKED WRITINGS. 271
(4.) The Apostle Peter says, " No prophecy of tlie scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man ; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Hohj Ghost.'''' * —
Here again he is speaking of the prophecies of scripture^ or of zcritten prophecy.
(o.) Lastly, St. Paul has given us the same view of the subject in those remarkable words : " From a child thou hast known the holi/ ,scriptu?rs, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation, through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scr'qjture (is) given by inspiration of God, and (is) profita^ ble for doctrine, &c."-f-
On tliis passage observe : [1.] The Apostle is speaking of scriptures (writings). [2.] That he calls them the holy scriptures, namely those books which the Jews received as canonical, and were called by them " the holy writings."" [3.] That he speaks of them as being "aZ? given by inspira- tion ofGocir
Mr. G. says, " If you refer to the passage, you will find the auxiliary verb, is, printed in Italics, and consequently not in the original Greek. It may, therefore, with equal propriety be translated thus : ' All scripture is given by inspiration of God, is profitable,' &c." J — On this we re- mark: [1.] That if we admit Mr. G.''s translation, still it proves that the holy scriptures are divinely inspired ; for th*^ Apostle having mentioned the holy scriptures as able to make a man wise unto salvation, assigns as a reason fortius, that " all scripture given by inspiration from God, is profi- table," &c. " Holy scripture is profitable for doctrine," and able to make a man wise unto salvation, because it is " siven by inspiration of God." [2 ] But Mr. G. ought to have remarked that the second (is,) also is supplementary ; and that, although the Apostle's words are sense in Greek, there is, without it, no sense in the translation. If he had then observed the situation of the conjiniction, (and,) as cverv English reader mav do, he would then have seen that the auxiliary verb must be supplied where our translators have inserted the fnst of the two. " All scripture
* 2 Pet. i. 20, Jl. t 2 Tim. iii. lo, 16. J Vol. H. p. 331.
272 THE DlVIXli INSPIRATION
is given by inspiration of God, and (is) profitable," &c.
How much then must our Lord and his Apostles have been mistaken, if the holy writings of the Old Testament were not divinely inspired !
2. We now come to the inquiry whether the ivritmgs of the New Testament were also inspired.
It is of some importance to observe here, that our Lord, before his ascension, was pleased to promise to his Apostles the special gift of the Holy Ghost. — " The Comforter, (said he) which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you."" * — Again : '" I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now, Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth ; and he will shew yovi things to come. He shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you." -f-
This great gift was promised to them, to fit them for their apostolic ministry. — " When the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me : and ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning. \ — When he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment." || — Again : " Ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you : and ye shall be witnesses unto me,"" § — It is an important question : Did not the Apostles bear witness of him as well by their writ- ings, as by their preaching ?
The Holy Ghost was promised to them, not as a tempo- rary, but a permanent gift. " I will pray the Father, (said our Lord,) and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you Jbr ever : " ^ that is, says Mr. G., " during your lives.""' **
This gift they actually received. " When the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in
*John xiv. 26. f John xvi. 13—15. + John xv. 26, 27,
II John xvi. 8. § Acts i. 8. *i John xiv. 16. ** Vol. II. p. 218.
or Tllli SACKKl) WltlTIXCS. 273
one place. And suddenly there ciune a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house wliere they were sitting. And there a])peared luito them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them ; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost." *
That the Holy Ghost was thus given to prepare them for preaching \ the gospel, so that " they spake as the Spirit gave them ntferance,'''' is an important truth. But they were equally inspired by it in xvriting for the estab- lishment of Christianity, and for the edification of the churches.
(1.) Hence they assert their Apostleship at the head of their Epistles. " Paul an apostle of Jesus Chi'ist, according to the faith of GocVs elect, and the aclcnoxcledging of the truth zchich is after godlhiess.'''' (See Tit. i. 1. Rom. i. 1. 1 Cor. i. 1. 2 Cor. i. 1. Gal. i. 1. Eph. i. 1. Col. i. 1. 1 Tim. i. 1. 2 Tim. i. 1. Tit. i. 1. 1 Pet. i. 1. 2 Pet. i. 1.) In this manner they assert their apostolic autlwriti/ in their zcritings.
(2.) They assert that the substance of their writings was the very doctrine which they preached, and which they had learned from above. For instance : " Moreover, breth- ren, / declare unto you the gospel xohich I preached unto you, which also you have received, and wherein ye stand : by which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I j)reached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. \ — For this cause, I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gen- tiles, if ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God, which is given me to you-ward : how that by revela- tion he made known unto me the mystery ; as I xo?'ote afore in few words, whereby when ye read ye may understand my knowledge in the mysterij of Christ ; which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets b/j the Spirit.\\ — That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we
* Acts ii. 1 — 4. •f- That they spake by the Holy Ghost, is obvious from the following pas- sages, as well as from many others . 1 Cor. ii. 6 — l(j. 2 Cor. xiii. 3. 1 John iv. 6. &c.
: 1 tor. XV. 1, 2. II Eph. iii. 1, .').
274
THE DIVIKK IXSPIRATIOX
have looked upon, and our hands have handled of the Word of life ; for the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear tcitness^ and shew unto you that eternal Life Avhich was with the Father, and v/as manifested unto us ; that which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us ; and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ. And these things zorite we unto you, that your joy may be full. * — Brethren, I wi-'ite no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment, which ye had from tlie beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning." f
(3.) They speak of their inspiration with respect to their writings. Thus St. Paul giving his judgment to widows, in his Epistle to the Corinthians, adds " I think also, that I have the Spirit of God."" J The word Soxeo;, (rendered *' I think,"") does not imply any doubt, but a satisfactory degree of certainty. — The same Apostle, speaking of the grand apostacy, in his epistle to Timothy, prefaces his prediction with, " Now the Spirit speaketh expressly." || In another place to the Thessalonians, he observes, " For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord^"" &c. § — St. John says, " I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice as of a Trumpet, saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last : What thou seest, xcrite in a book. — Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter," ^ Hence the frequent repetition of those words, " He that hath an ear let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches." ** — Peter says, that his " beloved brother Paul, had loritten according to the wisdom given %into him C and classes his f^j9i<s^?e5 with "the other scrip- tures." j-j- — And lastly, St. Paul, writing to the Thessal^ nians on the common duties of Christian morality, incul- cates them by adding, " He that despiseth, despiseth not man, but God, who hath also given unto us his Holy Spiritr XX
* 1 John i. 1—4. t 1 John ii. 7. X 1 Cor. vii. 40.
II 1 Tim. iv. 1. § IThcss. iv. 15. ^| Rev. i. 10, 11, 19.
*♦ Rev. ii. 11, &c. ft- Pet. iii. 15, 16. H I TliC'^s. iv. 8.
Ol) THK SA( KF.l) WlilllXl.S. UiO
(4.) Hence they exercise an apostolic authority in their epistles. [1.] With respect to points of doctrine. — " Be- hold, I Paid say unto you, That if ye be circumcised, Christ shall })rofit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law." * [2.] AVith respect to points of moraliti/. — " But to the rest speak I, not the Lord, [who has said nothing on this subject,] if any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. — And so ordain I'm all churches." -f* [3.] With respect to ecclesiastical rcgidations. — " 1 have -ivritten unto you, not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, &c ; with such an one no not to eat. — Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person." \ — Now we command you, brethren, in tlie name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly. || — Is any sick among you .'' let him call for the elders of the church ; and let them pray over him, anointing Mm with oil in the name (rf the Lord.''"' § — [4.] With respect to the use of spiritucd gifts. See 1 Cor. xiv.— Would St. Paul pretend to regulate tliose who were inspired, even the p70~ phets themselves, unless he loere inspiired in so doing.'' — [5.] And lastly : With respect to the behaviour of all the subordinate officers of the church: instances of which abound in the epistles to Timothy, and in that to Titus.
(5.) And hence they assert the apostolic authority of their zcritings. " If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. ^ — Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or by our epistle. ** — And if any man obci/ not our word by this epis- tle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed, -f-j- — These things [which I have written] command and teach." :J::|: — The reader may see also, Col. iv. 16.
* Gal. V. 2, 3. t 1 Cor. vii. 12, 17. : 1 Cor. v. II, 13,
II 2 Thess. iii. fi. § James v. 14. % 1 Cor. xv. ;57.
**2Thess. ii. 1'). tt2TUcss. iii 11. ♦* 1 Tim. iv. 11.
S76
THE DIVIXE INSIMKATION
1 Thess. V. 27. 1 Tim, v. 21. vi. 13, 14. 1 Pet. v. 12.
2 Pet. i. 15. iii. 1, 2. Jude 3. and Rev. xxii. 18, 19-
From all this it appears that the ] loly Spirit, which was promised to the Apostles to guide them into all truth, and to make them competent witnesses of Christ, was with them in their tcritiJig as well as in their public ministry, and supported that apostolic authority with which they publish to the end of the world the truths which they preached. — The arguments which Mr. G. has urged on the contrary part, are not levelled directly against the preced- ing observations, and, therefore, it is necessary to examine them only so far as they are apparently relevant.
1 " In order to estabhsh the truth of the Christian re- ligion, was any thing else necessary, than that we should have complete evidence of Xhcjacts, and of the divine orighi of the doctrines ?''' *
It was necessary, after the facts had taken place, that the doctrine founded on them should be deduced from them, that the consistency of that doctrine with the pre- ceding dispensations should be explained, ind that the doctrine itself should be vindicated against ordinary cavils. This could be done only by the aid of that Spirit whose office it was to bring things to the ' ' remembrance" of the witnesses, to " teach" them the truth, and to prepare them to be the immediate " witnesses" of Jesus Christ.
2. " But the highest degree of inspiration did not con- fer infallihiliiyr -f-
It is necessary to distinguish between the infallibility of the sacred writers in their personal conduct, and that in their delivery of the divine revelation i and between their fallibility in religious opinions, and their being permitted to propagate their errors. In their moral conduct, Moses and Paul were free agents ; in their prophetic character, they were the organs of the Divine Spirit. As moral agents they were capable of doing wrong : as men in- spired, they recorded their own faults, for a warning to other men. Again : Peter might be fallible, and refuse to go to Cornelius ; but yet his error was not permitted to
* Vc.]. 11. p. 323. t Vol. II. i>. 322, 348.
OF THK SACRV.l) WIUTIXCS. .lit
overrule the cliviiie purposes. He is l;ui(>Iit, l)y a divine revelation, what his prejudice had not ])ermitted hiui previ- ously to learn. He might prove his fallibility by separating himself from the Gentiles for fear of the Jews ; but the apostle Paul, zcriting- for the edification of the cliurcli, mentions it only as dijiiidt. His error is not permitted to propagate ; for while it is recorded it is condenmed.
3. " On some specific occcis'ions a claim is laid to a super- intending divine inspiration. AVhat can be more self- evident than that by thus asserting, that they occasionally spoke by divine inspiration, they did not make it as a gene- ral claim ? " *
How weak must be that cause which can be supported onlv by such an argument as this ! When a person, on some more important occasions, asserts the authority by which he speaks, can we infer that he does not speak by the same authoritv at all times, because he is not perpetually ringing it in our ears .'* There is, however, in j\Ir. G.'s argument, another important flaw. The cases which he has adduced on this occasion, are not cases of mere " superintending divine inspiration." St. Paul had received the whole gospel, including the commandments delivered by Jesus Christ, the design of his death and resurrection, and the nature of the Lord's supper, by revelation : not by a mere " superintending divine inspiration," but either by s^iggestion or verbal declaration. If therefore, in speaking on these subjects, he asserts the authority by which he speaks, he cannot be understood as abandoning, oij other occas- sions, his '•^ c\am\ io a. siiperintencVmg dA\'n\e inspiration."
4. But " in repeated, distinct passages, they absolutely disclaim a divine inspiration in their writings."
(1.) " They declare that they have not dominion over the faith of their followers, but are helpers of their joy." ^ — When the scriptures are thus quoted for a specific purpose, the occasion gives them a certain colouring, and we are ve- ry apt to suppose, at the first view, that they are well applied. It often happens, however, that if he that quotes them would attempt to drawout his argument at length, he would
* Vol. II. p. .-Ml. t Vol. II. p. 341.
278
THE DIVINE IXsriRATinX
himself perceive its fallacy. This is precisely the case in the instance before us. Mr. G. has quoted this passage to prove that the Apostles were not inspired with the knowledge of those doctrines which their disciples were called upon to be- lieve : and in the very same page, he has cited the words of the same Apostle to the same Church, in. which that Apos- tle assorts that he himself had " delivered''' to them that which he had " received'''' by d'lv'ine revelation, ^\\\\Qh they had " beUeved" and " by which they were saved.'''' * Perhaps the judicious Reader will be of opinion that the Apostle meant to say, he had no lordly " dominion over their faith" to subvert it. This sense agrees v/ith the context in which St. Paul subjoins by way of argument, " for by faith ye stand."" Thus understood, it is precisely what he has said to the Galatians : " Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have receiv- ed, let him be accursed." -f- The Apostles could " do no- thing against the truth, but^r the truth :" they had " no authority for the destruction of the church, but for its edifi- cation"
(2.) " They address themselves to the reason of their disciples, and appeal to their understanding whether they were right." ^--And why not ? Why may not he who speaks with divine authority appeal to the judgment of his hearers 'f Did not our Lord himself make similar appeals ? " Yea, and why even of yourselves, judge ye not what is right.'*" || And how does this prove that he did not speak by divine inspiration ?
(3.) " St. Paul says, on some occasions, ' I speak this by permission, not of commandment ;' — ' to the rest speak I, not the Lord ;' — ' I have no commandment of the Lord, yet I give my judgment."'" § — Very true: and thus he makes a distinction between those things which " were not the de- ductions of reason, but were imparted to him by Jesus Christ," and those things which were the deductions of his insjnred reason. Hence while on such occasions he acknow- ledges that Jesus Christ had himself given no commandment
* 1 Cor. XV. 1—3. t Gal. i. 8. + Vol. II. p. 342. 1| Luke xii. o?. § Vol. II. p. 342.
OF THE SACRED MniTINTS. S79
on these points, (which is the true meaning of those expres- sions,) he claims the superintendency of the Spirit in his advices. First, he declares that he gave his judgment as one that had "obtained mercy of the I^ord to be faithful:" * by which preface he asserts his apostolic authority. Second- ly, he says, " I speak this by permi.mo7i :'''' -f* of which per- viissio7i he could know nothing but by inspiration. Third- ly, he concludes, " I think also that / have the Spirit of God:'^\ and thus claims, at least, a superintendent inspi- ration.
(■i.) But Luke makes " a positive assertion that hewrites his gospel, of his own individual authority, loitlwut any eom- mand, or supernatural influence.''^ || — Indeed he does not ! Nor does he " disclaim" a supernatural influence. Tliis is one of the grand mistakes : that a man can do nothing un- der "a supernatural influence,"" for which his own mind has conceived a reason. But why cannot God lead men b/j their reason, as well as without it ? Until this question be an- swered, " this of itself" is not " sufficient to settle the point in agitation." — So far is Luke fi'om conceding; the fact of his inspiration, that some Critics think he has positively as- serted it. "It seemed good to me, (he says) having had perfect understanding of all things avu^sv, from above, to write unto thee." § This is the sense in which avwS-jv is used in John iii. 3, 7, 31. xix. IL James i. 17. iii. 15, 17.
5. " The reasonings with which the books composing the New Tesaament abound, evidently shew that they were not written under the influence of plenary inspiration." ^i
Not at all. DoesnotGodhimself reason with mankind, and say, " Come and let us reason together .''" ** Did not Moses recwo«,when he says, "Do ye thus requite the Lord.'' O foolish people and unwise ! is not he thy father that hath bought thee? Hath he not made thee.^"-|"|- — And yet Mr. G. grants that he had " the highest degree of inspiration." W — Did not Jesus Christ reason, and reason from a preceding divine revelation^ when he said, "Have ye not read that which was spoken urito
* 1 Cor. vii. 25. f 1 Cor. vii. 6. * 1 Cor. vii. 40.
II Vol. II. p. .342. § Luke i. 3. *^ Vol. II. p. 343.
**lsa. i. 18. ttDeut.xxxii.e. j: oV.l II. p. 319.
§80
THE DIVINE IXSPIltATTON'
you by God, saying, I am the God ofAbraham,andtheGod of Isaac, and the God of Jacob ? God is not the God of the dead, but of the hving." * And was not he inspired ? — Did not St. Paul '■^reason of righteousness, temperance, and judg- ment to come," before Felix? -f* And did not our Lord say, " Wlien they deliver you up, it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you !"| — Where then isthemconsistency hetweenreasoning'anddivineinspiration?
This is a point of great importauce. The Socinians uniformly assume, that there can be no divine inspiration, but where divine truths are imparted without the deductions of reason in the mind of the recipient. Nothing can be more foreign from truth. Our Lord promised the inspira- tion of tlie Spirit to his Apostles, when they should " be brought before governors, and kings for his sake :" and this inspiration was such that he thought proper to say, it should not be they that spoke, but the Spirit of their Father. And yet, there is no occasion on which the Apostles reason on the revelations which they had previously received, more than in their apologies. (See all the apologies of Peter and Paul in the book of Acts.) So true it is, that the Apostles were inspired when they reasoned on the truths which had been previously suggested to them.
6. " They often speak with such uncertainty as to ren- der it incredible, that the sentiment was at the time dictated by the Spirit of God." ||
(1.) We do not argue that every sentiment which the Apostles wrote, for any purpose whatever, was dictated by the Spirit of God, any more than that God dictated to David that, " There is no God."
(2.) Much less do we suppose that every thing was dic- tated concerning which they wrote. Mr G. has instanced in such passages as the following: " I l-now not whether I baptized any other." " I will come to you shortly, if the Lord wilV Now what is it that the Apostle directly affirms in such cases, but that he was uncertain ? He knew that he did not Jcnozo. And what he wrote, he wrote with truth. Who supposes that the Apostles knew eve?'?/
* Matt. xxii. 31, 32. f Acts xxiv. 25. + Matt. xvii. 20. || Vol. II. p. 345,
OK TIIK SACIIKI) V.ltlTINUS. 281
i/iifiSi' l)y inspirat'um ? "Who conttMuIs, tliat rvficn tlu-y were confesscdlij inspired^ i\\ey vfure at that <jw€ omniscient ? It WHS enough that tliey knew that which it was necessary for them to write. Their ignorance was their own, and not God's ; but it does not hinder that they were under a divine influence. It cannot be necessary for a ma.i to tell a lie, in proof that lie is inspired. The Apostles were inspired by the Holy Ghost : but " they had this treasure in earthen vessels.''"'
7. " The writers of the New Testament often make quotations from the Old Testament in a very imwrcct man- ner. Is it not a grievous reflection upon the moral charac- ter of the Deity to represent him as dictating a quotation from a prophet to different writers, and yet inspiring them to give that quotation inaccurately and variously .^" *
(I.) It is not necessary to inspiration that words should be dictated.
(2.) It is not necessary, even if God should dictate the words of a (pcotation, that the words should be, without any variation, the precise words of the original Author. It is the sense that is to be quoted : and if the sense be fairly quoted, the words may be more or less varied, according to the particular purpose for which the sense is quoted.
(B.) In addition to this, some allowance is to be made for a translation. If it were necessary, that qiwtations from the oriffinal should be always verbally the same ; it is not equally necessary, that one person should always translate the same words, in the same manner. Now the fact is, that the passages in question are not properly quotations but translations. And why should such a barrenness of lan- guage be attributed to the Spirit of God as would render it necessary always to use the same words on similar occa- sions ^ Had all the Apostles translated the same passage in the same manner, it would have been deemed a stiff, unne- cessary monotony, unworthy of the Spirit by which they wrote.
(4.) Many of the mistakes which Mr. G. has enumerated (Vol. II. p. 252.) are not necessarily imputed to the origi-
* Vol. H.p. .151. • T
282 THE DIVINE INSPIRATION
nal Writers, but to subsequent Copyists. Some of tbem have been rectified from different manuscripts ; and all of them, as he grants, are " unimportant." *
8. " In the last place, in the writings of the evangelists, there are inconsistencies and occasional contradictions, which in my estimation render it utterly impossible, that they should have written under the influence of a divine inspira- tion." t
(1.) The first case of inconsistency and contradiction is the account which the Evangelists give of the speech of Jairus to our Lord, concerning his daughter.
Matthew makes Jairus say, " My daughter upn srsXauTYiacv, is now at her end." The Evangelist could not mean by this expression to say that she was positively dead ; because he subjoins, " Come and lay thy hand upon hei*, and (not, she shall be raised again but) ^•iiTETai, she shall (not die but) Zitii?." | Luke makes Jairus say, " AT^oSvrjTxstv, she lay dying :" i. e. when the father left her. Here then is neither inconsistency nor contradiction, unless it hejbrced upon them. — Again : Luke says, " ns a certain person came and told him she was dead." Mark says, *' some came and told him she was dead." Now here is neither inconsistency nor contrad'iction, unless Luke had said, ' only one'' came. But it is not only possible, but perfectly natural, to suppose, that orze came before the rest, and that Luke satisfies himself with mentioning the first, and Mark mentions them cdl.
(2.) The second case of inconsistency and contradiction, is that of blind Bartimeus.
Matthew states, that as Jesus departedy^o??^ Jericho, he healed two blind men. || Luke states that this miracle took place, Ev rcj syyi^eiv, which Dr. Doddridge renders, " while he was yet near to Jericho." For this the Doctor assigns several reasons, especially the LXX. on Isa. 1. 8. and Jer. xxiii. 23. where they use the same phrase. If this be just, here is neither inconsistency nor contradiction.
But " Mark and Luke (Mr. G. says) state, there to have been only mie blind man, whilst Matthew says txvo.'''' § The
* Vol. II. p. ?>'^?>. t Vol. II. p. .^58. + Matt. ix. 18. || Matt. xx. 29. § Vol. II. p. 360.
()V TIIF. SACHLTU WKITIVCS. "S;>
Reader will jH>rlia])s turn to the Evangelists; hut he wil! not find that either Mark or Luke says, there was " onhj one."'' They mention one, but this is not inconsistent with there being more than one, or any direct contradiction of what IMatthew says. Bartimeiis might be best known, and liis case most striking, and therefore, two of the Evan- gelists, passing over the other, might mention him only.
(3.) Tlie third instance of inconsistency and contradiction is in the case of the two thieves, who were crucified with our Lord. — Here again to support his argument, ]\Ir. G. makes Luke say "positively, that only one of them reviled liim." * With what degree of truths the Reader will easily know. The fact appears to be, that at first both the thieves reviled him. One of them afterwards repented, while tlie other continued his contumely. The penitent thief then rebuked liis wicked companion. Now Matthew relates pai'ticularly the obloquy which was cast upon the Saviour by all around him, and therefore mentions their both reviling liim. Luke is relating the conversion of one of the thieves, and the im- mediate fruit of it, (which Matthew omits,) and therefore dweUs upon that part of the awful scene which was subse- quent to the conversion of the penitent. The one omits what the other relates ; but inconsistency or contradiction has no existence between them.
(4.) The last case of inconsistency and contradiction relates to the inscription which was fixed over the head of Jesus Christ, at his crucifixion. It would be tiresome to the Reader to go over a string of remarks similar to those alreadv made. The truth is, the Evangelists differ from each other ; but without anv inconsistency or contradiction : and there is no difference between the Evangelists whicli is more easily accounted for. The inscription ^\'as written in three languages ; and undoubtedly according to the genius of each of them. Suppose that, in Hebrew, it was written, " The King of the Jews."" This agrees with the account which Mark lias given. If this Hebrew inscription, as the first of the three, was translated by Luke, according to the genius of the Greek, he would render it, " This is the King
♦ Vol. II. |>. 360.
284 THE DIVINE INSPIKATION &C.
of the Jews." Suppose then Matthew to have given tlie proper Greek inscription, and John the Latin translated into Greek, all their different statements are accounted for. But Mr. G. to serve his purpose, takes into his head, first that the three inscriptions agreed verbally with each other ; and secondly, that each Evangelist " professes to give the actually inscription f' and having proved a variation from each other, he shrewdly denominates it, inconsistency and contradiction.
In concluding this subject, one thing must again be re- peated. Mr. G. takes for granted that there is no inspira- tion but that of immediate sug-g-estion : and against this he points all his artillery. But in ^acts of which the sacred Writers were witnesses, immediate suggestion was not neces- sary, even to the exactness of the history. The Evangelists related what they saw and heard : and it was enough that the Spirit of truth should bring things to their remembrance and give them to understand them, that the promise of Jesus being fulfilled in them, they, according to his design, might bear witness concerning Mm.
( 285 )
CHAPTER XIII.
Of the Fallen State of Mankind.
The present inauiry relates to the condition of human nature independent of Jesus Christ, and of the blessings of that gracious covenant of which he is the Mediator. Ac- cording to the doctrine of scripture, many blessings are bestowed on mankind, which are not hereditary, but which are the gift of redeeming grace : and many good effects are thereby produced, which are not natural, but supernatural, and which are to be attributed to him by whom we are cre- ated anew in Christ Jesus unto good works. As the present design is to delineate the true state of mankind, in order to ascertain their want of a Saviour, and of every branch of the Christian salvation, — " the gift of God by Jesus Christ*" must be either left entirely out of the question, or introduced as collateral evidence, on the principle on which we prove the sickness of a patient from the character of his physician.
Tlie subject divides itself into two parts, of which the first relates to that moral depravity which is trans- mitted to us from our first parents : the- second relates to our being legally involved in the consequences of their sin.
First. Of that moral depravity which is transmitted to us fx'om our first parents.
It is generally granted by those who are not determined to controvert the most obvious facts, that, with the exception of those who are rcncxced in the spirit of their mind, mankind have been, and still are, desperately wicked. This melan- choly fact even the heathens have seen, acknowledged, and lamented. Their iron age is a striking picture of the con- sumnuitc wickedness of mankind. Socrates confessed that
T 3
286 THE FALLEN' STATE OF MANKIND.
he was prone to the grossest vices. Seneca laments that " all vices are in all men." Propertius, that " every body has a vice to vhich he is inclined by nature."" And Horace, that " mankind rush into wickedness, and always desire what is forbidden ;" — that " we are foolish enough to attack heaven itself;" — and that " our repeated crimes do not suffer the God of heaven to lay by his wrathful thunderbolts."
The universal wickedness of mankind, is, however, a truth, for the confirmation of which we cannot entirely depend on their own opinion or testimony. Their confes- sions may easily be attributed to a voluntary or mistaken humility : and their evidence against each other to malice and envy. Even the knowledge of ourselves may possibly be an improper standard of the human character : and our experience may be too limited to become the foundation of a sentence on a whole species. But we can place unlimited confidence in the testimony of the Most High : to whose decision we the rather appeal, because " that which is highly esteemed among men is, (often) in his sight, an abomina- tion." Men are apt to " judge according to outward appearances ;" whereas God " trieth the hearts," and " judg- eth righteous judgment." Mankind are frequently tempted by self-love to flatter each other, and to extenuate each other's crimes ; but " the judgments of God are true and righteous altogether." There is no counsel against tlie Loud, nor any appeal from his decision. " Let God be true, and every man a liar ; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and overcome when thou art judged."
According to the unerring testimony of divine trutli, the first man born of woman, was " of the lo'ickcd one, and slew his brother, because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous." * Religion Avas set up in the family of Seth, who " began to call upon the name of the Lord."-f- But " when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair ; and they took tlicm wives of all which they chose. And the Lord said,
* 1 -lolm iii. I-. t (><*ii- i^ . -''•
THE FALLEN STATE OK MAXKIXD. 287
My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also Kjfii'sh : yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. There were i>'i(i>i{,s' in the earth in those days ; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men, which [rather than good men] were, of old, men of renown. And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it re- pented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the Lord said, I will destroy man, whom I have created — for it repenteth me that I have made them." " The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. And God looked upon the earth, and behold, it was corrupt : for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me : for the earth is filled with violence through them : and behold, I vnW destroy them with the -earth." *
After God had purged the earth by a flood, and had entered anew into covenant with Noah and his family, the truths of religion were soon erased from the minds of man- kind, and its institutions were soon neglected. To renew its obliterated traces and to prepare the world for the coming of the seed of the woman, Abram, a " Syrian ready to perish," was called from the house of idolatry to become a witness of Jehovah. And what was the character of his progeny ? Alas ! their unbelief, obduracy, disobedience, murmurings, rebellions, and idolatries, are known from their whole his- tory. It was not without reason that God bore witness against them by his prophet : " Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth ; for the Lokd hath spoken : I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me. The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his Master's crib : but Israel doth not know, my people doth not consi- der. Ah sinful nation, a people laden a\ ith ini([uity, a seed of evil-doers, children that are corrupters ! they have forsa- ken the Lord, they have provoked the Holy One of Israel
* Gen. vi. 1 — K!.
288 THK FALLEN STATE OF MANKIND.
unto anger, they are gone away backward. Why should ye be stricken any more ? ye will revolt more and more. The whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it ; but wounds and bruises, and putrifying sores." — It is true they were very religious ; but their religion was only the garb of hypocrisy, and the cloak of wickedness. — " To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me .? saith the Lord : I am full of the burnt-offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he-goats. When ye come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hands to tread my courts ? — Your hands are full of blood." *
Nor did the calamities of a long captivity produce among them any lasting reformation. They were still " a disobe- dient and gainsaying people." Purged from gross idolatries, their religion was still formal, and their heart worldly . — When the harbinger of the Messiah announced the coming of their Deliverer, so long as they were left satisfied with themselves, and were permitted to indulge in their worldly expectations, they rejoiced in his testimony But when the doctrine of the Son of God unmasked their hypocrisy, and the humility of his appearance cut off their secular pros- pects, they soon neglected him, forsook him, derided him, contradicted him, blasphemed him, laid snares for him, me- ditated his destruction, conspired against him, seized him, arraigned him, accused him, condemned him, and procured his crucifixion : and still proceeded to " fill up the measure of their iniquity, till wrath came upon them to the utter- most.""
In the mean time, what was the moral state of the rest of mankind ? The " Gentiles were walking in the vanity of their mind, having the understanding darkened, being alie- nated from the life of God through the ignorance that was in them, because of the blindness of their hearts, who being past feeling, had given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness."f- — When they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were
* I^a. i. 2—15. ri Kph. iv. 17—19.
THE lAl.r.KX KTATK 01' ArAXK/NI). 280
thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, and their foohsh heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be vise they became fools, and changed the glory of the uncor- ruptible God into an image made like to corruj^tible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things. — Wherefore God also gave tliem up to uncleanness through the lusts of' their oxen hearts^ to dishonour their own bodies between themselves : who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen ! For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections ; for even their wo- men did change the natural use into that which is against nature: [Pasijphaen nivei solatur amore juvcnci :^ and like- wise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman ; men with men working that which is unseemly, \^Formosum pastor Cory don ardebat Alexin:^ and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. — Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, cove- tousness, maliciousness ; full of envy, murder, debate, de- ceit, malignity ; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, de- spiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedi- ent to parents ; without understanding, covenant-breakers, without natural affection, implacable, tmmerciful : who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." *
Such was the state of the Gentiles. " What then ? Are we better than they .'* No, in no wise, (says St. Paul,) for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin." This the Apostle proves by sum- ming up the suffrages of his inspired brethren, in which are asserted, (1.) The iinivcrsality of human wickedness : — " There is none righteous, no, nut one : there is none that undcrstandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become im- profitable ; there is none that doeth good, »o, not one''' (2.) The eruptions of this wickedness in every possible way. " Their throat is an open sepulchre ; with their tongues they
* Rom. i. 21—32.
290 THE FALLEN' STATE OF JIAXKIND.
have used deceit ; the poison of asps is under their li/ps ; whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness : their fiet are swift to shed blood, destruction and misery are in their ways; the way of peace they have not known ; there is no fear of God before their eyes." *
Thus " have the scriptures concluded all imder sin,'''' for " cdl have sinned and come short of the glory of God," insomuch that, " if we say we have not sinned, we make God a liar, and his word is not in us."" This is the melan- choly fact. But how is this fact to be accounted for ? Ac- cording to the scriptural account of the origin of man, he was at first created in the image of God. How is it then that mankind resemble evil demons, more than the Holy God.?
To set aside the scriptural method of solving this problem, the universal and glaring wickedness of man- kind has been attributed to every cause that could be invented.
1. It is said, that " sin is the abuse of free agency : and that every man is a sinner merely by his own unbiassed choice."
That all actual sin is the abuse of free-agency, may be true. But the abuse of free-agency, though it may appear sufficiently to account for anyo?i^ sin, or for the sinfulness of 07ie half of mankind, can never account for universal wick- edness. Again : " If men were never drawn into sin any other way than as Adam was, namely, by temptations offered from without, the case would be somewhat different. But there are numberless instances of men sinning, though no temptation is offered from without. It is necessary, there- fore, some other account should be given of their sinning than of Adam's." -f- — In fact, this is only giving back the same question in another form : " What is the reason that all men have abused their free-agency ? ""
2. It is said, that " mankind have contracted evil habits, which render wickedness natural to them."
That evil habits have added very much to some other cause, and have increased the difficulty of our cure, is
* Rorn. iii, 9—16 . f Wesley on Ori^. Sin, ji.lSS.
TlIK FALLEN STATK OF MANKIND. SQl
readily granted. It is not easy for those " to do good, that are aicustomcd to do evil." * But evil habits are the effect, as Avcll as the causi\ of evil practices. The evil practiees which induce evil liabits, are therefore still to be account- ed for.
3. It is said, that " the prevalence of had example is the true cause of universal sinfulness.""
To this it is answered: (1.) That the first sinner can have liad no bad example before \m\\. Cain, for instance, had no example of persecution and viurder, by which he was led astray. Wickedness therefore existed before bad example. (2.) There must have been a general prevalence of bad conduct before bad examples could prevail. (3.) There have been good examples set before mankind, as well as bad ones. If example, therefore, be the only thing which governs the conduct of mankind, especially as it is so much more reasonable to copy a good, than a bad example, the good and bad must have divided the world pretty equally between them. — We have still to enquire, therefore, what is the source of bad examples, and what is the reason that man- kind so readily follow them.
4. It is said, that " a defective education is the cause of universal wickedness.
Education is undoubtedly 0£/;fl(9reia "ivyr,?, " the medi- cine of a diseased soul." " Ye shall know the truth,'''' said our Lord, " and the trtdh shall make you free^'' -f- The want of it may therefore be one important cause of the con- tinuance of the malady : but it cannot be the original cause of its existence. The want of medicine may leave men the unresisting prey of disease ; but we are not wont to attri- bute the existence of a disease to the want of medicine. Where there is no disease, there is no need of medicine ; for "they that are whole have no need of a physician." The cause of the spiritual sickness of mankind is, therefore, yet to be sought. — And beside this : Why have mankind neg- lected the education of their offspring .'' And why do the souls of men resist the healing influence of education .''— Still we are at a loss !
» Jcr. xiii. 'IW. + John viii. 32.
THE FALLi:X STATK OF MAXKIXJ).
5. " But if one of these do not account for the universal wickedness of mankind, may not the concurrence of them all produce this phenomenon ? Suppose the first sin to have been occasioned by a mere abuse of free-agency. This first sin may have corrupted the heart of the individual, and so opened a flood-gate of iniquity. From this source many sins have sprung forth. Sinful practices have grown into sinful habits ; and sinful habits have been fruitful of further sinful practices. The sinful habits and practices of the individual, have prevented the religious education of his offspring, and have been the cause of bad example, which, not being counteracted by proper instruction, has been pro- ductive of universal sinfulness."
This is putting the case in its strongest light. But let us examine it. (1.) This hypothesis embraces all the con- sequences which will follow from the common one, and therefore makes but little difference in the result. (2.) It deserves all the praise of human invention ; for it cannot be proved from revelation. The inventor of it was, therefore, undoubtedly a man of genius. (3.) There is, however, a lameness in it which does not belong to truth. It accounts tolerably well for the defection of an individual ; but not at all for that of all his offspring. It supposes his offspring to be naturally upright, and yet supposes them ioJMl with- out an adequate cause. It supposes them to want medicine (education) before they are diseased, and to be so disordered as umversallij to follow a bad example, while yet it supposes them to be in perfect health.
This subject may possibly be better understood when viewed in the light of an apt illustration. Suppose then, that God made man with a taste for wholesome food, and a dislike to poison. Now the phenomenon to be accounted for is, that all the human race have preferred deadly poison, to wholesome food. To solve this problem, you say that "the first man perversely ate of the poison, and thereby vitiated his taste. From thenceforth he ate poison only, and rejected food. His offspring, though born, as their parent was created, with an appetite for food, and an antipathy to poison, witnessing continually the example of their father, and not
THE KAI.T.EX STATE OF r.rAXKIN'D. 293
being properly informed liow t!)c poison may be expelled by antidotes, or how a vitiated taste may be rectified, * copied the bad example which they witnessed, vitiated their taste, and, from that time, severally rejected their proper nourishment and ate only poison." — You think you have perfectly accounted for the phenomenon. But review the whole affair, and you will perceive that you have left the grand difficulty as you found it ; viz. How a zohole race of beings were led to act contrary to the law of their na- ture, to overcome the bias of an unvitiatcd taste, to resist their appetite for food, and their antipathy to poison ? How is it that not one of them has preserved his taste vmvitiated, and overcome the influence of a bad example to which their very constitution was repugnant .'*
The scriptural method is the only one in which we can account for this melancholy fact, the universal wickedness of mankind.
1. According to the sacred writers, the external wicked- ness of human conduct flows from an internal depravity of heart. They inform us, that " the heart is deceitful above all things and desperately roicJced : -f that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart is only evil continually : J that the heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart while they live : || that out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies : § that as a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit, — an evil man, out of the evil treasure of his heart, bringeth forth that which is evil : that of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh : ^ and that it is an evil heart of unbelief " which causes them to " depart from the living God." **
Thus far, Mr. G. goes with us hand in hand. At least, till he vindicate himself against the charge, we may venture to accuse him of consistency. " The word devil,'''' he says, " seems in general accusation to signify nothing more than
* In allusion to that kind of instruction of which mankind stand in need, and which God has given us by reveiaiion, which is ^' the gospel of our salvalinn."
t Jer. xvii. 9. J Gen. vi. ."). || Eccles. ix. ;j.
§ Matt. XV. 19. ^ Luke vi. 43, 45. •* Heb. iii. J2.
294 THE FALLEN STATE OF ^fAN'KIXD.
that propensity to ill, observable in the human mind.'''' * Mr. G. will undoubtedly abide by this observation, that there is " in the human mind"' a '■'^propensity to ill.''''
2. This depravity of heart, however it may be increased by our voluntary indulgence of it, is traced back to our 'iivfancy. — " The imagination of man s heart is evil from his youth?'' -f- " The word we render youth, includes childhood and infancy, the earliest age of man ; the whole time from his birth."" " Foolishness is bound in the heart of a ch'ilcV \ " The wicked are estrangedyrom the womb, they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies."'' ||
3. It is therefore imputed to our birth, as an hered'itary disorder. — " Man that is born of a woman is of a few days and full of trouble. — Who can brino; a clean thing; out of an unclean .? Not one. § — What is man that he should be clean ? and (he that is) born of a woman, that he should be righteous? ^ — Man is 5or/i like a wild ass"'s colt." ** — " How keenly is the comparison pointed ! Like the ass, an ani- mal stupid even to a proverb : like the ass's colt, which must be still more egregiously stupid than its dam : like the w'dd ass-'s colt, which is not only blockish, but stubborn and refractory ; neither has valuable qualities by nature, nor will easily receive them by discipline. The image in the original is yet more strongly touched. The particle nice is not in the Hebrew. Born a wild ass''s colt : or as we should say in English, a mere wildass''s colt." -f-y — ■" Be- hold, I was shapen in iniqiiity : and in sin did my mother conceive me." \X
Hence our Lord, insisting on the necessity of a new birth, says, " That which is born of the flesh is flesh ; and that Avhich is born of the Spirit is spirit." ||{| — The plain meaning of which words is, that every one bo7vi of a woman^ needs to be born again, and to be born of the Sjnrit, be- fore he can enter the kingdom of heaven ; and that his being born of the Jlesh, is what renders it necessary that he should be born of the Spirit. It is commonly objected to
* VoL p. 76. X Gen. viii. 21. + Prov. xxii. 1.5. || Psalm Iviii. 3. § Jobxiv. 1,4. ^ Job XV. 14. **Jobxi. 12. ff Ther. and Asp. Dial. l.'J. + :Psalmli. 5. |||| John iii. 6.
THE FAI.I.EX STATE OF MAN'KIVD. S9j
this interpretation, that by "flesh" our Lord means "infirm humanity." He himself, however, was a partaker of the infinnitH's oi human nature. In that sense he was born of X\\iijic}ih, and was flesh. But did he need to be born again of the Spirit f If the passage be compared with other parts of scripture, it will be found to mean, that which is born of s'lnj'iil human nature, is shifitl human nature, and needs to be born of the Holi^ Spirit, that it may be holij. " If to walk after thcjiesh, as ojjposed to tcalking after the Spirit, is to follow our sinful inclinations : if to he in thejlesh, op- posed to being in the Spirit, is to be in a state of sin : if the Jtesh and the Spirit are two contraiy principles, which counteract each other : if the works of' the flesh, and the lusts of the flesh, are opposed to tlie Spirit, and i\\c fruit of the Spirit: then to he horn (f the flesh (in opposition to being born cf the Spirit) must signify sometliing more than being born of a woman," * and to he flesh (or carnal) in opposition to be Spirit (or spiritual) must mean something more than to partake of infirm humanity.
The doctrine of hereditary depravity is thus established, by our being taught to trace it to our birth and conception. In this way we are directed to a long, unbroken chain, the last link of which is one''s self and the first of which is Adam. Of him we arc informed, as if to instruct us par- ticularly in this subject, that " Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son, in his own likeness, after his image.'''' •[• ^^ The image of Adam m which he begat a son after his fall, stands opposed to the image of God in which man was at first created. Moses had said, verse 1, ' /« the duij that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him.'' But speaking of Adam, as he was long after the fall, he does not say, ' He begat a son in the likeness ofGodC but ' he begat a son in his oxen likeness, after his imaged Now this must refer to Adam, either as a man ; or as a good man ; or as a mortal, sinful man. But it could not refer to him merely as a man. The inspired writer could not design to inform us, that Adam begat a man, not a lion or a horse. It could not well refer to him as a good
• Wesley on Orig, Sin, p. 371. f Gen. v. ;5,
296 THE FALI.EX STATE OF JIAXKIXD.
man. For it is not said, ' Adam begat a son, who at length became pious hke himself; ' but ' he begat a son in Ms own likeness.'' It refers to him therefore as a mortal, shrful man ; giving us to know, that the mortality and corruption, con- tracted by the fall, descended from Adam to his son : Adam, a sinner, begat a sinner like himself. And if Seth was thus a sinTier hj nature, so is every other descendant of Adam." * — This subject will require further elucidation.
" God created man in his own image."" ■\ — He made him in his natural image : in the image of his intellectual and self-determined nature. As an intelligent being he made him capable not only of sensitive, but of abstract knowledge. He formed him capable of knowing not only visible but in- visible things : of knowing not only the properties of matter, but also of mind : of being led from effects to their causes, and of being taught to perceive their relations to each other, and the consequences of those relations. He made him ca- pable of being directed from the knowledge of himself', a visible effect, a creature, — to his invisible cause, his Creator ; and from the sensible blessings which he enjoyed, to the bountiful Donor. He made him capable of being taught his derivation from God, and his dependance on him : of learning and entering into the wise design of his Creator, so as to comprehend the purpose of his own existence. He gave him a capacity to understand the will of his Maker, and to perceive his obligation to do it. His understanding was therefore capable of exercising that sort of judgment which Ave call conscience : it could be taught to dictate what was right, and to accuse or to excuse him. As God is " a God of knowledge by whom actions are weighed," he made man like himself, capable of weighing his own actions. — As God made man after the image of his own infinite under- standing, he made him capable of self-determination. The Most High " doeth according to his will." J So man was made, not a machine, but a beingwhose actions are his own, and spring from his choice. — Such was the natural image of God in man. But this natural image was only the basis of his moral image. And this moral image was knowledge and
* Wesley on Orig. Sin, p. f»5. f Gen. i. 27. J Dan.ix..35.
THF. KAI.T.F.X STATE OK ^rANKIXD. COT
holiucsft. (1.) It was KXowi.KDGF.. God endowed liini with Sin atlecjiiate measure of tliat knowledge of whicli lie made liim naturally capable. As God had made him ea])a- hle of corporeal sight, and gave him light to make all things visible, that he might see; so God who made him capable of knowledge, of sj)iritual and divine knowledge, was liimself a light unto him : and as the sun renders himself visible, by his own light, and sheds his light on the visible creation, so in God's light did man see light. (2.) He made him in the imatre of his iiolinkss. — This knowledge gave the bias to his will. His choice was therefore wise, and right, and good. His heart was fixed on God as his portion. He loved God supremely, and with an undi^'ided heart. He chose the will of God as the rule of his actions : and the glory and pleasure of God, as the end of them. Thus, as God is *' most upright," he " made man vpright.'''' He created liim according to God, and planted in him the principles which led him to imitate God in righteousness and true ho- liness.
Over such a being, it was reasonable and proper that God should assume the character, not only of a gracious Benefactor, but of a righteous Governor. AVhen man knew his IMaker's pleasure, could discern between good and evil, was free to chuse the one or the other, he was capable of moral rectitude or obliquity, and was therefore a proper suliject of moral government. Able as he was to appreciate the blessings which he enjoyed, and to perceive the hand which bestow^ed them, it was fit that the continuance of those blessings should only accompany his voluntary dependence on the Donor, and his grateful acknowledgment of the gifts. AVhatever favours might, in the beginning, be bestowed on him gratuitously, must not be continued to him capriciously, but on the principle of a benign and holy justice, and, in some sort, according to his fitness to receive tliem, and his fidelity in the use of them.
The test to which it pleased God to put the obedience of Adam, w-as such as suited his constitution. The prohibiticm of the fruit of a certain tree, which was, in apjK'arance, " good for food, and pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be
u
298 THE FALLEN STATE OF MANKIND.
desired,"" — was a trial whether man would live according to the Spirit, or after the Jlesh : — whether he would continue to make choice of God, as his portion, or turn from him to a creature. The act whereby our parents fell, was therefore a rejection of the knowledge and enjoyment of God, a defec- tion from their dependence on him and their allegiance to him, and a consignment of themselves to the government of the flesh. The consequence Avas, that the appetites of the body became disordered and irregular : their disordered ap- petites inflamed their mental passions, and their passions enslaved their reason. As God was rejected, his inspiration was withdrawn ; and as the Devil was victorious, he took possession of the territories which he had subdued.
That this was the moral state to which Adam was re- duced by his fall ; and that the state of mankind, till they are restored by Jesus Christ, is precisely the same, will clearly appear from a candid examination of the scriptures.
1. Before his transgression, Adam had knowledge, and had it from his creation. He was " created in knowledge." When he had sinned against God, and had thereby rejected and departed from the source of spiritual and divine light, his mind was darkened, and ignorance took the place of his preceding knowledge. Of the gross ignorance of God into which he was now fallen, we have a most palpable proof, in his attempt to " hide himself* from the divine omnipresence and omniscience " amongst the trees of the garden." * — Is then the natural state of all mankind, similar to that of Adam before, or after, his fall ? This question is easily answered from those parts of scripture which declare, " there is none that understandeth — God; -f that the world by wis- dom knew not God ; :|: that the Gentiles knew not God ; |j that they have their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, through the ignorance that is in them because of the blindness of their hearts ; § and that to be RENEWED in knowledge after the image of him that created them,"" it is necessary that they should " put off the old man
*Gen. iiJB. f Rom. iii. 11. JlCor. i.2I.
1! 1 Thess.iv. 5, § Eph. iv. 18.
THE FAT.I.KX STATU OF MANKIXD. J?f)<)
with his deeds, and put on the nac, where Christ is all in all." •
2. IJefore his fall Adam had no irrcj^'ular or inordi/Kifc appetite. For instance : With the exception only of the forbidden fruit, God gave him leave to enjoy xcUhotit rc^ straint the ci'eatures which he liad given to him. " Of every tree of the garden, said the I^ord God, thou mayest freely eat." -|- But from the time of their fall, the fruits of para- disc were refused to their now irregular a])petite, which was to be checked by the use of more homely food, and the tax of labour and sweat. :|: — Does the present state of mankind more resemble the state of innocent, or of fallen, Adam .'' Is it now safe for human beings to be given up to unrestrained appetite, even in things lawful ? No : *' The flesh now lusteth against the Spirit. || — If, therefore, we live after the flesh, we shall die." It is now become necessary to " mortijij the deeds of the body that we may live .'' § — They that are in the flesh cannot now please God. For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh : but they that are after the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death ; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace : because the carnal mind is enmity against God ; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." ^ — The " fleshly lusts now war against the soul." ** That any man may be spiritual, he must be born again of the Spirit. " That which is born of the flesh is flesh ; but that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." -f"f- Before a child of Adam can be renewed in the spirit of his mind, he has to " put ofl" the old man which is corrupt, according to the dccc'iifxtl hints ; and to put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." :|:^
The power which the now irregular appetites of human nature have to overbear our enfeebled and darkened reason, is never more conspicuous than in the awakenetl sinner who, like Medea, says, Vidro vuliora prohoqiie ; diicrioj-ii scqtior.
* Col. iii. J), 10. t Gen. ii. Ifi.
J Similar oliscrvatioiis miolit he made oi\ their other appetites. II Gal. V. 17. § Rom. viii. V.\. \ Rom. viii. .5— H. •• 1 I'et. ii. II.
tt Jol'ii iii- 6. :: F.ph. iv.22— 24.
u2
soo
THF. FALI.EX STATE OF MANKIXD.
Such is the awakened Jew described by the Apostle Paul, whose language is, " We know that the law is spiritual : but I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. — Now then, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. For I know, that in me (that is in my Jlesh) dwelleth no good thing ; for to will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good, I find not. For the good that I would, I do not : but the evil which I would not, that I do. I find then a law, that when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man. But I see another law in my memhers^ warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin, which is in my mem- bers." *
Mr. G. has given us a very luminous view of this sub- ject. " Let us for one moment reflect, what man is. He is a being composed of body and mind. His mind consists of intellect and will.. The former comprehends reason and judgment, the latter containing passions and afi*ections of various kinds. — The body is perpetually exciting those pas- sions of the mind which are incons'istent with reason, and contrary to judgment, and therefore denominated sinfuV "f — " This " bondage of corruption," is broken only by the power of Jesus Christ. " There is, therefore, no condem- nation to them that are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, makes us free from the law of sin and death.":}: They, therefore, and only " they that are Christ's, have crucified the flesh with its affections and lusts. || — Ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." §
3. When Adam had thus preferred a creature to his Creator, and embraced the gratification of an animal passion in preference to the enjoyment of God, he lost the blessing of communion with God : and by the loss of that commu-
» Rom. vii. 14—23. f Vol. II. p. 241. + Rom. viii. 1, 2.
II Gal. V. 24. § Rom. viii. '.).
THE FALLEK STATE OK MAXKINI). 301
nioii with God wliith, from the moment that God inspired Jiim with the breath of hfe, was tlie hfe of his soul, he became, according to the warning given to him, sjnntmdlij dead. Here again we ask, Is the present state of mankind, without Clirist, the same in whidi Adam was made, or that into which he Jill ? Are mankind naturally in a state of communion with God, and spiritually alive from their birth? or are they without God, and alienated from the life of God? The answer is at hand. We have already found that " there is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after, — God ;"" that " there is no fear of God before their eyes :'"'* to which we may add, with St. Paul, that all mankind, wliile they are " Gentiles in the jicsh^'' who are " without Christ," — are " a^^M, Avithout God in the world :" -f- that *' having the understanding darkened," they are " aUcnatcd
from the life of' God, through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart ;"" j that " if one died for all, tlien were all dead:'''' \\ and that to every man now spiritually alive, it may be said "as to those that are alive
from the dead,"" § " And you w ho xcere dead in trespasses and sins, wherein in time past ye Avalkcd according to the course of this world, [like all other men,] according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit tliat now worketh in tlie children of disobedience, among whom also zee all had our conversation in time past, in the liists of onr flesh, ful-
Jdl'ing the desires of' the fesh, and [the consequent desires] of the mind : even when we were dead in sins, God, who is rich in mercy, hath guickened us together with Christ, and hath raised us up together, and made us to sit together in heavenly- places in Christ Jesus." ^
4. By the conquest of Adam, Satan obtained a power over him which before he did not possess, according to that maxim : — " of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought into bondage." ** Before the sin of man, Satan had no access to his mind or imagination, but through his senses- Hence arose the necessity for the Deceiver''s making the Serpent the instrument of his design. We read
« Rom. iii. 11, \H. fY.\A\. ii. 11, 12. X Eph. iv. 18. || 2 Cor. v. 11,
§ Kom.vi. 13. \ Eph. ii. I— (i. ** 2 I'd. ii. VJ.
U 3
86^ THE FALLEN STATE OF MAXKIXD.
of no such mean of temptation being subsequently used till the temptation of our Lord, who on one occasion says, ** The Prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in mc^ * His only way of tempting Jesus Christ was, as in tiie case of Eve, through his senses. But not so with man- kind, since their first parent was " overcome and brought hito bondage."" From that time, he is " the Prince of this world." " The world now lieth in ru rno^ripaj, the wicked one.^ + As " the prince of the power of the air," this ** spirit now worketh in the children of disobedience, among whom we all had our conversation in time past.^" :|: " H^ that committeth sin, [and ' all have sinned,'] is of the Devil ; for the Devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of tlie Devil.'" |] And his gospel is sent, *' to turn men from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God." §
Thus while the scriptures lead us up to our first parents from whom we derive our hereditary depravity, they point out the precise similarity between their state after their fall, and the present state of their progeny ; and that in every particular, and in such a manner as to furnish us with addi- tional proof, that the moral disorder of human nature is to be attributed to their fatal disaster. We have traced the corruption of the stream up to the fountain, and have found the corruption of the fountain and of the stream, to be pre- cisely the same.
Secondly : Of our being legally involved in the penal consequences of the sin of our first parents.
It is not intended here to assert that the posterity of Adam are accounted personally guilty of his personal sin. This is impossible. It is not, however, impossible for a parent, as the representative of his progeny, to involve them in the ruinous consequences of what must always be deemed his own fault.
When Adam was placed in the garden of Eden, " the Loud God commanded him, saying, Of every tree of the
* Johu xiv. ;5f7. t 1 Jolm v, IK. X Eph. ii. 2, 3.
i) i.Fok:i 1:1. ^. § Att> ixvi. IK
THl". FAI.T.KX STATK OK JIANKINI). 303
|?ardcn thou niayest freely eat, but of the tree of the know- ledi^c of iTood and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof, dying, thou shalt die." * — The tlireatening by which God thus enforced this command, includetl not only the death of the body, but that of the soul : a death every way opposed to the lives which were given to him, when "the Lord God breathed into his nostrils the breath of lives^ and man became a living soul.^'' t — To this penalty Adam stood exposed when he ate of the forbidden fruit. Had the sentence been immediately ex- ecuted in its full extent, the personal existence of all his posterity would have been absolutely prevented. The conclusion, therefore, that by his crime the personal existence of his progeny was forfeited, is unavoidable. Had condign punishment been inflicted on Iiim, thcij must have perished in his loins : and thus, though tlwi/ would not have suffered the personal punishment of his personal crime, their seminal sin would have met with a seminal punishment. As " Levi paid tithes in Abraham, being yet in the loins of his father when Mclchisedec met him," — so the children of Adam sinned, " being yet in the loins of their father," and in his loins they would have been destroyed.
When God arraigned Adam before his bar, though he convicted him of sin, he did not pronounce on him this sentence, but granted him a gracious reprieve. The first judicial sentence which God pronounced, was upon the Tempter. " And the Lord God said unto the Serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field : upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed : he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." \ — This sentence was, for Adam, a gracious sentence. It was not, however, a sen- tence of acquittal, but a reprieve. It did not absolve him, as the sequel shews ; though it did hold out to him the prospect of beholding the multiplicaticm of his species. It d jd not place him on the high ground from which he had
• Gcu. ii. Ifi, 17. t f'CU. ii. /• + tic"- "'• ^^> l"'
304 THE I'ALLEN STATE OF MAXKIXD.
fallen, but promised him a Deliverer by whom he might be restored.
Under this reprieve Adam lived to behold his progeny. But as he was not thereby absolved, so neither was his posterity, considered as his posterity. Hereby, neither were they restored to the possession and enjoyment of the blessings forfeited by him ; nor was the penal sanction of tlie broken covenant annulled. Considered merely in their relation to Adam, all mankind were, therefore, brought into condemnation, and were subject to the penalty of death. Whatever they became by grace, they were, " by nature, the children of lorath, even as others." * — The sense of this passage may be disputed, but it cannot be overturned. (1.) " The phrase cliildren of wrath, is a He- braism, and denotes persons worthy of, or Uable to, wrath. " (2.) The word (^unzi, hj nature, cannot mean custom or habit, for it never has that sense when it stands alone, with- out any qualifying epithet. (3.) It mea.ns hy birth. This is the sense in which the writers of the New Testament use it, "We who are (pujEj Ih^ccioi, Jeios hy nature: that is, Jeivs hy birth."" f (4.) This affirmation the Apostle makes of himself, the Ephesians, and others. — Hence those plain and repeated declarations of St. Paul : — " By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin ; and so death passed upon all men, for that cdl have sinned. (For until the law, sin was in the world : but sin is not imputed Avhere there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the si- militude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.) — Through the offence of one, many are dead : — for the judgment was by one to condemnation. — By one man's offence, death reigned by one. — By the offence of one, or, rather, Sf tvos ira.poi.TsrciJi/.a.ros, hy one offence, (judg- ment came) upon all men to condemnation. By one man's disobedience many were made sinners."" X
In this important passage, Adam is spoken of as rynror, a type, or figure of him that should come, viz. of Jesus Christ. In \A\i\i sense he is a type, is obvious from the
* Eph. ii. ;}, t Gal. ii. 15. J Rom. v, 12, VJ.
THE FALLEN STATK OF MAXKIND. 305
whole passage, in wliich the writer runs a parallel between the type and the antitype, and shews that like Jesus Christ he is a representative of all mankind. Hence Jesus Christ is termed " the last Adam." * — This " first man Adam*" is the " one man" here repeatedly mentioned. 13y him, (not by the Devil, not by Eve ; for thet/ were not connncm repre- sentatives,) sin, and death " the wages of sin," entered. By his one sin (for only till the commission of that was he a representative,) all were constituted sinners, — judgment came upon all men to condemnation, — and death reigned over all. This the Apostle proves by an appeal to an incon- trovertible fact, — the death of " those [infants] who have not [personally] sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgressions," and who, therefore, have not personally in- curred the penalty of sin. — Thus the doctrine on which we insist is positively asserted in its full extent by apostolical authority, and proved by an unanswerable argument. Dr. Priestley himself acknowledges, that "if this passage be .interpreted literally, it will imply that all are involved in his (Adam's) ^7/ iZ^, as well as in his sufferings." -f*
To this interpretation it is objected that " by all men being constituted sinners^'' and by the ^'^ judgment xohichcame (y)i all men to condemnation,''' nothing is meant but " their being liable to the death of the body."
Let the passage be considered in its own light, and it will appear that the Apostle speaks of another death than that of the body ; viz. eternal death.
1. The death which is the consequence of sin, is the subject of the Apostle's observations. This needs no other proof than what arises from a perusal of ver. 12, 17, 21.
2. The death which came by sin must be eternal death, because the Apostle contrasts it with eternal life : " As sin hath reigned unto death, even so might g-race reijrn unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ." J So, in another place : — " The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord."|| As no medium can be found between life and death, the death incurred by sin could not make eternal life necessary, unless that death were
* 1 Cor. XV. 45. t Hist.of Cor, Vol. 1. p. 28(i. ; J Rom. v.21. || Rom. vi. 23.
306 THE FALLEN STATE OF MANKIND.
otherwise eternal. If mankind are not exposed to eternal death, they have already eternal life, and God needed not to g-ive it by Jesus Christ ; for this would be to give only what they already possess. In other words : If eternal life is the gift of God by Jesus Christ, then eternal life was forfeited : which is the same as to say, that " the penalty of eternal death was incurred.*"
3. According to the Apostle, corporeal " death reigned from Adani to Moses, even over [infants] them that had not [personally] sinned after the similitude of Adam"'s trans- gression."* How then could he say, that "as by the offence of one (judgment came) upon all men to condemna- tion ; even so by the righteousness of one (the free gift came) vpon all men to Justification of life ?"" '\' For if the only sen- tence of condemnation is that of bodily death, how does jus- tification of life come upon those who suffer by that sen- tence, and thereby sviffer the whole penalty to which they are exposed ?
4. If it be said, " But infants who have suffered the penal sentence of corporeal death, are subsequently raised to life by Jesus Christ, and in that sense jvistification of life maybe said to come on them also :" — we answer, (1.) It is an odd sentence of justification which is pronounced after the supposed penalty \\a& been borne. Is not this at once to remit and to inflict the penalty ? Is it not like forgiving a debt after the debtor has paid it ? (2.) After suffering this sentence of the death of the body, either they would, without Christ, have eternal life, or they would not. If they would, then eternal life is not the gift of God through Jesus Christ. If they would not, then the gift of eternal life by Jesus Christ saves them from eternal death, which otherwise would have been the consequence. (3.) The ob- jector may take that side which he thinks most nearly allied to truth. — Let him be a materialist. He then supposes that the death of the body, is the death of the whole man. Ac- cording to this hypothesis, immortal life depends entirely on the resurrection of the body. He, therefore, who raises the body, saves the man from eternal death, by giving him
* Rom. vi. 11. t Rt""- V. 18.
THE FAM.KX STATE OF AtAXKlXI). 307
eternal life : and he that is dead, unless his body be raised, is ETEUNALLY dead. — On the other hand : Let the Ohjcct- or entertain a contrary opinion. liCt him suppose that man has a spirit which is naturally immortal. Ktvrnal life nuist then be distinguished from eternal existence ; because it is supposed to l)e a. gift to a being to whom an eternal existence is natural. It must stand opposed, not to an7iihilation, but to " eternal punishment."" This is obviously the sense in ■which the scriptures use the term. " These shall go away into everlasting punishment : but the righteous into life eternal." * Eternal life, in the scriptural sense of the term, is eternal blessedness. " Come, ye blessed of my Father,"" &c. "f* If Jesus Christ justifies all the infant offspring of Adam, and gives them eternal blessedness, he saves them from its opposite, eternal misery : an eternal misery Avhich is the inevitable consequence of the eternal existence and banishment from God, of a spirit made to be blessed, and necessarily desirous of happiness. But if by justifying them, .and giving them eternal life, he saves them from eternal miserv, — it is obvious that eternal misery would have been their portion, unless they had thus been justified and saved.
Having shewn that the whole human race were involved with their parent in the immediate legal consequence of his fall, we now explore the new condition in which our first pa- rents and their posterity were subsequently placed.
1. " And the Lord God said unto the woman, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception ; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children ; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."" ^ — Kere we see, that because the woman had unlawfully gratified her desire without consulting her husband, who, if he had been con- sulted, might probably have been the mean of saving her from sinning, her desire was subjected to his rule ; and sor- row was entailed upon her as a consequence of the gratifica- tion of her desire. But as the former is a grant, that she and her husband should still live together; her sorrow was connected witli the production of her seed, the predicted
•Malt. XXV. If^ t -Mall. xx\. M. J Gcu.iii. *',.
308 THE FALLEN STATE OF MAXKIND.
Deliverer. — It will not be denied, that the present state of married, and child-bearing, women, agrees precisely with the tenor of this sentence pronounced on Eve.
2. " And unto Adam, he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it ; cursed is the ground for thy sake : in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life. Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee ; and thou shalt eat of the herb of the field. In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground : for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." "f — In this sentence, a curse is pronounced on the ground ; but not immediately/ on the man. Adam is indeed warned of his mortality, already induced by his sin, and his death is predicted ; but in a manner which clearly indicates that he should be mercifully spared, and that, at the expence of labour, the ground, though under a curse, should afford him sustenance. This labour is entailed particularly on the man, who, because he chose to cleave to the woman, must now support her. Because he made himself the slave of her wishes, he must now be the servant of her wants.
It cannot be denied that the ground on which we live is still cursed ; that mankind eat of its fruits in sorrow all the days of their life : that it still spontaneously produces thorns and thistles : or, that mankind earn their bread in the sweat of their face.
It cannot be denied, that all mankind are now mortal, or that they return unto the dust from whence they were taken.
Dangers stand thick through all the ground. To push us to the tomb ;
And fierce diseases wait around To hurry mortals home.
Some men may impute this to our personal transgressions. The original cause, however, is, that " by one man sin en- tered into the world, and death by sin ; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.*" This is abundantly
t Gen. lii. 17, ID.
THE FAT,LF.\ STATE OF MANKIXD.
309
confirmed, as we have seen, by the suflPerings and mortahty of infants. Pain is the chastisement or punishment, and death is tlie wages, of sin. But these have no personal crime, on account of wliich they suffer, or die. Yet " death reigned from Adam to Moses (and still reigns) over them tha^t had not sinned after the similitude of Adam^s trans- gression."
In all this we find a gracious commutation of wholesome chastisement for destructive punishment. A commutation fcnmded on the sentence which God first pronounced on the Serpent. Wholesome chastisement this certainly was.— Hard labour, though once unnecessaiy, was now become wholesome: wholesome to the body, the constitution of which now needed it for the preservation of health ; and to the mind, which now, not naturally inclined to employ itself in the contemplation of its Maker, needed some innocent occupation to prevent the further increase of sin. — Pani and sorrow were now become as necessary and as wholesome as labour. Unmingled bliss might agree with spotless inno- cence, and was once a suitable proof of the unqualified approbation of their Creator. But pain was a necessary appendage of sin, and was adapted to remind them of their fall and of their loss of the Divine approbation. When, before their fall, they Uved in the actual enjoyment of God, they were thereby morally drazon towards him, and led to make him the supreme object of their choice ; but when, by their sin, they were robbed of their proper portion, the sufferings and sorrows of sin were necessary to drive them to him. They were, therefore, wisely left under the physical effects of their fall, until they should be completely recovered from its moral and judicial consequences. And their expul- sion from Paradise, and from the tree of life, with all that it implied, was a proper and standing evidence of the judicial sentence which still hung over them.
Their state was now that of moral agents under the displeasure of their Maker, but under a gracious dispensa- tion by which they might be restored : and with this all the circumstances of their new situation were in perfect accord.
310 THE FALLEX STATE OF MANKIKD.
The external circumstances of mankind are now pre- cisely those of fallen Adam. The human race are now surrounded with natural evil, and continually exposed to sufferings. " ]\Ian is born unto trouble as the sparks fly upwards." * If he enter at all " into the kingdom of God,"" it must be " through much tribulation." -f It is not neces- sary to recount here,
The heart-ache, and the thousand natural shocks. That flesh is heir to.
The heart knoweth its own bitterness. — This natural evil is the product of moral evil. Suffering is the concomitant of sin. These sorrows are the consequences of a breach of a former covenant, and are as truly the marks of legal con- demnation, as the sufferings of our first parents. They are intended, — to corroborate the divine testimony concerning the moral and relative state of mankind, — to make us con- scious of our real situation, — and to prepare us to receive the Deliverer from sin and sorrow : — and they will continue till, when we arc completely saved from sin.
Our mourning is all at an end :
when these that " have come through much tribulation, shall have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." In the mean time, while they answer these important ends, " it is good for us to have been afflicted."
The -more closely we examine the present condition of human nature, the more Ave shall be convinced, that it is precisely that into which our first parents were brought by their fall, and by the new covenant which was then made with them through the seed of the woman. We have the same marks of our loss of the blessings of the covenant of innocence, the same indications of the judicial sentence which hangs over us ; and we, like them, are under a new covenant by which provision is made for our recovery.
« Job. V. 7. t AcU >.iv. 22.
THK KAT.LF.X STATR OF MAKKTXP. Oil
1. Nothing can less need to be proved than that Adam by his sin forfeited his paradise, and tlie ease and enjoyments to which it contributed. " The Loud God sent liim forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man : and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden, Cherubim, and a flaming sword." * — If Adam had not sinned, he and his posterity would inidoubtedly have continued to inhabit the garden of Eden : but since his fall, no individual of the human race has been admitted. The case then is perfectly plain, that his posti?-if^ have lost it by his sin.
2. Our first parent forfeited the Tree of Life, and its immortalizing fruity together with his paradise. " And now," said the Loud God, " lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live for ever ; therefore the Loud God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, and placed Cherubim, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to 'keep the way of the tree cf life.'''' 'f' When Adam was placed in the garden of Eden, he had leave to " eat freely of evory tree of the garden," of which the tree of life was one, with the exception only of" the tree of knowledge of good and evil." | But who will say, that the posterity of Adam are at liberty to eat the fruit of the tree of life .'*
3. Whatever were the benefits of which a paradise and the tree of life are the symbols and pledges, they were for- feited w'ith them. The sin of Adam separated between God and him. He was therefore robbed, as we Jiave seen, of the gracious presence of God. He forfeited the divine light, and sunk into spiritual darkness. He foi'feited the divine assistance, and sunk into spiritual debility. He forfeited the divine favour and approbation, and the proofs of that favour and approbation ; and was therefore afraid, and hid himself from that God in whose presence he had otherwise rejoiced. He forfeited that communion with God, and that enjoyment of him, which were the life of his life ; and became wretched and forlorn. — All these we have already found to be the consequences of his fall, with respect to his posterity : of
• G.ii. iii. 23, 24. t Gen- iii- "-■^ 21. + Gen. ii. IG, 17.
312
THE FALLEN STATE OF MANKIND.
whom none has God with him or in him, none is enlightened or accepted, none beholds the love of God towards him, or enjoys fellowship with God, but in and through Jesus Christ the Mediator of the new covenant. — These are unde- niable facts. Here are a race of beings, by their very con- stitution capable of God, whose first parent had God for his portion, and forfeited that desirable treasure by preferring a creature before his Creator, and who now do not inherit from him his primeval portion. Why are they robbed of it, but because it was forfeited by their head and representa- tive, whose sin has placed some obstacle in the Avay of their enjoyment of it ?
It remains only to add, that mankind are now, like their first parents, under a gracious covenant which siipposes their fallen condition; which is adapted to their condition ni^ fallen ; which is designed for their restoration ; and to which it is to be attributed that any of the human race are enlightened, accepted, renewed, or saved.
The seed of the woman, who, in behalf of Adam, was appointed to bruise the serpent's head, is manifested, in behalf of maril'md, to destroy the works of the Devil. He, therefore, who was the Saviour of Adam, is the Saviour of all num, and " there is none other name under heaven, given among men whereby we can be saved."
1. He came into the world wj the supposition that we were fallen. " The Son of man is come to save that which was
LOST. * — This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all ac- ceptation, that Jesus Christ came into the world to save SINNERS. f — When we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. — He died for the ungodly, j — He died the just for the UNJUST, that he might bring us to God. || But he, by the grace of God, tasted death^r every man." § Therefore all men were sinners, ungodly, and unjust.
2. The method of our salvation by Jesus Christ is adapted to ns as fallen creatures. Jesus Christ is " the light of the world" because, without him, the world is " full of darkness and cruel habitations." He became a " propitia-
* Matt, xviii. 11. flTim.i.lo. jRom.v.fi, 8.
11 1 Pet. iii. 18. § Hel). ii. 1).
THE FAI.I.EX STATK OK MANKIXn. 313
lion for the sins of the whole worlil," * because " judgmeiit had come upon all men to condemnation, every mouth was stopped, and all the world was become guilty before God."-f- He required that all men should be regenerated, because all men are deeply degenerated ; and he testified, " Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot see the kingdom of God," \ because " that which is born of the flesh is flesh (is carnal,) and tliat only which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (is spiritual.) His Apostle insisted that " in Ciu-ist Jesus, neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncii'cumcision, but a new creature :" || because " the old man is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and the nezo man only is created after God in righteousness and true holiness." § And God has " laid help upon one who is mighty," because " without him we can do nothing."
3. The terms of the new covenant are such as are adapted for our restoration, and therefore imply our antece- dent rii'in. (1.) The gospel says to every one, " Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish." Now repentance is re- quired as a mean of raising the fallen. Jesus Christ " came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance ; for they that are whole have no need of a Physician, but they that are sick." Repentance then is only the duty of a sinner ; and is intended in order to his cure. " But God connnandeth all men every -where to repent," •[[ and therefore all men every where are sinners. The gospel of Jesus Christ is the gospel of repentance, and, therefore, is intended to promote the cure of the diseased. (2.) It requires -" faith in them that hear it." ** God, as of old, has " sent his word to Ileal" us. i"f- Jesus Christ, therefore, required that men should have " faith to be healed ;" \\ for faith is the mean by which we depend on the Physician of souls, receive his advice and his medicines, and by which Ave are consequently made whole. (3.) All men are taught by Jesus Christ to pray, and to pray, " Forgive us our trespasses." This im- plies that all men have committed trespasses, and that the
• 1 Jolin ii. 2. t R"»i- '»'• 1!^- X «'"''" "'• •''•
11 Gal. vi. 15. § Eph. iv.22, 24. ^| AcU xvii. ;10.
*• Hcl). iv. 2. ft Pbalni i-vii. 20. \X Acts xiv. 1».
X
314 THE FALLEN STATE OF MANKIND.
gospel is intended to direct all men to the forgiveness of sins. (4.) " If any man will come after me," said Jesus Christ, " let him deny himself."" * This implies that there is some- thing in every man, which it is necessary for him to deny or renounce ; and that the peculiar duty of a Christian is such as is adapted to save him from his sinful self.
4. It is to be attributed to the healing nature of the gospel covenant that any man is enlightened, accepted, renewed, delivered, quickened, or finally redeemed and saved. — (1.) The wisest of men have once been ignorant, and arc supematuralli/ illuminated. " Ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord." -f* (2.) All the people of God are they whose iniquities are forgiven. They are *' accepted in the beloved, in whom they have redemption through his blood the forgiveness of sins.'"" j " The Scrip- ture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe." j| " For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all." § (3.) All the holy people of God, are those who are renewed in the spirit of their mind. " We ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour towards man ap- peared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on us abundantly, through Jesus Christ, our Saviour." ^[ (4.) All the free servants of God are hberated captives. " He gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar peo- ple zealous of good works." ** (5.) The bodies of the fol- lowers of Christ arc brought back from the tomb, by virtue of the death and resurrection of their redeeming Head. " Now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first- fruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam
* IViutt. xvi. 21. t F-ph. V. 8. + Ei)h, i. G, 7. || Gal. iii. § Rom. YA. 32. ^[ Tit, iii. 3, ** Tit.i ■ U.
THE FALLEN STATK OK MANKIXO. 315
all die, even so in Christ shall all he made alive." * (G.) All the spirits of just men made perfect, ascrihe their salva- tion to Jesus the Mediator of a ncxo covenant. " Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father ; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen, -f- — Thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood, out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation. ^ — What are these Mhich are arrayed in white robes .'' and whence came they "^ — These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb. |1 — And 1 looked, and lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads. — These were redeemed from among men, being the first-fruits unto God, and to the Lamb." § — In a word : All our blessings are the gifts, not of nature, but of grace : they are not our paternal inheritance, but a '■^purchased
■possession" restored to us by him who came into the world to save sinners. " Of him are we in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanc- tification, and redemption : that according as it is written. He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord," Jesus
. Christ. %
It may possibly be urged that there are exceptions : that Jeremiali was " sanctified before he came forth out of the womb," ** and that John the Baptist was " filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's 'womb." •f"|- — If these were really exceptions, they would only confirm the general rule : for admitting that the purification of their souls from their birth, is what is meant, this does not con- tradict the general statement. (1 .) These expressions ilo not imply that the purity of Jeremiah and John was the result of their natural constitution, but rather that it was the gift of redeeming grace. (2.) If all mankind were sanctified from their birth, there would be no room for marking these as extraordinary cases.
* 1 Cor. XV. 20, 22. f Rev. i. 5, fi. + Rev. v. y. || Rev. vii. U, 15.
§Rcv. xiv. 1, 4. «! I Cor. i. 30, .'il. »* Jcr. i. 5. tfLukci. IJ.
X 2
316 THE FALLEN STATE OF MANKIND,
In attending to the objections which the Socinians gene- rally urge against these scriptural truths, it is reasonable to enquire whether Mr. G. do not first demand our attention. Although he has not entered thoroughly into this subject, he has given us a fair specimen, of the manner in which he would oppose it. His objections are taken entirely from scripture, and are undoubtedly some of the strongest which he has to produce. If we can fairly answer them, we may justly presume, that whatever others he may have in store, are equally answerable. We will not conjecture the cause of his giving us the texts without any comment ; but will briefly subjoin to each of them, what we deem an appropri- ate and satisfactory answer.
" For thy 'pleasure they are and Avere created!''' * — Un- doubtedly. Bitt Mr. G. will not affirm that all God's crea- tures have answered the end for which they were created. Some of them have proved extremely wicked. Has God then " any pleasure in imckedness ?" If Mr. G. mean to in- sinuate that the degeneracy of mankind cannot give God pleasure, we answer. Certainly it cannot. But the passage which he has quoted, speaks of their creation. He must remember that all which God created and made, was " created in six days," after which God " rested from his works." Now God did not create any thing sinful, as Mr. G. will inform us by his next quotation.
" And God saw every thing that he had made, and behold it was ver?/ ^oof/."-f- — Equally true ! But what has this to do with their sidjscqiicnt state ? Adam and Eve were very good when God made them, and when he ap- proved the work of his hands ; but were they very good when they ate of the forbidden fruit ? And are all their posterity very good until now ?
" He givcth to all life, and breath, and all things." \ — How does this passage prove that none of God's gifts are legally forfeited ? or that the gifts which we enjoy are not given according to the law of redeeming grace ? " Eternal life is the gift of God" to sinners ; but it is given " through Jesus Christ our Lord," and Redeemer.
* Vol. II. )>. 1::2. Rev. iv. II. t Vol. II. j.. 123. Gcii. i. 31. J .\ctsxvii. 25.
THE FAT.T.F.X STATE OF MAXKIXD. 317
" Suffer little children to conic xnito me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven." * — Who was it that spake these words ? Was it not the Saviour of sinners ? How then does this passage prove that little children have no need of the Saviour of sinners? Jesus Christ saves them, and therefore of such is the kingdom of heaven. Can tins prove that they have no need of being' saved? — IJut wait a moment.
" Verily, I say unto you, whosoever receiveth not the kingdom of God as a little child, shall in no wise enter therein." f — The true meaning of this passage appears to be, tliat no person can enter into the kingdom of God, but in that spirit of docility which a little child ordinai-ilij mani- fests in its general conduct. Whether these little children, without Christ, be lost, the Reader will immediately under- stand.
" For their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.'" — To these words Jesus Christ ndds, " For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.'" X Hence it appears that these " little ones" were lost, but that Jesus Christ saves them.
" God is love." — We have found it useful to turn to the passage which Mr. G. cites, and to read a little further, and will, therefore, again make the same exj^eriment. We turn to this passage, (1 John iv. 8, &c.) and read : — " Gtxl is love. In this was manifested the love of God towards us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins." — Mr. G. did not intend that we should pry so narrowly into every thing. Here, however, is St. John's own explanation of his own words, " God is love."" According to this explanation, liow does it appear from this passage that we did love God ; that we had no .tini for which a. propitiation was necessary ; or that we should all have lived without the comin"; of his only befjotten Son into the world .''
• Matt. xix. 14, Sic. f Mark x. !.'>. J Miitt. xviit. 10.
X 3
518
THE FALLEN STATE OF MANKIND.
" His tender mercies are over all his works." * — Most certainly ! But how is this to prove that all mankind have not need of his tender mercies ?
What remain are totally irrelevant. At least they may stand without any reply. They are such as these : — " Not a sparrow falleth to the ground without your Father. — His compassions fail not. — He will not always chide. — His mercy endureth for ever." -|- — All full of consolation for the faith- ful ; but nothing to the point in hand !
If Mr. G. understand how to quote scripture against us, we may expect but a feeble resistance from that quarter. It is when a Socinian assumes the philosopher, that he becomes formidable ; for then he is at home. If we are worsted by meeting liim on his own ground, it is some con- solation that we have a scriptural battery, behind which we can retire. While we keep ovu' proper place of retreat in our rear, we may venture to face the danger, and to attend to the philosophical objections which are made to this scrip- tural doctrine.
I. " It is impossible in the nature of things that man ohould be created holy. All holiness must be the effect of a man's own choice, and endeavour. It must be the result of a right use of his poAvers. Adam could not therefore be holy, till he had thus exerted his powers aright."
It is very justly observed, that those who are adverse to the doctrine of human depravity, are equally so to that of the original rectitude of our first parents. The reason is obvious ; for the one cannot be safely denied, if the other be admitted. If Adam were created in a state of positive moral rectitude, it would rest with the Socinians to prove that every man is born into the world in a similar state. This would be too much for even their philosophy. For the same reason it is necessary for us to prove the possi- bility of Adam"'s original rectitude.
1. The first and best proof which we give, is that taken from the scriptures which affirm that so it was.
(1.) Moses expressly states, that " God said. Let us make man i?i our ozon image.'''' %
* Psalm cxlv. i). f Vol. II. p. 12,3, IL'l . J Goii. \.^.
THE FAT.I.F.N STATK OF MAXKIXO. 319
(2.) When God had finislicd all liis works, he pro- nounced them all to be " very good." *
(;3.) Solomon consequently declares that "God made man iiprifrht.""-!-
But if the first of these texts imply only, that man was made with reason andchciiee, (which is not yet granted,) the second and third must imply that tliose powers had a proper direction. To argue then that the thing is impossible, is to argue against plain scriptural facts.
" Tliat righteousness, or holiness, is the principal part of this image of God, appears from Eph. iv. 22, 24. and Col. iii. 9, 10. On which it may be observed, [1.] By the old man is not meant a Hcaihcnlsh life, or an ungodly conver- sation ; but a corrupt nature. For the Apostle elsewhere speaks of our old man as crucified zcith Christ ; and here distinguislics from it their former conversation^ or sinful actions, which he calls the deeds of the old man. [2.] By * the new man' is meant, not a ncAv course of life, (as the Socinians interpret it) but a principle of grace, called by St. Peter the hidden man of the heart, and a divine nature. [3.] To jnd off the old man (the same as to crucify the flesh) is to subdue and mortify our corrupt nature : to jmt on the new m/in is to stir up and cultivate that gracious principle, that new nature. This, saith the Apostle, is create i aftfer God, in righteousness and true holiness. It is created: which cannot properly be said of a new course of life ; but may of a new natiire. It is created after God, or in his image and likeness, mentioned by Moses. But what is it to be created cvfter God, or in his image 9 It is to be created in righteousness and true holiness : (termed knoxdedge, the practical knowledge of God, Col. iii 10.) But if to be created after God, or in his image and likeness, is to be created in righteousness and trvie holiness, and if that prin- ciple of righteousness and holiness by which we are ' created unto good works,'' is a new man, a divine nature : it is easy to infer, that man was at first created righteous or holij.'''' |
2. This Socinian mistake arises from confounding a right state of the powers of the mind with a riglit use of
* Gen. i. :?1. f Kcclcs. vii. 29. + Mr. S. Ilehdcn's Tract on Kcrlc^.. vii. L':).
820 THE FALLEX STATE OF MANKIND.
them, or with those habits which are contracted only by use. It is readily granted that Adam could not act aright but by his own choice and endeavour, and that he could not contract huhits of holiness without a series of right actions. But the right state of his powers is another thing, and was antecedent to his choice and endeavour. A rational and free being, not only may, but must, begin his existence with his powers either in order, or in disorder, as every living- human body must be produced with either a healthy, or a sickly constitution ; for there is no medium. Could not God create a human body with eyes capable of seeing clearly and distinctly ? with senses to which what is useful would be agreeable, and^what is baneful would be unpleasant, and the result of the first exertion of which would be a choice of the good, and a refusal of the evil.'' And why could not God create a human being with the powers of his mind in such a state as immediately to view in a proper light every thing which should come under his notice, — to distinguish between the Creator and his creatures, — to perceive imme- diately the vast superiority of God to all other things, — and to have a distaste to sin, and a natural relish for piety .'' And would not the result of the first exertion of such powers in such a state, be a choice of God for his portion, and of the Divine will for the law of his being- ?
The further we pursue this subject, the more clearly we perceive that so it must have been. Suppose man to be created with his senses unfit for use : — how could he fit them for use by using them, since they could not be us^d until they were fit for use .^ Can a blind man obtain power to see, by seeing ? He cannot see, until heH^e blessed with power to see. — Again : suppose (if it be not a contradiction in terms,) a man created with appetites which make no dis- tinction between pleasant and unpleasant, wholesome and baneful. Before he can distinguish between food and poi- son, he must make the trial of both : and as his appetite is not antece'dently disposed to distinguish, he will not only try but eat both indifferently. He will be poisoned before he can know the difference. If he make any choice between them, it must be merely accidental, for he has no judgment
THE FAT.T.F.y STATE OF MANKIXn. 321
to guido liini. His " mouth does (not) taste meat." He may accidentally <^ive tlie decided preference to poison, and reject salutary food. Suppose that the poison do not take immediate effect, and he make repeated experiments where- by he may contract habits of distinction, and a true taste : — it is as probable that, without any fault of his, lie will contract ajiilse taste as that he will contract a just one. — The Reader has already learned to make the application.
Love to God is the essence of the duty of a rational crea- ture. And why could not man be created in a state of mind and heart constitutionally disposed to love God, as the human eye, when not disordered, finds it " a pleasant thing to behold the sun," or as the human palate is previously dis- posed to be gratified by w'holesome food ?
But here is the difficulty ! " Man (it is said) could not love God before he knew him."
Very true. But, according to St. Paul's explanation of the image of God, man was created in knoidedge as well as in love. He at once knexc and loved God, at the moment of his creation. Suppose a human being called into existence, not in midnight darkness, but in the light of the meridian sun, with his eyes open and perfect. In the very moment of his creation he beholds the sun, and admires it above every visible object. Just so, Adam, created with his men- tal powers in their perfect state, in the blaze of Deity, at once knew God and loved him.
3. It is very obvious that the objection which we have been considering, is founded in a mistaken notion of the nature of the things in question. The idea of what is pos- sible is taken fipm what generally is. Because, in the pre- sent state of tmngs, mankind come into existence very im- perfect, it is taken for granted that so it must always have been. But is not this begging the question, by supposing the original state of human nature to have been the same as the present .'' The present state of things is not, however, such as to afford no proof of the possibility of Adaufs b(Hng created in a state of holiness.
(1.) The human nature of Jesus Christ was produced liolij. Heme the angel Gabriel said unto Ma?-)/., " The
322 THE FALLEN STATE OF MANKIND.
Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee, therefore also that holy THING which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." * — Now if it were impossible for a being to be made constitutionally lioly, Jesus Christ could not have been born a holy thing.
(2.) When a man is reiuxoed in the spirit of his mind, the disposition to holiness precedes the choice and practice of holiness. The Socinians grant that liahiis are formed by long continued practices, and that these habits dispose a person to prolong the practices out of which they arise. How then can a man who has contracted violent habits of wickedness, which have become " a second nature," enter on the practice of holiness, without a previous clioice of the path of holiness .^ and how can he chuse the path of holiness without a disposition to make that choice ? The bent of his mind is directly contrary to such a choice : it is a disposi- tion to chuse the way of sin. Unless his disposition, there- fore, first be changed, there will be no change in his cJioicc, and consequently none in his jjractice. However the dispo- sition may be conjirmed by the subsequent choice and prac- tice, it must precede them. Hence the sacred writers do not attribute the change of a mian's heart to a change in his con- duct ; but the change in his conduct to that of his heart. " A good man out of the good treasure of the heart, bringeth forth good things." f " Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles .^"J " How can ye, being evil, speak good things ? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh." || " Make the ti-ee good, and the fniH Avill be good also ; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt : for the tree is known by his fruit." § — And this change of heart, so necessary to a change of conduct, implies not only a change of choice, but also a previous change of disposition : a change of disposition which, because it must precede a change of choice, is primarily attributed, not to him who is the subject of it, but to God. " We are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good toorlcs,
* Luke i. ;i5. f Matt. xii. 35. + Matt, vii 16.
II Matt. xii. .■^». § Malt. xii. 3.3.
TTTF. FAT.I.EM STATF. OF MAXKTNn. 323
which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." *
Accordint]^ to this doctrine, Adam was " created unto good zcor\-s, tliat he might walk in them."" It is perhaps no mean proof of tliis, tliat he lived a life of perfect holiness from the beffinnine: : and sinned not till he met with an external temptation. The present state of mankind we have found to be the reverse of this. They are " transgressors from the womb :" and never turn from their unrighteous- ness till they are solicited by grace divine.
II. " If Adam had been created perfect he could not liave fallen. His fall demonstrates that he was not perfect."
The fallacy of this argument lies in the ambiguity of the term, perfeet. It may mean absolute perfection, and may include hnmutaMUty. Taking the word in this sense, the proposition is a truism : it is the same thing as if the objector had said, ' If Adam had been made incapable of falling, he could not have fallen.'' But, as we do not con- lend for such a perfection in our first parent, the objection is irrelevant. It should have been said, ' If Adam had been created upriglit, he could not \\a\e fallen !' But then the objection would have carried absurdity on the face of it : and would have suggested the answer, ' Man could not have fallen^ unless he had been created upright? — The truth is, that Adam was created perfect in a certain sense. Kis was the perfection of a dependent being so constituted as to be fit for a Jair probation ; and, therefore, capable of falling, though not already fallen. Such a perfection Adam could not possess, xoithoiit a possibility of falling. If he could not sin, he could not freely obey ; and, therefore, he could not have been tried whether he would sin or obey.
The objection, however, in the mind of the objector, im- plies the impossibility of any moral change in a created being who has received a previous determination. It implies that a Tcicked man cannot tv7'n from his wickedness to do that which is law^ful and right ; and that a rightcon^H man cannot turn from his righteousness and do iniquity. It is imneces- sary to quote the scriptures to which we have now alluded,
* Eph.ii.i), 10.
324 THE FALLEN STATE OF MANKIXD.
in proof of the mutability of the determination of a moral agent. As truly as a wicJced man may turn from his roicJced- ness, and a rigliteous man may turn from his righteousness^ Adam might be created with a right determination., or be created a righteous man^ and afterwards turn from his righteousness : he might be made upright, and yet subse- quently j/^ZZ.
III. " It is impossible for man to be born in sin, for sin is the voluntary abuse of one''s powers."
To this we answer :
1. The scriptures uniformly assert, that man is " shapen in iniquity," and " conceived in sin ;"" — that " man cannot be clean who is born of a woman ;" — and that " that which is born of the flesh is flesh," and needs to " be born of the Spirit" before it can enter the kingdom of heaven. To con- tradict this statement, is, therefore, to contradict the plainest assertions of scripture.
2. Here is the same confusion on which we have re- marked in the counterpart of this objection. It makes no distinction between a wrong choice, and a wrong disposition, — between the wrong state, and the wrong use, of our powers. That man cannot be born with any thing which implies a wrong choice already made, is obvious. Perhaps it will be granted, that we have no innate ideas, and there- fore, as principles are compounded of ideas, that we have no innate moral principles. But may there not be a disorder of the faculties, before those faculties are called into action .'' We easily grant the possibility of the birth of a human body disordered in any of its senses or members, or in all of them. A human body may be born blind, or deaf, or dumb, or maimed, or lame. Again : A man may be born with a false taste, which exists before either food or poison has been presented to him ; and, therefore, before his taste has been vitiated by the use of poison. Now where is the im- possibility of the mental powers being produced m disorder 9 Why must they of necessity be in proper order and har- mony ? Why is it impossible that the understanding should be naturally blind, and the passions headstrong ? What reason is to be assigned in proof that the taste (shall we call
THE I'ALLKN STATE OF MANKIND. 325
it) cannot be naturally false, and give a wrong bias to the subsequent choice ?
IV. " Do you not make God the author of sin, by sup- posing that he brings every human being into the world in a state of sinful depravity .'' The proper production of a child is from God. ]}ut if God produces afivtiis which has sinful dispositions, he produces those dispositions."
" This argument proves too much. It would prove God to be the author of all actual, as well as ongvnal, (or heredi- tary) sin. For it is the power of God, under certain laws and established rules, which produces not onlv i\\ejktus, but all the motion in the universe. It is his power which so violently expands the air, on the discharge of a pistol or cannon. It is the same which produces muscular motion, and the circulation of all the juices in man. But does he therefore produce adultery or murder ? Is he the cause of those sinful motions ? He is the cause of the motion, (as he is of theyktus ;) of the si7i he is not. — Do not say this is too •fine a distinction. Fine as it is, you must necessarily allow it. Otherwise you make God the direct author of all the sin under heaven. To apply this more directly to the point. God does produce the foetus of man, as he does of trees, im powering the one and the other, to propagate eacb after its kind. And a sinful man propagates, after his kind, another sinful man. Yet God produces, in the sense above mentioned, the man, but not tlic sinr *
V. " You make a very good ajmlogy for the wickedness of mankind. If they be naturally disposed to sin, their sin is the necessary consequence of that disposition. How then can they be justly blamed for what is unavoidable t''''
That the natural depravity of the human soul is un- avoidable, we grant ; but not that the personal wickedness of every man is unavoidable. Nothing but universal de- pravity can account for universal wickedness ; and universal wickedness would be the necessary consequence of universal depravity ij" there were no cure for it. But " the grace of God which bringeth salvation hath appeared unto all men, teaching them that denying (renouncing) ungodliness and
* Mr. J. Wesley ou Orig. Siii.
326 THE FALLEN STATE OF MANKINB.
worldly lusts, they should live soberly, and righteously, and godly, in this present world ; looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of our great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ ; who gave himself for us that he might re- deem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good works." * Under these circum-" stances, mankind are placed in a state of personal probation : with this difference however : — Adam was created upright, and was proved whether he would Jail ; we are born prone, and, under a remediate law, are proved whether we will rise. He sinned voluntarily against the law of innocence ; we sin voluntarily against tlie laio of grace. He sinned and induced the disorder ; we sin partly by neglecting the remedy, and partly in consequence of that neglect. Our disease is un- avoidable ; but not so our neglect of the ewe.
VI. " Such a dispensation can never be reconciled with the justice of the divine administrations. How can all mankind justly suffer, for the sin of one person ?""
The undeniable fact is, that all mankind do actually suffer by the sin of Adam. Nor is there in this world any condition of human nature, of which we have any know- ledge, in which many do not suffer by the fault of others. Nothing is more common than for children to suffer by the folly, extravagance, intemperance, or wickedness of their parents. Did not the progeny of Ham, the families of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, and the children of Gehazi, suffer by the sin of their parents ? And he whose command- ments are Jwly, and Just, and good, speaks of himself as " visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth (generation) of them that hate him." f From whence then has the objector learned, that it is unjust that one should suffer by the fault of another ? Not from the actual state of mankind, or from the sacred scriptures. To give even plausibility to the objection, it must be stated in a very different form. — Say then, " It would be unjust for mankind to suffer unavoidably and finally, without remedy, and without advantage, in consequence of the sin of Adam." But in this shape the objection becomes irre-
* Tit.ii. 11—13. t Exod. xx. 5.
THK l-ALLEN STATE OF MA>JKIND. 327
levaiit ; because on that very ground on wliicli Adam was rejirieved, a provision was made for the conditional absolu- tion of each individual of his immense family. His reprieve opened indeed the door for tJieir birtli and personal existence in a state of thraldom, as it was derived from him ; but not without a simultaneous provision for their deliverance. The declaration that " tlie seed of the woman should bruise the serpent's head," was not so much a promise to Adam, as a denunciation upon the serpent, the enemy, not of Adam only, but of all liis progeny : and was a prediction of the conditional deliverance of the whole human race. But it was a benefit to mankind, not indeed through the first Adam, by birth, but through the second Adam, by grace. I3y that divine declaration therefore, all mankind were placed on new ground. Each individual has an interest in it, by which lie is saved from final and unconditional destruction, and by which, while a remedy is provided for the disorder uncondi- tionally entailed on him, a possibility is secured of its turning -to his advantage. Hence whatever, in the present stage of human existence, individuals may suffer through the diso- bedience of their first parents; no one merely on that account can suffer finally and eternally.
Although all mankind are involved in the penal conse- tjuences of the sin of Adam, the original promise of a Redeemer, which was the ground of the reprieve of our offending parent, or rather the fulfilment of that promise, has arrested the general sentence of condemnation : and while it conditionally saves the whole progeny of man from final ruin, it gives them great advantage. This consolatory truth we learn not only from the general tenor of the gospel of Jesus Christ, but especially from that parallel, or rather antithesis, which St. Paul has produced between the conse- quences of the offence of the first Adam, and those of the obedience unto death of the second Adam. " Adam was the figure of him that was to come. By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin ; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead ; vuich viore the grace of God, and the gift
328 THE FALLEN STATE OF MANKIND.
by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abound- ed unto many. And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation; but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. For if by one man"'s offence death reigned by one ; much more they which receive abundance of grace, and of the gift of righteousness, shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ. Therefore, as by the offence of one, or rather 5^ tvor iiapazs- ruixaros^ by one offence, (judgment came) upon all men to condemnation ; even so by the righteousness of one, or ICiws JiJta/wptaros^, by one righteousness, (the gift came) upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobe- dience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one, shall many be made righteous. — Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound. That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign, through righteousness, unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ our Lord.""*
If this apostolical mode of reasoning be appropriate, the present economy of God, so far from being unjust, is abundantly merciful. The benefits accnnng to mankind through the gift of God by grace, must not, however, di- vert our attention from our subject. If righteousness and life come by Christ ; it is because sin and death first came by Adam. (v. 12.) The grace of God, and the gift by grace, have abounded unto many ; because through the offence of one many are dead. (v. 15.) The free gift is of many offences unto justification ; because first the judg- ment was by one to condemnation, (v. 16.) If they which receive abundance of grace, and of the gift of righteous- ness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ ; by one man's offence, death first reigned over them by one. (v. 17.) The righteousness of one is upon all men unto justification of life ; because by the offence of one (judgment came) upon all men to condemnation, (v. 18.) If by the obedience of one many shall be made righteous ; by one man's disobe- dience many were made sinners, (v. 19.) And if grace reign through righteousness, unto eternal life, by Jesus
* Rom. V. 12—21.
THK rAI.I.KN' STATE Ol' INfAyKIXI). 329
riirist; sin had first ivi_i;nc(l imto death, (v. 21.) 'Vhc strenorth and extent of the remedy, })rove the inveteracy and extent of the disea.se.
VII. " At this rate you destroy the work of your own hands. Von first suppose that all mankind are de})raved and ruined, and then that they are all renewed and restored. Hut if all men are renewed and restored in Jesus Christ, liow can they be depraved and ruined in Adam ?""
AVc answer :
1. If mankind were personally justified and sanctified in Christ Jesus, it would imply that thev are otlicnclsc de- praved and ruined ; for if this were not the case, they wt)uUI not need the mediation of Jesus Christ.
2. All mankind are in such a sense justified throuofh Jesus Christ, as not to perisli, finally and eternally, merely on account of Adam's sin. Hence they are placed hi a state of probation, in which they have an opportunity for seek- ing and finding both a personal interest in " the grace of God," and a personal participation of " the gift by grace, which is by one man Jesus Chiist." In the mean time, they are not so justified as to avoid all the consequences of the sin of their first parent ; as not to need a personal union with Jesus Christ ; as not to be called to seek such an union with him ; or as not to be finally condemned for th.eir own .sin, if they wilfully neglect to embrace the Saviour and his salvation.
3. Mankind arc not vccessar'ihj regenerated or sanctified in Christ Jesus. If this were the case, tli'e fall of their parent would not account for their personal sinfulness. But the means of their regeneration and sanctification, are provided and set before them. They are unclean ; but a fountain is opened in the house of David for sin and for uncleanness, in which they may wash and be clean. Tliey are not whole, but diseased ; and therefore have need of a Physician : and there is balm in Gilcad, there is a Physi- cian there, by whom all that come to him, whatever be their diseases, may be made whole. — These observations leave room, however, for another objection.
V
330 THE FALLEN STATE OF MANKIND.
VIII. " If all mankind are guilty and depraved, how can dying infants be made partakers of the kingdom of heaven ? You grant the latter, and therefore must give up the former."
There is nothing inconsistent between the ruin and de- pravity of infants by the sin of their parents, and their be- ing finally saved by Jesus Christ. " If, by the offence of one, judgment came upon them to condemnation ; so, by the righteousness of one, the free gift comes upon them unto justification of life.*' However necessary it may be that they who, by personal sin, have confirmed the original sentence of condemnation, should seek and accept a perso- nal interest in Christ ; it cannot be necessary for those who have committed no personal sin, and who have never been capable of a personal application of the merit of the Sa- viovir. — As to their participation of human depravity : They have never, by an unholy choice or deed, given themselves up to its government ; and therefore, dying in personal innocence, they may be renewed by an operation of the Holy Spirit, which does not require, as in the case of adults, their personal co-operation. — Their ruin has been effected without their personal fault ; and their reco- very is effected without their personal choice.
As the depravity and ruin of mankind are clearly and decisively demonstrated, in the sacred scriptures, to be the natural and judicial consequences of the sin of their first parents; the whole Soclman system must fall to the ground. The rational Divines mvist relinquish their confidence in the infallibility of human reason, — grant that a Divine Re- deemer and Restorer is necessary, — submit to the doctrine of a propitiatory sacrifice, — and acknowledge their want of a supernatural influence on their minds and hearts, in order to their salvation. They must renounce their boasts of the moral dignity of human nature. — rank themselves with publicans and sinners, — and condescend to be saved^ by grace. — Nor will they hereby lose any thing but their unreasonable prejudices, and their destructive sins.
( 331 )
CHAPTER XIV.
Of the M'lraculmis Conception of Jesus Christ.
To bring this doctrine under suspicion, Mr. G. has given us, from Dr. Watts, " the principles and rules of judgment, by vhich men are influenced in deciding upon matters of liuman testimony."* His rules are not, however, exactly applicable to the present case. There is a consider- able difference between those facts on the evidence of which we receive the doctrines of Christianity ; and those of which we are thereby certified. Our Lord and his Apostles wrought miracles in confirmation of their testimony. These were public and notorious. But they have related many facts which can be ascertained only on the credit of their testimony ; because the nature of them is inconsistent ^\ ilh public notoriety. We cannot expect the same evidence of our Lord's transfiguration, which we have of his resurrec- tion : and it would be still more unreasonable to expect that the miraculous conception, a thing necessarily pri- vate, should be attested equally with our Lord's public miracles.
The evidence which we have of this part of sacred his- torv, is contained principally in the accounts wliich the Evangelists Matthew and Luke have given us, in the two first chapters of their respective gospels. " If these ch;!p- ters be genuine, that is, written by Matthew and Luke, their authenticity, that is, the truth of the facts recorded, (as Mr. G. justly observes) must follow; the general au- thenticity of these writers being fully established.""-]-
Whether these chapters be genuine, it shall now l)e our business to inquire.
• V.)l. 11. p. M2, &c. t Vol. II. p. 371.
v2
382 THE MIRACULOUS C'ONCErXION.
I. It is not a matter of small importance, that they now make a part of what we receive from our predecessors, as the New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Wetstein, Griesbach, and other learned Editors of the New Testament, have admitted them without scru- ple. They make a constituent part of all the Ancient Ver- sions. With the exception of casual mutilations, such as may take place at the extremity of any manuscript, they are found in all the Ancient Copies, concerning which we have any information.
II. In addition to all this, the early testimony of the Christian fathers, is decisive in favour of their genuine- ness.
Ignatius, the disciple of John, speaks of Jesus Christ, as being " both of Mary and of God.""* " Jesus Christ, (he says again) was, according to the dispensation of God, con- ceived in Mary, of the seed of David, by the Holy Ghost.''"'"!* — Mr. G. has admitted, that Ignatius believed the miracu- lous conception. " Ignatius (he says) assigns what we should now deem a ludicrous reason for this concealment, (of the fact in question,) that it might be hidden from the devil."+
Justin Martyr, who wrote A. D. 140, makes the follow- ing allusions to the passages in both Matthew and Luke : — " An angel was sent to the same virgin, saying : ' Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb by the Holy Ghost, and thou shalt bring forth a son, and he shall be called the Son of the Highest. And thou shalt call his name Jesus, (Luke i. 31, 32.) for he shall save his people from their ■ sins :'' (Matt. i. 21.) as they have taught, who have written the history of all things concerning our Saviour Jesus Christ.""|| Again : " And the virgin Mary having been filled with faith and joy, when the angel Gabriel brought her good tidings, that ' the Spirit of the Lord should come upon her, and the power of the Highest overshadow her, and therefore, that holy tiling born of her should be the Son of God,"" — answered, ' Be it unto me according to thy word.' (Luke i. 35, 38.)"§
• Epis. ad Eph. sec. 7. f Sec. 18. * Vol. II. p. 492. || Apol. 1.
§ Dial. Par. ii.
Ironaeus, who wrote A. D. 178, says, " Matthew relates his generation wliich is according to man : ' The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham:"''''' — "The gospel according to Matthew was writ- ten to the Jews ; for they earnestly desired a Messiah of the seed of David : and Matthew having also the same de- sire to a yet greater degree, strove by all means to give them full satisfaction, that Christ was of the seed of David ; wherefore he began with his genealogy." — " But the gospel according to Luke, being of a priestly character, begins witli Zacharias the priest offering incense to God.'" — " There are many, and those very necessary parts of the gospel, whicli we know only by his (Luke's) means : as the birth of John, tlie history of Zacharias, the visit of the angel to Mary, and the descent of the angels to the shepherds.''''*
Tertullian, who wrote A. D. 200, says, " The apostles John and iVIatthew, and apostolic men Luke and Mark, teach us concerning the one God the Creator, and his Christ born of a virgin."-f- He asserts the genuiness of the copies of the four gospels which were then held by him, and appeals to all the apostolic dmrclics founded by Paul and John, from whom he had received them, in proof of \i.\
It is not necessary to pursue this subject any fur- ther. We have here the testimonies of the earliest writers of Christian Antiquity, in favour of the doctrine, and of the genuineness, of the chapters in question. Perhaps there ai-e not many particular passages in the New Testament, wliich, distinctly considered, descend to us with more positive his- torical evidence : and we may venture to affirm, that the Socinians themselves would loudly proclaim the triunij^h of the miraculous conception, if it were not so violently at odds w^ith their own system.
III. To corroborate this external evidence, the chapters themselves afford intcnud proof of their genuineness. It divides itself into two parts.
• Euseb. His. Ecclcs. Lib. HI. cap. xi. sec. 8. cap. xxii. sec. ^. K. Passiiii ratena I'atnini in Matt. ; apud M.issuct, p. :{1/. Grabe, p. 171. Laid. Crcd. P. II. (Ii. 17.
t Ad> . .Marc. Lib. IV. cap. 2. ; Ibid. rd]>. .">.
V 3
334 THE MIRACULOUS COXCErTION.
1. Our Lord was called Jesus. This name every Chris- tian has been repeatedly told means a Saviour. That he is eminently " the Saviour of all men,"" is equally known. Now how came it to pass that he received a name so ex- pressive of his office ? Did his parents foresee that he would be a Saviour ? They could not without some divine revela- tion. Where then is that divine revelation recorded ? No where but in the account of his miraculous conception. The angel which appeared to Mary said, " Thou shalt con- ceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS."* And that which afterward appeared to Joseph, said, " She shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS : for he shall save his people from their *m*."-f- — These are the only accounts which we have of the reason for his receiving this appropriate and signifi- cant name.
2. Our Lord was always denominated, by those who be- lieved in him, " the Son ofGocV This appellation, we have seen, was peculiarly expressive of his character. (See p. 148 — 154.) But universally as this appellation was used, the reason for it is stated no where, but in Luke''s account of the miraculous conception. " The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee ; therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of Gocl"+
If these passages be erased, the sacred scriptures will be manifestly imperfect ; because they every where call their great subject, by the appropriate name, Jesus, and speak of him constantly as the Son of' God: and yet in no other place do they state how it came to pass that that appropriate name was, from his childhood, given to him, or assign a reason for his being distinguished by so singular an appel- lation ! — This is, therefore, a strong, collateral proof, that the story of the miraculous conception, and that of the vision of Joseph relative to it, are genuine.
IV. The evidence of the miraculous conception, docs not, liowcver, depend entirely on the narratives of Matthew
* Luke 1. ;il. t Matt. i. 21. + Luko i. .T).
thil miraculous roxcEPTiox. 335
and Luke. The precise manner in which Jesus Christ was conceived and horn, it is true, are recorded only by those Evangelists ; but the fact, that his humanity was produced by supernatural means, has the countenance of the scrip- tures in general.
1. What reason can be assigned for the peculiar manner in which God was pleased originally to promise the coming of the great Deliverer of the human race, unless it were to signify that he should be made of the substance of xcoman^ without the concurrence of man ? Why was he denomi- nated the seed of the zconian, rather than the seed of the vian and of the woman? How is this question to be answered, but on the supposition of the miraculous con- ception ?
2. It is scarcely necessary to remind the reader, of that prophecy which Matthew has so properly cited from Isaiah : " Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel :" * " God with us."
• " At the time referred to (in this chapter) the kingdom of Judah, under the government of Ahaz, was reduced very low,"" and was threatened by Pekah, king of Israel, and Resin, king of Syria. " In this critical conjuncture, Ahaz was afraid that the enemies who were now united against him must prevail, destroy Jerusalem, end the king- dom of Judah, and annihilate the family of David. To meet and remove this fear, Isaiah is sent from the Lord to Aliaz, to assure him that the counsels of his enemies should not stand ; and that they should be utterly discomfited. To encourage Ahaz, he commands him to ask a sign or miracle^
* either in the depth or in the height above,** which should be a pledge that God would, in due time, fulfil the predic- tions of his servant, as related in the context. On Ahaz humbly refusing to ask any sign, it is immediately added,
* Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign : Behold a virgin snail conceive and bear a son," &c.-f-
(1.) It is objected, however, that the original word, noby, almah, does not signify a virgin only ; for it is applied Prov. XXX. 19. to signify a young married woman."" The
* ha. \ii. 1 1. t i>i'- A. Ckrkc, ou -Mall. i. 2S.
336
THE MlHACULOrs CONCEPTION.
good sense of the reader will tell him that in tliose words, " the way of a man with a maid,'''' there is no necessity for understanding the latter word as meaning any thing but a virgin. " The word rxrhv almah, comes from Cibj? alam to Uc hid, he concealed. A virgin was called nxsbi; almah, because, as a looman, she had not been tincovered. — This fully applies to the blessed virgin, who said, ' How can this be, seeing I hiozo no man ?"'* — It is an important confirmation of this, that the LXX. translate it ri rsap^evoi, a virg-in.
(2.) To neutralize this passage, the prophecy contained in it is said to have been fulfilled in the impregnation of " the prophetess," the wife of Isaiah, as related in the following chapter. Whoever candidly compares the two passages, will see that they relate to two different subjects. Mahershalal- hash-baz is not the same name as Immanuel. The pro- phet's wife bearing a son is not called a sign : nor was it a tmracle ; but a thing perfectly natural. Much less can it be called such a sign as God offered to give to Ahaz. God offered to produce a miracle of the most stupendous nature, " cither in the depth or in the height above ;"'*'f whereas this was a thing perfectly common.
3. When St. Paul speaks of the incarnation of the Son of God, he says, " When the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman.''''l — We should not have inferred the miraculous conception from this pas- sage, if the Apostle had simply said he was bo7'n of a woman ; for every child of Adam is born of a woman. ])ut to be made of a woman is a thing very different, and is no where predicated of any but of Jesus Christ only.
V. The principal, peculiar doctrines of the gospel, are such as, considered in their connection with each other, re- quire that the human nature of Jesus Christ should be pro- duced in some extraordinary manner. — For three reasons, especially, it was necessary that his human nature should be without spot of sin.
1, Without the spotless purity of his nature, it could not have ^^pleasedxhe Father, that in him should allfidness dzn'clV '' The temple of God must be holy :" but especially that tem-
* J)r. A.C'iarkc, ou ."^lalt, i. 23. f I&aiuh vii. 11. *<Jal.iv.4.
THE MlRACl'LOrs CONCKI'TIOX, 337
pie ill which all the Godhead dwells. In him the holy (Jod could not be manifested — the holy Father could not be seen in the Son, unless the Son were holy like the Father. He must, therefore, be eminently " the Holy One of God.""
2. Without this spotless purity, he could not liave been " the propitiation for our sins." " Such an High Priest be- came us, who is Iioly, harmless, undefiled, separate from .sinners, who needed not daily to offer up sacrifice, first for Im OiCti sins, and then for the people's."* He could not have been " made sin for us," but that he " knew no sin.^f He must be "jw^^" who *' died for" us " the unjust."^ " The blood of Christ could not purge our consciences from dead works," unless he " offered himself roitJiout spot to God. ''II We must " have an advocate with the Father," who is eminently " the righteous,''' and who " is the propi- tiation for our sins.' § He could " take away our sins," only because " in him xcas no sin^^^
3. It was necessary that he should be perfectly holy, that the Holy Spirit might be communicated by him. The Apostles of Jesus Christ laid their hands on the dis- ciples, designating them as the persons for whom they prayed ; and the Holy Ghost Avas given in answer to their prayer. But Jesus Christ gives the Holy Spirit. " If any man thirst, said he, let him come to me and drink. This spake he of the Spirit.''''** Hence that Spirit is deno- minated ^^the Spirit of' the So?i.''''-f-f But how, unless he were w ithout spot of sin, could the " Holy Spirit be given to him without measure," that "out of his fulness all we might receive, and grace on grace ?''' How could the Corin- thians be ^'sanctified in Christ JesuSj^'J;}: unless Christ Jesus were h'lmscM perfectly lioly ?
It appears from these considerations, not on Socinian, but on scriptural principles, that there was an absolute ne- cessity for his being pure from all sin. But " what is man, that he should be clean, and he which is horn of a woman, that he should be righteous ?"|||| " How can he be clean that
* lleb. vii. 2C, 27. f 2 Cor. v. 21, J 1 Pet. iii. 18. || Hcb. ix. II.
§ 1 John ii. 1. ^ 1 John iii. .'3. ** Jolm vii. .'{/. f f Gal. iv. (>.
:: 1 Cor. i.2. nil Job xv.ll.
338 THE MIRACULOUS CONCEPTION.
is horn of a woman ?"* There is certainly some difficulty in this. That God can bring a clean thing out of an un- clean, is granted. But his power must be exerted in that way which his wisdom chuses. That Jesus Christ was " clean,'''' the scriptures every where maintain ; but they never account for this, except by the extraordinary manner of his birth. " The Holu Ghost (said the Angel Gabriel) shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee ; therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God." Blot out this, and how shall vve account for the unspotted holiness of the human nature of Jesus Christ .?
Mr. G. has, however, attempted to produce some po- sitive evidence, that the account of the miraculous concep- tion is spurious. His argument is much more remarkable for the confidence with which it is stated, than for its no- velty ; and may be fairly reduced to the following proposi- tions. 1. " Among the primitive Christians there existed some who were called Ebionites, and Nazarenes. These were one and the same people, and comprized all the He- brew Christians." 2. Those Hebrew Christians "disbe- lieved the story of the miraculous conception." 3. " They received only the gospel of the Evangelist Matthew. 4. Their gospel did not contain those chapters which give an account of the miraculous nativity."*!- — If this be a just statement of facts, the inferences, that those chapters are spurious, and that the story of the miraculous conception is Jhlse, are not without some degree of probability. But the statement itself is perfectly erroneous.
There is nothing more common than the variety of the applications which, under different circumstances, in dis- tant places, and in process of time, are made of the appel- lations given to religious sects, whether according to long established custom, or by way of opprobrium. We grant that the Hebrew Christians in the days of St. Paul, were called by the Jews " Nazarenes '^ that there was, at a sub- sequent period, a sect so denominated by the Gentile Chris- tians : and that the Ebionites were sometimes called Naza-
* Job XXV, 4. t Vol. II. p. 380.— 383.
THE MTnAC'iri.OUS CONCEPTION. 339
rcncs. Nor shall wc peremptorily deny that those generally denominated yazarcncs v,cre on some occasions, because of certain shades of similarity, denominated Ebionitci. What wc assert is, that the Ebionites are sometimes, for very sufficient reasons, distinguished from those who are distin- guished as Nazarcncs : and that the Nazarenes and Ebio- nites of Ecclesiastical History, did not comprize all the Hebrew Christians, but were perfectly distinct from the or- thodox Hebrews. If this assertion be founded on glaring facts, the futility of Mr. G.'s argument will be sufficiently apparent.
1. There were, in the days of the Apostles, certain be- lieving Hebrews, who, instructed by the first messengers of Jesus Christ, understood that he had " abolished in his flesh the law of commandments (contained) in ordinances,""* " stood fast in the liberty wherewith he had made them free, and were not entangled again with the yoke of bon- dage." f These Hebrews were called by their countrymen, •" the sect of the Nazarenes. ''"'l They were, however, dis- tinffuished from those who are so called by the Gentile con- verts. In his commentary on the prophecy of Isaiah, Je- rome distinguishes them from those " Nazarenes Avho ob- served the law."!] And though Origen seems to comprehend the whole body of the Hebrew Christians, under the name of Eh'iomtcSy and affirms, that they adhered to the law of their fathcrs,§ — in another place, where he professes to de- scribe the sects of the Hebrews with the greatest accuracy, he distinguishes between those who, like other Christians, en- tirely discarded the Mosaic law, and those who retained the observation of the law, with or without any spiritual exposi- tions of it.^ The first, therefore, could not be intended to be comprehended under the name of Ebionites who ad- hered to the law of their fathers. — These, then, are the Hebrew Christians whom, to serve their own purpose, the Socinians attempt to confound with the heretical Naza- renes.
Eph. ii. l.'». fGal. V. 1,2. ♦Actsxxiv. 5. || Jcromeon Isa. ix. 1.2, 3. § Contra Cds. lib. II. sec. 1. ^ Contra Ccls. lib. 111. scr. .?.
S40 THE MIRACULOUS CONCEPTION.
2. The Nazarenes of history were those who, contrary to the design of the gospel, adhered to the law. Jerome says, *' To this day a heresy prevails among the Jews * in all the synagogues of the East, who commonly go by the name of Nazarenes ; who believe in Christ, the Son of God, born of the Virgin : in whom we ourselves believe. But from a de- sire of being Jews and Christians both at once, they are neither Jews nor Christians.''''-f- They are sometimes dis- tinguished into two classes. The first seem to be the descendants of those " weak brethren," who were " zealous for the law of their fathers," though they beUeved in Christ. These are mentioned by Jerome, as Nazarenes who observed the law, but despised the traditions of the Pharisees, and thought highly of St. Paul. I These are the Hebrews described by Origen, as " retaining the observation of the law in the letter of the precept, admitting, however, the same spiritual expositions of it Avhich were set up by those who discarded it." \\ — The second sort of Nazarenes Avere, apparently, the descendants of those who, in the Apostles'" days, taught the Gentiles, " except ye be circumcised and keep the law, ye cannot be saved :" and inherited their bigotry. These are the Hebrews described by Origen, as *' observing the law according to the letter, but rejecting all spiritual expositions of it.*" § Epiphanius describes this sect of the Nazarenes as a set of people hardly to be dis- tino-uished from Jews. Jerome distinguishes them from the first sort, as " believing in Christ the Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary, in whom the orthodox believe ; ^ but as being- so biffotted to the Mosaic law, that they were rather to be considered as a Jewish sect than a Christian."" **
3. Although Origen gives the name of Ehionites to all the Hebrew sects which adhered to the law of their fathers, perhaps for the sake of giving an opprobrious name to the
* Dr. Horsley thinks " they arose in the second century, from the ashes of the church oi Jerusalem." Charge to the Clergy. f Epis. ad. August, torn. III. fol. 155. B. edit. Froben. + On Isa. ix, 1, 2, 3. and viii. 14, 19, 21, |1 Con. Cels. lib. II. sec. 3.
§ Ibid.
^ According to Jerome, "they acknowledged in Christ the Jehovah, Cod of hosts, of the Old Tcstauient." On Isa. viii. 13, 14. *» Epist. ad Aug.
THE MTnACUI.Ons CONCEPTIOV. 341
Nazarenes ; that name is used by some of the writers of an- tiquity, as belonging to a sect distinct from those wliom they call Nazarenes. Epiphanius, in his book on heresies, dis- tinguishes " the P^bionites, as a sect which branched off' from the Nazarenes, and appeared not till after the destruc- tion of Jerusalem." * Eusebius says, " they were so called from the word Ebiox, which in Hebrew means ' poor,' be- cause of the poverty of their understanding." He dis- tinguishes two sorts of them : Of the first he says, that " they esteemed Christ a simple, common, and mere man, born of Joseph and IMary : but, on account of his improve- ment in virtue, they thought him a righteous man , and that they deemed the observance of the law indispensably neces- sary to salvation." Of the second, he says, " They were cal- led by the same name, and though, avoiding the follies of the other Ebionites, they did not deny that Jesus was born of the virgin and the Holy Ghost, yet they fell into the same impiety with the others ; for they did not acknow- ledge either his Divinity or his pre-existence, or that he was the Word and the Wisdom of the Father. They were also zealous for the observance of the law. Both these, he says, rejected the Epistles of St. Paul, and stigmatized him as a deserter of the law, and a traitor. They used only the gospel according to the Hebrews, and thought meanly of the other gospels." -f- Irenaeus also says, that they " dis- owned the apostle Paul, calling him an apostate from the law." +
The evidence already adduced is more than enough to destroy the force of IVIr. G.'s grand argument. It already appears that though the Ebionites and the Nazarenes, in consequence of their agreement in some of their opinions, were sometimes confounded ; they were, in other respects, distinct sects. Epiphanius says, the Ebionites branched off from the Nazarenes. Jerome savs, the Nazarenes " ac- knowledged in Christ, the Jehovah, God of hosts of the Old Testament." Eusebius says, the Ebionites " did not even acknowledge either the Divinitv or the pre-existence of Christ, but denied him to be the Word and the Wisdom of
• Kpiph. Haer. IJO. f His. Eccles. lib. III. cap. 21. J Lib. I. cap.2fi.
342 THE MIRACULOUS C0>rCKPT10X.
tlie Father." Jerome says, the Nazarenes tlioiight highly of St. Paul. Eusebius says, the Ebionites all " rejected the Epistles of St. Paul, and deemed him an apostate and a traitor."" Irenaeus also says, they " disowned the Apostle Paul, and called him an apostate from the law." — It is equally apparent that the Nazarenes were not the orthodox Hebrew Christians : although the name of Nazarenes was first applied as a stigma on the latter. The Nazarenes of Ecclesiastical History adhered to the law of their fathers ; whereas when Tertullus accused Paul as " a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes," he accused him as one who despised the law and " had gone about to profane the tempUy* This was one great point of difference between the Naza- renes of Tertullus, and those to whom Mr. G. is so partial.
Having established these distinctions, we proceed to ex- amine Mr. G.'s assertions.
1. He says, " these Hebrew Christians disbelieved the story of the miraculous conception."
We reply : (1.) Jerome says, " the Nazarenes believed in Christ the Son of God, born of the Virgin Mary, in whom the orthodox believe." (2.) Eusebius says, that one part of the Ebionites " did not deny that Jesus was born of the Virgin, and the Holy Ghost." — On Mr. G. 's own hypo- thesis that " the Nazarenes and Ebionites comprized all the Hebrew Christians ;" it follows that many of the Hebrew Christians did not disbelieve the story of the miraculous conception. The stone, therefore, roils back on himself with a momentum increased by his labour. He appeals to the Hebrew Christians ; and they to whom he exclusively ap- plies those terms, become swift witnesses against him. — Affain : Admitting that some of the Ebioi>ites disbelieved the story of the miraculous conception, those Ebionites were not the proper Nazarenes ; nor were the Nazarenes the or- thodox Hebrew Christians. The Ebionites were universally stigmatized as heretics ; Irena^us says, " they were circum- cised and retained the Jev/ish law, and Jewish customs." -j* Tertullian says, " it was Ebion's heresy, that he observed and defended circumcision and the law." \ Jerome speaks
* Acts xxiv. 5, (j. f Lib. I. ca)i, 20. + Dc Prses. Hjeret. cap. 33.
TllF. MIUACUI.0U5 CONCEPTTON. 343
of them as a sect " anathematized for their Judaism, and fiilsdtj pn'tcmlinn- to be Christians." * Epiphanius, accord- ing to the translation by Dr. Priestley, says that Ebion " adopted ma7ijj more things than the Jews, in imitation of the Samaritans :" and the Doctor calls the rites which they borrowed from the Samaritans " abominable rites." -|- — But the opinion of heretics cannot decide what were the opinions of the orthodox.
2. IMr. G. says, that these Hebrew Christians received only the gospel by St. Matthew, and that it did not contain those chapters which give an account of the miraculous nativity."
All this may be granted with respect to the Ebionites, but how is it to prove, that the chapters contained in the gospel by St. IVIatthew held by the orthodox church, Avhich consisted of Jews who " stood fast in the liberty with which Christ had made them free," and Gentiles who would not " be entangled in the yoke of bondage," are spurious .? If the argument be good, it will prove that the other three gospels, and all the Epistles, are to be rejected. But if the testimony of these sects is not to be admitted against the rest of the Evangelists and Apostles, it is equally vitiated as it relates to the two first chapters of St. Matthew. The Socinians, therefore, have yet to seek positive and decisive evidence against the chapters in question.
We will conclude these observations, Avith two quotations from Jerome. — 1. Enumerating the Evangelists, he says, " The first is Matthew the publican, surnamed Levi, who wrote his gospel in Judea, in the Hebrew language, chiefly for the sake of the Jews, that believed in Jesus, and did not join the shadows of the lata icith the truth of the gospeV \ 2. " Matthew, called also Levi, first of all wrote a gospel in Judea, in the Hebrew language, and in Hebrew letters, for the sake of those of the circumcision who believed. More- over, the very Hebrew (gospel) is kept in tlie library at Caesarea, which was collected with great care by the martyr Pamphilius ; and with the leave of the Nazarenes who live
* t^pis. ad Aug. f Lt-t. tu Dr. Horscley, p. 15. + Prol. in Comment, sr.per Matt. T. iv. init.
844 THE MTRACULOUS COXCEPTIOX.
at Bersea in Syria, and use that volume, I transcribed a copy. It is observable, that whenever this evangeUst, in his own person, or in tlie person of our Saviour, quotes any passages of the ancient scripture, he does not follow the version of the Seventy, but the Hebrew original. Among which these two deserve notice : ' Out of' Egypt have I called my Son!" (Matt. ii. 15.); and ' He shall he called a Nazarene.' (Matt, ii. 23.)" *
These passages, the last of which Mr. G. has cited, (Vol. II. p. 381.) but not without prudently suppressing the concluding sentences, subvert his whole hypothesis. This was an ancient copy of Matthew's Hebrew gospel. It con- tained the parts objected to by the Socinians. Yet it was held by those who, in the time of Jerome, were known by the name of Nazarenes, and who then used it. In addition to all this, Jerome says it was originally written for those Hebrews who did not mix the shadows of the law with the truth of the gospel.
After this laborious, but vain attempt, to prove from esc- ternal evidence, that these chapters are spurious, Mr. G. proceeds to strengthen his argument by evidence which is internal. To effect this, he searches for all the difficidties which those chapters afford him, and adds a number still more considerable from his own fruitful imagination.
When a man has an hypothesis to serve by it, he can often find difficulties which would not have been perceived by a candid enquirer. Some of those difficulties may be real ; but this is no proof that the passages in which they occur are spurious ; for difficulties may be met with in any piece of ancient history, and actually occur in other parts of the sacred writings, which still are allowed to be both authentic and genuine. Others of them may be accounted for from the mistakes of transcribers without in the least invalidating the scope of the narrative. Let us hear, how- ever, what are Mr. G's difficulties.
I. He considers the two first chapters of Matthew''s gospel.
1. On the genealogy he observes, " it is the genealogy of Joseph, not of Mary." f
* De Vir. Illus. cap. III. f Vol. II. p. 390.
Tilt: MiUAcri.ors coni eptiox. 3v1
The Jews would not have been satisfied tliat their ■Mes- siah was of the house of David, liad not the genealogy of Josepli, his reputed Father, been traced to that source. Hence Luke, when he relates the miraculous conception, before he had given the genealogy, says, " tlie angel Gabriel was sent to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David :" * and jMatthew relates that " the angel of Lord appeared unto him, saying, Joseph, thou son of David." f It appears that the writers of the miraculous history^ whoever they were, concerned themselves to point out the descent of Joseph, rather than of Mary. This was perfectly agreeable to the Jewish custom. xVc- cording to Eusebius, " Genealogies were reckoned among the Israelites, either according to nature, or to Imc. Accord- ing to hue, as when another took his brother's wife to raise up seed unto him. And this method of reckoning genealo- gies which is taken from the law, could not be more signifi- cantly or properly expressed, than by the words of Luke ; "•being us evo/!x»^ETo,as is reckoned by law, the son of Joseph."^ — It is equally remarkable concerning JMatthew, that while he gives the genealogy of Joseph, he changes his terms at the end, and says, not, as in every other part of it, " Joseph begat Jesus," but " Joseph was the husband of Mary, s^ ris, of ivhoin [singular] was born Jesus."
2. " Matthew says there werejourteen generations from the captivity to Jesus : whereas, according to the account itself, there were only thirteen^ |[
What then ? Mr. G. grants that " the genealogy was found in several copies of the gospel of IMatthew used by the Jewish Christians :" § therefore it is not spurious. But no matter : a wound here may answ er a good Socinian purpose, by affecting the verses which follow. Griesbach, however, gives athorities for many manuscripts which read Jehoiachim between Josias and Jechonias, according to 1 Chron. iii.l-i— 16. — This will mixkcjburtccn generations.
3. " The 19th verse assigns the reason for Josejjh's conduct in putting her (his espoused wife) away privily,
» Luke i. 26, 27. f Matt. i. 20. + Eccl. Hist. Lib. L cap. 7.
II Vol. IL p. 31/0. § Vol.11, p.aey.
z
346 THE MIRACULOUS CONCEPTION.
that he was a. just man." Against this, it appears, there are two objections. (1.) That "it was not in the power of Joseph to put her away privily, after a contract of mar- riage." (2.) That " the reason here given for Joseph's in- tention, viz. that he was a. just man, is a reflection upon the justice of the Deity for the laws delivered to the Jews." *
(1.) Mr. G. should have pointed out the law which pro- hibited a private divorce before cohabitation. It is certain that Deut. xxii. 13. does not refer to such a case ; and that Deut xxiv. speaks of the wife's having" been in the husband's liouse, and says nothing of a public divorce.
(2.) It is equally clear that Deut. xxii. 13 — 21. is a law made for the benefit of the husband, and that it does not require him to exhibit a public complaint, but merely pre- scribes how the matter was to be decided in case he did com- plain.— But Joseph may have had good reason for not arraierninff his wife ; because though the cause to which she may be supposed to attribute her situation, was not satisfac- tory to him, it might be a very proper inducement to treat her with all possible lenity. No man could have acted more properly in a conj uncture so delicate.
4. Mr. G. thinks it " singular" that the true state of the case was " not communicated to Joseph by Mary, without so needless a miracle as the intervention of an angel : or if it had been communicated to him, that he did not give credit to Mary's information." -f-
We cannot doubt that Mary related the truth to him in her own vindication. But supposing the veracity of her story, what man, under similar circumstances, would not have been, at that period, equally incredulous ?
5. He violently objects to the relief of Joseph from this agitation, by a dream. " There is something not quite satis- factory to the mind, [it seems] in the account of miracles performed in a dream."
(1.) It is not inconsistent with what the scriptures teach of God's manner of acting, to suppose him to interpose on particular occasions, and to make known his will to indivi- duals, by a dream. We have instances enow in the cases of
* \'ol. II. p. 391. t Vol. II. \\ 393.
THK MtliACri.nrS cnXCKI'TIOM. .Ill
Abinielech, (Gen. xx. ()'.) of Jiicob, (Gon. xxxi. 11.) of Joseph, (Gen. xxxvii. 5.) of Piiaraoh, (GtMi xli.) and of Nebuchadnezzar. (Dan. iv.) These are a sufficient apolooy for all the dreams which ]\Iatthe\v has related.
(2.) Though the dreams of individuals, independent of other circumstances, may not be satisfactory to the world, divine dreams have always been made satisfactory to the persons for whom they were intended. If not, how is it that God said, " If there be a prophet among you, I the Loud will speak unto him in a dream ?" * Nor is it impossible for the relation of such dreams to become perfectly credible by the circumstances of him that reports them ; for why do we give credit to the dreams related by INIoscs and by Daniel ? — But it answ er''s jNIr. G.'s purpose to confound these dreams which were granted to private individuals for private purposes, w^ith public miracles wrought for the establishment of Christianity.
6. " It is stated that all this was done to fulfil a pro- phecy. The antecedent to ^ all this'' nnif^t be the situ- ation of INIary, and the appearance of an angel in a dream."" -f-
Where the point of this observation lies, it is difficult to perceive. But a man must say something ! — The words, " All ihis,"^ refer to the situation of Mary, and the means which were used for the preservation of her person and puritij, that the prophecy might be fulfilled.
7. " The anijel then assi";ns as a reason for his bcino; called Jesus, that it was predicted that he should be called Emmaxuei. !" J
When .'' and where ? The angel said no such thing. The prophecy is cited by Matthew ; not by the angel.
8. " Why did Matthew translate the Hebrew word Emmanuel into Greek, when he wrote for Hebrews .? "^ || Perhaps it was translated, when the translation of the whole was made, not improbably by Matthew himself. And why should not this word, while the original is retained as a pro- per name, be translated with the rest of the book ?
• Num. xii. 6. t Vol. II. p. 3W. I Vol. JI. p. .397. |1 Vol. II. p._« 7.
z2
848 THE MIRACULOUS CONCEPTIOX.
9. " The expression ^ first born ' was never used among the Jews as applying to an only child." *
But it was : or how could the Jews know that their first- born was the Lord's according to the law, until they had a second child ? The^r*^ child was thefirst-born, and was the Lord's, whether a second followed or not. We are not, however, concerned in the question, whether Mary had other children.
10. " Matthew in citing the prophecy of Micah, has the words ' art not the least ;' whereas the words of Micah are ' though thou art little.' " f
" Some manuscripts, of very good note, among which is the Codex Bez^e, have fxn sKaf^iuTri ej, 'Art thou not the least ?' This reconciles the Prophet and the Evangelist, without farther trouble." :|:
11. " The variation will be observed in the insertion of the word ' governor,' which is not in Micah, for ' he.' " ||
Suppose that Matthew wrote, according to Micah, " he shall come forth unto me to be ruler in Israel."" § He that 7'uleSy is a governor who rules ; and therefore our copy is a very good translation.
12. " But it is most remarkable in the change of the word ' Ephratah,' for ' Judah,' or ' Judea, ' as contained in many Greek copies of the New Testament." ^
Why then does Mr. G. " suppose this change to be made by Matthew," unless all the Greek copies had this change "^ But the change itself is of no importance when we consider that Matthew wrote for the whole world.
13. Throughout his whole comment on Matt, ii., Mr. G. without a shadow of proof, assumes that the Magi who came from the East, were judicial astrologers: or, as he calls them, " conjurors." ** This hypothesis affords much scope to his ingenuity. As many of his observations are founded on this theory, it requires some proof. " The Jews believed that there were prophets in the kingdom of Saba, and Arabia, who were of the posterity of Abraham by Keturah :
* Vol. II. p. 398. t Vol. II. p. 408. + Dr. A. Clarke, in loc. II Vol. II. p. 408. §Mic.v. 2. ^ Vol.11, p. 40!).
** Vol. W. p. 414.
THE MIRAtTLOU.S (()\( T-l'TIOX. 'U9
and that they tauglit in the name of God, what they had received in tradition from the mouth of Abraham. That many Jews were mixed with tliis people, there is httlc doubt ; and that these eastern Magi may have been originally of that class, there is room to believe. These, knowing the pro- mise of the Messiah, were now probably, like other believing Jews, waiting for the consolation of Israel."* — This is much more probable than Mr. G.'s conjecture; but it would Tiot have suited his purpose, which is to find, or to invent, improbabilities.
14. The flight into Egypt, and the return to Nazareth, are objected to by Mr. G.on such grounds as his prejudice, rather than his reason, has suggested. But instead of answering his cavils, the Reader must be reniinded that the gospel by St. jNIatthcAv, held by tlie Nazarenes, and copied by Jerome, contained these two passages : — " Out of Egypt have I called my Son :"" — and " He shall be called a Naza- rene." (See p. 344.) As these passages stand immediately connected, the first with the return from Egypt, and the last with his coming to Nazaretli, the proof that the gospel held by those Nazarenes contained those accounts, is un- equivocal. Mr. G., therefore, must grant that they are not spurious.
Having replied to those objections which have any ap- pearance of solidity, it is not necessary to follow Mr. G. through all the silly questions which, to darken the subject, lie proposes : or through the arguments which he erects on difficulties of his own making. He may puzzle himself a httle longer, in finding how Joseph could know the situation of ]Mary ; -f* and amuse himself with conjectures " how it could get to Matthew's knowledge, that Joseph had had a dream."" 'I When he has settled these knotty questions, lie will be at leisure to prosecute his inquiries into the propriety of Joseph's behaviour as related in Matt. i. 25. — Though we think him a little unreasonable, we will not intermeddle in his quarrel with ^Matthew, who has left Luke to inform us that Bethlehem was not the original abode of the holy family. || — Wc will not interfere in the department of com-
• Dr. .^. Clark, iuloc. f Vol. II. p. .■•.:'l. : Vul. II. p. :31M. 1| Vtl. 11 ).. 100.
z ',i
350 THE MlIlACL'LOnS COKCKI'TIOX.
mon sense to shew him, that the Magi meant they were in the East, when they first saw the star, of which they say, " we have seen his star in the east." * — He shall still be at liberty to speak of the xolsdom or of the Jbll^, of these Magi, in relating at Jerusalem the object of their journey, "f — He shall not be beholden to us for any ingenious conjecture con- cerning the nature of the star which guided them, its height, its motions, the possibility or impossibility of its being seen by other persons, its evanescence or its permanence. [J: — We will not explain to him how " all Jerusalem might be thrown into commotion by news, which, if true, bade fair to sap the foundation of a hated, tyrannical government." || — He shall still be left to imagine that tyrants (such as Herod) are open, sincere, tender-] tearted, conscientious, and hecji'om jealousy ; and that hypocrites cannot liope to be credited. § He shall not be hindered from supposing that a stranger may easily be found, by those who known either his name, nor his residence. ^ We will not vindicate the ratiojiality of Herod, who commanded the wise-men, to " make diligent search " for the young child ; ** or undertake the arduous task of teaching Mr. G. to enter into the feeling-s of those first xoorshippers of the Messiah, as exemplified in xheirjoy at seeing again the star which was to gviide them to the Savioue of the World. -|-f
Should the Reader inquire why a more particular answer is not given to such objections as these, he is desired to consider : 1. That to dwell on such subjects would prove a great dearth of controversial topics : and 2. That though Mr. G. might really need a little friendly assistance in some serious difficulties, he wants only the disposition to vindicate Matthew against these petty cavils which are the fruit, not of critical sagacity, but of unreasonable prejudice, and which are produced by misconstruing the text, and raising objec- tions against his oion comment.
II. Mr. G. proceeds next to consider the two "miracu- lous chapters " of Luke's gospel. Those of Matthew " ap-
* Vol.11. !>. 104. t Vol. II. p. 404 J Vol. II. p. 405, 406".
11 Vol. 11. p. 107. §Vol. II. p.411— 414. ^ Vol. II. p. 414.
*» Vl'I. II. p. 4i;;. ft Vol. II. p. 41.').
THE MIRACULOUS CONCEPTION. 351
pear to liim mdisputably spurious." * But we liave ventured to dispute it. " Tliose ascribed to Luke [he acknowledges] have not equally strong evidence against them."" -f- If there is any evidence against them, it will ap- pear in the examination of his Lecture. In tlie mean time, the Reader will remember that we have found strong and satisfactory evidence in their favour.
Having stated that Luke's gospel was written in Greece, for the Gentile converts, ;]: he " supposes for argument's sake," II [i. e. for want of argument,] that at first it did not contain the two chapters which relate to our Lord's nativity, and that they were early foisted in from some spurious gos- pel, and circulated in this form till the adulterated gospel was universally received. §
This " supposition for aj-gumenfs sake" cannot for truth's sake be admitted.
1. Mr. G. supposes that this story of the miraculous conception and nativity, made a part of one of those spurious gospels which were written before the genuine gospel of Luke. According to him, therefore, a report of the mira- culous conception was extensively spread among the Gentile converts, in the days of the Apostles. If this report had been false, the Apostles, whose business it was, as Mr. G. contends, to rectify every mischievous error, and preserve the purity of the gospel, would have pointedly refuted it in their writings ; and their not refuting it, is satisfactory proof that it was true. This argument is still more conclusive, on the supposition that the story was so early ascribed to Luke.
2. If Mr. G. suppose that this story was not added to the genuine gospel in the time of the Apostles, it is then to be rem'^mbered, that while John lived, the genuine gospel of Luke was circulated among all the Gentiles. Theodore, bishop of Mopsuestia, says, that before John Avrote his gos- pel, those of the three other Evangelists " were spread over all the world, and were received by ail the faithful in general with great regard."5[ When so many copies of the genuine gospel were in the hands of the Gentile converts, it would
•Vol. II. p. 495. t Vol. II. p. 491. + Vol. II. p. 431. Il Vol. II. p. 432. § Vol. II. p. i31— 133. *, Lard. Cred. Vol. l.X. p- 103.
352 THE MIRACULOUS CONCEPTION.
become extremely difficult, perhaps impossible, to interpo- late them all, and to introduce universally a doctrine so con- trary to what had been received, without raising violent opposition, and causing a commotion the report of which must have reached even to the present times.
3. The Marcionites held a mutilated gospel attributed to Luke, which did not contain the " miraculous story." Mr, G. enlists them under the banner of Socinus, because on this point they agree with himself : and he is welcome to as- sociate them with his party. TertuUian maintains against them the genuineness of those gospels, which teach that *' Chrht xvas horn of a virgin:''''* and of that of Luke in particular. " If it be certain, (he says) that is most genuine which is most ancient, that most ancient which is from the begin- ning, and that from the beginning which is from the Apos- tles; in like manner it will be also certain, that has been delivered from the Apostles which is held sacred in the churches of the Apostles. Let us then see, what milk the Corinthians received from Paul ; to what rule the Galatians were reduced ; v.hat the Philippians read ; what the Thes- salonians, the Ephesians, and likewise what the Romans re- cite, who are near to us, with whom both Peter and Paul left the gospel sealed with their blood. — I say then, that with them, but not with them only which are apostolical, but with all who have fellowship v/ith them in the same faith, is that 'gospel of Luke received from its first publication, which we so zealously maintain." -j-
Mr. G. already feels the weight of this argument, and, to evade it as well as he can, he supposes all the Gentile converts to have been perverted, and all the genuine gospels to have been interpolated : so that his faithful allies the Ebionites " had no alternative but to receive or reject the whole." ;|: Thus all the Greek gospels were lost to what he would call the Christian churches ! C redat Jndans Apelles! - — He then feelingly complains, that " of the conduct of the Hebrew Christians, (the Ebionites) all the accounts have come down to us through the medium ofoppo7ients.'''' \\ Alas !
*■ AJv. Marciot), lib. i^'. cap. 2. f Adv. Marciou, lib. IV. cap. 5.
; Vul. 11. ].. 135. II Vol. Il.p. Ijj.
THE MIUACLLOL'S COXCKPTIOX. 353
There were no Chr'istia7is in the first ages but the Ebionites: and of them, divine providence has not permitted one to give us a faithful account of the rest ! So Mr. G. confesses that he can place no dependance on ecclesiastical history, and that he is perfectly in the dark. But no matter ;
For ev'n though vanquish'd, he can argue still!
As he finds a deficiency of external evidence against the autlienticity of Luke's two first chapters, he labours to find, or to make, some evidence from the chapters themselves.
1. He opens his attack, by noticing a supposed incon- sistency between the Author's introduction, and the two first chapters. He takes for granted that in his introduc- tion, " Luke could intend only to relate the public life of Jesus ;"* whereas the tAvo first chapters refer to his birth and education.
If the Reader consult the first four verses of the Evan- gelist, he will find that not one word is said of Luke's design to write only the public life of Jesus. Mention is there made of " many who had taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which were most surely be- lieved, even as they delivered them who were eye-witnesses ;"" but Luke says, " it seemed good to him also, having had perfect understanding of things from the very first, to write in order.'''' — Here is nothing to distinguish, in his own pur- pose, between what was done publicly, and what took place 'm private. But if he had professed to write the public life of Jesus ; unless he had proposed o;?/y that, who would find fault with him for beginning with the birth and education of the subject of his history ? If a writer purpose to relate the public life of some great man, why is he to be condemned for beginning Avitli the time and place of his nativity, and the circumstances of his introduction to the scene of action ?
2. " It is a singular assertion of the angel, that John should be ' filled Avith the Holy Spirit even from his
* Vol. II. J). 139.
354 THE MIRACULOUS CONCEPTION.
mother''s womb.' No good can be imagined to have accrued from such a miracle." *
It i* singular : or why should it be asserted at all .'' And it would be singular if a Socinian could imagine what good could accrue from it. He has no idea of the gift of the Holy Ghost, but for the performance of miracles. Un- taught by the sacred writers, he never dreams that the Holy Ghost is " the Spirit of Iioltness" and that human beings do not answer the purpose of their creation, till they become " an habitation of God through the Spirit," and are " filled into the fulness of God."
3. " The promises which are made of the future king- dom of Jesus, (Luke i. 31, 32, 33.) if spiritual, imparted a degree of knowledge to Mary which she does not seem after- wards to have possessed." "f*
That they related to a spiritual dominion, there is no room to doubt : and that neither Mary nor the disciples un- derstood the precise nature of that dominion, till a later period, we grant. But the ignorance of Mary, after the annunciation of the angel, is certainly as excusable as that of the disciples, after the repeated declarations and instructions which they received from Jesus Christ himself.
4. " That Elizabeth should greet Mary, as ' the Mother of her Lord,' goes on the presumption that Elizabeth knew that the child of Mary was to be the Messiah, which was not known till thirty years afterwards." \
This is assuming that Luke's account is false, in order to prove it false. Elizabeth knew that Mary's child should be the Messiah, because the angel had said, that John should " go before the Lord their God," by " the babe leaping in her womb," and by " being filled with the Holy Ghost." ||
5. " Nor does our astonishment terminate here, for Mary also seems to be fully aware what her son would
But why be so astonished^ when it is known that the angel had said .'' — " Blessed art thou among women : — thou shalt bring forth a son. He shall be great, and shall be
• Vol. II. p. 439. t Vol. II. p. 441 . t Vol. II, p. 444.
II Luke i. 16, 17, 41. § Vol. II. p. 444.
Tllli: .MIUACILOIS CONCEI'TIOX. 355
called the Son of the Highest : and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David, and of his king- dom there shall be no end." *
6. " He objects to "the first five verses of the second chapter."
(1.) That " this phrase, ' the whole world,' is gene- rally used to signify the whole Roman empire. Now of all the historians who have written of this period, not one has mentioned this extraordinary taxing (of the whole Roman empire) in the days of Herod the Great." t
But what will this amount to, imless it be made to ap- pear that Luke's words, waiov rm oixoviAsv-nv^ are always *' used to signify the whole Roman Empire .'' " Where is the pToofoi this ? Mr. G. may find this same Evangelist obviously applying the same phrase to the land of Judea. " Men''s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on m oixouixevv, the land." Compare Luke xxi. 21, and 26. — And this is the sense of the passage in question.
(2.) " At this period the Roman emperors do not ap- pear to have interfered at all in the internal management of Judea." +
But Mr. G. has not made it " appear " that they did not. It's " not appearing," will not prove that Augustus did not issue this decree ; for from nothings nothing is to be inferred.
(3.) " Supposing that a decree of this nature was issued by Augustus, it is very improbable that each person should be compelled to go to the city or town in which he was born." II
Are we then to condemn every thing merely on our own perverse opinion of its improbability ? Mr. G. should either prove that Luke's statement is false, or let it alone.
(4.) " Bethlehem does not appear to have been Joseph's native place." §
• Luke i. 28, .-il— ;U. f Vol. II. p. 44;. t Vol. II. p. 448.
II Vol. II. p. tiy. § Vol. 11. p. 441).
356 THE AIIIlACULOCb COXCEl'TIOX.
It " does not appear " that it was not.
(5.) " There was no necessity, according to the Jewish customs, for Mary''s going." *
If there was no necessity, " according to the Jewish cus- toms," there might be prudential reasons for her going with her husband : the providence of God so ordering it that Christ should be born at Bethlehem.
(6.) " Cyrenius was not made governor of Syria, till ten or twelve years after the death of Herod." f
Granted. But the words of Luke, zypwrvi nyBfjionvovros rns'Lupixs 'Kvpwiou, may be translated, " before Cyrenius was governor of Syria.'' The word Tipajros is used in this sense, in John i. 30. : Ttpuros (aou w, " he was before me :" and in John xv. 18.: "the world' hated me, zxpcurov vfji.cov, before it hated you." The sense is therefore legitimate, and renders the passage consistent with the fact alluded to. ^See Dr. A. Clarke in loc.) Other solutions are given by Dr. Lardner ; (Vol. I. p. 248 — 329.) but none of them satisfy Mr. G. And no wonder ! It would not answer his purpose to be satisfied. But the credit of Luke is not to be affected by his dissatisfaction.
(7.) " But when Cyrenius was governor of Syria, Avhich was ten or twelve years after the death of Herod, there was an enrolment from which the Jews apprehended entire slavery. This must imply that they had never before been so assessed." J
Not at all. The Jews might patiently endure a Jlrst enrolment, because they had neither witnessed, nor con- ceived, the effects which it would produce. Before a second was made, their eyes might be opened, and they might be more easily excited to resist. But this, either under a first, or a second, enrolment, Avould depend on the zeal of some individuals. Accordingly, the very passage which Mr. G. has cited from Josephus, asserts that " Judas Gaulonites, together with one Sadducus, a pharisee, urged them to rebel, asserting that the enrolment brought upon them nothing less than entire slavery., and calling upon the nation
• Vul. II. p. 14y. t Vol. II. p. 450. : Vol. II. p. 453.
THE MIUACrLOrS CONCEPTION'. 357
to maintain their liberty." * This might be done as proba- bly on the second as on the Jirst occasion :
(8.) But Ave have additional " proof that this (under Cyrenius) was not only the_y?r*^, but the onli/ assessment of the kind, that Gamaliel in Acts v. 37. calls the days of Judas of GaUlee, the days of the taxing.'''' -f-
By no means : for Gamaliel might speak thus, because that taxing was rendered remarlcable by the insurrection which it occasioned.
Here then is no proof of any error in the statement of Luke.
7. " Another error will be found in verses 41, 42. It was not ' the nistom," among the Jews, for the whole family or for both parents to go up to Jerusalem, but for males only. It is then scarcely within the limits of credibility that both Joseph and Mary went up to Jerusalem everi/ ycar^ from Nazareth, when the law required the presence of Joseph only." j
The words of the Evangelist do not necessarily imply that it was the custom for females to go to the feast, but that it was the custom for males to go up when they were twelve years of age. That the Mother of Jesus should go with him, is not to be wondered, when we consider the extraor- dinary character of the child. Nor can the distance of Nazareth from Jerusalem, be a solid objection, when it is considered that boys of twelve years, went up from all parts of the land of Israel. When so great a concourse of people went up to the feast, it would be unreasonable to suppose that some women did not customarily attend them, though the law did not require it.
8. INIr. G. affects to raise a number of serious objections from the wonder and astonishment which were frequently excited by new circumstances. After many extraordinary things had taken place, " when Simeon congratulated the parents of the child, we are told that Joseph and his mother marvelledy \\ They were amazed when they found him in the temple conversing with tlie Doctors. § And lastly, when
• Vul. 11. p. 4.^)2. t Vol. II. p. 453. : Vol. II. p. 457.
11 Vol. 11. p. 156. § Vol. II. p. 457.
358 THE MIRACULOUS COXCKPTIOX.
he said, ' How is it that ye sought me ? Wist ye not that I must be about my father's business ? ' to perfect his argu- ment, as if Luke had again spoken of their zoonder, Mr. G. represents them as " at the acme of amazement." *
To pass by this last mistake, we put it to any man of sense and candour, whether it be not perfectly probable that new circumstances should excite new wonder. Who will say that the amazement of the parents has not since been raised to a much higher pitch, and that it will cease before Jiesus shall come in the clouds of heaven, when he shall be " admired in all them that believe .f*"
We now find ourselves again in the midst of objections which neither require nor deserve a reply. We are not con- cerned to prove the reasonableness of Mary's agitation on the salutation which she received,f of Elizabeth's retirement after her conception, J of Mary's leaving Elizabeth when she had about fulfilled her time,|| of the fear which came on the neiglabours of Zacharias after the birth and circumcision of John ;§ or of Mary's bringing forth at Bethlehem, under great inconvenience, when her cousin Elizabeth lived only a few miles distant. ^ Mr. G. shall be left to invent a more delicate speech for Mary, or to be shocked at that which is recorded, ** — to quarrel with Luke for not having informed him when Joseph and Mary were married, -|"f- — for not making further mention of Elizabeth, or of any additional visits which Mary paid to her, J| — to determine the nature of what Elizabeth felt on the salutation of Mary, and the manner in which it came to be known, I||| — to shew cause why Bethlehem was crowded,§§ — and to convince himself and his " learned [Socinian] commentators " that a manger is not a cave. ^^ — On such topics, the Bookseller will best appreci- ate his observations.
III. Mr. G.'s " next point is to compare the accounts in the two chapters supposed to have been written by Mat- thew, with the two ascribed to Luke. " We haste to attend him.
« Vol. II. p. 458. t Vol.11, p. 411. t Vol. II. p. 449.
II Vol. II. p. 443, 445. § Vol. II. p. 445. 1[ Vol. II. p. 4.55.
*# Vol. II. p. 442. +t Vol. II.p. 44.S. ++ Vol. II. p. 454.
llil Vol. II. p. 443. §§ Vol. II. p. 455, ^[^ Vol. II. p. 4.'i5.
THE MIRACULOUS COXCEPTION. 359
1. " The accounts are so totally difterent that no one event is found related by both."" *
That the two Evangelists dwell on different circimistan- ces connected with the birth of Jesus, is granted. But this makes nothing against the truth of their histozy. Luke relates what Matthew had omitted.
2. " According to IVIatthew, the Magi are the first per- sons who bring the important tidings to Jerusalem. "•f'
We will wait till IVIr. G. have shewn where Mattliew has said, that no news of the birth of Christ had reached Jerusalem before the IMagi came thither. When this is done, we will attend to the argument founded on it.
3. " According to Matthew's account, Bethleliem ap- pears to have been the usual residence of Joseph and Mary." +
It may appear to Mr. G. ; but to any person who can- not see with his eyes, it w^ill not appear that Matthew has said any thing about their usual residence.
4. " According to Matthew, the Magi are directed to a liouse as tlie residence of Jesus. From Luke we can col- lect only that he was laid in a manger."||
But does Mr. G. " collect" from Luke that that manger was in the open air ?
5. " According to Matthew, Joseph and j\Iary must have stayed at Bethlehem a considerable time, when they began their journey to Egypt. Luke states that after the performance of all the ceremonies according to the law, they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth."" §
The words of Luke do not necessarily imply that they went immediately from Jerusalem to Nazareth. It is therefore perfectl)? easy and natural to suppose that they ■went first to Bethlehem, where they received the visit of the IVIagi ; and that they then took their journey into Egypt, from whence they returned to Nazareth. This gives room for all that is related by either of the Evan- gelists.
♦.Vol. II. p.4:)9- t Vol. II. p. 460. : Vol. II. p. 461.
II Vol. 11. p. 461. § Vol. II. p. 462.
860 THE MIRACULOUS COXCEPTIOX.
6. " Luke makes the parents go up from Nazareth to Jerusalem every year. Matthew records their taking a long journey into Egypt."*
Mr. G. cannot prove from Matthew that the journey to Egypt took up a whole year. Nor does Luke say, how long they had strictly attended to the custom of annually going up to Jerusalem. His words may be true, as refer- ring to the time of which he speaks, even if the parents, while they were in Egypt, had once omitted to visit Jerusalem.
IV. Mr. G. in the last place examines the evidence deducible from other parts of evangelical history.
1. " The first thing that strikes him is, that neither Matthew nor Luke mentions the miraculous conception, throughout the whole remainder of their gospels. "f
The frequent recurrence of this mode of reasoning, and the gravity with which it is exhibited, excite a desire to know what are the principles on which it is founded. JNIust the account which the historian gives of the birth of his subject in the beginning of his narrative, be deemed spuri- ous, because, after he has finished that part of it, he does not afterwards advert to it .-^
2. " In the gospels of Mark and John, these miraculous events are altogether omitted.*"! ^
It is much more just to argue that if Matthew and Luke had, in their genuine works, given no account of the birth of Jesus, Mark or John would have supplied the defi- ciency ; than, that it was necessary for Mark or John, to repeat what was already recorded. This observation will have the more weight, when it is considered that an account of the birth of Jesus was necessary as a record of the ful- filment of many important prophecies ; and that John wrote his gospel as a supplement to the rest. The silence of Mark and John, therefore, if it prove any thing, proves that the accounts given by Matthew and Luke are genuine. ||
» Vol. II. p. 462. fVol. ll.p^46;i. + Vol. II. p. 463. II Mr. G. supposes Mark's gospel to be an abridgment of Matthew's, and then assigns a curious reason for Mark's silence on this suhiect : viz. that Matthew's gospel did not contain those chapters. Vol. ll.p. 464. So an abridgment proves that the original contained nothing but what is found in the abridgment. Taking the word in its vulgar sense, we do not, however, allow that Mark abridged Matthew.
THE MIUACLLOUS CONCEPTIOX. 3G1
But allowing Mr. G/s mode of reasoning to be good, it will follow that Jesus Christ was not born at all, because John or ^Vlark makes no mention of his birth,
3. " The conmiencement of the chapter which, in our received version, stands as the third of the Evangelist Mat- thew, is exceedingly unnatural in its connection with the two preceding chapters."'*
Such is the power of prejudice ! The third chapter begins with, " In tJiose days came John the Baptist, preach- ing^ Now let the Reader judge wheth.cr " thouc clays'^ are most naturally connected with the words, " and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations," — or with the latter part of the second chap- ter, which speaks of Jesus, " dwelling at Nazareth." While Jesus dwelt at Nazareth, " in those days came John the Baptist, preaching."
4. The next objection is taken from a comparison of the dates which Luke gives in the beginning of his third chap- ter, with what may be gathered from Matthew. Mr. G. computes that, whereas, according to Luke, our Lord was about thirty years of age when John opened his ministrv, according to Matthew he was then about thirty-six years of age.'^t
When a man has a piu'pose to serve by a compound, chro- nological calculation, he can take many advantages. If there are different periods from which he may calculate, he can fix upon that which will best serve the cause he has espoused. Where only the year is named, he can take what7«o»^/iof it he chuses, and thereby gain several months. And when time is to be allowed for any given transaction, he can lengthen or shorten the period of it as he pleases. + Thus, by various measures, all operating the same way, he makes sure of his object. But this is not the method in which a candid critic would examine the clironology of
• Vol. II. p. 46.5. t Vol. II. p. 466—469.
♦Mr. G. has given us a remarkable instance of this niancEuvrc. He says that our Saviour must have been between two and three years of a^e wlu-n Herod died : it is generally /*/t,»M»ifrf that he was /«(//■. Then, instead of taking that nunii>er which he grants may possibly lie ju^t, he lakeMhal nhich will be^l prove the error of the lAun^alist. Vol. 11. p. 4'j7, JCri.
A n
362 THE MIRACULOUS CONCEPTION.
a writer. He would give, rather than take, every advan- tage.
The reign of Tiberius may be calculated from two dif- ferent periods: the first, when he became a partner in the empire with Augustus ; the second, when he became sole governor. Several learned chronologers are of opinion, that Luke dates the ministry of John from the former of these periods ; and they are very probably in the right; for, whatever might be done in the imperial city, it was common in the provinces to date from the pro-concular reign. Now the pro-consular reign of Tiberius is supposed by some to have begun about three years before the death of Augustus, on the 28th of Aug. A. U. 764. According to this date, the 15th year of his reign began Aug. 28th A. U. 778. Sup- posing that John began his ministry in November follow- ing, in the same year, then, allowing that Jesus was born in September, A. U. 748, he would be about 30 years of age at the commencement of John's ministry.* Mr. G. sup- poses Herod to have died A. U. 750. This was two years after the birth of Christ. — It is not necessary to allow any more than about one year and a half from the birth of Christ to the massacre of the infants at Bethlehem, or more than half a year from the massacre to the death of Herod. — At this rate, Matthew and Luke agree exactly in their chro- nological dates.
5. " Luke in the Acts of the Apostles, alludes to his ' former treatise,*' and mentions the nature and object of that treatise, namely, to relate ' all that Jesus began both to do and to teach.'' If he had been the author of the two chap- ters ascribed to him, it would have been easy and natural to have mentioned these as included."-|-
Apply this to the genealogy, or, to the ministry of John, both of which are recorded in the chapters which Mr. G. thinks to be genuine, and try whether the argument be good. And yet it is as applicable in one case as in the other. Tlie truth is, the words of Luke mean no more
* The reader may find the authorities for this computaliou in Dr. Lard- ucr's Credibility ofthe gosjicl History, V. I. li. 11. C. 3. t Vol. 11. p. 470.
THE MIRACULOUS CONCEPTION. 363
than iliat he had treatetl of the acts of Jesus in his former work, and now he was about to write the acts of the Apos- tles.
(). " Luke states that all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ or not. — Ask yourselves whether the author Avho wrote the above, is the same as he who wrote the account of the shepherds, and of Anna."*
Suppose the reports which were spread by the shep- herds, by Anna, and add, by the Magi, to have excited an unusual expectation of the speedy appearance of the IVIes- siah. Does it follow, that they who looked for him, knew his person ? If not, they might at first imagine that John was " he that should come."
7. " If the Evangelists IMatthew and Luke knew that Jesus was born at Bethlehem, would they not, sometimes at least, have denominated him Jesus of Bethlehem P^-f-
Is it clear, beyond all contradiction, that 'every person is denominated from the place of his naiivitfj, rather than from the place of his long-continued residence ? Had the Evangelists denominated him Jesus a native of Nazareth, Mr. G. might have made something of it. But he is deno- minated Jesus of Nazareth, because " he dwelt in Naza- reth." Let ]\Ir. G. produce the place where the Apostles said or allowed that Jcsns was born in Naxaretli, and we must bow to its authority.
" Then here is the passage ! * When Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked whether the man were a Galilean ; and as soon as he knew that he belonged unto Herod's jurisdic- tion, he sent him to Herod.' Here you see an inquiry is actually made into the birth-place of Jesus, and the result of the inquiry is, that he was born at Nazareth. "";!:
How does it appear that the " inquiry was made into the birtli-place of Jesus T' Is liere one word about the jilace of his birth ? And why was not the place of his abode the subject of the inquiry ? Did not Jesus come under Herod's jurisdiction by being an inhabitant of Ga- lilee.?
♦Vol.11. J). 471. fVol. II.p. 471. : Vol. 11. p. 175. Aa2
364 THE MIRACULOUS CONCEPTION.
8. " It is recorded of John that he ' knew nof Christ. If the miraculous events recorded in the first two chapters of Matthew and Luke be true, and so great an intimacy subsisted between Mary and EUzabeth, is it probable that, for thirty years, Jesus should be unknown to John ?''*
It is not at all improbable that two persons should be thirty years unacquainted with each other. As for the " miraculous events" of Avhich Mr. G. speaks, none of them had any reference to their ever being brought together : nor can Mr. G. prove from those chapters that they had had any opportunity of knowing each other.
9. " All the Jews considered Jesus as the son of Joseph, and the Evangelists, so far from contradicting this opinion, appear to have encouraged it, and to have believed it them- selves."" j*
(1.) That the Jews in general believed Jesus to be the Son of Joseph, is not denied. Nor is it denied that they were never better informed during our Lord's ministry. Until he was " declared to be the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead," they were not likely to believe it ; because the proofs of his being the Messiah were the only proofs that, in the nature of the thing, could be given of the miraculous conception, had it been announced to them. To have explicitly published this circumstance before, would have been only to throw a stumbling block in their way. But though the Jews thought him the Son of Joseph, neither Jesus, nor his disciples when they were well informed, ever acquiesced in that opinion, or encouraged it. The truth is, that they seem to have always evaded it. Mr. G. has attempted to prove the contrary : but without suc- cess, " When he was come into his own country, his coun- trymen said. Is not this the carpenter's son ? and they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house."! — Was this either an acknowledgment, or a denial, that he was the carpenter's son ? In the next pas- sage which Mr. G. quotes, his being the son of Joseph is no part of the question. They said, " Is not this the car-
# Vol. II. 11.11". t Vol. II. p. 447. : Mat. xiii. 54— 57,
TIIF. AITRACt'l.OI'^ COXCKPTTOK. ,'JG.')
pentor, the son of Mary ?"* The next ])assao-c runs thus : "And they said. Is not this Joseph's son? and he said unto them, Ye will surely say, Physieian heal thyself. And he said, verily, I say unto you, no prophet is accepted in his own country."-f- " This (says Mr. G.) is vwst assurcdlij an acknoidaJgmcnt by Jesus himself that he was the son of Joseph. "+ But who beside ]Mr. G. can sec it ? It is an ac- knowledgement that Nazareth was his own country. Mr. G. thinks, however, that the Evangelists believed it because they have recorded these things without any note of cen- sure. || Just as well might he argue that they believed Jesus to be a blasphemer !
(2.) The correlative terms, father and son, are some- times used properly, and sometimes improperly. If this were not the case, how could " the author of the two mira- culous chapters generally ascribed to Luke,"" after he had recorded the miraculous conception, put into the mouth of Mary those words, " Thy Father and I have sought thee sorrowing i^*'"' and how could Jesus " call God his Father, and be the proper son of Joseph ?" Joseph niiglit be called " the father of Jesus," as being a kind o^ futher-in-la'iC, and the term might be so used with perfect innocence, when it did not involve the question of procreation. But Joseph is never styled his proper father ; whereas, when " the Jews souffht to kill him, because he said that God was tS»ov 'TTdTspx, ' his proper father ,'§ so far from retracting, he ]iro- ceeded to vindicate, die terms which he had used: and Paul styles him " tov i^iov viov, the j)ropcr Son of God."^
10. " When Philip found Nathanael, he said unto him, We have found him of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth the Son (yf
Joseph r**
At this time, whether the story of the miraculous con- ception be true or false, Nathanael knew nothing of it. He had but just become acquainted with the person of Christ, and distinguished him by the compellation by which he was connnonly known. This therefore j)roves nothing !
* Mark vi. .•?. f Luke iv. 22—24. ♦ Vol. II. p. 4;3.1l ||Vol. II. ,.. 479.
§ John V. 1(3. H Rom.viii. .32. *• Vol, II. p. 47'J.
A a 3
366 THE MIRACULOUS COXCEPTIOX.
11. "If Jesus were not the son of Joseph, what pro- priety or consistency can there be in that appellation, * The Son of Man ?' Would the same appellation be given to Adam ?*'"
What a blunder! Was Adam born of a woman? But waving this, when Mr. G. lias told us with what propriety Jesus was called " the Son of David," he will be able to assign a reason for his calling himself " the Son of Man,'' without supposing that Joseph was his proper father,
12. " We read in Mark that his friends said, ' He is beside himself.' How inconsistent this charge of supposed insanitij is with the miraculous chapters, a few moments' consideration will enable any one to decide."-f-
One moment is quite enough; for the charge is as con- sistent with those chapters, as with the miracles at his baptism, or the miracles which the inhabitants of Nazareth had " heard were done in Capernaum.";]: He that can re- concile it in the one case, will have overcome all the diffi- culty of the other.
13. " Luke is positive that he was the son of Joseph, really being, as he was supposed, the son of Joseph."]]
We may omit the passage already quoted from Euse- bius, (p. 343.) for Mr. G. has answered his own argument. " It is rather remarkable, (says he) that Grotius, when vindicating the two genealogies, although he says, Jesus was not the son of Joseph, states that — Luke, by the term £vo/M.<^£To, meant (not the natural, but) the legal descent. In plain words Joseph was not the natural, but the Z^'^aZ father, the father-in-law, of Jesus.
In concluding this important subject, it is but candid to observe, that Mr. G. has taken immense pains to render the miraculous conception doubtful. If the question is to be decided by the number of his arguments, the victory will be indisputably his. But if a weak cause can need to be betrayed by the imprudent officiousness of its apologist, Mr. G. is the man to decide its fate. A few of his argu- ments have apparent force, and needed to be fairly exam- ined and refuted : but the majority of them are the most
« Vol. f I. p. 480. + \'al. II, p.480. jLukeiv. 23. i| Vol. fl. p. 481.
THE MlRACrLOt'S COVCEPTIOX. .%T
unworthy of a man of sense that can be imagined ; and pre- cisely sucli as j\Ir. Paine has used against llie v liole Chris- tian system. It is not, liowever, the business of a pole- mic to ridicule, but to answer, the arguments of his opponent. We have answered far more than were deserving of notice, and after a close examination of them all, we see the doctrine in question stand unshaken as a temple, the main pillars of which have not been even touched. It is not, however, jNIr. G.'s fault, that he has not succeeded in robbing the Iledeemer of his peculiar glory, and in degrading him to a level with many of the sinners for whose salvation he came into the world.
( 3C8 )
CHAPTER XV.
Of the Ordinary Injiuence of the Holy Spirit.
It is an opinion of the Socinians, which has been fre- quently repeated by Mr. G., that the Holy Spirit is no other than the energy or operation of God. We think it right, for reasons already assigned, (chap. 6.) to hold a lan- guage which appears to us to agree more exactly with the general tenor of scripture, and to conceive of the Holy Spirit as of God energizing or operating on his creatures, in their formation, sustenance, or improvement. But whether, on this occasion, we adopt our own language or that of our antagonist, we are warranted to say, It is not possible that any creature should be without a divine influence. For w hether the Divine Spirit be the Divine energy or operation, or God operating on his creatures, — if that Spirit be (as the scriptures assert) every where present, God is every where operating upon his creatures.
1. The Spirit of God operated on all the creatures at their creation. (1.) On things inanimate. " The Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters. * — By his Spirit he hath garnished the heavens." f — (2.) On things animate, and on man in particular. " God breathed into man the breath [Spirit] of life, and he became a living soul. J — The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life." ||
2. The same Spirit still operates on all nature, for the support of the creatures of his power. (1.) On all the vegetable world. " Thou sendest forth thy Spirit ; they are created : thou renewest the face of the earth." § — (2.)
* Gen. i. 2. f Job. xxvi. 13. J Gen. ii. 7.
II .Jobxxxiii. 4. § Psalm cix.. 30.
THK onniXAUV IVFT.TTF.XrF, &:C. .']()()
On all the animal Morld. " If he ^atlior unto himscll' his Spirit all fUvsh shall pcri-sh together;' *— (3.) And on man in particular : " For in him we live and move and have our being." f
If the Spirit of God be tiie principal, immediate Author of every thing in the natural world, we may justly e\])ect to find him a principal agent in the spiritual and moral world. Whetlier man be considered as an intelligent beins, it is God that " teacheth him knowledge." — " There is a spirit in man, and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understand- ing. ^ Or whether he be considered as a moral agent, it is but just in him to acknowledge, " Thou, Lord, hast wrought all our works in us." || God poured out his Spirit of old upon the house of Israel. "§— He '< gave his good Spirit to imtruct them."^— His " Spmt strove with " them. **— He " vphdiV them by his ''-free Spirit." ff Some of them prayed him " not to ^aA-f- ymwi them his holy Spirit." ++— xVnd others of them " rebelled, and vexed his Holy Spirit."|||| But the plenitude of the Spirit Avas reserved for the latter days, and to do honour to the immediate reign of Messiah, who should "baptize" his followers "with the Holy Ghost and with fire. '§§ In this enlarged sense, " the Holy Ghost was not (previously) given, because tliat Jesus was not then glorified." ^«]" But when he " ascended up on high, he led captivity captive and received gifts for men ; yea, for the rebellious also, that the Lord God might dwell among them." ***
When the great Head of the Church sent 'forth his Apostles to set up and establish the new dispensation, and to christianize the world, lie fitted them for the vast under- taking by endowing them with supernatural wisdom, and miraculous power. That they might speak the truth of God, " not in words which human wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth," the Spirit of truth was given to them to guide them into all truth. And to cor-
• Job xxxiv. 14, 15. t Acts xvii. 28, J Job xxxii. H.
II Isa. xxvi. 12. § Ezek. xxxix. 2!>. If Neh. ix. 20.
••Geu. vi. ;i. t+ Psalm li. 12. U Psalm li. 11.
nil Isa. Ixiii. 10. §§ Lukeiii. 16. 1[T[ John vii.;W.
••» Fsaliu. Uviii. 18.
370 THE ORDINAUY IXFLUENCK
roborate their testimony, they were enabled, in the name of the Lord Jesus, to work the most astonishing miracles. They " received power from on high, when that the Holy Ghost was come upon them, and became witnesses " of their Lord. The ^^ great salvatimi, wliich at first began to be spoken by the Lord, was thus confirmed by them that heard him : God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will." *
This extraordinary inspiration, and these miraculous powers, were conferred on the first messengers of Christ for general purposes. The design of them was to enable the Apostles and their Helpers to spread and to establish Chris- tianity among both Jews and Gentiles. The use of them was for the conviction of unbelievers, and the edification of the church. (See 1 Cor. xiv. 4, 24.) But are these general purposes, the only purposes for which the Holy Ghost has been either promised or imparted ? Is not the influence of the Spirit of God necessary to individuals for their own personal salvation ? and is it not promised, and has it not been imparted, with that design ? — Without any hesitation, we answer, Yes.
When Mr. G. has occasion to produce any of those pas- sages which relate to this subject, he has frequently hinted, that they relate to the miraculous powers conferred on the Apostles and the primitive Ministers of the Christian Church. — As it would not be deemed fair to take occasion from those hints to examine this subject, without having produced some of them, the Reader is presented with the following specimens.
" It will, perhaps, be asserted, that we do not believe in the Holy Spirit, to which Jesus and his Apostles so fre- quently laid claim." f
" It was the energy, the power, the Spirit of God im- parted to Jesus Christ and his Apostles, manifested by their performance of miracles.'" |
Speaking of the command of our Lord to his Apostles to " baptize in the name of the Father, and the Son, and
* Heb. ii. 3,4, f Vol, T. p. HI. + Vol. 1. p. 112,
OF THE irOI.Y SPIRIT. 371
the Holy Spirit,'" he says, " The Holy Spirit, or divine energy, which was exhibited in miracles^ is distinguished from the Son, as not being his own naturally inherent power, nor resident in him alone, but likewise communicated to the Apostles.'''' *
" Thus they (the writers of the New Testament) will be found to have used the term Holy Spirit, sometimes as the cause, viz. the energy, power, or breathing of God himself, — sometimes as the effect, viz. the power they possessed of working miracles in consequence of this energy or breathing of the Deity. These significations will be found consistently to explain all the jyassagcs relating to the Holy Spirit."-f-
" This Holy Ghost, this Comforter — he now declares he will send to them, and then states it to be, that they were to be ' endued with power from on high.'' This poxcer, this Comforter, this Holy Spirit did descend from on high to dwell with the Apostles, and thus the promises of God and of Jesus Christ icerc fulfilled^ \
■ And lastly : Speaking of the final clause of the Aposto- lic benediction, " the felloxcship of the Holy Ghost, be xoith you all,"" he represents the Apostle as wishing all the Corin- thians " might enjoy a participation of the miracidous pozcers, the divine influence, whicli others possessed." ||
We have quoted thus copiously from Mr. G. that the Reader may fully understand the manner in which he pre- cludes the expectation of any supernatural influence on the minds of mankind, in order to their salvation. From this statement, two things may be gathered : That the Socinians suppose, (1.) That the gift of the Holy Spirit was restricted to the first ages of Chi'istianity, the age of miracles. And (2.) That it never was given but in miraculous gifts, and for extraordinary purposes. The scriptures which are to be cited on this occasion, are therefore of two classes. The first class is of those which speak indefinitely of the gift of the Spirit, most of which do not distinguish between the mira- culous, and the saving influence ; but which imply that the Holy Spirit is, or that it may be, possessed by all real Christians. The second class are of those in which the
* Vol I. p. 13-:. i\"ol l.p. KW. :\\.l. p. lf;:5. II Vol.1, p. 172.
37^ THE ORDINARY IXFLFF-XCE
ordinary influence of the Spirit is obviously distinguished from that which is extraordinary, and which speak of that ordinary infl[uence in such a definite manner, as to indicate a benefit necessary for all men to make them either wise, or holy, or happy.
I. Of those scriptures which speak of the influence of the Holy Spirit, in such a manner as implies that it is, or that it may be, enjoyed by all real Christians.
It is rot, perhaps, very easy to ascertain to what extent the miraculous gifts were, in the Apostolic age, given to Christian believers ; but it is perfectly clear that they were not universal. That many real Christians did not possess them, is obvious from the language of St. Paul to the Church which was at Corinth. " God, (said he,) hath set ,9owc in the church ; first, apostles; secondarily, prophets; thirdly, teachers ; after that, miracles ; then, gifts of healing, helps in governments, diversities of tongues. Are all apostles ? Are all proj)hets ? Are all teachers ? Are_ all •zoorl-ers of miracles ? Have all the gifts of healing ? Do all speaJc with tongues ? Do all interpret T' * But if all real Christians did not enjoy these miraculous gifts, and yet it should appear that they did enjoy, or were called to enjoy, the influence of the Spirit, it will follow that there is an in- fluence of the Spirit which is not miracidotis : and that that influence is the common privilege of all real Christians.
1. In the following scriptures, it is obvious, that the Holy Spirit is promised to all real Christians.
(1.) " And it shall come to pass, that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh ; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions : and also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I poiir out my Spirit.'''' "f — It is true, this passage speaks of the extraordi- nary and miraculous effusion of the Spirit, and that Peter applied it to the spiritual gifts which Avere bestowed on the day of Pentecost. Acts ii. 17, 18. But it is equally true, that the prophet speaks also of the universal effusion of the ordinary influence of the Spirit. It is to the sons and
* 1 Cor. xii. 28—30. f Joel ii. 28, 29.
OF TIIK HOI.V SPTIUT. 373
daughters of Israel, he promises that some (not all) of them should jirophcsy, dream dreams, and see visions ; but he jiro- mises the effusion of the Spirit to alljlcsh, — to Gentiles as well as Jews, and to the meanest as well as to the greatest : — to the servants, and to the handmaids.
(2.) " Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be bap- tized, every one ofrjon^ in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins : and ye shall jx'ccive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall eall.'"* — Here the Apostle has explained the extent of the preceding promise, which he had taken for his text. According to liim, this inestimable gift is imparted to all who repent and are baptized in the name of Christ for [ex- pecting through him] the forgiveness of sins. And this he asserts, not only of the Jews and their children, but of " all that are afar offV' the Gentiles also : not only of that genera- tion, but of all succeeding generations, even " as many as the Lord our God shall call."
(3.) " In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying. If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scrip- ture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. But this he spake of the Spirit, which they that be- lieve on him should receive."" -j- — What our Lord has here said of living zcater, the Evangelist has explained as mean- ing " the gift of the Spirit." This Spirit our Lord has most positively promised shall be received by all wlio believe oil him ; and he has invited, indiscriminately, all who thirst for it, thus to come and receive it. Precisely of the same clia- racter, in the latter respect, is that remarkable passage : " Let him tluit is athirst, come, and xcliosoever zcill, let him take the water of life freely." X
(4.) " If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him ?"|| Again: " If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith unto thee. Give mc to drink : thou wouldest have asked of
• Acts ii. 38, 39. t Joliu vii. 37—38. ♦ Rev. xxii. 17, || Luke xi. 13.
374 THE ORDINARY INFLUENCE
him, and he would have given thee living' water.'''' * — We have just seen, in the preceding passage, that by living- water is meant " the Holy Spirit." — In these two scriptures we are assured that the Holy Spirit is given to them that asl: it ; and the argument in both is such as to warrant the applica^ tion of the promise to all that ash it. In the former, our Lord places the promise on the ground of parental aifection, and, therefore, intends to give this assurance to all in every place and age ; for God is the Father of all. In the latter, our Lord argues from his own character as the Messiah, who is anointed with the Holy Ghost without measure ; and while he takes for granted, that when that character is pro- perly known and acknowledged, the living water will be asked, he also assures us that it shall be given.
2. The followmg scriptures prove that the Holy Spirit was actually given to private Christians.
(1,) " What ! know ye not that your body is the temple of the Hoi?/ Ghost which is in you^ which ye have of God T''-\ — Here the Apostle addresses himself to all the members of the Corinthian church individually, as having received the Holy Spirit from God, and as being his ha- bitation.
(2.) " For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body ; so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all bap- tized into one body whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free ; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit." % — Here, not merely the Corinthian church, but the church universal, including both Jews and Gentiles, and all the individuals of which it is composed, whether bond or free, are positively said to be partakers of the Spirit of God.
(3.) " This only would I learn of you. Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith .^ Are ye so foolish .'' having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh .? — He therefore, that tninistereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law or by
* John iv. 10. t 1 Cur. vi. 11). + 1 Cor. xii. 12, 13.
OF THE HOLY SPiniT. 375
the hearing of faith?"* Here the Apostle speaks of the Galatians as having " received the Spirit," and makes an obvious distinction between themselves as private Chris- tians, and those Apostles Avho had ministered unto them the Spirit, and had wrought miracles among them. And to this reception of the Spirit he alludes, as having been universal, by supposing their defection from the liberty of the gospel, to be, in every case, a submission to a principle opposed to the Spirit : " Having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by thejiesh ?'"'
(4.) " There is one body and one Spirit, even as yc are called in one hope of your calling^t — Here the individual members of the Ephesian church are supposed to be the members of an universal church which is inhabited by one Spirit ; and each one is supposed individually to partici- pate that one Spirit, as the members of one body are indi- vidually actuated by one living principle, and as they were individually called by one gospel, to the hope of one glo- rious inheritance.
(5.) " For our go.spel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance ; and ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost.";): — Thus the church at Thessalo- nica also received the Holy Ghost. The latter part of the passage is added, in proof that what they received was the ordinary influence.
3. The following passages shew that the persons who are addressed indiscriminately, had experienced, or did at the time enjoy, the divine influence.
(1.) " Ye stiff'-necked, and uncircumcised in heart and cars, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost : as your fathers did, so do ye." II — So the Holy Ghost had exerted his ener- gy on the minds of these disobedient Jews, or they could not have resisted him.
(2.) " Grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby ye arc sealed unto the day of redemption."§ — The latter part
• Gdl. iii. 2— .'). tEph.iv, 1. ♦ l.Tliess. i. 5, C.
II Acts vii, 51. §E|)h. iv. 30.
376 THE ORDINARY INFLUENCE
of this passage demonstrates that the Apostle spoke, not of the miraculous influence, but of the ordinary ; and the ad- monition impHes that the private members had received that influence, for otherwise they could not grieve him.
(3.) " Quench not the Spirit."* — The Reader will re- member how John the Baptist predicted that Jesus Christ should " baptize them with the Holy Ghost and with fire." This baptism of heavenly fire the Thessalonians had receiv- ed, and were in danger oi quenching it. The allusion is to the purifying power of fire ; and, therefore, the influence of the Spirit which they had received, was that which purt- Jies ; and was not the miraculous, but the saving influ- ence.
(4.) " And hath done despite to the Spirit of grace.''-!- — This passage supposes every apostate from Christianity to have enjoyed ' the fellowship of the Spirit,' to which he has done despite.
4. There can be no propriety in the language of the following passages, only on the supposition that the gift of the Holy Ghost is the common privilege of all Christian believers.
(1.) " The communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you aliy\ — This cannot be interpreted of the miraculous pow- ers, without supposing, in contradiction to the Apostle, that " all are workers of miracles."
(2.) " Be not drunk with wine ; but be yejilled with the SjDirit; speaking to yourselves in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord ; giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. II — This passage cannot be interpreted of the extra- ordinary influence of the Holy Spirit, unless we suppose it necessary to every act of religious worship, and then it is no longer extraordinary, but common.
5. The following scriptures imply, and one of them ex- pressly asserts, that a man cannot be a Christian without receiving the Holy Spirit.
* 1 Thcss V 19. t Heb. .\. 29. + 2. Cor. xiii, 14. 1| Eph. v. 19.
or TiTF. iTor.Y si'iniT. G77
(1.) " These be llicy wlio separate iheniselves, sensual, havinor not the Spirit.""* — It will not be objected that their not having niiraculous ])o\vers is here intended ; for what has that to ilo with their being sensual ?
(2.) " So then tliey that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so he tliat the Spirit of' God dzccll in you. Noio if' aiiij i/uiu have not t/ie Spirit of' Christ, he is none of his" f — According to these two passages, every man is in thejlc.sh, or is sensual, who has not the Spirit of God dwelling in him ; and he that is in the flesh, or sensual, cannot please God. It follows that no man can be a Christian without the Spirit ; because, without it, no man can please God.
Let us now take a view of the result of this scrutiny. — We have found that the Holy Spirit was originally promised to all real Christians ; — that whole Christian societies, and the Christian church at large, did actually receive it ; — that they who refused to become Christians, and they who apos- tatized from Christianity, in so doing abused the operations of the Spirit, and that all true Christians were in danger of imitating the example of the latter ; — that the apostolic ex- hortations and benedictions were such as imply that even the fulness of the Spirit might be enjoyed by them always ; — and that no man can be a Christian without some measure of it. From these truths we argue: (1.) That since mira- culous gifts were not possessed by every real Christian, the promises of the gospel were not fulfilled, unless the Spirit were imparted to produce eft^ects which were not miraculous: But " all the promises of God are yea, and amen, in Christ Jesus ;" and therefore the Spirit was poured out in his ordi- nary and saving influence. (2.) That several of these scrip- tures cannot be interpreted of mirandous gifts without sup- posing miraculous gifts to be essential to the character of a Christian. But if this could be proved, it would equally imply that the same gifts are necessary to form the C'hristian character now. And if it be admitted that a man may now be a real Christian though he do not possess those gifts, it will follow that a man might, in primitive times, be a
* Judc v.). t Koin. viii. 'J, 10.
Db
578
THE ORDTyARY IXFLUF.XCE
Christian without tliem. And if a Christian might then be destitute of all miraculous gifts, and yet the Spirit of Christ was necessary to form the Christian, it follows that divine operations not miraculous were then, and for the same rea- son will always be, necessary. (3.) That some of these scriptures distinguish the divine influence of which they speak, from those which were miraculous. Whatever reason may be given for the effusion of miraculous powers, will not be equally a reason for the eff'usion of that which was not miraculous. But every reason which can be given for the effusion of blessings not miracidous, in the first ages, will, in all ages of the church militant, be equally valid. (4.) That whereas some of these scriptures argue that a man could not be a Christian in the Apostles' days without the Spirit of Christ, — the same argument is equally conclusive at the present period. (5.) That this observation is corro- borated by others of these scriptures which expressly assert that in all succeeding times the Holy Ghost, as it is always necessary to produce the same effects, shall be always im- parted on the same terms on which it was imparted in the days of the Apostles. (6.) That if the primitive Christian Church was intended to be a perpetual pattern in doctrine and practice, it must be equally so in its means and enjoy- ments. If the truths which were delivered to the members of that church, by the Apostles, had either a near or a dis- tant relation to the gift of the Holy Ghost, and if that gift was tlie mean by which those truths were rendered effectual to their salvation, — the same truths cannot be of the same use to us, unless they still stand in the same relation to that gift, and are rendered effectual by the same means. In like manner : if the practice of the first Christians was the result of their reception of the Holy Ghost, and had the con- tinuance and increase of that heavenly gift, and further benefits by that gift, among its principal objects and motives, — the same practice can now be produced only by the same cause, and needs still the stimulus of the same mo- tive, or it cannot be itself the same. — This subject, however, will be much better illustrated from the considerations which follow.
OF THF. ITOI.V SPllJTT. 379
II. The second class of scriptures to wlilcli we refer, is of those in which the ordlnnrij influence of the Spirit is ob- viously distinguished from tlic iwtraonUnarij ; and wiiicli speak of the ordinary influence in such a definite manner, as to indicate a benefit wliich is necessary for all men, to make ll)cm either wise, or holy, or happy.
If ignorance were truly theniotlier of devotion, if religion consisted, as some seem to suppose, in morality without piety, or in the form of Godliness without the power, in a regular enjoyment of the creatures, and not in the enjoy- ment of God, perhaps it might be possessed and practised without any illumination, assistance, encouragement, or con- solation from above. But if true religion require that we know the God whom we worship, if piety be the soul of all genuine morality, and the essence of religion, if the power as well as the form be necessary to true godliness, and if God be the proper portion of his people,— no man can be a truly good man like Barnabas, only in proportion as, like him, he is " full of the Holy Ghost." *
1. According to the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, a divine and supernatural illumination is absolutely necessary to our proper knowledge of divine and saving truth.
Not that it is necessary for every man, like the Prophets and Apostles, to receive the truth by an immediate revela- tion from heaven. " Those Holy men of God spake and wrote as they w^ere moved by the Holy Ghost." f "All (their) scriptures were given by inspiration of God.' ' + But " the vision and the prophecy are now sealed." || The Christian Church, and every individual member of it, are now to be " built on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets [only, where] Jesus Christ is the chief corner- stone." § The book of revelation is now amply sufficient for every purpose both of faith and practice, and from thence " the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly fur- nished unto every good work." ^f No man, therefore, wlio- ther in a public or a private station, has any scriptural ri^rbt to expect that the same truths shall be made known unto
•Actsxi.24. t 2 Pet. i. 21. : 2Tini. iii. Ifi.
II Dan. vii. 24. § Eph. iii. 20. f 2 Tim. iii 17
B b2
380
THE ORDINARY INFLUENCE
liim in the same manner, much less that any divine know- ledge will be communicated to him in addition to that which is given in the sacred code. Even Apollos, while immedi- ately employed in the work of the ministry, had no know- ledge of divine things but what he had received from the "scriptures," and from the instructions " in the way of the Lord which he had heard." Though he was " fervent in the Spirit," and " spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord," he knew " only the baptism of John"" in which he had been instructed, until " Aquila and Priscilla took him unto them and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly."" * This example may serve to show the arrogance of those who pretend to new revelations, and the folly of those who pay any serious attention to them. — It was necessary to make this statement for the prevention of any misconception or misrepresentation of what we have to advance. For the same reason, we shall endeavour to avoid the use of the word inspiration : not because there would be any great impropriety in the use of it ; but because we have already applied it, with the authority of Peter, to the extraordinary communications which were received by the Prophets and the Apostles.
" But if the sacred Scriptures be sufficient for the in- struction of mankind, what need can there be of a divine illumination .?" — We answer.
(1.) It is in vain that visible things are laid before a man who is perfectly blind. Yet this is precisely the natural state of the human mind. " The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God [the things revealed by the Spirit of God in the scriptures :] for they are foolishness unto him : neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. "-f* This spiritual discernment is what we want : the faculty for discerning spiritual things being disordered. A man may have eyes, by which, because they are diseased, he does not see. So mankind " have eyes and see not." That we may discern spiritual things, the Physi- cian of the human mind exhorts us to " anoint our eyes with eye-salve that we may see." — The knowledge of divine
* Acts xviii. 24—26. f 1 ^or. ii. U.
OF THE HOLY Sl'lUIT. 381
tilings is therefore attributed to a gracious operation on the human mind. " We know that the Son of God is come (says St. John) and hath given iis an widcrstandlng, tliat we may know him that is true.''* And God says, " I will give them a heart to know me." f " He that is [thus made] spiritual, disccrncth all things'' X
(2.) In vain are objects of siglit laid before the eyes of any man in perfect darkness ; for nothing can render them visible but the light " That which maketii manifest IS light." But if light be necessary to the discern- ment of natural things, spiritual light is equally neces- sary to render spiritual things discernible. As the sun is seen only by its own light, so God is known only in the light of his own Spirit. " God is light," and " in his light (only) we see light." The light of the sun displays to our eye-sight every other visible object in nature ; and nothing but the light of God can display to our minds the spiritual things which are laid before us in the book of divine revela- tion. It is thus, and only thus, we see, like Moses, " him that is invisible." Not that the use of our rational, or intel- lectual powers, is thereby superseded, any more than the use of our eyes is superseded by the light of day. But rea- son enlightened from above, and properly exerted, produces the " faith (which) is the substance of things hoped for, and the evidence of things not seen."— This divine illumination is uniformly attriliuted to a divine influence. Hence the Apostle prayed in behalf of the Ephesians, that they might " receive the Spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knmdedge of him ; that the eyes of their nnierstanding being etdighi- cned, they might know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the .saints."j| By this twofold operation of the Spirit, and not other- wise, we are enablexl properly xo know the things of God. AVe say properly, because tli6re is what is ealhd knon^9dge, which may be attained {perhaps) without it. A Juan blind from his birth, may by oral instruction be made so far ac- (piainted with the theory of light and colours, a» even to be able to teach others ; -but-he will have no proper knowledge
* 1 Johu V. 20. t Jer,xxiv. 7. * 1 Cor. ii. 15; || Ejili.^. 17, 18
U b 3
382 THE ORDINARY INFLUENCE
of them. His knowledge is a mere artificial arrangement of Avords without ideas : or at least without the proper ideas. He can speak readily of the source, the properties, and the uses, of light : and can discourse of the comparative beauty of colours, without any conception of the true meaning of his borrowed words. His knowledge of the subject of his spe- culations, is, however, such as is convertible to no proper practical use. It cannot preserve him from the dangerous precipice, or guide him to his proper home. — Precisely such is all the knowledge of divine things which a man may have from any source of oral instruction, until God " open his eyes, and turn him from darkness to light." It is a mere artificial arrangement of words without appropriate ideas ; a speculation of no more real use than the theory of light and colours to the blind. It is not that " knowledge of the only true God, and of Jesus Christ whom he has sent, which is life eternal."
" The ffod of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." * — " The veil is upon their heart. But when it (that veiled heart) shall turn unto the Lord, the veil shall be taken away. Now the Lord is that Spirit [Avhich taketh away the veil:] and where the Spirit of' the Lord is, there is liberty" -^ to behold " the light of the glorious gospel of Christ." Then " God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, shineth in our hearts, to give the light of the l:?iowledge of' the glory of God, in the face of Jesus Christ :"]: and then, " we all with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lor d^^
These important truths will receive further confirmation from the following scriptural arguments.
(1.) The Apostles received their verbal instructions from the best of Teachers, who " spake as never man spake." The lessons which they received from him, were the most intelligible that, under existing circumstances, could be devised. The matter of them was adapted to the state of
* 2 Ccv. iv. 2. t (-'Ji'' iii- 17. +2 Cor. iv. 6. . || 2 Cor. iii. 18.
OF TllK 1101. V sl'IltlT. 383
their minds : for he " spake the word unto them as they were able to bear it f and the terms in which they were dic- tated were appropriate and famihar. He answered all their questions, obviated their difficulties, and replied to the doubts which they did not dare to utter. But notwithstanding tiie unparalleled propriety with which he taught them., it was necessary that they should be divinely illimiinated to under- stand his meaning. " These things have I spoken unto you, (said he) being yet present with you. But the Com- forter, (which is) the Holy Ghost, whom tlie Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, (and bring all things to your remembrance,) whatsoever I have said unto you." * — ^At another time, " he said unto them. These are the words which I spake unto you, wliile I was yet witli you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me." But they had not understood the things which he had said unto them, while he was yet Avith them. ** Then (therefore) opened he their imderstanding-, that they might understand the scriptures." — If then, the Apostles needed that Jesus Christ should " open their tinderstand'ing, that they might understand the scj-'iptiires,'''' and that the Fa- ther should send "the Holy Ghost to teach them all things whatsoever the Son had said unto them ;" — what arrogance is it for a Socinian to profess to teach his folio vvers in such ti manner, that they shall need neither that Christ should open their understanding, nor that the Holy Ghost should illumi- nate their mind !
(2.) " No man hath seen God at any time. The only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he hatli declared him." " If ye had known me, (said Jesus,) ye should have known my Father also." -f" " But as no one knoweth the Father save the Son, so no one knoweth the Son but the Father." I '< No man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost." || When " Simon Peter" said, " Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God, — Je.sus answered, and said unto him, Blessed art thou Simon I^u-- jona, for flesh and blood hath not revealetl it luilo thee, but
* Johu xiv. 2j, 2(i. f '^jl*" *-'^- ' • t -^la"- >^«- 2/'. II 1 (-«•'• J^i'- ^-
oSi THE ORDIXAUV IXFLUEXCE
my Father which is in heaven." * Wliat our Lord said to his disciples, is therefore equally applicable to every other human being : " I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you (my church) for ever; even the Spirit of'truth; whom the world cannot receive [not because the Father is unwilling to send him, but] because it seeth him not, neither knoweth [acknowledgeth] him. — I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you [m the Sph'it.] — Yet a litttle while, and the world [which cannot receive the Spirit of truth] seeth me no more ; but ye see me (for I am still with you by tlie Spirit of truth :) because I live and ye shall live also. At that day [when the Spirit of truth is come,] ye shall know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you. He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me : and he that loveth me [whether he be an Apostle or a private Christian, of the first or of the nineteenth century,] shall be loved of my Father ; and I will love him, and will manifest myself to Mm.'''' — The Socinians do not need to exclaim, ' Impossible !' for one, not a regularly accredited member of their corps, has prevented them. " Judas said unto him, (not Iscariot,) Lord, hoto is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world .'' Jesus ansv/ered, and said unto him. If a man [at any time, or in any part of the world] love me, he will keep my words : and My Father will love him, and we will come unto him [by the Spirit which ' shall be in you,'] and make our abode with him." -f-
(3.) Hence the Apostle John, addressing his general epistle to the private members of the Christian Church, some of whom were mere " hahes in Christ^'' says, " Little children, it is the last time : and as ye have heard that an- tichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists. JBut ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know aiil things [which are essential to Christianity, and con- nected with your v/elfare.] I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth. Who is a liar, but he that de-
* Matt. xvi. IC, 17. f John xiv. 1(5.— 23.
OF THE 1101. Y SIM KIT.
1385
nieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that deni- ctli the Fattier and the Son. Whosoever dcnieth the Son^ tlie same liath not the Father. Let that therefore abide in you which ye have heard [by verbal instruction] from the beginning, [and wliich ye kmnv by the anointing which ye Jiave from tlie Holy One]. — These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you." As to the truth concerning tlie Father and the S(m, from which those seducers wish to draw you aside, I need not write to you. " But tlie anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, [giving you the proper knowledge of those things ' which ye have lieard from the beginning,'] and ye need not that any man teach you [those things]. — But, as the same anointing [still] teacheth you of all [the] things [which ye liave heard from the beginning], and is truth, and is no lie, [is a true anointing from the Holy One, and leadeth you into the knowledge of the truth], and [teacheth] even as it hath taught you, [I trust] ye shall [still] abide in him." • The argument thus deduced from scripture is equally as conclusive with respect to the modern Christian world, as with respect to the primitive Christian church. Now, as in the beginning, " no one knoweth the things of God, but the Spirit of G<^d, and he to whom tltc Sjnr'it of God has revealed them." When the Socinians undertake to prove the contrary, they are called to prove, either — that there is now an essential difference in the faculties of the human mind, — that there is some method of obtaining the know- ledge of spiritual things, on which the scriptures are silent, •^or, that the same knowledge is hot now necessary for the same purposes. AVe have learned from themselves not to be surprised if any of them should venture to rmdertalcc such a task ; but the aecomplishment of it would be ranked among the greatest achievements of this adventurous age. The conqueror of this diiticulty will be the man to prove to die world, either — that eyos and light are not noxc neces- sary to vision, — or that the most important affairs of human life may noxc be transacted as well without it.
2„ According to the sacred .scriptures, the influence of the Spirit of God is neccssai'y to make mankind holy.
386 THE ORDINARY INFLUENCE
We shall not need to review the scriptural arguments by which it has been already proved, that the hearts of man- kind are morally diseased. The fact, sufficiently glaring in itself, we shall here take for granted. The question now is, By what means is this moral disorder to be counteracted and cured.'' — Without disregarding or underrating any mean which God has seen good to provide or to enjoin, Ave reply, " By the influence of the Holy Spirit." This is, perhaps, the true reason that the epithet holy, is so much more frequently applied to tlie Spirit, than to the Father or the Son : not because he is more holy than they ; but because he is the immediate author of our purification, — *' the Spirit of Holiness ^
That the ordinary operations of the Spirit are such as to destroy the constitutional freedom of the human mind, suspend its volitions, irresistibly direct its choice, or super- sede the necessity of human exertions, is no part of our creed. We are not disposed to make an unprovoked at- tack on those who on this subject may see reason to differ from us ; but we deem it necessary to guard the truth against those objections which are frequently taken from an hypothesis to which we cannot subscribe. As we cannot vindicate the doctrine of irresistible grace, we must avoid meeting an antagonist on that ground, by denying it. We do not conceive of the agency of the Spirit as of a mecha- nical motion, a chymical operation, or a magical charm; but as of the agency of one intelligent and free Being \q50n another being who is also intelligent and free. We there- fore no more suppose that the influence of the Spirit of ho- liness does violence to the human will, than that Satan, by his temptations, forces men to sin. In every thing in which man is accountable, we conceive he remains a moral agent ; or there could be no moral turpitude in his sin, or moral rectitude in his services. With the sacred writers, we sup- pose that the grace of God may possibly be received in vain, that the Holy Ghost may be resisted, may be grieved, or may even be quenched ; and that some have done des- pite to the Spirit of Grace.
OF Till', HOLY bl'IlilT. 387
This being premised, we proceed to examine whether, according to the scriptures, all the hohness and righteous- ness of human nature be not imputed to the influence of the IIolv Spirit.
(1.) Tlie first step whicli a sinner can take towards ho- hness, is repentance. — It will not be denied that repentance is sorrow for sin, producing sincere desires and strong re^io- lutions to amend : — a steadfast purpose to " cease to do evil, and learn to do well." That this is an act of the hu- man will, is undeniable. Hence " GoAcommandcth all men every where to repent.""* On the other hand, however, it is the gift of God. " Him hath God exalted with his right hand, to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins."-!* When, therefore, the Apostles heard of the conversion of Cornelius and his house, " they glorified God, saying. Then hath God also to the Gentiles gj-antccl repentance unto life.";!: — Had it been said that Jesus Christ came into the tcorld to give repentance, tlie Socinians could have given the subject an easy turn, by stating that Jesus Christ came to preach the doctrine of repentance. But the case before us is a little different from this. That Jesus Christ " came to call sinners to repentance^'' is a great truth ; but it is equally a truth that he is '■^exalted to giz'C repentance r In what sense, then, is that repentance given ?
Before a sinner can properly repent, he must know himself to be a sinner in the sight of God : — he must be convinced that in God's account " sin is exceeding sin- ful J" — he must be deeply impressed with the thought, that " the end of these things is death." But these are amonjr those spiritual truths, the proper, practical knowledge of which, we have already seen, can be received only in the light of the Spirit of God. Hence, Jesus Christ, when he promised to send the Comforter to his disciples, said "^Vhen he is come, he will reprove (or convince) the would of sin, and of righteousness, andof judgment."||
(2.) The next step which a sinner nuist take in order t(» his salvation is, to come to Christ. — Hence our Lord, ad- •Actsxvii.aO. t AcU v. 31. ;.\tlbxi. ly. IIJoliuwi. «.
388 THE ORDINARY INFLUENCE
dressing himself to penitent sinners, says " Come unto mc, all ye that labour, and are heavy-laden, and I will give you rest."* But has he not said also, " No man can come to me, except the Father who hath sent me draw him ?""-(- Now, in order to draw us to the Son, the Son must be re- vealed to us : revealed to us in the attractive charms of his benevolent character, as the Friend and Saviour of mankind, who " receiveth sinners."" The Father, therefore, reveals the Son. " It pleased God (says St. Paul,) who called me by his grace, to reveal his Son in me.""! For this purpose he must ^^ give to the sinner an understanding io know him that is true."|| The Father must give to him the Spirit of truth whereby Christ has promised to manifest himself to him, that he may see him whom the world cannot see. Com- pare John xiv. 16, 19, 21, &c. — To come to Christ, is " practically to believe on him." " He that cometh to me, shall never hunger ; (says he) and he that helievetJi on me shall never thirst.'"§ But this faith is the gift of God. " To you it \s gi-c en io believe on him."^ And it is given by a divine operation, and is therefore called, " a faith of the operation of God^**
(3.) The immediate object of a sinner's coming to Jesus Christ, is, that through him he may come to the Father. " He is able to save them to the uttermost that come to God by him.''''-|-t " I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father but by me.""jj — Wc have just seen that " to come to Christ," is to believe in him. But a sinner believes in Christ, that he may believe in God. He trusts in the redeeming love of the iSo7i, that he may trust in the pardoning love of the Father. " If ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons j udgeth accord- ing to every man''s work, pass the time of your sojourning in fear ; for as much as ye know that ye were redeemed Avith the precious blood of Christ, who was manifest in these last times for you, Avho by him do believe in God that raised him up from the dead and gave him glory, that your Jaith and
* Matt. xii. 28. f John vi. 44. J Gal. i. 15, IG. || 1. John v. 20.
§ John vi. 35. ^ Phil. i. 29. ** Col. ii. 12. ff Hcb. vii. 25.
XX John xiv. 6,
OV THE irOT.V SPiniT. i3S()
ftopc mioht be in G(xl.^'* Here llion we are to consider, [1.] that the Father is revealed to us in tlie Son, by the Spirit. " At tliat day,'" says our Lord, [when the Com- forter, the Spirit of truth is come, that he may abide v> ith you for ever] ye shall know that I am in my J'ather, and you in me, and I in you :""-f- — [2.] that this is involved in our coming to the Father by him, and that they are con- nected by our Lord, if not iilentified. " No man (says he) Cometh unto the Father but by me. If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also; and from hence- forth ye know him and have seen him:""| — [3.] that a sinner is encou ranged to come to the Father by beholding him in the Son, and to depend on liis forgiving love by kriowing the redeeming love of the Saviour. — All this is compre- hended in one sentence by the Apostle, who says, "Through him we have an access by one Spirit unto the Father."]!
(4.) The result of a sinner's coming to God by Jesus Christ is his irgenn-ation. Hence the Apostle Peter, hav- ing addressed the Christians of his time, as " through Christ believing in God, who raised him from the dead, and gave him glory, that their faith and hope might be in God, ' — subjoins : " seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit, — being horii again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever."'§ So the Evangelist John states, that to "as many as received him ('the Word of God,' who, ' full of grace and truth,' hath ' declared the Father ;"*) to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name : which were born, (not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but) ofGotV^
From the language of St. Peter, it is obvious that, in his opinion, to be born again is synonimous with " having purified our souls." — In the conversation of our Lord witli Nicodemus, the same idea is couched under similar terms. Jesus said unto him. Verily, Verily, I say unto thee, Ex- cept a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be
• 1. Pet. j. 17—2!. t Compare John xiv. 16—20. ♦ John xiv. rt, ;. II EiJh. ii. \i. § I. Tei. i. 22, 26. ^ John i. 1, 12—11, \K.
390 THE ORDIXARY INFLUEKCK
born when he is old ? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb, and be born ? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh, is flesh ; and that which is born of the Spirit, is spirit."* — From this passage we gather, [1.] That the new birth is a necessary preparation for a man's entrance into the kingdom of God. [2.] That it is a preparation necessary for every one born of a woman. [3.] That it is a change which our Lord here calls being made Spirit, in opposition to that which is born of the Jlesh, and isjlesh. — These phrases we interpret as re- lating to the moral disposition of the mind. To he Jlesh, in scriptural language, is to be carnally-minded : — to be spirit is to be spiritually-minded. In this sense, the Apostle Paul uses these and similar terms, as in the following passage : " They that are after thejlesh, do mind the things of the ^ficsh ; but they that are after the Spi?'it, the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally-mindedi?, death ; but to be spiri- tually-minded is life and peace. Because the car-nal mind is enmity against God ; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be."" It therefore renders a man unfit for the kingdom of God. " So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in thejlesh, but in the Spirit.'"'];
But whatever be the nature of the new birth, it is obvi- ous that the Spirit of God is the eflicient cause of it. Thus our Lord says, " Except a man be born of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." — " That ^vhich is born of the Spirit, is spirit." — " So is every one that is born of the Spirit.''''l St. Peter bears testimony to the same important truth, when he says, that the believers to whom he wrote, had purified their souls by obeying' the truth, and thus were born of incorruptible seed, by the word of God ; for he observes that they had obeyed the truth " through the Spirit:'\\
The idea which we have of a birth is that of an intro- duction to natural life ; to be born again, or to be born of the Spirit, is, therefore, " to be introduced into spiritual life." * .Tohn iii. 3, 6. f Rom. viii. 5—9. + John iii. 5, 6, 8. || 1 . Pet. i. 22.
OF THE IIOT.V SPTUIT. 391
" To be ftpinfunUi/-m'nidcd is rifl'.""* To bcoin to be splrl- tually-minled, is therefore to begin to live. Henec St. Peter, addressinof liimself to those of whom lie sjieaks as " born again/' exhorts them, "As nac-born babes desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby." The sacred writers, therefore, speak of the same subject under the idea of a spiritual resurrection. " Even when we are dead in sins, he hath quickened us together with Christ."-!- " And you, being dead in your sins, hath he quickened to- gether with him. "I liut this resurrection is effected by the Spirit. " It is the Spirit that quickeneth.]] — If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ be in you, the body is dead, because of sin ; but the spirit is life, [lives] because of righteousness.§ If we live in [or by] the Spirit, (says St. Paul to the Galatians) let us also walk in [or by] the Spirit."^
As regeneration is the beginning of spiritual life, that life is a tiera life. " We are buried with Christ by baptism into death ; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead, by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life."** But this renewal of life, in re- generation, is effected by the Holy Spirit: " He saved us (says St. Paul) by the washing of regeneration, and renew- ing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour."-f"f-
As they who are born of woman, are born in the like- ness of their parents, so they who are born of God, are born in his image. " That which is born of thejlesh, '\9,Jlesh ; and that which is born of the Spirit, is Spirit.'''' It is there- fore observed by the Apostle John, that " if ye know that lie is righteous, ye know that every one which doeth righteousness [who is righteous] is born of him."''':];| To be reneiced in the spirit of'one''s mind, is " to put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and trua holiness.'"|||| This moral image of God, in which we arc renewed, is attributed to the agency of the Spirit. " We
• Rom. viii.fi. fEph. ii.5. J Col. ii. 1.?. |1 John vi. 2.'?.
§ Rom. vii 9. 13. ^j Gal. v. 2.^). •«Rom.vi.4.
tt Tit. iii. ."i, (i. :: 1 John ii. 2y. |11| Eph. iv.2;;,24.
392 THE ORDINARY INFI.UEXCE
all with open face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of' the Lord.""
In these passages it is observable, that in whatever point of light the scriptures view the change of a sinner's heart, whether in its nature, or in its effects, whether the allusion / to human generation be preserved, laid aside, or exchanged
for some other mean of elucidation, — they uniformly attri- bute it to the Spirit of God.
(5.) From the time that this change takes place, the Holy Spirit condescends to inhabit the heart which is thus renewed. This is the substance of what our Lord graciously promised to his disciples. The Comforter, said he, " is with you, and shall be i?i you."* This promise was fulfilled even in private Christians. " They that are in the flesh cannot please God (says St. Paul) ; but ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell ^ in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ he is
none of his."""!- Every real Christian (and such is every regenerate person) has therefore the Spirit of God within him. Hence St. Paul, addressing the Corinthians, speaks on this subject with the utmost confidence, and in a manner that admits of no exception: "What! knowye not that your body is the ternjyle of the Holy Ghost which is in ?/o?/, which ye have of God fl And again: "Knowye not that ye are the temjjle of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you T'\ The same Apostle has another passage which re- quires an application only to private Christians, and extends to all succeeding ages. " Through him [Christ] we both [Jews and Gentiles] have an access by one Spirit unto the Father. Now, therefore, ye [Gentiles] are no more stran- gers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God ; and are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone ; in whom all the building, fitly framed together, groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord : in whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God
* John xiv. 17. t Rom. viii. 8, y. +1 Cor. vi. 19.
11 1 Cor. iii. 16.
OF THE MOI.Y bPlKlT. ^593
ilirough the Spirit."* — In this passage the Reader will per- ceive, [1.] That a distinction is made between the apostles and prophets on the one part, and the private Christians who are builded on them, on the other part, [i^.] That Jews and Gentiles are included : the former as built upon the prophets ; the latter upon the apostles. [3.] That all these ai-e said to be " an habitation of God through the Spirit." [3.] And that this habitation of God is said to *' ^rorc unto an holtj temple \n the Lord :'"' an expression ■which at once implies a continual accession of menibers to the Christian church, which still continues to be the habita- tion of God, and that it is always sanctified by his immedi- •atc presence.
(6.) This leads us to observe, that to the indwelling 'Spirit the saiictijication of the saints, whether initial, or complete, is uniformly attributed. It is this, according to the passage which we have just now examined, that makes the " habitation of God" " grow into a holy temple in the Lord." With this the scriptures in general accord. " Such (says St. Paul, to the Corinthians) were some of you : but ye are Avaslicd, but ye are sanctified, but ye arc justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.'''-f To the Thessalonians he writes, " God hath from the be- ginning chosen you to salvation through sanctijication of the Spirit, and belief of the truth."''^ And to the Romans he speaks of himself as " the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy G/*05<."|| — It is true, indeed, that the Holy Spirit uses subordinate means for our sanctification. Hence the Corintliians are exhorted to " cleanse themselves from aU Jilthiness of the flesh and Spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God." But it is equally true that this exhortation is founded on the promises of God. " Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves," &c.§ Now one of the promises to which St. Paul alludes, according to the preceding chapter, is, " Ye arc the temple of
•Epli. ii. 18— -Ji. t 1 Cor. vi. 11 . t 2 Thci,>. ii. lo.
II Rom. XV. 16. § 2 Cor. mi. I.
C C
t394< THE OIIDINAKY INFLUENCE
the living God ; as God hath said, I will dtoell in them and walk in them."*
(7.) From the sanctification, which, in all its various stages, is the effect of our being an habitation of God through the Spirit, all holy and acceptable obedience flows. " A good man out of [this] good treasure of his heart, bringeth forth good things." " The tree is (hereby) made good, and consequently produces good fruit.^f The apos- tle Peter, therefore, speaks of his believing brethren in the Lord as being " elect, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of' the Spirit unto ohedience?'\ — For thiij i-eason. Christian obedience is, by that Apostle, attributed in the very same chapter, to the same Spirit. " Ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth hhrough the Spirit."]] — But this subject requires a more extended investigation.
[1.] The first thing requisite to all holy obedience is the knozdedge of our duty. Hence St. Paul prayed for the Co- lossians that they " might be filled with the knowledge of the willoi God, in all wisdom, and spiritual understanding; that they might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work."§ — It is certain, indeed, that God has declared his will by his holy law. It is equally certain, that God sees it necessary, and that he has graciously promised, to " put his law into our mind,"^ or understanding. This he does by his Spirit. " Ye are ma- nifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God: not in tables of stone, but in fleshly tables of, the heart."** — In other words : It is necessary that God shoul4 ^' guide us with his counsel, and afterwards receive us tp glory."-|*-|* And for this purpose " his Spirit is good, and leads into the land of uprightness. "j| This guidance qf' the Spirit is granted to all his children ; for " as many as are ledhj the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God."|]||
[2.] The next thing essential to holy obedience, is a
disposition to do the will of God. " Incline my heart unto
* 2 Cor. vi. K;. t Matt. xii. 33, 35. * 1 Pet. i. 2, || 1 Pet. i. 22,
§ Col. i. 10. 'il Hel). viii. 10. ** 2 Cor. iii. .3.
ft Psaliu Ixxiii. 21. t+ Psalm cxliii. 10. |||| Rom. viii, U.
or THE HOLY SPIRIT. 395
thy testimonies;, (said David) and not to covctousness."* St. Paul jiravod tliat the Philippians might " approve things tliat are excellent ; that they might be sincere and without offence till the day of Christ, being filled with the fruits of righteousness."'!' For this purpose he informs them, " it is God, which worketh in you both to xcill and to do of his good pleasure.""! And for this purpose God promises not only to " put his law in our mind,''' that we may know it, but to write it on our /zmr/,'"|| that we may love it. — But this is effected by the Spirit : for as " the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, the Spirit lusteth [desireth] against the flesh : and these are contrary the one to the other ; so that fjirt CTowTi, ye Tnai/ not do the things that ye [otherwise] would-''^
[3.] It is also necessary to actual obedience, that we be strcngiheucd to do the will of God.— ^" Without me" says Jesus Christ, " ?/^ can do 7?o^/«;?^.""^ — But, on the other hand, " / can do all things^'' said St. Paul, " through Christ which strengtheneth me.""** It is by the Spirit, however, that Jesus Christ strenfftheneth his followers. " Likewise the Spirit also fielpeth our injlrmitics.''''-ff For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, that he would grant unto you to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man.":|::J:
In this way the promise of God to his people by the prophet Ezckiel, is fulfilled. " Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean : from all your filthi- ness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new lieart also will I give you, and a new Spirit will I put within you ; and I Avill take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause 7/ou to walkin my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.""!}!!
If we inquire into the source of every grace which forms the Christian character, we shall find that they all take their rise from these combinations of his various influence.
• Psalm cxix. .%•. f I'J'il- '• I". '•• : Pliil. ii. l-"?. 1| Hcb. >ii. ll».
§ Gal.v. \7. «; .John xv.5. •• Phil. iv. l.{.
ft Roui. vii. 26. :: EpU. iii. U, 16. || il Ezck.xxxvi. 2b,— 27 cc2
396 TH£ OUBlMAllY INFLUENCE
Thus PIETY, MORALITY, and VIRTUE, owc to him their very existence.
[1.] The Holy Spirit is the source of all genuine piety. — ^What is piety, but sincere and supreme love to God ? *' This is the first and great commandment : Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind."*
But love to God is one of God's greatest gifts. " The L,ORD directs ow- hearts into the love of God."-!* He has therefore graciously promised, that he will " circumcise our heart, to love the Lord our God with all our heart, and with all our soul, that we may live.":|: This great gift, God bestows by the operation of his Holy Spirit. " God hath not given us the Spirit of fear ; but of power, of love, and of a sound mind :''''\\ i. e. the Spirit by which power, and love, and sobriety are given to us, or wrought in us. — " I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, that he would grant unto you to be strengthened by his Spirit's might in the inner man, that Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith, that ye being rooted and grounded in love," &:c.§ — Again : " Who declared unto us your love in the Spirit.'"^ ^
[2.] The Holy Spirit is the source of all genuine morality. — If lo\'e to God be the soul of piety, love to mankind is the soul of sincerity, veracity, fidelity, equity, mercy, benevolence, and beneficence to man. " If there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely. Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour : therefore love is the fulfilling of the law."** But this commandment is obeyed only by the aid of the Holy Spirit. " Seeing ye have pu- rified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit, unto wifeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently .-|"|- And as love to our neighbour is the effect of the influence of the Spirit, so all veracity, justice, and benevolence, which are the insepara- ble companions of love, spring from the same source : " for
* MaM. xxii. ;57, .iB. f 2 Tlicss. iii. 5. t Deut. xxx. (j. || 2 Tim. i. ". ^ Kph. iii. 11— ir. «!('ol, i,«. «»Rom.xiii.!>, 10. ttirct,i.22.
OV THE HOT.Y SPIRIT. *i9T
the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness, and righteousness, and truth."*
[3.] The Holv Spirit is the source of all virtue. — Tem- perance, sobriety, chastity, deadness to the world and to all the means of sensual gratification which it affords, with the subjugation of every opposite passion, are the virtues of a Christian. " Risen vith Christ,'' he is called to " Seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on tlie right hand of God," — to " set his affection on things above, not on things on the earth," — and to " mortify his members which are upon the earth ; fornication, uncleanness, inordi- nate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry.^f But " the works of the flesh, which are these, adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like, — are diametrically opposite to these virtues."":): " They (therefore) who are Christ's have crucified the flesh, with the affections and lusts," || by *' walking in the Spirit, that they may not fulfil the lusts of the flesh."'''§ " Through the Spirit they mortify the deeds of the body that they may live."^
In a word : As " the grace of God, which bringeth sal- vation, teacheth all men,, that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, they should live soberly and righteously and godly in this present world," — all these are produced by the Spirit of God. " The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace,, [the graces of piety] long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, zjisis, fidelity, [the duties of morality] meekness, temper- ance" [the government of our mental passions, and of our bodily appetites, or personal virtue].
3. The influence of the Spirit is necessary toihc fif/ppi- ness of a Christian.
It perhaps will not be denied that every truly good niau is a happij man ; or that he who is a Christian in heart and deportment, enjoys the proper comforts of Christianity. Our Lord has pronounced every stage of true religion
*Eph. V. 9. t toli'i- ',2, J. ♦ Oal. v. 19— 'Jl.
II Gal. T. 24. § Ciil. V. 1(). * Horn. viiL l.'l.
C . 3
398 THE OnBINARY INFLUENCE
blessed, or happy : not excepting that of " the poor in spi- rit," of the " mournful," of those that " hunger and thirst after righteousness," or of those who are " persecuted for righteousness sake." And God has decreed, that the ways of wisdom " are ways of pleasantness, that all her paths are peace : and that happy is every one that retaineth her."*— But all the happiness of religion proceeds from the Comforter ; and depends on our " walking in the COMFORT of the Holy GHosT."-f-
(1.) The fiist and most essential ingredient in real happiness is inward peace. Not that insensibility, careless- ness, and ease, which characterize those who sleep secure upon the verge of hell, and who say to themselves, "Peace, peace, when there is no peace ;" but the calm tranquillity of a mind perfectly awake to its real situation : " the peace of God which passeth all understanding, keeping the heart and mind through Christ Jesus.""| Of this inward serenity, every true follower of Christ is, in a greater or less measure, a partaker. " Being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Chi'ist." || " Peace," said Jesus Christ to his disciples, " I leave with you, my peace I give unto you ; not as the world giveth, [deceitful, scanty, unstable,] give I unto you.'"§
This peace, we have already seen, is one of the fruits of the Spirit. And what but the Spirit could communicate it ? The deceiver of mankind may administer opiates to a guilty conscience, and sing the syren song to an unawakened sinner whom he rocks in the cradle of carnal security, — or the sinner may say to himself, " I shall have peace, though I walk after the imagination of my heart, adding drunken- ness to thirst ;"" — none however can calm his yet awakened conscience, but he that says to the raging waves of the sea, " Be still ! and there is a great calm." None but he can enable us to look God in the face, and to take a view of
That undiscovered country, from whose bourne No traveller returns,
and yet to sing, " O Lord, I will praise thee, though thou wast angry with me, thine anger is turned av/ay, and thou
* Prov. ili. 17. fActsix. 31. + Phil. iv. 7. 1| Rom. v. 1. § John xiv. 27,
OK TTiE iror.Y snuTT. 399
comfortcst me." * Nothing could produce this, but wh.at tlie xVpostle calls, the love of God [the pardoning, paternal love of God] shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given to us/'-f*
(2.) But Christianity affords not merely a negative con- solation ; it \% inW oi j^os'it roe and i^resent enjoyment. All the wicked are " without God in the world." To return to their duty, is to " return unto the Lord," — to " draw nigli unto God," — to " seek the Lord while he may be found."" — But this return to their duty is followed by a restoration to felicity. " Return unto me, and I will return unto you, saith the Lord of hosts.| — Draw nigh unto God, and he will draw nigh unto you.|| — Ye shall seek me, and find me when ye shall search for me with all your heart." § This done, they say witli the Psalmist, " The Lord is the portion of mine inheritance, and of my cup.^ — Whom have I in heaven but thee ? and there is none upon earth that I desire beside thee." **
■ In possession of such a portion, a Christian is unspeaka- bly happy.
When God is mine and I am his.
Of paradise possest, I taste unutterable bliss.
And everlasting rest.
He "joys in God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom he has now received the reconciliation.^f He cannot, however, rejoice in God unless he know that. God is his, — that he is graciously xv'ith him, and in him. And how does he know this .-' As the Shechinah was the symbol of the presence of God in his holy temple, Avhen he dwells in men by his Holy Spirit, he by that Spirit certifies them of his presence, and reveals his glory. " Hereby, (says St. John) we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us."":}:+ " I will pray the Father, (said our Lord) and he shall give you another Comforter, even the Spirit of truth : — he shall be in you. — At that day ye shall
• Isa. xii. 1. t Rom. v. h. J Mai. iii. 7.
II Jaines iv. 8. § .Jcr. xxix. l."]. II Psalm xvi. .">.
*• l'sa»Qilxxiii.2r>. ft l^"""- v. H. JJ I .John iii. 2 1-
400 THE ORDINARY INFLUENCE
know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in
you." *
(3.) Religion has its hopes, as well as its enjoyments. — The Christian's hope is full of immortality: being "as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, entering into that within the veil, whither the fore-runner is for us entered."-|* It is a, hope of future glory. He is " begotten again to a lively hope of an inheritance, incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for him."";!: But the Spirit of God is the source of this hope. Hence that prayer of the Apostle : " Now the God of hope fill you with all joy, and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost." ||
The more closely we examine this subject, the more rea- son we shall see to attribute the Christian hope to the Holy Spirit.
[1.] The first thing necessary to the hope of glory, is a knowledge of the nature and value of that glory. But this knowledge is given by the illuminating Spirit. " I cease not,"" says St. Paul to the Ephesians, " to make mention of you in my prayers; that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the Spirit of wis- dom and revelation in the knowledge of him : the eyes of your understanding being enlightened ; that ye may know what is the hope of your calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints."§
[2.] We cannot reasonably hope to participate this inhe- ritance, unless we be assured of our title to it. As an inheritance, it is held in reversion for those who are children and heirs. How then does a man ascertain that he is " no more a servant, but a son ; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ .^" ^ If the scriptural account be just, Ave receive this assurance from the Spirit. " God sends forth the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father."** And when we have received, not the Spirit of bondage unto fear, but the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father, — the self-same Spirit, avro to wvey/Aa,
* John xiv. 16—20. t Heh. vi. 19, 20. + 1 Pet. i. .3,4. || Rom. xv. 13. § Ei)h, i. 16—18. «; Gal. iv. 7, *« Cal. iv. 6.
OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. 401
beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God : and if children, then heirs ; heirs of God, and joint- heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together."*
[3.] Whether a pledge and foretaste of future glory is, or is not, essential to the hope of it, it is a benefit which God bestows to increase the earnestness of a man's desire for it, and to confirm his expectation. Such therefore is the blessing which is enjoyed by a Christian, and such are its effects. But this also is of the operation of the Spirit of God. " We know that if our earthly house of this taber- nacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this we groan, earnestlv desiring to be clothed upon w ith our house which is from heaven — that mortality might be swallowed up of life. Now he that hath wrought us for the self-same thing, is God, who also hath given us the earnest of the Spirit. Therefore Ave are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord ; we are confident, I sav, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord." -j* Hence St. Paul says to the Ephesians, " We (Jews) should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ, in whom ye (Gentiles) also (trusted), after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation : in whom also, after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of pro- mise, [that Holy Spirit which was promised,] which is the earnest of our inheritance, until the redemption of the pur- chased possession, unto the praise of his glory." He there- fore, who can say with the Psalmist, " Whom have I in hea- ven but thee ? and there is none upon earth that I desire beside thee," — can subjoin with him, " My heart and my flesh failcth, but God is the strength of my heart, and my portion J()r ever."
(4.) Not only the Jruition, but the hope of a Christian is a source of joy. — " We rejoice," savs St Paul, " in hope of the glory of God.";]: — He exhorts the Romans to be " rejoicing in hope."|| — St. Peter addresses the scattere<l
* Rom.viii. 1". t2ror. v. 1— «. J Roiu. v. 2. || Rom. xii. 12.
THE. ORDINARY INFLUENCE
Strangers, as " begotten again unto a lively hope to an in- heritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, — wherein," he says, "ye greatly rejoice."* — This joy in connection with the joy of present fruition, he represents as unutterable and glorious. " That the trial of your faith, — might be found unto praise, and honour, and glory, at the ap- pearing of Jesus Christ : whom having not seen, ye love ; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable, and full of glory ."f But whether the religious joy of a Christian be common or extraordinary, the joy of hope or of fruition, it is the gift of God by the Holy Spirit : and to that Spirit it is uniformly attributed. " The fruit of the Spirit (we have already seen) is joy," &c.:|: " Ye became followers of us and of the Lord (says St> Paul, to the Thessalonians,) having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost." || And this joy is one of the essential branches of Christianity; for "the kingdom of God is not meat and drink, but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Gho3t.'"§
To give the Header a clue to the doctrine of divine in- fluence, to guide him through the intricacies of the multi- plied passages which we have quoted, and to shew that in every gradation of religion, the work of human salvation is " begun, continued, and ended" in the Holy Spirit, — we have divided our subject into three distinct heads, under which the different texts are arranged. It must not be sup- posed that the divine operations are always divided accord- ing to these artificial distinctions. The powers of the hu- man mind have a reciprocal influence, and each promotes, retards, or changes, more or less, the operations of the other. Knowledge contributes to the choice of that which is good ; and the uprightness of the choice renders knowledge more easy of attainment. The holiness of the human heart con- tributes to its felicity ; while its felicity tends to increase its holiness. Again: Knowledge contributes to our enjoyment, while enjoyment increases the thirst for that knowledge, the happy influence of which we have felt ; or, in other words,
* 1 Pet. i. 3, 4, 6. 1 1 Pet. i. 8. + Gal. v. 22.
II 1 Thess. i. 6. § Rom. xiv. 17.
OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. 403
liappy experience makes us wiser. — In like manner : The various influences of the Spirit co-operate in one great de- sign, the complete salvation of the souls of men from ignor- ance, sin and wretchedness. We are illuminated by the Holy Spirit, not for purposes of mere speculation, but that we may " know the truth, and that the truth may make vs J'rce ,■" or, in other words, that we may be " sanctified through the truths There could be no moral, ameliorating change in the human heart, without the infusion of moral principles : and those moral principles must be apprehended by the understanding before ihev can govern the heart. As all moral action is founded in moral motives, those motives must be more or less distinctly perceived, before we can act under their impulse. There is, on the other hand, a certain influence of the Holy Spirit, which " God hath given (only) to them that obey him." We must be " rooted and founded in love" before w-e can be " strengthened with the Spirit's might in the inner man," so as to " be able to comprehend with all saints the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that we may be filled into all the fulness of God." — There is likewise a reciprocal co-operation of the sanctifying, and the consolatory, influence of the Holy Spirit. The gift of orpentance is necessary to prepare us for divine consolation. *' Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be covifhrtedJ* The gift of Jaith is necessary as the immediate mean of our receiving the Holy Ghost to dwell within us ; for we receive it " by the hearing of faith." On the other hand : When " the love of God to us is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given to us," — " w^e love him because he has^r^'^ loved us." Our filial affection and con- sequent obedience, are not the causes, but the effects, of his paternal regard. " The joy of the Lord is our strength." But this subject, though highly important and interesting, does not belong to the discussion of the Socinian controvcrsv, which, without the introduction of any thing extraneous, has been already sufficiently protracted. — To return :
1. The difficulty of explaining the mode of the Spirit's operation on the human mind, makes nothing against the reality of that operation. Every objection drawn from tiiis source makes equally against any divine operation, whether
404 THE OEDIXARY INFLUENCE
physical or moral, miraculous or common. It is enough for us to know that " God will give his Holy Spirit to them that ask him ;" and that it is our duty when we " live in the Spirit, to walk also in the Spirit." As to the manner how that inestimable benefit is given, we know nothing. " The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth. So is every one that is born of the Spirit." But it is not necessary that we should understand it. We do not see the worse, because we are unacquainted with the nature of light, or with the manner of its operation. Our food is not of less service to us, because we do not know how it is assimilated to our constitution, or how it nourishes our bodies. Our not knowing hotv we live, needs not hinder our living to the best purpose. Nor does our ignorance of " the way of the Spirit," need to hinder our reception of it, or the accomplishment of that great purpose for which it is given, the salvation of our souls.
2. Whatever others may pretend, Socinians cannot con- sistently urge that the world is already christianized, and that it needs not, therefore, that divine influence which was once necessary for the conversion of heathen idolaters. Ac- cording to Dr. Priestley, and his History of Corruptions, the whole of simple Christianity is overwhelmed in falsehood, and the Christian world is full of idolaters who worship a mere man instead of the Eternal God. At this rate, we are mere Christian Heathens, and almost need a restoration of the miraculous gifts, to effect a reformation of the reformed. Their objections must therefore take another shape. They will rather urge :
3. " That it is naturally in the power of man to do the will of God, must be taken for granted, if we suppose the moral government of God to be at all an equitable one. He that made man, certainly knew what he was capable of, and would never command him to do what he had not enabled him to perform ; so as to propose to him a reward which he knew he could never attain, and a punishment which he knew he had no power of avoiding."*
* Dr. Priestlpy's Hist, nf Cor. Vol. I. p. '2SI .
Of THE HOLY SPIRIT. 405
That the government of God is equitable, and tliat he does not require any thing which is impossible, is, and must be, granted. But in arguing from these premises, this Soci- niau patriarch has made no less than three mistakes.
(1.) He has altogether neglected to inquire what is the v-ill of God Avith respect to mankind. According to the New Testament, it is the will of God that we "walk in the light while we have the light," — that we " come to the light that our deeds may be reproved," — that we " believe ac- cording to the working of his mighty power," — that "vve " obey the truth through the Spirit," — that we " by the Spirit mortify the deeds of the body," — that we ••' walk in the Spirit," — that we bring forth " the fruit of the Spirit," — and that " we grieve not the Holy Spirit of God." — Had the Doctor considered this, he would have found it perfectly unnecessary to inquire, whether man have a natural power to do the will of God without the light, the power, the Spirit of God ; for the very language in which God has de- clared to us his Avill, implies that we have naturally no such power.
(2.) He has neglected to make a distinction between our being natitfaUy able to do the will of God, and our being enabled to do it by siipernatia'al grace. Mankind may be in fact able to do the will of God, and so be without ex- cuse, and yet their abiUty may be not natural, but super- natural. And this Ave take to be the scriptural truth. " Without Christ, we can do nothing,"* but " can do all things through Christ who strengtheneth us."t On this ground, we grant that the whole will of God is practicable. But when Dr. Priestley so imceremoniously " takes for granted, that it must be naturally in the power of man to do the will of God," — he takes for granted the very thing which he ought to have proved !
(3.) He has neglected to distinguish between a physical and amoral inability. A man maybe supposed to hephy- ,\icaUy able to " deny himself," — to " crucify the flesh with the passions and desires," — to " mortify the deeds of the body," — to renoinice the world,— or even to love God ; yet
» Jwhu XV. o. )- rhil. iv. \o.
40() TPIE OUDINARY INFLUENCE
if he be morally unable to do these things, if he have an aversion to them, — all his physical ability will avail nothing. But this moral inability is that for which we particularly contend. It is a contradiction in terms to say that man has a naUiral inclination to dejiy himself. It is the same as to say that he is naturally inclined to resist his natural incli- nation. The carnal mind may be changed, to a spiritual mind ; and, therefore, it has a physical capacity to love God and to obey his law. But so long as it is a carnal mind, it is enmity to God, and is not subject to his law, neither indeed, can be. Obedience, in this state, is morally impos- sible. The mind of man may be physically free in its voli- tions ; yet while " the flesh lusteth (causeth desires) against the Spirit," unless those desires be counteracted, by " the Spirit which lusteth, (causeth desires) against the flesh," the man is in moi'al bondage, and will still " walk in the flesh"" and " obey it in the lusts thereof." It is not impos- sible for us to " work out our own salvation ;"" but it is only rendered possible by God who " worketh in us to will and to do, of his good pleasure."*
4. Yes, says the Doctor, "God works all our works in us and for us, not by his own immediate agency, but by means of those powers which he has given us for that purpose .'''"•|-
In reply to this, we will ask a few plain questions. — When God is said to have given to the Gentiles, repentance unto life, — to have given to the Philippians, to believe, — and to have purified the heart of Cornelius by faith, — is nothing meant but that he had given to them faculties ca- pable of repentance, faith, and holy obedience ? Had they not, at this rate, repentance before they repented, faith be- fore they believed, and purity in the midst of all their filthiness ? And since God has given to all men the same powers, does it not follow that God has given to all men repentance, faith, and purity of heart ? When Jesus Christ is said to be " exalted a Prince and a Saviour to g-ive repentance to Israel," is it meant that he was exalted to give to the Israelites those powers which they had possessed from their infancy .'' Is not this something like being ex-
* Phil, ii. 12, 13. f Hist, of Cor. Vol. I. j). 283.
OF THE HOLY Sl'IRIT. ^O?
alted to create those who were aU'eady created ? — A hundred such questions miojht be proposed, all tending to shew, how little they who make these assertions, attend to the word of God!
There is a manifest distinction between the powers which God has given us by nature, and that which is necessary to the proper and effectual use of them. A man may have eyes, and yet be blind: ears and be deaf: hands and feet, and be maimed or lame : all the members of the human body, and be so paralyzed as to have no use of them : and lungs, which are rotten and cannot respire. The first thing he will want therefore is a cure. — Again : It is not enough that God has given us eyes ; we cannot sec till he has also given us light. Our ears would not answer the purpose of hearing, if we lived in vacuo, or if the air were robbed of its elaMicity. Our members, though in themselves formed for motion, would not move at our will, unless God had superadded something to which we find it difficult to give a name. And our vital organs would answer no purpose of life without the vital air for respiration. — The judicious Reader is left to make the application.
To conclude : The dogmas of philosophical and rational- izing Divines, and the dreams of Enthusiasts, though di- rectly opposed to each other, are equally distant from the doctrine of the sacred writings. Socinians, and less consist- ent Trinitarians, may reject the plain testimony of scripture, deny all intercourse with heaven, and ridicule the profession of serious Christians as the cant of hypocrisy ; while impos- tors and madmen impute to the Spirit of God their imagi- nary revelations, or absurd and unscriptual impressions : the one may renounce the truth of God, and the other may abuse it ; but it stands on its own basis, and is immoveable as the Rock on which the Christian church is built.
Granting that our Lord promised to his immediate followers, the knowledge of evangelical truth by direct inspiration, and those miraculous powers which demon- strated that they spake the wisdom and truth of God, — we have found it equally true that he promised the Holy Spirit, for other purposc:^, to all his followers in all ages, — that
408 THE ORDINARY INFLUENCE &C.
promises have hitherto been fulfilled, — that the scriptures are faithful records of the fulfilment, as Avell as of the promise, — that the blessing is necessary to each individual of mankind,^ — and that " the same Lord is rich unto all that call upon him/' The miraculous powers were given for the introduction of Christianity, and for its establishment in the world : and they were not withdrawn until the important design was accomplished. The same necessity for them now no longer remains. The ordinary influences of the Spirit were originally promised for the personal salvation of each individual of mankind. That purpose is not yet uni- versally effected ; but the same necessity for them remains. The cessation of the former, therefore, by no means implies the cessation of the latter. In six days God created the heaven and the earth, and all that are in them, and rested the seventh day. But a cessation from creation by no means implies that the divine energies are not still engaged in the preservation, propagation, and improvement, of the work of his hands. — Nor does God's withdrawing those extraordinary poAvers by which the Christian Church was called into existence, argue that he will not be with his faithful servants " always even unto the end of the world."
( -!()9 )
CHAPTER XVI.
The Conclusion.
IN exaniinino" and refiitino; tlie doctrines of modern Sow- nians, it can scarcely escape our observation tliat the source of their destructive errors, is tlio pride of reason. " If any man consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according- to Godhness, lie is proud." * One who is a stranger to the case might naturally 3U})posc, that a person born in a Christian country, and surrounded from liis infancy by the direct or reflected light of divine revelation, would be satis- fied with such a source of instruction, in every thing con- nected with God and religion. But this is not the case with those who run the race of Socinianism. As if every man were a fool, who does not light a taper of his own, to seek the me- ridian Sun, their belief of the divine testimony must be sus- pended, till from other sources they have demonstrated to themselves the being, attributes, and will of God. How- ever difficult such a demonstration might be to one Avho has no previous knowledge of these subjects, it is not cbfficult to one who in fact is only seeking a proof of his own ingenuity, and who therefore can easily persuade himself that he has demonstrated, by reason, what he has really learned from revelation. The result of his imaginary researches, he calls natwal religion.
Some of the principal doctrines of tliis natural religion are, — " God is" " God is onc^ " God is a Spirit," and " God is lore.'''' As the doctrines thus adopted are all bor- rowed from divine revelation, from thence they ought to be illustrated. For although our novice has imagined that he has perfectly demonstrated them, he lias not even perfectly vndc?'stood one of them. He knows neither what God is, what is the nature of his unity, what a Spirit is, nor how
* 1 Tiin. vi. .'5. U (I
410 THE CONCLUSION.
his love is modulated. It is easy to conceive the possibility, and the propriety, of receiving additional instruction from divine revelation, on subjects which as yet we have but im- perfectly comprehended. But how is it possible for a man to reason conclusively from premises which he does not perfectly understand, and, which, therefore, he cannot com- pare ? Is not this to build knowledge on ignorance ? The superstructure raised on such a basis, is " a castle in the air." Yet this is the regular process of a philosophical reli- gionist. Untutored by a celestial messenger,
Into the heaven of heavens he presumes. An earthly guest.
From his crude notions of what God is in some respects, he boldly infers what he must be in othe?' respects. From his dark, metaphysical ideas of spirit, and of the simplicity or unity of spirit, he concludes, by wholesale, that there can be no distinction in the Deity. And from his imperfect notion of the divine benevolence, as he calls it, he presumes to dic- tate what God must, and what he must not, do.
Having passed his novitiate, and, nurtured in academic groves, having become a staunch and positive philosopher, he is now prepared to make use of the book of revelation, as far as it will sanction his creed, or adorn his opinions. His adoption of the sacred code is however strictly guarded by this apophthegm, that " as reason is a partial revelation of the being, attributes, and will of God, a subsequent and more perfect revelation cannot contradict it.'' His philoso- phical system of "natural religion,'' is thus set up as an in- fallible test, by which every doctrine of divine revelation is to be tried. His reason is not, like that of a professed infi- del, so far perverted, as to deny the divine mission, as he affects to call it, of Jesus Christ. But so confident is he of the precision of every previous induction of reason, that a system promulged by divine authority is not permitted to convict him of any error in judgment. He is infallible. So complete is his information on almost every subject, and so competent has he found himself to the most abstruse ideas and reasonings, that every thing which rises above his pre- sent opinions, as well as whatever contradicts them, must be
THE COXCLUSIOK. 411
erroneous. With such a preparation for the study of a su- pernatural revelation of those things which " no one knows but the Spirit of God, and he to whom the Spirit hath re- vealed them," how is it possible but that many obvious scrip- tural truths must be discarded ? " The wisdom of God in a mystery" is " foolishness" to one who is thus " wise in his own eyes, and prudent in his own conceit."
To get rid of the difficulties which divine revelation has thrown in his way, is now the great work of our philosophi- cal divine. This herculean task does not discourage those who, like Dr. Priestley, have resolved not to be convinced, and aver that the doctrines of the Trinity, and of the atone- ment, " are things which no miracles can prove."* By what methods this is to be done, it was at one time intended here to exemplify. But the catalogue of " ways and means," drawn merely from Mr. G.'s performance, became so long, and tedious, that it is now omitted. The Reader is there- fore referred to the preceding pages for a sufficient number of examples of the unfair and unwarrantable means, in com- mon use among Socinians, by which the Bible is to be pur- ged from every thing that offends their illuminated reason.
But wherefore all these mighty efforts, in which the whole Socinian corps unite their strength, to purge from all mystery the revelation which the " great, mysterious God" has given of himself, his ways, and his will ? Is Socinian- ism itself so clear and intelligible, that no difficulty remains ? Have its votaries left no mystery unexplored ? Have they explained what God is, — what the Divine Spirit is, — how he exists witliout beginnings and zaithout succession, — how he Jills all space without extension, — how he foresees the actions of men, and yet leaves them free .'* — how evil originated when as yet there was nothing but good ? By no means. Nay, a Socinian is still a mystery to himself. He can explain neither how his material body thinks, nor how an immaterial, thinking substance is united with it. All this might, how- ever, be forgiven, if he did not pretend to divest religion of all its mysteries. To be ignorant is human ; but the pride of understanding was not made for man. —
• Hist, of Cor. Vol. II. p. 861.
Dd2
412
THE COXCLUSIOK.
*' The foolishness of God, however, is wiser than men."' Of all the known systems of theology, the Bible Avhich " explains all mysteries but its own," has the fewest mys- tei'ies. Compare it with Socinianism, and it will be found that the latter, in attempting to remove the veil from the holy of holies, has hung the temple of God with cob-webs. The philosophical religion also has its mysteries : mys- teries of its own creation. Mr. G. cannot get over the ex- istence of the Devil, without substituting two mysteries for on e. Thus, on the one hand, he has invented or borrowed the invention of an imaginary personage whom he calls '' the angel of death," and whom he supposes to hold a con- test even with an arch-angel, about the departed soul of Moses. (See p. 56.) On the other hand, to supply the place of the Devil, he has invented an abstract evil principle ^ an accident without a substance, as mischievous as the Devil himself. — Lest it should appear that " the Word of God was with God" before his incarnation, some of Mr, G.'s brethren contrive to send the human nature of Christ up to heaven, before he opened his ministry, that he might re- ceive his instructions and his commission. When Jesus Christ evinces his mysterious union with the Divine nature, by the Divine perfections which he exerted, and Mr. G. is forced to concede to him those perfections ; this metaphysi- cian contrives to abstract the divine perfections from the divine nature, and attributes them, in this abstracted form, to mere humanity. Here again, two mysteries are substi- tuted for one ! Here is the mystery of the abstraction : a mystery ten thousand times more profound, than that which should suppose that the rays of the sun, are abstracted from that luminous body with all their splendour. And here is the mystery of delegation, which supposes injinite perfec- tions to be possessed by a, finite being : a mystery infinitely greater than that v/hich supposes this Avhole material crea- tion to be inclosed in a nut-shell. — To exclude the mystery of the Divinity of the Holy Spirit, many mysteries are in- vented. From these teachers of " simple Christianity,"" we learn the mysteries of a Spirit, which is not a Spirit, — of a being who has no real existence, — who has jvopcjiics, with-
riiK coNci.rsioK. 413
out any substance in which they inhere, — searches all things without an vndtrstandinsy, — acts volunfar'ilt/ witliout a rcill, — and is neither a creature nor the Creator. — To rid the Avorld of the whole mystery of the Trinity, a mysterious Unity is invented, which more than equals the mystery of an atoyn filling the universe. — Nor have we yet explored all the mysteries of Socinianism. To set aside that of the miraculous conception, these philosophical divines give us our choice between a Saviour generated in the ordinary way, without partaking the ordinary defilement, and (as if Satan might cast out Satan,) a Saviour born a sinner to save his people from their sins. — The mystery of a proper " propiti- ation for our sins,'"' they have not found how to avoid, Avith- out first paying a compliment to the sacred writers, and sup- posing the Jewish sin offerings to have been " a figure for the time then present,"" and then paying a compliment to their idol, and supposing the " offering for sin"" made by the Son of God, to be so denominated by a figurative allusion •to those offerings which were " a shadow of good things to come."" Thus the offering of Christ is mysteriously i-educed to " the shadow of a shade :" and to add to the mystery, no suhstance is left to account for the derivation of either the shade or the shadow. Beside this, on the one hand, the beloved Son of God is supposed to have suffered the penalty of sin Avithout any respect to sin committed by himself or by others, as the crimir^al cause ; and on the other hand, God is supposed, as the moral Governor of the universe, to be at once just and the Justijier of the ungtxlly Avho believe in Jesus, Avithout any declaration of his righteousness by setting forth a propitiatory. Here again, the mysteries are multiplied. The riffhteoics God is supposed to haA'e in- flicted the penalty where it was on no account due ; and to have remitted it Avhere it Avas properly and justly due, Avith- out even a qualified substitution of the persons, or any com- mutation of punishment. None but a Socinian can explain this mystery, Avhich supposes public Justice to punish the innocent, and to rcAvard the guilty. — Having exhausted their own resources, and finding their oAvn imagination in- solvent, they now borroAv the mysteries of that very chiircl.'
414) THE CONCLUSION.
against which they have protested. To blot out from the book of God the eternal punishment of the wicked, two Po- pish mysteries are revived. First, hell is turned into a purgatory : and then, the finally impenitent being eternally excluded from the congregation of the righteous, a new limbus is opened for their reception, between heaven and hell. So true it is that extremes meet in the antipodes of truth ! The Roman and the Socinian churches having separated, the one having gone into the extreme of super- stition, and the other into the extreme of rational refine- ment, meet together in a fabulous Umbo, or a chimerical purgatory.
Such are the mysterious absurdities which rational Christians can swallow and digest, while they reject the sub- lime and heavenly truths of the Gospel ! So true it is that more faith is required to make a Socinian or an Infidel, than to make a Christian.
The men who sincerely and cordially love the Bible, are now called upon to consider seriously how much it is transformed by these calm investigators. " Let it be nei- ther mine nor thine," said the woman who was not the mo- ther of the child in question, " but divide it.'''' Such is the zeal of the Socinians to have their wisdom made current by the stamp of divine authority, that they rend in pieces the book of God, rather than not have it on their side. It is related by the Rev. W. Jones, whose anti-Socinian works deserve the most serious attention, that *' Dr. Samuel Clarke wrote a celebrated book upon the Being and Attri- butes of God ; and having discovered, as he thought, by the force of his own wit, what God is, and must be in all respects, he rejected the Christian doctrine of the Trinity ; and to put the best face he could upon his unbelief, spent much of the remainder of his life in writing ambiguous com- ments, and finding various readings, that is, 'm picking holes in the Bible." The same is the constant practice of our Unitarian Divines. If they are to be beheved, how small a part of the New Testament is genuine ! and how much is the rest obscured by their elucidations ! According to them its language is but unmeaning bombast .' It is a mere
THE CONCLUSION. 415
" mountain in labour !" Tliey glory in degrading it, by insinuating that it is almost replete with interpolations, false readings, contradictory representations, and unmeaning figures, and by charging the sacred writers with producing " lame accounts, improper quotations, and inconclusive reasonings."* Nor docs it at all concern them, that they are constantly undermining its authority ; for Socinianism has borrowed all its wants, and can' support its dignity by reason, without being any longer much beholden to revela- tion. But a Christian believer is as the Mother of the child, whose life was bound up in the life of her infant. " If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do T"* The canons of criticism which the Socinians have adopt- ed, are such as, if allowed, may equally serve to subvert every doctrine of the Bible, and to undermine the credit of the whole revelation of God. The arguments adduced to disprove the existence of the Devil, are equally sufficient to disprove the existence of all the heavenly hosts. The mode .of reasoning which is used in quashing the evidence of the Divinity of the Word and of the Spirit, needs only a bold innovator, an eastern philosopher, who will venture, on the same ground, to destroy all positive evidence of the proper Divinity of the Father. If Socinians have disproved the proper atonement made by Jesus Christ, they can prove that his being slain " by the determinate counsel of God,"*^ was unjust and cruel : and can set aside both the mercy and the justice of God. The extraordinary influence of the Spirit of God, must fall before the artillery- which levels the ordinary : and when it is made to appear that mankind heal the maladies of their own mind, and that the dead in sin arise without " the Spirit of life from God," the miracles of Christ and of his Apostles will need no longer to be at- tributed to " the finger of God." The criticisms which remove our dread of eternal misery, may equally subvert our hope in the eternal God, who, by an evcrla.st'mg cove- nant, has promised us a kingdom which shall endure Jbr ever.
* Dr. Priestley's 12th leUcr to .Mr. Bum.
416 TlIK <tJXt J.ISIOX.
The authority of the Evangehsts may as well be over- turned by the same engine by which they attempt to over- turn the authority of the Apostolic Epistles. Mr. Paine can furnish them Avith objections to the whole gospel, as specious as those Avhich they exhibit against the first chap- ters of Matthew and Luke. And Moses and the prophets will come under the same sentence of condemnation with the Apostles and Evangelists; for their doctrine is the same, the latter relating as facts what the former predict as future. Dr. Priestley therefore made only an honest confession when he said, " If the doctrine oi atonermnt were really scriptu7'aly I hesitate not to say, that, by me, the evidences of revealed religion would be deemed unsatisfactory."
Let the subject be maturely considered, and it will be found that Socinianism destroys all the prominent features and vital parts of Christianity. What part of the system of human redemption does a Socinian believe ? He talks loudly of the " divine mission of Jesus," and professes to reo-ard him as a " teacher sent from God :" But what honour does he put upon him, while, with Dr Priestley, he accounts him " fallible" like other men :* and, witli Mr. G., he deems him a mere time-server, who accommo- dates his discourse to the fashionable superstition of the day ; or a mere impostor, who pretending to cast out de- mons, when no such beings exist, makes a display 'of false credentials.'' (See p. 44.) With the exception of the re- isurrection of the human body, and of the truths wliich he .supposes himself to have learned from reason, which of the peculiar doctrines of Christ does he believe ? The story of Eve and the Serpent, though " written for our learning," Jie deems a fable which he does not care to explain. (See J). 44.) He denies, that " by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation ; and that by one man's disobedience many were made sinners." He will not allow, that " the V/ord, which was made flesh, was Godf or if he acknowledge it, for a moment, it is only that he may deny it at a more convenient time, and under more auspicious cir-
*]M. oiUiiil.lbiiri7, p. III.
Tin: coxcLusHtx. 417
cumstances. He makes it liis chief concern to shew, that " Christ hath [not] redeemed ns from the curse of the hiw, beinf]j made a curse for us ;"" — that he is not " the propitia- tion for our sins ;" — that " we have [iiot] redemption through his blood the foroiveness of sins ;" — and that " God hath [not] set him fortli a propitiation throu^^h faith in his blood/'' He counts it enthusiasm to say, that " God will give his Holy Spirit to them tliat n.sJc him." According to him, there is no Devil, and therefore " the Son of God was [not] manifested to destroy the works of the Devil."" Even the perfect example which Jesus Christ has left for his disciples, is ruined, for the support of Socinianism. If Dr. Priestley thought Jesus Christ, like other men, a peccable crea- ture, Mr. G. has gone still further. He has found a temp- ter in the breast of the Holy One of Israel, and ascribes to our Saviour the thought of pursuing " worldly objects" by the abuse of his miraculous powers. If Mr. G.'s comment, (See p. 55.) compared ■with the text, be true, the Son of God had it in contemplation to " gratify his palate" by un- warrantable means ; to satisfy a vain ambition, and " com- mand universal admiration" by an act approaching to sui- cide ; and to prompt his separate interest, at the expence of the honour of God, by " the corriipt use of his power." If " the thought of foolishness is sin," what then becomes of the perfect Christian pattern ? — If he be a materialist, he scouts the opinion, that " when the earthly house of this ta- bernacle is dissolved, we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens ;" and asserts that our only habitation for a while is in the dust of death. He robs the law of God of its sanction, by quenching " the unquenchable fire ;" and the gospel of its consolation, by counting the blood of the covenant an unholy [a coinmnn'\ thing, and bv denying the Spirit of grace." He robs God of his peculiar character, as a supreme, tnoral governor ; and man of his liberty, as a moral agent. In a word : he robs us of our immortal soul, and of our Divine Saviour ; and what docs he leave us iojear or to hope ?
After these Sociniau operations, wliat is left of Christi- anity to support even its existence ? It is not only dismcm-
418 THE CONCLUSION.
bered, but embowelled, and robbed of its very vitals. As a mere code of morals, it may still subsist ; but, even in this respect, its strength will be impaired, and its effective force will be lost. It wants those striking demonstrations of God's hatred to sin, which beget religious fear, and those convincing proofs of his love to mankind, which are the most powerful arguments for their love, gratitude and obedience to him, — and which can be derived only from the propitia- tory death of its great Author. But as a covenant of grace, established betwixt God and his offending and estranged creatures, it cannot possibly stand. If the moral, or legal, part of Christianity, may continue after the subversion of those doctrines which we have been called upon to vindicate, the Jideral part of it, and all that is properly gospel in it, must needs be involved with them in their ruin ; for that is all built upon the propitiation of Christ, and his propitiation upon his miraculous birth and his Divinity, which are there- fore the foundation of the Christian religion.
But after all, let us not be understood as uttering the language of despondency. The past experience of true Christians of all denominations, is, to themselves at least, an answer to all the sophistry of the " rational Dissenters," and an antidote to all their refinements. They may not be able to state with metaphysical precision the doctrines which they hold, nor to answer all the cavils of those who with a learned and imposing air impugn those doctrines ; but they " know of zcihom they have learned them," and have found them " the power of God unto salvation." St. John and St. Pau. will be acknowledged, and their doctrine will be " received with meekness, as the ingrafted word which is able to save the soul," when Mr. G. and his Lectures are sunk into oblivion.
The ignorance and levity of some, have prepared them before-hand to fall into the snare which is laid for them. To these, Socinianism and no religion, are synonimous terms. From such converts the cause of vice, immorality, and pro- faneness, will gain more than the cause of which Mr. G. is the advocate. A while ago they paid but little attention to the Bible, and, after the first ferment is over, they will pay as lit-
THE CONCLUSION. 419
tie to their new Leader. It is tlie property of Socinianism to quench all zeal but that of proselvtism to its own system: and of that zeal, in such a cause, only a few refined spirits will be found possessed. A false Philosophy laid the foun- dation of this vacant temple, and that Philosophy only can raise the superstructure.
The decision of the important questions which are dis- cussed in these pages is closely connected with our present and final happines, as individuals. " To his own master each of us stands or falls." AVhether therefore the Reader be a teacher or a student of divinity, — refined or vulgar,— converted from ignorance to Socinianism, or perverted from Christianity, — lukewarm or zealous in the cause he has es- poused ; — whether he be in danger from Mr. G.'s sophistry, inclining towards his opinions, or established in them, — it may not yet be too late for him to consider that as the pre- cepts of Christianity are the test of our obedience, its doc- trines are intended to be the test of our docility ; that he is .as much accountable to God for his religious opinions, as for his moral actions ; and that nothing but " the know- ledge of the truth can make himyr^^."
INDEX TO THE SUBJECTS.
Page . ADAM, — made in the image
of God, .. .. 295, 318
his fall, 297
consequences of the fall of, .... . . 298, 322
begat a son in his own
image, 294
posterity of, involved, 302 reprieved with his pos- terity,.. .. .. .. 307
state of, and his posten-
tyunder a reprieve, .. 308 his loss, and that of his
posterity, 310
and his posterity, under
a new covenant, . . .. 312 scriptural objections an- swered, '. 315
philosophical objections
answered, 318
Advocate — Jesus Christ our, .. 194 A/ojy — and its derivatives, .. 221
not indefinite, 224
objections answered, . . 227
Analogy — what, 123
Trinity illustrated by, 124 Angel — of Jehovah, JesusChrist
the 137
Angels — creation of . . . . 40, 42
why so called, 41
fall of, 41
sin of, 42
Appearances — of the word of God under the Old Testament, .. 136 Atheism — socinianism allied to 105
Athenagoras, I66"
Atonement — how made, .. .. 175
what, 176
objections to answered 178 deathof Christ an, .. 184 of Christ, taught by the divine messen- gers, .. .. ..198
Page. Atonement — madeby the human
nature of Christ, I99 justice and mercy dis- played by the, . . 200 whetherasatisfaction, 202 consistent with repen- tance, mutual for- giveness, and obedi- ence, 206
of Christ, a purifica- tion, 209
not made by the death of the Apostles, .. 211 See propitiafioti. Attribute — the Holy Spirit not a
mere, 103
See perfections.
BAPTISM —m^iiiwivon of, connected with the doctrine of the Trinity, .. 65, 159 Being — its image and operation their analogy to the Trini- ty, 126
Benediction — in the name of
Christ, 97
in the name of the
Holy Spirit, ,. .. 112 in the name of the Trinity, ., ..159 Breath — the Holy Spirit not pro- perly a 104
CHASTISEMENT— distin- guished from pu- nishment, 216, 240 Clemens, — of Rome, . . . . l63 of Alexandria, .. .. 166 Creation — ascribed to Jesus
Christ... 70
aproof of his Godhead, 73 DEMONS — possessing man- kind, .... .. 43
IN'DF.X.
4Sl
Page.
DiDioits — cast Out, 43
were sjiirits, 44
chief of, the Devil, .. 45
Depravity — hereditary, .. 28 J, 324
See Adam.
Devil — not known from reason, iG
not infinite, 40
chief of demons, .. .. 43 disputation of, with Mi- chael, 56
judgment of, 58
offices of, ascribed to God, 59 existence of, how connect- ed with the doctrines of
the Gospel, Gl
belief of, connected with
Christian duty, .. .. Gl consistent with our respon- sibility, G2
Dislinction— between the Father, Son, and Holy Spi- rit, illustrated, .. 125 consistent with unitj', 129 essential, necessary,
and eternal, .. .. 129
reasons for personal, 130
not only personal, 12g, 132
EBIONITES 339
Emancipation — terms of, ex- plained, .. .. 192 Equality — of Christ with God, 80 Eternity — of future punish- ment, proved from the meaning of aim, and its derivatives, . . . . 220 from the general tenor
of scripture, . . . . 228 objections to answered, 240 Eve — seduction of by the Devil 4G account of, not an allegory, 48 Evil principle — absurdity of ab- stract, 49
FATHER— union of Christ
with 80
Figures — scriptural, what, .. 103 Forgiveness — of sins, not known
from reason, . . iG of sins, through the
death of Christ, 187 of injuries, not incon- sistent with the at- onement, . . . . I'Oy
P»ge. Fulness — of God, dwelling in
Christ 77
GOD — beingof, nolfirstknown
from reason, Q
name of,given toChrist,82, 155 term used in a subordinate
sense, 8G
Jesus Christ the true, .. 87
the great, 87
the only wise, 88
the mighty, .. 88, 141, 14G the supreme and ever-bles- sed, 90
the Holy Spirit is, .. II7, 121 the Holy Spirit not a being
distinct from, .. .. 117 the Holy Spirit is cal- led, 118, 143
perfections of, ascribed to
the Holy Spirit, .. 119,143 word of, ascribed to the
Holy Spirit, 121
works of, ascribed to the
Holy Spirit, .. .. 121,143 moral government of, .. 213 human passions ascribed to 255 Goodness — ascribed to the Spirit
of God, 105
HEATHENS— ack nowledged their ignorance of divine things, 10 could not ascer- tain the immor- tality of the soul, 19 origin of divine knowledge a- .mong, .. .. 22 Holiness — ascribed to the Spirit
of God, 105
Holy Ghost — See Spirit of God.
IDEAS— or'igm of, 10
Jehovah — name of, ascribed to
Christ, 93
Jesus Christ — temptation of .. 53 pre-existence of . . G7 creator of the world, 71 94, 14G, 157 divine perfections as- cribed to, . . 73, 156 divine perfection proof of divinity of, .. 76 divine nature ascribed to 76
422
INDEX.
Page-
Jesus Christ — fulness of God in 77
union of, with God, 78
equality of, with God, 81
denominated God, 82
See God. the only Lord God, 92 the blessed and only
potentate, . . . . 93 forgives sins, .. 93, 157 judges, .. ..93, 158 the living God .. .. g3 the Holy one, . . . . 94 Alpha and Omega, .. 94 Lord of all, . . . . 94 Lord of hosts, . . . . 94 searcheth the heart,. . 94 quickeneth the dead,95, 157 the Lord of peace, . . 95 is honoured as the Fa- ther, 95
is worshipped, Qb, 151 the apostles bless in his
name, 97
is Jehovah, 97, 141, 147 two-fold nature of, . . 99 appearance of under
the Old Testament, 137 was known as the Son
under the Old Tes. 137 was proclaimed as the
Son of God by John, 147 the phrase, tlie Son of God, implied his di- vinity, 150
divinityof, demonstra- ted by his miracles, 150 divinity of, implied by the Apostolic sys- tem of doctrine, 157 See Son of God, Messiah and Word of God.
Ignatius l64, 333
Immortality — of the soul, not
known from reason, I9 Inspiration of scripture — import- ance of, 257
nature of, 26O
as to language, . . . . 269
proved, 270
of the Old Testament, 270
of the New, . . . . 272
objections to answered 276
notalways by_suggestion280,284
Page. Intelligence — ascribed to the Spi- rit of God, .. .,106 Intercession — of Christ, . . . . 195 Job — temptation of, not an alle- gory, 150
IrencEUS l65, 333
Judicial terms — explained, .. IQAf Justice — how satisfied by Christ, 203 of punishing the unbe- lieving, 205
Justijication — explained, .. .. 194 by faith, and by worksdistinguished 208 Justin Martyr l65, 332
KNOfFLEDGE— divine, not
from reason, . . 11 viz. of God, .. .. 13 of the Devil, .. I6 of duration of future
punishmetit, . . I9 of the immortality of
the soul, .. .. 19 of a future resurrec- tion, .. .. 21 — explained, 2l6
LAW— design of, 174
MAN— See Adam.
Matter, Jbrm and motion — their
analogy to the Trinity, 125 Messiah — opinion of the Jews
concerning, 146
See Jesus Christ.
Metaphor— what, 123
Mind, discourse, and wisdom or breath — their analogy to
the Trinity, .. ..127 Miracles — demonstrated the di- vine perfections of the Son of God, and his union with the Father, .. .. 150, 159 Miraculous conception — asserted by Matthew and
Luke, 331
confirmed byantiquity 332 by other parts of scrip- ture, 334
connected with other scriptural doctrines, 336 evidence against, refuted 338
INDEX.
428
Page.
Mysteries — of the gospel, . . 39 not explained by the
Sociiiians, .. ..411 created by Socinian-
ism, 412
NATURE — divine, ascribed to
Christ, 76
Nazarenes 338
OLD TESTAMENT— doc- trine of the Trinity main- tained by, 13G
PERFECTIONS— divine, as- cribed toChrist 73 inseparable from di- vine nature, .. 75 were manifested by the' miracles of Je- sus Christ, and proved his divinity, 151 ascribed to the Holy
Spirit, .. ..119
prove the dignity of the Holy Spirit, 121 Person — the Holy Spirit a, . . 102 Personal — affections, faculties, and offices ascribed to the H©ly Spirit, .. 109 pronouns applied to the
Holy Spirit, .. ..110 distinction of the Trini- ty, in the Old Testa- ment, 136
Personification — of the Holy Spirit, not merely grammatical, . . 103 figurative, what, . . 103 of the Holy Spirit, proper, .. .. 103 Persons — the analogy of three,
to the Trinity, .. ..127 Philosophy — consequences of blending it with the doctrines of revelation. 32 Phraseology — of the schools, of no importance to ihe support of divine truth, 133, l6l, 198 Plea — of Jesus Christ in behalf
of men, 196
Polycarp l65
Page. Power — Holy Spirit not a mere, 105 ascribed to the Holy Spi- rit, 105
Pre-exis(enee — of Jesus Christ, 68 Priesthood — of Christians, 189
of Christ, .. ..189
Prolation — this the only time of 230 Propitiation — the death of
Christ a, .. 185
See atoneyncnt. Punishment — duration of future not ascertained from reason, distinguished from
chastisement, eternal,
eternal accords with the general tenour of scripture, how described, does not imply anni- hilation, remediless, fire of unquenchable of Judas, state of final, not to purify, .
22
216 219
229 232
234 235 236 238 239 240
RANSOM .. ..192
Reason — not the source of di- vine knowledge, . . 9 the judge, but not the rule, of divine truth, 25
Reconciliation — Socinian expla- nation of refuted, 178 by the death of Christ 186 192 17
Redemption — by price. Repentance — insufficiency of,
consistent with atone- ment. Restoration — universal, consi- dered, . , . . . . Resurrection — of the body, not ascertained from reason, . . second, explained, first and second. Revelation — the only source of divine knowledge, not to be subjected to the test of reason.
206
243
21 240 241
25
5'.4Ci?/J7C£S— eucharistical, 175
424.
INDKX.
Page.
176
184
188 188 190
45 58
for sin, . . . _ levitical, - - - - of Christ, - - - - superiority of the, of Christ, - . .
of Christians, - - origin of, - - - - Satan — the chief of demons, Beelzebub, the devil, a spiritual adversary. Satisfaction — of Christ, 198, 202 Sin-offirings — the nature of levi- tical, . - - - 175 the death of Christ a, 182 Socinianhni — the rise and pro- gress of in the mind 40g does not explain the mysteries which it must acknowledge, 411 mysteries created by, 412 undermines the credit
of revelation, destroys the leadinc doctrines of the gos pel, . - - .
Son of God — his union with the Father known as such under
the Old Testament, 140 peculiarity of the phrase, _ - -
implies the union of Jesus Christ with the godhead, worshipped, - 96, meaning of the phrase among the Jews, See Jesus Christ. Spirit of God — not the mere ab- stract power of God 102 a person, _ . - 102
not a figurative person 103
- 414
416
- 78
148
150 151
152
not a mere breath, denial of personality of
leads to atheism, attributes of Spirit as- cribed to, . - - intelligence of the, volition of the, - - personal affections, fa- culties, and offices, • ascribed to the, personal pronouns ap- plied to the, - -
104
104
105 106 107
109
in
Page
Spirit if Gad — n o I h avi ng an an i- mated body, no ob- jection to the per- sonality of the, 112 benediction in the
name of the, - - 112 fellowship of the, no objection'to the per- sonality of the, - 112 certain expressions ap- plied to the, - - 115 supposed ignorance of
the, - - - - 116
given and sent, - II6 not a creature, - 117 is God, - - - - 117 not a being distinct
from God, - - 117
called God, - - 118
divine perfections as- cribed to the, - 119 word of God ascribed
to the - - - - 120 works of God ascribed
to the, - - - - 121 divine perfections prove the divinity of the, - - 1 122
worship due to the, 122 the phrase implies his
divinity, . - - 160 influence of universal, 368 extraordinary influ- ence of the, - - 370 Socinian doctrine of
the influence of, 370 influence of the, the
privilege of all, 372
illumination by the, 379 holiness by the, - - 38G repentance by the, 387 asinner comes toChrist
by the, - - - 387
to the Father by the, 388 regeneration by the, 389 man inhabited by the, 392 sanctification by the, 393 obedience produced by
the, - - - - 394
the fruit of the, - 396
the consolations of
the, 398
peace, - - - - 398 joy, - - - -399 402 hope, 400
IVDFX.
495
Sjihit of God — objections to ilu- ordinarv inHueiici" of tlio answered,
.S'////,iis li'^hl and vital iiijlucmc —
iheir analogy to the
Trinity, . . -
40-1
125
TEMPTATION— o^ Eve, of Job, of Jesus, of mankind, from the Devil, 4(i, 30, 53, 58 Terms — the use of different, re- lative to the death of
Christ, 210
Tt'rtuUinn - - - . \QQ, 333
Thfophilus lCi()
frinitij — the doctrine of, - - 123 ' the unity of, - - - - 129 distinction of, essential,
necessary, and eternal, 129 necessity for a personal
distinction of, - - 130 why a mystery, - - - 131 doctrine of the, main- tained in the Old Testament, - - - 136 jews held the doctrine of
the, 143
use of the doctrine of the 1 68
UNION— of the Father with the Son, - , - .
79
Page. I'nilariar, — Societies, constitu- tion of, - - - - ,';4 disagrecnu-nls of, - 3.'»
I uity — divine, 64
L'sc — of the doctrine of the
Trinity, l68
FOZ/^riOA^— ascribed to the
Holy Spirit, - - - 107
WICKEDNESS— o{mt.nV\n<S
universal, - - - 285 of the Jews, - - 287 of the Gentiles, - 288 how accounted for, 289 scriptural method of accounting for the, 2y3 JVisdom — the folly of human, in
things divine, - - 28 JJ'urd — of God, world created
by, 71
divinity of the, - - 82, 158 how distinguished from the
Father, 126
manifestations of the, un- der the Old Testament, 137 Jews held the doctrine of
the, 146
See Jesus Christ. fForship — divine, paid to Jesus
Christ, - - - 95, 151 due to the Holy Spirit, 122
IxNDEX TO THE TEXTS OF SCRirTURE,
MOllE on LESS ILLUSTRATED.
|
Page. |
Page. |
|||||
|
Gen. i. 1. - |
- |
I3G, 145 |
xxxiv. 16. |
- |
- |
- 144 |
|
2. - |
- |
125, 144 |
xl. 3, 5. |
. |
- |
97, 142 |
|
26. |
- |
136, 318 |
9, 11- |
. |
- |
- 143 |
|
'21. |
- |
136, 296 |
13, 14. |
- |
- |
- 140 |
|
31. |
- |
- 319 |
xliv. 24, |
- |
- |
- 121 |
|
iii. 6. - |
- |
- 307 |
xlv. 12. |
- |
. |
- 145 |
|
8. - |
- |
. 145 |
18,21- |
-25 |
. - |
- 99 |
|
14, 15, - |
- |
- 303 |
xlviii. 12—16. |
- |
- |
- 144 |
|
17, 19- - |
- |
- 308 |
liv. 6. - |
- |
- |
- 99 |
|
22. |
- |
- 136 |
Jer. i. 5. - |
- |
- |
- 315 |
|
23, 24. - |
- |
- 311 |
xxiii. 5, 6, |
- |
98, |
143, 147 |
|
V. 3. - |
- |
- 295 |
xxxiii. 15, 16. |
- |
- 98 |
|
|
XV. 1, 2. |
- |
- 137 |
Ezek. viii. 13. |
. |
- |
- 143 |
|
xviii. 17- |
- |
- 137 |
Dan. ix, 24. |
- |
- |
- 185 |
|
xxii. 1, 2, 12,15- |
-18. |
- 138 |
Joel ii. 28, 29. |
. |
- |
- 372 |
|
xxviii. 13, 20, 22. |
- |
- 138 |
Mic. v. 2, |
- |
- |
- 129 |
|
xxxii. 24 — 30 |
- |
- 139 |
Zee. xii. 1,10. |
- |
- |
- 98 |
|
Exod. iii. |
- |
- 139 |
xiii. 7- - |
- |
- |
- 143 |
|
vii. I. . |
- |
. 86 |
Mai. iii. 4. - |
- |
- |
- 97 |
|
XX. 5. - |
- |
- 145 |
iv. 2. - |
- |
. |
- 125 |
|
xxiii. 21. |
- |
- 139 |
Matt. i. ii. |
- |
- |
- 331 |
|
Lev. i. 3. - |
- |
- 180 |
i. 1—17. |
. |
- |
- 345 |
|
iv. 13—21. - |
- |
- 177 |
19- |
- |
- |
- 346 |
|
Num. xix. 1, 3, 4, 9. |
- |
- 209 |
21—25. |
- |
- 348 |
|
|
Jos. V. 13—16. |
. |
- 140 |
23. |
. |
- |
336 |
|
Judg. vi. 12. |
- |
- 140 |
ii. |
- |
- |
- 349 |
|
XV. 14. |
- |
- 143 |
iii. 12. - |
- |
232. 236 |
|
|
Job i. - |
- |
- 50 |
iv. 3. - |
- |
- |
- 158 |
|
xi. 12. |
- |
- 291 |
5—11. |
- |
- |
45, 53 |
|
xix. 26. |
- |
- 140 |
Matt. v. 26. - |
- |
- |
- 243 |
|
xlii. 1. |
- |
- |
vi. 13. - |
- |
- |
- 62 |
|
Psalm ii. 7, 12. - |
- |
- 140 |
ix. 18. - |
- |
. |
- 281 |
|
xxxvi. 9- |
. |
- 126 |
xii. 26. - |
_ |
_ |
- 46 |
|
xlv. |
- |
- 140 |
28. - |
- |
- |
- 160 |
|
Ixxx. 1. |
- |
- 86 |
xiii. 30. - |
- |
- |
- 232 |
|
xcvii. 7. |
- |
- 86 |
xiv. 32, 33. |
- |
- |
- 151 |
|
Prov. XXX. 4. |
- |
- 141 |
xvii. 5. - |
- |
- |
- 130 |
|
Kccles. vii. 29, |
- |
- 319 |
xix. 17. - |
- |
- |
- 87 |
|
Isaiah vii. 14. |
- |
- 335 |
XX. 23. - |
. |
- |
- 82 |
|
viii. 13, 14. |
- |
- - m |
XXV. 41. - |
- |
- |
- 58 |
|
ix. 6. |
- |
88, 145 |
46. - |
. |
- |
- 216 |
|
xi. 1, 2, 10. |
- |
- 142 |
xxvi. 24. - |
. |
- |
- 238 |
|
xii. 2. |
. |
- 142 |
60 — 66. |
- |
- |
- 153 |
|
INUKX |
||||
|
Page. |
||||
|
Mal.xxvii. 40. |
- |
- |
- 153 |
Acts xi. 18 - |
|
xxviii. ly. - |
- |
. |
()6, 159 |
XV. 23. - |
|
Mark ii. 7. - |
- |
" |
- 93 |
xix. 3. - |
|
ix.43, 44. |
- |
- |
- '236 |
Rom. i. 19—23. |
|
X. 15. - |
. |
- |
- 317 |
iii. 19—31. |
|
Luke i. ii. |
. |
. |
- 331 |
23—26. |
|
i.3. - |
- |
- |
- 280 |
25. - |
|
15. - |
- |
- |
- 315 |
V. 10. - |
|
35. - |
. |
. |
120, 150 |
12—21. |
|
ii. 1—5. |
- |
- |
- 355 |
viii. 3. - |
|
41,42. |
. |
. |
- 357 |
12—23. |
|
iii. 1. - |
- |
. |
- 361 |
27. - |
|
23. - |
- |
- |
345, 3C6 |
32. - |
|
iv. 41. . |
- |
- |
- 152 |
ix. 5. - |
|
X. 17, 18, |
20. |
. |
- 57 |
X. 13. - |
|
x\i. 24. - |
- |
- |
- 243 |
xii. 1. - |
|
John i. 1. - |
- |
- |
82, 127 |
xiv. 4 — 6. |
|
1,2,9, |
14, 15 |
, 30. 70 |
1 Cor. i. 2. - |
|
|
3, 10, 14. |
- |
- 71 |
ii. i)— 11. |
|
|
14. - |
- |
. |
- 158 |
vi. 3. - |
|
16. - |
. |
- |
- 77 |
19. - |
|
ii. 11. - |
. |
. |
- 151 |
vii. 25 — 40 |
|
iii. 3— 6. |
- |
. |
- 39<» |
x. 14—16. |
|
(J. - |
- |
- |
- 294 |
xi. 3. - |
|
3,31. |
- |
. |
- 68 |
11. - |
|
]6. - |
- |
- |
130, 148 |
xii. 6— 11. |
|
35. - |
- |
- |
- 131 |
8—11. |
|
V. 17, 18. |
- |
- |
- 152 |
11. - |
|
18, 19, |
31,33, |
36, 37. 154 |
xiii. 12. - |
|
|
23. - |
- |
. |
- 95 |
XV. 47. . |
|
... 29- - |
- |
. |
. 26 |
2 Cor. i. 24. - |
|
John viii. 58. - |
. |
- |
- 70 |
iii. 12, 13. |
|
ix. 38. - |
- |
- |
- 151 |
17. - |
|
X. 30. - |
. |
^ |
. 78 |
iv. 2—4. |
|
30—38 |
- |
- |
- 86 |
6. - |
|
33—3(5. |
. |
. |
- 153 |
V. 21. - |
|
36—38. |
. |
- |
. 154 |
vii. 1. - |
|
37, 38. |
- |
- |
. 79 |
Eph.i. 10. -' |
|
xi. 25, 27. |
- |
- |
- 151 |
ii. 3. - |
|
xii. 41. - |
- |
- |
• 94 |
18—22. |
|
xiii. 3. - |
- |
- |
- 68 |
iii. 9. - |
|
xiv. 5 — 10 |
- |
- |
- 79 |
17-19- |
|
XV. 13, 14. |
- |
- |
- 264 |
20. - |
|
xvi. 15. - |
. |
. |
• 130 |
iv.7. - |
|
28. - |
. |
- |
- 68 |
22—24. |
|
30—32. |
. |
- |
- 154 |
24. - |
|
xvii. 5. - |
. |
. |
- 68 |
V. 5. - |
|
XX. 28. - |
- |
. |
- 82 |
23. - |
|
30,31. |
. |
. |
- 152 |
Phil. ii. 6. - |
|
Acts i. 2. - |
- |
- |
- 127 |
iii. 21. - |
|
ii.38. - |
- |
- |
- 199 |
Col.i. 13—17. |
|
V. 3, 4. |
- |
- |
- 118 |
1."). - |
|
31.- |
- |
- |
- 387 |
16. - |
|
31. - |
- |
- |
- 157 |
10. - |
|
X. 22. |
- |
- |
- 9-T EC |
20—23. |
427
PBgC.
- 387
- 107
- m
- 23
- 208
- 211
- 190
- 187
- 305
- 196
- 245
- 107
- 149
- 90 . 157
- 188
- 28
- 157
- 106
- 57
- 118 267, 208
- 27
- 78
- 120
- 126
- 120
- 109
- 124
- 68
- 278
- 38
- 382
- 38
- 157
- 183
- 394
- 245
- 302
- 393
- 247
- 77
- 379
- 78
- 318 , - 157
- 86
- 78 80, 125
155, 247
- 72
- 126
- 40 6, 130
- 274
428
INDEX.
|
Page., |
Page. |
||||||
|
Col. ii. y. - |
- |
- |
76, 130 |
SPet. i. 1. - |
- |
- |
8a |
|
iii.y, 10. |
- |
. |
- 318 |
4. - |
- |
- |
- 78 |
|
1 Thes.v. ly. . |
. |
. |
- 376 |
ii. 1. - |
- |
- |
- 92 |
|
1 Tim. ii. 4, - |
- |
- |
- 24ti |
4. - |
- |
- |
- 42 |
|
iii. IC. - |
- |
- |
- 84 |
I John ii. 1. - |
- |
- |
- 194 |
|
vi. 15. - |
- |
- |
- 94 |
2. - |
- |
- |
- 186 |
|
2 Tim. iii. 15, \6. |
- |
- |
- 271 |
18—22. |
- |
- |
- 159 |
|
iv. 1 . - |
- |
- |
- 167 |
iv. 1,3. |
- |
- |
- 26 |
|
Tit. ii. 2. - |
- |
- |
- 247 |
3. - |
- |
- |
- 159 |
|
10. - |
_. |
. |
- 85 |
8. - |
. |
. |
- 317 |
|
ii. 13. - |
. |
- |
- 87 |
10. - |
- |
- |
- 186 |
|
iii. 4 |
- |
. |
- 85 |
V. 13. - |
- |
- |
- 159 |
|
Heb- i. 2,6., 8— |
-12. |
- |
- 71 |
19- - |
- |
- |
- 62 |
|
3.,3- |
. |
- |
126, 131 |
20. - |
- |
- |
87, 159 |
|
8. - |
- |
- |
- 34 |
J ucle 4. - |
- |
- |
- 92 |
|
ii. 17. |
- |
- |
- 186 |
6. - |
- |
- |
- 41 |
|
vi. 4—8. |
- |
- |
- 232 |
9- - |
- |
- |
- 66 |
|
X. 5 — 7. |
_ |
_ |
- 68 |
24, 25. |
- |
-^ |
- 88 |
|
10. - |
. |
. |
- 69 |
Rev. i. 3, 4. |
- |
- |
- 164 |
|
13, 14. |
- |
. |
- 210 |
8. - |
- |
- |
- 93 |
|
15. - |
- |
. |
- 221 |
14. - |
- |
- |
- 112 |
|
xiii. 11, 12. |
- |
- |
- 210 |
iv. 11. - |
- |
- |
* - 94 |
|
15. - |
- |
- |
- 189 |
13. - |
- |
- |
- 246 |
|
James v. 4. - |
- |
- |
- 94 |
xiv. 9 — 11. |
- |
- |
- 220 |
|
1 Pet. i. 17—19. |
- |
- |
- 211 |
xix. 13. - |
- |
- |
- 127 |
|
ii. 5. - |
- |
- |
- 189 |
XX. 6 — 15. |
- |
- |
- 241 |
FINIS.
Lately published, and may be liad of all Booksellers, In 1 vol. 8^'o., with a Portrait of the Author, price Alne Shillings in Board.*, Pulpit Rem.ains, being the substance of sevei-al Sermons de- livered by the late Rev. Edward Hare, carefuUji published from his Manuscripts. — To which is prefixed, a Memoir of his Life, by the late Rev. Joseph Benson.
James Nichols, Printer, 22, fi'nrwirk-square.
11012 01006 7066
*' 4 -
IS jn \
V f H -V "^^ fi ^■
,^ i ^'K^ V <s. .<#. «^. 'iij
« 'i ;•>
f ^ .ii
Jfr J.-_^; ,5S % i?
.« 'f '4 * 5 '■'?•
_^ 'j? •-«?. 'j 's; .^.
"•*i '4 -^ :i ^ \^
■•: ,^ _ifi- « Mj •> .,; ;
*,■ « «i' .d «.:■ .^ s*'s -i
-• .4 '^ \s ■)< ,L
y- .;<■ ;!| ':f- *? t ;ti