Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

ignorant of the important, at least interesting, circumstance, that Jesus of Nazareth existed before he lived in this world, in a state of great glory and happiness? Would any present believer in those doctrines, if he had once denied his Master, feel such silence justifiable? I think not; and I think too that if Peter had known that his Lord possessed a nature superior to that of man, he would not have been silent respecting it. He ascribes praise and dominion to him,* and yet if the second and third opinions respecting Jesus, (viz. the Trinitarian and Arian systems,) be true, the Apostle omits to state, nay, does not once refer to, the strongest reasons for praise and even adoration.

Evidence of PAUL.

We may now proceed to the writings of the Apostle PAUL. In perusing his Epistles with a view to the question before us, two things ought to be borne in mind; first, that Paul was not acquainted with our Saviour during his public ministry, and would therefore naturally dwell most upon the subsequent proofs of his divine authority, and upon his state of exaltation: secondly, that he had direct instructions from him; that our Lord was at least twicet personally present with Paul; and that probably he much more frequently, in some way or other,

* 1 Pet. iv. 11. 2 Pet. iii. 18.
Acts xxvi. 15, 18. xxii. 17—21.

manifested his purposes to this Apostle. The latter remark will render it unnecessary to refer particularly to those passages which are found in the Epistles, in which the Apostle appears to be influenced by the belief, that his Master was acquainted with his transactions, and that he often directed and supported him in the difficulties and perplexities of his commission. Language founded on such peculiar communications, which the Apostle might use with respect to our Saviour, cannot with any propriety be now used by the Christian; unless indeed it can be shewn from the Scriptures, that the Lord Jesus still personally presides over and regulates the affairs of his church, and still in a secret manner personally influences the minds of his faithful disciples.

In giving a general view of the doctrine of the Apostle respecting the person of our Saviour, as we may derive it from his Epistles, I wish to take them in the order of time; and as the opinion of Lardner on this point seems to be most generally adopted, I shall follow his arrangement.

VI. The first Epistle to the Thessalonians (written in A.D. 52, about sixteen years after the conversion of the Apostle,) contains nothing respecting the nature of our Saviour, inconsistent with, or additional to, the Apostle's declaration, that the MAN Christ Jesus is the only mediator between God and men, (1 Tim. ii. 5.) He speaks of him as the Son of God, who died for our benefit and was raised by God.-The second Epistle

(A.D. 52,) is equally silent as to any superiority of the nature of Jesus over human nature.

VII. The Epistle to the Galatians (A.D. 52 or 53) was written in consequence of the successful efforts of some Judaizing teachers to persuade the Galatians to submit to the law of Moses. This, one would think, was a suitable opportunity for inculcating the deity of our Saviour, as a reason why the Galatians should return to their first faith; since a covenant of which one who was the very and eternal God, or at least above all created beings, was the mediator, might reasonably be presumed to be superior to one of which man only was the mediator :* at any rate, I can perceive no reason which should prevent the mention of, or reference to, such a striking circumstance, except what I consider as the fact, that the Apostle was not acquainted with it. He endeavours to convince the Galatians that the Christian dispensation is superior to, and supersedes the Jewish; but so far from intimating that the mediator of the former was superior in nature to the mediator of the latter, he expressly says,† that when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son,§ born of a woman,||

[ocr errors]

* Gal. iii. 19.
Compare John xvii. 18.

Ch. iv. 4.

'As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.'

§ That the appellation Son of God has nothing to do with nature, but refers to character, or office, see Chap VI. § 3. For the present I refer to Rom. viii. 14. For as many as are led by the spirit of God, they are sons of God;' and to 1 John v. l. Whosoever be

lieveth that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God.'

[ocr errors]

"The phrase, born of a woman,' bears no allusion to the sup

[ocr errors]

born under the law' (i.e. himself subject to the law of Moses,) to redeem those that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.'*-There is, indeed, one passage which may by some be thought to indicate that Jesus Christ was a super-angelic being;† but however much it might suit such an opinion, it in no way whatever implies it, nor has it any thing to do with the nature but merely with the office of our Lord. And I find it has been inferred from the first verse of the Epistle, that Jesus possessed a nature superior to that of man; but if the passage prove any thing against Unitarianism, it proves too much, viz. that Jesus was not a man ;

[ocr errors]

posed miraculous conception of Christ. It is a common Jewish phrase to express a proper human being. See Job xiv. 1. xv. 14. xxv. 4. Matt. xi. 11. Luke vii. 28." Note in the Improved Version-I certainly think that the expression means a proper human being;' and that it is well illustrated by the passages referred to; but the phraseology in the original is somewhat different. In this passage it is γενομενον εκ γυναικος, in the other passages it is γεννητος γυναικός. That Paul uses γενομενος in the sense here given, see Rom. i. 3.

[ocr errors]

The Apostle obviously lays some stress upon the circumstance, that he who was to redeem those who were subject to the law, should not only be a human being, but also be himself subject to the law. Compare with this the reasoning of the Writer to the Hebrews, ch. ii. 16, 17, and the remarks made in this Chapter on that Epistle. † Gal. iv. 14. But ye received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus;' or but received me as a messenger of God, as Christ Jesus.'

[ocr errors]

Paul, an Apostle, not of men, nor by men, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father who raised him from the dead."—" The Apostle's distinction here is not between a man and a being of a superior order, but between men now living in the world, and who were themselves servants and messengers of Christ, and Jesus Christ himself, who had been raised from the dead and exalted to be the head and governor of the church." See Note in the Improved Version. -"Here observe," says Dr. Priestley," Jesus Christ is distinguished from God to whom he was subordinate, and by whose power, and not his own, he was raised from the dead."

and I should imagine that few would show the weakness of their cause, by adducing such passages.

1

VIII. The first Epistle to the Corinthians (A.D. 56,) contains no information respecting the nature of our Saviour in addition to what has been already stated. It is true the Apostle tells his converts, that he had not fed them and could not then feed them with meat, since they were not able to bear it; from which it might be inferred that he had kept and still kept the more mysterious doctrines of the Gospel from them: but if this inference suited the context, (which it does not,) it would also require us to admit, that these doctrines could not be essential to sanctification and redemption.t-The fact is, that if we take words in the plain obvious sense, we cannot learn from this Epistle that Jesus was the very and eternal God, or even (by direct inference) that he possessed a nature superior to that of man. The Apostle, if he had foreseen the additions which have been made to the simplicity that is in Christ,'‡ could not have more effectually guarded against one of the most striking of them, (the doctrine of trinity in unity, that in unity of the Godhead there are three persons of one substance, power, and eternity,) than he has in this Epistle by the following words; 'to us there is ONE GOD the FATHER, from whom

6

* 1 Cor. iii. 2. 2 Cor. xi. 3.

† See 1 Cor. i, 2, 30. iii. 16, 23, &c.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »