Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

and the use of a strong figure of speech; and instead of establishing the doctrine of the Trinity, serves to show what false conclusions may be drawn from apparent facts.

The word "Lord" is ambiguous in the Scriptures. Sometimes Jehovah is translated Lord. Sometimes it is applied to Jesus. But it was likewise a common appellation of respect, addressed by an inferior to a superior, or by one person to another out of courtesy ; and was merely equivalent to our modern word, Sir. Christ applies it to himself in the capacity of being the Master or Spiritual Head of his disciples. "Ye call me Master and Lord, and ye say well, for so I am."

There is another passage in which this word occurs, and which throws so strong a light on Oriental manners and modes of speech, that I cannot forbear quoting it at length. It will operate, I hope, as a caution to building hypotheses upon the customs and language of the East."Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account of his servants. And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him which owed him ten thousand talents. But, forasmuch as he had not to pay, his Lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife and children. and all that he had, and payment to be made. The servant therefore fell down and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all." It is said that Jesus was God, because he was worshipped. Upon the same principle, this king must have been God, because he was worshipped. If Jesus is said to be God, because he is called Lord, so must this

king likewise be considered to be God, because his servant called him Lord. So Mary Magdalene addresses a person by the appellation of Lord, whom she took to be a gardener. "She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Lord, if thou hast borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him." The appellation Lord, then, in the passage which we are considering, proves nothing in relation to Christ's nature.

The figure of which I spoke, is contained in the words, "from heaven." I am now to consider how far these words prove that Christ came literally from heaven. The phrase, "from heaven," when applied to the second man, is plainly intended as an antithesis to the phrase, "from the earth," applied to the first man. "The first man is of the earth, literally from the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven." Now Adam did not literally come up out of the earth. He was not made under the surface of the ground, nor was he ever below the surface of the ground before he was above it. Neither was he wholly of earthly origin. His soul was from God, or, in Scripture phrase, from heaven. So the body of Christ was from the earth, and partook of the same nature as the body of Adam. Their physical natures were both the same. The contrast between the two, then, is not as to essential constitution, but to character. The one was sensual, the other spiritual; the one earthly, the other heavenly; the one bore the stamp of mortality, the other of immortality. All this is confirmed by the next clause of the paragraph. "As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy; and as is the heavenly, such are they also

that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly."

It may be expected that I should take some notice of a famous text in the first Epistle of John, concerning the three heavenly witnesses. But it is now so generally regarded as an interpolation, by all parties, that it is no longer quoted by any well informed advocate of the Trinity.

LECTURE X.

THE HOLY SPIRIT.

ACTS, X. 38.

HOW GOD ANOINTED JESUS OF NAZARETH WITH THE HOLY GHOST AND WITH POWER.

THE subject of the present lecture is the Holy Ghost. And the points to be discussed are, Is the Holy Ghost a person? Is the Holy Ghost a Person of a Trinity, having in himself distinctly all divine attributes? These two points are said to be proved from the Scriptures. Texts of Scripture are alleged to prove these propositions. Other texts are brought to disprove them. The question is, On which side does the evidence preponderate? Is there sufficient evidence to sustain those propositions, against the evidence which is presented on the other side? The whole argument, therefore, is a balance of proofs. The way to proceed therefore will be, to bring up the texts on both sides, and weigh their force.

There are, however, in this case, preliminary considerations, one of which is this; Is the thing to be proved probable in itself? Is it a thing likely to be

true, independently of testimony? Is there any intrinsic difficulty in the doctrine of a Trinity itself, which the personality and Deity of the Holy Ghost goes to establish? Does it conflict with known and fundamental truths, and is the other side consistent with them? I maintain that such is the case. The fundamental truth, both of the Old and New Testaments, is, "Jehovah your God, Jehovah is one." This doctrine asserts, on the other hand, Jehovah your God, Jehovah is three persons. The Bible tells me that there is but one Object of worship. "God is a Spirit, and they that worship him, must worship him in spirit and in truth." But Trinitarianism tells me that there are three Objects of worship, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, and bids me worship them. It tells me that there are three Persons in God, who is a Spirit, one of whom is the Holy Spirit. Now the very idea of a Spirit in a Spirit, coëxtensive with it, and equal to it, is, in my judgment, a contradiction, and introduces into the mind the most utter confusion.

The interpretation, then, which attributes distinct personality and Deity to the Holy Ghost, is antecedently improbable. No defender of the Bible ought to admit it without the most unequivocal proof. In fact, the worship of the Holy Ghost is fast dying out of the world. It is retained in but two churches, the Catholic and the Episcopal. It is retained with them only by the circumstance, that they worship by written forms, which were composed before, or soon after the Reformation, before Biblical inquiry had searched into

« ÎnapoiContinuă »