« AnteriorContinuar »
men.”—“David took the crown of their king from off his head :" "and cut them (the citizens) with saws and with harrows of iron?” Are not these directly suitable to the history of David the conqueror, called by God his son, rather than to the office and nature of the meek and lowly Jesus, who, though most exalted among the sons of God, was himself the victim of the rage of unbelievers ? Even upon the trinitarian system, Do not such sentences as “ask I shall give thee the heathen for an inheritance,” corresponding with the passages in Chronicles, “ The Lord brought the fear of him (David) upun all nations—” “ Thus the Lord preserved David whithersoever he went," admit of better application to David, whose glory depended from time to time upon his supplications to God, than to Jesus, who as God himself, according to the Editor, was possessed of infinite power and glory from eternity and needed not to ask of another? Does not such address to the heathen kings as “kiss the son lest he be angry” &c. agree with the circumstances mentioned in 1 Chronicles XVIII. “ The Moabites became David's ser
vants and brought gifts:"-" The Syrians be- cane David's servants, and brought gifts:'
and he brought out the people and cut them · with saws and horrows of iron and with axes :
even so dealt David with all the cities of the children of Ammon”?
The opponents whom David broke “with a rod of iron” were his political enem es; consequently the assertion of the Eiitor that" the destruction to spiritual enemies is no whe e in scripture described as arising from the wrath of a mere creature” has no applicaliity to the subject in question. As to his assertion "prophets denounced on men the wrail of God and pronounced on them a curse in his name,” I only refer the Revd Editor to 2 Kings V. 26—27. in which Elisha is said, when displeased at the conduct of his servant, to have mi. raculously punished him with leprosy, without pronouncing on him verbally any curse in the name of God;-and also to Exodus XXIII. 21. wherein he will find that the angels of God, if provoked, have the power of keeping away pardon from men.
It may however be fairly concluded from the authority and acts of Jesus himself, that both the angels and the prophets of God in performing miracles either of punishment or reward according as they were disposed, applied always to God for power, though they sometimes omitted to express such applica
tions verbally. John XI. 41-42. “ And Jesus (in raising Lazarus from the dead) lifted up his eyes and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me, and I knew that thou hearest nie always."
From the words " who trust in him” found in the second psalm the Editor attempis to prove the deity of the son on the supposition that the phrase “ to trust in” is exclusively applicable to God, and corroborates his opinion by Jeremiah XVII. 5., forgetting that this term though it is often used with reference to God, yet is applied sometimes to created bein :3. Proverbs XXXI. 11. • The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil. Isajah XIV. 32. “ The Lord bath founded Zion and the poor of his people shall trust in it.” As to Jeremiah XVII. 5 quoted by the Editor “ Thus saith Jehovah cursed be he that trusteth in man and maketh flesh his arm and whose heart departeth from Jehovah," it of course implies that he who trusis in man independently of God should be cursed, as appears froin the last sentence of the same verse“ whose heart departeth from Jehovah.”
The Editor quotes Psalm XXIV. “ The earth is Jehovah's and the fuluess thereof, the
world and they that dwell therein ; for he hath founded it upon the sea and established it upon the floods" and compares it with John I. 3. “All things were made by him (the Word) and without him was not any thing made which was made.” The inference which he draws from this comparison is that “ In creating power Christ is equal to Jehovah." Were we to overlook the mistranslation of this verse* in the English version (which it is almost iinpossible not to notice) and to understand the passage as it stands in the orthodox translation, we should esteem Jesus as the cause of all created things. But we should be in this case naturally inclined to ascertain whether Jesus was an efficient or an instru. mental cause of those things; since the prepo. sition “hy” found in the verse signifies either a
* All things were done by him.] “ All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made, that was made.” Newcome : who explains it of the creation of the visible material world by Christ, as the agent and instrument of God. See his notes on verse 3 and 10. But this is a sense which the word sy eveTo will not admit. Vivouc occurs upwards of seven hundred times in the new Testament, bot never in the sense of create. It signifies in this gospel, where it occurs Giftyabree times, to be, to come, to become, to come to pass : also, to be done or transacted, Chapter XV. 7; XIX. 36. It has the latter sense, Matthew V. 18; VI. 8; XXI. 42; XXVI. 6. All things in the chris. rian dispensation were done by Christ; i, e. by his authority, and according to his direction; and in the ministry committed to his apostles, nothing has been done without his warrant. See John XV, 4-5. " Without me ye can do nothing" compare ver. 7, 10, 16, ; Joba XVII, 8; Col. I. 16, 17, Cappe, ibid. (Improved version.)
principal agent of an action or an instrument therein. We find Hebrews I. 2 (as it stands in the English version) deciding the question beyond a doubt: “(God) hath in these last days spoken unto is by his son whom he hath appointed heir of all things by whom also he made the worlds." Ephe. I11. 9.“ who (God) created all things by Jesus Christ.” Here all the worlds are represented as made by Jesus as an instrument in the hands of God. It is hoped that after reflecting upon this decision by the Author of these Epistles, the Editor may perhaps retract his assertion that “in creating power Christ is equal to Jehovah” and be of opinion that the world was made by the will of one being. Could not Jehovah to whom the Editor ascribes omnipotence create this world independently of another omnipotent being equal to him " in creating power ?" If not, the world must be, in this case, the joint production of Jehovah and Christ, as well as of the Holy Ghost, (whom the Editor here omits to notice) and each of them must depend upon the others in creation like joint managers of a con
Can the Editor point out any set of men or any nation professing a grosser polytheism than this? The only difference that he can show between his notion and that of ayowed Polythiests must consist only in respect