« AnteriorContinuar »
if not, it shall not be so." (11.)
(11.) “ And Elijah was taken up by a whirlwind into heaven.” (12.) “ And Elisha saw it and he cried, my father, my father, &c. 14. “ And when he had smitten the waters they parted hither and thither, and Elisha went over.” (15.) When the sons of the prophets saw him, they said, the spirit of Elijah doth rest on Elisha. And they came to meet him and bowed themselves to the ground before him." Besides we find in the evangelical writings that notwithstanding the power of performing miracles given by Jesus to his apostles, they could not avail themselves of such a gift, until their faith in God was become firm and complete : It is thence evident that God is the only source of the power and influence that one creature has over another. Matthew X. 1. “ And when he bad called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickuess and all manner of disease." Ch. XVII. 16. “And I brought him (the lunatic child) to thy disciples and they could not cure him.” (19) “ Then came the disciples to Jesus apart and said why could not we cast him out? (20) “And Jesus said unto them because of your unbelief; for verily I say unto you, if you have faith as a grain of
mustard seed, you shall say unto this moun. tain, remove hence to another place and it shall remove, and nothing shall be impossible ubto you." (21.) - How be it this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.” Mark XI. 22. “ And Jesus answering sajih unto them (his disciples) have faith in God (23.) for verily I say unto you that whosever shall say unto this mountain be thou removed" &c.
In my Second Appeal I mentioned that it is evident from the first ch. of Genesis that's in the beginning of the creation God bestowed on man his likeness and sovereignty over all liv. ing creatures. Was not his own likeness and that dominion peculiar to God, before mankind were made partakers of them ? Did God then deify man by such a mark of distinction"? on which the Editor thus remarks ; “it is in reality asking did God make him cease to be a creature by thus creating him ? we presume he expects no answer.” If the Editor acknowledges that God by bestowing on man his peculiar likeness and dominion did not make him cease to be a creature, is he not according to the same principle obliged to admit the opinion that altho' God raised Jesus above all, and bestowed on him a portion of his peculiar power and influence, yet he did not make him cease to be a creature. :.. .
In my Second Appeal (page 14. and 15.) I selected nineteen passages out of many in which Jesiis distinctly disavows the divine nature and manifests his subordination to God; to which the Editor replies, " they can prove nothing to his purpose, till they shew that his thus becoming incarnate, changed that divine nature which he possessed from eternity &c.” I therefore take upon myself to ask the Rev. Editor, whether the following pagsages found among those already quoted do pot prove the entire humanity of the son, or (in the words of the Editor,) a complete change in his divine nature, if he was ever possessed of it? “as the father gave me commandment even so, I do." "I CAN OF MINE OWNSELF DO NOTHING:" “all that the father giveth me shall come to me" “as my father hath taught me I speak these things.” “ To my father and your father and to my God and your God.” “Bebold my servant whom I have chosen." If these declarations do fall short of shewing the human nature of the person who affirms them, I as well as the Editor, would be at a loss to point out any saying of any of the preceding prophets that might tend to substantiate their humanity. The Editor may perhaps say, after the example of bis orthodox friends, that these as well as other sayings to the same effect proceeded
from Jesus in his human capacity, I shall then entreat the Editor to shew me any authority in the scriptures, distinguishing one class of the sayiogs of Jesus Christ as man from another set of the same author as God. Supposing Jesus was of a two-fold nature divine and human, as the Editor believes hima to be; his divine nature in this case, before his appearance in this world, must be acknowledged perfectly pure and unadulterated by hu. manity : But after he had become incarnate, according to the Eoitor, was he not made of a mixed nature of God and man, possessing at one time both opposite sorts of consciousness and capacity? Was there not a CHANGE of a pure nature into a mixed one? I will not, however, pursue the subject further now as I have already fully noticed it in another place. (page 137 and 140.) The Editor adverts here to Heb. I. 10. 1 Cor. XV. 24 and 25. but as I have examined the former in page 122 and the late ter in page 126. I will not revert to the consi. deration of them in this place.
At page 589. the Editor thus censures me “to say that in the mouth of the fa. ther "for ever and ever” means only a limited period, is to destroy the eternity of God himself,” and he quotes " Jehovah shall reign
for ever and ever.” I have shown by numerons instances both in my Second and in the present Appeal, that the terms “for ever" “everlasting," when applied to any one except God, signify long duration I therefore presume to think that the Editor might have spared this censure as being altogether undeserved. I will here however point out one or two more passages in the mouth of the father, which contain the term “ for ever” and in which it can imply only long duration ; Gen. XVII. 8. " And I will give unto thee and unto thy seed after thee-all the land of Canaan for an ever. lasting possession" Jeremiah VIJ. 7. “ then will cause you to dwell in this place in the land that I gave to your fathers for ever and ever” Daniel VII. 18. “ But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom forever even for ever and ever.” Is the land of Canaan now in possession of Israel; and will it remain in their possession after all rule, authority, and power have been put down, and after the son bas delivered up bis kingdom to God the fa. ther of the universe ? 1 Cor. XV. 24. and 28.
The Editor in the course of this discussion notices Philippians II. 6, whence he con. cludes that Jesus was in the form of God and thought it not robbery to be equal with God,