Imágenes de páginas

and of the same nature, (Psalm LXXXIX. 26. "he shall cry unto me, Thou art MY FATHER, my God and the rock of my salvation") and we also must esteem Israel one in nature with God; (Jeremiah III. 4.“ Wilt thou not from this time cry unto me, MY FATHER thou art the guide of my youth).” We must even adoit all Christians to be one in nature with the father of the universe, for we are taught to pray to OUR FATHER in heaven Matthew VI. 9. See also verses 1, 4, 6, 8, 14, 15, 18 and 32 of the same chapter: John XX. 17. “ Mv fa. ther and your father” &c. 2 Cor. I. 3. “ the father of our Lord Jesus Christ and the fa. ther of mercies &c." To enable my readers to take a clear view of this passage, I here quote the context, as well as the pote found in the Improved Version upon it ; verses 29 and 30.“ My father, who gave them me, is greater than all: and none is able to pluck them out of my father's hand.” “I and my father are one” that is “ To snatch my true desciples out of my hand would be to snatch them out of my almighty father's hand; because • I and my father are one;' one in design, action, a. greement, affection. See ch. XVII. 11. 21. 22. 1 Cor. 111. 8. “ Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one." (Improved version) Both in the scriptures and in ordinary com

position, unity, when referred to two sube stances, implies invariably perfect concord of will or some other qualities and hy nc means oneness of nature; a fact which my readers will perceive by a slight attention to the common usage of language and also to the fole lowing yerses-Gen. II. 24.“ and he (the hus. band) shall cleave unto his wife and they two shall be one fleshEzekiel XXXVII. 19. “I will take the stick of Joseph and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah and make them one stick and they shall be one in mine hand" 1 Cor. X. 17. “ For we being many, are one bread and one body; for we are all partakers of that one bread," .

[ocr errors]

I never amused myself with the thought that Christ did " pray that his disciples might be one with him and his heavenly father, nor did I ever rejoice at the idea that Jesus “a. man approved of God” was one in nature with the invisible Most High; Lonly observed in my Second Appeal, that if trinitarian authors succeeded in their attempt to prove the Deity of Jesus Christ from a perverted interpretation of such phrases as “the father in me and I in him,” -“ he dwelleth in God and God in him,” they would unavoidably increase the number of the persons of the Godhead much

beyond three, since similar expressions are frequently found, applied to the disciples of Jesus-John XIV. 20.“ At that day ye shall know (addressing himself to his disciples) I am in my father and ye in me and I in you XVII. 21. “ thou father art in me and I in thee that they may be also one in us” John VI. 56. “ He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me and I io him.” ] John IV. 15. “ whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the son of God-God dwelleth in him and he in God.” 2 Peter 1. 4. “ that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature."

· The Editor seems displeased having declined to submit indiscriminately to my countrymen the whole doctrine of the new Testament, because certain passages therein having undergone human distortions, occasion much dispute. I therefore beg to refer him to page 14 of this Essay as well as to all church history, which shew that my plan was conformable to the example laid down by the apostles and primitive Christians, who used to accomodate their instructions to the gra. dual progress of their followers.

In answer to his question “how was it that I did not feel struck with the absurdity

of a creature's creating all things” &c. I beg only to reply by another question viz. how does the Revd. Editor justify the idea that one, who was in the human shape possessed of human feelings and subject to the calls of nature, was the very God whom he defines as existing for ever, immaterial, invisible, and above all mortal causes or effects ?

The Revd. Editor says that “nothing can be more incorrect than my assertion page 26. that Jesus in John X. disavowed the charge of making himself God:after having borne the fullest testimony to his equality with God in ch. V. and VIII., at length prevarie cates and retracts for fear of death.” I there. fore refer to ch. V. and VIII. and now ask the Editor whether he calls the following sayings of Jesus found in chapter V. and VIII. the fullest testimonies to his equality with God? " The son can do nothing of himself,"_" for the father loveth the son and sheweth him all things that himself doth,"_" so the son quickeneth whom he will; for the father judgeth no man but hath committed all judgement unto the son,'-" he that heareth my word and be. lieveth on him that sent me hath everlasting life,"_'So hath he given to the son to have life in himself and hath given him authority" &c. "I


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

[ 281 ] cair of my mine owuself do nothing,"-I seek not mine own will, but the will of the father who hath sent me,"_" for the works which the father hath given me to finish &c.-"I am come in my father's name”--Ch. VIII, “but he that sent me is true,"-"I do nothing of myself but as my fatherhath taught me Ispeak these things.”_ “ But now ve seek to kill me a man that hath told you the truth which I have heard of God," “ neither came I myself but he sent me,"_“I seek not mine own glory,"_"I know him (God) and keep his saying '* Do these testimonies a. mount to the equality of Jesus with his God and father? If so, the Editor must have in view a definition of the term "equality"quite different from that maintained by the world. I at the same time entreat the Editor to point out a single verse in either of these two chapters containing a proof of the equality of Jesus Christ with God, setting in defiance all the phrases, I have now quoted from these very chapters. After reflecting upon the above cited phrases the Editor will, I hope, spare the charge that Jesus " at length prevaricates and retracts for fear of death;" for, his disavowal of deity in ch. X. 36. was quite consistent with all the doce trines and precepts that he taught in the evan.

* As to Joho V. 23, I beg to refer my readers to the subsequent chapter of this Essay where I will examine the same verse fully,

« AnteriorContinuar »