I cannot enter upon subjects of so much difficulty as the Son of God and the Holy Spirit, without again premising a few introductory words. If indeed I were a member of the Church of Rome, which requires implicit obedience to its creed on all points of faith, I should have acquiesced from education or habit in its simple decree and authority, even though it denies that the doctrine of the Trinity, as now received, is capable of being proved from any passage of Scripture. But since I enrol myself among the number of those who acknowledge the word of God alone as the rule of faith, and freely advance what appears to me much more clearly deducible from the Holy Scriptures than the commonly received opinion, I see no reason why any one who belongs to the same Protestant or Reformed Church, and professes to acknowledge the same rule of faith as myself, should take offence at my freedom, particularly as I impose my authority on no one, but merely propose what I think more worthy of belief than the creed in general acceptation. I only entreat that my readers will ponder and examine my statements in a spirit which desires to discover nothing but the truth, and with a mind free from prejudice. For without intending to oppose the authority of Scripture, which I consider inviolably sacred, I only take upon myself to refute human interpretations as often as the occasion requires, conformably to my right, or rather to my duty as a man. If indeed those with whom I have to contend were able to produce direct attestation from heaven to the truth of the doctrine which they espouse, it would be nothing less than impiety to venture to raise, I do not say a clamour, but so much as a murmur against it. But inasmuch as they can lay claim to nothing more than human powers, assisted by that spiritual illumination which is common to all, it is not unreasonable that they should on their part allow the privileges of diligent research and free discussion to another inquirer, who is seeking truth through the same means and in the same way as themselves, and whose desire of benefiting mankind is equal to their own.
In reliance, therefore, upon the divine assistance, let us now enter upon the subject itself.
OF THE SON OF GOD.
Since Christ not only bears the name of the only begotten Son of God, but is also several times called in Scripture God, notwithstanding the universal doctrine that there is but one God, it appeared to many, who had no mean opinion of their own acuteness, that there was an inconsistency in this; which gave rise to an hypothesis no less strange than repugnant to reason, namely, that the Son, although personally and numerically another, was yet essentially one with the Father, and that thus the unity of God was preserved.
But unless the terms unity and duality be signs of the same ideas to God which they represent to men, it would have been to no purpose that God had so repeatedly inculcated that first commandment, that he was the one and only God, if another could be said to exist besides, who also himself ought to be believed in as the one God. Unity and duality cannot consist of one and the same essence. God is one ens (entity), not two; one essence and one subsistence, which is nothing but a substantial essence, appertain to one ens; if two subsistences or two persons be assigned to one essence, it involves a contradiction of terms, by representing the essence as at once simple and compound. If one divine essence be common to two persons, that essence or divinity will either be in the relation of a whole to its several parts, or of a genus to its several species, or lastly of a common subject to its accidents. If none of these alternatives be conceded, there is no mode of escaping from the absurd consequences that follow, such as that one essence may be the third part of two or more.
There would have been no occasion for the supporters of these opinions to have offered such violence to reason, nay even to so much plain scriptural evidence, if they had duly considered God’s own words addressed to kings and princes, Psal. 82:6. I have said, Ye are gods, and all of you are children of the Most High, or those of Christ himself, John 10:35. if he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken—, or those of St.Paul, 1 Cor. 8:5, 6. for though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or earth, (for there be gods many and lords many,) but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, &c. or lastly of St. Peter, 2 Ep. 1:4. that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, which implies much more than the title of gods in the sense in which that title is applied to kings; though no one would conclude from this expression that the saints were co-essential with God.
Let us then discard our own speculations touching sacred matters, and follow the doctrine of Holy Scripture exclusively. Accordingly, no one need expect that I should here premise a long metaphysical discussion, and introduce all that commonly received drama of the personalities in the Godhead: since it is most evident, in the first place, from numberless passages of Scripture, that there is in reality but one true independent and supreme God; and as he is called one, (inasmuch as human reason and the common language of mankind, and the Jews, the people of God, have always considered him as one person only, that is, one in a numerical sense,) let us have recourse to the sacred writings in order to know who this one true and supreme God is. This knowledge ought to be derived in the first instance from the gospel, since the clearest doctrine respecting the one God must necessarily be that copious and explanatory revelation concerning him which was delivered by Christ himself to his apostles, and by the apostles to their followers. Nor is it to be supposed that the gospel would be ambiguous or obscure on this subject; for it was not given for the purpose of promulgating new and incredible doctrines respecting the nature of God, hitherto utterly unheard of by his own people, but to announce salvation to the Gentiles through Messiah the Son of God, according to the promise of the God of Abraham. No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him, John 1:18. Let us therefore consult the Son in the first place respecting God.
According to the testimony of the Son, delivered in the clearest terms, the Father is that one true God, by whom are all things. Being asked by one of the scribes, Mark 12:28, 29, 32. which was the first commandment of all, he answered from Deut. 6:4. the first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord, or as it is in the Hebrew, Jehovah our God is one Jehovah. The scribe assented; there is one God, and there is none other one but he, and in the following verse Christ expresses his approbation of this answer. Nothing can be more clear than that it was the opinion of the scribe, as well as of the other Jews, that by the unity of God is intended his oneness of person. That this God was no other than God the Father, is proved from John 8:41, 54. we have one Father, even God. It is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say that he is your God. 4:21. neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, shall ye worship the Father. Christ therefore agrees with the whole people of God, that the Father is that one and only God. For who can believe that the very first of the commandments would have been so obscure, and so ill understood by the Church through such a succession of ages, that two other persons, equally entitled to worship, should have remained wholly unknown to the people of God, and debarred of divine honours even to that very day? especially as God, where he is teaching his own people respecting the nature of their worship under the gospel, forewarns them that they would have for their God the one Jehovah whom they had always served, and David, that is, Christ, for their King and Lord. Jer. 30:9. they shall serve Jehovah their God, and David their King, whom I will raise up unto them. In this passage Christ, such as God willed that he should be known or served by his people under the gospel, is expressly distinguished from the one God Jehovah, both by nature and title. Christ himself therefore, the Son of God, teaches us nothing in the gospel respecting the one God but what the law had before taught, and everywhere clearly asserts him to be his Father. John 17:3, this is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. 20:17. I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God; if therefore the Father be the God of Christ, and the same be our God, and if there be none other God but one, there can be no God beside the Father.
Paul, the apostle and interpreter of Christ, teaches the same in so clear and perspicuous a manner, that one might almost imagine the inculcation of this truth to have been his sole object. No teacher of catechumens in the Church could have spoken more plainly and expressly of the one God, according to the sense in which the universal consent of mankind has agreed to understand unity of number. 1 Cor. 8:4–6. we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one: for though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many and lords many,) but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. Here the expression there is none other God but one excludes not only all other essences, but all other persons whatever; for it is expressly said in the sixth verse, that the Father is that one God, wherefore there is no other person but one.
Again, Eph. iv. 4–6, there is one body and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. Here there is one Spirit, and one Lord; but the Father is one, and therefore God is one in the same sense as the remaining objects of which unity is predicated, that is, numerically one, and therefore one also in person. 1 Tim. 2:5. there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. It cannot be explained how any one can be a mediator to himself on his own behalf; according to Gal. 3:20. a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. How then can God be a mediator of God? Not to mention that he himself uniformly testifies of himself, John 8:28. I do nothing of myself, and ver.42. neither came I of myself. Undoubtedly therefore he does not act as a mediator to himself; nor return as a mediator to himself. Rom. 5:10. we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son. To whatever God we were reconciled, if he be one God, he cannot be the God by whom we are reconciled, inasmuch as that God is another person; for if he be one and the same, he must be a mediator between himself and us, and reconcile us to himself by himself; which is an insurmountable difficulty.
Though all this be so self-evident as to require no explanation,--namely, that the Father alone is a self-existent God, and that a being which is not self-existent cannot be God, it is wonderful with what futile subtleties, or rather with what juggling artifices, certain individuals have endeavoured to elude or obscure the plain meaning of these passages; leaving no stone unturned, recurring to every shift, attempting every means, as if their object were not to preach the pure and unadulterated truth of the gospel to the poor and simple, but rather by dint of vehemence and obstinacy to sustain some absurd paradox from falling, by the treacherous aid of sophisms and verbal distinctions, borrowed from the barbarous ignorance of the schools.
They defend their conduct, however, on the ground, that though these opinions may seem inconsistent with reason, they are to be held for the sake of other passages of Scripture, and that otherwise Scripture will not be consistent with itself. Let us then set reason aside, and appeal again to the language of Scripture.
The passages in question are two only. The first is John 10:30. I and my Father are one,—that is, one in essence, as it is commonly interpreted. But God forbid that we should decide rashly on any point relative to the Deity. Two things may be called one in more than one way. Scripture saith, and the Son saith, I and my Father are one,—I bow to their authority. Certain commentators conjecture that they are one in essence,—I reject what is merely man's invention. For the Son has not left us to conjecture in what manner he is one with the Father, (whatever member of the Church may have first arrogated to himself the merit of the discovery,) but explains the doctrine himself most fully, so far as we are concerned to know it. The Father and the Son are one, not indeed in essence, for he had himself said the contrary in the preceding verse, my Father, which gave them me, is greater than all, (see also 14:28. my Father is greater than I,) and in the following verses he distinctly denies that he made himself God in saying, I and my Father are one; he insists that he had only said as follows, which implies far less, 10:36. say ye of him whom the Father hath sanctifted, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? This must be spoken of two persons not only not co-essential, but not co-equal. Now if the Son be laying down a doctrine respecting the unity of the divine essence in two persons of the Trinity, how is it that he does not rather attribute the same unity of essence to the three persons? Why does he divide the indivisible Trinity? For there cannot be unity without totality. Therefore, on the authority of the opinions holden by my opponents themselves, the Son and the Father without the Spirit are not one in essence. How then are they one? It is the province of Christ alone to acquaint us with this, and accordingly he does acquaint us with it. In the first place, they are one, inasmuch as they speak and act with unanimity; and so he explains himself in the same chapter, after the Jews had misunderstood his saying: 10:38. believe the works, that ye may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in him. 14:10. believest, thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you, I speak not of myself, but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Here he evidently distinguishes the Father from himself in his whole capacity, but asserts at the same time that the Father remains in him; which does not denote unity of essence, but only intimacy of communion. Secondly, he declares himself to be one with the Father in the same manner as we are one with him, that is, not in essence, but in love, in communion, in agreement, in charity, in spirit, in glory. John 14:20, 21. at that day ye shall know that I am in the Father, and ye in me, and I in you: he that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me, and he that loveth me, shall be loved of my Father. 17:21. that they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us. ver. 23. I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know, that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them as thou hast loved me. ver. 22. the glory which thou gavest me I have given them, that they may be one, even as we are one. When the Son has shown in so many modes how he and the Father are one, why should I set them all aside? why should I, on the strength of my own reasoning, though in opposition to reason itself, devise another mode, which makes them one in essence; or why, if already devised by some other person, adopt it, in preference to Christ's own mode? If it be proposed on the single authority of the Church, the true doctrine of the orthodox Church herself teaches me otherwise; inasmuch as it instructs me to listen to the words of Christ before all other.
Buy: And the Word was a god: A New Book on the Most Disputed Text in the New Testament - John 1:1 and The Dark History of the Trinity, is now available on Amazon by clicking here...and both are only 99 cents
See also Unitarianism & Universalism - 100 Books on DVDrom and Over 200 PDF Books on the Christology & Deity of Christ on DVDrom
See also Unitarianism & Universalism - 100 Books on DVDrom and Over 200 PDF Books on the Christology & Deity of Christ on DVDrom
No comments:
Post a Comment