Page images

name under heaven, given among men, whereby we must be saved.” But if Jesus Christ be our only Saviour, he must be “ the only wise God, our Saviour.” (2.) It is he “ that is able to present us faultless before the presence of his glory." "Christ also loved the Church, and gave himself for it;-that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy, and without blemish.” He, therefore, is "the only wise God, our Saviour.”

4. He is denominated the mighty God. Isaiah predicts the coming of the Messiah, and says, “ his name shall be called the mighty God,” Isa. ix, 6. In this verse the prophet speaks of both the human and the divine nature of Jesus Christ. “Unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given.” These words unquestionably refer to the hu. man nature which he should take on himself.” But the following words, “ his name shall be called the mighty God,” evidently refer to the divine nature. “ The Word of God,” which Mr. G. says is " no other than God him. self,” was to be “ made flesh,” or to take upon him the human nature; and on account of that union of the di. vine nature with the human, the “child born," the “ Son given," should be called “the mighty God."

It is curious to attend to the palpable inconsistency of Mr. G.'s efforts to attach to the original words some other interpretation than that given by our translators. After a variety of contradictory criticisms, he candidly avows that he “ feels no anxiety as to which of the inter. pretations be adopted,” (Vol. i, p. 501.) We give him full credit for his perfect indifference, as we know that the work of a Socinian is not to explain, but to confound. “ The phrase,” he says, "might be translated “a mighty Lord,' or counsellor of God, mighty."" (Vol. i, p. 194.) That is : (1.) The word (el) should not be translated God, but Lord. (2.) It may be translated God, if you will permit him to derange the whole passage. In another page the terms “ Wonderful, Counsellor, mighty God,” are all permitted to stand as a just translation, and are applied by him “ to the great Jehovah.” (Vol. i, p. 499.) To use Mr. G.'s own words, “ Is not this saying a thing, and then unsaying it again, which is saying nothing at all? If the last clause is to be believed, the first can. not, because the last is a negation of the first ; and if the first is to be believed, for that very reason the last cannot.” (Vol. i, p. 360.). It would have been well if this had been the only proof which Mr. G. has given, that his business is not to attend to the voice of Scripture, but to invalidate its testimony:

The reader will now be prepared to inquire, Why these laborious efforts to set aside the common translation, by a variety of contradictory criticisms? The answer is ready. Not because the common translation, which has the authority of Bishop Lowth, is not as proper as any other which has been given ; but because the Socinians meet with many difficulties in the application of it. Those dif. ficulties we shall now examine.

“With what propriety can the great Jehovah be the subject of a prophecy, as about to become something which he is not ? Can an immutable being be subject to change? Can the omnipotent Creator become a creature ? Can the self-existent Jehovah become a child, an infant born? What is to be understood when it is said that Je. hovah is a son given ?(Vol. i, p. 495.)

These are enow for a specimen of Mr. G.’s difficulties. They are mere repetitions of the same idea, couched in different terms. We cannot have a more clear demon. stration than this, that the Socinians, when they call for proof of the proper divinity of Christ, expect us to at. tempt, at least, to prove that the divine nature was changed into human, and that that huma was still divine. This is precisely what they would insinuate to be our opinion. From hence they draw all the supposed absurdities of our system, and on this hypothesis they ground their principal objections. These queries may serve to convict of error any who have formed such an opinion ; but they are not pointed at the doctrine of judicious Trinitarians. We do not believe that Jehovah became what he was not be. fore; or that he underwent any change contrary to his essential immutability. We do not believe that the Cre. ator became a creature : or that the Self-existent became

If Mr. G. ask us what we do believe, we answer in his own words, We believe that “the Word, which was no other than God himself, was made flesh," (vol. i, pp. 197, 200,) or took upon him the human nature. What can he object to this ? This human nature was the subject of prophecy; was the child born; was the Son given by Jehovah ; was advanced to power and dominion; and his union with the divine nature rendered appropriate that appellation, “the mighty God,” which be. longed to the divine nature before that union.

a child.

Mr. G. so sensible that he has not fixed any impro. priety upon our translation, that he adopts one additional measure to get rid of it. “ After all,” says he,“ they are only names, as Elihu, Gabriel,” &c. So, at length, we find that Jesus Christ is called the mighty God. If Mr. G. can find the place where this is made the proper name of Christ, he will not have proved what he aims at, till he has proved that our Lord was not in character all that he was called by name : that he was not a Saviour who was called Jesus, and that he was not anointed, who was called Christ.

One more objection, of a different cast, deserves attention. “Can the almighty Father of all, with any propriety, be called a Son ?” That is, how can Jesus Christ be a Son, and be his own Father ? Not at all. But let Mr. G. rather ask whether Jesus Christ may not be a Son in one sense, and a Father in another : “the Son of God,” and “ the Father of the everlasting age ?

5. He is denominated the supreme and ever blessed God. “ Christ, who is over all, God, blessed for ever," Rom. ix, 5. These words always did, and ever will, stand in the way of the Socinians. But their motto is, Nil desperandum. The first thing to be done is, to bring this doctrine under suspicion by contrasting with it a passage which appears to them to contradict it. The elect pas. sage is this : “When all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” Here is the apparent contradiction. The difficulty, however, is easily solved by applying the doctrine of the twofold nature of Christ. Here is a human nature which was “ of the Israelites," which, after being “ obedient unto death, even the death of the cross, was highly exalted, and received a name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of (things) in hea. ven, and in earth, and under the earth; and that every


tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” When all these things shall be subdued, this human nature shall also become subject to the divine. On the other hand, here is, in the same person, a divine nature which existed before the incarna. tion, which had glory with the Father before the world was, and which shall be “ all in all” when all shall have been subdued. The next thing to be done is to supply the word entw, be. The passage then becomes a pious ejacu. lation : God, who is over all, be blessed for ever!” But who gave to the Socinians this authority to add words of their own, whereby to pervert entirely the meaning of the words of God? The interpolation of a word is not, however, all that is necessary for the perversion of the meaning of this passage : the construction of it must also be altered. “ In an ejaculatory sentence the participle is always put . before the substantive.” Evãoyntos o Deos, is then the form, as in 1 Peter i, 3 ; Eph. i, 3; Luke xix, 38. But in a declarative sentence the substantive or pronoun is put first. The form then is, os xotiv Evãoyntos, as in Rom. i, 25; ο θεος, ο ων ευλογητος, as in 2 Cor. xi, 31; or, ο ων Osos evãoyntos, as in the passage under examination.Jesus Christ, therefore, is not only the blessed God, but also the supreme God: “ who is over all for evermore.

As Mr. G. has generously assisted us by several important concessions, he will now afford us farther assist. ance by a large collection of passages which we shall quote from his supplement. Having arranged them under different heads, he has thereby stamped them with a pe. culiar character which will spare us a great deal of argumentation. The reader will please to observe that the first passage of each of the following sections is cited by Mr. G. in the place referred to as properly descriptive of the divine glory of God the Father.

I. “ Jehovah the one or only God.

“ Jude 4 : Denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Vol. i, p. 227.) This is one of those passages in which the article is not repeated, and which we have already shown (p. 79) speak only of one person. Our (SEOTTOTIV) governor, God, and our Lord Jesus Christ, are therefore the same. But, beside this, it is to be ob. served that in a parallel passage Jesus Christ is spoken

of as our (δεσποτην) governor. Τον αγορασαντα αυτους δεσ. ποτην αρνούμενοι και “ denying the governor that bought them,” 2 Pet. ii, 1. This passage Mr. G. has placed among

those which distinguish the supreme God by peculiarly high titles and epithets. (Vol. i, p. 275.) But Jesus Christ is he that bought them : “ Thou wast slain, and (qyopaoas) hast bought us to God by thy blood,” Rev. v, 9. Now, if he that bought us is our governor, and there is but one governor, God; it follows that Jesus Christ, who bought us with his blood, is our one governor God.

« 1 Tim. vi, 15: Who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords.” (Vol. I, p. 227.) The same titles are given to Jesus Christ. 6 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall over. come them; for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings," Rev. xvii, 14. “ His name is called the Word of God. And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name writ. ten, King of kings, and Lord of lords,” Rev. xix, 13–16. If therefore the King of kings, and Lord of lords, is “ the blessed and only Potentate," Jesus Christ is that blessed and only Potentate.

II. God absolutely and by way of eminence."

“ Luke xxii, 69: Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God," (Vol. i, p. 229.) “ Christ the power of God," 1 Cor. i, 24.

“ Mark ii, 7: Who can forgive sins, but God only ?" (Vol. i, p. 229.) So Mr. G. quotes, as good authority for a Socinian, the enemies of our Lord.

66 When Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts? Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk ? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house,” Mark ii, 7-11.

“ Heb. xii, 23 : God, the judge of all.” (Vol. i, p. 263.) “ The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son,” John v, 22.

III. “God with peculiarly high titles and epithets." “ Matt. xxvi, 63: The living God.” (Vol. I, p. 269.)

« PreviousContinue »