« PreviousContinue »
and how Jayest thou then, shew us the Father ? 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 doth the works. A&ts ii. 22. Fesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God, among you, by miracles, and wonders, and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know. Aets x. 38. God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost, and with power ; who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
Heb. i. 3.
sider God as invisibie. The only way in which God can be seen, is in his works and in his dispensations. Thus we frequently say we fee God in the works of creation and providence, and particularly in the dispensation of the gospel. With the greatest propriety therefore might our saviour use this language concerning himself, who was the person chosen by God to introduce the gospel, and who of all other persons resembles God the Father most. See Col. i. 15. and
That nothing more was meant by him in this place seems evident from the subsequent verses. Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you, I speak net of myself, but the Fatřer who dwelleth in me, he doth the works. As if he had said, • In seeing me thou hast had every manifestation of the fupreme Father, which it is possible for thee to have. For thou hast heard the heavenly doctrines which I have taught, and thou hast beheld the mighty works which I have performed, and which, properly speaking, are not my own, but the Father's who dwelleth in me.”
From these passages it is evident, that our saviour never performed any miracles himlelf, and that his disciples never performed any in his name, in consequence of any natural inherent power of his own, but in consequence of those ykwers he had received from God. It is to no purpose for Trinitarians to have recourse to the union of natures in the person of Christ, to get rid of this difficulty. For had such an union really existed, the second person in the trinity, with whom it was that the human nature was united, would have been appealed to as the immediate author of the miracles. We find, however, that our saviour uniformly ascribed them, not to the power of God the Son, but of God the Father.
Mr. Hawker observes, that at the resurrection of Lazarus, Jesus called himself the resurrection and the life, and that in confirmation of the truth of it, he immediately brought a dead man from the grave. Hence, he concludes, that he must have been omnipotent. But it should be remembered, that Christ himself declares, that this power of raising persons from the dead, was given him by the Father. See John v. 26-29.
Great stress also is laid by Mr. Hawker, on our Lord's miracles being sometimes accompanied with the forgiveness of sins, But in answer to this, it
may be observed, that the same power was given to the disciples, John xx. 23. Whose foever fins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose foever fins ye retain, they are retained.
That by working miracles in the name of Christ, the apostles did not consider the power as derived immediately from him, which Mr. Hawker imagines to have been the case, (o) is evident from their joint prayer to Almighty God, that signs and wonders might be done in the name of his holy child (servant) Jesus. Ads iv. 24. 31. “ And they (the apostles) lift up their voice to God with one accord, and said, LORD, thou art God, which haft made heaven and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is-grant—that signs and wonders done by the name of thy holy child (fervant) Jesus." How, it may be asked, was it possible for them to have expressed, in stronger terms than these, their firm persuasion, that all the miracles they performed, were performed not by the power of Christ, but by the power of the Father in his name ?
Mr. Hawker's next argument is taken from the unparalleled discourses of Jesus Christ. (b) But his
(0) P. 188-191.
(b) P. 196.
reasoning on this subject is also set aside by the consideration, that our Lord himself frequently declares, he was not the author of his own doctrine; but that he received his doctrine, as well as the power of working miracles, from God. John vii. 16. Jesus answered them, and Jaid, My dotrine is not mine, but his that sent me. John viii. 28. Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lift up the son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things. John xiv. 24. And the word which you hear, is not mine, but the Father's which
So far, therefore, are the truths the blessed Jesus delivered, from being a proof of his deity, that they are a proof of the contrary. For had he been God, he would have spoken immediately from himself; but, on the contrary, we find him declaring, in the most express terms, that whatever doétrines he taught, they were not his own, but his Father's who sent him ; a declaration which he never could have made, had he been at the same time himself God.
No Divine Attribu'es given 10 Jesus Christ in the
H E next argument, says Mr. Hawker, in
proof of our blessed lord's divinity, inay be taken from the divine attributes he possessed; (9) the following of which, he is of opinion, are ascribed to him in the New Testainent.
Matt. xviii. 20. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. That this passage does not prove our Lord to be omnipresent, and the object of our prayers, is evident from the preceding verse ; where he says, If two of you shall agree on earth, as touching any thing that they fhall ask, it shall be done for them, not of myself, but of my Father which is in heaven. He then adds, For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. His meaning possibly might be, that whenever his disciples were gathered together to offer up their requests to Almighty God, their prayers would be
(9) P, 202,