Page images
PDF
EPUB

347

CHAP. II.

SIMPLEST OPINION CONCERNING THE PERSON OF CHRIST.

HAVING stated the three opinions concerning the person of Christ, to which all others may be reduced, I proceed to compare the grounds upon which they rest.

And here I must begin with observing, that general reasonings concerning the probability of any of these opinions, or its apparent suitableness to the end of Christ's manifestation, ought not to enter into this comparison. Ingenious men have said plausible things in the way of general reasoning in support of all the three. It may to some appear difficult to balance one of the speculations against the other, because men will be inclined to give a preference according to the complexion of their understanding, and their former habits of thinking. But you will be satisfied that such reasonings are of little or no weight in the scale of evidence, when you recollect how soon they lead us beyond our depth. Probability in this subject depends upon a multitude of circumstances, which are not within the sphere of our observation. Fitness or expediency in this subject depends upon the order and the designs of that universal government of which we see only a part. The fact, that Jesus Christ appeared in the land of Judea the teacher of a new religion, could not have been investigated by reason, but like all other facts is received upon credible testimony. The particular character and dignity of this person, therefore, is matter of revelation to be gathered from the books that inform us of his appearance; and the only solid ground of any opinion concerning his character is a right interpretation of the books in which it is described. After we have attained by sound criticism the information which is thus afforded us, reason may be employed in vindicating the opinion which that

information warrants us to hold, in bringing forward those views of its expediency which revelation enables us to assign, and in balancing the difficulties which may adhere to it, against those difficulties and objections which appear to attend other opinions not taught by Scripture. Reasoning comes here in its proper place to support our faith, by being opposed to other reasonings that attempt to shake it, and to rescue the opinion that is delivered in the word of God from the charge of absurdity. But we profess to learn the opinion from the Scriptures; and we hold it with firmness, because it is revealed.

This general observation suggests the plan upon which I mean to proceed in comparing the grounds of the three opinions. I defer all speculations concerning them, till we have learned what the Scriptures teach. I begin with the simplest propositions, advancing, as the information of Scripture leads us, to those which are farther removed from ordinary apprehension; and in this way, I shall not arrive at the most intricate parts of the subject, till our minds are established in the belief of those facts which ought to guide our reasonings. This patient method of proceeding is not the most favourable to disputation upon this subject; it is not the best calculated for lecturing upon it in a showy amusing manner; but it appears to me that in which I ought to persevere, as the only method becoming our distance, and the certain method of attaining truth.

The simplest opinion concerning the person of Christ is, that he was merely a man, os avogaños; and the advocates of this opinion rest it upon numberless passages of Scripture, upon a solution of those declarations concerning Christ, which appear to be inconsistent with their opinion, and upon the insuperable difficulties in which they represent all other opinions as involved. I lay aside at present all consideration of these difficulties, because I consider every speculation concerning them as calculated to create a prejudice either for or against the evidence that is to be examined; and I direct your attention only to the Scripture grounds upon which this opinion is rested, and the declarations of Scripture by which it is opposed.

I take the Scripture grounds of this opinion from a book published about the year 1773 by Mr. Lindsey, who gave

the world a pledge of his honesty, by resigning his preferment in the Church of England, because he held this opinion. The following arguments and testimonies, he says, will abundantly show that Christ was a man like ourselves, saving those extraordinary gifts of divine wisdom and power, by which he was distinguished from the rest of mankind. 1. The prophecies that went before concerning Christ speak of him as a man, the seed of the woman; the seed of Abraham; a prophet like to Moses; the son of David. 2. In consequence of these predictions, the Jews in all times have expected the Messiah to be a man. "Hath not the Scripture said," observe the people in the gospel of John," that Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was ?" 3. Christ's appearance in the world; his birth; his increase in wisdom and stature: and the visible circumstances of his condition answered to the prophecies concerning him that he was to be a man. 4. Christ continually spake of himself as a man, the son of man being the phrase by which he commonly designed himself; and the son of God, the title which he sometimes assumed, admitting of an interpretation, which does not contradict his being a man. 5. John, his forerunner, calls him a man. And, 6. The four evangelists show by their narration that they took him to be a man; and in the other books of the New Testament he is often so designed.

The testimonies which Mr. Lindsey has collected under these heads* prove that Christ was truly a man; they undoubtedly convey an impression that he was a man in all respects like us; and if they contained the whole doctrine of Scripture concerning the nature and person of Christ, the first opinion would claim to be received upon the highest possible evidence. But Mr. Lindsey is aware that there are passages in Scripture which appear to contradict this opinion. Like all those who have agreed with him in opinion, he attempts to give a solution of them; and the point that must be considered is, whether there are declarations in Scripture of such a kind, as to efface the impression made by the testimonies collected under the six heads now mentioned, and to show that the first opinion rests upon a partial view of Scripture.

* Sequel to Apology, by Theophilus Lindsey, ch. 7.

350

CHAP. III.

PRE-EXISTENCE OF JESUS.

THE philosophy which you have learned has completely exploded the fanciful doctrine of some ancient sects, that the souls of men existed before they animated those bodies with which we behold them connected. You know that this doctrine supposes a fact, which is nowhere revealed, which is not vouched by human testimony, which is not supported by any solid argument, and is contradicted by the principle of consciousness. You believe that the souls of men began to exist with their bodies; and, although you cannot explain the time or the manner of the union between these two companions, you never ascribe to the being of the man any date more ancient than the first formation of his body. If then there be evidence that Christ had a being before he was conceived of the Virgin Mary, he cannot be a man like us. He may be truly a man with all the essential properties of human nature, so that there is no impropriety in ascribing to him the name of man, or the Son of Man. But the opinion of those who consider him as aveęwños, nothing more than man, must be false. Accordingly, all those who hold the second and third opinions oppose to the Socinian system one simple position, viz. there is evidence from Scripture of the pre-existence of Jesus Christ. This position is sufficient to overturn the first opinion, and it is necessary to lay a foundation for the second and third. For although it does not follow from the pre-existence of Christ, either that he is the most exalted creature in the universe, or that he is God, yet, if he did not exist before he was born of Mary, he cannot be either the one or the other.

A position which contradicts the first opinion, and which is assumed in the other two, seems to be the proper point from which to set out in examining the three opinions con

cerning the person of Christ. Unless you are satisfied of the truth of this position, you will not be disposed to give yourselves much trouble in canvassing the second and third opinions. But if you find evidence, that by his pre-existence he is more than man, it will be natural to proceed to inquire how far he is exalted above man, whether he is a creature of a higher rank, or whether he be entirely exempted from the order of creatures.

In examining this position, I shall first bring forward those passages of Scripture, which teach plainly that our Saviour did pre-exist; and I shall next direct your attention to those passages which ascribe to him different actions in his state of pre-existence. From the first set of passages I do not mean to derive any thing more than simply a proof of the pre-existence of Jesus; but, in attending to the second, we shall unavoidably be led, by the descriptions of those actions which are ascribed to Christ, to consider his original character and dignity, and we shall thus pass naturally from the proofs of his pre-existence to the proofs of a higher point, to those passages, upon a right interpretation of which turns the decision of the question between the second and third opinions.

I shall at present bring forward only those passages of Scripture which teach plainly that our Saviour existed before he was born of Mary; and, in reviewing them, I shall lay before you those solutions of their meaning which are given by the more early or the later Socinian writers, that you may judge how far it is easy to reconcile them with the opinion of our Lord's being ψιλος άνθρωπος.

[ocr errors]

You will recollect a language which runs through a great part of the New Testament, that " God sent Jesus into the world," that Jesus" came in the flesh," "was made flesh," was made a little lower than the angels," "took part of flesh and blood." Now this language is greatly wanting in propriety and significancy, if Jesus began to exist at that time when he is said to have come in the flesh; whereas the expressions recited are the very manner in which it is necessary to speak of his becoming a man, if he had an existence beforehand. A language which thus implies that Jesus existed before he was born of Mary, being found in numberless places, may be considered as meant to correct the inference which might otherwise be drawn from the

« PreviousContinue »