« PreviousContinue »
not god, must be wholly irrelevant to the argument; as well, as all declarations, that man is not God, or that Unity is not Trinity. (P. 134. 1. 25
-30.)--After all the laboured, acute, and learned efforts of Socinians, and other nominal Christians, against the doctrine of the TRINITY ; the loose and general objections against it, thrown together in this place, are not greatly to be dreaded. A large proportion of learned Trinitarians give up, as an interpolation, the text quoted from John;' yet whether authentic or not, it must be allowed to be a clear and concise statement of our doctrine. “ The Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and “ these three are one:” ('Oulos oi Tpis šv slov.) These three persons (masc.) “ are one” (neuter,) efcov, ·
We allow that the clearest and fullest revelation of this mystery is contained in the New Testament. There it is so full and undeniable, that Antitrinitarians have evidently no resource left them, but to pronounce very many of the passages in proof of it, either interpolations, or corrupt readings, or the erroneous conclusions of the writer, as a fallible man and a feeble reasoner. If this procedure, which reduces the word of God to a level with other 'ancient, venerable, and • authentic books,' claiming no divine inspiration, be not needful to their tottering cause, why do they so constantly have recourse to it?-But, indeed, even the Jews may teach them that it is the doctrine of the New Testament; as one of their strongest objections to this sacred book is taken from that doctrine being so undeniably contained
in it. Fas est et ab hoste doceri. Let the point once be established, that Jesus is the Messiah predicted in the Old Testament; and the proof that the doctrine of the Trinity is taught by him, and his apostles, will not be a matter of great difficulty.
On the question, “ Was the Messiah to be a mere man like other men?' some things have been adduced from the Old Testament, as to his Deity, which, I am confident, cannot easily be answered. In addition to these, it may here be observed, on the general doctrine ; that the name of God in Hebrew being plural, and yet almost always, in this sense of it, used with singular verbs and pronouns; is at least a remarkable circumstance in the phraseology of that book, which especially makes known to “mankind the one living “ and true God,” as distinguished from all false gods. The language used in the creation of Adam, “Let us make man, in our image, after our like“ness : so God created man in his own image, “ in the image of God created he him.”] The circumstance also, that in the Hebrew the word rendered Creator is plural, “ Remember thy “ Creators ;” (Marg ;-) and many other things of this kind, are such as Antitrinitarians, Jews or Christians, would not have previously expected ; and which, however light they may affect to make of them, they would much rather had not been found in scripture.
The following passage from the law, is worthy of notice in this argument:“On this wise ye
i Gen. i. 26, 27.
? Ec. xii. 1.
« bless the children of Israel, saying unto them, « Jehovah bless thee and keep thee; JEHOVAH “ make his face to shine upon thee, and be gra“cious unto thee; JEHOVAH lift up his countenance
upon thee and give thee peace; and they shall
put my NAME upon the children of Israel, and I “ will bless them.” This threefold repetition of the name, JEHOVAH, has generally been considered as implying some mystery: yet who, except the man who believes a Trinity of persons in the unity of the Godhead, can shew what that mystery is? and what Christian can help recollecting the form of Christian baptism," In the NAME (one NAME,) “ of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy “ Ghost ?" or the Christian benediction, “The
grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of “ God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be “ with you all. Amen?") 1
Some 'explication of those texts which speak expressly of the Messiah as God ;2 yea, some peculiarly satisfactory explication ought in all reason to be given; before the doctrine should be treated with decided irreverence.
What shall we say to the command, “ Kiss the “ Son, lest he be angry;" and to the exclamation, “ Blessed are all they who trust in him ? "3 Do not both these ascribe divine honour and worship to him ?4_“ Cursed is he that trusteth in man, and « maketh flesh his arm. Blessed is the man that “ trusteth in the Lord, and whose hope the Lord
" Numb. vi. 23—27. Matt. xxviii. 19. 2 Cor. xii. 14.
? Ps. xlv. 8. Jer, xvii. 5, 6. Is. vii. 14. ix. 6, 7. Mic. v. 2, Zech, xiii. 10. 3 Ps. ï. 12.
Ps. cxlvi. 3, 4.
is." How then can he be blessed who trusteth in the Messiah, if the Messiah be only man like
other men ?' And, if the Messiah be not meant, what man, or angel, or creature, can be substituted in his place, to whom Jehovah would say, “ Kiss “ the Son lest he be angry, and ye perish from “.the way,
when his wrath be kindled, yea, but a “ little. Blessed are all they that put their trust “ in him?" 1
The language of many Scriptures, which are little regarded in the argument, requires somewhat more notice.
Thus we read in Isaiah: “Hearken unto me, O “ Jacob and Israel, my called, I am he. I am the “ First, I also am the Last.? My hand also hath “ laid the foundation of the earth, and my right “hand hath spanned the heavens : when I call, they stand up together. All
your“ selves, and hear; which among them hath de“clared these things? The Lord hath loved him; “ he will do his pleasure on Babylon, and his
arm shall be on the Chaldeans. I, even I, “ have spoken ; yea, I have called him; I have “ brought him, and he shall make his way pros
perous. Come ye near unto me, hear ye this. . “ I have not spoken in secret from the beginning: - from the time that it was, there am I, and now “ the Lord God, and his Spirit hath sent me.”3 Who is the speaker in this passage? There is not the least intimation of any change in the person
Is. xi. 10. xii. 2. Matt. xii. 21. Rom. xv. 12. Eph. i. 12, 13. · Is. xli. 4. xliv. 6. Rev. i. 11. 17. ii. 8. xxii. 13.
Is. xlviii. 12-16.
speaking in the former and in the latter part of the quotation; in which the peculiar style of Deity, and the name Jehovah are used. Even in the latter part, he speaks decidedly the language of Deity; yet he says, “ Adonai Jehovah, and his
Spirit hath sent me. Or,“ hath sent me, and his Spirit.” For this is the more obvious rendering of the clause.
Is there then in this passage nothing favouring the doctrine of the Messiah's Deity, or that of the Trinity ? In like manner, by another prophet; “ Thus saith the Lord of hosts, after the glory “ hath he sent me unto the nations which spoiled
you: for he that toucheth you, toucheth the
apple of his eye. For, behold, I will shake mine “ hand upon them, and they shall be a spoil to “ their servants; and ye shall know that the “ Lord of hosts hath sent me. Sing and rejoice, “O daughter of Zion; for lo, I come, and I will “ dwell in the midst of thee, saith the Lord : and
many nations shall be joined to the Lord in that
day, and shall be my people : and I will dwell “ in the midst of thee, and thou shalt know, that “ the Lord of hosts hath sent me unto thee.” 1 I must entreat the reader to examine carefully the language of this prophecy. I have marked some clauses, in Italics, as requiring peculiar notice. But it is manifest that the speaker repeatedly calls himself Jehovah; and uses expressions peculiar to God; and yet he says again and again, “ the “ Lord of hosts hath sent me.”. I scarcely know any passage in the New Testament more decided
'Zech. ii. 8-11. See also Zech. iii. 1, 2. vi. 12-14. xii. 10.