« PreviousContinue »
Here follow fome single Texts, to which I add no paralels; there being no danger of miltaking their application. John XX. 28. And Thomas answered and said, MY LORD, and my GOD.
Rom. IX. 5. Of whom as concerning
the Flesh christ came, who is over · all, GOD BLESSED for ever. Amen. , XIII.
Psal. XXIII. 1. The Lord (Heb. Jehovah) is my SHEPHERD. John X. 16. There shall be one fold, and one Shepherd.
If Christ be not the Lord, in Unity with the Father, there must of course be two diftin&t beings, to whom the Scripture has appropriated this Character of a Shepherd; and that would make two Shepherds. But Christ has affirmed there is but one Shepherd, that is himself, THE SHEPHERD of the Sheep, v. 2. whom St. Peter calls the chief Shepherd, 1 Pet. V.4. So again – Psal. C. 3. Know ye that the Lord he is God -- we are His
people, and the Sheep of His Pasture. John X. 3. He (that is, Christ himself) calleth His own Sheep.
And again - John XXI. 16. Feed My Sheep — said Christ to St. Peter : which in the Language of St. Peter himself, 1 Pet. V. 2. is -- Feed the Flock of God.
2 Pet. I. 1. — Through the Righteouf
ness of our God and Saviour JESUS
The Greek is – τ8 θεα ημων και ΣωτηρG- Ιησε xe158 — the very fame, as to the order and Grammar of the words, with the last verse of this Epistle — 78 Kugie nuwe sou Eatapos 1908 Xpose
which is thus rendered in our English version
of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. And fo, without doubt, it should be in the other passage: there being no possible reason why, 78 Der new, should not signifie, our God, as well as, 78 Kupie nuwv, our Lord. It is not my design to cast any reflection upon the wisdom of our excellent and orthodox Translators (whose verfion, taken altogether, is without exception the best extant in the world) or to advance this as any discovery of my own : for the Translators themselves have preserved the true rendering in the Margin; declaring it, by their customary Note, to be the literal sense of the Greek.
There is another expression, Tit. II. 13. that ought to be classed with the foregoing. Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing, T8 uszachs ber xoy Ewing a new Inox XP158, of our Great God and Saviour, Jesus Christ. Of which a great man, deep in the Arian Scheme, gives this desponding Account — “Many understand « this whole Sentence to belong to one and the “ fame Person, viz Christ : as if the words “ should have been rendered, The appearing of “our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ. Which “ Construction, the words will indeed bear; as “ do also those in 2 Pet. I. 1. But it is much « more reasonable, and more agreable to the “whole Tenor of Scripture, to understand the « former part of the words, to relate to the Fa« ther.”. As for the whole Tenor of Scripture, it is a weighty phrase, but very easily made use of in any cause good or bad: so I shall leave the reader to judge of that, after it has been exhibited to him in the following pages. And as for the reasonableness of the thing itself, let any serious person consider, whether the Doctrine of the Scripture is not more rational under the orthodox application of these words, than under that of this Author. For to allow, as he does, that Christ is God, but not the Great God, is to make two Gods, a greater and a lesser ; which is no very rational principle. And I make not the least doubt but this Author, had he been dressing up a System of natural religion, would have protested against a notion so absurd and impious. But when the Scripture was to be dealt with, he chose it as the lesser of two evils, the greater of which, was the Doctrine he had subfcribed to.
2 Cor. V. 19. God was IN CHRIST, re
conciling the world to himself.
It is allowed on all hands, that the world was reconciled by Christ Jesus to the one, only, great and supreme God. But, this very Jame God (for the word is but once used in the whole sentence) was in Christ; manifest in the flesh, and reconciling the world to himself. And were there no other passage of Scripture to be found, this alone is sufficient to overthrow the whole Doctrine of Arianism; which, as far as the Scripture is concerned, depends upon this one assertion—that “the word GOD, in Scripture, “ NEVER signifies a complex notion of more “persons than one; but ALWAYS means one “person only, viz. either the person of the Fa“ther singly, or the person of the Son singly.”. a Clarke's S. D. P. II. §. 33.
Which is absolutely false: for here' it signifies both. The text considers God as agent and patient at the same time, and upon the fame occafion; as the reconciler of the world, in the perSon of the Son ; and the object to whom the reconciliation was made, in the Person of the Father; yet there is but one word (God) to express them both. So that the word God, though of the fingular number, is of a plural comprehension. And thus I find it to have been taken by some of the most eminent writers before the council of Nice, “ Plasmatus in initio homo per “ manus DEI, id est, FILII & SPIRITUS,” says Irenæus ; a putting the singular name of God, for the two persons of the Son and Spirit. And the same word, in the language of Origen, (if we are allowed to take the version of Ruffinus as genuine ) includes the whole three persons Igitur de DEO, id est, de PATRE & FILIO & SPIRITU fan&to. b And our excellent Church has used the word God in the same sense ; as in the Blessing after the communion service — GOD ALMIGHTY, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
a Lib. V. §.23.
b De principiis. Lib. IV. C. 2.