Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

to allow they all wrote with common fenfe. And yet to defire him to allow this is to defire him to give up his favourite doctrine of Chrift's mere humanity. For only let this doctrine, to fay nothing of other points, be supposed to have been held by thefe holy writers, especially by the Penmen of the New Teftament, and let their writings be read under that fuppofition, and I will be hold to affirm that any perfon, who has himself common fenfe, will pronounce that in a multitude of inftances, the Apoftles and Evangelifts wrote without it. And to this test one may venture to fubmit the matter in dispute between Dr. Priestley and his Antagonifts.

[ocr errors]

The facred writers, he affirms, confidered our Lord in no other character than that of a mere man. Well Sir, let us for the prefent take this for granted, and let us make experiment how thofe paffages of their writings which relate to Chrift, read according to this hypothefis. If they appear to contain common fenfe, we will allow he has the truth on his fide: but if not, methinks it would be no unreasonable demand to require him to own himself in an error. I begin with St. Paul, whofe Epiftles are now under confideration, but fhall pafs flightly over the Epistle to the Romans, and the first to the Corinthians, becaufe Mr. Fletcher has already reviewed them. I fhall however refer to a few paffages. From the others I fhall quote more largely.

In the beginning of the Epistle to the Romans, according to his doctrine, we must understand · the Apoftle as follows.

Chap. i. Paul a fervant of Jesus Christ,' that is, a fervant of a mere man, 'called to be an "Apóftle (not of men, as he informs the Gala** tians, Chap. i. 1, neither by man, but by Jefus 'Chrift,' a mere man and God the Father who

• raised

raifed him from the dead) separated unto the Gofpel of God,concerning his Son Jefus Chrift, our Lord,' a mere man 'made of the feed of David according to the flesh, and declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the refurrection from the dead, by whom,' though a mere man, 6 we have received grace and Apoftlefhip;among whom are ye alfo, the called of Jefus Chrift, that is, the called of a mere man, once indeed on earth, but now confined to heaven, and whom therefore ye Romans never faw, nor heard, nor could have any access to, or intercourfe with,

To all that be at Rome, Grace be unto you, and 6 peace from God our Father,' the self-exiftent, independant, fupreme and evenlafting Jehovah, and from the Lord Jefus Chrift, a mere man, who had no existence till about forty or fifty years ago, but who, nevertheless, is the fource. and fountain, the Author and giver of grace and peace, conjointly with the fupreme God!

Now, Sir, would any man, who believed the mere humanity of Chrift, have expreffed himfelf in this abfurd manner? would he have fpoken of being called to be an Apoftle, not of man, neither by man, but by Jefus Chrift, if he had believed Jefus Chrift to be no more than a man? would he, in mentioning his being of the feed of Dauid, have added the words, according to the flesh, thereby manifeftly limiting the fenfe, and intimating that Chrift had a nature which was not from David? Would he have fpoken of receiving Grace and Apostleship, through this mere man, and have looked up to him, in conjunction with the eternal God, for grace and peace, to be conferred upon the churches to which he miniftered? I think, dear Sir, the Doctor himfelf would hardly affirm it: but if he would

L

affirm

affirm it, then I afk why his own practice and that of his brethren is fo very different from this Apoftolic pattern? Why do they never exprefs themselves in any fuch manner as this, either in their prayers or fermons, nor apply to Chrift in union with his Father, for grace or peace, or any other bleffing?

I fhall give another inftance out of the fifth Chap. When we were yet without ftrength, in due time Chrift,' a mere man, fays the Do&tor, died for the ungodly.God commended his love towards us, in that while we were yet finners, Chrift,' a mere man! died for us,' viz. one mere man for the whole human race! • Much more, then, being now juftified by his blood,'the blood of one mere man we fhall be faved from wrath through him. For if when we were enemies, we were reconciled unto God' many millions as we are! by the death of his Son," viz. the death of one mere man! much more, 'being reconciled, we fhall be faved (from everlafting damnation) by his life,' the life of the fame mere man! If by one man's offence, death reigned by one much more they who receive abundance of grace, and of the gift of righteoufnefs fhall reign in life by one Jefus Chrift.' Pass we on to the eighth Chap. There is, therefore, now no condemnation to them that are in Chrift Jefus,' that is, that are in a mere man!

For the law of the fpirit of life in Chriß Jefus.'-that is, the law of the fpirit of life in a mere man! hath made me free from the law of • fin and death.-For what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh-God hath done, fending his own (idiov proper) Son in the likeness of finful flesh,' that is, if Dr. Priefiley by right, caufing a mere man to be born!-and by a facrifice for fin (the Doctor fays, by dying • a martyr,

a martyr, merely, to confirm the truth), condemned fin in the flesh.Verfe 8, Ye are not in the flesh, but in the fpirit, if fo be the Spirit of God dwell in you:-now if any man have not the Spirit of Chrift, that is, the Spirit of a mere man he is none of his -But if Chrift be in you'-viz, if a mere man, crucified in Judea 1700 years ago, and now in heaven, be in you,

[ocr errors]

-

[ocr errors]

the body indeed is dead, (is mortal) becaufe of fin but the fpirit is life, (is immortal) becaufe of righteoufnefs. And he that fpared not his own Son,' that fpared not one mere man ! but delivered him up for us all; how fhall he not with him, alfo, freely give us all things; that is, on the Doctor's principles, if he delivered one mere man to die a martyr to con firm the truth of the Gofpel, how fhall he not, with him, deliver millions of men from everlasting damnation, and put them in poffeffion of eternal falvation! The Apoftle proceeds Who fhall lay any thing to the charge of God's ele?' It is God that juftifieth. Who is ha that con"demneth? It is Chrift,' a mere man that died: yea rather that is rifen again: who is even at the right hand of God, who alfo maketh intercelfion for us. Who fhall feparate us from the love of Chrift?" the love of a mère man!' fhalltribulation, or diftrefs, or perfecution, or fa ♦ mine, or nakedness, or peril, or fword? As it is written for thy fake' mere man though thou art! we are killed all the day, we are appoint ed as fheep for the flaughter. Nay, in all these things, we are more than conquerors through "him, that is, through a mere man that hath loved us.'-ftrange language this, from the mouth of a Scholar, a Chriftian, and an Apoftle! Nay, who can reconcile it with common * fenfe ?'

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

9

[blocks in formation]

:

But to proceed ftill more irreconcilable therewith, is the language of the fame Apoftle in the two next Chapters. I fay the truth in Christ,' that is, in a mere man, by whom I thus fwear, and to whom I thus appeal, though as a mere man, now in heaven, he certainly cannot know my heart, nor be a witness in any fuch matter, however, I lie not, my confcience alfo bearing me 'witness in the Holy Ghoft, that I have great 'heavinefs and continual forrow in my heart.for my brethren-my kinfmen according to the flefhof whom as concerning the flesh Chrift 'came.' Here again one might enquire what ideas the Apoftle, ftill fpeaking, it feems, of a mere man, could annex to the words, as concerning the flesh furely if Chrift be a mere man, his whole perfon was from the Jews, as much as the perfon of St. Paul himself. And would it not be absurd, if fpeaking of that Apoftle's progenitors and his defcent from them, one were to exprefs one's felf in a fimilar manner, and fay, of whom as concerning the flesh, St. Paul came? Those indeed, who believe the foul to be infpired immediately from God, and not derived from our Parents, may fuppofe that the phrafeology, though unufual, and perhaps unprecedented when applied to a mere man, is, however, not quite improper: but the Doctor cannot avail himself of any fuch diftinction between foul and body, for he teaches that man has no foul, diftinct from his body, and that even Jefus Chrift had none. On his principles, therefore, the expreffion is doubly abfurd. But what fhall we fay of the following claufe, wHo 13 OVER ALE, GOD BLESLED FOR EVER? How many abfurdities, on the Doctor's hypothefis, are wrapped up in this half fentence? To fay that a mere man is OVER ALL, to term him GoD, to affirm that he is BLESSED, and that FOR EVER! furcy

« AnteriorContinuar »