On this page
-
Text (2)
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
the introduction of Christianit'if * Was J M . ignorant of this gloss , or was he ashamed of it ? I charitably incline to hops the latter . Respecting such an interpretation , I think it quite sufficient to say , credat Judceus Apella .
J . M . however , with his usual dogmatical peremptonness asserts ^ that there is nothing in the New Testament like Christ ' s being equal . with God the Father . Jn proof that there was something like it ^ I adduced Phil , ii . 6 . On this text then we are at issue . And here ^ in opposition to J . M . I will venture to maintain that our present translation is the right one . 1 . —Sa far from opposing the . design of the apostle , it exactly coincides with it . He is enforcing humility , and he enforces it by the
wonderful example of Christ s humility . Though our Saviour was in the form of God ^ and thought it not robbery to-be equal with God ; yet , so great was his humility , that he emptiedhimself of his former glory , and took upon him the form of a servant . If he then thus humbled himself , how much more
should such poor sinful creatures as ye are . Let this mind , this humility , be in you , which was in Christ Jesus . Such is the drift of the apostle ' s argument ^ and a most powerful one it is : but had he argued as J . M . would make him do , he would indeed have merited Dr . Priestley ' s appellation of an inconclusive reasoner . 2 . —What J . M . says of there being only one God ,
and therefore that he cannot be equal to himself , ' and so forth , is nothing but his old hackneyed expedient of begging the question . As I have already in my former letter noticed this device , I think it superfluous to say any thing more , 3 . —His adducing Christ ' s assertion of his inferiority to his Father , is an argument of much the same cogency as his former grave
attempt to prove the humanity of our Lord , While , on the authority of John , xiv , 28 , we believe his inferiority to the Father in one point of view ; so , on the authority of Phil . ii . 6 , we believe his equality with the Father in another point . As for J . M . ' s " probably true rendering" of this latter passage , it would verily puzzle the whole society of schoolmasters to elicit such
a meanin g from the original . I have vainly endeavoured to discover the Greek words , which J . M . transmutes into " was not tenacious of retaining that likeness to God . " Woe would have been tome when a school-boy , had I been guilty of any such transmutation ! The exact literal translation of the passage is as follows : — cc Who , being in the form of God ^ did not
account the being equal with God , ( or the being as God , viz , on the same footing as God ) , a robbery . " Tne apostle vises iaa , adU vefbially , as it is used bv the'bedt Greek writers , Thus ^ to pro-
Untitled Article
The Clergymans Answer to J . M . 595
Untitled Article
VOL . II . 3 Z
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Oct. 2, 1807, page 525, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2385/page/17/
-