On this page
-
Text (1)
-
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
supposes time * generation and fet&er * and time als $ antecedent to * such : generation * Therefore , the ; conjunction of these two . terms * . SSonafad eternity , is absolutely impossible , as th 6 y imply essentially different and opposite ideas . " Note onLutei . 85 . ; '
These reasonings are pronounced by Mr . Wateoj * to . be " extremely futile , as . founded upon mere JiqjD&au analogies : ° he . wotild p * pve himself a prodigy if-J 10 eoulclshew any other foundation upoo , which the ideas suggested fry the terms father 4 H ^ son ca ** rest . Dr . A . Clarke maintains that the
phrase * 'S < m of God , " designate Christ ' s * bunaap nature , and refers to his miraculouss £ onceptioii : tbisy-Miv Watson denies , and he is much more successful in sotiteof his objections to the Doctor ' s h ^ pothesis , than in the establishment of his own , which is * that tue phrase is " aii appellation of Christ ' s divine nature , with reference
to his personal existence in the Trinity , aa ( J expressive of one of his peculiar and eternal relations in that personality tQ God the Father . " TheDoctor says , " the doctrine of the eternal So * iship of Christ is aiatiscriptural / ' he can find no express
declaration in the Scriptures coneer&mg it . True , replies the Remarker ( p . 6 ); but neither is there express scripture fpr the Trinity (?< except it be that in 1 Johi ) , so of ten disputed , and the genuineness of which Dr * Clarke has given U " J * f ° the two natures of Christ ,
nor for infant baptism . He proceeds , however , to qaote Scripture in behalf of eternal Sonship , beginning with the phrase , only-begotten * John i . 1-4 , 18 . Should it be objected that God gave this only-begotten to suffer , and that therefore it could not be the divine
nature , our author is not thus to be stopped : he answers , ( p . 11 ,. ) " // it suffered no pain , it suffered something ; of this there are mysterious , and from the nature of the thing , only mysterious indications in Scripture . '
Mr . Watson ' s next argument is from the term Father . " When" ( he says , p . 12 ) " the awful veil whiflh sfrrouds the Incomprehensible , is in part . with- drawn b . y the spirit of revelation , a # d
we are penxiitted at lea ^ t a glance of the ineffable manner in which , he . auh ^ - sists ; when the three divine fiypostases are exhibited in mysterious distinction and unit y > anil uamet * » re aolemnly
Untitled Article
given tp eacb > the Father k the hrgh and expressive distinction of the fast " This piece of sublimity , original as £ ar as respects the Scrifturesr ^ i i ^ followedk bj ? something exceedingly droll .- fhie
first person is the Father & £ the divine nature ; " hut of the human nature of Jesus , the first-person is nwt theJFath&r ? for the sacred temple of * awr LoreTs body was produced ly the Holy Ghost , the third person . ' 1 '' ( lb . )
From Rom . i . 3 , 4 ^ our intrepid Remarker attempts to prove the two natures of Christ , and he decides tb ^ L the phrase , " according to the spm € of holiness , ' * " is equivalent to accords ing to his Divine nature ! ( P . Id , note . ) He elsewhere ( pi . 4 £ ) contends ^ that
the resurrectioD of Christ / . js j a ^ prorf of his supreme divinity ! Does i « & ipean that it is mediately a proof s tey proving that be was mortall HewilJ r perhaps , grant this ; for lie adivanoes positions and makes concessions , which must startle bis more wary polemical
brethren . For instance , he cites ( p * 44 ) * with seeming triumph * in proof of the eternal Sonship of Gbrist , Heb ^ v ^ 7 ^ 8 | . contending , that when the writer describes tbe prayem and supplicatiass ^ the strong crying and tears ? the
obedience and miffiermg * the fear a » ck tbir deliverance of the Sob ,, ** be nwtstref&r distinctively avid exxlusivefo / , to the divine nature of Christ" ' * Was , it ( &e asks ) a subject to be introduced-wiii so great an emphasis of lioly wonder , that the Son , if his human nature alone
were contemplated , should becowae obedient uiato suffering < } v Thus , then ^ we have an assertion from the highest Methodist authority ^ of the sufferings of the Suprenae Ukeity . Again , Mt ? . Watson ^ with equal frankness , c&Of cedes that Isaiah ' s prophecy , A virgin shall conceivey &cg . was , before the : acs
complishnwiiifc , ^ obscure" and- eqtti ^ vocaV' that the Jews did not expect the supernatural birth of the Messiah ^ and ' that the disciples of ClnriBt might not know of his mirncuJbus con * ception ^ until the dtiy of Po ntccast-( Pp . ss—42 . )
The second mark of heresy wJhicb Mr * Watson discovers in his brother Dk . Adaijri Qlar ^ is in fyis * " canon , of i nterpretiation ^ " laid , dov \ xi atT the eiicl of his Comm ^ taKv ^ ?* tifci&t wfenfc ^ im
contra , ^ rea ^ am , iq contrary ha Sor ipimrto" ( P . 40 >) , TJii % he ot ^ serves , leads to > dad authorirtm A ^ rmtt
Untitled Article
Review . ~ flmk # rk $ & * the J ^ t ^ n 0 i iS ^ ifishm bf . go ?
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), March 2, 1818, page 207, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2474/page/55/
-