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
smee a itt&n is often represented as t ransacting human affairs with his understanding , fiairid , will , reason , fancy , or conscience , in a personal munner ?" " With respect to the term person , since neither scripture itself applies it to the Word or Spirit , nor the elder nor later writers of the church have
confined themselves to the use of this term , I can see no necessity of the confinement of ourselves or others to it , when we are speaking of the pure distinctions in the Divine nature . And when we are endeavouring to explain them in a rational manner , and to form and adjust our clearest ideas of
them , I think we may use the term , divine properties , or rather divine powers , for this end . Perhaps this word , powers , comes nearest to the genuine ideas of things , so far as we can apply human words to divine ideas , and this word , powers , makes the distinction greater than properties , and I think it is so much the better . But ire have several precedents for the use of both these terms among the ancient writers . "
" The divine Logos seems to be represented , both in scripture and in the primitive writers , as much distinct from the Father as the same essence admits of , or as distinct as may be , without being another conscious mind . Now this seems to be something more than a mere attribute : and therefore
I call the Logos a divine power ; imitating herein both the ancient Jews and the primitive fathers , who call him frequently , 2 < x /» a and Not ^ , and kwafA . i <; Ses , and particulurly Clemens Aiexandrinus , who makes him Harpm ^ ** $ fvepyfict . But since" God and his ^ essential Word do not seem to have
two distinct consciousnesses , or to be two conscious minds ; this eternal Logos can hardly be called a person , in the common and literal sense hf the term , as a distinct man or angel , but oa ty in figurative and metaphorical tonguuge . ** " The Snirit seems to be another
divine pow ^ r , which may be called fhe power pf effieience ; and although 11 is sometimes described in scripture a 8 a personal ag ^ ent , after the manner ° f Jewish and eastern writers , yet if ^ lf > ut all tfhe scriptures relating to this subject together , tod view them ln eorrfestiotiaeot fight , the Spirit of
Untitled Article
God does not seem to be described as a distinct Spirit from the Father , or as another conscious mind , but as $$ eternal , essential povver , belonging to the Father , whereby all things are effected . " " Thus it appears , that , as outward speech and fiireath are powers of the
human body , as reason and vital activity or efficience are powers of the human soul , so the great God in scripture has revealed himself to us as a glbrious Being , who has two eternal , essential , divine powers , which , in
condescension to our weakness , he is pleased to describe by way of analogy to our souls and bodies ; and this he doth by the terms Aoyoq ant ! JpvevfAoc in Greek , and in English , Word and Spirit . "
Thus we see that , in the judgment of this great mem , the Word and Spirit are not properly to be regarded as persons , but rather as powers belonging to the Divine nature . The way in which he explains and illustrates this
point , is highly interesting and instructive , nor coula a Unitarian wish to see his own characteristic opinions more justly stated . Yet we should hesitate to say that at this time Watts was a Unitarian ; for though we have seen that he had the root of the matter in
him , yet he had not as yet put forth the characteristic branches . At this time he held the strange opinion that the human soul of Christ pre-existed , and was employed by God in the
creation of the world , and he likewise approved of the religious worship of Christ as the Mediator , with other inconsistencies , which we have good reason to believe he afterwards
abandoned . Nothing can be plainer than that the doctrine contained in the foregoing extracts , cuts at the very root of every branch of the Trinitarian scheme and worship , and must , if admitted , bring the whole of that luxuriant growth defenceless to the ground .
EUELPIS . P . S . Allow me particularly to recommend that work of Watts ' s froui which I have made the above extracts , to the attention of your readers . It is fraught with learning and intcreating remarks .
Untitled Article
Dr . TVatts on the JFord and Spirit of God . 409
Untitled Article
v . xvn . 3 a
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), July 2, 1822, page 409, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2514/page/17/
-