On this page

• Text (1)

  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.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• 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

    knowable by tbe exertion of that his pcrwer , ver . 20 $ as characteristical of him , lea , xliv , 24 , xlviii . 12 , 13 , Job xxxviii . 4 , The builder of all things is very God , Heb . iii . 4 . Let him that challenges to himself a Godhead make another world , and it will be granted him , Jer . x . 11 . 12 : are there Gods

    one supream , another ministering ' , that made the heavens and the earth , allowed of in that context ? Isa . xl . 28 , Mai . ii . 10 . So as that the effi cienev thereof shall be attributable to

    God Almighty no otherwise than as the faculty or pQwer thereof was origincdly from him , and dependency upon him still , ( like as Judg . xvi . 28 , 29 , Acts xxviii . 8 , ) but subjected in the soul of Christ , the immediate

    efficient , having the power thereof in sese as John v . 26 , 28 , tho * not a se , ver . 19 , in the exertion whereof he himself , ( and so God by him , ) out of nothing caused to pass into being * and existence the whole system of the universe , intelligible and sensible , the throne and footstool of God ,

    angels and man . How is that God alone ? How the capacity of a derivative being ? Surely ' tis the peculiar of God by himself alone , not of any Son of Man , Acts xiv . 16 ; no , not of Christ , who then could not need that supply neither of his creature , Luke xxii . 43 ; another to raise him from

    the . dead , 1 Pet . i . 21 ; nor to have his headship over angels founded on his obedience , Phil . ii . 9 , Eph- i . 21 ; while he had a title paramount to it in nature , if their Creator ' , as being

    the work of his hands , Heb . ii . 7 ; neither needed you to have laboured so much in proof of his capacity of inspection , &c , when after you can make good this , that one text alone , Psa . xciv . 8 , 9 , will perstringe your adversary : Isa . xxix . 16 , wont more . To make or generate a Creator and immediate Father of all things , is to me an inferior God ( if that can be ) . It will drive to a God by nature , GaL iv . 8 . and issue in the Nicene belief

    for ought that you have said , at last . In which sentiment is Dr . Fowler * ( in nothing of yours , but of the inferiority of the iSon , in which the fathers with one mouth , centred with you ) . However , Dr . Cudw * goes by hinri-* Undoubtedly Cud worth aud Fowler were the names intended in the last

    Untitled Article

    self , who with the former , owning the eternity and consubstantiality , will have the word the Son to * be infinite , omnipotent , &c , but only ad ewtra from the Father ' s concurrance to all

    his operations - without , as of creation , &c . A paradox , indeed \ a God Almighty from without , to have the same specific nature , the like , ( as Father and Son , ) viz . the same natural faculties of life , understanding and will , but not in actu exercito the like or the same at all . But still the

    matter sticks about John i . 1 , 3 . All the fathers after Justin , ( the Second Epistle of Clemens Rom . was never admitted for authentic , ) you add , agree in attributing to the Logos the old creation ( with Philo , cotemporary with St . John ) . True I so doth St .

    Peter , 2 Pet . iii . 5 , 7 ; there 'tis \ 4 y < p , no person the same with p ^ jtxar * , Heb . xi . 3 , and the very same with that . Ps . xxxiii . 6 , Job . xxvi . 13 , and Prov . iii . 19 , allegorically expatiated

    on chap . viii . 24 , all relating to God ' s fiat , Gen . i . And Christ never taught his own creation of that world , Matt . xix . 4 , 6 , but whence John took up that term , ( not by immediate

    inspiration , ) in his aUusive application thereof to the person of Christ , God's mouth to us , 1 Cor . i . 24 , who never spake by him of old , Heb . i . I , I shall not define . While yet all the Platonic theology of the next fathers after Justin I find bottomed on that term ,

    used only by John , whence 'tis not unlike but that those might in the title of the Revelations give to him the style of John tov Seohoya , but you know my sense of that context . I don't believe that any Jew of . old did

    believe the preexi&tence of the Messiah , ( having no ground for it , ) or his being an instrument in the creation , neither did Philo * nor any Christian of the circumcision , nor yet St . John . His words , ** In the beginning , " &c ,

    letter which I sent . But the abridgement of the name Dr . Cudw , had an accidental stroke on the last part of the wy which gave it the appearance of w . H . R . B .

    * It appears by this that Mr . Manning entertained the opinion which has been so powerfully advocated by Dr . Jones , that Philo was a Christian . H . ft . B .

    Untitled Article

    36 Correspondence between Mr . Emlyn and Mr . Manning .

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Jan. 2, 1826, page 36, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2544/page/36/