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
firm * o the first dass , the Apostle John , cb . iv . 3 , asserts , that Jesus Chris t ; came in the flesh , that is , had real flesh and blood or a real human body : against the second , he maintains that Jesus is the Christ , and aaks " Who is the liar but he that
ctenietli that Jesus is the Christ ? This is antichrist who denieth the Father and the Son . " The impostors , availing themselves of the power which , under a ' visible appearance , descended on Jesus when baptized , said , that a real being , a God , descended upon him , and taught
that this God constituted the Christ , and rejected the man Jesus . John with tiie other apostles affirmed , that the appearance was the spirit of God or a commission from heaven constituting the man Jesus the Son of God : and they give him this title on the authority of the Father , which then proclaimed him as his beloved Son .
The Cerinthians , then , maintained that Christ was God ; John , that he was the Son of God . With this view he wrote his epistle , and the testimonies concentrated in the text of the three Heavenly Witnesses are
intended to prove that Jesus is the Son of God , in opposition to the Gnostics , who taught that Christ was God . You agree in this statement ; you must arree then , if you he consistent , 1 T i Mat John was an Unitarian , and
tyrote against the divinity of Christ . Strange to say , you deny this conclusion . Ben David , you s-ay , "Assumes it to be the writer's purpose to prove that Jesus Christ was nothing- more fhan a man 3 so that the assumption is made to determine the interpretalu , and the interpretation to prove ie
. ^ sumption—a process of reason"tf which every Tyro knows to be vjcious . Jt is to reason in a circle /' v o 55 . What ? John then wrote to P rove that Jesus waa a real man , and tar m * - _ A . * . J wrote
against those who taught that ^ wa more than a man . You allow I " ' Yet at the same breath you tell bar * ' awme the subject in detin *! lKi make the gratuitous assump-< n the grounds of an erroneous inpretation which every school-boy "T * T refute ' lf V ™ are sinrfon ! ' 18 ' y ° are hardly a fit permi . rea . with- Y ™ affect to w « ut hX fnn Ul 0 U 3 byputti ^ in- my n the fo llowing sylloffbtti : - The ^
Untitled Article
Gnostics maintained the divinity of Christ , St . John denied the divinit y of Christ thus held by the Gnostics ; therefore he denied ihe divinity of Christ according to the true and orthodox doctrine . This is the process
by which Ben David arrives at his conclusion , and barely to state that process mi ^ ht be sufficient to shew how palpably he beg-s the question , when he concludes that St . John , in condemning the Gnostic tenet , mu 3 t
also condemn all doctrines whatever of Christ ' s divinity / 5 John wrote , aa you agree with me , to prove that Christ was a real man , and wrote against those who taught his diviaity . Ho \ v then can it be that he does not
condemn all doctrines whatever of Christ's divinity , when he calls those who taught his divinity Hafe , fahe prophets , and antichrist ? It is difficult to divine what yo'i
mean to say , and this not trom any confusion in your ideas , but from a wish to mystify the subject , and to guard against the imputation of . contradiction and absurdity by being explicit . You however clearly intimate , though you do not affirm it , that John , while he denies the divinity of Christ in the Gnostic sense , asserts it
in the orthodox sense . My position on the other hand is , that the apostle in affirming the real humanity of Christ , affirms his simple humanitv ,
and in denying his divinity in one sense , denies it in every sense . To make good this proposition , I have only to shew that Jesus , . whom he affirms to be the Christ , was a real man and a mere i « an . If he were not
so , the burden of proving it falls on you . For he was a man in reality as well as in appearance . Both friends and foes considered him such . Till about thirty years of age he worked as a common mechanic . The people of Nazareth , amontr whom he wad
brought up , regarded him as the " son of Joseph ami Mary ; and for asfeson his own family sided with hrsr : enemies . The disciples believed : Mxi him and followed him ate a in'atn . ' Mary washed his feet ; the beloved
disciple rested on his bosom ; petetf denied him and Judus betrayed ' W ti ^ - ; without the least ¦ suspieitr ^ ^ dttft 4 ftr was any other than a m # te ^ fi-finfiS ^ f ^ being . Like other nqen , fti& * bM&d Jesus was subject to want , to p&iif , tt >
Untitled Article
Letter of Ben David ' s to the Christian Remembrancer . 469
Untitled Article
-aju . 3
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Aug. 2, 1826, page 469, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2551/page/25/
-