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
fati $ &e , to Borrow ; ted , finally , he g * £ ve $ lie test and highest pfoof of his simple huntanity by < tying on the erossu Our Lord not infrequently
efcllfcd himself the S&n of Man , & Jewish phrase , which implies not *» erfc ] y n real human being , a being born like other men , and possessing the nature and constitution of other
men , but a mere man , in contradistinction to God , to &ngels , or to any 'Other class of beings . The use of language in every age and country * from the beginning- of the world until now , supposes that where a man ' s name is employed , it means that man , and nothing more , who is
designated by it . If , therefore , Jolm affirms that Jesus is the Christ , he must have meant by that name what all the world meant by it—a mer ^ e man . His not apprizing the reader that by Jesus he meant oue that was God as well as man , while every reader understood Jesus to be a mere
man , makes it morally certain that the apostle uses the name Jesus in the common acceptation . But the Gerinthians of themselves furnish the most conclusive proof that John , who opposed them , considered Jestts a lYiere man . Those impostors
rejected hida as the Christy and why ? Because Jesus , they said , was a man , the Sd-n © f Joseph and Mary . But the apostle holds forth , as the Christ , the very $ esus whom they rejected as the Christ ,- »~ him who was a mere man , feind who was the legitimate Son
of Joseph and Mary . Further , the end which the impostors had in vi < nv , in teaching the divinity of Christ , implies that the apostle insisted on his simple humanity . This end was to efet aside Christianity by destroying the hope of a future state and its
salutary influence in reformingthe world . IF Christ were a God , he worked his miracles by virtue of his own power , and appeared after death by virtue of his own nature . There is , therefore , no resurrection of the dead : for a being seen after death ,
who by nature is superior to < leath , Is T ) o proof of the re&urrection of beings who by nature are subject to death . The simple humanity of 'J ^ bUB set s asid e this chain of rea-&& ** tng and its fatal effect , and holds fi ^ tfe his resurrection as a solid pled ire of the reaunretetion of man-
Untitled Article
kind by the « arn « A % igfefy ? Iftw $ r . The fiction of the Gnmtiiss / ivus ; ij the highest degree iinpcokable , ;^ J jf the apostle conceded the divinity of Christie <* fl ^ $ & * $ e , they would ha * e been Spared tfee necessity of feisrnW
the revolting absurdities which they taught , and from that concession estahlish the vtfry same conclusioa which they sought Irom their pecu liar tenets : and the aeeessity on their part of recurring ta such tenets mil
renvaia an eternal monument of tUc ^ reat fact , that John and his fellow apostles , and all the converts made by them , insisted > earnestly and u « e quivocaUy , on the simple humanity af Jestis Christ as a necessary groundwork <© f the commission which lie
received from his heavenly Father . But you toaiatain that John , in the beginning of bis Gospel , proves the divinity of Christ , because he represents the Logos , or the Word of God , which is God , as becoming flesh—as becoming a human being in the person * of Jesus . Jesus therefore was a
real man and a real God . This passage has ever been found a great stumbling-block ; and to confess the truth , all that modern Unitarians know of it is , that the interpretation put upon it by the orthodox cannot be the true one . But as you , Sir ,
agree with the statement given by Ben David , the mystery which hangs on the passage is dissipated , like mist in a summer ' s morn . Logos , hojw , means word or reason ; and in its strictest sense denotes , not a real being-, but an attribute of a rational
bein # . The impostor ^ Sir , you knw , stripped the Creator of all wi&dom and benevolence in forming the universe , and thus virtually taught that the Logos was not with God when he created all things . The Evangelist
meets this blasphemy and says , tliat " In the beginning the Logos was with God , and was God , and by him all things were made / ' which maans that the universal Father , from the first , was in the full possession of all
his moral perfections , that those perfections by which he made # 11 things and under which he displays bimselt to his rational creatures in his woj > 3 and in his word , were ev ^ r present with him , and essential to his , being-The sattxe impQ ^ t ors further a ijif ^
Untitled Article
470 Letttfr of BrnDatoidtt ' to the Qhrhtmn Remembrancer .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Aug. 2, 1826, page 470, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2551/page/26/
-