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

    all Christians are , in nature and in rank , essentially divine ; that € < such as is the father , such are the sons "agreeably to his own principle of what he calls the " plain , literal

    construction" ? Of such a tenet he ought , in consistency , to be the advocate . For such an inference he has stronger ground than he can take in the case before us ; where , from extremely precarious data , he advances to a vast and mighty conclusion .

    This part of the subject must not be dismissed , until we have copied some further remarks of a writer , to whom we owe a large debt of esteem and gratitude . * « the title Son of God , as applied to our Saviour , can be taken in no other than a figurative sense .

    * ' I know how common a reproach it is against those who adopt our views of Scripture doctrine , that we never take the words of the Bible in their literal sense , but are perpetually recurring to metaphors and figures ; and our opponents make it their boast that they keep close to the letter . I would , however ,

    request such persons to consider that they cannot understand the title Son of God literally , without degrading the spirituality of the Divine nature . Unless they are prepared to maintain that the relation between our Lord and his Father

    is precisely that which subsists between an earthly parent aud his child , they must take the words iti soine figurative sense . Whether they suppose Christ to be the Son of God in virtue of his emission or emanation from the Father , or the communication of the divine essence

    to him , or his creation in some more immediate and direct manner than all other beings , ( for in such unprofitable questions has the labour of metaphysical theologians been employed , ) still the term cannot be used in the sense in which it

    is applied to the connexion between one human being aud another . Consequently it is used in a figurative sense . " In the present instance , therefore , there is no foundation for the charge made by the professors of orthodoxy

    Against their opponents , of turning the -Jiiblc into figures of speech , because they themselves must do the same , and because a figurative interpretation is uecessary , to make different parts of Scripture consistent with each other . He who in

    many passages is called the only-begotten Son of God , is in . another declared to be * " The Scriptural Meaning , " &c , ut s upi * a , pp . 6-r-9 #

    Untitled Article

    the first-born among many brethren 5 both of which things cannot be literally true . But lest any one should think * that the use of figurative language , which * as the event has shewn , was liable to misconception , is an objection to the style of Scripture , let it be considered that the discourses of our Lord must

    come down to us as he addressed them to the Jews ; that the language of a people so separated from the rest of the world , and stamped with such a character of peculiarity by their institutions , must be tinged with allusions to their rites and customs , their past history and

    future expectations ; and that , to address either the hearts or the' understandings of such a nation with effect , the public teacher must use that language in which they were in the habit of expressing themselves . The Jews , therefore , being accustomed to speak in figures , our Lord aud Ids apostles must do the same . "

    Dr . Spry proceeds to consider some of those passages , in which Paul ap- * plies the title , " the Son of God /* to Jesus Christ . —We shall accompany him in his exposition of Ram . i . 3 , 4 : and here it will be our first object to place before our readers what , with becoming deference , we deem a literal and correct rendering of the pas ^

    sage : " Concerning his Son ( who was of the seed of David , according to the flesh , who was defined to be the Son of God with power , according to the spirit of holiness , by his resurrection from the dead ) Jesus Christ our Lord , &c , "

    < c It is not easy , " in Dr . Spry ' s judgment , € < to imagine a form of language which could more emphatically state the divine nature of Jesus Christ than this , when thus taken , according to the plain , literal and grammatical construction of the words /* Now , it is

    exactly upon such a construction of the words—a construction plain , literal and grammatical—that we regard these verses as clearly teaching the humanity of the Messiah ' s nature , and the

    divinity of his office . Dr . Spry * bin ) self appears to concede that the title , the Son of God , will not alone be sufficient to prove the Deity of Him who receives it : accordingly , we have this comment on the apostle ' s words : c < As St . Paul here tells the Romans , , ^ --.-..- - ¦ , ^| y- — i .. .. f — *¦ «<^* --V , ¦ ' —— ..- .-.. — ~ ¦ y— . ¦¦ — .. . ^ - ¦¦^ p- - VHi ' ¦¦ . ¦ ¦¦ t > - . .,

    * See , too , his reasoning * and statement in j ) . 23 .

    Untitled Article

    Spry * Two Sermons before ike-University of O $ for& 29 $

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), May 2, 1825, page 293, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2536/page/37/