On this page

• Text (2)

  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

  • 

    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

    xl That the Godhead is represented in Scripture under three differences * appears to me to be a fact so clear as hardly to admit of a doubt . A great variety of passages , indeed , might be produced , which go clearly to the proof of this point . But it will be sufficient to notice the words of the Baptismal form . According to this , we are baptized in . the name of the Father , the Son , and the Holy Ghost . Now , as God is the proper and exclusive object of worship , our baptism , it should seem , must have reference to him ; and , therefore , the being baptized in the name of the Father ¦ the Sou , and the

    Holy Ghost , would , necessarily , be a baptism in the name of God . I conclude , therefore , from this form of introduction to Christianity , that it is the design of the Gospel that we- should regard the Deity under these three distinctions . But , admitting this point , it then becomes a question , in what way these expressions are to be applied in relation to God . For it must be kept in mind , that this is not explicitly stated in the Scriptures , but is left to be deduced by reflection and reasoning . ' *—Pp . 22—24 .

    Even to those who are familiar only with the form in which this and the other passages relating to baptism are presented in the authorized version , it can scarcely be necessary to point out the utter precariousness and fallacy of this reasoning , or to cite the many examples which shew that being baptized into the name of any person or thing does not necessarily imply that that person or thing is an object of worship . Assuming , however , the correctness of his conclusion , the author proceeds to explain at considerable

    length his view of the senses in which the Deity is spoken of under different circumstances by the titles of Father , Son , and Holy Ghost . But in the first place he contests , as a gratuitous and unfounded supposition , the notion that the three scriptural designations of the Deity relate to the Divine essence . " The appropriate way , " says he , " for us to consider the matter is to regard these expressions as relating solely to the circumstances under which God has been pleased to exhibit himself to us in the Christian dispensation / 1 -P . 28 .

    And he thinks that if we adopt this view of it , the doctrine may be explained in such a manner as not only in a great measure to remove its mysterious and apparently contradictory form , but to illustrate its practical bearing upon the objects and ends of the Christian scheme . We cannot undertake to examine at length his sometimes ingenious , but generally fanciful , review of the different meaning of the three designations under which he conceives the Deity to be spoken of in scripture ; we shall content ourselves with exhibiting some of the results . The term Father is

    applied to God in three different ways ; first , as he is the Father generally of all good men , since it is he , and he only , who puts good thoughts into the mind ; secondly , as he was the Father of the Jewish nation collectively , who were properly under divine government and peculiar protection ; and thirdly , in a Twore especial sense , as , through the medium of Christ , he influences the minds of Christians , as will appear presently when we treat of the designation of God as the Holy Spirit .

    2 . In explaining the sense in which he supposes the Deity to be spoken , of as a Son , the writer enters at great length into a review of the meaning of the terms Son of God and Son of Man as app lied to Christ . The former he supposes , with Horaley , has a reference to the human nature of Christ , the latter to the divine—an appropriation the . reverse of what would naturally have been expected , and founded upon principles which we have in vain endeavoured to comprehend . For a much more intelligible and truly practical exposition of these , titles * we have great pleasure in referring our readers to two excellent discourses , one by Mr . Aspland , the other by Mr . J .

    Untitled Article

    vol . in . 2 q

    Untitled Article

    Doctrine of the Trinity . 553

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Aug. 2, 1829, page 553, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2575/page/33/