Page images
PDF
EPUB

sition to both, that Jesus Christ is truly and properly a Divine Person, a partaker of the same nature with the Father, and possessed of all his perfections.

In prosecuting this design, I might go over the Scriptures in regular order, selecting such information as they supply with respect to his personal dignity. It would not be necessary to confine your attention to the New Testament, because the Old is a part of the same revelation, and amidst its notices and predictions may be expected to give us some knowledge of his character, as well as of the work which he had undertaken to accomplish. But this method would be tedious, and would require more time than can be allotted to this department of our course. There is a classification of the proofs which we may commodiously adopt, because it is a comprehensive one, and, arranging them under distinct heads, leads the mind, by a clear and successive induction, to the conclusion. Jesus Christ is proved to be God equal to the Father, by the ascription of the same names, and perfections, and works, and worship to him.

In the first place, Let us attend to the Divine names which are given to him in the Scriptures. That he is called, God, is so well known, that it is almost superfluous to produce particular passages. Now, it is acknowledged, that the name is sometimes given to creatures, to magistrates and angels ; and Moses is said to have been a god to Pharaoh. * In the latter case, the meaning evidently is that Moses was in the room of God to Pharaoh, delivered God's commands to him, and denounced his judgments. The name, as we shall see, is used concerning Christ in a quite different manner. It may be observed, that when creatures are called gods, we are led to a figurative sense, not only by the plural number—which shews that their real divinity cannot be meant, because it is a fundamental doctrine of religion that there is only one—but by some adjunct or circumstance which qualifies the term ; whereas in its application to our Saviour, the laws of just reasoning require it to be literally understood. If it is said to earthly princes, “ Ye are gods,” it is added in the same breath, “but ye shall die like men;"'t and when angels are addressed as gods, they are at the same time commanded to acknowledge their inferiority by worshipping the first-begotten of the Father; # but the Godhead of our Saviour is expressed in such terms, and associated with such attributes and operations, as demonstrate it to be absolute.

“ The Word was God."S He was made a God, say the Socinians; but the deification of a creature is a notion which receives no countenance from Scripture, and it may be pronounced to be impossible. How was it done? Was a divine nature given to him ? or were divine perfections communicated to him? Not a word of these things is to be found in the Bible, and either supposition is grossly absurd. How could a man be changed into a God? or how could a limited nature be endowed with omniscience and omnipotence? Modern Socinians translate the passage thus, The Word was a God; but how strange is it to the ears of christians to speak of more Gods than one, as if, like the heathens, we had subordinate deities! No; they say, our meaning is that he is a figurative god, like magistrates and Moses. But besides that, in the following verses, the Evangelist ascribes to him a work which is peculiar to the true God, namely, the creation of all things,l the original does not admit of this translation. 80s, they reply, is without the article, and ought iherefore to be rendered a God. But here the idiom of the Greek language is violated, and scholars know, that while the subject of a proposition admits, the predicate rejects, the article, and that the proposition, "The Word was God," could have been expressed only as it is, 6605 ny ó argos. It is evident, that although esos stands first in order, it is the predicate of the sentence, and denotes what ó nogos, the subject, is. This criticism, then, proves only the ignorance of those who have made it.

• Exod. vii, 1, † Ps. lxxxii. 6, 7. # Compare Ps. xcvii. 7. with Heb. i. 6. $ John i. 1.

i John i. 3.

“ Unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.' To evade the evidence of this text, Unitarians tell us that it may be translated, “ God is thy throne;" because the words rendered O God, are not com, in the vocative, but ó @ess, in the nominative. They ought to have remembered, that this is a Greek idiom, and that in the Attic dialect, the nominative is frequently put for the vocative. God is said to be a shield, a rock, and a fortress to his people, and as in these cases it is signified that he protects and defends them, there is nothing inconsistent with his dignity and supremacy. “But it is the reverse in the case before us. A throne,” it has been justly remarked, “ derives its dignity from the character and dominion of the sovereign who sits upon it. To call the Eternal Majesty the throne of a creature," as the Messiah is supposed to be, “ seems little suitable to the reverence which is ever to be maintained towards the Creator, and which is one of the most distinguishing characters of the Scripture style." The design of the Apostle, in quoting these words of the Psalmist, is to prove the superiority of Christ to the heavenly messengers. He begins well, by shewing that God makes the winds his messengers, and flames of fire his ministers, thus reducing angels to the condition of servants; but he does not end well, if he say only that God is the throne of Christ, or the support of his authority. Where is the contrast? If he has given power to our Saviour, and upholds him in the exercise of it, he has done the same thing to angels and other ministers of his will ; and how does his pre-eminence appear? If we read, " Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever," the point is decided, for he is God, and they are creatures; but the new translation destroys the force of the argument, and must therefore be false. The ancient versions agree with ours; and as far as I know, the new translation was not thought of till modern times, when arguments against the divinity of Christ were eagerly sought and collected from every quarter. We may rest satisfied that this is another passage, in which our Saviour is called, God, in the proper sense of the term.

The Apostle Paul, when enumerating the privileges and honours of the Jews, thus expresses the last and greatest of them :—“And of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is God over all, blessed for ever. Amen."I This single passage furnishes a decisive answer to the question respecting the divinity of our Saviour. The adversaries of this doctrine, fully aware that it is fatal to their system, have tried every possible method of destroying its force. “ Of whom Christ came," ó av si TAITAV Otos. nects Oeos with Xpertos, and is used for os eSTI. To evade this evidence that he is God, they have proposed a different reading, 'wv om of whom, namely, the Jews, is God over all; that is, he is their God. But besides that, if this were the genuine reading, the article must, by the laws of the language, have been prefixed to suncgatos, (*20v • PT. Tertav @ess • svacqntos) which it is not; the alteration is made without the authority of a single manuscript, in order to silence the testimony of Scripture in favour of a particular doctrine. It is a mere conjecture, which Griesbach has mentioned among his various readings, while it would have been more worthy of him to have passed it over with contempt. We have said more than enough of it, and proceed to another attempt to annihilate the evidence, by converting the words into a doxology; as if the Apostle, while reviewing the instances of divine goodness to his nation, had felt the spirit of devotion arise, and burst forth into an expression of praise, “God over all be blessed for ever!" It is an overwhelming objection, that the words can

• Heb. i. 8. † Dr. Pye Sınith's Scripture Testimony to the Messiah, Book ii. c. 4. $ 14, * Rom. ix. 5.

"Ow con

not be so translated without a violation of the idiom of the language. In all the doxologies where evogntos occurs in the New Testament and in the Septuagint, (and more than forty instances have been observed,) it is placed at the beginning of the sentence. If, then, Paul had intended a doxology, he would have said, ευλογητος και αν επι παντων Θεος εις τους αιωνας. As he has placed the words in a different order, they are plainly and necessarily an affirmation concerning the person last spoken of, namely Christ, who is pronounced to be God. And you will observe, that there is no room for the pretext which is einployed in Other places, that he may be called God in a figurative and subordinate sense; because he is denominated ó @sos €7. marTW, the Supreme God, or the Most High God over all the earth. That he may and ought to be so designated, will be readily admitted by those who believe, and entertain just notions of, the Trinity; for if the nature is the same, the persons must be equal, and one of them cannot be greater than another.

When Jesus shewed the wounds in his hands and his feet, Thomas said unto him, “ My Lord, and my God."* We are told that this was merely a sudden expression of surprise and admiration. But to use the name of God on such occasions is profane ; it is the practice of irreligious men, and would not have been imitated by a follower of Christ in the presence of his Master; or if he had inadvertently fallen into it, he would not have passed without reprehension. We have no evidence from the Scriptures that the Jews indulged in such exclamations, although they are too common among Christians. It has been said again, that they are an ejaculation addressed to the Father, “My Lord, and my God, how great is thy power!" or, “ My Lord and my God has done this." We need only reply, that according to the Evangelist the words were not addressed to the Father, but to Christ, “ Thomas said unto him," &c. It follows that Christ was acknowledged by Thomas as his Lord and his God; and surely if he had been in an error, his Master would have set him right.

Besides the passages which have been quoted, there are several others in which the name of God is given to our Saviour, but the evidence does not appear to common readers, in consequence of the manner in which they have been translated. It is a rule laid down by some late critics, that when two or more personal or attributive nouns, joined by a copulative or copulatives, are assumed of the same person or thing, before the first attributive the article is inserted, before the remaining ones it is omitted. It follows, that when two or more attributives occur with the article prefixed only to the first, they ought to be understood as referring to the same individual. For example, if we find Xpertos and @sos coupled by the conjunction need, and ó before Xpertos, but not repeated before Oess, we must not explain them as referring to two persons but to one, and as asserting that he who is Christ, is also God. This canon has been established by examples from the classics, from the New Testament, and from the Fathers; so that we are fully authorized to apply it for the correction of some passages, in which, in consequence of not attending to it, our translators have misrepresented the sense. Dr. Wordsworth, who has examined the subject with great care, says, “I have observed more, I am persuaded, than a thousand instances of the form • XPATTOs xx4 ©605, some hundreds of instances of

Megas Θεος και σωτηρ, and not fewer than several thousands of the form o Θως και Getup; while in no single case have I seen, where the sense could be determined, any one of them used but only of one person.”+ The Fathers are good authority, as they certainly were acquainted with the idiom of their own language. When the same phrases, therefore, occur in the New Testament, we are bound to understand them as they were understood by the Greeks. On this ground we beg leave to differ from the received version in some texts, and * John xx, 28.

Six Letters to Mr. Granville Sharp, p. 36, &c.

[ocr errors]

to give a translation more conformable to the original :-"Looking for the glorious appearing of the Great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ,"'* ought to be, the appearing of our Great God and Saviour Jesus Christ ; tou pojedou Θεου και σωτηρος ημων Ιησου Χριστου. . “ That the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified in you, and ye in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ,” should be rendered, according to the grace of our God αnd Lord Jesus Christ και του Θεου ημων και Κυριου Ιησου Χριστου. “ No whoremonger -hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God,”'I in the kingdom of the Christ and God; εν τη βασιλεια του Χριστου και Θεου. “I charge thee before God and the Lord Jesus Christ,”'S before the God and Lord Jesus Christ και ενώπιον του Θεου και Κυριου Ιησου Χριστου. « Through the righteousness of God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ,”'l through the righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ; του Θεου ημων και σατρηρος Ιησου Χριστου. Ungodly men, denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ,''I denying Jesus Christ the only Lord and our Lord και τον μονον δεσποτων και κυριος ημών Ιησουν Χριστον.

Enough has been said to prove that, according to the New Testament, Christ is God in the true and proper sense of the word. But this is not the only name expressive of his divinity, and in the next Lecture I shall shew that he is also called Jehovah.

LECTURE XXXI.

ON THE DIVINITY OF CHRIST.

Divinity of Christ inferred from the ascription to him of the title Jehovah ; Instances—Inferred

from the ascription to him of Divine Perfections; as Eternity, Omnipresence, Omniscience, Immutability, and Omnipotence-Inferred from the ascription to him of Divine Works ; Instances.

I PROCEED to another name which is given to our Saviour. God revealed himself to his ancient people by the name JEHOVAH, derived from the verb 117, to be or to subsist, and therefore signifying Ens, Eristens ab æterno et in æternum, or the self-existent and eternal "Being. Its import shews that it cannot be given to a creature, but is appropriated to God; and accordingly he makes an exclusive claim to it in Scripture. As the name of a man distinguishes him from all other men, so the name, Jehovah, distinguishes the Most High from all other beings. “ Seek ye him that maketh the seven stars and Orion, and turneth the shadow of death into the morning, and maketh the day dark with night; that calleth for the waters of the sea, and poureth them out upon the face of the earth; Jehovah is his name. The Psalmist says, “ That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most High over all the earth.”+ These passages are instances of the exclusive ascription of this name to the Creator and Governor of the universe, and prove that it is peculiar to him. I shall, however, add one quotation more, in which he takes it to himself, with a solemn declaration that he will not give it, and consequently that it ought not to be given, to any other: “I am Jehovah; that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.”# It implies something in which no other can share: the glory of underived and independent existence belongs to no man or angel. • Titus ï. 13. + 2 Thess. i. 12. # Eph. v. 5. $ 1 Tim. v. 21. | 2 Pet. i. 1.

Jude 4. The word Escy, God, in our translation of this last verse, is omitted by late critics. ** Amos v. 8. tt Ps. lxxxiii, 18.

##Isaiah xlii. 8.

Now, the argument which we found upon these passages is this, that if this name is given to Jesus Christ, he is not a created or a nominal God, but a divine person, distinct, it is acknowledged, from the Father, but united with him in the same self-existent essence. It is objected, that there are several instances in which this name is given to a creature. To mention one, he who appeared to Moses in the burning bush is called Jehovah, and yet is said to have been an angel. But before this passage can be fairly alleged against us, it must be proved that he was a created angel, contrary to the belief of the Church in all ages, that this was the same person who was afterwards manifested in human nature as the Messenger of God, and was then the Guide and Guardian of the peculiar people. It is objected, that Moses called an altar which he had erected JEHOVAH-nissi, my banner ;* and that, when the ark was taken up to be removed to another place, he addressed it in these words, “ Rise up, Jehovah, and let thine enemies be scattered;" when it rested again, he said, “Return, O JEHOVAH, unto the many thousands of Israel." † But these passages are cited to no purpose, because it will immediately appear, that they are not parallel to those in which our Saviour is described as Jehovah. It is evident that inanimate objects could be so called only in a figurative sense, and could be considered in no other light than as memorials of him after whom they are denominated. The altar was not Jehovah, but was dedicated to his honour; the ark was merely a symbol of his presence ; and Moses addressed his words not to it, but to Him who appeared above it, between the cherubim. We give the same account of the passage in Ezekiel, which says, “ The name of the city from that day shall be, Jehovah is there:"I of which the meaning obviously is, that the city shall be the residence of JEHOVAH, who will manifest his presence in it by the operations of his power and grace. The application of the name to our Saviour suggests totally different ideas. He is a living person, and is throughout the Scriptures represented as possessing the attributes, and performing the works, of God; and hence we are authorised to consider it as applied to him in the true and literal sense of the term. If it is proved that he is God, because he is called God, it will be proved that he is Jehovau, if it is found that he is called JEHOVAH without a figure.

In the sixth chapter of the prophecies of Isaiah, we have an account of a vision in which he saw the Lord high and lifted up, and heard the seraphim adoring him :-"Holy, holy, holy is Jehovah of Hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory."$ If we turn to the twelfth chapter of John, we shall find him quoting the words which Jehovah addressed to the prophet on the occasion, and then adding, “ These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him.”ll Whose glory did he see? Christ is the subject of the Evangelist's discourse, and to him only can the pronoun refer. Isaiah therefore saw the glory of Christ, when he saw JEHovan in the temple; he saw it, not with the eye of his mind, contemplating future scenes, but with his bodily eyes. Is it not then certain, that Christ is Jehovah?

Isaiah xl. 3.-" The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of JEHOVAH, make straight in the deseit a bighway for our God." Hear what an Evangelist says: “In those days came we'in the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea.”_" For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye

the of the Lord, make his paths straight.”! To these verses we may join the words of the angel to Zacharias concerning his promised son: " He shall go before him," the Lord God of the children of Israel, “ in the spirit and power of Elias, to-make ready a people prepared for the Lord.” ** We

* Exod. xvii. 15. + Numb. x. 35, 36. # Ezek. xlvii. 35. Isaiah vi. 3, | John xii. 41. ( Matt. ii. 1, 3.

** Luke i. 17.

way

« PreviousContinue »