Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

Kings it is rendered in the Common Version to blaspheme, and in the Psalms to bless. No English translation with which we are acquainted, follows the authorized version in rendering it to curse, except that of Barnes. Nor does the word ever have that signinification in any of the cognate dialects. But while we believe that the rendering to curse should be rejected as resting on no solid basis, we cannot agree with Dr. Conant, that in chap. ii: 9 the word should be translated to bless. It is the only passage where he has himself so rendered it, and here he does so simply on the ground that it is spoken ironically. This is certainly a possible sense. But it is not the obvious meaning. It is not that which would readily occur to the mind of the reader. It is not required or suggested by the context. But the signification to renounce, which Dr. C. has given to the word in chap. i: 11, and ii: 5, has this great advantage over every other which has been proposed—that it suits all the places where the word has been supposed to require the rendering to curse or to blaspheme.

Such translations of the books of Scripture and commentaries upon them as have appeared from the pens of Stuart, Turner, Noyes, Hodges, Barnes, Alexander, Hackett and Conant, do great honor to the Biblical scholarship of our country, and afford a pledge that we shall soon be behind no nation in Christendom in this department of literature.

ART. VI.-UNITARIANISM AND ITS TENDENCIES. Ew? B. Sith.

Scripture Proofs and Scriptural Illustrations of Unitarianism. By JOHN WILSON. Third Edition. London: 1846.

As announced in our last paper, we propose at present, in the first place, to examine those passages in the New Testament which ascertain the personality and divinity of the Holy Spirit. Mr. Wilson charges with "egregious

error" those Trinitarians, who apparently think it unnecessary to adduce evidence, but assume that if the deity of Christ is founded on revelation, that of the Spirit will follow." We think this error not so egregious, as at first sight it may appear. For the great strength and chief refuge of the Socinian argument, lie in the appeal made to reason in behalf of the strict oneness of God, as opposed to a trinity of persons. Reason and nature proclaim that God is one; to this fact, falsely understood, the Unitarian flees, whenever he meets a passage inimical to his doctrine, or unusually difficult of favorable exposition. Of contented reliance upon this argument, in time of sorest need, we have exhibited at least one instance, on the part of Mr. Wilson, and could readily adduce very many more. Now this support, which we shall hereafter attempt to prove a "broken reed," is crushed at once, upon the establishment of Christ's divinity; for thus there would be displayed a duality in the Godhead, and therefore the whole fancied argument from reason, for the Socinian oneness of God, is swept away, Further, we think that the deity of Christ and that of the Holy Ghost are declared jointly by certain passages; so intimately connected, that the demonstration of the one necessarily confirms the other. Of these we shall speak immediately.

We admit, however, that we are wholly indisposed to lay upon our former argument for the deity of Jesus Christ, any portion of the weight of further conclusions; as it is preferable to establish each element of the doctrine of the Trinity separately, in order that each may sustain, so far forth, every other, and that we may assume, in addition, the strong ground of the mutual fitness of these elementary parts, and their essential unity. Nevertheless, we are so convinced of that unity, and to such extent satisfied for one part to stand or fall with the others,-for the divinity of the Holy Ghost to rest, as for its evidences, upon the same foundation which upholds that of the Son of God,-that, for the most part, we shall content ourselves in the present section, with arguing from the one to the other. This we shall do in considering those clauses in which the three

persons of the Godhead are named. These are as follows: (1.) "Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

(2.)

[ocr errors]

Jesus being baptized and praying, the heaven was opened, and the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape, like a dove, upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said: Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased."

[ocr errors]

(3.) The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all.'

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

In (1) we find joined, in the solemn rite of baptism, the name of the Holy Ghost with those of the Father and the Son. If these latter are two persons of the Godhead, it seems a necessary consequence that the former can be nothing less in dignity and importance. The Unitarian exposition of the phrase "Holy Ghost," or "Holy Spirit, or "Spirit of God," gives it to mean, "the supernatural influences of the Deity on the minds of his servants, with the accompanying gifts and powers."-(Illustrations, &c., p. 97.) Undoubtedly this is frequently intended, corresponding to a similar use of the names of God and Christ; but that it is generally so, or so in the passage before us, we must be permitted to doubt. Accepting Mr. Wilson's explanation of the expression, "baptizing in (or, into) the name of" a person, as equivalent to "baptizing into the person himself," that is, "into a belief in him and his doctrines,❞—it still seems no less inexplicable to us, that the name of an "influence" should here be found. This formula constitutes the initiatory confession of a new faith, -a faith unknown to the Jews. Hence the expression"the name of the Father and the Son," instead of "God and the Christ," as indicating a newly asserted relation.

* (1.) Matth. xxviii: 19; (2.) Luke, iii: 21-22; see, also, the parallel passages in Matth. iii: 16-17, and Mark, i: 10; (3.) 2 Cor. xiii 14. We do not wish it understood that these are, in our opinion, all the passages in the New Testament of the class cited; but, simply, that they are all we may have space to examine.

What need of mention, then, of that influence of God upon the minds of his servants, so fully recognized by the Jews, in the inspiration of their prophets? How should this mark the peculiarity of the new faith? It may be replied, that this formula was to be used not simply among Jews, but in "all nations;" yet we should not forget that it was to have its beginning at Jerusalem, and that it was intended to define the fundamental creed of the new faith, as distinctly opposed to all others, Jewish and Pagan. Hence it is proper to render the passage before us as establishing baptism in the name of the holy Trinity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost;-the merciful Creator, Preserver and Protector of all, our Heavenly Father,—the Son of God, our divine Redeemer and Surety, and the ministering Spirit, the Comforter and Sanctifier of our hearts.

The passage marked (2), ascertains fully the separateness of the three persons mentioned in (1). The Holy Spirit, Unitarians admit, sometimes indicates God, or rather, we should say, is called God; from which they insist that if a person, he is no otherwise so than as identical with the Father. But here we find the Holy Ghost descending, in a bodily shape, upon Jesus, whilst the Father, in the voice from heaven, acknowledges him to be his "beloved Son." We do not consider this passage as alone establishing the doctrine of the Trinity, though Mr. Wilson seems desirous to make us believe that Trinitarians so regard it. "Go, Arian! to the Jordan and see the Trinity," is a proper exhortation, for it does not necessarily imply that there alone is the Trinity to be discovered, but that the divinity of Christ and of the Holy Ghost being otherwise vindicated, we have here an instance in which the three persons of the Godhead appear distinctively.

In (3) we think the same distinction is set forth. The "grace of the Lord Jesus," the "love of God," the communion of the Holy Ghost" are invoked by the apostle upon the Corinthians; the two former being blessings bestowed by persons, which favors the view that the latter also is. The word "communion" is rendered by some Unitarians "communication." Though this sense is that

most favorable to the Unitarian interpretation,—namely, that the apostle invoked from God the impartation of that holy influence, called the Spirit, to the minds of those to whom he writes,-yet it by no means militates against the sense we defend, namely, that Paul prayed to the Holy Ghost for the communication to them of his wonderful gifts. This view, moreover, is sustained by Paul's own words: "There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit,' "to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom, to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit; &c."-(1 Cor. xii: 4, 8, 9.) But it seems to us that xovova is more allied in meaning to the sense conveyed by our word "fellowship," than to that of communication." The latter meaning it may, bear in some passages, (Philemon, 6; Rom. xv: 26,) but in a far larger number it undoubtedly obtains that of "fellowship.' This sense, taken in the given connection, asserts fully the personality and divinity of the Holy Ghost.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

But if the doctrine of the personality and divinity of the Holy Spirit can be established on independent grounds, it will go to sustain that of the deity of Christ, in that it will overthrow, in the manner we have already recited, the main Socinian argument from reason, and will in several passages, but especially in that marked (1) above, vindicate the dignity of Christ as co-equal with that of the Father and the Spirit. To demonstrate the personality of the Spirit, is, as we have already intimated, tantamount to the establishment of all for which we contend. The divinity of the Spirit, as identical with the Father, is generally admitted by Unitarians. Apart from this admission, however, we have the fullest evidence for it in the following passages:

"My Spirit," the Father himself says, "shall not always strive with man."-(Gen. vi: 3.) "Whither," asks the Psalmist, "shall I go from thy Spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence? If I ascend up into heaven, thou

*Of these we cite a few: Acts, ii: 42; 2 Cor. vi: 14, and viii: 4; Gal. ii: 4; Eph. iii: 9; Phil. i: 5, ii: 1, ("fellowship of the Spirit,") and iii: 10; 1 John, i: 3, 6, 7. See also 1 Cor. i: 9, and x: 20; and Eph. v: 11.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »