Page images

LXXV. Because the reason, assigned for the Holy Spirit not having been received earlier, is, that Jesus was not then glorified. "The Holy Ghost was not yet given, because that Jesus was not yet glorified," John vii. 39.

LXXVI. Because it is affirmed that Christ was exalted by God to be a Prince and a Savior, Acts v. 31.

LXXVII. Because God made that same Jesus, who wa crucified, both Lord and Christ, Acts ii. 36.

LXXVIII. Because God gave him a name which is above every name, Phil. ii. 9.

LXXIX. Because Christ was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead, Acts x. 42.

LXXX. Because God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, Rom. iii. 16.

LXXXI. Because all judgment is committed to Christ by the Father, John v. 22.


LXXXII. Because our Savior grounds the importance of his judgment solely upon the circumstances, that it is not exclusively his own judgment, which he pronounces, but that of the Father who sent him. "If I judge, my judgment is true ; for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me," John viii. 16.

LXXXIII. Because it is said, that when he was received up into heaven, he "sat on the right hand of God," Mark xvi. 19. LXXXIV. Because St. Paul affirms, that Christ, even since his ascension, "liveth unto God," and "liveth by the power of God," Rom. vi. 10. 2 Cor. xiii. 4.

LXXXV. Because it is affirmed of Christ, that "when all things shall be subdued under him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all," 1 Cor. xv. 28.

LXXXVI. Because the Apostle John asserts, that "no man hath seen God at any time; which is not true, if Christ were God.


Because in the prophecies of the Old Testament that relate to Christ, he is spoken of as a being distinct from, and inferior to God, Deut. xviii. 15. John i, 45.

LXXXVIII. Because the Jews never expected, that any other than a being distinct from, and inferior to God, was to

be their Messiah, and yet there is no evidence that our Savior ever so much as hinted to them that this expectation was



Because it does not appear from the Scriptures, that the Jews, except in two instances, ever opposed our Savior on the ground that he pretended to be God, or equal with God; whereas had it been his custom to assume such identity or equality, in his conversation with a people so strongly attached to the doctrine of the divine unity, he would have found himielf involved in a perpetual controversy with them on this point, some traces of which must have appeared in the New-Testament.

XC. Because in these two instances, when charged, in one case, with making himself God, and in the other, with making himself equal with God, he positively denies the charges In reply to the charge of assuming to be equal with God, he says immediately, "The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do;" and directly after, "I can of mine own self do nothing," John v. 19. 30. In answer to the charge of making himself God, he appeals to the Jews, in substance, thus; Your own Scriptures call Moses a god, and your magistrates gods; am surely not inferior to them, yet I did not call myself God, but only Son of God, John x. 34, 35, 36.

XCI. Because, had his immediate disciples believed him to be the Almighty, would they have been so familiar with him, have argued with him, betrayed him, denied him, fled from him, and left him to be dragged to the cross?

XCII. Because the Apostles, after they had been filled with the Holy Ghost on the day of pentecost, did not preach that Christ was God; but preached what was altogether inconsistent with such a doctrine; Acts ii. 22; xiii. 23; xvii. 3, 31; xxii. 8.

XCIII. Because there is no evidence to prove, that the first converts to Christianity ever incurred the imputation of idolatry from the Jews, as they must have done, had they belie and taught that the Son, as well as the Father, Jehovah; while it is notorious that this imputation has been among the most common of the Jewish reproaches against

Christians, since the Trinity became a doctrine of the church.

XCIV. Because there are, in the N. T. seventeen passages, wherein the Father is styled one or only God, while there is not a single passage in which the Son is so styled.

XCV. Because there are 320 passages, in which the Father is absolutely, and by way of eminence, called God; while there is not one in which the Son is thus called.

XCVI. Because there are 305 passages, in which the Father is denominated God, with peculiarly high titles and epithets, whereas the Son is not once so denominated.

XCVII. Because there are 90 passages, wherein it is declared that all prayers and praises ought to be offered to HIM, and every thing ought to be ultimately directed to An honor and glory; while of the Son no such declaration is ever made.

XCVIII. Because, of 1300 passages in the N. T. wherein the word God is mentioned, not one necessarily implies the existence of more than one person in the Godhead, or that this one is any more than the Father.

XCIX. Because the passages, wherein the Son is declared, positively, or by the clearest implication, to be subordinate to the Father, deriving his being from Him, receiving from Him his divine power, and acting in all things wholly according to His will, are in number above 300.

C. Because in a word, the supremacy of the Father, and inferiority of the Son, is the simple, unembarrassed, and current doctrine of the Bible; whereas, that of their equality or identity is clothed in mystery, incumbered with difficulties, and dependent, at the best, upon few passages for support.

For the Repository.


My dear brother-I now appropriate the present time to answer a letter of yours, which came to my hand yesterday; it seemed fraught with sentiments of friendship, good wishes, and real concern, relative to me. I

hope you will not indulge the thought, that I consider you my enemy, for I have long had full confidence to the contrary, and believed you wished to render me as comfortable in life as possible, and your letter fully evinces that, had you power proportioned to your willingness, you would qualify me for a future state of felicity. Well, there is one, I believe who has power sufficient, but whether he possesses your willingness, is the query! if he does not, it is not likely he ever will, as he is unchangeable-furthermore, as his will is self moved, it is not likely that all subordinate wills can operate upon it. Permit me just to notice your just remark, which is, "vain is the applause of mortals." I do not know your design, by this, for surely you cannot imagine that I expect to obtain temporal emoluments, by adhering to the sentiments of which your letter is the subject. For of all denominations with which I am acquainted, I know of none whose sentiments are more universally viewed with contempt. I presume you do not consider it an honor to yourself, the family, or me, to have it said, Sally is a Universalist.

Another observation you make, is this, "Remember this, all is well with us, if you are right; but if we are right, all may not be well with you." I think I have felt the force of this agument, and been under its influence. For many years, this was a sufficient barrier to my looking with candor on that, which if true, would catch me without the trouble of investigation. May I now, without offence, a little alter your observations, by way of query, and ask if I am wrong, and you are right, is it not possible all may be well with me, if I am included in the electing love of God? (which you say is the only ground of hope, for any.) May not this love extend to me, or will you say it never extends to Universalists, or will you say it might have been, had I never become

[ocr errors]

one? This I think would be limited election, bounding it on one hand, by time, and on the other, by the agency of the creature. Your good sense, I know, will reject either of these. Your request, that I should read the four Evangelists once more, I trust will be complied with, by my reading them a number of times, if the Lord continues my life. And though I should not be able, with my weak powers of mind, to reconcile all that is there contained, with any system, yet I hope I shall not conclude all is false. You intimated that the sentiments of our deceased friends ought to be examined with a hamble, prayerful candor. This I think ought to attend all our examinations of this kind, as well the systems of our surviving friends, as our dead ones. But do we, do you, and do I, examine those sentiments, we disbelieve, with equal candor, as those we believe? My brother, the recollection of departed friends is dear to me, but what their present state is, God only knows. The only hope I have for them, is predicated on the same foundation where I have a little for myself, that is, the infinite power and goodness of the Creator. I know our late deceased brother* has told me, although the goodness and power of God was exactly parallel, yet they cannot save but a part, because it is not best for the universe; if so, then, I do not see how we can determine, whether God is willing he, you, or I, should be saved, till we come into the eternal world-although I have, and still do enjoy the pleasures of friendship, which sweetens the journey of life, yet I have never found one, who could help me a step beyond the grave; and how could they? for they cannot help themselves. It is likely, by this time you will say, study to get a deep sense of depravity; I assure you, that I have spent many melancholy hours in this way, viewing the wickedness that is exhibited in

* A Calvinistic Preacher.

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »