Imagens da página

We may

The Bible does not tell us that God exhausted his capabilities in creating Jesus Christ. yet expect men, as gifted and elevated, or, even more so, as Christianity is hereafter unfolded.

We are not saved by Christ who lived nineteen centuries ago, but by the Christ that we find in our own hearts. If it could be proved that Christ never lived, or that he was an impostor, still Christianity would not be affected by it! So, if the apostles had never lived, or were impostors, Christianity would still be the same. It was taught by nature.

Christianity has no creed, or, if it has a creed, it is a creed of only one article, viz. that there is a God.

Christianity must be tried by the oracle in the human heart.

We want no one to stand between us and God. If we would have the full benefits of a spiritual Christianity, we must worship the Father as Jesus did, with no intervening mediator and then we shall be like Christ.”

Here we have Infidelity-daring, bloated, unvarnished Infidelity, preached at an ordination, by a professed minister of the gospel, under the curtains and coverings of Unitarianism. Such men in the sacred desk! Wolves in sheep's clothing!! Now, we ask the candid reader, Does not Unitarianism tend to the disbelief of God's holy word? and were we incorrect when we stated that there was no middle ground in our view, between Trinitarianism and Deism? Satan, the old red dragon, when the church was in its infancy, clad bimself in his crimson garb, and dyed it deeper still in the Martyr's blood.

But when the church became more numerous, he laid aside his blood-stained dress, and

clothed himself in white, or " transformed himself into an angel of light,” and we need not marvel that his ministers should do the same.

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

THERE are a number of classes or societies, who agree in the Unitarian doctrine, while they disagree in many other matters of faith. Some of these societies take the name Unitarian, or Congregational Unitarian. Others call themselves Christians, and we are informed by a very respectable memler of the Universalist society, that they also are Unitari


year 315.

It is a very difficult matter to state what Unitari. ans beliede respecting Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost, for they do not seem to agree among themselves, yet it is easy to see what they do not be lieve. The Unitarians have formerly existed under the names of Arians, Sabellians and Socinians "The Arians were the followers of Arius, who was a presbyter of the church of Alexandria about the

« Arius maintained that the Son of God was totally and essentially distinct from the Father; that he' was the first and noblest of those beings whom God had created the instrument by wbose subordinate operations be formed the universe. He also held that the Son was inferior to the Father, both in nature and dignity, that the Holy Ghost was not God, but created by the power of the Sun.” His views respecting the Son seem to harmonize perfectly with the views of modern Unitarians, but they, perhaps, differ in respect to the nature of the


Holy Spirit. The Sabellians were “the followers of Sabellias, a philosopher of Egypt, who flourished in the third century. The Sabellians held that there was but one person in the Godhead that the Word and Holy Spirit are only virtues, emanations, or functions of the deity; that the Father of all things was born of the Virgin, that he diffused himself on the apostles in tongues of fire, and was then denominated the Holy Ghost.

That there is but one person in the Godhead, is the belief of modern Unitarians. So here they agree with the ancient Sabellians. Also, do they seem to agree that the Holy Ghost is only an nation of the Father, but further they seem not to agree.

The Socinians were so called from Faustus Socinus, who died in Poland in 1604. They maintain " that Jesus Christ was a mere man, who had no existence before he was conceived by the Virgin Mary, that the Holy Ghost is no distinct person, but that the Father is truly and properly God.”

With this, modern Socinians, or Unitarians, will not fully agree. They agree, or seem to agree, that only the Father is properly God, and that the Holy Ghost is in no sense a person, or distinct from the Father. They seem to disagree in this, that Jesus Christ did exist before his nativity; but yet they deny that bis existence was eternal, and unequivocally affirm that “ Jesus Christ is not eternal.” We will now attend more particularly to the statements of nodern Unitarians.

Says a modern Unitarian," while speaking of what Christ is not: "He is not unoriginated, he is not self-existent, not immortal, not unchangeable, not omniscient, not all-wise, not all-good, not allpowerful, he is not omnipresent.

We now have it fairly stated what Christ is not, and these statements leave us to infer after all, what he really is, in view of Unitarians.

Says the same writer, “ Christ possesses but one nature." “ The two nature doctrine,” he says, “ is essentially incredible, a palpable contradiction.” “ T'he doctrine of the two natures, implicates the moral character of the Holy Jesus.”+

Again he says, " Christ testifies that he is not God." “ Jesus denies being God-denies calling himself God, and repels the accusation of blasphemy, even on the supposition he had called himself God." I

Again, “ The Father is the only true God.” “ Trinitarians professedly worship two other objects beside the Father.” st I see not how they can claim the character of “True worshipers.""||

* The Unitarian just named, is Mr. Morgridge. The above is found in his “ True Believers' Defence," page 50. Mr. Morgridge is & minister of the Christian denomination. He seems to have possessed a peculiar faculty for disposing of those texts which deal death to his system, for when there was no other way for him to clear his sygtem from collision with the positive declarations of Jehovah, he pronounced them“ spurious," with all the boldness of a Bolinbroke.

See Morgridge's" True Believers' Defence," page 70. See page 44 of the above-named work. # See page 40. Query. Does he not mean to convey the idea

« AnteriorContinuar »