AN INQUIRY INTO THE SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE PERSON OF CHRIST. INTRODUCTION. THREE principal hypotheses have been maintained concerning the person of Jesus Christ. 1. That Jesus of Nazareth is a proper human being, the greatest of all the prophets of God. 2. That a pre-existent created spirit of a higher or lower degree in a supposed celestial hierarchy animated the body of Jesus. 3. That the divine nature, or a divine person, was so united to the human body and soul of Jesus as to form one person, who is both truly God, and truly man. The first of these is the doctrine of the Unitarians; the second is that of the Arians; and the third is that of the Trinitarians. All Christians agree that Jesus of Nazareth was to outward appearance a man like other men: and that though he was an inspired prophet, who performed miracles, was raised from the dead, and ascended into heaven, he is not, on these accounts solely, to be regarded as a being of rank superior to the human race, but that separate and direct evidence is necessary for the establishment of this specific fact. Hence it follows that, in this inquiry, the whole burthen of proof lies upon those who assert the pre-existence, the original dignity, and the divinity of Jesus Christ. If any one affirm that a being who has every appearance, and every incident and quality of a man, is not a real man, but a being of an order superior to mankind, it is incumbent upon him to prove his assertion. If he fail in his proof, his hypothesis vanishes, and the person in question must be regarded as a real man. It is therefore by no means necessary for the Unitarian to adduce proof of the proper simple humanity of Jesus Christ. It would be equally reasonable to demand of the Jews a demonstration of the proper humanity of Moses. If the Arian or Trinitarian doctrines be not satisfactorily proved by direct and specific evidence, the Unitarian doctrine must be received as true. For who is so unreasonable as to require evidence to prove a man to be a man? In this controversy, therefore, the proper province of the Arian and Trinitarian is to propose the evidence of their respective hypotheses; that is, to state those passages of Scripture which they conceive to be conclusive in favour of their doctrines. The sole concern of the Unitarian is to show that these arguments are inconclusive: that the passages in question are either of doubtful authenticity, or misunderstood, or misapplied. This is the precise state of the question. It is admitted by all parties. It must be continually kept in view. This view of the subject points out the true and only proper method of conducting the argument. It is by proposing and carefully examining the controverted texts. He who will not submit to this labour must be content to remain ignorant, or to take his opinions upon trust. The following observations may be of use to guide our inquiries. 1. If Jesus or nis apostles peremptorily and unequivocally declare the doctrine of his pre-existence and original dignity, dignity, their evidence must without hesitation be admitted. They could not be mistaken. 2. Nevertheless, when a fact is contrary to the established order of Nature, and the antecedent improbability is very great, the direct evidence must be proportionably strong. The doctrine of the pre-existence and high original powers of Christ ought not to depend upon a few obscure, mystical, and ambiguous texts. 3. In examining the validity of an argument from Scripture, the first inquiry is, whether the text be genuine; the second is, to ascertain its true import, and the correctness of its application. 4. In order to judge of the true sense of a disputed text, it is necessary to consider the connexion in which it stands; the scope and design of the writer; the customs and modes of thinking which prevailed in the age and country in which the author wrote; his own turn of mind and peculiar phraseology, and whether he means to be understood literally or figuratively. Also, similar passages and forms of expression must be compared with each other, so that what is obscure and doubtful may be illustrated by what is clear and intelligible. 5. Impartial and sincere inquirers after truth must be particularly upon their guard against what is called the natural signification of words and phrases. The connexion between words and ideas is perfectly arbitrary; so that the natural sense of a word to any person, means nothing more than the sense in which he has been accustomed to understand it. But it is very possible that men who lived two thousand years ago might annex very different ideas to the same words and phrases; so that the sense which appears most foreign to us, might be most natural to them. 6. It ought by all means to be remembered, that profound learning and acute metaphysical subtilty are by no means necessary to settle the important question concerning the person of Christ. The inquiry is into a plain matter of fact, which is to be determined like any other fact by its specific evidence, the evidence of plain unequivocal testimony; for judging of which, no other qualifications are requisite than a sound understanding and an honest mind. Who can believe that the decision of the great question whether Jesus of Nazareth is the true God, and the Creator and Governor of the world, depends upon a critical knowledge of the niceties of the Greek Article? With equal reason might it be maintained, that no person can know any thing of the History of Greece, who is not perfect in the metres of the Greek dramatic writers1. 7. Inquiry to be useful must be impartial. The mind must be kept open to conviction, and ready to follow evidence whithersoever it leads; to sacrifice prejudices the most deeply rooted and the most fondly cherished, and to embrace truths the most unexpected and unwelcome. Truth must ultimately be favourable to virtue and to happiness. The subject is divided into Two Parts. The First contains A Selection and Examination of those Passages in the New Testament which have been alleged in favour of the Pre-existence and original Dignity, Power, and Divinity of Jesus Christ. The Second Part comprehends A summary View of the various Hypotheses which have been formed concerning the Person of Christ, and of the Arguments for and against each Hypothesis respectively. 1 Whoever heard of a juryman being challenged because he was not a good grammarian? The incarnation of a God, the incarceration of the Creator of the world in the body of a helpless puling infant, is a fact, the credit of which must rest, like that of all other facts, not upon grammatical subtilties, but upon evidence direct, presumptive, or circumstantial, upon the validity of which every person of common sense is competent to decide. PART PART THE FIRST. SELECTION AND EXAMINATION OF THOSE PASSAGES IN THE NEW TESTAMENT, WHICH HAVE BEEN ALLEGED IN FAVOUR OF THE PRE-EXISTENCE, THE ORIGINAL DIGNITY, POWER, AND DIVINITY OF JESUS CHRIST. THESE GENERAL DISTRIBUTION. HESE passages will be arranged under the following heads. I. The arguments which are alleged to prove that the Jews in the time of Christ believed in the pre-existence of their expected Messiah. II. The narratives of the miraculous conception and birth of Jesus Christ. III. The texts which are conceived to express in the most direct and unequivocal language the pre-existence of Jesus Christ. IV. The texts which, if they are not to be admitted as direct arguments, are nevertheless thought to be most correctly interpreted as alluding to this important fact. V. Those in which attributes appear to be ascribed to Christ, which are thought to establish his preexistence, and by many even his divinity. VI. Those passages which are understood as affirming the superiority of Christ to angels. VII. Those |