SECTION VI.

IT is affirmed, that the scriptures ascribe IMMUTABILITY to Christ, and that, therefore, he must be the supreme and independent God.

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today and forever.* This is considered a plain declaration, that he is immutable; and consequently GOD, whose distinguishing character is, that he changes not.

But, were it conceded, that Jesus Christ, who has at all times the spirit without measure, changes, not in his purposes, plans, or doctrines, how would this prove him to be the supreme and independent God? Can it be supposed, that this passage proves him to be immutable in every respect? If there be any truth in the scriptures, or in his own declarations, he has changed his condition often. The history of his life is a history of as great mutability in his circumstances, as is true of any descendent of Adam. He certainly has passed through the changes of death, and of a resurrection to immortal life. From a very low state he is now exalted to the right hand of God on high; and he will eventually deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father, and be subject to him, that did put all things under him.

The passage adduced, does not establish his immutabil. ity in any respect, save in point of doctrine. It is of this only, that the Apostle here speaks. "Remember them, which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God, whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation. Jesus Christ the same," &c. That Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever, is urged as a reason, why they should carefully imitate or adhere to the faith of those, who had spoken unto them the word of God, The whole force of the argument arises from the immutability of his doctrine, or system faith published by his ministers. Jesus Christ is therefore evidently put for the doctrine of Christ, Of this there are very numerous examples in Paul's writ *Heb. xiii. 8.

ings. One or two shall be adduced. "For me to live is Christ;"* i. e. it is for the advantage of his doctrine; seeing, by this means, it will be more abundantly published in the world. "Ye have not so learned Christ;"† i. e. ye have not so learned the christian doctrine.

The passage, reduced to plain English, will read thus; "Whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation." For the doctrine of Christ is one. It never varies. "Be not therefore carried about with divers strange doctrines; for it is a good thing, that the heart be established with grace." The person of Christ is not spoken of. This both the preceeding and subsequent context, which relates to the christian faith, clearly evinces. And surely it will not be pretended, because the system of faith, which Christ has inspired his ministers to publish to the world, does not vary, therefore he must be the immutable God! Especially, since Christ himself declares, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me."‡ * Phil. i, 21. + Eph. iv. 20. John vii. 16,

66

SECTION VII.

ANOTHER argument, much insisted on by the advo cates for the supreme Deity of Christ, is, that he for gave sins. All sins it is said, are against God, the only Being to whom men are accountable; and it must be an arrogant assumption of divine prerogative, for any creature to presume to remit offences against the Most High.

The account of Christ's forgiving sins is thus stated by Matthew. "And behold they brought unto him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed; and Jesus, seeing their faith, said unto the sick of the palsy, Son be of good cheer, thy sins be forgiven thee. And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, this man blasphemeth. And Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts? For whether is it easier to say, thy sins be forgiven thee, or to say, arise and walk. But, that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, then saith he to the sick of the palsy, arise and take up thy bed, and go unto thine house. And he arose and departed to his house. But when the multitudes saw it, they glorified God, which had given such power unto men."* According to Mark, the scribes said, "Why doth this man thus speak blas→ phemies? Who can forgive sins, but God only ?”†

er.

Whatever be understood by Christ's forgiving the sins of the sick of the palsy, it is certain, that his power or authority to do this, was not inherent, but delegated powThere are two words in the Greek, εξεσια and δυναμις, by which these different ideas are generally marked. The latter signifies inherent ability, or authority arising from capacity of nature. The former conveys the idea of licence, legality, or a moral right to exercise authority, and is derived from Ees, it is lawful, it is permitted. That these words suggest such distinction the scribes were sensible, and our Saviour evidently admitted. Hence, when he assumed the authority of forgiving sins by say

*Mat, ix. 2-8. + Mark i. 7.

ing, Thy sins be forgiven thee, the scribes choose to put a false and invidious construction upon his words, and to understand him as assuming divine authority. Murmuring among themselves, and pretending it an encroachment upon the divine prerogative, they say, Who can forgive sins but God only? The word they use, rendered can is δύναται, derived from δύναμις, a word expressive of that essential authority, which arises from ability of nature. But our Lord, to expose their maliciousness, and to evince, that he claimed not the authority which they pretended, uses the word, expressive of licence or permission. He does not say, That ye may know that the Son of man on earth Suvarai has natural ability to forgive sins ; but ex oiav has licence or permission so to do. Accordingly he gave proof of it, by immediately performing a miraculous cure. This explanation, accompanied with the extraordinary miracle, closed their mouths. And when the multitude saw (both the explanation and the miracle) they marvelled and glorified God, which had given such power unto men. Though they were well disposed to glorify God, in view of what they had seen and heard, yet they had no idea, that it would become them to ascribe divine glory to Christ; to whom, they rightly concluded, God had delegated these wonderful powers. Neither does it become us to differ, in our conduct, from them: Especially since inspiration informs," Him hath God exalted to be a prince and a Saviour, to give repentance to Israel, and the forgiveness of sins."

But what is the real meaning of Christ's forgiving sins In this passage? Some of the most respectable commentators are of opinion, that it means only his delivering the paralytic from his disorder, the consequence of his sins. Calvin expresses himself thus on the subject. "Unquestionably a strong disposition to scandalize him (obtrutandi libido) impelled these scribes to the base conclusion, that our Lord was a blasphemer for using such phraseology as he did. Had they really thought him worthy of reprehension, why did they not make inquiry into his conduct and meaning? Moreover, since the lan guage was ambiguous, and Christ said nothing which was

H

not customary with the prophets, while they testified the favor of God, why did the scribes convert, to an improper sense, what was capable of a more unexceptionable interpretation? In taking such a method to condemn Christ, it is evident therefore, that they were previously infected with spiteful malevolence against him."*

"John's

Dr. Mc. Knight, in his note upon the passage, where the Apostle directs to pray for a brother, who has not committed a mortal sin, and affirms that God will grant him life,† makes the following observations. direction Let him ask God and he will grant unto him life, is equivalent to that of James, Let them (the elders) pray over them, and the prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise him up, and so, although he hath committed sins, they shall be forgiven him; i. e. although he hath committed sins, which have occasioned him to be punished with a mortal disease, he shall be delivered from that punishment. In calling a miraculous recovery from a mortal disease, which had been inflicted as a punishment of sins, the forgiving of sins, James has followed his master, who called the recovery of the sick of the palsy the forgiving of his sins. Mat. ix. 2—5. In like manner the psalmist represents the healing of all his diseases, as the forgiveness of all his iniquities."

In the comment of the learned Pool on this passage, we have these observations. "Because all transgressions of the law did not come to the knowledge of the judges, therefore God sanctioned the law with threatnings of premature death, and also of diseases, as appears from Deut. xxviii. 22-27. Sometimes, indeed, there are natural causes of diseases and bodily disorders, God having thus permitted; as we learn from John v. 14, where our Lord says to the man, who had an infirmity thirty and eight years, Behold thou art made whole, sin no more lest a worse thing come unto thee. This disease was unquestionably derived to him through his own fault. The same also is evident from I Cor. xi. 30, where Paul says, concerning the practice of eating and drinking at the Lord's table unworthily, or so as to add drunkeness to thirst, For

* Vid. Harm, in loco. Translation of Apostolical Epistles, i. John 5, 16.