Essays on Socinianism

"and from hence we might have imagined it would destroy them, till we found by experience the weakness of this way of 'judging. But in the diseases now mentioned, there is not so "much as this shadow of probability, to lead us to any such "conclusion as to the reflecting powers we have at present; for "in those diseases, persons often, the moment before death, "appear to be in the highest vigour of intellectual life. They "discover apprehension, memory, reason, all intire; with the "utmost force of affection; sense of character; of shame and "honour; and the highest mental enjoyments and sufferings, even to the last gasp and these surely prove even greater "vigour of life than bodily strength does. Now what pretence "is there for thinking, that a progressive disease, when arrived "to such a degree, I mean that degree which is mortal, will destroy those powers which were not impaired, which were "not affected by it, during its whole progress, quite up to that degree? And if death, by diseases of this kind, is not the "destruction of our present reflecting powers, it will scarce be thought that death by any other means is.

'It is obvious that this general observation may be carried on "further. And there appears so little connexion between our "bodily powers of sensation, and our present powers of reflection, that there is no reason to conclude that death, which destroys the former, does so much as suspend the exercise of "the latter, or interrupt our continuing to exist in the like state "of reflection which we do now. Nay, for aught we know of "ourselves, and of our present life, and of death, death may immediately, in the natural course of things, put us into a higher and more enlarged state of life, as our birth does; a "state in which our capacities and sphere of perception, and of action, may be much greater than at present. These obser"vations together may be sufficient to show how little presump"tion there is that death is the destruction of human creatures. "When we get out of this world, we may pass into new scenes, "and a new state of life and action, just as naturally as we come "into the present. And this new state may naturally be a "social one; and the advantages of it, advantages of every kind, may naturally be bestowed according to some fixed general "laws of wisdom, upon every one according to the degrees of "his virtue."

BISHOP BUTLER.

ON THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST.

SOCINIANS are so far wise in their generation, as to know, that unless they succeed in disproving the Pre-existence of Christ, their whole system is shaken to its base. Retaining a keen sense of this inevitable consequence, they have naturally exerted their best efforts to subvert this fundamental doctrine of Christian faith, but, with a success, acknowledged alone by those who exalt Reason (that is, their own arbitrary reason) above Revelation.

There is no truth which may not be undermined; no principle, less than mathematical, which may not be attacked, if not subverted by the perverseness of human ingenuity; but while we appeal to the Bible, as to an infallible standard, correction is attainable, and Christians should advert more sparingly to general argument, and adopt more habitually for their motto, "To the law and to the testimonies.” This practice will be subsequently adopted in considering the question of Christ's Preexistence.

It will be admitted by all whose minds have not been desolated by Infidelity, that Christ our Saviour possessed all moral excellence; that his words were true; his intentions pure; and that, where our eternal interests were involved, or our present duties, his declarations were more particularly full and unambiguous; so that, in all the great concerns of Eternity, if we fail to understand aright, the fault is our own. With these postulates, it becomes every sincere inquirer after Truth, to ascertain, in the most rigid sense, what the words and statements of Christ were, as our only legitimate appeal, in reference to his Pre-existence. There is a second inquiry, of consequence, as auxiliary evidence, arising from the averments of his Inspired Apostles. The testimony, therefore, arising from these two sources, must be conclusive; unless we are resolved to concede nothing to heaven, and to rely exclusively on ourselves.

At the commencement of an inquiry like the present, a due sense should be entertained of its elevated nature, and of the contracted range of human views and talents. It is therefore readily conceded, that the union which subsisted between the Divine and Human Nature of Christ, involved in his preexistence, according to the express testimony of Scripture, can neither be fully explained, nor adequately understood; but there are some conclusions at which we may safely arrive. If Jesus Christ was, as Socinians affirm, "the Son of Joseph and Mary," he could have had no Pre-existence, and two consequences will follow; Christ's own declarations respecting himself, with those of his Apostles, are invalid; and the statements of Matthew and Luke, relating to his miraculous conception, are all false ! Christians do not question the testimony of Christ and his Apostles, so clearly stated by one, and affirmed by the other if Socinians do, they appeal to some criterion which Christians disown. Socinians, in justification of their peculiar opinions, must avail themselves of some authority, solid, or unsubstantial; and their dependence, it appears, rests on Ebion and Marcion, ancient heretics, who daringly rejected three of the Gospels, and mutilated the fourth, so as to exclude all that accorded not with their own caprice; and particularly, the miraculous conception. Notwithstanding their character has been held in the lowest possible estimation, by the whole Christian world,* they are still confided in by Socinians as unimpeachable authority.

The question of Christ's Pre-existence, will now be fairly, though briefly considered, from the unequivocal letter of Scripture, and the appeal be made to the conscientious convictions of every mind that attaches importance to Christian Truth. 1. "In the beginning was the Word."

* "The same was in the beginning with God."† John i. 1, 2. "Word," here, is admitted to be the designation of Christ, and no one, capable of reasoning, can deem it applicable to a Prophet, or one recently born.

2. "He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not." John i. 10.

No tortuous perversion of interpretation can show any accordance in these words with a purely human being of yesterday. Such a dilemma suggests a reason why Socinians should have so united their efforts, to invalidate this portion of Scripture.

* See Bp. Pearson, Bp. Horsley, Abp. Magee, Dr. J. P. Smith, &c. + See the declaration of Griesbach, on this passage, at the end of the essay.

"He that cometh after me is preferred before me, for he was before me." John i. 15.

If the Apostle had referred to priority of rank or office, he would not have added the emphatic words, "for he was before me; " which must refer to his pre-existence.

4. "The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." John i. 29.

The super-human character of Christ is here distinctly declared, and his pre-existence is equally implied.

"No man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." John iii. 13.

Coming down from heaven is inexplicable language, on any other admission than Christ's pre-existence.

6. "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” John i. 18.

This passage accords with Christ's pre-existence, and implies his two natures. He who was on earth in one nature, in the other, however incomprehensible, was in the bosom of the Father.

7. "He that cometh from above is above all. * * He that cometh from heaven is above all." John iii. 31.

These words of John the Baptist establish Christ's preexistence.

The commencement of St. John's Gospel so clearly establishes the Pre-existence, and the Divinity of Christ, that Socinianism has always been perplexed to avert its fair and obvious meaning. Mr. Lindsey has ventured to transfer the Logos, from our Saviour to the faculty of Wisdom. This sense, he states, was approved by Dr. Lardner, Dr. Priestley, and Mr. Wakefield. It has also received the sanction of the Editors of the "Improved Version." The following is Mr. L.'s substitution for the words of the Apostle.

"In the beginning was wisdom, and wisdom was with God, and God was wisdom: the same was in the beginning with God; all things were made by it, and without it was nothing made in it was life, and the life was the light of men; and the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John; the same came for a witness, to bear witness of the light, that all men through him might believe: he was not that light, but was

sent to bear witness of that light; that was the true light which came into the world, and enlighteneth every man. It (wisdom) was in the world, and the world was made by it, and the world knew it not it came to its own land, and its people received it not; but as many as received it, to them it gave power to become the sons of God, even to them who believe on its name, who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And wisdom became man, and dwelt among us, and we beheld its glory, the glory as of the well-beloved of the Father, full of grace and truth. John bare witness of him, saying, This is he of whom I speak he that cometh after me is preferred before me, for he was greater than me." [I.]

The whole of this (in a plain common sense view) is a mass of incongruities. Why should the divine attribute of wisdom be thus distinguished, more than power, or goodness? &c. Each, without the other, is nugatory: the whole combined are essential to Deity. Wisdom is inseparable from God, but it cannot be said that God is wisdom. Then, again, all things were made in wisdom, but not by wisdom. The world also was made in wisdom, but not by wisdom. Wisdom came, and its own received it not! Here the quality is transformed into a personification, and immediately after, the quality is restored, and yet it gives power. Wisdom, as an attribute, is inherent in Deity, but how can an attribute come to its own land, and its own people have received it not? How can wisdom, a common attribute, in any allowable sense, be called the well-beloved of the Father? Christ alone, by his incarnation, throws light on this subject, which, otherwise, is confused and unmeaning, as all but Socinians will instantly perceive.

8. "And what he hath seen and heard, that he testifieth." John iii. 32.

John had previously stated that Christ had come from heaven, and here declares that what he had seen and heard, that he testified. This implies Christ's pre-existence.

9. "The bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world." John vi. 33.

Could Moses or Isaiah, in any allowable sense, speak of coming down from heaven? But on the veracity of Christ, he came down from a pre-existent state, and that for human redemption.

10. "I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me." John vi. 38.

« Previous Continue »

Books