> contradicts the Bible, makes the Bible contradict itself, and finally, as if grown bold through trifling with sacred things, it fearlessly denies the inspiration of that holy book. If, then, the Bible is contradictory and false, where is our hope? We have no knowledge of God, his attributes, or his will we know nothing of Jesus Christ, his nature, or his office: we know not whether there has been any plan devised for our redemption and salvation, or if there has, we are ignorant of its terms or the means by which we are to obtain its benefits. We are left like a mariner upon the trackless ocean without a chart or compass-no sun, nor even the faint glimmering of a star to guide us to the desired haven. And, indeed, we know not whether there is a heaven to gain or a hell to shun; and if there is, we may founder in the one without knowing how to obtain the other. All is a dark and fearful uncertainty. We see by daily observation that we are mortal, and tending to the tomb, and that very soon we must all die, but whether we shall live again or not we cannot tell. Our souls may perish with our bodies, or they may live through all eternity in bliss or woe: this too is all uncertain. The promise of a resurrection, and of immortality and eternal life beyond the grave, is taken from us; for if Unitarianism is true, the Bible must be false, and these consoling promises must forever fail, while we are doomed to perpetual skepticism and doubt. Thus we see Unitarianism saps the very foundation of christianity, takes away all moral restraint, and opens the flood gates of infidelity, that moral scourge which has spread death and destruction over the face of the whole earth. It was a disbelief in the word and threatenings of God which induced Eve to partake of the forbidden fruit; and it is that same unbelieving infidel principle that has ever been the fostering mother of all iniquity. Who, then, will dare to risk their eternal all on such a system as this? Who that has ever read their Bible and been struck with awe and admiration while they have contemplated the sublimity of its style, the pureness of its morals, and the exalted nature of its doctrines? Who that ever heard the thunderings of Sinai, and with trembling confessed that by the deeds of the law could no flesh be justified, and then in that book of books divine has read the story of the cross, the condescension of the Saviour, who was God over all, and yet for our sake became incarnate, became obedient unto death even the death of the cross, and who gave himself a ransom for us to redeem us from the curse of a violated law, who arose for our justification, and ascended up on high, and there sitteth at the right hand of God to make intercession for us? Who, I say, in view of all this, can embrace a system which denies the Bible by denying all its fundamental doctrines? Can we renounce the Bible, that richest of heaven's blessings, in which alone life and immortality are brought to light, and upon the truth of which hangs our eternal destinies? We who live in the full blaze of gospel day, and in whose hearts the glorious sun of righteousness has shone with healing in its beams, and by its effulgent rays has scattered the gloomy clouds of moral darkness and despair and given us peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ-can we renounce the Bible? Noheaven forbid. Sooner, far sooner, let our right hand forget its cunning and our tongue cleave to the roof of our mouth; yea, let our bodies be lashed to the burning stake and perish in the flames, than that we should give up that holy Book, or deny one of its momentous truths. PAGE. LINE. ERRATA. 5 29 For Socinins, read Socinus.. 6 125 152 147 25 For Parke, read Parker. 1 For John Power, read John H. Power. 18 For each of three persons, read each of these three INDEX. II. From the reflection which an appeal to reason instead of revelation would cast upon Deity, CHAPTER I. ON THE IMPROPRIETY OF MAKING HUMAN REASON THE Shown, I. From the fact that human reason has been corrup- PAGE. 5 9 III. If reason were to be our guide, revelation would not be necessary, IV. Faith would not be the gift of God, V. From the opinions of ancient Philosophers, CHAPTER II. IMPORTANCE OF THE TRINITY, Shown, I. From a knowledge of God being fundamental to religion, II. From its being necessary to explain the Scriptures, III. From our views of God, IV. From a denial of it changing our love to God, VI. A denial of the doctrine of the Trinity changes the V. The doctrine of Atonement depends upon the doctrine of the Trinity, VII. Changes our love to Christ, VIII. Destroys all hope and trust in Christ as a Saviour, IX. From the manner in which a denial of it would affect the credit of the Scriptures, CHAPTER III. PERSONALITY AND DIVINITY OF THE HOLY GHOST, Personality. 34 Proved, I. From the mode of his subsistence in the Trinity, 34 II. From the Scriptures being unintelligible if the Spirit be III. From personification of any attribute of Deity being IV. From the masculine pronouns applied to him, V. Objections answered, Divinity. Proved, I. From the act of creating, PAGE. II. From being associated with the Father and the Son in the inspiration of the Prophets, III. From being the Lord of Hosts, IV. From the Tabernacle and Apostolic form of benediction, 42 V. From the form of baptism, VI. From being the Most High, VII. From being the Spirit of God, VIII. From being God, 42 43 44 47 48 Proved, I. From his pre-existence, II. From being the Jehovah of the Old Testament, Proved, I. From the opinion of the Fathers, V. From the form of benediction used by the Jewish High Priests, 168 VI. From the form of baptism, 171 VII. From the doxology used by the Apostles, 174 VIII. From the benediction used by the Apostles, 174 181 |