Sivut kuvina


he heavenly imprke ting anism destroyed test Eng all this beautan eart, and for the sea

mmortal and the route Cehends and biesia. zad who intercede 71

at cannot be utten ations of the experience

as scarcely to be 7 ptural occurrence; is

the Soul, and second e has azoniated by ed fron Him, and a par


ind, is called His Help!

ideas associated with God

cural eridence plid i erss, as proving, mata Epirit, for here we

from those of Grea

tions of His Spirit, with
to the new light tha
reign of the spirit of Go
readily were associate
ideas which were loo
istic faith of one w
kingdom of Heave
God and of Religio

Ghost.”—Matt. xxviii. 19; or, into the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, the word," name,” by an idiom of the Hebrew language, being redundant.

To baptize into a person was a form of expression signifying the reception of the religious ideas associated with that person. Thus the Jews were said to be baptized into Moses, because they received the religious ideas associated with the institutions of that Prophet: and on the othe

Titans were said to be baptized into Mount Gerizim, se they received the religious ideas associated with the " that there, and not at Jerusalem, was the appointed

the Temple. The formula then of baptizing in the the Father, and of the Christ, and of the Holy Spirit,

nothing more than the acceptance of the religious

sociated with God in this new manifestation of Himself, revealed through the Christ, and accompanied by the opera

His Spirit, witnessing, both internally and externally, ew light that had come into the world, the promised che spirit of God. These were the words which most ere associated with, and suggested those religious ch were looked upon as constituting the character

of one who was willing to enter into the gospel of Heaven, that is, to adopt the Christian idea of

of Religion. The Father, the Christ, the Spirit of us giving us some communion with that Father, by

us through spiritual sympathies with that Christ lls of the very soul of Christianity? God manifested es and our souls accepting the revelation, because the . Our Father within us draws us towards him who had e spirit without measure—is not this to express in a as all the characteristic and peculiar ideas of Chris. and therefore most fit to be used as suggesting sum

o matured converts the new faith into which they aptized? The same set of ideas might have been as

Pressed by the shorter form of being baptized “into

znations, baptiz desta the Son, and ofte East

to those who ask fait de se - speaks (probabi'r ia ers of the Old Law, Dari

of man, 'He will be not <Dirine Spirit a faida la

into all that comes them "e mind, so me maler ugh infinitelr apart from a litt *aul as analagoni (I met sy eie e the one is the fastes-be?

God in us giving
uniting us thr
is not this of the ver
in Jesus, and
spirit of our F
the same spiry
few words all
tianity, and t
marily to matured
were baptized ?
fully express

- the Spirit also helped

for as we ought; det Tot expressed in more and wakes us sigh for short story

B. While


Christ,” for this would imply the possession and acceptance of all the religious ideas associated with his person and ministry—and accordingly we find that in every recorded case of baptism or allusion to baptism in the Acts of the Apostles, and in the Epistles, the expression simply and briefly is to “ baptize into Christ,” and never once is there an allusion to the form of baptism into the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Now this demonstrates two things: first that the Apostles did not look upon these words as a form prescribed by Christ : and secondly, that they did not regard them as a confession of faith in a tri-personal God, else would they never have neglected all mention of the first and third persons, and simply baptized into Christ, that is, into the religion of the Christ. There is a remarkable confirmation of this view, if indeed it can be supposed to want confirmation, in the language of Paul to some disciples at Ephesus, who had not received the witnessing power and presence of the Holy Spirit. They declare that they had not so much as heard whether there was any Holy Spirit. To what, then, says the Apostle were you baptized; not into whom, observe, but into what were you baptized,—that is, was not the manifestation and participation of God's Spirit one of the religious ideas and expectations of your faith as converts. And they answer that they had only been baptized into the bapa tism of John, who had promised the Holy Spirit, but had no power to confer it. And then Paul baptized them into Jesus, and they received the Holy Spirit. Now can any one rea this passage and believe that the Holy Ghost implies the third person in a Trinity: was it not simply a portion God's spirit received by the first believers as an attestation to the religion of the Christ?

Nothing can be more arbitrary than to assert that baptism implies the personality and deity of that into which a person is baptized. The Apostle Paul says that Christians were baptized into the death of Christ. Rom. vi. 3. Is the


of Christ therefore a person and a God? Is it not simply one of the religious ideas which their faith embraced ?

The personality and deity of the Holy Spirit we indeed do not deny; but the methods by which Trinitarians attempt the proof of this self-evident proposition, are, like all proofs of Identical propositions, unsatisfactory to an extreme. The Lecturer in Christ Church, when meeting the objection, that

em into Christ was no proof of his deity, because we

so the expression, “baptism into Moses,” dropped out o signt the true bearing of the objection against the deity of s, and argued that the expression, baptism into Moses,

ar a proof of the personality of the Holy Spirit, beoses was a person. Was the death of Christ, a

Was Mount Gerizim, a person? We do not deny sonality of the Holy Spirit, though this is no way of

• We do deny that the deity of Christ is implied in

to his name, and the force of the expression, baptism Ses, in this bearing of it, was either not seen or was



proving it. We do deny the
baptism into his name, and ti
into Moses, in this be
put aside.

en or was

The argument, without any express jects of the same natu too, as the strongest, in Trinity in the Godhe a doctrine of revelat knows not how pro say, that Dr. Tatters sumptive proof of that is, in fact, no lead to the presu dence, and which evidence, amou such an argume content to rest su Revelation ? and s


gument, that because three words follow one another, ny expressed distinction, they must all refer to sub

e same nature, co-equal and co-extensive, and this, ne strongest, indeed the only direct evidence of a in the Godhead, is really one of those arguments for re of revelation, which a mind with any reverence

e how properly to discuss. I am glad to be able to Dr. Tattershall pronounces this to be only a preProof of the separate personality of the Holy Spirit,

fact, no proof at all, but merely such a hint as might e presumption that there may be additional evia which, therefore, in the absence of such additional amounts to nothing. If any one, however, advances gument, we have only to ask first, is any one really

rest such a doctrine on such a proof, and call this on ? and secondly, to advance in our turn, other pas


sages of Scripture, where this principle of interpretation cannot be maintained. If the concurrence of the words, Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit, necessarily implies that each of these refers to a person who is God, and that when taken together they make up the entire nature of God—then, I ask, what is the necessary inference from such expressions as these,—“I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things ?"1 Tim. v. 21. Now if the argument is conclusive that infers in the one case the deity of Jesus, it must be equally conclusive, when it infers, in the other, the deity of the elect angels. The Trinitarian answer will be,~“We know that the angels are not God, and in accordance with this knowledge, we interpret the passage:” and equally do we answer, that when such a passage is given us as proof of the deity of the Lord Jesus, we know that he was a man, and in accordance with this knowledge do we interpret the passage. Other instances might be given of similar modes of expression :-“And all the people greatly feared the Lord and Samuel,1 Sam. xii. 18; and more strikingly still, Rev. iii. 12, where the name of a place is associated as a religious idea, with the names of God and Christ. “ Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out; and will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is New Jerusalem, which cometn down out of Heaven from my God, and [I will write upon him) my new name.”

There is only one other passage in which these three tas pressions occur together; and it must have a precisely similar explanation: “ The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.” Now here the expression “ COMMUNION of the Holy Spirit,” fixes the meaning of the passage. The word communion signifies 6 participation," "a having." common.” Thus St. Paul speaks of “the commun

iciple of interpretatia mea rence of the words Pet sarily implies that exit d, and that when takana ure of God-ther, in rom such espressing a rod, and the Landbou 1 observe these this? it is conclusire that is t must be eqnals com : deity of the elemente \\e know that the 2 h this ky.edਣ, ਸਰ । lo we are, that when

sufferings of Christ,” Philipp. iii. 10. In this sense, then, it can have no reference to a person, and must signify simply a participation of that spiritual presence, comfort, and power of God, which was the promise and the witness of the religion of the Christ. In explaining such passages, we have again and again to recal ourselves to the belief, that we are actually con

gering the strongest Scriptural assertions of the doctrine of a Trinity of persons in the unity of the Godhead. The first

pistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians closes thus : “ The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. My love be with you all in Christ Jesus.” Who thinks of inferring the equality Paul with Jesus? And yet, if such a mode of reasoning is ose, from the close of the Second Epistle to the Corin

is impossible to give any reason for its not being conclusive when applied to the close of the first of the Corinthians. But such verbal reasonings are in ay unworthy of the solemn character of revelation, nor dind long dwell upon them without feeling how pain.

interfere with the sentiment of Reverence, and what a s it is of Christ and Christianity to place them in such

thians, it is impossible to go

of the deity of the Lord 1, and in contana sit passage. Other interes f expression – d Samuel,") sam i 12, where the same a, with the names of build eth will I make a pro 1go no more oct and ay God, and the end

Jerusalem, which and [] weil erite pali

can the mind long dwell fully they interfere wi lowering it is of Ch lights.

The portion of
upon to prove the
Spirit, is that mos
his disciples, in
as a Comforter
and who, when he can
to their remembrano
but which they h
promise of a C
promise after ti
tain the m eaning.
at the eighth v
after that the H
be witnesses u

Portion of Scripture, however, which is mainly relied

Prove the distinct deity and personality of the Holy is that most solemn and faithful promise of Christ to

ples, in which the Spirit of Truth is described omforter which the Father would send in his name. 's when he came, would testify of Jesus, and bring remembrance all things that he had said unto them.

they had not understood. Now let us connect this of a Comforter previous to his death, with a similar after the resurrection, and then endeavour to ascerM eaning. In the first chapter of the Book of Acts. ghth verse, it is written, “ Ye shall receive power, at the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall esses unto me, both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea.

in which these teret cist have a preciselt our Lord Jesus cir ommunion of the Bit

expression " g of the passage. I pation," "a banig: the communion if the



« EdellinenJatka »