صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

SECTION III.

THE Third Section of Mr. Jones's work is entitled," THE PLURALITY AND TRI"NITY OF PERSONS."

I confess that the word plurality, as it occurs here, has, to me, a heathenish sound.

Mr. Jones commences with the argument which has constantly been used in support of the doctrine of a plurality of Persons in the Godhead, namely, the use of the plural noun Elohim, applied to the Creator in many parts of the Old Testament, and especially in the books of Moses. It appears that the words Bara Elohim, that is, the Gods created, occur more than thirty times in the Mosaical record of the creation; and Jehovah Elohim, the Lord thy Gods, above a hundred times in the Law. This noun plural is usually constructed with verbs and pronouns of the singular number; and from this peculiar mode of expression both the plurality and unity of the Godhead has been inferred.

Of the explanations attempted by Jews, Arians, &c., of this irregularity in grammatical construction

I know nothing, excepting such as have been stated by opposing writers, with the view of exposing their fallacy; and therefore, I suppose, were not given in the most favourable manner.

Be this as it may, it appears strange that the argument should be so strongly and so frequently insisted upon, since it is given up as untenable, even by orthodox Divines. Bishop Heber, in his able course of the Bampton Lectures, seems to doubt whether it has not been prejudicial rather than serviceable to the cause of orthodoxy; and, in a note, admits that it may be "an eastern expression " of reverence;" showing that the same style is used in the old Scriptures, as a mark of respect towards persons of exalted rank and dignity*.

It is truly surprising that a doctrine of such awful importance should be built upon, or even supposed to derive strength from, so weak a foundation. If the arguments founded on the use of these Hebrew plurals could be in any degree supported by other passages in the writings of Moses and the Prophets, the inference would be greatly strengthened. If, on the contrary, we meet with passages utterly incompatible with such inference, the argument, though urged by so many writers, must fall to the ground.

If we venture to found doctrines upon particular words or phrases, as they stand in the original text

* HEBER'S Bampton Lectures, pp. 197, 198, 2nd Edit.

Deut. 4. 35.

Ibid. 6. 4.

Deut. 32.39.

Isa. 44. 8.

of the Old Testament, we
falling into grievous errors.

shall be in danger of For instance, a Poly

theist might plead such expressions as "God of "Gods," "Lord of Lords," "Great is our God "above all Gods," and such like, as a proof of a plurality of Deities, differing in dignity and power. It must be admitted, then, that a passage ought to be clear and unequivocal before we consider it as giving support to the most important and awful article of our faith. Let us hear, then, how Moses, in language that cannot be misunderstood, instructs his people.

"Unto thee it was showed, that thou mightest "know that the Lord HE is GOD; there is none "else beside HIM."

"Hear, O Israel, the Lord 'our God is ONE "Lord."

It appears that the word translated God, in this last text, is in the Hebrew given in the plural number; and therefore the text has been much insisted on by several writers, and some of great name, as a proof of plurality; but it will be satisfactorily shown hereafter, that this is altogether erroneous. (See p. 111.)

Hear Moses again.

"See now that I am HE, and there is no God "with ME."

And the Prophets.

"Is there a God beside ME? Yea there is no "God; I know not any."

"I am the Lord, and there is none else, there Isa. 45. 5. "is no God beside ME."

"Have we not all one Father? Hath not one Mal. 2. 10. "God created us?"

After all that has been urged on the ground of the noun plural, it is hard to reconcile these passages, and a multitude of others to the same effect, with the idea of a plurality of Persons in the Godhead.

It must be admitted, that the knowledge of the Being who is worshipped, is the fundamental point in religion. Moses surely would not have allowed the people under his care to be in ignorance on this head. If he had held the doctrine of three persons in the Deity he would have declared it to them in the plainest terms; we might reasonably expect to find it reiterated throughout the Pentateuch; but in no part of these writings do we meet with such doctrine. There are writers who labour with the view of making it appear, that this doctrine of the Trinity was originally revealed to the Jews, and entirely believed by them; but that in process of time it became neglected and forgotten! This is altogether incredible. It cannot be believed that God's peculiar people, "to whom 66 were committed the oracles of God," and who were so scrupulously correct in their records, especially of all religious and judicial matters; I say, cannot be imagined that they could suffer the pri

it

mary article of their religion to be lost and forgotten.

Incredible as this must appear to every reflecting mind, it is rendered still more so by the laboured arguments of some writers, to show that though the doctrine was lost among the Jews, it was retained in the Gentile kingdoms; having been, as they suppose, handed down by tradition from the Patriarchs!

It is perfectly clear that the Jews knew nothing of such doctrine at the time our blessed Lord appeared among them. Supposing, then, so incredible a thing as that the only people on earth to whom a right knowledge of God had been revealed had forgotten the chief article of their religion, it cannot be doubted that our Lord and his Apostles would have been especially careful to restore it; and that they would, in the most plain and clear language, have taught the doctrine of three Persons in the Godhead. Let us inquire, then, if this doctrine was delivered in the Gospel.

It may be remarked, in the first place, that though our Lord severely reproves the Scribes and Pharisees, for having corrupted "the word of "God," and of "making it of none effect through "their tradition," (Mark 7. 13,) he never once accuses them, nor their fathers, of having allowed the doctrine of three Persons in the Godhead to be forgotten and lost. This, though only a nega

« السابقةمتابعة »