DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.9552#0595
TO THE CHRISTIAN PUBLIC.
chapter, in the hearing of the Jews. Nay, further, from
the whole of his conduct and instructions, so impressed
were the Jews with his dependence upoh and confidence
in the Father as his God, that when he was hanging on
the cr»ss they fixed upon this as a ground of taunt and
reproach, saying, "He trusted in God ; let him deliver
him now, if he will have him, for he said 'I am the Son
of God.' " Matt, xxvii. 43.
The Editor then proceeds to say, "This (charge of
equality) Jesus neither denies nor corrects, but adds,
'The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth
the Father do,' which must necessarily be the case, if, as
our author affirms, the Father and the Son are one in
will and design." I ask the Editor, whethen this be the
language of one who is Almighty ? If the Father and
the Son be equally Almighty, why should the Son wait
until the Father acts, and then imitate him ? If a
subordinate officer, having been accused of equalizing
himself with his superior, thus declares, "I cannot
march a single step myself—but where I see him march,
I do march,"—would this be considered an avowal of
his equality. with his superior ? My readers will be
pleased to judge. The Editor then says, that "]esus
adds further, 'For whatever things he doth, the^e also
doth the Son likewise ;' a more full declaration of
equality with the Father cannot be imagined. How
could the Son do whatsoever the Father doth, if he
were not equal to him in power, wisdom, truth, mercy ?"'
&c. The Editor here omits to quote the very next line,
"FOR the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all
things that himself doeth," in which the preposition "for"
assigns reasons for the Son's doing what the Father
»
chapter, in the hearing of the Jews. Nay, further, from
the whole of his conduct and instructions, so impressed
were the Jews with his dependence upoh and confidence
in the Father as his God, that when he was hanging on
the cr»ss they fixed upon this as a ground of taunt and
reproach, saying, "He trusted in God ; let him deliver
him now, if he will have him, for he said 'I am the Son
of God.' " Matt, xxvii. 43.
The Editor then proceeds to say, "This (charge of
equality) Jesus neither denies nor corrects, but adds,
'The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth
the Father do,' which must necessarily be the case, if, as
our author affirms, the Father and the Son are one in
will and design." I ask the Editor, whethen this be the
language of one who is Almighty ? If the Father and
the Son be equally Almighty, why should the Son wait
until the Father acts, and then imitate him ? If a
subordinate officer, having been accused of equalizing
himself with his superior, thus declares, "I cannot
march a single step myself—but where I see him march,
I do march,"—would this be considered an avowal of
his equality. with his superior ? My readers will be
pleased to judge. The Editor then says, that "]esus
adds further, 'For whatever things he doth, the^e also
doth the Son likewise ;' a more full declaration of
equality with the Father cannot be imagined. How
could the Son do whatsoever the Father doth, if he
were not equal to him in power, wisdom, truth, mercy ?"'
&c. The Editor here omits to quote the very next line,
"FOR the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all
things that himself doeth," in which the preposition "for"
assigns reasons for the Son's doing what the Father
»