Columbus Whig. (Columbus, Miss.) 1843-18??, 1844-03-21
REVIEW OF THE TRINITY
CoNcLnnrn-

Il
nlshed you upon the subject of Cnrist's Divin-
Ity. ] regret that it is SO. And though having
written what believe to be true, and in ref
erence to subject which seemed to me wor-
thy of attention, Yeti had apprehended
that. the subject and the views advanced
would have been offensive tc your readers,
should most certainly have forborne to write.
For ifthe few who have ensured me for hay.
ing given my views through your paper to the
public, express the sentiments of many, and if
as they seemto think, the pulpit and religious
papers are the only channels, ard gospel Min
lssers, the only organs through which religious
information can be safely given to the public,
tnen nave been mistaken, both in the intel.
gence and the moral constitution of this commu-
nifty. had thought that boasting as we do Of
religious freedom, and of the unrestrained
right of thought and speech, some tolerance,
at least, might be extended to opinions which
| have had advocates, neither mean nor few,
amongst the learned and good and great of the
Christian world. And to condemn the express
sion of these opinions in this community, be-
cause they have never been uttered from our
pulpits, nor sanctioned by our Ministers,
would be to adept in practice what we have
condemned in theory. For we profess to object
| to the Roman Catholic Religion, because of its
spirit of intolerance and its opposition to free
thought and action; in pursuance of which it
withholds from the laity the privilege to read
and write and to think and act in matters of
religion, undirectedby the spiritual guidance of
her priests. But what have we gained if I'M
der our own system, the humble citizen who
sometimes has no Church, to sustain him
can not give his views to the public nor the
public read them, without incuring censure
for it! And confess, that if we are yet I'M
der the bondage of the priesthood, to think
and speak, and to feel and act as they direct,
have very grossly mistaken both my priv
lege and yours, and owe both the preachers,
and the public an apology for this breach of
right. But as l mot yet satisfied that am
wrong, or even censured by many, do not Of
fer an apology, and shall not yet desist from
giving my opinions TO the public.
It is scarcely worth the while to add TO what
has been already said upon the subject OF Gods
Unity. 1t is doctrine as firmly based upon
the Bible and reason, and so strongly support
ed by their plainest dictates, that no power
of logic and no ingenuity of argument can sue
cessfuly assail it. And on the other hand the
doctrine the Trinity is so full of absurdities,
so opposed to the Bible and so fraught with
Ioor 9th Va1
to show its uglness, and expose its fallacy.
For upon It's very face it denies the Omnipo-
tence, perfection and holiness of God; it robs
him of his most godlike attributes, and makes
him an object more of dread than of love, of
terror than devotion; it represents him as
God of ungoverned passions, whose infinite
wrath is kndled against the sons Of men for
one act of sin committed by their first forefa-
Their Adam, and so implacable in his purposes
of vengeance that no expdtion short of an In
finite atonement could redeem them from the
curse Of his eternal anger. The whole hu-
man family would have been condemned to a
hopeless perdition, IN the flames of heu,lf Christ
whose love for man was equal to his Fathers
hate, had not intel posed TO redeem them from
this awful doom, by offering himself sacrifice
pect ofthe Deity, no ray.of mercy beams from
his throne OF vengeance; no parental kindness
for the unfortunate objects of his own creation
and no kind relenings for the hopeless victims
of Adams sin, soften the sternness OF his Of
Tended brow. or mitigate the rigor of mans
homeless doom. Such is the grim and repulslve
portrait which the advocates of this doctrine
drawof God. And represented in thisaspect to
the bloody worshiper OF Seva he would shudder
and shrink back with horror from 1t; and with
good reason too, for far happier would he be IN
the worship and under the power OF that God
whose anger could be appeased, and.whOse IA
yor won 6v the short expiation of few tenn
poral uQngs and death. And as if to make the
9rim portraiture of the Deity more strong BY
contrast. whilst man is painted in this lost con-
dition. and looks up to God without hope OF
mercy. the light of salvation breaks upon him
from another source. Christ Is lis author;
and his cwn blood and death is the price it cost
him. Thus do they'd a distinction between
Christ and God; and ascribing all. the lovely
attributes ofthe Godhead to Christ, they con.
fine the stern and repulsive ones to God
The boundless sympathy aud love OF one are
evh;b;ted in contrast TO the hate and vengeance
of the other.
And the Trinity destroys Gods omniPo-
tence and perfection: because II omnIpotent'
He embraces al pOWOAp @1u >. tS
braces all goodness. That Is, there could
he no power, and no virtue IN the UNI
verse independent of him, and which did not
derive their existence from him. And yet
that doctrine be true, Christ and whatever vir-
tues he may possess are independent ohm o. h,m,
and derived their existence from another
sou,ce. or in other words, he is unereated, and
10th equal and coexistent with God God
does moi therefore embrace all power, nor is
~ Re author Of all intelligence and virtue and
consequently he is neither Omnipoten' nor per-
feet. rL.A
: fsise. for God says-"I, even am God:
Before me was no God formed; neither shall
,iera he after me. There is no God but me-"
Chit i therefore not God, but created be-
inp: 0 sthe Son Of God;" ''lhe express image Of
his Father" ..the first born Of every creature.
And having derived his being and his nature
froro Cor: beng the .screature," he could not
be equal NOT cOexistent with the Creator
God. assI
acet.;ne 4 the two natures, blended into one
v Which he trinitarians ascrI1e to Chr'st--say.
w k1@1s - 4l.< 80 swa0 firaG hath (2Od and