The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1872-04-18

lhcaviness and continual sorrow Of heart o.
account OF his nation, who had great priv
lleges, but were not improving them. FL
could even wish himself accursed for the sake
OF "his bre threD, his kinsmen according Il
The flesh" And so he goes on to ennme rat
some OF the peculiar advantages which they
had enjoyed, and which made their rejection
| OF Christ seem all the more painful 10 til,
! Apostle. They were ISraelites, to them per
tanned the adoption, and the glory, and The
covenants, and the giving OF the law and
| The service OF God. and the promises they
had the fathers, and not only so, but, highes:
| honor of all, from them, on the human side
spraug the worlds Redeemer from them
over all, God blessed forever" ITO the eye
of the Apostle this was the eliminating
| glory Of the Hebrew nation but, sad to be
hold, it was the very glory which they tram
| pied on and despsed.
! Now, the point Of the argument here, and which
is very striking the moment you give your atien-
ton to it, is this contrasting clause, las
ing the flesh" Why did the Apostle put that in
Because he was speaking of a being who was not
all 'fesh, not I'LL humanity, not all derived from
the Jews. Hence in abiding to Christs derivation
flying clause, to show how far and in what respec
Christ aods derived from the Jews. Christ, as
mere man, could have been descended from the
Jews but Christ as the Supreme God, could not
be descended from the Jews So that the apostle
does not say, from whom Christ came'' and leave
it there. That would be TO derive God from
ing the fesh-as respects his humanity--l hrist
came " If Christ had been a mere man, of course
the distinguishing clause would have been left
out; there would have been no need OIL it; but its
insertion by the Apostle shows that Christ was
more than man, and throws and added intensity
of light upon the declaration in the last part of the
passage, that he is he Supreme God From whom
ON his human side, Christ came-that very Christ
who has also another side, who is also the
supreme God God over all, blessed forever -
Row you will ask, what do the Unitarians do
with such a passage this? I will tell you
For regard DIR. Channing's attempt to evade the
obvious import of these words, as one OF the mos
extraordi airy and amusing that ever proceeded
from a man so able and wise as he undoubtedly
was. He proposes change of rendering, so as to
make the passage read like q dOXOlOgy thrown into
a parenthesA. somehow thus:*' from whom as con
corning the flesh Christ came, blessed forever be
God who is over all. y Thus he thinks he has com
pletely sQuached the doctrnal teaching of the OBJ
jeciionabIe part of the passage; he has not only
ended it about into doXOlOgy, but he has cooped
il ND in a narenthesis and so isolated il from ali
connection with the rest OF the passage. Blu,
there are Two fatal objections to any such render
ing. In the first place such, rendering il gram
NAUTICAL impossibillty the Greek words are not in
proper order for doXology thorough Greek
scholar would simply laugh at such rendering
But, setting aside the grammatical point in what a
ridiculous light such rendering would place the
apostle Paul What kind of place is this for the
apostle to give utterance to doXolOgy What is
the apostle taikingRbOut here He has just been
telling Of his great heaviness continual sorrow
of heart, in view of the forsecn doom of his own
nation and people, consequent their rejection of
Christ; q theme which was always one of solemn
and awful mystery to the apostle Paul Now what
was there in this theme, SO dark and sad to the
mind of the apostle, To prompt him to break out
here in a doxoogy He has just declared himself
ready to be GccUrSed from Christ, for the sake
of his brethren and kinsmen according to the
flesh - and to suppose him to break out and sing
doxology in the very next scripture to proceed
straight to blessing God for the doom of his nation
when he had just said hsGt he felt like being ac-
cursed on that account, comes pretty near to
contradiction. ow can a man have TWO such on.
ool;r soft hn rl
you suppose very sudden and instantaneous
transition from one feeling to another, from
heavlness to rejoicing then, the question comes
back, what was there to produce IL in this case |
You must show cause for it, You must make
the thing seem reasonable. But this DR. Charming
does not do, He simply changes the read
Which might done this The thought s1f9"s OF Oh
Redeemer, who was still precious to Paul, though |
The nation had despsed him; that thought break |
ing in upon the Apostles sadness, might have
lifted him to sudden transport, and brought from |
him an expression ofglad enthusiasm. But alas |
you have taken even this away. You have taken
away e divinity in order to create the doxology |
level of a mere man! You have snatChed his
theme from his lips What have you left then
ask, for this solrowins man to bless God for, al
just this point Of time There are proper times for |
eVCrything-times when dOXOlOgy seems Natural |
and fitting But to suppose a dOXOl0gy here it |
seems to me- would be very much like putting the |
prayer meeting who made mis- axe and shouted |
''amen" in the wrong place: 1t is hardly fair to
make the Apostle responsible for any such incon- |
gruity. He was the last man in the world to
violate the fitness of time and place. Loud halle
uahs all very well, when tkey spring naturally
and spontaneously. But here the very place |
in the Apostles life, when his train of thought was
least likely to vent itself in this way. Most |
decidedly, therefore, we reject DR.. Claiming s
proposed rendering, and take this passage just as
it stands, declaring in terms as plain language
Is capable Of that Christ is God, God in the
highest and literal sense the Supreme God,
will leave the other passages to your own |
private study, with the simple affirmation that |
they are all corroborative Of the teaching in this
ID. The next point which we promised to con |
slider is this, that the Bible represents Christ as
being equal in condition with God, and that the |
representations under this head are such as to en-
force the CONCLUSION that Christ IS God. OIL
course, ifhe is equal in condition with God, he is
God; for no other being than Col can be equal IN
condition with God. The condition
Of God is the condition Infinite and Supreme
oeing. 1t Christ has that condition, he D. God
.ud nothing less. And precisely this is what the
scriptures declare. Let me give you one passage
rot TO tarry 10 night upon any others Phil. 2
5-9.
g. Let this mind be iii you, which was also in
Chriet jesus.
&. VINO, being in the form of God, thought ii
not ROBBERY to be equal with Cod;
T. But made himself of no reputation, and took
upon him the form of servant, and was made
IN the likeness o. men;
g. And being found in fashion as a man. he
humbled hlmselEand became OSedlent unto death
even the death ofthe cross. a
Now, you will notice that the contrast in this
passage is important, as throwing all the clearer
light upon Its teaching. Two conditions are
spoken of here the condition of God, and the con
diton oi man. II is declared that Christ had the
condition OF God; that was his original condition
ma that he took the condition of man he took
the form vi servant, and assumed the likeness of
men. The contrast and transition here leave no
chance for mlstaking the meaning. Originally he
was lin the form of God, and thought it no rob
berry to be equal with God" Now, if one has the
form of Sod, he is God Precisely what that form
Is. of course we cannot conceive. But this we
know rational grounds, that one can not have
the form of the Infinite cod, without having the
nature Of God. and in the next clause we have It.