Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

CONTENTS OF THIS VOLUME.

Page.

BIOGRAPHICAL Memoir-containing an account of the Life,

Studies, Writings, Correspondence, and Character of the

Author.

iii-ccxiv

LETTERS-addressed to Candidates for Holy Orders in the

Episcopal Church of Scotland.

LETTER 1.

Christian belief of ONE, SUPREME, SELF-EXISTENT ESSENCE

--not deducible from reason, or the light of nature-taught

by revelation--shewing a TRINITY of Persons in JEHOVAH

different opinions respecting their mode of existence.

LETTER II.

Doctrine of Eternal Generation on what founded--how ex-

plained-by Dr. Bull--finding fault with a saying of Tertul-

lian, and calling it a “ monstrous effatum.”

7-15

LETTER III.

Title" Son of God”-how to be understood—not of his Deity

-as we never say, Father of God-how St. John introduces

the only begotten of the Fatherthe primitive Fathers appealed

to-Ignatius speaks of Christ as Begotten, and not Begotten

- contradicted by Drs. Bull and Waterland— Eternal Generu-

tion neither the language, nor doctrine of Ignatius.

15-26

LETTER IV.

The Apostolical Constitutions not friendly to Eternal Genera-

tion--neither the Council of Nice--the Greek language not

sufficiently expressive of the distinctive energy of the Hebrew. 27-33

LETTER V.

Nicene Creed farther considered-meaning of the clause “be.

“ gotten of his Father before all worlds”--begotten into the
office of man's Redeemer—why said to be “God of God”-
explained by Ignatius—“ Light of Light," properly “Lumen
ex Luce”--the clause "

begotten not made” descriptive of
our Saviour's incarnation-as “ of one substance with the Fa-

A

“ther"

Page.

" ther” is of his divinity-elucidated by Tertullian-Anathe-

ma of the Nicene Council against those who should say—“be-

fore he was begotten, he was not.

33–44

LETTER VI.

Athanasius thought favourable to “ Eternal Generation”-also

Theodoret of Cyrus—and Pope Gelasius-Athanasius, as quo-

ted by Beza, contradicts hiinself-modern writers-Drs. Bull

and Felton contradict one another—well-founded opinion of

Hilary of Poictiers respecting the real Deity of Jesus Christ. 44-54 ,

LETTER VII.

Opinion of Photinus Bishop of Firmium not favourable to “ Eter-

“ nal Generation”-jarring accounts of his condemnation-

something like the doctrine of “ Eternal Generation” appear-

ing in the fourth century-little heard of in the five following

centuries-occupied with disputes about other matters.

55-63

LETTER VIII.

Eternal Generation” supported by the authority of the Ro-

mish Church—not much noticed by the Reformers—how re-

ceived in Scotland and England--adopted by the Westminster

Assembly-how explained by Bishop Pearson and Mr Reeves. 64–79

LETTER IX.

Dangerous consequences of the doctrine of “ Eternal Genera-

« tion"--Subordination, and hence inferiority in Deity-

how insisted on by Dr. Bull--bis thesis considered, that

« God the Father, even according to his divinity, is greater

“ than the Son”—this, the opinion of Dr. Samuel Clarke-

controverted by Dr. Brown, Bishop of Cork and Ross—and

by Dr. John Edwards of Cambridge--and Dr. Bennet of Col-

chester-asserting, that the scriptures nowhere mention any

derivation, or subordination in the Trinity.

72-90

LETTER X.

Introduction of the term “ Eternal Generation" owing to three

causes~ 1. The Platonic Philosophy—improving on the sys-

tem of generated Deities--2. The translation of the Hebrew

scriptures into Greek-instances produced of its deviating

from the original--3. The much misunderstood doctrine of

Angels."

. . 91-100

LETTER XI.

Application of the arguments and facts already adduced-influ-

[blocks in formation]

LETTER XXI.

The plan of the “ Divine Oeconomy” clearly laid down in the

Creedy,

« AnteriorContinuar »