The Plan of Salvation.

Thames Star, Volume XII, Issue 3815, 21 March 1881, Page 2

The Plan of Salvation.

The Eev. S. J. Nei 1! gave his concluding lecture ©n this subject at the Presbyterian Church last evening. T>;a subject was " Tae defence of the doctri c held by the Chinch ":—

The chief points round which the strife rages are on? theory of the Trinity, of election, of the nature of Christ, of substitution, sad one or two others closely connected with these. Unless these vital points are established our whole plan of salvation vanishes like a ship of air or the mirage of the desert. First, then, the doctrine of the Trinity ; which teaches that there is but one God, and that in the unity of the Godhead tht^e ta three persons of equal substance, power, and eternity: Gel the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. The Father Is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding ; the Son is eternally begotten ol the Father; the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son. Accordto Mr Shaw, the authority used ia their colleges, this docking is indeed a mystery,

but is not absurd or contradictory to reason. It is not taught that the three persons are threj gods, thongh each person is really God. It is not, taught that the three are one in the same sense, and in the same respect in which they are three ; but they are three in one respect one in another respect, —three in persons, one in esseace. It is acknowledged that this doctrine surpasses our reasoa, but that nevertheless we are bound to believe it if it be clearly revealed in our sc. "ptures. Tbe word " Godhead " is us i.. me;iu the divine nature, that tidmusj eternal, unchangeable essence 'which is not peculiar to the Father, the Son, or the Spirit", bat common io all three. The term " person" was first applied to the trinity by tbe Latins ; the earlier Greek fatLerß using the word " substence " in its place. Th<j common acceptation of the word, according to j Dr Shaw, is " a separate independent" I being, but this term when applied J to the sacred Three is not to be underj stood in exactly the same sense. He says : " Three human persons have the same specific nature, but three divine persons have the same numerical nature. We do not teach that there are three distinct essences mysteriously conjoined ; what we believe is this, that there is a distinction in the Godhead to which there I is nothing similar in creatures." He admits that the word may be objectionable, as apt fo suggest an idea inconsistent with the Divine uuky, but attributes this to the imperfection of hi man language. Mr Cook, m the "Monday Lectures," says —"If my who are orthodox in their thoughts worship in thoir imagination thrra different beings, they, too, must be startled from this remaant of Paganism by a stern use of tbe scientific method," and tries to illuslrate the Trinity thus : " Sun, light, the raiubow, and the heat of sunlight are one solar radiance. Each has a pecrHarity incommunicable to the others: neither is fuU solar radiance without- the others. Each with (he others js such solar radie ice. Sunlight raiubow, heat—one solar radiant c. Father, Son, Holy Ghost— one God !" An illustration more free i'rom objection he (the speaker) would suggest, \ a., that heat, I'ght, and m.ty'ig influence be regarded as the solar representatives of the Trinity. Dr Hodge, of Princeton, says that the dockiue of the Trinity is peculiar to the Bible: we are not to regard the Triad of the aicient world as at r ' comparable to our Trinity. The Father, Son and Spirit are several'y subject ?nd object. Next, as to Election, —Our teachers tell us on this point that theology is not philosophy. Itdoesnotassumetodiseover truth; its province is simply to declare what God has revealed in His Word, r id v!ndicat3 it from objections and misconceptions. It is held that God's decrees are for His owu glo;y. Election is not on account of holiness, but unto holiness. He had already stated the doclr'ne pretty plainly, and now produced some of the texts quoted in its support, as well as the statements and arguments of perhaps their greatest theologian. To proceeu: On the subject of the nature of Cbiist they felt less j shcowded by metaphysics 1 or scholastic niceties. In the character of Jesus as He shines forth the light of truth, the vrarmth of love, and the-vivifying it fluent' • of his whole being, the ignorant and ." "■arned, all may feel the words of. the hymn ?te. ling over them. " O come, let us adore Him, Christ the Lord" It might be beLer for us in every way if we could content ourselves with less of the thcologicel reasoring aud strive to cultivate more of real love (o, and reverence for Jesua Curist, so that the world might be i'reed i'rom the stain which now mars it before God and the angeis and all earnest aud good men —the stain of so many millions professing to .be followers of Jesus, and the wars, the cheating— individual and national —the hydraheaded badness in high places and low places, which goes on very much the srme as ever; this was not on account ot men following Jesus, but largely on account of their professing to do so, while aH the time everybody knew, acd they raemseives knew, it was not so, but instead thereof a real aud hearty worsHp of the Devil.' Their creed; taught them that Christ was,truly divine,,;ifinit3 in all His attributes. '. According. • ( ,-. Dr Hodge, Christ's generation is stated^but not explained either in Script!.'■re? or in the ancient creeds. It may be. Sameness of nature, it niciy be derivation of essence, it may-be likeness, and tbe term Son be equivalent to Kevetier or L./gos, or it may be something altogether inscrutable aid to us incomprehensible, bu, the Nicene fathers, insfoad of leaving it where the Scriptures leave it, uuderU're to explaii what is meant by sonship, and teach t lat it meaus derivation Oi? essence. (To he coniimted.J