Henry Grew was a prolific writer who was frequently quoted both approvingly and critically by other 19th century theologians. Thus, I am finding snipets of his writings buried within other's works. The following excerpts were so found.

On page 27 of the aforementioned Watchtower, first paragraph, Grew is quoted with regard to the Trinity doctrine.
I believe that the WT quote was likely taken from Grew's book, "An Examination of The Divine Testimony on the Character and Nature of the Son of God".

On page 30 of that work, Grew made the following comment regarding Matthew 17:5- "While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him."

Henry Grew stated:

"When the heavens are opened, that the nature and character of the Saviour may be announced by the Majesty on high to a perishing world, what do we hear? This is the second person of the adorable Trinity? This is the supreme God? No; but, "this is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him." And what did the blessed Ambassador of peace require? "Dost thou believe on the Son of God?" [John 9:35] This great truth was indeed the dividing line between his disciples and the world. The former believed, and were saved; the latter denied, and perished. As Jesus never claimed a higher nature than this; he never required his disciples to believe that he possessed any higher nature. (An Examination of The Divine Testimony on the Nature and Character of the Son of God, p. 30.)

This next excerpt appeared on page 48:

"Although the Son of God… is honored with appropriate titles of dignity and glory, he is distinguished from 'the only true God,' by the following titles of supremacy which belong to the 'invisible God' alone.
Jehovah, Whose name alone is Jehovah. (Ps. 83:18)
The eternal God. (Deut. 33:27)
Most High God. (Mark 5:7; Dan. 5:18)
God alone. (Ps. 86:10; Isa. 37:16)
Lord alone. (Neh. 9:6)
God of heaven. (Dan. 2:44)
Besides me there is no God. (Isa. 44:6)
Who only hath immortality. (1 Tim. 6:16)
The only true God. (John 17:3)
The King eternal, immortal, invisible. (1 Tim.
1:17)
The only wise God. (1 Tim. 1:17)
Lord, God Omnipotent. (Rev. 19:6)
Blessed and only Potentate. (1 Tim. 6:15)
One God and Father of all. (Eph. 4:6)
The only Lord God. (Jude 4)
There is but one God, the Father. (1 Cor. 8:6)

This excerpt (reformated) comes from pages 66 & 67 of the "Examination" book:

CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES

-(versus)-

TRINITARIANS

To us there is but one God the Father. (1 Cor. 8:6)

-(versus)-

To us there is but one God, the Father, Word, and Holy Ghost.

My Father is greater than I. (John 14:28)
-(versus)-

The Son is as great as the Father.

Who is the image of the invisible God, the first born of every creature. (Col. 1:15)

-(versus)-

Who is the invisible God, the uncreated Jehovah.

The Son can do nothing of himself. (John 5:19)

-(versus)-

The Son is omnipotent.

But of that day, &c., knoweth no man, no not the angels, &c., neither the Son, but the Father. (Mark 13:32)

-(versus)-

The Son is omniscient, and knew of that day as well as the Father.

All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth, (Matt. 28:18) As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. (John 17:2)

-(versus)-

No given power can qualify the Son of God to give eternal life to his people.

God who created all things by Jesus Christ. - (Eph. 3:9)

-(versus)-

Jesus Christ created all things by his own independent power.

The revelation of Jesus Christ which God gave unto him. (Rev. 1:1)

-(versus)-

The revelation of Jesus Christ from his own omniscience.

For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus. (1 Tim. 2:5)

-(versus)-

There is one Mediator between God and man; who is also the supreme God and man in our person.

Denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. (Jude 4)

-(versus)-

Denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ, who is also the only Lord God, and a distinct person.

Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles, and signs, and wonders which God did by him. (Acts 2:22)

-(versus)-

Jesus performed his miracles by his own omnipotence.

For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself. (John 5:26)

-(versus)-

He is self-existent.

I live by the Father. (John 6:57)

-(versus)-

The Son lives by himself.

This is my Son. (Matt. 3:17)

-(verus)-

This is the only true God, the same numerical essence as the Father.

That they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent. (John 17:3)

-(versus)-

That they might know thee, who art not the only true God in distinction from the Word whom thou hast sent.

The following essay, An Appeal To Pious Trinitarians, was published by Henry Grew, in 1857.

I would again point out that this electronic version, which I have copied in order to post on this website, is fully protected by U.S. Copyright Law. I would ask that neither the site owner, nor visitors, make any copies of this article, without first obtaining the same permission which I received from the copyright holder shown in the Copyright Notice, included with the article below.

(C) Copyright 2001. Wetosa Computer Services, Inc.  All rights reserved.  No use of this electronic text may be made in whole or in part without the expressed permission of WCS, Inc.  License will be considered for non-commercial educational usage.  Please direct all inquiries to: WCS_Inc@hotmail.com

AN APPEAL TO PIOUS TRINITARIANS

BY HENRY GREW, Minister of the Gospel

"Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God IS ONE LORD." De 6:4.

PHILADELPHIA:

MERRIHEW & THOMPSON, PRINTERS.
Lodge St., north side of Pennsylvania
Bank

1857

AN APPEAL TO PIOUS TRINITARIANS.

DEAR BRETHREN, -We acknowledge our fallibility. Truth will endure the closest investigation. I bear you record that you have a zeal for God. Is it, or is it not according to knowledge? Is it in the holy word, which you declare is the ONLY rule of faith, that you have found the declaration, that the one God is three persons? Have you been taught it by Jesus Christ, or by fallible men?

You admit that it is a subject of vast importance to understand correctly, what person, or being in the universe, has the rightful claim to the supreme worship of all intelligences, and the glory of being, exclusively, the one great and infinite source, "OF whom are all things." If one person rightfully claims this unrivaled glory, it must certainly be an error of no ordinary magnitude to give it to another. No proposition is to be rejected because it cannot be perfectly comprehended by a finite mind. Yet a revelation to the human mind of anything, necessarily implies some intelligent understanding of it. The first question, however, for our serious consideration, is, Is the doctrine that God exists in three equal and infinite persons, a doctrine of divine revelation, or of human imagination?

Christian brother; can you open your bible and read, God is three; or that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, are one God; or any words of equivalent import? Even the interpolation of 1Jo 5:7, does not affirm that the three are one God. What do we read in the Word of the Lord on this important subject? "Hear, O Israel? The LORD our God is ONE LORD." De 6:4. "God is ONE." Ga 3:20. "There is but one God, the Father." 1Co 8:6.

What is the testimony of "The faithful Witness" of the Truth? Addressing his "Father," Joh 17:1-3, he plainly and positively declares THE FATHER TO BE "THE ONLY TRUE GOD." You believe that the Father is one person. If then you believe that "the only true God" is three persons, does not your faith stand in the wisdom of men," which denies the testimony of Jesus Christ, that ONE person is "the ONLY true God?" Please to consider the testimony of the inspired apostle, 1Co 8:6. It is not only that "there is but one God," but that this one God is "THE FATHER." He plainly distinguishes the Father as the "one God" "or whom are all things." The Father the PRINCIPAL, the Son the AGENT. Now behold the harmony of divine truth. "God created all things BY Jesus Christ." Eph 3:9. "By whom also he made the worlds." Heb 1:2. All his works of love and power, were what "God did BY him." Ac 2:22. "God our Saviour" SAVES US BY, or "through, Jesus Christ our Saviour." Tit 3:4-6. He "shall raise us up also (from the grave) BY Jesus." 2Co 4:14. "God will judge the world in righteousness BY" him. Ac 17:31. All this the Saviour confirms in his own declaration, "I came down from heaven not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me." Joh 6:38. The humanity did not come down from heaven. The divine and "only begotten Son of God" came down, and took the body "prepared" for him. Heb 10:5. Does not this prove the inferiority of his highest nature to the supreme God? Does not the supreme God seek to do the will of another rather than his own?

Please to observe in what character our blessed Mediator presented himself to a sinful and dying world as the object of faith. To the healed man he said, "Dost thou believe on the Son of God?" Joh 9:35. When he asked his disciples-"Whom say ye that I am?" what did the apostle reply, to whom our "Father in heaven" had revealed the truth one this important subject? Did he reply, thou art the second person in the adorable trinity, or thou art the supreme God? He replied, "Thou are the Christ, the SON of the living God." Mt 16:16,17. Is it a significant fact that our Lord never claimed any higher title than this? When the captious Jews charged him with making himself equal with God, did he not immediately repel the charge by the solemn asseveration, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, the Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do?" Joh 5:19. The omnipotent Jehovah cannot be thus dependent on another. "I live by the Father," Joh 6:57. "My Father is greater than I", Joh 14:28. The connection proves that this refers to his highest nature. His prayer, Joh 17:5, for the glory of his divine nature which he had with the Father "before the world was" proves the dependence of his nature.

The scriptural doctrine of the divine Sonship is essential to the true doctrine of atonement or reconciliation. The inspired testimony on this great doctrine is, that God gave HIS OWN SON to be a "sacrifice" or "propitiation" for the sins of the world. Joh 3:16,1Jo 2:2 4:10 Ro 3:25, &c. He made the "soul" of his son "an offering for sin." Isa 53. Trinitarianism admits of no such offering. It supposes that the human body only died, and that the union to supreme deity gave efficacy to the sufferings and death of humanity. It should be considered, that it is the dignity of the nature and character of the real sufferer and dying Lamb, as "the first" and "only begotten of the Father," which gives virtue to the offering. "We have a great High Priest, Jesus, THE SON OF GOD." His soul was in sheol the grave in Hebrew until "God raised him from the death state," and in sheol" there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge." Ec 9:10, "Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest." "He offered HIMSELF without spot to God." Heb 9:14. It was not for the death of humanity only, that the sun withdrew its shining, the earth shook to its center, and the curtain of the Holy of Holies in the Temple was rent in twain. "Surely this was the Son of God."

Please to consider candidly, whether or not you can truthfully reconcile his constant declarations of dependence on the Father, with his supposed supreme deity, by referring those declarations to his human nature. If this nature was united to the second infinite person, how could it be dependent on the first? The dependence must necessarily have been on the second person and not on the Father.

You ask, Is not our dear Lord "the Word" which John declares "was with God and was God?" Certainly; but is not the term God, used (like the term Lord,) in different senses in the sacred scriptures? Is it not applied to the rulers of Israel, Ps 82:6?, "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." Moses was a god to Aaron, Ex 4:16, "And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people: and he shall be, even he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of God.". Satan is "the god of this world." 2Co 4:4. The Son of the Blessed is "God over all." Is he God or ruler over all, independently, or by appointment of the Father, "the only true God?" Joh 17:1-3. Let the holy scriptures answer. 1Co 15:24-28, "God, even the Father-hath put all things under him." This is equivalent to his being "over all;" -"it is manifest that he is excepted which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subjected unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God (not the Trinity, but "THE FATHER," as verse 24 proves) may be ALL in ALL." Is not this divine testimony fatal to trinitarianism? Our blessed Lord as God, has a GOD. Heb 1:8,9. The Father has no god above him. You believe that the God with whom the Word was, is the supreme God. If then the Word was also supreme God, is it not a truth of divine revelation, that there are two supreme Gods? Scripture is its own best interpreter. See the context (verse 14) where the Word is defined to be "the only begotten (Son) of the Father, full of grace and truth." Mr. Andrew Fuller has well observed, that "the glory of the Word, and the glory of the only begotten of the Father, is one and the same." The Word was "begotten" and not self-existent. Again we read, that he is "the first born of every creature." Col 1:15, which must refer to his pre-existent state; for the apostle argues that he is so, from the fact of all things being "created by him." He is "the beginning of the creating power, that the intelligent universe will ever behold; "being the brightness of his glory and the express image of his person." The universe gains nothing, but sustains an inconceivable loss by substituting an infinite person for the matchless Son of God. To infinity you cannot add. One infinite person is equal to any number. The Father is "the alone (monou) God." Joh 5:44.

It is affirmed, that the same infinite attributes are ascribed to the Son as to the Father. Let us see. Peter said, "Lord, thou knowest all things." John said to his brethren, "ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things," 1Jo 2:20. Let us allow the sacred word to determine the source of the knowledge of our blessed Jesus. "God GIVETH not the Spirit by measure unto him," Joh 3:34. Will you not allow that, if thee is any thing unknown to the Son, in any nature, that he cannot be omniscient? He himself plainly declares that there is. He affirms that his "Father ONLY knows of the day of his second coming, Mt 24:30-36. He assures us that all the power he has "in heaven and in earth," "over all flesh," for the gracious purpose of giving eternal life to God's elect, is GIVEN him by the Father, Mt 28:18 Joh 17:2. I ask, for Jehovah's honor, if it is not contemning the divine wisdom, and charging God foolishly, if we say that an "given" power is inadequate for this purpose? Is it not the plainly revealed fact that "God our Saviour" hath "saved us, through (or by) Jesus Christ our Saviour?" Tit 3:4-6. The context of Re 1:8, does not require its application to the Son; it refers to the Father. -"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty." See verses 4, 5, "John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne; 5: And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood". If the spirit of Paul could be present with his absent brethren in their assembly, 1Co 5:4, cannot the spirit of Jesus Christ be present, in a more effective sense, with "two or three" who assemble in his name?

We have too little conception of the capacity of the Infinite to delegate "treasures of wisdom, and knowledge," and power, as he pleases. Infinite perfections are indeed incommunicable; but what a vast amount may be possessed within this boundary! It pleased the Father that in him (Jesus Christ) should all the fullness dwell," Col 1:19. "I and my Father are one." He did not say one God. He prayed that his disciples may be one with him and his Father," even as" he and the Father "are one," Joh 17:21-23 Php 2:5-11. "Christ Jesus-thought it not robbery to be equal with God." Doddridge and Macknight (both trinitarians) consider the word "equal" an incorrect translation, rendering the Greek word "like," or "as." As an example of humility, the apostle presents to the consideration of his brethren, a real and great change of condition of the pre-existing Son of God, which can never be predicated of immutable deity, being totally incompatible therewith.

Joh 5:22,23. "The Father hath committed all judgment unto the Son, that all men should honor the Son even as they honor the Father." Observe the ground of this great honor; it is judgment committed to him by the Father. We honor the Father, not on the ground of any thing committed to him by another, but as the independent source of all things, 1Co 8:6. Joseph was honored "even as Pharaoh," Ge 44:18. Yet Pharaoh was greater "in the throne" then JosEph 41:40. So our Saviour affirms, "my Father is greater than I" Isa 6:1-5, compared with Joh 12:41, is supposed to prove that Jesus is Jehovah. In the Hebrew the first word Adonai, and not Jehovah occurs. In the 5th it is Jehovah. Compare this passage with Ps 110:1, and it appears that Isaiah saw both Christ and Jehovah. Now it is declared that "no man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him," Joh 1:18. Must we not then understand that Isaiah saw the glory of God "in the face of Jesus Christ," who is "the brightness of the Father's glory and the express image of his person," see 2Co 4:6. Jesus said, "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father." How? "The Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works," Joh 14:10. He doth not say the second person in the Trinity, of my own deity that dwelleth in me, doeth the works; but THE FATHER. In respect to his power to forgive sins, see Joh 20:23, " Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained." Editor: I like the comparison someone used to express this thought: He said, "One cannot look at the sun with his eyes, but one can see the effects of the sun by looking at the world," likewise with God; one cannot look at Jehovah, but one can see the effects of Him by looking at the effects of Jesus. Re 5:13. "Blessing and honor and glory and power be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb forever and ever." 1Ch 29:20. "And all the congregation worshiped the LORD (Jehovah) and the king," i.e., David. Jehovah is worshipped as "the only true God," Jesus Christ as "his first begotten" Son, as Heb 1:6 proves, and as the Lamb that was slain. Re 5:12. David was worshiped as the King of Israel. Each in his true station. It is in the highest sense only, that we are forbidden to worship any but the Supreme. See Lu 14:10, "But when thou art bidden, go and sit down in the lowest room; that when he that bade thee cometh, he may say unto thee, Friend, go up higher: then shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee."

Mr. MacWhorter of Yale College has published a volume, to prove two things. First, That the Hebrew word Jehovah signifying "I AM," should be Yahveh, signifying, "I will be." Second, that Yahveh or Jehovah is Christ.

To test the correctness of the term Jehovah, he proposes to "substitute the English I AM, as an equivalent for Lord" where "the latter occurs in the Old Testament." "This (he affirms) is a perfectly valid test, and should such a rendering seem unmeaning or unworthy, in any connection in which it is made to stand, this fact of itself, would afford a strong presumption that we have not arrived at the true significance of the term." Page 14.

Let us now apply this "perfectly valid test" to determine, whether or not the learned author is correct, in affirming that Yahweh or Jehovah is Christ, and substitute the word Christ where the word Lord in capitals occurs, which, in the Hebrew, is usually, Jehovah or Yahveh.

Ps 110:1 "The Christ said unto my Lord, (Adonai, i.e., Christ,) sit thou on my right hand until I make thine enemies they footstool." Here we see the rendering is "unmeaning and unworthy;" and that the Father, and not Christ, is Yahveh or Jehovah. The dying martyr saw Jesus Christ, "on the right hand of God." Ac 7:56. Did he see two Jehovah, or is the Father not Jehovah? Isa 42:6. "I the Christ have called thee in righteousness, -and will give thee (Christ) for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles."

Isa 53:6-10. The Christ hath laid on him (Christ) the iniquities of us all." Ps 40. "I (Christ) have preached righteousness in the great congregation, O Christ thou knowest." Isa 53:10. "It pleased the Christ to bruise him," i.e., Christ. Ps 2:2. "The rulers take counsel against the Christ and against his anointed" (Christ.) See also verse 6, Isa 61:1. "The Christ hath anointed me (Christ) to preach good tidings to the meek," &c. See also Mic 5:4. He of Bethlehem (i.e., Christ) "shall stand and feed in the name of the Christ HIS GOD." See also Isa 55:5, and other passages.

This we see is all "unmeaning and unworthy," according to the learned author's own "perfectly valid test;" demonstrating that Christ is not Jehovah or Yahveh. Isa 63:16, positively declares; "O Jehovah (or Yahveh) thou art our Father."

The fallacious impression that we dishonor the Savior, if we withhold from him the highest possible divine nature, presents many from believing his testimony, that the Father is "the only true God." Joh 17:1,3. The writer was, for a tine, the subject of such an impression. Having found at the Cross that deliverance from the guilt and dominion of sin, which reading, prayer, and resolutions had failed to remove; his love abounded towards his precious Redeemer; but not "in all knowledge." Php 1:9. He has since learned, like Peter, that all regard for "the Son of the Blessed," (who delights to honor his Father) which is contrary to truth, will only meet his rebuke. Mt 16:22.

It plainly appears from 1Co 2:11, that "the Spirit of God" is no more a distinct person from God, than the spirit of a man is a distinct person from the man. It would be an anomaly of a most extraordinary character; if there was an infinite intelligent person in the universe, to whom no prophet, priest, apostle, or saint of the sacred Scriptures, ever offered any direct prayer or praise!! See the true doxology, Re 5:13. The Spirit of God is "poured out" or "shed forth," Ac 2:17,33; terms inapplicable to personality.

For the honor and glory of the ever blessed God, our Father; "the GOD and FATHER of our Lord Jesus Christ;" I submit this brief essay to your serious candid consideration.

Finally, "forbearing one another in love;" let our chief concern be to possess the holy, the humble, the benevolent spirit of Him who has loved us and given himself for us, walking daily in his imitable footsteps; "that when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming."

Yours for the truth, in Christian love.

The following 1848 Article was originally submitted by Henry_Grew@yahoo.com.

ARTICLE

BIBLE EXAMINER

Philadelphia, June 1848

"WHY WILL YE DIE?"

Such is the gracious expostulation of our Father in heaven to his perishing children, who, by transgression have exposed themselves to the penalty of his holy law, which is "DEATH." "The soul that sinneth it shall die." O, let us hearken to the voice of his love! He assures us that he has given his own Son to die for us, that whosoever believeth on him might not perish but have everlasting life, and kindly asks, "Why will ye die?" "As I live saith the Lord, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that he turn and live. Turn ye, turn ye, for why will ye die?"

O the remorse that will agonize the man that is now preferring the perishing riches, or honors, or pleasures of this transitory state, to all the ravishing glories of Immortality, when he shall see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and all the humble followers of the Lamb in the Kingdom of God, and he himself thrust out!

O ye whose hope will be as the spider's web, because ye purify not yourselves as Christ is pure; ye who have a name to live and are dead, who have the form of godliness without its power; ye who lay it up for yourselves treasures upon earth, and are not rich towards God, be kindly entreated to pause one solemn moment. Is it possible that, with the voice of eternal truth warning you so fearfully, "Except ye repent (reform) ye shall perish;" that you will continue to deprive yourselves of all the inconceivable and interminable joys of God's everlasting kingdom to be destroyed "soul and body in hell," for the sake of a momentary gratification in the idolatrous possession of the vanities of the presnt world? What will it profit for a man to gain the whole world and lose his life forever? Who can estimate the gain of losing our present life for Christ's sake, and finding it in life eternal? Why will ye die?

H. GREW

This electronic version is fully protected by U.S. Copyright Law, and I would ask that neither you nor your visitors make any copies of this article, without first obtaining the same permission which I received from the copyright holder shown in the Copyright Notice included with the article below.

HARTFORD, CONN.,

MAY 1, 1827.      

     
DEAR BROTHER IN THE LORD,--WE have for some time enjoyed the privilege of reading your publication, and have been edified by many of its communications. It has afforded joy to a few advocates for a strict adherence to the doctrine and ordinances of the New Testament in this place, to know that the ascended Saviour is raising up witnesses in different places to vindicate his truth, and bear testimony against those traditions which make void his holy commandments.

     
Deeply impressed with a sense of our duty, to keep the ordinances of him who has loved us and given himself for us, as they are delivered to us in his word, we have found ourselves obliged to take the course you have so ably advocated, of renouncing all the diverse creeds of fallible men--all sectarian or denominational attachments, and of fellowshipping, what we understand to be the truth, and that only, wheresoever and in whomsoever we find it.

     
Assured of the truth and importance of our Saviour's testimony, "My kingdom is not of this world," and of the corresponding apostolical command, "Be you not unequally yoked together with unbelievers," we have separated from those worldly religious societies, whose origin is so manifestly found in that wisdom which is foolishness with God. We have assembled on the first day of the week to break bread, teaching and admonishing one another from the word of the Lord, in psalms and hymns, singing, &c. We have no desire, however, to separate from any who love our Lord Jesus in sincerity, any farther than we are obliged so to do in order to obey his commandments. We would not overlook, what we indeed conceive to be, a very important principle in our Master's kingdom, i.  e. the law of christian forbearance; and while we desire in the spirit of meekness to come out from, and bear testimony against those things which tend to make void the laws of Zion's King, we wish to unite with all his true subjects in the observance of whatever we mutually understand to be his requirements.

     
With these views, you may well suppose we rejoice to co-operate to our humble measure, with those who are endeavoring to bring back the disciples of Christ to that simplicity of doctrine and practice from which they have been so awfully corrupted. We are happily agreed with the general views exhibited in the Christian Baptist; and if in any thing we are otherwise minded, we rejoice that your liberality has assured us of an opportunity for amicable discussion in your pages for the promotion of our union in the truth as it is in Jesus.

     
We wish now, we humbly hope for the truth's sake, to make a few remarks on the important and interesting subject of the character of our blessed Master. We have been perfectly satisfied with your remarks generally on this subject, as they have, like your remarks on other subjects, been obviously derived from the word of truth, and not from the systems of men. But we must frankly inform you that, in your last number, in defending yourself against the insinuations of your opponents, you have, in our opinion, adopted a phraseology, and expressed an opinion, opposed to the express testimony of our Saviour, and subversive of the great truth, that he is "the Son of the living God."

     
You reason thus: "There is more value in one human being than there is in one million of globes such as this we inhabit. If, then, the whole assembly, or church, or congregation of purified and glorified human beings belongs, jure divino, or by inheritance, or by redemption to the Lord Jesus; if it be his own, as it is his Father's, I [346] can conceive of no glory superior to his personal glory and majesty."

     
Now we believe and rejoice in the truth, that the whole redeemed church belongs to the Lord Jesus; but, that it is "his own, as it is his Father's," we cannot believe without rejecting the following testimony of our Saviour, "I have manifested your name to the men whom you gave me out of the world: they were yours, and you gave them me."--"You have given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as you have given him." "I pray not for the world, but for them whom you have given me." John xvii. 2, 6,9. Here the testimony is plain, repeated, decisive. The saints belong to the Son by gift. But do they belong to the Father by gift? Who has first given to him? They were originally, and by independent right, the Fathers. "Yours they were, and you gave them me."

     
Moreover--to say, "I can conceive of no glory superior to (Christ's) glory and majesty," is, in our opinion, opposing the testimony of the Saviour in the following words, "My Father is greater than 1." "My Father who gave them to me is greater than all."

     
We "reason thus:" "To us, there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things;" who "works all things after the counsel of his own will." Therefore, the Father is exclusively the eternal underived, and independent source of all being, perfection, and glory, and is worthy, and demands to be loved and adored as such. To us there is "one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things;" by whom the Father creates, governs, redeems, and judges his creatures, who is the "first begotten," the beginning of the creation of God--"the image of the invisible God"--"the first born of every creature"--the only "mediator between God and man," and is worthy to be loved and worshipped as such, "to the glory of God the Father." We worship and obey the Son as King in Zion, but we worship as the "one God, the Father" who set him there. Ps. ii.6. We joyfully acknowledge him as "head over all things to the church," but we believe the divine testimony, that the Father "gave him" this authority. Eph. i. 22. The Father "has appointed (him) heir of all things;" Heb. i.--"has put all things under his feet;" 1 Cor. xv. 25.--and "has made subject to him angels, and authorities, and powers," 1 Peter iii. 22. We rejoice in the animating assurance that he must reign till he has "put all enemies under his feet:" but we know that "when all things shall be subdued to him; then shall the Son also himself be subject to him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." 1 Cor. xv. 28.

     
Now then, dear brother, we "reason thus:" If we "conceive of no glory superior" to that of "begotten" or dependant existence--if we "can conceive of no glory," of power, or wisdom, superior to that which is derived from, and dependant on another, we must agree with you that we "can conceive of no glory superior to the personal glory and majesty" of the Lord Jesus. But if we can have any conception of a being who is self-existent, underived, (which reason itself teaches there must be) of infinite and independent knowledge, wisdom, goodness, and power; we must say that we can conceive of a glory superior to the personal glory and majesty of our Lord Jesus Christ. What conception, we ask, have you of the words of our Saviour, "My Father is greater than I?" To suppose that he meant (without giving the least intimation of such meaning) that the eternal Jehovah is greater than a man, is, to us, inadmissible. Moreover, it was not true that the Father was greater than he, if he was the eternal God and man. Had this been true, would he not have said, My father is greater than I am in my human nature?

     
Has not Jesus Christ plainly taught us that he is dependant on another, even the Father, for the highest glory he ever possessed, by praying (John xvii. 5,) for the glory he had before the world was? Did he not constantly declare his dependence on the Father, and not on the Word, or any second person in the godhead, for all things? And when the Jews charged him with "making himself equal with God," did he not repel the charge in the most unequivocal manner by the assurance, "Verily, verily I say to you, the Son can do nothing of himself?" Is it not manifest that the term God is applied to the Son figuratively, (as it is to beings of vastly inferior order) since it appears from Ps. xlv. and Heb. i. that as God, he has a God who "has anointed" him? These considerations, in connexion with many others, have long since convinced us that the common principle of referring every expression of dependence to his humanity only, is a violation both of scripture and reason.

     
To us there is no truth more plainly revealed from heaven, than that Jesus Christ is the SON of God. In this glorious character he was announced to a perishing world, as the object of faith and foundation of hope, by "the only true God," Matt. iii. 17.--by Christ himself, Luke xxii. 70.--and by his apostles, Acts ix. 20. 1 John iv. 15. But to say that the Son of God is God himself, (using the term in its highest import) is as manifest a contradiction as to say that the son of the president is the president himself. And as the affirmation concerning the son of the president, that he is president, would be an implicit denial that he is his son: so the affirmation concerning Jesus Christ, that he is the eternal God, is an implicit denial that he is his Son; and though we may "have found him of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write, Jesus of Nazareth," we have yet to look elsewhere for the Son of God.

     
We submit these free remarks to your candid examination, in the confidence that you have the pure truth in view, and are determined to advocate it, so far as you understand it, however contrary it may be to preconceived opinion, or popular systems. We should have offered much more evidence on the subject, did we not fear intruding on your liberality, by occupying too much room in your pages. Commending you to God and to the word of his grace, which is able to build us up, and to give us an inheritance among all them that are sanctified, we subscribe ourselves your brethren in Christ.

HENRY GREW,

         
JAMES HANMER,      

Members of a Church of Christ in Hartford.      

THE writer of the preceding letter had not seen our essay on the Preface to John's Testimony when he wrote the above. To this we refer him as an answer to his communication. We have another communication from him on another subject, to which we will attend in its own time.