Thoughts on nature and religion. Or, an apology for the right of private judgment / maintained by Michael Servetus [i.e. P. Blair] M.D. in his answer to John Calvin. [Anon].

  • Blair, Patrick, M.D., of Cork, active 1738-1780.
Date:
1774
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Thoughts on nature and religion. Or, an apology for the right of private judgment / maintained by Michael Servetus [i.e. P. Blair] M.D. in his answer to John Calvin. [Anon]. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    143/200 (page 135)
    t >35 ] may befall them: He fays, <c Let us run with patience “ the race that is fet before us, looking on Jefus as iC the author and finifher of our faith ; who for the “ joy that was fet before him, endured the crofs and cc defpifed the fhame, and is now fet down at the “ right hand of God.” And in this fame light Jefus fpeaks of himfelf after his refurreQion, “ Ought not “ the Chrift to have fuffer ei thefe things, that he might “ enter into his glory ” Here is plainly intimated the motive for his patience, in his enduring the crofs and defpifing the fhame, viz. the profpedt of reward, that joy that was fet before him, for, or on account of his refignation to the will of his father. He is therefore given, by Paul, as an example to be con- flantly before us, why we fhould fuffer all kind of perfecution, rather than quit our faith in the gofpel of Chrift. But I cannot reconcile thefe words of Paul to the council of Nice, or how the profpedt of reward, fhould induce the Almighty God, to fuffer either pain or fhame, on account of any future joy, to be acquired by thefe his fufferings from men; for I cannot believe that the happinefs of God can at all depend on the actions of men. Thus'Elihu fays to Job, If thou finnefl, what doji thou againfl him? or if thou be righteous, what receiveth he of thine haul ? It feems evident from this, that either Paul, or the council of Nice muff be miftaken ; and which is fo, let common reafon and unbiaffed judgment determine. From thefe reafons, it feems, that the Mefliah, pro- mifed by this defcription (altho’ quite applicable to Jefus Chrift) could not be God himfelf, but a real man to be prefented to the world, whofe do&rine and example fhould fave or condemn mankind ; and therefore was a proper judge to try them: And if Chrift was the Mefliah promifed, this defcription of the Mefliah is no way conformable to the Nicean creed. I 4 To