Notice

 •  1 min. read  •  grade level: 11
 
''I would engage my reader to consider attentively pages 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, of "Remarks, by J. N. Darby, etc., Oct. 1848," which tract, as I informed Mr. Craik at first, was what awakened my mind to the error of his statements.
The more I ponder Mr. C.'s hypothesis, the more it seems to me untenable: dishonoring to Christ, and destructive of the faith once delivered to the saints. It confounds "humanity" with "the state in which humanity May be;" as if "destroy-able by the sword" was part of humanity, instead of being connected with its state.
It supposes that the humanity of the Lord had no perfect relationship to God per se, as being of the obedient one; and it overlooks the grand difference of the state of Christ's humanity from ours; how it was sui generis, as being united to Godhead, which no one else's humanity ever was.
Mr. Craik's explanation (in his letter to T. M.) is only a fuller exposition of what I had stated in my "Appeal:" only the error is stated a great deal more clearly. In many leading points, it is identical with Mr. Newton's; from whom, I doubt not, it was unconsciously adopted.
So solemn a sin do I think it to attempt to define the person of the Son, that I would assure the reader I have no such thought in view in this paper. Mr. C. having unguardedly made statements calculated to puzzle some and to mislead others (with no such intention) upon matters connected with the foundation of their faith, I have endeavored to point out the trespass of his statements against the common faith and against common sense.