the eternal sonship of the lord jesus christ - Paradise Primitive ...

less explain the mystery. (4) The Arians might argue that it was "a contradiction," an "impossibility,""an absurdity," for these are not new charges against the true and real Sonship of our blessed Lord,but their strong, yet simple, faith was not moved by such arguments, for it stood not in the wisdom ofmen, but in the power of God, and firmly rested in the sure testimony of God as revealed in theScriptures, and in the inward witness of the blessed Spirit as sealing that testimony with a divinepower upon their heart. This was their sufficient, their only and all-sufficient answer to all the cavillingarguments and subtle reasonings of the adversaries of truth. Milner well says of them; "To believe, tosuffer, and to love-not to write" and we might add, "not to argue"-"was the primitive taste;" for theywere of that martyr band (5) of whom we read that "they over-came" Satan and his accusations "bythe blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony, and they loved not their lives unto thedeath" Re 12:11.(4) Milner, in his Church History, treats this point with great clearness. Speaking of the Council of Nice,he says, "But it soon appeared that, without some explanatory terms, decisively pointing out what theScriptures had revealed, it was impossible to guard against the subtilties of the Arians." Did theTrinitarians assert that Christ was God? The Arians allowed it, but in the same sense as holy men andangels are styled gods in Scripture. Did they affirm that He was truly God? The others allowed that Hewas made so by God. Did they affirm that the Son was naturally of God? It was granted, For even we,said they, are of God, of whom are all things. Was it affirmed that the Son was the power, wisdomand image of the Father? We admit it, replied the others; for we also are said to be the image andglory of God. Such is the account which Athanasius gives of the disputations. He was at that timedeacon of the church of Alexandria, and supported his bishop with so much accuracy and strength ofargument as to lay the foundation of that fame which lie afterwards acquired by his zeal in thiscontroversy. What could the Trinitarians do in this situation? To leave the matter undecided was to donothing; to confine themselves merely to Scripture terms was to suffer the Arians to explain thedoctrine in their own way, and to reply nothing. Undoubtedly they had a right to comment accordingto their own judgment as well as the Arians; and they did so in the following manner. They collectedtogether the passages of Scripture which represent the divinity of the Son of God, and observed thattaken together, they amounted to a proof of His being of the same substance with the Father."That creatures were indeed said to be of God, because not existing of themselves, they had theirbeginning from Him, but that the Son was peculiarly of the Father, being of His substance as begottenof Him.""It behoves every one who is desirous of knowing simply the mind of God from His own Word, todetermine for himself how far this interpretation of Scripture was true. The Council, however, was, by