| Show lJ A AI The first doctrinal difficulty In the tho discussion of the 1 to the lIe He Hebrews liebres brews bres by the Presbyterian Teachers association was W the third vorna ot of th the first fl chapter to the of ot God It tsaya SAS ya Who Vho being the brightness of at his hl glory and the express s of or his hi p per perl perROn r ROn flon l n and upholding all by hy tho the of or Ws his power when ho he hail had by himself purged our ins In sat Mt flown down on the right hand of ot the Majesty on high This Thill scripture coming In indirect direct l con conflict filet with the Presbyterian doctrine concerning God UotI tho the Father whom It do as IU being without form or fig figure figure ure an Immaterial Incomprehensibility naturally y pau cau d lt some omo debate nut But it appears to have havo been J n left lett In tn the tho same samo cloud of oC mystery In which It was WAI In Involved Involved d nt the commencement of the reading rending Tho The revised translation was appealed to but Jut it It offered no elucidation n tion Tho Th declarations of ot the Now New Testa Testament ment merit taken t ken without the vain philos philosophy ophy and speculative theories of ot uninspired d theologians are art to the that the Fattier Fatter fAmer Is a B personal Being In the tho sam form torm and m 05 the Son Eon the so eo completely a ii duplication of ot the tb Father that he Is declared l to tobo tobo tobe bo be the tho Image Imn of Ills His person persona a 4 The discussion it Is ts reported turned on the tho question M II to lo w ether Cod God had hadS S taken on buman form t rm How flow theta thero could be any on room for tor a difference U of ot opinion on that point among persons who are not only bound ln ore gret to be guld d b by the but aho allo stand as I s teachers of ot It too Is 15 certainly remark remarkable able The Epistle EI to the hebrews Hebrew particularly lart the he be first and nd chapters cou con coupled pled lh the first ot the Gas Oos Gasper per t 1 to io St EL J John hn establish il tho the thoI 1 I affirmative of ot the question b beyond yond dis dil dispute dilI putt to every ral nd the I whole tenor ot of th tM New Testament Tf Is isto Isto to the effect etl t that Christ was clod and I that he took m mn n form l nn And he ho hedMar h dMar d that tI l Tho The fan Sn can ean do nothing of ot but what I III her do for tr s to lOter w r h he ott also the tin Son likewise 1 The of o that thet statement rIght I ht to be clear even to the tt T ho are tied tI to a Il cried creed that Is III utterly I 1 with It The Th mission ml of the then theP th thIn P In n was wu to dictate exhibit and nd rep represent resent the th lather Father from whom hn hI h cane came and ad to whom he wt after litter his n and whose whole works work he patterned after art r In his own ex OX exP P rl lie He was ill as God manifest In InI inthe I l tho the flesh fluh I as lIS It Is II tott began I I c w T In ft this ago ngo with the appearance of ot tho the Father ond the tM Son Bon to Joseph Jos Smith not fifteen yeat of at ago age personages clothed In light lIht In appearance aranco end and In response to the boys Joys torrent prayer for tot Divine Divino guid guld guidance uld ance nn e one pointing to te t the tho other h r Bald This Ii my beloved Son hear him The Th TI truth Is Ii revealed that the Father Ii is a l personal person l Being Heine with a 1 spiritual body tody of ot flesh lIeh mid end bones the Son Bon SonIn IB In exactly like Him 1101 while moo man nod wo women women women men are ills His children In His image and likeness That Is III something that can be ho understood anti and nn Is III strictly In accord with former Carmer scripture con concerning Dotty Deity And that Is l why mystic and divided is la op to |
