OF THE
Theological Seminary,
PRINCETON, N. J.
Case, ^^Sr^S-rrr.. P'vi'
Shelf, I (0 1 ^. SecLi .
Boole,
No,
MJ-
Ufeful and Important ^^
ANSWERS
FREELY GIVEN,
T O
Ufeful and Important
QJJ E S T I O N S,
CONCERNING
JESUS the SON OF GOD,
Freely propos'd: o R, A Vindication of the (tQ t^tVAllnX ^Oll(l)fp of the Second Person in theXrim'tp;
With ai Answer to
The learned R o e l, Dr. R i d g l e y, Dr. Anderson, &^c.
Unto us a Son is given • and his Name Jhall
be called," the Mighty God, &'c If. ix. 6.
Thou art Christ the Son of the living God.
/ fay unto thee. Upon this Rock 1 will build my
Church: &c. Mat. xvi. \6 — 18. I AND THE Father are ONE. Jo. x. •^o. Search the Scriptures. Jo. y- S9' Bf^D'AV IIT M I L L A R, aTm!
LONDON:
Printed for the Author, and fold byF. Hett, at the Bi/'le and Crown in the Pou/i'jy and J. Ward, at the King^s-Arms in Cornhill, 1751-
Price Four SbilHngs, ftitclied in blue Paper.
I THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY,
^ Princeton, N. J.
' From the Rev. W. B. SPRAGUE, D.D. Sept. 1839.
mri
y O" \
Jo^/i Winter^ Efq;
Of Dartmouth-Street^ Weftminfter ;
THESE
Useful and Important A.nswers^
I N
Vindication of that Fundamental Article ^ The
Co*ecrenti'ai ^tiOnpofc^i?/^?;
Are mod humbly dedicated^ By his much obliged,
and mojl obedient Servant,
David Millar*
[iv]
THE
PREFACE.
^hought^ in a long Intro du^ion-i to have given Jome Account^ of my Concern in this Controverfy ; how I came to undertake this Work ; of a Conference / hadj fever ail ears ago, with the learned and worthy Author with whom I have now to do ; why I have con/idered what the learned Roel, Dr. Ridgley and Dr. Anderfon have advanced againfi the proper, and coeflfential Sonfhip of the fecond Perfon in the Trinity ; and of the woful 'Tendency^ and unavoidable Danger of Error : But the following Difcourfe is fwohi to fuch a Bulk, that I can only, at -prefent, give thefe few fhort Hinis.
The very firji Time I hear^d that thefe Ufeful and Important Queftions were publifhed, 1 prefently faid to the Minijiers who told it me. That, if the Lord fpared me my Life, I would, with his AJJifiance, anfwer them •, which I the rather then did, that I might, if pojfible, prevent the other Difcourfe, con- cerning the Pre-exiftence of Chrift's human Soul, i^c. which, they told me, the Author had promifed: And therefore, being, from the Conference 1 had with him, &c. not wholly unprepared, 1 fet immediately about it.
PREFACE. V
/ had fame Reafon to think, that my Refolution foon came to his Ears ; and that it hajlen'd the Pub- lication of the other : But, before it came from the Prefs, I had provided Materials, formed my Plan, and digefied my Method. And, refohing not to be moved from it, I have not, to this Day, feen that Difccurfe with my Eyes ; nor have I, thefe twenty Tears, read fo much as one Line of Mr. Fleming's Chriftology, from which, I hear and believe, our ivortfjy Author has borrowed many of the -principal things in his fecond Book.
My Anfwers were almofi ready, above three Tears and a Half ago. — / had written them, as in a Letter to himfelf ; and, from what had pad betwixt us., taken the Liberty to explain, and confute, feveral things of Moment, of which he has given us, in the Book, 1 am now to anfwer, only fome remote Hints^ or fome very dark, or general and ambiguous Ex- prejfwns ; not to fay feveral others, of which I cannot here find one Syllable.
When I was ready for the Prefs, hearing of his ill State of Health, &c. the very great Efteem 1 had for him, and the Jincere Love I bore to him, gave me a very fenfible Pain, left my Anfwer fhould difcompofe or add any Uneafinefs to him, in that Condition — In thefe Circumjlances, being in a Strait, whether to publifh my Anfwers then, or delay them, at leafi, till we might fee whether he fhould recover, I advifed with feveral Miniflers and others, and with one of the Deacons of the Church of which he was the Pajlor^ <i grave, folid, ferious old Gentleman yet alive : But, while I was in this 6u [pence, I was called upon, and invited to other JVork, even the Defence of the great Foundation of all our Hopes, the Satisfaction OF Christ ; and, much about the 'Time I had fnifh'' d it, our worthy Author went, I have no Doubt, into Everlafling Reft.
His Death put ms to mony Inconveniences, more and
greater'
VI PREFACE.
greater than every one will think. I was forced t$ alter a very great Part of what I had compofed ; to write almofi the whole of it over again, and many Pages of it oftner then once ♦, /^ drop altogether feme cf my principal Arguments, which I had leveWd chiefly •againfi feme of the Things, which had pafl betwixt us : J fay drop altogether, becaufe I abhor fuch Bafe- nefs, as to alledge, or impute any T^hing to one in his Grave, that is not known to all. I have been alfo obliged to be very referved in oppofing many Things^ which, tho* often plainly enough hinted and implied^ are no where literally, no nor clearly exprefs d. — ^hofe who confider thefe well, will not think it ftrange to jind a 'Thought which, flow and then, may not feem fo pertinent ; or an Argument, which may not come fully up to the Purpofe, or may, poffibly, appear to prove too much, &c. But, if any Perfon fhall point out any Fault, of any kind, inflead of evading, ex- cufing, or wriggling, I fhall be one of the jirfi who fhall acknowledge it, fhall heartily thank him, and be more careful to avoid the like for the future.
I write not for the learned, but for the young Student, and the plain, illiterate Chriftian, That, if it fleafe God, I may be fo happy, to confirm fuch as have kept the Truth, eftablilh thofe who may be wavering or unlet tied, and recover fome who have been feduced into Error. — To Anfwer thefe Ends, I have, throughout, i. y/xw<^^i fcholaftic Terms, as much as poffible, or explained them. 2. Have fiudied to exprefs myfelf, in Scripture Language. The Doctrines of Chriftianity, found bejl, and are, com- wonly, moji clearly and fully taught in Chrift's own Words. 3. Have given the fame Thought in a great VariHy of Phrafes, that every Thing may be made the more eafy and perfpicuous ; and thofe for whofe fakes 1 write, may be the mere fecured from TemptaiicH,
If
PREFACE. vii
If any Jhall be difpkafed, with my too frequent re- feting the very fame Anlwers, let them remember the Neceflity of it. — Our worthy Author abounds with them : And 1 have feldom repeted the fame Anfwer^ hut when he gives us the fame 'Thought^ and in the fame ^ or nearly the fame Words.
I have not offered Mr. Perrault's Opinion of the Generation of Animals, to explain the Do^lrine of the Trinity, which is as clearly and fully revealed in the Scriptures, as infinite Wifdom thought fit and neceffary for us, in our prefent State -, but to remove the Difficulties, which the fcholaftic Notion of the Generation of the own, the only begotten, Son of God, has brought into Divinity, which feem^d fo infuperable to thcfe learned Men Roel, Dr. Ridgley, Br. Anderlon, Qc. that they denied, either " That " the fecond Perfon, and purely as fuch, was, in any ** Senfe, the Son of God j" or *' that he was his Son, " i« a ftrift and proper 5^«/> :'* And this, I per- fuade myfelf, it will, with all judicious and impartial Readers, do effedtually.
/ hear from fever al Hands, 1 am to have " more " Queftions to anfwer^^ &cc. — / hope they do not think, That fending me more Qiieftions, will be a defending /i&^y"l^/;z^j, / have more than fuperabundantly confuted : And may therefore, I humbly conceive, expe^, they will anfwer me firfl. — However, If they fend me any, I hope they will be to our prefent Pur- pofe : And if, through the Grace of God, / can anfwer them, 1 affure them that, with his Help, / will; but, if I cannot, I fba II freely own, /cannot, which is more, I verily think, than they will do, when they cannot anfwer me.
Thd* I have not, at large and of Purpofe, con- fidered and anfwer ed all our learned Authors Notions, about Chrifl's pre-exiftent human Soul, / have not wholly paft them all. — Some of them are of much greater Moment, and confec^uently, of much more dan- gerous
viil PREFACE.
gerous Confequence ; (fuch as, " That his human " Soul is properly the Son of God, and therefore, That *' he is not as God, properly, the Son of God ; &c^*) and thefe, I hope, I have fuper abundantly confuted : The others, I have almojl altogether waved. — If my Friends think, that a more full and particular Con^ fideration of them is neceflary, I fhall, with the Help c/God, he ready to gratify them \ being well fatisfied, that what Mr. Fleming has faid, may, fo far as I can underfiand him, be eafily and fully anfwered. — And yet, I humbly conceive. That fingle Point, Whether Chrift's human Soul exijied before his Conception ? or rather, ever fince the Creation of Adam ? (for, I cannot fee any Reafon for fuppofing, that it was created before the World was,) may remain a Pro- blematical Queftion : And that ferious Chrijlians may be of different Minds about it, without much Danger.
Should any think it worth their while to anfwer mey Idefire no Quarter. Let them treat me with the fame honeft Freedom, they deftre to be treated : — Let them produce Scripture Texts, inflead of human Authorities ; and good Reafons inflead of Suppo- fitions : — Let them not beg the Queftion which they Jhould prove, fliift any thing they fhould anfwer, fly off when they fhould come up to the Point, or wriggle and quibble when they have nothing to fay : — And let them remember. That the Sub] eft is not only Sacred, but vejy awful and of the lafi Importance ; and therefore, treat it with all becoming Decency and Sexioufnefs, and I am pleafed ; and fo far from being uneafy, that I fid all heartily thank them. — If they a5i this Part, the Queftion betwixt us, may be brought to a ftiort Ifllie -, and then the Danger of erring ■ about ity may very eafdy he difcerned.
USEFUL
USEI^UL and IMPORTANT
ANSWERS
Freely given, to USEFUL and IMPORTANT
QUESTIONS, &c.
Some Thoughts on the INTRODUCTION.
TH E IntroduBion having feveral Things in it NeWy and Strange, and which feem to have been advanced as a Sort of Foun- dation, for the following Swper-firuSlure ; we Ihall not think it Labour lofi, to give the Reader every Word of it, p. i — 5. with fome very necelTary, but Ihort, Remarks upon the whole.
" 'Tis of fome Importance in the Dodrines of " the Gofpel, andefpecially in the great Article of the " blefled 'Trinity, to know the Meaning of the " Name Son of God, which is fo often given to " our Lord Jefus Chrifi in the New Teftament : " for hereby we fhall be better able to underftand " the chief Import and Defign of thofe Places of " Scripture." — To all this, we heartily agree : And add, ^Tis not only of fome, but of wry great
B Im-
Importance, m all the principal Do^rines of the Goi- pel ; and efpecially that great, and mcji Fundamental, Article of the moft Holy and Undivided Trinity ; to know the true, i. e. the whole Meaning of the Name Son of God, when given 'to the Lord Jefus Chrift, in the Scriptures : Becaufe, without it, we fhall hardly, if at all, be able to underftand the fi^/i?/" Import and Defign, of any one, of all thole Paffages wherein he is fo filled.
" But here I defire my Reader to obferve, that " I am not enquiring into the higheft and mofb *' fublime Senfe of which 'tis poffible that our " Lord himfelf might have the Idea when he ufed " that Word ;" * He cannot, it feems, deny. That this Title may poffibly have a higher and more fublime Senfe, then he intends to take it in, nor that our Lord himfelf might poffibly have that Idea, when he ufed it : And we fliall fee pre- fently. That the Jews, as foon as they heard him ufe it, or Words of the fame Signification, readily took them in the higheft Senfe they could poffibly bear ; whence, I conceive, 'tis undeniable that they well knew that Senfe, that it was familiar to them, and common amongft them, and the Senfe of that Title then generally received. — " but what is the " Senfe that Chrifi or the Apoftles and Writers of " the New Teftament more diredlly defigned to " convey to thofe who heard them;" Anf i. Chrifi, undoubtedly, defigned to convey the true Senfe of it, to his Hearers : For, furely, he did not defign, to amufe them, nor puzzle them, and much lefs to impofe upon them. — Wherefore 2. When the Jews took it, in the higheft and moft fublime Senfe, it could poffibly bear, Jo. v. 1 7. 1 8. if it was not
* JV. 5. The worthy Author, almoft everywhere, calls thefe three Words, Son of God, the Name, or the Word, neither of which are, I humbly conceive, proper. I therefore every where call them, the or this Title.
the
f 3 ]
the true Senfe, He would, moft certainly have, one Way or another, told them fo : And, if it was notthc very Senle, " which he more diredly defigned to " convey to them,'* He would furely, yea he ought to, have reSiified this Miftake^ fet them right in a Matter of fuch Moment^ and told them plainly " the Senfe he more diredly defigned." And — 3. The fame we fay of " the Apoftles, and Writers of " the New Teftament." They would, they fliould, have acquainted thofe, to whom they preachedj or wrote, with the true Senfe of this I'itky which they " more direftly defigned to convey to them," whether it was the higheft and moft fublime Senfe it could have or not : And, if they perceived (as they could not but perceive) them in Danger of taking it, in a higher Senfe than they defigned tliey fhould ; they ought, plainly and freely, to have warned them of that Banger. " and in what Senfe " the People generally did and could underftand " this Name." Anf. The People, generally, fo far as appears, both could, and did, underftand it in a Senfe far, if I may not fay quite, different from that which this Author gives it: And neither did, nor could, upon his own Principles, under- ftand it in his Senfe, as we fhall Hemonjirate by and by.
" 'Tis evident from feveral Exprefllons of Chriji, " that he well knew that his own Words fome- " times carried in them a much nobler and fublimer " Signification, than barely that which he defigned to " convey to the yezvs, or even to his own Difciples " at that Time :" Anf. One would not have ex- pefted thefe ftrange, thefe unguarded Words, from our worthy Author •, and much lefs, at the Begin- ning, and with fo very much AITurance, as to fay, " 'Tis evident." — However, How does he fupport this evident Propofition, which has fo very harjh a Sound .? Or, fince, 'tis plain, it is not felf-evident,
B 2 How
[4]
How does he, How can he, prove it ? Why, the only Two, I do not know what to call them. Proofs^ or Injiances, he gives of this, are both very ynlucky for him : As, indeed, are moft by far of all that follow. — " As when he fays to the JewSy Before Abraham was I am.^ Jo. viii. 58." And yet, whatever he deftgned, the Jews^ to whom he fpoke them, prefently took them, as " carrying in them " their moft noble and fiiblime Signification," and the Words themfelves feem plainly, yea neceflarily, to have led them to it. They are not, Before Abraham ivasy I was: (which, had he not " i^j-^f^ " to have conveyed to them a much higher, if not ** an infinitely more fublime Idea^^ would have been a clear, and very fufficient Anfwer to their Obje(5lion, or Queftion, Ver. 57. 'Thou art not yet fifty Tears old^ and hafi thou feen Abraham .?) But, £)/co £i/At, I am^ i. e. Whether you believe or no, I am, as I told you before, Jo. 5. 17. 18, the Son of God, vAio does whatfoever he does, 8zc. and, as fuch, have a neceffarily exijiing and unchangeable Being, as God •, not the Father, but the Son, who was always in Him, of Him, and with Him. Verfes 18. 29. 38. 42. 49, &c. That the Jews took them, in this Senfe, or as implying it, is undeniable from the very next Words, Ver. 59. Then took they up Stones to caji at him, as a Blafphemer, for aflliming to himfelf Eternity, Neceffary-Exijience, and Immu- tability: Or fpeaking oi himfelf, in fuch Strains, as no one, who is not, indeed, the one true God, can, or fhould do. — " And fo when he fays to his '* Difciples, Jo. xiv. jo. I am in the Father, and " the Father in me, they could not know that glo- ♦' rious and fublime Relation of Chrift to the Father, *^ and his intimate Onenefs with the Father, which " he himfelf was perfeftly acquainted with." Anf. i. Suppofing this, What then ? Will it, can it, follow, •' that he did not deftgn to convey to the Difciples,"
(thQ
[ 5] (the only Perfons prefent when he fald thofe Words,) the Knowledge " of that glorious and fublime Re- " lation, and his intimate Onenefs with the Father ;'* which was the Thing to be proved ? — By no Means. — The direft contrary feems rather manifeft. — What need was there to talk to them in fuch Strains ; or, what good End could it have anfwer'd ; if it was not to inform them of what, upon this Sup- pofition, they were ignorant^ and teach them what was mofi: neceffary for them to know ? — But, 2. How does it appear, " That they could not know " thefe." *' The moft glorious and fublime Re- *' lation of Chrifi to the Father" and as fuch, was. That he was his own, proper, begotten, only begotten^ Son: And could they not know this, when they had heard their ever bleffed Lord declare it, with the greatell Solemnity-, and in the plained and moft fignificant Words, openly proclam it, over
and over? Jo. iii. 16 18. ch. v. 17 -26. And
had themfelves alfo publickly profeit it, again and again; Mat. xvi. 15 — 18. Jo. vi. 69, &c. and that with the moil gracious Acceptance, and kindeft Approbation, of their truely Divine Majter ? — And could they not " know liis intimate Onenefs with " the Father," when they had heard himfelf fo ftrongly, fo emphatically, affert, Jo. x. 30. / and the Father 'iv itr/Afv, are one Thing ; i. e. not one Perfon -, for a Father and a Son are, moft certainly. Two Perfons •, but, one EJfence, Subflance or Nature ? Why, if they could not. It was not, becaufe he did not " dejign to convey to them " the nobleft " and fublimeft Signification of the Words :'* Becaufe, i. This " intimate Onenefs'* is not revealed any where in Scripture, more clearly, expreQy, fully and ftrongly, than in this very Text ; and in that, i Jo. v. 7. which feems, thus far, plainly parallel to it: And confequently, if he defigned to reveal to them this " intimate Onenefs,'*
any
[6]
any where in Scripture, one would think, it muft have been in thefe. — 2. This Propofition, I and the Father are one Thing, (t'v la/Afy) which muft be farther explained and vindicated hereafter, if we more carefully confider the Context, and re- member the Occafion and other Circumftances, and take a nearer View of the Words themfelves, hath, I humbly conceive, but one Signification ; and can admit no other, neither higher nor lower. — To confirm this, 3. The Senies which the various Seds of Ayititrinitarians^ would force upon it, feem, to me, ungrammatical, ftrained, and very contrary to all the Circumftances of the Paffage, many other clear Texts, and to the emphatic Words themfelves ; not to add, would hardly leave them any tolerable Senfe at all. And therefore, 4. The Jews^ readily, and very naturally, took them in that^ which feems really their true^ yea their only Senfe: And hence took up Stones again to ft one him^ Ver. 31. — They could not, it may be faid, " be fo " perfedly acquainted with that Onenefs, as him- " felf was." We acknowledge it : But, neither could, nor can, the higheft Angels in Heaven, to all Eternity. — Be it therefore ftill remembred,
N. B. I . That, how intimate foever this One- nefs is, it is neither deftru^ive of, nor any way inconjtftent with, the Diftin5iion of Perfons in the Godhead : Or, the blefied Three are, notwithftand- ing " this moft intimate Onenefs" Three true diftin5i Perfons.
2. That the Father, and He only, always and neceflarily, was^ is, and //// will be, the Father ; and the Son, and he only, always and necejfarilyy was, is, and ever will be, the Son. And,
3. That, tho' they are the one God, and there- fore each of them the true God ; yet, as the Father is not the Son, fo the Son is not the Father, or any mere Attribute, or Perfe^ion, of the Father, as
our
[71
our learned Author feems to have hinted he is, in many more Places than one.
What then fhall we fay to this odd, this ftrange Aflertion, which is here laid down as a Pojlulatuniy i. e. a Truth to which he may demand our AJfsnty and which we mull gra7it to be true^ without any the leaft Proofs or any Authority, but his own ? •— Does it not, to fay the leall, appear very injurious to our ever blefied Saviour ; and a heavy Impeach- ment both of his JVifdcm and Goodnefs : That He, who was anointed to preach the Gofpel to the Pcor^ Mat. xi. 5. and to Babes, Ver. ir,. Luke iv. 18. &c. /. e. the unlearned, the ignorant, and Perfons of weak Capacities, ^c. fhould fo frequently, and familiarly, ufe Words and Expreflions, of the higheft Moment, which he well knew " carried in " them a much nobler and fublimer Signification, " than barely that which he defigned to convey to " them ;" and when he faw that many, if not all of them, took them, contrary to his Intention, as defigned to convey to them the fublimeft Significa- tion they could pofTibly have, did not, plainly and exprefly, inform them of their Error, and deliver them, from the great Riik they run, by continuing in it ? — What Caufe was there for fuch ExprefTions ? What Good could they do? Would not other Phrafes have done as well •, and fuited the Capacities of his Hearers, and anfwered his own Chara^er, much better ? — Thofe who teach Babes, or the Young, the Ignorant and weak, &c. are wont to fpeak to them in their own Way •, chufe the eafiefV, and plainefl Words, fuch as they are befl acquainted with, and can bell underftand ; and are fo far from being fond of ExprefTions which are above them, or like to be miflaken by them, that, if they muft ufe any fuch, they are always careful, one Way or another, in lefs or more, to make them fo
plain.
[8]
plain, and bring them fo low down to their Ca- pacities, that their Scholars may not miftake them, but receive them in that Senfe, which they diredtly defign to convey to them ; and efpecially if their all is at Stake : And, as foon as they perceive they have miftaken them, they ftudioully endeavour to fet them right \ and ceafe not, upon all proper Oc- cafions, to keep them fo. — This was expedled from the Meffiah, as is clear from the fecond Article of the Woman of Samaria's Creed, When the Mejfmh is come^ he will tell us all 'Things. Jo. iv. 25. — This, He who knew how to fpeak a Word in Seafon to him that is weary^ If. 1. 4. could have done mod fweetly, eafily, and effedually. — But, upon this Suppofition, it feems he did not, yea, would not ; even in Points of fuch vaft Importance ! Suffer me then to afk. Were there no other Expreflions, in which he could have conveyed the Senfe he intended ? Or, if there were not. Would he not have plainly told them, fome way or other, by fome Periphrajis, or Similitude^ &c. the Senfe in which he would have them to take them, and fo pre- vented their taking them in another ? — Or, if in his Wifdom, he did not then think it proper, " to " convey to them the Signification which he barely " defigned," in exprefs and plain Terms, which they could not miftake : Would he not, (fince he knew they took thefe and other his own Words, in a Senfe which he did not defign,) at leaft have kindly told them fo •, and that the Senfe which they put upon his Words, was not the Senfe he defigned to convey to them ? — Or, was there, is there, any Danger, in taking them in their " much nobler
*' and fublimer Signification ^ &c." But, This
Pojlulatum then, we cannot grant, hecauje of the Fear of God. Neh. v. 15. 'Tis not only at beft,, a mere begging the ^ejiion, but abfolutely falfe, as
is
[9] .
is plain from both the Infiances given. — Pojlulatumt did I fay ? Why, it is really the principal B(^fts-t upon which a great Part of the following Uifcourfe is built. For, if this Title, Son of God, ever " carries in it the higheft Senfe of which 'tis " poiTible that our Lord himfelf might hav^ the " Idea when he ufed that Word ," or, fignifies a coejjential Son % as we fliall demonftrate it does ; and as, in this very Text, it evidently do?s, if it ever can do i It will be very hard to prove. That the Idea of Coejfentiality is ever, can ever, be quite dropt or excluded from it. But, if fo, his whole Fabrick, which chiefly refts upon 'This^ which is alfo the principal Thing he undertakes to prove, viz. " That it never fignifies a coejfentid Son," mufb needs fall with it. — And indeed. That Building can never Hand fzire, or long, which ftands on fo weak and fandy a Foundation.
*' My chief Bufinefs in this Difcourfe therefore is " only to fhew what is the true Idea or Meaning of " the Word Son of God, which our Saviour or the " facred Writers defigned to convey to their Difci- " pies, thro' all Ages and Nations by this Name.^* Surely, if they intended to give " the Irue Idea or " Meaning" of it, they would, once at lead, give the whole of it : And therefore would, fom.e where or other, give " the highelb and moft fublime Senfe" of it. " And in which, 'tis poflible, their Hearers *' could underftand them." Had our Author been alive, I fhould have ufed a little more Freedom with this. However, ab ejfe cd pojfe valet Co?ifequentia. What aftually has been, or now is, was, or is, mofl certainly, pofiible •, yea, more than poffible. — Well then, Whenever the J^£^;j heard our Lord affume this moft auguft Title, or call God his Father, in the Manner, and with all the Circumflances, which he did ; or fpeak of God, or Himfelf, in Terms equiva- lent •, they togk it in the higheft Senfe pofiible, as
C imply-
t lO ]
implying, a making hhnfelf equal with God, Joh. V. 17, 18. yea, a making Himself God j Ch. X. 30, 33 : And confequently, that, if he was indeed diSon, he was moft certainly aCo-ESSENTiAL Son: Fherefore, itw^s very poJpI;k, thty could un- deriland it in this Senfe. — The Catholic Church, every where, and in all Ages, ever fince, have ac- tually taken this to be the true Meaning o^ this Title: And therefore it was very poffible, yea more than poffible, they could. —Very few, if any one, till very lately, even of thofe who concerning the Truth have erred^ have been wholly of our Author's Mind, as to the Signification of this Title : And we fhall fliew,by and by, from his own Words, that it was ve- ry hardly, if at ail, poffible, that any one, and much lefs that the Generality of Chriftians, fhould ever put his : enfe upon it ; yea, that he has, with his own Hands yVi/hoWj and for ever demoHfhed his own Scheme. " And in order to find this Senfe of it, let us con- fider thofe Texts of Scripture wherein the Belief of Chriji to be the Son of God, is made the great Requifite in order to Salvation, and a neceffary Ingredient of Chriftianity." Whether this was he moft eafy, natural, and fure Way " to find this Senfe j" and whether thofe Texts have any Thing n them, v/hich leads to his Senfe, fliall be confider- ed afterwards : But the confeffed Lnportance of know- ng the true Senfe, ought to make us all very ferious ndeed.— " For in thofe Places of Scripture, thefe two Confiderations will offer themfclves ; ''i) That the Scnic of thefe Words muft be pl^in, familiar, and eajy to he underftood -, otherwife it could not be made a neceffary Article, or a Fundamental of the Chriftian Faith." This, and the next, require a much longer Reply, than I have here Room for j and much freer, than I am, at prefent, difpofed to give. However, weanfwer, i. The Words, Son, own Son, begotten Son^ only begotten Sen, are as plain, familiar,
and
f It ]
and eafy to he underjlcod^ as mofl -, yea, any Words* which convey the fame Ideas ; or, as any which can well be defired : And much more To, than any other which can now pofilbly be chofen by us, to fignify x\\t great Things ox Things^ meant by them. 2. The Sens:, of them is as phiin, familiar, and ea^ to be un- derjloodj in our prefent imperfe£f State, as Infinite Wijdom thought fit it fliould be underftood by us : Or, as it can be from fo many -plain^ familiar, and ■eafy 'Terms, ib often repeated, and illuftrated alfo from, or by, the Circumftances of the Places where they are found. And, 3. TIicSense we put upon thofe Terms, is, as fhall be proved, much more plain, familiar, and eafy to be underftood, than the Senfe he puts upon them ; and upon many other Words in this his Dif- courfe. — " It mud have alfo (2) fome apparent Con- " nexion with, and Inf.uence into our Salvation^'' So the Meaning, which we give it, manifeftly has. Yea, it has a much greater, nearer, and more apparent Connec- tion, &c. than his own. — Becaufe, ( 1 ) Had not the fecond Perfon in the Trinity, and as fuch, been coeffential, and confequently as fuch, equal with God, He neither was, nor could have been, quali- fied, for the Offices he executes as our Redeemer. (2) JVe leave out no very " Important Part" of his Senfe of this Title : But, he leaves out the mofl *' important Part," by far, of ours, which is the only true, Senfe, as we fliall fee prefently. " other- " wife the Belief of it would not have been made " fo grand a Requifite in order to be faved j" — I, for my Part, fhall now freely, and fully, grant this. " for it is fcarce to be imagined that the '* bleiTed God would appoint any mere arbitrary " and unoperative Speculations to be the Terms of " enjoying his Favour." W hat ftrange Language, is this ; and from fuch a Man ! However, we anf. i. That the fecond Perfon, in the ever bleffed Trinity, is the proper, the only begotten^ and therefore
C 2 CO'
[ 12 1
fcejfential, ^on of the Father is not a " mere Specu- "• L tion," but a Matter cf Fa£l \ and of fo very gnat Importance to be believed, 1 hat they, who deny hm^ to be fuch a Son, deny the Father to be fucb a Father: And, confequently, have Reafon to confider, whether they do not deny both the Father and the Son. i Jo. ii. 22. — 2. The Belief of his being a cceJJ'ential Son, is fo far from being an " arbitrary Speculation," That, upon the Suppofi- tion h^ really is fo, it necejfariiy arifes from the natural Relation, that is between the Two Divine Perfons ; and muft be owned a fundamental Article of the Faith once delivered to the Saints. — And, 3. It is fo far from being an " urioperative Specula- " tion," That the firm, and praftical, Belief, That God fo loved the JForld, that he gave his only begotten and therefore coeffential Son, another Self, Sec. Jo. iii. 16. and that this only begotten Son laid down his Life for us., &c. i Jo. 3. 16. Ch. 4, &c. will, powerfully and effeilually, excite, and quicken, and enflame us, to the moft humble and thankful Acknowledgments, the moft fincere and univerfal Obedience, &c. if the pradical Belief of any one Truth polTibly can •, and, indeed, more, by far, than any other. — " Now, both thefe Confidera- " tions will give us fomiC AfTiftance toward our " finding out the true Senfe of this Title." And we ill all fee, alas ! before we have done, what good Ufe our learned Author has made of this AfTiftance.
*^ The Texts of Scripture, wherein a Belief *' of Jejus to be the Son of God feems to be made " the great neceffary Term of our Salvation, are *' fuch as thefe. Jo. iii. 18. Jo. xx. 31. i Jo. v. " 13. I Jo. iv. 15. I Jo. ii. 23. and Ads viii. 37. " 38." I hope the Reader will confult thefe Pafiages himfelf, read them attentively, and excufe me from tranferibing them, according to my
JPromife ;
[ n ]
Promife : And I'll give him feveral more, the more deeply to imprefs this moft weighty Truth. See then, Jo. v. Verfes 17. 18. 23. 25 and 34. Rom. viii. 32. Gal. iv. 4 — 7. and carefully ponder thefe following. He that helieveth on the Son, hath everlafiing Life : And he that helicveth not the Son^ Jhall not fee Life •, hut the Wrath of God abideth on him. Jo. iii. 0,6. This is his Commandment, that "jce fhould believe on the Name of his Son, dzc. i Jo. iii. 23. — God fent his only begotten Son into the World, that we might live through him. Ch. iv. 9. — - Who is he that overcometh the World, but he that helieveth that Jefus is the Son of God. ch. v. 5. He that helieveth on the Son of God, hath the Witnefs in himfelf, &c. Ver. 10. — And this is the Record, that God hath given to us eternal Life : And this Life is in his Son. Ver. 11. He that hath THE Son, hath Life : And he that hath not the Son of God, hath not Life. Ver. 12. Even in his Son Jefus Chrijl. This is the true God, and Eternal Life. Ver. 21. — And this is Life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jefus Chrift whom thou hajl fent. Jo. xvii. 3. This laft Text, I have here quoted, only to prove. That the Knowledge of Jefus Ckrifi, i. e. his Perfon and Offices ; or what he was, became, did, fuffered, purchafed for, promifes to and befiows upon his People ; is as necejfary towards their obtaining Eternal Life, as the Knowledge of God the Father ; i. e. of what He does for, or gives unto them. And this it does, if any Text well can : Becaufe, if it is true, it is certainly, and as much. Eternal Life, to know the One as to know the other ; i. e. to know Jefus Chriji as to know the Father. Yea, we are fure. That that no Man can either knozv the Father, Matt. xi. 27. or come to the Father, but, by or through him, ]o. xiv. 6. — Our Author there- fore, with very great Reafon, goes on.
[ 14 ]
'' Nov/ if believing or net believing Chriji to be " the Son cf Gcd has Salvation and Damnation an- *' nexed to it by the facred Writers,'* Then the Belief of it is fo abjdiitely necejfary to Salvation^ that no one^ who hears the Gojpd, can have any Rcafon to exped: Salvation without it. " then furcly 'tis " of confiderable Importance to knov/ what this " Name means," Yes, it is fo : Yea, it muft needs be of the very greatefl Importance. '• that " we may not include tco little in it, and by leaving " out fome important Part, expofe ourfelves to that *' Anathema ;" An awful Thought ! Damnation is a terrible Anathema indeed ! Lord teach us thy 'Truths and help us to love^ and keep^ and do it -, that we may not come into that State of 'Torment. " nor in- *' dude too much in it^ and fo be tempted to lay *' our weaker Neighbcurs under the like Condem- " nation for want of fufficient Knowledge." But, this £ anger, when compared with the former, is really very little, or rather none at all ; becaufe, I. With refpeft to ourfelves, " fhould we include *' too much in it,'* if that too much, is not falfe, does not overthrow, or leave out, " fome impor- " tant Part ;" lead us afide from fome other mo- mentous and neceflary Truth ; occafion, involve us in, or draw us to, fome confiderable Omiffioiis, or Ccmmiffiom j we hope, we fhall not be, thereby, ex- " pofcd to thax Anathema.'* — But, 2. " Our lay- " ing our weak Neighbours under the like Condeni- " nation," whether in our own fecret Thoughts only, or in private Admonitions ; or joyning with others, in any judicial ACt, as in the leifer or greater Ex- communication, as they are called, (provided there be good Reafon for our fo doing, and we proceed with Caution and Deliberation, that Concern for the Glory ot God, and that CcmpaJJion and Love to our Brethren, which is required ;) is our Duty, and may, probably, do them Good : Whereas, if we do
thefe.
thefe, or either of them, ignorantly, rafhly, ma- liciouily, and much more if without ^2^/ C<;u''e •, it is our Sin, but can do them little or no hurl, and does not, at all, make them obnoxious to the everlafiing Judgment of God. But, — 3. "i hey who " expOje themf elves to Damnation" as oppofed to eternal Salvation, do, by their own AU: and Leed -, expofe themfelves to an endkfs Anathema. — And, 4. If their " want of fufiicient Knowledge" is owing to their Careleflhefs, I'ride, Prejudice, or any Fault of their own, it will neither much ex- tenuate their Guilt, nor lefien their Punijhment.
" But bkfled be God, fince it is a Name of " fuch Importance, he has not confined this Name " precifely to one fmgle, narrow, abftrufe and dif- " ficult Idea,*' i. e. To fignify precifely a coejfential Son, and nothing more. — Granted : And what then ? — Will it follow. That Coejfentiality is no " importantPart of its Signification j or, not one o^ ** thofe feveral Ideas afHxed to it in Scripture ?'* By no Means. — Sometimes 'tis confined, precife- ly, as we fliall fee, to the fmgle Idea of a coejfential Son ', and, at other Times, it fignifies the complex Perfon of the Mediator, who is God-man. — But, I muft further anfwer, a proper Name, when given to any one fmgle Perfon, denotes that individual Perfon and him only : The Title of an Office, which is peculiar to, or can be executed by, one only, when afcribed to any particular Perfon, denotes that individual Officer, and no other: Tho' the Idea of an only begotten, and therefore, coejfential Son, and as fuch, is confined precifely to one fingle Perfon, exclufively of all others, it is neither fo very " abftrufe, nor difficult an Idea :" And, in the Cafe before us, the Idea we affix to this Name, is neither fo abftrufe, nor difficult, as //^^/ which himfelf does, as we fliall fee. " but has affijced it to feveral Ideas
" ia
[ i6 1
** in Scripture,'* This I have freely granted ; and only add. That, whatever Ideas 'tis affixed to, it always fignifies one and the fame Perfon only ; and always includes his Divinity : Or, coejfential SonJJjip is always the primary ^ and moji important of them. " that fo if we receive it in the mofl important *' Senfes, we may be fecured from the Scriptural " Condemnation, tho' we fhould not happen to un- *' derftand and rece've it in all the fublime Senfes " which may be applied to it." — This is very ge- neral, and ambiguous. — However, If 07te of thele fublime Senfes, is the mod important of all, and the Foundation alfo of moil or all the reft ; whoever are fo far from receiving that into it, that they always and abfolutely exclude it from it, have great Reafon to look to themfelves : Not to add, they can neither, as fome wou'd fay, underftand the moJi im- portant Smfe of it ; no, nor fufficiently kftozv, nor confequently receive^ and believe in, the ever blefled Perfon, who is frequently fo called ; for a Reafon obvious enough of itfelf
" Let it be noted alfo, that perhaps the various " Imaginations and Reafonings of Men may have *' affixed more Senfes to this Phrafe than Scripture " has ever done :" A fad Truth ! Many Ages, fmce Chrift's Afcenfion, bear Witnefs to it! We need not go back to the antient Herefies condemned by the firft four General Councils, &c. &c. fmce there are feveral fuch Senfes now before us. — '• Yet, " in order to give this Enquiry a fuller Confidera- " tion," Hitherto, we have not, I think, had any one Confideration of it at all. — " we will furvey the *' feveral Senfes which have been ufually put upon *' it ;" And yet, the fecond of thefe, " which he " is very much inclined to believe, &c. p. lo." has yery feldom, if ever, been heard of, till very lately. — " And this fhall be the Jirfl Argument which I
" IhaU
[ '7 ]
*' Ihail life towards the Proof of the true Significa- " tion of this Name in the New Teftament, i. e, " by Way of a disjunftive Syllogifm, propofing " feveral and excluding fome of them." — With refped to this, one would have thought, i. That the Title, The Son of God, confidered abftradedly ; and efpecially when any of thefe Adnouns own, pro- per, begotten, only begotten, are affixed, could have no true Signification but one. i. That there was hardly, if at all any Danger, of miftaking that Sig- nification, when all Things fliouid be duly confider- ed. And, 3. That it had, and has, the fame Sig- nification in both Teftaments. But much more of this laft Sentence, by and by.
Having thus briefly, but plainly, examined the Introduriion^ proceed we now to the Difcourfe it- felf.
D
Ufeful
[ i8]
Ufeful and Important
ANSWERS
Freely Given, To Ufeful and Important
QJJ E S T I O N S
CONCERNING
JESUS the SON of GOD,
Freely propofed ;
Or, the CO-ESSENTIAL SON- SHIP of the Second Person in the TRINITY clearly proved, &c.
7
"^ H E IntroduElion thus animadverted on and difpatched, we hope, to the full Satisfa6tion of the impartial Reader, we now proceed to confider the Work itfelf. And, that he may, if poffible, have a true, clear, and full Idea, of the worthy Author's Principles and Befign^ we fhall firfc give him the Contents, whence he may, perhaps, at leaft in fome good
Mea-
[ 19 ]
Meafure, learn what he would be at -, ana how far he has departed from the Faith of the Catholic Church, which is plainly, exprefsly, and fully revealed in the Word of God., and indeed runs quite through the New ^ejlament.
Thefe he has propofed, in eight ^ejiions, p. 8,9. immediately after his Preface : And, tho' feveral of them are fo worded as to be very equivo- cal, and hard to be clearly underflood, you fhall here have every Syllable of them in order, with a diredl and plain, but brief Anfwer to every one of them, fo far as I can underftand them •, each ot which Anfwers Ihall be afterwards explained, illu- ftrated, and confirmed, fo far as is neceflary to our prefent Purpofe.
7^1)6 Contents.
" Queft. I. What is the true Meaning of the " Name Son of God, as given to Chrift in the New " Tejiament -, and ej-pe daily where the Belief of it " is made necejfary to Salvation ,?" — To this, he re- plies, " He has made it appear, that it does not, " yea cannot, neceffarily imply his divine Nature^ &c. p. 6, 8, 6^., &c. &c.
Anf The true, the only Meaning of this Title, the Son of God, when given, any where in the Scrip- tures, to the fecond P erf on in the ever blefled 'Tri- nity., and purely as fuch, is, that he is the own, be- gotten, only begotten, and confequently, the coes- SENTiAL Son of the Father -, or, in the Words of the Nicene Creed, which has been always, and every where, had in Reverence by the Catholic Churchy *' God of God, very God of very God, be- *' GOTTEN NOT MADE :" But, the triie Meaning of it, when given to Christ, (the Word made Flefh) in the New Teftament •, and " efpecially, " where the Belief of it is made neceflary to Salva-
D 2 '' tion,'*
[ 20 1
" tlon," is, That the blefled Perfon, fo filled, was, and is, the co-ejfential ocn of the Father, who, be- ing anointed before the Foundation of the World to be the Saviour of his People, was now manifefted in the FleffD, having affuiried our Nature, that, in and by it, he might execute all thofe Offices , which were neceffary to our Salvation. — So that,
N. B. This 'Title does always, and every where, even in the New Teilament, primarily, either pre- fuppofe, imply, or denote, his Divine Nature : Nor is, nor can, his co-effcntial Sonfbip be ever v/holly dropt, or quite excluded from it.
" Quell. II. Did the Difcip'es of Chrifl certainly " believe that Jefus was the true and eternal God " during his Life-time, or not till after his Death " andRefurre^ion?'''*—\^\^'K^^\^, if put into plain Words, is, " Not certainly till after his Refurre^lion \* which he alfo labours, with all his Might, to prove.
Anf. His Difciples never did, nor could, be- lieve, that he was the Father : But, they mod firm- ly believed, and oftener than once readily, publick- ly, cordially, and mofl emphatically, profeffed. That he was the Son of God •, and heard himfelf frequently, and folemnly declare. That he was his cvon, begotten, only begotten Son, and therefore, if thefe Words have any proper Meaning, his co-effen- tial Son : And confequently, they certainly might, and 1 humbly conceive did, and could not but, firmly believe, even " during his Life-time," That he v/as equal with him, and, as fuch, true and eternal God, as well as he ; or, with him the one true God. — But,
N. B. Since the Difciples believed this, after his Refurre5fion ; Are not we alfo to believe it now ? " Qiicfl. III. Could the Son of God properly enter into a Covenant with his Father before the Crea- tion of the World, to do and fuffer what was ne- ceffary to our Redemption, without having any
*-' human
ct
[ 2. ]
human Soul, which was tofuffer all?'* — He would have us think, " He could not."
Anf. Why could he not ? If the fecpnd Per/on m the ever blefled 'Trinity, who is called Ibmetimes the Logos, but much more frequently the Son, or the Son of God, was, as fuch, from all Eternity, a true and proper Perlon, dijlinof from his Father, he might (and we believe did) properly enough, enter into a Covenant with him, before the Creation of any Thing ; wherein he confented, and promifed, to take upon him our Nature, and fo become our near Kinfman, (Goel,) that he might have a Right, and be put into a Capacity, to do and fufftr for us, i. e. in our Name and Stead, all that was necefiary for our Redemption. — yf// this, I fay, he might un- dertake, as well before the Creation, as after it ; and before he had a human Soul, as well, as when he had one : Becatife, tho' he could not either aBually do, or fuffer, all that was necefiary without one ; yet, the to us incomprehenfihle Meafure of the GiftSy and Graces, ot the Holy Spirit, which the Father promifed him to pour out upon his human Soul, when it fhould be created^ v/ould, as he could not but know, moft fweetly and effedually prevail with it to give, and moft certainly fecure, and continue^ its moft free and cordial Confent, both to do, and fuffer, ALL that ftiould be required. — But before I leave this Queftion, I muft obferve upon it thefe four Things, out of many well worth the while.
(i) If it is properly propofed, his own Words evidently imply. That God had a Son without, and confequently before he had, a human Soul; which manifeftly overthrows his own Caufe, and eftablifties mine. — It ftiouid therefore have run thus. Could the Logos properly enter into fuch a Covenant, ^cF—And then,
(2) I ftiould have aftc'd, if the Logos, as fuch, was a true and diftindl Perfon, Why could he not ?
— Should
[ " ]
— Should It be faid, he was not a true Perfon : I muft have replied. This is pure Sabellianifm^ &c.
(3) Whence does it appear, that his human Soul was, (if I may not fay, could be,) a Contractor in the Covenant of Redemption, as is necefl'arily infinuated in this Queftion, ^c. • Permit me only to add,
(4) That, if we fhould, without all Reafon, fup- pofe that it did exift from Eternity, and that it did adtually enter into this Covenant with the Father, it neither was, nor could be, the primary and prin- cipal Undertaker : Becaufe, our learned Author of- ten acknowledges, That it was abfolutely necelTary our Redeemer fhould be both God and Man -, p. 44, 68, &c. and confequently, his Soul was not, of and by itfelf, equal to the moft glorious Undertaking.
" Quell. IV. Is the Godhead of Chrift and the •' Godhead of the Father one and the fame Godhead?^*
— His whole Reply, from ^. 130, to 141. to fay the lead, favours too much of Sabellianifm.
Anf. Seeing there is, there can be, but one only the living and true God j there is, there can be, but €ne only Godhead, or Divine Nature : And confe- quently, the Godhead, or Divine Nature, of the co- effential Son and that of his Father is, and muft needs be, one and the fame Godhead, fubfifting in the Father as a proper Father, and in the Son as a proper Son.
" Queft. V. Is there an intimate Union revealed '* between our Lord Jefus Chrift and God the Fa- " ther V — His Mind is. That, " by the intimate " Union of the Man Chrifi Jefus with this one God- ** head or Divine Nature which is in the Father, •* Chrift is the Lord Jehovah, &c. p. 144," &c.
— I ftiall leave it to thofe that can, to make Senfe of this at their Leifure.
Anf. There is an intimate Union between them, the mofi intimate poffible : And this moft intimate Union, is very clearly, ftrongly, and moft em-
phati-
[23 ]
phatically, revealed. — If we confider him purely as the Son of God, He and the Father, are, as we have heard, Jo. x. 30. one Thing : If merely as Man, the Holy Spirit was given unto him, rejis upon him, and abides in him, in a Marnier and Meafure inconceiveable to us ; and fo as he never did, nor Ihall, in any other; If. xi. 2 — 5. Jo. iii. 34: And, if as God-man, In him dwelleth all the Fulness of the Godhead, Bodily. Col. ii. 9. Ch. i. 19.
" Queft. VI. Is Chrift the exprefs Image of God the *' Father in his Human Nature, or in the Divine." — To which he replies direftly, and roundly, " In the Human Nature, p. 153.
Anf I do not know but T may fay in both. — Or rather, to be more particular, thus, Chrift is the Brightnefs of the Father'' s Glory, and the moft exprefs Image poffible of his Perjon, only in his Divine Nature, i. e. as his only begotten Son : And, in his Human Nature, i. e. merely as Man, He is, I believe, more the exprefs Image of God, than any other mere Creature, whether in Heaven or Earth, ever was or fhall be.
" Qiieft. VII. Jre the Worfhip of God the Father *' and of his Son Jefus Chrift confiftent with one *' another''*' — I cannot tell how to give his Reply? to this, in full, with any Freedom, without feeming to expofe him.
Anf What fhould render them inconfiftent ? We worfhip them both as the one God, tho* difiin^ Perfons : And as the Worfliip we pay to the Father^ asfuch, is thehigheft r^/^/f-z;^ Worfhip, we can give him ; fo the Vv orfhip we give to the Son, as fuch, is the higheft we can pay him. — In other Words, As it is the higheft Glory to the Father, as fuch, that he has fuch a Son -, lb it is the higheft Glory to the Son, that he had fuch a Father : And as the Glory we pay the Father, as fuch, redounds,
in-
[Hi
infinitely, to the Honour of the Son ; fo the Glory we afcribe to the Son^ and as fuch, refled:s infinite Glory to the Father. — When we worfhip any One of the blefled T'hree^ by Name, tho' we con- jfider him as a dijlin^ Per/on^ we do not as a Being diftind from the DEITY; or a P erf on divided^ or feparated^ from the other Two: But as having the fame Divine Nature^ with all its Effential Per- fedlions^ which tkey have. < — In fnort, we believe the Unity of the Divine 'Nature is not fo fingularj firait, or dofe^ as to exclude a Plurt^lity of real Perfons in it : And that the Diflinflion of the Perfons in it, is not fo wide^ fo greats or fo large^ as that a Divifion of that Nature is implied in, or can be inferred from it. — Thus, to be fomewhat more particular, we worfhip the Father^ as the Father \ and the Son^ as the Son : The Father^ as the firft in Order, and confequently in Operation^ who alfo, in the Covenant of Redemption, fuflains the Majefiy and Glcry of the D E I T Y, demand- ing, and accepting, a Satisfadion, &c. But his cwn, proper Son, tho' coejfential with him, as having condefcended to become our near Kinfman, and a6t in a delegated Capacity, ^c. ^c. And then, we confider his Divinity, or co- effential Sonfhip, as the only Foundation of the religious Worfhip and Adoration we pay him -, and his unparaileli'd Con- defcenfton, with the glorious Fruits of it, as the mod affedling, endearing, and conftraining Mo- tives, to trull in, fear, honour, obey, and love him, and delight ourfeives in him.
" Queft. VIII. What is the Worfhip paid to cur " hleffed Saviour Jefus Chrift, God''s exprefs Fmage ?" — I fhall not here perplex the Reader with his ftrange Reply, what is necelfary may come in hereafter.
Anf This is an odd Queftion, very hard to be underflood, if at all intelligible : And his Reply^ or Explication, p. 165 — 170. is fo very general,
loofe.
, [25]
joofc, and unguarded, not to fay Very offcnfive and dangerous, that I know not what to fay to it.
— I cannot remember I ever heard any fuch a ^lejiion before, and am apt to think that not one in a Hundred, of all the Chriftians upon Earth, ever did, any more than I. Does he mean, is Chrifi to be worfhipped as God's Image ; which, from his Manner of propofing it, p. 165. feems to be the Senfe ? I then defire to have it explained.
— Is it, what kvfid or fort^ of Worfhip do we, upon this Suppofiticn, give him ? in%. Is it fupreme, or only inferior Woriliip ? Is it diredled to the Creator^ or only to a Creature ? Is it abfolute, or relative ? Is it intended to terminate upon him- felf, the Image^ or to pafs through him to the Father^ whofe Image he is ? Is it, that we are to worfhip him purely as the Image of God, and not as his Son : And that it is not himfelf we worfhip, but the Father in him ? Or, v/hat does he mean ? — Till we know, I am perfuaded this clear and direct Anfwer to this Queftion, will fatisfy every ferious, impartial Chriftian. Our bleffed Saviour being the own^ begotten^ only begotten, and con- fequently, the Natural and coejfejitial. Son of God, He is, as fuch, the mofl exprefs Image poffible of his Father ; and, when we worfhip this Son, and as fuch, we honour him, according to his own exprefs Words, Jo. V. 23. even as ive honour the Father : But, becaufeHe, who being in the Form of God, (as his Human Soul neither ever was, nor could be,> and thought it not Robbery to be equal with God^ (as he muft have thought it, had he not been really equal with him,) emptied himfelf, taking the
Form of a Servant, humbled himfelf and became
obedient unto Death, even the Death of the Crofs ; for all which God alfo hath highly exalted him, (in his whole complex Perfon,) a7id given him a Name above every Name, Sec. Seeing, I fay, the Cafe is
E To,
[ 26 ]
fo, we heartily and thankfully confefs, "On'Kj^i©^ 'I*)(r8f X^irocy uf ^o^a,-j QsH zD-a1^o\-, That the Lord Jefus Chrijt is in the Glory of God the Father. Ph. ii. 6 — 1 1, And therefore, with the Angels round about the 'Throne, the living Creatures^ and the Elders, we fay, in as long a Doxology, as any we find in the Bible, (and which is almoft the very fame with that, which is afcribed unto ^«r G(J(^, Rev. vii. 12.) Worthy is the Lamb that iv as slain, to receive Pcwer, and Riches^ and Wifdcm, and Strength, and Honour, and Glory, and Blejfmg : And, with every Creature which is in Heaven, and on the Earth, and muler the Earth, and in the Sea, we chearfully fay, with the very fame Breath, and in the very fame Words, Bkjjing, a?id Honour, and Glory, and Power, be unto him that flit eih upon the Throne, and unto THE Lamb, for ever a?idever. Rev. v. 12, 13. Whence it feems evident, that our dear Redeemer, in his whole complex Perfon, or. He who is the Lamb, even the Lamb of God, has the very fame IVorfhip with the Eat her. And this is Urongly, and invincibly confirmed from, Ver, 6. where the Lamb, as it had been Jlain.^ was feen flanding in the Midfi of theEhrone, as partaking of the fame Glory, Dignity and Authority, with Hi^n that fat on it : And his ,own mofl exprefs, folemn, and emphatic Words, which put it out of all Doubt, Rev. iii. 21. even as I alfo over came, and am fet down with my Father in lis Throne. See and compare, Jo. xiv. 9. Ch. xvii. ii. 5. Heb. i. 8 — 13. Rev. xlx. 16. 17. Ch. xxi. Ver. 22. 23. Ch. xxii. i. and 3, &c. — Thus we 'have, I would fain hope, fully fatisfied all true Chriftians, as to this Point.
He then concludes the Contents, with thefe Words by themfelves, " To which is added an Effay of the " true Importance of any human Schemes to explaiji *' the facred Do^rine of the Trinity. — When the ". learned Author wrote " The Chriflian Do£lrine
. ■ . of
[ 27 ]
" cf the Trinity," — it was to be, " without the " Aid or Incumbrance of //«;;z^« Schemes." p. i. Happy had it been, had he kept to this his good Refolution. But, fince then, we have a Scheme made up of a Medley of the worfl human Schemes^ oddly blended together ! — However, this being very little, if at all, to our prefent Purpofe, we fhall only fay.
Scripture is, itfelf, the beft Explainei- of Scripture, — Human Schemes feem not 'io proper for this End, viz. to explain any Dodlrine of pure Revela- tion., except there be fomething in Nature., level to our Capacity, and well known to us, which fome Way refembles, or may, in fome Meaftire, illuftrate, the Thing revealed. This can hardly be expected, or but very imperfectly, feintly, and confufedly, in the Cafe of the adorable Myjlery of the Trinity, which, as Divines are wont to fay, nee capit Ratio., nee dem'njirat Exemplum., i. e. which created Reafon can neither fully comprehend., nor any Example or perfect Analogy in, or from, inferior Beings., clearly il~ lujlrate. — There are, I know, fevtral figurative ExpreflTions, both in the Old and New Teftament, which have been commonly thought to caft fome glimmering Light., on this great Do6lrine : But, i. Even thefe, are but general •, and what Light they give, is but very feint, and imperfed:, leaving it ftill an unfearchahle Myjlery. And,- 2. Schemes founded on Scripture Phrafes and Similitudes, are more than merely human. — In fliort, all Human Schemes hitherto invented, ** to explain this facred " Dodlrine," have, in my Opinion, been fo far from anfwering the Defign pretended, or defired, that they have but the more perplexed, and manifellly obfcured, debafed, or corrupted it ; And, whatever Evil our Author's Scheme, (which is not only Human, but a very Modern one too,) has done, or jnay do j it never did, never will,
E 2 never
t 28 ]
never can, do any Good. — The Do^rine itfelf runs through the Bibk, from the very Beginning to the End of it : 'Tis fufRciently revealed, for the Faith, Hope, and Love, yea for the Direction, Peace, and Comfort, of all Penitent Believers : And may be as eafily believed, as many other Matters of Fa5f recorded in Scripture, ^o the haw then, and to the 'Tejlimony, If. viii. 20. and let Human Schemes of all Sorts, be for ever calhiered, by all who have Wifdom, and Humility, enough to be contented with the Bible, our only Rule.
The Reader will now, readily and clearly, per- ceive, that the firft, of the former Eight Queftions, is the principal One : And that the Anfwer to it, whether true, or falfe, will naturally lead us to reply to all the reft, and indeed draw all the reft after it. — If this Title, the Son of God, ever belongs, or is afcribed, to the fecond Perfon in the Trinity, and purely as fuch-, or, if the fecond Perfon, and as fuch, is indeed the proper, only begotten, and therefore coeffential. Son of the Father ; then it will, clearly, and undeniably, appear. That he is, as fuch, as truly, and properly, a Perfon, as the Father : — That he might therefore, very properly, enter into a Covenant with him : — That his Godhead, and the Godhead of the Father, is one and the fame Godhead : — That there is the moft intimate Union polTible between them : — That, as a coeffential Son, he is the moft exprefs Image poflible, of his Father'^ Perfon, ^c. &c. But, if this Title does never belong to the Second Perfon, and purely as fuch -, or, if the Second Perfon, as fuch, is not, in Reality, a coeffential Son ; then, it will, as undeniably, appear. That Chrifi, purely as the Son, is not the true and eternal God : — That there- fore, purely as fuch, he is a mere Creature :— That, how intimate foever the Union between the Father and the Sen is, it is but the Union of the
Father
[ 29]
Father, with a mere Creature : — That the Son, as • fuch, cannot, poflibly, be fo exprefs an Image of the Father's Perfon, as if he were a coejfential Son : — That, as the Son, he is not to be honoured as the Father : — Yea, That, purely as fuch, he cannot be, at all, the Objeft of religious Worjhip, &c. — • This being really the Cafe, the great Queftion, which will determine all the reft, and upon which they all depend, will be, if put into plain EngliJIo, as our worthy Author's is not, run thus.
Does this Title, the Son of God, ever denote or fignify the fecond Perfon in the Trinity, and purely as fuch : Or, is the fecond Perfon in the Trinity, and purely as fuch, in Fa6t, the cwn^ begotten, only begotten, and confequently, coejfential Son of God the Father ? — The Catholic Church, in all Ages, have moft firmly, and fteddily, believed he is : But our Author is of another Mind, and appears moft zealous to draw others to his Opinion.
The Subje6b " if Salvation and Damnation are " annexed to it," ^c. muft be confeft to be of the laft Importance : And therefore, fince our all is at Stake, we cannot be too attentive, ferious, and inquifitive about this Matter. He himfelf, " has " fpent many Tears of his Life in diligent Inquiries " into the facred Do5lrines of the Gofpel, &c. Pref. p. 3. And now, " takes the Freedom to fay, thefe Papers are the ProduSi of that Part of Life, when his Powers of Mind and Body were in full Vigcur^* ibid. p. 4 And yet, a great many Things not only new and flrange, uncouth and abftrufe, but befides, and againft the Word of God, 6fr. and which were little expedled from fuch a Man, are found all over them.
" He has one Favour to beg of his Readers, and " that is, that they would not examine any of thefe '* Papers, by the mere Dilates of their own reafon-
" ing
[ 3° ]
*' ing Powers, ibid. p. 4. 5. O that he had taken this wife, this neceflary. Admonition in writing them. ^^ for the Suhje5i is a mere Matter of Divine " Revelation •," It is fo : And confequently, we can know nothing more of it, than what wc learn from thence., vrvAnd the true, the fure, the only, Way to know the true and full Meaning of the U'^'ord of God, is, not to bring our own Dreams, Fancies, and Wifhes, i^c. to it ; and then twift, and torture it, to vouch for, fupport, and eftablifh them : But, to take Things, as we find them in Scripture ; examine every Word -, compare one PafTage with another ; cafi down Imaginations (xo- 'yKTfxHg ReafoningsJ and every I'hing that exalt eth it f elf againfi the Knowledge of God, &c. 2 Cor. x. 5. &c. and then fubmit all our own Condufions, to his Authority. " nor that they would take the '' Sentiments or Schemes of elder or later Writers, " whether Schoolmen or Fathers, or Divines of " any Party," A fhrewd Evidence, he well knew, they were all againft himfelf ! *'/<7r a perfetl 'Tejl of " '■I ruth and Orthodoxy in thefe f acred Subje^s.'* I appeal to the impartial Reader, whether 1 have not complyed with this good Counfel. — Tho' 1 have, and mod juftly, a very high Regard, for the concurring Tellimony, Opinion, or Judgment, of the bathers, and that of many of our modern refor7nedY)W\m^ •, and particularly, thofe of the famous and mofl venerable Synod of Dort, and Assem- bly at Wejiminfier ; yet, I never did, and, by the Grace of God, never fliall, take the Schemes of any mere Man, or Men, " for a perteft Teft of " Orthodoxy," in thefe or any religious Subjects. — The Bible, The Bible, is the only Rule of Protejiants. — And I can, for myfelf, call the 'moji Pligh to witnefs, whether, '* in all mere " Matters of divine Revelation ;" or any Matters which can be determined by it, my firfl", my chief,
my
[ 3' ]
my laft Refort Is not, What saith the Scrip- ture ? And had this Author fpoken more accord- ing to this Word^ If. viii. 20. and been lefs fway'd by the Scheme of a very modern Writer, (who, tho' an ingenious and learned Man, neither indeed was, nor was ever thought to be, the bed of Guides^) I am incHned to think, the World had never feen " thefehis Papers." And hope, by that Time I have done, to convince my Readers, they had been at no great Lofs, if they had not.
They are not to expedl 1 Ihould follow him, through almoft every Page, not to fay Sentence, as fome tell me I have too much done with my laft Antagonifts •, for this Reafon, among feveral others : There are fo many Things in thefe Papers, which were fo little expedled from this learned Author, That were I to take this Method, except I fhould tranfcribe every Word from the Beginning to the End, thofe who have not read them through- out, again and again, and very attentively too, would be tempted to think, either that I had not plainly quoted his Words, as they lye-, or, had taken them by a wrong Handle -, or concealed fome Paffages which would have qualified them, if not fet them in another and in a better Light -, or flyly palmed fome Conclufions upon him, which are not really in his Premifes ; ^c. All which mean, bafe Arts, 1 moft heartily abhor-, and, fliould fcorn to ufe, did my Caufe need them : Bur, blefled be God, it does not. — Withal, there are not a few Particulars, which I could not anfwer, with that necejfary Freedom, the Importance of them requires, without being fuppofed to take Pleafure in infulting his Memory, which is the fartheft of all Things from my Thoughts, — That I may therefore, as much as poflTible, without injuring the Caufe of Truth, avoid all Sufpicion of any fuch pitiful Shifts, I ihall wholly pafs by a great many
dubious
t ^2 ]
duhious^ and offenfive^ Paflages; and treat others,
which muft be animadverted on, with all faithful
Tendernefs : And,^ inftead of a diredb, and fevere
Confutation of many of his numerous Mijiakes, and
Errors ; or dwelling too long, or frequently, upon
them, as if I delighted in fuch ungrateful Work ;
I Ihall rather fet myfelf to prove^ illujirate^ and
vindicate, thofe Doctrines of the Gofpel, which, tho*
very dear to the Church of Chrifl in all Ages, he
hzs perverted, denied, or oppofed. Return eji Index
fui ^ obliqui. — If 'J'ruth is clearly propofed, fairly
proved, and fully vindicated -, the contrary Errors,
whoever patronifes them, or however fpecioufly
advanced, or plaufibly mainrained, will be eafily
difcerned and for ever dernolifhed. — This Way
alfo, I fhall have the defirable Opportunity of
refcuing, explaining, and illuftrating, a great
many Scripture Texts ; (to which he has given a
Sabellian, or Arian Turn !) an Excrcife, which I
have, for many Years, look'd upon, as the chief
Delight of my Life. — And, that this may be
done to the beft Advantage, and with the moll
convenient Brevity, we Ihall follow this Method,
viz. Shall
1. State the principal ^lejiion, or ^efiions, between us, in the plaincfl and mod candid Manner, that every one may, clearly, difcern what we are difputing about, and may keep the true Points in Controverfy ftill in his Eye.
2. Offer fome juji and weighty Prejudices againft thofe novel Opinions, which this learned Author has efpoufed, and labours, fo induflrioufly and zealoufly, to maintain, recommend, and fpread.
3. Propofe feveral Preliminary Confiderations, which may help us to fome clearer Ideas of the principal Things in this Controverfy ; remove feveral Difficulties attending them-, and lead us, the more cafily and fully, to perceive, not only
the
[ 33 ] the Truths we are contending for, but the Im- portance of them.
4. Difcufs fome of his fuhordinate ^jejlions^ if they may be fo called, and anfwer the mod plaufible Things, he has, any where, brought in fupport of his Notions^ againft the Faith once delivered to the Saints.
5. Produce, and vindicate, a great many Serif- lure Texts, which the Church ofChrift- in all Ages, have pleaded, as fo many convincing Proofs of the coejfential Scnjhip of the fecond -'erfon in the ever blelfed Trinity : Or Proofs, That this Title, the Son of God, fo frequently afcrib^d in Scripture to our ever blefled Redeemer, does always, primarily and dire6lly^ either prefuppofe, or denote, his Di- vinity, or natural Relation to the Father, whofe ow7i^ only begotten Son he is ; and, That this Idea, is, every where, implied in all the PaiTages, wherein he is fo Itiled.
CHAP. I.
The principal Queflion, or QiieAions, Jlated^ in the plainefi and mofi candid Manner, that the Reader may clearly fee what we ci*-e dip- puling about, and have the true Points iri CoJitroverJy Jlill in his Eye,
WHEN one engages in any Work, wherein he, defignedlyand proferfedly, lets hiaifelf to oppofe any commonly received Opinion, or Article of Faith ; and cfpecially, if it be', in his ov/n Judg- ment, " an Article of fuch Importance as to have " Salvation or Damnation annexed to the believing, " or not believing it j" he ought to be careful, in
F . the
r 34 ]
tfie firfi Place, to propofe " his llyeme,^* in the cleareft Manner he can, That his Readers may neither miftakc his Notions^ nor Intention in advancing and fupporting them: — And the firft Thing an honeji Refpondent Ihouid do, is to fiat e the ^efiionSy fairly and clearly ; and then explain his Terms, de- claring wherein, and how far, he and his Antago- nift agrees, and in what Things, with what Views, and how far, they differ. If either, and much more if both, forget thefe, they may talk, or rather wra'rigk, without End, and to very little Purpofe, And hence it is, as well as from other Caufes, that Controverjies of all Sorts, and particularly religious ones, have fo little good Effect. — That this therefore may be, I hope, prevented at prefent, we fhall give our learned Author's Mind, in his own Words, faithfully, without altering, adding, or abridging them ; make fome Obfervations on them ♦, acquaint the Reader wherein we differ ; and then, honeflly and clearly, give the State of the ^efiions between us, and efpecially the principal One.
Having, in the laft Sentence of his Introducflion quoted above, promifed " to furvey the Senfes *' which have been ufually put upon the Name Son *' of God, — by Way of a disjunctive Syllogifm, *' propofmg feveral and excluding fome of them ;'* He begins his firft Seflion, in the very next Words, p. 5. thus, " This Name, Son of God, hath been ** fuppofed to be given to our Lord Jefus Chrifi, *^ upon fome or all thefe five Accounts," which he there gives us, and muft be particularly confidered afterwards. — Anf Upon One of them, it always has \ upon fome others, frequently -, and upon one, very feldom, and but by very few. The fifth, which is that which he, in thefe Papers, pleads for, we have, p. 1 6. You fhall have every Word of it.
" V. The laft Senfe in which Chrifi is called '* the Sgn of Qody is to fignify that glorious Perfon
ijjho
[35 ]
*' who was appointed to he the Mejfiah, the anointed " Saviour who was derived from God, and did bear *' fome very near and extraordinary Relation to God *' above all other Perfons ; and therefore he is call- " ed his Son, his own Son, his only begotten Son, his «' beloved Son, And fince the feveral other Senfes " cannot be admitted to be the precife Idea and " common Meaning of the Name Son of God in " the New Tellament, I take this to be the true " Idea of it, as it is generally ufed in the New " Tcflrament, and iefpecially in thofe Scriptures " where the Belief or Profeffion of it is made ne- " ceffary in Order to the Salvation of Men in the " Writings of the Apoftles." He fhould have added, and of the Evangelifis,
How orthodox now does all this appear! Had he ftopt here, we could hardly have defired more. Take this, in a Catholic Senfe, and I, for my Part,, can heartily fubfcribe almoft every Word of it, but one. Thus, " Chrift is called the Son cf God^" in numberlefs Paflages ; and we mod ftedfaftly believe. He is what he is called ; and that, in a moft pe- culiar, even in the higheil, and moft, yea only, proper ^^x\i^ '. — This Son of God was, and could not but be, as fuch, a moft " glorious Perfon j" Heb. i. ver. 2, 8, 10. and when he took on him our Nature, He was, and is, ftill one Perfon only, and a moft glorious one : — He, and he only, " was *' appointed to be the Meffiah, the anointed Sa- " viour " Prov. viii. 23. and he, and he only, i. e. as the Son of God made Flefh, could a£lually execute that moft glorious Office \ Rev. v. 3 — 6 : — He " was derived from God" even the Father ; for, he is his own, his only begotten, and therefore, coeffentialSon: John iii. 16. and 1 8 : — He bears a very *' near and extraordinary Relation to God-," for. He and the Father, John. x. 30. are One : — •" Above " all other Perfons ;'* Yes, (if we muft not except
F 2 the
[36]
the Holy Ghoft,) for, he is his only hegoi^en, \vho always was^ and w, of him, and yet with him, and in him. John i. ver. i, 2, 14. and i8» &c. — And now, taking thefe Words as Chriftians, in all Ages, would have taken them, and one can hardly fay any Thing more found. — But alas ! this is not his Senfe, tho' " he takes it to be the true Idea of this " Nmne /" as is clear from the very next Para* graph, which you fhall alfo have verbatim.
" It includes fome fpecial and glorious Relation " to God-," p. 17. It does, it mull do, fo, if it includes any Thing in it at all : Nor can any one pofllbly doubt of it. — " but whether that Relation *' belongs to his Flefh," i. e. if it be Senfe, to the Body he affiimed. Strange Words indeed / The Son of God himfelf took Part of the fame Flefh and Bloody of which the Children were Partakers ; Heb. ii. 14. and thereby, became cur near Kinfman : But, 1 ne- ver heard it fiirmized, till now, that, by taking our Flefh, he became more nearly related to God, than he was before he took it. — " or his human ** Soul," which, he tells us, had " a glorious and *' peculiar Derivalion from God the Father before the *' Foundation of the World," p. 10, ^c. Of which peculiar Derivation of his human Soul, the Scrip- tures, fo far as I can find, are entirely filent. — " or " his Divine Nature," a Claufe which our Author, above all Men, fhould have clearly explained, for a Reafon which will come up by and by. — " or to ** all thefe," And yet, if " this Relation belongs " either to his Flefh, or to his Divine Nature, or " to all thefe three,'^ his darling ISofirum, " That *' his Human Soul is properly the Son of God, p. 150, •' &c." is moft evidently demolifhed thereby. — ** is not fo diredlly determined by thofe Texts," Is it not ? Why ; If thofe Texts, where our Lord is lb frequently ftiled the own, the begotten, the only ^egotten Son ; and fuch as that, I and the Father.
" '■ ' ARB
[ 37 1
ARE ONE, 6?<r. do not diredly, I'll add fully, and flrongly determine, That that Relation belongs to him, as the proper^ natural, and therefore coejjen- tial Son, no Texts, no Words can. — If any think otherwife, I wifh they would only tell me What Words, or Phrafes, can determine it more pliinly, ftrongly, and undeniably ? " Becaufe, fays he, *' the chief Defign of them is but to point out the " Perfon andCharafter of thtMeJiab.'^ Very well : And can the Perfon of the Mejfiah be, pofTibly, pointed out, without fome Mention of both his Natures ; his Divine as well as, if not much more than, his Human ? — Yea, can it be pointed out with- out fome Account, or Hint, of both his Sonjloips ; or, that he is both the Son of God, and the Son of Man ', and as properly God, as the Son of God, as he is Man, as the Son of Man ? Or, can his Character be pointed out, without fome Notice both of his Natures, and his SofifJdips? — Had he laid. The chief Defign of them is but to point out the Office, which the Logos, or the fecond Perfon in the Infinity, when made Flefh, fuftained ; he had faid fomething to his Purpofe, and we had underilood him : But, as it is, it had been as well omitted. — However, This Reafon, as he has given it, evidently deftroys his own Caufe, and confirrns mine.
He proceeds to prove this to be " the true Senfe " of the Name Son of God ; and that it doth origi- " nally rcfpeft the Glory and Excellency of his Per- " fon, and his near Relation and Refemblance to " God, as appears from the Ufe of the Word Son " and Son of God in other Places of Scripture.'* Still, every Catholic, one would think, muft ac- quiefce in this ; and add. That it is next to impof- fible, that a fcrious Reader of the Bible iliould doubt of it. All the World muft own, that the fVordy Son, as it is ufed among Men, always denotes a Per- fgn 5 that it never did, nor does, fignify an Office ;
that
[ sn
that he, who is indeed a proper Son, is fo very nearly related to his Father, as to be of his own Flefh and Blood ; and that, if a Father is himfelf a Perfon of Honour and Dijiin^ion, this cannot but add to the Glory of the Son, &c. — If then, we ap- ply thefe Ideas to this Title, the Son of God, as the Chriftian Church have ever done, 'tis exprefTive of the higheft poflible " Glory and Excellency of his *' Perfon :" — Whereas, the Ideas he means by it, viz. " that it cannot neceiTarily imply his divine " Nature, p. 63. and that the pre-exiftent Soul of " Chrift is properly the Son of God, p. 150, cs?f.'* 'tis certain, are not. For furely. The proper, i. e, coejfential Son of God, and as fuch, is in his Ptrfon, infinitely more glorious and excellent -, flands in an infinitely nearer Relation to God the lather ; and re- fembles him infinitely more •, than the higheft poffible mere Creature either does, or can do, were all the higheft poflible created Glory and Excellency in him alone. — And yet, fays he, p. 20. in a Paragraph of which you fhall have every Syllable.
" But let us raife this Idea of the Name as high as ** we can fuppofe any of the Difciples had attained " before the Death of Chrift," — Which, as we fhall afterwards fee, was much, yea inconceivably, higher than he thinks. — " or as high as could be " requifite in Order to Salvation in that Day," — How could our Author know this ? — and I think '* it muft be granted that this Name Son of God " (fo far as it denotes the Nature of Chrifi diftind " from his Offices) can neceffarily be conftrued to " rife no higher than to denote fome peculiar and " glorious Likenefs to God," What is that ; or what Conceptions can we have of it ? " Some more " near and excellent Relation to God the Father," What Relation can " the Nature of Chrifi, diftinft " from his Offices," have to God ? — "or fome fpe- *' cial Derivation from him," Could his Nature be
any
[ 39]
any otherwife derived from God, but either by eternal Generation, or proper Creation ? — " fome '* divine Charader more eminent than belongs to *' Men or Angels when they are called the Sons of *' God,^^ He was fpeaking of the Nature of Chrifiy and not of any Chara^er. — " without any pre- " cife Determination wherein this peculiar Relation *' to God confifted." This has been already an- fwered. — But to be more particular.
What does, what cou'd, our learned Author mean, by " the Nature of Chriji diftindt from his " Offices r' The Word Christ, is a Title ofO/- fice: He who is the Chriji, is God-man, having two infinitely diftindl Natures in his one Perfon \ as himfelf often confelTes, p. 34, 44. (^c. — Which of them then could he mean ? If he meant his Di- vine Nature, then the Idea of this Name Son of God, efpecially as it denotes the Nature of Chriji, *' &c. muft neceflarily be conftrued to rife infinitely " higher," than he here alledges it can : Becaufe, he is very exprefs, (the Chrijlian Do^rine of the Tri- nity, Prop. 8. p- 37O " Yet thefe very Names, " Titles, Attributes, Works and JVorJhip, which. *' are peculiar to God, and incommunicable to *' another, are afcribed to Ihree by God himfelf in " his Word ; which Three are diftinguifhed by the *' Names, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.''^ and (Prop. 14. p. 149.) Thefe Sacred Three " are evi- *' dently and plainly difcovered in Scripture, to be •' one and the fame God, and Three diJiijiB perfonal *' Jgents or Perfons •, &c." and below, " That •' there are three divine Perfons,^* &c. — And now. Would one have thought that he fhould, after this, have fo pofitively affirmed, " I have made it ap- *' pear that the Name Son of God cannot neceflarily " imply his divine Nature .?" p. 63. &c. — If he means his human Nature, I grant we need not, and I think, we cannot, raife his human Nature any
higher
[4o]
higher than our Author has done : But then, I deny that this Title, So7t of God^ ever denotes, any- where in Scripture, " the human 'Nature of Chrift *' only, and as diftinft from his Offices.^'' — But, to wave fuch difagreeable Work, I ihall here leave only thefe few Thoughts with the Reader, and fhall afterwards confirm every one of them.
This Title, the Son of Gody muft, in the Judg- ment of all Men, originally, and properly, denote a Person: — It never did, direftly, if at all, fignify his Offices ; but, the Divine Perfon, as cloath- ed with them : — Vv hen ever the Jews heard our Lord aflume it to himfelf, they always took it, in its only proper, which is alfo its common, gram- matical, natural Senfe, as implying Samenefs of Na- ture with ^t Father^ or coessential Sonship ; nor did he himfelf ever once deny it, or let either them, or his Difciples, or any other, know that it was not to be taken in that Senfe: — We cannot think, that the Difciples, who heard this fo often, either did, or could, put any lower, or indeed any other, Senfe upon it: — Could any Thing be rationally fuggefted, againft our taking it, when it comes alone, in the higheft, which is indeed its only proper^ Senfe ; yet, when thefe Adnouns, own, proper, begotten, only begotten, are joined to it, we cannot tell how to leffen the Idea, without que- llioning the Veracity, Wifdom, or Goodnefs, of him who affixed them : — And, to wave fome others, T'his Title, efpecially with thefe Adjedives, gives, as we have faid, " as precife a Determination where- " in this peculiar Relation to God confifled,'* as any Title, or any other Words can. If any are otherwife minded, let them inftance in one or more of them, at their Leifure. — I cannot help adding the two next Paragraphs alfo. Word for Word.
*' Now
[ 41 ]
" Now to proceed : This Glory and Excellency " of the Perfon of Chrijl, which is originally denoted " hyxh&'^^mtSonofGod" p. 20. — Well then, i. This Name, originally^ denotes the Glory and Excellen- cy of his Perfon. And yet, 2. He will not have his Divine Nature, in which is the infinitely chief eft Glory and Excellency of his Perfon, fo much as implied in it ! " is part of his Qualification for the Office of " the Meffiah,"" No doubt, t\\c peculiar Excellency of his human Nature is ; but much more is the infi- nite Excellency of his Divine Nature, if it be pro- per to life fuch an Exprefllon. " part of the " Foundation of his Office, and what made him " a proper Perfon to undertake, fuflain and fulfil " it." But, fhould we (as we need not, yea can- not,) grant him, that his pre-exiftent human Soul could undertake his Office, it could neither have Ju- fiained, nor fulfilled it : But, as the coeffential Son of God could, from Eternity, undertake it, fo could he, in the Fulnefs of 'Time, affume a true Body and a reafonahle Soul, i. e. our Nature ; and in, and hy, that Nature, moft glorioufly and t^xidiUdWj fufiain and fulfil it. And therefore, his Divine Nature ought not, upon any Account, to have been omit- ted, efpecially by one, (who acknowledges Chrifi to be God-Man, p. 34. i^ paffim) when fpeaking of the Glory and Excellency of his Perfon. — What was all his other Glory and Excellency to this? — Might not every Arian in the Kingdom have faid as much as all this, if not much more }
" Yet this Excellency of his Perfon, this Likenefs " and Nearnefs to God,"" Still not a Syllable of his Godhead, or coeffential Sonfijip ! Still he fpeaks of his Human Nature as a Perfon ! "is not the com- " pleat Stnfe and Meaning of the Word Son of " God in thofe forecited Texts of the Gofpel j" Very true : Nor is it poffible to give the complete Senfe of it, if any true Senfe of it at all, without fome
G Ino-
[ 42 1
Notice, or Mention, of his Divine Nature. " but " it includes alfo a Defignation to his Office, viz. " that glorious Perfon of extraordinary Nearnefs " and Likenefs to God, who was ordained to be '* the Saviour of Men:" p. 21. All who read, underftand, and believe, the Bible^ are agreed, That the Mejfiah, and as fuch, is indeed the Son of God, and often fo callsd •, or, that this is one of the Titles of the MeJJiah; which it may be, tho' it . originally, and chiefly fignifies, and always pre- fuppofes and implies the coejfential Son/hip. " And " tho' the Name Son of God fignifies and includes " both thefe, yet fometimes the Scripture in uling " this Name feems to have a more fpecial Regard " to the Excellency of his Perfon, and fometimes to *' his Office" This may be granted, v/ithout dif- puting. " and perhaps for this Reafon, that a " Belief of his Scnjhip in one oif thofe Senfes, but " efpecially the latter, (i. e. his Office) in that Day " might be a fufficient Ground for the Faith or " Hope of Sinners." Anf i. Could any Jew, in that Day, believe him to be the Meffiah, without believing him to be alfo the Son of God? 2. Whe- ther they could or no, furely Sojifhi-p and Office are not, nor ever were, at leaft among Men, fynony- mous Terms. The two Ideas are quite different. Kor was ever a Son, as fuch, called an Officer \ or an Officer, as fuch, a "^on. — A Son indeed may have an Office, and be ftiled by it too: But no one would call him a Son, as an Officer, or becaufe he is an Officer ; becaufe he was a Son before he had, or could have that Office, and would have ftill been a Son, tho' he had never had it. 3. What was a " fuifficient Ground in that Day,'* is not the Qiie- ftion, but what is fo in ours. — 4. I may, I con- ceive, pofitively deny. That either the Difciples, the Scribes and Pharifees, or our Saviour's ordinary Hearers, ever took thie Title, barely for a Title
of
[ 43 ]
of Ofice', or, That when the Difciples publicly pro' fefled, that he was the Chrifi the Son of the living God, they meant nothing by it, but that he was the Mejfiah •, and fhall give my Reafons for my De- nial, hereafter. And, 5, I may fafcly defy the whole World to prove. That any one ot all thefe, or any other, did or could, in that Day, take it in our Author's Senfe. — Yea, 5. He himfelf has almoft exprefsly own'd as much, as we fliall fee. ■ — But, to wave this unpleafant Work, I vv^ould only afk every ferious, impartial Chriftian thefe lew Queftions.
1. Is not " a Belief of his Scnjhip, in this latter " Scnfe efpecially," /. e. as having " a more fpe- " cial Regard to his Office,"" when put into plain Englijlj, neither more nor lefs than, a Belief that thefe two Titles, Sen of God and the Meffiiah, are fyno- nymous, or fignify the very fame Thing } And if fo, would it not have been as well to have told us this, exprefsly, as the other learned Gentlemen, with whom I have now to do, have done? — But, whether this be fo, or not,
2. Can a ferious Perfon think, That a Belief of this •, or even of this Propofition, That " Chrift " was the glorious Meffiah, p. 63. was a fuflicient " Ground for the Faith and Hope of thofe Sinners,'* who had heard himfelf fo frequently and folemmly declare, that he was the own, only begotten Son, and that He and the Father were One, &c. without a firm Belief alfo of his Divine Nature ?
3. Can an impartial Perfon, who has no pre- conceived Opinion to biafs him, it he really be- lieves, " that the Meffiah hath two diliinft Natures " united in him, even the Nature of God and the " Nature of Man : and that Chrifi is true God,"* p. 34. &c. ever be induced to think That this Title, the only begotten Son of God, does not always denote, or at leaft imply, his Divine Nature ? Or,
G 2 " that
[ 44 ]
" That his human Soul is properly the Son of " Godr &c.
4. When this Title, the Son of God, has, as he fays it often has, " a more fpecial Regard to the ^' Excellency of his Perfon, p. 2 1 ." &c. Can it be imagined. That " this his Sonfhip may, (even then) " be better referred to his inferior Nature, or to " his Offices .?" p. 44. Or " cannot refer to his Di- " vine Nature .?" ibid. &c.
5. When it has a more fpecial Regard to his Of- fices^ Is not his Godhead pre-fuppofed to, or im- plied in, his being the Meffiah ? — The Title itfelf naturally, eafily, and diredly, leads to this ; and the Nature of the Thing neceffarily requires it : Be- caufe, he confeffes Chrifl is both God and Man^ p. 44. 67*^. — However, If it does neither denote, nor imply, his divine Nature, it muft of necelTity either fignify, or imply his human Nature only, or no Nature at all ! But his human Nature neither is, nor ever was, nor ever will be, a Perfon : And, if fo, it neither ever did^ nor can, a6l of itfelf, or divided from, the fecond Perfon in the Trinity. — Yea, fhould we fuppofe it could, yet it never was, nor could be made, eq^ual to the mighty Undertaking : &c. For Example, It could never, of itfelf, have fjfumed the Seed of Abraham ; it could never have had Power to lay down its Life, and much lefs, of itfelf, to take it up again, whatever Commandment it might have received of the Father. John x. 18. &c. &c. — Should any alledge, that this is not fufHciently proved -, 'twill be enough at prefent, to fay, That if he will confult " theChriftian Dodtrine," p. 28 — 84. he will fee it is, at leaft, an invincible Argu- ment ad Hominem. Once more,
6. Would not one have thought, That " thofe f^ Articles he has borrowed from the Athanaftan " Creed, which he freely and delightfully confefTes, ^. viz. That Chrijt the Son of God, is both God and
5' Man^t^
[45 1
*' Man-, — ferfe5l G&d and perfeSi Man-, — One, " by taking the Manhood into God^ fo as to become " one perfonal Agent, or one Per Jon \ and as the " reajonahle Soul and Flejh is one Man^ Jo God and *' Man are one Chrijlj who Juffered Jor our ■^alva- " /zw," &c. Pref. p. 5. 6. Would not, I fay, one have thought, That thefe would have kept him, from feveral very unguarded Things, ^c. &c\
I am very heartily ibrry, he has given Occafion. for fuch Qiieftions : And, that I may have done with fuch ungratejul ff^ork, fmce it is hardly pof- fible to give his true and Jull Meaning of this Titky in any one or two Propofitions, we fliall give it the Reader, as much as may be, in his own (Vords, m feveral very Ihort, and plain ones. And fhall, as we go along, hint at fome only of the neceifary and inevitable Confequences : And obfcrve alfo zvherein, and hotv Jar^ he agrees or difagrees from the other learned and worthy Perfons mentioned above ; fome of whofe Notions I am alio to con- fute. — Well then,
1. 'Tis his avowed Defign, throughout, to infi- nuate and prove, " That the Jecond Perjon^ in " the Holy and Undivided Trinity^ is not indeed, as " fuch, at all, the Son oj God •, and is never fo call- " ed, any where in Scripture:" And therefore he, every where, oppofes " his Eternal Generation^ and " the coejfential Sonjloip oJ Chrift^ p. 6. ^c. &'c.
In this, he differs from the Chriltian Church in all Ages, and the generally received Creeds^ Sec. — Withal, it this is fo. The Son of God., is not, as fuch, one of the Three undivided Per Jons •, is not God of God ; yea, is not at all God., &c. &c.
2. He is pofitive, he " has made it appear, " That the Name Son of God cannot neccilarily *' imply his divine Nature^'' &c. p. 63, and ex- prefs, " That this is his prefent Theme., to prove H fhat this Name, in the l^ew Tejlament^ does not
" gene-
[ 46 ]
" generally (if ever) fignify his divine Nature^^ &c. p. 45, ^c. ^c.
In this, 1 conceive, he differs, from all the Tri- niiarians that ever were, or now are, in the World ; and in particular from the other learned Gentle- men, with whom I am now to deal, and all others like minded, i^c. — Withal, if this is the Cafe, 'tis then undeniable. That the Sen cf Gcd is not, as fuch, in any Senfe, God •, has not the divine PerfeSfions j is not the Objed of religious Worjhip •, &c.
3. He is exprefs, " The pre-exiftent Soul of " Chrift," (which he frequently calls his human Scull) " in whom the Divine Nature or Godhead al- *' ways dwelt," (then it mull have been Eternal\) is '* properly the Son ofGod,^^ (which it could notpoffibly be, even tho') " derived from the Father before all " Worlds, as his only begotten Son,'' &c. p. 1 50, &c. And " is very much inclined to believe," that this Title " relates to his human Soul, and fignifies ** the glorious peculiar Derivation of it from God the " Father before the Creation of the World," &c. p. 10, &c. — What this ^^ glorious and peculiar De- *' rivation" is, he has no where pretended to tell us. — However, This Soul was either unmade, or made, tho' in a very peculiar Manner. — If unmade, it is neceffarily Exiftent, Eternal, i^c. — If made, it was not only " derived from the Father,'' but the fecond Per fen alfo, even the Logos -, for, all Things were made by him, and without him was not any Thing made that was made. John i. 3. Col. i. 16, 17. iSc.
All this now, to the beft of my Knowledge, is a very modern Fancy, unknown to all Antiquity ! — 'Tis not at all fufficiently proved, tho' it makes no fmall y^//^r^//^» in the Chrijlian Faith! — Yea, it it is not almxoft downright Arianifm, it, in my Opi- nion, comes not only too near it, but is very like
it!
[47]
it ! — And, tho' he doth not, in this Work, fet himfelf, fo direUly^ to maintain it, as in a follow- ing one ; yet, he has it often up ; frequently infi- nuates, and fuppofes it ; and makes no little Ufe of it, upon feveral Occafions ! l^c.
4. That which he principally feems to plead is, as we have heard already, " The lad Senfe in which " Chrift is called the Son of God, is to fignify that " glorious P erf on who was appointed to be the Mejfiah, *' the anointed Saviour who was derived from God^ " and did bear fome very near and extraordinary Re- ** lation to God above all other Perfons ; and there- " fore he is called his Son, his own Son, his only be- *' gotten Son, his beloved Son.''* p. 16, ^c. i^c.
Upon this, befides what has been offered above, I would defire the Reader to obferve, — i. 'Tis Chrift or his human Soul, and not t\\Q fecond^tv^on, as fuch, who, according to him, is called the Son of God! — 2. This Title, in his Opinion, fignifies a Perfon, tho* " not his Divine Nature /" — Then 3. ¥{\s, Human Nature muft be that Perfon, except he has fome other Nature, befides his Divine and his Human Nature ! — 4. If his Human Nature is a Per- fon, fince he acknowledges the fecond Perfon in the trinity, who affumed that Nature, is alfo a Perfon, and was fo before he affumed it ; then there are two Perfons, in the one Perfon of Chrift the Meffiah / &c. &c. — 5. 'This Perfon was "appointed to be *' the Mejftah •," i. e. according to him, his Hu' man Perfon was ! — 6. He was derived from God ; but not by Generation! — 7. " He did bear fome, *' very near and extraordinary Relation to God,** (but what that Relation is, he has not told us ;) " above *' all other Perfons /" Not, furely, above the fecond and third Perfons in the ever bleffed.Tnw/)'. — And 8. " And therefore is called his own Son, his only •' begotten /" But no Relation, how near and ex- ** traordinary foever, is, or can be, in the Language
of
[48 ]
of Men, and of common Senfe, a fufEcient Foa«- dation, or Reafon, for calling any one an own Son, an only begotten^ who has not, as fuch, the fame Na- ture with his Father^ of and from him alio. And therefore, as no one, who is not as truly and pro- perly Man as his Father^ can be called his own^ his only begotten "^cn : So no . one, can be truly called the own, the only begotten. Son of God the Father, who is not, as fuch, coeffeniid with him, and confe- quently, as truly God as he. — But, this muft be very particularly confidered, by and by.
5. He is plain, " This Title, Son of God, is " given to Chrill, fometimes upon the Account of " his Incarnatiomnd miraculous Birth, Luke i. 31, " 32, 35. p. n. — Tho' God be the Father of all " Men by CreatioJi, and of the Saints by a New " Creation or Regeneration,"^ He is fo called, but improperly only : And therefore, no one of them had ever the Honour to be called his Son, in the lingular Number, on any fuch Account -, and much lels that tranfcendent, that fmgular Honour to be filled his own Son, or his only begotten. &c, " yet in " a more fpecial Manner he is the Father of the " bleffed Jefus ; becaufe his Body was fo formed " or begotten by him, in fo peculiar a Manner, as " no other Man ever was." p. 12. Why then, " his pre-exiftent Soul was properly the Son of " Gc/i," p. 150. and his *■' peculiarly formed Bo- " dy" feems alfo, in this Way of talking, to have been the Son of God I But,
It is not, nor ever was, -nor ever will or can be, the Part of a Father, as fuch, to form a Body : — Nor was ever a Father, I believe, before now, faid, or thought, to have formed the Body of his own Son : — Nor are the Words formed and begotten, of the fame Signification : — No, nor were they ever, till now, fuppofed to be. — So far from it, that they can- not be predicated, either of the fame ObjeSl, or Sub-
jeH:
t 49 1
jeEl : Yea, • They are evidently Inconfiftent •, He v/ho forms a. Body does not, cannot pofTibly, beget it, any more than he who begets a Body, does, or can form it. But more of this hereafter.
Thefe are the principal Things, wherein our wor- thy Author has departed, from the common Faith of the Chriflian Church : And thefe are a few only of the neceflary, and unavoidable Confequences of them. — Every intelligent Reader muft fee. That as I have not Jlrained them, fo neither have I been fond of multiplying them. — Several more, alas ! out of many, muft be animadverted on, ere we have done.
The other learned Gentlemen agree with him, in fome of thefe Notions, tho' not in all : Nor, be it fpoken to their Praife^ have they, even in the Things wherein they have erred from the Truth, gone his fad Lengths. Their Principles, which we are now to oppofe, as well as fome wherein we agree, are
1. They all folemnly declare. That they firmly believe the fundamental DoSIrine of the Trinity, as well as he, viz. " That there are Three diftindt " Divine Perfons, of each of whom it may be af- " firmed, That he is the true and moft high God, " and that thefe Three are one.^'' * — Thus far, we moji heartily agree with them.
2. Roel, very fully and freely, confeffes, "That " the Son^ the fecond Perfon of the mofi Holy Trini- *' ty, was from Lternity begotten of the Father.''^ — "f In every Title of this, we agree with him, with all our Hearts : But our worthy Author, and his other
* CredL\m\Xi trei ejfc ilijlin^as per/onas di'L'ifias, dequibus fin- gulis afRrman queat quod fine i/f raj Sc fummus Drus, Pat rem, Filium ^ SftirUumS. Sc hos tres ejfe Vnum. Rod. DifTert. Theol. de G<:«. Filii, ^c. Th. 8. p. 4. Ridg. vol. i. p. 100 — 118.
f His Tenth Tbefis is, ibid. " Dicimus Filium, Secu^idam PcT' " fonam S. 5'. Trinitatis-, ab atcrvo a Fatre e£c gcnitum.''^
H Bre-
[ 5° ]
Brethren, will by no Means allow. That the fecond Perfon, as fuch, was, in any Senfe, begotten of the Father, or is ever called a^ the^ or his Son.
3. Roel, in the very next Words, ^thefts eleventh, is plain and full, That his eternal Generation is the firft and principal Reafon, why the " fecond Perfon " of the Trinity is called the Son : And becaufe " he is the true and eternal Son, \\ he is there- " fore faid to have been begotten from Eternity." — In this alfo, we moil cordially agree with him., in Words at leafl. But, as our Author and his other Brethren vehemently oppofe the Things meant by thefe Words, fo they will not allow, that they are ever ufed of the Jecond Perfon in the Trinity, and purely as fuch.
Should it then be afkt, wherein Roel and we differ ? We anfwer, Tho' he cannot deny, as his Brethren do, that the fecond Perfon, and purely as fuch, is often filled the Son, the own, the begotten, the only begotten. Son of God-, yet he will not grant that any of thefe Names or Titles are ufed of him fro^perly, Thef. 17. p. 3. or as they are commonly ufed among Men. Thef. 1 6.— He thinks that the Words, Soyi and Generation, when ufed properly, necellarily imply " Produolion, Inferiority, Dependence, &c.'* Thei^ 14. p. 5. which cannot be affirmed of " a " Divifte Vtdon, who is the tnie, the fupreme God," and confequently, " Eternal, independent, God of " himfelf, and of no other Perfon." &c. Thef. 15. And this is almoft the only Thing, of any Mo- ment, in which he has, thus far departed from the common Faith -, and in thefe lafl his Brethren agree.
4. He thinks therefore, " That it is the mofi " Jtmple, mofi agreeable to the Nature of the Thing,
II Hancq-, cjfe frjmam is" prci^epuam Raiiotiem, qiiod fecunda ilia Perfotm S. S. Trinitatis dlcatur Filius : i^ 'vicij/imy quia •verus Is' (Vternus Dei Filius, banc ejje cau/am, cur ah ateru9 genilus dicalier.
mofi
[ 5' ]
" moft fafe, and, in a Word, f«<?/? Orthodox Senfe, '* to fay. That the Words, Son and Generation^ in *' the prefent Cafe, do moft emphatically Jignif)\ " That /-^^ fecond P erf on has the fame Effence and '* Nature with the Firfl^ and did co-exifi 'with him *' from Eternity.^'' Thef. 20. p. 5. * — Whence 'tis plain, he thinks, that this is a Title of Nature^ and not of Office^ tho* he feems afterwards to have fomewhat changed his Mind upon this Head.
So that, N. B. 'Tis evident, he beheves, that the fecond Perfon, and purely as fuch, is, and is called, the Son : — That he is, as fuch, as truly and -properly^ a Perfon^ as the Firfl : — That he is a co- ejfential Son : — That he is co-eternal with the Firfl alfo : — That he is auroOso?, God of himfelf^ as well as He : — That therefore, he is, as fuch, in every Senfe, and upon every Account, equal with him ; and no Way derii':d from, or dependent upon him.
I do not remember. That the learned Dr. Ridg- ley, or Dr. Anderfon have, any where, expreft them- felves fo clearly, and ftrongly : But, in fome of thofe, they agree, or very nearly agree ; and, in others, they differ from him. — They deny. That the fecond Perfon, and purely as fuch, either is, or is ever called, the Son of God -, and confequently, deny alfo, that he is either a co-effential, co-eternal, or co-equal Son : But they believe, That the fecond Perfon, and purely as fuch, is the true and fupreme God -, that he is co-effential, co-eternal and co-equal with the Firfi Perfon, and no Way derived from, or dependent upon him. — Yea, neither they, nor the learned Roel, will hardly confefs, that there is any natural Priority, no not of Order, among the bleffcd
* SimpliciJJimum puto, natura ret con'venientijji/num, — dcfiiq\ ORTHODOXUSiMUM, ftdicatur : 'vocibus Filii ^ Generationis, ftgnificari in emphajif quod fecunda Perfona habeat, eandem cum prima EJfentiam ^ Naturans, illiq; ab atcrno co-exjfiterit. Thef. 20. p. 5.
H 2 Three i
[ 52 ]
'ithree ; no, nor any Subordination, fuch as there is between a Father and a Son an^.ong Men, tho' fup- pofed, in all other Refpe6ts, to be equal — Whatever Priority or Subordination there is, they think it is purely Oeconomical, and not Natural j infomuch, that they feem backward to call them the firjl^ fe~ cond, or third Ferfons. And hence, they cannot bear to hear the firft Perfon, the Father, called the Foun- tain of the Deily, or of the 'Trinity ; or that any of the other two, were derived from, or p? oduced by him : And, inftead of calling them the firfi, feccnd, and third Perfons, while they confider them pure- ly as God, they rather chufe to fay, in RoeW Words, they are alius, alius, and alius, one Perfon, another Perfon, and another Perfon. Differ. Theol. p. 39. i^c. and not aliud, aliud, and aliud, i. e, cne thing, another Thing, &c.
Our worthy Author agrees thus far, with the two BritiJIo Divines, only in thefe and their Confequen- ces, " That the fecond Perfon, and purely as fuch, *' neither is, nor is ever called, the Son of God, his " own, his begotten Son, &c •, and therefore, is " neither a co-effential, co-eternal, or co-equal Son, " &c. That he is, purely as fuch, neither derived " from, nor dependent upon, any other." — But he differs from them in thefe following. They knew no- thing of " Chriffs pre-exifient human Soul" and never dreamt That " this human Soul was properly *' the Son of God ;" or, That the Father's peculiar Formation of his Body was a begetting it, or the Reafon of his being called his own, his only begot- ten Son, &c. which are our learned Author's be- loved Nofrums. — Ke differs yet farther from the learned Roel. This worthy Profeffor, as we have heard, freely grants. That the fecond Perfon was, from Eternity, begotten of the Father, and is there- fore called his begotten Son, &c : That the Words, ^on and Generation, imply Ccejfentiality and Coeter-
niiy
[ 53 ]
nity with the Father^ and that this Title is a Title of Nature ; That therefore the Son, as fuch, is the true God, the ObjeSl of Worfliip, l^c. — But our wor- thy Author believes neither of thefe, nor any of their Confequences : Yea, he, with all his Might, oppofes them ! — But I muft add,
5. Tho' the Catholic Church have always believed. That this Title, the Son of God, is a Title of Na- ture, they feem all to be unanimous. That it is rather only, or at leaft chiefly, a Title of Office. — For,
Dr. Ridgley is exprefs. That " Chrifl is called " the ^on of God, zs Mediator.'"' vol. i. p. 128, ^c. So is Dr. Anderfon, "All the Texts relating to the " Sonfhip o'i Chrifl, in the New Tejiament ; all, none ** excepted, are applied to him as the Mediator." p. 39. — And, tho' Mr. Roel, has nothing like this in any of his Thefes -, and tho' it can have no Place, in what he calls the moll Orthodox Senfe of this Title, as mufh be clear to every one that does but read it : Yet he fecms afterward to have chang- ed his Mind a little, and admit, p. 40. " That, " tho' thefe Names, Father, and Son, chiefly fignify *' a Communio7i of the fame Nature, yet they feem " alfo to refpedt the Oeconomy of our Redemption,^* &c. — Our Author's Opinion we have had already. He thinks. That, this Title, the Son of God, is a Title of Office, yet fome Way or other implying, that he, who is fo filled, " was derived from God, *' and bears fome very near and extraordinary Rela- " tion to him," &c. /. e. that his " human Soulhad a " glorious peculiar Derivation from him."- —
Upon the whole, if any learned Man fliall think it worth his while to read this, he will eafily fee. That, whether Dr. Ridgley and Dr. Jndeifon were, in thefe Things, the Difciples of the learned Roel or no, they are, in moll of them, pretty much of his Mind ; and that, if they were, they have en- deavour-
[ 54 ]
deavoured to exprefs themfelves with more Caution, and Referve : And That, the* our worthy Author has followed the excellent Mr. Flemings as he calls him, and laboured to improve upon him, yet he has not been fo happy, as to have much mended Matters.
On the other Hand, tho' the Church of Chrift, in all Ages, have moft unanimoufly confefTed, That this Title, the Son^ the own Son, the only begotten Son^ of Godt is often afcribed to the Mejftah, as fuch, and in his complex Perfon •, yet, they believed it was not, ftridily fpeaking, fynonimous to, or of the fame Signification with thefe, the Mediator^ or the Mef- ftah \ or, in other Words, was not, in its firft and principal Senfe, a Title of Office, but of Nature :
— But that it primarily, and ftriftly, fignifies the fecond Perfon in the moft holy Trinity : — That this ever-blelTed Perfon was, from Eternity, the true, na- tural, and therefore co-ejfential Son of the Father: — That he was fo, and might have been fo called, in the Order of Nature, before the Scheme of Redemption was laid, and abftra(5ling from all Confideration of it :
— That, as fuch, he was, with the Father, th^ joint Creator of all Things, viable and invijible, &c. and that by him all Things conjijl : — That therefore, he is, as fuch, the Objed: of Religious Worfhip : — And, That his glorious human Soul is not properly the Son of God i nor is ever, nor can be, fo called ; and much lefs his own, his only begotten Son. So that,
N. B. I. The Queftion is not, whether Christ indeed is, and is called, the Son of God, which is their unfair Way of propofing it, and which we heartily believe, as well as thty : But, whether the fecond Perfon is ; which they deny, and we affirm ?
2. The Queftion is not, whether Christ indeed is not, and may be called, the Son of God, upon fe- veral Accounts ; which many yield, and we may grant without difputing : But, whether he is not in- deed
Issl
deed alfo, his Son, (i. e. whether the fecon^i Perfon Is not,) by eternal Generation? And whether this is not the Foundation, or principal Reafon, of his having this Title ? Both which they vehemently oppofe, and we heartily contend for.
3. The more particular Queftions, with our wor- thy Author, are
I. Whether " Chrift's human Soul is properly " the Son of God ?^^ 2. Whether he has made it ap- pear, " That the Name Son of God, cannot necefla- " rily imply his Divine Nature?" 3. Whether this is a Name, or Title of Office ? — Each of thefe, efpecially the two firft, he boldly affirms, and pleads for with all his Might : And we pofitively deny.
So that the great Truths I am, through the Grace of God, to prove and defend, are thefe,
1. That the fecond Perfon, in the holy and ujidi- vided Trifiity, and as fuch, is called, in Scripture, the Son of God ; and therefore, is, in Fa6l, what he is called.
2. That the fame ever blefled Perfon is ftiled his o'wn, his begotten, his only begotten Son.
3. That theretore, this is a Title oi Nature, and not of Office. And confequently,
4. That in all Places, where he is fo called, it, neceflarily, does either pre-fuppofe, imply, or de- note, his Divine Nature. And therefore,
5. That, as the Son, he is God of God, very God of very God, Begotten, not made. And
6. That his pre-exiftent human Soul is not pro- perly the Son of God.
1 have been fo very plain, and copious, in dat- ing the Queftions, (fome of the Terms whereof mull be hereafter explained, a little more particularly,) That the plain unlearned Reader may, the more clearly and eafily, underftand the true State of the
Controverfy, and the Importance of it : That
neither he, nor we, may miftake, or forget the
true
[ 56 ]
true Points in Debate : — That we may wholly cue off, or at lead abridge, what is either altogether foreign to, or comes not near, or at leaft not up to, our prefent Difpute : — That the Cafe may be brought to a fhort JJfue : — And, that I might, even in dating the Queftions, fhew how an illite- rate Perfon, of but an ordinary Capacity, may an- fwer more than one Half of all that I ever heard urged, againft the true and proper Son/hip of the fecond Perfon in the Trinity. — This he may eafily do, if he will only remember, That the Terms, the Chriji^ the Mediator., or Redeemer^ refpedl not the fecond Perfon, merely as the Son of God ; hut as God-man, as is readily confefied ; pajjim : And that, tho' the Title, Son of God ftriftly taken, fignifies only the fecond Perfon, and as fuch ; yet, we freely grant, it moft frequently denotes in the New Tefta- ment (even when the Adnouns own, only begotten, &c. are affixed) the whole complex Perfon of the Meffiah. — And one principal Reafon why the Me- diator, as fuch, is fo often ftiled the Son of God, leems to be, becaufe that glorious Title primarily implies the moft tranfcendcnt Excellency of his Per- fon; his ccejfential Sonjhip being that which chiefly qualified him for, or made him capable of, adling the Redeemer's Part. — It was not neceffary, that all his Titles fhould be given him, on every Occafion, wh"en he was mention'd : But, it was highly fo, upon feveral Accounts, when one of them was thought lufficient, frequently to ufe the leading one, which would moft conduce to his own Glory, and the Support of his People's Faith, &c. — Thefe Thoughts, I fay, will help even the weak Chriftian, to anfwer more than one Half of all that can be objefted, againft the ccejfential Sonfhip of the fecond Perfon. Of which, take now this one Proof, by Way of Sample.
The
[ .^7 I
The late learned Dr. Ridgley having, with more Modefty^ Brevity^ and Plainnefs, and not lefs Judg- ment^ than fbme others, propofed his Opinion, " That Chrift is called the Son of God, as Media- " tor,'* vol. I. p. 128, adds immediately, "• we " proceed to prove this from Scripture.". Let us then now, very briefly confider the 1 exts.
" And here v/e are not under the NecelTity of " {training the Senfe of a few Scriptures, to make " them fpeak agreeably to this Notion of Chrift's *' Son/hip ; but, I think, we have the whole Scrip- " ture, v/henever it fpcaks of Chrift, as the 6 on of " God, as giving Countenance to this plain Senfe " thereof;" Here, (i) 'tis infinuated. That IVc are under this fad " Neceffity of {training Scripture " Texts, to make them fpeak our Mind ;" where- as, we indeed are not : Yea, we are fo far from (training the Senfe of any of thefe Words, the Son^ the own, the proper, the begotten, the only begotten^ Son, that, in the Cafe before us, we take every one of them, in the plain, common, natural, and there- fore neceffary Senfe, in which all the World takes them, when they read, or hear them -, and in which he himfelf, and all his Followers do, in every other Cafe but this -, viz. as a Title, or Titles, Signify- ing the natural Relation of the Son to his Fat her ^ and not an Office. (2) 'Tis alio hinted, Ihat there are but a " few Scriptures" which we have to ftrain, or which can be (trained to our Purpofe. — Whereas, every Text, where any of thefe Titles occur, is, we conceive, as plainly for us, as we need defire. (3) Can any one, who has no darling Nojirum to defend, indeed think. That the " plain Senie" of this Title, the Son of God, or his only begotten Son, is. That he is not in Reality, the Son, the only begotten Son of the Father at all \ but a Servant, or one in Office un- der him? &c. Yea, (4) What hard draining mult it coft, to make a great many Texts, which literally, and
1 molt
[58]
moft properly, and emphatically, affirm any one Thing, to fignify nothing lefs ; if I may not lay, to make them, point Blank, deny what they fo pofi- tively do affirm ? — " So that I cannot find one " Place, in the whole New Teftament, in which " Chrift is called the Son of God : but it is, with *• fufficient Evidence, proved, from the Context, " that it is applied to him, as Mediator" ibid. And then goes on, as if the whole Difficulty was got over, " to refer to feveral Scriptures, in which *' he is fo confidered." — In the very fame Manner, the late learned Dr. Anderfon, v^ho has acled his Part, upon this Subje6l, as well as any of his Brethren, in his very learned Sermon, for fo it is, The Word made Flejh^ p. 39. " In the New Teftament, all ** the Texts relating to the ScnjJjip of Chrifi ; all, *' none excepted, are applied to Chrift as Mediator.'* — io all which we anf i. This AfTertion feems not, to me, to be true, in Faft. There are more Places, I conceive, than one, ''for Example, Heb. i. ver. 8. comp. with ver. 10.; in which Chrift is called the Son, or the Son of God, where this Title denotes only his Divinity , or coeffuntinl SonfJr.p^ and not at all his Mediatorial Offiice \ which v/e Iliail by and by produce, and explain. I defire the Reader would, in this, give m.e Credit, for a little ; which he may the more fafely do, becaufe, — 2. Were it true, it comes not home to the Point. — None of the Scrip • tures, which any of them have alledgcd, prove any Thing which we ever denied. — What he fliould have proved was, That thefe I itlcs, the Mediator and the Son of Gcd, fignity not only the very fame Perfon^ but the very lame Thing in that i erfon : — That this latter, is a Title of Office, and not of Na" ture : —That, it he, the fecond Perfon, had not been the Mediator, he had never been, or been called, the Son of God: — That his Deftination to his office, ■•vva=;, if I may fo fay, the Foundation of this Title,
&c.
[ 59 ]
&c.— Whereas, all that the Scriptures quoted prove, is. That this Title, the Son of God, is one of the Titles of the Mediator, as fucli ; which was never doubted by any of us. — 'Tis one 'I hing to fay. That the Mejftah, and as fuch, is called, and is aflually, the Son of God -, btcaufe, he really is fo, and could not have been the Mediator, if he had not: And quite a different 1 hing to fay, I hat thefe Titles are indeed fynonymous -, or, I hat the fecond Perfon, and purely as liich, was not indeed, in the Nature of Things, the Sen cf God, before his Defignation to his Offce, or abftrading from all Confideration of it. — 1 he Scriptures quoted to fup- port this Notion, tho' they muft come up hereafter, may be very briefly confid.red here. That the Reader may, by having a Tafle of them, perceive more clearly what we have been faying, and what little Service they do their Caufe. W e fhall treat them very modeftly.
The firft is, " That Scripture where Peter confef- " fes. Thou art Chrifi, the Son of the living God-y " Matt. xvi. 1 6. in which, fpeaking of himfelf as " Chrift, or the Mediator, i. e. the Perfon who " was invefted in the Office, and came to perform " the Work of a Mediator, he is, in this Refped:, " the Son of the living God" Here you have every Syllable he has offered upon this Text. — Anf No doubt of it. — The Mediator is, in th's Refpeft, / e. as the Mediator, the Son of the living Gcd : I add, and the Seed of the Woman, the ^on of David, and the Son of Abraham alfo. Gen iii. 15. Mat. i. i. Gal. iv. 4. But it will by no Means follow, either that thefe i itles, the Mediator and the Son of God; or, the Mediator and the Seed of the Woman, are flrift- ly fynonymous, or fignify the very fame Thing pre- cifely, in the complex Perfon of the Mejfiah.
The next is, the High Prieft's Qiieftion, " Mat. " xxvi. 6^. Jrt thou the Chrifl, the Son cf Cod? i.e.
I 2 " ^Irt
[ 6o ]
** Art thou the Mejfiah^ as thou art fuppofed to be " by thy Followers ?'. Here alfo you have every Word that relpeds this Queftion, ibid. Anf. Since all acknowledge, that the Word MeJJiah^ anfwers in Hebrew, to the Greek "Word, thrifts and fince he is pleading, that thefe two are fynonymous with the Title, the Son of God -, his Explication of this ^ejlion is, in plain Englijh^ neither more nor lefs than this, " Jrt thou the Chriji^ theChriJl, i. e. the Chriji^ *' as thou art fuppofed to be by thy Followers ?" A palpable '^tautology, if any ever was, or can be ! — But we fhall by and by demonftrate, That the High Priefb took thefe two Titles, the Chriji and the Son of God, in two very different Senfcs ; which will, for ever, confute and quite demolifh this Fancy. — The next twelve Lines make no Mention, of the Title, the Son of God.
The third is, " And, doubtlefs, the Centurion *' and they that were with him, when they confefled *' that he was the Son of God, in Mat. xxvii. 54. '" under flood by it, that he was the Mefftah, or the *' Chriji, which is a Character, by which he was mod *' known," i^c. p. 129. He fhould have added, to the Centurion, and thofe that were' with him j anci then, though I have fom.e Reafon to doubt this ; yet, if I had granted it, it would do his Caufe no Service. — However, the true Meaning of this glorious Confeffion, will be clearly determined hereafter.
The next is, '• that in Z^^^-^ iv. 41. When the " Devils are reprefcnted as crying out, 'Thou art *' Chriji, the Son of God, it follows, that they knew " he was the Chriji " What then .? Will it follow, that they knew that he had this Title, the Son of God given him, only becaufe he was the Chriji, or the MeJJiah : And that he would not, could not, have been fo called, had he not been the Mejftah ; which is what he intends, if to his Purpofe .'' By
no
[6. ]
no Means. No c^oubt, they knew he was the Chrijl ; but this they might know, and yet know alfo, that he was the Sen of God, before he was, or could be, the Chrift. ** So that the commonly received No- " tion of our Saviour's Sonjhip was, that he was " the Chrijl." ibid. Was the commonly received Notion then, commonly expreft in fuch Tautologies, i. e. in thofe two Phrafes, Names, or Titles, which he will have to be of the very fame Import ? — And, Did the Devils learn to tautologize, in the ufual Mode, after the People ? Or, are we indeed to believe, that this was the commonly received Notion, becaufe the Devils fo expreft themfelves ? — Or rather, Would not the fo common Ufe of thefe Titles together, or by Appcfition, as Gram- marians fpeak, naturally lead all Men to think. That, tho' they were given to, or denoted, the very fame Perfon, yet it was in different Refpeds ; and becaufe, they fignified different Things in that indi- vidual Perfon ? — However, this learned Gentle- man's Concluffon, " that the commonly received " Notion of our Saviour's Sonjhip^ was, that he *' was the Chrift," will by no Means follow, from the Evangelift's Remark on the Words of the De- vils, " they knew that he was the Chrijl •" no, nor any Thing like it. All that does, or can, follow from them, fuppofing that our Tranflation is the beft, is either one, or both of thefe. i. That the Devils knew, that he, who was the Eternal '^on of God, had undertaken to be our Redeemer -, and was therefore, in the Fulnefs of Time, to be made Flcjh : And confequently, fince they well know, that fefus was indeed the Meffiah, they concluded, and therefore confeft, that he was really alfo, the Son of God. — Or, 2. They knew, that thefe two Titles, the Chrijl and the Son of God, which primarily im- ply his two Natures, belonged both to the one Per- fon of the Meffiah, tho' in different Relpeds. Nei- ther
1 62 1
tKer of thefe anfwer his End : Yea, they plainly de- ftroy his Notion, and ftrongly confirm the Truth we contend for. — But, if we read the W ords, as in the Margin, He Juffered them not to Jay^ that they knew him to be the Chriji •, fince. He never forbad them, n©r any other, to fay that he was, or they knew that he was, the Son of God ; we may there- fore much rather conclude. That thefe two Titles are not, ftridtly taken, originally equivalent, but convey to us Ideas very different. — And we fhall fhew, by and by. That our Lord was fo far from being fhy of proclaiming his being the Son, the only begotten Son of God. &c. i. e. his being God of God, and confequently his having the Divine Na- ture, that he, many Times, avouched it openly, and maintained it ftrenuoufiy: Whereas, he never, fo far as we know, exprefsly and in fo many \^' ords, avowed himfelf to be the Mejfiah, either in public or private, but to the Vv^oman of Samaria only, John iv. 25, 26. till he was on his Trial : And, if I remember right, did, all along and upon every Occafion, forbid his Difciples to fpeak of him un- der that Character, till after his Refurre^ion. The Reafon of which muft be given, and enlarged upon, hereafter.
The fifth is that Paflagc, " John xi. 4. when " J^f^^ fays concerning Lazarus^ that his Sicknefs " was not unto Death, but for the Glory of God, " that the Son of God might be glorified thereby \ " the Meaning is, that he might give a Proof of " his being the Chrifi, by his raifing him from the *' Dead." ibid. What is this for his Purpofe, or againft us } We never doubted, that this Title, the Son of God, is one of the Titles of the Mefjiah, as fuch, — This, furely it may be, tho' it originally, dired:ly, and chiefly, it ftridlly taken, figniiy his coeffential Sonfoip. Nor will Martha''?, Reply, " ver. 27. I " believe that thou art the Chrifi, the Son of God,
" which
[63 ]
*' which Jhould come into the IVorW^ do him the leaft Service. — It was the Son of God, i. e. according to us, the fecond Perfon in the ever bleffea Trinity, who was to come into the World, i. e. be manifejied in the Flejh, take upon him the beed of Abraham, be made of Woman, that he might execute the Media- torial ' ffice : And when he did come, and was made Flefh, he made it known, by his Divi^ie Works, that he was indeed the Son of God, Imma-. nuel, God in our Nature, the Chrifl.
The laft is " Al^s ix. 20. Saul when converted, *' preached Chrijl in the Synagogues, that he is the " Son of God, i. e. he proved him to be the Mef- *' Jtah -," ibid. What then .? If he proved that he, whom he fo called, was indeed the Son of God, i. e. the Divine Perfon fo ftiled by the Prophets, it could not be denied, that he was the Mejfiah: Becaufe, no other Son was to he given, and be a Child born^ whofe Name was to be called the mighty God, &c. If ix. 6. but the Meffiah. " and accordingly, ver. " 22. when he was eftablifhing the fame Dodlrine, " it is laid, that he proved that he zvas the very " Chrifi.''^ ibid. 'Tis evident he took the plain, the ready, the only Way to prove this, by proving the other firft: Becaufe, if he had not preached Chrijt, that he is the Son of God, he could not pofllbly have proved, that he was the very Chrifi.
Thefe are all the Scriptures here produced, which feem, to me, direftly to his Purpofe : If thefc do him no Service, thofe that follow, which mull be afterward confidered, will do him as little. — And thefe few Thoughts I have here offered upon them, only that I may, as I faid, fully convince every Reader, That moft, by far, of the Texts urged againft us, come not at all up to the Point : And, That the Conchfions drawn from them, are, almoil all, merely, what the Logicians ftile, Ignora- tiones Elenchi, Proois oi what we never doubtcc],
or
[ 64 ]
or Conclufions befide the Queflion. — One Thing I muft obferve before we proceed, which will ap- pear, more and more, as we go on, quite throughout.
We have, from thefe Texts now quoted, pretty plain Evidence, That, tho' our Adverfaries feem very ready to multiply Scripture PaiTages for them- felves, yet they never much care to hear, feCy quote, or meddle with, any of thofe Texts, where the Ad nouns, own, proper, begotten, only begotten, which undoubtedly limit and neceffarily fix the Senfe, are annexed to the Word Son ! ■ — This learned Per- fon, tho' he dwells upon this Subjedt, for more than ten Pages in Folio, Vol. i. p. 120 — 130. has- not fo much as once mentioned any one of them^ but thrice, viz. Pf ii. 7. p. 124. and Jobni. 14. and 18. p. 125 ! every one of which fhall be very particularly confidered by and by. The like Ob- fervation, as every Reader muft fee, is true of eve- ry one of them. One Reafon of this will be eafily guefled, viz. 'Tis very natural to think. That fhould ferious, unprejudiced, Chriftians frequently meet, in fuch a Difpute, with thefe Titles, h's own, or his proper Son ; his begotten, or the only begot- ten of the Father ; Szc. or of his Son, who was, and is, the Brightnefs of his Glory, and the exprefs Image of his Perfon, Heb. i. ver. 2, 3. i^c. they could not fail to wonder what thofe Difputants meant, who durft fet themfelves to fliew. That the true Senfe of thefe Titles is, Ihat he is not at all his own Son, nor his only begotten ; no nor, as fuch, the Brightnefs of his Glory, nor the exprefs Image of his Perfon, &c.
Having thus clearly, and honeftly, ftated the ^efiions, go we on now to
CHAP.
[ 65 1
CHAP. II.
Some JUST and WEIGHTY Frejudices agmnji thefe his Novel Opinions, which will go far quite to overthrow them,
WHEN any Principle is well ef^ablifiied, or the Truth of any Propcfition is fully confirm- ed^ no Prejudices againil them, how plaufible fo- ever, are much to be regarded ; becaufe, no Truth is, or can be, inconjiftent with, oppoftte to, or defiru^ive of, any other Truth 5 and confeqiiently, thole Pre- judices^ how ftrong foever they may appear, muil either be, at bell, but ill grounded^ or they do not, in Reality, come up to the Point, whatever thofe who entertain, or urge, them may think : But, when up-ftart and unproved Opinions^ againft the. common Faithy even in Matters of the greateft Mo- ment, are obtruded on us, with great Importunity^ and mighty Efforts ; then all Sorts of Arguments, and even juft Prejudices amongft the reft, may be of very confiderabie Ufe -, and well deferve, upon feveral Accounts, to be regarded. For this Reafbn, I offer thefe few, out of many, againll this his Tiew Scheme.
I. The firfb/z//? Prejudice, we offer againfl thele Notions, is. The Novelty of them. — Take them all together, and they are but of Tefterday : And therefore we conclude. They are not likely to be true ; yea are pretty fure, they cannot be true, —
That the plain Reader may perceive the Weight of this Prejudice^ and [cme others that follow, let it be remembered,
K (i.>
r66 ]
(i.) We do not plead for, no nor pretend to, Perfe5lion of Khozvled^e^ in this imperfe^ State, wherein we now are : Nor, in particular. That any Perfons, even the moft holy, fagacious, learn- ed, and uffful, that ever were in the World, ever had the full Knowledge of the Meaning of every Word and Phraje in Scripture ; and much lefs, that thty ever had, or could have, clear, diftinft, and adequate. Ideas of the fiiblime Things themfelves, which are figmfied by them, — The Royal Pjalmiji himlelf, who had more Underjlandtng than all his Teachers -y Pf. cxix. 99. yea, than the Ancients \ ver. 100. did not pretend to 2.ny fuch Perfe^ion \ and therefore, fervently prays, ver. 18. Open thou mine Eyes^ that I jnay behold wondrous Things cut of thy Law : — The Prophets were obliged, by Read- ing, Meditation, and frequent, fervent Prayer, to enquire and fear ch diligently, i Pet. i. 10 — 12. into the Scope and Afeaning of their own Prophecies : — And the Apoftle Paul, who had as profound and comprehen/roe a Knowledge of the Scriptures, and the great Things revealed in them, as any meer Maa ever had, found Depths in them, v/hich he could not fiuhom. Rom. xi. 33. — They all had the fulleji Satisfa^ion, that they were under the infallible In- fpiration of the Holy Qhofi ; or, were moved, (pipo[As\)oi, barn up, by him; 2 Pet. i. 21. fo that they did not, could not, err, when thus injiru^ed: And knew as much, of what they delivered, by Word or Writing, as was at that I'ime neceJTary, for them- felves, and thofe to whom they were fent : But, a perfect Knowledge, of many of the Myfieries they re • vealed to others, they ne.ther had, nor could have -, bccaufe, the Things were revealed to them but in part, aBd they themfelves could only know them but in part. I Cor. xiii. 9. Much lefs can we, or any others, not fo infpired, now pretend to any fuch Attainments. ■^- So that, wc do not deny. That there are many
DiffMll'
[67l
Difficuliies in Scripture, which we do not throughly underjiand-i 2 Pet. iii. ( 6. many Expreffwns or Phra- fesy here and there, of the true Meaning of which we are not fure ; many fingle IVords, which cannot now be eafily tranjlated \ many Alliifwns^ which wc hardly at all "know ; many different Readings of par- ticular Texts ; and feveral, yea contrary, Expofttions of the fame PafTages ; ^c. — And therefore, we need not fcruple to grant, That the true and full Senfe, of fome of thefe, has never been known, fince the Death of the Apoftles : — That Interpreters and Minifiers may have, for fome Ages, generally, if not univerfally, mi [tinder ft 00 d [ever al of them: — That fome of thefe Miftakes, through the Devices of Satan, and the vile Defigns of his Emijfaries, may have prevailed, and been almoft unanimoully delivered to, and received by, the Churches of Chrift, as fo many undoubted 'Truths : — And, That they may, (efpecially, if we join with them the inexhauftible Fund of unwritten Traditiofjs, from whence the Popes have had always fome ready, whenever they thought they wanted them) have fadly affefted the Chriftian Faith^ and corrupted the Worfhip of God, &c. — But yet,
(z) Thefe need not much difturb us, or be a Jlumbling Block to us •, becaufe, molt of thofe Paf- fages relate to the Hiftories, or Genealogies^ &c. we find in the Bible •, or to the proper Names of Men, Ci- ties or Countries -, or the Computations of Time ; or the Names of Animals and Herbs ; (f$c. or fome Cufioms of the Eaftern Nations, well known to the Ifraelites, in thofe Days ; which very little concern plain Chriftians : — Or, they occur only in fome more obfcure Prophecies -, in Places where a "Word, or two, are found, which we no where elfe meet with, whence we might more furely learn their true Meaning -, or in Paflages, which feem to have no near Relation either to our Faith, or Practice,
K 2 which
[ 68 ]
which ferlous Perfons have not fo carefully enquired into : — Or, what is obfcure, and hard to be under- ftood, in one Place, is made plain and clear in
another; ^c We need not, I fay, then be
troubled, becaufe,
(3.) The Scriptures are, in all Things necejfary to Salvation, in fome or more Places, fo clear and perfpicuous^ that he that runs may read them^ and may affuredly know the true Senje of them alfo. One may not deny, no, nor doubt of this, with- out Blafphemy againft their ever bleffed Author. — If they are not fo clear, it muft be either, becaufe God could not, or would not, make them fo : A Sufpicion, which highly reproaches, either his Wif- dom, or his Goodness I — The Ends, for which they were given, even to be a Rule of Faith and Man- Tiers, Pf xix. 7 — 10, &c. a Light and a Lamp, Pf.cxix. 105. 2Pet. i. 19. i^c. ftrongly confirms this.
— A Rule, which cannot be perceived, is ufelefs : And a Light, which can't ht feen, is 2iCoKtradi£iion,
— Hence it will follow,
(4.) That, when God was pleafed to reveal his Mind and IVill, to his People, immediately, he did it in JVords that they underftood ; or by Vijions, Emblems and Signs, the Meaning of which they knew ; or if they did not, at firft, clearly perceive the Senfe of his Words, or Defign of thofe Vifions, &c. he was careful to make them underjtand them. This was, undoubtedly, the Cafe, when he gave them Laws, made Promifes, or denounced Threat- nings.' — And, when he fpoke of his own Being, Per- fections, or J^ioJis; or mention'd any of his. Names •, had he not, one Way or another, done this, He had as good have kept his Mind to him- felf: Becaufe, what he had /W to, or Jhewn them^ could anfwer no valuable End, or do them any Good. — JVords not underftood are, to him that hwrs them, were Sounds : And Emblems, or even^
Vifionsy
[ 69 ]
Vifwns^ of which we know not the true Meaning or Intention, are full as likely to lead us into Mijlakes, as into 1'rutb. — This was yet rather, I conceive, more neceflary, when he employed Prophets to bring his PFill to others : Becaufe, If they had not known the Meaning of his JVords, or of the Emblems they were to reprefent to them, ^c. fufficiently to anfwer his End in fending them ; I cannot fee how they could have remcmbred them, or delivered them to thofe to whom they were fent, ^c. — Withal, upon thisSuppofition, I cannot help thinking, That, if the People had but fufpefted fo much, they would have alledged that they came to ridicule^ ex- pofe, banter or infult over them, and have treated them accordingly. But, it feems, they had no fuch Thought. — Need I add. That, when the moji High faw it neceflary, he was often pleafed to ex- plain the Vlfions and Emblems to them. Am. vii. i, 2, 3. Ch. viii. I, 2. Zech. i. 18 — 21. and Ch. iv. 5, 6. {£c, &€. and fometimes alfo the Fredi£lions of future KventSy Dan. Ch.ii. iv, Ch. vii. 16 — 23, Ck. viii. 19 — 29. Ch. ix. 22 — 27. and Ch. xi. throughout, (^c. i^c. fo that, even under the Old Difpenfation, which was but a Difpenfation of Dark- nefs, the Church had Light fufficient to teach them all that they were obliged to knozv, and believe ; and Jhew them the right IVay they were to take, to obtain everlajiing Life. — Shall I offer one Thing farther,
(5. J That the true and full Import of 'Terms, and Exprefjtons, which had been long ufed by the People of God, and familiar among them, and all Ranks of them, for many Ages, could not but be well known among them ; at leaft to the moft in- telligent and learned, the Expounders of the LaWy and the Priefts, who were to have the Law of Truth in their Mouths, and whofe Lips were to keep Know- ledge. Mai. ii. 6, 7. — No reajonable Creature can
well
[ 'O ]
well doubt of this : But, if any fhould, let them recoiled:, That they had Propbeis with them, for fe- veral Ages, who were ahky and would be very ready f to give tht m all the requiftte Information they could •, and the Urim and Thummim alfo, which would afford them, at all Times, infallible InJiru^ion\ and then, they cannot entertain the leait Demur about this.
Having premifed thefe Things, the Weight of this Prejudice will be very apparent, if we do but well confider thefe few Thoughts, every one of which will much confirm the reft.
1. The Chriftian Religion was nof like the Arts and ScienceSy which are capable of various and numberkfs Improi'ements., from Age to Age ; but ferfe£ly (and therefore, not to be altered^) as foon as the Canon of Scripture was complete. — Our Lord himfelf knew all Things \ John xxi. 1 7, and all that he had heard of his Father he made known unto the Jpoftles\ Ch. xv. 15. to whom he alfo gave the Spirit to teach them all Things. Ch. xiv. 26. So that they could not but know, the true^ the complete^ Senfe of a Title, they were fo frequently to ufe.
2 . This Title, the Son of God, was well known, as we fhall fee, in Old Teftament Times : Yea was, as our Author confefifes, " univerfally known,'* when our Lord himfelf was upon Earth. " The *' Scribes, the Pharifees, the Priefts, and all the " Jewsy fays he, talk'd with our Lord Jefus freely " about the Mejiah under this Name and Title, as " being the common Name of the Mefjlahy and " perfectly well known amongft them," &c. p. 73. But, if it was " perfe^ly well known" the true and complete Senfe of it, muft, I conceive, have been well known alfo : And, " if all the Jews knew it,'* the Difciples and the ordinary Hearers of our Lord, could not be Ignorant of it, — V\ hence I gather.
That
That this true and full Senfe would be continued, at lealt, among tht? Dilciples •, who would coinmunkate it to others, wherefoever they went : That it would be well known among their immediate Succellors, and frequent in their Sermons and Writings: — And confequently, That it was next to impoflible, it fhould ever be quite forgot ; and abfolutely impof- fible, it fhould be foon forgotten, all over the World. And yet,
3. Jntiquity, to the bed of my Remembrance, never, any where, mentions his " compleat Idea of *' Chrift's glorious pre-ex^Jient human Soul,'''* &c. p. 10. and very feldom his other Notions ; nor are they found, in the Writings of any Age, ever fince, till very lately. — His Caveat, againft ^^ taking the '* Sentiments or Schemes of elder or later Writers, " whether Schoolmen or Fathers, or Divines of *' any Party, for a perfe6l Teft of Truth and Ortho- " doxy in thofe facred Subjefts," Pref. p. 5. feems a tacit ConfefTion of this. But this, as we have hinted, was next to an abfolute Impoflibility, if his *' compleat Idea of this Name" had ever been known in the firft Ages. — Need I add, I cannot re- collect, that it, (if any other of his Fancies; was ever once mention'd in the famous Coujicil o^ Nice, or any of the other General Councils, whofe Decijions are much fet by, and very juftly, among all the Pro- tefiant Churches : Whence 'tis plain, it was either not at all then known, or but very little regarded. —Yea,
4. So far were the Ancients, who were elleem'd Orthodox, from being of his Mind, in theje Notions, that, as all the World know, they were unanimoufly, zealoufly, and ftcadily, for the true and proper Gene- ration, and co-effential Sonjhip, of the fecond Perfon in the Trinity. This will hardly be denied : But, if it fhould, the Nicene and Athanafian Creeds, fo well
known
[72 ]
known among us, put it out of all Doubt. — Be it confidered further,
5. This Title, Son of God, does not occur once, or a few Times only ; in one, or a few, obfcurc Places only ; or without any Parallel, or equivalent Exprefiions to explain, and confirm it : But a great many Times, all over theNewTeftament; in a great Number of Paffages, which are clear, and eafily un- derftood ; and with many other Phrafes, which afcer- tain the true, the full Senfe. — Had we met with it only once, or twice j occafionally only, or by the by •, in fome dark Prophecy, or fome figurative or ambiguous ExprefTion ; there might have been fome Pretence for hefitating, demurring, difputing : But, when we meet with it, fo very frequently, on fo many Occafions, and with fo m.any fignificant Jd- nouns alfo, which fo certainly determine the Senfe, if any Words can determine it •, and have, in the Judgment of the Chriftian Church, adtually deter- mined it, at leaft, from the coming of the Holy Ghofi to this Day ; there was but very little Reafon, for all this extraordinary Oppofition to it. — Once more,
6. The Senfe of this Title we plead for, has been not only the general Senfe of the Church, in all Ages, but always accounted the Rock on which it is built. — And tho* the Gates of Hell, i. e. Satan and hisEmif- faries, have been, according to our Lord's Predidlion, Mat.xv'u 16 — 19. by all manner of Means, in- ceflantly, and ever fmce, endeavouring to batter, or undermine it, yet have they never, nor fhall they ever prevail againji it. Learning and Criticifm, Quirk and Quibble, and Sophiftry of all Sorts ; Yea, Ba- nifhments, Imprifonments, Racks, Wheels, Gib- bets, Axes, Fire, Faggots, and all Manner of Tor- tures, have been often ufed, for this End, and in many Places, but, blefled be God, all to no Pur- fofe. The coeffmtial Sonfnp of Chrift, is ftill, and,
if
[ 73 ]
if he Is the Truth, ever will be One of the Founaa^ tions of the Chrijiian Faith I — Let thole other- wife minded, confider thefe well, and they will eafi- Jy fee, there is more in them, than they were aware of.
II. Thefe Notions were not only^ fo far as ap- pears, wholly unknown, when our SaviOur was up- on Earth, but, by our Author's own Confeffion, could hardly be known, even to any of the Apoftles themfelves, but one only ; which, in my Opinion^ as I have hinted above, wholly and for ever, de- molifhes his own Caufe and eftablifhes mine. — One of the Reafons he gives, (even when he is telling us, " he is very much inclined to believe, that the *' Name, Son of God, vehtes to his human Soul, and *' fignifies the glorious peculiar Derivation of it '' from God the Father, &c. p. lo.) why he cannot " think this precife Idea is the very Thing defigned *' in thofe Texts, — wherein our Salvation is made " to depend on the Belief of Chrift being the Son of *' God ;" is this : — You Ihall have every Syllable of the whole Paragraph.
" Tho* the Apoftles Paul and John, and per- *' haps the reft of them, arrived at this compleat " Idea of his glcrious fre-exiftent human Soul in due " Time, yet it doth not appear evident that the " Difciples had all attained fuch an Idea, fo foon *' as they believed that he was the Son of God, in *' a fufficient Manner for their attaining the Favour " of God and a State of Salvation." p. lo, ii.
On which obferve, He dare hardly fay, That any onetvtn of " the Apoftles, arrived at tjiis com- " pleat Idea," at leaft for fome Time, but two at moft : — ■ He puts a " perhaps upon the reft of " them : — He mentions a " due Tmie ;" but nei- ther tells us when that due I'ime was, nor whether . the reft did then a<5lually arrive at it, when the due Time came ; — Is plain " it doth not evidently
L " appear
[74]
*' appear they had all attained fuch an Idea fo foon *' as they believed he was the Son of God^^ 8ic : And talks of their " believing this, in a fufficient *' Manner for their attaining the Favour of God :" &c. But neither acquaints us what he undcrilands by *' this fufficient Manner ;" nor when they " attain- *' ed the Favour of God, and a State of Salvation." — But, to anfwer all this more particularly, I muft af]<,
I . Why the Apoflle Paul^ in the very firft Place, who was no Difciple, yea knew nothing of Chriji^ till long after his Jfcenfton ; if it was not. That he verily thought irith himjelf^ that he ought to do many Things contrary to his ISlame ? A6ts xxvi. 9 — 12. — Did he, could he, know the /r^f Mean- ing of this Title^ before any other of the Twehe'^ — 2. Why the Apoftle John^ more than Peter and James ; yea, and the other EvangeJifts alfo, who all mention this Title, with feveral Thoughts to eftablifh the true Senfe of it.? — Did he fo much excel even all thefe in Knowledge^ or other Abilities ? — Or, did our Lord reveal any Thing to him, in his Life-Time, which he did not to his other two Favourites ? Yea, Is it not from the Apoftle John^ we have le- veral of the cleareft, fulleft, and ftrongeft Proofs, both of the Divinity^ and coejfential Sonjhip, of the fe- cond Perfcn ^ and of his Unity ^ and Equality^ with the Father ? — 3. Why did he fay, " and perhaps the *' reft of them arrived at this compleat Idea in due " Time r" Can there be any Doubt, That every one of them arrived at it in due 'Time \ if it was in- deed the true Idea fignified by this Title: Or " the *' Scnfe which Chrift more direftly defigned to *' convey to thofe that heard him ?" — Is not himfelf very exprefs. All Things that I have heard of my Father^ I have made known unto you P John xv. i/^. And could they then be ignorant of it.''- — If the Knowledge of ir, or his other Notions, was necef-
fary.
[75l
fary, either For their ccvn Inflruflion, Faith, Peace, Comfort, Joy, or Salvation: Or, for the faithful iLxecution of their Office ; Would not the Spirit of
Infpiration teach it them ? Or, Was there any
Thing in " this complete Idea, or indeed in any of " his other Notions," fo very hard to be conceiv- ed, retained, or conveyed to their Hearers, which the Holy Ghiji could not make clear and plain, to the weakeft of them all ? 4. When was " the due *' Time," he fpeaks of? — Was it to come foon, or not till feveral, yea many Ages after ? — Is it , now paft, or not ?-— One would think. That, if it is already paft, it arrived, if not before, yet when the Day of Pentecoji was fully come ; A6ls ii. i — 4. Or very foon after it : But, if that was the Time, we may, I think, be fure. That every one of them knew the true, the full Senfe of this Title ; and *' that which Chrift more direftly defigned to con- *' vey to his Church," long before the Apoftle PW did. — Yea, furely, every one of them knew all that was necefiary to the faithful and fucccfsful Execution of their Office, foon after that remarkable Event, through the whole Courfe of their Lives. — 5. Did not Peter, in his own Name, and in the Name of his Brethren, over and over, confefs that their blefled Mafter was the Christ, the Son of the living God? John vi. 6<^. Mat. xvi. 16 — 18. And did neither himfelf, nor any one of them, but "John, know the true, the /////Meaning of their own ConfeJJion ! — 5. Did not our Lord kindly accept, and- moft highly approve of this their Cojifejjwn \ adding, Blcffed art thou Simon Barjona : For Flefh and Blood hath not revealed tt unto thee, but my Father which is in Heaven ? Mat. xvi. 1 7. And, did not the Father then reveal to them " the Senfe of this Title, " which he more diredtly defigned to convey to *' them V Or, did neither of them, even then, know what they believed? Or, Could our v/orthy L 2 Audior,
t 76 1
Author, had he reflecled on this : Or, can any other now, foberly think they did not ? — 7. Whence Ihould any of them, at laft, have *' ar- " rived at this complete Idea ?" or any other of thefe Ideas ? — The Old Tejiament^ 1 humbly con- ceive, is wholly y?/(?«/, as to thefe Matters : — There is not a Syllable, that dropt from the Mouth of any of their Contemporaries, which, fo far as I can find, comes up to the Point :— And our blefied Lord, fo far as we know, never fpake one Word " of theglo- " rious peculiar Derivation of his Soul from God ** the Father before the Creation of the World.'* He never gave any Hint, That " his human *' Soul was properly the Son of God:'' — Yea, fo far was he from infmuating any fuch Thing, That when he afiiimes this Title, ihe Son of God, or fpeaks of himfelf in equivalent Terms, he does it as a co- ejfential Son, attributing to himfelf fuch Things, as none but a con-fuhftanttal Son could, or durft have done ; 13 c. as fhall be fully proved by and by. See Johnv. 17 — 20. Ch. viii. 54 — 59. Ch. x. 29,30, ^c. — 8. Whence then does it appear, That any one of them ever arrived at " this complete Idea" of his, or ever entertained any other of his Nojirums ? — 9. If anyone of them ever did, It was either neceffary, upon one Account or other, in lefs or more, that it jfhould then be made known by them fo the Churches of Chrift, or it was not. If it was not, then, in any Degree, neceffary ; I cannot but believe, it was not, is not, now : And therefore, humbly conceive, 1 hat, however our learned Au- thor came by the Knowledge of thefe Notions, he had as good have kept it to himfelf: Becaufe, if it was no Way neceffary, the World can never be the better for it, and had been full as wife, and as well, without it. — 10. If it was, in any Degree or on any Account, neceffary. Is it not fomewhat ftrange. That they never made any of thefe J^otlons, exprefly
knowft
[77 1
known to the Church ? Or, if they did, any where or any how, That we hear nothing of them in the Bible, or any of the ancient Creeds, or the JVritings of the Fathers, or in fome Tradition or other from the firft Ages ; and but very httle of fome of them, for many Ages after ; yea, till very lately ? — And, II. Since he was very fenfible, he could not, up- on his own Principles, make it evidently clear. That they all ever " arrived at this complete Idea ;'* it was very modeft, to exprefs himfelf with fo much Caution, " and perhaps the reft of them," (i. e. Peter, James, and eight or nine more of them !) " arrived at this complete Idea in due Time !'* However, he is pretty plain, " That the due Time'* came at laft-, (no great Matter when!} that others arrived at his complete Idea befides the Apoftles i that " the excellent Mr. Fleming" was one of them; and that fome of his Followers are fo very fond of it, as to employ all their Talents, to diffafe the Knowledge ot it far and near, left it fhould ever be unhappily loft again ! — But, we Ihall referve half a Dozen Queftions more relating to " this complete *' Idea," till another Opportunity. — Upon the whole. From thefe two jufi Prejudices, I conclude, with almoiL the Evidence of a Demonjiration, That Senfe of this Title, which he dare not pofitively fay was known to any one of the Apoftles themfelves, but two; and confequently, could very hardly, if at all, be known to ordinary Chriftians, before the Converfion of :^aiil the Perfecutor, at fooneft ; could not be " the Senfe, which Chrift himfelf or the " Apoftles and Writers of the New Teftament more *' diredtly defigned to convey to thofe that heard '' them :" But he dare not fay, '' that this hiscom- *' plete Idea," was known to any of the Apoftles themfelves, except two, before that Event -, &c, Er- ^0, It cannot be the Senfe diredly and defigned, 6f^.
III. We
[78]
III. We cannot think it at all fafe^ needlefsly to depart from the Common Faith of Chriftians, in all Ages ; efpecially, when we find it fo frequently, cxprefsly, fully, and ftrongly, revealed in the Scrip- tures. Why fhould we ? — How dare we ? — Should it be faid, Thefe Words, coejfential Sonjhipy no where occur in the Bible. We grant it. — But, (i.) Thefe Words, own Son,, begotten Son,, 07ily be- gotten Son, &c. are equivalent, and full as llrong : Nor can any Words, more emphatic and clearly for our Purpofe, be given or defired : Nor can they have any proper Senfe at all, if they do not fig- riiiy coejfential Sonjhip. — (2.) We do not, at leaft need not, believe the coejfential Sonjhip of Chrifl^ merely becaufe of thefe Titles, as exprefs and fig- nilicant as they are j but becaufe we find, That this only begotten Son, and as fuch, is frequently mentioned as having the Names, Titles, Perfe^ions^ Works and Worjhip, proper to the One true God, clearly attributed to him •, as mufl be fhewn by and by : And this, abfolutely and invincibly, confirms the Catholic Dodtrine. — (3.) Are any of thofe No- tions, he would court us to embrace, to be met with, any where exprefsly in the Word of God? "V^ here do we find the Words, " ChrijVs human •' 5ca/?" — Where is it written, " That his pre- '* exijient Soul is properly the Son of God -, or that ** the divine Nature always dwelt in it ?" p. 150. Or, " That Chrifl is the exprefs Image of God, in *' the human Nature ? p. 153." &c. &c. — Yea, How can any of thefe be, any how, proved from Scripture ? Withal, (4. ) Should we defert the Ca- tholic Church and go over to his Opinions, We fhould gain nothing by our fo doing: And he mud be very fond of Change, who will change for Changing's Sake. — We ihould not, I fay, gain any I'hing by our forfaking our Principles ; Be-^ caufe, if we indeed continued to believe the Scrips
[79]
ture Do^rine of the Trinity, and the Per fond Union of the Divine and Human Natures in Lhrifi, the Difficulties attending thofe two fundamental Articles of Chrifiianity, would be juft the fame they are, up- on our Principles : And the like we may fay of mod, if not every one, of his other Notions. — Or, if he may feem, here and there, to give us fome Light to help to remove fome inconfiderable Dif- ficulty, we fhall foon find ourfelves plunged into another, and a greater ! — This leads us naturally on to another Prejudice. — We conceive,
IV. Not only. That it is not fafe to efpoufe his Scheme ; but cannot help thinking, That it is dan- gerous, ytd. very dangerous to do it: And his Ma- nagement of his Caufe convinces us of this Danger. We find him, in many Places, talking too like, if not dire<5lly in the Strains of, the Arians, Sabellians, Nejiorians, Eutychicns ; &c. ex-pounding many Paf- fages of ^z Scriptu'i e, as thok Hereticks did, and do ; and obliged to wreft them, with all his Might, to fupport their Senfe. — For Example, thofe re* markable Pafiages Pr<?i;. viii. 22 — ^6. John v. 17. p. 39, 40. Mark xiii. 32. p. 42. i Cor. xv. 28. p. 43 — 44. Mat.xxvm. 19, &c. feV. — Yea, thefe Notions have led him, throughout, as every one muft fee who reads him attentively, to many un^ guarded and fufpicious ExprelTions, as if our Lord were not now, or was not when he was upon the Earth, Mediator fecundum utramque Naturam ; or, to fpeak of him, as if there were two Perfons in him ; or fometimes, as if he was only Man, and not God-man •, &c. &c. — Now we dare not, efpe- cially in an Age fo prone to apojiatife from the Truth, give Way to, and much lefs fall in with, fuch Fancies, or Ways of fpeaking, as may entangle us, 'ere we are aware, into the Paths of Error •, yea, and draw us to a manifefl Oppofttion to the great
DcKftrines
[ 8o ]
Podrlnes of Chriflianity. — A more particular Pre- judice is,
VI. The Denial^ of the coejfential Sonjhip of the fecond Perfon in the Trinity^ robs us of a very good, and convincing, Argument for the two great 2nd fundamental DoBrines of the Trinity, and the Divinity of Chrift. This, I take it for granted, will be owned to be an infuperahk Prejudice^ if well proved ; as fhall be done prefently, as foon as I have anfwered his fourth Se6tion, p. 6'^ — 69. which is a Reply to this Queftion, " What Advantage is *' there in not applying the Name Son of God to the *' divine Nature of Chriji ?" — After all, fays he, *' many a pious Chriftian will be ready to enquire •' and fay, fince you acknowledge Jefus Chriji to *' have 9 divine Nature,*^ This, to fay the leaft, is fomewhat flrangely exprefs'd ! " and to be truly and ** properly God, why have you taken fo much *' Pains to fliew that this Name the Son of God in *' Scripture, does not neceffarily fignify either his ** Godhead or his co- eternal Generation and Sonfhip ?" p. 63. 64. — 'Twas very natural indeed to think. That " many a pious Chriftian," would, with Wonder, make this Enquiry : And, I believe, every one, who has heard and confidered it, hath been ready to afk this neceffary Queftion, and to exped: a plain, direft and pertinent Anfwer to it. — Well, *' he hopes he can give fome fatisfadory Anfwers, " and offer fuch Reafons as may juftify and fupport *' this Attempt ; i^c^ and accordingly he gives us four, not one of which is at all fatisfadlory, or indeed comes up to the Point.
** I. I was willing to fearch the true Senfe of Scrip' *' ture in this Point, and to underjiand the Meaning " of God in his Word^^ p. 64. — So has, fo may, and fo will, every one fay, who has a Mind to ob- trude his own Dreams upon the World, be they ever fo filly, or ridiculous. — However, no doubt,
'tis
[81]
'tis every one's Duty, to fearch the Scriptures, that he may underftand the true Meaning of them : But, when we have proved all Things, we muji held fafi that which is Good *, i Th. v. 21. or elle, every honeft Man will fay, we have either not indeed proved all Things, or that we have loft the happy Fruits of our Search. &c. " Where any Exprefiion " is ufed fo very frequently in the Bible, as this " Name the Son of God is, and that in Texts of *' awful and folemn Importance, — 'tis of great " Moment to know the Meaning of that Expref- " fion," for the Reafon given and weighed abovcj viz. " that we may not include too little or too *' much in it," ^c. ibid. This is a great, and an acknowledged Truth : But, bleiTed be God, there is no great Need, if we will but believe his Word^ of much fearching, to know the true Meaning of it. — Not to add, That it is next to abfolutely im^of- fible, the Catholic Church Ihould have been miftaken, in this Point, till very lately.
*' 2. I was afraid to build my Belief of the Deity *' of Chrift upon feeble and infufjicient Foundations^ " and therefore I thought it neceffary to examine *' thi's Argument which is draivn from his So7i//np.''* BlefTed be God, Our Belief of the Ueity of Chrijl, is built upon fuch firong anci firm Foundaaons ^ that all the Devils in Hell, with ali their Emiffaries upon Earth, Ihall never be able to move them — He gots on, " The great Doftrine of the Liodhead of our Lord ** Jefus ChriiT, and Faith in him as tlie true God^ *' has been by many Perions built chietiy upon " this Name which is given him, viz. the Son of " God j and that upon this bare Prefumption, that " as a Son amongft Men has the fame fpecific Na- " ture with his Father, fo the \ on of God muil have " the fame individual Nature with his Father ; but " how weak this Argument is to fupport fuch a '* Dodrine, appears in the foregoing Difcourfe." &c.
M p. 65.
[82 ]
p. 65. Anf. I. I mull crave Leave to queftlon the ^ruth of what is here alledged. I do not remember, 1 ever heard of one Man of Senfe, if any one Man, who ever *' built this great Dodtrine chiefly on this *' Name, znd upon this If are Prefumption:** And am pretty fare, I never any where read any fuch Thing. None of the Syftems, I have by me, give any Countenance to fuch a Notion. I have carefully confulted two of the lafl, and beft, fyftematic "Writers in the World, the ever famous Turret ine, and his learned Nephew Pi^et, both Profeflbrs of Divinity in Geneva, who fay nothing to this Pur- pofe. The former, invincibly and at large, proves the Divinity of Chrift ; or. That the Son is true and eternal God, coejfential and cceternal with the Father ; from the common Topics, That the Names, At- tributes, Works, and Worship, o^ the ctie true God, are fo frequently afcribed to him in Scrip- ture : And then adds three more particular Argu- ments, from the Equality of the Son with the Father, his Onenefs with him, and his mediatorial Office-,* but not a Syllable of building his Deity, chiefly on this Name. He adds, 'tis true, in one Line, That the true and proper Divinity of Chrifl might be /«- vittcibly alfo gathered from his Filiation, or Son- ship, which no Man, who believes his coejfential Sonfljip, will, I prefume, be fo ridiculous as to de- ny. — The latter has alfo a whole Chapter, of God the Son, wherein he ufes the very fame Topics, as our worthy Author himfelf has done fince ; but he doth not fo much as mention his Sonjhip, as any Proof at all of his Deity -f-. So that what follows upon this Head, muft pafs for juft nothing. — 2. Had he no other Way " to examine this Argu- '* ment, drawn from the Sonjhip," of the Jecond
♦ Turret. 7heol. Vol. 1. Uc. 3. ^efi. 28. Be Deitate Filii. f Pia. Theol. Par. I. LiL 2. Cap. 15. l)e Deo Filio.
Perfoa,
[83]
Perfon, but by denying that he is a coejfential Son -, which fome will think, will amount to a denying. That he, or, if you will, that Chriji, is, in any Senfe, the Son of the Father ? — *Tis plain, and indubitable. That, if he is not a co-ejfential Son, He is not, at all, SL proper Son i is not, at all, a Sony/ho is co-equal with him •, who doih what Thing foever he doth -, or could fay, / and the Father are one ; as the Bible affures us He is, and could fay. ^c. ^c. But, — 3. Suppofing the Fa6l, I want to know whence, and how, " the Weaknefs of this Argument appears ?** " 3. 'Tis neceffary as far as poflible to remove " all Cavils from every important Do^lrine of Chri^ " Jlianity^ and fuch Is that of the Deity of Chrijt** p. 66. Let us grant this, at prefent, tho' I Ihall treely retort it upon himfelf before I have done. *' Now if the Doftrine of his Deity be built on *' his Sonfhip*^ We do not build this Do<flrine up- on it alone, as we have faid, and as every Body knows. " then he muft be true God confidered *' as he is a Son j" What then ? " but the Notipa ♦' of a Son in all Languages of Mankind import* ** ing fome Sort of Derivation and Dependence," — The beft Way to anfwer this, will be to turn the Queftion. Does ever. Did ever, " the Notion of a ** Son, in any Language of Mankind, import, *' 1 hat his Body v^2.'^ for^ned by his Father ?" p. 12. Or, That Generation and Creation are the fame ? — Withal, thefe Words, Derivation znd Dependence, are general and ambiguous : Nor is the Derivation and Dependence of a Son, m any Language of Men, inconfiftent with his Coejfentiality v/ith his Father ; or, with his enjoying all the Perfe£lions ot his Na-^ ture, as well as he. — '* and the Notion of Godhead " importing Independence and Self-exijience, feem to ** carry a Sort of Contradidtion in them." — Why, If it is but " a Sort of Contradidion,'* it may yet, be very confiftent with the Coejfentiality of the Fa-
M 2 tber
[ 84 1
ther and the Son : And, if they but feem to do this, fince numberlefs Things feem, to us, to be what they are not •, or to carry in them what they indeed do not •, they may, in reality, notwithllanding this feeming, carry no fort of Contradidlion in them at all. — " And this becomes a mighty Prejudice to " the Minds of Men," ^c. ibid. — Why, if it does. Who can help it? — Mull we give up the Faith once delizered to the ^ainis, or any " important Part" of it, becaufe fome are mightily prejudiced againft it ? Did not the Apoftles preach Chrifi crucified,' tho' as fuch, to the Jews a Jtumbling Block, and to the Greeks Foolijhnefs ? i Cor. i. 2 <. Is not He a Stone of flumhlmg, and a Rock of Offence, &c. 1 Pet. ii. \-.. Is He not fet for the Fall, as well as rijing again, of many in Ifrael, and for a Sign which jhall he fpoken agcinfi ? Luke ii. 34. And, is not his SoNSHip, the Rock, againft which the Gates of Hell have, from the Beginning, levelled all their Ar- tilLry ? Mat. xvi. 18.
But, after all, who are they to whom this becomes fo mighty a Prejudice ? Not, furely, the Catholic Church ; for they have always unanimoufly con- feiTed, That the /^^ oW Perfon is, as fuch, <2Son, or God of God ! — -A ho then ? Why, " the Brians '■' and Socinians /" You fhall have the whole Para- graph. *' Now if by this Expofition of the Name *' Son of God I remove any of the great Impedi- " ments out of the Way of the Arians or Socinians ^' from believing the true Deity ,of Chrift, then " I fhall account myfelf to have done Service and ^' Honour to that glorious Article of our Faith.'* p. 67. i do not know what to reply to thefe odd W^ords, and have too great an Efteem for the wor- thy Author, to treat them as they very well deferve. \\'e ha\x an Apoftle's V' ords for it. If any of yon do err from the ^Inith, and one convert him, he fhall fave a SouljrsmDeathy &c. James v. 19, 20. and ' ■ • .. . - - is
[ 85 ]
is confequently, well imployed. It feems then.
That, as innocent a Thing as Error is, now a Days, too commonly, /aid to be, it expofes the erroneous Perfon to Death I — However, Was there no other "Way " to remove any of thofe great Impediments,** but by talking too much in their Strains ! ^c. ^c,
•^ Was this the Way to convert them to the true,
/. e. the Catholic Faith? — Why, if he did indeed, or could, think fo, he has been very unlucky and unfuccefsful -, as every one, I really think, will be, who fhall follow his Steps. Some, to my own Knowledge, in feveral Places, have been, or fay they have been, tempted, or drawn, from the Truth of the Gofpel, by his unhappy Dijfertations, &c. to the Blafphemies of /jrius and 6ocinus : But, I have never heard of any one Jrian^ or Socinian, Man or Woman, young or old, who has been, by any of his \Vritings, by trimming, or by fuch Means, brought from thofe Abominations, " to believe ths " true Deity of Chrili •,'* and am apt to think, I never fhall. — Thofe that are gone fo very far wrong, are not fo foon, or fo eafily, recovered •, and much lefs, by fuch Methods : And, to yield any Part of the '^ritth to them, complement them, or meet them as it were half Way, ^c. is not the diredl Courfe to bring them over to the Truth ; but to harden them in their Errors, defert the Truth our- felves, and fo, betwixt us, to lofe it wholly. My
own Eyes have fecn fome fneer, and my Ears
have heard others make their Boafts of him, as if he was a coming over to them, i^c. •
Two Paragraphs under this Head, p. 66, 6j. I mull almoll wave. I'hcy are fo very metafhyjical, as to be far above the plain Chriftian's Reach. — If any one will but explain the firil of them, and flicw the Pertinence of it alfo, he will cafily fee whatUfe may be made ot it, and how little it ferves our Author. — In the Ql;Iier, ** he dares not utterly re-
. . Aouiicc
f 86 ]
*' nounce all thofe Schemes of explaining the Tri- •' nity, which make the Divine Nature of Chriji *' to be in any Way or Manner whatfoever derived ** or communicated from the Father^'* Even thefe Tcry Words need Explanation ! But, Why then all this Stir? V\hy fo very much ado? And, Why *' dares he not" do this ? " for I muft own myfelf ** loft in thefe Unfearchables, ^c.** And no Wonder, That ?i finite Being fhould be loft, in fearching out an Infinite one. How can it be otherwife ? But, blef- ied be his Name, it is neither our Duty^ fVifdom^ nor Interefi, lofearch what is unfearchable. Let us but read, and believe, the plain and familiar Language of our Bibles, and through the Grace of God, we ihall know enough. " yet he would not make the *' neceJOfary Proof of the Divinity of Chriji to depend *' upon this," i^c. No more did thofe great Men juft named, and no more do we.
" 4. I would do fomething to take away the. *' Anathema and damnifig Sentence which fome Par- •' ties of Chriftians who believe the Divinity of •' Chrift have thrown on others, who alfo believe *' his Divinity, merely for not explaining fome parti- *' cular Scriptures in the fame Way and Manner that ** they do, or for not ufmg the fame Arguments to " prove his Divinity." Our worthy Author, feems to be much afraid of that Anathema, forgetting that the Curfe caufelefs fhall not come I And yet, " a dif- *' ferent explaining of fome particular Scriptures,** may, in fome Cafes, make the Faith of Chriftians quite another Thing from what it was, and fhould be ; fo that we ought all to be very cautious, in fuch Matters. Thofe who are fond of new Explana- nations, and new Ways of fpeaking, are, generally, found to be looking to new T)o5lrines and Princi- ples: And thofe, who begin, pretending only to be dffpleafed with Words or Modes of Speech, which haye been long in \Jk and become familiar, are,
com-
[87]
commonly foon obferved, to be alfo difpkafed -with, the Things meant by them. — It is in the old Paths^ the good IVay, in which wejhallfind Reft for our Souls) Jer. v;. i6. And therefore, Thofe takr the fafeft Courfe, who go forth hy the Foot ft ep of the Flock ; efpecially, where there is a plain and long beaten Track. — 'Tis next to an abfolute ImpofTibility, the Catholic Church fhould have been fo very long miflaken, and in fuch a Point : — But, nothing alas ! is more Ordinary y than to fee even very great and good Men err ; and be pretty tenacious too, of their own Fancies. — I know no " Party of Chri- " ftians, who believe the Divinity of Chrift, that " have pafs'd a damning Sentence on any, who in- " deed believe his true and proper Divinity,'^ mere- ly, for thefe Reafons : And, if there are any, I for my Part, neither am, nor, through the Grace of God, ever will be, one of them. — " He does not " love to fee everlafling Death thrown upon Per- " fons who believe the fame Scripture Doftrine of ** the Deity of Chrift that we do, but chufe to ex- *' plain it another Way." p. 68. No, nor I neither, if, in Fad, any do this. — 'Tis a Maxim in our Law, Apices Juris non funt Jura. — However, were he now alive, I afllire the World, I fhould not throw an Anathema on him •, becaufe, I really be- lieve, he was not aware of the Confequences of the Things he has faid -, and feems not, to me, to have been either very clear, or fixed, or fteddy, in thefe his new Notions, as I gather from thefe very Pao-es I am now examining, among others : And, now that he is dead, I have no Doubt he is in Heaven ; and am well fatisfied, that, if ever I lliall be fo happy as to go there, he will never reprove me, for en- deavouring to prevent the bad Effe^s of his lately invented^ and dangerous Notions.
And thus have I confidered every Sentence of thefe Anfwers, that is worth any Notice, or can
do
[ 88 ]
do him any Service ; tho', perhaps, with too much Regard to his Memory : And muft now leave it, to every impartial and ferious Chriftian, to judge between us ; and fay honeftly, Whether " thefe An- ** fwers are fatisfadlory, and whether thefe Reafons *' may juftify and fupport his taking fo much Pains *' to fhew that this Name, the Son of God, cannot " neceflarily imply his Divine Nature, or co-eternal *' Sonjhip .?" p. 6 2-, 64. An Attempt, I think, never undertaken before ! To return then to this Prejudice^ which has led us to examine this Queftion.
Thofe Notions, which rob us of a good, and con- vincing. Proof of the Divinity of Chrijl^ can be nei- ther fafe, nor true -, and therefore, are not to be efpoufed, or vindicated : But, fo do thefe his No- tions : Ergo. — The Proportion, or Major, as it is called, cannot be doubted, in Reafon, by any One, who really believes his Divinity. The Af- fumption, or Minor, is evident. 1( the fecond Fer- fon is indeed coejfential with the fr/}, he is, moil certainly, God as well as he. For, if he is co-ejfen- tial, he is co-eternal alfo ; becaufe, the whole Divine Effence, if I may fo exprefs myfelf, is Eternal: — And, if he is co-ejfential and co-eternal, he has all the ejfential Perfeciions of the Divine Nature ; be- caufe, the EJfence cannot be divided from itfelf or the Perfe£iions, nor the PerfeSlions from themfelves or the Effence ; and therefore, he is co-equal with him alfo : But He, who is co-effential, co-eternal, and co- equalwith him, is God as well as he.— -This Prejudice therefore, muft needs appear wfz^^/)' •, and, 'tis evi- dent, remains unremoved. — Should it be fuggefted. That the Deity of Chrijl may be, and has been ma- ny Times, invincibly proved, from many other Arguments -, We grant it heartily : But, the more of them we have, I humbly conceive, the better. — Should it be faid. That the Argument from his Sonfhip " may feem, to many, feeble or falfe."
p. 6s>
1 89 3
p. 6^. which may be thought to weaken the Evi- dence of the other, and give " Occafion to fome " to infult the Faith of Chrift, &c.'* ibid. I can perceive no juft Caufe, for any fuch Sufpicion. Why, or How, fhould (?^<?/^^;^/^ Argument, wd'^/^^w many ftrong Ones? — However, The Catholic Church have never thought this Argument either feeble or falfe, inconclufive or dubitable. Yea, the eternal Generation and coejfential Sonjhip of the fecond Per- fon, if really, true and well fupported, amounts to a Demonftration of his true and proper Di'vinity^ as is evident to common Senfe. The Thing tells it- felf : And, if well managed, like Jonathan^ Bow, it will hardly turn back ; yea, it never did, it never can, fail to do Execution. — The fober Appellant , with the fhuffling and wriggling, which are the beft Artillery of the Party, made a Shift, tho' fome T imes a very lorry one, to anfwer, or rather evade, mol^, or all, of our Author's Proofs of the Deity of Chrifl : But, had he heartily and clofely urged his coejfential Sonjhip., that Gentleman would have found, that denying it abfolutely, would have been the beft, the only Way, to get rid of it. — But, this v/ill come up by and by, when we fhall il- luftrate, and confirm, it much farther, after we have demonftrated Chrift's coejj'eniial Son/hip.
I have yet two other Prejudices^ which, tho' per- haps, not lb confiderable, in the Opinion of fome, as thefe foregoing, are yet ot too much Importance to be wholly omitted ; viz. The Denial of the co- ejfential Sonjhip of Chrijl., is not only a Jjmbolizing with the jeijjs and Mahometans ; but mud there- fore, be likely to harden them, in their malicious Oppofttions to him, and Blafphemies againft him.
I. The Denial of the coejj'ential Sonfhip of Chrijl., is not only, a fymbolizing with the Jews ; but mult therefore, be likely to harden them, in their iwueterate Hatred ofy rooted Oppofition to, and odious
N ' Eluf
[90]
Blafphemies againft him. — That they always, dur- ing his Life-time, denied his proper Sorjhip^ and ■were filled with Rage and Madnefs, when he af- ferted it, either exprefsly, or in equivalent Terms, cannot be denied. — When, by Way of /Ipologj for his healing the impotent Man, on the Sabbath Day^ &c. he begun, MyYATn-EK worketh hithertOy and I work\ John V. 17. we are told, in the very next Wordsi 'Therefore the Jews fought the more to kill him^ Sec. ver. 18. — When he ftrongly afierted, / and the Father are One -, John x. 30. in the very next Line, it follows, 'Then the Jews took up Stones again to fione him. — That they took him to have always Ipoke of a coeffential Sonfhip, is evident from their continued charging him with Blafphemyy when- ever he fbiled himlelf by that Title, ^c. — Now, To deny That he was, and is, a coejfential Son ; or That as a Son, he and the Father were, and are One, is a Jufiifying the Charge the Jews, in his own Life-time, advanced againft him, &c. ^c. John xix. 7. — But, to jujlify thtjir Anceftors, in what they faid, or did, againft him, is the ready and the fure Way to harden their Pofierity^ in their confirmed and refo- lute Enmity againft him, ifjc. &c. — And is this then, a light Thing ? — Surely, they had need to be very certain they are in the Right, who will con- tinue to maintain fuch dangerous Novelties. Seep. 83. — But more of thele, in a more proper Place.
2. The Denial of xht p-oper^ or coeffential, Son- fhip of Chrijl is likely to humour, and, thereby harden, the Mahometans alfo,- — Every Body knows. That a Jeiv, who was, as fuch, an Enemy to the Name of Chrift, and an heretical Chriftian, who was lit- tle better, affifted in compofing that vile, that nccurfed. Hodge-podge, the Alcoran, Sec. And that the Mahometans exprefsly, avowedly, and malicioufly, blafpheme the Eternal So/ifhip of, Chriji^ &c. This Tou fhall have with the Realbn of it, in the Words
of
f 9' 1
oF the very learned and mod judicious Bifhop Pear- fon. " It was the chief Defign of Mahomet to " deny this Truth, becaufe he knew it was not " otherwife polTible to prefer himfelf before our " Saviour. — Wherefore he frequently inculcates *' that Blafphemy in his Alcoran^ that God hath no " fuch Son, nor any equal with him : And his " Difciples have corrupted the Pfalm of David, " reading, (inltead of, '^hou art my So7t^ this Day " have I begotten thee,) ^hou art my Prophet^ 1 " have educated thee'' &c. &c.* We may alfo add. That crafty and wicked hnpojlor well knew, that the Generality of thofe who were called Chri- Jlians, in Arahia, and the neighbouring Countries, in thofe Days, were moft miferably divided and di- jlra^ed, by a great Variety of Herefies relating to the Person of Christ, even thofe of Sabelliusy A'itiSy Eunomius, Neftorius, Eutyches, and I do not know how many more, which, tho' abfolutely inconjijitnt with each other, did all agree in oppofing the proper and coejfential Sonjloip of the fecond Per- fon, or the Unity or Dijlin^ion of the divine and human Natures m the one Person of Chrift : And that the few, who remain'd thoroughly yi?//;^^ in the Faithy had been long fadly harras'd, and perfecuted, by thofe Hereticks. He, I fay, who knew this well, might, very naturally, conclude. That they would not unanimoujly concur in any one Thing, and much lefs, to oppofe him, . who, fo flir, agreed with them, in fo material a Point : That one of the moft likely Ways to gain them, would be, openly and zealoudy, to declare againft the co-ejfential, and therefore fo-f/^r;7rt/, ^n^co-eqhaly SonJ/jipot tht fecond Perfon: And That, if he Hiould prevail with them,
* Vearhn's ExpoJttioTj of the Creed, p. 136 and in the Mar- gin of that Page, Ejl ipfe Deut iinus Dens Mternns, qui nee ge- nuity uec genii us ejf, &C.
jsf 2 frank'
[ 90
frankly and totally, to give up his proper Sonjhipr and confequently his Divinity ; it wouid not be ve- ry hard, with fome Care and Management, to bring them to part with his Satisfa^ion alfo, i^c. &c. — ■ Accordingly he fucceeded, and much more eafily than can well be thought, Gody in his juft Judg- ment, giving up thofe,. who did no longer hold the Head^ Sec. and therefore, could hardly be called Chrijiiansy not only to be fubdued by the Sword of Mahomet, but to believe even thofe moll ftupid Lies wherewith his Alcoran is fluffed. — Now then, Is not the pleading, and with fo much Vehemence too, againft the coejfential and coeternal Sonjhip. of Chrijiy yielding them a great Point ? i^c. What will they be apt to think, when they fhall hear, (not that idolatrous Papijlsy who are fo clear- ly condemned by the Light and Law of Nature it- felf, which is yet written in the Hearts of all Men, whatever fome Men may fay to the contrary, Rom. ii. 15. and fo evidently, fo invincibly, accujed, confuted, and jUdged, by the Scriptures of the Old and New Teft anient, for the moft grofs and jenfelefs- Idolatries, which ever were committed under Hea- ven, even amongft the moft ignorant, barbarous, and degenerate of Mankind, but; That even reformed. Chrjjlians, who are under no external Force ; yea, and Men, much, and defervedly, celebrated for Learning and Piety, Ihall not only give vp* but zealoufly contend againft, the coejfential Sonjhip of Chriji, i^c. and by fo doing, jutbiiy the Jews m charging him v/ith Blafphemy, &c. if not themfelves alio, at ieaft in fome Meafure, for denying his pro- per ScnJIjip ; and, in Confequence of that, his true ^n(\ proper Divinity? &c. But, — I fhall urge this, and kveral other Things relating to it, no farther. — I verily believe, our worthy Author would have been as fur from laying ajtumbling Block before them, of
any
[ 93 ]
any other, as any Man j had he thought that they, cr any others, would have ftumbled upon it.
Let not our Antitrintt avians of any, or all Sorts • or Unitarians^ as thofe Men moft ridiculoufly ftilc themfelves, who dare not deny, yea, who confefs. That there are, even to us Chrifiians^ at leafl two living and true Gods, for very Shame, obje<5t to us the Doftrine of the Trinity.^ — Does the Doftrine of the Trinity fall in, with any of the Dodrines of the Mahotnejans ? Does it, any how, countenance any of their Blafphemies, againll; the P^r/<jw, Natures, ov Offices of our Emmanuel ? &c. — Should we give it up, and go over to the Camp of the Sccinians^ who moft fcurriloufly and malicioufly deride it, we Ihould then harden them, with a Witnefs, in their Rebellion againft Chrift : But, inftead of remain- ing (.brijiians, we fiiould be not only almost, but very near altogether, Mahometans. < — The true Trinitarians, who have kept themfelves from Creature-Worjhip, and Idol-TVorJhip, and believe in^^ fear, ferve, and lOve, the one true God and him onljy Mat. iv. lo. are, and always have been, the only Unitarians upon Earth. — But, a few Thoughts relating to thefe Things may, perhaps, come in hereafter.
Thus have we produced, and urged, thefe jufi Prejudices ; and Ihall now leave it to all impartial and ferious Chrijiians, to fay. Whether they are not, as I have ftiled them. Loth Jufi and weighty ? — They are not, I acknowledge, equally w^/^y^/y ; but, if they take them altogether, and conlider them well, ^c. our worthy Author's moft zealous Admirers, will not find That, with all their Arts, they will be eafily removed : Yea, I would hope, will perceive, That they will go far quite to over- throw thofe his novel Opinions. Several others might have been added, but they will come naturally in,
under
[ 94 ]
under another Form, in a more proper Place. Ad- vance we then to,
CHAR III.
Several Preliminary Considerations, or Propositions, which may help us to fome CLEARER Ideas of the principal things in this Controverfy ; remove feveral Difficulties attending them -, and lead us, the more eafily and fully , to perceive not only the Truths we are contending Jor^ but the Importance of them-, &c.
THE previous Propojitions or Conjiderationsy we fhall now offer, with the neceffary Explication and Confirmation of theniy are only thefe feven,
1. The Doftrine of the Trinity y Is the firfl and great Foundation^ upon which, the Chrijtian Reli- giony as fuch, is built.
2. There is a natural Or der, both of working and fuhftftingy among the ever blefled Three.
3. The Terms, Father and Son, of whomfoever underftood, are relative Terms.
4. Thefe Terms are, in Scripture, and all other Books and Languages, ufed fometimes property and fometimes improperly or figuratively ; and that, on divers civily moral, and fpiritual Occafions.
5. The firfi Perfon of the moft holy and undi- vided Trinity is, in the truefV, ftrideft, mod proper, and fublime Senfe, a Father ; and the Fa- ther of the fecondy who is called his Son : And confequently, the fecond Perfon is, as fuch, in the
trueft.
[95 1
trueft, ftridbeft, mod proper, and fubllme Senfe, a Son^ and bis Son.
6. Whereas, in the one complex Perfon of the Re- deemer^ there are two diftinSf Natures^ the Divine and the Htiman^ He is a Son, and frequently fo call- ed, in relpeft of each of thefe Natures : i. e. i\s God, he is often called, as he indeed is, the Son of God ; and as Man, he indeed is, and is frequently called, the Son of Man.
7. Tho* our ever blefled Saviour, when on Earth, did never, fo far as we know^ but once, in exprefs Terms, acknowledge himfelf to be the Mejfab, till he was upon his Trial : Yet, he was never, from his Entrance upon his public Work, to the Day of his Death, Ihy or backward, to declare and proclaim his true and proper Divinity, by publifhing himfelf to be the Son, the only begotten Son of God •, and to maintain, and prove, that he was, as fuch, equal •with the Father, John v. 17 — 19, and that /^^ «»<^ the Father are one. Ch. 10. 30, ^c.
I. The Do6trine of the moft holy and undivided Trinity, is the firfi and principal Foundation, upon which the Chriftian Religion, as fuch, is built.
This Dodrine is. That there are Three, clearly diftinguiflied by Personal iV^7?z^j, Frojioims, Titles, Characters and Anions, (who have been therefore, called Three Perfons,) viz. the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghoji, to whom the very fame Essential Names, Titles^ and Ferfe^ions, as well as the very fame Works, and Worfhip alfo, which are proper to God moji High, are, in a great Variety of the moil plain and emphatic Phrafes, afcribed in Scripture: Whence it is concluded, and moft juftly. That, fmce God is one, these Three are the one TRUE God.
The Form of Baptifm, Mat. xxviii. 19. which is a fliort, but full. Summary of the moll ejfential Articles of our Faith, put this out of all foher Doubt :
-^The
[96]
'— The Form of Blejpng^ i Cor. xiii. 14. which is nothing but the Blejpng, wherewith the High Priefl of Old vfas fo btefs the People, iSJumb. vi. 7.Z — 27. put into A f TO T/?;iV2W^;?/ Language, makes it more evident : — The Work of our Redemption plainly fuppofes, and requires it: — The Creeds, which were generally received, in the firfk Ages, and contained little more than a ConfeJJion of this DoBrine, as revealrd in the Form of Baptifm and Blejhng: — An'] indeed, in aWord, ^Qwhole Scriptures ftrong- ly confirm it. — Here, becaufe thus far we agree, or feem to agree, in Words at leaft, let us only obferve thefe few Things.
I. This great Foundation 'Truth, runs quite through the H^ord of God. — 1 he Bible is full of it, from the very Beginning to the End. — ■ Whoever reads that Holy Book, with Reverence and Diligence, and in the Fear of God, muft find it there, whe- ther he will or no : Yea, he that runs may read it, — Infhort, It is not revealed, only in a few Places, or in obfcure and dubious W ords : But, almoft all over it •, and, in fome Paflages, I verily believe, in as eafy, clear, and proper Expreflions, as the infi- nite, and therefore unfearchable and incomer eh eyifible, Subje^ would well admit, or our prelent and im- perfect State bear. — The three very firft Verfes in the Old T'ejiament, and three very firft Verfes of the New, (if we allow the three firft Verfes of the Gof- pel according to John, to be the firft three) plainly enough reveal this Doflrine. There we ^nd God, 1. e. the Father, (he being clearly diftinguifhed from the other Two,) the Son, or Word, and the Spirit of God, all three concurring in the Creation of all Things : And therefore, the Joint Creator, or, if you will. Creators or Makers of the World. I fay Makers or Creators, becaufe this Word is, feveral Times, found in the plural Num- ber, when fpoken of the ever blejjed Three, as
Job
[ 97 ]
Job XXXV. 10. Ecd. xii. i. Ifaiah llv. 5. i^c. &c. Here then, are Three Persons and One God : For, whoever made all Things, is God.
2 . Tho' the Difiin^'ion of the '^hree ever blefled Perfons \ the P^r/, which each of them was to ad, in *the Work of our Redemptmi ; the Ohliga-* tioHs Behevers are laid under to every one of them ; the Glory and Honour^ they are to give each of them ; i^c. ^c. are much more frequently, clear- ly, and copiouily, revealed in the New 'Tejiamenty than in the Old: Yet, are all thefe to be found, in the 0 d'TeJlament, in a Suitablenefs to the Difpen- fation the Church was then under. See Gen. i. 26, 27. Ch. iii. 9 — 22. Ch, vi. 3. Ch. xi. 7. Ch.xviii, 20, 21, 25, and 33. Ch. xix. 16. and 24. Ch. xlviii. 15. i5. -* £aW. iii. 2 — 6. Ch. xxiv. 10, II. Ch. xxxiv. 5 — 8. Lev.'ix. 11, 23. compared v/ith Nmnb. vi. 22 — 27. Ch. xii. 8. comp. with £a:. xxxiii. 11. — Jcjh. v. 13 — 15. Ch. vi, 2. — y^^^. ii. 2 — 5. Ch. vi. II — 25; &c. — Job xix. 25 — 27. Job xxyim. 24. iy ii. 7 — 12. P/. xxii. throughout. P/ xxxiii. 6. P/ li. 11,12. P/lxviii, 13 — 20. compared with £p^. iv. 8 — 10. Pf.xcv, 7. — II. compared with f/i;(^. iii. 7— 11. P/*. xcvii, I and 7. comp. with /j?^*^. i. 6. Pr«?i;. viii. 22 — ^6, Ch. XXX. 4. — Ifaiah Yi. i, and 3. compared with John xii. 4[. and Aois xxvui. 25. Ch. ix. 6, 7* Ch. XXXV. 4 — 6. Ch. 40. 9 — II. Ch. xliv. 3. Ch. 1. 4 — 9. Ch. Hi. 12 — 14. and Ch.liii. through- out. Ch. lix. 20, 21. Ch. Ixi. 1 — 3. comp. Lukeiv. iS — 21. Ch.lxiii. 7 — 14. Jer.xxm. 6. Ezek.xxxvi. 27. Dan. IX. 17. and 24. Hof. i. 7. Ch. xiii. 14. Joel ii. 28 — 32. Z^c^ xi. 11 — 13. compared with MaU. xxvii. 9, 10. Ch. xiii. 7. M3/. iii. i. ti'c:. &c. Thefe are Ibme of the many Proofs, which might have been adduced, and vindicated, for this Purpofe. If any ferious Perfon v/ill read them attentively, he will find they {trongly confirm both
O tlus»
[ 9S ]
this, and the former Propofition ; and, T dare af- fure him, he will have no Reafon to repent his Care.
3. If a really honeft, and dihgent Inquirer were, or could be, in any Hefitatisn^ about the Doftrine of the Trinity^ he needed nothing more, to fatisfy him fully, than to hear a judicions SaheUia7i and an Arian difpute upon the Point. — Thefe taking the two oppofite Extremes, the former beheving That the Unity of the Divine EJfence is fo wtrj jlri^ and ftn- gtilar^ as to exclude any Dijlinolion of Perfons \ and, by Confequence, that the diiiinEl Names and Titles^ which are given to the blelTed Three, fignify or de- note only three CharaElers, Relations, or I do not know w^hat, of the fame one individual Per jon: And the other. That the 'DijlinBion of the three Perfons js ^o very ijoide, as that they are not Three diftinft Perfons, in the fame one undivided E.Jfence, but 'Three divided Beings, and infinitely diflant from each other alfo: — Thefe, I fay, if they afted their Parts well, would elfeclually, and irrefillably, deftroy each his Antagoniil's Opinion ; and fo, between them, illu- Urate, znd. invincibly conHrm, this great Fundamental. — The Sabellian would irrefifiiliy prove. That the j:ssENTi AL Names and Titles of Godmojl High, which are given to each of the 'Thre§, are peculiar to the cne true God and him only ; that the /it tributes or Perfections, afcribed to each of them, are infinite.^ agreeably to their Names and titles -, and that the JVorks, which each of them do, require, and the Worfhip, which is -paid to each of them, fuppofe the Divine Nature; which is all he could poflibly prove : And i\i^ Arian would demonjhate from, the pe,rson al Names and Titles of each, which cannot be given to any cf the other Tivo ; the different CharaEiers, or Offices, they fuflain, v/hich cannot, could not, :be polTibly executed, at leaft in the fame Manner, t>y ^r»y lyt one of them j their various Properties
pecvb
[99]
peculiar to each of them ; and their different, yea Seemingly contrary. Anions, rcfulting from thofc their Properties and Offices, &c. from thefe, I fay, he would eafily demovfirate. That they are in facft three DISTINCT Persons •, which is all he could poflibly prove. — Here then, we have one Party dcmonftrat- ing^ That they are three di[ii?i5f Perfons ; and the other, That they haf:e every one of them the Jams cne Divine EJJ'cnce, or Nature : Whence, 'tis un- deniable. That there are three Perfons in the God- head i or, three dijlin^ Perfons and one God. — Not ONE only Divine Person, or Ferfonal Agent ^ but Three : And not Three Divine Natures, or Gods, but One only.
4. As falhionable as it is become, in this hack- Jliding Age, to make a J eft of the Doctrine of the Trinitv ; and to fpeak of it, in fuch a light and impious Manner, as to fhew that the -profane Sneereri have thrown away all Modefty and Shame, as well a$ Senfe: Yet, it is unto the Belief of this Doctrine, we are baptized -, and hence all Parties, from the Beginning, have thought themfelves bound, by theic Profeffion, to acknowledge, That there is a 'Trinity^ in fome Senfe or other ; and to believe fome Parts, at lead, of the true Doclrine \ if they would beat the Chrifian Name. — Sahilius, the Pairipq/J:ans, and feveral other Se^s, who Vv'ere much of their Mind -, Arius, Eunordiis, and I do not know how many more of them, with their Followers, v/ere all forced to own fome Sort of a 'Trinity \ and found them- felves very hard put to it, to believe the Bihl^t and yet rejeft the true Scripture DoBrine, v/hich was in- deed, all along, the Faith, of the Catholick Church. Thofe who took the two Extremes^ invincibly prov- ed, as we have heard, that Part o'i thtfruth, which each of them held ; but quite confounded their Antagonifts, and eafily baffled all the Arts which they ufed to fupport their Errors. \\ hence we may
O 2 g^tl^r,
[ 100 1
gather, i. That all Parties have owned aTrimty: That the Scriptures are full of it : That the Cbriftian Religion is founded upon it : And that he is not a Chridian, v.'ho denies this. — I think, I may add, 2. That he neither is, nor ought to be called, a Chrijiian^ who, in his ordinary Converfation, can even pride himfelf, in jeering^ or ridiculing^ &c. either the Nnme or ihtThing commovly meant by them.
N.B, As the Proofs, That the very fame essential
Names, Titles, and Attrthiiies, and that the very
lame Works and Worjljip^ which fcem naturally and
necefiarily to fuppofe, denote, or require, Samenefs
of EJfence, are afcribcd, frequently in Scripture, tp
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghofl, mull: have
appeared to the Sabelliafis, very ftrong, and indeed
irrefiflable -, when, notwithftanding their Personal
'Names, Titles, andO^^fj, &c. which feem undeniably,
to fuppofe, denote, or require, different Perfcns, they
thought they even forced them to believe. That
thofe THREE Personal Titles, denote but one zWz-
vidual Fersou, under T.bree diflinft CharaLlers or
Relations : So, the Proofs of the real DiJlin5iion of
the three Perfons, notwithflanding thofe Essential
Names., Titles, PerfeElions, &c. which necefiarily
fuppofe, and require, the fame Essence orNATURE,
muft have appeared to the Arians, full as ftrong,
and undeniable, when they thought, they even cor/i-
pelled them to believe. That the Three Perfons have
no Communion at all, in the fame Effe7ice, but arc
really Three divided Beings, as feperate as infmit&
is from finite.
I might alfo have obferved, i. That, when the Jews charged Chrift, nsjith making himfelf equal vnth God, fohn v. i8. they did not accufe him with Pclytheifn. —Yea, 2. That, when they charged him cxprefsly, widi making himself God, Ch. x. 33. they did not, durft not, alledge, That.he^ made him- felf ANOTHER God J or was a Setter forth of a
STRANGE
[ '01 ]
i^T RANGE God, as the. Athenians did thtApoJilc^ bc»- caufe he preached unto them Jesus. A^s xvil. iS, J. Tho' the Apoftle Johfi, in the very firft Verfe of his Gofpel, mentions one^ who was with God^ and therefore dijiin£i from him who is fo called, and was himfelf God, as well as he with zvhom he was ; add- ing, ver. 3. as an undeniable Proof, that he was indeed God, as well as the other. All Things zvers made by him, and without him was not any Thing made that was made: And confequently. That //i? was not himself made : That he was before all Things^ that were made, and therefore is, in Scripture Stile^ Eternal: That he h'lmkli^ made all Things: fee Col. i. 16, 17. andHeb.'i. 10 — 12. And therefore, is Gc'JL Ch. iii. 4. — Notwithftanding all this, I fay, the Jews in thofe Days, did not, durft not, charge either the Apoftle, or the Chrijlian Church, witfi Polytheifm or Idolatry : Nor can I certainly fay, that any of them, to this Day, have ventured to charge thofe who believe the true Scripture Do^rim of the Trinity, with thele horrible Crimes. — But thefe, and fome others, will come up, in a more proper Place, when I fliall urge them home to my Pur- pofe ; and offer fome Confequences from them, which our Adverfaries will never be able to evade.
II. There is a Jtatural Order, both, o^ Working and fuhftjling, among the r^o^ Holy, and undivided Three. — Here we fhall prove, That there is fuch an Order, and that it is natural.
I. There is an Oi'der of IVorking, or Operation^ among them, according to which, they all, in their natural Order, concur to, Or in, all their iVorks. without themfelves ; not only of Redemption and Grace, but oS. Creation and common Frovidence. That there is an Order, and that they all a6l according tOv it, cannot, I think, be rationally doubted. — And hence, tho' the very fame Works^ of all Sorts, are
attri-
I 102 ]
attributed to each 'of them, in many Paflages tif Scripture^ yet it is, with fome Difference^ in fome Refped:, or other : W hence we may gather, moft evidently, both the Unity of Ejfence^ and the Di- Jlin6iion and Order of the Per Jons in the Trinity, .—Several of the Fathers, in the firft Ages, and ma- ny of the moft ferious and judicious Divines ever fince, and none more fo, than the very learned and famous Dr. John Owen, have obferved, 1 hat, tho' they all jointly concur to the Ynxy fameJVo7'k j (of Crea- tion for Example,) yet each of them do it, accord- ing to his own Perfonal Property : And htnce, the Contrivance, or the Defigning Part, if I may fo fay, is, in a peculiar Manner, attributed to ih^firfi Per- fon, the Father ; the ProduEiion, making, or exe- cutive Part, to the feco7id, the Son ;• and the fo- lijhing, finiJJjing, and ■perfecting Part, to the third^ the Holy Ghost. — And fo it may be obferved in, or of, all their Works, ad extra, as the Schools fpeak, i, e. without themfclves. — And hence God, the Father, is faid often to have created, or made all things BY Christ, or the Son-, Eph. iii. 9. Col. i. 16. Heb. i. 2. i^c. and by his Spirit, to have garnijhed the Heavens,. Job xxvi. 13. and to y^;?^ forth his Sphit to create, and renew the Face of the Earth, Pf. civ, 30. VL xxxiii. 6. i^c. — And yet, to, or of the Son, it is exprefsly faid, Thou Lord in the Begimiin^ hafi laid the Poimdation of the Earth ; and the Heavens are the Works of thine Hands-, Heb. i. 8 — 12. fee John i. 3. Col. i. 16, 17. and we are told, in fo many Words, That the Spirit of God moved upon the Pace of the Waters, i. e. communicated a cherifliing> quickning Virtue to them, Gen, i. 2. and Elihu is tuU to the Point, ^he Spii'it of God hath made me. Job xxxiii. 4. &c, — Whence thefe Things are plain and undeniable, (i.) That they all Three concur to the very fame Works i and the;-efore are, as. we have obferved
above,
[ 103 ]
above, the Joini -Creator^ or Creators^ of all Things. (2.) That the feccnd and third Perfons, are not the infinrmental Cctifes of all '•Jhings^ as fome moft ridi- culoudy and impiouOy fpeak, but the Joint- Efficient ^ or Efficients •, with the /;;//, each of them, im- mediately in his own Perfon, applying himfelf to the fame Work : And therefore, each of them, without any diminifliing Circumilance, or any Par- ticle, or VVord, to leflen, or fink the Idea, are cxprefsly faid to have made fome of them at leaft, as if each had been the foie Efficient. (3.) That thcfe different Phrafes or ExprefTions, manifeftly imply, or denote, fome Difference or Peculiarity, in the Manner of their Operation. And hence, Tho' the firft Perfon is faid to have created, or made, all Things, BY the fecond, or third: Yet neither of thefe is ever, or could ever have been, faid to have done thofe Works, by the firjl. — (4.) 1 hat this Difference, or Peculiarity, in the Manner of their Operation, neceffarily and manifeftly fuppofes a Dijlinoiion of Perfons. For, (5.) No imaginable Reafon can be affigned, or indeed imagined, for this Peculiarity, except what refults from their di- flind; Perfonal Suhjijiences and Properties. Becaufe, (6.) Should we fuppofe all the Three to be indeed diftin6l Perfons % and yet, abfolutely and omnimo- doufly, eq^ual, without any Sort of Natural Order at all amongft them : Whence is it, that we fo frequently hear of the /irjl Pcrfon's doing all thefe, BY the fecond, or third, or both-, and not-ivVc- verfa? Surely, the Fhrafeology denotes fome Sort of Pre-eminence in the fir;}, and fome Sort of Subotdi- nation in the other Two. But enough oi thefe higU and myfterious Things at prefent, tho' many pret- ty obvious Thoughts clearly to our Purpofe, may poflibly be hereatter deduced, and urged, from them.
(r,) From
[ 104 J
(2.) From this Orde?- of JVorking, among the ever bicfied three, I cannot help thinking, we may fsfely, yea afluredly, conclude. That rhere is an Order o{ fiwjiaing among them alfo, according to which, they may, they fhouid, at lealt, be called the jirlty fecond^ or third ; and that this Order is natural ; ajid confequently ntithr^r arofe from, nor is found- ed upon, any Difpenfalion. Whence came,
■whence could come, the former Order without this? — What Caufe, or Reafon can be conceived, for fuch Expreflions, as making the Worlds by his Son ; BY the Word of the Lord were the Heavens made ; who created all Things by Jefus Chriji', &c. which not only feem clearly to hint to us, but ftrongly to imply fome Sort ©f Priority, Pre- eminence, ox Precedency, in the/;;y? Perfon, and fome Sort of Subordination in the fecond and third ? — In thefe, there is no Room to ftiggeft the Oeconcmy of Redemption, as the Reafon. — Becaufe, here was no voluntary Humiliation, or Condefcenfwn in the Son, or Spirit -, no, nor any Sort of Condefccnfion at all. — Here was nothing, that feems beneath the Dignity of Perfons co-eqiial with the Father -, or, any how, V'/izvorthy of, or derogatory to, the Divine Nature. —-But, this is not all -, The Manner in which each cf thefe three applied themfelves to thofe Works, and confequently, their Order in the Operation, fcems manifeftly natural, and therefore necejfary : Which, I conceive, will almofl force us to believe^ That there is an Order of fubfifting among them, that is alfo natural, and confequently necejfary and unalterable. This I hought, which 1 offer chiefly Bg^nft Roel, brings us neai- to the t'rue Point in Debate : For, if there is fuch an Ot'der of Working, and confequently oi fubfifting, then xhtfirft Perfon is naturally and neceffarily, the firft, and a6ls as l^tjirft', and never could, in any Dtfpenfationwhat-
focver.
[ 105 ]
foever, or upon any fojjihle Suppo/ition^ afb as tha j'econd^ or third \ or by any Commijfwn from either, or both of them. — Now, if this Order is natural^ and confeqiiently the Manner of their Operation is necejfary, thefe 1 hings will clearly follow, i. That the biefled tbree^ are really three dijlin^ Perfonsi 2. That v/hatever is the ! cundation of it, there is a natural, and therefore neceffary, DiJiin£fion be- tween them, fo that neither of them is any of the other ; nor could, nor can, the firji be, or aft as, the fecond or thirds or any of thefe be, or aft as, the frft. 3. 1 hat there is fome Sort of Priority^ or Pre-eminence, in the firft Perfon, and purely as fuch, above the other two j and of the fecc?id, above the third: But, a Priority of Order only, and not of Existence \ and a Pre-eminence fully confiftent, with the true and proper Coejfentiality of all the three. No Father, among Men, ever exifted^ as we Ihall fee, before his Son : And whatever Pre-^ eminence a Father, as fuch, has above, or over his Son, as fuch -, yet, when he, the Son, grov/s up, he is as properly a Man as his Father. Yea, and often proves, in all other Refpefts, by far the greateft and worthieft Perfon of the two. 4. If thefe Things are fo, no other Account can be given of this Lijiin^iion, either the Nature or Fonn^ dation of it •, yea, no other need be enquired after, or defired, than what the Scriptures give us, vi-z. That the firji Perfon is, as fuch, a proper Father^ who begot t\^ fecond: That the fecond, and as fuch, is a proper Son, and was begotten of him ; and there- fore, has the fame Nature and Perfections which he has, as all proper Sons have : And, That the third Perfon, who is fometimes called the Spirit ; fre- quently {tiled the Spirit of God •, Rom. viii. 9. I Cor. iii. 16. ^c. and elfewhere, the Spirit ofhisSon^ Gal. iv. 6. and of Chriji ', Rom. viii. 2. Ph. i. 19, (^c, proceeds from them both -, John xiv. ver. i o.
[ io6 ]
17, and 23. Ch. xv. 26. Ch. xvi. 7, ^<r. and works with them alfo immediately, according to his own Perfonal Property. — But, becaufe thefe Things do not he fo dire6tly before us, at prefent, I wave them, and defire the Reader, carefully- to weigh and remember, thefe following Thoughts.
N. B. Thefe Obfervacions will be thought, per- haps, to appear more plainly, in that moji ajlonijh- ing, and unparalleled^ of all the IVorks of God-^ even the IVork of our Redemption. — The Source, Rife, or Original, oi tVii^ ftupendous ^ oxk..^ is, everywhere inSciipture, isScnhtd. to t\iz Father's Love-, John iii. 16. Rom. V. 8. Ch. viii. 32. i John iii. 16. Ch. iv. 9, 10, &c. and the whole Coittrivance or Deftgn., is affigned to him. There is a manifeft T^ig- nity and Precedence., in the very 'Title and Idea of Father. — In this amazing Defign he fuftains the Majejly and Honour, of the Deity., requiring and accepting a Satisfaction, and from one in our Na- ture too, i^c. — It therefore did not become him to take upon him the Seed of Abraham., and adt the near Kinfman's Fart : Nor would the Order we are fpeak- ing of, upon any Account, permit it. — The Execu- tion then of this unparalkWd Work, belong'd to, or devolved of Courfe upon, the Son; and the jipplication of all the glorious Fruits or EfFeds of it, upon the third Perfon ? — And yet, the Father is faid to do all thefe, by the other two, &c. &c.
N. B. 2. If any are prelfed with Objeflions, againft the Do6lrine of the Trinity, let them re- member. That the Bible is full of it : That the Form of Baptifm, and the Part each of them aft in our Redemption, make it abfolutely neceffary to be believed : That the Catholic Church has been always unanimous and fteddy, in the Belief of it : And, 7 hat the chief DifHculties arife, from the DifRculty we find in conceiving the Manner of it. And, to give fome Jfjijiame^ if not SatisfaSfiorty
in
t J07 ]
n this Cafe, let them remember, That the Divine
Ejfence is infinite^ and therefore incomprehe-nfihle and unfearchabk : — That, many Things therefore may, and muft, be predicated of it, which cannot be pre- dicated of any finite Ejfence whatfoever : — That therefore we cannot clearly conceive how, the one un* divided Divine Nature can fubfift, in three difiinSi Perfons', becaufe, we think, and judge, of it, as we do o^ othtr EJfences-f and perceive no fuch Thing in 2Lr\y finite Eflence j and confequently, find nothing in Nature parallel to it, or which can tolerably illujirate it. — And, That it is from the Infinitude of the Di' vine Ejfence, That it may, it always did, it muft, and could not but, fubfijt in three : As we are fure, from Scripture, it does, and ever did, and fhall.
A^. B. 3. Tho' the Idea, which Philofophers and others, have of Gcd, as of a Being infnitely, and therefore, omnimodoufiy -perfeEl \ Or, a Being, which has all Perfe5iions in itjelj, and fnhf.jiing in the ah' folutely moji perfeSl Manner : Tho', this Idea, I fay, doth not, in this our prefent State of Imperfedion, rife up to the Idea of the Trinity ; or, of three Per^ fons in the cne Divine Nature ; yet there is nothing in it, that is inconfiftent with, or deftrudive of it, neither. — We can know nothing of God, but what we know from him!'elf, or his JVorks, by Senfation, or Refle6lion : And therefore, it is Prefumption, and rank and ridiculous Pride, to imagine, 1 hat our Reafou is the Meafure of Truth ; I hat nothing is, or can be trite, which we cannot have clear and difiin5l Ideas of -, or. That we can find out the Al- mighty unto Perfe^ion. — But, 'tis Impiety, and Rebellion a^^ainft God, to dare to fay. That what God has faid, is not, or cannot be, true. — I have no Doubt, That, if we had the perfect, and adequate Idea, of the Divine Ejfence, of infinite Per' fe^ions, and the moft perfe^ Manner of exifiing, we ihould have the fulleji Hatisfa^ion of the Truth of
P 2 the
[ io8 ]
the Catholic Doftrine of the Trinity. — < But, enough of this, for thofe for whom I chiefly write, efpeciaUy fmce a PaiTage of Scripture, which led me, long ago, to this Way of thinking, mull be a little ex- plained, by and by, which will give us fome clearer Apprehenfions of the feverai Things to this Purpofe. And, whereas,
N. B. 4. The learned Rod reafons againft the -proper Sonjhip of the feccnd Perfon, chiefly from his abjolute and cmnimodous Equality with the Father ; ^nd has carried Matters fo far, as to deny any Order, either of Working or Subjijling, among the bleiled Three, but what is purely CEconomical I — Yea, and to venture to fay. That he who is called the Father^ might have been called the Son, ^c. becaufe the Name Son, as well as the Name Father, fignifies moft perfetl and true Deity \ His own Words are thrown into the Margin. I Ihall not ftay to Ihew, That his Conclujion out runs his Premises ; ^nd, That, if it did not, it would not follow from them, for another Reafon : And therefore fiiall on- ly fuggeil, to the plain Reader, a very eafy and full Reply, — Tho' the Name Son, among Men, efpe- cially, if the Son is grown up, equally fignifies i^rue Humanity, or Manhood, as well as the Name father ; and tho' the Son may be, in many Inftances, upon every Account, a more worthy and confider- ^ble, or, if you will, a more perfe^ Man, than his Father :■ Yet, as long as they are both alive, the Relation between them remains. The Father, is jtill Father -, and confidered purely as fuch, there is
Set^, ut ingenue loquar^ — fotuijfe — fieri, ut qua Perjona punc Pater 'vacatur, Filius 'vocata fidjfet. Si enim nihil fecundce Perfomf Perfeftionis detrahit Nornen Filij, nihil prima pra fe- cunda addit Nomcn Patris, is amnei Perjona fint equates cmni ^cd'j J l^ihil Di-vinitati ullius Perjona decederet, fi clterius No- mine ^'ocarttur, cum unum Nomcn <tq; ac aliud fignifictt perfcdif- Rmam & v\;ram Deitatein. Dijtr. 'IheoL de Gener. Filii,, p. 40,
fo^ie-
'I '09 ]
ibmething in the very Name, more venerable, great and honourable, as all Mankind, I think, agree. — Advance we then to another Propofition, about which there will be no Diipute.
III, The Terms, Father and Son, of whom- foever underftood, are both relative 1 erms ; and therefore, neceil'arily fuppofe each other.
This is undeniable, and Ic If-cvident. He who is a Father, has a ijon : And he who is a Sen, has a Father. No one ever could, or can be, truly call- ed, a Father, out one who either had, or has a Son : And he who is, or ever was called, a Son^ either bad, or has, a Father. — This holds, whe- ther we fpeak of God the Father and his only he- gotten: Or, oi God and his Creatures, v^htther yingels or Men, who are fometimes called his Sons : Or, o^ Fathers and '^ons among Men. In fhort, where there is no Father, there is no Son -, and vke verfa.
IV. Thcfe Terms, Father and Son^ are, in Scrip- ture and among all Nations, ufed fometimes pro- perly, and fometimes improperly, ov figuratively, and that on divers, civil, moral, and fpiri:ual Occafions.
I. They are fometimes ufed properly, as all dp, and muft confefs. — There would be no Room to fay they are ever ufed improperly, if they were not. The firll Senfe of every Noun-Subftantive, is the proper Senfe, including all the EJfential Ideas chiefly, together with thofe which we know do commonly agree to, or are found in the Subje5l : And, when we life it improperly, we drop feveral of thofe Ideas, and efpecially the primary ones, retaining fometimes more and fometimes fewer of the others, as the Word is ufed more or lefs improperly.
Among Men, when they are ufed properly, they are either taken more firi^ly, or largely. — Whe^i taken more ftridly. He is a Father, as both Fhi- lofophers and Divines have been wont to fpeak, who by natural Generation, communicates the Jame Na- ture
fure vfhich himfelf has, with all Its ejentiat Attri- hutes, to another : And, He is a Son^ to whom, the fame Nature, with all that is eJTential to it, is, that Way, communicated *. This is not only the common, but has been thought to be the proper. Signification, or philofophical Definition, of the *Terms, when taken ftridly. Thus Cain and Jhel were the Sons o^ Adam. — In a larger Senfe, He is a Father, who does not immediately, but, by the In- tervention of fome proper Son, communicate the fame Nature, ^c. \n the common Way, to ano- ther : And, He is a . on, to whom the fame Na- ture is thus communicated. — Thus Enoch was the Son oi Adam. And, as we commonly fay, when "we ftretch the Idea, Ada^n was the Father of all Mankind, or our fird Parent ; becaufe we were alt in his Loins, and diWfprang of, or from him. — Thus Jfrael is, frequently, ftiled the Father of all his Pofterity, as they are very frequently called the Children of Ifrael. — Thefe, as all Men know, are the primary and chief Ideas annexed to thefe two Terms : And, in this Senfe, they are always, with- out Exception, ufed among Men, when the Ad- nouns own, ox proper, are added to the Word, Fa- tber ; or the Adnouns own, proper, begotten, only hegotten, are affixed to the Term Son. In this, all are agreed : Nor can any one Exception be given, I think, to the contrary. 1 defire the ferious Reader always to keep this in Mind.
2. Thefe two Relatives, Father and Son, are, in Scripture and among all Nations, often ufed im- p'operly, or figuratively ; and that both when fpoken of God, with refpe(51: to the Creatures •, or of Men with refpefl to other Men : And that, upon divers dvily moral and fpiritual Occafions.
• Idea Generationis proprie dictje, eji Idea Pro- duftionis rd Jimilist fi-ve Communicationis ejufdem Naturae. Roel. Differ, Theol. p. 21. ^ paj/itn,
Thefe
[ III 1
Thefe Words- are ufed improperly^ when the firjt and principal Idea, or Ideas ^ denoted by them, when taken properly, are dropt ; and they are ufed to fignify Perfons, who (land not in fo near a Rela- tion to each other, becaufe of fome fecondary IdeaSy which are fuppofed, naturally, to arife from, or accompany, the Relation of a Father to a Son^ or vice verfa. An Example or two will make this plainer. — Thus, becaufe fbefides the Idea of be- getting^ and thereby communicating the fame Nature with all that is ejfential to it, to another^ which is, or has been, thought the primary Idea fignified by- the Word Father among Men ;} it has been, in all Ages, and, every where, obferved, by univerfal Ex- perience -, That there is in all proper Fathers, a na- tural, ftrong, and almoft indelible, Injtin5l or Pro- penfton, powerfully inclining them tenderly to love^ thofe whom they have begotten, provide for them, protedl them, hide their Infirmities, bear with them, inftru<5t them, pity and relieve them in Bijirefs^ and the like : Becaufe of thefe, I fay. Other Per- fons, who are obferved to be very fond of thofe, whom they have not begotten, to take them under their Froteftion, look after their Education, put them out to fome Trade, fet them up in the World, affift or diredl them in their Affairs, and the like, have been thought, and faid, to aft the Part of' Fathers to them: — And hence have been, every where, and in all Ages, very commonly filled, their Fathers : And thofe, to whom they have fhewed all this Kindnefs, have been as ufually called their Sons. — On the other Hand, becaufe own proper Sons have been generally obferved to refemble their own Fathers, either in their Faces, Complexion, Air, Temper, ^c. to fpeak or walk, like them ; to reverence, fear and love them -, to have the fame Tempers, Paffions, Foibles •, i^c. to imitate them, embrace xhdv Notions ox Opinions, and bevery tena-
cious
[ 112 ]
clous of them, or zealous for them ; to depend upon them, and run to them, upon all Occafions, for what they want ; and the like : Thofe young Perfons, who, tho' not akin, very much refemble other Men, either in their Faces, or Tempers, ^c, who imitate them, ftudy under them, are advifed and managed by them, and put themfelves under their Protection, depend upon their Favour, Af- fiftance, or Intereft, ^c. — Thofe young Perfons, I fay, have been commonly called their Sons : And thofe, whom they have thus refembled, imitated, or ftudied under, is'c. have been as ufually ftiled their Fathers. — This may fuffice, for the various improper Ufes of thefe tvvo Terms, among Men. — For Example,
Holy Job fpeaking of himfelf could, in his ^- Jlictions, remember with much Scaisfaction^ That he had been a Father to the Poor \ Ch. xxix. :6. and that the Fatherless ix'-.s brought up with him^ m a Father. Ch. xxxi. 17, 18. — The pious^i Youths, who were bred in the Schools of the Pro- phets of Old, were commonly ftiled, the Sons of the Prophets; 2 Kings ii. ver. ?. and 5. i^c. and they, with Reverence, called th-; Prophets their Fathers, ver. 12. 15, c-.c. — 11:. 5, or fomething very like it, was, and is ftill, alfo frequent, every where, among Divines, Phuofcphers, and 'Teachers of all Sorts of Arts and Sciences, and thofe who attend their Lectures, &c, — We read of fome called Fathers and Sons, upon a civil or political Account. — Whence God is faid to have made Jo- feph a Father to Pharaoh, Gen. xlv. 3. i.e. his chief Counfel lor or prime Minifter, whom the King refpeded as ^Father, and /ho counfelled him with the Wifdom and Prudenc; or a Father : And 'tis faid of Eliakim, he flmll oe a Father to the Inhabi- tants of Jerufalem, &c. If. xxii. 21. /. e. fhall be very careful and tender of tnem, ^c. as a Father.
— And
[ 113 ]
And hence it is, That wife and good Princeis, who have really Jludied the Welfare of their Suhje^s, have ruled them jujVy, and in the Fear of God., a?id have been to them as the Light of the Morning when the Sun rifeth., &c. 2 Sam. xxiii. ^. 4. have been defervedly honoured with the moft glorious of all their Titles, 'The Fathers of their Country : And thofe Princes have reciprocally honoured their Siihje5ls^ with the endearing Compellation of, their Children, — We read alfo of Fathers and Sons^ fo called upon a religious Account. — In fomething like this Senfe,- was the young Levite invited, tirft by Micha^ Judg. xvii. 10. and then by the Children of Dan^ Ch. xviii. 19. to be to them a Father and a Priefl : But, much more truly, and emphatically, does the Apoftle Paul fpeak of himfelf, i Cor. iv. 15. as the Father of thofe, whom he had begotten through the Gofpel. fee Gal. iv. 19. i Tim. i. 2.
Had our learned Author been as particular, Ind accurate, upon thefe Things, as he fhould have been, our Work had been much fhorter, and much more pleafant: But, feeing he has not, as the Reader will fee prefently, we mull obferve in general. That
1 . Tho' the Terms, Father and Son, when fpoken of Men, are often ufed improperly as well as properly., the Scope of the Speaker, common Senfe, or feveral Circumftances, i^c. and the Ad nouns own, begotten.^ &CC, do fo clearly determine the Meaning, That we can be in no Danger of miftaking.
2. That whenever thefe Terms, Father and Son^ are ufed of God and his Creatures : Or, when God is called the Father of any of hii Creatures, whether in Heaven or in Earth, or any of them are called^ his Sons ; both Terms are, every where, and without any Exception, ufed very improperly. And the Rea- fon is, Becaufe they are Creatures, ^r^^/fi, made, ov formed, by biw, of an Ejfence infinitely inferior to^
Q and
[ "4 ]
and divided from his own : And not, in a proper Senfe, begotten of him, or coejfential with him, as all proper Sons are. So that, neither is He the pro- per Father of any one of them ; nor is any one of them, in a ftridt and proper Senfe, his own Son.^-ln how many near, and dear, Relations foever, any One of them may ftand to him •, or how much fo- ever any one of them may refemble him, or be like him, in Dominion^ or Holinefs, or any other ^alitieSy the firft and chief Idea denoted by thofe Terms, when taken properly, is wanting: And therefore, they are not, in thofe Cafes, iifed properly, but improperly ; as will appear, by a very particular Confideration of all thofe Places, where any Creatures are, any where in Scripture, fliled the Sons of God, or to whom he is faid to be a Father.
I. Whatever the w^(7/^ Cr^^//(7« are, or have, the Creatures have all they have from him that made them •, even their Beings, particular Natures, Forms^ Powers, &c. And hence, their Almighty Creator has been often, and in all Places and Ages, (tho*, to the beft: of my Remembrance, never in the Scriptures,) ftiled their Father, or the Parent of all Things. — But, 'tis felf evident, they have not, or he did not confer upon them, or give them, his own Effence : And therefore, He is not, in a proper Senfe, their Father, nor is any One of them properly his Son. — 2. Be- caufe Angels are fpiritual Beings , excelling in Strength^ like God in Knowledge and Holinefs, &c. they are, three or four Times in the Bible, called the So7is of God; Job 1.6. ( h. 2. I. Ch. 38. 7. and upon the fame or the like Accounts, is the mofihigh cdlkd, the Father of Spirits; Heb. 12. 9. but, /w- properly alfo, for the very fame Reafon. — In like Manner, 3. If that PaiTage, Luke 3.38. which was the Son of Jdnm, which was the Son of God, be juftly tr-anflatcd, as perhaps it is not, Adam was, and the «nly mere Man that ever was, in the Singular Num- ber,
["5 1
ber, dignified with this glorious Title ; becaufe he was made after the Image ^ and in the Likenefs of the bleffed Three ', Gen. i. ?,6, 27. i. e. made a living Soul, endued with Knowledge, Right eoufnefs, and true.. Holinefs, i Cor. 15. 45. Col. 3. 10. Eph. 4. 24. having alfo Dominion over the Creatures: Gen. i. 26 — 28. But, tho' he did, upon theie Accounts, more nearly refemble his moft blefled Maker, or Father, than all the lower World befides ; yet, God is faid to have made and created, but never to have begotten him ; and no Man now dreams, That the Divine Effence was communicated to him ; for the Poet's, Divine Particula Aura, is, to Hiy the leaft, too bold, and cannot be juftified. In fhort, the very Idea of Creation, as we have hinted above, is abfolutely in- confiftent with Generation or Filiation : And the Re- lation, between a proper Father and a proper Son, is as different from that between a Creator and the Work of his Hands, as any Relation can well be. — 4. Becaufe Magistracy is of God, and ^\\ Authority and Dominion is from him ; and Magif rates repre- fent him, and a^ in his Name and Place, ^c. Deut. I. I J. iChro. 19. 6. ^c. hance Magiflr at es, efpecially the higher Powers, are once ftiled Children, or Sons of the mofl High : Pf Ixxxii. 6. But, they have been fo far from being, in a -prosper Stnfe, Sons of God, that many of them have been, in all Ages, as ^properly, as they well could be, ^"^ons of Satan. — 5. Becaufe thofe great Men, who have been very inftrumental, a6live, and fuccefsful, in founding, raifmg, enriching, eftablifhing, and protecting. Families^ Cities, Kingdoms, Qt Empires, giving them found and wholfome haws, or ruling them with pa- ternal Csire, Tendernefs and Love, £sfc. i^c. have been diftinguifhed, and honoured, with the Title of Fa- thers ', and have, with great Affedlion, called their Subjeds, Sons : For thefe, or the like Reafons, The mojt High, who chofe tht Children of Ifrael for a pecu-
Q^ z liar
[ "6 ]
liar 1'reafure unto himfelf above all People, Ex. xix, 5. &c. brought them out of Egypt ^ bare them on Ea- gles Wings^ bought them, made them and ejiablijhcd them, &:c. Deut. xxxii. 6 — 12. entred into a Cove- nant with them, Ex. xxiv. 6 — 12. gave them haws end Ordinances, &c. Ex. Chs 20, 21, 22, &c. and at lail, put them in PojfeJJion of the Inheritance promised. For thefe, or the hke Realbns, I fay, is He called their Father ; and he himfelf, moft fin- gularly honours them, itiling Ijrael his Son, his first-born: Ex. iv. 22. And they, in their Di- llrefs, many Ages after, encourage themfclves in Prayer, looking unto him as, their Fath er. If. Ixiii. 16. Ch. Ixiv. 8. But, notwithftanding all thefe, 'tis undeniable. That the Terms are here taken very improperly. — 6. Among the Ancients, 'twas very common for Perfons of fome Diflin^icn, v/ho had great E^lates, but no Heirs of their own Bodies, to chufe fome others, whom they loved, from any Fa- milies they pleafed ; and, in a public Manner, ac- cording to a For^n then prefcribed by haw, to adopt or chufe them for, and fo make them, their hegal Children: Whence the Adopters, were, in Law, reputed, and always after called, their Fathers \ and the Adopted were, by that Means, as it were, cut off from their old natural Families, and inoculated into another Family, and called by their new Fathers Names, or the Names of their Families, treated and educated as their own, and to them were their Pof- felfwns at laft bequeathed. — In Allufion to this Cuftom, God is faid to have predejiinated his People to the Adoption of Children ; Eph. i. 5. and Christ to give them Power, i^aa-lxv. Right, or Privilege to become the Sons of God\ John i. 12. and hence we read of their receiving the yidoption of Sons ; Gal. iv. 5. and o^ the Spirit of /Adoption; Rom. viii. 15, 17, ^c. But the very Word, Adoption, pre-fuppofes. That God is neither their own proper Father y nor they
his
[ i'7l
his own proper Sons. And confequently, when he is faid to have begotten any of thole adopted Children, or when they are faid to have been born of him ^ 'tis felf- evident, That the Words, begotten and born^ muft be ufed improperly : Becaufe, if they had been, in a proper Senfe, begotten^ or born of God, they would have been his Sons by Nature ; and theh, there would have been neither any Reafon , nor Room, for adopting them. — -And 7. Thofe who are born from above, or born again ; John iii. ^ and 5. are called the Sons of God by Regeneration. Ch. i. 13. Hence they are faid, to be born of the Spirit ; John iii. 5, 6, and 8. born of him, i. e. I humbly con- ceive, Christ ; i John ii. 29. (for, it is of Hijn the Apoftle is fpeaking •, 'tis He, in whom Believers are to abide, ver. 28. comp. Wixhjohnxv. 4, 6, ^c. 'tis He only, who fhall appear; ver. 28, and Ch. 3. 2. vfhowas manifefled; ver. 5, ^c.) and in fo many Words, born of God. Ch. iii. 9. — Ch. iv. 7. Yea, the Apoftle James is exprefs. Of his own Will begat he us \ Ch. i. 18. and another has it, God, who hath begotten us again, &c. i Pet. i. 3. and the Apoftle John is very clear. He that believeth, is born of God, i John v. i . and whofoever is born of Godftnneth not, but he that is begotten of God keepeth himfelf, &c. ver. 18. Thcfe, I think, are all the Texts in the New Tcftament, where any fuch ftrong Expreffions occur. And ftrong, and clear, and full, they are, and blefled be his Name, there are fuch in the Bible : But yet, 'tis plain, 'tis undeniable, that even in thefe, the Words, born and begotten, &c. are improper. — i. From xht Texts themfelves. W the Father of Lights is faid, to have begotten them again, 'tis evident they were begotten once before, viz. in the Likenefs of their Jinful Parents ; Gen. v. 3. and that this begetting them again, was only a rencju- ing them : Becaufe, we cannot be properly begotten twice. — 2. From the Nature of the Thing, I he
Di'jinf
Divine Nature is indivi^Me, and a Finite SubjeSi Is not capable of receiving, or containing, what is /«- fnite.^ — And 3. From this, that Christ calls him- felf, and is often called, the only begotten Son ; and he is confefledly, the true God, having xhtfame Ejfence and Perfections with the Father ; and theret, fore, the Terms are ufed of him, moft properly ; and confequently, He is, in the trueft, moft fublime, and moft proper Senfe, a Son, i. e. a coejfential Son : But, if he is, in a proper Senfe, the only he- gotten, 'tis Demonftration, That when the renewed are faid to be born or begotten of God, both thefc Words, born and begotten, are ufed figuratively for the Renovation of their Natures ; and not, properly, for communicating his own Ejfence unto them ; and lb making them coejfential Sons.
* Twill be in vain, if thefe Things are well confi- dered, to object to us thofe Vvords, wherein true Believers are faid to be made Gf/a? xoivuvo) (pua-iug. Partakers of the Divine Nature, 2 Pet. i . 4. which are the ftrongeft to this Purpofe, we find anywhere in the Bible : Becaufe, that Expreflion is clearly ex- plained by many others ; fuch as, / will put a new Spirit within you, &c. Ezek. 11. 11. J new Heart dfo willlgiveyou, &c. Ch. 36.26 — 29. Put on the new Man, which after God is created in Righteoufnefs and true Holinefs, Eph. 4. 24. That we might be Parta- kers of his Holinefs^ Hcb. 12. 10. and feveral others of much the fame Importance. Thefe all ftrongly imply, againft our P^/(^^i<2«/z^rj of all Sorts, and ef- pecially our Socinians, That a fupernatural Change is Avrought in his People, wherein, or whereby, the I- mage of God, in which Man was made at firft. Gen. i. 26, 27. and which was fadly defaced, and, in fe- veral Refpeds, abfolutely lofl, by the Fall: That this Image, I fay, is, in fome good Meafure, reflored in them, and an inward, vital, habitual, abiding Prin- cipU o'i fpiritual Light, Life and Strength, is intufed
into
[ "9]
into, or, created in them, by the Holy Spirit who is given unto them, and whereby they are made Neia Creatures, and in fome good Meafure to refembk their heavenly Father : But, except the wretched Ser- vetus, and fome half-crazed Creatures in the laft Age, not worthy any one's Regard, I do not re- member any who ever dreamt, That, by the Pro- miles, true Believers have the very EJfence of God communicated to them ; and confequently, tho* they are called, upon feveral Accounts, his Sons, 'tis only in an improper Senfe.
Our learned Author hath neither fo accurately di- ftinguiflied upon this Head, nor fo clearly, and fully, explained his Terms, any where, as we could have wiihed. And tho' he, in feveral Places, for feveral Pages together, is explaining them, or efTaying fomewhat like it, he never once, I think, tells us. That they, as almoft all other Terms, are fome- times ufed properly, and fometimes improperly or figuratively -, &c. nor acquainted us with the true, or common Definition of them, when taken properly, ^c. — In fhort, all is general ! ^ in Generalibus
latet Ambiguitas. Thus, p. 1 7. having obferv-
ed, " That the Name Son of God doth originally " refped: the Glory and Excellency of his Per- *' fon," Would not one then have thought. That it originally refpedls his Divinity ? " appears from " the Ufc of the Word Son and Son of God in other " Places of Scripture." He goes on, in the very next Paragraph, which you Ihall have verbatim.
" Son or Daughter or Child in the Hebrew " Tongue implies eminently two Things, fi.) It •' notes fome Derivation of one Thing from ano- " ther." How general, and equivocal is this ? However, perhaps it does fo, in fome very large, improper, or figurative Senfe : But, if taken pro- perly, he fliould have faid, The Derivation of the fame Nature, with all that is ejfential to it, from
the
[ I20 ]
the Father to the Son. " Men are frequently called " Sens of Men'' Yes. All Men that ever were born, might and have been called ^ons of Men ; be- caufe they really were fo : And none but fuch, could be, properly fo called. *' Ifraelites are called " the Sons or Children of Ifraeiy They are fo : And here, 'tis plain, the W ord is ufed, properly^ tho* with fome Latitude : " So Sparks are called " Sons of the burning Coal, Job v. 7, to fignify *' the Derivation of one from the other." i hey are fo, in the Margin of our Bibles : And here, every Man mufl: fee, they are ufed figuratively, and very improperly -, tho' the going forth of the Sparks from the Coal, and their having fomething of the fame Nature, gave rife to this lively, flrong and poetical ExprefTion.
" ''2.) It is alfo an Idiom of the Hebrew Lan- " guage, and a peculiar Way of Speaking much in " ufe arrong the Jews, to call one Perfon the i>on of " any other Thing or Perfon whofe ^ality and " Likenefs he bears. So wicked Men are called the " Sons oi Belial, &c. p. 17. 18." If this is fo, in all thofe Cafes, and the like, the Word is ufed ve- ry improperly : Becaufe, otherwife. Sons are the Sons of Perfons, and not of Things. He then takes No- tice, " That Adam, Angels, Saints, Magijhates " are called the Sons of God;"" p. 18. for the fame, or the like Realbns, that we have given : But, it is undeniable, they are all fo only, in an improper Scnfe.
He then adds, p. 19. " Now it is evident that " our Lord Jefus Chrifi is the Son of God, in a " Senfe fuperior to Men or Angels, for he is call- *' ed God's own, Rom. viii. 32. his only begotten " Son, John i. 14. 18." Why then, furely. He is, as fuch, begotten and not made : Andtiiere- fore, a coefj'ential Son ; if thefe Words have any Senfe. — He goes on, He is called his Firji-born,
th&.
[ i2i i
^' the Image of the invijible God, the firfi horn of every *' Creature : or that in all things he niufl have the *' Pre-eminence. Col. i. 15, 16, 18. p. 19." Here it is infinuated, That the Son of God, as fuch, is him- felf, in reahty, one of the Creatures, tho' created be- fore them all, and the chief of them ! Whereas, that very Context, ftrongly, and invincibly proves. That he is no Creature, but a coeffential Son, if any Words can prove any Thing. — Becauie, By him were all Things created that are in Heaven, and that are in Earth, vijible and invijible, &c. All Things were created by him, and for him : And he is BEFORE ALL Things, and by him, or .n him, eu auTto all -Things consist, ver. 16, 17. What more then could be faid ? He is the Firil. Caufe, and Laft End, of all Things : And therefore, as fuch, abfolutely and in all Relpe<5ts, yea infinitely, above the Rank of Creatures. — " Thefe fcriptural ExprtlTions plainly *' imply both Derivation and Refemblance." What then .? A proper Son, as fuch, is derived from his Father : And the nearer the Refemblance, the more likely he is to be an own, a coeffential Son. — Yet, in the very very next Words,
" He craves Leave to infert one Caution," And a ftrange one it is ! " Tho' 'tis fufficiently manifefl *' from the New Teftament, and efpecially from " Heb. i. that Chrifi is the Son of God in a Senfe far *' fuperior to Angels, yet I am in Doubt whether the *' Difciples at firft could have any fuch Idea of his " Superiority to all Angels : Perhaps their Idea of " the ''on of God arofe no higher at firft then to fup- " pofe him fuperior to all their Prophets and Kings, *' who were called Sons of God, tho' afterwards " it grew up to an Idea fuperior to all the Angels of " God." p. 19, 20. When " Doubts,'' " and Per- *' haps's," and that againft all Probability, are brought in to fupport a Caufe ; at the fame Time, that the Author fhews us his extraordinary Zeal, he too evi-
R dently
[ J22 ]
dently makes It appear. That Arguments are very fcarce, and other Proofs no where at Hand ! — More particularly, i. ThtVxooh o'i t\\t SofiJJjtp of Chrijiy Heb. i. are all from the Old Tejlament •, Pf. ii. 7. Pf. Ixxxix. 26,27. P/ xcvii.7.P/. xlv.6j7.P/icii. 25 — 28. moft, if not every one, of which were, by the ancient JeiviJJjChuxch^ interpreted of the Mejjiah, — 2. Couid the Difciples be ignorant. That the Second Pfalm, (to take the firtl that offers) was a Prophecy of Chrijt i or, That He whofe unh-crfal Dominion is there fpoken of, and whom the Father calls hi^ begotten Son, &c. v^d& fupericr to Angels'^. — 3. Was it pofii- ble. That thofe, who had heard himfelf fo folemnly declare, That he was the Son^ the only begotten Son of God', John in. 16, &c. who was Cf'^udl ^w'vAi him, and, to prove it, could fay, IVh/it Things fo ever the Father doth, thefe alfo doth the Son likewife ; Ch. v. 17, 19, ^c. &c. who had heard the Baptifi's Dif- courfes, Ch. i. 29 — 34. and Ch, iii. 27 — 36. as fe- veral of them no doubt did, and foon after, made that glorious Confffion^ Ch. vi. 69. Could they, I liiy, have any Doubt " of his Superiority to all An- " gels } " Why really, if they had, I fhail only fay at prefent. They might, certainly, have known bet- ter.— 4. How did they know " that the Prophets " were ever called Sons of God ? " 1 o the beft of my Remembrance, they were never fo called, till our Lord himfelf honoured them fo far, i^c. — But, to w^ave trifling, I mult afi^. What will follow from this, fnoukl I grant, Hiat the Idea the Difciples had of him, at firit, was fo very low? That this was the true Idea : That it will lufficc, if we have now the fame Idea ? &c. No, by no Means. The Idea, we nciv enquire after, is that v/hich, at laft, they arrived at. I (hall tlicrefore, once for all, defire the Reader to remember,
I . That Doubts and Perhnps's, again ft all Proba- jbility^ deferve no Regard. — 2. That Hints and Inft-
nuations
[ 123 ]
.nuations unfupported, and without Reafon, deferve very little. — 3. That begging the ^.efiion^ through- out, i. e. ajferting, or fuppofing^ what fhould have been proved, is not reafoning or difputing^ but talk- ing, at beft, and to very little Purpofe too. And 4. That I might have given twice twenty Inftanccs of this Kind, more than I fhail, as every judicious, attentive, and honeft Reader mufl obferve, whether he will or no. — But,
That you may be yet more convinced. That our Author has been, throughout, Tery general and am- biguous, yea perplexed, in propofing the ^eftion, and explaining the Terms, we fhall confider two or three Paragraphs more.
The Ohjertion he puts into our Mouths, p. 36, is this, " 'I he Word 'Son, among Men, properly fig- ** nifies one of the fame Nature with the Father ; and " therefore Son of Cod, when 'tis applied to Cbrii?, " muft fignify One of the l;tme Nature with God " the Father," ^c. — Now, this is not only very general, but really defeftive, if not plainly falfe. Would he have given our Minds, it fliould have run thus. One of the fame Nature with the Father, and of him, from him, or fome Way or other commiinicatedby him. But, his Anfwer to it, is yet much more fo !
" Aifw. I. The Word Son taken in its common " Senfes and Ufes, among Men, may be applied to " feveral Ideas," p. 36. So may almoft every Word. *' viz. a Derivation from the Father,''^ Had he faid of the fmne Nature, with all that is effential to it, that had been xhtfrfl, and chief \dt^ of the Word, when ufed properly : But, as it is, 'tis to fay the leaft, very general and equivocal. The others are all applied to it very improperly, to fay no worfe — • " a Likenefs to, or Imitation of the Father, a Subordina- *' tion, or fome Sort o^ inferior Relation to the Fa- " ther," — At this Rate, I do not know but fome Sons- may have Ten Thoufand Fathers I ""^ or a Being of
H 2 i^^
[ ^24 ]
* the fame Species^ Kind or Nature with the Fa-: ' ther^ and an individual Being dijiin^ from the Far ' ther.^"* -r If fo, there is not one Man upon the Face of the whole Earth, who is not the Son of every other Man in the World: Becaufe, There is not one Man, this Day alive, who is not a " Be- '' z;;^ of the fame Species^, Kind or Nature with, and *' an individual Being dijlin^ from,'' z'yitrj other Man ! — Surely there muft have been fome Rea- fons, for this xVay of talking ! Let others guefs them. — So much for this Paragraph, which you have had verbatim^ as you fhall have the three fol- lowing i the two firft of which come in as a Sort of Explanation, or Confirmation, of that which we have nov/ confidered.
" Now 'tis plain that when human Words and " Similes^^ (and^ I conceive, we have no other) " are ufed to reprefent Divine Things^"* (as they frequently are,) " there is no Necefiity that thole " Words fhould include all their original Ideas, " nor indeed is it poffible :" Granted, at prefent. *' 'Tis enough to fupport the Analogy, if but one " or two of the fame Ideas are denoted by the Ufe " of the fame Word." p. 36. — If the Words are taken properly, the original and principal, or, if you will, the effential Ideas denoted by thofe Words, are never, can never, be quite dropt : But, if they are taken improperly, one or more of the fe- condary Ideas, according as the Scope and Circum- ftances of the PafTage require, are, yea muft be fuf- ncient. **. Why may we not then fuppofe that the *' Name ^on of God, when applied to Chrijl, may *' fignify his peculiar Derivation from the Father, as *' to his Soul, or as to his Body, or his fub ordinate *' Chara^er in his Miff on by the Father, or his being *' appointed by the Father to be his Vicegerent in the " Kingdom, or his Likenefs to the Father in his na- *t turi Qualifications and Powers, or in his kingly
" Office,
[ >25 ]
^' Office, together with his being another individual ^* difiin^l from the Father? Why may not one or " two of thefe Ideas, and much more all of them, *' be fufRcient to account for the Ufe of this Name '* Son ^f God, without making it neceflary that *' the Word 'Sonjhip in this Place muft include a " Samenefs of Nature?" p. 37. Here our Author will allow. That this Name fignifies any Thing, or every Thing, that it can fignify, but that which it originally, and primarily, fignities, when ufed pro- perly. — But we jQiall here give a dired and fhort Anfwer, to every one of thefe Queftions.
I. We cannot grant it fignifies " the Peculiar Deri- " vation of his Soul ;'' ■ i) Becaufe, the Scripture gwts no Hint of qlyxj fuch Derivation. ( 2 ) No Man can tell what he means, by this peculiar Derivation. And, C^O All Things wei-e made by the Logos, as well as the Father : And therefore, had he been the Son of God, on the Account of this Derivation, he had been the Son of the fecond Perfon as well as xhtfirfi, &c.— - 2. It docs not " fignify the peculiar Derivation of " his Body :" Becaufe, had he had this Title, on any fuch Account, he Ihould not have been called the Son of the Father, but of the Holy Ghcfi ; as we fhall fee. — 3. With refpcd to " his MiJJion hy " the Father,"' Tho* an own Son, may accept of a Commiffwn, from his Father *, and the only begotten Son of God condefcended to accept of one from him : Yet, no One was ever honoured with this Title, Son, own Son, ^c. becaufe of any fuch a Com- miffion : And the fame we may fay with refpe<5t to his Vicegerency, or kingly Office. — 4. " The Like- " nefs''"' of the coeffential Son of God, to his Father, muft needs.be infinitely nearer, than the Likenefs of any poffihle Creature : And " the natural Qualifica- " tions and Powers" of fuch a Son, infinitely greater, i£c. — To pais feveral others, 5. Tho' " one or " two of thefe his Ideas might be, in fome Places,
« fuf-
[ 126 J
" fufficient for the Ufe of this Name Son of God •** yet, (i) They could not be fufficient for this Title, the own, the proper, the only begotten Son of God. (2) They could never have been a fufficient Foundation, for thofe glorious Things which our Lord fpake of himfelf as a Son •, I and the Father are one-, What Things . foever the Father doth, thefe alfo doth the Son likewife, &c. And therefore, I muft turn the Queflion upon him, when I have confidered the next Paragraph.
'* Befides, it is evident that the Word Son of God ** is applied to Angels, Job i. 6. and to Men, •' Phil. ii. 15. I John iii. i, 2. and even the *' Term of begotten Son is applied to Men ; i John v. " I. Yet neither Men nor Angels are of the fame ** Kind or Nature with God their Father, and in thefe ** Inftances 'tis impoffible that the Idea o^Samenefs, of " Kind or Nature Ihould be included." — A grand Difcovery ! And what then ? And therefore the own, the only begotten Son, who is equal with the Fa- ther, and ONE Thing with him, ^c. iSc. is not
a coeffential Son? Is not this — — •
•^ — But, becaufe the Subliance of what he offers againft the proper Sonfhip of the/ftcwJPerfon, which comes often up, and is frequently urged with all his Might, tho' with fome Variety of Expreffion, lies in this and the next Paragraph, which he calls his fecond Anfwer, I lliall, I muft, confider them very particularly, and with fome faithful Freedom. — Let us then, obferve, in the general.
1. Here feem to be two, or three, Solecifms. *' The Word Son of God is never applied to Angels, or Men. — 2. Where this Title Son of God is given to Chrijl, 'tis always, without any Exception, with the Article, the, tiius, the Son of God; which is both diftinftive, and very emphatic, evidently implying, as we fhall fee. That he is not only the Son of God,
" in
[ 127 ]
" In a Senfe fuperior to Angels and Men •, p. lo.**
but in a quite different Senfe ; they^ improperly on- ly, being his Creatures, he properly, and in the fublmejl Senfe, being God equal with him. — 3. As to the Text, i John v. 1 . where he will have it, *' That the Term of begotten Son is applied to " Men,'' 1 ho' we are not fo hard put to it, we fhall only now give his own Anfwer to us, in another Cafe, p. 45. " Neither is the Name Son of God " there ufed, nor is God called his Father :" And
therefore " it is not to our prefent Purpofe."
But, 4. Tho* true Believers are faid to be begotten of him. Yet that Title, the only begotten Son^ is fo very refiri£live, as to exclude all others, from being Sons, in the fame Senfe that he is, — Chrift alone is Itiled God's ozva, or proper Son j yea, his only begotten Son : And confequently, no other Perfbn Divine, Angelical, or Human, is, or can be, (o his Son as he. — Others, as we have heard, are call • ed his Sons^ in a figurative and an improper Senfe, by Creation, Ekulion, Regeneration, or Adoption: But He only, in a proper, or if you will, statural Senfe, by Generation. -— All others, fo called, are Creatures^ his Creatures, who were made by him^ as well as by the Father : John i. 3. Col. i. 16, 17. But He, as a Son, was begotten, and not MADE.-— If then his human Soul be a Creature, it cannot be, properly^ faid to be begotten : Becaufe, creating is not begetting. " A peculiar Manner of *' making or creating," be it ever fo peculiar, does not alter its Nature ; 'tis ftill a making, or creating. Majus & minus non variant Speciem. But, to be more particular,
Obf. I. Tho' Angels are, in the plural Number, in a Parabolical Speech, Job i. 6. and Ch. ii. i. and in a Poetical Defcription, Ch. xxxviii. 7. anci no where elfe, called the Sons of God : Yet no one treated Angel, no not the higheft, is ever in the fin-
gular
( .28 )
gular Number, honoured with this Title ; no, nor ought to be. — The Apoftie lays a mighty Strefs oh this, and fo ihould we. For unto which of the Angels, faid he, at any 'Time, ^hou art my Son. this Day have I begotten thee ? Heb. i. 5. Whence 'tis plain. That tho' Angels were ftiled the Sens of God, no particular Angel was ever called a, the^ or his Son ; and much lefs his own, his begotten :^on. They are not therefore, begotten and not made, q'^ -properly Sons, as the only BEGOTTEN SoN is, but, improperly and figuratively only, fo called, as fome other Creatures alfo arc.
2. Tho' fome Men, and particularly the Rege- nerate, 8zc. have been, in a Body, if J may fo fay, called the Sofis of God, &c. Yet no one particular Man, was ever, I think, in the Singular Number iz^wi;?*?^ with this Title, the Son of God, if we except ^sdajn only, the firft Man •, Luke in. 38. for which, two very particular Reafons may be aiTigned, which never could, nor can, be given in any other Cafe. — And, as to that Exception, fince the Words, which was the Son, are not in the Original, in all that Genea- logy, but once, when fpoken of Chrijl himfelf, ver. 23. I do not know, whether they had not been better omitted, by our learned Tranflators, quite throughout, and the vvhole read, as in the Greek, thus. And Jefus himfelf began to be about thirty I'ears of Age, (being as was fuppofed) the Son (j/Jofeph, ^/Heli, /. e. truly and properly, tho' with fome Latitude, the Son of Heli, of Matthat, of Levi, and fo on afcendingall the Way to, of Enos, ofSeth^ of Adam, of God. — So that it was Christ, who is faid to have been the Son of every one of thofe ; and confe- quently, it v/as he himfell, and not Adam, who is filled the Son of God. Or, to make it fomewhat plainer, Christ was not only, in a proper Senfe, tho' with fome Latitude, the Son of every one of thofe from Ileli to Adam, but over and above all thefe, and before thera all, he was alfo, the Son of
Gody
[ 129 1
God; and therefore, as truly and properly, the Son of God, as Gcd, as the Son of either, or all the others,- as Al^.n. — If this be allowed, no one is ever called, iri Scripture, in the Singular Number, ihe Son of Godi but himfelf: And then, in thefe Verfesj we have both his Natures in his 07ie Perfon, and both h s Sonfloi-ps alfo \ being, as God, the Son of God, and, as Man,' the Son of Man. I need not contend about this, my Caufe not needing it, tho' that Text, Mat. i. i . ^he Book of the Generation of Jefus Chrijl, the Son of Da- isid, the Son of Abraham, I think, feems to confirm it. For there, 'tis Chriji, and not David, who is faid to be the Son of Abraham : q. d. of Jefus Chriji; who is not only the Son of David, but alfo the Son of Abraham, in the fame Senfe^ and in the fame Manner fo.
g. Tho' Magifirates are ojtce, collcflively, if I may ufe the Expreffion, faid to be Children of the mojt High, Pf. Ixxxvi. 6. as they are, in the very fame Verfe, ftiled Gods ; and in both of them very im- properly : Yet no one Magiftrate, Prince, or King^ is ever, in the Singular Number, diftinguifhed by the glorious Title, Son of Godj and much lefs with that, the Son of God.
4. Tho' Believers in Chrifl, are noc only called the Sons of God ; but, as we have heard, faid to be born, or begotten of hijn : Yet, no one of them, no not tihe moft wife, holy, ufeful, or mod peculiarly favoured, is ever dignified with this diftinguifhing Title, Son of God, in the Singular Number. — FrorrX all thefe.
5. I conceive there is in the Expreflion, " ChriJI li " the Son of God, in a Senfe fuperior to Men or An- " gels." p. 19. and in that, " the glorious peculiar " Derivation of his human Soul from God," p. lo Sec. leveral Ambiguities, or Fallacies, which our Author ought to have guarded againfh, or removed^ by ex- plaining his Terms, or, more accurately y?^/z«<^' the
S- QueftionSii
[ 130 ]
Queftions, E^c. which would not only have ^^^/»^i theDifpute, but made it ea/y and pkafajit : — For, i, Cbrift is a Term of Office, fuppofing, or implying both Natures ; and his Condefcenfton and Humiliation in them. 2. Tho' the Title, Son of God^ is fome- times ufed, upon feveral Accounts, in a low and fi- gurative Senfe : Yet thofe Titles, his own, and his only begotten Son, &c. neither ever are, nor can be fo ufed ; becaufe many other Things fpoken of him, as fuch, do even compel us to believe he is a coejfen- tial Son. 3. The Phrafe, " in a Senfe fuperior to *' Angels or Men," is very equivocal. — Plain, honeft Chriftians, might think this enough ; becaufe, they hear of none fuperior to all the Angels, but God only ; I mean the moft blelTed Three : Whereas, our Author means one, who, tho' fuperior to Angels, is but himfelf a Creature ; and therefore, infinitely in- ferior to the Creator % and conlequently, let him be ever fo high, is, as fuch, as dependant, and as anni- hilahle, &c. as you or I, or the meaneft Infedl. — 4. That Expreflion, " the glorious peculiar Derivation of his Soul from God" is alfo very ambiguous, if it has any Senfe at all ! — It could not be derived from him, but either by a proper Generation, or Creation. If by proper Generation, then is it coeffential with the Father, as is evident to common Senfe. If by pro- per Creation, then it was either made out of nothings or out oi fome thing made before ; unlefs there was, as the great Dr. Waterland has it, " an Eternal Suhfiance *' not Divine," out of which, this Soul, which our Author fays, " is properly the Son of God," was made. — An eternal Suhitance, not divine, is a mon- ftrous Contradidlion, implying many, yea number- lels Abfurdities : And, it this hv.man Soul was made^ either out di nothing, or oi fomething made before, 'tis felf-evident, it is, in every Senfe, as much a Crea- ture ; and therefore, as dependant for all that it is, or has, or can do, and as annihilablsto-Q, z^c. as either you
or
[ i3« ]
or I. — 5. The Adnoun, " peculiar," tho' it may feem to fignify fomething •, yet, it really here does not : Or, if it does, it is fomething unconceivable^ and unintelligible. For, it either refpeds the Thing deri- ved, or the Manner of the Derivation, or both. Let any one chufe which he will, and then explain it, if he can. — But, to pafs many fuch Things, I fhall now, according to Promife, turn his Queftion, p. 37. upon himfelf, thus,— Suppofing, but not grant- ing, " That one or two of thefe Ideas, and much " more all of them, were fufficient to account for *' the Ufe of the Name, the Son of God,'' when it comes alone, and without any Adnoun, or other Phrafe, to determine and heighten the Senfe : Why is he ^o very zealous to make it not neceflary. That thefe Titles, God*5 own, or proper Son, his only be- gotten Son, who is, as fuch, equal with the Father, does whatfoever Things he doth, and is one Thing, with him, i£c. to make it not neceflary, I fay. That thefe Titles " mufl: include 3. Sa7nenefs of Nature,'* or cO' ejfential Sonjhip ? — Is it pofllble, they fhould indeed include lefs .? Let us then go on to his next Reply, which mufl be very particularly confidered.
" Anf. 2. The Word Son in the Language of '' Men,'* p. 37. He means, if to his Purpofe, when applied to the Sons of Men. " wherefoever *' It mezins a. Sawenefs of Nature,'' As it moft cer- tainly does, in all Places, and on all Occafions, without Exception, when it is taken in its firfl:, its ufual, its only proper and natural Senfe. " it always " means t\\t fame fpecific Nature, or a Nature of the *' fame Kind and species ," And it could mean no other ; becaufe, the human Nature is a fpecific Na- ture, /. e. a Nature that fubfifts in all the Indivi- duals of the Species. " but it never means the " fame individual Nature," No, nor cannot; be- caufe our Nature is not an individual, i. e. indivi- Jible Nature. ♦' for it always denotes a difiinSl, in*
S % " divi-
[ 132 ]
^' dividual Bebig.^^ And it always mull do fo ; bcr caule every diftindt Perfon, which partakes c/, ox in^ z/pecific 'Nature^ rnuft needs be a dijtiyict indi- vidual Being. — " Theretore, in order to keep up " this Part of the Idea of SonJIn-p^'' Vv hich we ne- ver defigned, never pretended to keep up. " and '' to maintain the Parallel in this Point," Which neither can be done, nor does our Caufe require it. " if we v/ill have the ^.cn of God ^o fignify *' one of the ffime iSlature zvith the Father^^ As it muft do, when taken properly^ efpecially if thofe Words own., proper., only begotten., are joined to it ; if they fignify any Thing at all. " it muft mean 5' one of the fame fpecific Nature, that is, a di- " fiinoi individual Being of the fame Kind with the " Father i" By no Means. The Divine Nature., in the common Language of Philofophers as well as Divines, is not a fpecific, but a moft fingular and therefore indivijihle Nature: And theretore, the Son is not a dijlindl individual Being of the fame Kind, but a dif^in£l individual Person, in the, fame Nature, with the Father. " and thus we ■" fliall be in danger of making two Gods." — /. e. If we admjt Premiffes which we do not, fome Conclu- fions would follow which we abhor. — However, the jEnemies of the Do6trine of the 'Trinity have, in all Ages, pretended X.0 terrify themfelves, and their de-' luded Followers, vvith this Danger •, tho'. Would onq think it! even the moft fubtle of thofe of them, with whom we are acquainted, are neither afraid.^ nor aflmmed., to declare. That there are, to them, TWO living and true Gods! When, bleffed be his Name, the Catholic Church have retained the an- tient Faith., That the three Perfons., into whofe Name we are baptized, are the one only, the living and true God. " But it is plain, that V- in order to fupport the Analogy of the Name \\ Son, we can never make the Word Son of God
"to
[ 133 ]
^^ to fignify one of the fame indhidtial Nature or " EJfence^'' Why pray ? " becaufe it never figni- " fics fo in the Language of Men ;" p. 38. Strange indeed ! — Anf. i . 'Tis enough to us, that it al- ways fignifies fo in the JVord of God. — But, 2. We reply in his own Words not two Pages before, " Now 'tis plain that when human JVords and ^imi- " ks are ufed to reprefent Divine Things^ there is ** no Neceffity that thofe Words fhould include all " their original Ideas, nor indeed is it poffible : '' ^c. p. g6." We never include all their origi- nal Ideas in neither ot the Terms, Father or Son, when they denote the firll and fecond Perfons in the trinity., which v/e do, when we ufe them, in com- mon Converfation, to fignify a Father., or a Son among Men. So far from it, that we know, That the Di'vine EJfence is iajimle, and indivijibk : That the Son of God is ftill in the Father^ and the Father in him : That they concur in all their Works ad extra, without thcmfelves, ^c. i^c. not one of v/hich could ever be faid, of any one Father and Son, among Men : But, we cannot help being fully perfuaded, that the firft and principal, or, if you Vv'ill, the leading Idea, viz. of Coeffentiality, can never be excluded •, yea, that it mud be chiefly included, efpecially, when the Adnouns own., proper, only begotten, &c. (which he has never mentioned, in any of thefe Paragraphs !) force us to include
them. 3. I fliall not tarry to tell you. That
.this, were it true., is a mere begging the ^ejlion ; ©r. That it is very confiifedly propofed, whether with Defign, or no, I know not: But, muH: be fp plain to fay. It is abfolutely falfe \ and to declare, in Oppofition to it. That " the Word Son of God, " ftriclly and properly taken, never fignifies, in Scripture, any EJfence but the fame individual Effefke which the Father has ; and to defy all the World to give one Inltance to the contrary. -•- And 4. Had his
r '34 ]
Argument been fairly propofed, it fhould have run thus, " The Word Son of God cannot fignify one *' of the fame individual EJJence with bis Father ; *' becaufe the Word Son of Man cannot fignify one *' of the fame individual Effence with his Father :" And then every one would have feen. That it is
no Argument. The ftrange Conclufion, he
draws from all thefe Metaphyjics^ is, " and there- ** fore there is no Neceffity that it fhould fignify *' one of the fame Nature in any Senle when ap- « plied to Chrift." p. 38. The Words, " in any *' Senfe," need to be explained ; and, when they
are, I fhall make a proper Ufe of them. Till
then, let this fuffice, i. This is juft fuch arguing, as if one fhould fay, one Title cannot fignify what it naturally, and neceirarily7?^;^//?^j j becaufe, ano- ther does not fignify what it cannot. Or thus, more largely, — 2. Becaufe the Title, Son of Man, never iignifies one of the fame individual Nature with his Father, who never had an individual Nature to com- municate to hitn •, thererefore, this Title the Son of God, never fignifies one of the fame individual Na" ture with his Father, who had no other Nature, of his own, to communicate to his Son ! Where is the Connexion ? Or, how can this follow from that ? But, I have no Inclination to
There is a third ylnfwer, p- 38. which will lead us on to more delightfii I Work, even to explain, and vindicate, feveral very remarkable Texts, to which he has given a Sabellian or Arian Turn : But, be- caufe they will come in, very naturally, hereafter, I fhall now pafs them, and go on, when I have ob- ferved.
That, if any learned Perfon fhall think it worth his while to read this, he will readily fee that I might have given another, and much fuller Reply, to our Author's Metaphyftcs, in this laft Paragraph. 5uti I think he will alio grant, that it is a fufficient
An-
1 135 1
Anfwer ad Hominem •, and as fuch only, did I give it: What is deficient, will come up in another Place. Advance we then, to the next Prelimi- nary.
V. Tht firfi Perfon of the mod holy and undi- vided Three, is, in the trueft, ftrideft, moft fub- lime, and moft proper Stnk, a Father; and fo called, with refped to the feco7td Perfon, who, as fuch, and abftraded from all Confideration of his human Nature or Mediatorial Offices, is, in the trueft, ftrideft, moft fublime, and moft proper Senfe, a Son, 2.ndi his Son. In ftiort, the /?:^ Per- fon, as fuch, is as far as poflible, a proper Father -, and the fecond, as fuch, as far as poffible a proper^ Son.
I need not tarry to prove. That the Terms, Father, Son, begotten, &c. when ufed of the Jitji and fecond Perfons in the Trinity, are taken from their common Ufe among Men. — This is owned by one of our greateft Adverfaries ; of this Mind, I think, are they all ; and common Senfe evidently confirms it fully *.
Nor, perhaps, is it worth while to fpend Time in fhewing, That, tho' the Terms, Father and Son, amongft Men, are often ufed properly, and often improperly, and that in all Nations, and in all Sorts of Wrirings, and in the Bible as well as in common Converfation : Yet, if xhtfuhjeSl Mat- ter, the Scope of the Difcourfe, or fome Circum' fiances hinted or expreffed, do not fo fufficiently. determine the true Senfe, as to remove all Ambi- guity or Doubt ; the Addition of fuch Adnouns as thefe, own, proper, begotten, only begotten, &c. does fo precifely determine the Senfe, that the Terms arc- to be taken properly ; That there can be no Room
* Extra Duhium eft, Voca Filji (ff Generationis defumptas eft ex Ufu inter Hominei,. Roel. Differ. Thef. 3. p. 5.
left.
1 136 ]
left, for the leaft rational Delay, Demur, or Hefi-
tation, in the Cafe. For Example.
\V ere A and 5, two Friends, talking of Z) ; and A fhould alk 5, Whence is this D ? Of what Family is he } — And B fhould anfwer, W hy. He is the ^on of C. Don't you know that ? Did you never hear it before .'' I thought every Body had known it. — And fhould they carry on the Gonver<' fation thus,
A. I confefs I have heard it often, but can't think it true : Or, if he is, 'tis only in a low, 01* figurative Senfe.
B. I aflure you, he is his Son^ his own Son.
A. Son ! I know he is " a-kin" to C, a very- near Relation, a great Favourite of his, highly e- fteemed and beloved by him, and very like him, &'c. But I cannot believe that ever C had an own or proper Son.
B. Cannot ! Why can you not ? — Depend up- on it, he is his own Son, as much as you are your own Father'' s Son.
A. What ! his own Son, fay you, as much as I am my own Father"* s Son ? It cannot be.
B. Be fatisfied he is his own, his proper Son, for he begat him.
A. I know there are many v/ho, upon various Accounts, are called his Sons, to whom he afts the Part of a Father •, for, he is a mofl generous Per- fon, and has many Relations, &c. But, he can't be his own Son.
' B. I protefl he is his own Son; for he hegat him : Yea, he has no other proper Son^ D is the only begotten,
A. You may fay what you will, I will not be- lieve you. It cannot be. I fay it cannot be.
B. It cannot be ! — Why, the Thing tells itfelf. D is the very Figure ot C, and as like him as he can look i he has his Tery Complexion, Features,
Shape^
[ '37 ]
Shape, Temper, ^c. it you but faw them together, you could not doubt of it.
J. I will not believe it -, fhould C and D both rell me lb. Say what you will, I will not believe it.
B. Say what I will ! Why, C has piUiJhed it often, and in the mod open Manner. He calls him his Son, bis own Son ; declares he is his begotten, his only begot- ten ; fpeaks of him as his Darling, his. Soul's Delight, hh Right Hand, &c. and, in fhort, has acknowledged him Heir of all. — Yea, D himfelf has publickly, avowedly, and exprefly, proclaimed ; ay, and pro- ved all this, and more ! Is it now poffible to exprefs any Thing more literally, clearly, fully, and ftrongly ?
What would the World think of 5, if he fhould zf- fert all this, fo emphatically, without good Reafon ? What mud B think of J, if, after all this, he Iliould make any Hefitation in the Cafe ? — He muft think, either that J took him to be the greateft 1 rifler, De- ceiver, or Liar, (s'c. or, that he was the hardeft to be perfuaded of all the Men he had ever i(ttn. — But, if B was a Man of Probity, and eftabliflied Reputa- tion and Honour, he could hardly forbear refenting his Carriage, as the greateft Affront which could be put upon him. — How highly muft C, the Father, think himfelf injured .'' He that could fay fuch Things to, or of, one whom he indeed did not be- lieve to be his oivn Son, muft be both Knave and Fool, if not fomething worfe. — But, if Z) himfelf had, publickly and privately, on all proper Occa- fions, avowed, in exprefs Words, that he was the o-ivn, the begotten, the cnly begotten Son ot C, i^c. I fliall leave it to the Reader to fay, how much his own lionour would be concerned : And what Thoughts he muft have of A. — And yet, in the })relent Cafe, every Thing is more fully and ftrongly to our Purpofe. ;
The FATiiER, by-thePr(?/)y&c'/i of old, proclaim- T td.
[ 138 1
cd, Chrijl to be his Son, his begotten Son ; Pf. ii. 7, and 12. Pf. Ixxxix. 26 — 37. If. ix. 6, 7. Ch. xlii. I — 8, ^c. and immediately, in his own Perfon, again and again, declared, by a Voice from Heaven, That he was bis beloved Son, in whom he was pleafed. Mat. iii. 17. Ch. xvii. 5. John xii. 23 — 30. and confirmed all, by the Works which he gave him to do, to which our Lord alfo often appealed. John v. 36, 37. Ch. X. 25. — The Baptiji, who was a fort of a middle Perfon between both Teflaments, witneffed the fame Thing. John i. 34. comp. with Ch. iii.
31 — ^36. The Son himfelf, frequently publijhed
this great Truth •, and that in the cleareft Manner, it could be done. He often, with a mighty Em- phafis, ftiles himfelf the Son, the own, the begotten, the only begotten Son of God, &c. John'vx.. 35. Ch. iii. 16 — 18. Ch. V. 17, 19, ^c. ^c. He com- monly fpeaks to, and of, the firfi Perfon as a Father, and his Father j and, in fuch Words, and with fuch Familiarity, as fuch a Son might be fuppofed to do to, and of, fuch a Father. — He in many Places de- clares. That he was with him before the World began ; That he came from him, and yet was ftill in and with him, £s?f. John iii. 13. Ch. vi. 38, and 62. Ch. viii. 42, i^c. and That the Father loved him, and would glorify him, as his Son, John xvii. ver. i, 5, i^c. — Yea, he avows, and proves too. That he was fo his Son, as to be equal with him j John v. 17- — 26. That he, and the Father, are One •, Johnx. 30. That he was in the Father, and the Father in him ; Ch. xiv. 10, II. and, in one Word, died to fea I all
thefc Truths with his Blood, as we fhall fee. And
the Jpojiles, efpecially the beloved Difciple, wherever they went, inculcated this great, this fundamental Truths (which they could not but do, as often as they baptized zxvj uncircumci fed Converts to the Faith) proclaiming him to be the Son, the only begotten of the Father, &"c. John i, 14, and iZ,-^ the Son of his
LovBi
[ 139 1
hove, hy whom, and for whom, all Things were crea- ted, znd by whom all Things conjiji ', Col. i. 13 — 17. •— the Son, who is owned by the Father, to be God, Heb. i. 3. and to have laid the Foundations of the Earth, &c.ver. i o. yea, and who is always the fame, &c. ver. 12, i^c. And that, before his Incarnation^ he was in the Form of God, and thought it no Robbery to he equal with him, &c. Ph. ii. 6 — 11, &c. &C. — All which help to explain his own Words, he that hsLthfeenme, hath Jeen the Father. Johnxiv. 8. Not, becaufe he was the Father j (an Expreffion to which feveral of our Author's approach too near) for, *tis certain, there is a perfonal Dijiin^ion between the Father and the Son : But, to ufe one of Milton'% Phrafes, q. d. He that hath feen me, hath feen a Son^
" IN WHOM ALL HIS FaTHER SHINES j" and
therefore, molt certainly, a coejfential Son.
And now, What more was necefiary ? What more could be faid, to demon/irate this great Truth, that the Terms, Father and Son, when ufed of the firfi and fecond Perfon in the Trinity, are taken in the trueft, ftrideft, mod fublime, and moft proj)er Senfe poflibie ? — If the Terms themfelves, are not thought fufficient ; yet, furely, the Adnouns, own, proper, begotten, only begotten, &c. joined to them, may well be thought more than fufficient, to put the Mat- ter out of all Doubt : But, when we remember. That the Son is, as fuch, equal with the Father> ONE with him, God, who laid the Foundation of the Earth, &:c. by, and for whom all Things were cre- ated, &c. thefe are more than enough, to put Un' belief itfelf to the Blufh. And fo they would, v/ere not Pride, fome ftrong, long contraded. Prejudices, &c. in the Way. — Can any Words prove any Thing, if thefe and the like, (fo often repeated, and with fb many concurring Circumjlances to ftrengthen them) do not prove this ? ' — Let me afk them again. What would they have had the Holy Ghoji to have
T 2 faid.
[ HO ]
faid, " precifely to determine, wherein the pectiliar " Relation of the Son, as fuch, to the Father^ as " fuch, confifts." — Let them tell us, if they can. — -If they can, I am pretty fure they will ; tho' they may
keep their Countenances, fay , but pretend
fomething or other as a Reafon for their not doing it. — It they cannot, as I am fure they cannot, the leafl we can expeft is. That, if they will not he- lieve, they will be fiknt, and 'keep their Notions to themfelves. — But, ht(:2^^(txh& fuller Proof of this great Point, is to be the Siibjed of the laft Chapter, we fhall wave it, at prefent ; and fhall, while we are upon this Propofition, do thefe tivo Things at large, where they come fo naturally in.
I. We fhall confider all the OhjeSlions offered againft the proper Ufe of thefe Terms, in this Contro- verfy, i. e. in other Words, againft the coeffential SonpDip of the fecond Perfon -, and anfwer them fully.
II. Shall, after our learned Author, carefully *' furvey all the five feveral Senfes, which have been " put upon this Title, Son of God\^ and more efpe- cially, when the foremention'd Adnouns are joined to it.
I. We fhall confider ^// the 0(^>^/£';^% which are produced, and urged, againft the coeffential Sonfhip of the fecond Perfon : Or, againft taking the Terms, Father and Son, in this Controverfy, in their truefr, ftricleft, and \T\d^ proper 'SitWie, as they are ufed to denote the Relation of an own Father to an own Son, or, vice verfa, of an own Son to an o-zvn Father, among Men •, as far as the Divine and Human Na- tures are analogous, or may be compared, and will permit us to carry the Ideas.
The plain, honeft, ferious Chriftian, after what has been offered from Scripture, in the moft com- mon, eafy, and familiar Expreffions, which are rea- dily and well underftood, may be, perhaps, difpo- fed to iiflv, What" need is there for tliis ? — Can fuch
a Truth
[ 141 ]
'a truth be more plainly, diredly, or emphatically, expreft ? In what Words can it be done ? — Thole who will not be llitisficd, with fuch a Number of PafTages, and fuch a Variety of the cleared, eafieft, and ftrongefl Phrafes, each mutually illullrating the other, and all directly to the Furpofe, will hardly be fatisiied with any Proofs : And the Men, who can think, by Quirk, or Quibble, ^c. to evade thefe ; or to wrejt^ and torture^ them to mean what they never do, in any other Cafe, or to mean juft nothing; may, iuW ?i^ii-^[\\y, glofs azuay xht Senfe'oi any V\ ords, or give them nnyJurn^ how ridiculous
focver, xhc'w Caufe requires. But, bccaufe the
Senfe, we put upon thefe Terms, is vehemently op- pofed ; a great many I'hings are objefted to it ; fla- grant Abfurdities charged upon it ; and our worthy Author is, fo very pofitive in the Cafe ; it may not be Labour lojf^ to confider, and anfwer, every One ■ ot them. — And, That this may be done, the more eafily, clearly, and to the greateft Advantage -, We fliall firft offer fome Thoughts upon the true, ftrift, and proper Ufe of thefe Terms, among Men •, and then propofe, and remove, the Objedions.
Wc have before obferved. That, when thefe Terms, Father and Sony &c. are taken in their true, ftricff, and only/To^cT Senfe, He is a /vz/ivr, as both Philofophers and Divines have been wont to fpeak, who, by Natural Generation^ communicates the fame Nature^ which he himfelf has, with all that is ejfcn- tial to it, to another •, who is, upon that Account, called his Son : And, He is a Son^ to whom the fame Nature, which the Father has, ^c. is, that Way, communicated. — Whence 'tis evident. That, in the Relation between a proper Father, and a pro- per Son, CoESSENTiALiTY Is the firft, the leading, the principal Idea : He being no proper Father^ who has not the fame Nature, &c. with his Son ; nor he a proper Son, who has not the famt Nature, Bcc.
with
[ 142 ]
with his Father, and vice verfa. — In this Latitude, were the Terms of old ufed, when applied to the jirji and fecond Perfon in the Trinity : And happy had it been, if the Importunity and rafl) Boldnefs of the Enemies of the Divinity of the Son, had not, as they thought, obliged them, (the Fathers, I mean, and other Divines ever fince,) to try to explain and illuftrate, not only the Thing itfelf, but the Manner of it. But, fince the Oppofers of the coejfential Son- Jhip of the fecond Perfon in the Trinity, have, fo ve- hemently urged many Conclufions drawn from the Nature and Manner of human Generation, againft this Article of the Chrijiian Fcilh, fomething muft be faid upon that Head, to remove all their Ob- jections.
After the Revival of Learning, in the Weftern Parts of Europe, and the prodigious Progrefs it made, everywhere, in the two laft Centuries, efpe- cially, fince Natural Philofophy became the darling Study of many great, and noble Perfons, of very diftinguiflied Abilities, who, in that their favourite Study, had many extraordinary Advantages above the Antients ; (chiefly from the amazing Difcove- ries of feveral famous Chymijis, and the Providential Invention of the Micro/cope,) the Nature and Man- ner of the Generation of Animals, came, of Courfe, to be more narrowly enquired into. — This Enquiry they had hardly begun, when the palpable Abfurdities, attending what was then called equivo- cal or fpontaneous Generation, appeared fo very evi- dent, that moft of the celebrated Inquirers foon re- folved to expofe that ridiculous Notion, which had too much prevailed for many Ages. And this they eafiiy, and quickly, did •, and with fuch Succefs, that it was, in a little while, every where, given up and run down -, and is now, I think, univerfally exploded. — Having rid themfelves of this, when the Nature and Manner^ of regular and proper, or,
as
[ 143]
as it was then called in the Schools, univocal Gene- ration, fell under their clofer and deeper Refearcbes; they quickly perceived, that all the former Hypo- thefes, to account for, or illuftrate, thefe Things, were either fo precarious and ill-grounded j fo dark and unconceivable, as well as inexplicable -, fo con- trary to Experience, as well as common Senfe \ or, fo evidently above, or contrary to, all the known^ or imaginable Laws of Matter and Motion ; that, after many, and various ElTays to prop, or amend, they were even forced to abandon them abfolutely.
— In this Cafe, feveral great Men were ready to propofe each his own Fancy, few of which gained either very much, or long Credit, till that very in- genious and polite Philofopher, the famous Mr. Perrault, gave it as his Judgment, That " God " created all the Animals, at firft ; not only the firft *' of every Kind, or Sort, but all, and every one ** of the Individuals :*' So that every Individual, that was to be afterward produced, by natural or ordinary Generation, i. e. the femina, or Jiamina, or Seeds of them, were adlually all made, or formed^ and inclofed in the firft Male of the Species : And that they were afterward to be brought forth to view, in his own appointed Time, according to Laws of his own ejiablijhing, as we fee they daily are.
— Of this Mind, with many others, was that great and learned Philofopher and Phyftcian, my famous Country -Man, Dr. Pit cairn, who carried this Thought very high indeed, as is undeniable from thofe Words of his, when fpeaking of the Stone m the Kidney, which need not now be tranflated: * And this is now the prevailing Opinion, I may call it Doctrine, and generally entertained by the moft
• Vel etiam, in Adami Tejiihus, Animalcula ijios Homines ex- hihitura Calculo renum aliqualiter nafcente laborahant ; &c. Pitcar. Elem. Med. p. Z07.
learn«
[ H4 1
learned V tho', with fome Difference, in explaining fome Things in it.
That mofb excellent Philofopher, the Author of the Religion of Nature delineatedy tho* he feems not to think, That the Animalcula of every Species were, from the Beginning, enclofed in the firji of their refpedlive SortSy p. 89. is yet pofitive, " That the *' Body (of Man for Example) cannot be formed *' by the Parents, — For, fays he, all the vital and " ejential Pans of it mufl be one co-eval Syi^em, *' and formed at once in the firft Article of the *' nafcent Animalculum -, — And fince an organized " Body, which requires to be thns ftmultaneoujly *' mad#,(faniion'd as it were at one Stroke) cannot be *'. the Etfed: of any natural and gradual Procefs, I " cannot but conclude, .that there were Animalcula " of every Tribe originally formed by the Almighty *' Parent, to be the Seed of all /z//«rf Generations of " Animals. — And it is certain, that the Analogy of " Nature in other Inftances, and microfcopical Ob- " fervations do abet what I have faidT?^^?;/^/)'."
I might quote many Things, . from the moft learned Dr. Nieuzventy-t^ that religious Philofopher., who is exprefs, " That our Parents are nothing elfe but unknowing^ and confequently no true., bur, at the moil, inftrumental Caufes only of our Exiftence. — That none of them all, were ever capable of knowing, or frying, whether it fliould be a Male or Female, a deformed or well-Jhaped Child, that was to be produced, &c. i^c." . I might, I fay, quote many Things from this great Man, and many others, to the fame Purpofe : But, I have no Mind to make any needlejs Oflentation of Learning ; and therefore, fhall only obferve,
I . Tho' I dare not undertake, to account for all the Difficulties, in this Notion or Scheme ; or, to anfwer al! that may be objefted againft it : Yet, I
am
[ HS]
am pretty fure. It can never be proved hnpojfihk ; as, I humbly conceive, all the other Hypothefes, I have heard and can now remember, eafily may be. • — And therefore, 2. 'Tis, to lay as little as can well be faid, egregioufly the mo^ probable Accovmt of thefe Matters ; and attended with the lead by far, and feweft Difficulties. — o,. The Scripture Phrafeology feems to favour it : Or, at leaft, there are feveral Expreflions, or Hints, in ScripturCy which feem to me to look direftly this Way. — For Example, thefe Exprefiions, to name no more, in
WHOM, £(p' ;J, ALL HAVE SINNED, Rom. V. 12. As
IN Adam all die, i Cor. xv. 21. Levi paid Tythes IN Abraham^ for he was yet in the Loins of his Father^ &c. Heb. vii. 9, 10. and many others, lofe Nothing of their Beauty, or Emphafis, if this- Opinion is admitted for Truth. Lofe, did I fay ? No. According to this Hypothefis, the literal Senfe of each ot them is irue^ and proper^ and firong : Whereas, according to any other, it may, perhaps, be queftioned, by fome, whether it be either ? But, 4. Whether it be true or no, fince it is, and muft be, I think, allowed poJ//ble, 'tis fufficient for my Purpofe at prefent. — If we cannot, from Scripture, prove, yea unanfiverably prove, the coejfential Son- Jhip of the fecond Perfon in the Trinity, and as fuch ; I, for my Part, fliall give it up ; for I mortally hate all Jljameful Evajion and pitiful Shuf- fling : — But, if we do, it will be in vain to talk of the Abfurdity or Impofftbility of it, when we can fhew a poffible Way, how all Difficulties may be re- moved. — For, tho' that Way fliould prove not to be indeed the right one, 'tis plain, there muft be fome other, fufficient in the Nature of Things, to remove them ; tho', perhaps, it may remain ftill unknown to all Mankind.
This Opinion now wholly removes many Things, which are gbjeded againft the coejfential SonJJjip of
U thQ
[146 1
the fecond Perfon, by our Author ; or the proper Ufe of the Terms, Son and Generation, &c. by
Roely Thef. 1 7. and his Followers. Remove
them, did I lay ? Why, this Account of human Ge7ieration leaves no Room for moft, if for any one, of the Objedlions. • — If this is admitted, 'tis plain. No Father exifis before his Son -, No Father is the true and efficient Caufe of his Son, i. e. forms or makes his Body -, or his Soul, &c. ^c. and confe- quently, many of the Difficulties pretended, and urged, againft us, vanifh "without an Anfwer. — ■ Yea, 'twill be ridiculous, hereafter fo much as to mention them ; as we Ihall (hew, when I have put the Reader in Mind of what needs no Proof, That our Author's, and his Brethren's, principal Argu- ments are drawn from the Nature and Manner of human Generation ; or, " the Meaning of the Word ** Son in the Language of Men," &c. as is clear from the many Hints already given. — Suffer me only to repeat his principal Objedlion, or Reafon againft our Senfe, p. 38. which I have given al- ready verbatim -, and lliall now do again, with a clearer and fuller Anfwer, to Ihew how many Falla- cies are in it, ^c — The Reader will excule me, Becaufe, if this falls, all his Sophifms fall with it.
" But it is plain, that in order to fupport the *' Analogy of the Name Son" which we never pretended, nor does our Caufe require it. — How- ever, be it ftill remember'd. That the principal Idea denoted by the Word Son, when taken properly, is Coeffentiallity with his Father. " we can never make, ** the Word Son of God to fignify one of the fame " Individual Nature or Ejfence,'* Why ? If it does not fignify one that has the very fame Effence v/ith the Father, it does not, it cannot, fignify any Ef* fence at all, as is evident to common Senfe.'— But, why can we not make it to fignify one of the fame individual Nature ? " becaufe it never ftgnines fo
" in
«c
[ H7 1 in the Language of Men." Anf. i. This Title, she Son of God^ never, any where, fignifies One of
any other Nature, in any Language. But,
2. Here are more Fallacies than one, or two. ** (i) 'Tis the Name Son,'' in one Line, but " the *' Word So7i of God, m the next j which, 'tis *' felf-evident, are not the fame, (i) Himfelf has given an Inflance, where the Word S<}'4y or Sons, when ufed improperly, do not fignity a T erf on, no nor any living I'hing ! " Sparks are •*' called the Sons of the burning Coal ; p. 17." bur the Title, the Son of God, always and every where, without Exception, fignifies a Perjon, and fo does the Word, Son of Man, &c. — 3. This Expreflion, " in the Language of Men," feems to have been
lludied, on Purpofe, to . If it has any true,
and pertinent Senfe, in this Place, it mull be this, *' Wherefoever it fignifies a Son of Man.'* And then, his Argurrent, in plain Englifh, is this. The Title, th£ Son of God, cannot fignify one of the Jame individual Nature with his Father, becaufe, the Title, the Son of Man never fignifies fo ! i. e. As I have given it above, there is no Necefiity, that This Title, the Son of God, fhould fignify what it cannot but fignify-, becaufe this Title, the Son of Man nt- ver fignifies what it cannot ! Is not this now, a goodly Argument ? " and therefore, there is no '* Necefllty that it fiiould fignify one of the fame '* Nature in any Senfe when applied to Chrifl:.'* ibid. Here are feveral more Fallacies. What does he mean by " in any Senfe ?" i^c. — Where is the Connection .'' — Or, How does this follow from the other ^. I earneftly defire to know. Mean while I rather reafon thus, and have no Fear of being con- futed. I. The Word, " Son of Man'' whether taken properly and ftri6tly, or more largely and figuratively, always fignifies one of the fame Nature with his Father : And therefore, the Title, Son of
U 2 Cod,
[ h8 ]
God^ efpecially when the Ad nouns own, only begot- ten, Sec. {which necejfarily limit and determine the Signification, that it mujt be taken, in the mofi jiriEf^ and proper Senfe) are adjoyned, mull always fignify €ne of the fame Nature with God the lather. — 2. . This Title, The Son of God, is never applied to any but him, who could fay, I and the Father are one, &c. &c. And therefore, there is an abfolute Ne- ceffity, that it Ihould alway fignify a cosjfrntial Son. —•3. Our Lord's Human Soul, how great foever, was never in the Form of God -, &c. Pliil. ii. 6. was never called God, by the Father -, did never, could never, lay the Foundation of the Earth •, &c. Heb. i. 3, 10. nor could it ever be faid of it. That BY it were allThings created that are in Heaven, tzQ. All Things were created by it and for it. And it is before all Things, and by it all Things conjift. Col. i. 13 — 17: &c. &c. But, all thefe Things are clearly, and ftrongly, affirmed of the Son, God's cnly begotten Son ; &:c. Whence I draw thefe Con- clufions among others, and fhall, through his Grace, be bound to make them good, (i.) That k is not his human Soul, that is called the own, the cnly begotten Son of God. — And (2.) That He, who is called the own, the only begotten. Son of God is, as fuch, mofl certainly a co-ejjential Son. — I fhall add, 4. Every own, proper Son is coeffential with his Fa- ther, whether the Effence they have is individual or fpecific, or in "what Senfe" foever that Word is
ufed. But,
Becaufe the learned Roel has, very clearly, given ns all the Objeftions againft this proper Sonfhip, to- gether and in a very fmall Compafs, T)iff. i. p. 25. we fhall here, for once, fairly propofe them in his own Words, of which you fhall have every Syllable \ and anfwer every one of them, in Order, and, I jiope, to the Reader's full SatisfaUion^
a
If,
[ 149 ]
*' If, fays he, we compare the Ideas of IrueD^i'*" " TY and Generation properly fo called, it will '* appear that they cannot both agree to one and the *' fame Thing or Perfon ;" To pafs the Fallacies here. What follows ? " and therefore. That a Di- *' vine Perfon cannot be faid to be properly begotten." How does he prove this ? Or, What Rcafons has he for it ? " In Generation J'roperly so call- " ED," /, e. In the Generation of all Animals., and par- ticularly o^ Men, " we have obferved, i. Produc- *' tion, and confequently a Tranfition from Non- '' exijlence to Being.'' Anf Thefe Words are very general, and ambiguous : But, take them in what Senfe he would, or could, they are manifeftly, and abfolutely falfe. Fathers among Men, were never faid, or thought, to be Creators : Nor, inhuman or any proper Generation., is there '' a Tranlitus a non ejfe ad ejfe.'' — Nor can a greater Abfurdity be conceived, if thefe Words are taken ftridlly, than to fay there is. — 2. " That the Begetter, among " Men, is prior to, i. e. exifts before, or, is older *' than the Begotten." Anf. (i.) Not at all : They were both created at the fame Time. Yea, all the Individuals of every Species were created, whdn the frji of the Species was. — (2.) The Terms, Be- getter, and Begotten, being Relatives, neither of them could fubfift without the other. There can be no Father without a Son : Nor before he has a Son. The Father, indeed, is firft brought forth in* to View : But, the Son exifled, in Animalculo vel Semine, as foon as he. — ■ " 3. In him that begets ah *' fMive Poit'er of begetting, and in him that is be- *' gotten a pnjjive Power to be begotten." — If he means, by an aSlive Power of begetting, a Power to produce out of Nothing-, or, to give Exiftence to what does not exift, according to his firft Obferva- tion; we anf. (i.) 'No Father, zmong Men, ever had J or poflibly can have, any fuch Power. — And,
to
[ 15° ]
Co apply this to the Point in Hand, (2.) In the E- ternal Generation of the Son of God, the Father did not produce any Thing out of Nothing : But, to fpeak after our Fathers, " communicated his own Ef- ** fence to him" — And, (3.) If we transfer the I- deas of human Generation, according to Mr. Per- rault*s Opinion, to the Generation of the fecond Per- jbn in the Trinity, then the aUive Power of the Fa- ther to he^et the Son, was only a Power to fend him forth, on any Occafion ; to fend forth, I fay, his always coexijlent Son : And the a^ive Power of the Son, for there could be no proper Paffion in the Cafe, was his Power to go, or adual going forth. And (4.) That Exprefiion, often quoted to prove his Eternal Generation, whofe Goings forth have- been from Old, from the Days of Eternity, Mic. v. 2. ieems to hint to us, (as feveral of the Fathers many Ages after, feem, to me, to have thought,) That there were feveral of thefe Goings forth, or Genera- iions. — "4. In both of them, {viz. the Father and *' Sen among Men) fome Change.'' No other Change but this, the Animalcule, which exifted, as fuch, before Generation, is brought forth into ano» ther Bed, or Neft if you will, more convenient for yiugmentation. — " 5. In the Begetter, the voluntary «' J^ of begetting." And, What then ? — 6. " Ma- *' teriam ^ femen ex quo gignat." This, as it is here expreft, feems neither clear nor true. How- ever, his Materia iff Semen is, or are, no other than the little Fcetus, or Embryo, perfeftly formed already *, and which was, in all Probability, adually formed, and, perhaps, enlivened with, and in, the firft Man : Or, according to that Hypothefts of the moft ingenious, and learned. Author of the Religion pf Nature delineated, which, he fays, " had been " long his,'* p. 90. viz. the little Animalcule, which " being already formed from the Beginning, and pre- " ferved in fome opportune Place, is taken in by
" the
t '50
'' the Father, fome convenient Time before Procrc- " ation,'*- — -p. 89. which may be thought to re- move, or take off much of the Force of, fome Ob« jedions, which feem to bear very hard upon Mr. Perrauli*s Opinion. " 7. In the Ad of begetting the " Beginning and End.'* And, What then ? " 8. In ** the Son Dependence upon the Father^ as the Caufe *' of his Exiftence." The Word, Dependence., is very ambiguous, and fo is the Expreflion, " the *' Caufe of his Exiftence.'* However, the Father is, as we have heard, at moll, but an Inftrument in the Hand of God^ or of Providence, to bring forth the little Animalcule, into a Situation, where it may have more Room, and proper Nourifhment aifo^ for its Growth, ^c. — True indeed it is. That whea we are born, we are, for a great while, the moft help- lefs and miferable of all Creatures, &c. (the humbhng Effects of Original Sin) and under numberlefs Obli- gations to our Parents for the Care they take of us, ^c. — But, when Cliildren grow up, they are able to do for themfelves ; and fometimes, tho*, alas I not fo often as they fhould, requite their Parents j and their Parents come to depend upon them. — Thefe now are all the Ideas of Generation he men- tions ! How juft they are, and how little they help him, Ihall be left to others.
A^. B. While his Hand was in, he would not, one would think, have forgotten the very IFife Reafon which the moft polite, learned, and pious Muhammed, or, as we commonly call him, Mahomet^ (which was alfo greedily lickt up by a Son, I mean a Difciple, of his, a Perfon of much the fame Spirit^ if not Size for Abilities, the unhappy antichriftian Socinus !) gave to prove. That God had not, yea could not have, a proper Son, viz. Becaufe he had not a Wife. And, I am apt to think he would not, had he not clearly perceived. That it was fo ridicu- lous, as to have moved Laughter, or Pity, or
Contempt,
1 152 1
Contempt, rather than done himfelf any Honour, or his Caufe any Service. But, leaft it Ihould be objefted to us, we anf. — i. TYitfirJi Perfon is, in numberlefs Paflages of Scripture, ftiled xht Father oi the fecond Perfon -, yea, is called his own, or proper Father, and exprefsly faid to have begotten him ; And, which is more, in fo many Words, Pf. ii. 7. tells himfelf, that he had begotten him : And the Son as often ftiled the Son -, the own, or proper Son of God, and calls himfelf the begotten Son, yea, the only begotten of the Father, &c. Now, They muft cer- tainly know : And we cannot think, that either of them would tell us a Lie ; or that they would con- fpire to do it, and fo impof^ upon us, ^c. — 2. Tho' the Father had no ^ife, he might, to fpeak with the Ancients, communicate the Divine EJfence and Perfe5!ions to another \ who, upon that Account, would be his Son, his proper, his begotten Son. — Or, 3. According to the more probable, and now more current. Opinion of natural Generation, might fend forth the fecond Perfon, who had been always, and neceffarily, with him as a Son : And the fecond might go forth from him, upon any Occafion mutually agreed upon between them, and fo be manifejled to be indeed a difiin^f Perfon from him, and properly a Son. — Upon either, or both, of thefe Accounts, fuppofing either, or both of them to be true, might the Father, tho' he had no Wife, be, and be ftiled, his -proper Father, and the Son, tho', as fuch, he had no Mother, be, and be called, a, the, or his^ proper Son. — Let us then go on to *' his Ideas of ** true Deity,'* which cannot, he lays, confift widi *' the Ideas of Generation properly fo called." You fhall have every Word of them in Latin, in the Margin, tho' I fhall not, for Perfpicuity's fake, tie myfelf to a literal T^ranflation. * " But, fays he, in
» /«Deitatk vero exiftentiam necejarlam (f etcrnam, cum ^Ua pugnat.
the
f '53 1
" the Deity we have obkrved- ExiJIence necejfary ** and eternal y p. 25. So have all the World. But, if the Exijience of the Deity is necejj'ary and eternalj " it quite excludes the Idea of proper Generation.^* Yes : his mifiaken Ideas, but not the true Ideas of it. But how does he fupport this? " * i. If the " Deity is necejfarily exijient and eternal, it always; " Was," True. ** and could never begin to be" Who fays the Deity ever did, or could, begin to be. We abhor fuch ftupid Blafphemy. — But, the Son, we fay, was begotten. — We do Co, and what then ? Therefore, he began to be F I deny the Con- fequence. He was always, and neceflarily, a proper^ and therefore, a coejjential Son ; as the Father was always, and necelTarily, a proper, and coejfcntial Fa- ther, -j- " 2. The Deity cannot be pojlerior to, or '* younger than another ?" The Reader will eafily per- ceive the Fallacies, in this "VV'ay of talking, which I am afliamed to trouble him with. NA'e lliall therefore propofe this, more plainly, thus, " In the '* Deity, there can be no Per Jon pojierior to, or *' younger than, another." Who fays there is .'' — As the Son never began to be, he could have none before him, or be pqfterior to any other. X 3- The " De%ty cannot produce its like or equal" Who fays it does, or can ? The Deity does not, cannot, in any Senfe, produce another Deity. The Notion is pregnant with numberlefs odious, monftrous. Contradictions. The very Suppofition is an abfo- lute ImpoffibiHty. But, from this Principle, " the '* Deity cannot produce its like, i. e. another Dsity^ " or Divine l^ature,'* to infer, That therefore, the Father could not have a coejfential Son, or could not beget the Son, is not only a mere Shuffle founded uppn his own Miftakes, and a poor begging the
* T. A'j.v cjfr, y incipere effe. f 2. Jlio pofteriorem
cfff X 3 • Pi'oo'uan (ui ftmile pojfe.
[ 154- ]
^tejlion alfo, but a plain, avowed Contradi£lion to numberlefsPaflagesof the/^F(?r/iofG^^. " || 4. The *' Deity is immutable^ but Generatioji fuppofes, or *' implies, that it is changed.^* Wherein? The Father and Son both, are, neceflarily, the fame that they were from Eternity. ; And, the go- ings forth of the Son^ were rather Manifejiations of his Son/hip, than the Foundation of it : Or, if there was any Thing in it, which might be called a Change^ it was purely relative -, at moft, no Way inconfiftent wdth the Unchangeablenefs of God. " * 5. In proper Generation, there is a Produ5lion by *' a voluntary A51 : But, the Deity cannot ht produced " by any fuchyf^." No, nor by any Ad. Who- ever dreamt it could ? — Here, and in the third, the ambiguous Words, produce and be produced^ • muft do the Bufinefs ? But, " the Communication of *' the Divine Effence to the Son, as our Fathers ufed to fpeak, was not a Produ^ion of any new Thing, that did not exijl before ; i. e. was not a Creation : And, according to the new Opinion, the Genera- tion of the Son was only the fending him forth, &c. as we have juft now hinted. " •f 6. Proper Gene- ** ration fuppofes Matter, both in the Begetter and " Begotten : But, the Deity is immaterial and fpiri- ** tual.''^ And what then ^ Bccaufe, in Human Ge- neration, there muft be Matter-, and the Body of the Son mufl be corporeal, as well as his Father* s : Mufl: the Son of him, who is a moji pure Spirit, be material alfo .'' — He is, in the mofl proper Senfe, a Son, who has the fame Effence or "Nature his Father has, and of him, what Nature foever that be. X 7. " In proper Generation, as there is a voluntary Ad:, ** fo muft there needs be a Beginning and Ending of it, " confidered both ^t^z'w/)' and ^^w/y .'"* Anf i. We
H 4. Mutari. * 5. Voluntario ASlu product. f 6. Ex materia generare aut generari. ^ 7- hi'tium aut Terminus
Zenerationis tt^i-va aut pa£i--v<s.
ob-
r 155 1
obferved already, that there was, there could be,- no proper Pajfion in this Cafe. 2. Tho' the Son was always, and necefTarily, a Son^ we may eafily con- ceive both the Beginning and the Ending of his Going forth from the Father ; or of the Father's fending him forth, and of the Son's going forth. 3. Thofe of the Fathers, who fpeak of more of his Goings forth than one, muft have given much the fameAnfwer. * " 8. In ip^optr Generation, the Son *' receives his Effence and Exijlence from his Father^ *' and depends upon him : But, this cannot be faid of " the fecond Perfon, if he is indeed the true God'* Anf. I. All the Sons of Men receive their Effence and Exifience too from their Maker, and not from their Fathers ; as their Parents alfo, did before them. — 2. Notwithftanding the Dependence of the Sons of Men, upon their Fathers, they are coeffential with them ; and, when grown up, are as truly, and as much. Men as they. 3. If the firfi Perfon commu- nicated, from Eternity, his own Effence and Per-- feSiions to the fecond -, 'tis undeniable, he is coeffen- tial, and coeternal, and, in every Thing but the relative Precedency of a Father, coequal with him alfo : And confequently, the true God, as well as he. N. B. When I fay he is the true God, I do not fay he is the Father, but the Son. — From all which, he fays, 'tis eafy to conclude,
■f " Deum nee generare nee generari poffe,'* p. 25. /. e. That God can neither beget, nor be begotten.'* In thefe Words, we fee one of the Fallacies, which runs through every one of thefe Particulars. — It was Deitas, //6f Deity, or Divine Nature, and in Capitals too, in the Premiffes ; 'tis Deus, God,
^ %, Ah alio EJfentiam &' Exijlentiam accipere, acdependere. "f- Unde procli've eji concludere, Deum nee generare, nee generari poffe, atqi adto de quo Gerteratio proprie di£ta a^rmatury de eo ne- gandetm eJJ'e veram Deitatem; is" de quo 'vera Deitas aff.rtnatur de eo generationem proprie diiiam eJTe negandam.
X 2 an
t iS6 ]
an equivocal Word, in the Condtcfion / So that *iff cither another Ignoratio Ekncbi, a Conclufion be* fides the Queftion, or, it is plain, it does not foK low from his Premijfes. — If therefore, his Mean- ing be, The Deity, or Divine Nature, can nei- ther begety i. e. according to him, produce another Divine Ejfence, nor be begotten by another Divine Ejfence-, Nothing can be more certain, nor more lelf-evident : But then, 'tis nothing againft us. — - If, That the Jirji Perfon could not beget the fecond ; 'tis a mere begging the Queftion, without any the leaft Proof But, fhould all the World beg this of us, never fo hard, we cannot, dare not, grant it, for our Souls. 'Tis a Contradiction to the whole Word of God, diredly contrary to the Form of Bap^ iifr,iy and to our baptifmal Covenant, &c. &c. — And yet, he is fo fure of this, as to be pofitive, " That he of whom Ge/ieration properly fo called '•' is affirmed, of him true Deity muft be denied,'* and vice verfa, Anf, i. His Ideas di Generation pro- perly fo called are, as we have heard, manifeftly falfe. 2. All that will follow from his Premijfei is this felf-evident Truth, That he who is begotten is not, as fuch, a Father \ and he who begets is not, as fuch, a Son! — " Unlefs, fays he, t\it Idea of *f another Sort of Generation properly fo called Ihalli *' be given, which may be confident with the Idea *' of Deity. *^ ibid, — Whether this learned Man had heard of Mr. P^rr^«//'s Account, ^^ oi' Generation " properly fo called," I cannot fay : But, his Way of Reufoning upon this Head, invited and led me, ma- ny Years ago, to confider it -, becaufe, it furnifhes us, with fuch an eafy, ready, and clear Reply to almoft all his Objedions. — However, we anf i. We have given" another Idea of Generation properly fo call- " ed," which, when transferred to the Generation of the fecond Perfon in the Trinity y fuppofes, im- plies, and requires, his Coeffentiality and Coeternity
with
[ ^57 ]
with the Father ; and confequently, his true Deity : i. e. That, as the Father^ is, properly, his Father^ fo he is, properly, his Son ; and that He and the Fa- ther are £v, Mium^ ONE Thing. — But, Imuftadd, 2. The old Idea, That the Father, from Eternity^ communicated his own EJfence and Perfe^ions to the Son, has never yet been proved inconfiftent with the Idea of Deity, nor never will ; no, nor never can. Yea, Ihould it be fuppofed, That we are indeed mijlaken in this Cafe •, yet, unlefs God himfelf fliould reveal it to them, all Mankind can never prove that we are. — Becaufe, Since we are fure it can never be proved from the Scriptures : Whoever fhall, without a new^ Divine Revelation, undertake to prove we are in this mijlaken, muft reafon upon a Subjedt infi' nitely above him, and of which he can know very little or nothing without Revelation ; and confe- quently, muft reafon without any Ideas at all ; or with Ideas very precarious if not ridiculous ; which can ne^ ver do a .good Caufe any Hurt, nor a bad Caufe any Service.
, This learned Man goes on, in the next Paragraph, .p.. %c^, 2,6. to acquaint us, " That Divines, to avoid '* thefe Difficulties, have removed all Sort of Imper- " .fe^tion from the Generation qixh^SonofGod," Sure- . ly, there cou*d be no Manner of Imperfe^ion in it. *' and call it a Hyperphyfical, or Supernatural Gene- *' ration'* . Had he given us a more proper Word, we fhould have ufed it. This, fays he, " they fay, " is, — X.. Eternal''- It is fo. — 2. " It admits of no Priority or Pojleriority." Not of Exijlence. — "3, " Nor any Power of begetting, whether a^ive or " pa/Jive." Not of proper producing or being pro- duced, viz. out of Nothing: Nor any other than we have allowed. — — " 4. No, or Change." No (^hange of their Nature -, nor any Change inconfiftent with the Immutability of the mojl High. — "5. 'Tis *' a natural, but no voluntary A^ in the Father.'*
Why
[ 158]
Why might not a Natural Ad be Voluntary ? — But, according to the Explication I have now given, I fee no Inconvenience in allowing a voluntary J^. — 6. It admits " Nullam Materiam ac Semen.'* There can be neither, in a ?noJl pure Spirit. — " 7. No Be^ " ginning or End in the Ad: of Generation." But, according to the Idea now given, we may grant both. '— " 8. Nor any fuch Dependence of the Son upon " the Father., as is the Dependence of the EffeEl *' upon its Caufe.''* If by the Caufe he means the Efficient Caufe., we anf — No T^ro^tr: Father is, as fuch, the Maker.) or Creator .^ of his Son., nor ever was, or can be. — In fhort, fays he, " They will have the Begetter and Begotten to be not only alike., but *' plainly or altogether e(iual., in Effence, Exiftence, " Power, Dignity, and in one Word true Deity,'* And fo they are, If the Son was, from Eternity.^ in the Form of Gcd •, if he thought it no Robbery to he EQUAL with him -, if he was in the Beginning with God., and was God ; and if all Things were made by him, &c. &c. &c. And fo he muji be, if He and the Father are One, (^c. — If thefe Things, I fay, are fo, The Son., and the Father are omnimodoufly EQUAL, excepting only in this, 7 hat He is the Son, and not the Father ; and the Father is the Father^ and not the Son.
In the next Paragraph, p. 26. He honeftly grants, *' That this Idea of Generation does not overthrow, " i. e. is not inconliftent with the Idea of Deity :'* And this every one muft grant, who believes the Do6lrine of the Trinity : But infills upon it, " That " it is wholly inconliftent with the Idea of Genera- " tion properly fo called.'' "Why fo .^ *•' Becaufe, " between this Hyperphyfical Gejieration and that ** which is properly fo called, nulla remanet ne mi- •' nima quidetn Similitudo, there remains no Likenefs., " no not the leaft." Anf. But, if his Idea of Ge- neration, properly fo called, is evidently falfe, as all
thQ-
[ '59 ]
the World do, and I think, miift agree i and the Idea of this Hyperphyftcal Generation agrees very well, with the true, i. e. the new Idea of Generation pro- perly fo called, as it really does ; as I have, I con- ceive, fufficiently Ihewn -, then all is Hill right. — Suf- fer me to add, i. His " own mojl orthodox Expli- " cation of the Words, Son and Generation,'^ when fpoken of the fecond Perlbn, " 'That they emphatic " cally Jignify, that the fecond Per [on has the fame '* Effence and Nature with the jirjt, and did from E- *' ternity coexifi with him-" Ihef 20. agrees well enough with the Old Account oi th^ Generation oi the Son, viz. That the Father Did, from Eternity, communicate his own Effence and PerfeBions to the Son. — For, here are the frft and the fecond Perfons -, here is their Coeffentiality, or their having the fame Ef- fence and Nature •, and, here is alfo, their Coexifience from Eternity : And this is all, that is in his mo!i or- thodox Senfe of thefe Terms ! Let every Reader judge. — It will be faid, I have added the Word, communicate. — I have fo \ becaufe, the Ideas " of ** Father, Son, and Generation,'* if we had no more to fay, feem naturally to fuppofe, or imply, a Com- munication ; and, in the Judgment of our Fathers heretofore, they aftually, in this Cafe, did : And no Man has, or can, prove, either that it is impof- fihle ; or inconfiftent with the Nature, Perfections, or Blejfednefs of the Deity •, or, of either the Fa- ther, or the Son. — But, 2. If we take PerrauWs Account " of Generation properly fo called," to be the true one, as is egregioufly the moft probable, and transfer the Ideas to the Generation of the fecond Perfon, then, as we have feen, moft of his Ob- jediions appear to be indeed no ObjeCiions at all, but merely his own Miftakes. So that, I think, I may conclude,
I. That, if this learned Man had heard of, and confidered Mr. P^rrj^///'s Opinion, and then applied his
Ideas
[ i6o ]
Ideas ^ of Generation properly fo called," to the Generation of the fecond Perfon ; he could not but have feen, that his Difficulties would have almoft all vanilhed ; and therefore, that he might have faved himfelf the Labour, of making fuch a Stir in the World. According to him, in ** Generation pro- ** perly fo called,'* there is, as we have heard, " No proper ProduSfion^ or giving Being to that •' which is not ; the Father does not exift before his^ ** Son ; nor is there any Change in Procreation^ but the ** going forth of the Xittlt Animalcule^ into a more con- " vementVhce for Augmentation', &c. &c." — Let thefe then be applied to the Generation of the fe- cond Perfon, and you fhall find, " That the Words, *' Son and Generation, emphatically ftgnify, That the " fecond Perfon, has the fame Effence and Nature " with thejirft, and exifledwith him from Eternity.**' — This, I humbly conceive, might have removed his Scruples: And feeing he is fo open, and exprefs, in the Do6lrine of the Trinity, might have fully fa- tisfied him. — Becaufe, Since an Order, among the ever-bkffed and undivided Three, there ever was, and mufb have been, and is alfo acknowledged ; 'tis- hard to think, that any one can doubt, That that Order is natural, and therefore neceffary : And him- felf has honeflly yielded, " That this Idea of Genera- *' tion is confiftent with the Idea of true Deity.** But, if it is confiftent with the Idea oi^ true Deity, and of Generation properly fo called alfo ; it might, I think, have given him the fuUcft Satisfaftion. — Let others judge. — And, 2. I leave it to all, who were acquainted with the learned Dr. Ridgley and Dr. Anderfon ; Whether, if they had known of fuch an eafy, plain, and natural. Way of getting clear of thofe Objeftions, which the Arians and Socinians urge, with fo much Confidence and Importunity, againft the commonly received Notion of the Gene- ration of the Second Perfon, ^c, which are all
drawn
[ i6i ]
drawn from the mtjiaken Opinions of the Generation of Animals^ which had, for fo many Ages, been, I think, univerfally entertained : Whether, I fay, had they known of fuch an eafy^ plain, and natural^ Way to get rid of thofe Objedions, and had well confider'd it, they would not have heartily embra- ced it, and chearfully acquiefced in it. — They were both of them very zealous for the Chrifiian Do^rine of the Trinity above-mentioned, and \Qry Jlrenuous in defending it : But could not, fo well, digeft " the Communication of the whole Divine Nature, or " Ej[ence from, or hy, the Father to the Son ;'* (tho', to the bed of my Knowledge, they never oppofed it ; and only faid, they thought it not fo convenient a Way to explain the Dodrine of the 'Trinity, or the Son/hip of Chrift •, ) nor reconcile it, with his Deity, They therefore, it feems, thought themfelves obli- ged to deny, that he was a Son, as God ; and to take this Title, the Son of God, even when the Adnouns, own, or proper, begotten, ov only begotten, &c. were annexed, to be a Title of Office and not of Nature ; and to fignify the Mediator, or be of the very fame Importance precifely with that Title -, which, I am well fatisfied, neither of them would have done, if they could have extricated themfelves out of thofe Difficulties. — Well then, here, I humbly conceive, is a clear, a ready, Method to get rid of them all : And to retain alfo the Truth, and, I hope, the whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth. Thofe Difficulties all arofe from miftaken Notions of the Generation of Men, which they applyed to the Generation of the fecond Perfon : Let their Difciples then, hearken to the truer Account of the Generation of Men, and of all Animals ; and then, if they pleafe to transfer, or apply, the true Ideas, to the Generation o^ the Son of God, mod, if not every One, of thofe Difficulties will vanifh ; Yea, and every Thing will appear to be, juft as they would have it. For then,
Y Plerc
[ '62 ]
Here will be 'Two dijlin^l Divine Per fans, coejfen^ tial ; and therefore, coeternal •, and confequently, every Way equals excepting only, That there is a natural, and therefore, necejfary Order among them ; according to which, they are not only the frji and the fecond Pcrf^onSj but /i?^ Father, and the Son. — Here, the Father is not the Efficient Cause of the Son, nor b ef or e\\\rc\,i^c. ISinvwzstheSon, as fiich, produced by him, nor is he inferior to him, or, properly, dependent upon him, &c. — Here, the Fa- ther, as fuch, has all the natural Preeminence and Prerogatives of a Father ; and yet, the Son, as fuch, is as Jiecejfarily exijient, I had almoft laid, as f elf -ex - ijient as he : For, the Idea o^ a Father, among Men, does no more imply felf exiflence, than the Idea of a Son ; every Father as well as every Son being, at the fame Time, made by God, and equally dependent upon him. — P* ccording to thefe Ideas, tho' the Ti- tle, the Son of God, primarily and llriftly taken, de- notes x.\\t fecondVtrion, as fuch, and him only •, yet, may it, even with the diftinguifhing Adnouns, and in the 'New Teftajnent, denote the complex Per fen of the Me- diator, in the full Execution of his Office : — And then, as I hinted already, as this Title, the Son of God, implies his Coexijlence with the Father, the "Words, his Generation, or being begotten, may de- note only fomeM/^^j;?, oxManifeflation, orHis goings FORTH to do what no One but fuch a Son could do, which would be an irrefiftable Evidence of his coef- fential and coeternal Sonfhip. — In thefe, 1 fay, I ap- peal to the Difciples of thefe two learned Men ; Whether as many of them as knew them won't ac- knowledge, I. That I have given the principal, if not the only, Reafons of their leaving the Catholic Church, in thcDodtrineof the/?r(?/'^r, and coeffential Sonfhip of the fecond Perfon. And, 2. That what has been now offer'd, would have fatisiied them, and brought them back to their Old Faith. — And,
3. ThQ'
[ '63 ]
3- Tho' I might not, by any Thing here faid, have convmced the worthy Author, with whom my chief Bufmers now is, (who has erred in many more Things, than any of thofe now mentioned •, and in Points of greater Moment too-,) yet, I think, I may alledge, That, if he had confidered Mr. Per- rault\ Opinion, as it well deferves, he would not have talkt fo very iinphilofophically^ and fo unlike himfelf, and fo very pofitively too, in many Cafes, as he has done : And, as to thofe Errors, in which he ftands alone, viz. " That Chrift's human Soul *' is properly the Son of God -, p. 150. that this Title " Son of God cannot neceflarily imply his divine Na- " ture, &c. p. 63. ^c. if, thro' the Grace of Coi, I do not confute them all, I am very willing, That every Word I have urged againft them, fliould pafs forjt/Ji Nothing. — I would not, however, by all this, be thought,
N. B. I. To prefume to fay I have, or can con- vey to any other, dear, dijli^i^, and much lefs ade- quate Ideas of the ccejfential Sonfhip, or Generation^ of the fecond Perfon of the Trinity ; and yet, much lefs of the Manner of it. Eic Mens deficit, that I may fpeak with fome of the Ancients, nee mea tan- tum fed Angelorum. All I pretend to, is to prove the Matter of Fa£l, That he is a coeffential Son. And This, or the to oVt, as the School Phrafe is, viz. that he is the own, 07ily begotten, or coeffential Son is, as clearly, fully, and ftrongly, revealed in Scripture, as any Thing is, or can be, in any Words •, and THIS, even that he is the only Begotten of the Father, 8ic. the weak, the ignorant, the young, may moft firmly believe, and (leddily -profefs ; and rniift do fo, if they exped: Salvation by him : But, the to (J^ioVt, and the to riwf, i. e. the Why, and the How, are not fo revealed ; but, if at all, much more generally only. — Should it then be afl:t, as fome are pre- Jumptuous enough, when they are talking of fuch
Y 2 fub-
[ i64 1
fublime Things to forget all Decency ; Why is the Firft Perfon, the frji-, and the Second, xhtjecond? Anfw. Thejrare each of them, naturally and neceffa- rily^ WHAT they are, and who they are. —Why is the firfi Perfon called the Father, &c. Anf. Becaufe he really is fo. — Might not He have been called the Sm ? Anf. No. Becaufe he is not, could not be, the Son. — Thus, feveral fuch bold Queftions, may be more eafily anfwer'd than fome think. — Should it be afkt, How the Son coexijled with the Father? Anf The blefled Three only knows this, clearly and fully : But, in general we may fay, He coexijied with the Father, juft as the Father coexijied with him. •— Each of them is called, Jehovah, in fome Hun- dreds of Places in the Bible ; and therefore, is Je- hovah : And confequently, they necejfarily exift, and every where ; and therelore, ihd' diftin5iPerfonSy they are ever, and every where, in and with each other, &c. — But enough, if not too much by far, of thefe adorable Things, which are incomprehenftble and paji finding out. — Through the Grace of God, I defire not to exercife myfelf, in Things too high for me : And always to ftand in Awe of that Queftion, Job xxxviii. 2. Who is this that darkneth Counfel by Words without Knowledge ? Bleflfed be his Name, 1 can very readily receive, and moll fecurely and firmly believe, what I find plainly and clearly in his Word ; efpeci- ally, if it runs thro' it, and occurs in a great Variety of very emphatical Phrafes, which mutually explain or illuftrate each other, without enquiring Why ? or How ? when he has thought fit to conceal them : Or, fo much as defiring to know what is fo evidently above me, and which he would not have me now know. — Nor, Would I have it fuppofed,
N. B. 2. That this great Myjlery, the coejfential,
or proper Sonjhip of the fecond Perfon, is in every
Relpedl, or indeed in any, to be exactly meafured by,
r fully refembled to, or compared with, the Sonjhip
or
[ 165 ]
or Generation of any Creature. — God is a Spirit, John iv. 24. a moll pure Spirit : And therefore, there can be no Sort of Likenefs between thefe two Genera- iions, if I may fo fpeak, but what is merely analo- gous. — 2. The Divine Nature is mo^ Jingular and indivifible : And confequently, cannot be communi- cated^ if I may fo fay, by Parts or Halves-, or fub* Jiji in different and divided Beings. — 3. The Divine Effence is abfolutely infinite^ betwixt which and what is finite, there is no Sort of Proportion. And, by Confequence, — 4. Thefe Conclufions, It is fo and fo, in human Generations, and therefore it mufl be fo, ex- adlly fo, in the Generation of the Son, if it be a " Generation properly fo called ; " or. No fuch Thing is, ever was, or can be, obferved in human Generations ; and therefore, there can be no fuch Thing obferved in this : Thefe Conclufions, I fay, muft appear, even to the common Senfe of all Men, not only moft precarious and uncertain, but molt prefumptuous and ridiculous. — Nor,
N. B. 3. Would I have any to think. That what has been now offered is fufficient, to anfwer all the ^ejlions, which may be propofed ; or remove all the Difficulties, which may be Jiarted, concerning this adorable Myfiery : Or give full SatisfaEfion to thofe, who will not be content with the I'efiimony of both the Father and the Son, and the Holy Spirit alfo, in the Scriptures o( Truth. — There is no End of infi- nuating, afl<:ing, doubting, demurring, objed:ing : And little good can be expefted, from any Attempt to reply to them -, or to perfuade the unbelieving and objiinate. — The only Way to have Eafe^ and Peace, in all thefe Cafes, is to cajl down Imaginations, {xoyi(r(jL^(; xaQatpaiiTf?, cafting down, demolifhing, purging out, or throwing away Reafonings, Thoughts, Arguments) and every Thing that exalt- eth itfelf againji the Knowledge of God -, &c. 2 Cor.'X. 5. If we would knozv the Truth, let us to the Law and
to
[ i66 1
to the Tejiimony. We are fure. That Gcd cannot lie : •— That he would not deceive us : — That he well knew how to reveal his Mind, fo eafily, and clearly, that even the weak, and the ignorant^ who fincerely and diligently meditate upon his IVord^ begging fervently, that he ivould open their Eyes, Jhe-zv them his Truth, and lead them in it, (hoiild not fail of knowing it, in all Matters of Moment, fufficiently for his own Glo- ry, and their Happinefs : — That the Catholic Church hath, from the Beginning, moft zealoufly and fted- dily contended for the coejfential Scrjhip of Chrijl •, and cannot help thinking, they could not he mijiaken, in the Senfe of all thofe Scriptures, upon which it is founded : — And fliall endeavour, by and by, to prove. That this Doftrine, even the cocjfential Sonjhip of Chrijl, is the Rock upon which the Church is hiiilt. — Let us then receive, and believe the Word of Gcd, without Demur, Hefitation, or enquiring Why ? or How ? — \iMen will not believe, furely they Jhall not he eftahlijhed. Ifa. vii. 9.
Should any, after all, afic, Why we have enlarged fo much on thefe Things, and been fo very particu- lar in anfwering all thefe Objeclions ? Anf — i. The Importance of the Suhjetl made it necefiary. Much, depends upon it : The more accurately therefore, and clearly, all Ohjeolions are propofed and anfwered, fo much the better. — 2. To fhew thofe, who may be too apt to doat, upon great Names, That there is not, indeed, fo much, in fome high -And, fanciful No- tions, or Pre ten/} ens to great Altaimnents, as they may be too ready to think. — 3. To let the weak, but honefl. Believer fee. That there is Nothing fo mo- mentous, in all the deceitful Oppcfition, that has, or can be made, to the coeffential SonfiAp of Chrift, as,, in the leaft, to (liake his Faith in the catholic Doc- trine. — 4. To convince even thofe, who are fondeft of No-;vel'.ics, That all, or almofi all of, the Argu- ments which are produced to fupport them, are, in
reality
[ 16/]
reality, founded upon evident, great Mijlakes : And confequently, do no Service, if it is not to expofe thofe who urge them. — 5. That I might, by the by, give an Hint, That true Philofopby is not, in any Thing, inconfiftent with true Divinity : And, That no Obje^ions^ whether from Phftcs or Metaphyftcs^ again ft any of the Mysteries of the Chrijiian Reli- gion^ do ever come home to the Point ; or, are fut- ficient to overthrow them. — 5. That all m.ay fee. That the more the Secrets of Nature, and Providence, are known, the more clearly may feveral abftrufe Points, m the Chrijiian Theology, be underftood, and more eafily defended. — I myfelf have long thought. That fome Difcoveries in the New Philofophy, and fome Notions lately introduced, or illuftrated and maintained, by Men of Figure in the learned World, tho' fuppofed to bear very hard upon fome favourite Bo^rines of the reformed Churches, (and, perhaps, fo vehemently inculcated for that very Reafon !) do, when all Things are well confidered, in very Deed, confirm them not a little.
'Tis like enough, 'twill be expefled I Ihould ihew, Hczv the Father is, in the moft proper Senfe, a Father ; and the Son, in the molt proper Senfe, a Son : Or, at leaft. That they are fo. — For, fhould we fuppofe the Son, as the Father'' s own Son, to be in the trueft, ftridleft, and moft fublime Senfe a Son, and vice verfa ; yet may it be afkt. How can it be faid. That he is a Son, in the moft proper Senfe of the Word as it is ufed among Men, when there are fo mrmy Ideas implied in the one Cafe, which can have no Place in the other ?
In Anfwer to this, I fliall prove every one of thefe four Superlatives, very clearly, and as briefly as I can.
I. Yi the Son, as fuch, is God, zs iht Father Kim- fclf fpeaking to and of him, as the Son, exprefsly acknowledges, Heb. i 8. And, if he is not another,
■ajtrange.
[ i68 ]
ajirange, or a new God, as he is never faid to be in Scripture, and indeed cannot be •, then he muft needs be the fame God with the Father. «— But, if as the Son, he is the fame God with the Father, he is, in the trueft Senfe, his Son, as is felf-evident : Becaufe, if he is fo, we have here Coeffentiality, (however the Son came by it) and confequently, Coexifience, and Coequality, and the moft omnimodous Likenefs pof- fible alfo, which plainly imply all the chief Ideas of Sonjhip in the truejl Senle. — Or thus fhorter, If God is One : And if the Father, as fuch, is God, and the Son, as fuch, is God ; then, it is felf-evident, they are the One Gcd : But, If the Father and the Son are fhe One God -, 'tis undeniable. That the Son is, in the very trueft Senfe. his Son.
1. \\ the Son^ with Truth, could fay, I am in the Father, and the Father in me, as he does, 'Job. xiv. lo, ^c. and, / and ibe Father are One, as he does, Jgj:. X. 3o,^r. i^c. 'Tis felf-evident, the Son is, in the Jinfteft Senfe, his Sor : Becaufe, no other Son could ever, with Truth, h ■ /e talk'd of the Relation be- twixt him and his Father, in any fuch Strains.
3. \^ the Son, as fuch, is God \ and therefore, is co^ffential, coeternal and coequal with the Father, then is he, in the mod fublime Senfe, a Son -, as is felf- evident, and needs no Proof. — And
4. As to the laft Superlative, That x.\vt fecond^er- fon, as fuch, is a Son, in the raofi proper Senfe of the Word, as it is ufed among Men -, tho' there are many Ideas implied in tiie Words, '^'on and Genera- tion, when fpoken of Men, that can have no Place, when we apply them to the eternal Generation of the Son of God. We may anfwer, That all the Ideas, drawn from the Generation of Amnals, which can have no Place in the confljip and Generation of the Second Perfon, plainly imply manifold lmperfe5lion •, and are alfo vifibly inconliltent, with an indi-vifible, and fpiritual 'Nature ; and therefore, mult be far re- moved
[ i69 ]
moved from it: But, where all the moft perfeB Ideas of SonJJoip meet, and the moft perfe^f Manner of Generation alfo ; there, I humbly conceive, the Son may be rather faid to be a Son, in the moft proper Senfe, than not. — But, for the farther Satisfadtion of the learned Roefs Followers, we add thefe five Thoughts more.
(i.) A Word may be ufed properly, in feveral Cafes, or of feveral Objedls, tho' all the Ideas may not be implied, in every one of them -, or, tho* the very fame Idea, or Ideas, may be fomewhat enlarged in one Cafe, and reftrifted in another ; or, tho' many Circumftances, either in the Nature, or Qualities, ^c. of the Things fignified by that Word, may dif- fer vaftly. — The Term, Legs, is properly ufed to fignify thofe Members, of all Sorts of Jnima's, upon which thtYfta72d, or walk -, tho' Ibme of them have but two, others four, or more •, tho' fome of their Legs may be Ihorter or longer, ftronger or weaker ; tho' fome of them may have more or fewer Joints^ which may differ in Size, Shape, or Colour ; and, in fhort, be hardly any how alike, &c. yea, and tho' the almoft only Idea, that can be applied to them all, is that which is taken from their Ufe. — And thus, the Terms, Head, Eye, Hand, ^c. when ufed of Animals -, the Terms, Seed, Plants, Blof- foms. Leaves, Flowers, Fruit, i^c. when we are fpeaking of Vegetables ; and the Words, Skill, Acute- nefs, Learning, &c. when talking of Men •, are all Vik(\ properly, tho' the Ideas fignified by them, when attributed to diftind: Kinds, Sorts, or Individuals, may have hardly any Thing, in them Jimilar ; or but very little. — Thus alfo, the Terms, JVifdom, Goodnefs, Holinefs, Juftice, Dominion, &c. are ufed properly both of God and Men : And yet, the U'^iJ- (dom and Goodnefs, &c. of God, are ejfential and infi- mte, &c. whereas, the IVifdom, and Goodnefs, &c. of Men, are Jinite, changeable, given to us or acquired
Z by
[ 170 ]
by us, y^. — Why then fhould not the Son of Go^^ be faid to be, in the mofl proper Senfe, a Son, or to have been begotten by him, when all the chief and pri- mary Ideas denoted by the Words, when fpoken of Men, (even his eternal Coexijtence in, and with, the Father, and his Goings forth from him as a Son, &c.) are plainly implied in this Cafe ; tho' fome inferior and lefs important Ideas, in Human Generation, are not ?— Let them not fay. That the Ideas, of Sonfljip and Generation, neceffarily imply Imperfection : Becaufe, I. If they do fo, when ufed among Men, they im- ply rather the Imperfetiion of our Nature, than of our Perfons. — For, 2. They imply no Manner of Imperfehion, but what is, or was, common to all the Fathers, as well as all the Sons of Men. — Be- caufe, all the Fathers were once Children, except the firjl, and he was immediately created by God. — 3. They imply no Sort of Imperfe^ion, inconfiftent with Coeffentiality and Coexijtence: And therefore, when transferred to the Second Perfon, can imply no Imperfection at all ; becaufe, the Divine EJfence is ab- folutely above all poffihle Imperfe^ion. — And, 4. What Imperfe^ion can be conceived mEternalCo-exifience in, and with, tht Father: Or, in the ttatural or necejfary Communication of the indivifihle Divine EJfence and Ferfe£iic7is to the Son, from all Eternity ? — But,
(2.) When we fay the. firji Perfon is, in the moft proper Sen{e, a lather ; and the Second, in that Senfe, a Son : We do not, need not, fay. That all the Ideas, of Paternity and Fili'ation among Men, are, or can be, transferred to the Divine Ferfons ; or. That the Generation of the SecoJid Perfon is, in every Thing, to be refembled to, or meafured by, Hu- man Generation : 'Tis enough, if the principal Idea, or Ideas, are transferred "and retained. — The Gene- ration of the Volatiles of all Sort,s, differs, in many Things, at leaft in the Manner of it, from that of the various Species of the Beads of the Field -, and
both
[i7» ]
both of them, vaftly, from that of the Fijhes. — And yetj were we, in any of thofe Cafes, to call the Begetters, Fathers, or the Young, Sons, as is fbmetimes done ; the Words, Generation, Father, Son, would, I think, be properly ufed, in all thofe Cafes : And every Body, even the weakeft, would iinderftand what we meant -, and would ftill retain the Idea of the Relation between the Begetter ^Lnd. Be- gotten, tho' they might hardly have any Ideas at all, or thofe but very genera', obfcure, and indiftinft, it not \n\\o\\y falfe, of the Manner of their gendring or being engencked. — 'Tisjult fo here. We fay, when we fpeak after our Fathers, That ihtfirft Per- fon is, in the mod proper Senfe, a Father ; becaufe he communicated his ivhole Nature, with all that is ejfemial to it, to the Second ; and according to Mr. Perrault, becaufe as a Father h^. fent forth \vlS coexijl- ent Son from Self, and fo maiiifefied him to have been in, and with him, from all Eternity, as his Son : And, That the Second Ferhn is, in the moH proper Senfe, « Son ; becaufe the whole Divine EJfence with all its Perfections were communicated to him from all Eternity, fey the fir ji ; or, upon the Account oH his Coexiftence in the fame EJfence with him, and his Goings forth from him, &c. And all this, without prefiiming to determine the Manner of thefe Things •, and much more, wkhout " fjpporting the Analogy of thofe *' Names in every Refpe6l."
(3.) I faid. That the Son i% in the mo^ proper Senfe, a Son ; becaufe, I could not think it amifs to fpeak after the Holy Ghoft ; or, to ufe the Expreflions, •which he had ufed before us. — Yea, I fhould have been very injurious, to the Second Vtrkin ; and unjufl to the C^/^o//V Church, whofe Faith I am defending, if I had not taken particular Notice of them, and fet them in the clearelt Light I could. — The Apo- ille is very exprefs, oV yz rv ISiv uj» oux i<psl(Tcx,ro, Rom. viii. 32. Is quidcm qui propria Filio tton pepercit. He
Z 2 that
[ 172 1
that /pared not his own, or his proper Son ; for, fo the Word is : But, if the Son, is his proper Son, the Father, is his proper Father. — And the Jews charge our Lord, in fo many Words, with faying, that God was his Father, Uccrifx 'i$m, Patrem proprium, \\\s proper Father, John v. i8. and therefore, by fo iioing, with making himfelf equal with God. — This Charge, high and grievous as it is, if not true ! he ■was fo far from denying, (which he might very eafily have done, many Ways, and ought to have done,) That he ftrongly confirms it, and proves by many Arguments, ver. 19, 23, 26, i^c. that he really was fo. — But, if the Father, is his proper Father, and He, his proper Son, then are thefe Terms, I humbly conceive, ufed, in the moft proper Senfe, of the Jirji and fecond Perfons in the 'Trinity, let Men oppofe it with ever fo many Cavils ; with which the ferious, honeft Believer has very little to do ; and therefore, needs not at all trouble himfelf.
(4.) 1 would afk. Whether theblcffedF/r^/;? was not, in a truer, ftri5ier, higher, and more proper Senfe too, the Mother of that which was conceived in her. Mat. i. 20. of that Holy Thing which was born of her, Luke
1. 35. than any other Mother ever was, of any other Child: And, Whether that Child, was not, in a more true, firi5f, high, and more proper Senfe too, her Son, than any other Son ever Was, of any other Mother ? No Body, I conceive, can doubt of it. — The Angel told her, fhe JJjould bring forth a Son, ver. 31. who had been long before promifed, as the Seed of the Woman ; Gen. iii. 15. and God is faid, by the Apoftle, to have fent forth his Son made of a Woman, &c. Gal. iv. 4. — lL\i^ Virginia faid to have brought forth her firfi'born Son ; Mat.'i. 25. and fhe herfelf called him Son : — Elizabeth, Simeon, and the Evangelifts^ called him her Son, Luke i. 43. Ch.
2. ver. 27, 34. Mat. 12. 47, iSc. — And yet, ma- ny ot the Ideas, fignified by the Words, conceive.
Mother,
[ 173 ]
Mother^ Son^ in ordinary Cafes, can have no Ad- mittance in this. — Here was no proper Father^ nor any pre-exijlent material Animalcule, as, I am inclined to think, there has been in all other Concepiions. — • Here was a creating, and not a begetting. -. — In Ihort, every Thing here was extraordinary, preter- natural, miraculous! — But, Was fhe, in any Senfe, the lefs his Mother ; or he, in any Senfe, the kfs, her Son ? No : By no Means. — Was flie not then, in a truer, higher, ftrifter, and therefore, in a rather more proper ^enfe, his Mother, than any other Mother ever was, or could be, of any other Son f And was not He, in all thefe Senfes, rather more her Son, than any other Son ever was, or could be, of any other Mother ? — I humbly conceive he was. He being the Seed of the Woman, conceived in a Vir* GIN, MADE of aWoman, &c. his bleffedBodyvf2>s made, or CREATED, OF HER SuESTANCE; (as the Body of the frji Woman was made of the Rib which God had taken from Adam : Gen. ii, 22.) not one of which, could ever have been faid of any other Mother, or Son. — Her Love to him therefore, muft have been, naturally, by many Degrees, more intenfe and fer- vent ; and her motherly Care of him, and Sympathy with, or for him, egregloufly more affe^ionate and tender, than in any other Cafe : Forafmuch, as her Relation to him, was exceedingly nearer, and her Intereft in him, fo much more natural and, above Parallel, endearing. — And, on the other Hand, the merely natural hove, which, in other Children, is, naturally, divided between the Parents, being, in him, center'cl in her alone, his purely natural filial Love to her, muft have been, naturally, above Com- parifon, more firong and flaming ; and his Care of. Pity for, and Affection towards her, fuperlatively more conflant and a£iive. — So that, as the Ties of Nature between them, were clofer, their purely na- tural Endearments muft needs have, upon that Ac- count,
[ 174 1
count, had there been no other, much more exqui- Jite ; and confequently, their merely natural Hap* pinefs^ in t\\€ir Jingular Relation to each other, egre- gioufly more exalted^ and delicate. — Here then was a Son, in the trueft, ftrifteft, higheft, and I doubt not to hy, the mofc proper Sen^^, tho' feveral of the Ideas implied, in what v/e commonly call na- tural -Ge^ieraticn, could have no Room in his. Here we have Samenefs of Nature, the Com?numcation of the fame Ndiure from the Mother to the Son, or, if you will, hxs Pr/dcipation o^ the fame Nature, &c. which are the firft and chief Ideas in natural Genera- tion ', and therefore, was the Mother, I conceive, in a more proper Senfe, his Mother, and he, in a more proper Senfe, her Son. -— In fine, 'tis becaufe of the Difference we find, betwixt the Ideas of this, and other Generations, that we conclude, 1 hat Ci^r//? was in the trueft, ftri6teft, higheft, and confequently, in the moft proper Senfe, a Son. To confirm this, fomewhat at leaft,
iV". B. One of the Names of the Son that was given^ and the Child horn to us. If ix. 6. is Wonderful ! May we not then think. That it was with Refped to, or upon the Account of, this miraculous Concep- tion, as well as fome other Things, that he had this Name or Title? — May we not then, with Reverence, fay. That he is wonderful as God, i. e. the coeffential Son of God •, and wonderful alfo as Man, the Seed of the Woman, and made of her ! Wonderful as the Son of a Woman, without a Man ; and wonderful as the Son of God, without a Wife I — May we not venture to fay. That his fingular Relation to his Mother^ as her Son, is the very hkeft, comes neareft to, and does beft refemble, his Relation to God, as his Son, of any Thing in Nature : And that, confequently » he is his coeffential Son ? — However, Chrifl is indeed a Wonder of Wonders ! — Wonderful in his complex
Perfon, Natures, Offices, Relations, States !
Wonder-
[ >75 ]
Wonderful as Man^ in his Conception, Birth, Life, Dodrine, Miracles, Death, Refurredion , &c I Altogether Wonderful ! — But
5. "When pleading for the coeffential Sonfhip of the fecond Perfon, or, in RoeFs own Words, Thef. x. I'hat the Sen, the fecond Perfon of the moji holy 'Tri- nity, was from Eternity begotten of the Father ; and Thef XX. That the mcji Orthodox Senfe of the Words, Son and Generation, is, that they emphati- cally fignify. That the fecond Perfon hath the fame Effence and Nature with thejirfi, and did from Eter- nity coexiji with him : < — When, pleading, I fay, for this, (and I plead for no more, when I plead for the coeffential Sonfhip of the fecond Perfon!) I could not well avoid faying. That he is, in the mofb proper Senfe, the Son of the Father ; becaufe, I conceive, the Phrafe, co- effential Sonfhip^ does really, and neceiTarily, imply it. Nor can I help believing, that every Body v/ill fay with me, 1 hat a coeffential Son, is, in the mofl: proper Senfe, a Son. — No ; will this learned Man and his Followers fay, that cannot be. " Between " Generation properly fo called," and the Generation of the fecond Perfon, there remains no Likenefs, " no " not the lead." — But, fay I, their Ideas " of *' Generation properly fo called," /. e. of human Generation, are all falfe. Let them reftify thefe, and then apply them to the Sonfaip of the fecond Perfon, and they will fee, as I have hinted above, that, in all the principal Ideas, they very well agree, as far as the Ideas we have of an infinite, and mofb pure Spirit, will permit us to carry them. — In fine. We are apt to think. That the Reafons, why the moji High, in his infinite JVifdoin and Goodnefs, has chofen to call the firfi and fecond Perfons in the Tri- nity, by the Names of Father and Son, is to fignify to us, — I. That thz Relation of the /r/? Perfon to the fecgnd, is the neareftto, and is bell refembled by the
E.d(itiQn
[ 176 ]
Relation of an own Father, to an own Son, among - Men, of any Relation in Nature, except, that be- tween the Virgin and her Son, purely as fueh. — 2. Becaufe the Father is as properly^ a Father, and the Son as proferly a Son, as they can be. And confe- quently, — 3 .Thefe Words both could and would excite in us, the moft familiar, eafy, and clear Ideas of this Matter, which he faw necejfary for us, and thought meet to excite in us ; or that we were capable of, in this prefent State. — And I cannot help being per- fuaded, — 4. That, if any Thing in the World, within our Reach, or of which we have any Knowledge, could have given us more dijtin5f and adequate Ideas of the Generation of tht fecond Perfon, or the Manner of it, fo as to have ftrengthned our Faith and Hope in our dear Redeemer, and enfiamed our Love to or Delight in him. Our moft gracious God and Saviour would have kindly indulged us with it. — This then he thought fufEcient : Let us therefore, be content with it, and thankful for it, and careful to improve it, and make the beft Ufe of it ; without daring to enquire PFhy, or How, or break through unto the Lord to gaze, Ex. xix. 21 . left we perifh. — Can wcy by [earching, find out God ? Can we find out the Al- mighty unto Perfection ? Job xi. 7.
Before, I conclude this, I mud remove fome Ob- jections, which J I am well aware, will be made to me, which indeed require an Anfwer, and will be of Ufe throughout all that follows.
Obj. I. Tho' I feem, and with much Zeal too, to oppofe the learned Roel •, yet, by adopting Per- rault^s Opinion of the Generation of Animals, i. e. *' of Generation /^rfiip^r/y fo called," I do, inEffedt, fall in with him ; and believe (not that the Son of God was, in a proper Senfe, begotten of the Father , but) that he coexifted with him from all Eternity ; and therefore, is unoriginal ed, and, av-JOeo? i. e. God of
him-
[ ^77 ]
•himfelf-) as well as he ; and confequently, is not, In a proper Senfe, his Son.
Anf. I. Tho' I am much inclined to believe P^r- raull's Notion, of the Generation of Animals^ to be true i and to apply his Ideas^ to the Generation of the Son of God : I fhall not contend fo earneftly for my fo doing, till I hear how ferious and judicious Chriftians relifh it. Nor lliall I, till then, ever fay any Thing more, againft the old Account of the Genera- tion of the Son., but that it gives Occafion to many feemingly ftrong, hui vt^dWy needlefs ObjeSJions % and does not fo well agree, with the true Ideas of human Generation. — 2. V/hen Mr. Perrault's Ideas of Ge- neration properly fo called, are applied to the Genera- tion of the Son^ they are much, if not exactly the fame, as we have heard, with what Reel calls the moft orthodox Senfe of the V' ords, Son and Genera- tion. Thef. 20. — 3. Had Mr. Roel heard of Fer- rW/'s Notion, and confidtr'd it well, it would, I conceive, have removed all his Difficulties •, and fa- ved him the Trouble, of making fuch a needlefs Stir in the World. — 4. Had he embraced it, he needed not have gone near fo far from the common Faith., as he has done : Yea, needed not, in any one Thing, but in the Change of a very few Expreffions, which are founded, I conceive, upon palpable Mi- flakes \ and therefore, deferved to be cafhiefd ; efpe- cially, when it may be done without any Danger, and a very probable Profpedl of feveral defireable Advantages. — 5. His not doing it, has led him to many Things, which feem of much greater Moment, than he was av/are of. Such as, — i. To deny. That there is any ^Natural Order.^ among the bleffed Three^ either of Subjifiing., or JVorking ! — 2. To af- firm, That whatever Order there is among them, is purely CEconomical -^ and therefore, voluntary and arbitrary ! — 3. To rob the frfl Perfon of all the Pre rogatives of a Father, and purely as fuch ; by grant-
A a ing.
[ 178 ]
ing, That he^ who is now called the /ry^ Perfon, or the Father^ might have been called .the fecond^ or the Son ; and confequently, might have been ap- pointedy and fent^ to be incarnate.^ and become obedient unto Death ! &c. all which, to me, appear Jjock- ing^ contrary to the whole Scripture^ and v^^hat turns all Things upfide down / — 4. To give the Son^ and as fuch, an ommmodous Equality with the Father^ and as fuch ; which is abfolutely inconfiftent, with all the Ideas of Father and Son^ whether ufed properly or improperly, and directly contrary to his lo 7'hefts, " That the Son, the fecond Perfon, was begotten of " the Father from Eternity."^ &c. &c. So that, I anfwer diredly to the Objedion, — 5.
Tho' I incline to apply Mr. Perrault^s Ideas of the Generation of Men, to the Generation of the Son of God, the fecond Perfon in the Trinity : Yet, I do not agree with Mr. Roel, in any one Thing now con- troverted, if it is not to doubt of, or to deny, the Propriety and Truth of the old Account of the Ge- neration of the Son, which, as all own, is founded on the old Ideas of the Generation of Animals, and which are now, generally, thought to be falfe. — And This is the only Thing, wherein I differ from the common Language of the Catholic Church. ►— I fay common Language •, becaufe, I do not differ, in one Hair's breadth, from the common Faith. For,
I. I firmly believe. That there are Three di- Jiin5i Perfons in the moft holy and undivided Trinity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghofi. — 2 . That there is a naturah and therefore, necejfary and unal- terable. Order among them, both of Subjijting and Working. — 3. That xhtf;fi Perfon could never have been called, noraftedas, xht fecond ; and vice verfa. ' — 4. That the frji Perfon is properly, a Father ; and the fecond properly, a Son. — 5. 1 referve all that Preeminence and Precedency that is natural to a Father -, and, in a Word, all the Prerogatives of a
Fa-
[ ^79 ]
Father^ and purely as fuch, to the firji Perfon : And hence, He might, very naturally ^ chufe, ap- point, and commifTion, his only Son to be the Media- tor, &c. — And, 6. I beheve there is fome Sort oi a natural Subordination in the Son ; or. That the Son, a3 fuch, is fome Way naturally fiih ordinate to the Father^ as fuch : And therefore. That there was a Becoming' nefs in it, that he fhould be deputed to be the Media- tor, &c. and not the Father. — All this I leave with the jiudicious, ferious, impartial Chriftian, who, I am fare, will acquit me of all affeded, unneceflary, or hazardous Innovation.
Obj. 2. You have talk'd fo very exprefsly, and emphatically, of three diftincl, and proper, coexijtent Persons, that you mud furely, for aught we can conceive, make them, or believe them to be. Three di;iinEl Spirits, or Minds, which is neither more nor lefs, rhan pure Tritheism. — To this 1 an- fwer diredly,
Anf. "What I. have laid is no more Triiheifm, than the DoSlrine of the Catholic Church, from the Beginning, \s, Tritheifm. — For, i. However they fx/);ry}Vthemfelves, they muft have believed them to be three dijiin£t proper Perfons ; becaufe, they all be- lieved a REAL Trinity : And, That the Father did really, fome Way or other, l^eget the Son -, and that the Son was really, fome Way or other, begotten : That the Father was not the Son, nor the Son the Father, &c. — 2. However they ^;v/)r^y}'J themfelves, they muft, they did, believe them to have been, frc7n all Eternity, coexijient Perfons : Becaufe, they be- lieved. That the Father was always a Father ; never without the Son, or aAoj/o? \ &;c. &c. and that the Son never began to be ; or, was without a Beginning, and always a Son, &c. &c. But, if the Father was always a Father, and the Son always a Son ', They muft have, as fuch, coexijledfrcrn all Eter- nity. — 3. They all believed, that the blefled Three
A a 2 did
[ i8o ]
didallfubfiftin one Divine Nature ; or, were coejfential % and that the Father and Son are one Thing, ^c. and therefore, are the one only^ the living and true God : But, if they are the one only God, they cannot poffibly be 'Three Gods. — 4. Our Saviour is exprefs, Gcd z'j A Spirit, John iv. 24. not two or three Spi- rits : And, /and the Father are one Tni-biG, Ch. X. 30. &'c. not twoThings: And we read, innumberlefs Pafiages of Scripture, of Jehovah, and Jehovah, 2.nd Jehovah, hut ntver of Three Jehovah^s: And of God, and God, and God, but never of Three Gods. — We therefore beHeve, 5. That tho' each of them is Je- hovah, they are all the one Jehovah -, and though every one of them is God, they are ^//, but the one God. — Thus God, who knows heji, and cannot lie, has plainly and exprefsly revealed himfelf, all over his Word : And thus we mod firmly believe, ac- cording to our Baptiymd Covenant ; and, by receiv- ing his Tejlimony, have Jet to our Seal, againft ail the blafphemous Antitrinitarians in the World, that God is true. Je. iv. 33.
Let it then luffice, in a Word, once for all, to fay. That it is ejfential, and therefore abfolutely ne- cejfary, to the Divine Nature, to fubfift in three di- Jiintl Perfons: And, that it necejfarily, tho* not without their Wills, fubfifts in the/r/?Perfon, as a Father •, in the fecond, as a Son -, and in the third, as proceeding from them Both. Or, if you will. That there are three diflinSf, and necejj'arily exijiing SubJiJiences, or Perfons, in the Godhead, a ^ro^tx Father, a proper Son, and a Third which properly proceedeth from them Both.
Thus far have I now ventured, contrary to my Cuftom, in thefe myjierious and adorable Things ! And now, O Lord, to thee do I look. Thou knoweji how fear Jul I am, at all Times, to fay any Thing, on fuch Subje3ls, without, bejides, or beyond, thy Word ; and to wander from the Footsteps of the
Flock ;
[ j8. j
Flock : In every 'Thing I have /aid amifs, O Lord forgive, and prevent its doing any Hurt, to any of of thy People ; and hlefs any Thing that may conduce to the Injiru^lion, Excitation, Ejtablifhment, or Re- covery, of thofe, who truly fear and love thee, ac- cording to the mofl earneji Defire of thy poor and moft unworthy Servant, for the Sake of thine only begot- ten, the Son of thy Love, and our only Redeemer and Advocate. Amen,
II. We iliaii now " furvey the feveral Senfes, " (which our worthy Author alledges, p. 5.) have " been ufually put upon this Phrafe Son of God ;'* And that, in Confequence of an Endeavour, " to " find the true Idea or Meaning of it in thofe Texts " wherein the Behef of Chrifb to be the Son of God *' i>^ made the great Requifite in Order to Salvation, " and a neceffary Ingredient of Chriftianity." p. 2. This is an awful Thought indeed ! enough to make us all look about us.
Of thefe Texts, he has given us fix celebrated ones, p. 3. and 4. which are all, I conceive, clear, full, and home to the Purpofe. John iii. 18. Ch. xx. 31. I John V. 13. Ch. iv. 15. Ch. ii. 23. and A£ls viii. 37. — Thefe we have mentioned already, p. 12. and added to them about twice as many, p- 13. the more to confirm a Point of fuch vaft Importance.
His firft Argument propofed " by Way of a *' disjunftive Syllogifm," begins thus, p. 5. " This " Name, Son of God, hath been fuppofed to be " given to our Lord Jefus Chriji upon fome or all " of thefe five Accounts, (i.) Becaufe of an Eter- " nal and Unconceivable Generation by the Perfon *' of the Father in the Samenefs of the Divine Ef- " fence. (2.) Becaufe of the glorious Derivation of " his human Soul from God before the Creation of " the World. (3.) Becaufe of his Incarnation or " coming into this World by an extraordinary Con- !* ception, and Birth of a Virgin without an earthly
Fa-
[ ,82 ]
*- Father, by the immediate Operation of God, *' (4.) Becaufe of his Refurredion from the Dead, *' and high Exaltation. (5.) In order to point out " that glorious Perfon who had in general fome " fublime and finguiar Relation to God, and who " alfo was to fuftain the Charadler and Oifice of the *' Mejfiah^ the Saviour of the World."
Here, let the impartial Reader diligently confider, and carefully remember, thefe few Things.
I. The Ambiguity often hinted above. The Que- fljon is not, whether this Title, the Son ofGod^ may be, and is actually, given in Scripture, to the Word made Flesh, in his whole complex Perfon ; or, to the Mejfiah^ and as fuch \ which no one of us ever once doubted : — But, V/hether it does not originally^ and efpecially if Jtri^ly taken, denote the fecond Perfon in the moji holy Trinity, and purely, as fuch ; or, Whether the y^^oW Perfon, and purely as fuch, is not indeed the coejjential Son of the Father \ and might not have had this ^itle, from all Eternity, antecedently to, or abflraftin from, all Confideration of his Mediatorial Under takings or Office ; which he ftrenuoufly denies, and we ftedfaflly affirm .?
2. That if he had invincibly proved, That Chrifi^ the Mediator between God and Man^ may be, or is adually, called the Son of God, upon all thefe four laft; Accounts, which is, I think, impoffible to be done ; yet it could never have fully ferved his Purpofe, or oppofed the Catholic Doctrine of the Son/hip of our Redeemer, except he had alfo proved. That the fe- cond Perfon in the 'irinity, and purely as fuch, isr not, and therefore cannot be called, the coeffential Son of the Father •, which he has but very feebly at- tempted, and can never, indeed, be done.
3. Many great and eminent Men, who have mofl zealoufly, ftrenuoufly, and fuccefsfully, contended for the coeffential Sonfhip of the fecond Perfon in the
&
[ i83 ]
trinity ^ have granted, yea and pleaded. That Chrift /j-, or may he called, the Son of God, upon four of thefe/w Accounts. — I fhall name but two, and thofe two of the greatefl: Lights and Orna- ments, the Church of England ever had ; (and ihe has had a great many,) even that univerfal Scholar, who was indeed a Sort of a Prodigy in Learning, the famous Dr. Ifaac Barrow, and the moft wor- thy, and judicious, Bifhop Pearfon. The former, enquiring into " the Grounds and Refpecls upon " which this Relation of our Saviour to God is " built, or the Reafons why he is called the Son of " God ; tells us there are feveral exprelTed or im- " plied in Scripture. * i. Chrift is called the Son of *' God, in Regard to his temporal Generation, as " being in a Manner extraordinary conceived in the " BleJfedP^irgin by the Holy Ghofi, Luke i. 35. Gal. " iv. 4. — 2. Chrift alfo may be termed the Son of '' God in Regard to his Refurreclion by Divine Effi- " cacy ; that being a Kind o^ Generation, or Intro- " duftion into another State of Life immortal. " Luke XX. 35, 36. AHs xiii. 32, 33. — Others, " fays he, are upon this Ground called the Sons of " God: — How much more then may he .'' — 3, " Chrift is capable of this Title by reafon of that " high Office, in which by God's fpecial Defignation " he was inftated. — • If ordinary Princes and Judges ^'- have been called the Children of the mofi High : " Pf. Ixxxii. 6. — With how much greater Truth '■'■ and Reafon may he be called his Son ? John x. '^^, " — 4. Whereas God hath conftituted our Saviour " Heir of all 'Things, given him to be Head above all " Things to the Church, put all Things under his " Feet, given him Power over all Things to the ** Church, — exalted him to, or at, his Right Handy " — and committed all Judgment to him ; well may
* Barro^vh Expof. of the Creed, Serm. 21, Jo. i. 14,
« he
[ >84 ]
" he in that Refpe6t be entitled the Son of God ; as " thereby holding the Rank and Privilege fuitable *' to fuch a Relation : He being the chief of the " Family, and next in Order to the great Pater^
" familias of Heaven and Earth. In thefe Re-
*' fpedls is our Saviour properly, or may be fully " denominated the Son of God, with fome Peculiarity " and Excellency beyond others : But his being *' with fuch Emphajis called God^s only begotten Son, " (denoting an Exclufion of all others from this Re- *' lation upon the fame Kind of Ground) doth fure- *' ly import a more excellent Ground thereof, than " any of thefe mentioned,'* ^c. Thus far this great Man, with his ufual Sagacity, Judgment, and vaft Compafs of Thought. On which I obf i . His Modefty. " Chrift is called the Son of God, may be " termed, is capable of this Title, and well may he be *' thus entitled :" His Modefty, I fay, in not affirming without what appeared to him fufficient Proof, And, tho' I humbly conceive, that Chrift is never adlually fo called, upon any of thefe Accounts, yet I can readily agree with him. That he may be fo termed, is capable of this Title, ^c. — 2. Among all thefe Senfes, there is not a Syllable of our worthy Author's fecond Account, viz. " That this Title *' fignifies the glorious peculiar Derivation of his hu- *' man Soul from God the Father, p. 10" Whence I ga* ther. That there was no fuch Fancy known in his Time ; or, that he thought it groundlefs j and there- fore, not worth any Notice. — 3. That none of thefe, nor altogether, were in his Judgment, incon- fiftent with the coeffential Sonfhip of Chrift.
Of much the fame Mind is the other great Man, who gives us the fame Reafons, tho' not in the fame Order, and, I think, with more Pofitivenefs. i. " It cannot be denied that Chrifi is the Son of God, '* for that Reafon, becaufe he was by the Spirit of *' God born of the Virgin i Luke i. 35. — 2. 'Tis
" un-
[ »85 ]
" undoubtedly true, That he being defigned to Co " high an Office, (as that of the M:ffiah,) he mud *' by Vertue thereof be acknowledged the Son of *' God, Jo. X. 34 — ^6. — 3. He muft be ac- *' knowledged the Son of God, becaufe he is raifed " by God out of the Earth unto immortal Life* " Luke XX. 36. Rom. i. 4. — 4. Chriji is, after his " Refurredion, made adually Heir of all Things in
" his Father's Houfe, from whence he alfo
" hath the Title of the Son of God. — But befides *« thefe four, fays he, we mud find yet a more peculiar *' Ground of our Saviour's Filiation, totally diftin£t '* from any which belongs unto the reft of the Sons " of God ; that he may be clearly and fully ac- " knowledged the only begotten Son." * — From thefe, the fame Obfervations offer themfelves, as from the former. — Suffer me only to add. That, if, by rhefe Expreffions, " he muft be acknow- " ledged becaufe, or by Vertue thereof," he means^ That they are irrefiftible Declarations, or Evidences^ that He, who had affumed our Nature, was, from Eternity, the Son of God^ we are agreed.
I need not give any more Quotations, to lliew their Opinions : Nor will there be any Occafion for Citations, from the Writings of the Protefiant Dif- fenters, not a few of whom have granted the fame. Nor will it be neceffary, after the Hints given* to acquaint the Reader, how ready I fhould be to es- cufe thefe lejfer Mijiakes, in Perfons of fo very great Eminence, and real Worth : But, becaufe, as I hum- bly conceive, they are Mifiakes, I fhall take the Li- berty, with all due Deference, to give my Reafons^ why I think them fo, and, at the lame Time, pro- pofe what I take to be the Truth. — The firft of thefe will come naturally in, when I confider " the
* Pear/on' &Exf of. of the CreeJ, Art. 2. p. 105, 106.
B b " five
[ i86 ]
" five various Accounts, upon which this Name ihe *' Son of God,'\\2Xk\ been luppofed, according to our " Author, to be given to Chrift : " The laft we fhalL offer in the Words of the learned Pi^ete^ a Man who had a very dear Head, and jolid Judgment.*'
" Chrifr, fays he, is not called the Son of God^ " either becaufe of his Conception of or b)\ the Ho- " ly Spirit^ or becaufe of his Ordination to the Me- " diatorial Office^ or his Reftirre£iion from the Deady *' or becaufe of his Exaltation to the Right Hand of " the Father. — Thefe are not the Reafons, for ■ *' which he is called the Son of God^ tho' from them " we may gather that He is the Son of God, whence " the Apoftle tells us, Rom. i 4. That he was *' DECLARED/0 ^f the Son of God with Power by his " Refiirre^ion from the Dead. ^^
This willj I hope, be clear, if we remember, I, That the Jecond Perfon as fuch, as has been and fhall be, by and by, farther proved, is a coeffential, or natural., and confequently, an eternal Son. — 2. It fo, he was the Son of God., and therefore might have been fo called, not only abftracfting from all thefe, but, in the Order of Nature, even before he could be deftgyied for the Mediatorial Office : — But it is not likely. That o?ie who is, and is acknowledged to be, the Son of God by Generation ; or his own, pro- per, or peculiar ^on ; fliould be called his Son, on any of thefe, or any lozver Accounts. — 3. He is, for the fame Reafons., and upon the fame Grounds, called the Son of God, that he is called his only begotten Son : But he could not be called his only begotten Son, upon any of ihtftfour A.ccounts. Er, — He could not be
* Non igitiir Chriftus dicititr^iWm, aut propter ejus Conceptio- nem ex Spiritu fan>^lo, aut propter ejus Ordinaiioiiem ad Munus Medip.tonum, aut ejus Sufcitationem a Mortuis, aut Exaltationem firf" Dextram Patris. — U^ non funt Rationes, propter quas didus eji Filius Dei, etji ex illis Chriflum fuljfe Filium Dei colligere pcjjumus, &c. Rom. i. 4.. Piil. Theol. Chrift, Lib. 2. Cap. \y.
called.
[ 187]
called, I %, his only hegotteyi Son, on any of thefe
Accounts : Becaule, it the Word, begotten, is
taken in a proper Senfe, 'tis evident, he is a coejfen • tial ^^on •, which, at once, demolifhes our Author's .whole Scheme : If, in an improper or figurative Senfe, all true Believers are, in that Senfe, faid to be horn of God, and begotten of God \ and then 'tis as evident. He is not, the only begotten. — 4. All thofe Texts which prove the Son, as fuch, to be God, (as thofe evidently do, Jo. x. 30. Heb. i. <s\ Col. i. 13 — 17, &c.) invincibly prove him to be a coeffential Son; and confequently, not there called his Son, for any fuch low Reafon. — 5. I cannot pafs Pi5lete\ chief Argument, from heb. iii. 3 — 6. where the Apoftle, fays he, " teaches us that Chrifi " was the Son of God, as God ;" (tho' there, I con- ceive, he is fpoken of in his complex Perfon, as the Meffiah,) " where he faith, that Chvifl as a Son ivas " over his own Houfe, vcr 6. after he had faid, ver. " 3. that he had built the Houfe, and ver. 4. that' " he that hath built all'T^nngs is God." — And, 6. When I proved at large, p. 127 — 13 f. that no one, neither in Heaven nor on Earth, is ever, in the Singular Number, called a, or the. Son of God, but our Lord himfelf ; N. B. I fliould have put the Reader in Mind of his Creed, m which he pro- fejfes his Faith, in Jefus Chrijl, the Father's only Son ! Whence it is evident. That, in the JVeftern Church, for many Ages paft, this has been an Ar- ticle of their F'ailh, That God had but one only Son , who being there propofed as the Object of our Faith; and confequently, o'i O'dv religious IVorfhip^ Fear, Obedience, Love, 'Jrufl, &c. as well as the Father, is, by Confequence, profeffed to be his co- effential Son, and therefore, God equal ijoith him. This, I conceive, is of fonie Weight, and therefore, fhould not be forgotten. N. B. The Eajiern Church, inftead of his only Son, keep to the Scripture Phrafe,
B b 2 hia
[ »88 1
his only begotten Son^ which is very much the fame. Proceed we then to h\s,five Accounts.
Thofe five we have given already, in his owri Words. The firji^ which is the principal., and, in my Opinion, the only true one, he flatly denies, and oppofes with all his Might, and by all Means ; the three next, he gives better Quarters to •, and then fixes upon the lafi., and pleads ftrenuoufly for it. — We, on the contrary, firmly believe the JirjT; ; doubt of, or deny, the next three -, and part- ly admit the lajl. We fhall therefore, as he has done, difpatch thofe we oppofe ; explain that, which we think is, in fome Senfe, true j and then efta- blifh that^ which we are, through Grace, to defend. — Begin we then, with his Second, in which he (lands alone^^ or almoft fo •, this new Article pf Faith being referved, for a very late Difcovery !
" II. Some may fuppofe the Name Son of God *' relates to his human Soul^ and fignifies the glorious ^' peculiar Derivation of it from God the Father before ^' the Creation of the World, and that in this Senfe *' he is called the firfi-horn of every Creature., and " the Beginning of the Creation of God. Col. i. 1 5. " and Rev. iii. 14. — that fo in all Things he might *' have the Preeminence. Col. i 18.*'-— p. 10.
This we have had, under our Obfervation, feve- ral Times -, and have freely examined, and rejeded it. See p. 125, and p. 73 — yy, i^c. where I have honeftly, and very particularly, expofed that Paragraph " about the Apoflles Paul and John,* &c. tho' we have as many more Obfervations upon it ip Referve. But, I cannot here fo pafs it, and therefore now add. — i. Some may fuppofe any Thing •, but, Suppofttio nil ponit in effe. Suppofition \s no Proof. But, what " fome may fuppofe in this " Paragraph, in the next he is very much inclined *^ to b(- iicve," and boldly, at laft, affirms, " That y the pre-exiftent Soul of Chrift --—— is properly
^' the
[ '89] " the Son of God^ p. 150, ^c. &c.** — 2. There is not the leaft Syllable of Chrift's human Soul, in any of the Texts cited ', no, nor in the whole EpifLIe to the ColoJ/ians, nor Book of the Revelation. — Nor, 3. Is there, to the beft of my Remembrance, any the leaft Syllable of the glorious^ or -peculiar Derivation of it, in all the Bible. — Yea, 4. The Texts quo- ted, will not, cannot, bear his Senfe. — He does not deny, yea, he often confeiTes, That Chrift's human Soul was a Creature, and nothing but a Creature^ tho' the firjl and chief of all the Creatures : But the Words, upon wnich he builds this Fancy, that Chrift's human Soul is properly the Son of God, oblige us to rejecft it. — The Son of his Love, Col. i. 13. is w^oiToroxog •nraV??? KriTeoog, born before all Creatures, ver. 15. and therefore, not created, but born ov begot- ten, before them -, and confequently, not a Creature, but a Son, yea, an Eternd Sen. To anfwer his Purpofe, it Ihould have been •ct^wto? xTio-Ottf, as we may learn from the very next Line, ot< iv dvrt^ iXTtcrh ra zjcc)jrx, for by him were all Things created. — He is begotten or born, they created or mad^. The Ho- ly Ghoft makes, and keeps up, the Diftin6tion ; and the diftin6t or proper Signification of the Words, and
fo ought we. In the other. Rev. iii. 14. He is
% uoyri rrtq Kricnun; t« 0ss, the Begifining of the Creation of God. Not the firfi Perfon, or Thing, he made : But He who gave a Beginning, or Being to all Things ; or He BY WHOM, and for whom, they were fnade. 'H d^^ri, the Begin7iing, exducles all Begi/ming of his own : And therefore, this Divine Title could never belong to his human Soul. — But, 5. Did thefe Words themfelves afford any Ground for the fhuf- fling Interpretation of the Arians, which is much the fame with our Author's, the Contexts would ftrongly reftrain us from fuch a Dream. Becaufe, in that Paffage, Col. i 13, — 17, it is faid of the §on, ALL Things werf created by him, and for him.
And
[ 190 1
And he is before all Things, and by him all Things consist. Not a Word of which ever was, or could be, true of his human Soul. And in the Epiftles to the A/tan Churches, he is faid to be jlJpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last, he that hath the [even Spirits of God, and the Amen •, ^c. Titles peculiar to Jeho- vah, the true God only, and which never could be- long to any Creature. — And, 6. As to his other Text, " Col. i. 1 8. that fo in all Things he might " have the Preeminence,^^ it can do him no Manner of Service ; no, not the leaft. For, allowing that thefe Words refpeft his human Soul, furely, it may have the Preeminence among, or before, the Members of his Body the Church, of whom only the Apoftle fpeaks in that Verfe; as will be manifeft to every one that confiders it.
After all, " he cannot think this precife Idea is " the very Thing defigned in thofe Texts, wherein " our Salvation is made to depend upon the Belief
" of Chriji being the Son of God ; becaufe, there
" have been Thoufands of Chriftians, who have been " faved, and yet have not entertain'd this Opinion *' concerning the Soul of ChriJl, &c. p. lo, ii." Anf. I. 'Twould have been ftrange indeed, if tiiey had entertain'd an Opinion, which they had never heard of', p. lo. and which very few Thoufands, any where, have heard of, to this Day. — - 2. 'Till he tell us what he means, by the Derivation of his human Soul ; and what, by " the glorious peculiar Deriva- " tion of it ; I cannot fee how any one can entertain his Opinion. — 3. I have proved. That his human Soul, however derived, is not properly the Son of God', and every one muft fee, that there is not a Syllable of this Soul in any of his Texts. — But feeing, ac- cording to a Hint already given, my prefent Pur- pofe, is not to purfue this Notion, any further, ex- cept when I meet with fomething which muft be re- moved :
[ 19' ]
moved : I Jliall only, e?i pajfenl, very briefly, offer a few more Thoughts, out of many, fufficient, I humbly conceive, to make all ferious Perfons be- ware of it ; and excite them to confider it well, be- fore they incline, in the leaft, to favour or embrace it ; and much more, before they undertake to main- tain it, or difpute and contend for it. I do not of- fer them as abfolute Certainties, or as invincible Ar- guments ; but rather, that they may be well weigh- ed, before we embrace This Notion : — They are thefe.
1 . This human Soul^ according to him, " is 2ifupra- " angelical Sprit ^'' and not only more glorious than, but before^ all the Angels: And therefore, I hum- bly conceive, very improperly called a human Soul. The Art am ^ who call the Logos a fwpr a- angelical Spirit^ talk, I cannot but think, more accurately, when they fay. That, when this Spirit zvas made Flejh^ Jo. i. 14. izfupplied the Place of a human SouL
2. It feems as great a Solccifm.^ and very unphi- lofophical^ to fpeak of the aSlual Exijience of a hu- man Soul, fo exceeding long, before the Creation of the human Species : Or, before any One Man was made.
3. A fupra-angelical Spirit united to a human Bo- dy, as our Souls are to our Bodies, would not confti- tute a true Man -, even tho' that Spirit and that Bo- dy, were derived from God, in a very peculiar Man- ner. If this be fo, as, I humbly conceiv,^, it is, then thefe Things, and feveral othirs, I fiacerely think, will clearly follow. -- i. That, had Chrift's human Soul been (pardon the ExprefTion) a fupra-angelical S. irit. He could not in all Things, if indeed, ftrid- ly fpeaking, in any one Thing, have been made like unto his Brethren: Heb. ii. 17. Nor could he, per haps, in Reality, and in a proper Stnfe, have been their Brother. (2.) He could not himfelf have fuf- fersd, being tempted, either what they fuffer, or as
they
[ 192 ]
they fuffer. ver. i8. — (3.) He could not have been touched with the feeling of their Infirmities^ fo as be- catne their great High-Priefi : Nor could he have been in all Points, if indeed in any one Point, tempt- ed like as they are. Ch. iv. 15. (4.) He could not have fuch Compajfion upon the Ignorant, and upon them that are out of the .Way, as was abfolutely ne- ceffary for us, in this State of Temptation, 'Darknefs^ Sin, a.nd Mifery. Ch. v. 2. — In fine, (5.J He could not, in Stridnefs, have been One of our Species ', and confequently, could neither have been our Prophet, Surety, Prieft, Sacrifice, Interceffor, Advocate, King^ nor Saviour, &c. — I fhall offer no more noWj on this Head, but refer the kind Reader, if he thinks it worth his while, to the Rescue of the Assem- bly's SHORTER Catechism, p. 63 — 65. and the Anfwer to Mr. Gibbs's miferaUe Letter, p. 26 — 36. both of which I acknowledge to be mine -, wherein he will find a great deal to this Pur- pofe, which may give him farther Satisfadion, and which will not, in the Opinion of many, be fo eali- ly confuted.
4. This Notion of the Pre-exifi:ence of 2,fupra-an- gelical Spirit, which was to be Chrift's human Sout, efpecialiy, if we take in a great many loofe and un- guarded Things relating to it, and feveral offenfive ExprefTions about the Logos, I am heartily forry to fay, looks fo very like, differs fo very little from, and comes fo very near to, the Abomination of Ari- ANisM, that it well deferves to be better confider'd by all, who truly love the Doftrine of the Trinity. — The Ariatis talk, and with a great deal of profelTed Reverence too, of " the glorious peculiar Derivation " of that fupra-angelical Spirit, which they call the " Logcs, from the Father before the Creation of the " World : " And Dr. Clarke feems to think, That the Word, begotten, in the prefent Cafe, denotes or implies fom.ething between neceffary ExijtenCei and
being
[ ^93 ]
heing created ! — They will freely grant, I thinks That ii>e Logos, which fupplied the Place of Chrifl's human Soul, is as " near a-kin to God," (a Phrafe of our Author's,) if the ExprefTion is, in any Senfe* tolerable, as any Thing, which is not God, can be. — They afcribe all the great and glorious Things to it, which our Author has done to this human Soul : And I cannot fee, how either of them can well add any more, that is conceivable by us ; if they, the Ariayis, do not add true and proper Divinity to the Logos, and he, to Chrijl^s human Soul. — Briefly, the Arians, I think, will not fcruple to grant, That the fup' a- angelical Sprit, which fupplied the Place of Chrifl's human Soul, is, in fome near and extraordi- nary Manner, toufefomeother fufpicious ExprefTions of our worthy Author, " united to God, and has God- " head, in fome fpecial Way, in or with it, ^£-." — • How far then does this "Notion, with all he has faid concerning it, differ from Arianifm ? I do not fay ic does not at all differ ; becaufe he fpeaks fometimes of the Logos and this human Soul, as two diftindfc Perfons : But, it had been better, had he kept far- ther from it. However, "That I fhall, at this Time, leave to others. I only wifh, it had been fomewhat more confiflent with what he has faid of //&,? Deity of the fccond Perfon, in his Chrijiian Doctrine of the Trinity.
'' III. I fay therefore, in the fhird Place, that this " Title, Son of God, is given to Chrift, fometimes *' upon the Account of his Incarnation and miracu- " lous Birth. Luke i. 31, 32. Thou fh alt bring forth " a Son, — he fhall be called the Son of the Highefi* " vcr. o^c^. The Holy Ghofi fmll come upon thee, — " Therefore alfo that Holy Thing that ft2 all be born of thee " fhall be called the Son of God." — p. 11. This alfo with the next Paragraph, has been confidered al- ready, p. 48, 49. y^c. I now only add, i. Thisyc;?;^- times is only, at mofl, this once. 2. It does not come up to the Point in Queflion, as we Jliall
C G ies
[ 194 1
fee prefently -, and himfelf owns, a very few Lines after. " Th^s cannot be ths chief Meaning of this " Name, — For furely the Belief that the Man *' Chrijl Jefus was begotten of God and horn of a Vir- *' gin without an earthly Father ijoas not made the ** Term of Salvation •, — doth not feem to have any
" fuch fpecial Connection with our Salvation ;
" doiibtlefs many a poor Creature might become a " true Believer in Chrifl when he was upon Earth, " by the Sight of his Miracles, and hearing his " Dodrine, without the Knowledge of the -parti- *' cular Circumjiances of his Incarnation or Birth ; " and many were converted by the Apoftles, with-
" out any Notice of it, for we fcarce find
** any Mention of it in their Preaching or Writings." p. 12, and 13.
Anf I. " The Man Chrifi Jefus^^ is never, in Scripture, faid to have hztn begotten of God. — 2. He, who was " born of the Virgin^'' was not only Man^ but God-Man; and his Mother was there- fore, really, ^iorUo^^ Dei-para^ the Mother of him who is God. Acls xx. 28. Rom. ix. 5. i Tim. iii. 16, 6ff. — 3. If Chrifb was born of a Virgin, it was certainly, " without an earthly Father."^ — 4. Thofe Prophecies, The Seed of the Woman fhall bruife the Serpent^ s Head., Gen. iii. 15. and that. If vii. 14. Behold, a Virgin fJjall conceive, and bear a Son, and fhall call his ISlame Immanuel, were Prophecies of fuch Moment, fo very emphatic, fo generally known among the Jews and believing Profelytes, and fo univerfally underftood of the Mefjiah ; that I can hardly help thinking, that the more conftderate and intelligent, at leaft, who really believed him to be the Chrifi, knew alio, very well, that he was to be, and was a<5lually, born of a Virgin. — And therefore, 5. If the hare Nefcience of this Doftrine, which is really a Fundamental ; (becaufe, had he not been conceived by the Holy Chof}, " without
an
[ «95 ]
an earthly Father,^^ He could not have been holy^ harmlefsy undefJed, and feperate from Sinners^ Heb. vii. 26. abfolutely without BlemijJd^ and tvith- o'dt Spot ; nor could that which was born of the Virgin have been, ra olyiov, that holy Thing ; nor could his bleffed Body have been called, as I humbly conceive it is, thine holy One ; Ads ii. 27.) If, I fay, the hare Nefcience of this, may be thought not fo very criminal : Surely, a Difbelief of it, and wilful Oppcfition to it, muft have been inexcufahle \ and therefore, very dangerous. — But, 6. 1 cannot fee, how any of the believing Gentiles^ could have been baptized into his Name^ without fome Knozvledge of this. — And 7. There feems not to have been fo much need of freqtient mentioning a Thing, fo very well known •, and, at that Time, not only, no where, contradi5led^ but mod cordially and unanimoufly believed, without any Hefitation : Not to add. That the Apoftles, no Doubt, mentioned it, wherever they faw it neceffary. In fine, — 8. Tho' we fiiould allow, that *' his Imar' *' nation and miraculous Birth" were Ground fuffi- cient for giving Chrift this Title, the Son of God -, they could never have been fufficient for calling him, the own^ or proper, or the only begotten Sen. For, fays Dr. Barrow, " the firfi Adam did alfo imme- " diately receive his Being from the Power and In- ** fpiration of God •, (God formed his Body and " breathed his Soul into it j) Ifaac, Sarapfcn, John " the Baptifi had alfo a Generation extraordinary *' and miraculous •, and Sarah herfelf received " Strength to conceive Seed-., Heb. xi. 11. which " Produdtions do not fo greatly differ from the " Produftion of Chrift as Man." &c. ibid. p. 232. And Bp. Pearfon, " Surely the framing Chrifi out " of a Woman cannot fo far tranfcend the making " Adam out of the Earth, as to caufe fo great a Di- ** ftance as we muft believe between the firft and *' fecond Jdam 5 or to place him in that Singular
C c 2 " Emi-
[ '96 ]
" Eminence which muft be attributed to the only he- *' gotten, p, 107." — So that granting what we need not, cannot do, yet the fecond Perfon in the 'Trinity may be, and moft certainly is, the coejfcntial Son of the Father. And therefore we m.ight go on, But,
Becaufe Chrift's miraculous Conception and Birth are, according to the Socinians, thofe moft maHcious Enemies of his Dii'inity, as well as of his Crofs, the chief y if not the only Reafon, why this Title, the Son of God, is afcribed to him, we muft confider this Matter more particularly, tho' very briefiy. Let the Reader then obferve,
I. That THE Logos was, in the Beginning, with
God ; and was God. That all Things were
-made by him, and that without him was not any Thiyig made that was made -, are the very firft Words of the Gofpel according to John, a Writer noted for a nohle Simplicity of Stile, above all the Writers in the World. — If they are true, 'tis undeniable, That Nothing that was made, was made without him : That therefore, he was the Maker of all Things : And confequently, That himfelf, as fuch, was not made : That therefore, he not only exifted before any Thing was made ; but, ,by confequence, That he was, from Eternity, a neceffarily exijting Perfon : And therefore, God over all, as he is exprefsly ftiled, Rom. ix. 5. — This Divine Perfon, the Logos, was made Flejh, Jo. i. 14. and his Difciples beheld his Glory, the Glory as of the only begotten of the Father -, ver. 18. and confequently, the Logos and the only be- gotten are the fame Perfon ; or, thefe two Titles fig- nify the very fame Thing. — But this is not all. It was the Father''s dear Son, the Son of his Love, i. e. the only begotten, by whom all Things were created that pre in Heaven, and that are in Earth, vifible and in- 'vifible, whether they be Ihrones or Dominions, &c. Col. i. 13 and 16. Yea, it is added, in the cleareft, and moft emphatic. Words that could be ufed. All Things were created by him and f or him. And he is
BSFOR^
[ 197 1
BEFORE ALL Tkings, and by him all Things CONSIST, ver. i6, 17. Whence 'tis as clear, as Words can pofiibly make it, That the Son, as fucii, was before all Things : That he is the first Cause and LAST End of all Things : And Thar, as all Things^ from the higheft created Spirit^ to the moft inconli- derable Particle oS. Matter^ were, at firft, made hy him •, fo are they, to this Day, _/^tji;/V and govern'' d by him. -r- And, if this is not enough, the Fathers own exprefs and moil emphatic Words to, and of him, are more than fufficient, one would think, to ronfound all the Oppofition o'i Hell. But unto the Son, he, the Father, vcr. ^. faith. Thy Throne, O God, is for ever and ever ; &c. Heb. i. 8. — And, Thou Lord in the Begiyining, hafi laid the Founda- tion of the F^arth -, which, by the by, was not the lead Part of the Work -, and the Heavens, the high- eft as well as the loweft of them, are the fVorks of thine Hands: Theyffjall-perijh, but thou remainest, &c. ver. 10 — 12. — From all which, thefe Things invincibly follow, if the Father himfelf did not ex- aggerate prodigiouHy ! That the Son, as fuch, ?V God; and therefore, a coeffential Son : That, as fuch, he has a Throne, an everlajiing Throyie : And, That he was not an Inftrument in the Creation of all Things, as the Arians, as ridiculoufly as blafphe- moufly, fpeak ; but, in the ftrideft Senfc, the Au thor. Efficient Cauje, ^nd Maker, of them all.— -He himfelf kid the Foundation of the Earth ! The Hea- vens, ^//of thern, are the Works of his Hand] — Here are no Prepofttions, forhis Enemies to qui bble about.-— Here is no Room to wriggle about the Nezv Creatic},\ which they dare not fay Jhall perifj ! — What, more plain, exprefs, or emphatic. Words are, any where in Scripture, ufed to declare, That the Father hiin- felf is the Creator of all Things .? Yea, What more clear, and ftrong Words, and full home to the Point, (efpecially if we take in with them that Con- text,
[ 198 ]
text, CoL i. 13 — 17. and Jo. 1. 3, &c.) could have been ufed to prove, That ibe Son was, in the trueft Senfe, the Creator, the Jirji Caufe and lajt End, of all Things that were made? I may defy them all to an- fwer any of thefe Queftions ? And therefore, N. B. from thefe, I draw thefe invincible Conclufions. i. Againft our worthy Author, That the Son, as Son, is God ; and therefore. That he is a coejfential Son : That it is the fecond Perfon, who is, and is called the Son : And, That thefe Things could never be faid of Chriji's human Soul -, and confequently. That it is not properly the Son of God, and cannot, with Truth, be fo called. — And, 2. That the odious, and accurfed Do6trine of Socinus, who fhamelefsly de • nied. That our ever bleffed Saviour, had any Ex~ ijience, (but in the Decree, as you, and I, and all Men had,) before his Conception in the Womh of the Virgin, is, (i.) \n itfelf, a mere palpable Z)^/im;w. And (2.) In him. One of the moft open, and avow- ed. Contradictions to the whole Word of God, which he -pretended to believe, that ever entred into the Heart of Man, — And (3.) In many of his Follow- ers, 'tis not at all Itrange, That, in this, they have, long ago deferted him, and are really afhamed of him. — May not I then afk, 4. "What Regard they owe to this Man's Authority, in other Things ? And, "Whether they have not great Reafon, to doubt every One of his Nojlrums ? Sec. — But,
2. If Chrift indeed made all Things, he, moft cer- tainly, exijied before his Conception -, againft the odi- ous Blafphemy of Socinus : And, if he was, really, the Son of God, before he laid the Foundation of the Earth ; he was, moft evidently, a coeternal, coejfen- tial, and coequal Son, againft the Abomination of Arius. — 'Por, if he was then his Son, he did not (eafe to be his Son, when he was manifejled in the Flejh : Nor did, nor could, his infinite Condefcenfion to become M^in^ change his pre-exijfent Nature ; or
make
[ 199 ]
make him lefs the Son of God., than he was. — The Fathers exprefs Words to., and of him, put this out of all poffible Doubt. 'They Jhall perijh., but thou re- mainejl : Heb. i. i [. and ver. 12. <ru ^i 0 auro? e?, Tu autem idem ipfe es, hit thou art the very felf-fame He, i. e. always the unchangeable., or the very fame from Everlafiing to Everlafling. — And therefore, fhould we grant, that in Luke i. -^e^. he is called the Son of God., upon the Account of his fupernatural Concep- iion, it would be ftill true, That he is a coeffential and coeternal Son j and therefore, a Son, upon an in- finitely higher Account. — But, we need not yield this. For,
3. This Text, I humbly conceive, proves no fuch Thing. — Becaufe, i. " Were his miraculous Concep- " tion and Birth.,^^ the Foundation of this Relation ; or, the Reafon., why he is, and is called, the Son of God •, then he fhould have been, and been called, the Son, (not of the Father, x!\\^ firfl Perfon, but} of the Holy Ghofi, the third; which yet he never is. There is, I think, no Mention of the Agency of the Father, in his Conception : But, the Agency, of the Holy Ghofl is mentioned, in feveral very ftrong, and fignificant Phrafes. The Holy Ghoji fhall come upon thee, &c. Luke i. 35. 'Tis exprefsly faid. That the Virgin was found with Child of the Holy Ghofl, Mat. i. 18. And the Angel, in fo many Words, x.o\di Jofeph, That which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghofl, ver. 20. i. e. fays that learned and moft judicious Annotacor, Mr. Samuel Clark, upon this Place, *' Proceeds from the powerful Work of the Holy " Ghofi, (v/ho yet cannot be called the Father of *' Chrijt, as Man, becaufe he bellowed a different '* Nature on him from his own, which is the Part " of a Creator, and not of a Begetter. ^^) — 2. Had this been the Foundation of this near Relation, be- tween God and Him, I am apt to think, that the W^ords had run, therefore alfo that holy Thing that
fhall
[ 200 ]
jhallbz BORN OF THEE, SHALL BE ths SoU of God :
Whereas they are, Jhall be called the Son of Gad, which admit eafily, 1 conceive, of another more natu- ral, and emphatic Senfe alfo, viz. This miraculous Conception fliall be the Evidence a»d Proof, or Iblemn and piibhc Declaration^ I'hat God. is 7ww manifefted in the Fleflo \ — That the Father has now fent forth his Son^ MADE OF A Woman j Gal. iv. 4. — That ihou art the happy Virgin, who fhalt conceive., and I ear a Son, and fhalt call his Name Immanuel; If. vii. 14. — Who, as he really is, the eternal Son of God, fo fhall he ftill be called, i. e. owned and acknow- ledged, notwithllanding his amazing Condefcenjion to empty hifttfelf, and take upon him the Form of a Ser-
vayit, and become obedient unto Death, &c. Phil.
ii. 6 — 10. I fay Immanuel, or God-Man; becaufe, he that was born of the Virgin, was not Man only, but God and Man in C7ie P erf on : So that, neither was God changed into Alan, nor Man into God; --- nor are there two Chrijls, one the Son of God, and the other the Son of Man ; but the t-wo Natures are per- fonally united, in one Chriji — 3. I am inclined to take this, for the true Senfe ; becaufe, otherwife, as I hinted above, Chrifh as Man, had been the Son of xhtfecondFtxion, as well as Oi xhtfirfl.— The miracu- lous Conception of his Body, was really a Creation ; But all Things, that ever were made, were made by the Logos : It theretore, this Creation was the Rea- fon v/hy he had this Title, Chrift, as Man, was t'he Son, yea the only begotten, of himfelf, as the Logos ; which feems not a little abfurd. — Should it be faid, not more fo, than that he created his own Body and Sold too. Anf This is not at all abfurd. Yea, upon the Suppofition of his affuming our Nature, it was abfolutely necefifary : Nor could he, I conceive, in Stridnefs, have been faid to have taken upon him the Seed of Abraham, Heb. ii. 16. — had he not been indeed the Creator. — - But, the Relation of a
Crea-
[ 20I ]
Creature to its Creator, is one Thing, and rli:it of a Sen to his Father^ is quite another. — In fine, 4. Mis, perhaps, not only needlejs^ \:,wx.vdn, to feck for any other Foundation of ChriiVs Sonjhip^ or Rea- fon for his being called the Son of God, but his Eter- nal Generation. And, I doubt not, the two great Men, I have fpoken of with fo much Honour, would have thought fo, had they ever heard of fe- veral Things which I have now to conflder.
*' IV. Chrift may be fometimes called the Son of " God, becaufe of his RefurreBion from the Dead, " and his Exaltation to univerfal Dominicn, by the *' peculiar Favour and Power of God. In this Senfe " Chrift is faid to be begotten ofGcd, &c. Atcs xiii. " 32, 33 " p. I :?. But the Queftion is not, Whe- ther Chrifl jnay be fo called, becaufe of this or the other Thing ; except that 'Thing be the Foundiition, or Grcund, of this Relation ; or, to ufe hi > own Words, p. 15. " except this Title depend upr^n it " v/hich he there owns it docs not. — However, " 'tis cer- " tain, fays he, p. 14. that the Name Son of God, " cannot direftly and chiefly fignity his Refur- " re&ion and future Exaltation in all thofe Places " of the Gofpels, v/here the Belief of it is made the " Term of Salvation." And, 'tis certain, fay I, that it never did, nor can, either " diredlly and " chiefly," or any other Way, " fignify his Refur- " region, &c." in any of thofe Places, or any v/here elfe. — Four or five Reafons, he gives for this.
" (i.) Becaufe he is very often called the Son of " God, long before his Death, Refurre6lion, &c'^ p. 14. True ; Fie is fo •, and his own, begotten, only begotten Son alio : And he moll certainly was, what he was called. — (2.} " The Jews were required to *' believe him to be the Son of God long before his " Death and Refurreclion. ^c. p. ic,'' No doubt, they were required to believe all that zvas written
Dd of
[ 202 ]
ef him : And all that the Baptiji, or himfelf, had taught concerning him. " Nor did Chrift himfelf " in plain Language openly and publickly preach *' his own Death and Refurreflion to the Mul- *' titudes." ibid. — This feems not fo confident with the former Sentence -, and is, I conceive, itfelf a Miftake. See Jo. ii, 19 — 22. Ch. iii. 14 — 16. Ch. vi. 51 — p,6. Ch. vii. \<^ and 33. Ch. viii. 28. Ch. X. ver. 11 — 18. Ch. xii. 23 — 0^6., &c. — *' (3.) The Apoftles themfelves, who were true " Believers in the Son of God did not know that he *' was to die and rife again, dsV." p. 15. An afto- nilliing Truth ! which yet undeniably proves, " That *' this Title the Son of God in thofe Texts does not " depend upon his Refurre^ion and ExakfJion." &:c. ibid. — " (4.) 'Tis abundantly evident from Scrip- " ture that he was the Son of God, before he died " or rofe again, becaufe he was only proclaimed or *' declared to he his Son by his Refurreftion and Ex- *' altation : 7 he Apoftle Paul explains it thus, " Rom. i. 4." p. 1 5. Very right ! And this An- fwer will ferve, for a full Reply to all thofe Texts, which he produces to prove. That Chrijl has this Title " given him, on Account of his Conception, " Birth, Office, Refurre5fion, high Exaltation, or *' being appointed Heir of all.^'' — The fecond Perfon in the I'rinity was, as fuch, the Son of God, his only begotten Son : And therefore, when he took upon him cur Nature, he was only, by thefe, manifejled, de- clared, proved, and prociat'rned, to he what he alvvays was. ■ — His Sonfhip was not founded, or did not de- pend, upon any, or all of thefe: But they are the undeniable Proofs, according to the Scriptures, That He, who had, by this miraculous Conception and Birth, become Man, and, (after his offering himfelf a meritorious Sacrifice for Sin,) rofe again from the Dead, &c. was the coeffential Son of God, who. had, from Eternity, undertaken, and in the Ftdnefs of
Time.
[ 203 1
I'ime^ was made Flejh, That he might, by hein^ made a Curfe for his People^ redeem them from the Curfe of the Law. Gal. iii. 13. In a Word, this Title does " not diredlly or chiefly fignify any one, **' or all, of thefe : " Nor was it, at firft, given him, becaufe of them : But, he was fo fbiled, be- caufe he was indeed the coeffential Son of God ; and all, and every one, of thefe were fo many con- vincing Sigjis., or lindeniable Confirmations, of what he called himfelf ; even that he was, notwithftanding his unparalleled Humiliation, the only begotten of the Father ; and, in particular, his Refurreclion and Ex- altation were fuch.
I. His Resurrection, which is afcribed, (i.) Sometimes to the Father, A^s y\. 24 and 52, i^c. becaufe, in the CEconomy of Grace, He fuf- tains the Majefiy of the Deity, and vindicates the Glory and Honour of it ; and is therefore to be con- lidered, as exatJing and accepting the '^atisfaBion gi- ven by our Surety ; and thereupon, releafing and dif charging him, when he had, to the full, anfwered all Demands upon him. — (2.) Sometimes to the Son himfelf, Jo. ii. 19 — 22. Ch. x. 18, ^c. be- caufe, whatever he undertook, he was to do of him- felf, and by his own Power •, and whatever he pur^ chafed, was to be the Purchafe of his ozv?i infinitely meritorious Obedience even unto the Death of the Crojs : — And -becaufe, by \\\s Refurreclion, he was, in an efpecial Manner, to difplay and confirm his Divi- nity, &c. &c. — And, (3.) Sometimes to the Holy Ghost, Rom. iii. i i. i Pet. ii. 18, &c. not only, becaufe all the bleffed Three concur in every Work, as we have heard, without themfelves, or relating to the Creatures ; but, becaufe the Holy Ghofi was gi- ven to Chrift, as the Head of the Church, (though, not by Meafure, Jo. iii. 34..) that, hy him, Chrift, as Man, might cafi out Devils, Mat. xii. 28. and confequencly, might do all his wonderful IVorks;
D d 2 and
[ 204 ]
and to teach, and alTure Believers, That he, who could, and did, raife up the Head, could, and would alfo, raife up the Members I — Now, in, and h)\ his RejurreSiion from the Dead, T'he Three that hear V/itne[s in Heaven did, in the moft glorious Manner, dechre and proclaim his coejfential ScnJIoip. — The Father had, as we have heard, attefted it by the Prophets, and feveral Times, immediately, by a Voice fror,i Heaven : But, in raifing him again from the Dead, he did it, in a yet more public and I'jtcontej table Manner. — The Son had often afcribed this Hofwiir to himfelf, proclaiming himlc^lf the Son, the only begotten of the Father ; and avowing him felt to be fo his Son, as that he doth ivhatfcever Thing the Father dcth, Jo. v. ij — 19. and that he is one with him, Jo. X. 30, &c. But, \\\s Refurre£iion was the higheft poffibls Proof, that he could poffibly give, or that could pofTibly be given, that he really was fo ; and that he raifed himself alfo, as he faid he could, and would. — And the Holy Gkost would never, by raifing him again, have fet his Seal to a TJe, to convince the World, That all that Chrift had faid was Truth •, and confequently, that he was fo the Scn^ as to be One with him, ckc. had he not indeed been fo. — For, his R^urre^fion put the Truth of all that he had ever taught, promijed, threat- ned, or faid, out of all Doubt.
2. 'Has Exaltation to univerfal Boniinion, was ano- ther invincible Evidence or his coeffejttial Sonftjip ; and that, mianyWays. — i. As it, unexceptionabiy, confirmed his Veracity, who fO oittn foretold his own Rcfurrcilion and Advancement to it ; and, even then, when he could fay, I am a Worm, and no Man, Pf. xxii. 6. and ver. 27 — 31, Isc. --- 2. As it was a moll glorious recognizing his natural Right as an cimi Son^ yea an only begotten ; after he had fo emptied himfelf, as to be^me obedient unto Death ; when it was very liard to believe. That the greateft Sufferer that ever
was.
[ 205 ]
was, was even then, when ajfaulted by all the Poiv- ers of Darknefs ! infuUed and, moft fpitefully and cruelly, abujed, by all Sorts of Men upon the Earth ! deftrted, yea, and bruifed by the Father ! was, I fay, indeed, his only begotten Son. — 3. As it fo con- fpicuoufly manifefied his Salifications for that Do- minion. For, furely, the moft High would not have exalted any one fo far, as to give him all Power in Heaven and on Earthy Mat. xxviii. 18. i£c. who had not Wijdoni and Prudence., Patience and Goodnefs^ &:c. to fit him for fuch fuferlative Honour ; which no mere Creature^ how great and glorious foever, ever had or could have. — 4. As it is therefore, a vi- fible and continued Demonftration., That he was a Divine Perfon, and equal with God., and confe- quently, a coejfential Son ; no one^ who was not equal with him, being capable of fuch Authority.^ Power and Glory. — Whence I gather. That as this does not originally fignify, fo neither is Chrifb called, the Son of God., on the Account " of his Ex- *' altation to univerjal DomiJiion :'''' But, That /i?/j Dominion adually prefuppofes his coejfential Sonjhip., neceffarily requiring Divine Perfe5iions in him who can execute it. — I fhould conclude this, but that I cannot pafs thefe Words, That " Chrift's Exal- " tation to univerfd Dominion is by the peculiar " Favour and Power of God." A flrange Ex- preflion !
I fhall not aflv feveral Things, which might be afk'd : But, taking it for granted, that there is little need of Favour., except where there is no other good and lawful Claim ; I muft obferve, i . We have already put it out of all Doubt, if God's own exprefs Words can put any Thing out of all Doubt, That the Son, as the Son., is God ; and, as fuch, has a Throne: Heb. i. 8. That, in the Beginning., he laid the Foundation of the Earth ; and that the Heavens are the Works of his Hands : ver. lo. That all Things
in
[ 206 ]
in Heaven^ and in Earthy were created by him and FOR him: Col. i. 13 and 16. And, That he is be- fore ALL Things, and that by him all Things CONSIST, ver. 17, i£^c. <^c. — 'Tis therefore unde- niable, That " the univerfal Dominion" over them ally is his, by Nature •, by ail Right •, and therefore, necelfnrily : For, fureJy, he hath the fupreme Do- minion over all the Works of his Hands. — And therefore, 'tis certain, 'tis infallibly true, That, as the Son, he has not this Dominion, by " the peculiar *' Favour oF God." — 2. The Exaltation of the Son^ when made Man^ or of the Mediator^ and as fuch, was not by mere Fcvour^ it at ali by Favour. For, Whatever there was, in his Exaltation to this Do- minicn^ more than his natural., and therefore unalte- rable Right, was neceflary to anfwer the glorious Ends of his Mediation ; and, for that Reafon, was prcmijed him, in the Covenant of Redemption.^ If. lii. 12 — 14. Ch. liii. 9 — 12. &c. &c. upon Condition of his bearing the Iniquities of his People, and making his Sotd an Offering for Sin., &c. — When therefore, he liad to the utmoft, fulfilled all his Engagements, and by his own Power., he had a Claim and Right., in Equity and Juftice too, a dear bought iv/^/j/ .' to all that was promifed him. — But this is not all, for, 3. By his Obedience unto the Death of the Crofs^ he, in the il deleft Senfe, me- rited his Exaltation, in all the Steps of it ; fo that it became to him, in his whole complex Perfon, in
Striftnefs, a jufi Reward, and no more. He
merited his Reftirre^i on, Heb. xii. 13 — 20. &'c. — Mis Exaltation to the higheft Authority, Dominion, and Power ^ Phil. ii. 6 — 1 1, if^c. — His htmg glorified with the Father, with the Glory he had with him, before the JVorld was, Jo. xvii. 4, 5. — \\\s fitting down with the Father en his Throne, Rev. iii. 21. i^c. — and His being ordained of God to be the Judge of the ^dck and the Dead, Ads x. 38 — 43. Jo. v, 27,
^c.
[ 207 1
&c. And therefore, to talk " of his Exaltation by " Favour^'' be it ever fo peculiar^ feems to me to detract prodigiouQy from his Merit ! Yea, the more peculiar the Favour was, the Merit will, perhaps, be thought the lefs. — But now, 4. Had Chrilt's human houl been properly the Son of God, even fup- pofing it to bt as great as it could poffibly be, 'tis felf-evident, (i.) That it was never, could never be, called God^ by the Father. (2.) That it never laid the Foundation of the Earth, &c. ^3.) That all Things were not created "^y it, and for it. (4.) That BY it all Things do not consist. And, (5.) 'Tis capable of the cleareft Proof, That it could never, by all it could poffibly do., have, in the flrideft fu- ftice, merited its own Kefurre^ion and Exaltation to this Dominion., and much lefs the Refurre£lion and Glorification of all Believers : And confqucntly, thele Scripture PafTages could never, with Truth, have been fpoken of it, as fuch. — To conclude this, 5. Tho' Chrift was raifed from the Dead, by " the " Power of God," in the Senfe, and for the Reafons, already hinted ; yet, As no Man could take his Life from him, without, or againft, his own mofi free and generous Confent, which was the principal Thing required of, and accepted in, the Offerer of a Sacrifice : And, as he had Power to lay it dozvn of himfelf i. e, as his own ^^^ iknd Deed -^ (for,, fo much, his own moft obfervable Words, dxx' lyJ tI^y.^a acoT-^ aV ifj-avTH, moft emphatically declare,) fo he had Power, to take it up again. Jo. x. 17, 18. — But, fuch a Power being equivalent to a creatirig, i. e. an infi- nite Power, his human Soul, which was its felf but a Creature, neither ever had, nor pofTibly could have: And confcqucntly, 'tis Demonftration, That it ne* ver was, never could be, dignified with this moft glorious Title, the only begotten Son of God, be- caufe, or upon the Account, of any fuch Power,
without
[ 208 ]
without which he neither was, nor could have been, " exalted to univerfal Dominion."
" V. The laft Senfe in which Chrift is called the " Son of God^ is to ^\g\-\\{y th.?iX. glorious Perfon who " was appointed to be the Meffiah^ the anointed Sa- *' viotir who was derived from God, and did bear " fome very near and extraordinary Relation to God " above all other Perfons -, and therefore he is called " his Son, his ozvn Son, his only begotten Son, his be- " loved Son. — And this he takes to be the true I- " dea of it, as it is generally ufed in the New Tef- " tament, and efpecially in thofe Scriptures where " the Belief and Profeffion of it is made neceffary to " the Salvation of Men." p. i6.
This we had before, and confidered it very par- ticularly, and half a Dozen Paragraphs more, where- in he tries to explain, and prove it. p. 34 — 49. Nothing then, is here neceffary, but to offer a few Obfervations, defiring the Reader to keep them conflantly, in his Mind, throughout. And
1. Since the Relation of a Father to a Son is the nearefi of all natural Relations, I refer it to every one to fay. Whether he would not have thought. That One, who bears fo very near and extra- ordinary a Relation to God," as to be " near a-kin " to him,"^ p. 26. and called, God's own, his be- gotten, yea only begotten Son, was not indeed a coef- jential Son ? Or, whether any but a coeffential Son, could have been fo called, with either Truth or Pro- priety? But,
2. Since he fays, " he has made it appear. That " the Name, So7i of God, cannot necelTarily imply " his Divine Nature \ &c. p. S'^" ^c. and is ex- prefs, " That this is his prefent Theme, to prove " that this Name, in the New 'Tejiamcnt, does not " generally (if ever) fignify his divine Nature ; &c. " p. 45 " &V. and therefore, every where denies, " that Chrift is a coeffential Son,'' yea, feems to
plead.
[ 209 ]
plead. That " God has not^ yea cannot have, a coef- " fential Son : " p. 36 — 38. & paj/im. And fince he is plain, " The pre-exiftent Soul of Chrift in " whom the Divine Nature or Godhead always " dwelt, is properly x.\\q Son of Gcd^ derived from " the Father betore all Worlds, as his only begotten *' Son\ p. 150, i^c." — Since, I fay, he is, in all thefe, plain and clear, Thele Things will undeniably follow. — That, in his Opinion, this Title, Son of God, is never the Title of the fecond Perfon in the 'Trinity^ and as fuch : — That it does not, yea cannot, neceflarily imply Chrift's Divine Nature : — That therefore, our Author does not imply his Divine Nature in it : — That confequently, when he gives Chrift that Name, he means only his pre-exillcnt Soul, or that Soul incarnate : — That that Soul was a glorious Perfon, before all Worlds : — That it was
appointed to be the Mejfiah, or Saviour of Men :
That it was to have a Body prepared for it, for the full Execution of that extraordinary Office : — And, That when it was united to that Body, it was ftill, or that Soul and Body now united, became, a glorious Perfon. — But, 3. ChrijV s human Soul, how glorious foever it is, was never a Perfon ; neither before its Union with his Body, nor after it : — And much lefs was his Body, (or in our Author's Words, his FlefJo,) ever a Perfon, tho' he will have it, " That it was " formed or begotten by the Father, in fo peculiar a " Manner, as no other JVIan ever was." p. 12. For, If cither, or both, of thefe ever were, or now are, a Perfon; fince 'tis granted by our Author, that the fecond Perfon in the 'Trinity, who, as fuch, is unchangeable, was united to this Perfon, it will evidently and necelfarily follow, either. That one of thefe Perfons did, upon this Union, ceafe to be a Perfon ; or, That they were, one Way or another, in or by it, confounded or blended together into one Perfon: Or, That there are two Perfons in the
E e Mejfw.h ;
[ 210 ]
MeJJiah ; and therefore, two Chrifl's : Or, That neither of thefe Perfons either were, are, or could be, the Chrijl. One of thefe, *tis plain, muft fgl- low.
As for the firft, Nothing, fome think, can be more abfurd than to imagine. That a true, or proper Perfon.^ continuing to exift^ fhould ever ceafe to be a Perfcn : Becaufe, if it ceafes to be a Perfon, it not only ceafes to be what it was ; but, in their O- pinion, ceafes to be. — The fecond. That thefe Two Perfons, and confequently, their 'Two Natures, were, in, by, or upon, this Vrnon, fome Way or other, confounded or blended together, into one Perfon ; is either the very Herefy of Eutyches, (condemned in the famous General Council of Chalcedon, the moft numerous anJi one of the moft confiderable, the Chrifiian Church ever fawj or very much fo j and is pregnant \N\th. nwrnh^xX fs Abfurdities; contrary to th^ whole Scripture; Luke xxii. 42. Jo. i. 14 -— 18. Rom. i. 3.4. Phil. ii. 6, 7. Heb. ix. 14, i^c. and really ever/ive of our Salvation. — The third. That there are Two Perfons in Chrift, and confequently, two Chrijls, IS the very Herefy of old imputed to iV^- ftorius, and condemned by the third General Coun- cil ; is contrary to the whole Scripture •, If ix. 6, 7, Adts XX. 28. Rom. iii. 4. Ch. ix. 5. Gal. iv. 4. t^c. and deflru5iive alfo of our Salvation. — The 4. That neither of thefe is, was, or could be, the Chriji ; as is plain from this. That the Chrijl was to be God-Man ; This alfo, I fay, is direftly contrary to the whole Scripture, and abfolutely everfive of our Religion. — One, or other, of thefe muft fol- low from this Nojlrum. His Difciples may chufc which : For it is hard to fay which, of the laft three, is the moft ridiculous and ruinous. — But to go on,
2. As Chrift's human Soul was never a Perfon, neither before, nor after, its Union with his Body ; 'tis felf- evident, it could never " be appointed to be '* the Mejfmhf the anointed Saviour ;" Becaufe, no- thing,
[211 ]
thing, that is not a Per/on^ can be o^JgenLy-JX^-AR a ftrid: Senfe, do any 'Thing at all •, and much lefs, execute any Office ; and yet much lefs, fuch an Of- fice ! — I may, I conceive, add 3. If it was not a Perfon, it could neither, with any Truth, or P7'-o- priety, be called a Son, an own Son, &c. — 4. Sup- pofing his human Soul, had been a Perfon, it could ne- ver have been *' appointed to be the Mejfiah:^^ Becaufe, how glorious foever it was, it was never capable, nor could be made capable, of that Dignity, as being no Way, Par Negotio, equal to the Tafk, as our Au- thor himfelf has owned. — 5. How nearly foever this Soul was related to the Father, the fecond and third Perfons in the Trinity, were, in an infinite Man- ner, more nearly related to him. — In Hne, 6. It was the fecond Perfon in the Trinity, and not his hu- man Soul, that agreed, in the Covenant oi Redemp- tion, to become our Surety and Saviour -, and for that Purpofe, to become our near Kinfman, &c. For, The Son that was given to be the Saviour, was to be called the Mihty God, If. ix. 6. as his human Soul could never be : — 'Twas the Logos ^ who was made Flejh, Jo. i. 14. and who is called the only be- gotten Son, &c. ver. 18. and not a Creature : •■ 'Twas God, i. e. the Son, as is evident, who was manifefted in the Flejh, i Tim. iii. 16. and not Chrift's human Soul : — 'Twas God, (0 Qsog, with an Article,) /. e. the Son of God, who pur chafed the Church with his own, proper Blood, Afts xx. 2 8. and no created Perfon : i^c. i^c. — 'Twas, I fay, the fecond Perfon in the Trinity, who is acknowledged, (Chriji. Do£i. of the Trinity, Prop. 14. ^ pajfim) to be true God, tho' a ^\^\x\^ per fonal Agent, or di' jlinSf Perfon from the Father, who undertook to re- deem his People. — Well then. If he is true God, he is from Eternity fo : — If a dii^mdi perfonal Agent, he needed nothing " to ftrengthen his Perfonality,'' to ufe an Expreflion, tho' almoft unintelligible, well E e a knowR
[ 212 ]
known to our Author : — This Divine Perfon, is, as ilich, in many PaiTages, ftiled the Son, the own Son, &c. of God : — 'Tis as the Son cf God, that he is, and is called, God •, this being the Title, whereby lie is diftinguilhed from God the Father: — Ever fince he emptied himfelf, and took upon him the Form of a Servant, &c. He is both God and Man, in one Person, as the Scrtptures now quoted, and many Others, put out all Doubt : — And this ever-blefled Perfon, God-Man, is commonly known by the Ti- tle, Christ, or the Christ : And hence, 'tis plain, That, when v/e fpeak of theChriJi, we mean that glorious Perfon, who is God-Man, the Mejfiah. From all which, I here offer thefe Demonflrations, againft our Author's principal Nofirums.
This Title, the Son of God, fays he, " fignifies *' that glorious Perfon who was appointed to be the Meffiah : — Chrift's human Soul, and as fuch, fay I, neither ever was, now is, nor ever fhall be, a Perfon : — Therefore, this Title, the Son of God, neither ever did, does, nor fliall, fignify Chrift's human Soul, and as fuch. ^ E. D. Or, if you will, Chrift's human Soul, as fuch, is not properly, the Son of God.
This Title, The Son of God, fays he, fignifies that glorious Perfon, ivho was appointed to be the Mejfiah : — The feco?id Perfon in the Trinity,- fay I, and he only, and as fuch, was that glorious Perfon who was appointed to be thcMeJfah : — I herefore, the fecond Perfon in the Trinity, and he only, and as fuch, is, ftriftly fpeaking, the Son of God ; or, 'tis he only, who is honoured with this Title. ^ £. D.
This Title, The Son of God, fignifies, fays he, that glorious Perfon who zvas appointed to be the Mef- fiah : — That glorious Perfon, fay I, when appointed to be the Mejfah, had the Divine Nature, and no other Nature, but the Divine : — Therefore, if this Title pre-fuppofes, implies, or fignifies any Nature ;
[ 213 ] it always, every where, and neceffarily, " even in " the New Teftament," pre-luppofes, impHes, or fignifies, the Divine Nature. Q^ E. D.
When this glorious Perfcn emptied himfelf., and took upon him the Form of a Servant^ &c. he did not, could not, ceafe to be the Son of God : And therefore, this Title neither did, nor could, lofe its ftri(5l, primary, and only proper Signification : And by Confequence, This Title, every where, pre-fup- pofes, implies, or fignifies, his Divine Nature, or coejfential Son/hip. Q^ E. D.
Several more might be offered, but thefe may fijffice at prefent, fince fome others muft come up in another Place. ' — Were our worthy Author alive, I ihould freely alledge what, as I oftener than once hinted to him, I fuppofed was, at Bottom, his main
Defign, which can never fucceed, without the
Art of reconciling a great Bundle of manifeft Con- tradictions, to fay no worfe. But,
Having thus difpatched thefe four Senfes of this Title, we return to his firfi, which we have p. 6.
" The firjt of thefe Senfes is patronized by many " Writers," Yes, by the whole Body of the Ca- tholic Church, from the Beginning to this Day ! tho' "he is perfuaded this can never be the Senfe of " this Name in thofe feveral Texts before cited ! '* ibid. *' viz. That an eternal unconceivable Generation " of the Perfon of the Son by the Perfon of the Father " in the Samenefs of the Divine EJfence, confubjiantial, *' coequal and coeternal with the Father.^ is included " in the Name Son of God." p. 6.
Had our worthy Author pleafed, he might have exprefs'd our Minds briefly, in the Words of the Nicene Creed, which are familiar^ and clearly give our Senfe, vix. That the Son., even the fecond Per- fon, ** is God of God, very God of very God, be- " gotten, not made, being c/One Substance with " the Father, &c." or in thofe ExprefTions, " He " is his ctmial, and coeffmtial Son,'" which are com- mon
[ 214 ]
mon and eafily underflood ; But this Definition, Defcription^ or I do not know what to call it, (to the beft of my Remembrance, having never read, or heard, it before,) is fo very Scholajiic^ as to be hardly intelligible ! — However, to avoid tri- fling, feeing what, I fuppofe, he means by it, has been the Faith of the Chriftian Church, in all Ages : Let us try to bring it down, to the Capacity of the weak and unlearned.^ in thefe few Proportions. — One^ viz. thtfirfi, of the blefled Three ^ is, in many PalTages of Scripture^ called a Father ^ a proper Fa- ther •, and faid to have begotten another, who is, as often, ftiled a Son, his own or proper, yea only be- gotten Son : They are therefore, both of them Per- fons ; and the firji a proper Father, and the fecond,
a proper Son. If the Son^-was begotten, or was a
Son, before the Foundation of the World, &c. as we are fure he was •, Col. i. 13 — 17. Heb. i. 8 — 12. &c. then was this Generation, in Scripture Language, " eternal,^'' or from Everlajling. — If the Manner of this Generation, is infinitely above us, and but very generally revealed, as we know it is -, Pro. xxx. 4. If. ix. 6, ^c. then is it to us, almoft " unconceivable.^* — It the Father begat, and the Son was begotten, as we are fure from many PalTages •, Pf. ii. 7. Jo. i. 1 8. bcc. then was " this a Generation of the Perfon of " the Son, by the Perfon of the Father.''^ — If the Di- vine 'Nature is immenfe ; and if the Father is in the Son, and the Son in him, as Chrift aflures us, Jo. x. 38. Ch. xiv. 10, II, &c. then is this " Generation " in the Samenefs of the Divine Effence.''* — If the Father is a proper Father, and the Son a proper Son, as we have fuper- abundantly proved -, then it is felf- evident, That the Father and Son are coejfential ; or, that " this Generation is confubjtantial." — If " this " Generation was confubfiantial -, " or, if the Son have the fame Nature with the Father, he is " co^ *' equal with him," as to his Effence : Becaufe, as the Divine Effence is indiviftble, lb the Divine Per-
Je^ions
[ 215 ]
feElions go with it, and can neither be feperated, nor divided, from it nor themfelves. — If the Father was never aXoyoq^ or without a Son ; and if the Son ne- ver began to be, or always was a Son ; then it is un- deniable. That *' this Generation was coeternal.''* — All this now may be eafily ajfented to, as a Matter of Fa£i, not only by the unlearned^ but by thole of very ordinary Capacities. And all this, I humbly conceive, I underfiand \ and fo may they, fufficiently for their Diretlion, in all the Ad:s of Faith, JVorJhip, Obedience, and Love, which we owe to the Eternal Father, and to his coeternal, and confequently, coef- fential Son. And this is enough, for us to know, of this adorable Msftery, in our prefent State.
All we plead, in the Controverfy before us, is only. That the fecond Perfon is indeed, and as fuch, WHAT he is fo often in Scripture, faid to be, even the own, the only begotten Son of the Father ; and. That the human Soul of our dear Redeemer, is not, properly, the Son of God, nor is ever fo called. — The former of thefe, tho' very frequently revealed in the Bible, and as exprefsly, clearly, and fully too, as any Thing can well be, he very confidently denies ; but the lanter, tho' no where revealed, fo far as I can find, he pofitively ajferts : And, to introduce and confirm this, it was, as I am apt to think, that he fo refolutely, rejefts and oppofes that. Scholajlic Niceties, in this Cafe, I defire to have nothing to do with.- — 'That Things are fo, as all alledge ; or, that the Matter of FaSl is fo ; the Scriptures have made undeniable ; for he that believeth not God hath MADE HIM A LiAR, bccaufe he believeth not theKE'^ CORD that God gave of his Son. i John v. lo. The Modus, or the How, we acknowledge is above us ; and, being but generally revealed, cannot be compre- hended by us : Yea, cannot be comprehended by any, but themfelves Two, and Him who fearches all Things, yea, the dee^ Things of Qod, i Cor. ii. lo. — When
Do^riMs
[ 2i6 ]
Do^irines are only revealed in general, in Part, or darkly, general^ imperfe^^ or obfcure Ideas, are fuf- ficient : And no other are required of us, or expelled from us. — There always were, and will be, yea, muft be, manifold Imperfe£iions and great IndifiinSt - nefs, in all our Ideas of Things fo fublime and ab- Jirufe ; and efpecially of that unfearchable, incom- prehenfible Being we call God, his EJfence, Per- fe^fions. Decrees, and the ever-blefled Perfons in the Godhead, &c. were x\\tRev elation of them, inconceivably, more particular, clear, and full, than it is. — Let us not, however, deny or reje5l what we know, be- caufe we cannot know f?// Things : Or, doubt <?/what is certain, becaufe we meet with many Things which are not fo. — But to proceed, Againft this Senfe of the Title, Son of God, our Author offers three Rea- fons,
" I. If this be never fo true, yet it is confefs'd " to be unconceivable." Not in itfelf : And not abfo- lutely fo, or altogether fo, even to us. That it IS, we may, we do, conceive-, tho' how it is, we well cannot. " Now, if it be fo very unconceivable, fo " myfterious and fublime aDo6trine," It is not more fo, than feveral which himfelf did, and all Chriflians do, believe ; and which even the Light of Nature teaches ! *' then I do not think the gracious God *' would put fuch a difficult Teft upon the Faith of *' young Difciples, poor illiterate Men and Women, •" in the very Beginning of the Gofpel, and exclude " them from Heaven for not believing it." p. 6. A flrange Reafon indeed, as ever was ! You have every Syllable of it. To which I might anfwer,
1. As I have given, and incline to believe, ano- ther Account of human Generation, upon which this, fo far as I can underftand it, feems to be founded ; I might fay. That this is not, perhaps, the Scrip- tural Senfe of this Title ; and therefore, I need not defend it ; But, becaufe the Catholic Church feem
to
[ 217 ]
to have taken it, for the primary^ the tt'ue, if not- the only Senfe, we lliall try to fupport it. — 2. I might plead, That this Dodlrine is neither fo " un- " conceivable, nor fo myfterious and fublime," as that we can have m Ideas of it at all ; or, as we can- not give a rational AJfent to it. — 3. I might al- ledge. That thefe Words, " then I do not think,'* are neither Reajon nor Proof. — 4. I might, per- haps, boldly aflert, That this very fame Tejl^ was, from the Beginning, put upon all Difciples j the Toung as well as the Old ; the unlearned, as well as the learned •, &c. as feems undeniable, from the Form of Baptifm. — And, 5. I might, without Fear, fay. That many, of the poor and illiterate, have truer Ideas of thefe Myfteries, than the great, and the learned. — The poor and the illiterate, who are evan- gelized ly the Gofpel, have generally fo much Mc^ defiy, as to think the moji High is wifer than them- felves •, and fo much Faith, as to believe. He will not deceive them. — They therefore, humbly take Things, as xhty find them in their Bibles ; come to the Word, for Inflru5iion, and receive it with Mcek- nefs •, dare not difpute, nor aik JVhy, nor How, when they cannot meet with any Anfwer in the Scriptures; are not didra^led with Heretical Cavils, or Philofophical ^irks, &c. and feldom fo far puff'd up, as to fwell themfelves, and dreatn, that they know more than all the World ever did, &c. as many of the great, and the learned, or thofe who think themfelves fo, alas ! too often are ! — One of the Fathers, ufed wittily to fpeak of a learned Ignorance, which con- fifts in a being willing to be ignorant of what is infi- nitely above us, and of what God has concealed from us : Or of what we can never know, or would do us no real Service, if we could. — Happy are they, upon more Accounts than One, who are fo learnedly ignorant ! But, to wave thefe, and focne others, at
F f pre-
[218 1
|5refent ; I fhall anfwer, in another Manner, by fome Interrogations only. — And,
I'. What does he mean by " unconceivable ?" — Is it, that we can have no Conceptions of it at all ? This I abfolutely deny, and appeal to the Propo- fitions^ into which I have thrown this Senfe. — Is it, That we can have no clear and diftin£f Ideas of it ? And, May we not have as clear and dijiin^ Ideas of this Senfe, even as he has given ir-, yea, much more clear and difiin^ \ than any Man can have, of feveral Things himfelf has offered upon this Subjeft, in the ChrJjiian Dc^rine, &c. Propof. 9, 10, 11, ^c. p. 100 — 134. if compared with thefe Papers? i^c. I appeal to all the Admirers our Author has in the World. Had he been alive, I fhould have pro- duced more, than one or two. •- — Is it. That we can- not conceive the Modus of it .? Pray, how few Things are there, of which we can conceive, the
Manner? Is it, that we can have no adequate j
and comprehenfive^ Ideas of it ? And can we have any fuch Ideas, of any of the Divine Perfe^ions, &c. 1 had almoft faid, of any Thing elfe } — 2. What is this. That is " unconceivable and fo myfterious," &c .? Is it tha Do6lrine of the Trinity ? No. This he has confefs'd, tho' in every Refpeet, as " unconceiv- *' able, as n^yfieriotis and fublime" as the Point in Debate, ever was, or can be pretended to be: Yea, tho' that Dodlrine, in the Judgm.ent of the Catholic Church, cannot be believed, or profefled, without- ■profiffrng alfo the coejfential Sonjhip of the fecond Per- fon. — Nor could he, nor can any Chriftian now, deny. That '^' this Dcftrine was put as a Teft," (I dare not '[?.y difficult Teji !' becaufe, it ill becomes us fo much as even to furmife. That it is a difficult Teft^. to believe the Truth of whatever God has revealed as a Matter of FaSi \ ) " upon the Faith of young Dif- " ciples, poor illiterate Men and Women, in the ** very Beginning of the Gofpel," ^c. (I mean, ever
fincc
[ 219 1
fince the Afcenfion of Chrift,) even upon all t\\^ ■Gentiles^ that were converted to the Faith \ and that, if not before, yet when, they were baptized. — We all know who, ajid of what Spirit^ they were, who faid, T'>5'/jzj^« HARD Saying, Who can hear it? Jo. vi. 60. — 3. What then is this difficult 1'efi? Is it, That the Jirfi Perfon is an own^ or proper Fa- ther, who begat the Son -, and, that the Son is an oijun^ ■ov proper Son j yea, his only begotten; and therefore, " confubjlantial, coequal, a.ndcoeternal with the Fa- « therr' Why! Beit ever fo difficult, Chrift did, again and again, as we have heard, affiert and pro- ■claim it, in exprefs Terms, or in Words fully equi- valent ; and that, in the ftrongeft Manner : — The 'Difciples, over and ovei:, profefs'd it ; Jo. vi. 69. Mat. xvi. 1 6. yea, and were fare of it : — Martha knew and believed it, Jo, xi. 27. and fo did Natha- nael, Ch. i. 49 : — And the Apoftles, every where, preached It, Rora. viii. 32. Gd. iv. 4. Heb. i. 8 — 12. Ch. iii. 3 — 6, ^c : —Yea, this, as we ihall fee, was tlie DoMrine of the Prophets-, and was alfo, gene- rally, believed and acknowledged by the J^roj-, both before his coming into the World, and when he was in it, as our Author feems fully to own ; p. 73, 74, ^c : '— And has been, as all^^the World know, the conftant Faith of the Catholic Church, every where, and in all Ages, ever fince. — So that, " 'This " was not fuch a difficult Teft,'^ but that it was *' put upon the young Difciples, ^c. p. 6." and the " poor and the ignorant, the labouring Men and *' the Children ; " p. 7. and was received, without any Demur, by all tru€ Believers ; and openly pro- fefs''d 3.K0, by them all, without any Hefitation. ■ I myfclf have often heard fuch People publickly pro- fefs. That the fecond Perfon was the eternal Son of God, his only begotten, &c. and that he became Man^ by taking to hi?nfelf a true Body and a reafonahle Soul, &c. and talk much more like mr Lord and his Jpo- F f 2 Jiles,
[ 220 ]
ftles, than the great and the learned. — And, till of late, this Do6trine was, with much Diligence and Zeal, injlilkd into the tender Minds of all the Chil- dren of Protejlant Diffenters. — And, 4. Was this Do^rine, of the coejjential Sonjhip of the fecond Per- fon, yea, or the Manner of it, more unconceivable, than Ibme, if not every One, of the Attributes of God^ which the very Light of Nature teaches, and confirms ? — Or, the Do^rine of the Creation of the World, and all Things in it, vifible and inviftble, &c. ^ out of Nothing, which Reafon even forceth us to ad- mit ? — Or, the Refurre^ion of the Body, without the Belief of which, no Man can with Truth be, or be called, a Chrijiian? i Cor. xv. 12 — 22. and ver. 42 — 44. ^c. — Yea, I think I may add, or many of the Miracles recorded both in the Old and New ^efiament, which every one, who profefles to believe his Bible, will blufh to fay he doubts of ? I, for my Part, as firmly believe. That thofe Miracles were wrought, where, v/hen, by whofe immediate Agency, or by whofe Miniflry, we are told they were, as it I
had been prefent, and feen them with my Eyes.
And, as to fome of them, I do not know, but, I have almoft as clear and diftin5l Ideas of them, as if I had feen them, and had had alfo Opportunity and Leifure to have confidered, and examined, them with the greateft Care. — And, I may, I think, well venture to fay. That, when any one of the Ene- mies of the coeJfe?ilial Son/hip of Chrift, Ihall give me clear, diftin6t, dire6t, and fatisfying Anfwers, to fill the Queftions which have, or may be, afk'd ; (for Example, concerning the very firfl in the Old Teftament, even Mofes's Rod being turned into a Ser- pent, &c. Ex. iv. I — 4. and the very firfl in the Nezv, viz. Chrifl's turning IVater into tVine ; Jo. ii. I — 1 1.) I may then promife, to give them clear, ^iflind, dired, and fatisfying Anfwers, to all they fiiall afk me, concerning the coejfential Sonfhip of
the
[ 221 ]
the fecond Perfon ; not to add the Dodrine of the
Trinity alfo ! Thefe great and Fmidamental
Do^rines, of our Religion^ (if they are indeed fwo, and not rather one only,) are revealed in Scripture, as Matters of Fa 51 ; and profejfedy in Baptifm^ as ab- folutely necejfary to be believed •, arui as being alfo of the very laft Importance^ for regulating the whole of our Worjhip and Pra5lice : And not, as he alledges, as " mere arbitrary and unoperative Speculations ;'* p. 3. which are therefore, of very little or no Mo- ment ; and which may be, in his Opinion, enter- tained, or rejefted, with very little, or not very much, either Profit or Danger! And therefore, i;hey ought to be believed^ profejfed, and maintained, at leaft, as readily, and firmly, and conllancly, as the Truth of the Miracles ; which are recorded, not as Problems to be lightly talk'd over, canvafs'd, and bandyed about, on every Occafion -, ^c. but, as plain, and unqtfejlionable, Hijlories of thofe Works of Won- der ', and the highcft pofTible Proofs alfo, of the Di~ vineCommiJfton of every one of thofe by whom they v/erc wrought. — Blefled be his Name, I never found any Difficulty^ in believing what God faid. — Having all the Affurance^ which intrinfic and extrinjic Evidence can give me. That, All Scripture is given by Infpi- ration of God^ 2 Tim. iii. 16. 2 Pet. i. 21, i^c. I can as readily, as ftedfaftly, and with as much Ra- tional Security too, be perfuaded of the Truth, of the Things therein revealed ; (tho' 1 do not pretend to anfwer every Thing, which may be propofcd con- cerning them •,) as I can be of the Things 1 now fee, or that I am now writing. — Bleffedare they that have NOT SEEN, and yet have believed. Jo. xx. 29.
" 2. Nor indeed is this eternal Generation and ** confubjlantial SonfJoip clearly enough revealed in " Scripture for us to m2kt it a fundamental Article ** in any Age, and to damn all who do not receive ^* it." p. 6. Anf. I . Thofe very Words, and in this Or- der, are not indeed, any where, literally, found in
Strip-
[ 222 ]
S€rifture : But the Thing we mean by them -, or the proper^ and therefore, ccejfmtial SonJIjip of the y^^<?;z^ Perfon is, as we have heard, (in leveral Places, and particularly, p. i-^c^ — 140. i5 pajjira^) as plain- ly, fully, and ftrongly, revealed, in many Paffages, as it can be. — And the Men, who can think to evade thefe, may, as eafily, pervert any Words, which can be pofllbly chofen. If they think other- wife, let them tell us what Words would convince them. — 2. Whether the Dodrine we plead for, be a fundamental Article^ or no •, if it be a 'Truth, and much more a ^ruth, of confideraUe Moment, as it certainly is, if it be a Truth ; it ought not to be de- nied, and much lefs oppofed. — 3 . It is fo nearly con- nedled with, if it is not indeed founded upon, the Do6trine of the Trinity •, that, if the Oppofition to it is not an Error contra, it is certainly one, circa Fundamentum. — 4. What was not 2i fundamental Ar- ticle, at leaft, ever fmce the Canon of Scripture was clofed and fealed up, neither ever was, nor could be made fo, in any fucceeding Age. — 5. We never pretended to make any Doctrine a fundamental Ar- ticle, which Chrifl has not made one : And, as thofe, who do, take too much upon them, their Authority needs give no honeft Chrijiian any Trouble. — "I " cannot fee Evidence enough in the Word of God " to make the Salvation of all Mankind, the poor, " the ignorant, — (even in fuch a Day of Know- " ledge as this is) to depend on fuch a Doftrine, - - ** contefs'd by the moft learned and pious Chri- " flian, to be attended with fo many Difficulties, *' which, after the Labour and ftudy of near 1400 " Years, (he might have faid 1700) is fo uncon- ** ceivable in itfelf, and was at firft fo obfcurely re- '* vealed," (^c. — Anf. Whether " the Salvation of *' all Mankind, or of any one Man, depends upon " it," is not, with me, the prefent Queition ; but, whether it be true : — I am very forry, that Popery and Deifm fhould be making fuch Ravages, and a
loath"
[ 223 1
ioathfome Luke-warmnefs , &c. fliould be every where prevailing, " in fuch a Day of Knov/ledge as " this is ', " which makes me afraid, That fuch a Day of Indifference about, or Hatred of, the Faith, of itching Ears, Error, and Ignorance, ^c. is its truer Chara6ler : As many Diffi- culties it is attended with, the moft learned and fious Chriftians, have, in all Ages, believed it ; many of them have fufFered, unto the Death, for it -, and many more lived, and died, in the Comfort of this, that the eternal Son of God had became their near Kinfman : '■ — There needs neither very much " La- *' hour, nor Study, ^^ to find it in the Bible, if we will but dip into it •, no, nor to under ftand it, as far as it can be underftood by us, in this State of Imper- fe5fion and D^rknefs ; if we will but believe plain, eajy, familiar Words : — It is not " fo unconceiv- *' able in itfelf •," but that ' even the poor, the ig- *' norant, labouring Men," i^c. may readily affent to it, as a Matter of Fa5i ; and a Do6lrine, which may alfo, not only regulate their Worfhip, but efta- blifh their Faith, confirm their Hope, and excite and enflame their Love: — And, It is fo far from being true, that it " was at firft fo obfcurely revealed,'* that it was clearly enough revealed in Old Teftament Times ; it was well known to the Jews, when our Lord was in the World ; and was then as clearly preached, and as convincingly defended, by himfelf^ Jo. Chs. iii. V. viii. x. xiv, ^c. as ever it has been
fmce. The lafl Rcafon is the weakeft of them
all.
" 3. There have been fome very pious and learned *' Men in feveral Ages,*' Which Ages? " who *' have acknowledged Chrift's true Godhead,** Who were they that did this, and did not believe his coef- fential Sonfhip ? " and yet fuppofed that his Sonjhip " referred rather to his human Nature," I defire firft to fee this explained^ and then the Fa<5t proved.
« OF
[ 224 ]
•* or to his OfEce o^MeJfiahy than to fuch an Eternal " Generation :" p. 7. I know there have been fe- veral fuch, who, I beheve, well deferved this good Charadler: But, I know none of them, who ven- tured to fay, " I have made it appear that the Name " Son of God^ cannot neceflarily imply his Divine •' ISature^** &c. or, " That his human Soul was *' properly the Son of God^^ &c. &c. All of them, whom I knew, or have heard of, and the learned i?of/ in particular, believed^ That this Title denoted Chrift's whole Perfon ; and confequently, could not but " imply his Divine Nature.^'' - — None of them, not one, divided his Na Hires j fo as to feem to di- vide his Perfon, and make tivo Chrijis. — None of them. Not one, when they ufed this Title, fpake of him only, as Man, &c. &c. — " And there are fome " in our Age — who heartily believe the eternal God- " head of Chriji^^ Do they indeed believe. That, cs God, he is a difiin^ Perfon, from the Father? " and yet doubt of or difbelieve this eternal Genera- " tion,^ But, Is this Doubt ^ or Difbelief, either a fuf- ficient Proof, or the genuine Fruit, of either their good Learning or fincere Piety ? " and I will " never pronounce an Anatheyna upon them. p. 7." No, nor I neither ; upon any one, who heartily be- lieves the eternal Godhead of the fecond Perfon. — • Our Author has this Anathema fo very often up, for we have had it before, that it feems he is much afraid of it ; tho* I never heard of any one, who was for pronouncing it upon him : And, as for the Judg- ment of the mcfi High, He knows them that are his.
The " moft learned and pious'* are not ab'
folutely exempted, from grofs and damnable Errors^ any more than from heinous and grievoufly aggra- vated Immoralities : If therefore, he permits any, of them that are his, to fall into fuch Errors, he will ei- ther keep them, from the pra^ical Effects of them j orfooner, or later, give them Repentance, toconfefs,
foi"
[ 225 ]
forfake, and turn from them, to the Truth; or, it may be, forgive them, as fome think, in feme Cafes, at lead, uf^on 2i general Repent p. nee ^ as he does thofe, who cry with the Pfalmift, fVho can under- ftand his Errors? Cleanfe thou me from secret Faults. Pf xix. 12. i. e. I conceive, from un- known Sins ; or Sins, which tho' really Sins, he did. not know to be fuch.
Thefe now are all the Reafons, " that perfuade *' him," or all the Proofs he gives, " that this " cannot be the Senfe of this Name ! " p. 6. And what, I pray, is there in them, that looks either like a Reafon^ or a Proof? For my Part, I can nei- ther fee any, nor any Thing that has the clear Ap^ pearance of any ! But, {o zealous is he for this Notion, That he will anfwer all our Objeftions alio againft it ! — He makes us objedl, as well we may.
" Object. Some will fay. If the Name Son of Gody " doth not fignify eternal Generation by the Father^ " in the Samenefs of the Divine Effence^ yet furely it " mult at leaft import Chrifl^s true and eternal God- " head" p. 7, 8. Why really, one would think fo, if he indeed has the Divine Effence •, and can hardly think otherwife ; efpecially, when the Adnouns, own^ proper, begotten^ only begotten, are affixed to it. — The Chriftian Church have, always, every where, and univerfally, been of this Mind •, Roel and others overcome, by the Evidence of Truth, have frankly acknowledged it •, and, if the Scriptures are the Word of God, and Chrift himfelf fpeaks the Truth, com- mon Senfe, ftrongly confirms it. — But, our Au- thor gives three Anfzvers to it, of much the fame Importance with his Reafons.
" Anf I. This Name Son and Sons of God is " often ufed in the Bible, and applied varioufly to " Men and to Angels, as well as to Chrifi :" p. 8. This alfo, or fomewhat like it, we had before : And in it are feverai little Fallacies, and plain Miflakes.
G g Thp
[ 226 1
The Name, Son of God, in the Singular Number, is never applied to any mere Creature, either in Heaven or Earth, but to the firft Jdam only, if to him •, but it is never, can never, be applied to any One, but Cbrifi alone, when the Ad nouns, ozvn, &c. are added : And Cbrift, never is, never could be, called Sons of God, &c. " — but it is never ufed — " to fignify true and eternal Godhead — but in *' thofe Places under Debate," ibid. Here are more Miflakes, and of the fame Kind. — This Name al- ways fignifies a Divine Perfon, and as fuch, and not diredlly the Divine Nature : — I have given about twice the Number of his Texts : — And have pro- ved, from many Paflages, That it is ufed of the/f- cond Feri'on, and purely as fuch •, and therefore, (i.) That it " neceffarily implies his Divine Nature.^' And, (2.) That then, " his human Soul, is not pro- *^' perly the Son of God" See Jo. v. 19. Col. i. 13 — 17. Heb. i. 8. 10. II. &c. — Withal, if it " fig- ^' nifies true, and eternal Godhead, in thofe Places,** 'tis more than fufficient for ever to demolifh his
whole Scheme. ■ " And therefore when
" Chriji is called eminently and abfolutely the *' Sen of God, the Meaning of it does not ne- " cefTarily rife higher than that he is the moft *' eminent of all other Beings (Men or Angels) »' that are called Sons of God, without a certain De- " termination whether he be true God, or no, by *' the mere Ufe of that Name, ibid.'' — Here are more Fallacies, than I care to point out. — The Ccnckfton will not, cannot, follow from the Pre- tnijfes ; becaufe, there is more in //, than in them. — ■ The Name Son of God, is not, in them, ufed emi- nently or abfolutely, as it is in the Conclufion.
Had it been fo ufed in them, the Propofition had been eminently and abfolutely falfe : Becaufe, no one Angel, or Man, ever is, or ever can be, called, eminently and abfolutely, the Son of God; nor are
any
[ 227 ]
any Number of either, or both of them, in that Senfe, the Sons of God, or ever fo called. — I fhall only add. That, fince thefe two Adverbs plainly hint, that this Title is often applied to Chrift, in a lower Senfe ; 'twould not be hard to prove. That, when he is called, eminently and abfolutely, the Son of Gody the Meaning neceffarily is. That he is his Son, in a Senfe " far more proper in itfelf," to ufe Bp. Pearfon\ Words, " and more peculiar to him, *■' in which no other Son can have the Icaft Pretence " of Share or of Similitude •, and that his Filiation *' is totally diftind from any which belongs to his " other Sons.^'' Expof. of the Creed, p. 106, 107.
" Anf. 2. This Name Son of God cannot necef- " farily fignify his true Godhead any otherwife, than " by fuppofing it primarily to fignify his coeffential " Sonfhip, - - and then confequentially that the Son of " God is true God, becaufe his Father is fo." p. 8. This we readily grant ; and think it Reafon, or Ground, fufficient ; efpecially, when the Adnouns, own, proper, only begotten, are prefixed to it ; had we no other Reafon, to believe him to be the true God, " Now, we have before proved, that this Name " cannot neceffarily fignify his coeffential or confub- " flantial Son/hip, &c." — Pray where ^ We have given every Syllable, that but looks this Way ; and have fully aniwered them too : And, if the intel- ligent, impartial Reader, can fee any Thing like a Proof, he muft, fee what is not be feen.
" Anf. 3. It is evident from fome Part of the " Condu6t of Peter and other Difciples during the " Life of Chrifl on Earth, that they did not hear- " tily believe they had the true and eternal God " among them, and that their Mafter was the true " and eternal God, as when they rebuked him, " when they queftioned his Knowledge of fome " Things, when they wondred, and were aftonifhed " at his working Miracles, i^c. as, fiys he, I fhall G s 2 fliew
[ 228 ]
" fhew, hereafter : Yet they then believed him to " be the Son of God ; — and profeft this BeHef " roundly, ^c. Therefore this Name does not certainly " declare his Divine Nature." p. 8. and 9. —This Argument, in fhort, is, " They believed him to be " the Soft of God i'^ But, had they believed, that this 'Title declared his Divine Nature, thty would " not, as they did, " have rebuked him, (^c. And therefore, " it does not certainly declare his Divine *' Nature." Anf This Conclufion, 'tis plain, does
not at all follow from the Premifies. Or,
" Therefore, they did not believe. That this Title ** declared his Divine Nature." Anf. Suppofing they did not believe this. What then ? Therefore it did not, indeed, declare this ? I deny the Confe- quence. — But, becaufe he harps upon this oftener than once, we fhall anfwer it fully hereafter.
" Obj. 2. It will be faid then. How comes it " about, that when the High Prieft alked our Sa- " viour, Jrt thou the Chrifi, the Son of the Bleffed ? " And Jeftis anfwer ed, I am. Mark xiv. 61, 62. " he charges our Saviour with Blafphemy, ver. 64. " if his calling himfelf the Son of God did not imply " his true Godhead?" p. 9. — The Jews charged him, before this, oftener than once, with Blafphemy, Jo. V. 18. Ch. X. 33. and after this alfo, even when he was before Pilate, Ch. xix. 7. upon the very fame Account. — But, tho' this Obje5iion has been thought, by the Catholic Church, in all Ages, un- anfwerable: Our Author anfwers it prefently, and feems to boaft of it too, " I have fhewn, — Thus it "• appears," ^c. p. 9.
*' Jfifw. It is evident that the Defign of the " wicked Jews was to fix the higheft and moft " criminal Charge they could againfl him : — " And a higher, and more criminal. Charge they could not poflibiy fix on him, or any other Perfon in the whole World, even the molt wicked ; if he was not,
in-
[ 229 1
indeed, what he confefs'd himfelf to be j and in their Senfe alfo : Becaufe, if he, indeed, was not. His Anfwer much better became Satan, the Father
of Lies ^ Jo. viii. 44. than the Saviour of Men !
And, had he not then, really, been the Son of God, and in their Senfe of that Title, Would he not, even at firft, have, plainly, yea, and with Horror, denied their malicious Charge ? — Would he not have taken Care, to prevent all fuch Accufations for the future ? — Ought he not to have done all in his Power to have kept his Difciples, and other Followers, from fuch a
grievous Error ? l^c. i^c. " But there was no
" fufficient Foundation for this Charge, which our " Saviour in another Place fully proves, John x. " 33, 34. as I have fhewn elfewhere in what fol- " lows." And we fhall wait till we fee this, and then forever confute it. — " Thus it appears," Not yet I am fure I " that tho' it be fully agreed that " Jefus Chriji, the Son of God, has true Godhead " belonging to him," What an odd Phrafe is this ? I wifh his Friends would but explain it. — I do not know but every Sabellian, Arian, Nejiorian, Euty- chian, and Tritheifi, in the World, may confefs this, in a full Confiftency, with their refpedlive blafphe- mous Notions ! " becaufe Divine Names and Titles " are given to him," Given ! To whom .? To the Son of God ? Why then •, this puts it out of Doubt, That, if thofe divine Names and Titles are proper, and fignify any Thing, the Son, as fuch, is Divine, or, is God : And therefore, a coejfential Son — If then they are given to the " true Godhead belonging to " him," I fhall only now afk. Is this true Godhead a Perfon, or not .? If it is not, thofe '' divine Names " and Titles," are given to what is not a Perfon, which is not a little ftrange -, and the perfonal Pro- noun, him, to fomething not a Perfon, which is ei- ther very figurative indeed, or not a little abfurd : Not to alledge, that this looks I'lktSakllianifm! &c. —
If
[ 230 ]
Jf this true Godhead is a Perfon ; fince he, every where, fpeaks of the Son of God^ as a Perfon -, here' are either, ( i . ) ^wo Perfons in the One Chrifi. Or, (2.) "Two Chrijls. — If thefe divine Names and Ti- tles are given to Jefus Chrifi, the fame Difficulties occur, as is plain. " yet this Name Son of God, ** does not necefiarily and certainly difcover or im- ply it." i. e. that he has " true Godhead belonging *' to him." And this, if it be Senfe, fhall be fully confuted. " Thus much for the firft fuppofed *' Senfe of this Name." p. 9, 10. Thus you have every Syllable of thefe two Paragraphs. — And, to avoid trifling, May I not afk. How he could prove, in his Way of reafoning, " That the divine Names *' and Titles given to Chrift, do neceffarily and " certainly difcover or imply, that he has true God- *' head belonging to him .^" or is th.t true God?
V' 57' ^ P^lfi^-
May I not argue, as he has done, p. 8 — 10. thus, *' Divine Names and Titles are, in the Bible, " applied varioufly, even to Men, (viz. Magiftrates, *' Pf Ixxxii. 6. and, as fome think. Prophets,^* Jor " X. 34, '^c,.) as well as to Chrifi : And therefore, *' when thofe Divine Names and Ttles are emi- " nently and abfolutely afcribed to him, the Mean- *' ing of them does not necelfarily rife higher, than " that he is the moft eminent of all other Men, " (Magiftrates or Prophets) to whom thofe Names *' and Titles are given, without a certain Determi- *' nation, whether he be the true God, or have true *' Godhead belonging to him, or no, by the mere " Ufe of thofe Names and Titles ? " — But, I have no Inclination to
I wiih his Admirers would confider thefe, ^c. Advance we then, to another Proportion,
VI. Tho' our ever bleffed Saviour, when on Earth, did never, but once, fo far as we know, diredly, or in exprefs Terms, profefs himfelf to be the Mef-
fiah.
[ 231 ] Jiah^ till he was upon his Trial : Yet he was never, from his Entrance upon his Public Work, to the Day of his Death, fhy, or backward, to declare, pro- claim, and profefs, his Divinity, both in private and in public, yea, and inculcate the Belief of it ; by calling himfelf often the Son, the own, the begotten^ the only begotten. Son of the Father -, and maintaining and proving, that he was, as fuch, equal with God, Jo. V. \j — 19. and that he and the Father are ONE. Ch. X. 30, i^c. i^c.
The latter Part of this complex or compound Propofition confifts of two Parts, 1 . That he was never fhy, or backward, to declare, and' -proclaim^ himfelf to be the Son of God \ and that, many Ways, by calling God his Father, fpeaking to and of him as a Father, claiming the very neareft Relation pof- fible, to him, ^c. and filling himfelf his Son, his own, his only begotten, whom he loved, who was ever with him, &c. All this, I fay, is fo frequently, and clearly revealed, that no One, who believes the Bible, ever did, or can, doubt of it. How full and exprefs is he upon thefe, in his Conference with Nico- demus, Jo. iii. 16 — 18. when before the Jewijh San- hedrim, Ch. v. ver. 17 — 47. in his Difputes with tht Fharifeees, Ch. viii. 18 — 59. in his j^nfwer to the Jews, Ch. x. 24 — 42. in his Mediatory Pray- ers? Ch. 17. ^c. ^c. — 2. That this was a pro- claiming his true and proper Divinity, is, I humbly conceive, as clear and undeniable. Thus, when he taught his Difciples, That all Things were delivered to hi??7, the Son, of his Father ; Mat. xi. 27. and all
Power in Heaven and in Earth j Ch. xxviii. 18.
That he had Power to lay down his Life ; and Power y as the Son, to take it up again ; Jo. ii. 19. Ch. x. 1 7, 18. — That he was, as the Son, equal with Gop ; and to prove it, declares, That Whatsoever Thing the I'ather doth, thcfe he, the Son, doth likewise ; That the Son qtiickneth whom iiz will-. That all
Men
[ 232 ]
Mm Jhould honour the Son, even as they honour the Father ; That he, the Son, hath Life in himfelf, can raife the Bead, and is appointed to judge the World ; &c. Jo. V. ly —- 19. and vers. 21. 23. 26. 28. 29.
That the Son is Eternal ; Ch. viii. 58. and One
Thing with the Father, Ch. x. 30, i^c. (jfc. — When all thefe are well confidered, they declare his true and proper Divinity, as the Son, if any Words can do it. — But, feeing all thefe, and many Things more to the fame Purpofe, muft be enlarged upon, in a Chapter by themfelves, we fhall now pafs them, when I have offered thefe Two Obfervations,
(i.) That, tho' our Lord, as we have already hinted, did, on many Occafions, both in public and private, exprefsly and folemnly, charge a.ndfor- bid his Difciples, and others, to tell any Man that he was THE Christ -, or to fpeak of him under the Chara^er o^ THE Messiah, till after his Refurre^ion ! Mat. viii. 4. Ch. ix. 30. Ch. xvi. 20. Ch. xvii. 9. ^c. ^c. Yet, he never, any how, charged, or forbad, any Man, To fay, or declare, that he was the Son of God, when, or wherefoever, theypleafed! ■ And yet,
(2.) That he very feldom, if ever, either in pub- lic or private, fo far as we know, Jiiled himfelf, by this Title, the Son of God, or his begotten, &c. or openly, and in fo many V/ords, confefs'd, That he "was his Son •, except when he had to do with the more learned, as Nuodemus, Jo. iii. and the Pha- rifees, Chs. viii and x. or, when he was before the
Sanhedrim. Ch. v. and Mark xiv. 62. &c.
The Reafons of both which remarkable Obferva- tions, we fliall have, by and by.
The former Part of this Propofition, That our Lord, when on Earth, did never, any where, or at any Time, but once, fo far as we know, in public or private, in exprefs Terms, declare, or frofefs, himfelf to be the Meffiah, till he was upon his Trial:
This,
[ 233 ]
This, I fay, needs no Proof, - — If any one doubts it, let him fliew when, or where, he did fo, in ex-
prefs Terms. Our learned Author, however,
*' confefTes, there are two or three Occafions alfo " which our Lord took to profefs himfelf the Mef- " Jiah^ in direft and plain Words -," p. 77. and yet gives us but two, viz. " Jo.iv. 29." it fhould have been 26. " and Ch. ix. o^j,''* in which are no fuch Words as Chriji^ or the Mejfmh ! Thefe notorious Slips here, and in feveral other Places, inclines me to think, there have been feveral Miftakes in the Co- py, &'c. Our Lord's Words, ver. 25- are, Dqfi thou believe on the Son of God? Wherein he, exprefsly, propofes himfelf, even as the Son ofGod^ for the Ohje^ of Faith : And therefore, flrongly profefTes himfelf to be the coejfential Son of God ; becaufe, if he had not been a coeffential Son^ he could nor, as a Son, have been the Objeci of Faith. — In like Manner, he feems to talk, p. 24, 25.
" If we confult the Gofpel and Epiftles of St. " John, we fliall find the Name Son of God and *' the Name of Chriji ufed very promifcuoufly for *' one another," And fo they well might, becaufe they denote the very fame Perfon ; tho' thefe Namies are not ftridlly fynonymous : Nor is the Foundation, or Reafon, of them the fame. He could never have been the Chrifi, had he not been the Son of God : But, he was, from Eternity, the Son of God, in the Order of Nature, before he was, or could be, appointed to be the Meffiah. " and fometimes with a " Defign to explain each other," — This is, to fay the lead, very ambiguous. We ufe to explain what is lefs known, by what is more known : Which of them then, explained the other } — He often, before the Jews, profefied himfelf to be the Son of God: But never once, to be the Christ. ' Ihey had right Ideas of the Meaning of the
Title, the Son of God ! even. That he who w^% the
H h Son
[ 234 1
Son of God, was equal with' God! Jo. v. i8. yea, and was God! Ch. x. 33. But they fee m, in his Days, to have loft all true Ideas of the Office of the Mejfiah ! — I fay, they knew well the true Meaning of the Title, the Son of God: For, otherwife. Our Lord would, I cannot but believe, have correded their Miflake, and fet them right in a Matter of fuch Im- portance : — Or elfe would have roundly denied their Confequence, and told them plainly, That the Ti- tle, the Son of God, in the higheft Senfe, did neither prefuppofe, imply, nor fignify. Equality with God : And therefore, J "hat, tho' he ufed that Title of himfelf, he was not guilty of Blafphemy, and did not make himfelf God. Might he not have afkt them. How fuch a Fancy came into their Heads ? Did they ever hear of a Son of God, that was equal with him ? Yea, and was God ? &c. — " and both *' to denote the great promifed Redeemer, the Saviour " of the World" This they might do, tho' one of them, ftridly fpeaking, was a Title of iV^/Zifrf, and the other of Office. '1 he Texts he quotes, tho' no way againft us, may be afterwards confidered : On- ly the laft, I cannot now pafs.
" And that awful Text, Jo. viii. 24. is certainly " to be interpreted the fame Way, If ye believe not " that I AM HE, jy^ fhall die in your Sins. That is, " as Chrift himfelf explains it in the next Verfe, *' that I am the fame that I faid unto you from the " Beginning', that is, the Chrijl, the MeJJiah, the Son *' of God, the Saviour of the IVor Id." p. 25. But we muft carefully remember. That, fo far as we know, he had never, before them, ufed any of thofe Titles, but one ', nor faid to any one Jezu, no not once, that he was the Chri^ii, the Meffiah, the Saviour of the World; but only, ihat he was the Son of God: And there- fore, this Anfwer was only a perfifting in it. That he was, as he had often faid, the Son of God. — He goes on, " Nor is the Abfence of the Word He in
the
[ 23J 1
'* the Greek any Bar to this Interpretation, for the *' Expreffion is the fame, Jo. iv. 29. ky^] n^ai." — Anf. 1 . We are not enquiring here about the Inter- terpretation^ till we firft agree about the literal
and common Senfe of the Words. 2. Sup-
pofing the Meaning of our Lord's Anfwer, is juftly tranflated, by adding the Pronoun, He •, and that the Senfe our Author puts upon it, be alfo right, viz. / a7n the Mejfiah ; I fee no juft Reafon, for dropping the Empbafts of the Phrafe, lya h^juiy Cwhich was a well-known Title of the mo't High^) in either of the Paifages. — For, 3. In his Anfwer to the Jews^ the Phrafe, \yf2 ejjwj, I am (fee Ex. iii. 14.) implies no more, than the Senfe which they themfelves put upon this Title, the Son of God\ viz. That, by affuming it to himfelf, he made himfelf equal with God; yea, made himfelf God. — And, 4. In reply to the Woman of Sainaria's Creed, Jo. iv. 25. I know the Meffmh Cometh : When he is come., he will tell us all Things : This moft emphatic Na?ne, or Expreffion, would give her higher, and jufter. Thoughts of the M^f?/^, than perhaps, fhe had ever heard ; keep, or recover, her and her Country Folks, from the felf/h, unworthy, carnal, and low Ideas of the Mejfiah, v/hich the Jews had entertain'd, and with which they were then generally bewitched ; and confirm her Faith, That he could, and would, tell them all Things. — He clofes the Paragraph thus, " and Jo. ix. 37. \ydm(; Eo-Ttv, he it ts," (which by the by, comes no way near the Point,) *' where we " are fure that Chrifl means that he is the MeJJiah.** But, whoever will read the Paffage, he will fee he means, That he is the Son of God : And, That the Word Chrifi, or the Meffiah, does not occur in all that Chapter •, but ver. 22. where we hear of an A^, to ey:co7nmunicate any Man that fhould confefs him to
be the Cbrifi. • After all,
H h 2 'Twill
[ 236 ]
'Twill be alledged, That thefe Titles are all tant- amount, denoting the very fame Perfon, and con- veying to us the very fame Ideas. Anf They do indeed' freiguently denote the fame Perfon ; and, fo far, are fynonymous : But, they are afcribed to him, upon different Accounts •, and do not, always, convey to us the very, fame Ideas -, and therefore, they are not, ftridlly fynonymous, and of the fame Signification. — They are all Titles of the Mejfiah, and as fuch : But, the Reafon, or Foundation^ of them is very different ; and fometimes they excite in us very different Ideas. — The Title, the Mejfmh, which in the Greek, is o ^^irog, the Chrift, are, properly, and diredly. Titles, or rather, a Title, of Office ; and, primarily, imply his Relation to his People, or Work: But, the Title, the Son of God, does neither, primarily, properly, nor diredlly ; nor, in- deed, if we confider the natural and common Sig- nification of the Words, and take them Itriftly, any other ^ V ay, imply, or denote any Office ; but is a Title of Nature, which primarily and literally ex- cites in us the Idea of his Relation to his Father ; and, I humbly conceive, that only. — But, becaufe it is about Words, the proper, or improper Signifi- cation and Ufe of them, we are now difputing -, an apt Simile, or Example, once for all, may make the JDehate and Importance of it, more plain, to the honefl, ferious, and unlearned Chriftian.
Thefe three, The Ki?tg's fecond Son, The Duke of Cumberland, The Genet aliffimo of our Army, are all Titles denoting the very fame Perfon : But, 'tis plain, they are not of the fame Signification •, nor are they given to him, upon the fame Account. They exprefs very different Relations, and, when taken ftriclly, raife in us very different Ideas. — The firft, denotes his Relation to his Royal Father ; and is, evidently, a Title of Nature: The fecond, his Peerage 5 and is, manifeflly, a Title of Honour : The
third.
[ 237 ] third, his Relation to the Jrmy ; and is, undeniably, a Title of Office. — Any one of the three may be, and fometimes are, iifed when fpeaking of him ; and confidering, that it is well known, that every one of them belong to him, and him only ; every one of tliem is fufiicicntiy difiinguijhing : But, 'tis evident, the Words are not of the fame Signifi- cation ; nor do they, dircdiy, raife in us the fame I- deas. — He was the King's fecond Scf2, before he was either of the other : He would ftill have been fo, had he never been any of the other ; or were he to refign his rommiffion : So that the firft is natu- ral, which cun never be taken from him ; whereas, the other two. Were freely given, &c. — Were the Queftion put, What is the Meaning of thefe Words, The King's fecond Son F 'Twould bethought an odd Reply, The Duke of Cumhr.rland ! — Or, if it were afls:t. Why, or upon what Account, is he, and is called, the King's fecond Son ? 'T would be thought a very ftrange Anfwer, Becaufe he is the Generalif- ftmo of our Army ! — Let us apply thefe to the Cafe in Hand. " The Chriji, the Mefiah, the Son of " God, the Mediator," &c. are all Titles given to our Lord, in the Nev/Teftament : They all denote the fame Perfon, and him only : And therefore, any one of them, is fufficiently diftinguifhing : — But, the Words do not fignify the fame Things ; nor are thefe Titles given to him for the fame Reafon, or upon the fame Account -, nor do they raife in us, or convey to us, the very fajne Ideas. — The Idea of this Title, the Son of God, is evidently more ftrift, and fingular ; the Idea of, theChrift, &c. more complex. — He was the Son of God, antecedently to all Confideration of, and independently upon, his Office \ and will be fo, when he f hall have delivered up the Kingdom to God even the Father: i Cor. xv. 24 — 28. And therefore, his Sonjhip was not founded, nor does it depend upon, his Office. • — Were the Queftion put, V\hy is Cbrifi
called
[ 238 ]
called the Son of God? I can't but think, it would be an odd Anfwer, becaufe he is the King of the Jews, or the Mediator^ &c. — But, were it alkt, Why is hexalled his begotten Son? The Anfwer would found very ftrange indeed, Becaufe, he is not at all his Son, and neither was, nor could be begotten of him 1 And, were the Query, Why is he called the only begotten of the Father? The Reply would not found much more agreeable to Chrijlian Ears, Becaufe " of the '* glorious peculiar Derivation of his human Soul from *' God the Father I'''' &c. p. lo. — So that, in a Word, (i.) This Title, '^he Son of God., as we have already hinted, when ftridly taken, according to its primary, grammatical, and I had alrnoft faid, necef- fary and only Senfe ; and efpecially, when the Ad- nouns, own, begotten, &c. are affixed •, is a Title of Nature, denoting his Relation to his Father, and that only ; or his Divine Nature, and that he is God of God. (2.) The Titles, th& Chrijl, xhtMef- Jiah, th^Mediator, &c. are naturally, and, according to their only grammatical Senfe, necelTarily, Titles of Office ', which, tho' they do not, diredly or properly, fignify any Nature, yet they, in him, pre-fuppofe, or imply, both his Natures : Becaufe, he could not have fully executed his Offices, had he not been God-Man ! — Nor can I, by the by, help thinking. That com- mon Senfe may convince every Man, had we no other Proof of it. That the Mediator between God and Man, mufl; of Neceffity, him.felf be both God and Man. — To return,
The only Time our Lord ever, diredlly and in ex- prefs Terms, declared, or confefTed, he yN2.%theMeffiah, {till he was brought to his 1'rial before his Judges, Eccleftaftical, Made xiv. 61, 62. and Cm/, Jo. xviii. 32— 3 8. v/here he before them and Pontius Pilate witnef- fedagoodConfeffion, i Tim. vi. 13.) was to the Woman of Samaria, who feems to have had truer Notions, both of the Perfon, and Office, of the Meffiah, than
the
[ 239 1
the Generality of the 'jewijh Nation, yea their learned Rahhins^ then had. — That poor Creature having given him two principal Articles of her Creeds I know the MeJJiah cometh^ &c. Jo, iv. 25. v/hy, fays our Lord, I that [-peak unto thee am, or, as we tranflate it, AM HE ; Ver. 26, which he never did, on any Occafion, to the Jews •, no, not when queftioned upon it! — After that folemn Declaration, Jo. viii. 24. If ye believe not that I am, or, as it is in our Tranflation, that I am he, ye /hall die in your Sins; ■when they immediately afked him, Who art thou ? Ver. 25. tho' he had then a fair Opportunity to profefs himfelf, in fo many Words, to be the Mejfiah -, yet he did it not, in exprefs Terms : But only replyed. Even the fame that I faid unto you from the Beginnings i. e. the Son of God ; and in their Senfe of this Title too, fo his Son, as to be equal with him ; which his Words, ly2 si^ut, I am,
plainly enough imply. • Yea, when afterward
they feem even impatient, to know the 'Truth •, and therefore afk. How long dcji thou make us to doubt ? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly, Jo. x. 24. Trapp-io-ta, freely, above board, in Words we can't miliake : W hence 'tis clear, he had not hitherto been ,fo open, or plain. And now, tho', one would have thought, he could not have handfomely waved, or declined, a dired, full, and categorical Reply ; yet he only anfwered, as before, I tcldyou, and ye believed not: &c. Ver. 25. — Now, he had never once told them, that he was the Chrifl, the Mejfiah, or the King of the Jews ; but only that he was the Son of God, Chap. v. 1 7 — 47. and thati-^^r^ y^bra- ham was, he was the 1 am, i. e. the Eternal, Un- changeable, I AM; Chap. viii. 58. — And his Dif- courle following his Anfwer, Chap. x. 25.wherein he is very plain, I and the Father are one, Ultr^ti', are ONE Thing, Ver. 30. feems neceflarily to lead us to this Senfe. — One more Evidence, I cannot pafs.
When
[ 240 ]
When the Baptiji fent two of his Difciples, for their own full Satisfa^ion^ and that they might be throughly eftablifned in the 'Truth, with that moft important ^uejlion, Luke vii. 19. Art thou he that fhould come, or look we for another F i. e. in Ihort, yfr/ thou THE Messiah? — His Anfwer is very- remarkable. He does not readily reply, Tes, or, I am ; as to the Woman of Samaria : But, Go your Way, and tell John what 'Things ye have feen and heard, how that the Blind fee, the Lame walk, the Lepers ere cleanfed, the Beaf hear, the Dead are raifed, &c. Ver. 22. For, in that fame Hour he cured many of their Infirmities, and Blagues, and of evil Spirits, &c. Ver. 21. — But, Why this Anfwer? Why fo ihy to fuch Meffengers, and fuch a Mejfage ! — We reply, i. That he might fhun all Ofentation ; &c. and avoid all unneceffary Dijputes with the Scribes, and the need- lefs Cavils of the Multitude^ &c. — 2, That he might fuit himfelf to the Weaknefs of the two that were fent, who envied him for their Mailer's Sake ; fo. iii. 26. and, remembring alfo that the Baptifi himfelf was then a Frifoner, might have been offended, had one, in fuch lov/ Circumftances, and who made fo mean an external Appearance, openly avowed himfelf to be the Meffiah. This, I conceive, may be gathered from Ver. 23. And Bleffed is he whofoeverfJjall not he offended in me. — And 3, That ke might put Honour upon John, by leaving it to his Sagacity and Integrity, to anfwer his own Queftion, to the full Convitlion of his Difcioles, from the Things their own Eyes had feen, and their own Ears had heard, q. d. Go tell your Mafter what you have feen and heard-, and he will eaiily, clearly, and thoroughly, refolve all your ijotibts concerning me ; by flicwing you, that thofe Prophecies of Ifaiah, Ch.^p. XXXV. 4 — 7. and feveral others, which always have been, and muft be, underfcood of him that jhould come, and of 7io other ; and by which, the
Meffiah
f 241 ]
Mejfiah, when he fhould come^ was to be known ; are, even before your own Eyes, moft fully, exadlly, and to a Tittle, fulfilled in me : And confequentiy. That / dm your God^ who was to be manifejied in the Fkjh^ and to come and do all thefe Things. — Thefe v/ill be fufficient to keep you ^xom ftumbling^ at the Meannefs of my outward Appearance •, &c. And him you will attend to, and regard, with lefs Pre- judice, than you would, at prefent, do me : And, by thefe Means, you will alfo be the more readily difpofed to receive, and believe in me, to your own eternal Salvation. — But,
This Remark, which cannot but feem ftrange to many pious Chrijlians, naturally requires a clear, and full, Refolution of thefe Three Queftions. Did our Lord, indeed, never once, till upon his Trial, de- clare to, or among, the Jews, That he was the
Meffiah ? What Reafon can be imagined, or
alfigned, for this his Refervednefs ?-Did he never tell his own Difciples, that he was the King of the Jews, or fpeak to them of his Kingdom, or promife them a Kingdom ^
Queft. I. Did not our Saviour, indeed, declare, and proclaim, himfelf in fo many exprefs Word-, to be the Mejftah, neither to the Scribes and Pha- rifees, nor to the Multitudes, till he was upon his Trial ?
Anf He never did, not fo much, as once, fo far as we know, in fo many Words, fo much as fay, either to the Scribes and Pharifees, or to his ordinary Hearers, or the Multitudes, or any other, except to the Woman of Samaria, That he was the Mejftah ! Yea, fo far was he from boafting of it, from talking of it, upon every Occafion, &c. that he never al- lowed any of the Jews to fpeak of him under that Chara^er! And expreQy forbad, yea. Solemnly charged, thofe who were healedhy him, to fay to, or tell no Man that he was the Chriji. — I cannot re-
I i member
[ 242 ]
member any Exception. — He bid the Leper^ whom he had deanfed^ to go and JJjew himfelf to the Prieji i Mat. viii. 4. and the poor Man, out of whom he caji a Legion of Devils^ to go home to his Friends, and tell them, how great Things the Lord had done for him-, Mark V. 19. and charged the impotent Man, to Jin no more ; Jo. v. 1 4. &c. &c. but never proclaimed himfelf to be the Mejfiah ! — Yea, tho' his Fore-runner, the Baptiji, declared indeed openly. That he was before him, and exceeding greater, and more glorious than he ; Mat. iii. 11. that he was the Lamb of God, Jo. xi. 29. and the Son of God: ver. 34. Yet he never, in fo many Words, ftiled him the Mejfiah \ What he faid of him, was true only of the Meffiah ; and fufficient alfo, to incline his Difciples, to take him for the Meffiah -, nor was it without Effect, for he came to prepare a People for him, and prepare his Ways: Luke i. 17. and 76. But he never, in ex- prefs Words, called him fo. — This, I prefume, is not a little confirmed, from the MefTage he fent by his two Difciples. — As for the Twelve Apoftles, they believed, and were fure. That he was the Chrijl the Son of the living God ; Jo. vi. 69. as Martha alfo, and many others of his ordinary Hearers and more intimate Acquaintance, I make no Doubt, did : But, fo far as we know, he never to, nor before, them affumed to himfelf this Title ! — Yea, we cer- tainly know. That, when he fent them out, he ordered them. Mat. x. 7. to preach faying, Ihe Kingdom of Heaven is at Hand ; and gave them Ccmmijfton alfo, and Power, to work Miracles : ver. 8. But, gave them no Command to proclaim, in exprefs Terms, That the Meffiah was come ! And much lefs. That he himfelf was H e .
Qut'ft. 2. Flow can this flrangg Shynefs, this un- expetTcd Refervediufs, be accounted for.^ — Would not every One, and not without fome probable Ground, have thought. That, if he was, indeed,
the
f 243 ]
the Mejftah, he would, on all proper Occafions, or now and then at lead, have openly proclaimed it : And, if he could alfo have clearly proved that he was, would have, in fo many Words, avowed^ and maintamed it, even to the Faces of his Enemies ? — • What fufficient Reafon then could there be, why he was not more explicite, in this moft momentous Cafe ?
Anf. I. That ferious Chriflians may not be here miftaken, let them remember. That, from his Baptifm^ (when the Father and the Hcly Spirit did both, personally ^ hear Witnefs to his coejfential Scnffjip ; and confequently. That he was the Chrili •, Mat. iii. 16, 17) to the Day of his Death, he loH no proper Opportunity, every where, and to all Sorts of Peo- ple, to declare, yea and prove; that he was the Christ : Tho' not in direct Terms, and in fo many W'ords, yet by feveral infallible Proofs. — Such as, I. By the Titles, which he either afTumed himfelf, or accepted from others •, fome of which, primarily, and evidently, fignify his Divine Nature^ fome his Human, and others, fuppofe or imply the Union of both Natures, in the Perfon of the Mejfiah. (i) By thofe Titles, which, diredily and neceiiarily, fignify his Divine Nature, viz. the Son, the begotten, the only begotten Son, of God, which he fo frequently affumed to himfelf. Thefe the fews very well knew, as our Author has owned, v/ere Titles peculiar to the Meffiah. Pf ii. 7. If. ix. 6. &c. They alfo well under- ftood the true Import, or Meaning, of them \ nor did they evtr mifiake it, or vary from it ! as we have, and fliall, put out of all Doubt. (2) By thofe, which he either commonly took to himfelf, or ac- cepted from others, and which, chiefly and clearly, denote his Human Nature -, viz. that peculiar One, the Son of Man, and thofe, the King of Ifrael, Jo. i. 49. the Sen of David, Mat. xx, 30, &c. which are I i 2 acknow-
[ 244 1
acknowledged to be Titles of the Meffiah, and thae with Refped to his Manhood — Now, when he auumed, or accepted, thofe Titles, which were proper to the MeJJiah and him only. He, conftruc] tively, if not diredly, acknowledged himfelf to be the Mejfiah ; and that fo plainly, and fully, as no one of common Senfe could either miflake, or doubt of, his Meaning: For, furely, he would neither have affumed, nor accepted, any Title which did not belong to him. (3) When the fame Perfcns, who fo well knew the true Import of the Title, the Son of God^ heard him afTume that Title one Day, and ftile himfelf the Son of Man the next, they could not but think, (if he fpoke Truth, and knew alfo what himfelf faid,) That he fpoke of himfelf as both God and Man, as the Prophets had often done of the MeJJiah, Pf ii. 7 — 12. If ix. 6, 7. Jer. xxiii. 5, 6, &c. and therefore made himfelf the Meffiah. And, it is plain enough, they knev/, or were fure, he fpoke
of himfelf as, or made himfelf, the Christ.
2. Fie proved himfelf to be the Meffiah, by his Doctrine, and his Manner of delivering it, and the Effects of it, &c. — His Do^rins manifefted itfelf to be Divine, when he expou?tded and vindicated the Law, exploded xhtfalfe Gkffes of the Scribes, and confronted the 'Traditions of the Elders, &c. &c. — He delivered it, with a certain Divine Majefty proper to himfelf; an Authority, becoming liis Dignity -, an inimitable Plainnefs and Sweetnefs -, and a moft con- vincing Power and Efficacy ; &c. Mat. vii. 28, 29. Luke iv. 22. Ro. vii. 42. according to the Pro- phecies of him. Pf xlv. 2. Ifxi' 2. Ch. 1. 4, &c. So that thofe, who were not converted, were co'a- vinced ! And, they who would not believe, had nothing to reply, or oppofe. — 3. By His Miracles, efpecially if we confider their Number, almofl paft numbering! ih^ix Nature, requiring /;yf«//^ Power!
hi&
[ 245 ]
his Manner of working them, at a DIftance ! with a Word! in the Twinkling of an Eye! &c. &c. Thefe, I fay, put the Matter out of all Doubt. If we now take all thefe together, the Evidence is fo ir- reftftihle^ That it is no wonder it rendered all^ and every one, who knew the Scriptures^ and heard him, and faw his tVorks, and yet received him not^ wholly inexcufahle. — This was his own Judgment, upon the whole. If I had not come and fpoken unto them, they had not had Sin : But now they have no Cloke for their Sin. If I had not done among them the Works which no other, ih\q clxko<;, did, they had not had Sin : But now they have both feen and hated both me and my Father. Jo. xv. 22, 24. I might have added his Life, and the mod perfeft Example he has given, &c. &c. but thefe may fuffice.
Why then, will you fay, did he not tell them plainly, who he was ? Anf He told them often, and as plainly as was poffible, That he was both the Son of God, and the Sen of Man. — But, why did he not exprefly tell them. That he was the Meffiah ? Why was he fo ftudioufly cautious in this Point ? Efpecially, fince this was the very 'Thing chiefly aimed at, in, and by, all his Difcourfes, and Mi- racles, even to fhew, and to prove. That he himfelf was, indeed, the Meffiah !
Anf 2. Several Reafo?is may be fuggefled for this, when I have remembred the Reader of thefe Things.
The Hebrew Word, Meffiah, and the Greek Word, Chrifi, both fignify anointed : — Among the Ifra- elites. Prophets, Priefts, and Kings, (who were all Types of Chriji, the great Prophet, Priefl, and King of his Church,) were anointed; and fometimes ftiled, the Lord's anointed, and called by himfelf, my anointed: I Sam. xxiv. 6. Pf cv. 15. i Kings xix. 16. Lev, viii. 12. and 30. ^c. — Hence the glorious promi fed Saviour was, frequently, by the Prophets, emphati- cally
[ 246 ]
cally ftiled, the Messiah, /. e. the Anointed: Whether it was, becaufe Kings were more fre- quently anointed i or, becaufe of the greater Solem- nity of their Confecration -, or, of the Superiority of the Regain to the Prophetical and Sacerdotal^ Offices -, or all of thefe •, the Title, the Lord's anointedy came to be referved, and, in a Manner, appropriated to Kings:
— In one of the principal PrediElions^ of Him that vjas to comcy Dan. ix. 25. He is ftiled, Meffiah, the Prince : — From that Time, none of the Princes of the Jews were anointed ; and they had no more Kings :
— Not long after, this Title, the Mejfiah^ or the A- nointedy was commonly given by way of Eminence, to the great expelled Deliverer : — Many great Things being foretold of, the unparallell'd Dignity of his Per/on -, and of his Kingdom, the Extent, Giory, and Per- petuity of it j &'c. the numerous Conquejls he was to make •, &'c. the Peace, Splendor, Magnificence, and Felicity of his Reign -, &c. the extraordinary Blejfings v/herewith he was to enrich his happy Sub- jects ; tff:. and that he was to reign in Zion God^s holy Hill, and fit upon the 'Throne of David his father •, &c. Pf. vi. 12. P[. Ixxii. throughout. Pf. ex. 5, 6. If. Chs. xi. XXXV. xlix. Iv. l£c. Dan. ii. 34, ^c,. and 44. ^c. ^c. Thefe Prophecies, I fay, in procefs of Time, came all to be taken, (even contrary to the plain Scope, yea and clear exprefs IVords of many, if not moft by far of them,) by the degenerate Jews, in a narrow and carnal Senfe, which was every Way un- worthy of him •, as if he was to be a Temporal Prince, who was to come with an irrefiftible Power to over- come, yea, and deftroy all their Enemies •, to reftore the Kingdcrn to Ifrael, Exalt their Nation to the high- eft Pitch of Honour, Power, Happinefs, if not to live among them, in Perfon, for ever! &c. — That this was, in Fad, the Cafe, at leaft in almoft every fart of it ; efpecially, after they fell under the Ro- man Yoke, is too evident, from the New Teftament,
to
[ 247 ]
to be denied : I'his Jlrange, unworthy^ and vile
Notion gradually prevailed, among all Sorts -, and the more their Necks were galled, the deeper Root it took : — The Infe5lion^ at laft, became Epidemical -, and the whole hump was leaven' d! — By Degrees, the Word, Mejfiah, came to be with them, the fame with Mejfiah the Prince^ or the King Mejjiah^ i. e. in their miftaken Opinion, a mighty temporal Warriour and Conqueror ; &c. and all other Thoughts of him, his Perfon and Ojjices^ and all other Exf eolations from him, were either almoil forgotten, or wholly dropt and loil ; or very much altered^ cbfcured^ or cor- rupted!— Hence it was, that, when they could not but know, and, 'tis plain, did actually well know. That the Time of the Coming of the MeJfiah, foretold by the Prophets, was at Hand •, they long'd fo ve- hemently for his comings as to be ready to follow every v^ickedlmpojior! &c. feejo. i. 19 — 27. Ch. vii.26. 41. Mat. xxiv. II. and 24. A6ls v. ^6. Ch. xxi. 38.
• The growing national Prejudice continued, till
all feem to have been tainted ! — Yea, The Dif- ciples themfelves were fo invincibly enchanted. That neither the plain Admonitions^ nor frequent and clear Infiru^ions^ Mat. xvi. 20, 19 — 2^. Luke xiii. 31 — 34, &c. &c. nor the Example, Jo. xii. 7. no nor the Sufferings and Deaths &c. of their bleffed Mcfier^ could recover them ! A5is i. 6. or give them truer Ideas of the great End of his coming ! — And, as for his ordinary Hearers, they once intended to take him by Force y and make him a King : Jo. vi. 15. Upon a Time, Luke xix. 1 1. they thought the Kingdom of God Jhculd immediately appear : And, when he made his public Entrance into Jerufalem^ the Cry of the Mul- titude was, Hofanna to the Son of David, &cc. Mat. xxi. 9. i. e. Save or profper, this King we pray thee, ^c. From all thefe now, we may eafily learn the Caufes of his not openly, and frequently, declaring himfelf, m exprefs Terms, to be the Mejfah.
I. That
[ 248 ]
1 . That the Scribes and Pharifees, &c. who, molt cruelly and defperately, hated him, (not only for his Do^rine, but chiefly becaufe of his low and mean Apfearance in the World, which prodigioufly, yea, and totally, difappointed all their carnal Expe£lations from the promifed Deliverer !) and therefore •, had he, in exprefs Terms, avowed himfelf to be the Me/Jiah, i. e. the King of the Jews, would have mod readily and fpitefully, and with many Aggravations, &c. in- formed againfl: him, as a feditious and dangerous Perfon ; yea, a Pretender to the Crown ; and there- fore, an Enemy to Cefar^ &c. as they afterwards, as malicioudy as falily, did : Lk-^^ xxiii. 2,5, 10. Jo. xix. 12. — That, I fay, they might have no juji Matter of Accufation againfl: him, no, nor any Pretext for any, he fo ftudioufly declined to call himfelf the King of the Jews. — 2. Leafl:, by his afluming that Title., he himfelf fhould have given any Umbrage to the Romans ; or, any the leafl; Handle to Pilate, to molefl:, and perfecute him, before his Hour was come : Or given them any Advantage., upon any Account, either againfl: himfelf, his Difciples, or ordinary Hearers, as if he had been an ambitious, worldly minded Per fen, or proud, a Self-feeker, &c. — 3. That he might give no Occafton, of any Sort, to the great Multitudes, that followed him wherever he came, to imagine, he ever defigned to fet up for a temporal King. — And, 4. That he might, by Degrees, lead them all, and the IVorld alfo, to jufter 'Thoughts of himfelf, his Perfon and Offices, &c : — And let them know, That he was the Son of God, who was come to feek and to fave that which was loji ; Luke xix. i o. and to fave his People from their Sins, Mat. i. 21, &c. from Satan, Adls xxvi. 18. and from this prefent evil World ; Gal. i. 4. and not from Cafar, or their Subje6lion to the Romans. — And this brings us to the lafl: Qucftion,
Queft. 3.
[ 249 1
Queft. 3. Did our Lord never tell his Difciples (nor any oriiers,) That he was the King of the Jews^ or of Ifrael -, nor fpeak to them of his being a King, nor of his having a Kingdom j no, nor promife them a Kingdom ?
Anf. Tho' he was fometimes jfhiled the King of Ifrael^ and believed^ by as many as indeed took him to be the Chrifi, to be the King of the Jews ; Jo. i. 49. Ch. xii. 12 — 16, &c. Yet he never, fo far as we know, no not once, called himfelf, in fo many Words, the King of Ifrael^ nor confefled that he was the King of the Je-ivs, till he was upon his Trial. — He fpokc indeed often, and moft exprefly and fo- lemnly, of a Kingdom^ which he fometimes called his Kingdom : But it was a Spiritual cind not a Tempo'ral Kingdom ', the Kingdom of Heaven, &c. — Thus, when his Forerunner entred upon his Miniflry, he began with this. Repent ye: Mat. iii. 2. For the Kingdom of Heaven is at Hand. — In the very fame Strains, did himfelf, Ch. iv. 17. commence his own public Work: And, when he fent out the Twelve to preach, Mat. x. 7. he put the fame Words into their Mouths : — Yea, in many of his Parables and Dif- courfes.^ Ch. xi. 11. Ch. xiii. ver. 24, o^'},., 44, &c. he calls the New Difpenfation., or the State of the Church under the Gofpel, the Kingdom of Heaven ! — But, in all thcfe, there is not the leaft Word, or Circumflance, which favoured the Carnal Notion the Jews had entertain'd of the Kingdom of the Me^iah ! — Not a Syllable of fuch mean, perijhing Things as Worldly Grandeur, or external Power, Pomp, Opulence, Vanity ! &c. — Not a Letter to feed the Pride, Avarice, Malice, Sec. of that degene- rate Age •, or flatter the vain Expediations of that 7iarrow-fpirited, and/c"//^ Race! — All here is pure, fpiritual, and heavenly, having a direct Tendency to wean them from fuch bafe, and low Things •, and lead them, to feek firjt the Kingdom of Heaveny and Kk to
[ 250 ]
tQfet their Jfe^ions on "Things above. — He himfelf came from Heaven, i. e. condefcended to empty himfelf, and affume our Nature, &c. That he might gather a People out of the World, infiruEi, renew, fan^ify, and prepare them for Heaven, whither he declared he was to go, to prepare a Place for them, Jo. X. 9—18. and ver. 27-29. Ch. xiv. 2, 3, &c. Yea, Inftead of promifinghis Followers worldly Riches, Ho- nours, Pleafures, Delights, or indeed any fenfual and fiefhly Profpe£iS', he told them, plainly, what they were to expeft : Mat. viii. 20. Ch. x. 16 — 22, &c. And many of his Infiru5lions were defigned to prepare them for Contempt, Reproach, Poverty, and Per- fecutions of all Sorts ; and to teach them how to behave wifely, peaceably, contentedly, yea and joy- fully, under them, refigning themfelves wholly to the Difpofals of Providence, &c. &c. — In Ihort, many of his Doctrines, his Promifes, as well as moft perfed: Example, were intended, chiefly, to eradicate their felfilh, narrow Hopes, &c. to fweeten their Na- tures, and infpire them with the moft ardent Love to all, who feared God, and loved their bleffed Mafler ; yea, and with p.niverfal Benevolence to all Men, &c. in the Expeftation of the heavenly Inheritance, in
another World ! From all which, 'tis plain,
'I'hat, tho' he was, and is, a King •, and had, and has, a Kingdom -, his Kingdom is not of this JVorld.
*Twill, perhaps, after all, be thought ftrange. That our Lord fliould not only never, in exprefs Terms, prcfefs himfelf to be the Meffmh \ but, fo often, and fo folemnly, charge his Difciples to tell no Man that he was, or, to fpeak of him, under that Character -, when he was fo ready, and before the chief of his Enemies too, on all proper Occa- fions, to proclaim, maintain, and prove, 1 hat he was the Son of God, his own, his only begotten Son ! What could be the Reafon ? — Did not this Title plainly imply the other ? And, Did not the Jews
know.
[25' ]
know, That, when he called himfelf the Son of God^ his Defign was to intimate, that he was, indeed, the Mejfiah ? — • Anf. Thefe two Titles, the Son of God and the Mejfiah, did both belong to him that was to come •, or, both denoted the lame Perfon ; and, therefore, might be uied of him, promifcuoufly : — • The Jews were very lenlible of this, as is plain enough, and our Saviour well knew it : — But yet, they are not, ftridly fpeaking, fynonymous-, nor is the Foundation of them, or Reafon of afcribing them to him, t\\t fame ; nor would they, nor did they, in the Roman Governour, nor, perhaps, in the common People, excite the very fame Ideas. — And therefore, tho' his avowed Declaration, That he was the Meffiah, might, and very probably would, and could not but, produce the Effe5fs above hinted ; yet his affuming the Title, the Son of God, neither would, nor did. But, That the unlearned Reader may the better underftand this, let him remem- ber,
I . That, as we have obferved above, Our Lord leldom, if ever, at leaft publickly, called himfelf the Son of God, but before the more intelligent and learned^ as Nicodemus, the Scribes, Phmifeesy and their Council ; who might know better, how to make a right Ufc of it. 'Twould convince them. That, as mean, and miferahle, his external Jppear- ance was, he yet openly avowed himfelf to be a Divine Perfon : — And might, and fhould, there- tore, have led them more carefully, to fearch the Scriptures, that they might fee, (i) Whether the promij'ed Saviour, was not to be Emmanuel, God- Man ? If vii. 14. Ch. ix. 6. &c. &c. (2) Vv^hether they did not, in fo many Words, call him as Gody the Son of God, his begotten Son ; Pro. xxx, 4. If. ix. 6. Pf. ii. 7, &:c. and afiMan, the Seed of the fVoman^ Gen. iii. J5. the Seed of Abraham, Gen. xii. 3, &c. K k 2 and
[ 252 1
and the Son of David: Pf. Ixxxix. 27 — 37, &c. (3) Whether they did not, in many Places, clearly fpeak of a two-fold State of his i and that, the Mejfiah was to be firft humbled^ and affii£ledy &c. and then exalted I Pf. xvi. 8 — 11. Pf xxii through- out, If lii. 13 — 15. &c. &c. (4) Whether they were not very particular, and exprefs, concerning the fingular and unparallell'd Depth of his Humilia- tion ? PI, xxii, Pf Ixix. I — 4. compared ver. 20, 21. If liii. throughout, Zech. xiii. 7, &c. &:c. (5) Whether they were not very clear, and full, in de- claring. That the Mejjiah v/as to be the Lights the Saviour^ , and King, of the Gentiles, as well as of the Jews?' Pf xxii. 27. Pf Ixxii. 10, u. Pf xcvi. throughout, Pf cxvii. i, 2. If xlii. 4 — 6. Ch. xlix. 6. Ch. xlv. 22, &c. Ch, li. 5, &c. &c. (6) Whether they ever fay. That he was to be a temporal Prince ; That his Kingdom was to be of this World ; That he was to conquer his People by Fire and Sword ? Sec. Or whether the Blejfings, and Salvation, he was to beflow, were not fpiritual and heavenly ; tho' often predifted, under the "Type of fenfible, and worldly Things.? fee If. ii. i — 5. Ch. xi. i — 10. Ch. xii. 3. Ch. XXXV. 7 — 10. Ch. xli. 17, 18. Ezech. xxxvi. 25 —38. Mai. iv. 2, &c. &c. And, to add no more, (7) Whether all the Prophecies relating to the Meffiah^ and in particular thofe concerning his Pamily, and the Meannefs it was to be reduced to, the Place and 'Jime of his Birth, the Miracles he was to work, i^c. (s'c. were not exadly, and to a Tittle, all fulfilled
in him? If xi. iMic. 5, 2. Dan. \x. 24 27.
If. XXXV. 5, 6, &c. &c.
2. Our Lord, on thofe Occafions, chofe this Title, the Son of God, (which could give no jufl Reafon, to his Enemies, to accufe him of being a Rival of Qffar, ^c. this, being abfolutely unworthy of a Divine Pcrfcn ;) That, when it fhould come
to
[ 253 1
his Ear, it might ftrike the Roman Governour with Reverence and Fear, as it adually did. Jo. xix. 3.
And,
3. He feems to have ufed this Title chiefly, That, by putting them in Mind, of the infinite Dignity of him, who had, from Eternity, undertaken to be the Saviour of his People, i. e. to be the Mejfiah, he might convince them of the Stupidity of that national
Prejudice, which had even enchanted them.
And had they confidered it well, and fufl^ered it to have had its full Weight with them, it could not, one would think, have tailed even of breaking the Charm. — Nothing can be conceived more unworthy of the moft High, than that he had fuch a Purpofe : Or, of the Eternal Sen, than that he fhould have humbled himfelf, and be made Flejh, i^c. to execute it. — 'Tis a Contradiftion to all the Perfe^lions of the Divine Being •, diredly contrary to the whole Scriptures -, and vile and unjuft in itfelf ! Yea, If the Eternal Father could have entertain'd fuch a Purpofe, it might have been eafily perform'd, without thofe moil aftonifhing of all Events, the Incarnation, Sufferings, and Death, i^c. of his own, only begotten Son. — Had he but railed up an Abraham, a Mofesy a Jojhua, a Sampfon, a David, &'c. and lengthened out their Lives far from half the Length of Methu- felah's it might have been eafily done. — Say not with thole moft malicious Enemies of his Cro s, the Socinians, That the Ends of the Sufferings and Death of Chriji, which we afllgn, are as tmju/l, &c. and every Way unworthy of the Mojl High : Be- caufe they are not fo. — Mankind, in gene al, by the Ufe of expiatory Sacrifices, every where, ^c. have agreed they are not fo : — 7 he Scriptures are clear, tuli, and Itrong, in afligning the Ends which we alhgn •, and therefore, we are fure they are not fo : And the Things themfekes confirm us in it, that they are not lb. — Yea, fo flu- is this from being
true,
f 254 1
true. That in, and by, the Scheme of Redemption^ we have the mod glorious Difplay of the Veracity^ Ho- linefs, and Jufiice of God^ &c. and of his Regard for the Glory of his Law, and the Honour of his Govern- ment, on the one Hand : And of his Goodnefs, Mer- cy, Grace, and Love to the World, on the other, that ever was, or could be given. So that the Ends intended by his Obedience even unto the Death of the Crofs, and all his unparallell'd Sufferings, were really the moji glorious of any that could be conceived ; every Way worthy of our Imm anuel : And which none in Heaven, or in Earth, but himjelf, either were or could be made, capable of compalTing. Mat. XX. 28. Rom. iii. 24 — 26. i Jo. i. 7. Ch. iii. 16. Ch. iv. 9, 10. Rev.v. 9 — 14. &c. &c. And, 4, The Reafons why our Lord fo often ftikd hiin- felf the Son of Man, efpecially before the Multitudes ; and, in private, with his Difciples -, were fuch as thefe, (i) As we have hinted. That he might incul- cate it upon them, That he was that Son of Man, who Avas to be a Man of Sorrows, and acquainted with Grief ; to be wounded, hruifed, fcourged, cut off out of the Land of the Living, and Jiricken for the Tranfgreffwns of God's People, becaufe he was to hear their Iniquities, &c. If. liii. 3 — 12. Ch. 1. ver. 5 — 7. Zech. xiii. 7. &c. To inculcate this, I fay, upon them ; and, by Degrees, to prepare them for, and to reconcile them to all this, or fortify them againft it. — 2. That, as Man, he might fuit himfelf to the Efiate of Humiliation he was in ; fhew how dearly he loved the World, and how contented he was with his Circumjtances in it •, ^c. make it appear, that, as his Condition was low, his Heart was lowly ; and as He, who was rich, TrX^a-iog uv, (being the Heir of all 'Things, Heb. i. 2.) i7rTd;)(^ev(TSy had beg- gared himfelf, or made a Beggar of himfelf , 2 Cor. viii. 9. fo he was fatisfied to be accounted as one. I do not know but I may add. That, by a frequent men- tioning
[255]
tioning of this Title, he might the more familiarize his future Suffering to himfelf ; Heb. v. 8. and be the better fitted for it. — But the chief Reafon, I hum- bly conceive, was, 3. That, by his fo ftudioufly for- bearing to call himfelf theChriJl; his avoiding^// Thames of worldly Honour, Grandeur, ^c. and affu- ming this humble Title, like one dehghted with it, (^c. he might gradually wean them from that Pre- judice which had taken fo deep Root in them, as well as in the great and the learned, That the MeJJiah was to be a temporal Monarch, &c. — One would won- der, how the Difciples, confidering their Circum- flances, could be lo ftrongly poflefs'd with it : But fo it was ! And, to root out this wretched Notion, took he all this Pains. — And, hence, (i.) Tho* he always carried himfelf as God manifejied in the Flejhy as his Do^rine, Miracles, and whole Converfation witnefled : Yet, he never, any where, took State up- on him ; never affected 'worldly Pomp, Greatnefs, or Power, no, nor meddled with fee ular Affairs ; ^c. never affumed a coercive Authority, or gave any the leaft Reafon to any of them to think, that he, in his Heart, afpired after, or would have accepted, 'Do- minion. &c. Yea, would not fo much as fpeak to one's Brother to divide the EJlate with him, Luke xii. 13. ^c. &c. (2.) When he obferved any Thing in them carnal, or fellifh, or afpiring, he always checkt it : And, when they contended, which of them fhould be the greateji, he told them plainly, and with much Solemnity, That the Way to be greateji in his Kingdom, was to be the moft humble, the Servant of all. Mat. XX. 25 — 28. ^c. — Yea, in the whole of his Behaviour before them, he, (3.) Shewed even a Contempt of all thefe ; i^c. never fpoke of any fuch Things to them, and much lefs promifed them any of them ; ^c. but, was very exprefs. That the Son of Man came not to he minijlred unto, but to mi- nijler -, &c. that the Servant was not above his Ma- iler ^
[ 256 ] Jier ; &c. yea. That he himfelf was among themy as he that Jerveth', Luke xxii. 24 — 27. 6fr. And confequently, That, if they would be his Servants, they mu^ follow his Example. — In fine, (4.) So far was he from giving them any Reafon to expeft the Honours, Riches, or Pleafures, &c. of this World, That he told them plainly, they were to be perfecuted, imprifoned, fcourged, fpoiled of all, put to Death, yea, and hated of all Men for his Names fake -, &c. Mat, X. 16 — 22. Jo. XV. 13 — 21. Ch. xvi. i — 4. i^c. ^c. ' And now. Would not one have thought, that all this would have totally eradicated this groundlefs Principle ? Yea, muft have done it, if they had had any Regard^ for what their blefled Ma- fter faid ? And yet, fo incurably were they bewitched with it, that nothing could recover them, till the Holy Ghofi was poured out upon them !
Thefe Things I thought might be of very great Ufe, upon many and various Accounts, to the young Student, and the plain honeft Christian : And therefore have expatiated fo much upon them ; for which, I hope, they will readily excufe me. — Pro- ceed we then to the laft Preliminary.
VII. Whereas, in the one complete Perfon of the Redeemer as fuch, there are two dijiin^ Natures, the Divine and the Human -, He is ^ Son, and frequent- ly fo called, in Refpe6l of each of thofe Natures : i. e. As God, he is, and is often called, the Son of God ', and as Man, he is, and is often called, the Son of Man.
The latter Part of this Propofition, (That as Chrifi, as Man, is really the Son of Man, fo is he, as fuch, frequently ftiled, the Son of Man,) is not, cannot be, denied. — Hence is he called the Son of the Virgin, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham ; Yea, as we have hinted, p. 128, 129. the Son oi every One of his Anceflors, according to the Flefh, from the Virgin to Adam : And the Reafon is, be-
caufe
[ ^S7 ]
caufe he was of them, l^ Sv to x«t« o-apxa, as to Ufhat concerned the Fle/h -, or, of them as concerning the Flefh he came -, Rom. ix. 5. i. e. to ufe a common Phrafe, becaufe he had the Blood of every one of them in his Veitis, and took Part of their FlefJj and Blood \ Heb. ii. 14. and therefore, was not afhamed to call them Brethren, ver. 11. Here, let us only remember, i. That therefore, this Title, the Son of Man, ftridly fpeaking -, or, if we confider the common, grammatical, 7i\\<\ -proper, Ufe of the Words; is a Title oi Nature, and not of Office : And there^ fore, fignifies only his Human Nature, or his Relation to his Anceftors. — But, 2. The eternal Son of God having taken upon him the Seed of Abraham \ or, alTumed his human Nature into a Ferfonality with himfelf, (and fo prevented its Ferfonality,) that, in and by it, he might fully execute the Mediatorial Office ', this Title, the Son of Man, I fay, does often, in Scripture, by a Figure very frequent in all Lan- guages, fignify, or denote, the complex Perfon of the Redeemer, as appointed to, and in the aflual Execution of, that moji glorious Undertaking. Mat. xxvi,
64. Luke xix. 10. Jo. xii. 34, &c. &c. And
yet, 3. Tho' it, in many Places, fignifies, or denotes, the complex Perfon of the Meffiah, and in the a5lual Execution of his Office : Yet it, every where and without Exception, has an efpecial Reipedl to his human Nature, pointing direftly to his unparallell'd Humiliation, &c. in it ; or to fome very extraordi' nary Anions, or Paffions, of our bleffed Lord., as Man. Every one, who will but confult the PaiTages, may
fee this. And 4. As the Delights of the Eternal
Son, before the Foundation of the World, were tvith the Sons of Men ! Prov. viii. 3 i . So, when he became our near Kinfman, he feems to have been fo much pleafed with his Neiv Relation, as to have been highly delighted with the Title, the Son of Man ! And there- tore, as if he had even gloried in it, he more fre-
L 1 quently
[ 258 ]
quently ufed it than any other ♦, particularly, before his Difcipks and other Followers ! and efpecially, when the Time of his Death drew near !
The fecond Part of this Propofition, (That Chriji, as God, is indeed the Son of God, and often, in Scripture, fo called,) I hope, we have, by this Time, fufficiently proved ; and fhall, through Grace, put it, by and by, out of all rational Doubt. -— Taking it then here for granted, I now, only offer thefe Ob- fervations. — i. This Title, the Son of God, ftridly fpeaking, is alfo a Title of Nature : Or, if we con- fider the common, grammatical, and proper, Ufe of the Words, denotes, or fignifies, only his Divine Nature ; or his natural Relation to God the Father, as his own Father ; and not his Office. — 2. The only begotten Son of God, having condefcended to be the Mediator between God and Man ; and having ajfumed cur Nature, (that, in and by it, he might a6b the Mediator'^s Part,) and fo become God-Man, or God and Man in one Perfon : This Title, the Son of God, does often, by a Figure very ufual in Scripture, and in all Sorts of Writings, denote, or fignify, the whole complex Perfon of the Redeemer, or God- Man, as called to, and in the aBual Execution of, that ftu- pendous Undertaking. Jo. v. 25. Ch. ix. 35. Mark xiv. 61, 62. ^c. &c. And yet, -— 3. Tho' it, in many Places, denotes the complex Perfon of the Mefjiah, as God-Man, and in the a6lual Execution of his Office \ yet, even in all thofe Paffages without Ex- ception, where it is taken in this large Senfe, it has a particular Refped to his Di-vine Nature, plainly leading us to remember. That it was the natural and coeffential Son of God, who had undertaken our Re- demption •, and that it was the infinite Dignity of his Perfon, as fuch, and that only, which render'd his Obedience unto Death, even the Death of the Crofs, infinitely meritorious and fatisfa^ory. — And therefore, 4. That this Title, every where, and neceffarily,
pre-
f 259 ]
pre-fuppofes, implies, or dire(5lly fignlfies, his Di- vine Nature.
Againft all this. Our Author puts an Objedion * into our Mouths, which, tho' we have iiad before, or fomewhat very like it, you fliall have every Word of it, and his Anfwer to it. --- " If it be allowed, " that there are any Places of Scripture where the " Name Son of Man denotes the humane Nature of ** Chriji, or that he was really and truly Man^"* Surely it fignifies his human Nature^ if it fignifies any Nature at all : Nor can it, pofTibly, fignify any other. " why may not the Name Son of God as well fig- " nify his Divine Nature, and denote that he is true " and real Go^ ?" p. 33. — And, Why may it not, fay I ? — The Catholic Church have always thought this Queftion, unanfwerahle : But our learned Au- thor makes nothing of it ! " To which I anfwer., *' that the Cafe is widely different •," ibid. Where- in, or upon what Account ? " for the Name Son of *' Man is never applied to any Perfon who is not true " and real Man •" 'Twou'd have been ftrange, in- deed, if it had, for this plain and evident Reafon : Becaufe, there is no one Creature, in the Univerfe, who is not really and truly Man, who either was, or could have been, either in a proper or improper Senfe, called the Son of Man. " and the Scripture apply- *' ing it abfolutely and eminently to Chrijl, Ihews " him to be the chief of the Sons of Men ;" -— Anf. i. I want to know the Meaning of thefe two Adverbs,
" abfolutely and eminently," in this Place. 2.
Tho' Chrifi, even as Man is, bleffed be his Name, the great Refiorer of Mankind -, and fo egregioufly the chief of the Sons of Men, that the very great ejl of them, were never isjonhy to hear his Shoes -, Mat. iii. II. Yet this Title, as we have hinted, is applied to him, not fo much, if at all, to denote his Greatnefsy as the unparalleird and unconceivable Depth of his Humiliation, who was the Perfon to, and of, whom,
L I 2 the
[ 26o ]
the Father himfelf faid. As many were aflonijhed at thee', HIS Visage was fo marred more than any Man, 6fr. If. lii. 14. ^c. &c. and who could fay of himfelf, Bi£t I am a Worm, and no Man ! ^c. Pf. xxii. 6. i^c. " But the Name ion of God is ap- *' plied often in the Old '^eftaynent^ and in the iV^w, " both to Angels and to Men:"* But this, fay 1, is a great Mi ilake. Seep. 127— 131. ^f. For, (i.) No one in Heaven, or in Earth, but himfelf, is ever, in Scrip- ture^ ftiled the Son of God : And it would be a Blun- der, indeed, to fay, that Angels and Men, in the Plural Number, are called the Son of God in the Sin- gular. No one, I fay, (having thought more fully of that Text, Luke iii. ^;^.) but himfelf, is ever, in Scripture, called the Son of God : For, it is not Adam, but Chriji^ who is there fo called, as I humbly con- ceive, for thefe Reafons. (i.) There is no need of an Ellipfts^ where the Senfe is plain, and full, yea, and very emphatic, without any. (2.) It feems very llrange, to meet with upwards of feventy of thefe Fi- gures, where there was no Occafion for fo much as one of them. (3.) ' lis yet much more fo. That thele Words, which was the Son of, fhould be, wiihin the Compafs of a few Verfes, feventy Times at leaft, taken in the mo^proper Senfe ; to fignify, that every one of thofe mentioned, was the Son of his Father by natural Generation : And yet, at laft, and in the very fame Line, fhould be taken once, and but once, in a very, if not the moft, improper Senfe ; to denote, not that /idam was the Son of God by natural Generation, Cas Chrift, as God, or the only begotten of the Father,
really is,) but only, improperly, by Creation.
And, C4.) The Evangelifl having carried up the Genealogy, to the firji Man ; there was no need to tell us, that Adam had no Father, except his Creator : But, there was great Reafon to remind all, to whom his Hifbory fhould come. That this Child, who, tho* conceived mtraculoufly, was yet born in a Stable, &c.
was
[ 26l ]
was indeed the Son that was to be given unto us, and he called, the Mighty God -, &c. If. ix. 6. and con- fequently, was (jod-Man : Or, That He was not only, according to the tlejh, the S,on of every One of his Progenitors ; but alfo the Son of God, and, as fuch, overall, God blejfed for ever ; Rom. ix. 5. or, as the Angel told Zacharias, Luke i. 16. the Lord their God — (2.) No one of them ever was, or can be, filled God^s own. -proper, and much lefs only be- gotten Son, — But, thefe Adnouns were here very wifely forgotten! — And therefore, (3.) Thofe An- gels and Men, who are called his Sons, are fo called, in an imp'i oper Senfe only, for this undeniable Rea- fon : Becaufe, they are all his Creatures •, and there- fore, not properly his Sons. " and yet they are not " true and real God •" No: they are not, cannot be. — No Son of God, but his only proper, coeffential Sotfy is true and real God. " and therefore when this Name *' is given abfolutely and eminently to Chriji, it can *' neceflarily be conflrued to fignify no more, than " the moji eminent and chief of all ijoho are called the " Hons of God, or one who is above them all, in Cha* " radler and Office." Anf. i. This I confidered before, and now again, deny, that this Conclufion
does, or can, follow from his Premiffes. ■ 2. The
" nwjl eminent and chief of all, who are called the *' Sons of God," is his coeffential Son, his only be- gotten. — 3. We do not, or need not, believe that he is a coeffential Son, and, as fuch, the true God^ merely becaufe of thefe Titles ; tho' confidering the Number, the Variety, the Emphafis of them, and how frequently they occur, they are a fufficient Foundation tor the Faith, oi ^my rational Creature : But, becaufe there are fo many and great Things affirmed of, or afcribed to, this Son, If. ix. 6. Ch. xlv. 22 — 25. Rom. ix. V. Tit. ii. 13. ^c. i£c. as even force us to deny the Bible, blafpheme the ever-bleffed Author of it, or confefs him to be a coeffential Son ; and
there-
[ 262 ]
therefore, the true God^ as he is alio exprefsly, and very emphatically, called, i John v. 20. — 4. It is not " the Character " of this Son^ but hxsPerfon: Nor his " Office," but his Nature, about which we are now contending. And, to name no more, — 5. His " Charadler and Office," as we have often ob- ferved, do neceffarily pre-fuppofe, imply, or re- quire, his coejfential Sonjhip. And this naturally
leads me to his third Anfwer, to the firft grand Ob- jedlion, p. 38. which he makes, in our Name, againft himfelf -, which I promifed to examine, and where we fliall have more delightful Work.
" Jnfw. 3. There are many Places of Scripture " wherein Chrift is called the Son of Gody and the " Son abfolutely," If, by this Adverb, and that other, e^ninently^ which come fo often up, that I may obferve it once for all, he means, in the higheft Senfe, in which this Title, the Son of God, is taken in Scrip- ture, as he mufl mean, if it is to his Purpofe ; 'Tis, in itfelf, abfolutely falfe ; and, in him, a meer begging the ^ejiion, even againft the cleareft Proof : If any Thing elfe, it does him no Service. The only Senfe of, the Son abfolutely, in the Places where it occurs, that I can think of which is true, is that the Title, the Son, comes alone ; or, that Chrift is called only the Son, and not the Son of God or the Son of Man, or the own, only begotten Son of God i or, in Ihort, without any Word or Expref- fion to limit or fix the Senfe : And thus I under- ftand it. " where God is faid to be his Father, " wherein we cannot fuppofe the Godhead of Chrifi, " is or can be defigned in the moft juft and natural " Interpretation of the Text -, fuch as are moft of *' thefe that follow, viz." p. 38 to 45. Here he quotes fourteen or fifteen Texts to prove this •, fome of which are as remarkable, and peculiar, upon feveral Ac- counts, as any in the Bible: And, would one think it, difputes as zealoufly, againft the Truth,
and
[ 263 ]
and the Catholic Church, as the Arians and the Soci- uians themfelves do ; yea, and in their Manner, and fometimes in their very. Words ! — Thefe Jo. v. i8, 19, 20. Ch. viii. 38, and 44, and Jo. v. 30. will come up hereafter, when they 111 all be remembred : The reft you fliall have in Order, with a diredt Reply to each of them, when I have reminded the Reader of thefe few Things by Way of Queftion. I . Should we grant that he is right, in all thefe Inftances here given •, Will it, Can it, follow. That he is fo, in many more, where " the moft juft and " neceffary Interpretation of the Texts," does even force us to believe he is wrong ? — 2. Becaufe he may make a hard fhift, platifibly, to pervert the Senfe of this Title, the Son of God, alone, or without any of the Adnouns, own, proper, &c. to limit, and determine the Senfe : Will he. Can he, conclude. That " the moft juft and neceffary Inter- " pretation of thofe many Texts," in which he is ftiled God's own Son, his only begotten, i^c. is, that he is not indeed his own Son ? is not, yea cannot be, his proper, or only begotten Son ? — 3. Should we allow. That this Title in every one of thofe Places, fignifies the Mejfiah \ and that the primary Defign of it, in thofe Texts, was not diredly to point out his Godhead: Is not the Mejpah, and as fuch, God- man ? Can then either his Perfo?i, or Office, be de- figned by this Title, if it does not imply his Divine Nature ? — Is not his Divinity always prefuppofed to his engaging to be our Redeemer : And neceffarily required, in his fulfilling that Office ? —r- 4. Might not the Jirjl Perfon in the Tri?2ity, who, as fuch, is a Father ; and has, as fuch, all the Prerogatives of a Father -, for the more confpiciious Difplay of the Di- vine Attributes, &c. out of his unconceivable Love to the World \ delegate his own only begotten^ ^nd as fuch, his coejfential Son, to an Office, in Jfpearance, in- deed, beneath iiim, and unworthy of him : And
might
[ 264 ]
might not this Son, upon mutual Promt fes agreed on between them, for Ends really worthy of them both, voluntarily and freely, in his mifpeakahle Love to us, accept of a Commiffion from him, to execute that Of' fice ? — 5. If it was abfolutely neceJGTary for our Re- deemer, to be God -Man : Might not the coejfential Son, who had fo greatly condefcended, as to redeem us with his precious Blood, i Pet. i. 19, ^c. humble himfelf fo far, as to empty himfelf, and take upon him the Form of a Servant, and he made in the Likenejs of Men, &c. Phil. ii. 6—1 1. &c, that he might have a Right, and be put into a Capacity, to adt the Re- deemer's Part ? Heb. ii. 9 — 18. i^c. — 6. When the Son had affumed our Nature, or taken a true Body and a reafonahle Soul into a Perfonality with himfelf : Might not the two Natures, with all their effential Properties, remain diftindl -, fo that, in his complex Perfon, all the P erf e£f ions of the divine Nature, and all the natural Imperfections and Jinlefs Infirmities alfo of our Nature, might meet ? —7. If we confider him purely as Man, a mere Creature, made under the Law, ike. who was alfo to give his People a mofl per- fe5i Example of all Righteoufnefs : Was it not his Duty , always to fear, ferve, worlhip, pray to, truft in, and love God, and do every Thing elfe, for his Glory ? 8. Since the coejential !Son vo- luntarily undertook to be the Redeemer, and, for that End, emptied himfelf, and took upon him the Form of a Servant ; &c. fince the Father is the firji of the blelTed Three, both in fiibjiftin^ and working ; fmce they ail 'Three concur, in all their Works relating to the Creatures ■, and fince the Son as fuch, accepted of a Commiffion from the Father, upon the Prcmife of his conjlant Concurrence with him, in the whole of his Work : May not I afk. Why may we not think, That the Redeemer, who is God-Man, and as fuch, efpecially when his unconceivable, if I may not fay infinite, Paffon drew near •, when in his Agony •, and
when
when forfaken of his God ? Why, I fay, may we not think. That, at all Times, but efpecially on thofe Occafions, he f not only might, but; aftualiy would, and did, moft heartily, fervently, and importunate- ly, pray^ or rather -pleads that his Father would remember, 2ind perform, his Promifes to him, then when,
as Man, he was in his greateft Extremity ?
Would not this, that he had thefe Promifes to plead, be an unfpeakable Support, and Relief, to his holy, and bleffed Soul, in that unconceiveable Bijlrefs ? — Yea, with the utmoft Reverence, as in his Prefence, I fpeak it. — 9. Why might not the fecond Perfon, and as fuch, plead the conjlant and promifed Con" currence of his Father, upon all proper Occafions ; and efpecially, upon thefe now mentioned : 'And plead, I humbly conceive I may fay, infifi upon it, (fee Jo. xvii. 24.) That all the Promifes made to him in the Covenant of Redemption, might be fully performed ? — Is it, any how, or upon any Account, more unbecoming, or unworthy ol, the coeffential Son, and as fuch, to plead for that proniifed Con- currence, than it was to accept of the Promife ot it, and rely upon it : Or, to infiji upon the Reward, when he had fully anfivered all Demands upon him, than it was to undertake and fuftain his Office, upon the Promife of that Reward ? — Suffer me to obferve farther,
N. B. I'. Chrifb being as truly God, as the. SoJ^ ^^ God, as he is Man, as the Son of Man, this Titlc^ " the Son abfolutely," i. e. (if true and to the Pur- pofe,) without any other Words added to it, may denote him either as the One, or the other, or both, as the Context, the Scope, or CircumiHmces of the Place where it occurs, diredi and require. — This is evident of itfelf, and the common Senfe of all Men will grant it is fo.
N. B. 2. When our Lord was, in a long Dif-
courfe, Jo. v. 17—47. Ch. x. 24 — 38, &c. plead-
M m ing
[ 266 ]
ing, and proving. That he was a coejjential Son, or fo the Son of God as to be equal with him ; he might, notwithftanding this, give feveral Hints, That, for the full Execution of his Office, he had condefcended to become Man, &c. as their own Eyes faw : And conlequently, might lometimes, in the fame Dif- courfe, fpeak of himfelf in Language proper only to the coeffentid Son ; and fometimes fink his Stile to fuit the ISattire he had affumed. or the Chara5ler he then fuilained. There is nothing in this incon- venient, improper, or improbable. - — ■ Yea, How could he fpeak of himfelf, and of Things concern- ing himfelf, what was abfolutely neceffary he fhould fpeak, if he had not ? For,
N. B. 3. Had not our blefied Saviour, as proper Occafions offered, declared himfelf to be God the Son, and therefore, as fuch, the one true God, or eo^ual with the Father, he had not publickly pro- claim'd himfelf to be the Divine Ferfon, who the Prophets foretold, was to come •, fee If ix 6. Ch. vii. 14. Ch. XXV. 9. Ch. XXXV. 4 — 7, Ch. xl. 9---ii. Ch. xlv. 21— -25. Jer. xxiii. 6. Zech. xiii. 7, &c. nor could judicious People, who knezv the Scriptures, have, upon juft Grounds, received him SiS the promifed and expetted Saviour : And, had they not feen, and been fatisned, that he was indeed true Man ; and that he afted in Chara^er as became him, and as it was written of him •, they could not have been blam'd, if they had not acknowledged him to be the
Christ. And,
-N. B. 4. In no one of the Texts, I am now to examine, but one, (which fhould therefore have had no Place hen,} is Chriji called the Son of God, but only, the Son: And therefore, as we have now obferved, fince he is both the Son of God and the Son of Men, this Title may be applied to him, as either the one, or the other, or both, as the Scope and
Circumflances of the Pafiliges may determine.
Should
[ 26?]
Should I therefore grant, (i) That the Language of any, or all, of thefe Places where he calls himlelt the Son, and no more, is not the Language of the fecond Pcrfon •, and could he alio prove it ; 'twould be nothing againft me, who am not pleading, Tnat the I'itle, the Son, every where denotes the fecond Perfon, and as fuch : But, that the Title, the Son of God, when ftridtly taken, always does. — Should I fay, (2) That Chriji, in fome of thofe Places, fpeaks of himlelf chiefly, if not only, as Man, as I fhall prove he does ; 'twould, no way, contradidt myfelf, or fervc our Author : Becaule, I freely grant, That this I'itle, the Son, when it comes alone, and is applied to Chrifl, fometimes figniiies only his human Nature -, or that, when he ufes it,
he fpeaks ot himfelf, as Man only. (3) Should
I fay, This Title, the Son, fignifies the Mediator, and as fuch, as, at leaft, in feveral of thofe Places, it certainly does •, (tho' fometimes with a particular Refped: to one Nature, and fometimes to the other ;) yet the Idea of Mediator necelTarily implies them both.
So that, let thefe Texts be interpreted how
his Admirers can defire, they can never anfwer their Purpofe, except they fhould infift upon it, — (4) That this Title, the Son, is in them taken, *' eminently " and abfolutely." And then, I anfwer. If, by thefe Adverbs, they mean, that it is taken in the very higheft Senfe, in which this Title, the Son of God, is ever taken, when applied to the. fecond Perfon, or to Chrift i we fhall, by and by, prove, That it is eminently and abiblutely falfe : If they mean ""any Thing elfe, it no way ferves their Caufe ; as every judicious and impartial Reader muft fee, whether
he will or no. And thefe now might fuffice to
fhew every intelligent Perfon, how to reply to all that can be urged againft the ^ruth, from thefe or the like Places, were there many more of them -,
M m 2 without
[ 268 ]
wlihout obferving how much our Author is miftaken, in tht Tuy^is he has given them; ^c. or the fad
tendency of feveral But, we fhall
here anfwer every one of them, directly and fully,
in another Manner. Proceed we then to his
Texts
" jo. vi. qS. i came down from Heaven^ not to do " mine own JVill^ but the Will of him that fent me j *' i. e. the Father. This does not found like the *' Language of Godhead," An out-of>theAVay Ex- preffion ! " which is fupreme and independent, and *' can do all Things of itfelf, and by its own Will." p. 40, 41. — Anf. But, it founds very like the Language of the fecond Perfon^ who voluntarily con- defc ended to receive a Commljfion from the Father ; and who humbled himfelf alfo, egregioufly, I think I may fay infinitely^ in the Execution of it : Yea, and could not poffibly have done this Will, had he not indeed been a ccejfential Son.
" Jo. xiv. 28. My Father is greater than I. 'Tis " hardly to be fuppofed that Chrift here intended to " fpeak of his Divine Nature." And it could be no News to the Difciples, nor any other Perfons upon the Face of the Earth, to tell them. That God the Father was greater., yea infrntely greater., than his human Nature I '* The eternal God is the greatejt of *' Beings, and can acknowledge no greater than " himfelf." But, the eternal Son has an eternal Father., who has all the natural Prerogatives of a Father ; and therefore is, as fuch, or fo far, and in
this Senfe, greater than he. Withal, tho' Chrift
might not here, " intend to fpeak diredly of his *' Divine Nature," as indeed he did not -, this Title, the Son., might " neceffarily imply it:" And, if taken in its mod eminent Senfe, certainly does fo. — But, our Author feems to have quite miftaken the Scope of this FafTage : For, our Lord does not here, I humbly conceive, fpeak direi^^tly of any of his Natures., but ot
his
t 269 1
his Ejiate of Humiliation as Mediator, and chiefly as Man, &c.
" Jo. xiv. gi. y^5 the Father gave 7776 Commandment, " even fo I do. This dees not feem to be the Lan- *' giiage of fupreme Godliead, which recei'. es no " Commandfiient from another." p. 41. It does not indeed fecm to be, nor is it, the Language of the Father,' the firfi Perfon in the Godhead, who neither ever did, nor will, nor can, " receive 'om- " mandments from another:" But it is, plainly, the proper Language of the Son, the fecond Perfon, wdio humbled himjelf, or co'iukc ended to accept of an Office under him ; and, by Confequcnce, to receive
Commandment from him. Aiter all, " Language
" of Godhead, and ot fuprem.e Godhead," and feveral other fuch ftrange and uncouth Phrafes, arc far from being proper : But, too clearly, con- ceal fome Thing under them.
*' Jo. xvii. 5. Father, glorify m.e with thy Self, " with the Glory which I had with thee before the World " was. Surely Chrifl as God does not offer up " Prayers to- the Father," p. 41. This and the Three following Paragraphs you fhall have verbatim, the fubje6l Matter con -in'd in them requiring a direct, and Ytry ftiU^^V^y- Anfw. i. And fureiy, fay I, the Son of God, i. e. the fecond Perfon, 7iow made Flefh, might offer up Prayers : Or rather, if you will, might claim, and infifi upon, the Performance of the Promifes made to him. -- For, thefe Words are not fo much, if at ail, a proper Prayer, i. e. a Deiire of, or Supplication for, fomething out of }nere Favour ; and which therefore might be granted, or denied, according to mere Pleajure, without any Injuflice : But, a proper Claim of what was now due to him, (not only by Promife ; but) in the firi^efi Juflice. "q. d. fays that moil judicious and accurate " Annotator, Mr. Clark, upon the Place, NojV I *' have done my Work pay me my \\ ages for it,
" PhiL
[ 270 ]
" Phil. ii. 8, 9."— 2. It was adlually the fecond Perfon who made this Clai'm : Becaufe, Chrift had no other real Exijlence^ before the Foundation of the World, but as the fecond Perfon, or in his Divine Nature : At leaft, the Catholic Church have gene- rally thought he had no other •, and the Scriptures^ io far as I have obferved, do, no where, ajirm he had. — But, 3. No one, who was not a coeffential Son^ could, or durft, have cfired up that Prayer, which is indeed a Sa^nplar of his Inter cejjion in Heaven, as
our Advocate with the Father, i Jo. ii. 2. Yea,
4. It would have been dired: Blafphemy in any One, but the fecond Perfon, in any A61 of TVorfAp, to life fuch Words ofhimfelf, as thofe, vers. 2, 3, 10, 20, 22, 24. if I may not fay, to ufe any one Verfe
in the whole Chapter. " and much lefs could
*' he pray for a Glory, which his Divine Naaire *' once had, of Vv^hich he feems diverted at prefent. *' All this is hardly confiftent with fupreme Deity " belonging to his Sonfhip,"'' This new, and almoft unintelligible Exprefiion wants fadly to be explained ! However, if it is confiftent, tho' hardly, all may be ftill well. " i. e. either to be diverted of his Glory, or to pray for the Reftoration of it." p. 41. Anf. — i.Tht ejfential Glory of the Divine Nature is abfo-
lutely, and in itfelf, alzuays the fame. 2. The
effential Glory of each, of the //jrt'^Perfons, and purely as fuch, is alfo, abfolutely, and in itfelf, always the fame, and can neither be laid afide, nor interrupted ; Nor can any one of thcnl divert himfelf, or be
diverted, of it, any more than of his Godhead.
But, 3. The fecond Perfon, v/ho purely as fuch, was in the Form of God, (as his human Soul, never was,) and thought it not Robbery to be eqtjal with God, (as his human Soul muft have thought it j and as the fecond Perfon muft needs have alfo thought it, had it not been ftriclly true •,) The fecond^zxfovi, I fay V)ho v^as in the Form of God, might, and did, vo-
lur\-
[ 271 ]
voluntarily fuffer his Glory to be vailed from us r Or might, and did, to ufc our Author's Words, fo far diveft himfelf of it, as to empty himfclf, as the Apoftle expreift'S it, fjid take upon him the Form of a Servant^ and be found in Fajhion as a Man, (nei- ther of which, I conceive, his human Soul could do, or, with Truth, be faid to have done,) and humble himfelf, (not only to be a Man of Sorrows, and ac- quainted wiih Grief, &c. but) to become obedient un- to Death, even the Death of the Crofs ! Phil. ii. 6 — 8. [Be it here, by the way, remembred,That the Humilia- tion of the higheft polTible Creature, was juft nothing to tht Humiliation oitht coeffentialSon of God: — That the Obedience of no mere Creature to his Creator, could be, with any Emphafis, called an humbling of himfelf : — And, That the Obedience of no created Perfon^ could be, in the ftri^teil Senfe, meritorious; and much lefs Satisfactory, for any other Perfon •, and yet much lefs, for all the Redeemed. &c.] And, 4. The Word made Flcjlo, or the coeffential Son of God in our Nature, might be reviled, abufed, &c. &c. put under an /// Name, &c. yea., and be condemned iisd. Alalefaolor, a Deceiver, &c. or aBlafphemer, for calling himfelf the Son of God ; and when fuifering for our dins, be made a Curse for us \ Gal. iii. 13. yea, and be forfaken of his God I Mat. xxvii. 46. &V. Might, did I fay ? Why, it was really fo. The Word made Flcfio adually fuffere.i all the fe : For, it was One who is called God, and with the Article too, zvho pur chafed the Church with his OWN' Blood : Ads xx. 28. And the Son of the Father's Love, through zvhofeBLodwe have Redemption, was He by whom, and for whom, all Things wei'e created, bcc. Col. i. 12 — 17. i John iii. 16. — And who, that had feen him in the Garden, in an A- gony, or on the Crofs ; and had heard him cry. My God, my God, why haft thou forfaken me ! could have then thought. That he was indeed, the only begotten of the Father? Plow hard was this, xhen to he believed?
Verily,
f 272 ]
Verily, Flejh and Blood could never have revealed it to any Man. Mat. xvi. ver. 17. — And, 5. Why might he not then have prayed, or injijled upon it, Tiiat the Father would glorify him, according to his Promile, (i.) By wiping off all thofe Reproaches, ^c. — (2.) Juftifyitig him in all that he had laid of himfelf, Cfff. — (3.) Giving the higheft poffible Proof, that he was indeed his only begotten Son, &c. by raifing him from the Dead; (4.} And con- ferring upon him all that additional Glory, which was promifed him as God-Man, fuch as the Afcenfton of his human Nature into Heaven ? i^c, ^c. — This being, in my Opinion, the chief Text which Mr. Fleming, as I remember, produced for his principal Nofirums, I have been fo particular in confidering it ; and fliall therefore illuftrate it alfo, by a common Si- mile. When we fpeak of an Eclipfe of t]\f Sun, everyone now knows, that theExprelTion is improper. It is not the Sun that is then darkned, (as the Moon really is when flie is in an Eclipfe,) but qwt Earth. The Light of the Sun is not then, abfolutely and in itfelf, in the lead diminifhed : But the Moon, by coming between it and us, hides it from us, that we cannot fee it •, and hence proceeds the Darknefs. ^ — 'Twas juil fo, in the Cafe before us. The Glory of the Son ofGcd, theyt-<:<7;?(^Perfon, and as fuch, was, ab- folutely, and in itfelf, always the fa^ne : But, when he came to talernacle among us, the Veil of his Flefh and the unconceivable Depth of his Flumiliatian, in, or under it, did fo very much intercept the Rays of his Glciy, That it was not eafy, yea, without Divine Revelation and the Concurrence of his Grace alfo, hardly pcffible, for them, who fav/ him in the Days of his llefh, ftedflUtly to behold his Divine Glory, or, clearly, fee that he was indeed, the coeffential Son of God.
" Jo. XX. 17. Chrift fays, 1 afcend to my Father
find your Father ^^ Yes, -n-^o? roy ■k&M^oc. [xa ^ TTajifa.
uiw,uv, to the Father of me ajid the Father of you -,
and
f ^71 ]
tnd not rli Tirctrifix ^'juuv, our Father, as he has taught us to fay ; plainly hinting a Diftindion j and. That the Foundation of this his Relatio'/i to the Father was quite different, from tht Foundation oi theirs to him. And, indeed. Generation and Adoption are wholly different, yea, and inconfiffent. " and to my God " and your God.** Where the fame Manner of Ex- preffion, the God ov u^, &c. is ufed •, tho' for ano- ther Reafon. " So 2 Cor. xi. 31. and i Pet. \. g., " the Father is called //^^ God andFath.r of our Lord JefusChrijir—Kx\{. Godt\itFather is, ( i.) adiially the OWN Father di Chrifl, as God, /. e. of the fecond Perfon : As he is his own Son, by a proper Generation. (2.) He is, or may be called, the Fa i her of Chrijf, as A4an -, becaufe he created him : But then, it is only in an improper Senfe, that he is his Father. And, (3.) He is, I think, or may be called, his Father, but improperly alfo, as Mediator \ becaufe he concurred in, and to, the pergonal Union of the tivo Isa'iires in him ; and appointed and called him to thr.t Office,
And he is the God of Chrift, (i.) As Man-,
becaufe he not only created his human Nature, but chofe it to that moft peculiar Honour, to which any created 'J^hing was ever advanced, viz. to be perfonally united to the only btgotten Son of God. — (2.) I do not know but I may fay, As the fecond Perfon in the Trinity, tho' not purely or merely as fuch ; but as he had voluntarily condefcended to accept of a Com- miffion from him, and a6l as his Deputy, in Con- fequence o\. a Covenant between them. And, (3.) As the Word made Flcfo, or the Mediator -, for as much as he had engaged to do every Thiiig for his Glory, exped;ing his Concurrence, and a full Reward ac laff. " Now the Father cannot properly be ths " God of the Deity of Chrijl,'' Another very odd Expreffion ! And what then .^ Becaufe he is not, properly, the God of the Deity of Chrijl : May not he be the ozvn, proper lather of his ov;n^ only he •
N n gotten
[ 274 1 gotten Son? " i. e. his Creator, his abfolute Go- " vernor, and his Objeft of V/orfhip, which is the " proper Senfe of my God in all other Scriptures.'* This, 1 humbly conceive, is a Mtfiake. The Ex- preflion, 7ny GolU every where in Scripture, di- redlly and primarily denotes a Covenant Relation^ be- tween God and him that, ufes it : But, in a Covenant, there are mutual Promifes, and, if I may fo fay, mu- tual Obligations on both Sides. — And hence, when God declares his Covenant Relation to any People^ or Perfon^ he always calls himfelf, or promifes ro be, thei}' God : And, when they, or any of them, plead fuch a Relation, or the Promifes made to them in the Covenant, they flile him iheir God, or cur God ; and
each of them for himfelf, my God. Thus did
our Lord himfelf. If. xlix. 4, 5. Mic. v. 4. Mat,
xxvii. 46. &c. ■ Whence it is plain, That thofe
Expreffions, in thefe Texts, refer to the eternal 'Tranfa^io'tts, that were between the Father and his Son, relating to cur Redemption. — " Nor is there " any fufficient Real on then why we fhould conftrue *' the Words my Father, as relating to the Deity of " Chrift, fince the Words my God cannot be fo con- " flrued : And fince both thefe Titles feem fo inti- *' mately connefted and referring to one and the " fame Subject." p. 42. Anf i. The Texts do not fay. That the Father is properly the God of the Deity of Chrifl : And therefore, it may be fufficient, if we can fhew, as we have done, That he is, in any Senfe, his God ; and much more, in fo many Senfes, tho' improperly only. 2. Tho' thefe Titles are fo intimately conneded, as to reter to one and the fame Perfon, they neither refer to ihe fame Nature in that Perjon ; nor, precifely, to the fame Relation that is between the Father snd the Son. — But feeing, 'tis plain, there is nothing in thefe Texts that can do him any Service, we go on,
" Mark
[ 275 ]
" Mark xiii. 32. Of thai Day and Hour knowetb " no Many no not the Angels which are in Heaven^ " neither the Son, but the Father."'' p. 42. This being the Pafiage, which the Arians and all other Enemies of the Divinity of Chrifty and the Doftrine of the Trinity y have, in all Ages, had perpetually in their Mouths ; and of which they are inceffantly boafling, as abfolutely unanfwerable •, we Ihall the more carefully examine it. — Their Argument is this. The true God knew the Day of Judgment y i. e. the Day and Hour when it fliall be : Chrift, when he fpake thefe Words, knew not^ as he tells us himfelf, of that Day and Hour : Therefore, he was not then, and confequently, is not now. The true God. Or, thus fliorter, The Son knew not the Day of Judgment : And therefore was not, could not be, God. — One would not have expecfted our learned Author among them : But, fince it is otherwife, we ihall firfb confider every Syllable he has faid ; and then, offer fome other Thoughts, upon it.
" I confefs it may be fliid in that Paragraph he is *' called the Son of Man, ver. 26." He is fo -, and no where in all that Chapter, nor indeed, but twice or thrice, in that whole Gofpel, the Son of God, tho' he, a great many Times, in it, ftiles himfelf the Son of Man. " yet it muft be granted that the more na- *' tural Senfe of the Words is. Of that Hour knoivetb " not the Son of God, but only God the Father."* — ■ Why i if it muft, it muft! -— But, Whence docs this appear ^ Has he any Thing, any Word, to fupport this muft ? No : Not fo much as one Syllable ! Only it would fuit his Purpofe ; and therefore, he roundly aflerts it : And confequently, it muft be granted ! But, tho* an Angel from Heaven fhould fay it. Gal. i. 8. we Hiould not, durft not, grant it. " but only " God the Father F" And now. Will any of his Ad- mirers, upon fecond Thoughts, affert This ^
The fecond Perfon in the Trinity ^ and as fuch, is not N n 2 Cod
[ 276 ]
God the Father : And yet he grants, within four Lints, as we fhali fee prefentiy, (if his Words have
any Senfe^ and are true \) tliat he did knew it! —
^ he Holy Siirit, the /^/r^Perfon, is not God the Fa- ther : And, did not he^ who fearcheth all 'Ihings, yea, the deep 'Things of God, j Cor. ii. 10. know the Day oi Judgment? Could not, did not, he^whoknoweth the Things of God, as the Spirit of Man which is in him knoweth the Things of a Man, ver. 1 1 . know the Day
of Judgment ? — " This Text does fo plainly
" Ihew Chriffs Ignorance of the Day of Judgment " as he is the Son,"- — He fhould have here added, " of " G(?<i," and in the fecond and third Line below alfo ; OF elfe, it is not at all to the Purpofe : Or, " abfolutclyj" and then it would have been abfo- lutely fdje. But, the Fear of God, I hope, re- ftrained him. — This Title, the Son, when applied to Chrifl, may. as we have often heard, fignily ei- ther the Son of Man, or the Son of God, or the Me- diator, and purely as fuch. — If it here fignifies, as it certainly does, the Sen of Man, and purely as fuch, we freely grant, That Chrifl, as Man, did not know the Day ol" Judgment. — If it fignifies, the Son of God, we b.lieve, {^and fo, I think, does our Author, in the two very next Lines,) That he knew, and knows y all that the Father does. See John xxi. 15 — 17. Mat, ix. 4. Jo, ii. 24, 25. Jo. xiii. 4. Rev. ii. 23, &c. — It it denotes the Mediator, God-Man, I cannot help thinking. That he knew it: Becaufe, \i tho. Eternal Son, and purely as fuch, ever kneiv that Day ; I cannot believe, 1 hat his taking cur Nature, or his under- taking and executing that Office in it, could make him forget itj or, that he could forget it. " that tho' it be " granted the Divine Nature of Chriji knows the Day of Judgment," /. e. That Gcd the Son, or the fecond Fcrlon, knows it. This mufl, I fay, be the Senie, it it has any ; and if it is not downright Sahel- Uanifra ! If he means the former, we are agreed •,
bttC
[ '^11 ]
but then, every one almoft of thefe Lines c6n- tradid:s another : If the latter, it deltroys the Do6lrine of the 'J'riniiy^- and overturns the whole Chriilian Faith. " yet as a Son^ he docs not : " It fhould have run, " yet, as the Son of God, he does riot :" or, it is not at all to the Point : And, had it been fo, 'twould have been Anivver enough, to have replied. Neither does this Text Hiy fo, nor any ether. *' therefore as a Son^ he hath not a Divine Nature, or true Godhead." Thus you have had every Word of this ftrange Paragraph. I need fay no more to it ; nor indeed can I, without feeming to delight to —
— . ]f any Man, upon the Face of the
Earth, fliall, from thefe Premijj'es^ draw a juji Con- clufion, which fliall deftroy the Caufe I am pleading,
I have done. 1 cannot help faying, i am apt
to think, that there has been feveral Miltakes in the Copy, i^c. for furely, fuch Paragraphs as this and fome others, Vvherein are fo many little Things, ^c. could never come from our worthy Author.
But, I cannot, fo lightly, pafs this celebrated Text ; and therefore, muft afk,
Queft. I . Who^ or what., does, or could he, here
mean by, " the Son of God ?" It cannot be the
y^^roW Perfon, in t\\t Trinity : Becaufe, he is po- fitive throughout, 1 hat he., as fuch, neither /j, nor
is ever called, his Son, or a Son. It cannot
be, " the Bivine Nature of Chriji,'^ to ufe one of his own Expreffions : Becaufe, as he grants, it knows
the Day of Judgment. « It muft therefore be
his human Nature, if he has any Nature at all : For verily he tcck not upon him the Nature of Angels ; Heb. ii. 1 6. and the Scriptures never fpeak of any created rational Nature, but the Angelic and the Hu- man. — If he means his Human Nature, I want fad- ly to know, Whether thefe two Titles, the ion of God, and the Son of Man, do not, with him, fignify the very fame Thing preciielv : Or, if they dilfer at
all.
[ 278 ]
all. Wherein, or how far, they do differ ? Should it be iaid, " His pre-exiftent Soul, is properly the Son of *'' Gi?,^," and is a y?(!pr^-^«^i?//V^/ Spirit. Anf. Wa- ving the Impro-priety at prefent, and fuppofing alfo all this to be true ; our Author has, in another Place, faid enough, in my Opinion, to make us think his hitman Soul could not but know the Day of Judgment. *' Suppofing the Divine Wifdom, in Prov. viii. pri- " marily to fignify the Idea of the Divine Counfels *' and Decrees about Creation and Redemption, it " may be properly faid. This JVifdcm was begotten " or brought forth before the Creation," (May it in- deed ? We fhali fee prefently.) " and all this Sy- " flem of Divine Counfels being depofited with the " pre-exident Soul of ChriH, [in izihom are all the " 'Treafures of Wifdcm and Knowledge^) &c. p. 46." Then, fur.ly, it could not be ignorant of the Day of ludgment! — " And thofe who believe the Doc- " trine of the pre-eyiflent Soul of Chrift^ have made " it appear," Yes, perhaps torhemfelves ! " that if it " refer toChrift, it is very probable this fre-exiflent " Soul confidered as having the Dhine Nature united '' to it," This fadly wants to be explained, " is '* here reprefented as commencing its Exiftence, its " Union with Godhead, receiving its Commiffion, " and beginning its Office." p. 47. Anf i. Surely, it did not commence its Exiftence, after the divine Nature was united to it. 2. I want to know what he here means by Godhead -, and what Kind of an U- nion this was, i^c. — However, fuppofing, I fay, all this to be true, I can hardly think any Thing more improbable, than, That among all " thofe Counfels *' and Decrees about Creation and Redemption, " which were depofited with this Soul,'* there fhould be nothing relating precifely to the Day of Judgment.
< Are all the Treafuies of IVifdom and Knoiv-
ledge, indeed in it, or him : And could it, or he,
then be ignorant of that Day ^ = Did he not ,
when
[ 279 1
when he had received his CommifTion. know dl that were given him of the Father ? Jo. vi. 37. Ch. xvii. 2. and 6. ^'f.— - Was he not, by his Ofice^ to be the Shepherd of the Sheep^ who was to give his Life for them. Sec.
Jo. X. 14 ■ iS. and give diW Jccoimt of them ?
And does he not k7tozv them ; John x. vers. 11. 17. 27. i^c. yea, and call them by their Names ? ver. 3. — Are they not in his Hand, and does he not give unto them Eternal Life? ver. 28. c^c. — And does he not, thro' all that Chapter, fpeak of the /r/? Pcrfon as his Father^ and ot himfelf 3.^ his Son, vers. 17. 18. 30. 2^. &c. — And could he then be ignorant of the Day of Judgment ? Yea, I muft afk,
Queft. 2. How thcArians, and others, who dream. That the Logos lupphed the Place of Chrift's human Soul, and that he had no other Soul \ nor any other Thing in him, that v/as immaterial and rational: How, I fay, can they interpret this Text ? — All thefe Things now quoted, and feveral others to ths fame Purpofe, (not to mention the many Proofs he had given of his knowing the Thoughts and tlie Hearts of Men ; Mat. ix. 4. Ch. xii, 25. &c. norv/hatthe Evangelift aflerts very clearly, fully, and folemnly. That he knew all Men, Jo. ii. 24. and knew what was in Man, ver. 25.) be affirmed of himfclf, long before he told his Difciples, That the Son knew not the Day of Judgment I — Can all thefe Pafiages then be indeed true, if he was really ignorant of the Day
of Judgment ? If he really knew his Sheep, Jo.
X. 14. 27. ^c. ^c. and other Sheep whom he was to bring home -, ver. 16. If he could call them by their Names, ver. 3. and knew all that the Father gave him, Ch. vi. -^"j. and was to lofe none of them-, ver, 39, ISc. ^c. — If all thefe, I fay, are really true, furely he knezv when, and where, they lliould be born, and live ; &c. which of them fliould be lail called, znd converted ', i^c. ^c. when the Number of God's
Ele^
[ 28o ]
Ek5i would he acomp'.ijhed -, ISc. and when he would give- unto them eternal Lije : And therefore, one would think, could not but know the Day of Judg-
ment. — From all which, I conceive, we may
conclude, i. That there are two -diftin^f Natures in Chriji, the Divine and the Human: And that, as God, i. e. the Son of God, he knew all thefe Things, and confequently, the Day of Judgment alfo ; but that, as the Son of Man, he did not know them all, nor this in particular. 2. That, till they can prove. That the eternal Son did not take unto himjelf a true Body, and a reafonahle Soul, which can never be done ; this Text can never, with a good Grace, be urged againft his true and proper Divinity, except they dtny all thofe other Paflages. — And, 3. That, if they ceafe their Noife and Blujiering about this Exprejfion, till they have well conlidered, and contuted, what I have here offered, as I would fain hope they will,
we fliall hear no more of it in hafte. ■ — Should
it be afkt of us,
Quefl. 3. Sirtee ChrrtV^ Words, neither the Son, are plain. How we Curfelves can get over this Diffi- culty ?
Anf We fee ;w Difficulty in it at all, no not the leaft ; any more than there is, in that PafTage, Luke ii. 52. /^7zJ Jesus, i. e. the Child, who was not only born of, but made of, the Virgin, and as fuch, INCREASED in Wifdiom and Stature, &c. i. c,' increafed in the one, as he did in the other, even as, mutatis mutandis, other Children do. — This Text clearly explains the other, and makes every Thing eafy and expedite: And, if this no Way derogates from the Glory of our ever blcjfed Redeemer, the other cannot. — Our worthy Author confelTes, Pref. p. 5. " That Chriji the Son of God, is both God and Man ; <« — perfect God andperfe^ Man ; —and that he who " Jufferedfor us, was God and Man, tho' one Chriji'^ Well then, that we may remove every Thing that
but
[ 2Sl 1
but looks like a Difficulty, we fnall firft offer a few Propofitions, and then confider this Context.
I. If Chrijl is •perfect God a^^d perfe^ Man, let thefe Propofitions be well reinembred, (i) The t'jvo Natures, tho' perfonalU united in him, were and are, yet dijiinSi \ or elfe he could not be perfectly and -purely, either the one, or the other. (2) If they were diftin^ and perfeEi, he had in his Perfon, all that is ejjentialto them both, diftinBly. — Very well. Chrift, as Man, was a Creature, a mere Creuture, and as much fo as other Men : — As Man, he could kitow nothing, as God does ; but learned Things by Senfa- tion, Obfervation, and RefleSlion, &c. according to \i\% Age and Capacity, juft as other Men : — What could not be known, any of thefe Ways, he mufc have been ignorant of, as well as they^; unlefs it was, one Way or another, communicated to him by Reve- lation : — The Day of Judgment could not be kno-wn^ any of thefe Ways i — Let his Capacity, as Man, have been as great as pojfble, he could not poffibly kno"jj all 'Things: — God, i. e. any of, or all, the ever bleffed 'Three, m'l^Vi reveal to him more or lefs, as he, or they faw meet ; and that, at what Times, by v/hat Means, in what Manner, to what Degree, and for what Purpofes, he or they thought Good : — It was no Diminution of his Charauler, as Man, not to know what was above his Capacity, as fuch ♦, what was no Way neceffary, or could anfwer no valuable End, in his then prefent Circumftances -, provided, he had always the full Knowledge of every Thing, which could, any how, contribute to the fuccefsful and effeUual Accomplifhm-ent of his glorious Under- taking : — The Knowledge of the Day of Judgment^ was no more neceffary to him as Mm, nor could have been any more ufeful to him, at that Day, than it is to us now -, to whom it would be really, upon feveral Accounts, dangerous and hurtful ; for which Reafon, God has, in great Wifdom and Love to us, cor.- O 0 ceakd
[ 282 ]
cEaled it from us :— And himfelf, in thefe Words, fignifies. That God had not revealed it to him, as
fuch. . And that this is the Senfe, will
appear,
2. If we confider the Ti?ne, the Occq/ion, and the Ferfons to whom our hkjfed Lord fpake thefe Words. They are Part of the i\n{wcr, he gave his Three Favcuriies nnd Jndrezv, Mark xiii. 3. who, (perhaps prefmning too much, upon the Familiarity where- with he difti'tignijhed and hofwured them,) ajl':ed him privately^ When jhall thefe things he ? &c. or as Matthew has it, Ch. xxiv. 3. What Jhall he the Sign \ of thy coming, viz. to execute thy Judgments upon Je- rtifalem, ver. 20. and of the End of the World, when the univerfal and final Judgment fhall com.mence ?
ver. 26. 27. • ' Cur Saviour, (well knowing,
that it would be of great and manifold Ufe, to the helicving Jews, to have fome Signs, whereby they might know when the former fliould draw near ; and to his Church, in all Ages, to have fome, to ac- quaint them with the Approach of the latter, &c.) gives them many and various, interfperfing many weighty Cautions, and Inflruclions, and Exhortations alfo how to improve them, fo as that they mjght be
always ready : But, as to the Day and Hour^
i. e. the precife Time, it was no Concern of theirs ; would do them no Service \ and therefore, they were not to cjk any Thing about it. And, to make them eafy. He afilires them. That no one,' no not the Angels, jieither the Son, knew it, hut the Father ; not ex- cluding the fecond and third Perfons, as we have heard, but Creatures only, all of them, even the greateft, the Son of Man himfelf, and as fuch, not excepted. — He well knew their Temper, Mark. x. 35. Jo. xxi. 21, &c. and the Prejudice they were under, i^c and that they would be very fond to know tiie very Time, even to the Bay and Hcur. That he might therefore, check this vain Curioftty,
teach
f 283 ]
teach them Humility^ &c. and p-event any farther
Sollicitations^ about fuch Things which they had no
Concent with, did he give this very particular jsnfi;jer.
q. d. What was necejf.iry for me, as the Sen of Man^
either to know or to teach^ the Father hatli revealed
to me i Jo. V. 20. Mat. xi. 27. and I have made
known unto you \ Ch. xv. 15. and fhali farther d';«'-
■plain^ and confirm every Part of it, hereafter ; Ch. xvi.
12: But tlie precife Time of the. Day di'JvAgment^
which was not 'necejfary for me, now in my preient
State, to knozv^ he hath not. — I am eafy and fatis-
fied, not deQring now to knew it, feeing it is his
Pleafure •, and fo fliould you. — 'The Dijctple is not
above his Mafter : Mat. x. 24. Learn then of 7ne,
for I am lowly in Heart. Ch. xi. 30. — What is that
Day^ and that Hour, to you ? 'Tis net Jor you to
know the Times cr the 'Seafons., zvhich the Father huth
put into his czvnPo-wer. Ads i. 7. t. e. 'Tis not your
Btifinefs \ would be of no real Service to you, nor
any other-, yea, might and would ,i/^//2/r/ ; Rellrain
therefore ^owz finfv.l Curicfity -, trouble not yourfelves
v/ith what does not belong to you ; you have other
Work enough to do -, mind that. — That, the Dif-
ciples took thofe Words, or might and Hiould have
taken them, as fpoken of him only as the Son of Man ;
or that he fpake of himfelf only as fuch; feems to
me undeniable, {i) From the Words of the beloved
Difciple, to Peter, a few Days after, o KJpto? Ir*, It
is THE Lord. Jo. xxi. 7. (2) From the Apoflle
Peter's own Confeffion, Lord, thou knowefi all
Things : And therefore, he could not but know
the Day o'i Judgment . vcr. 17. And, (3) From that
glorious Confeffion oi Thomas, 0 Ku'pto? jw» kcx] q Qsog
|0!,», My Lord and my God : And therefore, furely,
did, as fuch, bww that Day. Ch. xx. 28. And ,
thus, I hope, we have refcued this Text forever,
from the vile Drudgery to which the Enemies of his
true and proper Divinity, have long ftriven to prejs
O o 2 ;t,
^t, tho' in a direft Oppofition to the whole Word of Gcd. — We therefore proceed to the next Pafiage, of which iillb you fnall have every Word.
" To. iii. 35. The Father loveth the Son^ and hath " given all Things into his Hands.^^ — Whence I con- ckide. That therefore, he is a ccejfential Son : Be- caufe, if he were not, Fie could not poffibly have r^- ccived all Things from hirn. — " ver. ^4. God gi-'ceth " not the Spirit byMeafure unto him" — This alfofeerns neceflarily to imply his Divinity : Becaufe, if the Reci- pient was fnite^ he could not have pofiibly received the Spirit^ but, if I may ufe the ExpreiTion, in fome certain Meafure. — " All this implies an Inferiority *' or Dependency." What Words imply any Thing, v/hich we have not granted ? Does the Father'' s loving the Son imply this •, or any Inferiority of EJfence in him ! Or, his giving all Things into his Hands^ any Dependency^ which is beneath a coejfential Son., who voluntarily condefcended to accept of a Commiffion from him, and aB as his Servant^ upon the Promife^ that he would ^zVf all thefe Things to him } — " As a Son " he receives all from another, which Godhead can- " not do." p. 42. — Our good Fathers would have replied direftly and roundly ! He received all Things, as well as his EJfence, from his Father ; and, could not have been a proper coejfenlicil Son, if he had not.
• 2. That it is full as improper, to talk of
Godhead's giving, as receiving ! And, I fhall fay no- thing againft either of thefe. — But, they v/ould, I believe, all of them have alfo faid, That this Title, the Son, in thefe Texts and fome others which we have now vindicated and explained, and many more, denotes the Prrfon of the Mejfiah, who, as fuch, is both Gcd and Man ; and therefore, neceflarily, (not cxiXy pre fiippofes, but) implies his Divine Nature ; and eonfequently, does his Caufe no Manner of Service, nor ours any Hurt.
[ 285 1
" Luke xxiii. 47. When the Centurion or Captain^ " faw the Miracles at the Death of Chrift, he cried " cut^ Verily, this Man was the Son of God. He " cannot be fuppofed to mean that this Man was the " true and eternal God, i^c. p. 42. 43." Anf. i. There is a Miftake here. Thefe Words are found. Mat. xxvii. 54. and not Luke xxiii. 47. — 2. Chrift is, by the Centurion, called the Sen cf God ; and not " the Sen abfolutcly," in hisSenfe; and therefore, this Text fhould have had no Place among thofe PafTages where, he will have it, he is fo called. — We fhall
confider it, with Pleafure, by and by. The
laft is,
" I Cor. XV. 28. Then /Ijall the Sen alfo himfelf be " fiihje5l to him that hath pit all Things under himy *' that God may he all in all. This is a Charadler of " too much Inferiority for true Godhead." p. 43. What is this Chara5fer .^ Is it that Chrifi is called, the Son ; and is, at laft, to he fuhjecf., &c ^ — We may anfwer in his own Words, to one of our Texts, the very next Page but one, " The Name, Son of " God^ is not here ufed •," and therefore, is not to " our prefent Purpofe." p. 45. Or we may fay, this Title, the Son, may denote our Saviour, as Man ; or, as the Mediator, as we fhall fliew prefently it does in this Place: But becaufe this Text is not without its Dijficulty, as all Parties find -, We ftiall therefore, more carefully confider. it, when I have reminded the Reader, i . That Chrifi, as God, is the Son of God; and, as Man, is the Son of Man ; fee p. 256. 257. 2 . That each of thefe Titles, the Son of God and the Son of Man, tho', ftridly and properly, both Titles of iSature, do fometimes denote and fignify the com- plex Perfon of x\itAhdiator, and as fuch. fee p. 2 /; 6. 2 5 7. 3. That, when Chrifi is ftiled '* the Son abfolutely," i.e. if it beSenfe and true, when thisTitle, the Son, is given him, without any Word added precifely to deter- mine, whether he is fpoken of as God, as he is the
Son
[ 286 ]
Son of God ; or, as Man^ as being the Son of Man ; or, as the Mefjiah: This Title may, yea muft, de- note him either as the Son of God, or as the Son of Man, or as the Meffiah, and, as fuch, both God and Man ; and that either with a more pecuHar Re- fpe6l to his Godhead, or Manhood, as the Scope, or Circumftances, of the Text or Context require. — Thefe remembred, let us obferve,
I . Our Lord is not, in all that long Chapter, I Cor. XV. no, nor in all that Epiftle, 'io much as once, called the Son of God. — 2. He is not, in all that Chapter, fo much as once, fpoken of purely, or merely, if at all, as God. — 3. He muft therefore be confidered, all thro' it, either merely as Man ; or, in his delegated Capacity, as the Mediator, and, as fuch, God-Man. — 4. It is plain. That, thro' the whole Context, he is confidered as the Mediator, but with a very particular Refped to his Human Nature. For, ftriftly fpeaking, 5. 'Twas on- ly as Man^ he could die-, ver. 3. 'twas \{\s bleffed Body only, which could be buried •, ver. 4. 'twas only as N'lan, he could be raised up, and be seen of his Difciples ; ver. 4 — 8. i^c. — And, 'twas only as our Redeemer, he could die for our Sins ; ver. 3. and rise again, and that by his, OWN Power; ver. 4. comp. with John x. 18. be- come the FIRST Fruits of them that flept -, ver. 20. 23. and the glorious Perfon, in whom Ai.h fljall he made alive. 21 — 23. Yea, 'Twas only as /^^ Re- deemer, or Mediator, that he bruifed the Serpent* s Head, Gen. iii. 15. put away Sin by the Sacrifice of Himfelf, Heb. ix, 26. and obtained Eternal Redemp- tion for his People, ver. 12 by which Means he alfo came to have fuch an Inter eji in them. is'c. i Pet. i. 18 — 20. &c. — And it is only as fuch, that hefJoall deliver up the Kingdom : ? Cor. xv. "24. — For he muft reign till he, i. e. God hath put all his Enemies un- der his Feet -, ver. 25. even Death itfelf ! ver. 26. —
From
[ 287 ] _ '
From all which, 'tis plain, That it is not the Son of God, and purely as fuch, but ihe Redeemer, the De- legate, and as fuch, who fliall h fubje£f io God even
the Father. — Let us therefore return to our
Author ; and, tho* the Paragraph be long, you fhall have it alfo, verbatim.
" The Argument ftands thus : If the Son of God " be true God confidered as a Son, then he is origi- " nally and neceifarily Lord of all," — He is fo. " and then it muft be faid 'tis by his own vo- " luntary Condefcenfion x.\\it he is fo far deprejfed and " humbled by the Oeconomy as to become the Father's " Deputy and Vicegerent •," I Ihould rather have faid, with the Apoftle, By his own voluntary Condefcen^ fion, He, who being in the Form of God, thought it no Robbery to be equal with God, yet empt i ed h imself, — HUMBLED HIMSELF, and becawe obedient unto Death, even the Death oftbeCROSS, Phil. ii. 6 — 8. and fo was made A Curse for us. &'c. Gal. iii. 13. For, I hum- bly conceive, the coeffential Son, might, poffibly, by another Oeco?w',ny, have " become the Father's De- *' puty and Vicegerent," witliout fo humbling him- felf, or being deprejfed, thereby, " and when that " Oeconomy ceafes, he is of courfe exalted to his " Equality with the Father," hs an own Son, he was neceffarily, coeffential with the Father, and, purely as fuch, he defired no other Glory, after his Humilia- tion^ than that which he had with his ownfelf before the World was. Jo. xvii. 5. " and to his effential and " natural Lordfliip over all. p. 43." If the Son of God be true God, confidered as a Son, his effential and natural Lordfhip over all was never, could never, be laid afide ; nor could there, poffibly, be any Inter- cifion of it. It was always the fame, and could no more be diminifbed, or parted with, than his Effence ox Godhead. Seep. 269—272. " But the Reprelcntation " of St. Raul is juft the contrary :" Is it fo ? This is News indeed ! Pray, where ? " in many Parts of his,
Wri.
[ 288 ]
«« Writings (particularly Phil, ii.) he fhews, that the " Son of God is not deprejl but exalted by the Oeco- " nomy to the Kingdom. ^^ This is fo very ftrange,
. that, I cannot help thinking, there
mud have been many accidental Miftakes in the Copy : For furely. Our learned Author could never talk at this Rate. — I have given fome Claufes from that Context, in this very Paragraph : And If, for One., who thought it no Robbery to be equal with God, &c. to empty himfelf take upon him the Form of a Servant., — humble himfelf., and become obedient unto Death, even the Death of thy. Cross, be not to abafe and deprefs himfelf: I may defy all the World to tell me. How- he could humble himfelf, or be depreffed, more ! — His G/(?ry, as a Son, was from Eternity, with the Father^ as one brought up with him., and daily his Delight, 6f<r. Pro. iii. 30. But when, for the full Execution of the Office he had undertaken, he became Man, he was firft to be humbled and then exalted. And, as his Humiliation was to be as deep as pojfible, even, iff may fo fay, to the lowefl FIdl: His Exaltation was to be fully anfwerable to it, even to the highejl Hea- ven. So fpake the Prophets of old, Pf. xxii.
throughout. If. iii. 13 — 15. Ch. liii. i — 12. ^c. So fpake he himfelf. Mat. x. 24, 25. Ch. xix. 28, 29. Ch. XX. 18. 19. and ver. 28. Ch. xxv. 31 —' 46. ^c. and fo did all his y^(7y?/fj. Luke ii. 7 — 21. Mat. xxvii. 26 — 54. Rom. iii. 24 — 26. Ch. iv. 25. Ch. viii. 3 and 32. i Pet. i. 18 — 20. Ch. ii. 21 — 24. Rev. v. 9. &c. — In a Word, he was firft to fuffer, and then to reign. — For, (i) Tho' there were many and great Reafons, why the Mediator fhould empty himfelf, &c. there were none why he fhould be always humbled. — (2) 'Twas neither con- fiftent with the Wifdom, the Goodnefs, the Jujiice, nor the "Truth of God, that he fhould have been for ever depreft. — (3) 'Twas not poffible, in itfelf, that the Glory of the eternal Son^ fhould be, always
veiled
[ 289 ]
veiled and hid : (4.) The two Natures perfonally
united in thcMeJJiab, were never to be diznded : (5.) There was a Glory defigned for him, as Gcd-Man : (6.) He had in, and by, his human Nattire, merited the higheft Glory poihbltfor it : And, (7.) Had not the Redeemer been exalted, he could never have accom- plifhed his great Work, even to fave his People from their Sins, and all the woful Effe^s of them ; and
give them the Kijtgdom •, &c. &c. " And he tells
" us in this Text, that when the Son gives up this " Oeconomical Kingdom, he comes again into Sub- " jedion ; Then fiall the Son himfelf be fuhje^i " to the Father r Anf. i. His effential and na- tural Lordpip over all, when we confider him purely as the Son, tho' it might be hid for a Time, from us, is and was always, in itfelf, the fame, without any pofli- ble Alteration. 2. Chrifl Jefus, before he emp- tied himfelf, and took upon him the Form of a Servant y &c. Phi. ii. 7, 8. was, or exijled., uird^-xwy, in the Form of God, and Jp/ xPTrccyiAQi) riyfiirxro to hvoa ktos 02W. i. e. literally, thought it no Robbery, i. e. no Ufurpation, no Prefumption in him, or nothing but his Due, to be equal with God, ver. 6. i. e. to reckon himfelf, fpeak, and a6l, upon all Occafions, as one equal with him : And therefore, was not then, in any Subjection; for the mere relative Subordination of a coeffential Son to his own Father., was not Subjed-ion. 3. What then could he mean, by his coming " again *' into Subjection .^ " He was not, properly, in any Subjeftion, till he emptied himfelf, and hum- bled himfelf, &c. — He was never in any fuch Sub- jedion, but once\ even in his Eftate o'l Humiliation. — I hope our learned Author could not think, he would ever come into any fuch State again. — 4. The Oe- conomical Kingdom was given him for certain Ends \ and therefore, only till thofe Ends ^-iOXxXdi ht fully an- fwered •, and confequently, muft then be given up : But, furely, he is not, after all his Obedience, Suf-
P p feringSy
[ 290 ]
fertngs, and Coftquefts^ to be reduced to a w^r/^ State, than he was in before. The very Thought is highly hlajphemous, and, being full of Contradiftions, ab- folutely impoffible in itfeif. — 5. So far from it, that the Apoftle affures us the IfTue fliall be, That every Knee Jh all how^ — and every Tongue conjefs. That the Lordjefus Chrift, i. e. the Perfon of the Mediator, God -Man, is in the Glory of God the Father, ver. 10, 1 1. --And therefore, 6. His Conclufion, " which *' plainly Hiews, that confidered as a Son, he is na- " rurally fubjed; to the Father ; and that at the End " of this oeconomical Exaltation he ihall return to " his natural Subjection, and iliall be fo for ever " when God appears all in all. This is moil evi- " dently the Meaning of the great Apoftle." That all this, I fay, is either manifcftly falje^ or another Igyioratio Elenchi, i. e. a Conclufion befide the Que-
ftion, or I do not know •- feveral
Sheets wou'd not be fufficient, for a full Anfwer to
it, as it well deferves. I fliall only remind the
Reader,
1 . Chriji is not, in all that Chapter, called the Son of God; but, only the Son : And therefore, he may be either fpoken of as the Son of God, or as the Son cfMan, or as the Mediator, as the Scope and Circum- ilances require. — • 2. Though the only begotten, and purely as fuch, was fiibordinate to the Father ; he was jet a coejfential Son -, and therefore, not properly, (or only by voluntary Condefcenfion,) in Suhje^ion. 3. As fuch, he expedted, yea, he defired, no higher, r.o other ijlory, than that ivhich he had with the Fa- ther, as his only So?j, before the V/orld was: And in- deed, feeing he e>:ijied in the Form of God, &c. /. e. not only in the Nature, but in all the Glory of God, he could not pofllbly be exalted any higher. -— 4. S'his Glory is abfolutely inferrable from the EJfence : And therefore, it was as abfolutely impoflible it fliould be ever taken from him, laid afide, or inter- rupted.
r 291 ]
rjpted, ^c. as it was that his feature, or hk Sonfiip^ fhould be taken from him, &c. — 5. The (Economical Kingdom was not given to him, purely as the/^fWPer- fon, fcr the only begotten ; but, as having ccndejcended to become the Redeemer, and for that Purpofe, to become our near Kinfmqn : And therefore, becaufe he could not fully execute that Office, but in, and by, our Nature j nor be aBually invejied with, or inau- gurate to it, till he had redeemed his People zvith his Blood ; therefore, I fay, he is not commonly thought to have entred upon his Kingdom, in the highefb and moft proper Senfe, or commenced his Reign, til! his RefurreSion or Afcenfion. — 6. When he Jhall have given up the Kingdom to God even the Father, as the coeffiential Son, and as fuch, fhall be no Lofer, upon the whole, by or for his amazing Humiliation, but fhall receive all the Glory promis'd him in his v/hole <:omplex Perfon, as Mediator : So fhall he, as fuch, be, to all Eternity, the Means of the bleffed Union between God and his People ; and fliall reign alfo, for ever and ever, as the Head of his Church, tho' not in that Way, that Difpenjatory IVay if I may fo call it, which he now does. — Surely, the Union be- tween him and them, fhall never be diifolved : Be- caufe, as the Church, can never be without a Head, tht Head can never be without a Body, Eph. i. 22, 23, ^c. — Surely, when the Marriage of the Lamb is confummated, no Divorce fliall ever follow : But they fhall continue in that State to all Eternity. If. Hv. 5 — 10. Hof ii. 19. Jo. xii. 26. Ch. xiv. 23. Ch.
xvii. 24. I 'Thef. iv. 17. As he is the Light of
his People, in this World ; the Lamb is the Light of
the New Jerufalem above. Rev. xxi. 2, 3. As
he is their Life, and quickens whom he will, here, fo, V. 21. and continues to be their Life, while they are here ; Col. iii. 4. fo. Because he lives, they fhall LIVE alfo, hereafter, forever, Jo. xiv. 19. &c. &;c. And, 7. To wave many other, even neceffary Things, P p 2 the
[ 292 ]
the Difficulty arifing from this Paflage may, I hope» be enough, or to Satisfaftion, clearly anfwered thus, Tho' the Redeemer, and as fuch, is often fpoken of as God's Sef'vant, and confequently, fome Way, in SuhjeSfion to him. If. xlii. i. Ch. Hii. ii. and ac- cordingly, did all he did for his Glory •, Jo. viii. 28, 29. Ch. 10. 37, 38. i^c. Yet, to anfwer, all the Ends of his Office, All Power is git'en to him in Hea- ven and in Earth, Mat. xxviii. 18. {s?f. and confe- quently, hd fits at Helm managing all Affairs in the World, according to his own good Pleafure -, &c. all Things in his Church are, in a very particular 'M.^nnei' tranfa^ed in h\s I'iame ; &c. he is all, AND IN ALL, unto his People; and does, in his own Perfon, fo eminently exercife the Authority and Dominion of God, (as if the father had refigned the Sovereignty to him) efptcially fmce he judgeth no Mail, but hath committed all Judgment to the Son ; John V. 22. i^c. as if he were, indeed, no Way, or upon no Account, fubje^l to him •, at leaft, not vifibly, and manifeftly fo. — Well then, fmce thefe are fo. When all Things, at the End of the World, fhall be fuhdued unto him -, &c. When he has fentenced the Wicked to Everlafting Punijhment, and received tht Righteous into Life Eternal -, Mat. xxv. 46. &c. and. When all the Ends of this Difpenfation, fhall be fully anfwered : Then fliall he deliver up the Kingdom, pre- fenting all thofe that were given to him perfect and without Spot, &c. Eph. v. 26, 27, and refign that Dominion alfo over all Things, which was given him chiefly for their Sakes •, and fo put an End to the prefent external Difpenfation of the Kingdom, by the
IVord, Sacraments, and other Means of Grace :
And then fhall the Son, i. e. the Mediator, alfo him- felf, who has fo long aded as having the Sovereign Power, he fuhje^ unto \i\m. ysVo gave him that Do- minion, by refigning, as it were, his Commiffion, and manifefting himfdf evidently to be, as he had always
been.
[ 293 ]
been, tho' not fo vifibly and clearly, a Suhjlitute or Deputy: That God, ejfentially confidered, /. e. the whole 'Trinity, may be all in all, as Cbrijl now is -, Col. iii. II. and xhtprefcntCEconomy, by a Vicegerent^ and all the external Means, whereby Chrijl now coni- municateth himfelf to his People, may for ever
Our learned Author begins the next Paragraph thus,
" This Text will not prove that Chrifi is not " God, p. 44. No, blefled be his Name, nor any other. — " for he is fo by perfonal Union to the " Divine Nature," I earneftly defire to know the Senfe of this : Having fome Reafon to queftion, whether any Chrijlian ever heard fuch Words before. — " he is God manifejied in the Hejh" He is fo. Eternal Glory be to him who took upon him the Seed of Abraham I But, it was the fecond Perfon only, and no other, who was fo manifejted. - — " he is God and " Man in one complex Perfon." He is fo, or he could never have been our Redeemer : However, the
blejfed Three, are not one Perfon. " But, in
" moil or all thefe Scriptures," which we have con- fidered, " it is manifeft, that the Character of " Chrift as a Son is fet far below the Father, not " only in Order or in Office, but in Knowledge, " Power, Sovereignty, Self-fufficiency and Au- " thority, &c." Anf. Chrift is not here called the Son of God : — Nor is this Title, the Son, ufed in feveral of thefe Places in the higheft Senfe, in which this Title, the Son of God is : — As the Son of Man, he is infinitely inferior to the Father in all
thefe : As Mediator, he condefcended to be a
Delegate, to receive a Commilfion, and confequently Commands from him ; i^c. i^c. I am glad, how- ever, to hear, " That Chrift, (as God the Son) or " in his Words, in his Dizine Nature, is equal to " the Father in Power and Glory" ibid. Becaufe
then
t 294 J
then, he is not the Father^ but a proper Son really diftindt from him. But,
While my Hand is in, I mull retort the Difficulty, (not only upon our worthy Author, who refolutely denies the coejfen.ial Sofj/bip of Chrifi, or that he is God OF God ; but) upon our y^rians and Socinians^ who obftinately oppofe his true and proper Divinity ; and afk, What Anfwer they, or any of them, can give to this Difficulty ? Our Author will have it. That Chrift's human Soul, which he grants is a mere Creature, " is properly the Son of God: — Th.t Arians dream, That the Logos is not God ; and therefore, muil be a Creature t—AnA the Socinians will have it. That Chrijl when on Earth, was a mere Man, tho* Unce, Rifum tenealis, made a God ! Well then ? Was not this human Soul, the Logos, and this Man, always finite Beings, omnimodoufly dependent upon God? &c. — Was it poffible, that either of them could be in the Form of God ; or have the Divine Names,
and 'Titles, &c. attributed to them ? < Could
either of them poffibly be capable, of all Power in Heaven and Earth, &c. Or be all and in all to
Believers ? &c. Were not they all naturally,
and therefore neceffarily, every Way, in every Senfe, anci always, fubje^ to the Father ? — Could there poffibly be any Doubt of this, by any Man in his
Senfes ? &c. Could any poffible Diffenfation
alter the Nature of Things ? Or, Can a Creature
poffiibly ceafe to be a Creature ? Or, to be always, and omnimodoufly, fubje^ to his Creator F — What then is, what can be, the Meaning of thefe Words, Thsn fhall the Son alfo himfelf be fubje^l, &c ? — When I ffiall hear a fatisfaftory Reply to thefe Queftions, I have leveral more ready.
Thus have we confidered thefe Texts, and, I hope, explained, and vindicated them, to the Satis- fadionof the /^n(?//j Reader. Wehaveffiewn, That,
ia
[ 295 ]
in fome of them, this Title, the Son, denotes the human Nature of Chrijl only ; that, in others, he is fpoken of as the Mediator^ but with a particular Regard to his human Nature ; and in others, with a more particular Refpeft to him, as God the Son^ who had undertaken to be Redeemer. And mufl fay it again. That if the ferious Chriftian remem- bers, That Chrijl^ as God, is the Son of God -, and as Man, the Son of Man ; and that the Mediator^ as fuch, or in his complex Perfon, is often called the Son of Gody or " the Son abfolutely," i. e. if it be Senfe, and true alfo, without any Adnoun or other Word joined to it : And confequently. That when he is called " the Son abfolutely ;" this Title may either refer to him purely as the Son of God, or purely as the Son of Man, or as the Me- diator, as the Scope or Circum (lances of the Paffagcs dired: and require : If, I fay, he remember thefe, he needs not be much moved, with any Thing which can be urged from thefe, or any the like,
were there ever fo many of them. Go we on
then to.
CHAP. IV.
So7ne Confiderations upon his Subordinate Questions, with proper Anfwers to the mofi plaufible Things offered in fiipport of his Notions : Or, An Anfwer to that ^^/o/?. Did the Difciples of Gljriji fully believe that he was the true God dimng his Life-time^ or not till after his Death ajid RefurreBion ? p. 70.
A
Direft and plain, but brief Anfwer, we have given, in general, to this ^^efiion ; p. 20.
and
[ 296 ]
and have, and fliall, by and by, more clearly and fully, prove it to the Convi^ion of all, who will be fatisfied with the Word of God, and the Tejimony of the Three PFitmJfes in Heaven, for a Proof : But, " in order " to folve this Qiieftion," our learned Author " makes thefe five following^ Enquiries ; p. 70." every one of which, with all his Anfwers to them, with his Befign in propofing them, we fhall confider, very briefly, if worth the while, as they come in our Way.
" SECT. I. The Jews old Opinion concerning the Mejfiah.
*' I . What 'Notion had the Jews in general con- cerning thiir Mefiiah ?" p. 71.
His Defign in this Se£iion, as appears from his ^e ft ions and Anfwers, p. 72 — y6. and the Con- clufion of it, " In fhort their Notions of this Matter " were fo very confufed, fo uncertain, fo incon- " fiftent, fo various, that they cannot be reduced *' to any certain or fettled Scheme of Sentiments. *' p. 76." is obliquely to deprive us, oi zny AJpijlance, from the Principles of the ancient Jewifl:) Church, in fupport di the coeffential ^cnfJoip cf the Meffah?
He cannot deny. That " the Old Teftament fur- " nifhed them with fufficient Prophecies concerning " his divine and human Nature, his fpiritual King- " dom, his Sufferings, his Death and Refurredlion, " ^c. p. 71." He might have faid. That many of thofe Prophecies were fo plain, full, and minute, that they lookt rather like exaSl Uiftories of Matter of Fa^, than Predi£iions. " yet fo wretchedly blind- " ed were they with the corrupt Glofies of their " Teachers and with their own foolifh Prejudices," (which they alfo learned from their Teachers, thofe blind Guides who caufed them to err -,) " that they did agree " in no Notion concerning him more univerfally, " than that he was to be a temporal Prince, that he " was never to fuffer, nor to die, &c. ibid.''^ Grant- ing this, What then ? — ^ Tho' they had fo far
turned
[ 297 1
turned afide from the Truths as to have perverted, or forgotten, their Creed ; The Old Tejiament, efpccially as explained and illuftrated by the New, ftrongly fupports the Doftrine of the Trinity, and the coejf:ntial Sonjljjp o^ Qhn^: And therefore, through the Grace of God, v/e Hiall neither fuffer thofe Proofs to be wrejied from us ; nor put our Eyes, againft fo clear a Light, becaufe the degenerate Jews fhut theirs. But I mull obferve, That here, as in many other Cafes, he is very general and ambiguous, which may lead plain ferious Chri/lians into great Miftakes ! For, his firft Words,
" The Jews old Opinion," one would think, was their Opinion, in their old and beft Times ; or if not fo old as the Patriarchs, or Mofes, or David, or the prophetic Ages after the Revolt of the Ten Tribes ; yet at loweft, of Ezra, Neheniiah, and the Men of the great Synagogue : Whereas, he feems to mean their Opinion, when our Lord was upon the Earth !
— Ahraham fawChrifs Bay ; Jo. viii. c^6. and knew that he was the true God ; (not the firfi Perfon, but the Second',) for, when he appeared to him,G&n. xviii. i. he heard him -call himfelf, Jehovah •, ver. 13, 14. and he alfo in his Interceffion, called him Jehovah, ver. 30, and the Judge of all the Earth -, ver. 25. and knew, I conceive, as well as Mofes. That he was Jehovah, who rained upon Sodom and upon Gojporrah Brimftone and Fire from Jehovah out of Heaven. Ch. xix. 24. So that, tho' he well knew. That Jehovah is one ; or, that there is but oneJehovah; he knew there were two, v/ho were fo called : Or, he knew Jehovah and Jehovah, but not two Jehovahs.
— Jacob knew, that the Man who wreflled with him, ivas God ; Gen. xxxii. 24 and 30. (who is called by the Prophet, God, Hof. xii. 3. the Angel, vcr. 4, and the Lord God of Hefts, &c. ver. 5.) and even when under the Spirit of Prophecy, worfhipped him as the Angel which redeemed him from all Evil.
Q^q Gen.
I 298 ]
Gen. xhm. i6, &c. — And hence, when we re- member, that he appeared to them, in a bodily Shape, as a Man, as a Prelude to his Incarnation, we may learn what was the Faith of the Church, concerning the promifed Redeemer, in their Days. — Should it be laid, That this was Cbrijl's pre-exijlent human Soul, which appeared, i^c. and not the feccnd Perfon. We Anf. i. This is gratis di^um, faid without any Proof, or any Appearance of any. ■ — 2. Tho', in thofe Days, and for many Ages after, we find he was oi'ten called an Angel, the Angel of the herd, the Angel of his Face, or Prefence, i^c. yet we find no Mention, no not the leaft, of his human Soul. — 3. The Patriarchs fpoke often to him, and of him, and ivorfhipped him as God, the God of his People, Jehovah, &c. without any Apprehenfion, fo far as appears, of any fuch human Soul. - — 4. Him- felf often aflumed the Names, and Titles, accepted the Worjhip and did the Works, &c. of the One true God ; but gave no Hint of his having then, any human Soul. — And, 5. To the beft of my Knowledge, There remains 7to "Tradition, of any Sort, That the Jewijh Church, from the Beginning, if I may not fay, to this Moment, ever heard of, and much lefs entertained, the Opinion of his pre-enjient
human Soul, &c. Yea, 6. We fhall fhew, by and
by. That Mofes, David, Solomon, Ifaiah, and the Prophets, knew his coeffential Sonjhip ; and therefore, reafonably prefume. That this was the common ^aith of the J ws, in the feveral Ages wherein they lived. — And, 7. 1 cannot think it poffible. That, in the Days of Ezra and Nehemiah, when the Canon of the Old Teflament was clofed and fealed up ; and when they had three, if not more. Prophets alive, to explain Things to the?n -, the Jews in gene- ral, fliould not ha^e fome right Notions of the Perfon, Natures, and Offices, of the promifed Saviour, and his fpiritual Kingdom : Or be ignorant. That he
was
[ 299 ]
was firft to be humbled^ and then exalted \ or to fuffer, die, rife again. Sec. &c.— See, bsfides the many- Texts quoted above, Hag. ii. 9. Zecb. ii. lo — 13. Ch. iii. 8, 9. Ch. vi. 12, 13. Ch. ix. 9. Ch.xi. 12, 13. Ch. xii. 10. Ch. xiii. ver. i and 7. Ch. xiv. 4.
Mai. iii. I. Ch. iv. 2, &c. They did indeed,
foon, alas ! too foon, degenerate -, and, had I Time, I might give fome Hints, when, by what Means, and by what Steps, &c. Things grew worfe and worfe, till they came to that aimoft defperate State, in which they were, when Chrift was in the World ; when, (excepting that their Love to Idolatry had been check'd, or cured, in and by their Captivity in Babylon,) they were, generally, more corrupt, both in Faith and Manners, than ever they were, at any Time before. — And, I have fomctimes thought, when confidering the firft and fecond Chapters of Ijuke, that there was a remarkable Change for the worfe, very vifible among thofe in the Tribe of Judah, between the Time of our Saviour'' s Birth y and his Baptifm. — But, to pafs many fuch Re- marks as thefe at prefent, I Ihall only afk, What could be expedled from thofe, who fo fhamefully glofs'd away, the Senfe of the moral Law ; but, that they would alfo fadly corrupt the Faith ? — And, What Regard can we owe to the Opinion of fuch People ? &c. &c.
I might alfo alk, what he means by " the Jews " in general ?" &c. 'Tis enough for us, if the wifeji and bejl of them, wherever they were, had a right
Opinion concerning the Mejp^ah, &c. Should
the Queftion be put. What Notions have the Church Party, or the Protejtant Dijfenters, in general, con- cerning Predejlination, Grace, the Trinity, &c ? Or, How far they differ from their Old Opinions ? &c. 'twould not be eafy to give a juft and direft
Reply. However, to his own Query, he
anfwers,
Q^q 2 I. They
[ 300 ]
I. They generally believed he fhould be a Man •* of their own Nation, of the Tribe of Judahy of " the Seed of David, &c. p. 72." I do not think there was a native 7^'tc, in the whole World, who retained the Profefiion of the Jewijh Religion, that did not believe all thefe. — And, as for the Exception he makes, from Jo. vii. 27. in the next Paragraph, it proceeded, in my Opinion, rather trom willful Perverfenefs, &c. than Ignorance.
" 2. They believed that he had an Exijlence before " he came into the World ',"'' p. 73. This they muft have believed ; becaufe he could not come into the
World, before, or till, he had an E>:iflence. —
for, the Prophet fpeaks of him as " <3 Ruler in " Ifrael, whofe Goings forth have been from of Old, '* from everlaffing." Mic. v. 2. — Whether " this " Opinion was univerfal," ibid, or not, one would think. That whoever thought thefe Words were fpoken of the MeJJiah, muft have believed him to have exifted from Eternity : And confequently, if
then the Son of God, a coejfential Son. But,
the Jews, in thofe Days, had never heard of any " pre-exijlent human Soul of his:" Or, if they had, thefe Words could never have been fpoken of it.
•^.* 3. They believed that he had feme glorious " and eminent Relation to God.^' p. y^. Tt was not poiTible, That any one who believed the Old Tefia- ment, could have any the leaft Doubt of this. " This " appears from the Name of Honour that the " Mefjiah was univerfally known by amongft them, *■* viz. ^he Son of God, ibid." This we had before, and anfwered it alfo; p. 70, &c. andfhall only now add, Jf " all the Jews talkt with him under this Name,. " as being the common Name of the Mejfiah, and ** perfectly well known amongft them." ibid, then fiirely they knew the Meaning of it : Or our Lord
would have fet them right. Well then, what
higher.
[ 301 1
higher, or more glorious, perfonal Title could pof- fibly have been given him ? — If he is the Sen, the own Son of God, &c. and, as fuch, equal with Gody which was their Senfe, and the only natural and proper Senfe, of that Title ; then is he God the Son; And we can give him no higher Title, it we do not call him God the Father. But furely, our learned Author would have been greatly offended, to have heard any One call the Meffiah, God the Father ! I might have added. That it is undeniable. That the Jews did not ufe this litle, the Son, " as a " Name of Office -," or not chiefly, and only fo -, but, as a Name of Nature, as it always is, in every other Cafe.
" 4. The Prophets in the Old Teftament fre- " quently intimate the Divinity of Chriji •,^' t^, 74. They do fo : And, I'll add, they do it clearly, and ftrongly ; yea, and as a Son too. Pf. ii. 7 — 12. Pro. XXX. 4. If. ix. 6. Ch. xl. 10 — 12, &c. What follows about Dr. Allix^s and Mr. Fleming's Account of the Memra, &c. is out of my Way at prefent. I
have read them both, ^c. *' But what
'* doubtful Hints or plain Evidences there might be,, " that Chrifi was to be the true God, yet the Jews •' in Chriji's Time did not generally believe it." p. 75. Anf. I. Suppofing this. What will follow ? That it was not, clearly and fully, revealed in the Old Teflament -, or known, and believed, by their
Fathers.? By no Mears. 2. The Jews could
not but know. That the Word, Elohim, which ■we commonly tranflate God, is plural : — That there were feveral, to whom this Name, and the other Titles of the Mofi High God, and his Perfections
alfo, are afcribed in Scripture : That, how
intimately foever united they arc, and how infepa- rably foever they a6t, in all their Works relating to the Creatures, they are fpoken of, as diftind per- fonaUgents: — That there is not only a Dijiin^ion^
but
[ 302 ]
but an Order among them: --- That ofte of them is fometimes filled the begotten Son of another j who is, therefore, his own, his natural Father : -^ And that this Son was he, who" had undertaken, and was anointed, to be the Mejfiah ; as we have, and fhall, farther prove, i£c. — 3. What much confirms me in thefe two laft Thoughts is, that the Opinion^ That God moft high, had <^ Son^ an own Son, who was to be horn of a Virgin, become Man, and the Governor, if not alfo the Redeemer of the World, ^c. was then difperfed far and wide, and well known to many of the Heathens. I need not mention the Sibylline Oracles, nor offer any other Proofs of this, but the famous fourth Eclogue of Virgil, which was written near the Time of our Lord's Birth, and is now known to every School-Boy ; and particularly that glorious Line, fo much, fo juftly admired,
Cara Deumfoholes, Magnum Jovis Incrementum !
Which, I conceive, very clearly and ftrongly ex- preffes the Idea of a proper and coejjential Son -, and was, however he came by it, moft certainly taken from Ifaiah, or fome other of the Prophets, or fome JewiJJj Tradition. — I, for my own Part, have been long perfuaded, from many Paflages of the JSneid, as well as of that Eclogue, that Virgil was no ftranger to the Septuagint, (a Tranflation of the Ofd T^efiament into Greek,) not unknown to many learned Heathens
long before that Poet was born. But, fays
our Author,
" Surely if the Pharifees had but embraced this " Opinion, they could never have been at a Lofs *' to have anfwered our Lord's Queftion, Mat, xxii. " 43—46. If Chrjji be David's Son, how doth he " in Spirit call him Lord ? it was plain by their " Silence and Confufion, that they did not believe " his Godhead, p. 75. Anf. i. Whence did our Author learn this ? 'Tis plain, indeed, that they
gave
[ 3^3 1
gave him no Anfwer : But, the Text fpeaks nothing of their Confufton. — 2. 'Tis certain they believed. That God had a Son^ who was equal with him^ Jo. v. 18. and who was God, Ch. x. 33. and that they charged Chrift, with giving out himfe{f to be that Son. — Or, 3. If they did not know, that the Mejfiah was to be God, Jehovah, &c. and therefore, the true God, they mud either have been very ignorant indeed, or almoft incurably objiinate : Becaufe, all this is fo frequently, fully, and emphatically, revealed all over the Old Tejiament. Gen. xviii. 1 3, 25, &c. Numb. xxi. 5—9. compared with i Cor. x. 9. Pf. xcvi through- out, &c. If. ix. 6. Ch. xxxv. 4-- 6. Ch xl. 9--- 11. &:c. Jer. xxiii. 6, &c. Hof. i. 7. Ch. xii. 3—5, i^c. Zech. xi. 13, ^c Mai. iii. 1—4. — 4. We can other- wife, much better, account for their Silence. And, to pafs their Pride, Enmity againft him, i^c. 7 hey knew very well, That our Lord, by all his Far -.hies, Mirccks^ &c. defigned to prove himfelf to be the Meffiah \ tho' he had never., for the Reafons above given, exprefsly fo called himfelf : — They remem- bred the Dilemma he brought them into, by a ^efiion he afkt them, but a little before : Mat. xxi. 24 — '7- — They perceived, that, if they fhould deny that ChriJlyNzs, the Son of God, and as fuch, the true God, they had the Scriptures, the Judgment of their Anceftors, and their own Sentiments alfo, all diredly againft them ; and if they fhould confefs him to be the true God, he would then turn it upon them, and fay. How could they then, iov Jhame, dream of his temporal Kingdom, &c ^ And therefore, feeing they were refolved to hold faft that vile, that ridiculous Opinion ; and knowing that, which Way foever they replied, he would be too many for them ; they wifely thought, it would be beft for them to hold their Peace. — But, 5. I muft retort this, upon our learned Author, thus. Had they known, any Thing " of Chrifl's glorious fre-emftent human Soul, i^c'*
they
[ 304 ]
tliey might have readily, and without any Confufion, anfwered him, and perhaps have kept their fcandalous Prejudice too ! Tho' Chrifl is David's Sen, " ac- *' cording to (his ficjhly Original^ or) the Influence of *' the Flejh into his Birth, p. 50." (if thcfe Words are really intelligible!) Yet, his " pie-exiftent hu- " man Soul is a fupr a- angelical Spirit, &c." and therefore, is He, upon that Account, his Lord alfo. I humbly conceive, I may add, — 6. Had this been the Cafe, they would have openly derided him for his ftlly Queftion. — But, we wave feveral others, and proceed to,
" SECT. II. JVhat Ideas did Chrift give his " DiJci-pUs of himjelfV p. ']G — 83.
" Anf. I . He takes particular Pains upon many Oc- *' cafions to fhew that he was fent from God, or re- *' ceived Commiffion from Heaven to teach the Doc- *' trines which he taught, and perform thofe glo- *' rious Miracles which he wrought, to confirm *' both his Do6trine and Commiffion : And then '' refers to John v. vi. viii. &c."— -He did fo : And his Works infallibly proved both thefe -, tho', in the Chapters referred to, hisDifcourfes wereVc^therJpologies for himfelf, or Anfwers to and Reafonings with the Pharifees, the Sanhedrim, and the murmuring cavil- ling Capernaites, than Inflrudlions to his Difciples.
" 2. He proves by mofl infallible Evidences, *' that he was the Meffiah, the Saviour of Mankind:^* He did fo : Tho' this could not have been done, as we have fhewn, without declaring and proving. That he was the coejfential Son of God, and, as fuch,
equal with him. See what we have offered to
this Purpofe. p. 3 6, '^y, i^c.
" 3. He often takes Occafion to declare, that he *' had a Being before he came into this World. Jo. iii. « 13. Ch. V. 38. and 51. tsff." p. ^^. Yes: But, (i.) He never, fo far as I know, fpoke one Word of hii pre-exijfent human Soul ', which, lam inclin'd
to
1 305 ]
to think, he would have done, once at leafl, had he had any. (2.) He is very fokmn, in declaring him- felf the only begotten Son of God, whom he fent into the World \ and that he that believeth on him^ the Son, and as fuch, is not condemned, &c. Jo. iii. 1 6 — 1 8. &c. But, to believe on him, or in his Name, is an Adl of religious WorJIjip : Whence I conclude, he is a coef- fential Son, and as fuch, the true God. (3.) In fome of the I'exts quoted, Our Author has, upon his own Principles, much over done it ; and, in others, as
much under done it. Chrilt's human Soul was
not " the living Bread, which came down from Hea- ven ; &c." Jo. vi. 51. — He that was fent, " not on- *' ly came down from Heaven, but came forth from the " Father; Ch. xvi. 28." and could fay. Trap axirH iiyki, I am FROM, or of him, viz. as a Son. Ch. vii. 29. ^c. ^c.
" 4. He afTumes to himfelf the Chara5ler of the ** Son of God, in a more eminent and fuperior " Way than Men or Angels are his Sons ; for he *' calls himfelf the o'dy begotten Son of God. Jo. iii. " 16. i8. p. 73." Anf (i.)TheTitle, theSonofGod, is not properly, if at all, a Chara£ier, but a Title of Nature. (2.) In every Senfe, in which the Word^ Son, is ufed, except its only proper Senfe, to denote the natural Relation of one that is begotten, to him that begat him, there are many who have been called the Sons of God : But, Chrijl is an only begotten Son : Whence I conclude, as above. That he is a Son, in a quite different Senfe from all others •, or, in the only proper Senfe, i. e. a coejfe7itial Son. (3.) He not only affumed this Title to liimfeli', but accepted it often from others. — And therefore, to pafs feveral Things, (4.) What more would he have had our Lord to have faid ? Yea, What more could he have faid, to prove his coeffential SonJIoip, than lie has faid, *' Johnv. 19 — 23." which I have, and mull yet farther confider ? — He owns " thefc cannot be fup-
R r pofed
t 3o6 1
*' pofed to be fpoken of any mere Greature," Right; " " And therefore — they give fome Intimations of his " Union with Godhead^ &c." p. 79. — This Jufpi- cious Language needs Exphcation. Is, or was, this
a perfonal Union ? ■ If it was. Which of the Per-
fons does he mean ? — ■■ — If it was not a perfonal U- nion, and with a particular Perfon, What was this Union with Godhead ? &c. &c. — No other Name is here mention'd, hut the Son of God, or the Son-, and therefore, if thefe Words are true, they mull be true of him, as the Son : Not chiefly, not merely, if at all, as the Son of Man •, and therefore, as the Son of God : And confequently, " the meer Name, the Son " of God, in thefe Pallages, gives," with his good Leave, " fome Intimations of his Divinity." ibid. And, I may add, having proved it, every where elfe in Scripture, from the Beginning to the End.
" 5. Fie fometimes takes Opportunity to acquaint *' them with his moji iniimateUnion or Onenefs with the *' Father, &c. p -79." He does fo : And does it as clearly, and ftrongly, as it is ever done ; or as it could be done, in a Confiftency with the Difiin^ion of the^wo e-ver-bkffedPerfons.—'-'' For when he fays, John *' X; 29. My Father, who gave-me my Sheep, is greater " than all ;" Yes : He is abfolutely, yea, infinitely greater than all, who would endeavour to pluck them out of his Hands. — " yet he adds in the next Verfe, " / and my Father are one : " Yes : Thefe Two Per- fons, the Father and the Son, are "v, Unum, One ,Thing. — One Thing, as having the fame EJfence ; and therefore, One in Cojfent, Will, and Power ^ who will mo^ perfectly concur, and agree, in preferving the Sheep : And confequently. Whatever Prerogative, or Greatnefs, tht Father as fuch has, which the Son, as ilich has not, it is purtly relative and perfonal, .and fully confiftent with iheir Coeffentiality . • *' w])ich I think arc Int:imations of a fuperior and " inftiior Nature, and that tiiQ Divine Nature of
the
[ 3^7 ]
'* the Father was in him.'* p. ^(). — Which Words give thefe Intimations ? Not, furely, the Words,
Father and Son : Not the Order in which
they are placed, I and my Father: — Not the
Predicate of this Propofition, Fv, one Thing :
What then ? — Why, either thefe, j . " The Father is greater than all." Anf. No furely : For the Words, Father and Son^ intimate their having the fame Na- ture, and not a " fiiperior and inferior Nature •, " and the Words, 'Iv i<T^iv, are one Thing, put it out of all Doubt. Or, 2. Thefe, " H'ho gave me my Sheep ^* Anfw. This ExprefTion intimates, indeed, a Priority of Order, which is natural ; and an (Economical Supe- riority and Inferiority, which on the Part of the Sen, as fuch, is purely voluntary : But, it plainly pre- fuppofes, and requires, an Equality, or rather iame" nefs of Nature -, becaufe, had not he, to zvhom the Sheep were given, been equal zvith God, he had been no Way Par Negotio \ and could neither have re- deemed, led, kept, nor faved them. — It will be faid. That, when he fpake thefe Words, every one faw he was Man, and had our Nature. Anf, Yes. BlefTed be his Name, He, who thought it no Robbery to he equal with God, had emptied himfelf, and taken upon him the Form of a Servant, &c. which if he had not done, he could never have been the good Shef herd, &c. Johnx. II — iS. But this was no Way inconfiftent, with his beings coeffential Son, as God. Or, 3. Thefe, " That the Divine Nature of the Father was in him." Let it be remembred, that the Perfon he here calls him, is Chrijl : And then I anfwer, Chriji may be confidered as Mediator, and as fuch, God-Man, or merely as the Son of God, or merely as the Son of Man. — If we confider him as Mediator, he is God 3.nd Man m one Perfon: And therefore. Since there is but one Divine Nature, " the Divine Nature of the " Father was, and is, in him ?" — If merely as the Son of God, and if he is indeed his own, his only be-, R r 2 gotten
[ 3°8 ]
gotten Son., then furely he is coeffential with him : And therefore, the fame Divine Nature, which is in the Father as a Father, is in him as a Son : — If merely as the Son of Man, he has no other Nature but the
Human. But, he is not, in any of the Texts
here quoted, called the Son of Man; and therefore, in every One of them, his coejfential Sonfhip is necef- farily implied. I, for my own Part, believe. That, in every one of them, he is fpoken of, as the Media- tor, and as fuch, as God- Man : But, with a very ve- ry peculiar Refpeft to his Divinity. Let the
Reader impartially confult the Pafiages, " John iii. " i6 — i8. Ch. V. 19 — 23. Ch. X. 29. 30. and " 38. Ch.xiv. 7— II. Ch. xvi. 28. p. 78 — 80." and his own Eyes will convince him.
" 6. There arc alfo feveral other Intimations that *' our Lord gave of his Divinity, tho' it was not the " Doftrine that he thought fit at that Time to teach
" in plain and exprefs Language. Thus the
*' Words, ilib/. xviii. 20. leem to denote a divine ** Omniprefence : — Thofe, Ch. xvi. 19. found " God-like : And, when he promifes the Difciples, '* as Luke xxi. 15. or fays, as John ii. 19. he imi- " tates divine Language fo much, that it might have " led the Difciples onwards to the Belief of his Deity. '• p. 80." — Anf. Why, really, if it did not, they were, indeed, vzvy flow of Heart to believe : And very flow of Undsrjtanding alfo ! But, to be more particular, I mufb aflc him again. What would have pleafed him : Or, What Ihould Chrift have faid, which iie has not faid ? — 1 . Would He, who was fo lowly in Heart, have given any Intimations of his Divinity.^ had he not indeed had Divinity ? — Wou'd he, who was the mod perfect Example of Humility, have ufed "Words of himfelf, which feem to denote a divine Omniprefence \ or, found Godlike ; or, imitate divine Language ; &c. had it not become him to do it } — Or, Would the moit f elf -denied Perfon that ever
was.
r 309 ]
was, and who moft fludioufly ihunned all OJientation, &CC. have claim' d to himfelf what was not his Rights or fpoken of himfelf in Strains, which did not be- long to him. — 2. How could he have more clearly, fully, and ftrongly, intimated his coejfential Son/hip than he has done ? — I want fadly to know, 3. How could our Author then fay. That " Chrift did not ** think fit at that Time to teach his Divinity^ in *' plain and exprefs Language ? Surely he would not have had him to call himfelt the Father : And he has as plainly, exprefsly, and emphatically, called him- felt his Son, his only begotten Soft, &c. as he could ! Surely he would not have had him forget the Dijlinc- tion of Perfons in the Trinity -, his own voluntary Con- defcenfion\ his ^conomicdl Subjection ; Exinani- TioN, &c. &c. — What fhould he then have faid, in his State of Humiliation , that he has not faid ? — Would he have had him to talk out of CharaMer^ and of his Exaltation, before he could fay. But 1 am a Worm, and no Man ? — Did he not behave, while he was in the World, jufb as the Prophets faid he would, ^c. — 4. Is it not fomewhat itrange, That he fhould fo often mention his Son/hip ; fpeak to, and of, the Father, with all the Familiarity of a co- ejfential Son j and in Strains, which found Godlike ^ 6cc. and yet never, in plain Terms ; no, nor in any Terms, fo far as I can find, of *' the Pre-exiftence ** oi his Human Soul '," or, o^ ^^ the glorious peculiar *' Derivation of it from GodP" — 5. Isnothisalledging, That our Lord " did not think fit to teach his Di- *' vi?nty, &c/' either a mean Equivocation, very unworthy of himfelf; or to ufe a Law Phrale, a di- redl Protejiatio contra Factum ? — 6. I defire earneflly to know. How he could inJlruM his Difciples, or any others, Who, or What, the Mejfah was ? What he was to do, or fitffer ? What Benefits he was to procun and confer, &c, and how he was, or could
be.
[ 3IO ]
be, qualified for all thefe, l^c. without teaching them his Divinity? &c. &c. — But
What he has faid of " Chrift's A£five and PnJJive *' Behaviour^ p. 80 — 83." is true, and exceeding well faid : And the' we need " not lay the whole " Strefs of the Caufe," i. e. of his " being true /' God^ upon this-," becaufe we have many more Proofs : Yet we might " venture to do it •," becaufe, if we did, we fhouid be in no very great Danger.
" One fpecial Reafon why our Lord did not pro- " claim his own Godhead" — which he fays " is evi- " dent and fufRcient," is very flrange indeed ! Marginal Notes, p. 82. " He muft have done it ei- *' ther with plain and co7ivincing Proofs of it orwith- " out them." Anf He did aftuajly give both -plain^ and convincing Proofs of it : And thofe who were well- difpos'd, and did feriouily confider them, were con-. vinced by them ; fo that it was the Fault of all who had thofe Proofs, if they were not fully convinced. See John i. 14. I fay, convincing Proofs, if calhng and proving himfelf the own, the only begotten bon of the Father \ and if doing the IVorks, and ac- cepting the Wcrfhip of the true God, be fuch. Jo. v. 17 — 47. If. 25. 6-"9. Ch. XXXV. 4 — 6. comp. with Mat. xi. 2 — 6. Ch. xlv. 22 — 25. comp. with Mat.yii. 28. &c. J^r.xxiii. 6. comp. withM^/. xx.28. J<?.x.3o.&c." If hehadonly afiertedit plainly, with- " out convincing Proof, he had haftened the Malice of *' the Jews to put him to Death for Blafphemy." — The Jews had not Power to put any one to Death : — "When they aftually did charge him with Blafphemy before Pilate, which put the Governor into a Fright, John xix. 7. 8. he did not ground his Sentence upen that Accufation, as is plain from the '^itle over his Crofs : vcr. 19. ---And yet, our Lord did often, and mofb folemnly, afTert his coeffential Sonfhip before them ; and that in fuch Words, and with fuch Cir- cumftances, that they prefently charged him with
making
[ 3'i ]
making himfelf equal with Gcd •, Ch.v. 1 7, 1 8.^r. which he was fo far from denying, that he proved it by many plain Arguments, which were, really, convin- cing Proofs I ver. 19 — 47. — I call them convincing Proofs^ not only becanfe they were, in themfelves, ftifficient to convince : But, becaufe they, feem to me to have, then a5luaUy convinced them. — For, They never, fo much as once, interrupted him, in all that long^ that glorious Apology ! They never oppofed one Word, to any Thing he faid ! They feem to have heard him compofedly, with Attention, without murmuring, and to have been fo Jiruck with the over-bearing Evidence of his Defence j and the divine Authority^ and Majefly^ which appeared in his Perfon and Delivery ; that, if they were not effetlually con- vinced., they had nothing to obje^l, durft not gain- fay, but were obliged to be filent : And therefore, fufFered him peaceably to finifh his Difcourfe., and then permitted him quietly to depart! Whereas, having afterwards hardened themfelves, in their Pre- judice and Unbelief., they no fooner ever heard him fpeak in fuch Strains, but they were filled with fuch Madnefs and Fury., that they fought to take him, dec. Ch. vii. 29, 30. or, took up Stones to caji at him, Ch. viii. 58. 59. or to ft one him ! Ch. x. 30, 31. — " On the other Hand, if he had given moft convin- " cing Proofs of it while he afferted it, the Jews and " Gentiles had been reftrained from putting him to " Death at all -, for St. Paul tells us exprefsly, i Cor. " ii. 8. Had the Princes of this World known it, they " would not have crucified the Lord of Glory, This would require a long Anfwer; but, paffing feveral Things, it may fuffice in fhort to fay, There is a mighty Difference between the moft convincing Proofs confidered abftradly, or in themfelves, and con- vincing, overcoming Grace. The moft con- vincing Evidence we (I mean every Man hath, or can,) have of any Thing, at lead next to our own Exijlence,
is
t 312 ]
is that oF the Being of a Deity : And yet, fome have denied, That there is a God! — Men generally ac- knowledge, and are mod firmly perfuaded. That God y^^j what they do : And yet, very few of them, alas! ad as if they did ! — Yea, the mofl convincing Proofs are not, in themfelves, effectual againft rooted Prejudice^ wilful Unbelief, habitual Enmity ! &C.— I fhall there- fore only afk, i . Was the Ignorance of thofe who crucified our Lcrd^ a fufficient Excufe ? — 2. "Will not fufficient Proof render the Unbelief of all, who have, or might have it, a heinous Crime ? — 3. Will not fufficient Proof render all, who have it, ceteris paribus, equally obliged to believe ? &c. — 4. Could any Proofs, in the prefent Cafe, have adlually con- vinced the Jews, and imfrejfed the Convi^ion, fo as to have reflrained them, from what they did, without fufficient Grace? &c. And, to name no more, 5. What Proofs were wanting, which, ail Things con- fidered, would have been more convincing, merely as Proofs ? I may defy the World to name me any One ! Put, I muft obferve upon a few Lines more, p. 83. " And tho' we can never tell exactly what makes *' the perfonal Union between the divine and human " Natures in Chrijv ;" We cannot, I humbly con- ceive, ever tell exaftly what makes the Perfonal U- nion, between our own Souls and Bodies : But, as this comes the neareft to, or moft refembles that, of any Union between fuch different Subjlances known to us ; fo, by ferioufly confidcring this, and carefully ex- amining what we may learn from Scripture concern- ing that, we fhaJI, with the Illuminating Grace, which is promifed to all thofe who afk it as they are re- quired, arrive at as exa^ a Knowledge of it, as is ne- ceflary for us in this World. " yet perhaps this may *■'■ be a jufl Evidence of a perfonal Union with the " Godhead, (viz.) when the Actions and Characters *' and Sufferings Vv'hich Chrifi performed and fuf- " tained, might be properly faid to be performed
*' and
[3i3l
" and fuflained immediately by God himfelf." To treat this, and fuch fufpicious Language, which oc- curs, in almoft every Page, as it well deferves,
would be thought by fome, I Ihall
only obferve, i. Here is no Mention of the feco?id Perfon ! — 2. "A ferfonal Union with the Godheady^ is neither the Language of Divines nor Philofophers,
Chriftians nor Jews. 3 . The human Nature oi
Chrifiy was not, is not, pcrfonally united to the Godhead as fuch, L e. to all the Three Perfons in the Godhead ; but only to the fecond^ even the Son. — 4. " The " Actions and Characters and Sufferings, which *' Chrifl performed and fuflained," were not the A6tions and Charaders and Sufferings oi the Father^ for, to fay fo would be downright P atrip ajfianifm ; nor of the Holy Spirit., for, w^e find no Intimations of any fuch Thing in Scripture : But only of the Per- fon of our Redeemer, even the Son., the fecond Fer-
fon, in our Nature. And therefore, 5. They
*' could not be properly faid to be performed and " fuftained immediately by God himfelf," whatever he meant by thefe Words, " God himfelf:'* Be- caufe, (i.) God himfelf cannot at all he properly faid to fuffer Pain, ov die, i. e. to fuflain Sufferings im- mediately. (2.) The Adtions o^ Chrifi, as Adan, (for Example, his eating, drinking, walking,) cannot be " properly faid to have been performed immediately " by God himfelf," who as fuch neither eats., nor drinks ; &c. no, nor by the Son of God himfelf, and as fuch ; but o^ the Man Chrifi Jefus, and as fuch ; or, if you will, o'ixheMcdiator, but purely as Man. — They may indeed by a Figure, (which the Fathers called Communicatio Idiomatum, and we a Commumcation of Properties, if not by a much more common one, even 2. Synecdoche ;) be faid to have been done " by " God himfelf •," becaufe, they were done by One, who is not only true Man, but alfo the Son of God, and, as fuch, true God : But they cannot be properly
Sf laid
[ 3H ]
faid to have been performed even by the Son of God as fuch, and much lefs immediately. 'Tis a Maxim among Divines, That, when the firji and the fecond Cau^ e concur to any one A^icn^ it is attri- buted to the neict and immediate., i. e. the fecond Caufe. Thus, Tho' it is God which worketh in us loth to will and to do \ Phil. ii. 13. for Inftance, to believe and repent : Yet, becaufe we ourfelves work pjider, and with, his Grace, and fo are really the next and immediate Caufes, 'tis we who are laid to believe and repent, and not He. — I fhall leave the Intelligent Reader to m.ake other Remarks upon this, and the like PalTages, as he may a great many more : And to fay, Whether they do not found more like the Herejies of Sahellius, the Patripajfians, if not the Eu- t)chia7is, &c. than the Faith of the Chriftian Churchy
or the Scriptures of 'Truth ? He concludes thus,
" But I much queftion whether his Difciples in that " Day did certainly infer fo much from thefe Words, " viz. / and my Father are one. lam in the Father, and , *' the Father in me^ (Then they were certainly Two^ how intimate fo ever the Onenefs was!) " 'The Father " who is in me doth the JVorks." (Not he only ; for the Son, who doth what Things foever the Father doth, was neither mwMive, nor paffive.) " He that hath ^^ feen me h&th feen the Father.^'' He hath fo : And yet furely, he hath not feen that he was the Father.— But our Author needed have made no Qiieltion of this : For, I dare affure the World, and fhall be bound, through Grace, to make it good. That the Difciples, fo far as appears, never " inferred fo much," no, nor any fuch Thing, neither in that nor any other Day, " from thefe Words :" And, that he has inferred many other Things, which never came into their Minds ; nor, for aught which can be proved, into the Minds of any others, till very lately.
Twould, pe.haps, be thought fevere, &c. to hint what feems to have bjen the true Deftgn of this Secr
tion ;
[i'S]
tion : I fliall therefore, leave the Reader himfelf to find it out ; and proceed to another Subje6t.
" SECT. III. What Idea the Dtfcipks had of " Chrifi ill his own Life-time'^'' p. 83— 86.
We agree, " That the Difciples did not iindcr- « Hand and effcdually learn all that our Lord taught " them," till they were filled with the Holy Ghofi : Ads ii. 4. And, that " there were many Things y which, they could not bear in his Life-time. John '" xvi. 12." Let us then hear " the Sentiments they " (aftually) entertained concerning him," while he was here,
" I. They firmly believed that he was fent of " God. Jo. xvii. 8." p. 84. They did fo : And ic was next to an abfolute Impoffibility, that thofe, who faw and heard what tky did, fhould not. — - Numbers, btfides them, m.oft T.rmly believed this.
" 2. They were convinced that he w.jj the true Mtf- '■'■ ftah. John vi. 6q. p. 85."^They were lb: And were alfo jure. That he was the Son of the living God, And, 1 humbly conceive, That he was^ the Son of God., before he engaged to be the Mejfiah -, and that he could not have been qualified for bting the Meftah, if he had nor. — And yet, as ccnvincii^g the Proofs of his being the Meffiah v/ere, they were not effe£luat to reftrain one of them from betraying him, another from denying him, and two more, at leaft '[xon\ doubting \t. L«/^^ xxiv. 2 1 .
" 0^. That he had a peculiar and gkrious Relation to " God, p. 85." 'Twas abfolutely impoffible. That any One, who knew and were fure he was the Mef- fiah, could doubt of this. " that he was the Son of *' the living God," They could not have believed that he was the Meffiah, without believing this. " which primarily referred to the Dignity of his
*' Perfon," 'Tis plain, it did fo! Why then,
(i.) 'Tis primarily a Title of 'Nature, and not of Ofjice^ which alone, overthrows 'Dx, Ridgley^'^O'
S f 2 tion.
[3i6]
tion. (2.) Did they, could they, think, That this Son, was, as fuch, a mere Creature •, though a very
glorious one ? i^c. " and oftentimes included
" in it alfo his Charader, or Office as the appointed " Saviour." Yes. And when /i^f E/^r;^^/ 5"^?/; had un- dertaken that Office -, and even when he had aflumed our Nature into a 'Personality with himfelf, and, in his whole Perfon, had enter'd upon the Execution of his Office ; it was ftill the moft glorious of all his PerfonalTitks -, and frequently ufed alfo, for the Sup- port of his People's Faith and his own Honour and Glory, to denote his complex Perfon and as Mediator. — The three Texts he quotes muft be confidered by and by.
" 4. They believed alfo, that he had an Exijience " before he came into thelVorld. p. 85." They could not polTibly doubt this : Becaufe, it was impoffible, that he could come into the World till he had one, or before he exided. — But, he durft not fay, p. 10, II. they believed, that his Human Soul then exijied : And therefore, when rhey profeffed, and were fure, that he was the Son of the living God, I cannot help thinking, they were fure he was the fecond Perfon, and, as fuch, the coeffential Son, now made Flefh. And the Text quoted, " John xvi. 28. and 30. I came forth from the Father, &:c." makes much for me. " This, fays Mr. Clark, confirms us in the Belief of " thy Deity and OmnifcimceP
5. " They believed alfo that God was in a moft *' eminent and "peculiar Manner prejent with him^ " &c. p. %6.^^ This is fo plainly implied in the former Thoughts, that thofe, who believed them, could not poifibly doubt of this : Not to add. That Nicodemus's Reafoning is clear, invincible, and con- vincing. Jo. iii. 2. No one can do thofe Miracles which
thou doeft, except God be with him. " But they
" did not feem to have any fixed and certain Belief " of fuch a peculiar and perfonal Union of the Man
'« Chriji
[ 3^7 1
*' Chrifi Jefus with the true God during his Life ** Time, as to give him the Name and Title of *' Gody This Sort of uncouth Language comes fo often up, that I can hardly, with a fafe Confcience,
help fetting it in its true Light !
They never, neither during his Life- time nor after it, heard, or fpoke, one Word of his perfonal Union with the true God, in his Senfe of that Title : — They heard him often, and plainly, fpeak of the Father and the Son, which were the perfonal Titles of 'Two difiin5l Perfons ; and therefore, could not but know. That the 07ie was neither the other^
nor them both : They never called him the
Father, but always the Son, which was the Title proper to him : — They could not but know, that, when he called himfelf /.f^ 5(7« of God, in the Way and Manner he did, the Jc-ivs always charged him with r,iaking himfelf E(ruAL with God, or making HIMSELF God, Jo. x. ^^. and that he never denied that he was ; and therefore, I humbly conceive, could not but believe. That he was adlually equal ijuith God, i. e. the Father, and beiag a coeffential Son, was indeed God, tho' not the Father : — This they might believe, tho' they might not always either fpeak, or a^ fully up to their Faith : — When he is fpoken of as Mediator, the Name God is CEconomi- cally afcribed, if not referved, to the/r/?Perfon, the
Father with whom he mediates : Notwithftand-
ing the perfonal Union of the Divine and Human Natures in the Mediator, " 'i he Man Chrifi Jefus,' as fuch, had never the Name and Title of God given him, either during his Life-time or after it ; nor never will : — And, to wave fome others, I do not know but I may add. That, fuppofing them to have been mod " certain that he was the true God,*' they might doubt, Whether, during his Eftate of Humiliation, they were " to give him the Name and ** Title of G»d,'' without particular Inftrudion
from
[ 3'8 ]
from himfelf i which he, in his Wifdom, had not thought meet to give them, for the Reafons hinted
above, or the hke. If " they did fcarce under-
" ftand his Onenefs with the Father, in fo fubhme a *' Senfe j" it was not, becaufe it was not fo clearly revealed before his Refurre^iion •, for it was as clearly revealed before it, as after it : But, it proceeded from their Prejudices^ their fFeaknefs, their Jlownefs of Heart to believe and underjiand, ^c. — And yet, I am fatisfied, they believed, That there is but one God: Thut ihe Fai.her w^s the t7'ue God : And, That ihe Sen was a coejfential Son, and therefore equal with him. — After all, the Queflion betwixt us is not,
"What Idea they had : But, v/hat Idea they might and JI?ould have had : Or rather, What Idea we, who have the whole Scriptures complete, ought to, and
may now, have of Chriji. Were a Socinian, or
modern Jew, difputing againfl the Satisfaction of Chriji ; and, in profecuting his Purpofe, fhould divide his Difcourfe into feveral Sedlions: What would our Author have faid, had one of them begun thus, What Idea the Difciples had of ^the Death of Chriji, with the glorious Ends and bleifed Effects of
it ? Surely he would have fmiled, had either
of them anfwered, i. They firmly believed, that he was the true Mejfiah \ and therefore, was never to die. Jo. xii. 34, <3c. — 2. They believed, that he was to be a King, a mighty Conqueror, &c. — But, 3. Had the Socinian, without either Fear or Shame, aflerted. That he was not to be a Prieji, till after his Refurre5fion ! nor offer his Sacrifice, till heafcend- ed into Heaven ! &c. that he was only a metaphorical Redeemer, and that the Sacrifice which he offered as a proper Sacrificer, was only a fokmn /iddrefs ! &c. &c. Would he not, and with fome Zeal too, have told the Jew, That the Old Teftament Sacrifices in Blood, with the acknowledged Dejign and Effe£fs of them,
wer^
[ 3^9 ]
were all typical Prefigurations of the great, and true Sacrifice, even his own precious Blood, which he was to offer as the Price of Redemption -, CsrV. and that feveral of the Prophets had, in the clearefb and fullefl Manner, prophefied of his Suferings, and Death as a Sacrifice for Sin, &c. Pf. xxii. throughout. If lii. 14. Ch. liii. throughout, ^c. &c. And, Would he not have told the unbelieving Socinian, That their ever biefled Mafter had fo plainly, and fre- quently, yea, and emphatically, told them. That he was to fufi^er many Things, and be crucified, &cc. that he was to lay down his Life for the Sheep, Sec. and give his Life a Ranfom for many, &c. &c. and therefore they might, they ought to, have known
better ? i^c. i^c. • • Would he not have thought.
That all their Arguments againft it, were poor, pitiful Sophifnis ; and all their Reafonings like the fenfelefs, perverfe Chat of fome conceited, obitinate, peevifh Boys ? &c.
The Defign of this Se5Jion is fo plain, that the ferious Chriftian will excufe me if I pafs it.
" SECT. IV. PFhat Evidence they gave of he- " lieving his true Deity, p. 87 — 94."
The plain Befigyi of this SeElion cannot be miftaken. Several Things recorded by the Evangelifts, have been thought fufficient Evidence, that the Difciples and others believed him to be, what the Prophets foretold he was to be, even Immanuel, God in our Nature : Pf ii. 6 — 12. If vii. 14. Ch. ix. 6. Zech. xiii. 7, ^c. ^c. But, Our Author, with his " Doublings, perhaps' s. Sec. tries to inv^alidate thern all ! and is very zealous in it too !
" I. Upon fome fpecial Occafions they wor- '-'- fhipped him.'' p. 87. And, confidering the Faith of the Jews, in thofe Days and ever fince, if the Worfhip they gave him was " Religious and Divine ^' Worfhip, 'tis an irrefragable Argument, (i) That fhey believed his true Deity : Becaufe, if they had not,
their
[ 320 ]
their worjhipping him with religions and di-vine Wor- Jhip, had been, in them, wilful, and dire£i Idolatry. (2) That he knew himfelf to be the ccejfential Son of God, and as fuch, really God: Becaule, if he had not, he would not, could not, have accepted r^- ligious a.v\d divine PForJhip from them, without daring Robbery of the mojl High, making himfelf an Idol,
^c. He gives us five Inftances, where the very
fame Verb is ufed, which is commonly ufed to fig- nify religions and divifte Worfhip ; even thofe of *' the Leper, Mat. viii. 2. the Ruler, Ch. ix. 18. *' the Woman of Canaan, Ch. xv. 25. the blind Man, *' Jo. ix. 38. and the Difciples that were in the Ship.
" Mat. xiv. 32, 33. But it may be doubted,
^' fays he, whether all this arifes to the Notion of " religious and divine Worfhip, fince this Word is *' fometimes ufed in Scripture, referring to moral " or civil Honours paid to our Fellow-Creatures, *' I Chron. xxiv. 20. Mat. xiii. 26." &c. »
It is fo : And very frequently, in this Nation, we ufe the Englifh Word, Worfhip, to fignify civil Honour ; as when we bow to a Jufiice of the Peace, and
call him your Worfhip, &c. But, it is not from
the mere Ufe of the Verb, Trpoo-jcuvnv, nor the Englifh Word, Worfhip, that we reafon : But, from the
whole Adtion ; or all that was faid, and done.
The Leper did not only worfhip, i, e. bow his Head or Body, and " pay him a meer high Degree of " Reverence and Obeifance," p. 88. but profefTed his Faith in his Power to make him clean : And the others, befides the Refped they paid him, profefTed their Faith, ' that he could cajl out Devils, raife the
Dead, &c. Were any ferious underftanding
Chriftian now to fee, and hear one who had the Leprofy, bowing reverendly, and faying to another. Lord, if then wilt, thou canfi make me clean : Would he not think, and fay, either, That the Leper be- lieved
r 321 ]
lieved him to be the Lord, who could make him clean -, or tliat he was a mere Fool \ or dijha£fed -, or, that he mocked the other ; or, that he really made aa Idol of him, in expefting that from him, which' he could not do, and attributing that to him which did not belong to him ? i^c. And, Would he not think, and fay. That he, who accepted fuch an Addrefs, and did not admonijh, or reprove him, i^c. either took him for a mad Man, &c. or was himfelf a vile, p'oud Monjler, &c. or, indeed, the Lord, who could cleanfe him. ? ijUl, I muft be more par- ticular, when I have obffrved,
1. That the Enquiry, in the preceding and fol- lowing Sections, was concerning the Ideas the Difciples
■had of him, or, what he had taught them, &c. and fo his Words, in this, feem plainly to imply : Whereas, of the fix Inftances here given, four or five, fo far as appears, were not his Difciples, and had never feen him till that Day! ■ So that,
2. Thofe four or Jive Inftances, are no Way to his Purpofe : And therefore, lliould wt- grant every one of them, and every Word he has faid upon them, and that all his Doubts, &c. in thefe Cafes, are rea-
fonable, they do him no Service. But, we
fhall {hew, that every one of his Perhaps* s are ground- lefs. And therefore,
" As to the Lepcr\ worjhipping him, I think we may be fure, it was with " Religious and Divine. " IVorjhip •," and therefore, an "- Evidence that he
" believed his true Deity" Whether this Sort of
Leprofy among the Jews, was only an Uncleannefs, or a real Sicknefs, or both, I am not fo certain. Thefe Things however, concerning it, i conceive, we certainly know. — x. The Leper was not fent to the Phyftcian ; nor do we read ol: any Medicines, of any Sort, or any other Means, prefcribed, either for his cleanfing or Cure. — 2. The Prieji, to whom he was fent, neither pretended to fltcipfey nor heal him;
T I ' but
[ 3^2 ]
but Ctfily to proncunce him ckan^- or unclean^ ac- cording to the Dire^ions prefcribed. Lev. xiii. and xiv. — 3. The Jews generally think, and feveral Things render it ahnofl; certain. That the Leprofy, was a Pumjhment, or Brand, infiifted immediately^ by God hinill-lf, for fome particular Sin : And conle- quentiy, could be neither removed, nor in the leafl abated, by any natural Means, whether applied ex-
■ ternally or internally, till he himfelf interpoled. ■
4. This, we are fure, was the Cafe with Miriam, Nurnb. xii. 10^ — 15. Gehazi, 2 Kings v. 27. and Uzziah, 2 Chro. xxvi. 19- -21. the only /Zt^^ Lepers, whofe Names are mentioned in the Old Teftament.
— And, 5. Hence it would appear, T'hit this Le- profy differ'd greatly, if not totally, from the Difeafe
known at this Day, in Europe, by that Name.
It feems therttore clear, — 6. That none could cleanfe the Leper, i. e. remove the Effect, but He who could remove the Caufe, i. e. forgive the Sin : And confe- quently, That none could cleanfe the Leper, but God himfelf-, becaufe, none but he can forgive Sin.
— Of this Mind, was the King of Ifrael^ 2 Kings V. J. Am I Gov, that . I Jhould recover a Man of his Leprofy ? And of this Mind was the Leper, of whom we are fpeaking •, and therefore, beHeving Chrifl to be the Son of God, and, as fuch, his coejfential Son, and f^?/^/ with him, Yitworfmpped him, faying. Lord, if thou zvilt thou canfi make me clean, q. d. Lord, I firmly believe, that, thou art the Son of God; and therefore, if it be thy good Pleafure, thou canst forgive my bin, the Caufe ; and, confequently, canfi alfo remove my Leprofy, or juake me clean : —I know alfo, that thou are mofi merciful, and ready to forgive the Penitent ; and moil zvife, and knoweft when it is
. mofl feafonaUe, to remove the viftble Efe3fs of thy Vi, pleafure for Sin:- — I cannot tell, if it is agreeable to thy Wifdcm, or confident with thy Glory, fo foon to r.iake 'me clean : -— . But I IcdVe my moll humble De-
fires
[ 3^3 ]
fires with thee, Thy Will be done. The hkelieft Way, in fuch a Cafe, to obtain a gracious Anfwer, that cou'd be conceived! — BtJt, If the Leper had any Doubts of Chrijl's Divittity ; his Anfwer, and v/hat followed, could hardly fail to remove them.
" As for the Ruler of the Synagogue., Mat. ix. 18." Since the other Rulers., the Scribes., and the PharifeeSy well knew the Meaning of the Title, the Son of God •, even that he who aiTumed it to, or ufed it of, himfelf, was equal with God., &c. we have no Reafon to doubt, that this Ruler was of the fame Mind : And his Requeil, That Chrifl zvould come, and reflore his dead Daughter to Life, may confirm us in it. Whence I conclude, tliat he worfhipped him with religious and divine Worjhip.
As to " the Woman of Canaan, her Cafe Yi2iS Jin- " gular. She was not a Defcendant of Jbraham ; was not, for aught appears, a Profelyte ; had never feen Chrifi : And yet, was one of the moft eminent Believers that ever was I — She had heard of hinty and o^ his fVorks: And, Faith coweth by hearing. — 'Tis plain, from all that pafs'd, that flie was a Wo- man of good Senfe and quick A'p'prehenficn, as well as of fuch a ilrong Faith, as would take no De?iiaL — She knew, by Report, That our Lord had, and therefore could, caft out Devils ; Sec. and confe- quently, w^s the MeJJiah, the Son of God: No one of the Prophets, nor any other before him, having ever pretended to do any fuch Thing, which plainly re- quired divine Power. — She might, poffibly, have heard, That, to cafl out Devils, was the /ri'/^r Work of the Mejfiah, who was to bruife the Serpent's Head : And, That the Son of God was to be manifefled, to de- Jiroy the Works of the Devil. — Thefe and the like, or, what other Hints fhe might have had, concerning the expelled Saviour, from Tradition then very com- mon, as we hinted above, all around, far and near, among the Heathen ; and what other Things Ihe,
T t 2 who
[ 3H ] who lived jufl: on the Borders of Canaan, might have heard, or learned, from fome pious Jews her Neighbours •, or otherwife, from thofe who had heard him, or feen his JVorks, and perhaps had them- felves been healed by him ; and what fhe herfelf had then obferved in him, to raife her Idea of him, and encourage her Faith in him and Expe^ations from him, I cannot fay : But, it feems plain, flie, at that Time, fpake and a6Ved, under a very fpecial In- fluence of the Holy Sprit ; and neither would, nor could, have a6led the Part fhe did, if fhe had not.
• And therefore, feeing 'tis clear, that fhe fpake
to him, as to a Divine rerfon •, I humbly conceive, we may be fatisfied, that the Worjhip wherewith fhe worfi>ipped him, was Religious and Divine Worjhip : Or elfe, that our Lord would have admonifhed, and directed her, as he did the young Ruler ^ Luke xviii, 19. inftead of giving her fo very ample a Commen- dation. And the Grant of her Requefi, Be it unto thee, even as thou wilt, *' founds fo God-like, and " imitates divine Language fo much, that it might *' have led," and confidering her Sagacity, Humi- lity, Importunity, and Conftancy, I conceive, could not but, yea, did adually, lead " her onward ** to the Belief of his Deity," fliould we fuppofe her to have been, even to that Minute, utterly igno- yant of it.
The Cafe of the poor blind Man, John ix. is ra- ther more clear. He was not ib much as enquiring after Chrifi ; or minding him, in the leaft ; fo tar was he from expecting, that heeither could, or would, open the Eyes of one that was horn blind I ver. 30— -32. But,^ cur Lord, y^w him, as he was pajfm^by, ver i. and without being aflct, or, fo far as appears, fpeaking one Word to him, Jpat on the Ground, having no.
Water at hand, made Clay, ■ anointed his Eyes,
ordering him, for the ^'n^j/of his Faith, what
to do ; ver. 6, 7. and then went his Way, before
his.
[ 325 ]
his Patient was fo happy, as to fee the extraordinary Perfon^ who had not only opened his Eyes, but done it by fuch Means as were more hkely to clofe, or keep them fhut, than to open them ; and on the Sabbath-Bay too, againfl the then received fuper- ftitious Interpretation of the Law of the Sabbath ! — All the Account, he could afterwards give of his wonderful Phyjician, was, that he W9S a Man called Jefus, that he made Clay, and anointed his Eyes, &c. ver. 1 1 . Whence he very rationally, and juftly, con- cluded him to be a Prophet; ver. 17, and that he was not a Sinner, as they faljly and malicioujly al- ledged, but a Favourite of Heaven arid of God ; i^c. and, as a fure Proof of it, had done to him, what had never been dontfince the World began, ver. 30 — • 33. — As the open, judicious, and brave yf- pology, for his glorious BenefaSior, (for which they, in their mad Zeal, excommwnicated him, ver. 34.) Ihews him to have been a fenjible, grateful, well-dif- pofed Man ; Our Lord, when he had found hiniy (that he might further inflru5f him concerning him- felf, and confirm him in it. That he was indeed, 7rap« ©£», OF God, or from him, viz. by Eternal Generation ;) faid unto him, Doft thou believe on THE Son of God ? ver. '^r^. A Queftion which ne- ceflarily pre-fuppofes, and implies, his true and pro- per Divinity. 7r»r£uf<v Uq tov viov tS" ©£», to believe on the Son of God, is an A6t of religious and divine Wor- Jhip, John xiv. i. if any A61 of Worfliip can be fo : But, our Lord affures us, Thou fhalt worfhip the Lord thy God, and him only fhalt thou ferve. Mat. iv. 10. And therefore, if he then fpake Truth, and is here confident with himfelf, 'tis undeniable. That He is the Lord our God, and That he propofed himfelf, the Son, as the Objed of Divine Worfhip ; and con- fequently. That the blind Man fhould worfhip him, '
3s the Lord his God. The poor Man's Anfwer
plainly declaring, that he was very ready and willing
to.
[ 326 ]
to do it, afibon as he fhould know, H^o he •was: ver. c}6. Our Lord prefently replies in the cleareft, and fulleft Manner, ^hou haft both feen him, and it is he that talketh with thee. ver. 38. q. d. I, whom thine Eyes fee, and who am the very Perfon who opened them. Am the Son of God, who, ac- cording to the Prophets, was to be given, to be the Child born, whofe Name was to be called the Mighty God; If. ix. 6. even the Virgin's Son, Immanuel, God with us. Ch. vii. 14. I am he whom Ifaiah calls your God, and of whom he prophefies, that I was to come, and that, when I Jhould come, Then the Eyes of the Blind fhall be opened, &c. Ch. xxxv. 4, 5. Qc. Doft thou then believe the Report, I now make to thee ? And, Doft thou not only believe, that I am what, and who, I tell thee, I am : But, Doft thou believe on me, as the promifed Saviour ? i.e. Doft thou receive me, and yield thyfelf to me, as thy Saviour •, who has given thee full Evidence, that I can fave thee from thy Sins, and open the Eyes of thine Under/landing, &c. by opening thy bodily Eyes,
which thou knoweft none but God could do ?
Upon which, the Evangelift informs us. That he readily, and heartily, faid. Lord, I believe. And, to teftify that he did, 7r^o<nyAw<Ti)) aurw, he worjhipped, or adored him. q. d. Notwithftanding the Meannefs of thine Appearance, and the malicious Surmizes of thine Enemies i ^c. &c. I firmly believe what thou fajft of thyfelf. That thou art the Son of God, now come unto the World: And, I receive thee, and accept of thee, as my only Saviour : And, in Teftimony of it, I now moft humbly worftiip thee as Emmanuel, iViy Saviour and my God.
" The Leper, Luke xvii. 15. who was the only " One of the Ten that were cleanfed^ who glorified " Gcd, and fell down on his Face at Chrifi^s Feet j " Luke xvii. 15, 16!" was a Samaritan: And confec^uently, i. For aught appears, no Difciple :
And
[ 3^7 ]
And therefore, Ihould have had no Place here. .
But, if he was, 2. It is not faid, That " he gave *' Chrijl T'hanks^ as the glorious Means and mira- " culous Inftrument of his Deliverance," Words that need to be explained ! Nor, — 3. Is it certain, that " he did not know. That Chrijl who healed " him, was himfeif the true God." p. 88. Becaufe, (i) Our Lord had been two Days among the Samari~ tans.) by whom he was alfo kindly received. Jo. iv, 40 — 42. — (2) Many of them believed on him^ for the Saying of their Town's- Woman, ver. 39. and many mere believed on him, becaufe of his cuonWord: ver. 41. for that they had heard him themfelves ; and declared, they knew that he was indeed the Chrifl, the Saviour of the World, ver. 42. — Whence it appears, — ( ^) That his IFord had more Succefs among them, than generally among the J^-zx^j-; And, That they had clearer, and better. Notions both of his Per/on, and Office, than the others. And, (4) For any Thing we know, probably he might have heard our Lord, when he was in Samaria, call him- feif the Son of God •, or might have heard from his
Neighbours, that he had. Or, Thofe, who
knew that he v/as indeed the Chrift, the Saviour of the World, might, many other Ways have heard, as well as Virgil, &c. that he alfo was the Son of God, and therefore the true God.
In a Word, I cannot help thinking. That, in the four former Cafes at lead, they worfhipped him with
religious and divine Worflfi-p, for thcfe Keafons.
I. It cannot be doubted, that every one, whom he healed, or difpoffeffed, &c. " paid him moral or civil " Honours-," and yet, none, I think, but thefc, are faid to have worfhipped him. — 2. Thefe Inftances were all extraordinary, requiring more Power and Authority, than ever had been given to any Creature.
No one, before him, had ever pretended to
deanfe a Leper ; raife the Dead, only by taking them by
the
[ 328 ]
the Hand -, or, open the Eyes of one that was horn blind;
&c. 3. The happy Perfons were, every one of
them, endued with a very extraordinary Degree of Faith J and were alfo, at that Time, under the exci- ting and quickening Power of the Holy Spirit. ■
4. The Manner and Circumjiances^ as well as Words^ of their Addrefs, feem to make it plain, that it was religious and divine Worfl)ip they paid him. — And,
5. I cannot bring myfelf to think. That our Lord, who was meek and lowl)\ would, in his Humiliation^ have accepted of fuch JVorJhi'p, had it not been reli- gious JVorfhip ; or healed them, till he had admonijhed them, had they afcribed more to him than was his Due.
The Cafe of the Difciples, Mat. xiv. 25 — 33. I humbly conceive, is undeniably for me. — Jefus
went unto them walking on the Sea, he bid Peter
come to him on the Water, — caught him when he was finking, — when he was come into the Ship, the Wind
ceafed. Here were feveral Miracles, and fuch
as they had never feen -, no, nor heard of ! Upon this, they came and worjhipped him, faying. Of a Truth thou art the Son of God. And therefore, the Ob- jedt of religious and divine Worfhip.
" 2. The Scnfe he gives us of Peter'* s Words, *' when in a great Surprife, Lukev. 4. Depart frojn " me, for I am a finful Man, O Lord,^' is exceeding good i and his Thought, " he might at this Seafon " have an overwhelming Glimpfe of his Divinity,'* I, for my Part, readily admit and believe : But, he adds, *' it may be eafily faid, that this Miracle alone, *' the great Draught of Fijhes, was not fufficient to *' give a juft convincing Proof of his Godhead. *' p. 89." Anf. I do not pretend to know, what " might be, to our Author, ajullconvincingProof," But, it is plain, that taking it, with all the Circum- ilance of it, it exceedingly afionifJoed them all ; yea, rather more, than fome others we have now confi-
dered.
r 329 1
dcred, which were, as, I humbly conceive, I have made appear, a juji and convincing Proof of it : ■ This might flill convince them the more, who
had feen fo many of another Nature : The
*' overwhelming Glimpfe of his Divinity^* would give them the moft convincing Proof that could be given them: — And, Fetef% Words make it evi- dent. That himfelfwas, at leaft at thatTime, moll fully convinced, ^c.
" 3. The Apoftles feem to make a Petition to " Chrifi for fpiritual Mercies in a Way of divine " Worfhip, Luke xvii. 5. And the Apoftles faid to *' the Lord, Increafe our Faith -, which Addrefs ftems *' to have more of the Appearance of Religious *' Worfhip paid to him by them, than any other *' ExprelTion I know of before the Rcfunedion of *' Chrijt.''* 89, 90. This I hd-vt ^\ve.n verbatim. — Anf. I. Here we have, " they ftem to make a Pe- '* tition to Chriji !" Surely, this was a Petition, if any Words can fignify a Petition : And " they made it ** too •,'* if they knew what they were faying, and
did not jeji with their bleffed Mafter. 2. It was
certainly, " for fpiritual Mercies,'* if the Increafe of Faith, be a fpiritual Mercy ! — 3. It was certainly, " in a Way of Divine Worfliip," Whether we con- fider the Object, the Matter, or the Manner of it, or the End of the Difciples in miaking it. — 4. It had not only " the Appearance of Religious Worfhip," but was really either religious and divine Worfhip, or downright Z:/<?/«/rjy / Yea, It not only " feems ** to have the Appearance," But was indeed, if it was any Thing, adually religious Worfhip. — And, 5. Tt will be hard to find, any greater Appearance of " religious Worfhip paid to him," by them in a Body, either before or after his Refurredlion. ■ But I mull wave feveral Things here, ■ Yet,
So very zealous is our learned Author, upon this Head, That if he mufl grant. That this was indeed
U u " n-
*' religious and divine JVafjip,^ and that Chrlft alfo accepted it •, yet, fays he, " Ibme v/ould queftion *' whether this Petition did evidence their firm Be- " hef of his Godhead" for a Perhaps or two, which I do not now care to mention, and this ftrange Obfervation, " For it. is remarkable, that when he ** forgave the Sins of the Man fick of the Palfy, Mat. ix. 2 — 8 — though the Scribes and Pharifees charged *' him with Blafphemy, yet the Multitude only mar- ** veiled and glorified God who had given fuch Power " unto Men.** -^— What, I pray, is this to the Purpofe ? We were fpeaking of the Difciples, who
were never called the Multitude. Surely, they
might, and did, know more than the Multitude. —
But, — ■ enough of thefe. ' His
*' parallel Cafe, Mark'iiL. :L^. p. 91." is of one who
was no Difciple, i^c. and yet might be turned
againft him, with a Witnefs.
" 4. The Difciples may feem to own his Omrn- " fcience^ John xvi. 30, l^c. but probably, at that ** Time, they underftood this all Things^ in a Irmi- " ted Senfe, (as the Woman, 2 Sam. xiv. 20.*') &c» If fo many may he's^ perhaps* s., and prolahlfs^ may oafs for Arguments^ 'twou'd hardly be impoflible, to prove, that Monfter of Monfters, Tranfuhfiantiationt
. " For the utmoft Inference the Difciples
" make from it was, th.dX.Jefus came forth from God^ *' ver. 30. not that he was God himfelf." p. 92. ■ — But, If they had known, that he was a coeffentiat Scn^ and, as fuch, equal with God ; and intended alio, in thefe Words, 10 profefs as much; they could not poffibly *' have made a higher Inference from it," except they had faid " by this we beHeve that thou *' ^r/ /y??^ Father !" and not, that thou camefi forth from, him., viz. as a Son. — The great Mr. Clark^s Note upon this is, " This confirms us in the Belief *' of th^ Deity and Omnifcience.'* He gives " ano- " ther Reafon for this, becaufe Chrill had told them»
" but
r 331 ]
** but a very little before, that he himfelf did not *' know the Day of Judgment'^ But, there^ as we have fully proved, he fpake of himfelf as the Son of Man y whereas, here^ he fpake of himfelf as :he Son cf God, who, as fucli, came out from God, vcr. 27. came forth from the Father^ ver. 28. and could fay, ALL Things that the Father hath are mine, ver. 15. and that the Spirit of Truth fhall re- ceive of mi'H'e^ and fhall fhew it unto you^ ver. 14. (^c. ail which make it undeniable, that he fpeaks of himfelf, as a coeffential Son. It makes it, I fay, un- deniable, I . Becaufe all the Difciples, by his own Ccn- fefHon, p. 10. u. quoted abjve, knew Nothing of his pre-exiftent human Soul -, and therefore, coula not think, that that was it which came out from God, &c.
2. They could not dream, that his Body, which was Made of a Woman, came forth from the Father.
3, He mull therefore, have fpokcn all thefe of himfelf, as God the Son. And, 4. Thefe V/ords cannot, if we take them all together, be properly predicated of any but a coejfential Son : Becaufe, it would be hideous Blafphemy in any, but fucb a Son^ to life fuch ExprefTions of himfelf.
C£
5. They believed I bat he was the MeJJiah ; who *' is ipoken of in feveral Places of the Old Tefla- *' ment, as the true God.'* They did fo : Nor is it pofTible, one would think, to read, and believe, the Old Tefiament, without believing it. See If. ix. 6. Ch. vii. 14. Ch. XXV. 6 — 9. Lh. 35. 4 — 6. Ch. xl. iO— 12. ^c. &c. " But as we cannot find that " the learned Dodlors of that Age did generally un- ** derfland thole Prophecies, or believe the true Dei- <* ty of the Meffiah, &c." p. 93. This is another Proteflatio contra factum. The learned Dodors of that Age, underftood the Propliecies fo well. That they readily, and always, put the only true Senfe upon our Lord^% Words, when he fpake of himfelf, as the Son^ who wrought the fame Works with the Fd\ U u 2 thcr^
. t 332 1
ther^ John y. 17, 18. or was One with him, Ch. xl 30. ^c. even that he made himfelf equal with God, or made him[elf God, " fo neither do we find any *' Hint in the Hiftory of the Gofpel, that the Apo- " files themfelves before the Death of Chriji under- " flood thefe Prophecies, fo far as to apply them to " the MeJJiah in that Senfe •, £5?<r." P- 93* 'Tis well they underflood them afterwards ! And yet, Would one think it, the firft two Lines of the very next Pa- ragraph fufRciently confirm it, and confute himfelf!
6. " They believed and confejfed him to be the Son of " God."" They did fo : And that he was the Chrijly i. e. the Son of God, ■'"now become the Son of Man^ that he might fully execute the Office of the Meffiah. — They had alfo heard himfelf often flile himfelf the begotten., the only begotten Sen of God: And, no Doubt, believed he was really what he called him- felf. And what do we^ what can we, defire more ? Yea, What could He fay more, if he had not called himfelf the Father ? " but, fays he, this Title does '* not necefTarily amount to any more than a glorious *' Likenefs to God, ^c" But, fay I, we have proved the contrary ; and thefe Texts, If ix. 6. Phil. ii. 6. Col. i. 13 — 17. Heb. i. 8. 10. 11. and many the like, put it out of "all Doubt.
" Thus I have mentioned the fairefl and flrongefl: *' Evidences that I can find of any Degree of Faith ** or Belief they had of the Deity of ChriJI during his *' Life," And fairer, andflronger. Evidences could not then, yea cannot now, be given of his Deity ; efpecially the laft. And 'tis not a little flrange, that our worthy Author, fhould fo zealoufly reafon againfl plain Fa5} ; or forget. That there are three Perfons in the Godhead -, and that Chrift is not the J?r/?, but the fecond -, &c. " and 'tis poflible they ♦' might fometimes have a Glimpfe of that glorious ♦' Doctrine." p. 93. This was not only poffible, but our Lord has afTured us, Mat. xvi. j 7. That
[ 333 1
Flejh and Blood had not revealed it unto them, but his Father which is in Heaven.
The Deftgn of this ^ejiion^ and of his Anpwers to it, is too palpable to be miftaken \ and his Manage- ment of the Whole, too — ■ for me to
take any more Notice of it. Let the Reader only remember,
1. That the Difciples were not only weak Men, but under the Power of very flrong Prejudices, from which no Injlru^ions, &c. could deliver them, till the Hcly Ghoft was poured out upon them !
2. That therefore, though we fhould grant every "Word he has faid, through all thefe Sections, tho* we dare not grant but a w try few of them, it would do him no Service. The Sufferings of the Meffiah.^ with the glorious Eyids and Effe^s of them, were as clear- ly, tuUy and emphatically prophefied of under the Old Teftament, if not more fo, than his proper, i. e. coejjential Sorjhip I And yet they could rfot be brought to believe, that he was ever to fuffer!
3. What would our Author have faid, Ifa^^a- nian difputing againft the Satisfa^ion of Chri/t, had given fo many, and fuch little, Things concerning the Dtfbelief of the Difciples ? ^c. But
(C
SECT. V. IVhat Indications the Difciples " gave during the Life-time of Chrijt of their *' Dijbelief of his Godhead, or at leajt of the Un- " certainty of their Faith in that Matter". p. 94. The Defign of this is manifeft to all, and gives a vtrj firange Proof oi our learned Author's extraordi- nary Zeal for his 'Nojlrums ! — His Argument, in fhort, is this. — The Difciples fo firmly believed, that he was the Son of God, his only begotten, as ne- ver to dijbelieve it ; no, nor fliew any Uncertainty about it : And therefore, had they as firmly believed. That " this Title, did neceffarily imply his Divine " Nature, p. 6^, or, that " as the Son of God, he
" was
[ 334 ] •* was true Qod-," they would never have given arr^ IrJi cations of their BiJheUef oi'it, or the Uncertainty dT their Faiih in that Mw^tter : But, they did adiially give fome Indications ^ of their Dijbelicf of the Godhead of the Son as fuch ; i, e, that Chrift, as the Son of God j if at all or in any Senle, was indeed true God^ or, at leafl^ of the Uncertainty of their Faith in that Matter : Er, They either difielieved, or, at leafl, were un- €ertain of, his Godhead ; either abfolutely, or as the Son.
To which we might reply, i . Suppofmg all this. What then I Will it follow. That this Title, the ffwn Son, the onl^ begottin Son of God, does not necef- jarily imply coejfential Sonjbip ; becaufe they did not helieue it did ? Or, That Chnil was not the true God, becaufe they did not helieve he was ; or, were uncertain^ as to that Matter ? By no Means. — 2. They could not be brought, to helieve he was ever to fuffer fiicb Things, as the Prophets had moil clearly predi^ed; and himfeif had, over and over, ajfured them of, as plainly as ic could poffibly be done \ So ftrong, fo deeply rooted, were thewPreJudices f Befides, 3. The Difcipks were weak Men, Jiow of Heart to he- lieve, Luke sxiv. 25. of Utile Faith^ Mat. viii. 26, (i. e. fays the great Mr. Clark, That bad a mean O- pinion of Ctnjfs Power and Care of them.) who fomedmes aifo were apt to forget what they had feen, but a little before. Mat. xvi. 9, 10. yea, whofe Heart 'was hardened^ Mark vi. 52. fo that they nei- ther perceived, nor underftood, what they might ea- lily have done, Ch. viii. 17. and Ch. xvi. 14. tff. ^c. And, 4. Sometimes they fpake before they wiji what to fay, Mark ix. 6. and fometimes, not know- ing what they f aid, Luke ix. 33. ^c. ^c. — In fuch earthen Fejfels was the Trcafure of the Gofpel put, that the Excellency of the Power might he of God, and
mt of Men ! 2 Cor. iv. 7. Let us then confider
the Anfwer he gives to his own Queftion.
'" I. If they had a firm and fteady Belief that he
" was the true God, they would, fome where
'* or other, have evidently exprejfed their JPaith in this
" Mat'
[ 335 ] «« Matter, ^^ p. 94. Anf. i. If they indeed, be- lieved him to be God, they believed him to be the true God: Becaufe they knew of no God, but one.
— 2. They as evidently exprefled their Faith, that he was the Son of the living God, as they poffibly could do. — " They would have upon fome Occafion ** or other, addrefs^d him as Thomas did. My Lord •* and tyiy God.** — Anf. Our Lord had never ex- prefly ftiled himfeif God, but only the Son of God :
— They might need Dire^ion in that Cafe : — The Name, or Title, God, was not fo fuitable to his Ejfate of Humiliation : — The (Economy might then require this Title, to be generally referved to the Father : — And the Jews knew. That the Son of God, was indeed God. Jo. x. ^^, &'c. " We cannot " but fuppofe alfo, that among their Doubts and *' Queries,'* many of which, to fay the leaft, were very weak? "they would have afkt him this ob- " vious and important one. How could he be God, " and his Father he God alfo, and yet not two Gods ? " p. 94." — Why, if they had. He could, I con- ceive, have given them no other Anfwer, than he aftually did ; 1 and the Father are one. i^e. *' They did not talk of him to the World under " any Character of Godhead** p. 95. A poor legging the ^ejlion I Did they not believe, and pro- fefs him to be the Son of God? And was not this a Charafter of Godhead'^. — And that he was the Mejfiah ? And, Could they fpeak of him as fuch, without implying his Divinity f&c. — But thefe, and many the like, deferve •
2. " If they had believed him to be the true " God that made the Heavens and the Earth, ^c, " they would not have been fo furprifed, as they " were, Luke viii. 24, 25. or ajionifhed, as they '* were, Ch. v. 9. or marvelled, ^c. as Mat. xxi. " 19, 20." Anf. (1) Should we fuppofe, that all this proceeded from fVeaknefs^ it would do his
Caufe
r 336 ]
Caufe no Service, But, (2) Surely their Surprize, Sic. at thefe Miracles, if we confider them well, with all the Circumftances of them, was no Indication of their Dijbelief : Or, if they were, they might, by a more clofe Attention, have Jlrengthened their Faith. — (3) When they wtxt afionijhed, Luke v. 9. they
had been but lately acquainted with him : The
Obedience which the Winds and Waves immediately, and in an Inftant, paid to his Commands, Luke viii. 24, 25. could not, I am apt to think, fail to re- move all their Doubts of his Divinity, if they indeed had any : — And much the fame we may fay of the Barren Fig-tree. Mat. xxi. 19. 20. — When we remember, that all he faid to it was. Let no Fruit grow on thee hence forzvard, &c. and that it im- mediately ^withered axvay ; not only the Leaves, but the Body of the ^t^ee^ and in an Inftant, ^c. and that none could do this but God, we may eafily per- ceive why they wondered, ^c.
3. "If they had believed Chriji to be the great " and glorious God, they would not have treated " him with fuch an indecent Roughnefs, as they *' did. Mat. xv. 33. when they anfwered. Whence " jJoould we have fo much Bread in the Wildernefs to *' fill fo great a Multitude! — and ver. — 12, &c. nor " would Peter have been fo free as to give fuch a " Rebuke to his God! as he did, Ch. xvi. 22.'* p. 96, 97. — We might Anf. i. The Difciples were Galileans, a heavy, ignorant, and flupid Sort of People : Jo. i. 46. Ch. vii. 52. They had not been folijioed by fuch Education, as to make them Mafters of good Breeding : Filhermen have, commonly, a Roughnefs, and Rudenefs, about them, more than their Neighbours : And therefore, it is not fo flrange to hear fuch indecent Language from them, ^c. — 2. The affable, fweet, and loving Way, in which our Lord, at all Times, fo familiurly converfed with them i his Readinefs to cover their lelTer Faults, or \ ' c>icufs
r 337 1
txcufe them ; his Tendernefs to them, upon all Oc cafions ; ^c. might, at laft, fo much embolden them, as to tranrgrefs the Rules of Good Manners. — Fa- miliarity, fays the Old Proverb, is apt to breed Con- tempt. ' — 3. Even good^ and wife Men, fometimes forget themfelves -, ffeak before they thinks and what does not become them; And many unworthy Things may drop from their Mouths, not only without any /// D^ign, but, perhaps, with a good One. — 4. 'Tis plain the Difciples themfelves were, in all thefe Inftances, much to blame. They con- fidered not^ &'c. Mark vi. 52. Perceive ye not yet, neither underfland, &c. faid their blefled Mailer ? Ch.viii. 1 7—2 1 . Whence 'tis plain, they ought to have known better, and might have known better ! Have ye your Hearts yet hardened, ■n-ETroopujijAvYiVt callous or brawny, i. e. ftupid, and ififenfible, fo as nothing will make any deep and lafling Impreffion upon them ? — He is there fpeaking of the Miracles of the Loaves, which could not poffibly have been wrought, but by one who is the true God. — He, who could multiply five fmall Loaves, fo as to fill five Thoufand Men, &c. could make a\sfoRLD 1 And indeed, all Things were made by him. Jo. i. 3. So that, if they did not beJieve Z/:'^ Deity of Chrifi, it was not for want of Evidence f For, their Eyes faw, and their Ears heard! ver. 18. And therefore, he fharp- ly rebukes themi ver. 21. Thefe Paffages then,
are fo far from ferving our Author's Purpofe, in the leaft, that they quite overthrow it ! — 5. As to Peter's Cafe, we know his Temper, his Forward- nefs, &c. nor was this the only Time when he fpake, not knowing what he faid. — But, it will be urged, " We cannot fuppofe he would give fuch a Rebuke " to his God." p. 97. And therefore, 'tis plain, " he difbelieved his Maflefs Godhead'' Anf Tho' honefi Peter faid v/hat he faid, out of a Sort of Love to him j yet, it was very ill, and very ill faid.
X X There
■ [ 338 ]
There was a great deal of Arrogance, Ignorance^ carnal Wifdom^ &c. &:c. in it : And therefore, our Lord gave him the fevereft Reproofs he ever gave to any. -— But it will not follow, that he did not firmly hdk-ie-y that Chriji was the ccejfential Son of the Father J and as fuch, the true God., ov equal with him. For, (i) He had, again and again, folemnly, and deliherately frofcjfed the contrary : Whereas, thefe Words were fpoken hajlily, and without Conftdera- tion\ as his Denial of Chriji afterwards was. ■
(2) The holiefi mere Man that ever lived, did not always fpeak to., or of, the mojl High, according to his I'aith in him: Such is our prefent Imperfection I — It is one Thing to have a fixed, yea, habitual. Belief of the Being and PerfeMions of God\, and quite another, to think, fpcak, or a5f, at all Times, according to Principle. — Where is he to be found, v/ho ahjays behaves, as in the Prefence, and under the Eye, of the Omnifcient ? — How often did the Children of Ifrael, the Body of that Nation, (who had the Pillar of Cloud, in which the Lord went hejore them ; who v/ere fed and cloathed by Miracle, &c. and who could not pofTibly, one would think, doubt either of his Prefence with them, or his Power, Sec.) call them both in Queftion ? — And, 3. To give an Inftance to confront all thefe. When God had told Mofes, (who knew as much, and, I conceive, a great deal 7nore, of God, than Peter did of Chrifi ; who had feen all his Meanders in Egypt, and at the Red Sea, &c. &'c.) That he would give Fleflo to his People in the Wildernefs ; and Mofes faid, fhall the Flocks and the Herds befiain for them, or fhall all the Jbifto of the Sea be gathered together, &c. Numb. xi. 19. • — 22. 'tis plain from God\ Anfwer to him, {Is the J^ord^s Hand waxed fhcrt?) That Mofes, even the renowned Mofes, by whom the Law was given, and by whom God faved them, &'c. 'Tis plain, I fay, that he doubted the Prornife, and fpake very in- decently
t 339 ]
decently and unlike himfelf: And that, tho' God was gracioufly pleafed to pafs it by, yet he kindly r-e proved him for it^ 'Thou Jhdt fee now whether my tVord fhall come to pafs unto thee^ or not. ver. 22. fee alfo, Ch. xx. 7—12. — But now. Did ever any- one think, That " thefe were Indications of his Dif- " belief of the Deitf^ of him that promifed ? i^c. I think not. They were, 'tis true, plain Evidences of the Imperfection of Grace ^ and of the Remains of Unbelief, ^c. even in Mofes ; as the Examples, we are confidering, are of the ImperfeCfions and Weak- nefs, ^c. of the Difciples : And that is all. No mere Man ever yet behaved, in all Cafes, as he ought and might ; no, nor never will in this World.
" I might add alfo, that tho' the Virgin Mary " under the Influence of Rapture and Infpiration, " exprefles herfelf thus, Luke i. 47. My cpirit hath *' rejoyced in God my Saviour ^''■^.<^^. Then, furely ! ihe
knew, I. That fhe was und.tr Infpiration.
2. That Chrijl was really her God and Saviour. And therefore, — 3. If ever fhe forgot this, or futFered the Impreffions to languifh, or wear off, it was her great Imperfeuion., and her Fault. " yet if fhe had '" firmly believed her Son to be her God, fhe would " not have chid him fo feverely when he was twelve ■" Years Old, Luke 2. 48. Son, why hajl thou dealt " thus with us ? p 97." — Anf. I can perceive no chiding at all, in thefe Words : Nor any Thing, but what was becoming, and exceedingly tender and affectionate. She and Jofeph had fought him Jor- rowing : — And had they known were he was -, or had he told her, he had Bufmefs at the Temple, ^c. and mufl tarry fome Time -, they had been eafy. And, I verily believe, he would have told her, or gone with her, had he not been under fome llid- den and fpecial Influence of the Holy Ghofl.- -With- ail, his Mother might firmly believe him to be God X X 2 mafii'
[ 340 ]
manifejied in the Flejh -, and yet could not bisC remember, that he was made of a Woman •, and con- fequently, was true Man ; and that fhe was his Mother, who was therefore to take Care of him : And yet might not know, that it was proper for himy as fuch, and at his Age, to tarry behind, with- out acquainting her with it. -— He had never done any fuch Thing before ; and therefore, feeing he had not told her, that he would, or muft, tarry, fhe might, fhe ought, in Duty as a Mother, to enquire what had kept him behind. — And his Anfwer, How is it that ye fought me ? IVijl ye not, (^c. (q. d. fays Mr. Clark, Having had fuch Notice feveral Times, Who, and What I am, you might have learnt from thence that I have another Father to ferve and obey) which has more of a Rebuke in it, than her ^eftion, makes it pretty plain, She was to blame j and that he would remind her. That, the' he was her Son according to the Flefh^ he was from Eternity the coeffential Son of God, and mufl there- fore mind his Bufinefs : And, that he came to do his Will, and not theirs.
" 4. If they had thought Chrifi was the trm '*' God, they would never have tried to entertain his " Curiofity , by fhewing him how magnificent the *' Buildings of the temple were. Mat. xxiv. i." p. 97. 98. I am inclined to think, it was not to entertain his Curiofity, which might have been often fo enter- tained before •, but to move his Pity, (by trying, if they could thus prevail with him, to revoke, or at leaft fufpend, that dreadful Doom, Ch. xxiii. ^6 — 38.) that they fhewed him the Bui Mings of the J^emple : And, iffo, this was raxhcr sin Indication oi their Be- lief, than Difhelief, oi his Deity! —If I am heremifta- ken, this Adion of the Difciples was only ano- ther Inftance of their Incogi fancy, or JVeaknefSy
t' 5- His
[ 34« ]
" 5. His Hint from Jo. xvi. 30. p. 98." I have already confidered, and turned it againft himfelf. — . In the next Page, he tells us, " Thefe Things will " give Occafion to three or four Queftions." — They all lie out of my Way, at prefent, but the firfl : And therefore, (fince they are of the fame Kind with moft of the reft, would require a very long Anfwer, and feveral Remarks which I am not now difpofed to make, i^c.) I Ihall wholly wave them.
*' i^uejt. Did the Difciples believe him then to he a *' mere common Man ? p. 99." A ftrange Queftion, and yet amhiguoujly worded ! — Mofes, Solomon^ and I- faiah, &c. were mere, but, 1 think, not common Men. Even the wretched Socinians, thofe malicious Enemies of his Divinity and Crofs, who dream he was a mere Man, do not, I fuppofe, degrade him fo far, as to think he was a common Man I Even they will hardly fcruple to agree to every Thing he has of- fered, p. 100. except the Pre-exijfence of his human Soul. — — It was almoft impoflible, that any one fhould take him for a Common Man. None of the JewsdXdy Mat. xvi. 14.. no not his Enemies, Jo-vu. 46. — But, — I need fay no more. — Procead we then to
CHAP.
[ 342 ]
CHAP. V.
Plain and clear Proofs, of the Coessential SoNSHiP, of the Second Person of the ever- bleff'ed trinity : Or, That this Title, The Son of God, fo frequently afcribed to the Se- con d Person, or to Christ as God, does, di- re Bly and primarily, denote /'/j Deity, or natural Kelation to the Father, whofe Son, whofe ONLY begotten Son he is,
THIS being the principal Thing, which will, of itfelf, determine the Controvcrfies between us, we fhall be the more careful in advancing, and illu- Ilrating, the Tejlimonies we produce •, and removing whatever may be offered to weaken them. And, tho' our learned Author feems to limit the ^ejlion, p. I. " to the true Meaning of the Name Son of " God, given to Chrift in the New Tejlament" (as Dr. Clarke, in a Cafe nearly parallel, very unfairly,
if not did!) We fhall enquire into i\it true
Me-anifig of it, in both Tefbaments : And that, for thefe Reafons. — i. The fecond Vtr{on is, in the Old. Teftament, fometimes ftiied, the Son, the Son of God, his begotten Son^ &c. as well as in the New. ■ — 2. The Scriptures of the Old Teftament were given by Infpiration of God, 1 Tim. iii. 15, 16, i^c. and Ho- ly Men of God fpake, and wrote, in them, as they were moved by the Holy Ghoji, 1 Pet. i. 21. ^c. as well as in the New. — 3. The Faith of the Church of God, was, as to the Subjiance of it, and in all Effen^ tints, the fame of Old as now. A^s xv. 8 — i r . Eph. iv. 4 — 7. 2 Ccr. iv. 13. Rom. iii. 30. ^c. — 4. The New Teftament explains the Old Teftament, as the Old confirms the New: And indeed, each of them do much illvfirate the other. • — 5. Our hord and his
Apo-
[ 343 ]
Apojiles, on all Occafions, appealed to MofeSy and the Prophets^ for all that they delivered : Nor did they preach any other Do Brine, or teach any other Commandments, than thofe had done before them, or faid Jhould come. Mat. iv. 4-- 10. Ch. xv. 3 — 9. Ch. xxii. 29 — 46. L^//^^ xxiv. 25 — 27. and ver. 44 — 47. y*?. iii. 14 — 18. Ch. v. 45 — 47. Ch. vi. 45. Ch. vii. 23. ABs ii. 16 — 36. Ch. ix. 22. Ch. xiii. 32 — 41. Ch. xv. 14 — 18. Ch. xvii.
2, 3. Ch. xxvi. 22, 23, &c. ^c. 6. The Old
Teftament is as much a Part oi our Rule, as the New. Whatfoever Things were written afore Time, were written for our Learning, ^c. Rom. iv. 23, 24. Ch. XV. 4. ^<:. — Yea, 7. T'i'^ ly^r^ able to make even Timothy wise unto Salvation, ^;?ii the Man of God Perfect, throughly furnifhed unto all good Works. 2 Tim. iii. 15 — 17. Luke xvi. 29 — 31. — ■ In fine, 8. The Church itfelf, and the Faith of Be- lievers, are built upon the Foundation, not only of //'^Apostles, but of /i?^ Prophets. Eph.'xx. 10.
Begin we then, with our Proofs from the Prophets, and then we lliall proceed to thofe from the Apofiles, and our bleffed Lord himfelf -, that, out of the Mouth of thofe two Clouds of Witneffes, and of Him who is the Kui.Yi, the faithful and true Witness, Rev, iii. 14. the important Truths, we are contending for, may be ejtablijhed. And, becaufe Mofes, that great Prophet, both fpake and wrote of him ; ^ea, and all the Prophets from Samuel, and thofe that fol- low after, as many as have fpoken, have likewife fore- told of thefe Days, &c. A^s. iii. 20 — 24. Ch. x. 43. i. e. both who he was that Jhould come, and what he came to be, to do, to fuffer, to pur chafe, to pro- mife, and to beftow upon his People, we ihall beo-in with Mofes, and then offer a few Things from feveral of the reft, as we meet with them in our Bibles.
I acknowledge the Terms, Father and So7i, as afcribed to the hirfl and Second Perfons in the Trinity.,
are
[ 344 ]
are not, any where, found in the Writings of Mofes : And therefore, it may be fuggefled. That no Tefti- monies deduced from them, can come home to the Point in Hand. But, tho' thefe very Words, thus appHed, do not, any where, occur in them, yet, there are not a few Things, to be met with in them,
which are very much to Our Purpofe. For, i.
In them we find the Dodlrine of the Trinity, i. e. of ^hree, which are plainly dijlinguijhed, by diftin<5t .Pergonal Thames, Chara^lers and Anions ; to whom the ejfential Names, titles, and PerfeSlions of, as well as the fame Works and Worjhip, which are proper to, the One only true Godj are frequently, and clearly afcribed : But if fo, each of them is the one true God ; and is always fpoken of as fuch, even when adling in a ^- %^/fi Capacity. Gen. 'in. ver. 8. 9. 13, 14 — 24. Ch. xi. 5 — 9. Ch. xii. 7, 8. Ch. xvii. i — 22. Ch. xviii. I. 13. 25. i^c. &€. — 2. We no where, in them, have any the leaft Hint, fo far as I can perceive, of a created fupra-angelieal Spmz, or a. pre-exi/lent human Soul, to which any of thofe Divine Names, Titles, or Perfeflions, i^c. are, or could be, attributed. To be more particular.
I . We read in the Books of Mofes, of a Plurality
of Perfons in the Deity. j^nd God faid. Let
US make Man, Gen. i. 26. Behold the Man is become as one c/US, Ch. iii. 22. Let US go down. &c. Ch. xi. 7.— 2. There we find the plural Word, Elohim^ to denote a Plurality of Perfons, in numberlefs Places, joined to a Verb fingular, implying the Unity of the Godhead: And, fometimes we meet with it joined with a Verb in the plural Num- ber, more clearly, and emphatically, to point out the Plurality of Suhjifiences, in the One Divine Fffence. Thus, Gen. xx. 13. When God caufed me to wander, hithhhu othe Elohim, literally, they theyf/- mighties, err are facer ent, did caufe me to wander. So alfo, Ch. XXXV. 7. becaufe there Cod ap- peared
r 345 1
peared unto him, Niglu Elohim, (literally the AU •power fuls, revelavijfent, had revealed to him. ^c. This will appear more plain, from the Pafilige re- ferred to, Ch. xxviii. 12, 13. where, if the Ladder Jacob faw in his Dream, reprefented the fecond Per- fon, as Mediator, fee John i. 51^ the Lord God whofiood above it, moft certainly was the Firji Per- fon : And fo, here were Two Almighty Perfons re- vealed unto him. In a Word, in M?/f/s\Vritings,
we frequently hear, i. Of One, who, in fome pe^ culiar Manner, or Senfe, is called Jehovah, the Lord God, God Almighty, the God of /ihraham^ Ifaac, and Jacob, &c. who is never laid to be fent^ or imployed on any Mejfage ; and who is never faid to have appeared in, or under, or with, any vifible
Shape, Form, or Similitude whatfoever. 2.
Of One who is, every Vv'hcre, called by thofe very Names, and diftinguifiied by thofe very Titles \ and who alfo exprefsly fliles himfelf. El Shaddai, God Almighty, or God All-Jujjicient, Gen xvii. i. Ch. XXXV. II. the God of Bethel, xxxi. 13. the God of Abraham, and Ifaac, &c. Ex. iii. ver. 6. ^c. yea, affumes that moft auguft and incommunicable Title, that Name of Effence, Jehovah : And Jehovah, Ch. vi. 2, 3. and vep. 6 — 8. ^c. (^c. Who alfo did the JVorks of_ and accepted the Worfhip due, and referved, to the One true God only. Gen. vi. 13. and 17. Ch. xvii. throughout. Ch. xviii. 23 — o^^- ^^* xix. 24. Ch. xxviii. 16 — 22. Ch. xxxv. i — 15. l^c. ^Sc. who yet, is fometimes called an Angel, the Angel, of the Lord, and of his Prefence or Face ; and who appeared often to the Patriarchs, in, or un- der, fome viftble Symbol, and ufually in a hitman Shape, and adled as one fent by the other, ^c. Gen. xxii. 15. Ch. xlviii. 16. Ex. xxxiii. 14, 15. Gen. xvii. I. 3. 22. Ch. xxxii. 24 — 30. Ch. xxxv. 7. and 13. Qc. £ffr.— And, 3. If One called the Spirit, and the Spirit of God, who moved upon the Face of the
Y y Waters,
[ 346 ] Waters^ Gen. i. 2. fir ove with the old World, Ch, vi. 3. wasinjojeph^ Ch. xli. 38. re/ied upon the Rl- ders, Numb, ii, 26 came upon Balaam, Ch. xxiv. 2. (and is, in my humble Opinion, in his own Perfon, exprefsly called G(?<i, 2ir\^ the Almighty y ver. 4.) and with iL-hci-n.) thofe excellent Mechanics, Bezaleel and Aholiahy were filled. Ex. xxxi. 3 and 6. &^f.— So that, the T^hree Per fins, in the ever-bleffed trinity, were well knov/n in the Church, in Mofies his Days, and indeed, as we have heard, from the Beginning. But, this is not all, For, by comparing Teveral Places to- gether, we Ihall find.
That it was the ficonddi thefe, who was to ajfume cur Nature, and who was actually God''s own Son, whom he fient forth, made of a Woman. Gal. iv. ver. 4. This will appear fo plain, from thefe Confidera-
tions, as to admit of no rational Doubt. i. It
was he who a-pp eared with the two Angels to Abraham, who were all, at firft, called Men, becaufe they ap- peared in human Shape, Gen. xviii. 2. And yet. He is ftiled Jehovah, ver. i. 13. 17. 20. 33. i£c. and the Judge of all the Earth, ver. 2 5 : But, the Father judgeth no Man, having committed all Judgment to THE Son. Jo.w 22. For we fhall all fiand before the Judgfnent-Seat of Christ ; Rom. xiv. 10. who is
both Lord, ver. 9. and God, ver. 12. 2. It was
this Angel of the Lord who appeared unto Mofes in the Bufh, Ex. iii. 2. who is called Jehovah, and God, ver. 4. and in fo many Words, proclaims, I am the Cod of Abraham, &c. ver. 6. I am that I am, ver. 14. and Ch. iv. ver. 11. Have not I the Lord? It was he, I fay, who fent Mofes to Egypt, giving him Power to work Miracles, ver. 9. promifing to be with him, ver. 12. who went before the Camp of the Ifraelites, by Day in a Pillar of Cloud, and by Night in a Pillar of Fire, &lq. Ch. xiii. ?. 1 . comp. with Ch. xiv. 19. who is called God, and Jehovah, whom they tempted. Numb. xxi. 5. who fent the
[ 347 ]
Jiery Serpents among them^ ver. 6. 6?c. ^c. But, this^ was He, even the Son^ who had undertaken to be the Saviour of his People -, and who, after he had been fent forth in the Likenefs of ftnfiil Flejh, Rom. iii. and had put awai Sin by the Sacrifice of himfelf^ Heb. ix. 26. was declared to he the Son of God zvith Po-joer^ by his Refurre^ion from the Dead. Rom. i. 4. This, I fay, was Chrifi^ as is undeniable from thefe Reafons, among many others, (i.) Mofss knew, and could not but know, and no Doubt told others, who fe Re- proach it was, which he ejicemed greater Riches than all the '^reafiires in Egypt : But, the Apoftles afllires us, Heb. xi. 2.6. That it was the Reproach of Chrifi. (2.) I cannot help thinking. That he and the pious Part at lead of the Congregation, well knew, That it was the promifed Deliverer, who had brought them cut of the Houfe of Bondfgey and conduced them in the I'VildernefSy and that That Rock that followed them was Chrifl, &c. i Cor. x. 4. — And, (3.) 'Tis un- deniable. It was him they tempted, for which they
were defiroyed of the Serpents, ver, 9. l^c. i^c.
3. He who called himfelf /i?^ ^^^^ ■S^^/i'^r^, Johnx. ver. II. and 14. and is ftiled, the great Shepherd, Heb. xiii. 20. and the chief Shepherd, 1 Pet. v. 4. He, I fay, and not another, was the Shepherd oflf- rael of Old, who dwelt between the Cherubims, that led Jofeph like a Flock, Pf. Ixxx. i . and did this by the Hand of Mofes and Aaron. Pf. Ixxvii. 20. ■
But He, we have feen, was not a Creature, no not a created fupra-angelical Spirit, nor a pre-exifient hu- man Sou], but Jehovah, the Lord God, the God of Abraham, &c. the great Ehje ajber Ehje, I am that I AM, literally, 1 shall be what I shall be, i. e. I M M A N u E L, God in our Nature, v/ho Hiould fave his People from their Sins. But, to be yet a little more particular,
Mofes fpoke, and wrote, both of the Divine and Human Nature, of him that was to come ; and of all
Y v 2 the
[ 348 ] • the Offices alfo, which he was to execute, as our Re- deemer : But, not a Syllable, fo far as I can find, of his pre-exiftent human Soul. — i. He fpoke, and wrote, of his Divine Nature, as is undeniable from thofe Paflages now quoted, and numberlefs others. That he was God, God Almighty, &c. &c. and yet a diftind Perfon from another, (to whom all thofe Names, Titles, and Perfeftions, ^c. are alfo afcri-
bed,) and fent by him, and adled as his Angel.
Here then were Two Perfons, the one the Firft, the Father, the Sender •, the other the Second, the Son, the Sent. — 2. He fpoke and wrote of his human Nature. That he was to become the Seed of the Wo- man, Gen. iii. 15. the Seed of Abraham, in whom all the Nations of the Earth jhould be bleffed. Gen xxii. 18. ^c. and of Ifaac, Ch. xxvi. 4. and Jacob, Ch. xxviii. 14. fe?c. ^c. — ■ 3. He fpoke and wrote of him as the Messiah who was to be the Prophet, Frieji, and X/;^^ of his Church, (i.) The Prophet, from the midft of his People, like unto Mofes, Deut» xviii. 15 — 18. but infinitely preferred before him, ver. 19. as a Son over his own Houfe, and as God who huilt the Houfe, and all Things. Heb. iii. 3 — • 6. — (2.) The Priest, who was to offer a Sacrifice for Sin, typified by all the Sacrifices of the Ceremoyiial Law, but of infinitely greater Value ; inafmuch as, tho' it ijoas not poffihle that the Blood of Bulls and of Goats, fhould TAKE AWAY SiNS, Hcb. X. 4. &c. lie appeared to put away Sin by the Sacrifice of HIMSELF, Ch. ix. 26. cindhath, i^_y one Offering, ferfe^ed for ever therii that are fan£fified ; Ch. x. 14. and having thus made an End of Sins, Dan. ix. 24. he entred in once into the holy Place, by his own Blood, having obtained eternal Redemption for them, Heb. ix. 12. and there appears in the Prefence of God for them, ver. 24. as their Advocate with the Father^ \ John ii. 2. and ever lives to make Inter- cession
[ 349 1
CESSION for them -, Heb. vii. 25. and from thence
commands alfo ^^^ Blessing upon them. Now
it is clear, from Scripture, and common Senfe too, that none but one, who was God-Man, could do all this. — Had he not been Man, he had had no Blood to Jhed, no proper, meritorious, falisfa^fory^ Sacrifice to offer : And had he not been God, the true God, the Sacrifice of himfelf cou'd not pof- fibly have had fo much Worth, as to take away Sins, and perfe^ for ever them that are fanSiified. — Yea, had he not been true God, he could never, by his Obedience and Death, have obtained Eternal Redemp- tion for any One of them ; could never have raifsd his own dead Body from the Grave ; and confequently, could not have ever lived to make Inter ceffion for them : But, having been made a Curfe for them, when he was crucified, muft have continued under that Curfe for ever. ■ — — Now this Divine Perfon, was not the Firft Perfon, the Father •, and therefore, it is plain, it was the Second Perfon, the Son. — What do I fay? Chrift, as a Priejl, who was alfo to be the Sacrifice, and the Jltar too, was indeed both the Subftance, and t\\t End, of the C^r^;;2(?;w^/ Law. — And, (3.) The King of his Church, even the Shiloh, to whom the gathering of the People was to be -, Gen. xiix. 10. and confequently, was to reign for ever, and of whofe Kingdom there was to be no End: And therefore was certainly both the Son of God, and the Son of Man. See Luke i. 31 — 2i5' comp. with ver. 16.
I have enlarged fo long on thefe Things, not on- ly to fhew, That the Faith of the Church, as to allxhz principal Points in Difpute, was the fame, as to the Subftance of them, in Mofes's Days, as in our own : That the Old and New Teftament, bear Witnefs to each other : That the Old confirms the New, and the New illufirates the Old, reprefenting the Shadows, Types, Prefigwations^ Prophecies, and Promifes of
that.
[ ^5o ] that^ which had not a little Obfairity in them, as plain hifiorical Fadls^ which may be much more ea- fily, clearly, and fully undertlood : But chiefly, becaufe our Lord himfelf appeals x.o Mofes^ in that long Defence againft the fuppofed Crime of making himfelf equal with God, by faying. My Father work- eib hitherto, and I work. John v. 17, 18. and 46. — I take it for granted. That Chriji knew what he faid : — That he could and would talk to the Purpofe : — That he would neither trifle with them, nor amufe them, nor impofe upon them : — And con- fequently, would not have called Mofes to prove the Point in Queftion, if he had not indeed been clearly and fully, for him :— But if he is, we may certainly learn, even from him. That the Son of God is a coef- fential Son, and as fuch, equal with the Father •, and confequently. That it is the fecond Perfon in the Tri- fiity, as fuch, and not his pre-exiftent human Soul, that is called, and is, the Son of God.
I need not tarry to fliew. That he, who appeared to Jofhua as a Man., and declared that as Captain of the Hofi of the Lord he was come, Ch. xv. 14. was the Mediator, (this being a chief Part of his Office as fuchi) and is, Ch. vi. 2. exprefsly called Jehovah: — That the Angel of the Lord that came to Bechim, and fpeaks as the true God, Judg. ii. i • — 5. was the fe- cond Perfon : — That it was he, who appeared in human Shape, to Gideon-, and is exprefly called, Jehovah-, Ch. vi. ver. 11. 14. 16. ^c. and God. ver. 36. 39: — That it was alfo this Angel of the Lord, who, in like Manner, appeared to Manoah and. his Wife; Ch. xiii. and is ftiled by him, God. ver, 22. and by her, Jehovah, ver. 23. and who tells them his Uame was secret, or rather, won- derful •, ver. 18. which is one of the Titles given to Chrifl, by Ifaiah ; Ch. ix. 6 : — That J oh knew that his Goel, near Kinfman, Redeemer, i. e. the Mejfiah, livetb, and that he v/as God : Ch.. xix. 25 — 27. —
That
[ 351 1
That David, Solomon, and Jfaiah fpeak of him a^ the Son, and, as fuch, as God\ of which more pre-
fently : And That Jeremiah mentions, one whom
God would raife up unto David, a King, who yet Jhould be called, and therefore indeed be, Jeh-j-vah OUR Righteousness; Ch, xxiii. ver. 6. ^c. i^c.
• But, this Divine Perfon, who is fpoken of in
all thefe Pailages, was not ihe Father, as is confeffed ; and therefore, muft be the Son: And conftquently, feeing he is in them, and in many other Texts, fil- led Jehovah: He is, and muft be acknowledged
to be a coejfential Son. But it is Time to proceed
to thofe Paflages, wherein the firft Perfon is exprefs- ly called a Father, or the fecond the Son.
And here, we muft difpute fome principal Texts with this great Man, who fiw very well. That, if the Senfe of this Title, the Son of God, when applied to Chrijl, m the Old Teftament, was then known,, and -fiiied, and received, 'twould be in vain to try to wreft it to another, and an infinitely inferior one, in the New. He therefore oppofes many of them, and urges whatever has been offered, even by feveral Antitrinit avians, to pervert their true Senfe ! and has fuggefted fomewhat of his own, with a very plau-
fible Air ! Come we then to them, in Order as
we meet with them.
SECT. I. Proofs of the coessential Son- ship <?/ Christ from the Prophets.
The firft of them is, *' that remarkable Text, " Pf. ii. /. Thou art my Son, this Day have I begotten " thee ; which has been ufually interpreted, to fig- " nify the eternal Sonfhip of Chrijt as God." p; 47. To which he gives five Anfwers ! It feems he thinks
it very remarkable indeed. " i. 'Tis evident
" that in A^s xiii. 33. St. Paul applies this to the
" RefurreSiion of Chrijl, and not to any eternal
" Generation." Anf Did the Apoftle fay. He was not his Son before ? If he did not, then, it is plain,
his
[ 352 ]
his tlefurre5fion was not the Foundation, or formal Reafon, of this Denomination, but the folemn and public Declaration of it, as we have heard from Rom. i. 4. and our Author has acknowledged, p. 14. — *' 2. Chrijl is here faid to become a Son by a Decree \ " &c." ibid. But here is no fuch Thing faid. No fuch Sound, no fuch Senfe ! Nor can any fuch Meaning be put upon, or wrefted from the Words ! Tho', according to this learned Perfon*s own Notion, Cbrijt did indeed become a Son by a Decree, whether the Word Son " relates to the Glory and Excellency of
" his Perfonl or to his Office /" p. 20. " 3. 'Tis
" fpoken literally of the Exaltation of David to his " Kingdom, as the Type of Chrift." How does he prove this ? How can it be proved ? " and not con- *' cerning the natural Production or Generation of *' David ; and therefore, it muft in the Antitype- " fignify myjlically the Exaltation of Chriji to his " Kingdom, and not his natural eternal Generation.'* p. 47, 48. Strange Reafoning ! Muft every Thing then, in the Type, have fomething, in the Antitype, exaftly to tally with it } Or, cannot this, in feveral Things, egregioufly, yea infinitely, exceed that ? Is it not certain, that, in all fuch prophetic, or myfti- cal PafTages, feveral Circumjlances, agree both to the Type and the Antitype -, feveral, more or lefs, to the one, or the other •, and feveral, to one of them on- ly ? " 4. The Word, this Day, never fignifies
" Eternity in Scripture in any other Place, and why " then muft it do fo here?" ibid. Many Wordis have a peculiar Signification, in one Place of a Book, which neither of them have any where elfe in that
Book. But, I ftiall not ftay to difpute about
this Word here ; becaufe, if we can prove the proper., or coeffiential, Sonjhip of the fecond Perfon, 1 hardly think, that any one will queftion the Eternity of it. — Not to add, Non amo nimis argutam Theologiam : We have no need, blefled be his Name, of any Arguments
that
[ 353 ]
x]\zt are dther flrained, or fdr^fetchedi ot not obvious and well fupported, to prove the coejfential Son/hip of the /^rW Perfon, ^c. — Let us therefore confidct" this glorious PalTage, which is the firft, in the Bible, wherein the fecond Perfon is exprefsly called the he- gotten Son of God \ is plain enough of itfelf •, and is thrice quoted in the New Teltament, from whence we may, more clearly and certainly, gather the true and full Meaning of it.
The Pfalm is Prophetical. — The coming of the Son of God., I. e. the fecond Perfon, in the Fle/h ; his Exalta- tion to his Kingdom, maugre all the Oppofition of Hell and Men ; and the Extent, and Glory, and Continuance, ^c. of his Reign, are the Contents of
it. Of him, and of Jbifn only, does the Prophet
here fpeak. — There is not a Syllable in it, which does not agree to him, in its plain, and obvious, yea and fuUeft, and fIricSteft Senfe ; and is not exa6V- ly true, to a Tittle : But there are but very few, which, with all the wrefiing in the World, can be, any how, applied to any other ; and even then, in a very low and diminutive Senfe, and far fhort of the l>hinImport of the Phrafes : Yea, 'Twou'd be diredl Blaf- phemy, &c. to apply feveral of them to any, but him- felf. — Tht Father, in this Verfe, calls him his Son, declares he had begotten him, and fpeaks of him with the utmoft Complacency. — He promifes him a widely extended Dominion, if not an univerfal Monarchy, ver. 8. irrefiftible Power, and fure Conqueft, ver. 9. fo that, if even Kings would be wife, they would ferve him with Fear, even in the midft of all their Glory, ver. 10. And, If he ijs not lliled Jehovah, ver. 1 1, as feems to me undeniable-, yet it cannot be doubted, he is propofcd as the Obje^ of Worlliip, even of his People's Allegiance, Obedience, and *Trufl, i. c. in New Teflament Language, Faith. ver. 12. Therefore he is the Lord their God, Mat. iv. JO. and is exprefsly fo called, by the Angel. Luke i.
Z z 16.
[ 354 ]
i6. — This is the more remarkable, becaufe Jeho- vah only is the Objedl of religious Truji; If. xxvi.
4. thofe only who truJl in him are blejfed -, Jer. xvii. 7. but curfed is the Man^ that trufteth in Man, ver.
5. i. e. as 1 take it, in any Creature whatfoever, fhould we even grant it, (if there indeed be any fuch,) to be z. fupr a- angelical one. — To be yet more particular. The Pfalmift, having in Vifton, or by the Spirit of Prophecy, a clear Profpeft of the outragious Oppofition, that would be made to the fetting up the Kingdom of the Mejfiah, begins with a trium- phant Defiance to all his Enemies j ver. i — 3. reads their Doom ; ver. 4, 5. introduces the Father as proclaiming, that he had [et up his King in fpite of them all \ ver. 6. and the Son declaring his own full JJfurance of this, from what the Father had faid to him, according to the Agreement between them, in the
Covenant of Redemption, ver. 7. So that the
Words are the Words of God the Son, and the
Pfalmift fpeaks them in his Name. • • The Word,
Hhock, as commonly, and frequently, fignifies a Statute, Ordinance, or Law, as, (if not much more fo, than) a Decree, or Refolution, i. e. fomething deter- mined, and done, and paft already, as a Decree or
Purpofe of ^orntihing future. The Phrafe is not,
'Thou SHALT he my Son, or I will make thee my Son, as it Ihould have been, " if Chrid was to *' become a Son by the Decree-,'''' but, '^hou aPs.t my Son: And therefore, he was fo, and muft have been fo, before the Decree could be told him by the Fa- ther. But, If he was then a Son, he was then alfo a begotten Son ; for furely, he was not as a Son, be- gotten after he v/as a Son, unlefs, as a Son, he was twi:e begotten: And confequently, this Decree was not a Purpofe, or Promife, to make him what he was not ; but, in the moft evident, public, and glorious Manner, to declare what he always wcs, and had continued to be, nqtwithftanding, and during, his
deepefl
[ 355 1
deepeft Humiliation ; and that the Father would give unconteflable Proofs of it. — So that, the Verfe may be thus paraphrafed, I, the Meffiah, will declare THE Decree, i.e. will reveal and pubHfh the P«r- pofe of the jirji Perfon concerning me ; or rather, his Agreement with, and Promife to me, when I undertook to fave his People from their Sins^ and for that End, condefcended to become iVf<3W, and humble myfelf even to die upon the Crofs-, and under the Curfe ; THE Lord, xhtFather., hath said unto me, for my Encouragement and Support under all I am, as Man^ to go through ; Thou art my Sun, as thou always wajl ; tho' it will not be eafily believed, when thy Glory fhall be fo very much, aim oft totally, eclipfed ; THIS Day, the Day of thine Incarnation, and more efpecially of thy Refurre^ion^ and Jfcenjion to nvf Right Hand; have I begotten thee, declared and made it appear before all the World, that thou indeed art, what thou didft, or flialt, fo often declare, even my own, proper^ only begotten Son ; And, as fuch, the Lord God, in whom thy People Ihall truji. ver. 1 2. — But, before he leaves thefeWords, " He adds, 5. This Text is cited in Heb. i. 5. " where it is joined with God's Promife in future " T'xmts to be a Father to Ghrifi-, 1 will be to him a " Father, and he fldall be to me a Son ; which does " not fignify Eternal Generation." p. 48. What if it does not ? — Does it fignify any Thing inconfiftent with it ? — -Is it unufual, or impertinent, among Men, for an own Father, to promife, with much Pleafure, to be a Father to a worthy obedient Son ? In fuch Cafes, there is a ftrong Emphafts m the Ex- prefilon. I will be . more fo than ever : Whatever others are to me, I'll delight to call him my Son : I fhall think it an Honour, yea my greatell Happinefs, that I have fuch a Son. — The Promife here referred to is that, 2 Sam. vii. 1 4. (which the Pfalmift alfo feems to have in his Eye, Pf. Ixxxix. 26, 27. and
Z z 2 we
[ 3S6 ]
we may add, Pf. Ixxii. 17. in the Margin, Be Jhall he as a Son to continue his Fathers Name for ever ;) in all which, Solomon is originally meant, as is, I conceive, too evident to be denied •, and Chrijly only more remotely : Nor is he, in thofe Places, conli- dered purely, or principally, as God^ or the feco7id Perfon, but as Mediator, God-Man-, and that with a peculiar Refpecl to his human Nature, his be- ing the Son of David. — This Promife then, I fay, primarily refpefted Solomon., who was not tJ:^n horn, ver. 12. He was to huild theHoufe for God., ver. 13. which his good Father's Heart, was fet upon doing, ver. 2, 3. 'Tis fuppofed he »zz^Z'/, and would, commit Iniquity-, ver. 14. But God affures David, that hisMercy Jhould not depart away from him, as he took it from Saul. ver. 15. Now, none of thefe can be underfbood
of Chrifl, or of any but Solomon. But, Chriji
was undoubtedly meant, in the Claufe referr'd to ♦, becaufe, " the Apollle applies it to him." He was fo. — And the Words are ^prefs, " he fhall he to *' me a Son." Yes. But they are not exprefs, that he was not his Son, from Eternity ; or, that he was, long after that Prophecy, to hegin to be his Son -, and much lefs, that the formal Reafon, of his being, or being called, the Son of God, was his being promi- fed to David, as his Succeffor in his Kingdom ; &c. — The plain Meaning then is, when the promifed Seed, who Pall proceed out of thy Bowels, is come, not- withilanding the external Meannefs of his Appear- ance, I WILL, (by my Prefence, and Spirit with him ; the Signs, Wonders, and Miracles, I will do hy him ; mine infinite Love to him, and Complacency in him ; and my full Acceptance of him, and my People for his Sake •, &c.) manifeft, and declare, before all. That I am his own proper Father, and he my only begotten, the Son of my Love. He Jhall huild an Houfe for my Natne., even his Church -, and 1 will
eftaUifh
[ 357 1
eftahlijh the throne of his Kingdom for ever. See Lule
»• 32, 33-
The fame Anfwer will ferve, for the other two
Paflages. David himfelf was, perhaps, primarily
intended, in Pf. Ixxxix. and Solomon, in Pf. Ixxii.
Several Things in both of them, do not fo naturally,
diredlly, and literally, refer to Chrifl, as to them :
But, feveral of them, muft be applied to him ; be-
caufe, they do not appear, at all, or in any Senfe,
true of them. But, in both. He is prophefied of as
the Mejftah, that was to come ; and principally, with
Regard to his human Nature : His Divinity being
only implied, or taken for granted ; it being well
known. That it was the Son of God, who was tO
come into the World, and that he was David's Lord,
before he was to be David's Son. Pf ex. i. — To
proceed. Our Author is at great Pains to weaken
our next Argument alfo, from
" Prov. viii. 24, 25. where Wifdom fays. Before *' the Hills, was I brought forth, &c. which whole *' Chapter is generally interpreted concerning the " divine Nature of Chrift. p. 45." — It has been, now is, and ever will be, generally interpreted of him ; nor can it, with all the torturing in the World, without making pure Nonfenfe of a very great Part of it, be interpreted of any other: But, I never heard of any One, who interpreted it, mere- ly, wholly, or folely, of him as the Son of God, or of his ^zi;/»^ Nature. — No -, Chrift who is the Speaker, here fpeaks of his divine Nature, and of his Office too : Of himfelf as, from Eternity, the Son of God, but rejoicing in the Profped of his becoming alfo, in Time, the Son of Man.
" Anf I. He neither here affirms nor denies, " that the Divine Nature of Chrijt, has any Sort or *' Manner of Derivation from the Father.** ibid. And yet, one of his chief Defigns, throughout, is to alled^e, or prove, that it has not ; And, if it has,
his
[ 358 ]
his darling Nojirum is not only manifeftly/^^, but mod dangerous. " But that the Name Son of God^ " in the New Tejiajnent, does not generally (if ever) " fignify his divine Nature ; this, fays he, is my " prefent Theme : " To which we again reply, i. If it ever does, 'twill be hard to give a good Reafon, why it fhould not generally, yea always, do. 2. If it fignify this, in the Old Tejlameni, 'twill he a ftrange Attempt, to prove that it does not this alfo, at leaft fometimes, in the New. " And therefore the Al- *' legation of this Text out of Proverbs is not to our " prefent Purpofe." It was always a Piece of Pru- dence, to let thofe Things alone, which could not be meddled with, without Hazard. But, we be- lieve the whole Word ot God is our Rule: And there- fore, think it our Duty, to fearch it diligently, and weigh every Syllable of it carefully, that we may ga- ther his Mind in it, from the whole. " nor is the " NamiC Son of God there ufed, nor is God called *' his Father.'^ ibid. But, if there are feveral Phrafes there, fully equivalent, and which ftrongly confirm the Truth, we conceive it is much to our prefent Purpofe : Tho', by the Way, the very fame Thing,
may be objefted to not a few of his own Texts.
If I have not given you every Word of this Para- graph you fhall have every Syllable of the next. " Anf. 2. I dare not deny this Chapter to relate to " Chrifi;" 'lis hard to think, that an honeflMon,
can deny it. " Yet it does not follow, that
" it refers only to his divine Nature, as I fhall fhew " immediately." p. 45. Nor do I know any one,
who ever faid it did. • " And it mufl be ac-
*' knowledged, that it is very hard to prove, that *' this 8th of Proierhs does certainly, denote the Per- *' fon of Christ, p. 46." I am fo far from ac- knowledging this, that, I humbly conceive, itisea- fily capable, of the mofl certain Proof Pray, what does it denote in, or of Chrift, if it does not fup-
pofe.
[ 359 ]
pofe, or principally denote, his Per/on ? " Athana- " fius himfelf fometimes explains it another Way." And if, upon fecond Thoughts, he altered his Mind,
and then gave the true Senfe -, all is well. " Bi-
" fhop Patrick, that noble Commentator, will fcarce " allow of it ;" And not a few others, as noble Commentators as he, admit it moft readily, and upon the cleared Evidence, and with all their Hearts.
" and many others have been of the Opinion,
" that Solomon means only Wi[dom as a Principle of " Contrivance and Counfel, whether human or di- " vine ;" Strange Words ! But, who thofe many others are: Or, What could induce rhem to dreamy that Wtfdom, i. e. the Speaker of, or in, thefe Pafiages, is only a Principle of Contrivance and Counfel ; and much more to add, " whether /6«»2^;z or divine;'* is fo far above me, that I muft leave them to thofe ma- ny others. — " or at moit, the ideal World in the " Mind of God, tho' he ufes fuch Sort of perfonal *' Charailers in his Defcription of this V/ijdom, m " \ki^ Hebrew Xd^om" Stranger ftill ! That this /- deal World Ihould be fo perfonified ! and be intro- duced, as calling to Sinners, teaching, exhorting, promifing, threatning, proclaiming what it was, declaring what it did, &c. ^c! — Would one have expefted thefe, from our worthy Author ^ — If the Socinian Notion, (that, by tVifdom here, we are to underftand that PerfetUon, or Attribute, of God, fo called ; or, as fome ex prefs themfelves, that ^ality^ ox Virtue, &c.) be here intended : I would only alk,
1. Why ihould this Perfe^ion be fo perfonified, and glorioufly celebrated, rather than his Power and Goodnefs, which were as confpicuoufly difplayed, in the Works of Creation and Redemption, as this ? —
2. Could any one poflibly doubt, that the Wifdom of God, was always with him, as well as his other Attributes? — 3. Upon this Suppofition, What Senfe can thefe Phrafes have, Iwasfetup, ver. 23.
I was
[ 36o ]
I was brought forth, ver. 24, 25. I was there, ver. 27. then was I by him, as one brought up with him, — rejoycing always before him ? ver. 30. I moll ear- neftly defire to know, if any one can tell me. — 4. Might not thefe have been faid of, or by, the other Perfections now named, with as much Truth, Pro- priety, and Emphafis too, as of this F — I am hear- tily forry, I am obliged to make fuch Remarks.
*' 'Tis granted that many of the Ancients ex- " plained it of Chriji," Yes; by far the greateft Number, and thofe too of the greateft Weight and Authority. " but fome of the Fathers fuppofed it '* to mean the Holy Spirit ;" And fome of the Mo- derns, we fee, fuppofe Things full as abfurd. " and " all Men know they were but very poor Expofitors, '* who dealt much in Allegory, and in ftraining of " plain Texts to their Purpofes," &c. p. 46. And yet, I do not know, if any one Inftance, of gr offer firaining a plain Text, to ferve any of their Purpofes, can be produced, out of any of their Writings, than this we are now examining ! But, if the Ancients were " but very poor Expofitors," we have, at leaft. Nineteen in Twenty, if not Ninety- nine in a Hun- dred, and thofe the moft learned too, through all the middle Ages, and of the Moderns alfo, all witnef- ftng to the coeffential Sonjhip of the fecond Perfon ! — I cannot conceive the Reafon of this Gird upon the Ancients, if it was not, becaufe " ail Men know" they were, and are, clearly, fully and ftrongly, againft himfelf : And thereiore, leaft any ftiould be moved or fwayed, by their venerable Names, they are branded, as " but very poor Expofitors ! " But, had any of them, who were not ftigmatized as Here- tics^ patronized any of thefe New-fangled Notions, I doubt not we fhould have heard of this " excellent " Father," and the other " excellent Father!" I Ihall only add, I pretend to fo much Acquaintance with the Ancients, as to wifti that- the fame Good
Senfe,
[36i 1
Senfe, Serioufnefs, Piety, and Zeal for the Truth, appeared, as generally, in the common Run of the Writings of our Day, as in theirs. He has not yet done.
" Anf. 3. Supposing the Divine ^/^/i/*?/;? inP/-<7L'. viii. " primarily to fignify the Idea of theDivine Counfels " and Decrees about Creation and Redemption," ibid. i.e. Suppofmg, wbdt cannot he fuppo fed ! Who can fuppofe, that an Lka Ihould be reprefented as a Perfon, calling, promifmg, &oc. as fet up, or anoint ed, ver. 23. ^c. zsrejoycing, z.nd hd^ving Delight ? ver. 30, 31. ^c. p. 46. — " it may be properly faid, This " Wifdom (\. e. this Idea !) was begotten, and brought " forth before the Creation," May it fo ^ Did any one before this, ever hear of the begetting an Idea ; or of an Ideals being begotten ? If any one ever did •, if he confiders what he is faying, I cannot think, he
will alledge that the ExpreiTion is proper. " and
" all thisSyfhem of divine Counfels (i. e. this Idea) " being depofited with the pre-exiftent Soul " of *' Chrijl ', {in whom are all the Treafures of Wifdom " and Knowledge,)''' — That all the Treafures of Wifdom and Knowledge are in Chrijl, as God, or as his Son, I as furely believe, as I do that they are in the Fa- ther: But, fuppofing that ]\\s human Soul tx\?itd be- fore the Creation,, yet, i. I mud, with all Humi- lity, queftion, whether it was capable of receiving, or containing, all this Syftem, i. e. this Depofitum. But,
2. Should we grant its Capacity, 'tis plain that
all this Syftem, was not, in fad", depofited with it •, becaufe, our Author declares that, " as the Son of God, *' He knew not the Day of Judgment " p. 42. The Strength of this Argument reils upon thefe two, (i.) That the Day of Judgment Wcisfxed in this Sy- ftem, and was a Part of it -, which, I verily fuppofe, none will deny. And, (2.) That fuch a fupra-aitgeli- ^^/ Spirit, as was capable of receiving this Depofitum^ could never forget, and totally too, fuch a remark-
A a a able
[ 362 ]
able Part of it ♦, which, I really think, no one will affirm. — " this human Soul of Chriji^ thus veiled " with divine Ideas," what ? and is this proper too! — " may be included in Solomon's Idea of Wifdom?* p. 47. /. e. in his Idea of this Idea ! But, What does he mean by Solomon's Idea ? The Words are Chrift^s own Words.- His, and his only. — This glorious Account of his Perfon, Generation^ Chara6lers, and Works, he gives himfelf, who bed cou'd do it ; and only borrowed Solomon's Pen : For, Solomon, with all his Wifdom, could never talk in thefe Strains,
or write this Chapter. But, What if this human
Soul were included in this Idea? Will it therefore follow, That *' many Things, in this Chapter, do not " feem much more naturally to refer to his God- *' head," which was the Objection he was to re- move ? p. 45. By no Means. — Thus have I given you thefe four Paragraphs, almofb Word for Word, and have confidered them fo largely, chiefly to fliew what very hard Shifts even learned Men are put to, in Defence of their own private Opinions, when once they have wandered from the Truth : And how un- willing, yea how backward, they are to give up their Nojirums, as long as they can have any Thing to fay for them, be it ever fo weak, or even perfedly ridi- diculous !
In his next Words, he gives us a Suppojition, and from thence, infers a Probability •, which, tho* very far from being well-fupported, we might grant, without any great Detriment to our prefent Caufe. And therefore, we fhall now pnfs them, and proceed to confider this glorious Chapter, which, for thefe many Years, I could hardly ever read, without thinking I was reading a Chapter in the Gofpel ac- cording to John. And here, we fhall ihew, —
I. That it is a proper Perfon^ who fpeaks quite
Throughout. 2. That he is a Divine Perfon,
even one of the ever-blefled Three. 3. That, as
fuch.
[ 363 ]
fuch, he is a Son, the Son of God. And yet, — 4. That he fpeaks, in moft of the Verfes, as the Messiah, our Saviour. This I fay, we fhall do, when we have only obferved thefe few Things.
That the firfl: eighteen Verfes of Jo. i. will give great Light, for the underflanding of this Chapter :
That the Divine Speaker does, at leaft from
ver. 4. of this Chap, quite throughout, ad: the Pro- phet, and Teacher, of his Church ; thereby {hewing, that he was indeed the Logos, the Word ; and per- haps, upon this Account, (as well as his being the Omni FIG Word, as Milton calls him, by whom the Father made all Things, that were made,) well de- ferved that glorious Title : — That (confidering the well-known Occafion, and the Time of the writing of John\ Gofpel,) when the Holy Ghoft filled him fo emphatically, the Word, he probably intended to point us to this Chapter ; and thofe Paflages in par- ticular, where he is filled Wifdom, or fpeaks of him- felf as the greatefl Teacher, even the Light of the World (here the learned will call to mind the Xoyo:; hiix^sTog and 7r^o(pofiwq of the Ancients) and the joint Maker of the World : — And That, perhaps, the firfl three or four Verfes of this Chap, are a glo- rious Preface fpoken by Solomon, to awaken Atten- tion, and introduce this fublimely Divine Speech, with a fuitable Solemnity.
I. That he is a Perfon, who here fpeaks, from ver. 4. to the Clofe, will appear very evident, from thefe Confiderations. • (i.) Jll the Pronowis,
Perfonal and Pojfejfive, which any Perfon, fpeaking of himfelf, ever ufed, or could ufe, viz. /, me, my, mine, are here found, in many Places, and with
the gvt2i\.Q^ Emphnfis. I. ver. 4. 17. 20. 23.
^c. me, ver. 15. 16. 17. 18. ^c. my. ver. 6. 7.
8. 19. 31. 32. ^c. mine. ver. 14. (2.) The
Divine Speaker inflances, in a great Variety of his
own perfonal Anions, which are alio very beautifully
A a a 2 and
[ 364 1
and {Irongly expreft. Icall^ ver. 4. Iwiltfpeaky
ver. 6. riove, ver. 17. 7 lead, 20. i r^?«/^, / will
fill, ver. 21. /^y^j there, 27. /w^J hy him, — re-
joycing always before him, 30. rejoycing in the habitable
Parts of his Earthy and my Delights were with the Sons
of Men. 3 1 . &:c. ( 3.) A great Number of Per-
final Chara5lers, are alfo afcribed to him. He is The ever-blelkd Teacher and Exhort er ; ver. 4. — 6. i^c. The Truth', 7. 8. The Counfellor; 14. The King of Kings \ 15. 16. &c. He is the Captain, or Leader ot his People, ver. 20. And is very exprefs, I was fit tip, or anointed. Viz. to an Office. 23. 1 was brought forth -, i. e. begotten, or born, as a Son. ver. 24. 25. Jzvasthere, 27. I was by him, 30. not as an idle, or unconcerned Spe6tator, but Joint IForker with him ; for, he made all things by me. John i. 3. Heb. i. 2. / was daily his Delight ; 31. the Father's Darling, as his only begotten. — In fine. He may be finned againjt, and hated, to the utter Definition of thofe that do hate him, ver. '^6. and loved, and found, to the everlafting Happinefs of all his own People, ver. 17. and 35. /. e. He is the Life, x.'n.tbavicur, of his People, Sind the Judge of all the Earth, &c. ver. 2 i . 34 0,6.- — If all thefe now, do not prove, that the Speaker is really a diJlinB proper Perfon, 'tis abfolutely impoflible to prove any Thing by Words.
2. That he is a Diiine Perfon-, and one, even the
fecond, of the blefl^ed Ihree. If the former be
well fupported, and fhould Our learned Author de- mur to this, it is eafy to evince it, beyond all modeft Contradidion, from his perfonal Chara^ers juft na- med. The great Prophet of his Church, is the Truth, John xiv. 6. the Faithful Witnefs, Rev. i. 5. and the God A'ME'n, or God of Truth, If. Ixv. 16.
^c. all which agree well with, vers. 6, 7, 8.
He fpeaks in the Language of One who is the true God, ver. 14. Counfel is mine, and found Wifdom, I
am
1 365 1
am Underfianding, I have Strength. See If. ix. 6. CL
xlv. 24. John i. 4 — 9. 'Tis only by One,
who is God, that Kings reign, &c. ver. i^. 16, — • None but a Divine Perfon could promife, what we have, ver. 17 — 19. or, that he would caufe thofe that love him to inherit Substance, i^c. ver. 21. — It was the feco7td Perfon, who was fet up, or anointed, conftituted, ordained, from Everlafiing, &c. ver. 23. before the Creation of the World j /'. e, in Scrip- ture Language, from Eternity : He and no other. «— — It was he, ky whom all Things were made, ver. 24 — 29. comp. withC^/. i. 16, 17. i^c. therefore. He was w/ made, but neceffarily exijling ; and confequently.
Eternal. • This was not the firjl Perfon, bur
one who was with him : But, there was none with him, before all Things, except his Son and Spirit. — Briefly, in his Favour is Life -, in his Wrath is Death ; and confequently. He is God over all. S5^ 3^' Rom. ix. 5.
3. That this Divine Perfon was, and is, as fuch, a Son, THE Son of God, his begotten, his only begot- ten. This being the very Hinge of the Con-
troverfy, we fhall put it out of all Doubt ; which will be eafily done, if it be remembred, ■ That there is not, in the Verfes to be quoted, the leaft Hint, that the Speaker was then a Complex
Perfon, or had then two Natures : ■ That ther^
is not a Syllable, in this Chapter, beneath, unworthy of, or anyhow unbecoming, xht fecond ?tx^on, when
he had undertaken our Redemption: That
there are many Things in it, which could not be faid of any polTible Creature, be it ever fo high : ■ And, That it would be Blafphemy, to afcribe feveral of them, to any other, but one of the ever-blcffed Three. — The Paflages I now pitch upon, are thefe glorious ones, which come full home to the Point 5 are too clear and plain to be denied ; and too dired and ftrong to be evaded, or glofled away. ---7/^^
Lord
[ .366 ]
IjOKd pojfejfed me, ver. 22. I was brought forth, ver. 24. and again, ver. 25. I was there^ ver. 27. Then was I by him, as one brought up with him ; , / was daily his Delight, rejoycing always before him. ver. 30. 31.
1. The Lord possessed me in the Beginning of his Way, before his Works of. Old. The Objedion taken, from the Septuagint, is well known •, and has been, a great many Times, unanfwerably anfwered. — The plain Chriftian hath nothing to do with it. — The Hebrew Verity is clearly, and fully, for us. — The Lord, the Father, poffeffed me, not as a Creature, or One of another Nature ; and therefore, 2& a Son, and co- effential with him, as is plain from the next Verfes. — He poffeffedme, that is. In the Beginning I was, not began to be : 1 was with God, a diftindt Perfon from him, and yet exifting, or fubfifting in him -, John \. 1. — He pojfejfed me, for I was always, and am in his Bofom r ver. 18. — I am his only begotten ; ver. 14. but fo, that I am flill not only with him, but in him •, and He with, and in me. John x. 38. Ch. xiv. 10 and 1 1. — 'So that, this Phrafe clearly fuppofes, and implies, the i^TrfpTp^wp^crK of the Ancients ; agrees well, with the modern Notion of Generation, for- merly mentioned •, and accounts for the feveral gO' in^s forth oi' the Son, frequently mentioned by fome of the Fathers.
2. / was BROUGHT FORTH ; ver. 24. and the fame Words are repeated, ver. 25. Brought forth as a Son: And therefore, I am a Son. — Thefe Expref- fions, can bear no other Senfe : Nor will the Em- phafis of them permit, or leave Room for, any E- vafion. — The Verbs, Jalad, Pf. ii. 7. gignere, to h^get, and hhul, parturire, to bring forth, in thefe Verfes, are both emphatic. This latter does more properly denote the Ad, or Part, of the Mother, in Child-bearing : And, flri£lly, fignifies to bring forth with Labour, Pain, and Sorrow. And were
they
[ 367 1
they then chofen^ by the [econd Perfon himfelf, (for ]ie is the Speaker in both Places,) in vain, and with- out Caufe ? Was one of them repeted, fo foon, and in fuch a Manner, without any Emphafis ? And mull they all pafs, for little or nothing ! Or would, or could, fuch ftrong Phrafes, have been pitcht upon, either with any Propriety^ or even Truth ; only to intimate his being " created^ in a peculiar Manner ? " Words, by the by, of which no Man can form any Idea ! But, both thefe will receive yet more Ligbt
and Force too, from what follows.
3. J was there, ver. 27. and, I was by him^ ver. 30. I was brought forth, fays he, before the Moun- tains, and BEFORE the Hills ; ver. 25. i^c. in other Words, before the Creation, ;. e. according to the
Stile of Scripture, from Eternity. / was there ;
When ? when he prepared the Hea'vens, when he fet a Compafs upon the Face of the Deep. &c. &c. ver. 27 — 29. i.e. when he, if I may fo fay, delineated, or drew the firft Draught of them, and all along till they were all glorioully finifhed. — Well, but was he there, only as an idle, unconcerned Spectator? No. Had this been the Cafe, 'twould neither have been fo much worth his while, to have entertained us, with fuch a |X)mpous Account of little or no- thing •, nor ours to have fo much regarded it.- --Well then. How was he employed ? Why, In working with the Father.— All Things were made by him, &c. John i. 3. Him, the Son, and as zSon too ; at lead, if the Apoftle may be credited : For, By his dear Son WERE ALL Things CREATED, that are in Hea- ven, and that are in Earth, — yea, and for kim alfo. Col. i. 13 and 16. — Withal, if this is not fuper- abundant Proof, the Father himfelf is yet more ex- prefs, and ftrong to our Purpofe. Thou Lord in the Beginning haft laid the Foundation of the Earth, &c. Heb.'x. 8—10. Will any one Man now fay, " That this '* Name Son of God cannot neceflarily imply his Di-
*' vine
1 368 ]
•* vine Nature.*' — Should it be fuggefted. That even in thefe Places, it " denotes the MeJJiahy* and as fuch. Anf. I. Granting this, 'tis clear, it will not, it cannot, help our learned Author : Becaufe, it is undeniable, " His Divine Nature is here neceflarily
'* implied." 2. *Tis evident. That, though the
Perfon fpoken of, is the Mediator ; and, in mofl of the Verfes of that Chapter, is mentioned as the Media- tor \ yet is he, as fuch, God-Man : And, 'tis cer- tain he is confidered, ver. 10. as the Creator j and therefore, as God, and not as the Mediator ; becaufe,
1. None of the Divine Works afcribed to him, in that Verfe, by the Father himfelf, were Mediatorial A^s^ or any Part of the Mediatorial Fundion. — Nor,
2. Was his human Nature confidered at all, in that Verfe, or but very remotely : For, it was not his hu- man Soul, by which all things were created ; nor did
it lay the Foundation of the Earth, &c. &c.
It was the Son, whom the Father himfelf thus ad- dreffes. Thy Throne, O God, ver. 8. — and, Thou Lord in the Beginning haft laid the Foundation of the Earth, &c. ver. 10. —'Tht Son therefore, and purely as fuch, is, not only, in a ftrid and proper Senfe, a Perfon, but He who did all thefe Things : And con- fequently, as fuch, he is God, the true God ; who, being infinitely perfe6t, could do them all. — But, as a Son, he is not the firfi but the fecond Perfon : And confequently. It is the fecond PcrCon m the Trinity, and not Chrift's human Soul, who is ftiled, and is, the Son of God. Q^ E. D.
N. B. Here is one Text, and a very remarkable one too as any in the Bible, in which Chrifl is, I conceive, fpoken to as a Son, where the Title is not, cannot be, a Title of Office, but of Nature : Or, where he is confidered, as the great Creator of all Things, or purely as the coeffential Son of God, and not as the Mediator between God and Man.
Then
[369] ^
Thefi was I by him. Halo, juxta, apu^-, as a diftind Pcrfon from God the Father ; — as on a BROUGHT UP with him, amon, nutritius, alum- nus, as om begotten of him, and brought forth by him, ver. 25. and cheriped, nurfed, as it were, and brought up with him, as dear to him as' his ov/n
Son •, / was daily, continually, and forever,
HIS Delight, as an oyily begotten Son', re-
JOYCING ALWAYS, withoUt CCafing ; BrFORK
HIM, as a wife and loving Son, before a Father,
Ver, 30. Thefe Words are fpoken after the
Manner of Men, and fiiited to our Capacities, that we might have the clearer, and more lively. No* tions of the Divine Things contained in them : And, confidering who was the Speaker, have in them the Force of a Thoufand Arguments. — How familiar^ how full, how firong, are thefe Expreflions ! How apt to raife our Ideas to the very highefl ? How fublirne, yet how becoming, how like, fuch a Son ! How worthy of fuch a Father I Were the fecond Perfon, indeed a coeffential Son, Is it poffible he could aft more in Chara6ter : Or, talk in a Strain, more proper, or congruous to that neareft, and moil lliblime Relation ? Were the j^r/? Perfon, in Reality, a coeffential Father, Is it poffible, his own Son could reprefent the Heart of fuch a Father, to an only begotten, in a more emphatical Stile : Unlefs it were in unfpeakahle Words, if I may allude to 2 Cor. xii. 4. which it is not pofible for a Man either to utter ^ or underftand ?— Upon this Suppofition, every Word has its natural, genuine, and full Senfe and Force \ and the ■■ Two Divine Perfons are, molt beautifully de- fcribed, as ading in Chara6ler, the Father as the Father, the Son as the Son ; and that, in F,x- prcffions the fweeteft, deareft, moft lively, and yet to us intelligible ! But, upon any other, the Se?tfe is infinitely funk, the Beauty is loft, and the incon- ceivable Emphajis does almoft totally vanifh.
B b b Such
[ 370 1
Such Language is fo natural^ from an own, a proper Son, and every Way fo eafy, fo familiar, that we might reafonably exped it : But, from a Creature, even the higheft poffible, they feem quite to lofe, not only their Propriety and Beauty, but both their Senfe and Truth. — Need I add, What would our Author have had a coejfential Son to have faid ? What could he have faid, more clearly, fully, and
ftrongly, to our Purpofe ? To conclude this.
This Verfe moft fweetly reprefents to us, not only the inconceivable Satisfa£iion^ the Father and Son had, in their Counfels, concerning the Creatures, and, in particular, the Work of Redemption : But chiefly their moft near and intimate, their moft conftant, familiar, and fweet Converje together ; the infinite Complacency they had, and have, in each other ; yea, and the unconceiveable Delight, which all the Perfons of the ever bleffed 'J'rinity have in themfelves, and one another -, wherein, by the Way, confiits much of the Hclpine^s of the Divine Nature, < — Much^ did 1 fay ? Yea, if the Exprcffion may be allowed, irfinitely the greater Part of it : For all the Pkafure, dr/iflacency, and Sc2tisfc.5iion, (I dare not call it Haptinefs I) which the ever blefied Per- fons in the Deity can have, in the whole Creation, feems in Ileality, juft nothing to this. — But, becaufe none but themfelves can comprehend the full Mean- ing of thefe Verfes, we fhall leave them, to the moft ferious Conf deration of the pious Reader : And only fay. That, if we have not put this Pro- pofition, beyond all reafonable Doubt, we may well defpair, of ever proving any Thing, by any Words.
4. That the Son fpeaks of himfelf, tho' not I con- ceive quite throughout, as the Mess i a h, our Saviour. — This our worthy Author, would have readily admitted. Every Verfe almoft, of this Chapter, which is all over Gofpel, renders it unde- niable.
[ 37M
liable. — He here afls the Prophet, inftrufbing, cal- ling, counfelling, exhorting and perfuading his People to come to, hear, and love him, promifing Life to thofe that find him, ver. '^c, and threatning Death to all who hate him ; for fo he interprets, or con- ftru6ts finning againfi, or not hearing him. ver. 36!
But, thofe moll amazingly kind and loving
Words muft not be omitted, rejoycing in the ha- bitable Parts of his Earth, as if thefe had been his chiefefl Joy ! and my Delights were with the Sons of
Men ! ver. 3 1 . • When he was daily the Father's
Delight^ no Doubt, the Father was alfo his : But, how aftonifliing is this ! Not only my Delight, as if this was the principal : But, mv Delight? were, as if all of them had been, with the Sons of Men only ! — Oh thou eternal, and only begotten, coeffential Son of God, what was it in the Sons of Men, all of whom thou fawtft lying wallowing in Sin! guilty, polluted^ inflaved! Weak, Rom. v. 6. Sinners, ver. 8. Enemies, ver. 10. yea, Enmity, Ch. viii. 7. — What, Oh! What was it in them, which could be thy Delights / — What Communion could Light have with Darknefs ? Or,
Purity with Filthinefs ? Or, What was it thou
waft to do with them, for them, or to them .? —Thine own Words, /delight to do thy Will, O
God. Pf. xl. 8. are the beft Anfwer. But, What
was this Will? Why ; That, having undertaken to redeem his People /rcw the Curfe of the Law, Gal. iii. I :^, &c. he might, in the Fulnefs of Time, take unto himfelf a true Body and a reafonable Soul ; that fo, he might have a Life to give a Ranfom for them. Mat. XX, 28. and thereby put away Sin, by the Sacrifice of himfelf, which // was not poffible the Blood of Bulls and Goats fhould do -, Heb. ix. 26. Ch. X. 4 — 14. and, in the glorious IlTue of all,
hring many Sons to Glory ! Ch. ii. i c. Praife
and blefs him, O Heavens and Earth. — O all ye
his ^higels and People, Exalt him, Sing of him,
B b b 2 Re-
[ 372 1
Rejoyce in him. 1 have dwelt fo long, upon
this celebrated Gofpel -Chapter^ (tho' confidering the glorious Suhje^f^ 'tis but little, very little, I can fay upon it,) becaufe, I humbly conceive, the Ar- guments from it are fo irrefragable, that I could venture our whole Caufe upon it alone: — But, I ihall be briefer on the following
Prov. XXX. 4. What is his Name, and what is his Son's Name, if thou canfi teU'f In which, thefe Things appear to me invincibly clear. Here are two diftind, true^ and prcper Perfons : — One of them is the Son of the other ; and therefore, the
other is his Father : They are Divine Ferfons,
even Two of the Holy and Undivided Ihree-^ becaufe. Divine A6lions, Charaders, and Works, are afcribed to them: — None, but One who is Go^y could gather the Wind in his Fifts •, bind the Waters j If. xl. 12, or efiaUijh all the Ends of the
Earth : • • And, all thefe are attributed, not only
to the Father, but to the Son, as we have juft now heard. — 'Tis plain. That they who do thefe Things, have been akvnys co-exifient, and are alfo infinite, in
Wifdorn, and in Power, &c. Whatever then
may be meant by Name % whether the Nature and Offence, or Authority, or any Perfe^ion or Perfections, of thefe Divine Perfons -, or, whether if by the Nameoi the Father, we are to underftand his P erf on, and fo of the Name of the Sen -, 'tis evident, the Name of the Son is, as fecret, unknown, and incomprehenfihle, as that of the Father : And therefore, the Queftion, or Challenge, runs thus. What is his {the Father^s) Name, and what is his Son's Name, if thou canfi tell ? ' — They are plainly put upon a Level, as to this ; and are tqually, unfearchable, unconceiveahle, and pafi find'ng out : And confequently, thefe ever blef- fed i'tifons are emdly God; becaufe, the Name, (whatever be meant by the Word,^ of no Being, or Perfo'n^ who is not Gcd, can be fo fecret, ineffable,
and
[ 373 ]
*nd infinitely above us, as the Name of One who is. — If then, by Name is meant Nature, Perfe£fionsy or Authority ; thefe, in themjelves, are the fame ; and they are equally, in both Perfons, oply in the One as a Father, and in the other as a Son : But, If by his Name, is denoted the Perfon of the Father, or his perfonal Property, and the Relation refultino- from it, viz. Paternity, as the Schools fpeak ; and by the Son's Name, his Perfon, or perfonal Property, and the Relation arifing from it, viz. Filiation : Yet ftill, the Name of the Son is as unfearchaUe and incomprehenfihle, as that of the Father \ and there- fore. He is God equal with him.
N. B. Here then is another Text, where the
fecond Fcri^on is Riled Son, his Son, ■ i. Without
any RefpeSl to our Redemption.-- And thevdore, it feems undeniable. That the Terms Son, and the Meffiah, or Redeemer, are not of the very fame Sig- nification : That this Title is not founded on his
moft kind Undertaking, but Antecedent to it : •
That he was, and is, his Son, and might have been fo called, independently of, and abftrafted from, his Meffiahfdip : And therefore, it is a Title of Nature,
and not of (jffice. 2. Hence 'tis clear. That his
human Soul, even as fully qualified for our Redemp- tion, is not here meant by his Son : Becaufe, the{e Works, or Effects, viz. to gather the Wind in his Fifis, to bind up the Waters in a Garment, and to eflablifJj all the Ends of the Earth, require infinite Wifdom and Power, in t'neir Caufe, which are nor, fo much as fuppofed to be, in this his Soul: And confrquently. That it is the /^r(?W Perfon, He only,
and as fuch, who is, and is here filled, his oon.
Withal, 3. 'Tis felf evident, th3.t tht EJence, Ex- ifience. Perfections, &c. of this his human Soul, be they ever fo extraordinary, or far above us, are not fo incomprehenfihle, as thofe of God the Father : Or, that the Nm^e of it, might poffibly be told by thofe,
who
[ 374 ] who could not, poflibly, tell what is the Name of the other. — — I do not remember, that any One of our Adverfaries, ever medled with this Text ! The Reader fhall be left to guefs the Reafon.
If. ix. 6. For unto us a Child is born^ unto us a Son is given^ and the Government Jhall he upojt his Shoulder: And his Name jhall he called^ Wonder fuU Councellor^ The Mighty God, 'The everlajiing Father, The Prince of Peace. — Here, a great many Things offer themfelves, at lirft View, which are clearly and fully for us •, and, in my Opinion, do indifputably determine the Caule in our Favour. In Reality, fo many Woj'ds, were it necefiary to ex- patiate, fo many Arguments. — One glorious and ever bleffed Perfon, is the Subjed of this Verfe : . — He is a complex Perfon, having, in him, the Divine, and the Human Nature : — He was to be lorn, and born of a Virgin, Ch. vii. 14. and there- fore, was, as her Child, or as made of a IVoman, TRUE Man : — PI is Na?ne was to he called, i. e. he fhould be really, and alfo declared and acknow- ledged to be, The Mighty God ; and therefore, was, and is, the true God : — And confequently,
He is, indeed, God-man. This Perfon,
tho' named. The everlafiing Father, or The Father of Eternity, was not the Firit in the Trinity, as is felf-evident -, for, thefirjl never was in any Senfe, be- gotten or born ; and never was to be called a Son, or a Child : — No one ever dreamt that this was the Third Perfon ; for the very fime Reafons, and many
others : — And therefore. He was the Second.
This Son, even after he was to become a Child born, or made Flejh, was to be called, i. e. to be pro- claimed,- and publickly own'd, to be what he always was. El Gibbor, The mighty God : Not a new, an inferior, z-made, ^puifneyGod, (Idefire theReader to pardon the Nonfenie,) but the ftrong, the powerful, the mighiy, and therefore, the true God. --■ I fay
always
[ 375 1
always was ; becaufe, if this Title had not always belong'd to him, it could never have belong'd to him : Or, he had never really been the mighty God, had he not been necejfarily, and eternally fo. — • This Child's Body\ purely as fuch, never was, never could be. The mighty God; nor, with any Propriety or Truths be fo ftiled. — His Human Soul, notwith- ftanding its enlarged Capacity and all its peculiar Privileges, never was, and confequently, never
could be called, the mighty God. It remains
therefore. That this glorious, This incommunicable Titkj is due to Chrifl as God the Son, even the fecond, of the ever blefied Three ; for, it is un- deniable, it is here afcribed to the Son given to us : i\nd therefore. This ever bleffed Son is, as fuch, truly, and properly, The mighty God : And con- fequently, A COESSENTIAL SoN. Q^E. D.
'Tis needlefs to enlarge any farther on this Text, at prefent : And therefore, I fliall only remove an Obje6tion or two out of the Way. i. The Divine Perfon, who is the Subjedl of this Paflage, is the
Mediate?', and is here defcribed, as fuch. Anf.
Suppofing this -, the Mediator is both true God and true Man. — As God, he is the Son of God-, and as fuch, here faid to be a Son given to us : As Man^ he is the Son of Man ; and, as fuch, here faid to be a Child born to us. — 2. The Mediator "■' has true *' Godhead, in him, and upon that Account, he is * '- the true God ; tho' he is not fo, as he is the Son *' of God.'' Anf The Mediator is Godman, in whom dwelleth all the Fulne'^s u/^i'd' Godhead, which is indivifible, bodily : Col. ii. 9. But, the ExpreiTion, " has true Godhead in him, or belong- *' ing to him," is, to fay the leaft, hardly, if at all, intelligible. — Is the fecond Perfon, in the Trinity, as fuch, truely a dijiin^ Perfon from the frjl ! Was it be, and as fuch, who undertook to be the
Me-
_ [ ,'!76 1 Mediator? And, is not he, as fuch, here called a Son given ? If fo, we are agreed. — If not. Our Author mufl not have taken it ill to have been told. That an Jrian might fay all this, if not much more !
Dan, iii. 25. And the Form of the fourth is like THE SomofGod. Towhich our Author objefts, p.19. '* The Son of God who was with the three Children " in the fiery Furnace, Dan. iii. 25. is fo called, to " fignify a glorious and excellent Being, that had *' fomething Divine or Godlike in him •," To pafs this, which needs much to be explained, I afk, "Why ? " for this is rhe Exprefiion of Nebuchad- *' nezzar, who is not fuppofed to know any Thing " of Chrijl or the MeJ/iah." Anf. Nebuchadnezzar calls this Divine Perfon, whom he here ftiles the Sen of God, his Angel \ vcr. 28, — How then, or whence, fhould we fuppofe, he knew any Thing of the Exiftence Osgood Angels ? Or, of one eminent One, who, in the moft emphatic or peculiar Manner, was his Angel? And, That the Son of God, was, or ill ou Id be called, his Angel? or vice v erf a ? Sec. The only fatisfying Account can be given is, that he knew thefe, fome Way or other, by Revelation -, and very probably, by his Converfation with Daniel and his Fellows. — That King was, con- feffedly, a great Genius ; a Man of Parts, well ac- quainted with Men and Things : And fuch are ufually inquijitive. — Daniel and his Companions had been long about the Court •, were not only very intimate with him, but in great Credit and Con- fidence •, and much trufted, and employed, by him. — Nothing then, is more likely, than that he would, (efpecially after that glorious Confefjion of the infinite Excellency of the God of Daniel, above all other Gods, Ch. ii. 47.) either out of Curiofity, or for Injlru5lion, or both, enquire farther about his God i IVho^ and TFhat, he was ? How to be wor-
fhipped ?
f Z17 ]
fliipped ? And in what Manner, or by what Means, he made himjelf, and his Mind, known unto them ? &c. — Or, that Daniel and his Friends would lay hold of fome favourable Opportunities, to inform him of their Faith, concerning the true God j how he came to be their God, in Covenant -, what great Things he had, in all Ages, done for their Nation, ^c. and would yet, in his own Time and Way, do for them, and their Pofterity -, ^c. and that it was He, who, for their Sins, had caji them cut of their Land, &c. &c : And, in particular, to give him fome Account of their Religion and Laws, which, as he well knew, were full as ftngular, as they were famous, &c. — On thefe Occafions, they would be naturally led to acquaint him, with his proper, and incommunicable Name : That, tho' this Name was peculiar to the one true God, yet it was afcribed to more than One : That one of thefe had often ap- peared, to their Ance'lors in human Shape, and with or in a vifible Glory ; &c. which infallibly af- fured them, that he was the true God : That it was he, who brought them out of Egypt, and went hfore them, through the Wildernefs, hy Day in a Pillar of Cloud, to lead them the Way -, and hy Night in a Pillar of Fire, to give them Light ; Ex. xiii. 21, ^c. &c. and that he was, by Way of Eminence, ftiled the Angel of Jehovah ; &c : And that, in after Ages, he was revealed to them, by the Title of a Son, an own Son, a begotten Son, who had alfo promifed, that when they fhould zvalk through the Inre, they fhould not be burnt •, 7ieither fhould the Flame kindle upon them -, If. xliii. 2. the which Pro- mife, the King and that numerous Aflembly had lately, with their own Eyes, feen literally, and to a
Tittle, fulfilled, l^c. If thefe, or either of
them, (which are fo very likely, that we can hard- ly doubt of them •,) be granted, we clearly fee, how Nebuchadnezzar came to talk fo exadlly, in the
C c c Lan-
[ 378]
Language of Scripture : — And his very Words, the Form^ Afpeft, Countenance, or Appearance, of the fourth is^ not is the Form of, but is like the hon of God ; fcerns even to force this Senfe upon us. q. d. His Form exadly anfwers to the Accounts I have heard of his former Appearances. — Or, If we iliould fuppofe, as the Thing itfelf fpeaks, that he was now under fome extraordinary Influence of the Spirit of Illumination^ as he feems afterwards to have been, Ch. iv. 34 — 37 under fan^Iifying Influences ;
this will make the whole Matter yet clearer.
However, One or both of thefe mull have been the Cafe •, becaufe, it is hardly pofiible any other Way, to account for the King's Words. — How could he know, that God had 3. Son! an only Son? That this Scn^ was kis Angel? That he could reftrain the Power of the Fire, fo as to preferve his Ser- vants in it, v/ithout the lead Hurt^ infomuch, that there was not f.n Flair of their Heads Jinged ? &c. ver. 25, 27. Yea, how could he, or any Man, haveufed any fuch Expreflions ? To fay, he fpake in the Language of the Heathens, (whofe Gods were fancied to have Sons, and Daughters too, fome more, fome fewer, and more or lefs eminent, or beloved,) is not true: For then, he would have mentioned which of their Gods, and which Son, &c. — And to fay what our worthy Author has done in the Words quoted, is to
fay juft nothing But
Mic. V. 2. Whofe Goings forth have been from Oldy from the Bays ' of Eternity. This Text is, upon feveral Accounts, very obfervable ; and fo has been reputed, in all Ages. — That xhtMeffiah is the Sub- jedl of it, is not, cannot, be denied. — That the twofold Generation of his Perfon, as both God and Man, is here very particularly revealed, has been the conftant Faith of the Catholic Church, from the Beginning. Here is plainly, a Generation, or Generations, from Eternity, and another in Time:
Or,
[ Z79 1 Or, at leaft, goings forlh from Eternity, which cannot agree to his human Soul, and can be true of no other but the feccnd Per/on, as. fuch ; and another in Time, cul of Bethlehem. Jhall he come forth \ &c. which can be applied to none, buc the Child born of
the Virgin^ and as fuch. This was the principal
Text, that led fome of the Fathers to talk of leveral Generations of the fee end Perfon, as fuch. — And, I cannot help adding, It is evidently more agree- able to Mr. Perraulth Notion of Generation, ^c. than to the old one. — But, I (hall not detain the Reader any longer upon this : Nor take any Notice, at prefent, of feveral Parages, which feem ftrongly to fupport our Dodrine, tho' the Terms, Father and Son, are not found in them. What I have offered is more than fufRcicnt for our Purpofe, viz, to prove, That the Title, 'The Son of God, as afcribed to him ijoho "mias to come, was well known in Old Teftament Times : That it is a Title of Na- ture, and not of Ofice : That it primarily, and
always, fuppofcs or denotes a coeffential i'on : ■
That this Son, and purely as fuch, is the fecond Perfon in the Trinity ; tho' fometimes, this Title may defign the complex Perfon of the Redeemer, in the Execution or his Office : — And, in one Word, That it neceffarilj, and therefore every where, fuppofes, or implies his true Godhead. Q^ E. D !
N. B. From thefe Things, I humbly conceive, we may be fully fatisfied, i. Whence it was, that this Title was lb common and univerfally known, among the Jews, when our Saviour was upon Earth, as this learned Author has acknowledged ; and that, as the moft glorious and niolt diftinguilli •
ing Title of the Mejfiah. 2. That the Meaning
of it, as afcribed to the promifed Saviour, is exadly the fame in the New Teftament, that it was in the Old. If he was a confuhflantial Son then, he is moll certainly fo ftill. And, — 3. That hence it was C c c 2 that
t 38o 3
that the Jews^ in our Lord's Days, knew fo well, and fo readily, that God had a Son, who was equal with him ; and therefore, was a diftin^i Perfon from, tho' of the fame EJfence with, him. Knew this, I fay, fo readily, that (when they heard him ftile himfelf the So7i of God, or call God his Father, in fuch a peculiar Manner as he did, and no other could,) they, without any Hefitation, charge him with making himfelf equal with him. Proceed we then to our Proofs, from the New Tellament, which are many, various, clear, and itrong, and which come full home to the Point.
Plain Proofs oj the co essential Sonship ofth^ SECOND Perfon in /i?^ Trinity, as fuch, drawn from the New Teflament only, and chiefly from Chrifi^s own Words.
To produce, explain, and vindicate, all the Paf- fages, in the New Teftament, wherein Chrift, the Mediator, or the fecond Perfon in the Holy and un- divided 'trinity, and as fuch, is called the Son of God, would fwell this Difcourfe to a large Volume ; and is really at prefent, I hope, needlefs : We fliall there- fore, now, confine ourfelves to the Gofpels, and illuftrate the Argument with all Brevity, waving a great Number of other Texts, which are no lefs plain and llrong for our Purpofe, till, if we are encouraged, another Work fhall be publifhed, in which, with the Divine Afliftance, I intend to prove, and confirm, the true and proper Divinity of Chrift, from his Mediatorial Offices of Prophet, Priest, and King, ofhisChurch.
That the Argument may be the clearer, we fhall rano;e our Proofs into thefe five ClafTes ; viz. Thofe where he is called the Son of God, without any other Word annexed : — Thofe in which, the Father bears I'eftimony to him, as his beloved Son : " Thofe wherein the Adnouns, ow7t, proper, begotten,
or
I 38i ]
cr only begotten^ are joined to the Word Son : — Thofe in which the two Titles, the Chriji, and the Son of God, come together : — And Thofe in which he is charged with Blafphemy, in making himfelf equal with God, only for faying, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work ; or, making himfelf God, for much the fame Reafon ; and for vindicating his own Words, with which they were highly pro- voked.
We fhall not need to produce every one of the Texts, under each of thele ; but fhall content our- felves with feme few of the Principal, defiring the Reader to obferve. That every new Clafs will the more clearly iiluftrate, and llrongly confirm, all the former, and add not a little Light to thofe that follow ' — Begin we then with,
I. Thofe Texts, where Chriji is called, the Son of God, without any other Word added to it.
iV. B. We mufb not forget thefe moft remark- able Things, before we go any farther, — i . When the Angel came to foretell the Birth of John, the Fore-runner of our Lord, he does not call our Lord, THE Christ, or the King of the Jews : No, nor fpeak of him as a Man, or as any Creature -, but, only as the Lord God of his People. Luke i. i6,
1*7. —2. When the fame Angel, at the
Annunciation, as we call it, of the blefled Virgin, had faid unto her, thou fhalt conceive in thy V/omby and bring forth a Son, and fhall call his Name Jesus ; he adds, in the firft Place, as his chief and moft honourable Title, He fhall be great, (not as having ?L fiipra-atjgelical Spirit for his human Soul, but) and fljall be called the Son of the Highest, ibid. ver. 31, 32. and then mentions his everlafiing King- dom, ver. 33. — 3. Elizabeth alio, when under the Spirit of Infpiration, filled him my Lord, ver, 43, and his Mo:her, the Lord, ver. 46. and God my Saviour, ver. 47. And, 4. Zacharias called him
ex-
[ 382 ]
expreQy the Highest : And thou Child, fpeaking of or to his Son, John, Jhak be cdled the Prophet of THE Highest. — Why, or upon what AcGOunt ? for thou fhalt go before the Face of the Lord, i. e. of Chrift, our Saviour, to prepare his Ways. ver. j6. Whence we may gather, thefe feveral Things, very naturally.
I. That the promifed Deliverer was well known, in Old Teilament Times, by the Titles of, the Loud, and the Lord God of Jfrael. Had it not been fo, I cannot but think, That the Angel would nor have fo ftiled iiim, when he fpake of him to Zacharias ; or would have, for feveral very obvious Reafons, added fome other Name, or Names, to explain it ; ^c. — 2. That neither the Angel, nor Elizabeth^ nor the Virgin, nor Zacharias, give any
the leaft Hint of a prc-exijlent human Soul.
3. That every One of them profefs his Deity, as the Foundation of their Faith in him. — 4. That neither of them, when under the Infpiration of the Holy Spirit, degrade him fo infinitely, as if he were only a viade God, a God but of Tefterday, &c. or a new God, &c. as our blafphemous Antitrinitarians dream. So far from it. That one of them expreHy calls him, l!he Lord their God, another God, and with an Article too, and a third the Higheft, an incom7'dunicable Title, peculiar to the one only true God. To proceed.
When his Forerunner pointed him cut to the World, 'tis very obfervable. He did not begin thus. Behold the Adefiah, the long expeded King cf Ifrael-, but (to correal their falfe and unworthy Notions of the Me£iah, and vain and foolifh Expedtations from him) thus, Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away (0 &jpajy, Vvho beareth as a Sacrifice) the Sin of theJVor^d; Jo. i. iq. thereby very emphatically declaring, that lie Was to be the great Sacrifice for Sin ; that his other Offices, were founded in this -,
that
[ 383 1
that he was firft to be humbled^ frffer, and die^ before he was to fet up his Kingdom in the World ; and that his chiet Bufinefs, by his Doblrine^ Life^ and Deaths was not to make his People greats but good ; and to fave ther.-^ not from external Slavery, but their Sins -, and confequently, that his Kingdom was to be the Kingdom of Heaven^ Mat. iii. ?,. /. e. not a temporal^ but a fpiritual Kingdom. — And, to fatisfy them, that he was an all-fiiffident Saviour ^ every Way qualified for, and equal to, this great Tafk, he alio bare Record^ that this is the Son OF God. ver, 34. — And that there might be no Doubt, about the Meaning of that moft glorious Title, he tells his Difciplcs, That this Son of God cometh jrom above^ and is above all ; and tliercr fore is fupreme : Ch. iii. 31. That he hath feen and heard, i. e. he mod certainly knew and moH fully comprehended, that he iefiifieth : ver. 32: That God giveth not the Spirit by Meafure unto him ; and therefore, \it^\Yt\h.\\v[^irameafiiTably, which no poffibie Creature is capable of receiving or containing: ver. 14. That the Farther loveth the Son, and hath given all Things into his Hand \ ver. ^^. but the highelt poflible Creature cannot fo much as know all Things, and much lefs order, manage, and rule them : — And, That he that believeth on the Son hath everlafiing Life •, &c. ver. 36. and confequently, the Son, as fuch, is the Obje^ of Worfhip, who is to be believed on, and trufted in ; and has alfo Life in himfelf, and hath purchafed everlajiing Life, which he gives to his People. — But, He of whom all thefe Things are true, is moft certainly true God : And there- fore, THE Son, as fuch, is the true God : And, by confequcnce, when this Title, the Son of Gody is given to Chrift, it denotes a coeffential Son ; and therefore, does neceffarily/«/)/)^y^, or imply his Divine Nature. Q, E. D.
To
[ 384 ]
To illuftrate this, and put it out of all Doubt with the plain Chriftian, Let him remember thefe fix Things, i. I take it for granted. That the Baptifi underftood the Meaning of his own Tejiimanyj and intended to inftru6l his Difciples, in the true Senfe of it. — 2. Our learned Author has not io much as alledged, That John knew any Thing of .his new fangledNotions : i. e. That he had ever heard of the pre-exijtent created Soul of the MeJJiah: Or, That this his human Soul was but a created, tho' a fupra- angelical Spirit ; and much lefs. That it was this human Soul that was, or was called, the Son of God. — 3. It clearly appears, from what has been faid, and will be yet more certain, and evident, from what follows ; That, by this Title, the Son of God, which was of old afcribed, and indeed appropriated, to the fecond Perfon, v/ho was, from Eternity, anointed to be the Saviour of his People, the Jews, common- ly, if not univerfally, underftood a confubjlantial Son.
' But, if fo, 4. The Baptift could have no other
Notion of this Title •, and therefore, could defign to convey no other Notion, or Idea, of it, to his Dif- ciples. ' — And therefore, 5. Had the Senfe of it been afterwards changed, this would have been plainly revealed, fomewhere or other, that all might have known it, and might have hG.tn.fet right in this
great, I may fay. Fundamental Article. « • But,
6. Since no fuch Intimation is, any where, given, we may be fully facisfied. That the Senfe of this Title, when afcribed to Chrijl, is the very fame that it ever was : And confequently. That, ever finee this Title was applied to the fecond Perfon, the Church of God hath, in all Ages, and every where, underftood it to denote a confuhfiantial Son -, and, accordingly, have acknowledged, and believed in him, as fuch, i. e. as God of God. Q. E. D.
He that pleafes may confult, Mark. xiv. 61—64. Mat. xxvii. 43, and 54. Luke xxii. 70. Jo. xi. 4,
r 385 ]
t^c. t^c. But, having already confidered ievera^ of thefe, and other Texts, where this Title occurs, I fhall only offer a Thought or two upon thefe few more.
Mat. xi. 27. All Things are delivered unto me of my Father-, but this^ as we havejuft now heard, neceffarily implies his Godhead ; and no Man knoweih the Son, but the Father ; neither knoweth any Man the Father, fave the Son ; therefore, they are equally incomprehenftble to all the Creatures, infinite in themfelves, and intimately and perfe£ily known to each other : Yea, it fcems plain, thnt the Son knew the Father, as throughly, as the Father did him. The Words ^Va? and ^§\ tu, and the compound Verb iTTiyivioa-Kii are emphatic ; and lead diredly to thefe Thoughts. — The Phrafe feems yet ftronger, Luke X. 22. No one knoweth who the Son i?, but the Father ; atid who the Father is, but the Son. So that, they are equally paft being found out to Per- feEiion -, and their Nature, Attributes, and the Re- lations in which they (land to each other, as diftind: Perfons, are equally unfearcheable : And Therefore, The Son, as fuch, is God : Or, this Title implies true Godhead, and coejj'ential SonP?ip.
Jo. vi. 46. Not that any Man, ng, any Creature, hath feen the Father ; i. e. either hath, or can, imme- diately or tully, , know his Effence, Counjels, JVill ; fave he which is of God, irx^x ri 0£s, of, ox from him as his Son, by natural and ineffable Generation ; and therefore, lb of him, as to be (lill with, and in him, as I am •, he hath feen the Father, i. e. He, He and he only, hath intuitively and pafe^ly, been acquainted with himfelf, his Secrets, and Purpofes : Nor can any Man hioiv the Father, know him at all, or know him to be a Father, and much lefs to Salvation, but he to zvhomfocver the Son will reveal
him. Mat. xi. 27. Chrift then is, and wis,
D d d the
- [ 386 ]
the Light of the World : The Do6trine of the
'Jrinily, is to be known only by the Revelation of the Word and Spirit, and not by the Light of Na- ture : — Nor fliould we had any Knowledge of the Diftincflion of the Three undivided Perfons ; or, that one of them was an own, i. e. a proper Father ^ and another an only begotten Son ; had not this Son himfelf, who was, from the Beginning, the great Prophet of his Church, revealed them to us — Thefe Words then, feem plainly to imply the Divinity of Chrijl, as a Son. See Jo. vii. 29.
Mat. xiv. 33. Then they that were in the Ship, came and worjhipped him, f<^yi^gt ^f ^ Truth thou
art the Son of God. They, viz. his Difciples,
ver. 22. had, from their firft Acquaintance with him, firmly believed he was the Mejfiah, and con- ftantly acknowledged him as fuch. — Even Andrew, Jo. i. 41. and Philip, ver. 45. who were neither the moll eminent, nor moll forward, of the facred College, and of whom we hear but very little more, were yet, from the firft, fully perfuaded of this. — No Doubt, the more Miracles he wrought before them, they would be the more confirmed, in the Truth of this great Doftrine : But, there was fome- thing, in this, both in the J^ature, and Manner of it, fo very extraordinary, that they came and wor- JhippedKim, not as the Mejftah, or not only and merely as fuch ; but as him who was of a Truth, the Son of Cod •, and therefore, the Objeft of Religious Wor- fhip. — The common, but mean and falfe Notions, they had entertained of the Meffiah, as fuch, had no Relation to fuch extraordinary Works. — None of the Prophets had ever wrought fuch Wonders^ and much lefs in fuch a Manner. — It lookt fo like gathering the Wind in his Fifls, Pro. xxx. 4. which, none but the Almighty Father, and his equally Al- mighty Son could do : And feem'd fo clear a Proof of his abfoluie Power over all Nature^ that even the
Wind
[ 387 1
fVind and the Sea oheyed him ; that they feem to have had rather higher Thoughts of him, than they ufually, if perhaps ever, had before •, and therefore, worjhipped him, (which, fo far as we know, they had never, I think, done before, on any fuch Oc- cafion ;) as having now, to their full Convidlion, proved himfelf to be the Son of God, u e. as the Jews generally underftood it, the cceffential Son, and therefore, equal with God. q. d. Lord, Wt know the Scrips and Pharifees feek to kdl thee, becaufe thou calltfl thyfelf the Sen of God : But, had they been here, and ken, and heard, wh.u we have now done, they might have had the fulkft ConiiSliin poflible, as we have. That thou art indeed his only begotten •, and therefore, equal with him.
Jo. ix. ^^ — 38. Our Lord, (having found the Man which was Blind from his Birth, ver. i. whom he had cured, ver. 6, 7. who had been called before the Sanhedrim, examined, and by them excommuni- cated, ver. 15, 24, 34. only becaufe of the grateful Senfe he entertained of the Kindnefs done him j and the jufl Regard he fhewed towards, or for, his un- known Benefador ;) faid unto him, Boji thou believe
on TTKiriiiiq hq TOV JiOv tk 0.», THE SoN OF GOD ?
Upon his anfwering to his Queftion, Who is He, Lord, that I might believe on him ? Our Saviour re- joins, 1'hou haft both feen him, and it is he that talketh with thee. Upon which, the Man readily replies. Lard, I believe. And he, Trfoa-sw'vno-iv, adoravit,
worjhipped him. This was mentioned betore,
and we fhall now only obferve. That he does not call himfelf the Me/f ah, but the Son of God : That he requires Faith in himfelf, as fuch -, and therefore, propofes himfelf, and as fuch, to the Man, as the Object of Religious Worfhip ; which none, but one who was, as fuch, true God, could be : And, that the Man declared his Belief in him, and adored him j which, as a Jew, he would not, fhould not, durlt D d d 2 not,
[ 388 1
not, have done, had he not taken him to be, as fuch, the true God, the one Obje^ of Worihip. And therefore. That Chrift, as the Son of God, is indeed true God ; and confequently, a coejfential Son : For furely, he would not have accepted that Worjhip, as the Son cf God, which was not due to him, as fuch.
To wave many others, and that very obfervable One, Mat. xvii. 24 — 26. Of whom do the Kings of the Earth take 'Tribute or Cujlom ? diro rm J jw« auTwu, of their own Sons ? &c. We fhall add but one more.
Mat. xxvii. 34. Now when the Centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jefus, faw the Earthquake, and thofe Things that were done, they feared greatly, faying^ Truly this was the Son of God. To this our Author objedls, " He cannot " be fuppcfed to mean that this Man was the true *' and eternal God," p. 43, — Thefe were not the Words of the Centurion only, but of thofe that were with him alfo-; feveral of whom might, perhaps, know the true Meaning of that Title better than he : Nor did he, nor any of' them, mean, that He was the Father, the firfi Perfon ; or, that He only was the true and eternal God ; or, that he was only the
true and eternal God, and not alfo true Man. • >
" but only that he was a great and glorious Perfon, *' like God, or fome Way related to God," — Pray What Ideas could the Centurion have of thefe Words, " like God, or fome Way related to God .?" I want much to know — However, If by this Phrafe, re- lated to God, he meant, with our Author, near a-kin to him, he exprefs'd himfelf moll ftrongly •, and per- haps, as properly too, as he could do, when he called him the Son of God. — ** or he was the Perfon " whom the J^'ie.'j expefted for their AfCi^^^." That this only was not his Meaning, will prefently appear evident ^ tho', by this Timt, I h^-'C no doubt he firm-
1 389 ]
ly believed him to be the Mejftah. " This Roman
** Captain could not imagine Chrift to be God him- " felf." Thus you have every Word of this flrange Objedtion. — Anf. This Roman Captain had heard his TriaU before Pilate : Heard the Queftion pro- pofed, Jrt thou the King of the Jews \ to which he replied, 'ihou fayeft it, Mark. xv. 2. i, e. It is as thou fayeft : And heard him accufed, that he made him- felf the Son of God ; and therefore deferved to diCy by their Law •, Jo. xix. 7. the Law againft Blafphemy^ Lev. xxiv. 16. to which he gave no Jnfzver ; no, not one Word, (either to vindicate himfelf by ex- plaining, excufing, or jullifying, what he had faid, or, to deny the Charge, tho' his Life was at Stake !) and confequently, might well have been thought to have acknowledged the Charge, that he had indeed made himfelf the Son of God ; and well deferved to die^ if he was not really, and in their Senfe too, what he made himfelf to be. — Had thefe two Titles been of the very fame Import, Pilate's, laft Qiieftion, had been perfectly ridiculous. Our Lord, having ac- knowledged that he was the Meffiah, had really, upon that Suppofition, acknowledged the other Charge alfo ! — 'Tis then felf-evident. That, tho* thefe Titles, the Chrifl., and the Son of God, denoted the fame Perfon •, yet they were not exaftly fy, nonymous, and did not mean the very fame Thing in him, but were given to him upon feveral, and quite different Accounts -, the former being a Title of Office, the latter of Nature. This the Centurion might, yea, could not but, know, as we Iliall de- monftrate by and by.
We need not offer any more under this Clafs. What we have faid is fufficient, efpecially fince it will be much ftrengthened by what follows. But to all thefe he will objed.
In all thefe Paffages, the Baptlft, the Difciples, the blind Man, and our Saviour himfelf, ufe this
Title
[ 390 ]
Tide to denote the Mefiah, and as fuch. Anf. Sup- pofing this, Is not tbe MeJ^ab, as fuch, Godman ? Might not they then, in thefe Ir'affages, have a pecLihar Refped to his Divine Nature ? Could all thefe have been faid of his human Soul? Or, of the Mejfiah^ had he not been true God? &c. This his Obje6lion therefore, is, in reality, no Objeftion. Procc-ed we then to,
II. Thofe in which the Father publickly, by an audible Voice, bears I'ejiimony to him, as his Son. We fhall confider thefe two, the one at his Baptifm^ when he was juft entring on his publick Miniftry, and the other in his Transfiguration, to confirm him for his Pajfion^ and prepare his Difciples againfl their Trial therein.
Mat. iii. 17. And lo, a Voice from Heaven, f^y^'^igt This is MY BELOVED SoN, iuwhom I am well pleafed.
Here, the Repetition of the Article, by the
Three Evangelifts, who retain it alfo, in the Hiftory of his Transfiguration, muft not be flightly pafs'd by. The Words, I think, may be rendered, This is THAT MY Son, that my beloved, whom Mofes, the Pjalms, and the Prophets, did fay Ihould come
into the World. Let us then obferve. That here
was a glorious Revelation of the Trinity, the Three that hare Record in Heaven, Jo. v. 7. which gave Occafion to that triumphant Challenge of the Ca- tholics of old, Abi Ariane, &c. Go thou Arian to Jordan, and there thou fhalty^'^ the Trinity : — This was the Father^s own Teftimony ; and plain, clear, and full, it was ; the Language of a Father -, ex- prefTive of his very Heart ; and fuch as might be,
in the prefent Cafe, expefted from him. He
does not ftile him, mineEle^, my Servant, as j^ xlii. I. the Meffiah, Dan. ix. 25. or my King, Pf ii. 6. fnine Anointed, as el fe where ; tho* all Expreffions of Love and Delight, as well as Honour : But, my Son, my beloved Son, thereby fhewing, hot only the high- eft
[ 391 1
eft poflible Satisfaction with, and Complacency in liim, but the Son's tranfcendent and infinite Dignity and Glory. — The Phrafes themfelves, the Circum- ftances, and the End alfo of this Tejlimony^ will not permit us to take this Title, in any common, low, or improper Senfe ; but, in the very higheft it will bear, as implying that he was his own, his only begot- ten Son ; fo his Son as no other ever was, now is, or Ihall, or can be, i. e. by proper Generation : Becaufe, ( I ) In every other Senle, there are many, who may be called his Sons, yea, his beloved Sons. — (2) His being fuch a Son, was that only, whereby he was rendered equal to his glorious Undertaking. And therefore, (3) The Father not only declares himfelf well pleafed with him, but in him, i. e. with all his People, for his Sake -, becaufe, fuch a Son, fo every Way well qualified, had voluntarily engaged to lay down his Life for them, Jo. x. 15, 17. If liii. 10 — 12. &c. to feek, find, and bring them home to him. Luke XIX. 10. Heb.n. 10. &c.
Mat. xvii. 5. During his Transfiguration, ver. 5. Behold a bright Cloud overfhadowed them : And behold a Voice out of the Cloud, which f aid. This is my be- loved Son, in whom 1 am well plea fedy Hear ye HIM. To pafs many Things of the Time, Place, Defign, and other Circumftances, of this Teftimony, as well as of the Witneffes -, and defiring the Reader to remember what we have faid upon the former Text -, w« ihall only here offer thefe few Thoughts.
I. Mofes that renowned Giver, and Elias the
mofb zealous Reftorer, of the Law, appeared unto
them. 2. That remarkable Addition, Hear ye
him, in the prefent Cafe, and before thofe illuftrious Perfons, efpecially if we remember, that they Jpake of his Deceafe, and his Death, which was to be ac~ complifhed at Jerufalem, Luke ix. 0,1. (his Death being the Completion or Fulfilment of all that he was to do, and fufltr, in his Eftate of Humiliation,)
is
[ ^9^ ]
is very emphatic, implying many Things in it, viz. That this was the great Prophet foretold t
Deut.xvm. 15. and 18. That rho' hitherto.
Believers were referred, chiefly, yea only, to the haw^ and to the 'Tejiimonyy If viii. 20. now they muft hear him : — Hear him^ (not correcting the Law, or adding any Thing to that which was ferfe5i before, Pf. xix. 7. or able to make Wife to Salvation, 2 Tim. iii. [5. fo that even the Man of God might be ferfe^, &c. ver. 17. but) vindicating, explaining, illuftrating, confirming, fulfilling it, and expound- ing in all the Scriptures the Things concerning himfelf. Lukexxiv. 27. — 3. That Mofes and Elias heartily confented to this TejUmony, and Canmand ; mod wil- lingly referring all the Honour they had, as Prophets^, to the Son of God-, nnd rejoycing to fee all that was foretold of him, fo gloriouQy tulfiUed in him. — 4. That in this confifts one chief Glory of the New hifpenfation, above the Old, that, in it, God fpeaks
to us in, or by, his Son. Heb. i. i. 5. That
the Church is now, abfolutely, and implicitely, to believe the Son : He, as fuch, being, as we have heard, the God, Amen, i. e. the God of Truth, is a-jTOTTic-ro?, worthy of all Credit, purely upon his own Account : And therefore, as a Son, he is a
(oeffential Son, and equal with the Father. What
puts this out ot all Doubt with me, is, — 6. That the Prophets of Old, even the moft eminent and diftinguilhed amongft them, prefaced their Dif- courfes and Prediftions, with a. Thus faith the Lord \ even after their Authority was moft eftablifh- ed : But, Chrift never once did ! — His verily., verily, I fay unto you \ or his naked, I fay unto you,
was equal to, Thus faith the Lord I And,
feeing a Divine Faith, muft needs have a Divine Tefti'rnony, to reft upon-, and the Faith of the New Teftament Church, cannot be fuppofed to be built upon a more weak, fallible, or difputable,
Foun-
[ 393 1
Foundation^ than was that of the Old : It muft needs be lb : And therefore, Chrijl is Jehovah^ not
the Father^ but the Son. >. From all which it
follows, even with all the Certainty and Evidence of Demonftration, Tha: the Son, as the Son, is ab- folutely infallible^ which Chrift's human Soul, with all its Glories, neither was, is, nor can be : Becaufe, no one Perfon can be abfoliitely infallible, who is not omnifcient, yea, and infinite in all Perfe6lions : And conlcquently, as a Son, he is infinite in all Per- fections : And therefore, a coeffential Son, and fo equal with the Father. Q^ E D.
To this, all our Adverfaries will objeft, i. This Teftimony was a public, folemn, and moft glorious, Atteftation of his being the Meffiah. Anf. Who doubts it ? But, he could not have been the Mefilah, had he not been antecedently to that, the coeffential Son of God i becaufe, he had not been etiudl to the Office, if he had not.
Obj. 2. What End could it anfwer, for the Father to bear Teftimony, That Chrifi was his coeffential Son F Anfw. Many, and thofe the molt
veceffary Ends. The Prophets had foretold,
that it was the Son of God, one who had, formerly, affumed the Names and 'Fitles, done the Works, and accepted the Worfioip, of the one true God, who was to fave his People from their Sins : And therefore, the Difciples muft be moft convincingly afTured, I'hat the Son who was promifed, was aftually come upon
that blefled Errand ; and, that this was He. •
Ifaiah had predided, Ch. xl. 9, 10, i j. That it was the Lord God who fhoiild come, and feed his Flock like a Shepherd : Seeing then, that Chrifi had de- clared himfelf the good •shepherd, fee Jo. x. ver. 1 1. and 14, ^c i^c. it was therefore now moft neccifary, that the Father fhould bear Witnefs, that he was that Shepherd which was foretold ; and confequently,
ihe Lord God. &c. God had promifed
E e e by
[ 394 1
hy Jeremiah^ Ch. xxiii. i6. That the Lord would
raije up unto David a King — whofe l^lame Jhould
he called, i. e. who fliould be, the Lord our Righteousness! Jehovah, 3.s God tht Son , for, it is certain, be is not the Father ; and our Righ- teoufnefs, as the Mejfiah^ our Saviour I Now, no- thing could be more necefiary, than the Father^ Teftimcny, that this was the Perfon : And that he was Jehovah, as his leloved Son; and our Righ- teoujnefs, as he in whom he is well f leafed : Becaufe, it is only fov, or upon the Account of, his Righ- teoufnefs^ that he is fo well pleafed v/ith any Sinners, as to forgive all their bins, pronounce them righteous, adopt them for his Children, ^c. t^c.
In fhort. If they will have it. That the Father
here proclaimed his Mejfiahfljip, as I, for my Part,
moft readily grant, We muft infill: upon it. That
there are two Ideas in this Teftimony ; not only
that he is the Chriji, a Deputy, a Serva7U, one in
an Office : But, that he is more than fo ; even the
Son, the own Son, the only begotten of
the hather, and confequently, his coejjential Son ;
which is always the firft, the principal, the leading
Idea, v/hen we fpeak of the complex Perfon of the
Meffiah, — And hence, in the New Teflament, the
Father, as we have jufb now obferved, never ftiles
him, iuy Servant, or the Chriji, but my beloved Son,
who can, and will, do all my Pkafure ; and in whom,
I can, and do acquiffce. — N. B. His Office is the
greateft Honour imiaginable, yea, polTible, to his
human Soul, be it as great, and glorious, as it
poffibly can be ; and to which it never had, nor
could h^ve, been advanced, had not the own, the
only begotten Son, afllim'd it into his own Perfon, or
been ferfonally united to it : Bur, his Deity, i. e, his
Divine Nature, as the Son, or the fecond I'erfon,
is an infinite Honour, both to the Perfon of the
Redeemer, as fuch, and to bis Office,
III. Thofc
t 395 ]
III. Thofe in which the Ad nouns, cnjon^ "proper^ begotten, only hegotten, are annexed to the Word, Son : Of which there are a great many, and all of thfem mofl memorable. — We lliall now give a few Thoughts only upon the three or four, which firfl occur in the Gofpel according to John.
Jo. i. 14. IVe beheld his Gkry, the Glory as of
THE ONLY BEGOTTEN of the FaTHER. Upon this
obferve, i. He was then the Son, the begotten, the only begotten 6on, not of the Deity, but of the Father. — It was not the Ejfence that begat another EJfence, or begat itfelf ; but the Father, the jirji Perfon, begat the Son, the fecond Ferfon. — It is not, at all, or hardly, Senfe, to talk of a Nature's be- getting., but of a Ferfon's begetting : Nor is it proper to fay, an EiTence is a Father, or a Son ; but a P erf on, is the one or the other — 2. It was the Logos, t};e Word, that was made Flefh, i. e. af- fumed our Nature into a perfonal Union with him- felf, (by taking unto himfeif a true Body and a reasonable Soul, the Word Flejh, being here taken fynecdochically, for the whole that was Human in him, or his whole Manhood, as in innumerable Flaces of Scripture. — It was his Glory, fays the Apoftle, we beheld, i. e. the Glory of the Logos, even when made Fle/h ; and this Glory, v/as the Glory as of the only begotten of the Father, fuch as became, and could be found in no other but, his own, -proper Son. Whence, I hum- bly conceive, that theLo'^os, i. e. the perfonal Word^ and the only begotten, arc convertible Terms -y or that each of them, in flridnefs, denotes the fecond Perfon only ; and then, 'tis undeniable from ver. I — 3. That the only begotten, as fuch, was in the Beginning, was with God, and was God, and that all Things were made by him : But if fo, the only begotten, and as fuch, is the Creator of all Things, (as his human Soul, is not, cannot be, fuppofed to be) E e e 2 and
[ 39M
and confequently is, as fuch, the true God; and therefore, God the Son. — Or, if this fhould be doubted^ I cannot but think, from the Manner of Expreffion, &c. that, of the two Titles, the only begotten is rather the Superior, and more Auguft : And that, The Logos^ or the JVordj is a Title o^ Office, denoting the Omnific Creator, or the great Reveder of the Father's Will, or both ; and the Son, the only begotten, is a Title of Nature, exprefllng his coejfential SonJJjip, or his having the fame Nature and effential i^erfed:ions with the Father. — The Title, the only begotten Son, is never, was never, among Men, a Title o'i Office -, nor is it ever fo ufed ; but always denotes the natural Relation between an own Father and his own Son : Whereas, the Title, the LoGO', i. e. as we render it, the Word, (if it is not iifed to denote the Relation between Thought and the Mind whofe Thought it is, or Speech pro- ceeding from the Mind, as fome of the Fathers feem to have conceived ; and then, it is much, if not wholly, the fame, with the Idea they had of the Generation oj the Son ; or, whereby they tried to explain the moft intimate, and natural. Union of the firll and fecond Perfons, in the moft Holy and Undivided 'Trinity : If, I fay, this is not the Mean- ing of it, then this Title, the Word,) plainly denotes the omnif.c Word, i. e. the Divine Ferfon who made all things, Jo. i. 3. who fpake, and it was done, &c. Pf. xxxiii. who faid. Let there he Light, and there was Light, Gen. i. 3. &c. and who was alfo the great Revealer of the Will of God ; either immediately, Ex. xx. i — 17, i^c. &c. or by his Spirit in the Prophets, and that from the Beginning, till the Canon of Scripture was Sealed, i Pet. i. 1 1 . Ch. iii. 18—20. Rev. xxii. 6 and 16, &c. And, if this is the Cafe, then 'tis evident, That, the' this Title, THE Logos, plainly fuppofes and implies, injinite Power and JVifdom and indeed all Per- fections J
r 397 1 Fedions ; and confequently, that he^ to whom it is given, is true God: Yet, it feems rather a Title of Office^ than of Nature. All this I leave with the ferious Reader, not daring any farther, to break
through unto the Lord to gaze. And, 3. The
Phrafes are. We beheld.^ [we^ even as many as received him^ to whom he gave Power to become the Sons of Gody ver. 12. or, at leaft, we the Difciples, who were afterwards conftituted his JpojUes., Mat. x. i, 2. beheld) his Glory, i.e. faw, in fome Senfe, with our Eyes, lQi(x.<ra,ixs^x Tvv ^o'^ccv, the Divine Glory and Majefty that was in him, the Glory as of the only begotten cf the Father., i. e. of one who was with him., and was fo with himi as to be God., tho' a diftindl Perfon from him. — This muft be the Meaning, as is evident, not only from all thefe Hints, and what we fliall fubjoin under the next Proof, but from this Confideration, That our learned Author, as we have heard, durft not fay, that all the Apoflles did ever arrive at his own Notion. — All he would venture upon is, " Tho' the Apoflles Faul and John.^ and " perhaps the reft of them arrived at this com- *' T^\t2i\.\^t2i.di\i\% glorious pre-exiflent human Soul m " due Time, Grf." p. 10, 11. But, if they did not arrive at it, it could not be faid they beheld the Glory of it : And yet, the Apoftle alTures us, they i, e. all of them, beheld fuch a Glory, as was worthy of the only begotten, now manifejied in the Flefh ; and confirmed them in it, that he was indeed, what he called himfelf, the only begotten : Whence 'tis plain, they did not, could not, think that he was called the only begotten, upon the Account of his Soul', Or, that his glorious human Soul, was
properly the Son of God. Q^ E. D, And this
is too much to confute this Fancy.
Jo. i. iS. No Man hath feen God at any 'Time ; the mly BEGOTTEN Soiv, which is in the Bofom of the
Father^
[ ^98 ]
Father, he hath declared him. If the Reader will compare this, with our Exphcation of Mat. xi. 27. p. 385. he will clearly fee, tiiey very much illuftrate each other ; and that here, we have as many Ar- guments as Words. No Man, u'Jijj, no one, no Man, no, nor Angel, i. e. no Creature ; hath seen God at any Time ; i. e. as the next Words fhew, hath, or can, intuitively know him, his Mind, and Will ; or, no Man could have known that he was a Father, or who, and what, he was, and what his Purpofes are ; i^c. the onlv begot- ten Sf)N, his own Son, who was always with him, and was God y 0 wv, which is, not which was, or fhall be, but is now, i. e. is, and was always, (which could not be faid of his human Soul, when he was upon Earth, if it was not Omniprefent,) in the Bosom of the Father, near and dear to him, in him, and infeparable from him, and who knows the Father, as the Father knows him, and therefore is, as the only begotten, the true God; he hath declared him. All the Acquaintance his Church ever had of him as a Fa' her, and of his Mind and Will, they had from him : But fince his Coming, i^nyriG-ccro, he hath explained, more clearly revealed,
his Perfon, Cqunfels, Grace, and Will. JNow,
thefe Words are much too high, for any Creature. — Even the human Soul of Chrifl:, neither aid, nor could, know God perfectly -, or as it was known of him : For, we have feen, that Chrift, as Man, did jwt know the Day of Judgment. — 'Twill be faid. In him are hid all the ''Ireafures of fVifdom and Know- ledge, Col. ii. 3 ^ Yes, in Chrift, Godman. — Yea, all thofe Treafures, as far as a Creature is capable ot them, or as far as they were necejfary for the perfe£p fulfilling his Work, were, or are, treafured up in his human Soul: But, abfolutely, all the Treafures of Wifdom and Knowledge could not be hid in it ;
be-
I 399 ] becaufe, it was not capable of containing^ or com- prehending them ; but in the fecond Perfon, who is, as fuch, the only begotten of the Father : In him, even when made Flejh^ were all thoje 'Ireafures hid.
Jo. iii. 1 6. For God fo loved the World, that he gave his only begotten Son, that ivhofoever believcth in
him Jhoiild not -perifo hut have everlafiing Life.
For God, i. e. the Father, loved, not only fparecl, wiflied them well, and did them good, yea fhewed them many undeferved Favours, but LvViid! THE World, i. e. Men, not j-.ngels \ fallen Men, not fallen Angels ; the Jews, as well as the Gentiles ; 2xA [ome of every Kindred., andT^ongne, and People, and Jsfaiicn! Rev. v. 9. so loved that he cave; not so as, there being, in Nature, no Parallel to it! but fo that he gave the higheft po[j hie Evidence of it, which he gave freely, and cut of pure Love I his Son ! not a Man, not an Angela not a Creature, even the higheft polFible, but a Son ! not a -Son, by Creation, or Adoption and Grace, but by TSiature, a begotten Son! not one of more or many, but an only begotten! He had no more! not begotten in a common, lov/, or figurative, but in a full and proper Senfe ! that whosoever, of any Nation, or any Degree, without Exception, BELiEVETH IN HIM, i. t. affentcth to all that is revealed concerning him, conjenteth to be his as he requireth, receiveth him as the only Saviour, and giveth himfelf up to him as his Teacher and Ruler, and refleth upon him alone, for Wifdom, Righteouf- jtefs, San^ification, and Redemption, should not perish ! for ever, as he would mofl certainly do, if he did not believe in him-, but have evi^r- lasting Life ! /. e. zW pcjfible Happinefs, without any Alloy, Interruption, or End; a ■litle to it in his Juftification, the Beginnings of it in his Regene- ration^ a growing Meetnefs for it in his Sannifica-
iion^
[ 400 ]
tion, and, at laft, the a£Jual Enjoyment of it in Heaven forever.
What more now, would our learned Author have the Lord Jefus, when in this World, to
have faid, to determine the Cafe between us ?
What more could have been faid, had he intended, in the plaineft and fullefl: Manner, to have decided for us ? Or rather, forever to obviate all Doubts, Demurs, or Cavils, againft the T^ruth i' — Yea, I muft again afk. What more can now be faid ? I want fadly to know. — For, i. He is exprefs. He is the only begotten Son of God. Therefore, no other, is fo his Son •, or his Son, in the fame Senfe that he is ; or called his Son, upon the fame Account, or for the fame Reafon, that he is. • — No different Manner of creating, if thefe Words have any Senfe, could have made him an only begotten Son. — 2. He was fo, i. e. his only begotten, before the Father gave him^ as the Words put out of all Doubt. He did not then become his Son. upon his being given, or after it ; for he was his only begotten betore. This Title then, was not afcribed to him, upon the Account of his being given, or fent, or in Confequence of it. Whence thefe Things are undeniable, (i.) He is not, cannot be, the only begotten Son^ becaufe of his miraculous Conception, in as much as he was the only begotten Son of God, before the Creation of the World. (2.) For the fame Reafon, he could not be pro- perly ftiled the only begotten, on Account of his RefurreUion, Afcenfion, or Exaltation^ becaufe he was the only begotten, before he was firfl given, (g.) Seeing the Expreffions, God gave his Sen, &c. plainly imply his Oliice ; ; he gave him to be the Mefliah, or as the Mefiiah,) I humbly conceive, 'tis undeniable. That he was the only begotten, be- fore he was, or could be called, the MeJJiah, or could be defigned to his Office j and confequently.
This
t 401 1
This Title is not afcribed to him, upon the Account of his Office \ and therefore, is not a Title of Office, but of Nature -, and, by Confequence, he is a
coejfential Son. But, if this will hold. This
alone is fufficient, forever to confute that Notion, That the Titles, the only begotten Son of God-, and the Meffiah, are fynonymous, /. e. of the very fame
Signification. 3. He was the higheft, the
greateft pofiible. Gift the Father could giv^e. He fo loved ^ THAT he gave him, a Son^ i:n only he- gotten ! And therefore, could not pofTibly give any higher Proof, or Effed" of his Love! But, let Chrift's human Sold be ever fo glorious, fince it was but a Creature^ God might have created another equal, if not fuperior, to it ; and could have given that ; which had been an equal, if not greater.
Evidence of his Love to the World. 4. He
gave him to be lifted up upon the Crofs, firfb as a Sacrifice for Sin ; and then, in the Preaching of the Gofpel; as a Saviour^ that the tvounded^ fenfihle. Sinner might look unto him, and be faved, as the flung Ifraelites were to look to the brazen Serpent in the JVildernefs, and live, ver. 14, [5. comp. with
Numb. xxi. 7 — 9. 5. Here then, Chrifl pro-
pofes himfelf as the Objeft of Faith^ and Religious Worfliip ; and confequently, as the Lord our God, whom only we are to ferve. Mat. iv. 10. But, it is the only begotten Son of God, in whom the fenfMe Sinner is to believe : And therefore, he is the only begotten Son, and as fuch, the Lord our God-, but if fo,
he is God of God, or a cceffential Son. 6. He is
the Juthor of eternal Life, to all that obey him : But none, but 07te v/ho is God, could either purchafe eternal Life for his People, give them the fure Promife of it, a Right to it, prepare them for it, or keep and brijtg them to it, i^c. And hence, the only begotten, is called and is, as fuch, the Lord of Glory, I Cor. ii. 8. the God of Glory, Ads vii. Fff 2.
[ 402 ]
2. ever all, God hlejfed for ever. Rom. ix. 5; Q,E. D.
But, I cannot fo lightly pafs over this fo remark- able a Text, wherein we have the whole Gofpel, (in Miniature indeed, but") plainly, fweetly, and fully. — It is here evidently fuppofed. That the World was in a miferable, perifhing, loft Eftate ; and had con- tinued in it, had not God himfelf moft kindly interpofed. — It is clearly implied, that he did pity them in that State •, and contrived a Way, for the Salvation of his People. And, in this we have, — I. The glorious and divine Spring, Source, or Rife, of this Salvation, even the unparallel'd, ftupen- dous. Love of God. God fo loved, that, ^c.
2. The Adorable Means of obtaining this Salvation, in the Undertaking and Miffion of his only begotten Son. No other was, or could be made, eqiial to the Work : And therefore, tho' he had but 07ie only proper, begotten Son, yet him he gave ! Matchlefs Love! and on both Sides, truly Divine! 3. The prime and leading Duty of the Golpel, viz. Faith in him. That ivhofoever believeth, &c. 4. The great Salvation itfelf, exprefied both negatively, fljould not perifh, and pofitively, but have Everlajting
Life. But, among many other obvious Things,
I fhall only, at prefent, add, thefe few Thoughts.
I. That, in the Order of Nature, God's Love of the World preceded, not only this giving his Son, but the Purpofe of it. — 2. That Chrift was neither the Caufe, nor the Foundation, as the Schools fpeak, of this Love, but the Confequent, or the Fruit, and Effe^ of it. God loved fir ft, fo loved, and then gave his Son : Or, so loved that he gave him. •
3. Tho' Chriji is the only meritorious Caufe of th^ Salvation of thofe, that were given him of the Father; Jo. 6. 37 — 40. Ch. x, vers, i\, 15, 17, 28. Mat. XX. 28. I Pet. i. 18 — 21. Ch. ii. 24, 6ic. ike. yet he was no Way, the Caufe of their
Ele^ion
[ 4<^3] ■ ^
EleBion to it. 'That was abfolntely, and in
every Refpedl /r^^, Rom. ix. ii. Eph. i. 4 — 12.
2 Tim. i. 9, &c. &c. • • 4. That, in the Order
of Nature, or of Things, Chrift was not the Father's frft Eka. — He firft, fo loved his People, as to chiife them : And then, in Confequence of this, (and that he might fave them, in a Way becoming himfelf, fecure the Honour of his Law and Govern- ment, and difplay his own PerfeUions^ and particu- larly, his Wifdom, Love, Grace, Holinefs, Juftice and Truth, to the utiermcjl, &c.) he chose his own Son, to be the Mediato'r between him and themj and redeem thera to God by his Blood, Rev. v. 9. Herein is hove, not that zve loved God, hut that hb LOVED US, AND SENT his Son to he the Propitiatiofi for our Sins, i Jo. iv. 10. Rom. v. vers. 6, 8, 10. I Pet. i. 19, 20, &c. In all which Paffages, Th&Love of God, towards his People, is not only fpoken of as preceding the Mijfion of Chrift, but as, in a Senfe, the Caufe of it. — And, 5. That the fupreme and ultimate End of all the Divine Counfels, concerning the Redemption of Believers through Chrifi, was not the Glory of the fecond Perfon, as fuch ; and much lefs, of that created, fupr a- angelical Spirit, which our learned Author fays was his pre-exiftent Soul, and will have to be " properly the Son of God •,'* nor of his whole human Nature -, no, nor of the Meffiah, in his whole complex Perfon, and as fuch : But, the Eternal Glory of God effentially confidered, /. e, of the whole Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, (each of whom, has a diftind Part afcribed to him, agreeable to the Order of his Sub- Jijience, in the Deity, his perfonal Property, and the Nature of the Work itfelf -,) and the effential Per- feftions of the Godhead, juft now named, which are
common to them all. Thus, the Father is, in
a peculiar Manner, faid to have chofen his People, to have given them to the Meffiah, to have kid
F f f 2 their
[ 404 ]
their Sins upon him, to have demanded, and accepted^ his meritorious Sacrifice-, &c : — The fecond Perfon, when manifejfed in the Flejb, is f^id to have executed the Offices of the Prophet, the Prieji, and the King, of his Church, to have brought in everlajling Righ- teoufnefs, been made Sin, and a Curje for us ; &c : ,— And the Holy Gho/l, not only to convince us of Sin, to enlighten, lead, fan5iify, quicken and comfort his People, &c. but to have been the chief Conductor of Chrifi, as Man, during his Humiliation, i^c. In all thefe were, snd are, the perfonal Glories of each, in a mofb aftonifhing Manner difplayed ! and fliall be {o to all Eternity. — I freely grant, there was a peculiar Honour due to the Perfon of the Mejfiah, and as fuch, as the ReiJcard of his Humiliation, &c. and I defire to rejoice in it with all my Heart, That, after his Eicinanition, God hath highly exalted him, and given him, in his v/hole Perfon, a Name above every Name : But, all this is no Way incon- fiftent with the Propofition I am now illuftrating -, fince, all his Glory, fome Way redounds, to the Honour of all, and every 07ie of, the ever hleffcd Three.
There are many other Paflages, wherein Chrift is ftiled the o'uon, or the begotten, or the only begotten Son, with feveral Circumilanccs, which flrongly confirm the Catholic Doftrine, againfl all Innova- tions : But thefe, I conceive, may fuffice at prefent, efpecially fince our Argument will gather both Evidence, and Strength, in our Progrefs ; tho' we may fafely venture our whole Caufe upon this fingle Clafs.
I would defire the Reader, only to remember what we have fo often hinred, i. That, in every other imaginable Senfe of tlie Word Son, many have been, arc, or may be, fiiled Sons of God ; except the true and only proper Scnfe, even a Son by Generation : - — Chrijl is not, cannot be, called thic
C7ily
[ 405 1
only begotten Son of God, in any of the former Senfes : — ■ None but he can be the Son, in the latter Senfe : — Therefore, as no other is his Son by Generation^ the fecond Perfon moft certainly is. — 2. That no Manner o^ Creation, whether of Souls or Bodies, be it ever fo peculiar, can be a Foundation, for calling any one the proper, begotten, only begotten Son of God, with either Propriety or Truth. — For, how peculiar foever any Creation may be, it is ftill but a Creation ; and nothing more : But, no fort of Creation, is Generation. — Well then, permit me to argue the Cafe a little, (r.) This Title, the Son, the cnly begotten Son, was often, if not always, taken, by the Jews, to fignify his being equal with God, tho' as a Son diftincl from him : And, Would not Chrift then have ^tt them Right, if it had not ? — (2.) This is the highefl: Title our Lord ever affumed ; or that, in their Senfe, he could afTume, or any other give him : And did he alvv^ays, and every
where, when he ufed it, conceal his Divinity ? '
(3.) Even when he laid to Philip, he that hath feen me,
hath feen the Father -, Jo. xiv. 9. he doth not call
himfelf the Father -, but, tho' a Son, and becaufe
he was fo, one in Ejfence with him. — (4.) What End
could it have anfwered, to be fo often, fo em-
phatically, calling himfelf the Son, the only begotten \
(unlefs it was to lead his Difciples, thro' all Ages,
into mofl dangerous Errors ;) if he was not really
fo, as his Words were then, and ever fmce, under-
fliood by the Cathohc Church ? — -(5.) Can we believe,
that Chrift would have left the V/orld in fuch a
Miftake, when he might fo eafily have redificd the
Matter .^ • — Fnfine, They that can think fo of him,
may even think any Thing ! as, Alas ! we fee they
do.
IV. Thofe in which the Titles, the Chrifi, and ths Son of God, conic together. Of thefe there are
feveral ;
r 406 ]
feveral ; but there are twO; upon many Accounts, very remarkable, which muft, for that Reafon, be a little confidered, when I have firft mentioned fome others.
Our Saviour having, at his firft Interview with Nathaniel^ in anfwer to his Queftion, acquainted him, that he knew Things abfent as well as prefent, at a Diflance as well as near \ that Ifrr elite indeed, gathering what he was from what he had heard; as, by Divine Infpiration, cried out. Rabbi, thou art the Son of God, thou art the King cf Ifrael, i, e. the promifed MeJJiah, or long expedted King of the Jews \ for thefe three laft, were very nearly, if not wholly, of the fame Signification. — The plain Meaning is, Thou art the Son of God, who waft to become Maji, to be our Deliverer, and Saviour, Immanuel, God in our Nature, Jo. ix. 6. comp. with Ch. vii. 14. and our God, Jehovah for whom we have waited, Ch. xxv. 9. &c. — We have confidered the Devil's Teftimony, Luke iv. 41. already. — Martha^s Creed, Jo. xi. 27. is not to be forgot. 'Thou art the Chrijl the Son of God, which fhould come into the World, (i. e. Thou art the promifed Meffiah, even the Son of God, whofe Appearance in our Nature has been fo long promifed, and fo earneftly €xpe6led,) is fo much the fame with the two follow- ing, that we pafs it.
When many of his Difciples went back, as not believing, or not relifhing his Do6lrine, tho' he had explained it, Jo. vi. 66. and he had faid unto the twelve, to engage them to a more full, explicit, and open Confeflion of him. Will ye alfo go away? ver. 67. Feter anfwered in the Name of them all. We believe, and are fure^ lyvjcx.auiv on o-u a zve know, that thou art, 0 Xaicrroq, The, or That Cbrifl, 0 uiog. The, or That Son, tb ©£» th ^uvrog, of the living Cod. — The Repetition of the Article, four Times,
before
I 407 ]
before four Words immediately following each other, is pretty rare ; and renders the PalTage both very remarkable, and very emphatic, q. d. Thou art that Son^ of that God, who is, the only true and living Gody and who declared, by a Voice from Heaven, that thou art the Meffiah, the Saviour pro- mifed to our Fathers. Or, the Senfe, I conceive, amounts to this. Thou art The one. The only begot- ten, and therefore, The coejfemial Son, of the one only living, and therefore true God, who wall to be a\fo the Firgiffs Son, and foGoD with us, God in our Nature : And this we firmly believe concern- ing Thee,
This very ConfeJJion, in the very fame Words, is repeted, by the very fame Mouth, as their jcint Creed, on another memorable Occafion ; when our Lord himfelf put the Queftion to them. But whom
fay ye that I am? Mat. xvi. ver. 15, 16. And
now. Can any one, after this, furmife, that they knew not their own Meaning ? — Their ever bleffed Mafter was much pleafed with this Anfwer, and highly approved of it, declaring, at the fame Time, that it was not by their own Sagacity, or Induflry, or any other natural or human Means, but by immediate Divine Revelation, that they came to the Knowledge of this great, and fundamental Truth. For Flejh and Blood hath not revealed it unto thee, fays our Lord, but my Father which is
in Heaven, ver. 17. And, Did they not then
indeed know what they believed? and profefTed too! ' — Would Chrifl have fo publickly, tejlified his Satisfadion with them, if they had not ? — The Words of themfelves are eafy, and plain, ^nd fuch as were familiar to them ; and did they not then underjiand them ? — Their Confejfion, was clear, and /////, but Jhort ; and had they, no Right Ap- prehenfion of the firft, and moft obvious, Senfe of it? Or, was there any need o'i fuperfluous Words in
it?
[408]
It ? — If this is Life Eternal to know the Father to be the only true God, and Jefus Chriji whom he has fent -, Jo. xvii. 3. it is plain, they had this K?wwledge ; and confequently alfo, Eternal Life. — Here then, they profeffed. That the Father of Chrift was the Living God: That he had a Son: That their Mafier was He : And, That he was not only his Son, but his Son made Flefh, the Christ. —He was therefore his Sen, before he was the Chrijt,
and independently of his being fo. Whence 'tis
felf-evident, That his Sonfhip did not confift in his being the Me£iah ; or, was not founded upon it : And confequently. That he was not called the Son of God, becaufe he was the Chriji : And therefore, that thefe Titles are not fynonymous ; but that the former is a Title of Nature, necefiarily im- plying his Di'vinity, and the other a Title of Office.
I think I may alfo fay, That this ConfelTion is a compound Propolition, which is equivalent to, or made up of, two -, Ihou art the Chrift, 'Thou art the Son of the living God. Nathanael\ Salutation, Jo. i. 49. makes this evident, Thou art the Son of God, Thou art the King of Ifrael •, if thefe two Titles are not of the very fam.e Signification ? — The only Difference, between this Confefilon, and that of the Apoftles are, Nathanael inverts the Order of the Propofitions, and ufes the Title, the King of Ifrael inflead of the Chriji, which are confcfs'd to be, in their Senfe at leaft, perfe6lly fynonymous ; and therefore, do hardly alter the Cafe. — Well then, taking both their ConfelTions for compound Propofitions, I humbly conceive, they are much in the Nature of Enthyraemes -, and, if we thus con- fider them, the plain Senfe of them will readily
appear. Nathanael refiedling upon our Lord'^s
Words {Before that Philip called thee, when thou wafi under the Fig Tree, 1 frw thee, Jo. i. 48. and
there-
[ 409 ]
therefore faw what no other could fee ; and what could not be feen, in the Place where he had been ; without fome miraculous and divine Power j) gather- ed who^ and what, he was -, and, being alio under the Impulfe of the Spirit of God, proclaimed aloud, Thou art the Son of God : And therefore, feeing Thou art come into the World, and haft manifefied thyfelf in the Flejh, I know Thou art the King of Ifrael, i, e. the promifed Meffiah. — On the other Hand, the Confeffion of the Difciples, and Martha^ may run thus. We believe, and are jure, from thy Works, thy Bo5lrine, and the Fulfilment of all the Prophecies in thee, which relate to the Me(fiah, &c. that thou art, in very Deed, the Christ -, and confequently. That thou art the Son of God, which Jhould come into the World. — Whence 'tis evident. That, tho' thefe two Titles do both denote the Perfon of the Meffiah, yet they are far from being perfeflly fynonymous, or having the very fame Signification. — It is therefore clear as the Sun, that there are two Ideas, in all thefe Con- feflions. That he was the Chrifi ; and therefore, the Son : Or, not only the Chrifi ; but alfo the Son : Or, becaufe he the Son was now 7nade Flejh, 'twas certain he was the Son of God, which fhould come into the World ; and therefore, the Chrifi.
Roel, Dr. Ridgley, and others, who agree in th's, *' that Chrift's McdiatorfJj'ip explains his Sonfhip.^ " and that he is Son as Chrifi or Mediator,^' would fain overlook this DiHicuIty. They do not well know what to fay to it. Many Texts they bring, wherein the Mediator is, as fuch, called the Son i and where this Title denotes the Mediator -, all which we freely grant : But, they bring none, can bring none, which fay he is not an eternal and coejfential Son ; was not a Son, in the Order of Nature, ante- cedently to his Defignation to that Office ; or that he might not have been called the Son , had he G g g never
[ 4^0 ]
never undertaken, or fuftained it : And thereibrc, bring not any one PafTage, oflfer not any one Thought, no nor Syllable, that comes home to the Point. — They do not much care to meddle with the Adnouns, own^ proper, begotten, only begotten : And avoid confidering thefe Tautologies. &c. &c. — But,
Our worthy Author, who will have it, " that " Chrifb's abated, but pre-exijient, human Soul is " properly the Son of God,''* tries to get over this Difficulty another Way. He alledges p. 20, 21, &c. " That this Name Son of God originally denotes *' the Glory and Excellency of the P erf on of Chrifi,** Indeed it always does this, in the true Senfe of thefe Words. " but it includes alfo a Defignation
" to his Office, viz. that glorious Perfon or-
*' dained to be the Saviour of Men :" But thefe are not the fame ! " Yet fometimes it is ufed, with a " fpecial Regard to the Excellency of his Perfon, and " fometimes to his Office,'' Anf Tho' this Name may fometimes be ufed to fignify the whole Perfon of the Mediator, as fuch, and in the Execution of his Office alfo ; yet his Divinity^ which is always the primary Idea prefuppofed to, or implied in it, is, one would think, the chief Excellency of his Perfon : And, whether Men will think it or not, // is indeed infinitely above all his other Excellencies. — '* It may feem to have fome fpecial Regard to the *' Excellency of his Ptrfon, where it is joined by *' Way of Expofition to the Word Meffiah or *' Chrifi, as a turther Dcfcription of the Perfon " who fuftained that Office ; as in thefe Scriptures " Mat. xxvj. 6'^. Ch. xvi. 16. Jo. xi. 27. Which *' Expreflions mean thus- much. Thou art the *' Chrifi or Mejfah, that gkirious Perfon of peculiar ^' Relation to God who was ordained to this
" Office, p. 21." This Paragraph I have
given without any Alteration, excepting only that
I
f 4" 1
I have not given the Wprds of thefe Texts, at large •, and thus reply.
1 . The Excellency of his Per/on and his Office are, in Reality, two quite diftinft, and wholly different Things ; and, taking thetn as fuch, it was no Tau- tology to fay. Then art the Chrifi^ the Son of God : Yea, there can be no true and "aving faith in him, without the Knowledge and Belief cf them both ; even That he is the proper, the only begotten. Son of God, now made Flefh, in Order to the Execution of the Office of our Redeemer. — But, if we take them, to be fynonymous, as the learned Roel and Dr. Ridgley do, they make as poor a Tautology, as if one fhould thus addrefs his Majefty King George, Thou art the King of Great Britain, Thou art the King of England and Scotland: Whereas, if we take this Title, the Son of God, in our worthy Author's Senfe, who will have it. That it was " his pre-exijient human Soul, that was properly " the Son of God,^^ the Confcffion is not only very imperfect, but a very dangerous Error -, not to add. That this created Soul, how excellent foever, could not pofTibly be capable of this Undertaking, which, tho* not indeed abfolutely unworthy of the coeffential, and therefore tternal. Son of God, was yet infinitely above any Creature, — 2. How glorious foever any Perfon is fuppofed to be, and in whatever near and pe- culiar Relation he may ibnd to God, no Perfon called his Son, and confidercd purely as fuch, or with Refpecl to his Exijlence, can ftand in any Re- lation to him, but either that o^ a proper, begotten, and therefore coeffential Son, or of a mere Creature, the Work of his Hands. — Our learned Author, with much Zeal, pleads. That the Son of God, and as fuch, is only a glorious Creature fuftaining the Offices of the Mefjiah. Upon which, I would afk, (i.) "What then becomes of '■^ the Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity ?" — (2.) How, and with what G g g 2 Trutln
[ 41^ ]
Truth, could the Mejfiah be, fo frequently, fo em- phatically, ftiled, God, Jehovah, the Lord God, THE Lord our God, &c. as we have feen he is, both in the Old and New 'Tejiameni ? And, to wave feveral other Queftions, — (3,) Wherein does this
Notion differ from ^uve jirianifm P
3. Whereas he fays, that " this Name Son of God " is joined by Way of Expofition to the Word " Mejfiah or Chrijt^^ I wou'd have the Reader to remember, that, in the three Texts quoted, the high Prieft, Feter, and Martha, were the Speakers : And, Did they then explain the Word Mejfiah or Chriji, of which, we are fure, they had fome Notion, by another, of which they feem to have had none ? Our Author durft not, as we have heard, venture to fay, that even " Peter had, at *' this Time, arrived at this /j/j compleat Idea of his " glorious pre-exifient human Soul ;" and if fo, we have little Reafon to think, that the high Prieft, and much lefs, that Martha had : And is it then to be imagined, that either of them would ufe a Name, which they did not at all underftand, to expound another which, in fome Meafure at leaft, they did ?
— 4. When he talks " of a further Defcrip-
*' tion of the Perfon of the Meffiah^^ he feems to think. That the Perfon of the Mejfiah might be defcribed, without taking any Notice of his Di- ijinity ; which is a very great, and obvious Miftake, and a diredl Contradiftion to himfeJf: Or, That his Humanity is the firft, and principal Idea in his Per fen -, which, tho' it feems to run thro' the whole of this Performance, is, in Reality, to fay the very leail, to invert both the Nature
and Order of Things. Proceed we
then to,
V. Thofe in which our Lord is charged with Blafphemy, in making bimfelf eqjj al wi r h God, &c. for faying with fome apparent Solemnity and Au- thority •.
[413 ]
thority : My Father Worketh hitherto, and I PTork^ &c. &c. and for fupporting, and vindicating, his own Words.
The Texts are, Jo. v. 17, 18, &c. Ch. viii. ver. 54 and 56 — 59. Ch. x. 29 — 39. Ch. xix. 7. Mat. xxvi. 63 — 6^. compared with Mark xiv. 61 — 64. ' — This laft he hath tried to anfwer, p. 9, 10. and we have replied to it above. Of the firft compared with the third he fays, *' they afford " perhaps the moft important Objedion againft his " Senfe of the Name Son of God," p. 52. and therefore, tho* we have met with it already, he has brought it up twice more ; has fpent almoft twelve Pages upon it •, viz. 39, 40, and 52 — 6^. and turns himfelf every Way to get rid of it ! — We fliall firft remove what he has offered, by perplexing and perverting thefe Texts, to ward off the Blow; (thefe being the Places I formerly waved,) and then explain, illuftrate, and confirm them in Order.
He begins, p. 39. "7(7. v. 18, 19. When the ** Jews had made a ftrange Inference, and charged " Chriji with making himfelf equal to God., becaufe *' he called God his Father, he anfwered. Verily, ** verily I fay unto you, ^he Son can do nothing of " himfelf, but what he feeth the Father do. Sec. *' This is not an Expreflion which reprefents the *' Son as the true and eternal God," It does not in- deed reprefent him, as the Father : Nor did our Lord
intend fo to reprefent himfelf. " or that grants
" their Inference ; for it is plain that this Expreflion " reprefents him under a Degree of Impotence and '* Dependance, that he could do nothing of himfelf. Anf. I. The ever bleffed T^hree, in all their Works without themfelves, do all concur as the One joint Caafe, or, if you will, as the joint Caufes of them : But each of them, as we have heard, according to
the
[ 4H ]
the Order of their Subjifience and JVorking ; or the
Part each of them aft in our Redemption.-^ 2.Tbe
Son, i. e. the fecond Perfon, and as fuch, is not a feparate Beings or divided, from the Father \ and therefore, neither of the Two, in any Thing they do, which relates to the Creatures, ever do, will,. or, with the ucmofl; Reverence be it fpoken, can, ad: without the other : But, the Father, who is the Firjl in Order, works by the Sen, and the Son with, or as fome fay from, the Father •, fo that the very fame Work, is the Vvork of, or is wrought by, them both, as one johi^ Caufe. — 3- In a Word, in nil of them, they naturally, confent, concur, and co- operate : And confequently, our Lord's Words do not " contradidl their, and our Inference, and deny *' his Equality with God •," but " rather allow and ** confirm it." — For, !f he indeed, can do what he feelh the Father do, I humbly conceive, 'tis un- deniable, he is Omnipotent : And confequently, equal with him -, which is the very Inference they, and we alfo, draw from his Words, ver. 1 7.
" The Senfe of this Expreffion may be learned " from Jo. viii. 38, and 44. /speak that which I " have feen with my Father, and you do that which
*' ye have feen with your Father. Te are of
" your Father the Devil, &c." Is it fo .'' 'Tis
the firft Time I ever heard fo much •, or, I am apt to think, any other Perfon ever did ! And, Is the Senle of Chri/l's [peaking what he had feen with his Father, to be indeed learned from their doing, that v/hich they had feen with their Faeher, i. e. the Devil! God forbid. — I love our worthy Author's Memory too well, to fay any more of fuch an odious Comparifon, or Similitude. — Bur, Flow does he attempt to prove this } " Now 'tis plain that the *•* Jetvs had never feen the Devil do thefe Things
" which they did, &c." And, If we are to
talk
[415 ]
talk at this odd Rate, I do not know but I may add. And 'tis as plain. That Chrift had never feen his Father turn Water into Wine^ Ch. ii. 9. heal the Nohleman^s Son^ Ch. iv. ver. 50. or fay to an impo- tent Man, Rife, take up thy Bed and Walk. Ch. v. 8.
But, " And lb alfo, that Chrift doth all,
*' by God's Influence and Diredion, is the plain " Meaning of Chrift's fpeaking or doing what he *' has feen with his Father.''* Anf i. If thefe Words are intelligible, they want fadly to be ex- plained. 2. This clearly contradidts feveral other of his Sayings. 3. Is Chrift the Efficient Caufe of
what he is faid to do, or not ? &c. So zealous
is he, that he goes on
" Nor will the following Words deftroy thii " Interpretation, Whatfoever "Things the Father dothy *' thefe alfo doth the Son likewife" Will they not ?
Then no Words can ! For, If they are true^
the Son doth the %'ery fame Works, and all and every one of them alfo, oy,oiocg, pariter, Jimiliter, in like Manner, equally, not lefs than he, or together and
conjundlly with him. " that is, whatfoever
" Things the Father contrives and appoints, the " Son executes and performs as commiffioned by " the Father -, or the Sen performs them by the " Father's Influence." p. 39, 40. Strange Words ! You have every Syllable of them. — Is this then ally that the Father doth, in the Works of Creation and Providence ^ even to contrive and appoint them, and commiflion the Son to perform them ! If fo, I defire the Reader to turn to what I have offered upon this Head, p. joi, 105. &c. and then I
anfwer, i. Then the Father can hardly, with
either Propriety or Truth, be faid to be the Efficient Caufe of any one of them ! or, in our Lord's own Words, be faid to work them ! — 2. Then the Son is, in ftridnefs, yea in Truth, the only Efficient, or Worker, of every one of them ! Then, — 3. He is,
furely.
[ 4i6 ]
furely. Omnipotent; and confequently, a co- ejfential Son : For He, who works all the Works of Creation arid Providence, is the One only, the living and true God ; tho* not the Father, but the Son. Gen. i. i, 3 and 31. compared with Jo. i. i — 3. — Col. i. 12 — 17. Pf. xcv. I — 7. compared with Heb. iii. 7 — 11. — Pf. c. 3. P/. cii. 24 — 27. com- pared with Heb. i. 10 — 12. (^c.^c. As to
the Expreffion, " the Son performs them by the " Father's Influence,'* it, i. Needs fadly to be explained. — 2. Whatever be meant by it, it no Way agrees with the former, but rather direftly contradidls it : 'Tis evident, they cannot poflibly be hoth. true. For, 3. If /^^ ^(yw executes and performs them as commifTioned, fo far as he adtually executes and performs them, he does it, not only as the next and immediate Caufe, but does it alfo by his own Power, &c.
" Then it proceeds ver. 20. ^he Father lovetb " the Son, and Jheweth him all things that himfelf " doth,'* p. 40. W'^hence, I humbly conceive, he is a coejfential Son : Becaufe, no Perfon of an inferior 'Nature, is, or can be made, capable of feeing and knowing all Things that the Father doth. " and he will fhew him greater Works than thefe^ " that ye may marvel.^'' i. e. He will with, and by, me, as his coeffential Son, work yet greater Works, than curing the impotent Man, which will more evidently, and fully, convince you, that I had a Right to fay what I faid •, and that I am, his own Son, and as fuch, indeed equal with him : — Or, he will enal^le me, as the Son of Man, to work yet greater Miracles, to convince you that I am the MeJJiah ; and confequently, tho' made of a Woman, and a Man of Sorrows, and acquainted with Grief,
yet He who was to be called, the mighty God ?
This, I fay, muft be the Senfe ; becaufe, if we take the Words literally, they were not true.
The
[417 J
The Father never Jhewed him thefe, nor the greater Works, /. e. never did any of them before him,
nor fhew'd him how to do them. " Hence it
" follows, that the Father had not xkizajhewn to the " Son thefe greater Works," All that follows is. That our Lord had not yet had Opportiinity, or had not yet thought Good^ to do them ; and therefore, the Father, who never wrought any fuch Thing without him, but always with him, and by him, had not hitherto, but would, at all proper Seafons, do them with him. " or given him CommilTion and " Power for the Performance of them," p. 40. Anf I. This is no Expofition of the former Words.
— 2. I never heard of any Commijfion Chrifb had, but one -, which was to do every Thing, which the faithful Execution and full Succefs of his Mediatorial Office required. — 3. He had all Power in himfelf, as God the Son, who made and upholds all 'Things that were made : Nor could he, pojfibly, be any how, upon any Account, or in any Degree, deprived of it : And
— 4. The Father had given all Things, before this, into his Hand, Jo. iii. 35. as the Mejfiah : And con- fequently, Power to do thefe greater Works, when fit Opportunities fliould offer, without any either new Commijfion or Power, Szc. " But this can never be " faid concerning the Divine Nature of Chrifi:, " which can receive and learn nothing new.'* The old uncouth Words ! Anf in fliort, i . Tho* the Divine Nature is not, in apy of the ever blefTed Three, capable of any cither Increase or Decreafe : Yet the Second in Order might, and did, condefcend to accept of an Office, for the m.utual Glory of them all, and as fuch, a6t as a Delegate and Inferior.
— 2. Tho' it is no where faid, in Scripture, that the fecond Perfon, or the Son of God, as fuch, did, even in his loweft Condefcenficn, ever cither receive or learn any Thing New : Yet, as neither of them could adl, {ad extra, as the School Phrafe is,)
H h h witliOut
[ 4.8 ]
witliout the other -, and, as the Second had, according to a Covenant between them, condefcended to accept of a CommiJ/im from him, to aft under, and for him, as a Deputy, he might, in the Execution of his Office, (efpecially having ailumed another, and confequently an infinitely inferior. Nature) infift, as we have formerly hinted, upon the Fulfilment of the Promijes made to him, and that the Father would, on all proper Occafions, concur with him, &c.
And, 3. I do not know, but it may be as
proper, to fay. That the Divine Nature receives and learns, as that it fhews or teaches.
Thus you have had almoft every Word of thefe four Paragraphs, with a dired Anfwer to them : And, that I am right, will, I conceive, appear from his own Words, in the very next Lines! " And tho' there are fome Expreflions in that " Paragraph of Scripture down to the 30th Verfe." — " Ay, and in feveral of the following Verfes alfo. *' which feem fuperior to the Charafter of any mere *' Creature,'* — Seem! Why, they are are abfolutely fuperior : Becaufe, he is plain. What Thing foever be (the Father) doth, thefe alfo (all and every one of them) doth the Son likewife, i. e. in hke Manner and together with him, &c. " and which would have " been hardly applied to Chrijt the Man, if not " united to Godhead •," — Were I aniwering any other, I would try to fet thefe, and fuch like, fuf picious Words, once, in the true Light. But,
Our Lord himfelf is there the Speaker-, and is anfwering a Charge, That he made himfelf equal ijoith God : A very heinous one, the mofl heinous poflible, if not true ! — And, if aflerting. That what Thing foever he (the Father) doth, thefe alfo doth the Son likewife, ^c. &'c. does not prove that he indeed made himfelf eqv a l with God, I may defy the World to tell me, how he could have done it, if he had not directly faid, / am equal
with
[ 4^9 ]
rvith God, or exprefs'd himfelf as the Apoltle has, Pbil. ii. 6. except he bad, in fo many Words, called himfelf the Father : And nothing lefs, it feems, would convince fome People, That he was the true God, or equal with him ! *' yet " Chrift confidered as the Son of God throughout *' that Paragraph, is reprefented as dependent on " the Father for all, and receiving all trom the " Father," p. 4. Anf. i. I cannot fee one Syllable, in all thofe Verfes, which fpeaks of his being " dependent on the Father for all ;" no, nor any Thing like it, in his Senfe of the Word dependent. — • 2. Our Lord does not there fpeak of himfelf merely, as the Son of God •, but, in feveral Verfes at leaft, as the Son cf God, who had condefcended to become our near Kinfman, and a6l as the Father's 'Delegate, and our Redeemer : And therefore, he mi^ht, in the fame Difcourfe, fpeak of himfelf as EQUAL with God, v/hen confidered purely as his coejfential Son ; and yet, as infinitely inferior to him, when confidered merely as Man •, and, in fome Senfe, as receii'ing many Things, (his Commiffmn, Authority, Jffijiatue, and Succefs,) as the Father's Deputy. *' which is hardly confident with the Idea " of fupreme Godhead," Ambiguous, fufpicious Words ! " if that were included in Son/hip. '* Anf i. If, by Godhead, he means EJJence, Nature, or Sul^- flance ; then, if the fecond Perfon is the own Son, the only begotten, of the Father ; and if thefe Words are true; he is certainly coejfential with him : And the one fupreme Godhead is in the Father, as a Father ;
and in the Son, as a Son. 2. If, by the Idea of
fupreme Godhead, he means, the Idea of Paternity, or (if I muft ufe the Word) Father/hip, as he fhould mean from the Term Sonfhip, (if we have not here fome poor Quibbles,) we Anf — I'he Son never fpake of himfelf as the Father ; nor did he ever affume to himfelf the Idea, or any of the Prerogatives, of H h h 2 the
[ 420 ]
the Father^ as fucli ; nor did any other ever apply- any of them to him, and much lefs call him, the Father. • — And, 3. To receive any Thing, and much more all Things, from the Father, is not at all confiftent with the Idea of the /r/? Perfon, even the Father, who neither ever could, did, nor can, receive any Thing but Praife, Glory, and Service, from any other. But, 4. Our good Fathers, with the Catholic Church, would have thought it no Sokcijm to fay, That the Son, i. e. the fecond Per- fon, received Power, Wifdom, and all Things, together with his Nature or EJfence , from the Father: And, I'll venture to Hiy, That this is fo far from being inconliftcnt with his being a co- ejfential Son, that it plainly fuppofes and implies that he is fo.
" Wherefoever Chriji calls God his Father, he *' himfelf ftands under the fpecial Charadler of a " Son.'''' Even in this, as we have feveral Times hinted, there is one or more Equivocations. Chrift is, properly, both the Son of God, and properly alfo, the Son of Man : And the Queftion is not. Whether this Title, the Son, when given to him, but whether the Title the Son of God, efpecially when the Adnouns, own, only begotten, are added to it, does not always, and neceffarily, prefuppofe, imply, or denote, his coejfential Sonpip ? And neither he, nor any one elfe, has, or ever can, give any one Inflance, or Text, where it does not. " Now John V. 30. where he fays, I can of wyfelf " do nothing, . I feek not mine own Will, hut the
" Will of the Fatber ivhich hath fent me. This
" does not found like the Language of God- " head, £fff." p. 40, 41. Tho' I had thefe Words up before ; we again anfwer, i. Language o^ God- head founds very Uncouth. 2. This is not the Language of the firft Perfon, but of the Second. 3. 'Tis not the Language of the fecond Perfon,
and
[ 421 ]
and purely as fuch ; but, as having condefeended to" a6t in an inferior Capacity, and for that End, to take unto himfelf a true Body and a reafonahle Soul: And therefore, this Language was very fui table to his Character. 4. As whatever the Father doth, he doth with, and by, the Son, i. e. the fecond Perfon, and never without him : So the fecond Perfon, and as fuch, does whatever the Father doth, not as a feparate Being, but as one with him. And therefore, I may venture to fay, 5. That whatever the Son, i. e. the. fecond Perfon, and as fuch, does,- he " does " it of himfelf, and by his own Will," as well as the firft Perfon, &c. But,
So very zealous is he to pervert this Text, which he fays, " affords perhaps the moll important Ob- *' jeftion againft his Senfe of the Name," Son of God, that tho' we have had it twice already, he brings it up the third Time, p. 52. and turns himfelf every Way to obfcure, evade, or wreft, it and a parallel Paflage, from us ; from thence to p. 67^. And, to obferveit once for all, ufes the fame uncouth, improper, ambiguous Expreflions, ^c. here, as almofl: every where elfe •, and, by trying to " make it clearer," p. 53. does only the more pervert it, and intangle himfelf.
He gives our Objedlion thus, " If the Title " Son of God did not fignify true Godhead, why did " the Jews charge Chrifl with Blafphemy, and fay, " that he made himfelf casual with God, and feek " to kill him, becaufe he faid, God was his Father'* " p. 52. Our Lord's Words were. My Father Worketh hitherto, and I Work, which are much
more emphatic, than as he has given them. ^
" And why do they charge him again with Blaf- " phemy, when he faid, / am the Son of Lod? " Jo. X. 33. becaufe that thou being a Man, makefi " thyfelfGod" p. ^^. The Words upon which they
founded
[ 422 ]
founded this Charge were, / and my, or the. Father are one. fee vers. 30, 31. " How could this be, if " the Name Son of God did not fignify Godhead ?" i. e. If this Title did not denote a coejfential Son. To which he replies thus.
Anfwer i. It is poffible that fome learned Men " among them might have a confufed Notice " from the Prophecies of the Old "Tefiament, " that the Mejfich or the Son of God was to have
" true and real Godhead in him, ^c" p. 53. •
Verily, this feems to be very confufed. The learned Jews, who were but tolerably acquainted with the Old Teilament, might, yea, I conceive, could not but know. That the Word Elohim, is plural: That, tho' Jehovah is One, yet this Title of EJTence is afcribed to more than One : That one of them was anointed to be the Mejfiah : That this One was brought forth, or begotten of another, and brought up with him ; and was there- fore his Son: That this Son who is faid to be given, was to be called the mighty God : That, when their GodJIjould ccfne, then the Eyes of the Blind floould be opened, &c. and, That he fhould feed his Flock like a Shepherd, &:c. &c. as is undeniable from the many
Texts quoted above. " Yet I have much
" reafon to doubt, whether they did certainly know " that the Mejfiah was to be the true God, for they " were moil ftupidly and fhamefully ignorant of " his true Charader, tff." p. 53. — As ignorant as they were of this, they knew very well the true Meaning of the Title, the Son of God: And, That he, who called himfelf fo, pretended to be the Mefjiah, &c. — The other Reafons of his Doubt, z'iz. their " being puzzled at that Queftion, Mat. *' xxii. 45. " that they cannot be fuppofed to have ** known more of his Divinity than the Difciples ** did ; p. 54. or than Peter ;" ibid, have been very particularly confidered and confuted. — His next
Reply
[ 4^3 ] Reply, which he calls the plained, ^c. we have alfo met with before.
" Jnfw. 2 . 'Tis evident that the Defign of the " wicked Jews in thefe Places was to bring the
" highcft Accufation againft him, ^c. p. 55.
Granting this, Would he not. Should he not then, have been the more careful to have vindicated his Charader, and cleared himfeif from thofe " groITeft *' Calumnies,'" if they had indeed been fo ? — " It *' ever he fpake of his Kingdom (tho' he owned his *' Kingdom was not of this JVorld) yet they in their " Malice would conltrue it into Sedition, &c." ibid. — He never called himfeif a King, or their King ; nor could they prove, before Pilate, that he had : But, when Pilate interrogated him, upon their Accufation, Art thou the King of the Jews % our Lord's Reply, acknowledging that he was a King, but fuch an one as needed give him no Umbrage, fatisfied the Governor. — " And fo when he called *' God his Father, and. declared himfeif to be the " Son of God, they in the Fury of their falfe Zeal *' conftrue it into Blafphemy -, as tho' to own him- " felf to be the Son of God, were to affume Equality *' with God :" — This Cafe is neither fully nor fairly reprefented ! — " whereas Chrift Hiews them '* plainly, that thefe Words did not neceffarily " imply fuch a Senfe •," I have read it moft care- fully many Times •, and muft fay, if he fhews this any how, I am fure he does it not plainly : — • And 'tis clear, they did not think he had. — " And this " is fufficienily manifefl by the Defence which " Chrift made for himfeif in both thofe Places." — Surely he could have done it fo plainly, and, I muft fay, ought to have done it, fome wnere or other at leaft, as to have removed all Manner, or Reafon, of Doubt; which, 'tis almoft felf-evident, he has not done. Let us however, confider the De- fence.
JO. V
[ 424 ]
" Jo. V. 17. When the Jews accufed him that by *' calHng God his Father" p. c^6. (/. e. with fuch CIrcumftances, and in fuch a pecuHar Manner, as he had done to their Faces,) " he made himfelf equal " with God J he doth by no Means vindicate that *' Senfe of his Name Son of God, but rather denies " his Equality with God confidered as a Son, ver. 19 *' — 30." — This is News indeed ! — If the Reader will look to the whole PalTage, and refleft upon what I have fuggefled a few Pages above, we fhall leave it to his own Confcience, till it comes up again •, and only now afk, In what Senfe could he affirm " his Equality zvith God" if not " con- " fidered as a Son ?" — 'His Inference from thefe, in the next Words, has really nothing in it, if wc remember what has been again and again fuggefled already. That our Lord m.ight, in the fame Dif- courfe, plead his coejfential SonJIjip, and yet intimate his voluntary Condefcenfton : Or, acknowledge his perfonal Subordination to the Father as his Son, when defending his Co-equality with him as God. And, in Reality, fmce they faw he was a Man, he could not have a6i:ed his Part, if he had not.
" The other Text where cur Saviour is thus accufed, and detends himfelf, is Jo. x. 30 — 39. Seven of thefe Verfes, he has given us at length : But, if the Reader will confider the other two, he will fee all he has faid fufficiently confuted. "In " which Portion of Scripture we m.ay obferve thefe " three Things.
" (i) Thac Chrifl: doth neither plainly and ex- " prefsly own nor deny himfelf here to be true " God, &c." Strange ! And what then ? — He never, any where, lo far as we know, to the Jews, either affirmed, or denied, thefe very Words of himfelf. " for this was not a proper Time to fatisfy " the Curiofity of the malicious Jews in fuch afub- " lime Dodrine, in which he had not as yet clearly
and
r 425 ]
*' arid fully inftrucled his own Difclples." Stranger flill ! — Anf. I. The Queftion the 'Jews propoled, ver. 24, was not a Queftion of Cunojily, nor merely about his Divinity ; but, Hoiv long dojl thou make us to doubt : If thou ^^ the Chr ist, tell us plainly i To which our Lord anfwered prefently, ver. 2r. / told you, i. e. as we have proved already, the Son tf God, (for tho' he had never exprcfsly told them that he was the Chrift ; he was never fhy of pro- feffing himfelf to be the Son of God,') And, tho'jy^ believed not, the Works that I do in 'my Father's Name, i. e. that I do with him, and by his Com- iniiTion, they hear JVitnefs of me, that I am indeed his Sen, his only begotten, and therefore, coeffential Son, tho' I have emptied myfelf, and taken upon me the Form of a Servant : Becaufe, no one but a
coeffential Son, can do what I do, and as I do.
Whence, I gather, that he did then, as " clearly " and fully inftrud them, and his own Difciples *' too," that he was the true God, as ever he did^ or could do, if he had not either ufed thefe very Words, or, exprefsly, called himfelf the Father.
" Yet (2) he gives feveral Hints of his Godhead,'^ Yes, verily, and more than Hints. — " or his *' being one with the Father, when he faySj / and *' 7ny Father are one -," — And was this but a Hint .? — " and when he fays, ver. -2^%. I do the Works of '• my Father, that ye m.ay know and believe that tht " Father is in me, and I in him ;" — What, and are all thefe but Hints too .? — What could he poffibly have faid more, or more fully, and ftrong- ]y ? — «« by which he fecretly intimated," — Our^ Lord's Words were fpokcn openly and above Boards ^^rt plain and not in Parables.—'^ that the Nlan Jefus " had alfo a Divine Nature in him," — How now ? And is there any Divine Nature, but One ? — If his own Words are true. He and the Father are, h^
I * i ununu
[426]
unum') ONE Thing. — " and was perfonally united *' to Gc^," — What, and is this Scripture Language ? Or, the Language of any but Sahellians, &c. ? — Our Lord calls himlelf the Son, and the frj} Perfon ibe Father, plainly declaring they are iivo Perfons : And none but the PatripaJ/ians, &c. ever dreamt, either that thefe two Perfons were one Perfon j or, that the Father was perfonally united to the Human Nature of Chriil. — *' tho' he did not think fit to preach " his own Godhead plainly at that Time." p. 57. ——-To pafs what ought to be faid on thefe Words ; or obfcrving, that they almoll exprefsly contradi6t the preceding Lines •, I want fadly to know -when, or where, he ever ■preach' d it more plainly 'f Thus,
for the • of then^, I have given you every
Syllable of thefe two Paragraphs : And defire the learned Reader to fay. Whether we may not find in them fomewhat very Hke both Sahellianiftn, and NeJioria7iifm, See.
He goes on in the next Line, " And indeed if " he had not been the true God, and in that Senfe, *' one with the Fathr,^^ — 'He fhould have added, tho', as a copjfential Son, a dijlin^ Perfon from him ; for the Man Jefus was not the true God. — " we " may juftly fuppofe, that he would upon this " Occafion have denied himfelf to be true God, and " thus roundly renounced the Conclufion itfelf which ** they pretended to draw from his Words," p. c^^j.
— Suppofe ! We may be fure, he would.
Would he that was meek and lowly, have fuffered them to furmife, That he made himfelf God, without his declaring his utter Abhorrence of any fuch hideous Blafpher>iy, had he not indeed been God? and had alfo faid, and avowed as much ? " as well " as he did deny the Jiijlnefs of their Confequence^ " from his calling himfelf the Son of God." p. 58. He did not then, it feems, r£77cunce the Conclufion itfelf ;'. (?. that he was really the true God! But
only
[ 427 ]
only *« the Juftnefs of their Confequence^' i. r That this followed from any Thing he had then faid ! So that, as Logicians are wont to fay, Tho' the Conclufion was materially true, it was not formally fo ! Or, tho* it was true in itfelf, and might be other- wife proved, it did not follow from thefe Premijfes ! — But, here are feveral Millakes, befides his per-, verting the Senfe of onr Lord's Words. For, — I. He had not, at that Time, exprefsly, called him- felf the Son of God: So that this was none of his Premiffes. — 2. The Words, for which they took tip Stones again to ft one him, ver. 31, were, I and MY Father are one, ver. 30. which they took to have a very different Meaning and Tendency. — For, 3. The Senfe they put upon them, or the Inference they drew from them, was (not that he viade himfelf equal ivith God, but) that he made him- felf Gody ver. ^Z- ^"^ therefore, had not kept up the Diftindlion between the t-u:o Divine Perfons. — • So that, 4. They feem to me, to have put much the fame Senfe upon them, which our Author feems to have put on them, or on others not unlike them, in many Places where he talks of " the fame numerical *' Effence or Nature," &c. " of the Man Jefus being *' perfonally united to God," p. c^y, &c. " his moil *' intimate Union with the Godhead of the Father,"
p. 61, ^c i^c. So that the more he flruggles,
he finds himfelf the more entangled ! As all will find themfelves, who plead for Error : The farther they wade, the deeper are they in the Mire.
" I fay therefore (3.) The chief Defign of his *' Anfwer, was to refute the Cakimny of the Jews *' and the Weaknefs of their Inference, by fhewing " that the Name Son of God, doth not necefiarily ** fignify one equal to God," &c. p. 58. But, whoever will read the Verfes will fee, that there are no fuch ExprefTions in them, as wc have jufl; now obferved ; And confequently, That all this
I i i 2 is
[4^8 ]
is a mere E"jcifwn, and nothing to the Pur- pofe.
" Prophets or Kings, Judges or Dodlors of the " Law were called Gods, and Children or Sons of '• the moft High, Pf. Ixxxii. 6. and in other ^' Places of Scripture," Anf. — i. Only Magiflrates and Judges, I humbly conceive, and that moft
improperly, p. 120, &c. 2. Not one of them
fmgiy was ever fo diftinguillied. — 3. Much lefs v/as ever any one of them faid to be his cwn, his l;egctten^ his only begotten Son. — Nor, 4. Did any one oi them ever aiTume this Title to himfelf, or fay, / ajn the Son of God. — Nor, 5. Did ever God himftlf honour any of them with thofe Titles, ^c.
— Nor, 6. Are they ever called Sons of the mcji High, but in that -poetical Pafiage. " becaufe they ^' c me from God, ^<:." — No one is ever faid to have come f rem God, or come forth from him, bu^ his own, only begotten Son.
*' Our Lord's Argument is a jninori ad majuSy ^* They who where originally in and of this Worlds ^' u7ito whom the Word of God carue, had the Title " of Gods given them : Therefore the Mefjiah who ^' was not oiiginally of this JVcrld, but was with " tic Father, &cc. may furely be called the Son of ^'' God without I anger of Biafpheojy. p. 59, 6c." No i'^oubt, he might : Becaule, it he had not been really the Son of God, the only begotten, and therelore his ccefj'ent-'d Sen, and, as fuch, true God, he cculd not, poiTibly, have been the Meffiah. ^' And indeed 'tis worth our Obferyation here,"
— And fmce it is fo, you fhall have every Word of it.
" Tlio' the Jews built Part of their Accufation " upon his faying, 1 and the Father are One," p. 60.
Thefe v/ere the very Words v/hich excited,
and C!. flamed, their Fury, and on which they principally founded their Charge. — " Jefus did ^ " ' " not
[ 4^9 ]
^' not diredlly anfwer to thofe Words," — What then, did he fliiifRe with them ! ^' nor undertake to " vindicate or explain them j" — The diredt con- trary is manifeft ! " becaufe he might defign in *' thofe Words to intimate his Godhead or his *' 0716716/5 with God the Father ;" — Might defign ? Why, if he defigned any Thing at all, 'tis felf- evidcnt, this was adtually his Defign, if he did not intend to amufe, or impofe upon them, and deceive
them. " Therefore he negledls and drops this
*' Part of the Ground of their Charge," — Could any Thing be more unworthy of our blelTed Lord ?
— 'This was the chief, if not the only. Ground of tlieir Charge ! And could he pretend to anfwer it, by negleding and dropping it ? — If thefe his Words were true^ he 77tade hvmfelj God, tho' not the Father : If they were not true, himfelf was certainly a Deceiver ! " and applies himfelf intirely to anfwer *' their Accufation, as it was built upon his calling " God his 0W71 Father, and himfelf the Sofi of God :^*
• But, this was not their Accufation at this Time, as any one will fee who confults the Place : And confequently, all this is but a mere Evafion. — How- ever, How, or when, did he anfwer their Accufa- tion ? " And this he did becaufe he knew that this " Name did not neceflarily imply Equality with " God, and fo he could boldly refute their Inference
" and renounce their Charge, p. 6i. Stranger
ftill ! Anf I. There is not a Syllable of Equality with God, in all that Chapter. — 2. Where did he fay, or where is it faid, or whence does it appear, that " he knew that this Name did not neceflarily *' imply this Equality? — — 3. Where did " he " boldly," or any how, " refute their Inference ?"
— And, 4. Was ^' neglefting and dropping this '* Part of their Charge, boldly to renounce it r" i^C' — The Caufe of all thefe Mifiakes^ is ins con- founding
[ 430 ]
founding the two Paflages, which, as we fhall £tCj
are not only diftinft, but very different. In
Ihort, 'tis plain, as every Child may fee, That he did not deny their Charge, viz. that he made hitnfelf God, which he could not have done, without di- reftly contradicting his own moft folemn Words : And then all he denied was. That he was guilty of
Blafphemy, or was the Father. < Whence I infer,
and fhall prove it prefently, " That he both vin- dicated and explained his own Words -," and is there- fore God. But, would one think it, be begins
his next Paragraph thus,
*' Yet it fhould be obferved alfo, that before *' Chrifl leaves them,'* — The Words, ver. 39. therefore they fought again to take him : But he efcaped out of their Hands •, as well as thofe, Ch. viii. 59. make it plain, that they intended tumultuoufly to have murdered him, had he not, (which might have the more convinced them, that he was indeed God,) miraculoufly delivered himfelf, and fo efcaped their Fury. " he leads them to his
" Godhead;' Did he fo ? Why then, Ci.) He
confirmed his own Words, ver. 30. and acknow- ledged their Charge, That he made himfelf God! This, 'tis undeniable, he did, if it was pollible to doit! unlefs there are two Godheads. (2.) 'Tis as plain, he made himfelf a coejfential Son : Becaufe he fpeaks of himfelf, as the Son of the Father, quite through that Difcourfe ! And thus, he clearly, and exprefsly, yields the Caufe to me ! For which I heartily thank him. Ma^na efl Veritas, i^ prevalebit ! " i. e. to his moft intimate Union with God the " Father, ver. 38. and 30. p. 61." Right. 'Tis evident, yea, and undeniable, from ver. 33 and 30. That his Union with the Father, was as intimate, as the Union of a coefen:ial Son^ polTibly could be.
He
[431 ]
He as ftrangely, gives up his Caufe in the next Paragraph, ibid. " And indeed if we take the Word *' Son of God to fignity necefiarily in that Place " an Equality ivith the Father,*^ As we fhall fliew prefently, it necelTarily does. " we plainly take *' away the Force of our Saviour's Argument and " Defence," Why, our Saviour's Defign, Ch. v. ij — 47. was, evidently, either to prove, and de- fend, h's Equality with him, or to fhuffle and wriggle with the Jews. " we leave the Accufation ** of the malicious Jews in its full Force againft
" him." p. 61. Anfw. (i.) If, by their ^<:<:^^-
fation., he means, That, he made himfelf equal with " G^J," Ch. V. 18. we believe, that it was plainly implied in his Words : And know, that our Lord was fo far from thinking it an unjujl Accufation.^ that he acknowledges it, and llrenuoufly defends it, yea
and clearly and invincibly proves it. (2) If,
by their Jccufation, he means. That he vfolated the Sabbath., by curing the poor Man on that Day, and bidding him take up his Bed., and walk : We anfwer. That, by neither of thefe, was he to be accounted a Breaker of the Sabbath ; and that the Jews could not but know, that their Accufation was mo^falfe, and malicious. — Becaufe, They could not deny, that the Cure Chrift had wrought was, all Things confidered, above the Power of Nature or fecond
Caufes : That therefore, it required Divine
Power ; and confequently, was really a fFork of God : — That, fuppofing our Lord, as the blafphe- mous Socinians contend, to have been but a mere Man, or only a tnoral Inflrument in the Hand of God., as the Prophets of Old were ; then God him- jelf was indeed the Worker., and not he., who only fpake a few Words, and at his Command : — That the 7nojt High would not have owned him fo much, as to cure the Man, had he not approved of what
he
, [ 432 J ^
he did and faid : — That the Man's carrying his Bed fhewed, evidently, to all who faw him, the; PerfeBion of his Cure ; and fo, was for the Glory of God: — And, That ordinary Prophets had, as the jews acknowledged, Authority to difpenfe with Rites, Ceremonies,, and indeed all Circumfiantials, &c. &c. (3) If, by their Accufation, he means, That " he " made himself God, Ch. x. i^o^.'^ we believe he did fo, tho' not in their Senfe -, and our Author, if his Words have any Meaning that is true, has, as we have juft now heard, acknowledged that he did ; and, 'tis plain, that the Jews thought that he, at leafh dejignedto prove it ; ver. 39. yea, and our Lord has in Fadl, clearly proved it, ver. 37, 38. But, (4) Ifj by their Accufation, in either or both oi* thofe Paflages, he means their Charge^ that he blafphemed when he faid what he faid •, we are fo far from leaving that Charge, in its full Force againft him, that "we believe his Words were not, at all, Blafphemy, but implied feveral great and divine Truths -, and that our Lord continued to declare, and prove, that they did fo : Or, in his own Words, p. 62. " that he *' indeed defigned to let them know that he was *' actually equal with God, but that he was no Blaf- " phemer, becaufe it was a great Truth. " — But fays he,
" Now that he did not defign this, — ■ feems *' evident to me, becaufe his Anfwer cannot reach '* this Senfe •," ibid, "Tis evident he never denied this Senfe, when charged with it : And we fhall fhev/ prefcntly, that his Anfwer did fully reach it. — ■ *' and if flrained to this Senfe^ 'tis very obfcure " and far fetch'd :" — Our Lord's Anfwer, as we fhall fee, is in itfelf, plain enough : But, our Author confounds two Paffages, which are not the fame, but really different, and brings them from fo great a Diflance, as from Ch. v. to Ch. x. and troni Words fpoken at a great Diflance of Time
too j
[ 433 ]
too ', t?t*. and hence their pretended Ohfcurity t *' It might alfo have been fpoken in plainer Lan- *' guage twenty Ways," Anf. I dare not pretend to teach, or correft our Saviour : — His Lan- guage was fo very plain^ that the Jews never, but once, miftook the Senfe ; and tlien but in Part only : — Chrifi never, but once, anfwered as if they had mijiaken it, or corrected their Miftake : — He invincibly proves, that he was tqiiol with God: — And, it would not be eafy, to fpeak this Senfe, in much plainer, and ftronger Language too, twenty Ways, i£t:. — " and he would doubtlefs have *' proved it by plainer Citations out of the Old *' Tejiament, which aflert the Divinity of the Mejfiahy *' &c." Anf The Scriptures never any where afferc fuch a Divinity of the Mejjiah^ as our Author feems every where to intend : — He needed not bring any Citations to prove the Divinity of the MeJJiahy which feems to have been a Thing known, and acknowledged, among the Jews : — His DoSIrine and JVerks^ vrcvt to be the principal Proofs of the Mejfiah : — Chrift gave a great many invincible Proofs^ of his Divinity, as we have heard : — And, *Tis next to impoITible to aflfert his Equality with God, as his Son, more fully and emphatically than he has frequently done. Jo. v. 17. Ch. x. 30, &c.
&c. From all which 'tis evident. That our
Lord's Defign was, not only, no nor at all, " to *' (hew the FalJJjood of their jirjt Inference, ibid." but to explain, illuftrate, and confirm, his own moft folemn Words. — Whence
I conclude, and fhall by and by demonjlrate. That nothing can be more falfe, than to tell us, p. 63. " That the BJief of Chrifi to be the Son of " God in fome more eminent Senfe than all the *' antient Prophets and Kings were," (tho', moft certainly, he was and is fo,) " i. e. to be the glorious ." Mefftahy (as he moft undoubtedly is,) "is all K k k " tha
[ 434 ]
'' that Chrifl diredly and plainly defigned in calling « himfelf the Son of God, &c.". — I'll add, That nothing can be more certain, than that, by this 'Title, he did direftly, and plainly, yea primarily, defign to reveal, proclaim, and confirm, his own coejfential Scnfloip, or Equality with God : And that he has moft Itrongly confirmed it alfo. But,
So eafily are even great Men brought to think thofe 1 hings apparent, which they wifh were fo ; efpecially, when they have long fancied, zealoufly maintained, and have even begun to difpute, that they are fo ! that he concludes, " Thus, I have " made it appear that the Name Son of God cannot " neceffarily imply his Divine Nature^ &c." ibid. But, may I not afl<, Where ; or How ? — By what Evidences, Reafons, or Proofs ? — What Nature does it then neceffarily imply : For one^ at lead, it mud ? — I earneftly defire an Anfwer, having, I conceive, more than fufficiently proved. That he has made no fuch Thing appear. — Let the ferious, impartial Reader judge, the Scriptures being his Guide, or Rule.
Having thus difcufs'd every Thing, of any the leail Moment, which our learned Author has offered, to wrefi thefe Texts from us, and turn them againfi their literal, plain, and obvious Senfe ; we now return to confider them more clofely, begin- ning with the firft.
Jo. V. 17. Our bleffed Lord having, on the Sabbath Day, at the Pool of Bethefda, with a IVord fpeaking, cured an impotent Man that had been difeafed thirty eight Years, and bidden him Rife, take up his Bed, and walk ; ver. i — 8. the Jews quarrel with the Man for carrying his Bed on that Day ', and being informed, that it was our Saviour^ who had made him zvhole, &c. they perfecuted him, and fought to flay him, for this fuppofed Crime : — And therefore, having, as is. generally thought,
brought
[ 435 ]
brought him before their Smthedrim^ and read his Indictment to him -, or interrogated him, Why he did, or How he durft do, fuch a Thing ? ver. 8 — 16. Our Saviour gave this direti Reply, whicli fuperabundancly juftifies what he had faid, or done, My Father worketh hitherto^ and I work. v. 1 7. — Words exceedingly folemn, and emphatic, if any Words ever were : And, no Doubt, pronounced,
as his Way was, as by One having Authority.
In them. He proclaims his moft peculiar Relation to God, i. e. the firji Perfon, as his Father ; or. That he himfelf was fo his Son, " as no other Son, " or Sons, can have the leaft Pretence of Share or
<' Similitude :" That, tho' the Father refied
on the feventh Day, from the Work of Creation, and appointed that Day to be kept as a Day of Reft, in Remembrance of it •, yet he did not abfo- lutely ceafe from working, but continues, incejfantl;, to uphold, preferve, provide for and govern, &c.
all his Creatures : = That therefore, he never
i:eafes to work^ -on the Sabbath^ any more than on other Days : — And yet, that they neither did, could, nor durft, pronounce him a Breaker of the
Sabbath. But they might have, and, no
doubt, had he faid nothing more, would have afkt, What is that to thee ? Dareft thou prefume to fay. That THOU CANST do, or doft, whatever he does ; and therefore, mayft, or doft, alio work, whenever
he works ? Yes, fays our Lord, He worketh
hitherto, and I work. i. e. What [over he does, ad extra, 1 alfo do: And therefore, ,Whenfoever he works, even on the Sabbath Day, I alfo work with him : And confequently, can no more be blamed, for doing thefe Works, on that Day, than He. • That this was his Meaning, his glo- rious Apology, as we fliall fee, puts out of all Doubt. Well, How did the Jews bear this ? What Ccn- JlruBion did they put upon thefe his emphatic Words ? K k k 2 Why,
1 436 ]
Why, they took them as, I humbly conceive, every honeft, judicious, and thoughtful Man would have done, in their plain and natural Senfe ; as implying. That he made himfelf equal with God: ver. 18. And therefore, fought the more to kill him. — — A Charge, or Crime, fo very heinous and fatanical! had it not indeed been plainly implied in his Words, and the very Senfe, our Saviour intended they fhould take them in ; That, if he had had any Regard for the Glory of God, or the Salvation of Men, or any Concern for his own Character, &c. Yea, had he not been loft to all Senfe of T^ruth, Modefly, Humility, &c. he would, he ought, he could not but have, even with Horror, fhewn them their Mifiake, and have fet them. Right; which he might eafily have done,
more than " Twenty Ways." He might, he
fhould, have told them, He fpake no fuch Words, he meant no fuch Thing, he detefled any fuch hellifh 'thought, he abhorred every Thing fo fuperlatively devilifh, fo defperately, fo infinitely wicked, &c. &c.— But, Did he ? — No : So far from it, that he, in a long, a Divine Apology, explain'd himfelf, and confirmed this Fundamental Truth, That, as the Son of God, he was, adbually, equal with him ; which we proceed to fhew, when we have reminded the Reader of what we have often ^proved already. ■
I. That Chrifl is called, and is, adually, both the Son of God, and the Son of Man -, and is as truly God, as the Son of God, as he is Man, as the Son of Man,
2. Ihat therefore, ^ach of thefe Titles are,
when literally and ft riftly taken, Titles oi Nature, and not 0^ Office. — 3. That yet, each of them are fometimes ufed, in a larger Senfe, to denote the complex Perfon of the Mediator, and as fuch, in
the aftual Execution of that Office. 4. That
therefore, this Title, the Son of God, may either fignify the fccond Perfon and purely as fuch, or the
[ 437 1
Mediator as fuch : And that this Title, the Son^ without any otherWord annexed, may denote either the fecond Perfon and purely as fuch ; or the Man Chrtji Jefus and purely as fuch ; or the complex Perfon of the Mediator^ as the Scope, or Circum- ftances, of the Pafiage may require. — 5. That therefore, our Lord might ufe this Title, the Son^ in each of thefe three Senfes, in the very fame Difcourfe ; as he adually, I conceive, did in this. — And, 6. That our Author has pitched upon fome Ckufesy which, by his Art^ might be fo fer- verted, as to feem to favour his Caufe •, but has taken no Notice of others, in the very fame Verfes, which cannot, by any Jrt, be tortured to any fuch vile Purpofe. — Let us then fee how our Lord explains himfelf, and pleads, and confirms his Equality with God, i. e. the Father. He anfwered their Charge, thus.
Verily, Verily 1 fay unto you, The Son can do nothing cf himfelf, ver. 1 9. but zvhat he feet h the Father do : — The plain, the full. Meaning of which is, q. d. Tho' I do not deny the Senfe you put upon my Words, becaufe it is flriftly true ; yet, I would have you remember, I am not the Father, who is firfi in Order and Operation, but the Son : And therefore, tho' I faid He workeih hitherto, and I work, I did not fay, nor mean, that / wrought firft, or was the firfi ; and much lefs, as divided from him, or without his Co-operation and Concurrence : But, that I wrought with him, and from him ; fo that, we work the very fame Works, as One joint Caufe, or, if you will, as two undivided and infeperable Caufes, but each according to the Order of his Subfiilence ; He as the firfi, and I as the fecond, no one of us ever working without the other. — And that this is indeed the only true Senfe, is plain from the next Claufe of that very Verfe, For what Thing foever HE doth, thefe alfo doth the Son likewife. — IVhat
Thing
. [ 438 ]
I'hing foever^ ad extra, i. e. relating to the Creatures, in Heaven or Earth j and whatfoever, without Exception, the Thing be, whether according to, befides, above, or contrary to, the Power or ejiabli/hed Courfe, or Laws^ of Nature, — he, i. e. the Father doth, whether in the Kingdom of Nature or Grace,— thefe alfo doth the Son likewife, all of them, with the fame Eafe, Power, and Authority : So that the Operation of the Father and the Son, is really undivided, and their Works the fame. And, as HE never works without the Son, fo neither doth, nor will, nor can, the Son do any Thing, but what the Father in him and he in the Father doth, or will, or can : And therefore, in accufing me,
ye really accufe him. Or, if we fbould fuppofe,
that our Lord fpeaks of himfelf in this Apology, at leafl ver. 19 and 20. not ftridlly, and merely, as the fecond Perfon, (but as having condefcended to be the Mediator, who had alfo alllimed our Nature,) our Argument would lofe nothing by it : Becaufe, 'tis felf-evident, That, in what Senfe, or Capacity, foever, he could do what Thing foever the Father doth, he is moft certainly equal with him in Power ; and confequently, in all other ejfential Perfe^ions ;
and therefore, in EJfence alfo. ■ ■ But, it will be
faid.
In the very next Verfe, Our Lord is exprefs. For the Father loveth the Son, Yes, He loves him as another felf\ and as his own felf: Yea, and cannot but love him, who is the exprefs Image of his Perfon. — " and fheweth him all '■Things that himfelf doth,^* p. c,6. Yes. — The Father is the jirfi in Order and Operation : And this Phrafe, very naturally, denotes as much. — But, more par- ticularly, we anfwer i. If thefe Words are fpoken of him, purely as the Son of God, they intimate, I humbly conceive. That the Father does, as it were, begirt, or is the firjl Agent, in every Work of the
Bleffed
[ 439 1 Blefifed T'hree. Or, 2. If we would talk with our Fathers, They point out that ineffable ( ommunica- tion as oihis EJfence, fo alfo of all his H^^'ili and Pur-
pofes, &c. to the Son. But, 3. Since he does
not, in all that long Apology, ftile him fel f /^^ Son of God, but only the Son, I rather incline to think. That our Lord here, throughout, fpeaks of him- felf as the Mediator, tho' with a very particular Refpedl to his Divine Nature And then, as he condefcended to receive a Commijfion from him, and confequently, to receive Commandments, &c. alfo ; I fee no very great Inconvenience in granting. That the Father did, on fome particular OccaJionSy or always, fome Way or other, acquaint him with his Will ; or, what he would have done, together with the Place, Time, and Manner, ^c. as well as the Work itfelf, which himfelf would concur in, or work with, and hy him. — For, the Words themfelves make it evident. That all 'things, which the Father fheweth the Son, The Son himfelf was to do ; either together with the Father, and as well as he ; or, hy himfelf, and without him. — " and he will fhew *' him greater Works than thefe," Yes : And what then ? *' Thence I infer, that he hath not fhewn " all yet i" Not to trifle, I anfwer i. We have proved above, that the Words are not, cannot be, taken literally. 2. The following Verfes put it out of all Doubt, That the Father had shewn him, what thefe greater Works were ; becaufe, he cer- tainly knew them : For, otherwife, he could not have told them of them, as every one, who can but read the PafTage, muft fee he did. He adds, " and ver. ^o- I can of myfelf do nothing," True : He could not, as the firfi Perfon, or without him^ or as a Being feparate from him, as they pre- tended he was. — *' 1 feek not mine own Will, but " the Will of the Father who hath fent me,''' Anf. (i) As his coeffential Son, he did not feek his
own
[ 440 ]
own H^ill, in xhtfirji Place, or not only, or not as divers from, and yet, much lefs, as contrary to his : But, in feeking his Will, he fought his own, as being indeed the fame with his. (2) As the Mediator, and, as fuch, God-man, he condefcended to a61: in a delegated Capacity, and to become the Father s Servant -, and therefore, had obliged him- felf to feek his Will, in Purfuance of the Covenant between them : But, feeing he knew the Father^! Will, which was alfo indeed his own ; and chofe, yea delighted to do it ; he really did his own Will j and that in the Profpeft of the Glory that was fet before him, as the Saviour of his People. Heb. x. 7. • — 13. Ch. xii. 2, ifc. And, (3) As Man, he was not only fuhordinate, but infinitsly, and in every Senfe, inferior to him : And therefore, was not, at all, to feek his own Will, in any Cafe •, or, only in a perfecSt, and abfolute, Submijfion to his.
He concludes this, in thefe Words, not one of which is true, " All which ExprelTions fufficiently " evince," Not a Syllable of them, nor altogether, evince any fuch Thing. — " that he did not *' intend to fignify his own Godhead, or Equality *' with God, when he called himfelf the Son of God,** Anf. I. He did not, in all that Chapter, call him- felf the Son of God. And yet, 2. If he did not intend to fignify this, 'tis evident, he fhuffled with them. But, — 3. 'Jhe coeffential Son could not poffibly prove his Godhead, as is evident, any other Way, but by declaring and proving, his . ejfential Unity and Equality, with the Father. — I fay as 'tis evident, except he had declared he had another Godhead ; and confequently, that he was another God : And then, the Jews, might and would, have charged him, with making himfelf a new God, a ftrange God, whom their Fathers knew not ', &c. and therefore, as our Arians and Socinians now do, That he made, at leaft, two Gods!
■ How
[441 ]
—However, how does he prove this ? " for in " his very Anfwer to their Accufation he reprelents " himfelf inferior to and dependant on God the " Father." p. 56. Words very ambiguous ! and therefore, in the prefent Cafe, exceedingly unfair. To which we anfwer.
I. We have often obferved. That Chrijl, God- man, confidered purely as the coejfential Son of God, was not the firjl but the fecond Perfon ; fecond in Order ^ and Operation ; and therefore, fubordinate to the Father, as his own Son : — That, confidered as having undertaken our Redemption, he condefcended to be fubje^ to him ; yea, and become his Servant :
And, That, merely, as the Son of Man, he
was infinitely inferior to him, and omnimodoufly dependant upon him, — 2. That he might there- fore, in this Apology, or any Difcourfe, prove himfelf as a coejfential Son, to be God equal with the Father : And yet, relatively, fubordinate to him as his Son, ceconomicaliy, fubjcS to him as his Servant, and infinitely inferior to him as Man, his
Creature. 3. He does not, in all that Chapter,
call himfelf the Son of God, but only the Son, and
once the Son of Man. ver. 27/ 4. Thefe Ex-
prefTions, The Son can do 7iothing of himfelf, but what he feeth the Father do, ver. 1 9. the Father SHEWETH him all Things that himfelf doth, ver. 20. I feek not mine own Will, but the IVill of the Father who hath fent me. ver. 30. naturally, and eafily, point out the Concurrence of the blelfed Three, in all their IVorks relating to the Creatures ; that the Son is the fecond, as in Order fo in Operation j and that as the Mediator, tho' really equal with God, he condefcended to aft as the Fathers Servant, and as fuch, to feek his Will : But not at all, that he is not a coejfential Son, and, therefore, as fuch, equal
with him. For, 5. In general, He doth what
Thing jocver the Father doth j ver. 19. — And, 6. In
L. 1 \ oar-
[ 442 ]
particular. He quickeneth whom he will, i. e. by his awn Poiver and Authority j ver. 21. — Alt Judgment is committed to him, ver. 22. which neceffarily requires infinite Perfeftions, and therefore, prefuppofes his eternal, coejfential Sonfuip •, — He is to be honoured by all Men, even as they . honour the Father \ and therefore, he is equal with him, ver. 23. — He that helieveth on him, is pajjed from Death unto Life ; and therefore, he is God, the Author both oi f-piritual and eternal Life \ ver. 24, 26. — And all that are in their Graves floall hear his Voice , &c. ver. 28, 29. ^ — If thefe now do not invincibly prove, That the Son is God equal voith the Father -, and confequently, a coejfential Son -, 'tis abfolutely impolTible to prove any Thing by Words.
But, befides thefe, Our Lord brings other Wit- neffes to prove his Equality with God. — 1. John the Baptift, ver. 39, — '^c^. whofe Evidence we have
produced, and illuftrated. 2. Thk Father,
ver. 36 — 38. whofe '•lefiimony we have alfo given,
and vindicated. 3. The Scriptures, ver. 39.
which bear Witnefs to this great Truth, from the Beginning to the End of them, as we have heard, and may yet farther demonftrate. — And, 4. Mofes, ver. 45, — 47. who, as we have proved, hath fuper abundantly teftified the fame Thing. What
then would fatisfy Men .^ What would they
have ? — The Lord incline them to confider.
From this Time forward, we may obferve. That, whenever he fpake of his Divinity, i. e. fpake of God as his Father, in fo fingular a Manner, or of himfelf as his own Son, &c. they always were either difpleafed, or cavili'd, or reviled him, or in a Rage, or fought to murder him. — Thus, after he had multiplied the Loaves, Jo. vi. 1 — 14. a Miracle^ if any ever was ! when he came to make the Ap- plication, and call God his Father, and himfelf his Son i to tell them he ivas the Bread of Life, that he
A came
[ 443 J came down from Heaven, to give Life to the Worlds &c. ver. 32, 33, 46, (all ExprefTions neceflarily^r^- fuppcjing, or implying^ his coeffential Son/hip ;) not- withftanding the extraordinary Fondnefs they had jufl before exprefTed, ihty Jlrove amongfi themf elves ^ ver. 52. cavilled, ver. 60. deferted him, ver. tb^ iic. — In like Manner, when he feems to have again plainly enough hinted, That he was the Son of God, and, as fuch, God of God, Ch. vii. 28, 29. then they fought to take him, ver. 30. — But, Thefe Things may be yet more particularly obferved, in the fol- lowing Chapter.
Jo. viii. 12. Our Lord having called himfelf /;&5 Light of the Worldy vtx . 12. (for the Father being Light, the Son is Light of Light, as well as God of God ;) tlie Pharifees fcornfully reply, 'Thou hearefi Record of thy f elf, thy Record is not true, ver. 1 3. '-lamnot alone, faysChrift, but I and the Father that fent me, ver. 16. and he alfo bears witnefs of me. ver. 1 8, In which we may obferve the Familiarity exprefs'd, the Order of the Words, and the near and indilToluble Union between them. q. d. I am not alone .in my Tejiimony, any more than in my Effence and IVorking : But, as neither of us exijl, or work, without the other j or, as we are not divided in our EJJence, or ' Working, fo neither are we divided in our Tejiimony : (fee ver. 29. Ch. xiv. 10, &c.) For the Three that bear Record in Heaven, are one, Vv, unum, one Thing. — This feems to have again enraged them, ver. 20. — And, when afterward he fpeaks of him- felf, more plainly, as the Mediator, ver. 28. who would make his People free; 32. and they (hame- fully boafled, that they were never in Bondage, being Abraham^ s Seed : 33. Our Lord very exprefsly tells them, that they had another Original, or Father, befides Abraham ; becaufe, had they been the ge- nuine Sons of Abraham, and like him^ they would have followed his Steps, who rejoyced to fee his Day ;
L 11 a and
[ 444 ]
andfnw it, and ivas glad •, ver. §6, Sec. < — ■ Abraham^ fay they ! "What, Haft thou feen Abraham ? Yes, fays Chrift. Before Abraham, yivea-^xi^ was, was born, was made, exified, I am. — — T\itjews took his Meaning dire6liy, as we have obferved already, •That he ajfmned to himfelf necejfary Exiftence, or Eternity ; and thereby -made him j elf equal with God, or a coeffential Son -, and therefore, taking this to be, ^in fo mean a Perfon, as they thought, or rather •would be thought to think, he was,) Blaffhemy,
they took up Stones to cafi at him, ver. ^6 — c^^.
Or, perhaps, they put the fame Senfe upon thefe Words, which we Ihall fee they did, upon another Expreffion, Ch. x. 30. ■ — ■ However, I fhall only now add, i. The delirious Interpretation, which Socinus gives of thefe Words, is really, not only beneath Contempt, but plainly contrary to their natural grammatical Conftrudion ; and would alfo render our Lord's Words either a poor Shuffle, or little better than Nonfenfe -, &c. — 2. The Title, iyta bI/mi, I AM, plainly implies necejfary Exigence -, is one of the Titles of the moff High-, Ex. iii. 14, &c. and is never, can never, be ufed of any, but one who is true God ; &c. — Yea, 3. Could it be ufed of any but the true God, we can hardly think. That he^ who was meek and lowly, would have fo publickly, and with fuch Solemnity too, to the Faces of his Enemies, who feldom failed to pervert every Thing
he faid, alTumed it to himfelf. Efpecially,
4. Since he could not but remember. That they had lately accufed him of Blajphemy, for talking in fuch Strains ; and could not but know, that they would again be filled with hdignation •, and that he, upon that Suppofition, needlefiy, not only Jiirred up Anger, but expofed himfelf to their Fury, &c. by ufmg fuch Words. — 5. 'Tis clear, he fpeaks of himfelf, quite through that Chapter, as the Son of ^^od now made Flefh. — 6. 'Tis evident, from their
taking
t 445 1
iakin^ up Stones to Jione himy That they took him to have afiumed to himfelf true and proper Divinity. And yet, 7. He did not fo much as attempt to tell them, that they mifiook him-, or to fet them rights in fo important a Point!— Yea, 8. So far was he from doing this. That, by his miraculous Efcape^ ver. 59, for fo it was, fee Ch. x. 30. he confirmed the Trutb^ That he was indeed God-, and might have confirmed them in it. That he, indeed, made himfelf, and as i>is Son too, equal with God. — And, to wave feveral others, 9. Had the Jews ever heard of his pre-exiflent Soul, or had he now told them of it, 'tis felf-evident, he might have feen Abraham, and affirmed as much without Blafphemy, &c.
Jo. X. 33. We find them charging him with Blafphemy ; becaufe he being a Man, made himfelf God', for faying, in fo many Words, ver. 30. I and the Father are one. — This with our Lord's Reply, ver. 35, 36. being the Paflage, which the Antitrinitarians, in all Ages, have pretended does either totally overthrow our Faith, That he made ■himfelf God, or equal with him -, or, at leaft, very much weaken our Proofs of it : We Ihall, the more particularly, confider it ; and fhew that it invincibly eftablifhes it.
As our Lord walked in the Temple, ver. 23. the Jews, i. e. the Scribes and Pharifees, came round about him, as if they had been very fincere-, and indeed much in Earneft \ (tho' really with a Defign to entangle, and enfnare him,) and faid. How long doft thou make us to doubt ? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly, ver. 24. He immediately replied, I told you and ye believed not, ver. 25. Ch. viii. 25. Now, he had never, as we have proved already, told them, that he was the Chrijl ; but only. That he was the Son, the own, the only begotten Son of Cod. ]o.m, 16 — 18. Ch. v. 17, &c. The IVorks
that
[ 446 ]
that I do in my Father's Name, they bear Witnefs of me. q. d. As I told you, that I was the only begotten of the Father^ the Divine Works which 1 do, (not as a mere Injirument, but) as indeed a real efficient working together with him, fully confirm what I fay / am. — None but one, who is God, can do thefe Works : But, I do them : And therefore, I am God.
— I do not pretend to be the Father^ but only the Son : And therefore, I am ^ coeffential Son. — — The Father would not concur with me, in any Work, to confirm a Lie -, and, by fo doing, impofe upon the World : And therefore, you may depend
upon what I fay. And, tho' you believe not
this, ver. 26. yet My Sheep hear my Voice -, ver. 27. and confequently, believe. That I am the only be- gotten ; that 1 do the Works of the Father -, and that the Father wcrketh hitherto, and 1 work: And, by con- fequence. That I am equal with God. Ch. v. 17 — 19.
— And, I give unto them Eternal Ufe, and theyfloall never periflo, &c. ver. 28. which none but One, who is God, can fay and perform ! — I do not indeed promife this, as a feparate Being from the Fat her ^ as the World fuppofe rne to be i or, as purfuing my own Glory and not his, or, as divided from his ; or, as that they were not Jiill his : For, tho' He gave me them -, yet are they ftill in his Hand ; and therefore, they Jhall never perifij •, ver. 29. becaufe, in and for their Preferv at ion ^ zue jointly concur : He worketh, a7id I work. And, in Reality, fays he, it cannot be otherwifc : JSldther of us can work, without the ^'//^^r ; For, jV la-fj^^.v, unum fumus, we are ONE Thing. In which obferve,
I. He fpeaks of himfelf and the Father, as two difiinSi Perfons ; as every Father Sind- Son neceffarily are. — 2. That the Verb plural ect/aev, we are, puts this out of all Doubt. — 3 . That, as he never faid of himfelf, I AM God, for the Reafons given above,
fo
[ 447 ] fo he does not here fay, / and God^ but I and the Father •, that he might the more clearly keep up the Dijlin£iicn of the Perfons, even when he was moi^Jirongly to exprefs their Unity of EJfence. — 4. What he affirms of them, are one Thing j /. e. in a Word, I as the Son and He as the Father, are as much One, as we pofiibly can be ; or, every Way, and in every Senfe, One, but that we are two perfonal Agents ; or, as we are one in EJfence, Co are we in all EJJential Perfe^ions. — As his Omnipotence is my Omnipotence,
fo is my Omnipotence his \ and fo of the reft. •
5. The /^Wji/Z^r Manner in which he fpeaks. — Sup- pofing the Son to be a coejfential Son, Could he, poffibly, fpeak more in Charad:er, more familiarly, or more like fuch a Son ? — But, 6. The Order of the Words, (/ and the Father ; and fo it is, Ch. viii. 16, &c.) can never be enough confidered. ■ — They are joined, as the Subject of the fame Propofition ; he names himfelf firft, and no Doubt with an Emphafis ; he did it before his Enemies, who were ready to catch at every Word •, and in A nfwer to their important ^ejlion ! And therefore, not with- out a Defign. — Could any Words be to them more irritating ? — Was it then confiftent with common Difcretion, needlefly to provoke them ? — Was this like one, who was meek and lowly? — Would it not, does it not, look Wkt feeking his own Glory P — The Manner of Speaking, (which would not be fuffered among Men, were not the Speaker at leaft equal to any of thofe before whom he named himfelf,) confirms me in it, That our Lord intended, in the moft obfervable and emphatic Way, to proclaim his Coejfentiality with the Father. — I have often won- dered, that, to the beft of my Remembrance, I never heard of, or read, any One, who laid fuch a Strefs upon this, as it well defer ves ! For my own Part, I have never confidered it, for many Years paft, but I was ftruck with it : And cannot help
faying.
[ 448 ]
faying. That were I in any Doubt, or Doubts, about the Doflrine of the Trinity, and coejfential Sonjhip of the fecond Perfon, this Order of thefe
Words would, alone, forever remove them all. •
Durft any, but a coejfential Son, have exprefied him- felf in this Manner ? before fuch a Company ? ^c. ^c. * Well, How did the Jews bear this ? — Why, they were fo enraged, that, without waiting to carry him before their Sanhedrim, they took up Stones again to jlone him, ver. 31. in a tumultuary Way, as they did the Froto-Martyr afterwards. — And when our Lord mofl: kindly expoftulated with them. Many good Works have I Jhewn you from my Father: Which are my Credentials-, and in doing which, he would not have owned me, and concurred with me, to confirm any Lie of mine ; or, if I had not fpoken the Truth, and for his Glory. — For which ofthofe Works do you jlone me ? ver. ^2.q.d. 'Tis full as reafonable to jlone me for my good Works, as for any Words I have faid : Becaufe, my Works are the highejl Proof, which either the Father, or I, can
give of the Truth of my Words. When, I fay,
Chrift had, in this tender Manner, reafoned with them ; they anfwered him in their Fury, faying. For a good Work we jlone thee not ; hut for Blafphemy \ and becaUfe that thou being a Man makejl thyfelf God^ ver. 33. q. d. Good Works! they cannot be good Works ; becaufe, as we have told thee often, Jo. v. ver. 10 and 16. Ch. ix. ver. 14, 16, and 24. thou art not of God, but art a Sinner -, yea, a Blafphemer ; in that thou being but a Man, fuch a poor, mean, defpicable Man, makejl thyfelf God. — In which, let the Reader obferve, i. They called him a Man ;
and this, he did not, could not deny. 2. They
pretend and infmuate, that he was no more but a Man, or a mere Man, and a very mean one too. • — 3. They charge him therefore diredly, with Blafphemy -, a, capital Crime ! for which they were
corri=^
[ 449 ]
commanded tojlone him. Lev. xxiv. i6. — 4. They would here make good their IndiHment^ from his own Words, / and the Father are cne^ hu, 0ns Thing. — What Man foever dare talk in this Strain, is guilty of Blafphemy : Thou haft done fo, in our Prefence : Therefore, Thou art guilty of Blajphemy. Here now let thefe Thoughts be well re- membered,
N. B. (i) The Words, on which they grounded this Charge, are not the fame with ihofe^ Ch. v. 1 7.
Our Lord's Words, in that PafTage, are, My
Father worketh hitherto, and 1 work : Here, they are, / and the, or my. Father are one. — N. B. (2) The Senfes the Jews put upon them, or the Inferences they drew from them, were not the fame neither. Their Conclufion from that was, That he made him- felf equal iznth God : From this. That he made him"
felf God. N. B. (3) In the former Words,
Chrift, clearly and ftrongly, exprefTes the Dijiin^fion between the Father and hinifelf, as being two Co-wcrkers j and confequently, two f erf onal Agents -, without any plain, 21 Ic^H literal Intimation of their £7;zzV_y and Co- ejfentiality ; whence they conclude, and naturally enough. That he made himfelf equal with God: Whereas, in the latter, he not only exprefsly keeps up the Dijiin^ion between th,e Perfons, but ftrongly, and very emphatically, intimates their Unity and Coeffentiality ; whence they infer. That he made him-
felf God. N. B. (4) Tho', for one, who was
true Man, and not alfo Gcd^ to 7nake himfelf equal with the Father, was really Blafphemy, as well as, for fuch a Perfon, to fay, I aiid the Father are, 'iv, one Thing : Yet, the Jews feem to have thought, that this latter Expreffion had more in it ; and was rather more Blafphemous, upon fome Account or other, than the former ; and therefore, tho' they were exceedingly difplcafed with thaty they permitted our Lord to make his Apology, they heard him our, M m m and
[ 450 ]
Bnd fuffered him to depart in Peace : But, they were fo furioufly enraged with him, for this, tho' his Defence was, in Reality, much the fame, that
they fought again to take him, &c. ver. 39. So
that, N. B. (5) They feem to have thought. That . he either dropt the Dijlin^ion of the Perfons al- together •, or made thefe Words, / and the Father^ to imply little more than a Difiin5iion of Namei», Charafter.", or Offices : And, that he really mads himfelf the Father ; or, at leafl, left not room enough for a perfonal Diftindlion betwixt them 5 and confequently, that, inftead of ufing the Lan- guage of the Prophets, and of their Fathers, (for which, it would feem, they had ftill fome Re- verence,) he talk'd, if I may be allowed the Phrafe, pretty much at leaft, in the Strains of the Sabellians
and other Heretics. That this was, in Fad, the
Cafe, appears to me, from thefe Confiderations, befides what has been ofrered.
'^his was one of the two, or three, principal Texts, on v/hich the Herefy of Sahellius, and the Patripaffians, &c. was founded : — If any Words could give any fpecious Pretext for fuch a Fancy, it cannot be denied, that thefe Words, / and the Father, tv la-fAn', we are one ^hing, might ; efpecially, becaufe, 'tis evident from the Context, that Chrift there reafons, as well he might, from their Unity cf Power ^ to their Unity of Effence : — 'Tis plain, the Jews were 'more vehemently offended with thefe Wcrds, than thofe, Ch. v. 17. for which, na other Reafon can be imagined : — — And our Saviour's Anfwer, puts it, I conceive, out of all
Doubt. Well then, How did he behave?
What Jpology did he make ? What Anfwer did he give ?
Did he ** fhew them plainly, that thefe Words ** did not neceffarily imply, that he ajfumed Equality " wilh God i" *s our worthy Author will have it ?
P-55-
[ 45' J
p. ^^. No : He did no fuch Thing. — Or, That he altered, or retra5fed, or even foftened, any Thing he
had faid ? No : Not at all. Is there then any
Thing like Eva/ton, or Shuffiing, in our Lord's De- fence ', or, did he decline to give a direft Reply to their Charge, as others have more than hinted } No. — Far be any fuch mean Things, from our dear
Redeemer, the only begotten Sen of God. Did^ he
then let them right, in that wherein they mifiook him ^ Yes. — Did he give a dire6t Anfwer to the Charge ? Yes. — And did he unanfwerably confirm what he had faid ? Yes ; in every Part of it, moft
fully. For, as to the feveral Parts, or Articles,
of the Indi£ftnent, which we have mentioned above, obferve,
I. He allows himfelfto be 2. Man-, and denies not that, in his then prefent Circumftances, he was a mean Man : But alledges. That feveral, who were but mere Me}!, had been, even in the Scripture, and confequently, without Blafphemy, called Gods ; and
therefore, lb might he. 2. He declares. That,
tho' he was a Man, and in a low and mean State alfo in the Eyes of the World ; yet he was not a were Man, or nothing hut a Man -, but, even as Man, inconceiveably exalted above all other Men : And therefore reafons, from the leffer to the greater. Thus : If he, without Blafphemy, called them (Magiftrates) Gods, unto whom the Word of God came, as the Scripture which cannot he hroken, ver. ^3. /. e denied or found Fault with, affures us ; Say ye cf him, whom the Father hath fan^lified, feparated to be the Mediator, hy whom Kings reign, &c. Pro. viii. i ^. Thou hlafphemefl, hccaufe I Jaid, (not that / am God, in your Senfe, and as you hint, but) / am the Son of God .'' — Surely, He whjm the Father hath fent unto the PVorld, i. e. the Son, who was pro- mifed to be given, to be the Child horn to us, may, even as fuch, with infinitely more Reafon, and M m m 2 * much
[ 452 ]
iruch more properly, ftile himfelf th^ Son of Gody
then they might be ftiled Cods. c^. He ftrong-
ly keeps up the Biftinftion of the Perfons, / and the Father, He ivhcm the Falher hath [an5tified\ bcz, and therein fhews, that they were indeed two fro^er
Perfons, as all Sons and Fathers are. 4. He, by
fo doing, rectifies thcrir Miftake, That when he faid, / and the Father are one Thing, he did not mean. That he was the Father, as they feem to me to have thought : But, tho' coeffential with him, only the Son of the Father, and not the Father him.felf.
* 5. He proves. That, as the Son of God, he
was indeed, as they took him to mean, equal with him : And he does it, by the very fame Argument he had ufed, Ch. v, 1^7, 19. If I do not the ff^orks of my Father, (vvhich require infinite Power, and which I really do with him, or as well as he,) believe me not : But, if / do them, as you cannot but fee, I really do ; tho' ye believe not nie^ believe the Works \ Tcr. 38. and thefe will fhevv, infallibly fhew, the Omnipotent Power of him, who works them ; and confcquently, That the Father worketh hitherto, and I work, viz. the Ytvj fame Works, with him. — But, whereas they might ihave urged. Thou didft, in fo many Words, and with much Affurance, fay, 7 and the Father, are one 1'hi;ig ; He anfwers direftly, ' — 6.1 did fo : And now iland by it, 'That ye may know andbelii,ve, Th:.t //j,? Father is in me, and I in HIM. ver. 38.x e. faith the learned Mr. Clark, " That *' the Divine Effence is xhe. farae\i\ us both, (ver. 30.) " tho' there be a Bifiin^ion of Perfons between us." And 'tis felf-evidcnt, 1 hat, as the Divine Effence cannot poUibly be divided from itfelf, or the iJivine Perfioiions, any more than the Divine Perfe5iion^ can be feparaied from th-.^mfelves, or from the C'ivine Effence : So, 'tis as evident. That the very fame PerJe£lions, which are in the Father and the Son,
de-
[ 453 1
demonftrate. That the felf-fame Offence is in them both ; or. That they are^ tv, one Thing.
Thus have we clearly explained, and vindicated^ this Context, v/hich has been thought, by many, as well as myfelf, to have no fmali Difficulty in it,
arifing from the Miftake hinted above. We
have, I fay, made every Thing plain, and eafy, even to the meanejR: Capacity : Yea, and made it alfo appear an irrefragable Argument^ for the Coejfentiality of the firji and fecond Perfons of the Trinity -, and therefore, of the coejfenlial Soijhip of the Seconds Here the Reader will find no Pf^riggling, or mean Eva/ion ; no declining any Thing, v/hich feems to make againft us ; no advancing, nor fuppojing, any Thing pre- carious, or without both Recfcn and Proof: Yea, here he will fee every Word, which could raife any 'Demur, or Bctibt, fairly confidered, and the true
SeJife of it fully eftabliihed. And two
Things further confirm me in the Truth •, and, I verily think will fully convince every impartial Perfon.
I. When the Jews, upon his Trial, when they fiiewed their Malice to the uttermofl, accufed him of Blafphemy, they did not charge him with making himfelf God, {i. e. making himfelf the Father, or leaving no pcrfonal Diftinftion between himfelf and the Father •,) but only, with making him- felf ^ the Son of God. Jo. xix. 7. Whence it feems plain, he had convinced them, ( 1 ) That they had
miftaken the Senfe ol his Words, Ch. x. 30.
(2) That he had alTerted nothing more in that Verfe, than he had done ; Ch. v. 17. but only, more fully and plainly, exprefs'd the Coeffentiality of the blefied Perfons. And, — (3) That he was fo far from yielding. That he did not, " as ^ Son, affime " Equality with the Father^'' that he ftill maintained it, and proved it too, by the Itrongeff, and moft
con-
[ 454 ]
convincing Argument poITible \ If I do not the Works of my Father^ believe 'me not^ &c.
2. This, 1 conceive, is rendered indubitable from their Carriage, therefore they fought again to take him : ver. 39. viz. as a Blafphe^ner, for affuming Divinity to himfelf, which did not belong to him. And, I think alfo, I may add. That his miraculous Efcafe out of their Hands^ was fufficient, not only to filence them j but confirm them in it. That he.i 2i% his own Son, thought it indeed no Robbery TO BE EQUAL WITH GoD. Procecd wc then to,
Jo. xix. 7. This is the laft Text wherein thejww accufed him with Blafphemy. ^he Jews anfwered i>im, we have a Law^ (the haw againft Blafphemy^ Lev. xxiv. 16.) and by our Law he ought to die^ hecaufe he made himfelf the Som of God. -— This I produce lail, not only becaufe it comes laft in Order ; but becaufe it is, if I may fo fay, the Seal of all the reft, and confirms them fo abfo- lutely, as to leave no Room for a fober or rational Anfwer ; yea, and hardly, for any wriggling, fhuffling or evading ; as will appear undeniable, if we confider,
( I ) Every one, v/ho will but read the Paflages, may, yea miuft fee. That, whenever the Jews beard him call himfelf the Son of God, his only begotten Son -, or call God his Father^ in that folemn and peculiar Manner, and with thofe Circum.ftances which he added ; they always, and every where, put the fame Senfe upon it •, and charge him with making himfelf equal with God, &c. and with Blaf phemy, for fo doing. — (2) 'Tis as undeniable, That they put the very fame Senfe upon this 'Title, in this their Charge, before Pilate : Becaufe, 'tis felf evident, l>iat. If they had put our Author's Senfe upon it, or indeed any other Senfe, their
Charge
[ 455 ]
Charge would not have amounted to Blafphemy c For furely, it was not Blafphemy to fay, " that his " Human Soul was created before the Foundation of ** the World," (to pafs the Inconfiftency in theic Words,} " tho* in a very peculiar Manner j" nor to pretend to be the Son of God^ i. e. the Meffiah^ if, by fo doing, he had not, in their Opinion, made himfelf equal ivith God ; no, nor to call himfelf his Son, in any low, or improper Senfe, becaufe others have, without Blafphemy, called themfelves, or been called, his Sons, in all thofe Senfes : And confequently, l^y their Law he ought not to have died. — Need I add. They would then have advanced the moll criminal Charge againft him, which they had any Thing like a Pretext for, l^c. — And- therefore, 3. 'Tis no lefs evident. That he is, really. So the Son of God, as to be, as fuch, eo^ual*with him ; and therefore, a ccef[ential Son ; as will be manifcfl, beyond all fobcr or ferious Contradiftion, from^ thefe Confiderations.
This Title, the Son of God, his only, begotten^ if taken in a ftrid and proper Senfe, naturally, as is. evident, denotes a cocffential Son : — 'Tis undeniable. That the Jezvs ahvays took it in a Jlriff Senfe ; and therefore, always accufed him with making himfelf equal with God : — '1 is vifible to every one, who can but read the PafTages, That he never directly, or. exprefsly, denied the Accufaticn^ tho' he might eafily have done it many Ways : — It can't be doubted. That it was his Diity^ as the Prophet of his Church, either to have exprefs'd himfelf, fo plainly and fully, upon fuch an important Point, that his Followers might not miflake Wm ; or, at lead, to have corrected tb.eir Miflake^ when he perceived they did : — A truly pious Perfon could not have heard fuch an Accufation, had it not been true, without Grief, Horror, Detefcation : — He, who was tneek and lowly, mull have abhorred, I had almoll faid, /«-
finitely
[ 456]
finitely abhorred the Suggefiion^ as mofi: hateful^ and abominable to God\ and, with the utmoft Care, and even Anxiety^ have cleared himfelf of all fuch odious Sufpicions : — Yea, a meer morally honefi Man, had he been no more, muil have protejied againft it, had it not been true, as a falfe, injurious, malicious ' Charge •, and fo exceedingly criminal, as to be indeed Blafphemy ; and that the guilty Wretch well deferved to be put to Death : — He was now upon his Trial, before a Judge who feemed very ready to favour and releafe him, and very willing to put the beft Conftrudlion upon any Defence he could make ; and therefore, in Juftice, and in Pity, to him, he ought, at leaft, to have offered fomething, if not to deny, yet to alleviate the Charge, or, one Way or other, to explain and defend himfelf: » When a Prifoner at the Bar has not the Courage, fo much as to deny the Indi^ment, no Judge, nor Jury, in the World, would think it unjujl, no nor uncharitable, to JindKim. Guilty, a.nd proceed againG: him accordingly •, yea, Silence in fuch a Cafe, has always, and every where, been reckon'd equivalent to a Confejfton, if the Prifoner is indeed compos Mentis : — ■ It our Lord was not, really, fo the Son of God, as to be equal with him. How eafily might he have faid, Tho' I called myfeif, the Son of God, I did not fay, I did not mean, that I was equal with hini j and therefore, I did not blafpheme ', and confequent- ly, ought not to die for what I faid : — He either, as his Son, made himfelf equal with God, or he did not ; If he did, he is indeed equal with him, becaufe our Author confeffes. He is the God of 'Truth \ If |ie did not, Should he, Could he, have left fuch a heinous Imputation on himfelf, without a Reply : — His Life was then at flake, for Blafphemy, a Capital Crime, which juftly expofed to Death ; and therefore, to be fiknt, was, in Effed, to confefs himfelf guilty -, and confequently, to be Sinfully
a('
r 4S7 ]
accejfory to his own Death : &c. &c. — In fine, he who can think, That Chrift would, or could, have been filent^ under an Accufation of Blafphemy^ for making himfelf fo the Son of God, as to be equal with him -, if it was not, indeed, a great 'Truth j may even think, or fay, any Thing of him they pleafe, as, alas ! we fee many of them do, without either Fear^ or Shame.
Well, How did Pilate receive this frefii Charge, as 'tis evident he took it to be ? Why, we are told, he was the more afraid, ver. 8. — He was afraid, it feems, before -, but he was much more fo now. Afraid for what he had done ! afraid to pro- ceed ! afraid to have any Thing more to fay to, or do with him ! — And went again into the Judgment Hall, ver. 9. that, by talking with Chriji, he might inform himfelf farther about this New Accufation^ which he had not heard of before ; — and faith unto Jefus, Whence art Thou? — Not, JVho art thou ? Or, fVhat haft thou done ^ But, Whence art thou .? q. d. What is thy Original, and Generation ? Art thou indeed from Hea^uen ? Art thou, in Fadt, the Son of God, and, as fucb, equal with him, as he per- ceived the Jews meant it ? Or, Art thou fuch a Son of the God of the Jews, as we Romans believe the Sons of our Gods are ? — Whence, 'tis evident, he took this to be a Title of Nature, and not of Office ; as every unprejudiced Man in the World would have done. — And now. How eafy would it have been, for our Lord, to have given us fome Inti- mation of " his pre-exiflent human Soul, and its
*' peculiar Derivation from God ?" What a
proper Opportunity was this, if the Jews had all along miftaken the Meaning of this Title, the Son of God, to have explained it ; and have, for ever, wiped off the Stfiin of Blafphemy from himfelf ; and prevented, forever, his People, from falling into this Error of the Jews -, which, if it be an Error, is fo far fyom being a fmall one, that it is, indeed, N n n Blaf'
[4S8]
Blafphemy ? — Yea, whether we will hear it, or no V on one Side, or the other, there is really Blafphemy •' If the Son, as fuch, is, in Fact, equal with Godt as, we think, we are fure we have demonjiratedy then it is plainly Blafphemy to deny it ; and much more fo, to oppofe it, and wrejl fuch a great Num- ber of Texts to patronife this Oppofition : — And, If the Son is not, as fuch, in Reality, equal with God, i. e. a coejfential Son, 'tis plainly Blafphemy, to fay he is ; or, afcribe that Divinity to him, as fuch, which does not belong to him.
Well, What Reply did our Lord give to Pilate*s
Queftion ? — But Jefus gave him no Anfwer. And
therefore, as we have unanfwerably proved, did, at
leaft, tacitly allow, and, in EfFed:, confefs. That
he was fo the Son of God, as to be equal with him,
i. e. a coeffential Son. — And hence, by the Way,
we may certainly learn the true Meaning, of the
glorious Confeffion of the Centurion, and thofe that were
with him. Mat. xxvii. 54. Truly this was the Son
OF God. — He had, fome Space before, glorified
God, faying. Certainly this was a righteous Man ;
Luke xxiii. 47. but having, with fome others, feen
and obferved more of the Miracles that attended
his Death % and reflected alfo more ferioufly, upon
what they had heard, during his T'i'ial -, and that he
had, (tho' like himfelf, without OJlentation !) really
confeffed, that he made himfelf the Son of God -, they
feared greatly, faying. Truly This was the Son of
God. And, if he was indeed a Righteous Man, he
was truly the Son of God : Becaufe a Righteous Man,
would not have been filent, and fo have, in Effect,
fealed a hie with his Blood.
Hence it was, that I called this Paflage the Seal of all Vv'hich has been faid, upon this Clafs, if not cf all the Proofs we have produced : Becaufe, it confirms, and forever eftabliflies, the coeffential Son- fijip of Chrifl, beyond all that can, poflibly, be foberly replied. — Our Lord died under the Impu- tation
[ 459 J
ialion of Blajphemy^ for making himfelf the Son of God J and, as fuch, equal with him : And therefore, he did adtually make himfelf a coeffential Son, and. this was a great Truth and not Blafphemy. — Or, He was accufed for making himfelf a coequal^ and therefore a coeffential Son -, which, would have been Blafphemy in him, to have done, had he not been indeed io: He did not fo much as deny he had made himfelf fuch a Son : And therefore, we mufl: conclude, he was really what they faid he had made himfelf. — Yea, He did not fo much as honeflly explain his Words, tho' his Honour, Veracity, and Difcretion, &c. yea, his Life was at Stake : And therefore, we may be fure, his Enemies did not miftake the true Meaning of them ; or put any other Senfe upon them, than that which, he intended they Ihould put upon them, v/hen.he ufed them.
From this Text, which, all Things confidered, may be faid fufficiently to explain, and vindicate itfelf, or perhaps that it needs neither, being clear enough without them ; I now, according to my Promife, offer a Demonflration or tv/o, againft all my Antagonifts. I call it a Demonflration, becaufe it is ftri^tly fo ; being well aflured, that every in- telligent and impartial Perfon, will acknowledge it to be lo. And,
I. I argue againft Dr. Ridgley, Dr. Anderfon, and {ill of their Mind -, (as well as the learned lioel, and our worthy Author, fo far as they agree with them ;) who take this Title, the Son of Gody to be a Title of Office and not of Nature j or, in their own Words, fayj That " Chrifl is called the Son of God, *• as Mediator, or the Meffiah, &c.*' p. 53. and all who deny that the fccond Perfon is, as fuch, a Son ;
and confequently. That Chrifl is, in any Senfe, a coeffential Son. • — Againft them all, I fay, we reafon
thus.
N n n 2 If
[ 46° ]
If not only the Jews and "Pilate^ but our Lord himfelf, took that Title, the Son of God, to be, properly and ftridly fpeaking, a Title of Nature and not of Office ; and tbis Title, the Cbrift, to be always a Title of Office and not of Nature ; then is that, ftridly fpeaking, a Title of Nature, and tbis a Title of Office : But they all moft certainly did io : Ergo, They are fo. Q^ E. D. — Or thus,
Thofe Titles which were neither in the Opinion of the Jews, nor of Pilate, nor of Cbrifi himfelf, ilridly fynonymous, were not ftriflly fynonymous : But thefe Titles, tbe Son of God, and the Mediator^ or the Mejfiab, or the Saviour, were neither in the Opinion of the Jews, nor Pilate, nor of Cbriji, ftridly fynonymous, z. e. of the fame precife, but of a very different Signification : Therefore they are not ftridly fynonymous, nor of the fame precife, but of a very different Signification. Q^ E. D.
The Propojition, or the Major as it Is called, is undeniable: Becaufe, Ihould we fuppofe, that the Jews erred through Malice or Prejudice, and Pilate thro' Ignorance, we are fure Our Lord himfelf knew, and could not be miftaken. — The Ajfumption or
Minor, we prove per Partes, in all its Parts.
I. Tis evident. That the Jews, who had falfly accufed our Saviour, for perverting the Nation, and forbidding to give Tribute to Cefar, faying that he himfelf was Chrifl a King \ Luke xxiii. a. and for fiirring up the People, teaching them throughout all Jewry, &c. ver. 5. advanced this. That he made himfelf the Son of God, as a nezv, a frejh Charge ; and believing, that he thereby made Jsimfelf equal with God, 'tis evident, they thought it, by far, his greateft Crime: And therefore, plainly enough hint, That, if the Governor fhould make fo light of his Sedition and Treafon, they had a Law, by which he ought to die, for a yet more heinous TranfgrefTion. ' — 2. 'Tis as evident, that Pilate did not take
thefe
t 46i ]
thtfe Titles, the Chriji, and the Sou of God, to be Ilriftly fynonymous, or of the fame Signification pre- cifely ; but of a very different Signification : And thought that the former was a Title of Office, the latter of iV(^/«r(? •, as he could not but fee the Jews did. — When he examined him about his being a Seditious Perfon, an Enemy and Rival to Cefar, feeing his Accufers could prove nothing, his ^eflions were very natural, Jrt Thou the King of the Jews ? Jo. xviii. 33. What haji thou done ? ver. ^^, Art thou a King then? ver. 37. And fo was this, when they had accufed him with making himjelf the Son of God, Whence art thou ? q. d. Art thou indeed the Son of God, come down from Heaven to fojourn among Men ? &c. — Withal, Had either the Jews, or the Governor, believed that thefe Titles, the Chriji, and the Son of God, were flriftly fynonymous, nothing could have been more fuperfluous, yea ridiculous, than either this new Charge, or Ptlate*s
new ^ejiion. 3. Chrijl himfelf did, by his
Silence, in this Cafe, abfolutely, and forever, con- firm this great Truth, That thefe Titles, the Son of God, and the Chriji, were not ftriftly fynonymous, but that a Title of Nature, and this of Office. — When the high Priefi ajked him of his Difciples, and of his Do^rine, Jo. xviii. 19. he anfwered di- redlly, ver. 20 — 23. When the Govcrnour put the Queflion, Art thou King of the Jews ? ver. 33. he acknowledged it, but like one that was meek and lowly in Heart, as he was. ver. ^7- B'-^t to this. Whence art thou ? Jefus gave him no Anfwer. - — Can any Thing then be more certain, than that thefe Titles, the Chriji, and the Son of God, do not pre- cifcly fignify the fan-^e Thing, but excite in us, or convey to us, very diflind and different Ideas } — And indeed, tho' he could not have been the Meffiah, had he not been the Son of God -, yet he was the Son of God, in the Order of Nature, before
he
E 462 ]
he could be defigned to, and abftrading from all Con- fideration of, his Office.
This Demonftration then I have offered againfi this Notion^ and am fatisfied it can never be evaded, and much lefs confuted. I fhall only add, N. B. This will remain a Demonjiration^ againft Dr. Ridgley^ &c. and their Admirers, even tho* it could be demon- firatedy That the fecond Perfon is not a coejfential Son : Becaufe, it cannot be denied. That neither the Jews^ nor Pilate, nor Chriji himfelf, took thefe two Titles, the Son of God and the Chrifi, to be fynony- mous or to lignify the very fame Thing : And con- fequently. That Chriji is not called the Son of God^ as the Mediator or the Mejfiah. — I therefore hope their Difciples will, forever, freely give up this Nojlrum^ as I verily think themfelves would do, were they now alive.
2. I offer this Deraonjlration againfi feveral other of our learned Author's Notions.
The Jews, when they heard him, in that folemn Manner, and with fo many Circumflances, ftile himfelf the Son of God, his only begotten Son, &c. always, and every where, took him to have meant a coejfential Son ; and therefore, charge him with Blafphemy, for making himfelf equal with God : &c. Our Lord was fo far from ever, clearly, or exprefsly, or indeed any how, denying it •, as he would, and cught, upon many Accounts, to have done, had it not been true •, that he always maintained and de- fended that Senfc, either by infallible Proofs, or Divine Works ; or both : Ergo, He is the coejfential Son of God Q^E. D. — Or thus.
Our Saviour was charged with this, as a capital Crime, upon his I'rial, when his Life was at flake, and when the Glory of God, the Salvation of his People; i^c. ^c. did loudly call upon him to deny it rou .Jly, if it was not indeed true; or explain himfcU clearly, if his Words were miflaken : But he did neither, no not in the leafl j and therefore,
fince
[ 463 ]
fince Silence at the Bar, is allowed by all, to be equivalent to a Confejfwn, he did, in this Manner, confefs. That he was indeed the coejfential Son of God ; yea, and fealed this great and fundamental Truth with his Blood: Ergo. He is indeed his coejfential Son^ and, as fuch, equal with him. Q^E. D, ^-And, in a Word,
Many Things we have heard of this Son, and, as fuch, which neither ever were, nor pofTibly could be, true of his human Soul^ be it as great, and glorious, as poflible : Ergo, His human Soul is not properly the Son of God. — Q^ E. D. In Reality, it neither is, nor in Scripture is ever fo called.
I need proceed no further at prefent, being pretty well afiured. That the Subjlance of what has been faid, can never be confuted. — A clear Caufe pleads, and proves, itfelf. A very indifferent Pleader, with fuch a Caufe, may do pretty well, againft all Op- pofition. — If any fhall attempt a Reply, I affure them, I fhall neither wriggle, nor fhuffle, nor meanly evade, in any Cafe. — My WeaknefTes, Miflakes, Blunders, or Nonfenfe, they may be very free with. Let; them quote my own Words fairly, as I do every Body's : Let them confute me, if they can, with Scripture, or Reafon -, and they fhall find that, through the Grace of God, I fhall not fhut my Eyes againfl the Light. Only let ferious Things be managed fcrioufly, and I am pleafed.
Thus, we hope, through the Bivine AfTiflance, we have proved the Six Propofitions. p. 55.
1. That the fecond Perfon in the Trinity, and as fuch, is often, in Scripture, fliled the Son of God : And therefore, is really fo, in fome Senfe or other.
2. That the fame Dm;/^ Perfon, as fuch, is often called his own, his begotten, his only begotten. Son.
3. That therefore this Title, the Son of God, and efpecially when thefe Mnouns are annexed, is a Title of 'Nature.^ and not of Office. And confequently,
4. That
[ 464 ]
4- That, in all Places where he is fo calledj, it neceflarily does either prefuppofe, imply, or denote^ his Divine 'Nature. Nor can it be otherwife. And therefore,
5. That, as the Son, he is God of God, very God of very God, begotten not made. And,
6. That his pre-exiftent human Soul, Is not, pro- perly, the Son of God. I add, is never fo called.
The Reader, I doubt not, will think it ftrange,^ as well he may. That I have not confidered, and improved, the F<?ri» of Baptifin. Mat. xxviii. 19. — The Reafon is, I intend, // the Lord will, a Dif- fer iation on that noted Text, having feveral Things to illuftrate it, which, for ought I know, are new ; when we fliall not forget to prove, according to Promife, That the coeffential Sonjhip of Chrifl, i. e. of the fecond Perfon made Flejh, is the Rock on which the Church is built-, and therefore. That the Catei Qf Hellfhall never prevail again jt it.
We fhould have, according to the Cuftorn we defign to follow, confidered the Danger of erring, in this Cafe *, and on which fide, the greateft Danger rnoft evidently lies : But, our worthy Author feems to have been well aware of it ; and, in my Opinion, to have faid enough, at prefent, if not too much, upon that Head.
Conclude we then, with the Angels, the living Cj-eatures, and the Elders, to fay and fing. Worthy ;j THE Lamb that was flain, to receive Power, and Riches, and Wifdom, and Strength, and Honour, and Glory, and Blefjing, Rev. v. 11 — 14. which he had never been zvortJyy to receive, had he not been God THE Son. and therefore, a coessenti al Son : And Ble[fmg, and Honour, and Glory,^ and Power, be unto HIM that fitteth upon the 'Throne, and unto the Lamb for ev^ and ever. — Amen, and Amen.
FINIS.
M
4 m ^^ ^ 4. fflf. yk- .^■: ^P .\ .^' --'^ "#■
.t .t ;W' 3 }^ ,^ ;? )^. ■ ,| ;t ;# ;^. 'f :4. f ^. .4. ^^ ,^' ;f ,f >1' ,^f /^ ^- H -*■ *t '^^ ■" ' ' "" '^' '^' 4 ' I' > '4' 'i- '4 !4- i' ^' '-^ '^^' >■ ^ "■ "-*■ '*•
"^ 'i *k n '.'t 1.S *|
;♦',* *
^^i
|
. "' A ^^ ** " |
||||||
|
') A A A :i |
||||||
|
■ ;*• ,t .f .^' ,f .1 .f ^- . |
«• . ' ■'■^' ^'i '.^- "^ '^^ :i^. '^r ^- i<- ]^ |
|||||
|
V |
:^.t.M.tf^,f ;t: |
■V 'i H --^i ':i |
||||
|
.^t.t,^4;f:t.f.t;,.. .. . .., •* J .4 t '^- «■ -^'^ '■*■ "**• *^'-*' '*■ '4^ '<^- -M' " |
'••M ;4 «■ A A '^-j^ |
|||||
|
^ |
.1 i,v"i i'i;i*f ;i'U4'^'^''-'i'H" J f .V '# ;j^' ^' ;4- -ji- 4. \i % '4' 5^' U' 4 ^ 4- J- ,\ \i i- 't ;f 'k- A '4 ^f- •■^' H- ^' H ^- '^ ' ,1 ;4 t:t'^' « '^ '4-* >^'^^ ^.^ -. - '. •■ ^ /i-'^ ^^'4 t'"l '■'i' W '^^ Vi- ^ |
i A y |
||||
|
• ■ |
.'V |
,f |
.'^^ .^' ?i^ ,'f- '^ \ ^ > '^ A *«' '=4- ^' >^^ -^ H' y -^i |
■1 |
A |
j-H'-i ftJi'Mv':! i*. |
|
? |
' tt |
A |
A- |
;'H^H^i"'^ ^ |
||
|
,1 }■ A 'A '-k 'A 4 > !4 '4' M-^ '^^ 4 4 A 'i % |
A |
A |
'AnAA-i':^^ |
|||
|
^hf |
■* |
:^ A ^' -\a ^ a ■« .1^4?^-':'^ ;t;^';i'^f-^ |
'A |
%' |
*-i ,^:'f ,i'i-4 -• |
|
|
f' %■■ i) |
X |
i V |
,1* AA A: A ^■^- A '-^ '^ '^^ ^ •^- H' ' ^ 4 -i H |
|||
|
i 'i 'i * ' jr t |
.1" |
.V '*• -^^ >«■ ,i ^# '4. '^ ^. ',f 'i ii y, 4 ^ A A. |
||||
|
f .♦ |
^?- .f .f -^' ''^' A A A A A >^- ^- ^^ "'^- ^^ -^^ ^i |
■iAs-A k:'i-A A A '■- |
||||
|
'* |
^' i ,^- A- A A i A A- 'i' U' *|: ■;: i 'i ^i 'f t '4= A^ A^ A H' A A A- '^ m '^-s. ^^^ |
'i i''4 AAA^'IaAAAA4 ,. . ^.. - ' i 1 'i ,4' ^^ :4' 'I i U- '4 '4 A A '-^ *t, 4 -,r -t- .
: -^ ? '.'i A'i- i i ^^''i ^'■SiU ^-'■' " ^ -• :^ '; ;
_ .. .: . ^ .f * f ,<• ;^ ;4' ^' 5' 'i .;4' ;,.■,■ '^n ' ■■ ^ ■.: ^ I ,^ -^i- W- 4 t \i '4. v| A 'A n^A' A .. -^ ■. . ., 'i rs '* ,*■ 'I A: 'i- '4 '^f U \i A A A^i^^iii A A '4
■ , . , , rM' 4 ,^ 'i' •» '4 '^ ■ f '4 ;4 J4 :-! u ■ ■
■ A^- kH-A l-^ A A- A A A '4 '4 "^ ■■••'
I .i 'I A 'i A '4 '^ > ■*■ %i 'I "4
' ' * -4 'I \A i V '■■'■■■■-
A A" ■ '
|
4f • 3 |
■i |
a |
||
|
-; ;^: |
4 |
!i- |
ii |
|
|
'4^ |
'^i |
!^- |
*■«■• |
|
|
.'4 |
•n |
4 |
'i(f- |
fi'i |
|
..-.i -« |
;f A |
A |
^■/' |
|
|
^i 'M' |
ii |
■'4 |
'i |
■■•i*- '• |
t H ' \- >■■:
1 ' ■ ' «
'^- ^. ;4 ^ \i ''-4
f .'^ ^' -1* *' .*? .- I "<' 'ii H 4^ A
|
3^ |
|
|
•i |
|
|
•i -i' |