which was and which is to come as for Persons though it be not as to the Letter in Scripture yet 't is virtually first in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equivalent to that of †Heb. 1.3 Person then in the very same word but spoken of * 2 Cor. 1.11 Men where it signifies an Individuum or a Person and though just the very word is not used in Scripture 't is not material because in Divinity not the Word but the Thing not the Sound but the Sense are to be minded And though the word Person be deduc'd from Stages and things not serious yet we ought to look to the Use more than to the Eâ—ymology or Derivation and what if it be taken from things created and very unlike to God So we may say Are all Words purified from their original Imperfefection But for the abuse of a Word or a Thing we must not leave the right use of it When Scripture saith there is One God this Oneness can relate to nothing but to the Being Essence or Nature of God for in this respect God is one so we have reason thereby to represent the Unity of the Godhead there is in Scripture mention of God's Godhead * Rom. 1.20 and of his Nature when they which by nature are no gods †Gal. 4.8 are excluded from being Objects of our Worship So when Scripture reveals there is Father Son and Holy Ghost it makes a distinction between them yet calls every one God have we not cause thereupon to call them Three Persons and affirm that in One Essence or Godhead are Three Persons Do not these Words express the thing without doing it any Wrong or Injury for they are neither profane nor unworthy of God if the Words Essence Unity Trinity be not in so many Letters in Scriptures no more is the Word Sacrament yet though the Name be not in the thing is But herein they are more peevish than their Father Socinus who tells Francis David * Vol. I. p. 778. that though the Terms of Essence and Person be not in Scripture if the Sense be 't is no matter and that they who went upon such Grounds exposed their Cause The Method which the Enemies to this Truth ought to take should be this Whether they own according to the Revelation the Father Son and Holy Ghost to be One God Which if they deny we want no Proofs but if they own it then let them proceed to a Debate whether they are One in Nature and Three in Persons or how the Case is to be stated for it is very unreasonable to dispute about Words and Explication of any thing concerning the Relations or Manner till the thing it self be plainly confessed or denied Now by the Grace of God we must proceed and though I love not a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Dispute about Words yet as Words do signifie Things so some are so fundamental to the matter in hand that something I must say about 'em the first is Essence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he which is what * Exod. 3.14 we call Essence or Nature is not an imaginary thing and existing only in the Mind as in an Idea neither is it a thing separated from the Persons but always inherent in them whereby they subsist so that if there were no Individuum of such a Species there also would be no Essence of that Species as in the case of Human Nature which comprehends a rational Soul and an organical Body then Humanity is that whereby every Man is a Man but this Nature doth not subsist without Men but is so inherent in Men that in case there were no Men there could be no human Nature or Humanity Thus in God the Divine Essence is not a thing Existing without Son Father and Holy Ghost as if it was a fourth thing wherein these Three be contained but as we say in Philosophy of the Soul est tota in toto tota in qualibet parte so divine Nature is whole in the Father whole in the Son and whole in the Holy Ghost and that in an infinitely more excellent way than either Nature or the Soul are in us for they are finitely in Men but infinitely in every Person of the Trinity and exactly and perfectly the same for indeed the Essence of God is nothing else but his Nature namely the Deity or the Godhead God is not divided into divers Essences but distinguished into divers Persons God cannot be divided into several Natures or Parts so the Persons which subsist in that One Essence are only distinct and not separate one from another He who saith a Person of the holy Trinity saith One Essence common to Three Persons Hereupon we must know how in the most Holy Trinity something is common to the Three Persons such is the Essence and something incommunicable and proper to every one in their respective relations We ought further to know how the Words Essence Substance and Nature though in some respect they may admit of some difference yet when spoken of the Godhead they are taken for one and the same Whereunto may be added Deity and God's being there is in Schools of Divinity and Philosophy but one Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be to signifie Essence and Substance and therefore let me speak to some by way of warning that they may multiply Substances no more than Essences for 't is but one and the same thing without running into Tritheism or the Blasphemy of Three Gods neither may they entertain the Notions of Three Minds Beings or Spirits for as there is but One divine Nature and Being and but One God so that same God is but One Spirit Wherefore in these times Men should follow the Christian Prudence and Moderation of the Doctors of the Church in former Ages who were very cautious not to rush into new Notions of their own about these Matters or rashly to run into new fangled Opinions or Hypotheses as they call them or Suppositions of their own when it would be much better for them to follow the Theses of the Text among Attributes of what we call Essence Metaphysicians reckon this to be one that it is to be participatively indivisible because 't is equally imparted to those whose Essence it is for if there was any Addition Diminution or Alteration it would not be the same much more and upon a better account doth this hold about that Divine Nature by the Apostle in the very words attributed unto God 2 Pet. 1.4 In the Godhead there is no Division only Distinction the Essence and Persons not really but rationally distinct for the Essence is whole and indivisible in every Person but the Persons be really distinct one from another by means of some incommunicable Attribute for the Father is not the Son nor the Son the Father nor the Holy Ghost either Father or Son The
within another this made our Saviour say * John 10.38 The father is in me and I in him and †Ch. 14.10 I am in the father and the father in me Yet this hinders not but that they are distinct among themselves for they are not so one in another as the Accident is in its Subject neither is one predicated and spoken of the other as Man is of John for the Father is not the Son nor the Son the Holy Ghost 't is enough they are personally distinguished and in their manner of subsisting the Father unbegotten begets the Son the Son begotten of the Father the Holy Ghost proceeding from both as this is ad intra inwardly and among themselves so outwardly though the outward Works be common to the Three yet it seemed good to divine Wisdom particularly to attribute unto the Father the Work of Creation to the Son that of Redemption to the Holy Ghost that of Sanctification Works of Power in Schools of Divinity are attributed to the Father of Wisdom to the Son of Mercy and Goodness to the Holy Ghost In these Works ad extra as Creation Salvation Sanctification essentially there is but One Cause and Principle for there is but One God but personally there are Three because Three Persons which not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do freely cooperate and as these Persons in subsisting are distinguished in order so also in their working one doth not operate without the other and this Operation follows the Subsistence the Father is and works from none the Son from the Father and the Holy Ghost from both yet this order of working doth take away the Equality of Persons no more than doth their Order of subsisting Now the Acts whereby the Father hath begotten the Son and both produced the Holy Ghost are in several senses voluntary and necessary the first because no Violence or Compulsion but very freely the second 't is not voluntary but necessary if we take Voluntary in opposition to Natural for Voluntary signifies Contingent that which can be or not be but 't is so necessary that the Father could not but beget the Son and both breath the Holy Ghost and this from all eternity otherwise some new thing had befaln divine Nature which is absurd And this Generation and Production are not as in human things where the Father is in time before the Son but here the Son is coeternal with the Father and the Holy Ghost with both not forcibly but necessarily as Light is from the Sun and Heat from the Fire so the Father is no more without the Son and the Holy Ghost than the Sun is without Light God is not without his Wisdom and his Virtue and this from all eternity I mean that called imparticipata or à parte ante and à parte post that is without beginning or ending incommunicable to the Creature and herein indeed doth differ this divine Production from that of the Light of the Sun and Heat of the Fire wherein is a succession and a difference the Light of the Sun to day is sometime different from that of yesterday but the Son is to day the same he was yesterday * Heb. 13 8. Christ the same yesterday and to day and for ever There is also an order among the Three Persons the Father is first as †Matth 28.19 Baptize the nations in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost thus the Father is named first * 1 John 5.7 the Son next then the Holy Ghost In the Creed the Father is also named first the Son the second the Holy Ghost the third the Father of himself the Son of the Father and the Holy Ghost as already said of both yet all Three may be called and are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 self God as we shall by Gods Grace speak of more hereafter Neither doth the divine Nature though subsisting of it self as single and individual make any fourth Person in the Godhead distinct from the Three because it subsisteth in a certain manner and only in the Persons of Father Son and Holy Ghost these Three Persons are not of another or different Nature nor of the like or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under which word the Arians would have shelter'd their Error nor of a common as Men who have a common Essence but not the same in Number but this divine Essence in Three Persons is the very same in number All this is a great Mystery revealed in the Word of God professed by the Church from Christ's time to this though Satan's Rage against the Son of God * 1 John 3.8 who came to destroy his works did from time to time raise up Instruments to blaspheme against it and we ought humbly and devoutly to adore and not presumptuously and profanely dive into it CHAP. IV. Of the most Holy Trinity ALthough the matter about the divine Nature and the Three Persons which we have already spoken of be but one and the same with that of the most adorable Trinity as indeed they in Discourse are Parts one of another and so twisted and connexed together that what we speak of one hath a Relation to and Dependency upon the other yet before we come to the Polemical or Controversial Part of these Points we by the Grace of God shall under the Head of the Blessed Trinity continue to speak of the Didactical or Doctrinal Part of our Discourse the more to inculcate into the Minds of the Readers less acquainted with these Disputes what Grounds they ought to go upon and to believe concerning these Fundamentals of our Faith and necessary Doctrines of our Salvation What we believe about it is above not against Reason for we believe not One God to be many Gods nor Three Persons to be but One Person If in Human Things I should say absolutely I James am Father and Son it were a Contradiction indeed but to speak it relatively there is none at all I cannot say I am Son and Father to my Father or Father and Son to my Son but I may very well say I James one Man am upon a different Account and in a different Relation Son and Father in regard to my Father I am a Son in relation to my Son I am a Father let the great Masters of or pretenders to Reason herein shew me a Contradiction no more can they when I say in the Godhead is one Essence or Nature subsisting in Three Persons and Three Persons existing in One Essence Unity in Trinity and Trinity in Unity This great Point is not only very hard and difficult by reason of the Mystery of the Eternal unspeakable and incomprehensible Generation of the Son of God by the Father but also of a most high Concernment First Upon the Account of God's Glory for to deny this Doctrine is to deny the True God because * 1 John 2.23 whosoever denieth the Son the same hath not the-Father Secondly
there was any difference the words for the first seem stronger than those for the last for to be in the form is more than to be in the likeness because forma dat esse rei a thing hath being from its Form or Nature but he gave sufficient and great demonstration of both Natures in him to those among whom he did converse Socinians would wrest the Text of Luke 1.3 〈◊〉 The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the power of the highest shall over-shadow thee therefore that also which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God They would have the Particle therefore to signifie the Cause wherefore Christ was to be called the Son of God that is that miraculous Conception by the Holy Ghost but no such thing may be deduced 't is not the Cause but the Consequence or Inference which is signified by the words therefore and wherefore by which Particles we usually draw Conclusions from Premises whether they be Causes Effects or Signs or that which upon any other account whatsoever may be deduced therefrom And in this place out of the scope thereof it cannot be demonstrated out of any Circumstances that the Conception by the Holy Ghost is the true cause why Christ was to be called the Son of God 't is not upon the account of that manner of his Conception for then for that same cause either Christ would call himself or be called by others Son of God else the Angel's Prediction should prove false by which reason he rather should not be called than called the Son of God even according to their Principles which deny the Holy Ghost to be true God but the words of the Angel do import not that he should be called once or by some few Son of God but always and generally by all that should own him to be the Son of God Besides this Exposition of theirs they can bring no Example to confirm it for in abundance of places we read Christ to be called Son of God but find none at all wherein he is called Son of God according to the Flesh And the Angel doth not say therefore he may happen to be but absolutely and publickly declareth he shall be called wherefore seeing he no where is called Son of God according to the Flesh we may necessarily conclude he is not such in that sense to be called is sometimes really to be as in that Text * 1. John 3.1 Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us that we should be called the Sons of God that is that we should really be owned and declared to be the Sons of God such as truly we are being adopted in Christ his true natural Son The word holy used gives a strong Evidence that Christ was to be called Son of God for a much better and higher reason than that he was to be born of a Virgin he shall be called Son of God because he is holy therefore not upon the account of the Flesh but by reason of his Holiness because the Holy Ghost coming upon the Virgin some holy thing was to be born of her that makes the Angel say Therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God not as to the manner of Conception but as to the thing to be conceived though by the Angel it be not expressed how great was that Holiness we may well conceive it to be that highest and infinite Holiness as becomes the Son of God wherefore Isaiah in his Prophecy of him calls him as already observed the mighty God Elizabeth calls him Luke 1.43 her Lord the Angel calls him ‖ Chap. 2.11 Saviour Christ the Lord and Daniel * Dan. 9.24 He was anointed the most Holy Before the wise Men fell down and worshipped him which they were sent to do and to that purpose guided by a Star †Mat. 2.2 11. and according to the Prophecies ‖ Psal 72.10 offered him Gifts and Presents as to a King for under that Name his Birth was declared to them and promised therefore the Holiness of Christ is the Holiness of God and of him who is by Nature Lord and King The Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and or also which follows therefore is not in vain but shews a Comparison and is related not to the word called but to be born and the sense is not only that word which from Eternity is born of God is Son of God but that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God because that eternal Son of God shall take human Nature and be born of thee And this is one of the things which the Holy Ghost coming upon the Virgin was to do namely that she should conceive without Man and conceive a Man him who from eternity is according to divine Nature the Son of God which could not otherwise be effected than with the Holy Ghost uniting human Nature which was to be formed out of her own Blood and Substance sanctified before and preserved from Sin and Corruption with the Person of the Son Men must not think there is in Scripture the least tittle or word without cause for the Holy Ghost doth and saith nothing in vain Another reason is the Angel saith Christ shall be called the Son not of the Holy Ghost but of God the Father Now if the manner of this Conception was the cause of his being called Son of God he should properly be the Son of the Holy Ghost not of the Father for he is said to be conceived by the Holy Ghost but they deny the Holy Ghost to be a Person yet actiones sunt suppositorum is a Rule in Philosophy and this Conceiving being an Act the Holy Ghost must be a Person for I defie them to shew any thing to be done but by a Person Scripture in the quoted place Rom. 1.3 the Question being about Christ's being the Son of God excludes the Flesh to attribute it to the Spirit but Socinians would have it according to both yet S. Paul's scope is to teach how he is Son of God according to the Flesh and how according to the Spirit as to the first he explains himself when he saith which was made of the seed of David as to be second he declareth his meaning when he saith he was declared Son of God with power whence we may conclude he saith Christ to be called and really be the Son of God not according to the Flesh but to the Spirit or else he had not sufficiently declared in what sense he is the son of God and 't is clear how he opposes the Flesh to the Spirit according to the first he was made of the Seed of David according to the last he was declared the Son of God Withal Scipture would have such a Son of God as is without Father c. such as Melchisedec no mention being made of his Father Mother or Genealogy
because infinite communicable without being multiplied in many persons To the same purpose they object in another manner God is One therefore cannot be Three so there is none but the Father The Answer is easie and we already have said something to it that which is one cannot be two or three in the same respect it cannot be one and many in the same sense What Christ says John 10.30 I and my Father are one is most true so that One is related to the Nature and I and Father to the Persons so then God is one as to the Nature and three as to the Persons Seeing the Nature or Godhead cannot be multiplied it follows that the Persons and Subsistences only are multiplied They say farther A simple Essence cannot be of three Persons otherwise it will be divided or multiplied But though this be true of finite it is not so of an infinite Essence neither doth it follow that because the Essence is common to three Persons it may be common to more for it were contrary to divine Revelation which only mentioneth one Father one Son and one Holy ghost the Father God the Son God the Holy Ghost God yet not three Gods but only one God Neither doth it follow that because divine Essence is common to three Persons therefore every Person shall be common and because the Persons are not common therefore the Nature must not be This is the cause of their Mistake that they do not mind the distinction of the Person from the Essence for tho they differ not really yet rationally they be distinguished It doth follow to say if the Essence be common to three Persons therefore the Persons are common no more than to say if Abel hath his Nature from Adam and is a Man therefore he hath his Posterity and is a Father from him The things say they that are separately numbered are not one in number and essence but the Father and the Son are separately numbered and are by themselves called one as one God one Mediator one God and Father one Lord wherefore Father and Son are not one only God or one Essence But I say Numeration doth not import a distinction of Essence for in finite things Essences being multiplied they are reckoned individual not in relation to the Essence but to the Persons that which is numbered is one neither is it one without the Essence yet for all that it is not one essentially or by his own Essence separated from any other whatsoever so then when the Father and Son are numbered they are not so essentially but personally also they are the same in number and essence contrary to what is objected whereof one is said to be with the other as the word was with God for in God to be one with another is only an hypostatical or personal distinction for as to be one with another doth import a distinction so the same Evangelist sheweth the Essence of both to be but one and the same when he addeth the word was God Furthermore they argue thus The Father and the Son are really distinguished for the Father is absolutely God that is the divine Essence for say they the words Father and God are synonimous or the same because the word God is explained by the word Father 1 Thes 1.3 therefore the Essence of the Son is distinct from that of the Father Our Answer is Tho' the Persons of the Father and of the Son be really distinct it doth not follow that their Essences are so as if the Essence of one was not that of another seeing the names of Father and Son are relatives which indeed signifie different Persons in the same Nature but rationally distinguished from the same If Father and Essence be synonimous what remaineth for the Son besides a shadow of the Deity For as the Paternity and Innascibility or not being begotten which are proper only to the Father are incommunicable that Essence if it be the same thing as is the Father cannot be communicated unto the Son It doth not follow neither that the Names God and Father are the same because the first is sometimes used for the last seeing it is attributed unto the Father in his Person to constitute the Deity by reason of the Spring and in the comparison and order of Persons and not because the Person of the Father is in no wise distinguished from the divine Essence Paul doth congratulate with the Thessalonians for their Work of Faith Labour of Love and Patience of Hope and because their Hope was in the Coming of the Lord Jesus these three he referreth in God whom he calls Father because he already had made mention of the Mediator But if the Names God and Father be the same by reason that Paul had to the word God joyned Father by way of explication Tit. 2.13 2 Pet. 1.2 then the Names Great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ are also the same because two Apostles explain the name of Christ by that of God our Saviour Besides the Argument is faulty for it hath four terms to the end that both Propositions be true in the major the Person of the Father in the minor his Essence are to be understood To this Argument answereth another The eternal Father is not the Son whom John calls the Word but the Essence of the Divinity or that one God of Israel is the eternal Father of the only begotten Son therefore the Essence or the God of Israel is not the Son called the Word The major is false for to have it true the sence ought to be this That Essence or that God which is the Father is not the Son that is the Person of the Father is not the Person of the Son This farther they say The Essence and one God are convertible but according to us in the Unity of God there is Trinity therefore in the Essence there is also Trinity But we say God who is one in Nature is three in Persons so in that onely Essence there is a Trinity that is wholly and indivisibly subsisteth in three Persons there are not three Essences The minor Proposition must be understood of a Trinity of Persons and not of Essences I observed before how they quarrel much with several expressions used in this matter as Trinity Essence Person c. which are neither prophane nor unworthy of God seeing in Scripture there are words which answer to them Rom. 1.20 Col. 2.9 Phil. 2.6 2 Pet. 1.4 as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both signifying Godhead and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Form of God and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divine Nature Also the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in Latin is translated sometimes Substance sometimes Essence sheweth the quiddity or nature of the thing As for the word Person Clastical Authors as well as Divines in this holy Mystery take it for a rational Subsistence or Father Son and Holy Ghost however out of these they
of his Father's Person 'T is in vain that they cavil out of God's words Let us make man in our image and after our likeness for the Question is about Generation and not of Creation God made man that is created him as in that place of Genesis explained in the following Verse but 't is never said that God made but begat his Son as of Adam not that he made but begat Seth in his own likeness after his Image Thus the Son of God is truly and really begotten of the very Substance of the Father and this by Immanence and Communication Heathens feigned a Minerva the Goddess of Wisdom and Prudence to be born ex Jovis cerebro out of Jupiter's Head and Brain a dark Notion of this high Mystery as was their cara deûm soboles magnum Jovis incrementum as expressed by the Poet. The Lord Jesus is called not only * Heb. 1.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the express Image but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Brightness of the Glory of God by a Metaphor taken from the Sun Beams which if the Sun was eternal would be eternal too wherefore in the Nicene Creed is well called God of God Light of Light so not only like but also †Phil. 2.6 equal with God This eternal Generation to be look'd upon with the Eyes of Faith more than of human Reason is first not transient but immanent secondly terminated if we may use the word not in an absolute Existence but in the Subsistence or manner of subsisting for the Essence neither begetteth nor is begotten neither through this Generation is God absolutely constituted but the Son is relatively Thirdly It is eternal without any difference of time so that the Son may not be said begotten and not begotten existent and not existent but always begotten Fourthly The Begetter and begotten are always the same in Nature and in Time or rather Eternity Fifthly Through that same Generation the same Divine Nature is communicated to the Son not in Species but in Number not in part but wholly not to be or exist but to subsist in such a manner Sixthly The same is natural and so simply not voluntary nor involuntary that is necessary but not forced But as to the main thing 't is enough to know that Christ was before he manifested himself in the Flesh for therein he appears to be eternal which Eternity of his we shall have occasion to prove In the Scripture none but the Lord Jesus is in the singular number called God's Son Abraham is called his Friend Moses his Servant and in the Parable of the Vineyard and the Husbandmen * Luk. 20.9 10 c. to whom God under the name of the Lord of the Vineyard sent his Servants whom they beat and wounded then said he I will send my beloved son it may be they will reverence him when they see him but they said this is the heir let us kill him that the inheritance may be ours I say in that Parable where the Lord Jesus spoke of himself and against them as they perceiv'd it v. 19. we may observe what a vast difference he makes between himself and all that came before him who were all but Servants but he gives himself the Character of God's beloved Son whom they ought to have reverenced when they saw him who was the Heir of all things by his Nature and not by any Privilege of Dignity by Favour bestowed upon him as upon Men and Angels * Heb. 1.4 5. Being made so much better than Angels as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they what this Name is is expressed in the next Verse For unto which of the Angels said he at any time thou art my son this day have I begotten thee c. We see the difference of the Sonship a Son not created nor adopted but begotten for that Name comes to him by inheritance as in the Text that is by his own natural Right and Property and not by Grace Then the Lord Jesus is Gods natural Son because called his own and proper Son †Rom. 8.3.32 every one knoweth how those Sons that are naturally begotten by their Parents are called their own Sons and on the contrary those that are not so are not proper Sons but Strangers so that proper and Strangers are so called and distinguished according to Nature only therefore seeing Scripture doth not indifferently call Christ Son but God's own Son thus by this special Attribute distinguishing him from all others it means natural Son and of the same Essence the more because he calls God * John 5.18 his own Father for which cause the Jews would have stoll'd him for they well understood as express'd in the Text how thereby he made himself equal with God thus he is called God's own Son in opposition to adopted Sons one may adopt another to be his Son but can never make him his own natural Son begotten of his Substance and as Christ is God's own Son so is God his own Father then from Eternity or else there had been in time a new relation in God which had not always been that might be called a kind of an Accident so contrary to the simplicity of his Nature and according to this God had within these 1700 Years been made that which he was not before namely Father of his own Son whereby Changeableness is father'd upon him and his Immutability that is an incommunicable Attribute thereby overturned Now in the same Chapter the Apostle to express own Son makes use of another word which fully and clearly doth decide the Question which is Whether the Lord Jesus be properly God's Son for if he be properly so then all improper Applications are out of doors Now the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used by S. Paul * Rom. 8.32 signifies proper so if the Lord Jesus be God's proper Son we must properly understand and believe him to be such although our shallow Brain can neither conceive in its Thoughts nor express in Words the incomprehensible and unexpressible manner of that Generation which is wonderful †Isai 9.6 as his name is yet we must believe it because God in his word hath declared it to be so The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proper they mis-interpret and do render by special or peculiar as if Christ was God's Son only in a special manner above others but none can be call'd proper Son to any one except he be begotten of his Blood and Substance which being not he may not be called such a one's proper Son Thus they would confound proper and peculiar which two words are very different for one may be a proper Son who hath nothing peculiar above the rest of his natural Brethren for when a Father hath many all are his proper and own Sons begotten of his Substance yet no one may happen to have any thing particular above the rest likewise one may happen upon a special
different things thô pertaining to one and the same Subject or else every Lord were a God thus a Husband were a God unto his Wife because Sarah called Abraham her Lord the Lord of the unfaithful Servant were his God because he calls him his Lord the Lord of the Vineyard were the God of the Vineyard because called it's Lord and many more such Instances And I shall illustrate the thing by a trivial Saying among us A Servant may say his Master is Lord but not God at home The Text that saith * 1 John 2.22 23. Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ He is Antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son whosoever denieth the Son the same hath not the Father these words do import how he that denyeth Jesus to be the Christ doth thereby deny the Son not that Christ and the Son do formally signifie the same in themselves but because to be Christ and Son of God do meet in one Person so that none but the Son of God is Christ and Redeemer of the World Withall after this Socinian way of arguing it would follow in this Text that the Names Christ Father and Son do signifie the same for here the Apostle offereth two Propositions the first He is a Lyar that denyeth Jesus to be the Christ the last He is Antichrist that denyeth the Father and the Son The Adversaries make them both equivalent for in both is the same Object of denyal whence they infer that Christ and the Son are of the same signification but according to this Kule it may be concluded that Christ the Father and the Son signifie the same because in the first Proposition Christ is the Object of the denyal and in the last the Father and Son together Any one may see the Absurdity of such Consequences But because Christ to prove himself to be the Son of God speaks to the Jews about his Sanctification by the Father which Sanctification is the anointing spoken of by Peter †Acts 10.38 wherefore they would have that to be the cause of his being Son of God but if there was no other reason of that divine Filiation but the Sanctification and Anointing then the cause by the Angel given in ‖ Luke 1.35 Scripture were false So then Christ is called the Son of God not only upon the account of his extraordinary Birth and of his kingly Office as Socinus saith but for being of the same Nature and Essence with the Father which that Text of John 10. is not against for in that place our Saviour doth not give in the cause why he is Son of God but only goes about to refute the Slander of Blasphemy by the Jews cast upon him not by an Argument à pari taken from equal things but from the lesser to the greater He had said v. 30. I and my Father are one thereby expresly asserting his Consubstantiality and Oneness of Nature with the Father whereupon they took Stones to stone him because of that pretended Blasphemy in that he being man made himself God which Objection he answereth with an Instance from less to greater Thus if those are without Blasphemy called Gods who exercise a divine Office in their ruling and judging of Men much more and upon a better account may Christ the Messiab from eternity begotten by the Father and in time sent down from Heaven into the World be called God wherefore there is no Blasphemy nor have ye any just cause of stoning me because I said I am the Son of God one with the Father The Name Son of God relates to the eternal Generation by and Consubstantiality with the Father therefore not a Name of Office but of Nature and Person and the Names Christ and Son agree as to the material in one Person but not in the formal the Name Son is by reason of an eternal Generation and that of Christ upon the account of a temporal Anointing to an Office In the mean while we retain the proper and literal Sense of the word and not the metaphorical till we see cause to the contrary And this we leave for them to prove how because Magistrates by reason of their Office are called Children of the most high therefore not because of an eternal Generation and Coessentiality with the Father but for his Royal Dignity the Lord Jesus is called Son of God To be short we have other Texts to prove how the Name God's Son signifieth some essential thing in Christ as that heretofore quoted Christ was made of the seed of David according to the Flesh c. the Flesh signifies his Humanity as doth Declared the son of God according to the spirit of holiness his Divinity for we see * Dan. 9.24 To anoint the most holy doth denote by the most holy his divine Person and by to anoint his Office of Mediatour So we have that of the Angel to the Virgin The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the power of the highest shall overshadow thee therefore also that holy thing that shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God The Angel's meaning is that in Christ's Conception the Power of God was necessary to the end he that was to be born might be called Son of God but if that Name had related only to the Office and he that was to be invested with it had been a meer Man no need of that Power of the Spirit in the Conception now the Angel calls holy that which it Essential in Christ he was holy before he should be born and that essential holy thing is called the Son of God The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not that Man that was to be born not holy in the Concret but holy in the Abstract Withall seeing in Baptism the word Son doth not in Christ signifie his Office but his Nature for the Names Father and Holy Ghost do not denote any Office but Persons so in Christ it signifies his divine Nature not his Office All this may also be proved out of other Texts as this †John 3.16 God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son c. compared with ‖ Rom. 8.32 He that spared not his own Son but delivered him up for us all wherein God's Love towards the World and us is so highly comended which if it were only an Office laid upon Christ would come very short of that inflnite Love of God which as Paul saith * Ephes 3.19 18. Passeth knowledg and gives it the four Dimensions bredth length depth and height But to say that God spared not his own beloved and only begotten Son but deliver'd him to death this is Love indeed The same we may learn out of this Heb. 5.8 that though he were a Son yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered What Man is he that would sacrifice his Son to the Safety and Preservation of his Enemies Yet God hath done it
is here said to reign The Lord God Almighty but to reign belong to Kings and if we go back to v. 15. this we shall find The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ who is called * Ch. 19.16 Vers 6. King of Kings and Lord of Lords and if we go back to v. 6. we may hear Alleluia the reason is for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth and in another place we read of the song of the lamb which I suppose no Man doubts to be the Lord Jesus and what is the Song Great and marvellous are thy works Lord God Almighty He is the Almighty God and certainly we have as many Evidences of his Omnipotency as there be Miracles wrought by him And if God the Father be Almighty as they will not deny him to be the Son must also be Almighty †John 5.19 for whatsoever things the father doth these also doth the son likewise Unchangeableness belongs to the true essential God Christ's Immutability but thou art the same saith the Psalmist 102.27 and Christ is unchangeable in his Words and Promises ‖ Matt. 24 35. Heaven and earth pass away but my words shall not pass away for * 2 Cor. 1.20 All the promises of God in him are yea and in him Amen and †Rev. 19.11 He is called faithful and true Other Names and Attributes there are in Scripture which though not incommunicable yet are so eminently spoken of the Divinity that they are almost equivalent to it so that they be fixed in God as their Spring and in the Creature but detivatively and as it were a small Drop in comparison with the vast Ocean and these being attributed unto Christ by way of Excellency do not only illustrate but also prove his Divinity I shall speak but few words about them the first is the highest which indeed I find in Scripture never to be spoken of Men in the superlative degree This is spoken of Christ in the place where it is said * Gen. 14.18 19 20. Melchizedec was the Priest of the most high God equivalent to the word highest and in the two following Verses 't is repeated so that no less than thrice the Name most high is set down which I conceive to be not without cause and may be in relation to the most holy and blessed Trinity Well this Name is attributed unto the Lord Jesus as what Zacharias said of his Son John †Luke 1.76 And thou child shalt be called the Prophet of the highest for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways So the Attribute is given to the Person therein spoken of which no Man may question to be the Lord Jesus This was given him by the Multitude and approved by him upon his entrance into Jerusaâ—em for they cryed saying * Mat. 21.9 Hosanna to the son of David Hosanna in the highest and though as I said this be simply proper to God and †1 Tim. 6.15 belonging only to him yet being joyned with the Name of God is attributed unto Christ ‖ Acts 16. These men are the servants of the most high God which shew unto us the way of salvation Servant of Christ is a Title which Paul doth usually take upon him Who this Most High God is we read in the next Verse Jesus Christ in whose Name he commanded the Spirit to go out which he did the same hour The word the blessed with an Article doth as I have had occasion to shew signifie the same as God and 't is said of the Son of God *âŽ* Psal 72 17. All nations shall call him blessed and the Multitude in the fore-quoted place called him so blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord and in that noted place the Apostle joyneth both blessed and God and gives him * Rom. 9.5 who is over all God blessed for ever Paul saith not Let him be in a way of Wish and Desire nor he shall be as if then the thing was not but only to come but he saith He is God blessed for ever thereby meaning his Being and Nature In Scripture †Isai 14. Psal 71.23 the Name of holy one is given to the only true God whom Israel doth worship This also is spoken of Christ ‖ Psal 16.10 Thou wilt not suffer thine holy one to see corruption and Peter *âŽ* Acts 2.27 and 3.14 doth certainly declare those words to have been spoken of Christ The Angel said to Mary * Luke 1.35 Therefore also that holy thing or holy one for it was a Person which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God before he was born Holiness was his Attribute and 't is †Rom. 1.4 according to the spirit of holiness that he was declared to be Son of God with power he not only is holy but also Holiness it self in the abstract To him sitting upon a Throne the Seraphims ‖ Isai 6.1 2 3. cryed Holy holy holy is the Lord of hosts the whole earth is full of his glory which is by John â‚ Joh. 12.41 applyed unto Christ These things said Esaias when he saw his glory and spake of him and * Rev. 4.8 The four beasts â—est not day and night saying holy holy holy Lord God Almighty which was and is and is to come which last is in S. John's stile a Description of the first these words spoken to him who sits upon the Throne and I hope none will deny Christ is sitting upon the Throne as absolutely expressed in several places of this Book So Daniel ‖ Dan. 9.24 called him The most holy Other Names and Titles Scripture doth appropriate unto Christ which are all strong Demonstrations of what he is namely the natural Son of God which I only shall name for indeed it would be almost an endless Work to insist upon all Testimonies of Scripture upon the matter He is then King of Kings and Lord of Lords Rev. 17.14 and 19.16 King and Lord of glory Psal 24.7 10. compared with 1 Cor. 2.8 Lord of David Psal 110. with Matth. 22.44 where 't is observable how the same Name given to the Lord spoken â—f is also given to the Lord spoken to as equally belonging to both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in this sense he is in several places of Scripture called one Lord 1 Cor. 8.6 and Lord of all Acts 10.36 because all things were made by him John 1.3 So the Lord and Saviour because there is no Salvation in any other Acts 4.12 Let special notice be taken of Psal 68. where speaking of Christ according to Paul's interpretation Ephes 4.8 he among other high and great Names is called the Lord God the God of our salvation and such more which certainly do belong only to the true essential God In Scripture the Names of Lord God King absolutely taken or with the distinction
so called As for us we own but one God and one Lord whom he gives proper attributes unto the one God is the Father of whom are all things and we in him the one Lord is Jesus Christ by whom are all things and we by him for as all things are of him of whom all things are made so all things are by him by whom they are made so then as all things are by Christ he must be before all not only in dignity but also in time Out of this Text we learn first that as there being but one Lord even Jesus Christ doth not exclude God the Father from being Lord so there being but one God even the 〈◊〉 doth not exclude the Lord Jesus from being God also and the Apostle not only affirms that it is so but withall he sheweth how it is by means of the prepositions of and by here used all things are of God the Father by the Lord Jesus Christ all things have the same Principle and Cause but somewhat in a different manner all things are of the Father but by the Son which in the work of making all things sheweth a sort of distribution thereof in the way of it and such a kind of subordination if I may so call it between the two persons as if neither of them was precisely the adequate cause of all things but the person of one God by the person of one Lord and the person of one Lord of the person of one God for if all the same things were not of one God by one Lord but some of one God others of one Lord then the strength of the words of and by with the Order and Coherence between one Lord and one God would fall and so the assertion of one God would be false because there would be two equally first and immediate principles of all things than which nothing can be more contrary to Scripture and reason for the one God is he who is the Supreme Cause not of somethings only but of all and the one Lord is he by whom not only some but all things were and what all these things are it doth appear out of all the Texts I upon this point have made use of being compared together which can make the thing plain enough to any unbiassed and unprejudiced man If here Christ be excluded from being God by the same reason shall the Father be excluded from being Lord. But it seems nothing in the world can stop the boundless impiety of men who with their restrictions will as far as they can confine the Spirit of God within their own Sence for upon the Text they say by all things we are to understand only those which belong to the Church of Christ and to Christianity as such which is a meer invention of Socinus's Brain and not of Christ or of his Apostles However rather than to be mute something he will say that the word all can have no relation to those things that were before him that is before he was born of the Virgin wherein he goes upon his wrong principle as if he was not at all before he was born of Mary for though we own that according to the flesh Christ was not properly before he was born of her yet according to the Spirit he was as accordingly hath been sufficiently demonstrated and as to that Spiritual and Divine Being of his all things were made by him and he was Lord over all But this Dominion of Christ he is endeavouring to reduce not only within the time of our Saviour's being born of the Virgin but also within that of his Resurrection But therein he makes a confusion between Christ's purchased and his natural Dominions which ought well to be distinguished the first was indeed after his death and resurrection grounded upon our redemption as formerly the special Right and Dominion of God over the people of Israel was entailed upon his having delivered them out of the Egyptian bondage but tho he had not delivered them yet still he had been their Lord upon another and more ancient account thus before Christ redeemed us by his death he had a natural Dominion over all things he was our Lord because we were the work of his hands before he was our Lord by a special purchase for before he humbled himself and took upon him the form of a Servant he was in the form of God Son of and equal with God 't is said indeed Rom. 14.9 that Christ both died and rose that he might be Lord both of the dead and living because there the question is about his acquired Dominion but in this place both are spoken of for Christ is opposed unto Idols upon the account of both his Dominions of which both the ground is contained in the words by whom are all things and all things are said to be by him not because he is Lord but rather he is Lord because all things are by him He is Lord of all Acts 10.36 The Apostle saith absolutely and without restriction of whom and by whom are all things yet they would have it reduced only to Christians as such Because 't is said to us but 't is not said of whom or by whom we have all things or all things are ours but barely and generally of whom and by whom are all things without any particular relation to Christians but this would follow that if according to the several relations we stand in we should have some things of one and others of another namely such as creatures such as men and such as Christians we would divide the supreme cause so that there should not be only one but many thus not only one God and one Lord but many quite contrary to what the Apostle saith Besides that if such a restriction be put upon the words one Lord by whom are all things the same must be layed upon the former one God of whom are all things whereby they shall presume upon the Father as well as upon the Son for there is the same reason for both so that both ought either generally or particularly to be taken which how presumptuous an attempt this is let any impartial man judge Not only the work of Creation but also that of divine Providence that is preservation and governing of the world is attributed unto Christ Colos 1 1◠this is of two kinds Ordinary and Miraculous the first spoken of when 't is said and by him all things consist for in the foregoing verse having said by him were all things created in this he addeth by him all things consist for he not only created but also preserveth all things and as 't is said else where all things are upheld by the word of his power Heb 1.3 in which place as in the foregoing is shewed how he who made the world doth also preserve the same the two go together and be inseparable and in the preservation of this world and works of Nature by him created
was really in Heaven before he came down upon Earth and as he really and actually ascended up into it so he really and actually descended from thence upon Earth here are two terms a quo and ad quem as he could not go up to Heaven but from the Earth so he could not come down upon the Earth but from Heaven and is there the least ground in the whole Chapter to think Christ's intention was to entertain them with his having been in Heaven in Idea and Meditation when his design was to shew how what he had said of being the Author of Resurrection and Life and the manner of it by means of eating his flesh was a thing not to give them offence nor impossible Considering what he was originally from Heaven therefore not to be considered as a meer man but such a one as was far more divine and powerfull than any man They finding this will not do yet to dispute the ground as long as they can they forged in a Dream for otherwise it cannot be a very strange adventure that Christ was in Heaven before he was upon Earth seemeth undeniable therefore because they dare not give him the lye they would mince the matter thus how Christ between his Birth and Death and before he preached went up into Heaven where for a while he remained to be better instructed by the Father in the things which he was to teach mankind after which he came down again but there is not the least ground but only fancy for it The Evangelists do give us an account of most passages of Christ's Life and how could they all four have forgotten this which is one of the most important that might have befallen him in that kind The Evangelists Matthew and Luke in their four first Chapters relate many things belonging to that time as not only his birth but also his Circumcision on the eighth day and his being carryed to the Temple to be presented to the Lord received by Simeon spoken of by Anna a Prophetess adored by the Wise Men carryed into Egypt his return to Nazareth his being found in the Temple sitting in the midst of the Doctors asking them questions his being subject to Joseph and Mary baptized of John tempted in the Wilderness c. and not one word about this pretended ascension How came it that he was not missed by any This they would to have been in imitation of Moses whom God called up to the Mount That it was so with Moses we read in the word but nothing like it of our Saviour And when God is silent our mouth should be stopped and nothing allowed to fancy or imagination besides when Moses was called up the people had publick notice given them of it and by God's command he took Aaron's Sons and Seventy of the Elders all the people saw the glory of God upon the Mount and when Moses came back all Israel saw him with his face shining none of which things can be said of this pretended Ascension of christ's whereof there are no witnesses not so much as any of his Disciples as he had in his Trassiguration which three Evangelists give an exact account of Which though important yet not so considerable as this which could not be performed without a great Miracle whether he had been carryed up only in Soul for then his Soul had been separated from the Body so death must have followed or whether in Body and Soul the Body could not have been sustain'd in the Air without a Miracle And during that time where were his Disciples This certainly should have made a great Gap in the History of his Life which we cannot perceive in any of the Evangelists no nor in those that have written his Life from his Birth to his Death Resurrection and Ascension St. Luke saith of the Gospel he had written how he had made a Treatise of all that Jesus begun both to do and to teach Yet not a word of this Acts 1.1 as indeed there was no necessity for Christ to go up to Know as they say his Father's Will which might have been communicated unto him as to Moses John Baptist without going up to Heaven in case he had not known it but he knew it before At his Baptism the Heavens were opened unto him the Father had highly owned him the Holy Ghost was descended upon him so that he return'd from Jordan full of the Holy Ghost Luke 4.1 wherefore there was no need of his going and so the Cause ceasing so must the Effect so that also it had been preposterous after what happen'd in his Baptism for him to have gone up into Heaven upon such an Errand Besides that we are assured he enter'd but once into the holy place Heb. 9.12 Hereby we see how if we were willing to take it that sort of Men would be ready to put upon us every Suggestion of theirs for an Argument every Argument for a Law yea and every Dream for a Revelation Tho' our Saviour here calls himself Son of Man and not Son of God it doth not in the least prejudice what we say for if he had call'd himself Son of God it had been a begging of the Question for they would not own him to be such And this sheweth the better the Oneness of the Person when there is a Communication of the Idioms when in the Person that which is proper to one Nature is spoken of the other Christ according to the Flesh was never in Heaven before his Ascension but according to the Spirit that is his Divine Nature he was Here our blessed Saviour calling himself Son of Man may allude to with intent to make Men take notice of what is spoken of himself by the Prophet Dan. 7.13 14. I saw in the night Visions and behold one like the Son of Man came with the Clouds of Heaven and came to the ancient of days and they brought him near before him And there was given him dominion and glory and a kingdom that all people nations and languages should serve him his dominion is an everlasting dominion c. This is an exact Prophecy of his Ascension One thing more they have to say and 't is the Example of Paul's having been caught up to the third Heaven but must it from what hath happen'd to Paul 2 Cor. 12.2 follow that the same must needs have befaln the Lord Jesus That indeed we read of Paul therefore we ought to believe but of Christ we read no such thing Yet for all that we never read that either Paul was from Heaven or came down as we read it of Christ very often Paul speaks of that with the greatest modesty in the World for fear he should seem to exalt himself but our Lord without any ambiguity or fear that Men would think he takes too much upon himself doth speak loud highly declares and often proclaims himself to be the Son of God equal with him sent by the
The Blasphemous Socinian HERESIE Disproved and Confuted WHEREIN The Doctrinal and Controversial Parts of those Points are handled and the Adversaries Scripture and School-Arguments answered WITH Animadversions upon a late Book called Christianity not Mysterious Humbly Dedicated to Both Houses of PARLIAMENT By J. GAILHARD Gent. And many other things blasphemously spake they against him Luke 22.65 And we know that the son of God is come and hath given us understanding that we may know him that is true and we are in him that is true even in his Son Jesus Christ this is the true God and eternal life 1 John 5.20 Textus non fallit multos speciosa fefellit Glossa Dei verbo nitere tutus eris LONDON Printed for R. Wellington at the Lute in S. Paul's Church-Yard and J. Hartley over against Grays-Inn-Gate in Holborn 1697. TO THE Lords and Commons NOW IN PARLIAMENT Assembled Right Honourable and Honourable AT this time God's Providence hath brought you together to consult about the great Concerns of the Nation and the Matter I now do most humbly offer to your serious Consideration is one of if not the most important that can be laid before you for it doth conduce to the Glory of God the Peace of the Church as by Law established the Asserting and Defence of its Doctrine and to the Welfare of the Kingdom Though I presume to appear upon so high a Stage and draw upon me the Eyes of as August and upon every account as famous an Assembly as any in the World Yet the Subject I go upon holding so near a Proportion with the Station and Dignity wherein God hath placed you will I hope secure me from being aspersed with Rashness and Vain-glory or accounted a Busie-Body I offer you a Field of Honour and an occasion of exercising your Piety towards God Love to Truth your Justice and Wisdom with putting a stop to and a Curb upon a boundless and blasphemous Impiety which seems openly to defie Heaven and Earth Psal 111.3 'T is God's Work which as David saith is honourable and glorious 't is good necessary and great but Time is short and uncertain therefore must be well improved for the Opportunity may happen to be lost never to be recover'd so 't is wished the thing be done whilst it may and before it be too late to time things well is one of the best parts of Prudence and one of the most Essential Circumstances of our Actions Among the several Seasons and Times mention'd by Solomon we read of two Eccles 3.7 a time to keep silence which I look upon to be over and a time to speak which I take now to be fully come There ought to be a proportion between the Distemper and the Remedy thus extream Distempers require extream Remedies and an extraordinary Necessity doth vindicate an extraordinary Method in the Use thereof When the Watchman whose immediate Duty is to give warning doth through Sluggishness or other Cause at the approach of the Enemy neglect to blow the Trumpet then every one concern'd in the Community hath right to do 't for the Preservation of the whole That Passage of Craesus's dumb Son who one day perceiving how some went about to kill his Father was so much stirred as to cry out Murther though trivial may well be admitted upon the present occasion for no true Christian having before his Eyes the near and great Danger which our holy Religion lies under upon the account of some damnable Heresies now more than ever brought in again but must be moved and cry out against it But what do I talk of danger when the evil it self the Philistins are upon us The Enemy is not only at the Gates but in the very body of the place and in the Bowels of the Church and to speak in Moses's words Num. 16.46 There is wrath gone out from the Lord the plague is begun for blasphemous Socinianism attended by Atheism Deism Prophaneness Immorality yea and Idolatry c. doth bare and brazen-faced walk in our Streets as much as in it lyeth to deprive us of our blessed Lord and Saviour so it strikes at no less than the Head and Author of our Salvation And men are puffed up and have not rather mourned 1 Cor. 5.2 that they that do this deed might be taken away from among us To what purpose is Popery or Idolatry expelled if Socinianism or Blasphemy be let in But I am not so hasty as to affirm Popish Idolatry to be turned out for we know too much of the contrary witness those Swarms of Priests which are in and about the City and the many places where I shall not say in private for 't is publick enough the Wafer-Idol-Worship is performed against the Laws of God and of the Land which some that should do not mind nor care for whereupon we have much cause to renew the Apostle's Complaint All seek their own Phil. 2.21 not the things that are Jesus Christs And in the Country almost every Popish Family of any note hath a Priest when able to keep it all this for want of due care to see Laws against them put in execution Upon this account a thing there is which doth so much lie in my way as that I cannot avoid taking notice of it and indeed the thing is so publick that many have and do daily with a kind of Indignation wonder at it As in this World nothing is free from God's Jurisdiction so when we have an occasion to speak of his Cause nothing hath Immunity or Privilege to plead for Here we have an Ambassadour who for himself and Family hath a private Chappel in his own House and a publick one in a Street not far from it for any one that hath a mind to come to it We know it to be a Privilege as good as grounded upon the Right of Nations for every foreign Minister to have within his doors the free Exercise of his Religion for his Person and Houshold but a Plurality hath no ground to plead for Here it hath been unknown and unheard of since the Reformation that any foreign Minister was at any time allow'd two Chappels In the supernumerary one I and many more besides to whom it is an Eye-sore have on Mass days seen and still can see Three or Four Hundred People going in and out not the Ambassador or his Family if you except the Priest and his Clerk with may be some inferiour Servants but generally all English and perhaps some few Irish and others We may well remember how under a Reign which never was commended for Piety I mean of Charles II. when the Parliament complained and the People grumbled about the growth of Popery that Prince not only said Gentlemen offer what you think fit for the Security of your Religion and Liberty and I will give my Consent to 't but withal he sent to all foreign Ministers to desire them to receive none of his Subjects within
of the Godhead The Blasphemer was by God's immediate Command stoned to death by the whole Congregation Levit. 24.24 because as the Sin and Scandal were publick so was the Punishment to be and here the Law alloweth the Ecclesiastical Courts to proceed against Offenders in the Capital Cases of Heresy and Blasphemy Capital I call them for if in human Things Treason and Rebellion be so then fundamental Heresy and Blasphemy are such in those of a Divine Nature * Sir Tho. Ridley's View of the Civil and Ecclesiastical Laws p. 59. see the Margin against such is provided Sentence of Death which here hath actually been executed upon some thus one Bartholomew Legat for these Arian and Socinian Blasphemies was on the 18th of March in 1611. burnt in Smithfield and in the following Month of April Edward Wightman was for the same burnt at Litchfield Queen Elizabeth having heard of some of them in her time said She was grieved to hear she had such Monsters in her Kingdoms If Bishop Hall was now alive how much more cause would he have had to say Irem Sect. 23. hoc avo c. In this Age the Souls of Christians are seduced not only by Papists Anabaptists Antinomians and Pelagians sed per infernalem Socinianorum haeresim but by means of the hellish Heresy of Socinians Anti trinitarians New Arians we have cause here in England to fear the utmost and last Destruction of Christian Religion Let upon this account no just Cause be given to renew that Lamentation of Jeremiah the Law is no more chap. 2.9 least out of a just Judgment of God this should follow the Gospel is no more for us I tremble to think how at last God will with a witness take notice of those who now take no notice of him nor of his Concerns We read the Character of a wicked Man in the Person of Pharaoh Exod. 5.2 when he said Who is the Lord that I should obey his voice to let Israel go I know not the Lord neither will I let Israel go Well saith God I will make thee know me before I have done with thee wherefore in Scripture by the Prophets especially by Ezekiel in so many places God's usual Stile when either he threateneth or executeth Judgments is this and they shall know that I am the Lord Ezek. 30.19 chap. 20.26 he saith thus will I execute judgments in Egypt and they shall know that I am the Lord and sometimes these Punishments are inflicted to the end they might know that I am the Lord. God grant none in this Land for want of performing their Duty in his Station do provoke God in the way of Judgments to make them know he is the Lord who both acts and speaks with a strong hand Isa 8.11 Whether or not the Ecclesiastical Court hath in this occasion of Socinianism acted its part according to Laws I must not take it upon me but leave it for the World to judge but this I now do insist upon that whether or not it be done in conformity to Law the Magistrate is about it to be addressed to for in such cases he at last is to act his part as ever 't was practised by those Christian Emperours who upon the like occasion minded the Glory of God But here we must stop a little for fear of being thought to insinuate to our Superiours any thing relating to the Duty of their place which we are not so vain as to think of in the least but one of the Grounds we go upon is out of the Book called the Reformation of the Ecclesiastical Laws began in the days of Henry VIII and continued in the time of Edward VI. under the Head of Judgment against Heresies these words are positive Tùm consumptis omnibus aliis remediis ad extremum ad Civiles Magistratus ablegetur puniendus Every other Remedy proving useless the obstinate Heretick must at last be sent to the Civil Magistrate to be punished De judiciis contra haereses c. 4. de contumacibus Haereticis and as to the point of Blasphemy in the first Chapter under that Head is pathetically expressed the detestableness of that most wicked and in some Sense unpardonable Sin in Chap. 2d quomodo sit punienda blasphemia 't is said sit igitur hoc à nobis constitutum ut haec execrabilis blasphemiarum impietas quà m primùm de eà ritè constiterit ab Episcopis nulla ratione toleretur sed eodem supplicio confixa sit quâ pertinax haereticorum insania plectitur c. wherefore we order thus that the execrable Impiety of Blasphemy assoon as the Bishops have found it out shall by no means be tolerated but shall suffer the same Punishment as is inflicted upon obstinate Hereticks the constiterit is not so much in relation to Blasphemy it self which is easily known when either things belonging to God as Infiniteness Eternity Unchangeableness Holiness c. are denied him and attributed to the Creatures or when things contrary to his Nature as to lye to deny himself c. are fathered upon him or when Men do curse him but the constiterit doth regard the Blasphemer and guilty Wretch when he is found out according to this Ridley in his View c. p. 35 36. Bishops are to take Cognizance inquire into and declare whether or not the Person or Persons be guilty of Blasphemy which being clear he or they are to be delivered into the Civil Magistrates hands but if through neglect or otherwise any of the Bishops happen not to act their Part but stop the Course of Justice certainly the Magistrate is to look into 't and do his Duty though others do not theirs 't is nothing but what is very Just that every Man's hand should be against those Ishmaels whose hand is against every Man As to the Laws I mentioned just before they were by the Excellent Persons named by the King collected and finished under Edward VI. the Pious Josiah of that Age and so were then received with great and general Approbation both Kings Father and Son by right of their Supremacy as we may see 't in both their Letters gave them a Character of Authority and if they were not passed into an Act the only Cause was the untimely Death of that young Prince who designed it and the Business had already been proposed in Parliament as we see 't out of these words of his Epistle to Archbishop Cranmer c. Cum vos triginta duos viros ad leges nostras Ecclesiasticas perlegendas componendas juxta vim formam effectum cujusdam Acti Parliamenti in tertio regni nostri anno c. So that there is something of a Parliament's Authority and if there be any thing wanting it lyeth in your Power to set a Parliamentary Stamp upon it especially those Heads that relate to the Divine Moral Law as do those about Heresy Blasphemy and Idolatry wherein God's
be true even in natural things how much more in those of a spiritual and divine Nature which to Men's understanding are past finding out wherefore I affirm it to be but reasonable for them in such things to submit Reason to Faith which is a Mystery to our natural Reason 1 Tim. 3.9 so called by S. Paul Holding the mystery of Faith in a pure conscience when he was writing this Faith with its Object was clearly revealed yet still he then calls it a Mystery and I hope no Socinian dares say he knows the Nature of Faith better than that great Apostle did As for Scripture they pretend to own and do quote it so also could the Devil but mis-apply'd it Before him whom he knew to be the Son of God he could say it is written And as in the beginning of the Predication of the Gospel so in the renewing of the Truth of it by Reformation Tares sprung up with the Grain some Men would not order and regulate their Opinions according to Scripture but would bring it to be subservient to their Notions and of it to make a Nose of Wax to serve their turn hence it is that they wrest things that therein are so plain which if we believe Peter 2 Pet. 3.16 must be to their own destruction I know of no wrong the Son of God hath done them that in all their Writings they should so slightly speak of and so much below him Of late one S among others Page 20. saith of the Lord Jesus In that great Instance of Magnanimity he hath outdone all the mentioned Heroes of Greece and Rome he would seem to speak much in his Commendation but latet anguis in herbâ there is a Malice in the bottom to enervate the Truth of our Saviour's Life as if there were in 't some of the Tales and fabulous Accounts which are found in the Lives of the Heroes be mentions They would have him a Man and nothing more though upon all occasions even before that wicked Counsel of the Priests Scribes and Elders Matt. 26.63 64. being by the High Priest adjured in the Name of the Living God to tell whether he was the Son of God He owned himself to be which he would not have done if it had not been true and so had died to maintain a Lye which is the part of an Impostor and this Confession of his being Son of God was the very ground of his Accusation Condemnation and Execution we have a law John 19.7 said they and by our law he ought to die because he made himself the Son of God and at the time of his Death all their Revilings and Injuries against him did run upon this Matt. 27.40 43 54. If thou be the Son of God come down from the cross and he said I am the Son of God it had been very strange if he had suffered for saying he was that which he was not in the Sense he spoke it and they took it To deny this is to be worse than the very Heathens the Roman Soldiers for the Centurion and they that were with him having seen the things that were done said Truly this was the Son of God thereby pointing at the Cause of his Death as if they had said He was what he affirmed himself to be and what he dyed for that is Truly the Son of God What S. Paul saith in another Caese about the Resurrection Acts 26.8 Why should it be thought incredible with you that God should raise the dead We may say it in that of the Incarnation of the Son of God for if God attended by two Angels in the shape of Men Gen. 18. more familiarly to dine and converse with Abraham shewed how he could assume the Figure of a Man why might he not in time take upon him our humane Nature The Scripture being so full of Evidences that he could he would and hath done it But what can we say of People who deny it to be day though the Sun shineth never so brightly like the Philosophers Maid who being blind would not own it but said the Room she was in was dark this is the case of those in whom the God of this World hath so blinded the Minds that they cannot and their Hearts that they will not see I wish God may be pleased in this high Concern of his to stir up the Hearts of every one to act in his Station whether Civil or Ecclesiastical They which in this last Capacity are Men of Piety and Learning might out of Presses and Pulpits be very instrumental in asserting the Truth if they were pleased to consult with Scripture preferably before their own Reason for the Word of God being the Spring of right Reason will afford Reasons enough to confute and convince Blasphemy and Heresie Therein lies our strength about these Matters This ought to be the method and manner of those who engage in the Cause Let us all well observe what is said of Apollos who in this same Subject was concerned against an unbelieving and obstinate Nation Acts 18.24 that he was mighty in the Scriptures About these Controversies some thing hath already been attempted by Men otherwise of Learning and good Parts but upon the account of some Principles of theirs little good is herein to be expected from them Arminians I mean whom I look upon as not very sit to write against Socinians no more than Arminus would not write against Socinus though they were contemporary when I am reading Socinian Disputes I often in my way meet with Worstius Episcopius Bertius Curcelaeus and such others who favour them if not in all yet in too many things wherein they go hand in hand and they will mince the matter with them but if after what several Men have written heretofore some other Persons of Learning and sound in the doctrinal part of the XXXIX Articles would now appear as a Reverend and very able Prelate hath in some Points effectually done then it might be hoped through God's Blessing for us to see those impious and Heterodox Opinions justled out of doors to the Honour of God the Peace of his Church and clearing the Land of such a Generation as in some respect may be called worse than the Devils Matt. 8.29 Mar. 1.24 and 5.7 Luke 4.34 41. 8.28 Psal 119.126 who publickly owned the Lord Jesus to be the Son of God of the most high God the holy one of God whom they confessed to have the Power not only to command but also to torment and destroy them whilst these Men deny him truly to be such With David we must say It is time for thee Lord to work for they have made void thy law In the mean time though very sensible of my Weakness and Incapacity I presume to appear in publick trusting in him whose Cause we defend that he will make his Virtue perfect in our Weakness and with the gracious Influence of his holy
David's Son for if only upon some borrowed account or accidental reason he were David's Lord as may be some Power and Dignity above him then Christ's Argument would quite loose its strength which wholly lies in this if he be his Lord how can he be his Son Upon some extraordinary account and relation it may happen that a Son may become a Lord over his Father but here Christ is certainly asserted to be Lord over David and in some sense 't is impossible for David to become Lord over Christ which can be upon no other account but of his divine Nature besides that he was David's Lord in David's time and before his Birth of the Virgin Mary His Son he was according to the Fâ—esh and his Humanity and his Lord according to the Spirit and his Divinity The Fourth Argument whereby Christ is proved to be God's natural Son is taken out of the Words whereby he declares himself to be such a Son as is one with the Father not any other way to be understood than by Nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for this the Jews took to be his meaning and for that same cause called him a Blasphemer and would have stoned him and thereupon our Saviour did not go about to shew they were mistaken though his Life was concerned on the contrary he used Arguments to make 'em believe he was so though to them it seemed incredible and blasphemous Chap. 5. And in another Text he affirmeth himself to be such a Son of God as is of an equal Power with and can do the same Works as the Father so that what things soever the Father doth this also doth the Son likewise the Son doth nothing without the Father nor the Father without the Son by reason of their Oneness of Nature and Equality of Poweâ— Though the Jews out of these words of his v. 7. My father works hitherto and I work concluded he made himself equal with God yet though they were offended at it and he thereupon did run the hazard of his Life though he never was so uncharitable as to give any one just ground of offence nor so rash as unnecessarily to venture his Life yet he would not deny his Equality with the Father but on the contrary with several Arguments he confirms it from v. 19. to 22. and this not to be understood of an Equality only in some respects for the Unity of natural Power and Operation argueth an absolute Equality and as in Power so in Nature * John 10.30 I and my Father are one and v. 38. you may by my works believe that the Father is in me and not only so but I in him as for greater confirmation * ch 14.10 repeated out of that place of John I and the Father are one Augustine's †Pereant vaniloqui mentis seductores c. words are to be taken notice of let vain and Seducers Arrius and Sabellius perish Christ said not I and the Father am one but I and the Father are one when I say one let the Arian take notice of it and what I say we are let the Sabellian mind it let not the Arian divide one nor the Sabellian take away are one we refer to Nature are to the diversity of Persons The Fifth Argument is taken out of the Lord Jesus his own words and we know him not only to be true but truth it self †John 14.6 though he beareth record * c. 8.14 of himself this is when in a legal way being asked by Caiaphas and ‖ Mat. 26.63 64. adjured by the living God to tell whether he be the Christ the son of God * Mar. 14.61 62. the Christ the son of the blessed he owned it and said Thou hast said I am For which Confession he was accused of Blasphemy and condemn'd to death for said they to Pilate †Joh. 19.7 We have a law and by our law he ought to dye because he made himself the son of God so he suffer'd for owning himself to be the Son of God which Confession of his S. Paul takes special notice of in the Charge he giveth his Disciple * 1 Tim. 6.13 the meaning is that he was the true natural Son of God or else it would not have been accounted a Blasphemy for any Jew to have called himself Son of God no more than God's People Abraham's Seed by virtue of the Promises and Privilege of the Covenant and Grace and God they call their Father John 8.41 yet thought not they were Blasphemers for that therefore Christ's Words they took in another that is in a strict and proper sense Indeed the High Priest's Question was a Snare laid for Christ for though they sought false Witnesses and many came yet their Witness did not agree together wherefore they sought to have something out of his mouth wherewith to accuse him The Question was amongst other things grounded upon what our Saviour had said of himself in the Fifth and Tenth Chapters of John whether he was of the same Nature with God and in Power equal with him which is the same as to be natural Son of God and of the same Essence which he having affirmatively answered unto and said he was thereupon having gained their Point they rent their Cloaths and said What need we any farther Witnesses and upon this very Confession he was accused condemned and executed Hence I ask Socinians Did Christ speak the truth when he said he was the Son of God one with him or of the same Nature and to him equal in Power I farther ask whether the High Priest and the rest did not well apprehend this to be the true meaning of his words If so as certainly both are true if Socinians had been in the place of the Jews they would have used him as they did and would do the like if ever it were in their power for some of them when they write and give a Character of our blessed Saviour's Person they seem to take a pleasure to say he was by the Senate or Council of Scribes and Pharisees in Jerusalem condemned and executed for Blasphemy in that he had said he was the Son of God that he said so 't is most true out of John 10.36 but I ask again when the Lord said so did he speak the truth or not If the truth why do Men not believe him that is in the sense the Jews understood it true proper natural Son of God equal with God For this they took his meaning to be but if he was not what he owned himself to be then he must be supposed to have spoken a lye which is a Sin To such Blasphemers our blessed Lord speaks in defiance as once he did to the Jews * John 8.46 Which of you convinceth me of sin We know he suffer'd as a Blasphemer a Deceiver and a Transgressor but was he really so The Apostle saith †1 Pet. 3.18 He suffered the just
Condescention is a wonderful Argument of God's Goodness which is the greatest Glory of Divine Nature this is cause of Thankfulness not of Cavils and Exceptions he knows what is best and fittest for him to do and wants not our Counsel had the Son of God appeared as a great Prince he probably would thereby have made more Hypocrites than real Converts and not so well persuaded Men to Holiness and Goodness for Arguments to do it must not be fetch'd from the Pomp and Prosperity of this World but from the great Rewards and Glory of that which is to come But before I leave this Point I must take notice of that place wherein the Apostle makes the Son of God upon his coming into the World speak thus Heb. 10.5 but a body hast thou prepared me the Body was prepared against his coming into the World and that prepared Body at his coming he took so then he was before the Body was prepared for him and before his coming into the World for nothing can be said to be sitted as the word implies in the Original for one who is not hence we conclude how the Son of God was before his Incarnation and had a Being but we now return to our Proofs The next place is of the same Prophet Isa 9.6 For unto us a Child is born unto us a Son is given and the government shall be upon his shoulders and his name shall be called wonderful Counsellour the mighty God the everlasting Father the Prince of Peace of the increase of his Government and Peace there shall be no end c. I ask Is this appliable to any Son that was to be born of Ahaz For this is the same Person mentioned in the fore-quoted place and may be seen if compared together Observe how the different Expressions do denote different Natures the Child is for Humanity the Son for the Divinity the Child is born but the Son not born but given in relation to Human Nature he had a beginning and a progress he was a Child before he was a Man but the Son not so a Child is not before he be born but the Son had a being and did exist before he was given yet both united in one Person for the Child was not one Person and the Son another for all along the Prophet though he had named a Child and a Son speaks in the singular number his Shoulder his Name his Government as his Name is wonderful so is the manner of the Union these two Natures are in one Person without Confusion the Divine retained her Proprieties so hath the Human and yet these different Proprieties are so united in one Person that the Person may be called by the Name of both Natures Christ is God and Christ is Man in the Concret tho' in the Abstract it may not be said Divinity is Humanity nor Humanity Divinity they are united but without Confusion But to return to our Point there was never so many glorious Names joyned together to describe one Person as we find to be in this place to him alone they all belong because the Spirit of Truth saith so which if they were not properly his by right he would not give them Wonderful in his Name in his Nature in his Person in his Incarnation Wonderful every way Counsellour for he is the Wisdom of the Father without which the Only Wise God never doth any thing the Mighty God most proper to God and never in the singular number given any Creature * Isa 10.21 the remnant saith our Prophet shall return even the remnant of Jacob unto the mighty God the true essential God the God of Israel is meaned in the place 't is such a Name as is made use of when in a most Eminent way God is described †Deut. 10.17 your God is God of Gods and the Cord of Lords a great God mighty and terrible And ‖ Nehem. 9.32 now therefore our God the great the mighty and the terrible God and elsewhere * Jerem 32.18 the great the mighty God the Lord of hosts is his name and when the Question is to know who is the King of Glory the Answer is the Lord strong and mighty this High and Divine Name is here in the place aâ—â—â—ibuted to Jesus Christ the Son of God about whom is the Prophecy that which follows is no less considerable or incommunicable the everlasting Father or as 〈…〉 Father of Eternity nothing more Noble or becoming God can be said than to call him so nothing â—ut the True God is Eternal and nothing more propâ—â—â— to God than Eternity How can a Child or any meet mortal Man be called everlasting Father Now what can hinder us hence to argue thus the mighty God and everlasting Father is true God by Nature but Christ is such out of this place therefore Christ is true God by Nature Two things more are here said of this Son of God he is the Prince of Peace for by his Death he made our Peace with God and procured an inward Peace of Conscience and reconciled things in Heaven and on the earth he came into the World in time of universal Peace when the Roman Empire the greatest in the World fully enjoy'd it and for a Sign the Temple of Janus in Rome was shut up nay Herod and Pilate Luke 23.12 both his Enemies were before his death upon his account reconciled one to another Secondly 't is said of him The government shall be upon his shoulders and of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end After the Father had said to him * Psal 2.7 8 9. Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee he promiseth to give him the Heathens for his inheritance and the utmost parts of the Earth for his Possession thou shalt break them with a Rod of Iron thou shalt dash them in pieces like a Potters Vessel whereunto agreeth another Scripture †Rev. 12 5. of the Man-child that was to rule all Nations with a Rod of Iron this he declared unto Pilate ‖ John 18.37 Rev. 11.15 Luke 1.33 I am a king to this end was I born and for this cause came I into the world So then the kingdoms of this world are his and he shall reign for ever and ever and of his kingdom there shall be no end The New Testament doth also in several places demonstrate two Natures in the Person of Christ S. John having affirmed the Word to be God which relates to his eternal Generation he doth afterwards speak of his Incarnation when he saith * Joh. 1.14 The word that was God was made flesh that is the Person call'd the Word the Son of God took upon him our human Nature and so united two Natures divine and human in one Person for this Word is in the whole Chapter spoken of as of a Person acting making or creating coming all this is the Character of a Person
and Christ do not denote the same thing neither could Christ by virtue of his Office which he received but in time be properly called Son of God and equal with God as it appears ‖ John 10.33 37 38. compared with John 5.18 he made himself and really was No sort of Men more prone to wrest Scripture than Socinus and Socinians wherefore in the matter now in hand in that Confession which Peter made of and to our Saviour Matthew hath these words * Mat. 16.16 Thou art Christ the Son of the living God and John upon another occasion †John 6.69 We believe and are sure that thou art that Christ the Son of the living God but because Mark saith only ‖ Mark 8.29 Thou art the Christ and Luke * Luke 9.20 The Christ of God wherefore saith he the Name of Christ contains the full meaning of Son of the living God But who knoweth not the diversity by the Evangelists used in their Narrations one more at large the other more briefly one sets down all the other only some part as 't is observed between Matthew's and Mark 's Relations If after the Socinian way from the comparison of words one could conclude all to be but one and the same sense many Absurdities would arise therefrom as for instance Matthew relates that our Saviour said to the man sick of the palsie Mat. 9.2 Son be of good cheer thy sins be forgiven thee but Mark leaves out the words †Mark 2.5 be of good cheer saying Son thy sins be forgiven thee and Luke instead of the word Son uses that of Man ‖ Luke 5.20 thy sins are forgiven thee then according to this way of arguing it may be concluded how the words Son and Man are but one and the same and signifie but one and the same thing for whom Matthew and Mark call Son Luke calls Man so after this rate Man and Son now do not differ as an absolute Name that denoteth Nature and a relative signifying a relation to a Father It is said how in a Vision Cornelius saw an Angel of God Acts 10.3 and v. 30 he said to Peter Behold a man stood before me in bright clothing what he saw in the same Vision is called an Angel and a Man must we conclude an Angel to be a Man After the same manner they would wrest some other places as when Matthew saith Mat. 26.63 The high priest said unto him I abjure thee by the living God that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ the Son of God and Mark †Mar. 14.61 Again the high priest asked him are thou the Christ the Son of the blessed and Luke ‖ Luke 26.66 67. The chief priests and the scribes led him into their counsel saying art thou the Christ Tell us Where the Name Son of God is omitted the Heresiarch doth conclude that the words Son of God and Christ are the same But we already shewed the Falseness of such Consequences and this is farther to be observed how though the relations by the Evangelist be not contrary yet they sometimes differ and are not expressed in the same words Matthew useth the Name Son of God Mark calls him The Son of the blessed where the words God and blessed signifie the same thing though one expresseth the Nature the other the Worship This difference of relating doth farther appear that Matthew and Mark say the High Priest asked but Luke saith it of the Chief Priests and Scribes shall we then concludé that the High Priest and the Scribes are the same But withal the word Son of God is not quite left out by Luke for we find it v. 70. Then said they all art thou then the Son of God Here by the by take notice how what our Saviour said of himself under the Name of Son of Man by reason of what is said of sitting on the right hand of the Power of God they well took the meaning to be Son of God which Christ confirmed and indeed he often declared himself to be true Son of God but we read no where that ever he denyed it But to return to our Text hence appeareth the insignificancy of their Exceptions for all the Evangelists do joyn the Names of Christ and Son of God And we are to take special notice how after our Saviour had affirmed he was the Son of God they all concluded he had blasphemed which there had been no cause for them to say except thereby had been meaned he who is begotten of the Essence and Nature of God and therein equal with him It seems they will not be perswaded but that Christ and Son of God are synonimous to which end they farther make use of other places whereof the first hath these words * 1 Joh. 5.1 vers 5. Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God the next is thus Who is he that overcometh the world but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God The last is this †‑ Chap. 4.15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God God dwelleth in him and he in God Whence they would infer that the Names of Christ and Son of God are the same because they are put one for the other but the Consequence is not good for all that followeth is this that Christ and the Son of God are the same which we own and is true both do meet in the Person of the Lord Jesus for he is Son of God and Christ but we deny the Name of Christ to be the same with that of Son of God because this last is a Name of Nature and the first of Office and to say he is Son of God because he is Christ is a meer begging of the Question Christ is called Immanuel Wonderful Counselour Mighty God The everlasting Father The Prince of Peace by Isaiah and The Lord our Righteousness by Jeremiah ‖ Chap. 23.6 all which Names are given to one and the same Person yet none may say they do formally signifie the same thing no more than Prudence Courage and Liberality can be said to be the same because they meet in one and the same subject and the same Person may be prudent couragious and liberal 'T is bad Logical from the Unity of the Person to argue for the Unity of Names seeing one and the same Person may be called by several Names God is merciful and just yet though Mercy and Justice be in God they differ one from another between themselves abstractively taken though we know in God they are one and the same thing Thus though the Words Son of God and Christ belong to one and the same Person yet in themselves they differ one from another as do God and Lord which in Scripture are often joyned together as the Lord God and put one for another yet God is a Name of Nature and Lord signifies his Dominion they in themselves denote
that is against Reason nor Christian that is against Scripture nor peaceable that is against the Church for they speak against Reason Scripture and the general Consent of the Church If their Exposition be true Christ might and would have said Glorifie me with the Glory which thou hast decreed for me before the World was then he had said nothing but what every Believer may say how that before the World was God fore-ordained them to the Glory which they shall enjoy at the last day so might every one else say before the World was I was fore-ordained to have Wife Children Lands Offices c. nay according to their opinion at the same time when Christ asked that Glory he had it if to be appointed thereunto be to have it and if he had it why should he ask for it If Christ had said nothing but this And now O Father glorifie thou me with thine own self it had sufficiently declared the Sense of our Adversaries without saying any thing of the Glory which he had with him so with thine own self they explain to be in Heaven as if he had said in thy House but if that had been Christ's intention he would have said Glorifie me in Heaven but since he expresses himself otherwise and makes mention of the Glory which he had with the Father before the World was if we can believe he well knew what he would have and was able to express his Thoughts then we must say he had very good cause for all he said Now we shall proceed to some other of his Attributes Christ's Omnisci he knows all things Omniscience and perfect Knowledg and Wisdom ‖ Rom. 16.27 which belongs to God alone whereby God in a divine manner understands himself and every thing else doth also belong to the Son who saith to the exclusion of all Creatures * Mat. 11.27 No man knows the Son but the Father neither knows any man the Father save the Son and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him And †Rev. 19.12 no man knoweth his name but himself thus he hath a perfect knowledg of his Deity and of every thing else even of the most contingent whereby the true God is distinguished from all and every Creature this also belonged to the Lord Jesus as he sometimes foretold his Disciples and in the case ‖ Mat. 21.2 of the Ass and Colt and * Luk. 22.10 13. of preparing the Passover and to Peter †John 21 19. the manner of his Death and all the Prophets being acted by his Spirit foretold things to come that holy Spirit ‖ Ch. 16.13 14. shall receive of mine and shall shew it unto you and ‡ Rev. 13.10 the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophesie And to make this the more excellent and conspicuous he attributes unto himself that which no body will deny to belong unto God alone * Psal 7 9. and 26.2 1 Sam. 16.7 The righteous God tryeth the heart and reins the Heart is unsearchable to any but to God alone Thou even thou only saith Solomon †1 Kings 8 39. knowest the hearts of all the children of men but Christ doth attribute it to himself ‖ Rev. 2.23 I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts and ‡ John 2.24 25. he knoweth all men and what was in man and needed not that any 〈◊〉 should testifie of man for * Mat. 9 4 he knew the thoughts of the Scribes and †〈◊〉 12.25 the thoughts of the Pharisees 〈◊〉 ‖ John 16.19 be knew the desires of his disciples withal â‚ Chap. 6.64 and Chap. 18.4 he 〈◊〉 from the beginning who they were that believed not and who should betray him he knew all things that should come upon him and in few words he know all things Christ is present every where Christ's Omnipâ—esence which argueth his Immensity and Infiniteness which elsewhere I have spoken of whereunto I may add how though absent in the Body he saw * Joh. 1.48 49. Nathanael under the Fig-tree whereupon he call'd him the Son of God the King of Israel a Title which Scripture gives the only true God and also he affirmeth this when he saith †Chap. 3.13 No man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven even the son of man which is in heaven by the Son of Man he meaneth himself who if we must believe was in Heaven when to Nicodemus he spoke these words upon Earth which cannot be understood of his Humanity which he assumed in the Virgin 's Womb but of his Divinity which alone is infinite But here they take exception and say that by to be in Heaven is meaned only to know and understand heavenly things according to Paul's saying * Phil. 3.20 and Ephes 2.6 Our conversation is in Heaven The Conversation of pious Men in Heaven is said in opposition to worldly mindedness when they were said to be quickned in Christ and as expressed to fit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus they say not to be in Heaven but in and with Christ in heavenly things †Colos 3.3 Our life is hid with Christ in God We do not intend to prove the Divinity of Christ barely because one who is upon Earth is said upon any account to be in Heaven but out of this that Christ is said not only to be descended from Heaven and is again to go up and out of this that though he be come down from Heaven he is still there whence we may well conclude for his Omnipresence Now to descend from Heaven upon Earth and to ascend from Earth to Heaven are spoken of Christ only as to his Person and thereby is meaned his coming upon Earth There is such another place ‖ Eph. 4.9 to the same purpose about ascending and descending This we must say that whilst Christ in his human Nature was on Earth with his divine he filled the Heavens Elsewhere he explains it as to places Mat. 18.20 and 28.20 Christ's Almightyness Where two or three are gathered in my name there I am As to time For I am with you always unto the end of the world The Lord Jesus is also almighty Omnipotency which is an infinite Power incommunicable to any Creature for all are uncapable of it Christ applyes it to himself when he saith * Rev. 1.8 he is the Almighty I have already shewed how every thing in that Verse Christ speaks of himself only I shall add how the same Name is given him in several other places of the Book We give thee thanks Ch. 11.17 O Lord God Almighty which art and was and art to come which are the same Expressions used in that v. 8. and what is the reason of the Thanksgiving 't is in the latter end of this same Verse Because thou hast taken to thee thy great power and hast reigned so who
a Creature but the Author of all Creatures so that he is their Father rather than their Brother and he by whom all things are created must needs be in time and dignity before all and he is called the image of the invisible God not for publishing and preaching the Gospel for that the Apostles had common with him but because the Son is so like the Father that he who seeth the Son seeth the Father and he is the image of the Father not as he is the Son of Man but as he is the Son of God Neither must this be restrained to Angels and Men because those two kinds do not contain every Creature and certainly if it be granted that every rational Creature was made by him we may easily conclude of all the rest the more because 't is universally expressed of every Creature The sixteenth verse doth explain and much enlarge upon the foregoing and doth first universally and absolutely affirm the whole work of Creation to be the work of Christ then makes a distribution as things in Heaven and in Earth of what nature rank and degree soever and this mention of things in Heaven and of things in Earth here expressed sheweth how the Apostles intention is to speak of the first Creation and not of the second this last or renovation doth not comprehend all things that are in Earth but the first doth Wherefore this last is not spoken of in this place and tho elsewhere the word Creation be understood of the new and Spiritual Creation Ephes 3.9 it doth not follow it must be so here for there it is spoken of the revelation and predication of the Gospel which cannot be proved to be here the scope of the place where is to be seen not only the word to Create or Creation but also the things created are expressed as clearly as may be Furthermore it cannot be denyed but by invisible things as Thrones Dominions c. are meant Angels which were created with or before the World that is very long before Christ his appearing in the Flesh but I find no where in Scripture that since the first Creation they were renewed or created again The good Angels needed it not for they were never defiled the bad ones are not for they continue as bad and wicked as ever so 't is very strange that amongst the Creatures renewed by Christ they reckon the Devils themsēlves and who besides them could ever have thought that in Scripture the bare word Creature signifies a new Creature to Create to Create a New This is not at all the stile of the word of God wherein we believe the Apostles spoke with a design to be understood and not to clog their Writings with Ambiguities to cause doubts and difficulties for on the contrary here he makes things as intelligible as can be to remove scruples as when he saith all things that are in Heaven were by him Created for fear there should be some doubt about it he explains it with the words visible and invisible for in the Heavens are visible things as Sun Moon Stars and also invisible as Angels Now there is no doubt but the Apostle in that commendation he gives of Christ aimeth chiefly to shew his Dignity and Excellency as being first born of every Creature but the Socinians go about robbing him of that Prerogative for 't is spoken generally of every Creature without exception but say they not so only of every new Creature yet the Lord doth excel above every Creature good or bad high or low and is Lord over all If they say Christ is the first born of every Creature only as it is a new Creature then it must be said the Apostle is to blame for omiting the word new though so necessary to understand his meaning which is no better than as much as in them lies to ridicule the Apostles word how he is the first born of every Creature in as much as every Creature is subject to his Dominion for every thing is subjected to him thus far as God hath subjected every thing unto him But seeing they own Christ to be in time before every new creatures what shall they say of some who before his birth of the Virgin were new Creatures seeing 'tis he that made them all If thus under the New Testament we must conclude it to have been so under the Old for they could not be such except they were so made by him Now as the Apostle begins this verse so he endeth it by him were all things created and all things were created by him that is to confirm this Truth beyond all ground of doubting of it in the same verse he doth twice set it down and in the same words with a most important addition last of all that as all things were created by so for him not as means and a medium but as an efficient and final cause to him Psal 136.5 saith the Psalmist that by wisdom made the Heavens 't is not said in but by wisdom as a Person and efficient Cause for as such is the Son of God represented under the name of Wisdom Prov. 8. where the Attributes therein mentioned belong to a person the work of creating the Heavens is a distinguishing Character of the true God by nature from false Gods Idols Psal 96.5 all the Gods of the nations are Idols but the Lord made the heavens And Christ is the power of God 1. Cor. 1.24 and the wisdom of God by whom the world was created Let this be added to prove this truth God by his Son made also the Worlds Heb. 1.2.10 and this Text being joyned with the two foregoing doth afford this Conclusion he by whom God made the world by whom he made all things and by whom he made the worlds certainly was before the world before all things and before the worlds now God by his Son Jesus Christ made the world all things and the worlds therefore his Son Jesus Christ was before the world before all things and before the worlds and so Eternal The words of this place are as plain absolute and extensive as of the others and because some sophistical distinction of the word world might happen to be invented therefore to prevent it he saith worlds in the plural thereby to cut off the ground of any distinction as of this world and that world and it seems to leave no place for the distinction by Socinians of the old and of the new world the original word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ages wherein are contained all times and temporal things wherein the world and all things in it are comprehended But here as in other places they must bring in their own imaginations for they will have only the new not the old world to be understood though the Apostle speaking absolutely leaves no ground for such notions and to cavil they say that to Make and to Create are different things contrary to the stile of Scripture
he together with the Father John 5.17 doth work hitherto Thus spiritual creatures are preserved in their Individuum and corporeal in their Species he gives Food raiment and other necessaries unto all disposes of Times and Seasons causes his Sun to shine sends rain c. without which concourse of his the world would soon come to an end and this is a kind of a second Creation The exercising of a miraculous Providence is a kind of work which manifest's Christ to be the true Essential God for such things are beyond and above the power of nature and a property of the true Lord God of Israel who only doth wonderous things and this our Saviour did shew upon some extraordinary occasions in matters of nature Psal 72.18 and also of grace As to the first when he changed water into wine rebuked the wind and the Sea gave the blind sight made the lame to walk Matth. 9.33 John 9. â—2 curing diseases healing distempers virtue daily issuing out of him which made people wonder and admire because such things had never been so seen in Israel nor since the world began and to say that a great Prophet is risen up among us and that God hath visited his people and the Gospels are filled up with such miracles which he did in all kinds and of what nature soever were their infirmities and diseases he cured them all and as Peter said was approved of God by miracles Acts. 2.22 wonders and signs And in this virtue and power of his own he gave others power to do the like But they whom he gave that power to exercised it not in their or any others but in his name Matth. 10 1. Mark 16.17 18. Luke 10.9 to shew how the power of working miracles was only in and from him in my name they shall cast out devils speak with new tongues c. And work miracles by my power and authority Thus the seventy disciples being again returned with joy said Luke 10.17 Lord even the devils are subject unto us thorough thy name Thus Peter having healed the lame man said to the people which ran greatly wondering why look ye so earnestly on us as though by our own power or holiness Acts. 3.12.16 we had made this man to walk men being so apt to look upon and fix on second causes and instruments he first goes about to remove those thoughts out of their heads he directs them to the cause of the miracle Christ's name thorough faith in his name hath made this man strong which in the next Chapter before the high Priest and Councel they solemnly declared Chap. 4 10. be it known unto you all and to all the people of Israel that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth whom ye crucified by him doth this man stand here before you whole And in another place he said to a certain man Aeneas Chap. 9.34 Jesus Christ maketh thee whole Hereby I shew Christ to have been the spring of miracles which were done in his name as before he wrought them himself in his own name whereby his divinity is evidenced The disciples could not at all times work miracles but Christ could Lord said the man if thou wilt thou canst mare me clean Matth. 8 2. John 5.21 and he quickneth whom he will so he answereth the man I will be thou clean and immediately he was cleansed One thing more must be observed upon this how Christ did miracles for his own glory which is not lawfull to say of any man beâ—â—ase it belongeth to God alone Prov. 16.4 to make all things for himself Thus of the Lord Jesus after his first miracle 't is said John 2.11 This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee and manifested forth his glory Thus he said himself that the sickness of Lazarus was yeor the glory of God John 11.4 Chap. 9.3 that the son of God might be glorified thereby And so was the man's being born blind that the works of God should be made manifest in him that is that in giving him his sight he might therein be glorified As amongst miracles raising one from the dead is the most conspicuous so therein at several times the Lord Jesus highly manifested his own divine power but in none so much as when he raised himself for when he by himself had purged our sins Heb. 1.3 John 10.18 he not only rose again from the dead but also sat down on the right hand of the majesty on high No man said he taketh away my life from me but I lay it down of my self I have power to lay it down and I have power to take it again I see so much of Majesty in those words and they are spoken with so much assurance that therein I perceive the character of his divine Power and Nature I joyn them together for I take them to be inseparable here is the triumph of the Son of God Colos 2.14 15. when not only he hath blotted out the hand writing of ordinances that was against us and nailed it to his Cross but also having spoiled principalities and powers he made a shew of them openly triumphing over them in it for all his euemies and ours received their mortal wound and laid dead under his Cross the works of the devil 1 John 3.8 Hos 13.14 1 Cor. 15.54 55 56 c. that is sin he destroyed and invisibly Satan was crucified with him O death he was thy plagues O grave he was thy destruction he conquered them all and thereby death which is the last enemy is by his resurrection swallowed up in victory After his resurrection Peter asserted it to be impossible it should have been otherwise or that he should be holden of death Whence Paul exalteth the exceeding greatness of the mighty power of God Acts. 2.14 Ephes 1.19 20. Rom. 1.4 which was wrought in Christ when he raised him from the dead which same efficacy is elsewhere attributed to the spirit of holiness that is to the divinity in the Son distinguished from his humanity all which agreeth with what our Saviour had foretold of the temple of his body John 2.19.21 destroy this Temple and in three days I will raise it up again understood of the temple of his body he rose not to be but because he was God thus much as to matters of Nature But Christ doth also works of Grace all understood under the name of redemption which hath two parts impetration or purchase and application through his active and passive obedience he hath fullfilled the Law for us and redeemed us from the Wrath of God and the Curse of the Law having fully satisfied his Justice and reconciled us unto him he hath obtained the pardon of our sins by a sufficient attonement he made for the same through his Death and sufferings He by the mouth of the Prophet shews what he is at the coming out of his
by our Saviour belonging only to his Humane Nature which may be due and necessary from one in nature and quality inferiour to another but it was also an undue and meerly voluntary obedience which may be rendred by an Equal and some times by a Superiour as we read when Joshua said Josn 10.12 13. Sun stand thou still upon Gibeon and thou Moon in the valey of Ajalon so the Sun stood he was obeyed but there is in it more than this the Sun of himself could not stand nor alter or stop his Course a Superiour power to do 't was required and indeed we find that in the beginning of the verse 't is said then spook Joshua unto the Lord in the day when c. Sun stand thou still so let it be spoken with that awful reverence and to an infinite Majesty in some kind we may see how in this case the Superiour was pleased to obey the Inferiour so we may say a sort of obedience may belong to Divine Nature as when God commanded the World should be created and it was performed by his Son of this nature is Christ's obedience as spoken of by the Apostle concerning Christ Phil. 2.6 7 8. who being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God he humbled himself This was a voluntary obedience for he was not humbled but humbled himself he was not made but made himself of no reputation thus the obedience is valued according to the dignity of the person which obeyeth To be in the form of God is to be God for forma dat esse rei the form is the nature of the thing and makes it to be what it is But what this man granted before he is now willing to take away when he would have this worship not to be terminated in Christ but from him to pass unto God so this is but a relative worship Thus Papists say they worship images but they are mistaken for though God hath exalted him it doth not follow that Adoration should be only Transitory and not fixed So God hath exalted the Kings of the Earth but the Civil Worship or respect rendered unto the King is rendred unto a Man but not in the capacity of a Man but is terminated in him as he is a King so when Christ Man is adored he is not so under the notion of Man but as he is God of the same nature with the Father and that he is in the Father and the Father in him the Father may well be worshiped in him and he in the Father but making them as they do to be of different natures I see no cause why they may not be worshiped asunder one from another which yet doth but rend and divide the object of our worship with this new as they call it way of worship to adore God in a Man But they must say what they understand by him for both the Prophet and the Apostle make use of the word Is it one or a different person named by them if the same then Christ is the one God if not the same then the Apostle hath not well explained the Prophet If in the Psalm Christ be not spoken of but only the God of Israel of a nature altogether different then in the Epistle the words are made use of to no purpose for therein the design is to prove how Christ must be worshiped by all Angels Now he doth not answer his purpose when to prove one who is not the God Israel ought to be adored he brings a Text which commands the Angels to adore him only who is the God of Israel a great disparagement indeed not only to the Author of the Epistle but to the Spirit of God which directed him he saith in that worship exhibited unto Christ the Lord Jesus represents the person of God the Father how as an Actor upon the Stage doth represent a King After this rate Christ with all the worship given him would be without blasphemy let it be spoken but a Stage God If to reign doth signifie the Kingdom of Christ why shall not also the name Jehovah who reigneth belong to his person If he hath the thing why should he not have the name also Christs Kingdom is therein described Jehovah is the King why should not Christ be Jehovah which if he be it must be properly for Christ nor no one else was ever figuratively called Jehovah and the Kingdom of Christ under the name of God is described then if Christ be not God Jehovah then 't is Jehovah that indeed doth represent Christ so he must be the Type of Christ thus they unavoidably run into absurdities but in very deed Christ doth not act the part of the Father but his own He doth act the part of three persons upon the account of his three several offices of a Prophet of a Priest and of a King he therein exerciseth his own office and not that of the Father he doth what belongeth to him and not to others Joh. 17.10 and as all things the Father hath are his so the Kingdom Throne Scepter Power Majesty Ministry and Subjects are all his if he received the Kingdom from the Father he received it as only begotten Son and Heir of all things not as of anothers but as his own wherefore he doth not reign as a Servant or a Minister of the Farther so then when he reigneth he doth not represent the Father's person but his own not as his Vicar or Lieutenant but as God equal with him The first part of the verse Matth. 1.20 Luke 2.9 13. Matth. 28.2 5. and again when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world sheweth how at his first coming into the world he was worshiped and served by Angels for his Conception Birth and Resurrection were published by Angels and then it demonstrates there are two persons one that bringeth the other that is brought in the one is the Father the other the Son the first commanding the last to be adored for he saith not worship me but him There is an Emphasis in the word first begotten simply spoken to be understood of every Creature Col. 1.15 for 't is very just he should be worshiped by Angels as his Creatures and indeed in Scripture I cannot find any truth more clearly and fully proved than this is he was worshiped not only by Angels but also by Devils Mark 5.6 7. the Legion in the Body of the man possessed But as we proved the Lord Jesus ought to be worshiped by Angels so we now must shew he ought to be by men and the place is this That all men should honour the Son even as they honour the Father he that honoureth not the Son John 5.23 honoureth not the Father that sent him To understand the place well we must go up higher and take notice how from verse 17. to 23. our Saviour speaks of his equality with the Father as well understood by the
by St. Paul the name Saviour is often joyned with that of God Tit. 1.3 according to the commandment of God our Saviour both names belong to one and the same person as truly really and actually God as he is Saviour and in another place all these names God Saviour and Lord are given to Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ 1 Tim. 1.1 As he is Jesus Christ so as certainly he is God Lord and Saviour not only his Offices but also his divine Nature is therein contained and in the same Chapter he calls him the Blessed God ver 11 as in another place God Blessed for ever That Christ is thereby meant it appears by his saying the glorious Gospel of the Blessed God Now 't is in several places called the Gospel of Christ wherefore in almost every Epistle of his he calleth himself an Apostle of Jesus Christ Mark 1.1 Rom. 1.16 1 Cor. 9.12 18. Gal. 1.7 Rom. 8.9 sent by him to preach the Gospel So elsewhere he saith if so be that the spirit of God dwell in you now if any man have not the spirit of Christ he is none of his That which in the beginning of the verse Paul calls the spirit of God in the latter end he calls the Spirit of Christ whereby he makes God and Christ to be but one and the same person Under another Head our Blessed Saviour doth in many places afford us an argument for his divinity consisting in a certain divine manner of speaking with Authority not as subordinate or delegate but original in him as the Head and Spring not as by Favour and Courtesie derived upon him but out of his own natural Right which is above what any Man ever did or could pretend to as when in his Sermon upon the Mount he reformeth the abuses crept in against the Law wherein he asserteth his Legislative Power at several times Matth. 5.20 22 28 32 34 39 44. Chap. 7.29 but I say unto you And the people that heard him could take notice how he taught them as one having authority and not as the Scribes And he said unto his Disciples when he sent them recive ye the holy ghost whosesoever sins ye remit they are remitted and whosesoever sins ye retain they are retained and to Peter Feed my Sheep go and teach all Nations All these are words of Command Further let us observe how no Man's Will is absolutely the rule of another's one Man's Will is free and independent from that of another no Man is bound absolutely to follow the will of another because every Man's Will is fallible and so may led us into errour but the will of God alone is infallible and so alone to be followed wherefore in our Prayer simply we say thy will be done and when Man's Will is to be obeyed 't is relatively and only in conformity to that of God But Christ's Will is the Law without Dispute or Exception thus when he calls those that are heavy laden Matth. 11.27 28. he positively saith I will give you rest having in the foregoing verse affirmed how none knoweth the Father but he to whom the Son will reveal him Thus when he cured the Leper he said I will be thou clean so he saith The Son quickeneth whom he will and him that believeth on me I will raise up at the last day Joh. 6.40 44. Herein is his own Power set forth So 't is when speaking with the Samaritan Woman that the water he will give shall be in him that receives it a Well of water springing up into everlasting life and in that other place If any man thirst let him come unto me and drink He doth not say I will pray the Father that he may have everlasting life or that out of his belly may flow rivers of living water but let him come to me and without going for this farther to any he shall certainly drink and be satisfied for that I will do for him this is to speak like Lord Master and God But it may be said Men he may speak to after that rate being so graciously exalted above them all well but I will go higher and say something more than hath been hitherto when the Lord Jesus speaks to the Father Joh. 17.24 he sometimes saith I will as in the Prayer which before his leaving the World in the capacity of Mediator he puts up to him for the Elect Father I will that they also whom thou hast given me be with me where I am to behold my glory thus according to his own will he disposeth of Glory Did any Man meerly such ever speak to God in that way Elijah and John Baptist were the two most fervent Men in spirit that we read of in Scripture but can we ever find any thing like this that ever they did or said No none but God the Son can be so familiar with God the Father and we must believe that he well knew both God the Father and himself when he spake thus except he had been sure he might he would not have done it but it had been as a most unsufferable Presumption nay Blasphemy in any Man to have said so we must conclude he was more than a Man and that he thus spoke upon another account even upon the same he had said before I and the Father are one and had made himself equal with God We read how our Saviour took on him Heb. 2.16 not the nature of Angels but he took on him the seed of Abraham the reduplication took not and took denotes the voluntary Act of a person who made a choice which he had not been in a capacity to do except he had praeexisted before he took the Seed of Abraham so that before he was made of the Seed of Abraham he must need have had another Being and before he was made he must really have been God he could not have been an Angel because he took not upon him the nature of Angels Again our Saviour saith I ascend unto my Father and your Father and to my God and your God why not to our Father as he said when he taught them to pray for themselves For if they had been brethren upon the same bottom of Grace though in different degrees he would have spoken of him as of their common Father but speaking disjunctively and in different numbers seeing he said and did nothing without good cause there must be a particular reason for it which is naturally and easily insinuated to be this That God was their Father and His not upon a common one and the same but upon a much different account their Father by Grace and his by Nature Furthermore Christ so often speaketh of his being sent by the Father as I seek not my own will John 5.3 6 38. Chap. 7.16 Mark 9.37 but the will of him that sent me I came down from Heaven not to do mine own
was the Creator of all which is the reason given in the next verse why he calls him the first born of every Creature For by him were all things created that are in heaven and that are in carth And which is more at the later end of the verse all things were created by him and for him He created all things for himself which may not be said of any Creature for if he were a Creature he had been before himself And if we desire a farther explanation we have it in the following verse heb 1.2.6 and he is before all things And if we compare this place with another we shall find a sweet harmony in both he is called God's Son Col. 1.13 yea his dear Son in the first in both Creatour or maker of the World saith the last by whom also God made the worlds As to Creation so as to preservation for one saith by him all things consist and the other by him all things are upheld and the phrase in the Colossians the first born of every Creature is in the Epistle to the Heb. interpreted by this appointed heir of all things That is to be Lord of every Creature or whole Creation the first born is the Heir and Lord The Elder Brother or First Born is loco parentis Heb. 12.13 as a Father and so in the same Epistle behold I and the children which God hath given me Now the reason is clear and the consequence obvious Christ is before all things because all things were created by him upon which account he calls himself the beginning of the Creation of God That is the efficient cause which expressions are both joyned together as being of the same importance the beginning and first born from the dead Rev. 3.14 Col. 1.13 that is the efficient cause of the Resurection from the Dead These two places out of Colos and Heb. ought to be lookt upon as parallel one with another Now by the Son of Gods or the word 's making the worlds we have an eminent Testimony of his Eternal Godhead and Power for saith the Apostle he that made all things is God Heb. 3.4 So since all things were made by the Son he must be God Here I must take notice of their cavil against the place where it is said God made the world by his Son they would have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by whom to be taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for whom as if God had made them for his Son for his sake which is a down-right corruption of the Text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not with an accusative to signifie propter but in the Genitive which never denoteth a final but always an efficient cause In the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by is used about 600 times with a Genitive Cafe and in no one may be rendred propter for and so cannot be here and suppose it could yet it would be against the constant use of the word for which some particular reason ought to be given why such a sence should be admitted for which there is none in this place it also must be taken notice of how the case is not the same where Things as where Persons are spoken of What now I am by the grace of God entering upon is to shew how our Blessed Saviour had a real being before he was conceived in the Womb of the Virgin and my reasons shall be drawn out of the 6. chap. of St. John's Gospel where the matter conducing to our purpose is spoken of at large â—â—r Christ doth in several places thereof speak of his being come from Heaven and shall begin with the last verse wherein he discourseth upon the point because it will by degrees lead us back to the rest Joh. 6.6 What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before which words he spoke of himself to remove the offence which what he said about the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood had given many of his disciples for he saith his words are not literally or corporally but spiritually to be understood for he was to leave the Earth and go up into Heaven where he was before out of which words we may easily conclude how Christ was in Heaven before he was upon earth this seems to be clear But however they will not agree to it Vers 32.33 38 50.51 Ver. 41.42 first they cavil about the place saying that by where he was before Heaven is not meant when in this very chapter no less than five times he saith he came down from Heaven which the Jews took special notice of and murmured at which truth our Saviour had before declared to Nicodemns and No man hath ascended up to Heaven but he that came down from Heaven even the Son of Man Joh. 3.13 which is in Heaven so that although in this verse the word Heaven be not named yet is so plainly described that there is not the least ground left for any one to doubt of it either for his Disciples or others for what need of his naming again that which he named so many times before There is a Text parallel with this Joh. 16.28 which doth explain it I came forth from the father and am come into the world again I leave the world and go to the Father To say he shall ascend up where he was before and to return to the place whence he came is it not the same and had he not declared at several times that his Father is in Heaven And if any doubt should remain 't is wholly cleared by the execution and when the thing was fulfilled at his ascension for while they beheld he was taken up Acts 1.9 and a cloud received him out of their sight But this not serving their turn but by these Texts being pincht to the quick to hold out they take another way which is figuratively to explain the words where he was before and wrest their proper signification into a Metaphor that is Christ in his mind and thoughts conversed in Heaven being taken up in Meditation with those heavenly mysteries that are there which were so present unto him that although he was upon Earth yet he might be said to be in Heaven this indeed is a way of perverting the sense of Scriptures but not a fair one But if so our Saviour would have spoken in the present is and not in time past was for as they say he continually was taken up with such thoughts if continually then not discontinued when at that time he discoursed with them But the word before doth import a relative opposition between the time wherein our Saviour was in Heaven and that when he spoke upon Earth besides that actually and really he was upon Earth when they make him to have been in Heaven meerly in Thoughts and Meditation which holds no proportion between his being in Heaven and upon Earth so then Christ
was made so upon Earth We speak of the rising of the Sun which hath a Being before he riseth on our Hemisphere but only at such a time he appeareth unto us like the Star that guided the Wisemen to the place where he was born and of Christ it is said Thou hast the dew of thy youth from the womb of the morning As to what Socinus saith That Christ is said to be God but not that onely God we answer how Christ is not upon every account said to be God but only he is said to be such a God as true divine Worship is due unto who alone is to be worshipped and served as he saith Mat. 4.10 So he is no other but the onely God in Scripture called the true God They object the place where the Holy Ghost saith 1 Cor. 8.6 But to us there is but one God the Father of whom are all things who is distinguished from Christ who is one Lord by whom are all things But the Adversaries Prejudice makes that they either will not or cannot see how in the place St. Paul doth not separate one God from Christ nor one Lord from the Father for his scope is to teach us Christians how there are not many Gods nor many Lords but only one God and one Lord Now if the Father was one God and one Lord separately from Christ then there would be two Gods and two Lords which wholly overturns the Apostle's design so that of necessity we must say the Father and Christ are one God and one Lord consequently that God and the Lord are the same for there is no doubt but that God is the Lord and he who by Divine Reason is Lord and opposed to Idols as 't is the true sense of the place he also for certain must needs be God So then when Paul saith that onely God to be the Father he also owns him to be the onely Lord and when he saith the one Lord is Christ he owns him to be one God and as he excludeth not the Father from being Lord so he excludeth not Christ from being God 'T is a weak notion grounded upon these Particles of whom and by whom are all things for both the same in Scripture are attributed to God Rom. 11.36 Of him and through him and to him are all things so there is in them nothing to exclude Christ from being God for both belong to Father and Christ only one is chiefly attributed to one the other chiefly to the other 'T is an Error in the Adversaries to say the words by whom to signifie a second Cause seeing that very same Particle is elsewhere attributed unto God which in the same place we must also believe to be attributed unto Christ seeing the Apostle's mind is to shew there is only one God and one Lord But in Socinus's sense there would be two Gods and two Lords one of whom are all things the other by whom are all things tho' the same Apostle doth without any such Particles absolutely affirm There is one Lord one God and Father of all Ephes 4 5 6. wherefore Men must conceive no Mystery to be in those Particles to make a distinction between God and Lord one and the same Nature or Person is certainly God and Lord. Thus David saith Psal 85.8 I will hear what God the Lord will speak And if two be so one is no prejudice to the other Hence I conclude how no stress is to be laid upon these Particles of and by as if there were two different Natures and Principles as also in another place already quoted they would upon the Particle and where 't is said To know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ where they would have the copulative Particle to joyn different Natures and Persons to exclude him from being the true God but after this manner of interpreting the words God and Father must import two different Subjects and Natures so that God shall be one and Father the other for 't is said Gal. 1.4 according to the will of God and our Father which contradicts their Opinion of one onely God namely the Father but in that place the words God and Father are essentially taken for Father Son and Holy Ghost one only God Farther they argue thus If Christ be the Son of that onely God he is not the onely God himself or else he would be his own Son but he is not his own Son therefore he is not the onely God But I answer the Son is distinguished from that one God not as to the Nature but as to the Person for the Essence cannot be distinguish'd because the Son hath not part of the Nature but wholly together with the Father the Person must be distinguish'd for he is not Son of himself but of another tho' he be God of himself Hence followeth that as to the Nature the Son is that one God not as to the Person seeing in Nature it doth agree but must be distinguish'd as to the Person Another Objection is this If Christ be the Son of that only God then that one is not God the Father Son and Holy Ghost but only the Father so that onely God is not in three Persons We answer When Christ is called the Son of one God one God is there taken for the Person of the Father or as it subsisteth in the Person of the Father for Christ is the Son only of God the Father but when Father Son and Holy Ghost are said to be one God then one God is taken essentially They need not say where are one and three there are four as if the Essence and three Persons were four things really distinct But we answer Where are one Being and three Beings there indeed are four but not where are one Being and three manners of being This may be illustrated by an Example of Metaphysick where is one Ens or Being and three as properties or qualities unum verum and bonum one must not conclude there are four but unum verum bonum to be simply one Being Wherefore seeing in this most simple Essence the Persons are Subsistences or Manners of subsisting it follows that three Persons and one Nature do not make four in God As to the Rule of the tertium which I have taken notice of before it faileth here because the Essence is communicable for Divine Nature being infinite is so Now we come to some Objections relating to the Son of God's eternal generation The Father alone say they is not begotten but the Son and Holy Ghost are begotten and made so cannot be the true God We know how the relative Property of the Father is to beget of the Son to be begotten and of the Holy Ghost to proceed so the word God is attributed to Son and Holy Ghost that the Son is called only begotten because he is the natural Son and the first born as Mediator because he hath many Brethren he is called the