That which you add from the third verse of this Chapter will finde elsewhere a fitter place to receive an Answer in NOw I come to Matth. 28.20 Matth. 28.20 Lo I am with you always to the end of the world Answ Sir from the scope of your Paper it is easily seen what you would inferr hence but as yet the Reason of your inference lies in the dark the meaning of this phrase I am with you always unto the end of the World is no more then this I will do you good whilest ye remain imploy'd in my work My Authour in this Exposition is old Jacob no bad Interpreter Gen. 31.3 the Lord commanded Jacob to return into the Land of his Fathers and to his kindred and for his encouragement adds to the promise thus I will be with thee which Jacob in chap. 32.9 thus expounds I will deal well with thee or I will do thee good Jesus Christ is present with his Messengers or deals well with them when he doth instruct comfort strengthen or protect them and all these works he doth in his absence by his spirit whom the Father hath sent in his Name Joh. 14.26 Let me only for brevity sake instance in the work of instruction Christ instructed his Apostles but not immediately for the spirit which came in Christs Name and received of his was the Instrument by which Jesus Christ did the work John 16.13 14 15. When he the spirit of truth is come he will guide you into all truth for he shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear that shall he speak and he will shew you things things to come He shall glorifie me for he shall receive of mine and shall shew it unto you all things that the Father hath are mine therefore said I Hic locus de modo praeseutiae spiritus quo se suaque nobis communicat caeterum corpore abest Beza in loc he shall take of mine and shall shew it unto you Christ is now in Heaven sitting at the right hand of God and is present with the Saints in Earth by the spirit and glorious influences of grace and mercy John 14.16 17 18. This kinde of presence by the spirit Beza and others understand to be intended in Matth. 28.20 REv. 2.2 is now to be minded Rev. 2.2 whether it doth joyn with the fore-going Texts in speaking any thing by way of Justification to your Assertion or not Answ Christ could not say you at so great a distance know all the works of the Churches as meer man What could he not Is any thing too hard for the Lord What could the Prophet Elisha know at a very great distance what the King of Syria said in his bed-chamber And yet cannot Christ know at a distance He hath the spirit to wit wisedom power c. given him without measure John 3.34 And therefore can know beyond what we can conceive And yet is not the most high God for his knowledge is of another John 5.30 I can of mine own self do nothing as I hear I judge and my judgement is just because I seek not mine own will but the will of the Father which hath sent me Though he always knew all things necessary for the perfect discharge of his Offices yet there was a time when he was excluded from the knowledge of the hour and day of judgement Mark 13.32 The words from the Greek are these But of that day and hour no one knoweth neither the Angels which are in Heaven Nor the Son unless the Father Hence it is plain that the Father onely knew the day and hour of Judgement and that the Son himself was at that time excluded from the knowledge of it therefore this knowledge was not originally of himself nor always perfect COl 1.15 Col. 1.15 I finde next in your Paper but have already spoken to it yet was willing here to mention it least you should think I had forgot it Sir this Text you say holds forth the Eternal Generation of Jesus Christ I pray consider it again and by your next let me hear what part thereof it is in which Christs Eternal Generation may be seen THe next Scripture is Col. 1.16 Col. 1.16 with John 1.3 To which I shall add John 1.3 being reserv'd for this place Answ Sir here you harp upon two other strings and think they sound that alowd in your ears which you have entertained in your thoughts to wit that Jesus Christ is the most high God But pray Sir consider whether your Conclusion be the Eccho of those Texts or else of your own thoughts onely But you seem to gather this Argument from the words to manifest the verity of your thoughts He by whom all things were made is the most high God But all things were made by Jesus Christ Therefore Iesus Christ is the most High God I shall answer to your Major by distinguishing betwixt the Agent Principall and Instrumental That there may be in one and the same work one Principal and another Instrumentall Agent none will deny But whether there were in the work of Creation one Principall and another Instrumentall is a thing to be proved That the Father was Principall therein and so the most high God comes not under debate But whether the Son was onely Instrumental in that great work of Creation is the Controversie and must be the subject of our present inquiry I affirm that Iesus Christ was onely an Instrumentall Agent in the Creation of the worlds The Reasons by which I shall at this time guard mine assertion from suspition of errour are these that follow The first is drawn from the silence of all creatures The book of the Creatures as well as the book of the Scriptures Ex Creatioue agnoscitur Deus sed non Deus pater fil spir si quoni im vis illa efficiens quia mundus fuit creatus pertinet ad Essentiam Dei non ad subsistentiam ejus personalem Amesius speak forth with open mouth this sacred truth that there is one first cause and Principall Agent of all things Of a Trinity of Persons in Unity of Essence as Principal Agents in the work of Creation the whole Creation is wholly silent Wherefore our Divines acknowledg that God is known from the Creation but not God the Father Son and Holy Spirit because that efficient power by which the world was created belongs to the Essence of God not to his personall subsistence Yet by their leave God is a Person all actions being proper unto persons and therefore by their grant the works of Creation hold forth but one Agent who must needs be the Principall if not the only Agent therein for it is not imaginable that if there were then one Principall Agent they should not all be equally discovered by the work being equally concerned in it Therefore if Christ were an Agent he was but an instrumental one The Second Reason proceeds from the verdict of pure
Sabellianism Your Third Scripture is Tit. 3.13 Tit. 3.13 which I shall pass over till I come to your second paper where it is brought forth in a more formal way and with an appearance of greater strength THat which follows is 1 Iohn 5.20 1 Iohn 5.20 This is the true God and eternall life Answ Christ is the most high God in that he is as you suppose here called the true God The words I confess at the first blush seems to stand on your side but if well considered they speak not a word for your cause for they relate not to the Son but to the Father onely First if we consider these words this is the true God and eternal life as an intire body of themselves not having dependance on the words immediately preceding as probably they have not being by a full point separated from them then they are the Epitome Abridgement or summe of the whole Epistle And so the Apostles mind seems to be this This Father which I have in this my Epistle treated of is the true God and this Iesus Christ of whom I have spoken and in whom ye have believed is eternal life that is the way to it Secondly but were it granted that these words This is the true God do depend on the foregoing words yet will it not of necessity follow that the Son not the Father is the Antecedent to the Relative this and so that the sentence must be thus understood This Son is the true God In the precedent words there is mention made of the Father And we know saith the Apostle that the Son of God is come i. e. We Believers assuredly know that the Son of God is already come in the flesh notwithstanding many at this time gain-say and deny it And hath given us an understanding that we may know him that is true and this Jesus Christ being in the bosome of the Father and having received from him the promise of the spirit hath anointed the eyes of our mindes that we might savingly know him that is true that is the true God as some Greek Copies have it And we are in him that is true c. If with Erasmus and Tindal we read the words thus and we are in him that is true through his Son Jesus Christ the meaning is this We have not only an apprehension of but also union and communion with him who is the true God by the means of his Son Jesus Christ But if we follow Piscator the words hold out that oneness and fellowship which the Saints have with the Father and his Son Jesus For thus he would have them read And we are in him that is true to with the Father and in his Son Iesus Christ But last of all if we consent with Hierome who by making 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a redundant hath them thus and we are in this true Son Iesus Christ they speak only of that oneness we have with Christ Now the words that follow relate to the Father This is the true God The Apostle intends the Father But because his assertion is contrary to many mens interpretation take for the backing of it these few Reasons 1. Because the Text will Grammatically bear it for the words may be thus rendred That is the true God and so the Antecedent to the Relative is not the Person immediatly foregoing which is Jesus Christ but another spoken of at a farther distance to wit the Father 2. Because Jesus Christ no where in the Scripture is called the true God and therefore is it the more questionable whether he be so called here the place being somewhat doubtful and ambiguous 3. Because the Father is called the true God distinct from the Son 1 Thess 1.9 10. For they themselves shew of us what manner of entring in we had unto you and how ye turned to God from Idols to serve the living and true God and to wait for his Son from Heaven whom he raised from the dead even Iesus which delivered us from the wrath to come It is evident from this Text that the Father distinct from the Son is called the living and true God and therefore is it probable that in the Text under Examination the Father onely is intended in this expression this is the true God 4. Because the Father is called the onely true God John 17.3 And this is life eternal that they might know thee the only true God and whom thou hast sent Iesus Christ Here the Father is called the onely true God and so the Son is excluded from being the true God and therefore of necessity in 1 Iohn 5.20 The Father onely is intended THe Text which comes next to be scanned Ier. 23 6. is Ier. 23.6 And this is his name whereby he shall be called The Lord our Righteousness Hence is gathered that Iesus Christ is the most High God because the incommunicable name Jehovah is attributed to him Answ First that it is a probable conjecture that our English Translators saw not this Mystery wrapt up in the name Jehovah In that they do not here follow their usuall custome in giving the Hebrew name for they read not Jehovah but the Lord our righteousness Yea that the Apostles themselves were ignorant of the use where unto the name Jehovah is put by you and others For though we have in the New Testament Hebrew names yet Jehovah appears not there but in stead thereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord which is a common name Against this you once objected That the name Iehovah cannot be exprest in the Greek language But to me this seems not true for there is no letter in Iehovah which the Greeks want but may be found in other names which in the New Testament are rendred in imitation of the Hebrew as Iacob Abraham David And it cannot but seem strange that that name which cannot as you say be expressed in the Greek language by which the Old and New Testament was published to the greatest part of the world should be a foundation for that which you call a truth fundamental Secondly that it is not an undeniable consequent that Jesus Christ is the Most High God because called Iehovah for although the name may most properly belong to the most High God yet 't is communicated in the Scripture unto creatures To Angels frequently Gen. 19.24 Then Iehovah rained upon Sodom and Gomorrha brimstone and fire from Iehovah out of Heaven That is the Angel which did sustain the name of Iehovah he rained c. If credit may be given to some the title Iehovah is in this of Ieremiah appropriated to the people of Israel and Iudah They read the words thus and this is the name which they shall call it to wit the people Iehovah our righteousness that is God hath done well for us In Ier. 33.16 the people of Ierusalem and Iudah in the letter but according to a Mysticall sense the Church of Christ is called Iehovah our righteousness
personally and yet be one in essence with him To this distinction hear what a learned and godly man speaks His words are these As for this wretched distinctions to omit the mention of the Fathers is not onely unheard of in Scripture but is also disclaimed by Reason For 1. it is impossible for any man if he would but endevour to conceive the thing and not delude both himself and others with empty terms and words without understanding to distinguish the person from the essence of God and not to frame two beings or things in his minde and consequently two Gods Secondly if the Person be distinct from the Essence of God then it is either something or nothing If nothing how can it be distinguished seeing nothing hath no accidents If something then either some finite or infinite thing if finite then there will be something finite in God and consequently since by the confession of the Adversaries themselves every thing in God is God God will be finite which the Adversaries themselves will confess to be absurd If infinite then there will be two infinites in God to wit the Person and the Essence of God and consequently two Gods which is more absurd then the former Thirdly to talk of God taken onely essentially is ridiculous not onely because there is no example thereof in Scripture but because God is the name of a Person and signifieth him that ruleth over others and when it is put for the most High God it denoteth him who with soveraign and absolute authority ruleth over all but none but a Person can rule over others all actions being proper to persons wherefore to take God otherwise then personally is to take him otherwise then he is and indeed to mistake him Thus much for the Major The Minor which is That whole Christ is distinct from God is now to be prov'd The Scripture being full and frequent in the demonstration of this I shall speak but a few words to it First Christ himself doth confess it John 8.42 Jesus said unto them to wit the Jews if God were your Father yee would love me for I proceeded forth and came from God neither came I of my self but he sent me In this Text we may note these few things 1. That God is a Person and that Father is his name If God were your Father ye would love me c. 2. That Christ doth plainly distinguish himself from God If God were your Father ye would love me for I proceeded forth and came from God c. Yea he affirms that of himself which denies him to be God to wit change of place I proceeded saith he and came forth from God And subjection to God I came not of my self but he that is God sent me Christ also distinguisheth himself from God Lu. 18.18 19. And a certain ruler asked him saying Good Master what shall I doe to inherit eternall life Jesus answered and said Why callest thou me good none is good save one that is GOD. Here Christ affirmeth that there is but one God to wit by way of eminency and excludes himself from being this one God Why callest thou me Good there is but one good even God Were Jesus Christ the most High GOD and were this a fundamentall as you assert it is imaginable that Jesus Christ who came not to condemn but to save the world should never say it and should in this place so much cloud it Secondly now let us hear some testimonies that the Apostles who were to speak nothing but what their Lord and Master Jesus Christ did command them have given to the thing in hand Let Paul as Peter was wont to doe speak for the rest In 1 Cor. 12.4 5 6. He tels us That there are diversity of gifts but the same Spirit and there are differences of administrations but the same Lord and there are diver sity of operations but 't is the same God which worketh all in all Here the Apostle doth distinguish the Spirit and the Lord from GOD and shews that those gifts which were distributed to men by the Spirit that they might be fitted for severall ministrations in the Kingdome of the Lord Christ did all of them proceed from God The same Apostle in the same Epistle Chap. 8.5 6. doth as one designing the thing distinguish the Lord Jesus from God For though there be saith he that are called Gods whether in heaven or in earth as there be Gods many and Lords many but unte us there is one GOD even the Father of whom are all things and we unto him and one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things and we by him Here we have the Apostles and Primitive Christians Creed They beleeve that there is but one GOD in way of eminency to wit the Father of whom as the first cause are all things and unto whom as the ultimate end Saints are and so all things and that there is but one Lord in way of eminency amongst all made Lords even Iesus by whom as the great instrument of God are all things and we by him See Ephes 4.4 5 6. where a plain distinction is made betwixt the Spirit the Lord and GOD But enough of this Obj. But Christ doth say that he is one with the Father John 10.30 Sol. 'T is true Christ doth say that he and the Father are one But one what one Person that none will assert But are they one God one Essence Yea that 's the thing which many will subscribe to as Christs meaning here But did Christ intend to signifie that Doubtless no which appears not only from the absurdity of the thing but also evidently from Christs vindication of himself from the accusation of the Pharisees who misconstruing of this did mis-inferre from this saying of his I and my Father are one In this vindication we may observe First that Christ denies the Premise of their conclusion They concluded that he spake blasphemy and therefore went about to stone him because as they understood he made himself God to wit the most High God and so made more Gods then one Verse 33. This Christ denies affirming that his saying did amount to no more then this The sonne of God verse 36. that is Gods representative Secondly Christ asserts the lawfulness of his saying by an argument drawn à minori ad majus from the less to the greater If they to whom the Word of GOD came to wit the Judges of the great Synedrion who received a commandement from God to judge the people of Israel were without blasphemy called Gods then he whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world to have dominion over all mankinde may without blasphemy be called God or the Son of God But they to whom the word of God came were called Gods This Christ proves from Psalm 82.6 Jesus answered and said Is it not written in your Law I said ye are Gods verse 34. Therefore he that the Father hath sanctified and
Reason If Reason may obtain credit she will tell us that there could be in the work of Creation but one Principall Agent because there is by nature and in way of eminency but one God For if there were two Principall Agents there must be two Gods in way of eminency the terms being convertible which to affirm would be absurd and easily disproved And therefore if Jesus Christ were any he was but an Instrumentall Agent in that work of Creation The Third Reason issues from the nature of Christs being That whole Christ is a creature hath been already proved yet let me adde a word from Col. 1.15 which doth immediately precede the Text now in question Christ is there called the image of the invisible God and so is distinguished from God because the image and the thing whereof it is an image are not the same in that nothing can be the image of its self Now he is called the image of the invisible God in that God through him did principally manifest and declare his Divine Glory and in that the chiefest Dominion of the creature was by the Father committed to him in this sense man is called the image and glory of God 1 Cor. 11.7 He is also called the first-born of every creature whereby he is ranked among the creatures yet so as that he is the Head of them Now if whole Christ be a creature then will it unavoidably follow that he was but an Instrument in the work of Creation for God and creatures are contradistinct and he could not be unless he were God a Principall Agent The fourth Reason doth spring from the manner of Christs working 1. Though he had an hand in the Creation of the world yet was it not originally of him 1 Cor. 8.6 where the Apostle doth plainly shew us that all things are of God even the Father and that all things are by not of Jesus Christ and so the Son is distinguished from the Father in the work of Creation the Father being the first cause and originall of all things and Christ the instrument of the Father by whom he did manifest his Divine Glory in producing creatures 2. Instrumentum Minist Ter. In that in the work of Creation the Scripture tells us that God acted by him Ephes 3.9 where 't is said That God created all things by Jesus Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Just 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theoph. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Origin So in Heb. 1.2 which openly hold forth Jesus Christ as Gods instrument in creating the world He is frequently called by the Fathers the Instrument and Servant of God But you endeavour to strengthen your Proposition by a Reason such as 't is drawn from impossibility God could say you make use of no instrument in the work of Creation But Sir this assertion derogates from Gods All-sufficiency Is any thing impossible with God Is any thing too hard for the Lord 2. It contradicts your own testimony I remember that in a Conference where I exercised both silence and patience to the Glory of God since I received your paper you did affirm in the hearing of not a few that God might at first have made an Angel or some other creature and by it have made all things How to reconcile one with the other is a thing unfeasible and therefore you must confess that you are not always infallible yea that sometimes you differ from your self and so 't is no wonder if you disagree with others But what shall I take from your present judgement Must your last words stand If so then you have weakned your cause and I may save a labour in returning an answer to that which follows in your paper If the former then you must recant what you last said and I must not here make an end of my Reply to your Major The truth is I honour Reason so much that I should rather prostrate my self to its shadow and appearance then to the best mans testimony and assertion wherefore I shall honour Reason so much as not to pass by without examination that which appears in your paper with Reasons dress on it Your Reason thus runs Now because Creation is a making of all things out of nothing and required an infinite power God can make use of no Instrument inasmuch as God cannot derive and give an infinite power to any creature because no creature is capable of such a Divine Attribute for it would make him God to be Almighty or to be infinite in power Answ I shall not answer to all in this Reason which seems not to be sound doctrine but only so far as the matter in hand requires 1. Though it be true that Gods infinite power was manifested in the work of Creation yet was not the Infinity of his Power manifested fully in that or any other work for he hath more power then ever yet he had need to use or then could in any work be fully declared 2. Your assertion plainly denies the man Christ Jesus to be God Almighty or Infinite in power for you say that God could not give or derive an infinite power to any creature and that a creature cannot be God Almighty c. The man Christ Jesus was a creature how then can that Person be God 3. The ground of your Argument is straw and stubble For infinite power may be manifested by them to whom 't is not communicated and so their proper power As is evident in those that wrought miracles and raised the dead in which infinite power was manifested and yet the instruments thereof were not in power infinite The like might be said of Gospel-Preachers whom God makes his Instruments in mens conversion as great a work as the worlds Creation The same might be said of Christ in his work of our Redemption But enough of this I shall now examine your Minor which was That all things were made by Iesus Christ. This is true Christ being excepted of whose Creatural being I have already spoken Obj. But you will say that in Iohn 1.3 it is said That all things were made by him and without him was nothing Made that was Made Sol. The words are to be restrained to all those things which by the use of an instrument were made and created In the first verse of this Chapter the creation of Jesus Christ is included and in this third verse he is spoken of as the instrument of God in creating all things and therefore is here to be excepted As when John the Baptist speaking of Christ John 3.32 said What he hath seen and heard that he testifieth and no man receiveth his testimony it is evident that Iohn was to be excepted Persons are sometimes segregated from others of the same kinde in way of eminency being chief amongst them Thus in Psal 18.1 where 't is said that David sang that song when the Lord delivered him from the hand of all his enemies and from the hand of Saul What was
enjoy the discoveries of Gods hidden secrets Thus Paul was in the third heavens when he heard unspeakable words which is not possible for a man to utter 2 Cor. 12. In this sense Christ was in heaven saith Grotius Christus introspexit patris intima saith he Christ looked into the most secret things of the Father 3. Because this sense which I have joyn'd to this text makes the text appear as fitly joyn'd with its context In those two verses which immediately precede this Christ doth reprove Nicodemus for his unbelief which he aggravates from the certainty of the thing spoken Verily verily we speak what we know c. and then from his perspicuity in speaking if I have told you earthly things that is either things that may and are necessary to be known in the earth or else the words have respect onely to the manner of Christs holding them forth and ye beleeve not how can ye beleeve if I should tell you of heavenly things In this thirteenth verse you have an exclusion of all men Christ excepted from the knowledg of heavenly things which are reserved for another world or which are known here as they are in themselves THe last Scripture which I find in your Paper John 17.15 is Ioh. 17.5 And now ô Father glorifie me with thine own self with the glory I had with thee before the world was Answ This Verse is part of Christs prayer and will no way disrelish this meaning O thou Father who dost abound in kindness and art the fountain of goodness the time being come of finishing my course in earth and returning to thy self glorifie me in heaven who have emptied my self taking to me a naturall and mortall body and walking among men in form of a servant and now being ready to humble my self to the death even the death of the Cross in obedience to thee with that glory which I had in heaven before the world was being then with thee as Heir of all things clothed with Majesty and Glory answerable to that high station wherein thy pleasure was to set me and to that great dominion wherewithall thou wast pleased to invest me SIR What you can fetch from this scripture to confirm your doctrine of Christ's Deitie doth lie as yet under the shadow of darkness and in the land of obscurity That much might be gathered hence by a good deduction to make opposition against your assertion is not a little perspicuous and apparent A few things I shall present you with as a taste of that which might be gathered hence to disown that point and conclusion which with so much heat and passion you endevour to uphold and maintain amongst us It appears from this Scripture That whole Christ is a Creature First in that he directs his prayer to the Father If our Lord Jesus were God equal with the Father there had been no need nor can cause be shew'd why he should supplicate to the Father a Person in the Trinity and not act relyance on the Godhead which dwelt in him bodily These words spake Iesus and lift up his eyes to heaven v. 1. Secondly in that the Glory was not divine which he had with the Father before the world was Because this Glory which he had in heaven with the Father before the world was at this time of his praying was separated from him This must be asserted or I know not how Christs prayer can be justified We doe not pray but praise for things we have if we know that we have them but it cannot be imagined that Christ was ignorant of what he had Now if Christ were a person in the Trinity coequall with the Father and so enjoying by the same right the highest Glory he could not especially with the Father or in heaven be without it in any sense whatsoever as by the clouding darkning or obscuring of it Therefore the glory which he had with the Father was not the highest glory but a glory proceeding from the Highest and so by good consequence He who at that time was the subject of it was really and indeed a Creature Thirdly it appears that the Glory which he had with the Father was not Divine or the highest Glory because it was to be communicated Glorifie me ô Father with that glory c. Now the Highest Glory being infinite could not be given or communicated to the humane nature which was finite and so uncapable of it This is but your own assertion in what you speak relating to the creation but 't is absurd to conceive that the Divine glory which is essentiall in God could be communicated to the Divine Nature of Jesus Christ And therefore this Glory was not the highest and the subject of it was a Creature Thus I shall take my leave of the Scriptures which you alledg to confirm that Jesus Christ is the most High God leaving them for that they are intended for being without controversie not useless but exceeding usefull SIR Unto your texts of Scripture you adjoyn one Reason if it please you so to call it which I shall set down in your own words thus It may be said truly that this Doctrine which makes Christ a meer creature brings in as it were another Gospel destroys the true Gospel in many of the parts of it and brings in another Scripture in many main points Come now let us reason together concerning this your Reason which is formidable in appearance to your Antagonists but whether it carries the Sword of truth in its hand and strength of conviction let us now seriously consider That we may with the more certainty and facility determine I shall be your leave draw your Reason into the form of an Argument Thus That Doctrine which brings in as it were another Gospel destroys the true Gospel in many of the parts of it c. is erroneous and to be rejected But that Doctrine which makes Christ a meer creature doth so Therefore SIR I shall subscribe with both hands if need be to the Major that it is true And if the Minor be of the same blood I shall conclude with you in the conclusion and let him be Anathema that holds the contrary But how will it appear that that Doctrine which makes Christ a meer creature doth bring in as it were another Gospel destroys the true Gospel in many of the parts of it c That it might be evident you bring in twelve Instances which were they good and true though fewer might serve for a sufficient Jury to bring in a finall verdict concerning the thing in debate but of what moment your Instances are let us now examine Instance 1 If Christ be but a meer creature and not God then the giving ef Divine worship and honour and service to a meer creature is lawfull and warrantable which yet everywhere is forbidden in reference to any creature but is practised unto Christ in Rev. 5.12 13 14. and would be Idolatry if Christ were not God Answ