Christ in the Father To this exposition there were these exceptions taken by our brother 1. Christ had the fulnesse of the Godhead before his ascension and therefore Christ did not ascend that he might receive the fulnesse of the Godhead 2. If the Godhead were imparted to any Saint that Saint would be as Christ is truly God 3. The Saints are not in the Father as Christ is in the Father for the divine Persons are {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} quia {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} they are in one another because they have one and the same infinite essence they are all three one and the same God 4. The Father is not the Godhead because the Father if we speak properly is the first Person the Godhead is the nature of all three Persons His next Argument was taken from John 14. 12. The Saints have a greater power then ever Christ had for every one that believes in Christ may doe greater works then ever Christ did Our brother answered that the speech was limited they should doe greater works then these that is greater then the miracles which Christs speech referred to and therefore Master Earbury did ill to interpret the Text as if the words were to be simply and universally taken when it is evident that they are to be restrained quoad materiam subiectam for Christ did satisfie the justice of God for the sins of all the elect which no Saint could ever have done M. Earbury was asked whether he would acknowledge that Christ satisfied Gods justice for the sins of all the elect but he would not answer yea or no but said that M. Cheynell endeavoured to intrap him M. Earbury said that the Apostles gaue the Holy Ghost which was a greater work then ever Christ did M. Cheynell desired him to prove that the Apostles gave the Holy Ghost as Christ did by their owne immediate power or prove that Christ did not give the Holy Ghost M. Earbury replyed that Christ did not give the Holy Ghost before his ascension and so retreated to his first hold as if Christ had ascended that he might receive such a fulnesse of the Godhead as did enable him to give the Holy Ghost Our brother desired them who were accquainted with the Socinian controversies to observe that M. Earbury had not his revelation from Heauen but Poland and desired M. Earbury to consider that Christ satisfied for the sins of the elect before his Ascension M. Earbury his next proof was taken from John 14. 20. 21. Joh. 17. 5. 21. 22. from whence he collected that the same fulness of the Godhead was given to the Saints wch was givē to Christ for the Saints have the same glory because they are one with Christ perfectly one with him as the Father is one with him therefore the fulnesse of the Godhead dwels in them The same glory which Christ asks for in the 5 verse he gives to the Saints verse 22. of the 17 of John there is the same union between Christ and the Saints which is between Christ and this Father verse 21. 23. the same love verse 23. I say the same love saith M. Earbury speake in as high a measure as you will I will prove the same measure nay there is a higher measure of love expressed to the Saints then to Christ though in a mystery there is the same love and the same union that is an union of love Many answers were given to this Argument which need not be repeated To that concerning union with Christ it was answered to this effect That the union betweene Christ and the Saints is either a mysticall union by faith or a morall union by love or a glorious union by a beatificall fruition And because M. Earbury pressed the word as one with the Father as Christ is one our brother answered that there was a received distinction among Divines sicut veritatis sicut aequalitatis sicut similitudinis As doth sometimes note onely the truth of a thing and so the union between Christ and the Saints is a true union a reall though a mysticall and spirituall union 2. As notes no equality in that place of John though it may note a similitude so the proportion and distance be observed betweene creatures and their Creator Finally M. Cheynell told him that the interpretation smelt too strong of Poland when he intimated that there was only an union of love between the Father and Christ for there is also an union of nature but there is not an union of nature between God and the Saints the saints are joyned to Christ by faith and are therefore one spirit with him 1 Cor. 6. 17. but they are not one God with him Then M. Earbury insisted very long upon Coloss. 2. because that Chapter doth explain the mystery of God even the Father and of Christ verse 2. though the Spirit that is the power of God as we said before even Christ who is the wisdome of God and the power of God doth manifest himself Joh. 14. 21. The Father is the eternall God God in himself and of himselfe greater then all and highest of all the Father is the Godhead and he fils the man Christ with all the fulnesse of the Godhead Coloss. 2. 9. For Christ hath all given to him as the Saints have and as there is the fullnesse of the Godhead in Christ so is there also in the Saints For they are {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} verse 10. which is rendred compleat now the Saints are not compleat till they are filled with all the fulnesse of God Ephes. 3. 19. filled with love for God is love and that love wherewith we are filled is God filled with Christ the wisdome of God and with the spirit the power of God with those three that are in Heaven this is the mystery and it is incomprehensible for the love of God to Christ and the Saints is Incomprehensible We fear that you would be tired out if all that was objected against this exposition should be related but it must be observed first that when M. Earbury speaks of God he saith God even the Father and when he mentions the Father he saith the Father is God himselfe the eternall God c. whereby he doth intimate that Christ is not God of himself the eternall God equall to his Father Our brother therefore took exceptions against these expressions because they seemed not to drop from M. Earbury but to be affected since they were so often repeated M. Cheynell offered to prove that Christ is God by nature God of himselfe equall to his Father M. Earbury replied dear Sir you are not to dispute but to answer what I object whereas indeed M. Earbury was to have been respondent and did make a Speech instead of a Supposition for the explication of his Thesis and therefore M. Cheynell should have had free liberty to have disputed and M. Earbury was engaged to answer his arguments
same measure though not in the same manifestation as it dwelt in Christ whilest hee was here below in the flesh For the proofe of this damnable doctrine he alledged as we are informed these places of Scripture 1 Sam. 16. 13. compared with Heb. 2. 11 12. and Psalme 22. 22. Coloss. 1. 27. Coloss. 2. 9 10. John 17. 21 22 23 24. Ephes. 3. from v. 14. to the 19. 1 Cor. 12. 12. 2 Pet. 1. 4. Zach. 12. 8. Mark the Scripture doth not only say we shall bex one with God as Christ is but it sayth more we shall be as God But sayth he it will be objected That God hath anointed Christ above his fellows Heb. 1. 9. I answer sayth he this place is meant of being anointed with the Godhead but be it known to you Christ hath no more of the Godhead then we have and therefore is not anointed in greater measure then we are but onely in a greater manifestation and if we beleeve this we shall doe greater works then ever Christ did that Text then Heb. 1. 9. is meant only of the manifestation of the Godhead For as the soule is as much in the little finger as in the head so is there as much of the Godhead in the least member of Christ as there is in Christ himselfe I do sayth Master Earbury remember another Text that is urged by some to overthrow the doctrine which I have delivered which you may read in the third Chapter of John v. 34. 35. but the objection being specially grounded upon the 34 verse may be answered out of the 35 verse for sayth Master Earbury whatever God hath given to the Son he hath given to the Saints and if the Saints saw this they would never ask any thing any more of God because all things are given to the Saints and God loves the Saints as he loves the Son John 17. 23. True it is that all Kingdoms Countries and people arex given to Christ Psalme 2. 7 8. but it is as true that they are given to the Saints Revel. 2. 26 27. whatsoever the Son hath received of the Father the Saints have received likewise they have received the same power the same glory but they do not see it Nay whatsoever is spoken of the Son is spoken of the Saints for the Saints are the Son and this is manifest sayth Mr. Earbury and then produced two places of Scripture to prove it Revel. 3. 9. Revel. 21. 7. Wee are now heirs of all things as the Son is and we shal know it and men shal know it and come and worship at our feet therefore let this be the ground of our Faith and Hope for Christ is not shut up in Heaven but Christ is in us the hope of glory Master Earbury doth as you see positively deliver these blasphemous errours and yet when he was admonished by one of our brethren hee sayd hee did not deliver any thing dogmatically for hee did only enquire into the Truth of things as one that was to seek To which it was replyed that First hee did urge Scripture to prove his opinion Secondly that hee sayd his Exposition was manifest Thirdly that he pressed the people to receive his Exposition to build their hope upon his interpretation and to believe the Scriptures in his sense Fourthly to encourage them to receive his interpretation hee assured them that if they would believe his doctrine they should do greater things then ever Christ did and men should come and worship at their feet Fiftly hee was advised to deliver practicall points to the people and not to teach any thing for truth concerning which hee was not fully perswaded in his own minde Sixtly our brother desired him to enquire of those who were able to resolve him in those things of which hee doubted and not to enquire of a company of unsetled people for by that means he might bring them also to doubt of most of the principles of the Christian faith Moreover upon the eleventh of December Master Earbury took upon him to prophecy of greater shakings yet in England and Scotland as well as Ireland In Scotland sayth Mr. Earbury they think to preserve themselves but you shall see and they will feel greater shakings yet even mighty Earth-quakes but if the Lord teach you this doctrine which I have now delivered it will keep up your spirits Remember that it is not only God that gives you strength but God is your strength and you shall walk upon God himself as upon high places believe it wee are filled with the same Godhead with the same glory that Christ is and wee are one with the Father as hee is These Notes were communicated to one of our company by a Captain whereupon one of our brethren preached just the contrary doctrine and proved that it was a fundamentall Article of the Christian Religion because Christ hath built his Church upon this fundamentall confession or acknowledgement as upon an immoveable Rock Matth. 16. 16 17 18. Simon Peter said Thou art Christ the son of the living God and what said Christ upon this Rock will I build my Church This is the great Article so often disputed and cleered in primitive times by the Apostles for the conversion of Jews Gentiles That Jesus Christ who took our nature of the blessed Virgin is the true Messiah the son of the living God God equall with his Father nay the same God though not the same person with his Father God by nature and yet Man by nature perfect God and perfect Man both natures the divine and humane being inseparably united in the person of the son of God the second person of the glorious Trinity This truth was made evident by the whole series of the book of the Acts of the Apostles and therefore it 's not sufficient for us to acknowledge that Christ is in some sense God and Man but we must believe this truth as it is revealed and declared in the Scriptures because the Scriptures are the doctrinall foundation and Christ the personall foundation Wee are built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone Ephes. 2. 20. yee must walk sayth the Apostle as yee have received and be built up in Christ and established in the faith as you have been taught Coloss. 2. 6 7. Divers of Master Earbury his Auditory were startled with this Sermon two of them came to Mr. Cheynell and told him that he had delivered Doctrine contrary to what they had been taught by a very pretious man Mr. Erbury Mr. Cheynell told them they were to examine which of those contrary Doctrines was agreeable to the scriptures For he that preacheth contrary to M. Erbury his opinion is not to be condemned if Mr. Earbury his opinion be contrary to the word of God whereupon they desired Mr. Cheynell to give M. Erbury a meeting that the point in controversie might be fully discussed in the presence of them
but when that would not be permitted and M. Earbury desired our brother to consider that that phrase God by nature was no Scripture phrase Master Cheynell replyed Sir now it appears that you are not so well read in Scripture as you pretend to be you may read the expression Gal. 4. 8. and though you will not give me leave to dispute yet suffer me to expound the place and shew the ground of my Exposition The Apostle shews in this place 1. That religious service must be performed to none but to him that is God by nature from hence it will follow that if Christ be not God by nature we ought not to performe religious service to Jesus Christ 2. The Apostle shews that they are ignorant of God who perform service to them who are not Gods by nature 3. M. Cheynell shewed that Christ was God by nature subsisting in the form of God and was God equall to his Father and proved it from Phil. 2. 6. {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} subsisting in the form of God thought it no robbery to be equall with God He who is in the form of God and without prejudice to the Father equall to him must needs be God by nature the selfe same God though not person with the Father and therefore an Independent God God in himself God of himself the eternall God It is robbery to make more Gods then one It is robbery to make the Saints equall with God but it is no robbery to make God the Son equall with God the Father because Christ is God by nature but no Saint is God by nature the fulnesse of the Godhead all the fulnesse of the Godhead dwels and dwels bodily that is really for body is opposed to shadow in the person of the Lord Jesus And therefore it is evident that the same fulnesse of the Godhead which is in Christ is not truly and really in any Saint The Congregation received this exposition with a generall shout and acclamation but M. Cheynell desired them to forbear and told them that if he could not intreat them to be silent he would silence himselfe and proceed no further least such testimonies of approbatiō might give offence or cause disturbance 2. Desired the company to take notice that M. Earbury called the Spirit the power of God almost as oft as he had occasion to mention the Spirit which expression did too plainely declare that M. Earbury held correspondence with the Socinians in their hereticall opinions M. Earbury professed that he never read any of their writings and yet when M. Cheynell distinguished between the spirit and the graces of the Spirit a little after M. Earbury forgot himself and said that was a Polandisme conceiving that the spirit was by that distinction imprisoned in Heaven and he began to tell a story of some cast out by a Synod for such expressions and when M. Cheynell did distinguish afterward between Christ considered as a glorifiedman and as the Lord of glory M. Earbury said glorified man was one of the Polonian expressions let the Reader judge whether M. Earbury never read any of the Polonian Writers 3. Our brother desired M. Earbury to deal plainely and clearly with him whether he did acknowledge and believe three Persons and one God our brothers question was grounded upon M. Earbury his mention of three in Heaven and yet his frequent confounding of the Son with the Spirit for sure if the Son be the Spirit as he doth commonly preach there cannot be three in Heaven for the Son and the spirit are but one as he conceives nay there will be but one in Heaven for the Son is nothing but the wisdome of the Father or the power of the Father and so there will be no more divine persons in Heaven but the Father only Besides M. Earbury saying that the Father is the true God and God is love and the Son is wisdome and the spirit is power M. Earbury seemed to put off his Auditory with a Trinity of Attributes instead of a Trinity of Persons and consequently to make many Threes in Heaven for iustice mercy eternity will make another three in this sense But M. Earbury said that he came not thitherto be catechised but it was easie to reply that he came thither to explaine himself and satisfie the Congregation which could not possibly be done unlesse he would give positive answers to pertinent questions M. Earbury told us that the fulnesse of the Godhead should be revealed more clearely hereafter in the flesh of the saints at the sound of the seventh Trumpet but it was more clearely revealed in the Prophets then by the Apostles becasue the Apostles were most taken up with writing about Faith and particular things yet John the Divine wrote clearly of it 1 John 3. 2. and therefore he pronounced all them to be Antichristian who did not believe that there is the same fulnesse of the Godhead in Christ and all the saints which he conceived to be very cleare from the 1 John 4. 2. 3. that is saith he whosoever denies that Christ is in us is Antichrist for by flesh is not meant the humane nature saith M. Earbury but the coming of Christ is the manifestation of the Godhead in the flesh of Saints for Christ himselfe is the Spirit with God Our brother was here forced to lay open M. Earbury and declare that M. Earbury conceived that Christ was man before the world was and therefore though he came into the world to be made of a woman yet he came not to be made man but to be made flesh Hereupon Mr. Earbury charged our brother with revealing of secrets and said that he had delivered himselfe to that purpose in a private Conference Our brother replied that he had not spoken a word about that Argument if M. Earbury had not led him into it by his perplexed discourse and pronounced such a censure upon all men that are not of his mind as to say they are Antichristian Master Earbury insisted much upon Ephes. 3. 19. That ye may be filled with all the fulnesse of God which our brother said was to be expounded by John 1. 16. of his fulnesse we have all received grace for grace Divers are said in the Scripture to be full of the Holy Ghost when they are sufficiently enabled to perform the dutyes which belong to their present estate and are growing up towards that fulnesse which all the Saints shall enioy when God is all in all But M. Earbury seemed most confident when he came to urge his arguments taken out of the Book of the Revelations The first was drawen from Reuel 2. 26. The Saints haue the same power over the nations to crush and breake them that Christ himselfe hath The answer was that the Saints did not overcome by their owne strength but by the strength of Christ Christ doth overcome and we triumph we have a share in that victory which Christ gaines by his