seueral man Paul Peter Iames and Iohn are foure men aswell as foure persons But the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost are onely three persons and not three Gods For the establishing of your faith in this point I pray you remember that I haue made it euident to you out of the scripture both that euerie one of these is a seuerall person and also that they are all three but one God That euery one of them is God it hath been manifestly proued and no lesse that there is but one God Whereupon it must necessarily follow that they are all three not three Gods but one God And this is that which you haue set downe in the Creede named before l Athâ—nas Creed ver 3. That we worshippe one God in Trinitie and Trinitie in Vnitie that is one God and yet three persons Three persons and yet one God If any man for the satisfying of his minde desire farther to vnderstand the reason of this difference betwixt the Creator and the Creatures why euerie seuerall person amongst men should be also a seuerall man and not all one man and yet the three persons but one God he must knowe that this proceedes from the diuersitie of nature in God and man The nature of man being finit may be multiplyed into many seuerall men of the same kindes But the nature of God being infinit cannot possibly admitte any multiplication because there cannot be many infinits or infinit substances as there may be and are verie many finit substances seuerall and differing each from other He that can with iudgement and learning examine those points that concerne the nature of God may conceiue the truth of that I say they that cannot haue sufficient ground for their beliefe in the word of that God who neither can be deceiv'd in discerning his owne nature because he is infinitly wise nor will deceiue any man in speaking of it because hee is infinite in truth and goodnes â—et vs goe forwarde therefore to learne of him the doctrine of the Trinitie The word Trinitie as I sayd ere while of Person is in no place of Scripture but the thing being there we are not to refuse or mislike the word especially since it is of good vse and hath beene of so long continuance in the Chruch It is enough if wee vnderstand that whensoeuer the Trinitie is named all three persons are signified as for example when wee say the Trinitie is holy blessed and glorious wee meane that the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost are holy blessed and glorious When wee say the Trinitie of persons it is our purpose to shew the nuÌ„ber of the persons that they are three These two points touching the vnitie of the god head and Trinitie of the persons are set out at large in l â—â—th mas Creed ver 3. 4. 5 c. Ver. 4. the forenamed Creed from the beginning of the third verse to the ende of the twentie one verse The summe of all is this that wee must neither confound the persons nor diuide the substance To confound in that place signifies to mingle together and so to make one of many and that is the verie naturall meaning of the Latine word So that when wee are forbidden to confound the persons wee are taught that wee may not so hold the vnitie of the Godhead that we denie the Trinitie of the persons and in stead of three make but one whereas Ver. 5. according to the next verse There is one person of the Father another of the Sonne and another of the holy Ghost and not one of all three Neither yet may wee diuide the substance as if the diuine nature were multiplied according to the number Ver. 6. 7. of the persons For as it followeth immediately the Godhead of the Father of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost is all one the glorie equall the maiestie coaeternall Therefore all the attributes properties and titles which appertaine to God belong equally and in the same respects to all onely they are distinguished by that which is proper to each person The particulars whereby Ve. 8 9. 10 c. this matter is declared in the same Creede are these To be vncreated Incomprehensible Eternall Almightie to be God and Lord. All these and all the rest of this kind which are many are common to all three persons because the nature of all three is one and the same wherefore although wee must acknowledge euerie person by himselfe Ver 19. to bee God and Lord yet wee may not say there are three Gods or three Lords Ver. 20. I haue shewed you that there is but one God which is three persons euerie one of them being alike and equall in all things that belong to the nature of the godhead It remaines that I should speake of the distinction of the three persons onely so farre as to make vs vnderstand wherein that distinction consists For the better conceiuing whereof wee may say in one word that the manner of being which each person hath proper to himselfe is that by which they are distinguished in all other things there is no reall distinction of any one of them from another The very names themselues which are giuen to them seuerally in Scripture point to the distinction that is amongst them The Father as euery man knowes in that hee is a Father or as hee is a Father is conceiv'd to bee of himselfe and to giue being to his Sonne Consider Adam the first man without looking backe to his creation by which he had his being from God but looke onely forward as hee was his Son Abels Father Do you not plainely perceiue that Adam thus considered is author oâ— Abels being Apply this to God the Father Being God hee canne in that regard haue no authour nor beginning of being Consider him as the Father Hee Ver. 21 is of himselfe not made not created not begotten not proceeding It is not possible truly to imagine any thing of his Being but that Hee is May wee reasonably affirme the like of the Sonne Surely as hee is God there can nothing be sayd or conceiv'd of the Father but may truely and must necessarily bee spoken and thought of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost seuerally aswel as of the Father wherin then lies the distinction Euery man can readily answer In his manner of being or in his being the Sonne Take the former example Adam and Abel are both men in respect of their humane nature there is no difference betwixt them What then Is there none at all therefore yes sure Adam hath not his being of any other as hee is a Father Abell hath his as hee is a Sonne of his Father Adam Let it not trouble you that I mention a difference betwixt Adam and Abell and acknowledge no difference but onely a distinction betwixt God the Father and the Sonne the reason is because Adam and Abell are as two persons so two men God
verse he is said to be the light of men In the 7. verse that Iohn came to beare witnesse of the light of whom did Iohn beare witness but of the Messiah Iesus Christ Iohn seeth Iesus Verse 29. comming to him and saith Behold the Lambe of God that taketh away the sinne of the world And a little after he Verse 33. professeth that it was reuealed to him by God which sent him to baptise that hee vpon whom Iohn should see the spirit come downe and tarry still on him was he which baptiseth with the holy Ghost Now vpon Iesus Verse 34. did Iohn see the holy Ghost light and settle and thereupon confidently affirmeth that he is the Son of God I might add hereunto that he is the Word by beliefe in whom we haue the prerogatiue to bee the Sons of God Verse 12. And who knows not that he is Christ l Gal. 3. 26. we are al the Sons of God by faith in Christ Iesus That m Ioh. 1. 14 the word which was made flesh dwelt among vs was no other but Iesus of whom Iohn bare witnes But what should I stand heaping vp needless proofes in a matter that is out of question The conclusion of the first point is this that the Word of which our Euangelist speaketh is Iesus Christ It followeth that we should inquire how this name The word belongeth to our Sauiour In which inquiry if I should but euen recite the conceits and subtilties of diuers writers I should spend all the rest of this hower in that only and weary my selfe and you to smal purpose Therfore to make short I will commend to your farder meditation some few reasons of this name which to me seeme the most likely These reasons coÌ„cern our Sauior eitheras he is the Son of God or as he is the mediator betwixt God man For the former the n Nazian lib. 2â— de filio Athana sius Hilarius Ambrosius Augustinus Cyrillus c. ancient later Diuines that haue labored to shadow out that vnspeakable mysterie of the holy Trinitie haue thought it fit to giue vs a little glimse of this dazling light by comparing God the Father to our vnderstanding God the Sonne to that which inwardly our vnderstanding conceiueth I will endeauour to speake as plaine as possibly I can to the capacitie of the simplest When a man inwardly discourseth and reasoneth with himselfe it is sure and cuident that he frameth in his mind a certaine kind of speech or sentence and as it were a word without sound which is called the conception of the mind If he desire to communicate this conceit of his to other men hee formeth some outward speech and words either vttering them with his mouth or writing them with his pen. Thus doth he delâ—uer out a Copie of that the Originall wherof he reserueth still within where it was first bred Let vs according to the weakenes of humane capacity apply this to the vnsearchable mystery of the Sonne of God Confider them reuâ—rently and humbly that God being from all eternitie infinite in wisedome hath alwayes had some conception in him as a man hath when he discourseth in his vnderstanding This conception in man though it remaine in the soule yet is not of the substance of the soule But in God that is most simple and without all manner of composition there can bee nothing that is not of his Diuine substance This conception of God is the second person in Trinitie the Sonne of God Would any know why the like conception in man is not the Sonne of man Let him remember that the Sonne must be of the same nature with the Father as our conception is not without vnderstanding but Gods is of necessitie because as I said ere while there can bee no composition I adde nor imperfection in the diuine Nature The first reason then why the Sonne of God is named the Word is this that he is begotten by his father in such manner as our inwarde word or conception is framed in vs. These things I confesse seeme to mee somewhat curious and subtill that I can hardly perswade my selfe they were intended by the Euangelist neither would I haue aduentured to propound them to you but for reuerence of o Dionys Roma apud Athanas Athanas de de finit Euseb de praepar Euang. lib. 7. cap. 4. Hilar lib 2. de Trinitate c. very many learned Diuines who from time to time haue continued this exposition But there is more likelihood that the holy Euangelist in giuing our Sauiour this name had respect to his mediatorship p Origen lib. 1. in Ioan Clem. Epiphan haer 73 Chrysost hom 2. in Ioan. Euthymius ad hunc locum either because it is he that reuealeth the knowledge of the father vnto vs or for that he was promised to be the Messiah That the former is a part of our Sauiour Christs office and hath bene performed by him from time to time it hath bin held time out of mind and may be prooued for these later times out of the Scripture Who almost is ignorant that q Tertul. contr Iudae cap. 9. the ancient writers were of opinion and the later haue receiued it as it were from hand to hand that the second person in Trinitie appeared oftentimes to the Fathers in the olde Testament euen as often as he that appeared is specified by the holy Ghost to be Iehouah I shall not need to quote the seuerall places Begin at Gen. 12. 7. and so goe forward and where you find that the Lord appeared to Abraham Lot Isaac Iacob or any other of the Fathers in the old Testament there make account you see heare the Sonne of God declaring some part of his fathers will to them to whom he speaketh If wee come to the New Testament whom haue wee there preaching but the Sonne of God r Heb. 1. 1. At sundry times and in diuers manners God spake in the old time to the Fathers by the Prophets in the last dayes he hath spoken to vs by his Son whom also he hath commanded vs to heare Å¿ Mat. 3. 17 This is my beloued Sonne in whom I am well pleased heare him And indeed whom else should wee heare since t Ioh. 1. 18 No man hath seene God at any time but the onely begotten Son which is in the bosome of the Father hee hath declared him Fitly then may hee bee called the VVord who is the Embassador of God his Father to make his will knowen to mankind by word of mouth in his owne person and by the ministery of them whom it pleaseth him to employ to that purpose To make this opinion the more likely u Ioan. Maldon ad hunc locum a popish Interpreter in his Commentarie vpon this place confidently affirmeth that the Chalde Paraphrast translates Iehouah by this word Memar 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a word as
did write Some man perhaps will inquire yet farder why hee is called simply The word and not the word of God To whoÌ„ * Theodorus Mopsuest in Cate. graec we may shortly truly answere that it was meete to leaue out that addition for distinction sake For it is well knowen to all men that by the word of God in the Scripure either some commandement from God or some reuelation or some part of the doctrine of the Scripture or some such thing is signified Therefore that the Messiah might be vnderstood to be here spokeÌ„ of it was conuenient and in a maner necessary to call him the word and not the word of God yet I would be loth to stand too much vpon this reason because our Euangelist a Reuel 19. 13 other where doubts not to call him the word of God But you will aske why the Euangelist would call him the VVord and not rather The Sonne of God or The Sonne was hee affraide b Basilius homil in haec verba Leontius incomment Theop. Euthym. ad hunc locum as some thinke Least if hee had named him Sonne some men as the Arians afterward did would haue conceiued grossely that He must needs haue a mother as well as a father that He was part of his fathers nature and such absurde and blaspemous fancies as the Turkes Alcoran is stuffed withall If hee would not call him the Sonne yet hee needed not haue named him the word seeing hee had such choice of titles to giue him The wisedome of the Father the Light the Brightnesse and many other of the like kind as is plaine in the Scripture It is likely therefore that there was some especiall reason of that choise What might that be Surely it is not vnlike that the Messiah was commonly so tearmed among the Iewes or that the second person in the Trinitie was knowen best to them by that name And this later point may the rather be credited because c Philo. in lib. quod deter infid meliori de opific. mundi Philo a Iew and no Christian who liued within the first hundred yeeres after our Sauiours birth neuer cals the second person by the name of the Sonne but as our Euangelist heere dooth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The VVord Hence also it was perhaps that d Mercur. Trismeg in Pimandro Plato in Timaeo Cicero de vniuersitate rerum the old Philosophers who fetched their knowledge out of Egypt speake of a second nature which they tearme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet I think they rather conceiued him to be Reason or VVisedome then the VVord as a man may see in their writings But the promise of the Messiah being so often renewed his comming according to promise so continually earnestly looked for if I say it be likly that the Iews knew him generally by that name I suppose I shal say nothing which may not reasonably bee coniectured It may bee also thus if the Chalde Paraphrast as some affirm he did vsually translated the word Iehouah where he thought it beloÌ„ged to the second person by Memar a word the Iews learned of him by the direction of their Rabbins to call the Messiah by the name of the VVord But I doe not certainely knowe whether euer hee so translate or no that he doth not alwayes I am very sure and hee that will may see as much in many places of Genesis I sai and Ieremie I forbeare to recite the particulars because it were to small purpose for this Auditorie We see then of whom the Euangelist speakes let vs hearken what he saith of him The Word was where partly ignorance and partly curiositie hath bred a needlesse and fruitlesse question which though I might not well omit yet I will speake as little of it as possibly I can The Euangelist saith Hee was why not Hath beene If the question were of the English euery man could and would readily aunswere that it were no good speech because Hath beene is neuer spoken but of that which hath an end of being vnlesse we adde some limitation of time as when we say He hath bene there these two howers dayes moneths c. But the Greeke admits no occasion of any question in this case For e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Verbe which our Euangelist vseth hath no such difference of tense or time but whether the matter or thing you speake of be as it was or be not the same word may bee vsed I will go no farther then this Gospell for proofe of that I say f Ioh. 1. 44. Philip was of Beth-saida g Iohn â— 1. There was a man of the Pharises named Nicodemus h Ioh. 4. 6. 46 There was Iacobs VVell There was a certaine Ruler i Iohn 5. 35. Iohn was a burning shining Candle But what name I so many Patriarchs Euery Chapter affords proofe sufficient Wherewithall wee may obserue that our English hath also the like libertie in the word VVas as the examples I alleaged euidently shew Indeede the Latine may seeme to giue some warrant for the moouing of this question because there are k Erat suit two diuers wordes of the same verbe vsed by the Translater in this verse of our Sauiour and in the sixt of Iohn Baptist But neither is there any such difference obserued by good Latine Authors in the vse of the words and the translater it should seeme intended no such thing For in another place where the same word is in the Originall and the same matter handled by the Euangelist he puts the word fuit which heere hee vseth of Iohn and not erat which wee haue in thi first verse of our Sauiour Christ l Ioh. 1. 1. That which waâ— from the beginning fuit saith the vulgar Latine Wherefore leauing this conceit as more subtill then true let vs content our selues to vnderstand that the holy Ghost meanes to teach vs by this word that euen then when all creatures began to bee the word was or had his being already Which I so speake as not intending thereby to preiudice m Origen in diuer hom 2. Chrysost in Ioan. hom 3. their iudgement who are of opinion that the worde it selfe may learne vs in this place to consider that the VVoâ—d was eternall Only I take it to be plaine that no such thing can necessarily be drawen out of the nature of the word n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 VVas But when was this VVord In the Beginning saith our Euangelist Here groweth a new question what should be meant by The Beginning o Clem. Alexandr in protrept Origen in Ioan. tract 1. Cyril in Ioan. lib 1. cap. 1. Greg. Nystem â—d Simplicium The Father as some think in whom the Son was and is But the word Beginning is neuer so taken and it is not fit except necessity require it to giue a strange sense to a word often vsed And therfore wee may not admit
vpon his words doubt of the holy Euangelists credite and doctrine that had been so many hundreds of yeares continued and confirmed by so many glorious Martyrs with their bloud and maintaitained against all the wisdom power of the world before Mahomet was euer heard of And yet what brings he but ignorance and impudency against the eternitie of our blessed Sauiour All he can say is this that if God haue a Son he must needes haue a Wifeto not vnderstanding in his wilful ignorāce that the Lord God hath no more neede of a Wife to the begetting of his Sonne then of hands to the making of this world Yea if comparison might bee made it is easier for God to beget a Sonne like himselfe which is naturall to him then to make the World which dependeth vpon his will and hath no other necessity of being Thus wee are faine to speake according to our poore vnderstanding wee knowe that God hath a Sonne how himselfe knoweth As for the Iewes we will send them to be taught of their owne country-man Iohn the Baptist whome they worthily magnifie as a man sent from God He it is d Ioh. 1. 27 sayth Iohn of our Sauiour that commeth after me which was before me whose shoo-latchet I am not worthy to vnloose But if their owne long continued and greeuous calamity with the destruction of their owne City and Temple in which they trusted be not of force to draw them frō the blasphemous errors of their wicked ancestors surely there is no possibility for any man to perswade them Therefore we will leaue them to the gracious mercie of God to be conuerted to the truth in his good time e Phil. 3. 21. By that mighty power by which he is able to subdue all things vnto himselfe and commend our selues to his fatherly blessing that we may bee strengthened in faith against all the assaults and practises of Satan and his instruments and may neuer doubt of the eternity of our most glorious Sauiour but alwayes ascribe to him with his Father and the holy Spirit one true immortal inuisible and onely wise God all glorie power obedience and thanksgiuing for euer and euer Amen THE SECOND SERmon vpon the first Chapter of IOHN Iohn 1. Verse 1. 2. 1. In the beginning was the VVord and the VVord was with God and the VVord was God 2. The same was in the beginning with God IT is generally thought and I thinke not vntruly that the blasphemous heresies of f Anno 85 Ebion and g Anno 95 Cerinthus who denyed that our Sauiour was God or had anie being before he tooke flesh of the holy Virgine his mother was one especiall occasion of writing this Gospell To root out that impious conceit and to establish the faithful in an assured beliefe of our blessed Sauiours eternall God-head our Euangelist truly and with Apostolicall authority affirmeth that the VVord was in the beginning Neither doth he content himselfe therewithall but for the further instruction of them that belieue hee addes that The VVord was with God and was God yea that The same VVord was in the beginning with GOD. The first point of our Sauiours eternitie was expounded as it pleased God to enhable mee in my former exercise I am now by his gracious assistance to goe forwarde with that which followes The VVord was with God Wherein for the words themselues first wee must enquire what is meant by God then what the Euangelist woulde teach vs when hee sayth The VVord was with God 1. h Orig. in Ioa. lib. 2. Chrysost in Ioan. hom 2 God when the word is properly taken not applied to a creature signifieth either the Diuine nature in all three persons The Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost or only the first of the three The Father Examples of the former are in euerie leafe and page of the Scripture Let vs alleage one or two out of this Gospell i Ioh 4. 24 God is a spirit Not God the Father onely but the Sonne also and the holy Ghost For this spiritualnesse is a propertie of the diuine nature not of anie one person therein else should not the other two bee spirituall The k Ioh. 16. 2. time shall come that whosoeuer killeth you vvill thinke he doth God seruice Surely no man that killeth Christians for beleeuing in CHRIST IESVS can thinke hee doth seruice to the Trinity For our Sauiour CHRIST is one of the three But the idolatrous heathen and the superstitious Iewes make accompt that they performe acceptable seruice to God namely to the diuine nature when they destroy them that acknowledge the three persons to bee one God or deny that there are more Gods then one or worshippe our Sauiour Christ as God Of the later the old Testament affords vs few examples or none the new very many and to make short wheresoeuer God and the Sonne or Iesus Christ are mētioned together there by God the Father is signified l Ioh. 3. 16 So God loued the world that he gaue his only begotten Sonne God what not the diuine nature For that hath no Son to giue else should the second person haue a Sonne and the third to because both the Sonne and the holie Ghost are the diuine nature or God no lesse then the Father But euery mans owne reason teacheth him that the Sonne is the Fathers Sonne So that by God which gaue his Sonne God the Father is vnderstood The same Father is also meant by the name of God when hee is mentioned with Christ m Rom. 1. 8 I thanke my God sayth the Apostle through IESVS CHRIST euen him whom in the next Verse before he had called God our Father Verse 7 Verse 9 and whose Sonne in the ver following he maketh Iesus Christ God is my witnessewhome I serue with my spirit in the Gospell of his Sonne Of the same kinde are all those places where there is any mention of praying to God in or thorough CHRIST For to him hath our Sauiour taught vs to pray n Luke 11. 2 VVhen yee pray saie Our Father vvhich art in heauen o Ioh. 16. 23 VVhatsoeuer yee aske the Father in my name hee will giue it you Now let vs see in whether of these two significations the word God is to bee taken in this place Surelie not in the former because then The VVord should haue beene with himselfe which is no reasonable speech For who vnderstands not that euery thing which is said to be with an other is diuerse from that with which it is sayde to bee Therefore if the VVord vverewith God the VVord was not God But the Euangelist directly auoucheth that the VVord vvas God What remaines then if by God wee will haue the Diuine nature to bee meant but that wee must confesse there are two Gods The VVord and hee vvith vvhom the VVord vvas But it is certaine in Religion and reason that there is but one God And therefore God
other beleeuers that a title common to euery Christian should be made proper to som few though principall members of the Church You will obiect it may be that these writers stile themselues Apostles as if they desired to haue their dignity and office knowen to all men True it is that they do so indeed in their Epist But neither did that name belong to al the faithfull or to any but some certaine men and it was necessary for the authorizing of their writings How then Doe I condemne the title or the first Authours or the continuers vsers of it Nothing lesse For I gladly acknowledge both that the Apostles and Euangelists had especiall interest in that name and that there could be no danger of scandall seeing it was not taken by themselues but giuen to them as an honour by the consent as it were and with the liking of all true Christians whose purpose it was not to make them Mediatours of intercession betwixt God and men vpon earth but to shew the reuerend opinion they had conceiv'd and did hold of such worthy and holy men And to say the truth what doth the word signifie but d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Holy How often is it giuen in the Scriptures to all that are members of the true Church in their seueral Congregations It shall suffice therfore to shut vp all in one word that wee meane not by this title Saint to note any office of mediation but onely to testifie our respect reuerence of those whom it pleased our blessed Sauiour to choose and employ in so excellent and glorious a seruice In this sense I desire to be vnderstood whensoeuer I vse that title and to be excused in your charitable construction if according to that liberty which auncient and later Diuines haue lawfully vsed I sometimes omit it in naming this Euangelist or any other of his fellow Apostles or Euangelists I may not forget to adioyne to that which hath been spoken a fewe things more which the Scripture hath recorded of him namely that hee was e Matth. 4. 21 the sonne of Zebede and brother of Iames called with him to be a Disciple of our Sauiour afterward f Luke 6. 14 specially chosen with the same his brother to be one of the twelue Apostles All these things are so plainely deliuered in the Scripure that it is enough to name the places without any more adoe But of his mother it is needful to speak more particularly because it is not so cleer who she was though it be as certaine we are then to vnderstand that his mothers name was Salome which is thus to be proued g Matth. 27. 56 Saint Mathew reporting the history of the women that stood afar off looking vpon our Sauior when he was crucified writeth thus of them Among whom was Mary Magdalen and Mary the Mother of Iames and Ioses and the Mother of Zebedeus children Now Zebedeus children were Iames the elder as he was called for difference sake and Iohn But how shall we knowe that this womans name was Salome h Marke 15. 40 Saint Marke tells vs so in these words There were also women which beheld afarre off among whom was Mary Magdalen the Mother of Iames the Iesse and of Ioses and Salome Who seeth not that she whom the former Euangelist called the Mother of Zebedeus children the later nameth Salome So that our Euangelist was the son of Zebedeus and Salome vpon him as vpon the rest i Acts 2. 3. the holy Ghost descended like fiery clouen tongues induing them with the admirable gift of vnderstanding and speaking all strange languages Neither was he only thus qualified with the rest but as it should seeme of greater account in the Church then most of the rest Therefore k Gal. 2. 9 the Apostle Paul reckons him with Iames and Peter as one of the Pillars of the Christian Church Yea our Sauiour himselfe in his life time was wont to admit him as it were into his priuate counsell l Marke 5. 37 when he went to raise vp Iairus daughter from death was not Iohn one of the three whome he made choise of to take with him m Matth. 17. 1 was not he one of the 3. witnesses of his glorious transfiguration in the mount To conclude in n Mark 14. 33 that his greeuous agony in the garden our Euangelist was one with whom our Sauiour would bee accompanied And for the person of Iohn this may suffise vnless perhaps some man look that I should adde hereunto as a farder proof of our Sauiours loue to him the mention of those wonderfull reuelations wherin the estate of Christs Church vpon earth to the very end of the world is liuely and certainely discyphered As for other things which are recorded touching him in the Ecclesiasticall histories I will craue leaue to omit them because they little or nothing concerne the matter we haue in hand I know there are but fewe present that are able to search the authors as o Acts 17. 11. the men of Beroea did the Scriptures to see whether those things be so or no. I come now from the person to the writing where first for the occasion time of penning this Gospel I wil onely say thus much p Euseb hist eccles lib. 3. cap. 21 that it is commonly thought to haue beene written after the returne of the Euangelist out of banishmēt from Pathmos both to supply that which was wanting in the other three concerning our Sauiours dooings and sayings before Iohn Baptist was imprisoned and also to satisfie the request of the Christians in Asia especially the Ephesians that it might be a counterpoison against those heresies which Cerinthus and Ebion had hatched and whereby the Godhead of our Lord and Sauiour was called in question Wherein if any man shall persume to thinke that our Euangelist hath not taken such a course as was fit for the refuting and suppressing of those heresies let him learne first that the holy Spirit of whose enditing this Gospell was is not to bee taught by the blind conceits of proude ignorant men Then let him farder vnderstand that it was not the Euangelists purpose nor indeed a matter beseeming the authority of him whom the Lord vsed for his Secretary to dispute by writing with prophane and blasphemous Apostates but to instruct the Church of Christ in the truth formerly deliuered And this he hath performed with such maiestie and authoritie that we may see in him the grace answerable to that name q Marke 3. 17 which his Lord and Master gaue him euen power to thunder For who is not astonied with admiration of those wonderfull mysteries concerning our Sauior Christs eternal diuinitie which this sonne of thunder as it were ratleth out Therefore did r August Prolog in Ioa. Theodor prodromus in distich the antient writers cōpare him to an Eagle as one that mounted vp aboue the pitch of
p Orig. in Ioan. lib. 1. Athanas contr Arian quod verbum e◠Deo sit that second interpretation which by the beginning vnderstandeth God who is no where so called in Scripture Both these expositions for the matter of them are true but not warrantable by this place There are two other explications of this word which agree for the sense of the place that our Sauiour eternall being is here signified though they differ much in the meaning of the word it selfe The former will haue the beginning to bee taken for Eternitie the later referres it to the first creation of all thinges Against the former some take exception because they say the Word Beginning is neuer found in that sense in the Scripture But that may well bee doubted of because it is sayd of our Sauiour that q Iohn 6. 64. Hee knew from the beginning who they were that beleeued not and who should betray him Now this he knew from all eternitie For r Hb. 13 nothing is hidde from him who is God euerlasting but all thinges are alwayes open in his sight Therefore the word may sometimes bee taken for eternitie But that will not serue the turne vnlesse wee can shew some place wherein it must necessarily bee so vnderstood Such as that of Iohn is not nay rather wee are directed by the Euangelist himselfe in another place to conceiue that by the beginning the calling of the Apostles is signified ſ Iohn 16. 4 These things sayd I not vnto you from the beginning that is I neuer tolde you of this matter from the first day of my being conuersant with you That place t Colos 1. 18 to the Colossians Hee is the beginning and the first begotten of the dead may also reasonably and more fitly bee referred to our Sauiour as mediator then as God euerlasting So can not that in the Reuelation where it is certaine by the first and last part of the verse that the Lords euerlasting being is described u Reuel 1. 8. I am A and Ω the beginning and the ending saith the Lord which is and which was and which is to come Heere though beginning do not of it self note eternity yet with the ending it doth There is yet a plainer and certainer Text to put the matter out of doubt where x 2. Thess 2. 13 the Apostle saith that God hath from the beginning chosen the Thessalonians to saluation What is from the beginning but as the same Apostle speaketh in the like manner in y Ephes 1. 4 another place Before the foundation of the world It cannot therefore bee doubted but that by The beginning Eternitie is sometimes signified yet it is not plaine or certaine that it must so bee conceiued in this place But wee may reasonably perswade our selues that if our Euangelist had meant to haue the beginning taken for Eternitie hee would haue said as the holy Ghost dooth in the Scripture * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From the beginning For indeed it is no fit speech to say of any thing which wee woulde note to be eternall that it is in Eternitie but that it hath beene or was from Eternitie Neither if wee vnderstand Eternitie by the beginning will this speech of Iohn suite so well witl that of Moses a Gen. 1. 1 In the beginning God created heauen and earth To which it is out of question our Euangelist alludes and in which Eternitie cannot by any meanes be signified What else then can be meant by the beginning bu◠the first creation of all things For what can any man more easily and readily vnderstand when hee reades or heares In the beginning then the beginning of time at the creation of the world Which also the rather to direct vs to this interpretation the Euangelist presently addes b Ioh. 1. 3 By him were all things made so shall Moses and Iohn agree and our Sauiour most fitly be kept out of that lumpe in the creation within which the blasphemy of heretickes would include him yea more then that hee shall easily be conceiued to haue beene from all eternity if he bee excepted from the generall creation wherin all things that are not eternall had their first beginning Whereas then our Euangelist sayth In the beginning The sense of the Euangelist was the word it is all one as if hee should thus haue spoken VVhen all things that haue not an euerlasting being of their owne nature began first to be by the almighty power of God the Creator who made them of nothing euen then hee that is the eternall VVord of the Father hee that from time to time hath declared the will of the Father he that was appointed and promised by the Father to be the Messiah bad already an euerlasting being not by the will of a superior power as a thing created but by the necessity of his owne diuine nature through the eternall generation of God his Father This is that which by our Euangelist is implyed in those fewe words This is that which it concernes all the faithfull to beleeue without doubting This is that which blasphemous c Ebiō Cerinthus denied This Epiphan Au◠Theodoret. vbi supra is that wherby their wicked heresie is condēned Thou tellest vs wretched hereticke as thou art that IESVS CHRIST had no Being till he was conceiued in the wombe of his mother the blessed Virgine The holy Ghost sayth He was in the beginning Thou wilt haue him younger then Mary the holy Ghost makes him elder then Adam In a word thou wouldst perswade vs that hee had his first beginning almost 4000. yeares after the world was created the H. Ghost enioyns vs to beleeue that he had neuer had any beginning For euen then already he was in perfect being when all things that had any beginning became something of nothing of not being began to be Shall I neede to note the doctrine of this text Who sees not that it teacheth vs the eternity of our Sauiour Christ Shall wee suite it with other places of Scripture The word of the holy Ghost in any one place is all-sufficient But let vs yeelde somewhat to humane weakenesse that by the mouth of two or three witnesses all excuse of infidelitie may be vtterly cut off Hearken then what he saith in d Reuelat. 1. 8 the Reuelation I am A Ω the beginning and the ending sayth the Lord which is and which was and which is to come Doth it trouble thee that is was is to come note a kind of succession in being If in our weakenesse wee could otherwise haue conceiued of euerlastingnesse the holy Spirit of God would haue spoken otherwise But who then should haue vnderstood him Surely not euery poore soule whome hee purposed to teach by the Scripture But if mysteries delight thee listen to our Sauiour in e Ioh. 8. 58. this Gospell Before Abraham was I am what is this I am before hee was I vnderstand
word and the word was with God and God was the word The like figure also hath Moses t Gene. 1. 1. In the beginning God created heauen and earth and the earth was without forme But our Euangelist affordes vs more examples of it u Iohn 1. 4. 5 In it was life and that life was the light of men And the light shineth in darkenesse and the darkenesse comprehended it not Can any man doubt that the holy Ghost intended to keepe the elegancy of the figure Are not the Sermons of our Sauiour himselfe beautified with flowers of Eloquence Doth not the prophecie of Esaie flowe with streames of Rhetoricke I dare boldly say It is a very hard matter to match the beginning of that booke for varietie and force of Eloquence out of the writings of any of the heathen Orators Greeke or Latine quantitie for quantitie That we may iustly blame the ignorance and boldnesse of them who thinke it a dishonour to the Gospell that the preaching thereof should be graced with humane Eloquence I would know of these men what it is they call humane Eloquence and what Eloquence there is in the Scripture which may not beare that name without any disgrace thereunto Are there not the same tropes and figures both of the word and the sentence in the writings of men yea of heathen men which are in the Scripture Or if the Scripture haue any which men haue not yet obserued may they not learne from thence asto liue holily so to speake eloquently If any man imagine that the holy Ghost hath either appropriated any ornament of speech to himselfe in the Scripture or that he deuised new tropes and figures for his owne Secretaries the holy Prophets and Apostles the writings of the heathen wherein all those elegancies are to bee found will giue euidence against his ignorance I deny not that there is a certaine maiestie shining in the Scripture which no man can worthily expresse by imitation or by meditation conceiue sufficiently But this ariseth partly from the matter it selfe and partly from the skill of vsing those Rhetoricall ornaments wherein as in all things the holy Ghost that taught them is perfect whereas men haue but a shadow as it were of his perfection But I may not spend too much time in this matter onely thus much I will adde that he which in his publike ministrie shall either willingly refraine or carelessely neglect to vse the helpe of humaine learning and namely of Rhetoricke whereof onely wee haue now occasion to speake shall both faile in his duetie to God and come short of that worthy effect of preaching whereby the loue of God to vs is most gloriously set foorth and our loue to God most ardently set on fire It is the spirit of God that begets faith and obedience But not without those meanes by which hee hath enabled his seruants to teach and perswade The principall thing is the matter as it were the dart or arrowe that pierceth the heart of man by the power of the Spirit But speech is as it were the arme and Eloquence the thong or string whereby it is sent with force to the marke it aymes at He that trusts in Eloquence makes flesh his arme Hee that despiseth Eloquence takes strength from his arme It is our duetie to vse the meanes It is Gods blessing that the meanes take effect and of this vpon this occasion enough Now in expounding the words ere I come to the meaning of the place I will first touch a cauill of x August de doctrin Christia lib. 3. cap. 2. the Arians whereby they endeauoured to voyde the euidence that is brought in heere for our Sauiour Christs Godhead What could be spoken more plaine then for the Euangelist to say The VVord was God Yet would they shift off the matter by mangling the sentence in this sort God VVas say the Arians what shall then become of the Word That say they belongs to the next verse which must thus bee read The same word was in the beginning with God I told you before that the order of the words in the text is God was the VVord In our language word may not bee put before this or this same In Greeke it may and so in Latine How then shall wee answere the Arians Plainely and truely that there was no reason why the Euangelist should tell vs that God was For neither did any man doubt of it and hee had said sufficient to that purpose in the former clause when he affirmed that The Word was with God with whom the Word could not be conceiued to be but that the being of God must of necessitie bee presupposed Besides the holy Ghost in the Scripture neuer speakes of God to shewe his being by Was but either by Is the present tense or time as we call it y Exod. 3. 14 I am sent me or by all three times * Reuel 1. 8. Is VVas Shall be which was which is and which is to come yea the very clauses of the verse might haue taught them that the VVord must needes belong to this verse In the beginning was the VVord and the VVord was with God and the VVord was God Cut off the VVord from this last clause and you make it altogether vnlike the former and spoile the grace of the speech Let the Arians goe then with their foolish shift and goe wee forward in our exposition Wherein we are first to learne what the Euangelist meanes by God then to shew how the sentence it selfe is to be vnderstood In the former clause one person of the Trinitie euen the first God the Father was signified by the name of God which is common to all the three Here the same word is taken in the proper sense nothing the Diuine Nature There needs no other proofe of this matter but onely to make you see that if you vnderstādit of any one persō you auouch somwhat which is vntrue For example will you say God the Father is the Word or the Word was the Father By this maner of speech you confound so destroy the persons whose very being necessarily requireth that the one bee not the other Neither may we say that the holy Ghost was the Word or the Word the holy Ghost For the same errors ensue thereupon and the Trinitie of persons is ouerthrowen thereby It cannot be then but that God in this last part of the verse must of necessity be taken for the Godhead or Diuine nature whereupon it followes necessarily that our Sauiour Christ is God Against this the Sabellians who acknowledge no distinction of persons except and labour to perswade vs that the Euangelist is rather thus to bee expounded God was the Word that is say they That God the Father with whom the word was was nothing else but the word it selfe How false foolish this exposition is if any man see not by himselfe he may thus easily discerne To what purpose could it be for
of whose punishment we are so affraid And yet what was this extremity in comparison of the intolerable wrath of God in the fire of hel where there is neither ease of pain nor end of misery f Psal 2. 12. O kiss the Son least he be angry and ye perish in the way g 1. Cor. 10. 22 Doe we prouoke the Lord to anger Are we stronger then he h Reuel 6. 15 Doe not the kings of the earth and the great men and the rich men and the chiefe Captaines and the mightie men hide themselues in dens and among the rockes of the mountaines Doe they not Verse 16 crie out most lamentably to the mountaines and rockes Fall on vs and hide vs from the presence of him that sitteth vpon the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb Oh miserable comfortless wretches Flee you from the Lamb It is hee i Ioh. 1. 29 that taketh away the sins of the world If there be ny drop of mercy it is by the bloud of the Lamb if there be any hope of comfort it is in the gentlenesse of the Lamb. They are absolutely without al possibility of the least relief that can find no fauor at the hands of the Lamb. If the Lamb frown who wil look cheerfully vpon vs And dare any wretched miscreant nourish in his heart doubtfull thoughts of our blessed Sauiours eternall God-head For it is almost incredible that any man should be so desperate as blasphemously to denie it If we could heare but as it were a far off the hideous shreeks and most wofull lamentations of that wretch I spake of ere while our haire would stand vpright on our heads with horror and our hearts sink in our bodies for feare k Ioh. 5. 22 Hath not the Father committed all iudgement vnto him Must we not all stand before his throne to receiue sentence from him either of life or death Oh I where wilt thou bestow thy self poor naked miserable distressed soule It is vnpossible for thee to hide thy selfe To behold the wrathfull countenance of the Iudge it is intolerable Oh! how wilt thou tremble when thou shalt heare that dreadful voice l Luk. 19. 27. Those mine enimies that would not that I should raigneouer them bring them hither slaie them before my face Slay them I but so that they shal alwaies be dying and neuer dye For so is that â—eatefull â—entence which will loose the ioints make the knees knock together when it shall be heard m Mat. 25. 41 Depart from me ye cursed into euerlasting fire which is prepared for the diuell and his angells Is it not better for vs then to acknowledge Iesus Christ to be God while we liue here may learn it then to be driueÌ„ to confess it when it shal auaile vs to nothing but to increase our iust damnation I am sory a sham'd that in this cleere sun-shine of the Gospell any man making profession of Christian religion should make doubt of so main a ground therof Neither would I haue wearied you my selfe with so large an exhortatioÌ„ but that I know too wel there is too iust occasion of it Yet I may not forget my selfe too much That which hath bin said is sufficient with the blessing of God without it nothing that can be say de Let vs now come neerer home and betake our selueâ— to that which is more proper to our calling For as the Angells that are ministring spirits though they be faine oftentimes to oppose themselues against the malice and fury of satan his instruments yet haue not this office properly assign'd vnto them but as it furthereth their principle charge to helpe them forward which shall be heires of saluation so the ministers of the Gospel must account it their especial duty to instruct comfort them that are the true members of the body of Iesus Christ To you therfore beloued in the same our Sauiour will I now addresse my speech euen to all you that beleeue in Christ to iustification Haue you learned that the Messiah your Sauiour is God almighty Do you firmly and stedfastly beleeue this without wilfull gain-saying or doubting Assure your selues the holy Ghost hath set you in the waie to euerlasting life But me thinkes I heare some poore soule sighing in himself striuing if it were possible to conceale his own thoughts from his own heart What is it thou dost so labour to suppresse what art thou so affray de to be knowen of Be not dismaied nor discouraged If thou tremble like n Marke 5. 33. her that heard our Sauiour aske who hath touched him remember with what ioy to her selfe she was discouered Promise thy selfe no lesse from him who will certainly o Mat. 11. 28 refresh all them that being heauy laden come vnto him What Those that haue now and then some doubt in them of his eternall God-head I euen those in despight of Satan and all his treacherie Let mee reason with thee a little Dost thou not beleeue that the scripture is the vndoubted word of God yes thou doost Art thou not perswaded that the same Scripture teacheth thee that thy Sauiour Christ is very God Thou art But thou hast many times some doubting of the point within thy heart What Dost thou doubt willingly as one that either thinkes it not to be so or at the least that was neuer resolutely perswaded that it is so Let me say more to thee Wouldst thou haue him bee God or no If thy affection desire to honour him all that may be if thy weake faith labour to ouercome this doubting Satan would haue thee doubt makes thee afraid thou doubtest but indeed thou dost beleeue It is not a property of the most sanctified men to bee without tentations but not to yeelde to them with ioy and liking True faith may be weake though perfect faith cannot Weaknes of faith wil admit occasion of doubting but not giue place to doubting Doost thou not finde it in thy selfe thy doubting neither brings forth denying nor receiues any kinde entertainement at thy hands then art thou wholly free from wilfull gainesaying or doubting Satan can not make thee beleeue that thy Sauiour is not God Only he makes thee afraid least he should not be God And how comes hee to this aduantage Surely by no other meanes but by driuing thee to examine the point by reason There can be but one God which is he that sent Iesus Christ into the world and not Iesus himselfe If thou tell him of the three persons hee demaunds further how thou canst conceiue that there should be three such persons and all they but one God As if p 2. Cor. 5. 7. wee walkt heere by sight and not by faith I know it is possible to beate the Deuill at his owne weapons and by the force of reason to maintaine against him that there is a Trinity of persons though that mystery by discourse
of reason could neuer be attained to without reuelation from God But this is not the armour a Christian trusts to Thy bulwark must bee the shield of faith borne vp and held out by some strong rest of holy scripture The word was God Saith our Euangelist By it were all things made Let Satan cast his fiery and poysonous darts against vs This shield quencheth the fury and killeth the strength of their fire and poyson As for his distinctions and respects wherby he sweats and tyres himselfe to proue that our Sauiour is but God by fauour not by nature because he is imploied in such an office not because he is eternally begotten of God his father they are sparkles that keepe a cracking with more feare then hurt and venom that raiseth a few Pimples in the outer skin with more trouble then danger Keepe thee close vnder the shield of faith and though Satan make thee stagger yet hee shall neuer ouerthrow thee Being then thus armed at all points with an assured perswasion of our Sauiour Christs diuine nature and hauing beaten the enemy that charged vs with such force and fury let vs peaceably and carefully consider with our selues what vse wee may haue of that fort which wee now possesse in safety Is this Sauiour of ours God eternal infinite in wisedome in power in holinesse in all worth and perfection Surely then may wee truely and bodly say that p Psal 89. 19. God hath layed help vpon one that is mighty more mighty to rescue his people out of the hands of sinne and Satan then Dauid was to free the people of Israell from the Philistines and all other that oppressed them Are they mighty that are against vs Hee that is with vs is more mighty Doe you not heare the Apostle as it were defying all the world in confidence of this assistance r If God saith he be on our Rom. 8. 31. side who can be against vs What though hee speakes of God the Father Is not the Sonne our Sauiour the same God of the same power Me thinkes I am encouraged by this meditation to dare Satan and to bid him battaile to his face Let him not spare to magnify the iustice of God to amplifie the grieuousnesse of my sinne to lay out to the vttermost the furiousnesse of Gods displeasure to set before me the weakenesse of my estate to recken vp as it were on his fingers the huge summes of my debt what is all this If Iesus Christ be God Though the iustice of God will not bee corrupted by feare pity bribery or flattery yet it will bee satisfied If the wrath of God be infinite against my sinne an infinite sacrifice may appease it I haue nothing to pay But he that is God is all-sufficient Å¿ Mic. 67. Will not the Lord bee pleased with thousands os Rams nor with ten thousand riuers of oyle t Heb. 10. 4. â—â— 12. Is it vnpossible that the bloud of Buls and Goates should take away sinne Yet u Act. 20. 28. hath Iesus Christ who is God by his owne blood entred once into the holy place and obtained eternall redemption for vs. God x saith the Apostle hath purchased the Church with his owne blood What though y Mâ—c 6. 7. the Lord will not accept my first borne for my transgression Will he also refuse the sacrifice of his owne first begotten yea * Ioh. 1. 18. of his onely begotten which is in his bosome No no he hath proclaimed him from heauen a Mat. 3. 17. to be his sonne that beloued one in whom he is well pleased Now the sufficiency of this worthy sacrifice ariseth not from the bloud of man though it be more excellent then that of buls or goates but froÌ„ the inualuable worth of the person whose blood is sacrifice Could the bloud of Isaac of Abell or of Adam while he was innocent and holy haue beene a sufficient ransome for sinne committed against the infinite maiestie of God Looke how much it lacks of infinitenesse in valew so much it lacks also of worth to make satisfaction For no finit sum can discharge an infinit debt But as God himselfe so sin against God is infinit Multiply any finit nuÌ„ ber though neuer so great that which proceeds of it wil be but finit And whatsoeuer is finite imagine it as great as you can in number or measure is no neerer infinitnes then the least point or fraction that can bee conceiued For there is no kinde of proportion betwixt them else should finit infinit be al one Because that which hath any part of it finit being compouÌ„ded of finite parts put together must of necessity it selfe be vnderstood to bee finite For the parts make the whole and that taketh it nature from these Now who knows not that the holinesse and nature of man is finit Such therfore would the whole lumpe bee if all that is or can bee in al men were gathered together into one How then can a sacrifice which is but finite make due satisfaction for sin that is infinite And that which I speake of men I would haue vnderstood also of all creatures whatsoeuer Angels or other For since their nature and worth is finit it is as farre from infinitenesse be what it will in comparison of the valew of other finite things as nothing is from all that which is from that which is not There is then nothing at all left wherein wee may haue any trust or hope of hauing satisfaction made to God for vs but onely the inualuable sacrifice of our Sauiour Iesus Christ b Heb. 10. 14 VVho with one offering hath consecrated for euer them that are sanctified c Ioh. 1. 29. Behold saith he that was sent to shew him the lambe of God that taketh awaie the sinnes of the world But whence hath our blessed Sauiour this inestimable valew I know not saith one neither will I trouble my head about it I beleeue his sacrifice was sufficient and that serues my turne without any further adoe Oh my brethren let vs not be so vnkind to our blessed sauiour so vnthankfull to God the father so contemptuous against the holy ghost so retchlesse of our owne saluation Is it not monstrous vnkindnesse to haue so incompatable a fauour done thee and not to labour to know that which is most honorable to him that did it How shalt thou worthily lift vp thy heart to praise and magnifie the Father that sent his sonne for thy redemption if thou neglect to vnderstand how glorious he was whom hee sent At the least despise not the wisedome and prouidence of the holy spirit as if hee had troubled himselfe in vain with setting his Secretaries on worke to pen the particulars of thy saluation for thy full satisfaction and comfort Well let all this goe If thou beest not ashamed of so vnreasonable vnkindnesse vnthankfulnesse contemptuousnesse yet bee afraid least thou lose that which thou thinkest
things created began first to be There is then no great likelyhood that the reasoÌ„ of this repetition was to teach vs that in the beginning must be added to the second clause or vnderstood with it How much easier might it haue bin set down in the place to which it properly belonged if there had been any need thereof There f Tertullian con Praxean ca. 15 is another coniecture somewhat more likely that it was the purpose of the holy Ghost to giue vs to vnderstand that the Word before the creation was with God onely and so continued though hee were not seene of men till his incarnation But this exposition also was needlesse For where could he be conceiv'd to be but with God when as there was nothing but God As for the time of his incarnation the Euangelist signifies that afterward where hee sayth The VVord became Verse 14. flesh and we sawe his glory Yea the whole Gospel is well knowen to all men to be nothing els but an history of his comming into the world and continuance there till the time of his ascending vp to heauen I would not trouble you with this diuersity of interpretations but that I am desirous now in the beginning both to speake fully of such matters as concerne the God-head of our Sauiour and the holy Trinity and also to giue you som direction by example how to iudge of the expositions of Scripture Let vs see now what new matter we may gather out of this verse if it be not intended as a repetition First it serues to stop the mouthes of those Heretickes who fondly and lewdly teach that there are two Wordes one which is indeed as it were in God the other without him or not vnited to him The former say they was not the Messiah but the later and of the former S. Iohn speaketh in the beginning of this Gospell It is hard to say whether this conceit be more blasphemous or more absurd What is it but blasphemy to denie that our Sauiour is the same God with the Father And what is more absurde then to dreame of two Words without anie inkling of such a matter giuen by the Euangelist or to imagine that the word here spoken of â— not the same that afterward became flesh First this â—erse is apparantly of the same Word that was descriâ—ed in the former as if the Euangelist had sayd This â—ord which I have auouched to g Ioh. 1. 1. 2. have been in the beginning â—o haue been with God and to be God this same word was in the beginning with God Is there any least signification here of any Word but one what followes By it were Verse 3. all things made By what By the Word What word but that which was mentioned before For to what else can it possibly be referred Let vs goe forwarde In it was life and so to the sixt verse Who sees not that the Euangelist continues his speech of the same Word Verse 4. Then followes Iohn the Baptists testimony Of whom Verse 6. but the same Word the light of men as before ver 4. who is afterward called the true light What need more Verse 9. Ver. 10. 11 Verse 12. words his intertainement hee had by men is shewed and the honour they haue that receiue him by faith described From which the Euangelist passeth to the incarnation of why should I doubt to say so the same Ver. 14 Word And the VVord saith he became flesh Be not so vnreasonable as to imagin that the holy Ghost would make a discourse in so many verses of one Word and vpon a sodaine fal into a new matter of an other Word neuer heard of neuer thought of before Tell mee I pray you if you can to what purpose all the formeâ— speech was if our Euangelist now first begin to write of him whome only his Gospell dooth concerne But what doe I spend time in refuting such absurdities It is one and the same Word that was in the beginning with God that in due time took flesh of the blessed Virgin Mary his mother But these heretickes make shewe of proofe for that they say as if they were blasphemous with reason If Christ say they be that Word of the Father since the Father and the Word are of the same substance the Father also must be the word First this makes no more against our Sauiours being the Word then against the the other Word which you fancy to your selues For the Father and that Word also by the like reason must be one word because they are one in substance that is one God and yet not one Word because to bee the word is a propertie belonging to the person not to the nature or substance of God as it shall appeare God willing when I handle the Doctrine of the Trinitie They add that the word being as it were made by speaking must needes differ from the word which is spoken for the making or producing of it wilfully refusing to vnderstand that although the act of speaking and the word that is spoken be distinct each from other yet there are not two Words but one namely that which is formed by speaking The Father doth not speake one word by which the second is framed but by speaking frames begets the Word Lastly whereas they tel vs that the word which our Sauiour saith hee kept and which the Iewes heard of him was not all one with Christ himselfe they say true but nothing to purpose For that worde was not any thing vnited in nature to God but the CoÌ„mandemeÌ„t of God which is ordinarily in the Scripture called the word of God As for their grosse absurd conceite that the Word meant by our Sauiour in such speeches of his should be I knowe not what speaking in him as it were a spirit in a body possessed it is fitter to be laught at then laboured against For how is our Sauiour Christ said h Ioh 8. 55. to keepe the worde of God which is the place which these fonde Heretikes bring By hauing it shut vp within him as it were in prison not rather by remembring and dooing that which God enioyneth The other place they alleage is no lesse absurd i Ioh. 14. 24. The word that yee heare is not mine but the Fathers that sent me Is it not euident that our Sauiour means the word spokeÌ„ the word that I speak So spake verse 23. he before If any maÌ„ will loue me he wil keepe my word And immediatly before the words they bring Hee that loueth me not keepeth not my word then followeth And that word which you heare is not mine Hee should rather haue said in your sense And it is I that you heare speaking But to conclude this point that which our Sauior saith here of the word he speaks in another place of his doctrine k Ioh. 17. 16. My doctrine is not mine but his that sent me Thus
much and indeed too much for this sottish heresie It is also gathered from hence by some that the word is coeternall or equal to the Father in eternity A doctrin very true needfull to be knowne but such as was signified before when it was said that The VVord was in the beginning that it was with God Neither doth the beginning in this or the former clause note eternity but the time when all things began to be created Wherfore to shut vp the interpretation of this verse with shewing what I conceiâ—e to be intended in it by the holy ghost I am perswaded that the purpose of the Evangelist was to repeate that which in the former verse he had deliuered For if he had meaÌ„t to add a fourth point of the like kind to the other 3 in all liklyhood he would haue continued the same manner of writing by coupling this to that which went before and haue said And this was in the beginning with God If any man obiect that he doth not so in that which followeth he is already answered that in the next words the Evangelist comes to a new kinde of argument wherby he proues that which before hee had avoucht namely that the word was in the beginning was God At the least he describes the Word by outward effects towards the creatures not by his owne nature or properties Neither is this a bare repetition but a plainer instruction for the simplest that they may â—ssure theÌ„selues that the Word was in the beginning with God I graunt so much was implied before but not exprest to euery mans capacity Here the Evangelist speaketh so that all may vnderstaÌ„d him giues directioÌ„ for the interpreting of that clause The VVord was with God When was the Word with God In the beginning When as yet there was neither time nor place euen then had the Word his being with God I would gladly adde to all this that which is obseru'd by l Toletus in Ioâ—n cap. 1. Annot. 11. some as I perswade my selfe not without great likelihood that the Euangelist by his repetition would farther giue vs to vnderstand that The VVord not only was in the beginning but was then with God a worker in the creation of all things The ground of this interpretation is taken from that place in m Pro. 8. 22. the Prouerbs where this same Word is described by the name of wisdom There first his eternal Being is described Verse 30 The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his waie I was before his works of old I was set-vp from euerlasting c. This description is continued to the end of ver 26. In the 27. the holy Ghost proceeds to shew vs that the same wisdome was with God as a nourisher when hee prepared the heauens when he set the compasse vpon the deep c. Yea it may be somewhat more particularly applyed Salomon sayth when he prepared the heauens I was there To that answereth this of our Euangelist This was in the beginning with God His nourishing as some expound it his creating or ordering of all things the holy Ghost heere expresseth at large in the words following By him were al things made The conference of these two places seemes to warrant this exposition as we haue seene I wil not striue much about it so wee apply this repetition to the strengthening of our fayth Concerning our Sauiour Christs eternall God-head doubtlesse we attaine to the principall thing intended by the holy Ghost And of that point what Christian can doubt though he would neuer so faine Dost thou not perceiue that the holie Euangelist deliuers it with aduise and deliberation It is not a matter that hee hits vpon but a point chosen by him to begin his Gospell withal It slips not from him at vnawares but is repeated vpon good aduisement Certainly this doubling of the point makes it manifest that the holy ghost would haue vs view and consider it throughly on al sides It is neither of small importance that it need not to be learned nor easie to be beleeued that it need not to be taught but once Wherefore is it propounded and repeated but that it might be vnderstood and remembred Vnderstood that no hereticks deceiue vs remembred that our hearts faynt not Hee that is God Almighty hath redeemed vs who shall bee able to hold vs Captiues Let vs not be afraid to defye sin hel death and the deuil himselfe n Rom. 8. 31. God is on our side who can be against vs Hauing thus expounded these two verses and finding in them some poynts which concerne the admirarable Doctrin of the most glorious and holy Trinity so many things also beeing spoken euery where in this gospel of the Father the Son and the holy Spirit I haue thought it necessarie both sor your instruction and the discharge of my dutie to bestow the rest of this hower in opening that blessed mystery Wherein according to the example of our Euangelist the whole course of the scripture I will content my selfe with the Euidence of the word without the curiosity of schoole diuinity It shall be sufficient for vs vnderstand that the scripture affirmeth that there is one God and three persons though we can see no reason how it can be so And farder in shewing that the three persons are indeed distinct one from another and not diuers respects of one and the same I will not stand vpon their nature in themselues so much as vpon those effects which beeing ascrib'd to them in the Scripture cannot as in shall appeare bee performed by anie one person Our Euangelist deliuers the point of our Sauiours diuine nature in a few words here in the beginning of the Gospell Hee proues it at large by many wonderfull works of his through the whole course of his writing This shal be my example and warrant Yet I would not haue any man think that I either condemne their paines and care who haue laboured to explaine these mysteries by the light of reason or affirme that the points themselues cannot stand with reason They are indeed aboue reason but yet not against reason As the light of nature cannot discerne them so it cannot disproue theÌ„ And the chiefe end of them that endeuoured to discusse these maters in some sort by reason was rather to stop their mouths that would not beleeue theÌ„ to inforce theÌ„ to beleeue Now this course in this place and auditorie I trust is needlesse I am sure with the greatest part it would be bootlesse For how many or rather how few are there heere present that are able to examine or conceiue the subtill arguments that haue been deuised and vsed in these questions Neither are wee to settle our faith by the waight of humane reason but to ground it vpon diuine authority Now to the matter Wherein that I may proceede the more orderly and be the more easily vnderstood First I will speake of the vnity of
about a matter of so small importance only I see no necessity of any such curiosity in translating For seeing it is very apparant that the Evangelist intendeth to describe our Sauiour Christ of whome the whole Gospell doth intreate and that al the other verses and clauses of verses are applyed therevnto he must needs be lesse then a reasonable man that would pluck this verse out of the midst of the rest and conceiue that by it which neuer came into the thought of him that pend it But for the translation reade it as you please so you vnderstand the meaning of the Euangelist aright that the Word or Sonne of God our Sauiour Christ made all things This being vnderstood wee are first to enquire what this speech importeth By him then what is said of him namely what this making was and what was made By him or By it By the VVord or by the Sonne why dâ—th the Euangelist make choise of this kind of speech and not rather say plainely as he might He made all things It is and hath bin alwaies commonly held that this maner of speaking doth better set out the worke of the Creation and confirme that former point of doctrine whereby our Sauiour was affirmed to bee the sonne of God If it had bin said that The VVord created all things it might haue bin imagined that the Father had had no hand therein whereas now it is implyed that the Father made all things by the Sonne But surely sauing their better iudgemeÌ„t that thus reasoÌ„ there is no more feare least the father shoulde bee thought not to haue created the world because the sonne did then least the holy Ghost should by the same speech be imagined to haue had nothing to do therein it is as much against the truth of religion to deny or doubt of the Godhead of the holy Ghost as of the fathers being God Yea the daunger was greater concerning the holy Ghost because not only the Scripture doth more often ascribe that worke of creation to the Father then to the holy Ghost but also the generall opinion of al men makes the father a Creator whereas the diuine nature of the holy Ghost is not so commonly knowne or beleeued Neither will this kind of speech which our Euangelist here vseth though you take it neuer so largely preuent or remedy that doubt touching the worke of the holy Ghost in the Creation but that for ought that can possibly be implied in this phrase By him the spirit may be thought to be no creator But that I may omit nothing which may be gathered for our instruction out of any reasonable obseruation let vs a little consider how this manner of speaking may confirme our faith concerning our Sauiour Christs being of his father When we say By him we ofteÌ„ times imply that there was some other beside him of whom we so speak For example if I say By Ioab the Ammonits were subdued I may signifie thereby that Dauid did sub due them by Ioab So By the VVord all things were made I may hereby giue notice that the father made al things by the Word Yet to say the truth neither doth this maner oâ— speech vsually imply any such matter nor the other exclude any that are or may be held to haue bin doers therein And therfore we are faine to adde only or alone when we would haue it conceiu'd that some one was the dooer of this or that But let vs grant that By him signifieth also the working of the Father that wee maye come to the cheefe thing intended by that obseruation What if all thinges be made by the Sonne We must learne thereby that the Sonne hath all that he hath from the Father and not of himselfe The father is said to haue made all things because he is of himselfe All things are said to be made by the sonne for that he is of another I propound these things to your consideration not so much with any opinion that the Euangelist had any such meaning as for the satisfaction of some who think it not lawfull to leaue any thing vntaught which hath beene formerly observ'd and deliuered for truth And I doe it the oftener now in this beginning that I may rather bee excused hereafter for leauing that out of my exposition which hath no certaine euidence of truth nor great likelihood of reason Wherefore I will for the most part content my selfe with the alleaging and refuting of such interpretations onely as the heretikes Papists and other haue made for the avowing of some of their errors For the present to cleare that which I haue begunne to speake of the doctrine of our Sauiours receiuing his being from his Father yea the very power of creating if you consider him as a Sonne is true and souÌ„d For being so coÌ„sidred he is wholly of the Father and hath nothing of himselfe that wee may not continue a needlesse fruitlesse controuersie begune slaunderously by some Papists and ignorantly as I shewed in my last exerciâ—e concerning the Godhead of the Sonne But this Doctrine cannot necessarily be gathered from this kind of phrase But if our Euangelist had intended any such thing hee would haue said that the Father made all things by the Sonne as u Heb. 1. 2. the Apostle speaketh By whome also he made the world and not thus vncertainely and to such a purpose obscurely By him all things were made Especially since the same speech may truely be vttered euen of God the Father or of the Diuine nature in which all three Persons are comprehended I doe therefore rather perswade my selfe that the Euangelist vsed his libertie and whereas hee might say either He made all things or By him all things were made he did make choise of the later both for variety and for elegancy of speech He had spoken of the Word altogether as yet after one maner of phrase The Word was that he now varies saying not He made but By him were made and this suiteth with the next verse very fitly By him were all things made In him was life There is no question but that this making which the Euangelist here noteth was the creating of the world whereof Moses speaketh And how soeuer it is a common opinion that creating signifieth making without any matter whereof the things to bee created should be made whereas making presupposeth matter ready to be framed and formed yet indeed there caÌ„ hardly be any such distinction wrung out of the words themselues For neither hath the Hebrew that Moses vseth to set out the creation any such nature nor the Greeke by which it is translated For the former it appeareth manifestly by the ordinary vse of it in the Scripture and namely by Moses himselfe who applies the word making to that which in in the next verse he cals creating lâ—t vs make man Thus God created the man in his image The words are diuers and yet spokeÌ„ of the same thing or
Is it not enough that wee are assured by the holy Ghost in the Scripture that the Lord hath giuen them charge ouer vs Many and many times are wee defended and guided by them though wee see them not As the Diuell laboureth all hee can to drawe or thrust vs into daunger So doe they striue against him to keepe vs from it or to pull vs vs out of it How many times haue wee beene stirred vp by them to the seruice of God and the workes of our calling How often haue they made vs remember and see that wee were entring into the way of destruction It is indeede the blessed spirit of the Almightie that inclines our hearts and affections to like of and yeelde to holy motions but the Angels are they that ordinarily make these motions Beleeue then in Iesus Christ and thou art presently furnisht of a most sufficient guard both for state and strength d Psal 34. 7. The Angel of the Lord pitcheth round about them that feare him and deliuereth them King Salomon in all his royaltie in the midst of them e 2. Chr. 9. 15. 16 that carried 200 targets and 300. shieldes of beaten golde was not so richly nor so safely guarded such honour such securitie doth beleefe in Christ procure all true Christians how meanely soeuer the worlde account of them It will here perhaps bee demanded by some whether those wicked spirits which we commonly call Diuells be of the number of those Angelles or within the compasse of those All things which the Euangelist sayth were made by Christ But the question is aunswered already because these spirits are not God and yet haue a true being it must needes bee that they tooke their beginning by Creation from him Without whome nothing was made that was made Besides it is not vnknowne I thinke to any man that these euill Angells are all one for the substance of their nature and being with those other holy and glorious spirits yea the Lord doth vse them oftentimes as executioners of his iust wrath vpon the wicked I will not stand to inquire whether euer hee doe imploy those his Angels of Light in any such kinde of seruice or no or whether this office bee put off to those euill spirites onely once it is a matter out of doubt that these later are sometimes so imployed f 1. Sam. 16. 14. The spirit of the Lord departed from Saul and an euill spirit sent from the Lord vexed him And of the Israelites it is sayd in g Psal 78. 49. the Psalme That the Lord cast vpon them the fiercenes of his anger indignation and wrath and vexation by the sending out of euil Angels Such was h 1. King 22. 21. that lying spirit which offered himselfe to deceiue Ahab by the mouth of his false Prophets As for that wickednesse of theirs which now by long custome is as it were turned into nature and hath taken so full possession of them that they are vtterly reprobat to all goodnesse it was not made with them but bred and brought in by them they receiued not that corruption with their nature but by their choise of euill corrupted their nature Their estate by creation was happie their nature holy i Iud. v. 6. But they kept not their first estate but left their owne habitation as Saint Iude tells vs and as k 2. Pet. 2. 4. the Apostle Peter plainly saith They sinned The Lord found no stedfastnesse in them as l Iob. 4. 18. Eliphas affirmeth in the booke of Iob They are now euill and nothing but euill but from the beginning they were not so Yes saith one euen from the beginning witnesse our Sauiour himselfe who doubteth not to affirme that The deuill hath beene a murderer from the beginning What From the beginning of his creation That were indeed to make God the author of sinne properly and immediately But how should the Diuell bee a murtherer when as yet there was none whom he could murther yea after that Adam was created which certainly was after the creation of Angells who were in all likelihood the beginning of Gods workmanship the Diuell was not yâ—â—â— murderer For Euah by whome he preuailed to the destruction of Adam and her selfe with their whole posterity was not yet framed But as soone as the Diuell had seene the man and the woman his malice against God his enuy at their present happinesse and future glory made him attempt that murder which he so soone committed So that from the beginning is nothing else but from the first time that hee had opportunitie to doe a murther I deny not that hee was ready enough before to haue done the like but our Sauiour speakes of that actuall mutther Neither yet doe I graunt that hee was naturally so inclyned by reason of any euill created in him But this I say that being holy by nature hee wilfully rebelled against God before the creation of Adam and by that rebellion of his defaced in himself the Image of God in which hee was created and was giuen vp by God to his owne wicked heart without hope or possibilitie of recouerie This in part our Sauiour himselfe in that place signifieth when hee addes immediatly vpon the former words that Hâ—e abode not in the truth For by this speech hee doth imply that hee was first in the truth Let vs not bee afray de then to confesse that the Sonne of God made the Diuell but let vs knowe and remember that hee made him not a diuell Hee is a Spirit by creation an euill spirit by declining from that puritie wherein hee was created His being is from the will of God his being euill from his owne will But that which concernes ve especially in this matter is this that how great soeuer his power seeme to bee in the world how extreame soener his malice bee against God how desirous soeuer he bee of our destruction yet hee in whom wee beleeue that did create him both hath him at coÌ„mand as a creature and would neuer haue created him if hee had not beene able to bring his owne purpose to passe for the saluation of those that trust in him in despight of Saâ—â—n and all his instruments Therefore take courage to thy selfe whosoeuer thou art that hast committed thy selfe to Iesus Christ to bee saued by him Dooth Satan rage against thee Dooth hee beleger thee on euerie side Dooth heee come with open mouth like a Lion to deuoure thee Hee that made him and thee knowes his strength and thy weakenesse Sooner shall hee burst himselfe with swelling enuie or fret himselfe away to nothing with bootelesse anger then separate thee from thy Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ Hee loue thee for the first creation a thowsand times more for the second generation Though thy first righteousnesse was lost by sinne thy second grace shall ouercome sinne But let vs proceede to the creation of visible things Whereof I shall neede to say
They saw him not but were perswaded hee should bee seene at the time appointed Neither haue wee seene him but are out of doubt that hee was seene while he liued here vpon the earth They trusted in him as the onely and all-sufficient meanes of life Is not our faith the same Therefore least any man should imagine that the Fathers which died before our Sauiour Christ was born were destitute of spirituall life our Euangelist assures vs that there was euen then life in him These reasons may giue some good satisfaction to them who desire rather to informe themselues to edification then to aime themselues for contention Giue me leaue also I pray you to propound to your consideration meditation at your better leasure what it hath pleased God I should conceiue of this matter would any man knowe of me why the Euangelist saith In him was rather then In him is life I think he may be fully satisfied if he do aduisedly consider that hee continueth the course which he begun in the first verse followed in the second and third In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God The same was By him were without him was Do not meruaile thē that the Euangelist sayth here In him was life Tell mee how hee could haue spoken more fitly Hee proceedes in the description of the Messiah touching his mediatorship whose Godhead he had before declared Could he doe better thē to hold on the same manner of speech But will you see yet a farther reason that nothing may be wanting which may helpe vou forward in the vnderstanding of this scripture Who knowes not that the Euangelist according to the ordinary course which they take that write the hystories of famous men settes downe in the beginning a briefe description of him of whom afterward hee is to intreat at large by shewing that in particular which was at the first deliuered in a generall sort This being so let vs remember that the historie is of him that is not now liuing amongst vs but departed out of this life from vs. Therefore it was necessarie for our Euangelist to speak of him as of one that had beene and now was not Not as if hee were not now at all but because hee is not now aliue in the world as hee was when those things were done the historie whereof is written in this Gospell So then we must conceiue that Saint Iohn in saying was hath respect to the time of our Sauiours being herein our nature and therefore not only might but ought also to say In him was rather then In him is life because he is totel vs what he did here in the world and not what hee doth now he is out of the world This the holy Ghost teacheth vs when he saith k Ioh. 20. 30. toward and l Ioh 21. 25. in the end of this Gospell Many other signes also did Iesus and there are also many other things which Iesus did Yet the ende of all is m Ioh. 20. 31. that wee might beleeue that Iesus is the Christ and so that life is in him now for vs as well as it was for them that liued in his time The excellent comfort of this doctrine drawes mee to it with both the hands but that my promise holdes mee backe very strongly Let me first discharge this then I will bestowe my selfe wholly vpon the handling of that more at large I vndertooke to shewe these two thinges what spirituall life is here signified of grace or of glorie or of both why the tearme life is applyed to note that holinesse and happinesse I doubt not but euerie man perceiues already that by life I vnderstand as well our liuing righteously in this world as our liuing gloriously in the world to come How else could it note such holinesse and happinesse The reason perhaps is not so apparant I will doo my best endeuour to giue you satisfaction touching that also It is verie fitte if not necessarie to giue as large an extent to all texts of Scripture as the circumstances of the present place and the ordinarie vse of the wordes will beare least wee seeme to restraine the meaning of the holy Ghost more then wee are warranted by him to doe And therefore I could haue beene contented to haue stretched the worde euen to note the preseruing of naturall life but that I can finde no such vse of it in the Scripture neither will that sense well agree with that exposition which the light in the second clause seemes necessarily to require as I hope to make it appeare anone if God will But neither any circumstance of the place tieth life to the one or to the other and the word is diuers times taken in both senses Of eternall life what shall I need to bring many examples This Gospell is full of them I will giue you a taste by one or two Yee search the Scriptures n Ioh. 5. 39. 40. sayth our Sauiour to the Iewes for in them yee thinke to haue eternall life and they are they which testifie of mee Yet yee will not come to mee that yee might haue life That which in the former verse hee nameth eternall life in the later hee calleth simply life The Ver. 24. like wee haue in the same Chapter not very many verses before Hee that beleeueth in him that sent mee hath euerlasting life and shall not come into condemnation but hath passed from death to life To what life Euen to euerlasting life which he was sayd before to haue The other life grace in this world both is implyed oftentimes in the life of glorie whereof also it is a part the Image of God in vs being renewed by it and is manie times spoken of by it selfe as I shewed at large before out of o Eph. 4. 24. diuerse places of Scripture It is needlesse to repeate them or to adde more to them What should hinder vs then frō expounding this life so largely as wee haue done Nave might wee not be thought iniurious to the holy Ghost if wee should leaue out either of them By life then wee vnderstand that spirituall estate of righteousnesse and glory of which all that beleeue in Christ are made partakers by beeing ingraffed into his mysticall bodie Would any man knowe why this estate into which wee are restored by our Sauiour should be tearmed life I aunswere him in a word because the miserable estate into which wee fell by sinne was called by the name of death It will not bee vnworthy our labour to consider this point a little When the Lord God had made our first parents and placed them in that palace of pleasure the garden of Paradise p Gen. 2. 8. Hee charged them to forbeare to eate of the Tree of the knowledge of good and euill threatning them that if they brake his commaundement that day that they ate thereof Ver. 17. they should dye the
father There was a man of Beniamin The new Testament is full of the like examples some of them wee heard before a few more will suffice There Ioh. 5. 5. 2. 1. was a mâ—â— there saith our Euangelist speaking of the poole at â—ethesda There was a man one of the Phaâ—ises Aâ—â— 5. 1. 10. 1. A certaine man named Ananias There was a certaine man in Caesarea I mâ—ght rehearse many more of the same kinde but these are more then enow and by this I thinke wee haue sufficient warrant to conclude that the holy Ghost in this History of Iohn speakes as hee doth ordinarily in other places of the like kinde without any intent to signifie his nature of whom he speakes and this is the simplest and Plainest interpretation of these former words The later Sent from God offer these two things to our consideration who sent what this sending was What needs any question of the former may some man say Doth not the Euangelist speake plaine enough and tell vs that God was the sender Hee was sent from God But we learned in the beginning of this Gospell that the worde God somtimes signified the diuine nature which is but one and the same in all three persons sometimes some one of them And we haue here the more reason to make this inquirie because one of the persons namely the second is he of whome Iohn was to witnes Not to vse more words then neede wee are directed by Iohn himselfe to vnderstand this of GOD the Father This I prooue by this our Euangelist in this present chapter where he reports part of the Baprists tesimonie touching our Sauiour in this sort He that sent mee to baptize with water he said vnto me vpon whom thou Ioh. 1. 33. shalt see the spirit come downe and tarry still on him that is hee which baptizeth with the holy Ghost Who is this that sent Iohn to baptize Not the diuine nature For he is distinguisht from the Sonne and the holy Ghost who can it be then but the Father God the father gaue Iohn a token whereby he should know the Sonne that was the Messiah the comming downe of the holy Ghost and his abiding on him S. Mathew sets out the point as distinctly The second Person is in the water newly baptized the third sits vpon him in the likenes of a Doue the first proclaimes him from heauen This is that my Sonne Mat. 3. 17. that beloued one in whome I am well pleased As if hee should in plaine tearmes haue said to Iohn This is hee of whome I sent thee to beare witness The like distinction for the Father and the Sonne wee haue in Saint Luke where Zachary the father of Iohn prophecying Luke 1. 76. of his sonne sayeth that hee shall be called the Prophet of the most high namely of God the Father as it appeares by the speech of the Angell Gabriell to the virgin Mary Hee shall be called the Sonne of the most verse 32. high Then followes Iohns office Thou shalt go before the face of the Lord namely the Lord Iesus for whome Iohn prepared the way But how did God the Father send him Surely hee may well bee said to haue bin sent in regard both of his person and of his office His person as it is wel knowne I will but point at the particulars was after an extraordinarie manner from GOD as I saac was giuen to Gen. 18. 10. Abraham and Sarah by him His father and mother were both striken image and she also barren insomuch Luke 1. 7. that when shee was conceiued with childe contrarie to her expectation and beyond all likelihood and naturall possibilitie shee hid her selfe fiue monethes till shee might bee more sure of that which to Ver. 24. 36. many would seeme vnpossible and to take away too much occasion of speech from the common sort For his office it was assigned him by GOD and notice also of that Assigâ—ment giuen to his father before the child was conceiued Hee shall goe before him saith the Angell in the spirit and power of Elias Neither was he only thus foreappointed for this excelâ—ent office but when the time came that hee should enter vpon it he receiued a speciall commission and warrant from God for the execution thereof The worde Luke 3. 1. 2. of God came to Iohn the sonne of Zacharias in the wildernesse It is to no purpose to spend time in seeking how this worde came whether by any inward motion of the spirit onely or by some outward vision also wee may safely be ignorant of such matters hath not pleased the holy Ghost to reueale in the scriptures yet if wee may lawfully ghesse it seemes most likely that it was without any such outward shew because the Euangelist makes no mention of it in setting downe the History This last sending onely is thought by some to bee signified in this place If they had said no more but chiefly I should ensily haue assented to them Now they say onely I doubt whether they haue any sufficient warrant so to restraine the holy Ghosts words or no and therefore thinke it most conuenient to allow them as large an extent as they will reasonably beare You looke perhaps that I should now proceede to deliuer the Enangelists meaning and accordingly to adde such proofe and exhortation as may helpe vs forward in the embracing of the Gospell But I thinke it fittest to forbeare that for a time till I haue expounded the other part of the verse that I may take all together It followeth then to speake of the name and why the Euangelst records it The name as it soundeth in our language hath little resemblance of the originall whence it commeth Which if any man thinke a fault let him take heede that he doe not rashly condemne the holy Ghost who in the Greeke hath had small care to expresse the Hebrew sounds following continually the custome howsoeuer not answering the originall tongue Shall I need to bring any particulars for proofe of that I say Looke ouer the new Testament and wheresoeuer you finde the name of any Prophet where the Greeke differs from the Hebrew you haue an example of that which I affirme Begin with Moses if you will and so goe forward to Malachy You shall finde that the holy Ghost keepes one and the same course in naming of them without respect of their significations or sounds The reason of this is that the parties were wel known to the Iewes by those names according as the 72. Interpreters had translated them after the manner of the Greeke tongue Other languages Except perhaps the Flemâ—sh by the same warrant haue iustly taken the same liberty and not doubted as they needed not to fit the He. brew and Greeke names to the fashion of their seuerall tongues So that if any man shall either curiously affect or superstitiously obserue the nature and sound of those names which
language may suite with their strange and new Religion English eares mislike the manner of their speech as Christian hearts doe the points of their doctrine Wee commonly translate the words for a witnes fitly in regard of the sense and easily for all mens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In testimonium vnderstanding This same came for a witnes that is This man who I said was sent from God came to bee a witness The Euangelists manner of speech is not fully deliuered who according to the custome of the tongue hee writ in saith worde for word he came to testimonie namely to giue testimonie which the Latin also followes though that language doe scarce beare it so well as the Greeke doth To draw into English such kinde of phrases is not to inrich the tongue but to corrupt it Wee haue no way to expresse the Euangelists speech and meaning in English but to say To giue or beare testimonie or witness This was then the office of Iohn Baptist To be a witness Now the vse of witnesses is for the confirmation of some truth or for manifestation of it For where there is no doubt nor question howsoeuer perhaps in forme of Lawe there may bee witnesses required yet indeede there needes none Where there is neede of them there the matter is not plaine in it selfe or at the least not acknowledged to bee true So that the point for which Iohns testimonie is to bee had hath of its owne nature or by the ignorance or peruerseness of men somthing not cleere or not confest What if it haue Could not God haue made it manifest by some testimonie from himselfe without such an extraordinarie course ossending a witnes as it were downe from heauen Yes out of doubt He that made the vnderstanding of man can make man vnderstand what pleaseth him He that framed the heart can perswade and incline it to what himselfe list But all such courses of reuelation from God were as extraordinarie as such a kind of birth and message and both the one and the other little enough in this case as the euent shewed For although the Lord testified of his sonne by his owne voice from heauen and by Iohn vpon earth yet was he scarcely acknowledged by any man As for the work of Gods mighty power in the soules of them that come to beleefe in Christ it was not wanting to any of these Iewes who aduisedly religiously gaue credit to the testimonie of Iohn the Baptist or set themselues to consider of it as they ought to haue done which if they had done it was not possible but they should haue seene both the loue of God in sending them such worthy meanes of instruction and the truth of that which Iohn deliuered by commission from him Doost thou wonder at the blindnes and frowardnes of the Iewes whome the testimony of a man in their owne iudgement not to bee excepted against could not moue to beleeue View thy self in this glasse and consider whether more witnesses acknowledged by thee to be sent from God to speake according to the truth of God be not of as small credit with thee in many points wherein thy obedience is required But of this more anone when wee haue a little better examined of what kinde this testimony of Iohn was That he might beare witnesse of the light The words haue beene all expounded already in the matter there are these two thinges to bee considered what manner of testimony it was that Iohn gaue what it was that he testified A testimony as all men knowe is ordinarily giuen by word of mouth wherein some matter in question is either affirmed or denied and they that giue these testimonies are called witnesses Amongst Christians there is another kinde of witnesses tearmed Martyrs by the Greeke name which is common to all that testifie any thing especially in matters of Law and iudgement The same word is heere vsed to signifie the witnesse that Iohn bare Those whome wee call Martyrs are such as by their death beare witnesse to some truth of God reuealed in his word suffering themselues to bee tormented and murthered rather then they will denie or not confesse a knowne truth of God when they are lawfully demanded of it Such was Stephen and so is hee called by Paul When the bloud of thy Act 22. 20 Martyr Stephen was shed The same title is giuen Reuel 2. 13. to Antipas whome our Sauiour calles his Martyr when Antipas my faithfull Martyr was staine among you For this cause Christ himselfe is named a Martyr from Iesus Christ which is a faithfull Martyr or witnesse and the first begotten of the dead As for Iohn who knowes not that hee was put to death by Herod for dooing his dutie in witnessing a trueth of GOD Yet hee is not thought to bee any of the Martyrs that giue witnesse by their death because it is commonly helde that the dying for no trueth makes a Martyr vnlesse the trueth concerne somewhat belonging to the profession of the Gospell so that neither Isay nor any of the Prophets are properly to be tearmed Martyrs I will not striue about the point especially since I doe but touch this by the way onely for Iohn I thinke hee is not properly to bee reckoned in the number of the Martyrs not so much because the matter for which hee reprooued Herod did not appertaine in any particular sort to the Gospell as for that he was not executed professedly for that he had sayde and did constantly mainetaine but for satisfying of the Kings promise and Horodias malice but whether that bearing witnesse could make him a Martyr or no questionlesse it was not that which our Euangelist here speakes of for it was not any testimonie of the Light How then did Iohn beare witnesse By preaching of Christ and auowing that hee was the Messiah ordayned and sent for the saluation of them that would beleeue in him This may some man say was common to him with the Prophets at the least with many of them and with all the Apostles that succeeded him who also therefore are called in the scripture by the name of witnesses Let vs make that wee say apparant to all men First for them all in generall Zachary the Father of Iohn Baptist speaking of our Sauiour and redemption by him sayeth that God spake of him and his comming to that purpose By the mouth of his holy Prophets Luk. 1. 70. which were since the world beganne And the Apostle telles vs that God had promised the sending of his Sonne afore by his Prophets in the holy Scriptures Rom. 1. 2. In particular I will make choyse of two onely Isay and Daniell Of which the former is ordinarily called the Euangelicall Prophet as if he had written the Gospell in his Prophecie And that not without cause For hee hath spoken very plainely of the birth life and death of our Sauiour Concerning his birth hee noteth that which was most
It is needlesse to heape vp any more examples These fewe may serue to teach vs that beleeuing is sometimes put for beleeuing in Christ. If it please you to take a view of other places of the same kind I doubt not but you will bee confirmed in the truth of this obseruation The ende then of Iohns bearing witnesse was that all men through him might beleeue in Iesus Christ to saluation There is yet an other doubt who it is that the Euangelist meanes by Him through him Through whome For the word in the Greeke may agree either to Iohn the witnesse or to the light whereof hee beares witnesse though in our English there is a plaine difference because if we would haue it vnderstood of Iohn wee must translate the word as we do Him but if we referre it to the light we must say It that all men by it might beleeue Let vs see now to whether of the 2 the worde must belong By light as it is apparant our Sauiour Christ is signified so that if we vnderstand it of the light the meaning is that all men should beleeue by Christ But this is a strange kind of speech without al warrant of example from the Scripture concerning him To beleeue Christ To beleeue in or on Christ are vsuall and ordinary but to beleeue by Christ is a phrase with which the Scripture is not acquainted And whereas some men would defend the applying of this to the light by expounding it that men through Christ might beleeue in God they affirme that of Chr. which the Scripture neuer speaketh of him Where is it said of him that he taught men to beleeue in God Once in this Gospell hee mentions beleeuing in God but as a thing to which they needed no instruction of his because they did already performe that duty Ye belieue in God saith hee Beleeue also in mee I deny not that Ioh. 14. 1. the Iewes needed to be taught by our Sauiour how they ought to belieue in God but I cānot see why we should imagin that the Euangelist woulde in this place speake of such a point as he no where toucheth in any other part of his Gospell It is best therefore to translate as we read it and to vnderstand it not of Christ but of Iohn who was sent to beare witnesse of the light to assure the Iewes that Iesus was he by whom they were to receiue life and light that they being thus instructed and perswaded by him might beleeue in Christ to the obtaining of euerlasting life and this was the ende of Iohns ministery For the farder commēdation wherof some alleage the generality of it that it belongd to all Iewes Gentils one and other without exception as the words they say manifestly proue that all men through him might beleeue It is not my desire nor purpose to speak any thing that may darken the glory of so honorable a calling as Iohns was as it might and I hope did appeare when I handled the point of his witnes-bearing But But I am now to seeke out the meaning of that which our Euangelist heere reporteth not to apply my selfe to set forth the largenesse of Iohns commission or the excellency of his office The question is how far these wordes All men are to be stretcht according to the true intent and meaning of the Euangelist What needs any question of this matter saith one The Euangelist hath spoken plaine enough Let the wordes haue their full course and restraine not that to some which is imparted to all If the like speeches were alwaies in Scripture of as large extent in the holy Ghosts meaning as they are in their owne nature there might be no question made but that in this place they were so to be taken But who is ignorant that often times in Scripture the generall sense of the worde must bee limitted to some particulars For example in this very case concerning the ministery of Iohn Saint Mathew saith That All Iudea and all the Region about Iordan went out to him Mat 3 5. VVho is so vnreasonable as to expound this All of all men woemen and children Yea who dare avouch it of all men or precisely of the greater part The holy Ghost followeth the ordinary custome of mens daily speech who to signifie a great number are wont to say All Such is that common phrase All men or all the world knowes it And of the same kind is that in the Gospell though not so large All holde Iohn as a Prophet Mat. 21. 26. and yet there might be many that perhaps had scarsly heard of him but generally hee was taken to be a Prophet Shall I alleage a straunger kind of speech for proofe of that I haue affirmed As in Adam all men dy So in 1. Cor. 15. 22. Christ shall all bee made aliue Here is the very same worde twice vsed and yet diuersly All in the first part of the verse signifies euery man woman and child that came from Adam by naturall propagation But in the later part it is restrained to certaine men as the next verse makes it plaine But euery man in his Verse 23. order The first fruites is Christs afterward they that are Christs Those All are no more but such as are Christs For none but they are made aliue in Christ that is as members of his body whereof he is the head If you presse mee with the opposition betwixt Adam and Christ to conclude from thence that All must bee as generall in the later clause as in the former first we haue heard the Apostles limitation They that are Christs Secondly consider the similitude of the first fruites which sanctifie none but their owne lumpe and the wicked are not one lumpe with Christ no more then they are part of his body Lastly conceiue also the reason of this diuersity and the opposition will stand for all this restraint In Adam all men dy simply all men not one excepted of any age sex or condition Why so Because euery man woman and child was in Adam when hee sinned and is naturally descended from Adam Shall all men in like sort be made aliue in Christ Not simply all because all are not Christs as all were Adams yet is there a fit comparison of contraries For as all Adams dy in Adam So all Christs liue in Christ Seeing it is so cleere that the word All neither must nor may alwaies be extended to the vttermost of the proper signification thereof I trust no man wil rashly condemne me If I make inquity whether it be so generall in this place or no VVould you knowe why I doubt You haue heard the generall reason thereof I will come to some particulars Frst there is no remedy but it must be some what restrained because there were many thousands in the worlde that could not possibly come to any knowledge of Iohn or his testimony Yea I may truly and therefore boldly say that the hundreth
their worldly cares or some other such respects from the due consideration of that whereof there is offer made them But the Hebrewes as Saint Paul there writes had receiued the light that is had giuen assent to the truth of that which was taught them and for the maintaining of it had indured as it is there witnesses greate fight in afflictions If we take the word in the former sense only for shining vpon the things that are needfull to bee seene that they may shew themselues vnto vs it is out of doubt that in respect thereof euery man is inlightned for so much as concernes the office of the light which is to make manifest those things that were not without it to be seene For so our Lord hath revealed the will of his Father concerning the meanes of saluation which Ioh. 1. 18. but by him had neuer beene publisht and proclaimed to al the world But this is rather lightning thē inlightning as he that carries a candle or torch with him inlightens not the party before whom he goes or to whō he comes but only lights him and in this sense our Sauiour doth but shewe men what is to bee beleeued Whereon there growes more question how it may be said that euery man is thus lighted For it is very manifest that there were many thousands in the world euen then when our Sauiour himselfe shone so brightly by his glorious workes and powerfull preaching who neuer heard or saw the one or other nor in any likelyhood of reason possibly could do What say I There were many thousandes I may truly say the thousand man then liuing neuer had nor could haue any sight of the light that then shined among the Iewes Yet I confesse that the light stretcht and spread his beames to the vttermost of his nature and strength Take example of the Sunne which in the height of summer riseth early mounts highe shines gloriously sets late and yet there are diuers nations in the worlde which haue not the least glimse of his light all the while he shewes himselfe to vs in these parts of the Hemisphere most apparant and bright Therefore when we read or heare That our Sauiour the true light lighteth euery man as much as in him lies we must not consider him as God but as the mediator of mankind become man As he was God he could haue giuen euery one then liuing in the worlde certaine knowledge that himselfe was ordained for the Sauiour of the world But he was heere to demeane him selfe as a person who by the diuine power of his Godhead could do al things but by the conditiō of his mediatorship was to doe no more then his humane nature might be known to be imployed in some way or other He taught the admirable secrets of God by his voice he wrought wōderful miracles by his almighty power but still it appeared to all men that by the word and wil of him whom they saw to be a man all those wonders weredon So then if we take this lightning of euery man for affording them the meanes of knowledge to saluation we must thus conceiue the matter that our Sauiour preacht and shew'd his miracles by himselfe and his Apostles and doth daily vouchsafe the knowledge of the truth to euery man without exception not forbidding his ministers to teach any man nor barring any from learning of them Let vs now see how we are to vnderstand the Euangelist that the true light inlightneth euery man Inlightning causeth him to discerne the truth of that which is deliuered so that the doctrine of the Gospell is alwaies effectuall to him that is inlightned The Lord opened the heart of Lydia that shee attended to the things that Paul Act. 16. 14. spake All that heard him were lighted but they only inlightned which beleeued the things hee spake How then may Christ be said to inlighten euery man since it is apparant many yea the greatest part beleeue not Surely the former answer satisfies this doubt very sufficiently Whosoeuer is inlightned hath this inlightning from the true light And this interpretation as I shewed before agreeth very well with the Euangelists words and meaning But let vs apply the common distinction to this purpose Christ inlightneth euery man as much as lies in him If wee vnderstand this of his absolute power wherby he is able as God to do al things it is manifestly false Else should euery man vndoubtedly beleeue For he is able to beget faith in the heart of euery man Therfore the most that can bee truly avoucht in this matter is this that hee is ready to inlightē euery man But this interpretation as far as I can conceiue doth not fully expresse the sense of the place if wee expound it of inlightning For it is one thing to inlighten an other thing to bee ready to inlighten What could the Euangelist say more of them that are actually inlightned I acknowledge the truth of the doctrine that our Lord is ready to refresh all that come vnto him to teach all that vse the meanes to learne but Mat. 11. 28. me thinkes this is not all that the holy Ghost in this place affirmes Therefore I had rather interpret the text either of lightning that the true light shines to all without exception no man being shut out from the hearing and reading of the Scriptures by any commaundement or restraint of the light it selfe or of inlightning that all which are made partakers thereof attaine to it only by this true light and both these expositions are true and may agree with the words meaning of the Euangelist to commend our Sauiour Christ as the true light of all men Now whereas some men herevpon would conclude that because the true light inlightens euery man therefore God hath not made choise of any man more then of all men to be heires of his glory in heauen they gather that which growes not of the text I will make it plaine by a short examination of the matter according to the former interpretations No man is barr'd the ministery of the worde Therefore saluation is intended alike to all If you adde in regard of the ministery thereof yet that you say will hardly proue true For though no man be abbridg'd of liberty to heare by any charge to the contrary from God yet many are not vouchsaf't the possibility of hearing How shall wee affirme then that in respect of the ministery of the worde saluation was intended alike to all I graunt that the meanes is affoorded in generall but I deny that therefore there is no difference in Gods purpose touching lightning of one nation more then of an other It is as free for any restraint made by God for the Turkes to haue the Gospell as for vs For they are Gentiles as well as wee But yet it were too greate vnthankfulnesse and absurdity to say that concerning the ministery of the worde God meant to light them to
in the matter of our iustification I deny not that the Hebrew addeth the preposition ◠often times which the 70 sometimes expresse sometimes ouerpasse but this I say that the phrase which the holy Ghost most commonly vseth in the new Testament to expresse Beleeuing in Christ is neither in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 greeke translation of the old nor for ought I could euer yet find in any greeke Author whatsoeuer except those that writ since and tooke it from the Scripture To beleeue in God or in Christ for the substance and sense is no more but to trust to God or Christ and this kinde of speech is vsuall in the greeke tongue and writers To helpe vs in the vnderstanding of this the 70. in their greek afford an other phrase maruelous significant To 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beleeue vpon or on God This the holy Ghost might haue contented himselfe withall vsing it often as hee doth and by this the Hebrew Preposition is now and Act. 16. 13. Rom. 4. 5. 18. then exprest in the Greek But as if hee would haue vs out of al doubt touching a matter of so great importāce he becomes autor of a new phrase himselfe To beleeue in Christ Shall any man perswade me that hee meanes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no more by it but a bare assenting to the truth What needed this straunge manner of speech which doth rather darken then inlighten the vnderstanding for the right conceiuing of the holy Ghosts true meaning Abraham beleeued God Euery man knows what this means especially if it signifie no more hut giuing credit to the truth of that which is spoken But the Apostle expoūds it by Beleeuing in or on God Is not this to make the matter doubtfull by an exposition whereas of it selfe it was plaine and certaine enough It cannot bee therefore but that the holy Ghost by this new kind of speech notes somewhat more then simply to assent to the truth of God vpon the autority of the speaker In particular I say farder touching that of Abraham Rom. 4. 5. first that his beleeuing as we haue often heard is a beleeuing in God or resting vpon God 2 that beleeuing could not haue profited Abrahā if he had only acknowledgd the truth of that which God promised and not trusted to him for the performance thereof What can it auaile any man to Iustificatiō that he holds IESVS CHRIST to be the only Sauiour and faith in himt he only means of saluation if he doe not withall rely vpon him to bee saued by his mediation Thirdly it must bee considered that the Apostle applying that particular of Abraham to all beleeuers expoundeth that beleeuing by relying vpon God Which beleeue on him that raised vp Iesus our Lorde from the dead What is it think you to beleeue on Verse 24. him that raised Iesus To assent to the truth of Scripture that tells vs he was raised Then should the Apostle rather haue spokē thus which beleeue God who saith he hath raised him But it is required that wee beleeue on him and there is no speech nor thought of any thing affirmed by God which wee should beleeue Let vs vnderstand it thus which beleeue that God raised Iesus Certainely if this had beene the Apostles meaning hee would neuer haue spokē so doubtfully of so weighty a matter where he had a plaine and easy speech to expresse that which he intended to the vnderstanding of euery man whereas no man woulde euer conceiue what he meant by these wordes if they signified no more but giuing credit to the truth of our Sauiors resurrection As for the other place out of the Epistle to the Hebrewes what can possibly bee concluded out of it against Heb. 11. 7. that I haue deliuered touching the nature of that faith by which we are iustified What if by it we vnderstand that the world was ordained of GOD Is this all that is required to the iustifying of a man in respect of faith There is no such thing either exprest or implyed in the words Nay rather all the examples that follow are so many proofes that the faith whereof the holy Ghost there speakes can not bee seuered from be leeuing in God I will not stand vpon the particulars at this time the later part of the next Chapter before vpon occasion whereof the Apostle falles into this discourse of faith giues sentence for me The iust shall liue Chap. 10. 38. 37. by faith By what faith by that which only giues credit to the truth of God No but by such a faith as makes vs rest vpon God for the performance of his promise which presupposeth the truth thereof How chance thē that the Apostle in setting forth the nature of faith asscribes such effects therevnto as may bee without any resting vpon God Shall wee say that this faith spreds it selfe ouer the whole soule and is seated aswell in the vnderstanding as in the affection I see not how it can stand with reason to place any habit or quality in two diuers partes or faculties of the soule VVhat then Is not beleeuing of the truth required to iustification Yes surely There is no possibility of saluation without it For how shall any man trust in Christ to be iustified by him it hee doe not beleeue that hee is appointed by God to be a Sauiour of all them that trust vnto him But the question is first whether Beleefe bee nothing else but an assenting to the truth Secondly whether the true nature of that faith which is availeable to our iustification consist in resting vpon Christ to be iustified by him or no Assent is required as the roote and foundation but the very forme of iustifying faith is beleeuing in Christ as it shall appeare I hope when I haue iust occasion to define it and handle it at large In the meane while that no man may bee troubled about that place to the Hebrewes let vs remember that the Apostle being to sette forth iustifying faith and to perswade continuance in obedience therevnto enters into a commendation of fayth in generall for the amply fying of that particular But for the settling of our minds in the true knowledge of that beleefe which is required to our iustification nothing I take it can be of greater force then the consideration of the worde as it is vsed ordinarily in the olde Testament VVhen any blessing is to bee receined from God what beleefe is it that the Lorde expecteth of his people to the ende they may haue his protection and assistance A fewe examples will shew the nature of it Because thou hast rested on the king of Aram and hast not rested vpon the Lorde thy God therefore is the hoast of the king of Aram escaped out of thy 1. Chro. 5. 18. 19. 20. hands Thus did Hanani the Seer reprooue Asa king of Iuda shewing him that the reason why hee preuailed not against the Aramites
can hardly perswade my selfe to thinke so For thought it be true that by flesh and bloud man oftentimes is signified yet the wordes in that sense are neuer so diuided or placed Let vs take the examples which they alleage that so expound these wordes Flesh and bloud hath not revealed these things to thee Flesh and bloud Mat. 16. 17. 1. Cor. 15. 50 cannot inherit the kingdome of God All the rest are like these wherein who doth not easily marke both that Flesh is still set in the first place and Bloud neuer Flesh and Bloud not Bloud and Flesh and also that they are alwaies ioyned together and not seuered the one from the other If our Euangelist had meant to haue spoken of man by that kinde of speech hee woulde haue said which are borne not of flesh and bloud May wee diuide those former places Flesh hath not reuealed Bloud hath not reuealed Flesh caÌ„not inherit Bloud cannot inherit These were marueilous strange kinds of speech not agreeâ—ble to the phrase of the holy Ghost in Scripture Wherefore thoh I acknowledge that interpretatioÌ„ to be true for the generall sense of it yet I see not how I may like of it in the particulars especially seeing the holy Ghost vseth a diuers manner of speech in these 2 later from the former There hee said no more but Not of bloud In the other he denies also the will or desire not of the will of the flesh not of the will of man Let vs then if you please vnderstand by bloud the matter by flesh the man the efficient cause and maker as it were what shall wee say of the will of the flesh and man Surely I will not grratly striue with any man who thinkes it should be taken for concupiscence It is enough that I propounded the reason of my doubt before Giue mee leaue now to deliuer what I conceiue of the matter which is no more but this that I had rather vnderstand by will desire then lust What then shall bee the sense of it This as I take it that the Euangelist giues vs to vnderstand that the Sonnes of whom hee intreates are not borne according to or by any desire of man which might procure or affect or wish that kinde of Son-ship How fitly this will agree with the scope of the place it shall appeare by and by when I haue examined that which remaines All that wee haue said hitherto concerning this birth is to shew whence it is not Not of bloud not of man VVhence is it then Of God God sometimes notes the nature of the God head sometimes some one of the three persons How may wee most fitly expound it in this place What if wee referre it to the Ioh. 3. 5. sanlen in concord Euang. cap. 1. holy Ghost the spirit of whome euery man must bee borne that shall enter into the kingdome of God I doubt mee wee shall hardly finde any one place of Scripture where the worde God signifieth any seuerall person but the Father I deny not that in some place that is said to be don by God which in som other is particularly ascribed to the Sonne or to the holy Ghost but I say that in those places where God is so named the nature is to bee vnderstood nd not any one person The compareing of these places together doth teach vs that the Sonne and the holy Gost are by nature God but it doth not proue that where God is named there either of these two persons is specially signified Neither is it necessary to apply this to God the Father but rather the opposition standeth betwixt the diuine humane nature not of man that is not of man-kind or of the nature of man but of God of the diuine nature which is one and the same in all three persons Thus haue wee the meaning of the Euangelist that the Sonnes hee spake of arise not to that dignity by any power or wisedome of man but meerely and only by the mighty worke of God himselfe who begets them to himselfe by the effectuall working of his spirit and of his owne gratious fauour vouchsafeth to adopt them for his Sonnes I doe the rather make the sense so large because I woulde not willingly omitte any thing which it may bee reasonably presumed the holy Ghost did or might intende For the cleerer vnderstanding whereof let vs cal to minde what was before deliuered at the twelfth verse that there is a double Son-ship in respect of GOD the former is that whereof our LORD disputes with Nicodemus by which wee are borne againe Ioh. 3. 35. c. of the spirit and fitted for the later which is our Adoption by GGD the Father The prerogatiue of being the Sonnes of GOD is our being adopted which is not vouchsaf't vs by GOD at the first while wee are in our corrupt naturall estate but then only bestowed vpon vs when by beleeuing wee are become one with IESVS CHRIST the naturall Sonne of GOD his Father The other Sonne-ship is but a preparing of vs therevnto by which that beleefe is begotten in vs by the powerfull working of the holy Ghost in the ministery of the worde In this sense the thirteenth verse dependes thus vpon the last wordes of the twelfth Saint Iohn had said that they become the Sonnes of GOD which beleeue in the name of the Messiah Hee proceedes to shewe how they attaine to this beleefe By being borne not of bloud c but of God They haue it not by nature in their birth they get it not by any naturall desire or will but they are borne anew of God and haue it by him framed and formed in them The doctrine of both these points is most true the wordes will beare them both they will both stande with the scope of the place and purpose of the Euangelist Chrylost in Io. homil 9. The oph ad hune locum that I am not afraid of doing any wrong to the Text though I make so large an interpretation therof Let vs then in the feare of God handle these things some what particularly but shortly as the time requireth What a prerogatiue it is for men to bee the Sonnes of God wee heard in the last exercise here the Euangelist farder sets foorth the excellency thereof by shewing the basenesse of our naturall birth which for the matter of it is bloud for the making at the best but humane whereas the other is wholly and only from God I will not amplify the former point touching our naturall birth as I might doe but only referre you to the consideration of it by your selues For your better direction wherein I will name two Iob. 10. 9. 10. 11. Ezech. 16. 4. 6. places of Scripture which I commende to your humble and diligent meditation In the former the naturall breeding of man-kind is purposely described in the later his birth is shewed by way of allegory if wee consider the intent of the holy Ghost but