he seemed not to be born on Earth but rather fallen from Heaven having neither beginning of Days nor ending of Life but made like unto the Son of God whereof he was a Type shewing these Attributes to be more proper to and true of the Son of God which cannot be otherwise understood then thus either that the Son of God hath such a Nature as doth by no means come and is derived from earthly and carnal Parents without beginning or end and so eternal to all eternity such as is divine Nature or else that both Natures of Christ divine and human are denoted human without Father upon Earth divine without Mother in Heaven and either overthrows the imaginary Notion of Socinus of Father according to the Flesh This must not be understood of the Priesthood about which the Question is not but about his Origine and Genealogy he is said to be without Father or Mother not but that he had some only there is no mention nor description made of it for the Greek word without Genealogy signifieth not the Genealogy it self but the description of it besides that the words without beginning of Days or ending of Life may by no means be applyed to the Priesthood wherefore he is said to have no beginning of Days not but that he had but is brought in as if he had not to answer him whose Type he was Days and Life are not referred to a Priesthood but to a Being a Person an Existence and Life the beginning or ending whereof absolutely no mention is made at all so then in this place the Comparison is not about the Priesthod but about the eternal Person of Christ for Christ's Priesthood had a beginning as is expressy set down in Scripture * Heb. 5.5 6. For he glorified not himself to be made an High Priest but he that said unto him thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee as he saith also in another place Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec So then in that sense it cannot properly be applyed to Christ 't is frivolous to say as if it were to be understood of any Family for the Apostle absolutely speaks of beginning of Days not of a Priesthood to speak absolutely of a Beginning and of a beginning of a Family are two things and that is to wrest the Apostle's sense and meaning and make him say a thing which he never intended We don't deny but that the Apostle speaks of the Priesthood of Melchisedec and of Christ's but it must be owned he also speaks of other things as of Melchisedec's being King of Righteousness King of Salem King of Peace c. and his being without beginning of Days or ending of Life relates to his Person and Life for no mention is made of his Birth or of his Death though both besel him but from the Eternity of his Person the Apostle inferreth the Eternity of his Priesthood So then when the Lord Jesus is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Person of Melchisedec the two last are not to be understood of his temporal Generation and Birth of the Virgin for two Evangelists have written his Genealogy but of his eternal Generation and of this speaks the Prophet †Isai 53.8 Who shall declare his generation An Expression equivalent to this no Man can it is eternal incomprehensible When our Saviour was born of the Virgin he was born in time ‖ Gal. 4.4 When the fulness of the time was come as Scripture calls it Now this Parallel between the Type and Anti-Type Melchisedec and Christ doth not run upon our Saviour's Birth according to the Flesh and about his human Nature but about something higher his Divinity wherefore the Apostle in the place where he saith Melchisedec to be without Father c. doth ascend higher saying * Heb. 7.3 but made like unto the Son of God The more â—o prosecute this Argument we must say how Christ in his Childhood even in the Womb was God for he is Immanuel God with us from the Virgins Womb the thing is clear out of this that God being not Flesh but Spirit can have no carnal only spiritual Sons the true Birth makes the true Sons and this is of two sorts those that are born of the Flesh are carnal those of the Spirit are spiritual for saith Christ Joh. 3.6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the spirit is spirit now to be born of the Flesh is to be born of a carnal Seed as to be born of the Spirit is to be born of a spiritual Seed wherefore Peter †Pet. 1.23 24 25. mentioneth two Seeds one corruptible the other incorruptible that of the Flesh as Grass withereth away the spiritual endureth for ever If then Christ was born of the Spirit as not long before we took notice the Adversaries would have him to be because he is said to have been conceived by the Holy Ghost then that Birth of Christ would be spiritual but not according to the Flesh 'T is not without cause that when Scripture speaks of our Blessed Saviour in several places it makes a restriction according to the Flesh and an Opposition to 't according to the Spirit thus 't is in the fore-quoted places Rom. 1.3 4. and Chap. 9.5 thus The word was made flesh the Word and Flesh do signifie two different Principles distinguished and in opposition one to another So the Apostle saith * 1 Pet. 3.18 Chap. 4.1 Christ was put to death in the Flesh but quickened in the Spirit and again He hath suffer'd for us in the flesh that is in his human Nature then in him is a Nature in which he suffer'd not and 1 Tim. 3.16 God was manifest in the flesh In one and the same Subject are two different Natures divine signified by the word God and humane by the Flesh What mean those words of S. Peter * Acts 2.30 31. how God had sworn unto David That of the fruit of his loins according to the Flesh he would raise up Christ and that his Flesh did not see corruption but to shew that in Christ was another Being different from that according to the Flesh according to which he was not David's Son Thus S. Paul as already quoted said God sent his Son in likeness of sinful Flesh there is a difference between being Son of God and being in the likeness of sinful Flesh And elsewhere †Ephes 2.15 Colos 1.22 Heb. 5.7 Ch. 10.20 Having abolished in his Flesh and You hath be reconciled in thâ—â—body of his Flesh again Who in the days of his Flesh and Through the vail that is to say his Flesh that visible Vail did hide some invisible thing Now I say it were in vain in Scripture to see so often mention made of Christ's Flesh if there was in him no other thing as the ground of the Distinction thus when we speak
of Man's Body 't is to distinguish it from the Soul so of his Soul to distinguish it from the Body for though in one Man there be Soul and Body yet the Soul is not the Body nor the Body the Soul So in Christ though he be but one Person yet that Person consisteth of divine and human Natures one expressed by Spirit the other by flesh a necessary Distinction to make us know which Nature in him is spoken of for they ought not to be confounded each having its proper Attributes But as their way of arguing is altogether Cavils and Sophistries so they would put a false Gloss upon our Saviour's fore-quoted words That which is born of the Flesh is Flesh c. as if he were speaking of that which is naturally done but Christ's Conception and Birth is supernatural but see what a wrong Principle they go upon for the Conception by the Spirit they reckon to be natural as if the Spirit of God bestowed upon us in a spiritual Generation or Regeneration was natural to us when 't is a supernatural Gift of divine Grace Now seeing the Lord Jesus according to the Flesh is not born of any spiritual but a carnal Matter he is not properly born as of a Seed and so may not be called Son of God according to the Flesh though through the Operation of the Spirit he was born of fleshly Matter But that one may properly be said to be born of the Spirit 't is not enough to have the Holy Ghost be the Author of his Birth but also he must be born of spiritual Seed to the end there may be a Proportion betwen a spiritual and a carnal Birth or else if to have one to be properly born of God it be enough for God to create a carnal Seed then it would follow that all things which at first were created out of the Earth and Water through a Production of Seeds by God might be said to be properly born of God which is absurd so that after that manner Christ may not be said to be properly born of God and be his Son The Knowledg of this matter is of so high a Concernment that I must somewhat more enlarge upon 't Socinians would have Christ to be truly and properly Son of God according to the Flesh because say they God acted the part of a Man but we say how to the end one may in point of Generation act the part of a Man it is not enough to afford any matter of Generation but it is necessary it be out of his own Substance for if he affords another and foreign Matter that which is born may upon the account of such Matter by no means be called his Son nor be said to be born of such a one because he is not of his own Matter and Substance neither may he be accounted to be true Father to one so born he that is not born of the Flesh and Blood of a Man may not be called such a Man 's proper Son Certainly if a Woman should beget a Son of anothers and not of her own Substance she might not be called his true Mother for she communicated nothing unto him By the same reason one may not be called a true Father who is Author of Generation not of his own Body and Substance but of another's to be a true Son one must be begotten not only by the Father but also of the Father by the Father efficiently and of the Father in some manner materially that is either of the Father 's own Substance or out of that which is derived therefrom Hence it appears how in the Generation of Christ according to the Flesh the Father acted not properly the part of a Man because he communicated not his own Substance but made use of that of another wherefore Christ may not according to the Flesh be properly and absolutely called Son of God but only secundum quid and in some respects as Adam by God formed out of Clay is indeed called * Luke 3.38 Son of God but improperly for he was not begotten in the manner of a Son so Christ according to the Flesh must not properly be called Son of God not being begotten of God's Substance in the manner of a Son to be properly a Father is not to supply the part of a Father as Socinians say but really to beget of his own Substance or else he may not properly be called such a one 's Son Our Saviour indeed as to his human Nature is properly Mary's Son because begotten of her Substance but in this Generation of Christ God supply'd indeed the part of a Man as much as relateth to the absolute Generation of a Man but not as to the Generation of a Son so that in relation to God it may be called a Production rather than a Generation A Man by God's Will may be made of nothing or of any matter but a Son being a Relative to the Father with whom he hath a Consanguinity and Unity of Blood he must be formed of the very Substance of his Father To say that God created a new Matter in the Virgin 's Womb is to talk at random without the least ground for it in Scripture neither was it necessary for God could out of the Virgins Blood have caused a perfect Generation of a Man Wherefore we conclude that since Christ is called God the Father's proper and own Son he must be begotten of God the Father 's own and proper Nature and Substance Hence we do also infer that the Name of Son of God signifies some essential thing in Christ and not an Office and Dignity as appeareth out of the Acts †Acts 8.37 I believe saith the Eunuch that Jesus Christ is the Son of God for if to be Christ and Son of God signifieth the same thing then the words would contain this Tautology that Christ is Christ but upon this solemn occasion of his being about to be baptised in answer to what Philip had said that he is to be baptized in the Name of Christ so he must make a declaration that he believes in Christ and of what he believes him to be namely the Son of God so that the Name Son is not the Name of an Office as that of Christ but the Name of the Person that exerciseth that Office as good as if he had said This Jesus Christ whom thou hast preached to me is not to be consider'd only as the Son of the Virgin Mary who dyed and was crucified but also as the Son of God who liveth for ever To be Christ and to be the Son of God is not the same thing but different relations the Sonship hath a relation to a Father as the Patornity hath to a Son but the relation of the word Christ is either to God who * Heb. 1.9 anointed him or to the Church over which †Zech. 9.9 he is made King So then according to the formal Reason Son of God
that of the Apostle â—om 4.17 God calleth these things that be not as though they were And by that very word the Angels were made as every other Creature was not as by an Instrument for the particle by is not a sign of an Instrument but of an order in the Creation Rev. 19.13 To our purpose notable is that place his name is called the word of God which makes it appear that the name word of God is appropriated to and appliable to none but him as a Person if the name belongs to him then also the thing as indeed every where in Scripture the Word Father and Holy Ghost are distinguished one from another so John calls him the Word before he was made flesh and before the Creation Herein we may observe Socinians to be worse than Aâ—â—ians who owned Christ to have been from the time of the Creation when they would have him to have been only from that of his Birth But he was in the form of God before he took upon him the form a Servant he existed before Phil. 2.6 7. as indeed before his Incarnation he governed his people was with them in the Wilderness gave them meat and drink for he was the Manna and the Rock out of which they had Water he was the Angel whom God promised to send before them and before his being made flesh he reconciled regenerated preserved and interceded for his people if this be true as certainly it is according to Scripture why should he not have been in the beginning of the Creation and have had a hand in it For there is the same reason for all these if he existed but one year before his Incarnation then we may conclude for a hundred and thousands and so to Eternity upon the same ground on which he existed before he was man it could not be according to his humanity for no man can be said to be before he is but in a different respect from that whereby he is nothing can resolve this difficulty or reduce this impossibility into an act but owning him as he is the Eternal Son of God who when all things are said to be made and created is himself said to be begotten Notwithstanding the clearness of this Truth they use all means to darken it first against the 1. and 3. v. all things were madâ— by him in the beginning say they of the state of the Gopel but nothing more false if we â—â—â—sider every word and the scope of the 〈…〉 was in the beginning simply said without 〈◊〉 relation to this or that but absoluâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 beginning of all things then the Evangelist will have us to look higher when he addeth the word was with God And if Christ was in the beginning of the Gospel then he was in the beginning of the world for as I observed before the Gospel was preached in the beginning of the world and immediately after the Fall the Messiah was promised but as the design of St. John is to assert Christ's divinity he doth it by degrees as first In the beginning was the Word then He was with God and so to go higher he saith He was God and to shew it farther he comes to the effect namely the Creation of the world All things were made by him c. Secondly they would darken v. 10. the world was made by him whereby they understand the world to come but they forge ambiguities where there is no cause for it here is the world with the Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without any Epithet and thus it is usually taken for the work of Creation and they ought to give a reason why in this place the word world should have a rare and unusual signification and why the Evangelist should bring in ambiguous terms in a thing which he designeth to make plain and clear Neither are there instances that the name world signifies an age or a world to come which is as absurd as if one would say this world signifieth this Life and suppose world meaneth life to come as to enjoy it and to be in Heaven denote the same it would follow that Christ made Heaven which is part of the work of Creation If the Evangelist by the world was made by him had meant only a new Creation or renewing of the old he would have added something to shew it is not to be understood of the old Creation but there is nothing to that purpose on the contrary he could not more plainly have said that the World spoken of is the same as was made by the word So the Apostle saith positively and absolutely The world was made by him but they say it was not made by him but only renewed in this sence they would have these Texts to be understood He lighteth every man that cometh into the world and he is Saviour of the world but as every man is not inlightened and saved by him for the world knew him not it must be understood say they that he doth what he can to save and renew the world but they ought to know there is a great difference between giving Christ the title of Saviour of the world and saying He renewed the world saved and enlightned every man in the world after this manner we might say John Baptist Paul and every Apostle renewed the world in as much as they desired and laboured after that it might be so yet it would not sound well to say the world was made by John and the Apostles which must be inferred from thence if to make the world be only to do what one can to have it renewed The world was made by him expresseth two things the Thing anâ— the Cause the Thing the world was made the Cause by the Word and if the first proposition be true so is the second Now an effect is visibly seen out of this assertion the world was made Another text to prove the Creation of the World by Christ is this The first born of every Creature Colos 〈◊〉 15 16. For by him were all things created that are in Heaven and that are in earth visible and invisible whether they be thrones or domiâ—â—ons or principalities or powers â—ll things were created by him and for him This place is clear and full whence we draw this he who is the first born of every Creature is in time before every Creature not that he should thereby be reckoned among the Creatures only he therein is 〈◊〉 a metaphore dâ—noted to be first of all that in 〈◊〉 things he may 〈◊〉 the preeminence and not 〈…〉 accounted of the same kind with others for 〈…〉 not first created but first born Ye◠〈◊〉 the first born as to be the only begotten and he may also be called a Creature according to the Flesh and as he is a man but not according to the Spirit The reason given why Christ is so called 't is this for by him were all things created which shews plainly that Christ is not
so called As for us we own but one God and one Lord whom he gives proper attributes unto the one God is the Father of whom are all things and we in him the one Lord is Jesus Christ by whom are all things and we by him for as all things are of him of whom all things are made so all things are by him by whom they are made so then as all things are by Christ he must be before all not only in dignity but also in time Out of this Text we learn first that as there being but one Lord even Jesus Christ doth not exclude God the Father from being Lord so there being but one God even the 〈◊〉 doth not exclude the Lord Jesus from being God also and the Apostle not only affirms that it is so but withall he sheweth how it is by means of the prepositions of and by here used all things are of God the Father by the Lord Jesus Christ all things have the same Principle and Cause but somewhat in a different manner all things are of the Father but by the Son which in the work of making all things sheweth a sort of distribution thereof in the way of it and such a kind of subordination if I may so call it between the two persons as if neither of them was precisely the adequate cause of all things but the person of one God by the person of one Lord and the person of one Lord of the person of one God for if all the same things were not of one God by one Lord but some of one God others of one Lord then the strength of the words of and by with the Order and Coherence between one Lord and one God would fall and so the assertion of one God would be false because there would be two equally first and immediate principles of all things than which nothing can be more contrary to Scripture and reason for the one God is he who is the Supreme Cause not of somethings only but of all and the one Lord is he by whom not only some but all things were and what all these things are it doth appear out of all the Texts I upon this point have made use of being compared together which can make the thing plain enough to any unbiassed and unprejudiced man If here Christ be excluded from being God by the same reason shall the Father be excluded from being Lord. But it seems nothing in the world can stop the boundless impiety of men who with their restrictions will as far as they can confine the Spirit of God within their own Sence for upon the Text they say by all things we are to understand only those which belong to the Church of Christ and to Christianity as such which is a meer invention of Socinus's Brain and not of Christ or of his Apostles However rather than to be mute something he will say that the word all can have no relation to those things that were before him that is before he was born of the Virgin wherein he goes upon his wrong principle as if he was not at all before he was born of Mary for though we own that according to the flesh Christ was not properly before he was born of her yet according to the Spirit he was as accordingly hath been sufficiently demonstrated and as to that Spiritual and Divine Being of his all things were made by him and he was Lord over all But this Dominion of Christ he is endeavouring to reduce not only within the time of our Saviour's being born of the Virgin but also within that of his Resurrection But therein he makes a confusion between Christ's purchased and his natural Dominions which ought well to be distinguished the first was indeed after his death and resurrection grounded upon our redemption as formerly the special Right and Dominion of God over the people of Israel was entailed upon his having delivered them out of the Egyptian bondage but tho he had not delivered them yet still he had been their Lord upon another and more ancient account thus before Christ redeemed us by his death he had a natural Dominion over all things he was our Lord because we were the work of his hands before he was our Lord by a special purchase for before he humbled himself and took upon him the form of a Servant he was in the form of God Son of and equal with God 't is said indeed Rom. 14.9 that Christ both died and rose that he might be Lord both of the dead and living because there the question is about his acquired Dominion but in this place both are spoken of for Christ is opposed unto Idols upon the account of both his Dominions of which both the ground is contained in the words by whom are all things and all things are said to be by him not because he is Lord but rather he is Lord because all things are by him He is Lord of all Acts 10.36 The Apostle saith absolutely and without restriction of whom and by whom are all things yet they would have it reduced only to Christians as such Because 't is said to us but 't is not said of whom or by whom we have all things or all things are ours but barely and generally of whom and by whom are all things without any particular relation to Christians but this would follow that if according to the several relations we stand in we should have some things of one and others of another namely such as creatures such as men and such as Christians we would divide the supreme cause so that there should not be only one but many thus not only one God and one Lord but many quite contrary to what the Apostle saith Besides that if such a restriction be put upon the words one Lord by whom are all things the same must be layed upon the former one God of whom are all things whereby they shall presume upon the Father as well as upon the Son for there is the same reason for both so that both ought either generally or particularly to be taken which how presumptuous an attempt this is let any impartial man judge Not only the work of Creation but also that of divine Providence that is preservation and governing of the world is attributed unto Christ Colos 1 1◠this is of two kinds Ordinary and Miraculous the first spoken of when 't is said and by him all things consist for in the foregoing verse having said by him were all things created in this he addeth by him all things consist for he not only created but also preserveth all things and as 't is said else where all things are upheld by the word of his power Heb 1.3 in which place as in the foregoing is shewed how he who made the world doth also preserve the same the two go together and be inseparable and in the preservation of this world and works of Nature by him created
Father called God Son called God Holy Ghost called God and here the Enemies of Truth should begin their Opposition which is the true way and method yet they do not but they except against the Explication which only tends to farther Edifying and Instruction and quarrel with Words as Essence Trinity Persons c. Divine Nature is One yet common to Three in the Mystery of the Trinity we must learn the Truth the Height and Excellency thereof the Truth doth not depend upon our Apprehension and Understanding of it but upon the Consent of the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments and tho' under the first Men were more in the dark yet there was Light enough to make 'em believe it with humble Faith and Piety but under the last that Truth is clearly apparent 't is by * John 5.4 Faith only that we are enabled to overcome the World so †2 Cor. 5.7 we walk by faith and not by sight to shew our Religion is matter of Faith more than of Fact to be attained unto through Belief and not through Senses whose Object is visible and temporal but that of Faith is * 2 Cor. 4.18 spiritual invisible and eternal the holy Mystery of the Trinity cannot be comprehended by the Light of Grace nor of Glory much less by that of Nature Controvertes about Principles are more intricate and difficult than about Conclusions especially in things relating to God the Principal of all Beings and that for two Reasons the first because the infinite and incomprehensible Majesty of God doth far exceed our Understanding the second upon the account of the Blindness and Vanity of Man's Mind which either will not depend upon the Revelation without which we can never know things of that nature or else goes about with its wrong Notions to depravate it not so much as to the Words as in the Sense and Doctrine wherein Heresie doth consist Now as 't is a damnable Presumption in those who in these Matters do pervert the true Sense of the Word of God so I must say 't is a great Imprudence in those who undertake to refute them to abound in their own Sense leaving the trodden way and slighting Arguments made use of by the former Assertors of these Truths to set up new Notions and Hypotheses of their own which render those Points more abstruse and these new Lights of theirs instead of clearing make them darker instead of proving they do not so much as illustrate the matter the Proofs ought to be drawn out of the Revelation and in the Explanation thereof 't is no Shame nor Loss of Reputation to follow the Steps and Methods of Learned and Orthodox Men who went before and with great Success opposed Error and Blasphemy I do not hereby intend to deny a Man the liberty of making use of the Parts and Learning which God hath endued him with above others and improve them to a further Confirmation of the Truth but I would not have them to depart from the Foundation laid before them nor to exercise their wandring Thoughts about the adorable and incomprehensible Nature of God merely to affect Singularity and thereby to be applauded This very thing hath of late led if not tumbled some into strange and horrid Precipices which to avoid they more and more intangled themselves therein as hath well been observed by others 't is no good Consequence for such to say that if a Person be a Mind a Spirit and a Substance then Three Persons must be Three distinct Minds Spirits and Substances as distinct as Adam and Abel though not separate But the Error of the Hypothesis lies in this which openeth the false Ground thereof namely because Mind Spirit and Substance in their proper signification are absolute but Person in its proper signification is a relative Term because King William is King of England Scotland and Ireland must we argue that since a King is a Man an Animal a Substance therefore because of Three distinct substantial Kingdoms he is Three distinct Men Three distinct Animals and Three distinct Substances not so because Man Animal and Substance are Terms absolute but King is relative Suppose as one said before and to the purpose a Man were Dean of Pauls of Westminster and of Windsor should we thence conclude that since a Dean is a Man an Animal a Substance therefore because of Three distinct Deanaries he is Three distinct Substances I think not because Man Animal Substance are Terms absolute but Dean is relative It is very sad now to see the blasphemous Heresie of the Threetheites or of Three Gods revived among us by such as might do better in every well-order'd Christian State Idolatry and Blasphemy ought not to be tolerated but severely punished I know there are certain Terms to be explained in the Discussion of these Controversies especially in the Schools as may be Essence Existence Subsistence Substance Individuum Suppositum Hypostasis or Person wherein they agree and wherein they differ but I conceive they who writ for a publick good and would make these Points intelligible to most if not to all Readers might well avoid too far engaging in Metaphysical Notions I humbly conceive it were better because more profitablē in a Theological way to write and explain that which is most necessary to be understood according to the Pattern of Scripture and the Practice of the Orthodox Primitive Church and of its Doctors against Hereticks as we have it in the three Creeds which are a production of their universal Consent But for some Men herein thus far to indulge their fancy as to let it spatiate as much as it will and give it a full Latitude to wander and then express it self in such Terms as one of a Hundred Thousand can hardly understand the meaning thereof Nay upon reasonable grounds it may be doubted whether the Author doth well understand them this is only to intricate the Matter to puzzle the Reader and that which is worse to want a due respect for the Majesty of God whose Mysteries ought to be handled with an awful Reverence no Man may presume to know of him beyond what he hath been pleased to reveal himself for if we cannot well and perfectly know things created much less the Creator neither can the less comprehend the greater and if * Rom. 11.33 God's Judgments be past finding out much more is he himself Besides that this way of thus managing these Matters doth much prejudice the Cause and gives the Adversaries thereof ground to say of us They cannot among themselves agree how to defend it CHAP. II. Of Divine Essence HERETICKS Dispute against the Words Essence Trinity and Person used in the Primitive Church but sound Faith contendeth not about Words when the Truth of the thing is agreed upon Trinity is the abstract whereof three is the Concret expressed 1 John 5.7 as that of Jehovah and Lord signifie the Essence render'd by him * Revel 1.8 Which is
different things thô pertaining to one and the same Subject or else every Lord were a God thus a Husband were a God unto his Wife because Sarah called Abraham her Lord the Lord of the unfaithful Servant were his God because he calls him his Lord the Lord of the Vineyard were the God of the Vineyard because called it's Lord and many more such Instances And I shall illustrate the thing by a trivial Saying among us A Servant may say his Master is Lord but not God at home The Text that saith * 1 John 2.22 23. Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ He is Antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son whosoever denieth the Son the same hath not the Father these words do import how he that denyeth Jesus to be the Christ doth thereby deny the Son not that Christ and the Son do formally signifie the same in themselves but because to be Christ and Son of God do meet in one Person so that none but the Son of God is Christ and Redeemer of the World Withall after this Socinian way of arguing it would follow in this Text that the Names Christ Father and Son do signifie the same for here the Apostle offereth two Propositions the first He is a Lyar that denyeth Jesus to be the Christ the last He is Antichrist that denyeth the Father and the Son The Adversaries make them both equivalent for in both is the same Object of denyal whence they infer that Christ and the Son are of the same signification but according to this Kule it may be concluded that Christ the Father and the Son signifie the same because in the first Proposition Christ is the Object of the denyal and in the last the Father and Son together Any one may see the Absurdity of such Consequences But because Christ to prove himself to be the Son of God speaks to the Jews about his Sanctification by the Father which Sanctification is the anointing spoken of by Peter †Acts 10.38 wherefore they would have that to be the cause of his being Son of God but if there was no other reason of that divine Filiation but the Sanctification and Anointing then the cause by the Angel given in ‖ Luke 1.35 Scripture were false So then Christ is called the Son of God not only upon the account of his extraordinary Birth and of his kingly Office as Socinus saith but for being of the same Nature and Essence with the Father which that Text of John 10. is not against for in that place our Saviour doth not give in the cause why he is Son of God but only goes about to refute the Slander of Blasphemy by the Jews cast upon him not by an Argument à pari taken from equal things but from the lesser to the greater He had said v. 30. I and my Father are one thereby expresly asserting his Consubstantiality and Oneness of Nature with the Father whereupon they took Stones to stone him because of that pretended Blasphemy in that he being man made himself God which Objection he answereth with an Instance from less to greater Thus if those are without Blasphemy called Gods who exercise a divine Office in their ruling and judging of Men much more and upon a better account may Christ the Messiab from eternity begotten by the Father and in time sent down from Heaven into the World be called God wherefore there is no Blasphemy nor have ye any just cause of stoning me because I said I am the Son of God one with the Father The Name Son of God relates to the eternal Generation by and Consubstantiality with the Father therefore not a Name of Office but of Nature and Person and the Names Christ and Son agree as to the material in one Person but not in the formal the Name Son is by reason of an eternal Generation and that of Christ upon the account of a temporal Anointing to an Office In the mean while we retain the proper and literal Sense of the word and not the metaphorical till we see cause to the contrary And this we leave for them to prove how because Magistrates by reason of their Office are called Children of the most high therefore not because of an eternal Generation and Coessentiality with the Father but for his Royal Dignity the Lord Jesus is called Son of God To be short we have other Texts to prove how the Name God's Son signifieth some essential thing in Christ as that heretofore quoted Christ was made of the seed of David according to the Flesh c. the Flesh signifies his Humanity as doth Declared the son of God according to the spirit of holiness his Divinity for we see * Dan. 9.24 To anoint the most holy doth denote by the most holy his divine Person and by to anoint his Office of Mediatour So we have that of the Angel to the Virgin The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the power of the highest shall overshadow thee therefore also that holy thing that shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God The Angel's meaning is that in Christ's Conception the Power of God was necessary to the end he that was to be born might be called Son of God but if that Name had related only to the Office and he that was to be invested with it had been a meer Man no need of that Power of the Spirit in the Conception now the Angel calls holy that which it Essential in Christ he was holy before he should be born and that essential holy thing is called the Son of God The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not that Man that was to be born not holy in the Concret but holy in the Abstract Withall seeing in Baptism the word Son doth not in Christ signifie his Office but his Nature for the Names Father and Holy Ghost do not denote any Office but Persons so in Christ it signifies his divine Nature not his Office All this may also be proved out of other Texts as this †John 3.16 God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son c. compared with ‖ Rom. 8.32 He that spared not his own Son but delivered him up for us all wherein God's Love towards the World and us is so highly comended which if it were only an Office laid upon Christ would come very short of that inflnite Love of God which as Paul saith * Ephes 3.19 18. Passeth knowledg and gives it the four Dimensions bredth length depth and height But to say that God spared not his own beloved and only begotten Son but deliver'd him to death this is Love indeed The same we may learn out of this Heb. 5.8 that though he were a Son yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered What Man is he that would sacrifice his Son to the Safety and Preservation of his Enemies Yet God hath done it
is here said to reign The Lord God Almighty but to reign belong to Kings and if we go back to v. 15. this we shall find The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ who is called * Ch. 19.16 Vers 6. King of Kings and Lord of Lords and if we go back to v. 6. we may hear Alleluia the reason is for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth and in another place we read of the song of the lamb which I suppose no Man doubts to be the Lord Jesus and what is the Song Great and marvellous are thy works Lord God Almighty He is the Almighty God and certainly we have as many Evidences of his Omnipotency as there be Miracles wrought by him And if God the Father be Almighty as they will not deny him to be the Son must also be Almighty †John 5.19 for whatsoever things the father doth these also doth the son likewise Unchangeableness belongs to the true essential God Christ's Immutability but thou art the same saith the Psalmist 102.27 and Christ is unchangeable in his Words and Promises ‖ Matt. 24 35. Heaven and earth pass away but my words shall not pass away for * 2 Cor. 1.20 All the promises of God in him are yea and in him Amen and †Rev. 19.11 He is called faithful and true Other Names and Attributes there are in Scripture which though not incommunicable yet are so eminently spoken of the Divinity that they are almost equivalent to it so that they be fixed in God as their Spring and in the Creature but detivatively and as it were a small Drop in comparison with the vast Ocean and these being attributed unto Christ by way of Excellency do not only illustrate but also prove his Divinity I shall speak but few words about them the first is the highest which indeed I find in Scripture never to be spoken of Men in the superlative degree This is spoken of Christ in the place where it is said * Gen. 14.18 19 20. Melchizedec was the Priest of the most high God equivalent to the word highest and in the two following Verses 't is repeated so that no less than thrice the Name most high is set down which I conceive to be not without cause and may be in relation to the most holy and blessed Trinity Well this Name is attributed unto the Lord Jesus as what Zacharias said of his Son John †Luke 1.76 And thou child shalt be called the Prophet of the highest for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways So the Attribute is given to the Person therein spoken of which no Man may question to be the Lord Jesus This was given him by the Multitude and approved by him upon his entrance into Jerusaâ—em for they cryed saying * Mat. 21.9 Hosanna to the son of David Hosanna in the highest and though as I said this be simply proper to God and †1 Tim. 6.15 belonging only to him yet being joyned with the Name of God is attributed unto Christ ‖ Acts 16. These men are the servants of the most high God which shew unto us the way of salvation Servant of Christ is a Title which Paul doth usually take upon him Who this Most High God is we read in the next Verse Jesus Christ in whose Name he commanded the Spirit to go out which he did the same hour The word the blessed with an Article doth as I have had occasion to shew signifie the same as God and 't is said of the Son of God *âŽ* Psal 72 17. All nations shall call him blessed and the Multitude in the fore-quoted place called him so blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord and in that noted place the Apostle joyneth both blessed and God and gives him * Rom. 9.5 who is over all God blessed for ever Paul saith not Let him be in a way of Wish and Desire nor he shall be as if then the thing was not but only to come but he saith He is God blessed for ever thereby meaning his Being and Nature In Scripture †Isai 14. Psal 71.23 the Name of holy one is given to the only true God whom Israel doth worship This also is spoken of Christ ‖ Psal 16.10 Thou wilt not suffer thine holy one to see corruption and Peter *âŽ* Acts 2.27 and 3.14 doth certainly declare those words to have been spoken of Christ The Angel said to Mary * Luke 1.35 Therefore also that holy thing or holy one for it was a Person which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God before he was born Holiness was his Attribute and 't is †Rom. 1.4 according to the spirit of holiness that he was declared to be Son of God with power he not only is holy but also Holiness it self in the abstract To him sitting upon a Throne the Seraphims ‖ Isai 6.1 2 3. cryed Holy holy holy is the Lord of hosts the whole earth is full of his glory which is by John â‚ Joh. 12.41 applyed unto Christ These things said Esaias when he saw his glory and spake of him and * Rev. 4.8 The four beasts â—est not day and night saying holy holy holy Lord God Almighty which was and is and is to come which last is in S. John's stile a Description of the first these words spoken to him who sits upon the Throne and I hope none will deny Christ is sitting upon the Throne as absolutely expressed in several places of this Book So Daniel ‖ Dan. 9.24 called him The most holy Other Names and Titles Scripture doth appropriate unto Christ which are all strong Demonstrations of what he is namely the natural Son of God which I only shall name for indeed it would be almost an endless Work to insist upon all Testimonies of Scripture upon the matter He is then King of Kings and Lord of Lords Rev. 17.14 and 19.16 King and Lord of glory Psal 24.7 10. compared with 1 Cor. 2.8 Lord of David Psal 110. with Matth. 22.44 where 't is observable how the same Name given to the Lord spoken â—f is also given to the Lord spoken to as equally belonging to both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in this sense he is in several places of Scripture called one Lord 1 Cor. 8.6 and Lord of all Acts 10.36 because all things were made by him John 1.3 So the Lord and Saviour because there is no Salvation in any other Acts 4.12 Let special notice be taken of Psal 68. where speaking of Christ according to Paul's interpretation Ephes 4.8 he among other high and great Names is called the Lord God the God of our salvation and such more which certainly do belong only to the true essential God In Scripture the Names of Lord God King absolutely taken or with the distinction
manner of Conversion without a revelation in the Word are incomprehensible as our Saviour saith to Nicodemus in point of Regeneration The wind bloweth where it listeth and thou hearest the sound thereof John 3.8 but canst not tell whence it cometh and whither it goeth so is every one that is born of the spirit observe the blockishness of a Doctor and Master of Israel in Spiritual things Can a Man enter the second time into his mothers womb and be born v. 4. Where was his reason all this while several such things we read of the Disciples whereof I shall give but one Instance about the Resurrection Mark 9.10 They questioned one with another what the rising from the dead should mean Nay they were in that gross Ignorance till after our Saviour's Resurrection Joh. 20.9 yet they knew not the Scripture that he must rise again from the dead wherefore he upbraided them with their unbelief Mark 16.14 and hardness of heart and indeed they were no better till he opened their understanding Luke 24.45 that they might understand the Scriptures In his Page 81. his Conclusion is false that neither God nor his Attributes nor Eternity are Mysteries to us But certainly the smite cannot know the Infinite but as much and in such a degree as the Infinite is pleased to communicate himself as no Day light but what the Sun doth communicate and that more or less according as 't is done in a dark Room one sees only proportionably to the Light that 's brought in so in a Spiritual Light and Life 't is only as God is pleased to reveal and as Man is capable to receive the word alone is a dead Letter but the Spirit doth quicken it as it was in the Apostles the word they had heard from Christ was quickned by the Holy Ghost when he came upon them which in them caused a wonderful Alteration and made them quire another sort of Men Divine things cannot be comprehended for want of an Adequate Notion there is to be a Proportion between the Knower and the thing known so our Reason without Revelation apply'd by the Inward Teaching of the Spirit can no more know the Nature of God and his Attributes than a little Bottle hold in all the Water of the Sea To know things we must know their Essence and Nature as to God we by the Light of Nature may know there is one but what he is must be reveal'd and 't is usual when we speak of any thing to have a Definition or Description of it What is a Man a rational Animal What is God an infinite Being describ'd by his Attributes Almighty Eternal Independent c. Concerning the Infiniteness and some other Attribute of God's David owneth his Ignorance when he saith Such knowledge is too wonderful for me Psa 139.6 it is high I cannot attain to it And no wonder seeing in the same Psalm he so much admires the formation of his Body in the Womb when he saith he was fearfully and wonderfully made v. 14 15 16. If any one pretends he can know more than the Prophet David let him speak and stretch his Reason further than he could his Son Solomon was of the same Mind both as to Bodily and Spiritual things when he saith As thou knowest not what is the way of the spirit nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child Prov. 11.5 even so thou knowest not the works of God who makes all These times of Ignorance are over now say Socinians we have Men more knowing and wiser than David and Solomon But if it be so of the formation of our natural Body how much more of the work of Regeneration within us which our Saviour as said before compared to the blowing of the Wind that such things are we know and feel but understand not the manner Thus we know that Gold Silver and other Metals are form'd under Ground for we draw them out of the Earth's Bowels but the manner and how they are formed we cannot tell so these are hidden secret and mysterious things unto us much more are supernatural He goeth upon a Mistake as if we thought Matters of Religion to be Mysteries after the Revelation which makes them cease to be Mysteries which they were before so 't is in him labour in vain Pag. 91. When a Prophecy is fulfill'd it ceaseth to be a Prophecy and becomes a History The strength of his Argument lays herein that those things once revealed are no longer Mysteries But we must know how some things are wholly revealed and others but in part it is true we must yield an Obedience of Faith that the thing is so as that the Son of God was made Man that there are three Persons in the Godhead God having revealed it we are fully perswaded it is so but the manner and how we are in the dark about it is incomprehensible by and unconceivable to us and beyond the power of our Nature to know it yet as much as is necessary t is revealed here I cannot avoid taking notice how the Man unworthily compares the Mysteries of our holy Religion with the Tricks and Cheats of the Heathens Page 99. and what If what in their false Worship they called Mysteries there were Cheats as we own doth it follow it must be so in our Religion Theirs was Idolatry and Superstition but ours is Holy and Divine then after this Rule because they had false Gods we must have none at all and so must be as bad as they the Devil who is God's Ape and in imitation of God's Church hath set up a Synagogue for himself hath his Drudges and Bondslaves to serve him must not God's People adore him and because there is a false Worship must there be no true one Thus for Men who so much pretend to Reason 't is a very unreasonable Inference to say that because the Heathens in their Matters of Idolatry had Tricks which they call'd Mysteries therefore the Mysteries of our Holy Religion must be Cheats and Tricks Such comparisons are odious and unworthy to be used by any who call themselves Christians Then if Mystery does relate sometimes to the Matter and sometimes to the Manner certain Points of our Religion as the Trinity Eternal Generation of the Son Procession of the Holy Ghost were a Mystery before they were reveal'd it follows That the Revelation was necessary to make them known unto us and that it was not in the Power of our Reason to know them without Revelation so they were above it and thus tho' the thing be re-reveal'd so that we must believe it yet still there are some things that be unreveal'd and above our Capacity He would have every thing after the Revelation to cease to be a Mystery in Religion but as I said some things are not wholly reveal'd because 〈◊〉 full Revelation is not necessary to our Salvation and within this Limitation is to be