especially by remitting the injuries done unto them by others and so lift up pure hands without wrath and doubting To which purpose fasting is of great avail yet so that men impose it upon themselves without any mark of hypocrisie Q. What is fasting A. Abstinence from meat and drink for a certain space as may be observed from sundry examples in Scripture Q. Is it not fasting where men abstein from certain sorts of meat A. You may perceive by the definition of fasting which we have given that to abstain from a certain sort of meats is not fasting but rather a choise of meats which the Apostle reproveth and reckoneth amongst the doctrines of Devils 1 Tim. 4. 3. Q. Ought those that fast to be tyed unto certain dayes A. At no hand for the same is contrary both to the property and liberty of the Christian Religion which is spirituall and not at all tyed to times Neither is fasting acceptable to God unlesse the glory of God and the Salvation of our selves or others or some pressing necessities draw it from us Wherefore the whole time alotted unto fasting is to be spent upon Christian exercises as reading and explaining the Word of God ardent Prayers and pious Conferences CHAP. III. Of the Lords Supper Q. WHat are Christs Ceremoniall Precepts as they call them A. There is but one namely the Lords Supper Q. VVhat is the Lords Supper A. It is an Institution of the Lord that the Faithfull should break and eat the Bread and drink of the Cup to declare the death of the Lord which Institution is to continue till the Lords coming Q. VVhat is it to declare the Lords death A. It is in a solemn and publick manner to give thanks that he out of his unspeakable love would suffer his body to be tortured and in a manner broken and his Bloud to be shed for us and so to extoll and celebrate this great benefit Q. VVhy would the Lord have the memory of this thing above all others to be celebrated in his Church A. Because of all the actions of Christ it is the chiefest and most proper to him for though the Resurrection and Exaltation of Christ be far greater yet they were performed by God the Father and not by Christ himself Q. Is there not another reason for which the Lord instituted the Supper A. None at all although men have devised many some saying that it is a sacrifice for the quick and dead others that by the use thereof they gain the remission of their Sins and hope to confirm their Faith and bring to their remembrance the Lords death Q. VVhat are we to hold concerning these opinions A. That none of them can stand for since that is the end of celebrating the Lords Supper that we should give thanks to Christ for benefits received it is apparent that it was not therefore instituted that we should there receive something yea he that will worthily partake of the Lords Supper he ought to be assured of the remission of sins on the part of God and confirmed in the faith and so affected that the death of Christ never slip out of his mind Q. VVhat are we to think of that opinion which saith that the Supper is a sacrifice for the quick and dead A. That it is a most grievous error for the Scripture testifieth that the offering of Christ was performed in heaven and could not be performed on the earth Besides since Christ himself is both Priest and sacrifice it followeth that none can offer Christ but Christ himself Finally since the Sacrifice of of Christ is altogether perfect since it is one whereby he hath for ever perfected them that are sanctified there is no need that it should be repealed otherwise it would not be perfect and absolute Heb. 8. 1. 2 3. 4. Heb. 9. 24. Heb. 7. 27. Heb. 10. 14. Q. VVhat is the meaning of those words this is my body A. They are not taken by all in one and the same manner for some think that the bread is truly turned into the body of Christ and the wine into his blood which turning they call Transubstantiation others think that the Lords body is with in and under the bread Finally there are some who in the Lords Supper think they are truly partakers of the Body and Blood of the Lord but spiritually All which Opinions are fallacious and erroneous Q. How will you demonstrate that A. Because in these words This is my Body the particle This may be referred to the whole action of breaking and taking the Bread and pouring out the Wine Wherefore it is not necessarily referred to the Bread and Wine only by the Adversaries neither can their captious opinions be hence framed and contrived Besides as to the Transubstantiation it self as they call it since the Scripture doth in the very use give the name of Bread to that Berad we take as appeareth from the words of Paul 1 Cor. 10. 16. and chap. 11. 26 27 28. It is evident that Bread remaineth there without any transmutation into the Lords Body Furthermore the same Scripture testifieth that the Body of Christ is in the Heavens and must be there contained till the times of the restitution of all things wherefore it cannot any more exist on the Earth In a word if the Bread were turned into the very Body of Christ it would follow that the immortall Body of Christ wherewith all agree that he is now endued is taken in a grosse and carnall manner but this cannot be that an immortall Body should be so taken and consequently neither can the Bread be turned into Christs Body As to the second Opinion that as it cannot consist for the former reasons especially this that the Body of Christ is now in the Heavens so neither can it for his grand inconvenience namely that this Opinion doth devest the Body of Christ of its properties Lastly as to the third Opinion that cannot have place since it is absutd that one should be really partaker of Christs body and also spiritually And they themselves sufficiently bewray the uncertainty of their own opinion whilst they confesse that this manner of receiving the Body of Christ is altogether inexplicable or at least that they are utterly ignorant how it is done Q. VVhat is to be held touching the use of the Body and Bloud of Christ John 6. A. Christ doth not in that place treat of the Supper for there he doth without any condition ascribe Eternall Life to him that shall eat his Flesh and drink his Blood and on the contrary taketh Eternall Life away from him that shall not eat his Flesh and drink his Blood Which that it is not spoken of the Lords Supper is evident from hence in that a man may partake of the Lords Supper and yet perish And on the contrary may be saved although he partake not thereof But Christ there speaketh concerning the cause of Faith on him which is the continuall meditation
of the death of Christ from whence we derive strength unto a pious and immortall life Q. How are those words of Paul to be taken The Cup of blessing which we blesse is it not the Communion of the Bloud of Christ The Bread which we break is it not the Communion of the Body of Christ A. In such a manner as that all those who blesse this Cup that is using it celebrate the name of the Lord and blesse him and also those that break the Bread in Communion do thereby openly testifie that they are partakers of the Body and Bloud of Christ that is of all those things which Christ by his death hath procured to us As he a little after speaketh of the Israelites saying that the Israelites who did eat the Sacrifice were partakers of the Altar that is belonged unto all those things which were promised in that Religion Q. Explicate therefore to me the true and genuine sense of those words This is my Body A. It is as if Christ had said this action of breaking and eating this bread is a commemoration and certain adumbration of that which is to be done with my Body and this action pouring out and drinking this Wine is a commemoration and representation of what is to be done with my Bloud or that we may explain the words of Paul 1 Cor. 11. 25. the drinking of this Cup is a commemoration of that excessive love of God exhibited to us in the New Covenant and confirmed by the death of Christ In this manner it is written concerning the solemn custome of eating the Paschal Lamb for they had their loynes girded their feet shod their staves in their hands and did eat it hastily that it was the Passeover of the Lord Exod. 12. 11 27. Thus also Ezek. 5. 3 4 5. it is said of the shorn hairs part whereof was burned part scattered part conserved that this was Jerusalem CHAP. IV. Concerning the Baptisme of VVater Q. WHat think you concerning the Baptism of VVater A. That it is an externall Rite whereby men coming from Judaisme or Gentilisme to the Christian Religion did professe openly that they acknowledge Christ for their Lord. Q. Do Infants belong to that Rite A. By no means for neither have we in the Scripture either precept or example thereof nor can they as the thing it self sheweth acknowledge Christ for their Lord. Q. What then is to be thought of those that baptise infants A. Although they erre herein yet is it not therefore lawfull to condemn them so that they be not otherwise Idolaters but live piously according to Commandments of Jesus Christ and forbear to persecute others who reject their opinion For the Kingdom of God consisteth not in these outward things but in righteousnesse peace and joy in the holy Spirit Q. VVhat think you of them that think they are regenerated by this Rite A. They are exceedingly mistaken for Regeration is nothing but the transformation of our mind and will and composure of them to the doctrine of our Saviour Christ as the very word Regeneration doth intimate But such a transformation cannot have place in Infants who know not good and evill much lesse that a thing of so great moment should be incident to them But that those of perfect age in whom the transformation of mind and will hath place should be regenerated by Water is so distant from truth that it seemeth to carry a face of Idolatry with it whilst that is ascribed to a grosse elementall thing which is onely to be ascribed to God himself and his Word since it is he who hath of his own will begotten us by the Word of his truth and that incorruptible seed whereof we must be regenerated is the Word of God that liveth and abideth for ever Q. But the Apostle saith Tit. 3. 5. that God hath saved us by the Laver of Regeneration A. True but he doth not therefore affirm that that Laver of Regeneration is the Babtism of Water Neither is it unusuall in the Scriptures that the purlfication of our Souls which is wrought by the Word should be siguratively called a Laver for the same Paul Ephes 5. 26. writeth That Christ hath sanctified his Church having purified her with the Laver of water in the Word And the Authour to the Hebrews exhorteth them who had long since given their names to Christ and did no more stand in need of the Baptisme of water that they should have their hearts sprinkled from an evill conscience and their body washed with pure water Finally the Apostle himself in this very place which we have in hand explaineth himself what he meaneth by the Laver of Regeneration sub-joyning those words that give light to the foregoing ones namely And renewing of the holy Spirit For that this particle and is sometimes all one with that is was formerly demonstrated Q. But as concerning these words of Ananias to Paul arise be baptised and wash away thysins having invocated the name of the Lord Acts 22. 16. what is to be held A. It is to be held and we shall find this observation give light to many other places of the Scripture that when in the writings of the new covenant that is ascribed to some act or outward ceremony which altogether belongeth to eternall salvation this is not therefore done as if that act or outward ceremony had such power but because thereby a certain adumbration is made of that thing which altogether belongeth to salvation Thus when it is said The Cup of blessing which we blesse is it not the communion of the Blood of Christ the bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ 1 Cor. 11. and elsewhere as many of you as have been baptised into Christ have put on Christ Gal. 3. 27. And after this manner the words of Ananias may and ought to be understood although the place may be so constrained as that the meaning of Ananias was not that Paul by the Baptisme of water should wash away his sins but that he should be baptised and wash away his sins by invocating the name of the Lord since the time was now come wherein every one that called upon the name of the Lord should be saved Q. Doth not our Saviour Christ in his conference with Nichodemus John 3. 5. by water understand Baptisme A. By no means for there he speaketh of being born from above but the water of Baptisme cometh not from above besides he treateth of such a regeneration without which none can enter into heaven which reason it self sheweth cannot be said of the Baptisme of water Now that water and the spirit are the same in that place so that by water is meant the spirit or spirituall water seemeth thence to be plain in that the particle and may in this place signifie that is as we formerly shewed that it sometimes signifieth so in the Scripture and by name in that passage Matt. 3. 11. which is like to this
one we must needs be distracted in mind not knowing who hath prescribed that way to us And therefore the Scripture frequently admonisheth us of this thing as you may see in Moses Deut. 6. 4. which passage is cited by Christ himself Mark 12. 29. Hearken Israel thy Lord the God is one Lord. And again in Moses Deut. 32. 39. See that I alone am He and there is no God besides me Esay 44. 6. 8. Esay 45. 5. 14. 21. Esay 46. 9. 1 Cor. 8. 4 5 6. Gal. 3. 20. Eph. 4. 6. 1 Tim. 2. 5. Q. How the third A. Unlesse we believe God to be eternall how can we hope for eternall life from him and so attain the end to which this way doth lead Q. How the fourth A. To believe that God is perfectly just is necessary unto Salvation first that we may perswade our selves that God will make good his Promises to us though we be unworthy Next that we may acknowledge all those trialls to be just which being entred into this way we must of necessity undergo in that they are permitted by God Q. How the fifth A. This is therefore necessary to be known to the end we might not doubt that even our very heart then which nothing is harder to be searched out and from which the chiefest estimate of our obedience is taken lieth alwaies open unto God Q. How the sixth A. Because we could not expect eternall life from the hands of God as the prime Author were we not perswaded that his power is circumscribed with no bounds and limits Againe who would endure so many adversities as are incident to all those that make profession of the Christian Religion were not this perswasion deeply fastned in his heart that all things are in the hands of God and afflictions happen not without his will neither is any thing either in heaven or on earth able to hinder his divine power from accomplishing what he hath promised and we expect from him Q. You have unfolded what things are necessary to be known touching the Essence of God and therefore I pray you now discover what things are very conducible thereunto A. It is very conducible hereunto to know that in the essence of God there is but one Person Q. Demonstrate this I pray you A. Inasmuch as the Essence of God is but one in number there cannot be so many persons therein since a person is nothing but an individuall intelligent Essence Q. Who is this one divine Person A. That one God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ Q. How prove you that A. By the most evident testimonies of the Scripture thus Christ himself Iohn 17. 3. saith This is life eternall that they may know thee Father the onely true God And the Apostle Paul 1 Corinth 8. 6. saith To us there is but one God the Father of whom are all the things we for him And Ephes 4. 6. There is one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in you all Q. But Christians commonly hold that not onely the Father but also the Son and the Holy Spirit are persons in one and the same Deitie A. I know it well but they are grievously mistaken producing arguments for it out of the Scriptures ill understood Q. What are their arguments wherewith they endeavour to prove their opinion A. The chief are these First they say that the Scripture calleth not only the Father but also the Son and the Holy Spirit God And forasmuch as the same Scripture affirmeth that there is but one God hence they gather that these Three are that one God Q. How must this Argument be solved A. I will first make answer concerning the Son and then concerning the Holy Spirit Q. What answer will you make concerning the Son A. The word GOD is two wayes chiefly used in the Scripture The first is when it denoteth him who both in the heavens and on the earth doth so rule and exercise dominion over all that he acknowledgeth no superior and is so the Author and Principall of all things as that he dependeth on none The other is when it designeth him who hath some sublime dominion from that one God and so is in some sort partaker of his Deïty Hence is it that the Scripture calleth that one God the God of Gods or most high God Psal 50. 1. Heb. 7. 1. And in the latter signification the Son of God is in certain places of the Scripture dignified with the title of a God Q. How prove you that the Son of God is in this latter signification dignified with the title of a God A. From the very words of the Son himself John 10. 35. If he call them Gods to whom the Word of God came and the Scripture cannot be broken say ye of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world Thou blasphemest because I said I am the Son of God By this speech Christ doth clearly intimate both that the word GOD is somtime attributed unto them in the Scripture who are far inferiour to that one God as also that he called himself the Son of God and consequently a God for no greater reason then because he had been sanctified by the Father and sent into the world Q. But what answer give you concerning the Holy Spirit A. The Holy Spirit is no where in the Scripture expresly called God and though in some places the things of God are attributed to him yet doth it not thereupon follow that he is either God or a person of the Deity since this happeneth for another cause as you shall hear in in its place Q. VVhat is the second argument wherewith they go about to prove the three Persons in one Deity A. It is taken from those places wherein mention is made of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit Q. VVhich are those places A. The first is that where Jesus commandeth his Aposties to make all Nations Disciples baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit Mat. 28. 19. The second is that where the Apostle writeth in this manner There are diversities of Gifts but the same Spirit And diversities of Ministeries but the same Lord. And diversities of Operations but the same God that operateth all the things in all 1 Cor. 12. 4 5 6. And afterwards in the eleventh verse of the same chapter he saith But all these things operateth one and the same Spirit distributing to every one as he will The third is in John 1 Epist 5. 7. There are three that hear witnesse in heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Spirit and these three are one Q. What are we to think of these Quotations A. In generall I answer that these Quotations onely shew that there is a Father Sonne and Holy Spirit which we not only acknowledge but constantly assert so that we pronounce him to be no Christian who is either ignorant thereof or doth not
tempted From these words likewise it can not be shown that Christ was indeed tempted in the wildernesse For instance should any man say let us not be refractory to the Magistrate as some of our Ancestors were it could not thence be concluded that the same numericall Magistrate is in both places designed Now if there be found in the Scriptures such kinds of speaking wherein the like speech is referred to him whose name was a little before expressed without any repetition of the same person this hap'neth in such a place where no other besides him whose name was expressed can possibly be understood as Deut. 6. 16. Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God as thou temptedst in Massah But in this speech of the Apostle whereof we speak another then Christ may be understood as Moses the Angel c. see Num. 21. 5. Q. From what place prove they that the glory of Christ was seen by Isaiah A. From Iohn 12. 41. These things spake Isaiah when he saw his glory and spake of him Q. What say you hereunto A. First that these words are not of necessity to be referred to Christ inasmuch as they may be referred to God the Father For the words that are set a little before are spoken of the same namely he hath blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts Again the glory which Isaiah saw might be yea was not a present but a future glory For it is proper to Prophets to see the things that are to come Whence likewise they were called Seers 1 Sam. 9. 9. Finally although you understand these words of that glory which was then present and seen by Isaiah yet is it one thing to see one's glory another thing to see himself for in the glory of that one God Isaiah likewise saw the glory of the Lord Christ for the Prophet there saith The earth is full of the glory of the Lord. Which thing was then accomplished when Jesus Christ first appeared to the people of the Jewes and afterwards was preached to the whole world Q. From what testimonies of Scripture do they endeavour to demonstrate that Christ was as they say incarnated A. From Iohn 1. 14. where according to their Translation it is read The Word was made flesh And from Phil. 2. 6 7. Who Christ Jesus being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal to God But made himself of no reputation taking upon him the form of a servant being made in the likenesse of men And being found in fashion as a man he humbled himself c. from 1 Tim. 3. 16. Great is the mystery of godliness God was manifested in flesh And frō Heb. 2. 16. For verily he took not on him the nature of Angels but he took on him the seed of Abraham And from 1 Ioh. 4. 3. Every spirit that confesseth Iesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God And lastly from Heb. 10. 5. Wherfore entring into the world he saith Sacrifice offering thou wouldest not but a body hast thou prepared for me Q. What say you to the first testimony A. That it is not there said that God was incarnated or that the divine Nature assumed a humane For it is one thing to say The Word was made flesh another that God was incarnated as they say or that the divine Nature assumed a humane Besides these words The Word or rather the Speech was made flesh may and ought to be thus rendred The Word was flesh Thus the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendred verse 6. of this very chapter There was a man sent by God his name John And Luk. 24. 19. Who was a Prophet great in word and deed And these places with sundry others shew that it may be so rendred But that it ought to be so rendred the order of the Evangelists words sufficiently teacheth for it would have been incongruous to have said that the Word was made flesh that is as the adversaries would have it assumed a Humane Nature after he had already spoken those things of the Word which followed the Nativity of Jesus Christ as namely that John the Baptist gave testimony of him that he was in the world that his own received him not that to them who received him he gave power to become the Sons of God Q. How is that to be understood that the Word was flesh A. That he by whom God perfectly revealed his whole will and who had been therefore by John called the Word or Speech was a man of the same constitution with others and subject to the same infirmity afflictions and death For in this sense the Scripture useth the word flesh as appeareth from those places where God saith My spirit shall not alwaies strive with man for that he also is flesh Gen. 6. 3. And Peter out of Isaiah saith All flesh is grasse 1 Pet. 1. 24. Q. What say you to the third A. It is one thing to say that Jesus Christ being in the form of God took the form of a servant and that the Divine Nature assumed a Humane For here the form of God cannot design the Divine Nature in that the Apostle writeth that Christ emptied himself of that form But God can by no means empty himself of his nature Neither doth the form of a servant denote a humane nature since to be a servant is referred to the fortune and condition of a man But neither is it to be concealed that the writings of the New Covenant doth use the word form elswhere but once namely Mark 16. 12. and that in such a sense wherein not the nature but exteriour fashion is signified whilest it saith that Jesus appeared to two of his Disciples in another form Q. But from those words which the Apostle presently after subjoyns namely He was found in fashion of a man doth it not appear that he was as they say incarnated A. At no hand For it is said of Sampson Judg. 16. 7. 11. that if such and such a thing was done to him he should become as a man And Asaph Psa 82. denounceth to those whom he had called Gods Sons of the most high that they should die like men notwithstanding it is certain it cannot be said that they were as the adversaries say incarnated Q. But how do you understand this whole place A. Thus that Christ who conversed in the world as God doing the works of God and receiving divine worship did when God so willed and the salvation of man required become as a servant and vassall and as one of the vulgar men when he of his own accord suffered himself to be bound whipt and crucified Q. What say you to the third A. First that in many ancient copies and in the vulgar Translation the word God is not here found so that nothing certain can be concluded out of this place Again though we read the word God there yet is there no cause why it should not be referred to the Father
since it may of him be affirmed that he was manifested in Christ and the Apostles who were flesh And though it be afterwards according to the vulgar translation read that he was received up into glory yet is it in the Greek he was received in glory that is with glory or gloriously Q. What then is the sense of this place A. That you may the better perceive it I will cite the whole Thus therefore the Apostle saiâ—h God was manifested in flesh was justified in spirit was seen of Angels was preached to the Gentiles was believed in the world was received in glory The meaning of all which is this The Christian Religion is full of mysteries For God that is the divine Will touching the salvation of men was perfectly discovered by weak and mortall men and yet notwithstanding by reason of the miracles wrought by the spirit in confirmation of the Gospel it was acknowledg'd for true The same was at length perceived by the Angels themselves preached not only to the Jews but also to the Gentiles and not only generally believed but entertained with the greatest glory and magnificence Q. What say you to the fourth A. In it there is not so much as a resemblance of an Incarnation since the divine Author doth not say took but taketh nor humane nature but the seed that is the posterity of Abraham And indeed to shew the invalidity of the argument taken from this place there needs no more then to consult the various reading of the English Translators set in the margin Q. What then is the sense of this place A. The meaning of the Author is that Christ is not the Saviour of Angels but men who being subject to afflictions leath which thing he before exprest by the participation of flesh bloud therfore Christ of his own accord submitted himself to the same that he might free the faithfull from the fear of death and succour them in all their afflictions Q. What say you to the fifth A. Here likewise is nothing to assert the incarnation as they term it For wheras it is read in the ordinary Bibles Every spirit that confesseth Jesus to be come in the flesh is of God The Greek hath it Every spirit that confesseth Iesus Christ come in flesh or Every spirit that confesseth Iesus come in flesh to be Christ That is Every spirit is of God that confesseth Iesus who discharged his Embassie on the earth without any worldly pomp ostentation in the most humble manner as to his outward presence with the greatest contempt finally indured a most ignominious death to be the Christ or King of the people of God Q. VVhat say you to the sixth A. Here also is no mention of any Incarnation since the world whereinto this Author here saith that Christ entred to performe his offering is as hath been formerly shown the vvorld to come Whence to enter into the world doth not here signifie to be born but to passe into the heaven Again by body in those words A body hast thou prepared me may be understood an immortall one Q. What then is the sense of the place A. That God while Jesus was entring into heaven furnished him with such a body as was very suitable fit to discharge his Priestly Office Q. You have hitherto explained the places of Scripture from whence they endeavour to prove that which is not found there I entreat you therefore now to alledge those places from whence they draw wrong conclusions A. The Scriptures from whence they draw their wrong conclusions either directly concern Christ or are referred to him by a certain accommodation Q. What are those that directly have respect to Christ A. They are such wherein Christ is called either a God or one with God or equall to God or the Son of the living God or the proper or only begotten Son of God or the first born of every creature or having all things that the Father hath or the Father of eternity or the Word of God or the Image of the Invisible God or the Character of his substance or he who being seen the Father is seen or in whom the fulnesse of Deity dwelleth bodily or that had glory with the Father before the world was or whose Spirit was in the Prophets or that came down from heaven came out from the Father and came into the world was sent by the Father into the world or the only Lord Lord of Glory King of Kings Lord of Lords and to whom Faith and divine honor pertaineth Q. In what places of the Scripture is the word God attributed to Christ A. Joh. 1. 1. The Word was a God And c. 20. 28. Thomas saith to Christ My Lord and my God And RoÌ„ 9. 5. writeth that Christ is a God over all to be blessed for evermore Q. What say you to these passages A. That it cannot from thence be demonstrated that Christ had as the adversaries speak a Divine Nature may to omit what hath been formerly spoken be made appear from hence namely that it is spoken in the first testimony touching such a word as was with God In the second Thomas calleth him his God in whose hands and feet he found the prints of the nails and in his side the print of the spear And Paul saith that he who was of the Fathers according to the flesh was over all a God to be blessed for evermore All which it is cleer cannot possibly be said of him that is God by Nature For from the first it would follow that there are two Gods whereof the one was with the other As for the other twain namely to have the prints of wounds and to be of the Fathers do altogether pertain to a man which that they should be ascribed to him that is God by Nature is very absurd But if any one to cloak the businesse pretend the distinction of Natures we have formerly removed that and taught that this distinction is not to be endured Q. Where doth the Scripture teach that Christ is one with the Father A. John 10. 29. 30. Where the Lord saith The Father that gave me the sheep is greater then all and none can snatch them out of the Fathers hand I and my Father are one Q. What say you to this proof A. When it is said that Christ is one with the Father it cannot be thence evinced that he is one with him in Nature as the words of Christ himself spoken to the Father about the Disciples to demonstrate see Jo. 17. 11. Father keep them in thy name whom thou hast given to me that they may be one as we are one And afterwards v. 22 The glory which thou hast given me have I given them that they may be one as we are one Now that Christ is one with the Father this ought to be taken of unity or onenesse in will or power as to the businesse of mans Salvation Yea that the Divine Nature of Christ
is therefore called the Word or speech of God because he hath declared the whole will of God to us as John himself seemeth to expound it chap. 1. 18. No man hath seen God at any time the only-begotten Son who is or rather was in the bosome of the Father he hath declared him As he is in the same sense called both Life and Truth And the same may be said of his being called the Image of the invisible God But he is called the expresse Image of his person or substance hereby is meant that God hath already exhibited in him whatsoever he hath promised to us But as to the saying of Christ he that seeth me seeth the Father this is not fit to prove the Divine Nature of Christ since that reason of seeing is not appliable to the Essence of God which is invisible but to the knowledge of those things which Christ as his Fathers Embassador both said and did For proof of this see Joh. 12. 45. Neither lastly can the divine Nature of Christ be evinced from thence namely that all the fulnesse of the Godhead or of Deity dwelleth in him bodily since this word God-head may denote the divine wil see Eph. 3 19. forasmuch as the Apostle doth oppose that speech not to persons but to Philosophy legall ceremonies it is evident that it is meant of the Doctrine of Christ not of his Person But should we take the words as they sound yet could not such a divine Nature as the adversaries have imagined be thence collected For it is true and manifest that the fulnes of Deity or Godhead doth now dwell in Christ even bodily in that his very body is altogether divine as being made both of divine spiritual matter namely that of the heaven see 1 Cor. 15. 45 47 48. and being indued with divine life and divine splendour diviâ—e strength But concerning the word corporally of that we wil discourse somwhat afterwards Q. But where saith the Scripture that Christ had glory with the Father before the world was A. John 17. 5. Now Father glorifie me with thy self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was or as the Greek runneth with the glory which I had before the world was with thee Q. What say you to this place A. Neither can the Divine Nature of Christ be evinced from hence for that Christ might have glory with the Father before the world was and yet not be thereupon God is apparent from 3 Tim. 1. 9. where the Apostle saith of the faithfull that grace was given to them before the world began Besides it is here written that Christ doth beg this glory of the Father which sheweth neither that he was formerly in actual possession therof for then he would have been in possession of it still and consequently needed not as he doth to beg it as the reward of his work nor had a Divine Nature for then his Divine Nature would have supplied him with such glory as he wanted without being beholden to another Wherefore the sense of the place is that Christ beseeches the Father to grant unto him that glory which he had with him in his decree before the world began Q. Where saith the Scripture that the Spirit of Christ was in the Prophets A. 1 Pet. 1. 10. 11. Concerning which salvation the Prophets diligently scarched and inquired who prophesied of the grace that should happen to you searching at what or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ in them did signifie Q. What say you to this A. The spirit here said to be in the Prophets is therefore called the spirit of Christ either by a prolepsis because he is now become the spirit of Christ or because he foresignified the things of Christ as Peter himselfe hinteth saying when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that should follow which forme of speech you likewise have 1 Joh. 4. 6. where the spirit of truth and the spirit of error are so called because they speak the things belonging to truth and to error Q. Where saith the scripture that Christ came down from heaven came out from the father and came into the world A Joh. 3. 13. No man hath ascended into heaven but he that descended from heaven the son of man that is or rather was in heaven And chap. 16. 28. I came out from the father and came into the world againe or rather on the contrary I leave the world and go to the father and Ioh 17. 18. As thou hast sent me into the world Q What say you to these passages A. That the divine nature of Christ cannot hence be evinced is apparent in that the words of the first testimony namely who came down from heaven may be figuratively taken as in Jam. 1. 17. Every good donation and every perfect gift is from above descending from the father of light and Rev. 21. 2. 10. I John saw the holy City the new Jerusalem descending from God out of heaven But if they ought properly to be taken which we most willingly admit it is apparent that they are not spoken of any other then the son of man who since he of necessity hath a humane person he cannot be God by nature Moreover whereas the Scripture testifieth of Christ that the father sent him into the world we read the same concerning the Apostles of Christ in the words before quoted John 17. 18. As thou hast sent me into the world so have I also sent them into the world But that saying namely that Christ came out from the Father are equivalent with his descending from heaven but his coming into the world is such a thing which the Scripture sheweth to have happened after his nativity see John 18. 37. where our Lord himself saith I was therefore born and therefore came I into the world that I should bear Record to the truth and 1 John 4. 1. It is written that many false prophets were gone out into the world So that from those forms of speech a divine nature of Christ cannot be evinced But in all these speeches is described how divine the beginning of Christs prophetick office was Q. But where is Christ called that one Lord Lord of glory King of Kings and Lord of Lords A. 1 Cor. 8. 6. To us there is one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things and we through him 1 Cor. 2. 8. For had they known they would not have crucified the Lord of glory Rev. 17. 14. They shall make war with the Lamb and the Lamb shall overcome them for he is a King of Kings and Lord of Lords and chap. 19. 16. and he hath on his vesture and thigh a name written King of Kings and Lord of Lords Q. What say you to these testimonies A. As to the first the divine nature of Christ cannot be concluded from the Apostles calling him that one Lord. For first he manifestly distinguisheth him from the father whom
not men knowing that whatsoever good thing every one shall do that he shall receive from the Lord whether he be bond or free Ephes 6. 5 6 7 8. And 1 Pet. 2. 18. Let servants be subject to their masters with all fear not onely to the good and gentle but also the froward And Tit. 2. 9 10. That they please their masters in all things not answering again not purloyning but shewing all good fidelity And 1 Tim. 6. 1 2. As many as are servants under the yoke let them account their masters worthy of all honour lest the name of God and his doctrine be evill spoken of And those that have believing masters let them not despise them because they be brethren but serve them so much the more because they are faithfull and beloved partakers of the benefit Q. What is the office of Masters towards Servants A. That they give to Servants that which is just and equall and forbear threats knowing that they themselves also have a Master in the Heavens and there is with him no acceptation of persons ' Ephes 6. 9. Col. 4. 1. Q. What is the sixth precept A. Thou shalt do no murder Q. What hath the Lord Jesus added hereunto A. That we be not rashly angry with our brother and offend him with rough speeches proceeding from a desire of revenge which the Lord Jesus expresseth by the word Racha that is a vain person a fool Mat. 5. 22. hereunto belongeth those words of Paul Ephes 4. 31. Let all bitternesse and chasing and anger and clamour and evill speaking be put away from you with all malice Q. What is it to say to another Racha or fool A. It is all one as if you should say he were a man good for nothing or without reason Q. But if it happen that we offend our Brother what ought to be done A. He is very carefully to be reconciled for unlesse we be at peace with our Brother our Religion is vain and there is danger lest we fall under the judgement of God Q. It is then altogether unlawfull to be angry A. It is indeed unlawfull to be angry and that you should endeavour to satiate your desires of revenge but if any one be angry at the apparent sinfulnesse of a thing and yet doth not meditate or studdy any revenge not persevere in his anger it is not forbidden to be angry in such a matter Q. What else hath the Lord Jesus added to this precept A. He hath prohibited all kind of revenge not onely private but that which is by the Magistrate so that if any one hurt either our body goods or good name we should be ready rather to receive another injury then to revenge our selves which the Lord Jesus taught in these words But I say unto you resist not evill but if any one smite thee c. Mat. 5. 39 40 41. Q. Are not those words of our Lord to be taken simply as they sound A. No for we read of our Saviour himself that when he had a blow given him with the palme of the hand he did not only forbare to turn the other cheek but also opposed those words to the smiter If I have spoken ill hare witnesse of that evill if well why doest thou smite me John 18. 23. we read the same of the Apostle Paul Acts 23. 3. Q. May we not then go to Law before the Magistrate and prosecute injuries A. Yes so you be free from the desire of revenge for our Saviour forbiddeth this onely But it is revenge when a man endeavours to requite him that hath been injurious towards him with like for like as it was tollerated in the Law of Moses to requite eye for eye tooth for tooth hand for hand foot for foot burning for burning stripes for stripes Q. What is the seventh precept A. Thou shalt not commit adultery Q. What hath the Lord Jesus added thereunto A. first that we do not onely avoid the act of Adultery but forbear to look upon a woman so as to lust after her intimating that he which lusteth after her in his heart hath already committed adultery with her besides he addeth that he which putteth away his wife unlesse it be in case of Adultery and marryeth another doth commit adultery and he also that marrieth her that is put away doth also commit adultery Lastly he forbiddeth all fornication and uncleannesse and filthy speech and sacrallity and jests Mat. 5. 28. chap. 19. 9. 1 Cor. 9. 10. 13. 18. Heb. 13. 4. 1 Thes 4. 3 4. Ephes 5. 3 4. Q. What pertaineth to the same precept A. That a Beleever do not marry with an Unbeleever lest by such a Marriage the Beleevers heart be seduced for which cause we see that under the Law such Marriages were forbidden by God himself See 1 Cor. 7. 39. Exod. 34. 16. Dent. 7. 3 4. Q. What if it happen that one of the unbeleeving married parties become a Beleever must the other unbeleeving party be thereupon deserted A. By no means if the unbeleeving party be content to dwell with the beleeving but if the unbeleeving party be not content the beleever is at liberty in such a case 1 Cor. 7. 10 11 12 13. Q. What is the eight precept A. Thou shalt not steal Q. What is forbidden in this precept A. All manner of interversion in those things that concern the commodity of our neighbour which commeth to passe when we either take away those things which he hath or doe not when we are able lend our assistance to him standing in heed Q. In what manner doe we take away from our neighbour that which is his A. Either by force or fraudulent interversion how it is effected by force is evident to every man but there are sundry ways of fraudulent Interversion for you may easily find them in buying or selling or exchanging or hiring or letting or lending or other actions as we have an old prohibition of God touching sale Lev. 19. 35 39. Deut. 25. 14 15. Thou shalt not have in this house an Epha and an Epha but thou shalt have a just waight and a just Epha Q. Is not Usury to be referred hither A. Yes Q. What is Usury A. It is the extorting of Commodities and benefit from money lent with the oppression of another which appeareth from the signification of the word wherewith Usury is expressed in the Old Covenant which is all one with biteing Exod. 22. 25. Levit. 25. 36 37. Deut 23. 19 20. whence it is apparent that to receive Commodities from money lent without biteing or detriment of another is neither biteing nor Usury whence it commeth to passe that under the Gospell the receiving of such benefit is no where forbidden unlesse it be there where Covetousnesse or extortion is forbidden although all those things that are contrary to the Spirit and Doctrine of Jesus Christ are in sundry places expresly set down Q. What hath the Lord Jesus added to that precept A. That we should
it repugnant to reason A. In that it would hence follow that Christ hath undergone Eternall Death if he had satisfied God for our sins since it is clear that the punishment which men deserved by their sins was Eternall death Again it would follow that we were more beholden to Christ then to God as who had shewed exceeding favour towards us in making satisfaction whereas God by exacting fully what was due to him had shewn no grace at all towards us Q. Tell me also how this Opinion is pernicious A. Because it openeth a gap to licentiousnesse or at least inviteth them to sloth in the pursuance of Holinesse and Vertue whereas the Scripture testifieth that this among others was the end of Christs death that we might be redeemed from all iniquity redeemed from our vain conversation received by Tradition from our Fathers delivered out of this evill world and have our consciences cleansed from dead works to serve the Living God Tit. 2. 14. 1 Pet. 1. 18. Gal. 1. 4. Heb. 9. 14. Q. But how doe they maintain this Opinion A. First they endeavour to maintain it by reason next by authority of Scripture Q. What is their reason A. They say that there is in God by nature both Justice and Mercy and as it belongeth to Mercy to forgive sins so is it the property of Justice to punish them Now in as much as God would have both his Justice and his Mercy take place he found out such a way as that Christ should suffer death in our stead and to satisfie to Justice of God in that nature which had offended God Q. What answer make you to this Reason A. This reason is plausible in shew but in deed hath neither truth nor solidity in it self For though we confesse and exceedingly rejoyce that our God is wonderfully mercifull and just yet we deny that such mercy and justice as the Adversaries would here have is in him by nature For that mercy is not so in God by Nature as they imagine is evident because he could not then punish any sin at all and on the contrary were that Justice in God â—y nature as they suppose he could not forgive any sin at all In as much as God can never do any thing repugnant to those properties that are in him by nature For instance since wisdome is in God by nature God never doth any thing contrary thereunto but whatsoever he doth he doth it wisely But since it is evident that God forgiveth sins and punisheth them when he pleaseth it appeareth that such a Justice and Mercy as they imagine is not in him by nature but are only effects of his will Besides that Justice whereby God punisheth sins and which the Adversaries oppose to Mercy is never called by this name in the Scriptures but anger or fury Yea it is attributed to the Justice or righteousnesse of God in the Scriptures that he forgiveth sins see 1 John 1. 9. Rom. 3. 25. 26. Quest What is your opinion concerning this matter Answ That for as much as that Justice and Mercy which the Adversaries speak of are not in God by nature there was no need at all of that temperament and reconciling of the Justice and Mercy in God which they have devised We doe not indeed deny that there is a certain naturall Justice in God but that is such a Justice as is called rectitude and opposed to pravity And this indeed appeareth in all the works of God whence they are all just and right and perfect and that no lesse when he forgiveth sinnes then when he punisheth them Quest What are the passages of Scripture whereby they endeavour to confirm their opinion A. Such as say that he dyed for us or for our sins and that he redeemed us or gave himself or Soul as a ransome for many and that he is our Mediatour and reconciled us to God and is a propitiation for our sins finally they fetch an Argument from the Sacrifices under the Law which did shadow forth the Death of Christ Quest What answer you here unto Answ The satisfaction of Christ cannot be proved from such places wherein it is said that he dyed for us for the same Scripture saith that we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren 1 John 3. 16. and that Paul suffered for the Colossians and filled up that which was behind of the afflictions of Christ for his Body which is the Church Col. 1. 24. But it is certain that neither doe the Faithfull satisfie for the Brethren neither did Paul for the Church Quest What is the meaning of those words that Christ dyed for us Answ This expression for us doth not signifie in our stead but on our behalf as the like words intimate when the Scripture saith that Christ dyed for our sins which manner of speech cannot mean in the stead or room of our sins but by reason of or on the behalf of our sins Wherefore the meaning of that expression Christ dyed for us amounteth to thus much that he therefore dyed that we might both imbrace and obtain that life which he brought from Heaven and promulgated to the world which in what manner it is effected you heard a little before Quest What answer you to those testimonies wherein it is said that we are redeemed by Christ Answ From the word redemption the satisfaction cannot be evinced in that it is said of God himself in the Scripture that he redeemed his people out of Aegypt Isaiah 29. 22. And wrought redemption for his people Psal 31. 6. as also that Moses was a Redeemer Act. 7. 35. and that we are redeemed from our iniquities and vain conversation or the curse of the Law Tit. 2. 14. 1 Pet. 1. 18. Gal. 3. 13. But it is certain that neither God nor Moses satisfied any one nor can either our iniquities or vain conversation or the Law be satisfied Q. What force think you those words carry when it is said that Jesus redeemed us and gave himself a ransome for us A The word Redemption doth here signifie nothing but freedome Now it is said of Christ that he by his Bloud or Death hath redeemed or freed us because by the intervening thereof we have obtained freedome both from the sins themselves that we should no longer serve them and from the punishment of them that being delivered out of the jaws of Eternall Death as we might live for ever Q. Why that freeing of us expressed by the word Redemption A. Because there is a great similitude between our deliverance and a redemption properly so called For as in a proper redemption there must be a captive and he that detaineth him and a redeemer together with a ransome or price of redemption so in our deliverance Man is the Captive Sin the World the Devill and Death they that detain the Captive God and Christ the redeemer of the Captive and Christ or the Soul of Christ given to the Death the ransome or price of
the believing Jewes as the Jewes to the believing Gentiles For thus we read God therefore who knoweth the heart gave testimony unto them that is the Gentiles having imparted the Holy Spirit unto them as also unto us Jewes neither hath he put a difference between us and them having purified their hearts by Faith And now why tempt ye God to put a yoke meaning the Law of Moses on the necks of the Disciples that is the Gentiles which neither we nor our Fathers were able to bear Yea by the Grace of the Lord Jesus c. Neither is it any impediment to this interpretation that word Fathers is nearer then the word Disciples as we have formerly shewn from the places which we alledged on a like occasion Also neither is that of any moment that the word they is of the Masculine and the Word Gentiles in the Greek of the Neuter gender for the word Gentiles is elsewhere found in the Scripture either joyned with a masculine gender or related thereunto vide Mat. 28. 19. But if this will not be here admitted we say that the word they is commodiously referred to the word Disciples going before which is of the masculine gender Of Christs KINGLY Office Q. I Have perceived all things pertaining to the Prophetick Office of Christ proceed I pray you to his other Offices namely the Kingly and Priestly A. Thus then the Kingly Office of Christ falleth under a two-fold consideration both of the Kingdome it self and of the people subject thereunto Q. VVhat is the consideration of the Kingdom it selfe A. Namely that God hath placed Christ being raised from the dead and taken up into Heaven at his right Hand having given to him all power both in Heaven and on Earth and put all things in subjection under his feet that he might govern defend and Eternally save those that believe in him Quest Where are these things extant Answ The Scripture is full of them but the Apostle Paul giveth a singular attestation thereunto Ephes 1. 19 20. c. where he saith that God the Father put forth the exceeding greatnesse of his power when he raised Jesus Christ from the dead and set him at his right hand in the Heavenly places far above all Principality and Authority and force and Lordship and every name that is named not onely in this world but in the world to come c. and the Apostle Peter Act. 5. 30 31. saith that the God of their Fathers had raised up Jesus whom the Jewes had slain hanging him on a tree And that he had exalted him to be a Prince and Saviour to give Repentance and Remission of sins to Israel Q But the Adversaries say that Christ raised himself Answ They are exceedingly mistaken since the Scripture saith manifestly in infinite places that God the Father of Christ raised him from the dead Which is so true that the writings of the New Covenant in many places not expressing the Name of God doe thus describe him He that raised Jesus Christ from the dead Rom. 4. 24. chap. 8. 11. Q. How cometh it to passe that they hold such an opinion A. They think it is hinted in some passages of the Scripture as when Christ John 2. 19. saith Destroy this Temple and in three dayes I will raise it up And afterwards John 10. 17 18. Therefore the Father loveth me because I lay down my life that I may take it again None taketh it from me but I lay it down of my self I have power to lay it down and power to take it again And Peter 1 Epist 3. 18. Christ once suffered the just for the unjust that he might bring us to God being mortified in the Flesh but quickned in the Spirit Q. What answer you to the first Answ First I answer that so few obscure and figurative places ought not to be opposed to so many and perspicuous ones so that a few obscure places should explain many perspicuous ones but rather the few and obscure places should be interpreted according to the tenour of the many and perspicuous ones Again as to the first testimony the sense may be that Christ being brought again from the dead should raise up or erect his Body namely when God had put life again into it But indeed in such figurative expressions not so much the words in particular as the sense is to be attended especially if the obvious and literall sense seem to contain in it somewhat that is false and repugnant to other places of the Scripture Yet neverthelesse if any man will obstinately urge that expression I will raise it up let him consider first that the Scripture is wont to say a man doth a thing which he onely causeth to be done or is the occasion thereof thus Jeremy chap. 38. 23. saith to Zedekiah Thou shalt be taken by the hand of the King of Babylon and thou shalt burn this City with fire for so the Hebrew context hath it And John 12. 25. He that hateth his life or rather soul in this world shall keep it unto Eternall life Yet neither did Zedekiah if you speak properly burn the City nor doe those that suffer death for the Word of God properly keep their Soul Secondly in as much as the Jewes demand of Christ that he should doe a Signe it was necessary that he should so shape his answer as if he himself were to doe the thing he speaketh of otherwise he had not so oppositely answered them yet that his words might carry a sufficient intimation that he himself should not properly do the work it is observable that in the Greek he omits the particle I saying onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which had it been inserted would have clearly shewn that he had truly raised himself though even then it could not have been thence firmly collected that he did it by his own power and consequently was the most High God Quest How thence is the place to be understood Answ As if Christ should say though you take me out of the way yet shall I after three dayes be raised from the dead and restored which will be a clear signe that I was sent by God Q What say you to the second A. This speech doth not prove that Christ when he was dead had some power in him to raise himself since we read of believers that power is given to them to become the Children of God that is immortall though it be certain that God enduing them with immortality will make them his sons John 1. 12. so that the meaning of the passage is this I have power to lay down my life because I have received this commandment from my Father whose command giveth sufficient power and authority for the doing of any thing I have also power or right or priviledge as the Greek will bear to take it or receive it as the Greek may also be rendred because the Father hath promised that if I lay down my