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
which was and which is to come as for Persons though it be not as to the Letter in Scripture yet 't is virtually first in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equivalent to that of †Heb. 1.3 Person then in the very same word but spoken of * 2 Cor. 1.11 Men where it signifies an Individuum or a Person and though just the very word is not used in Scripture 't is not material because in Divinity not the Word but the Thing not the Sound but the Sense are to be minded And though the word Person be deduc'd from Stages and things not serious yet we ought to look to the Use more than to the Eâ—ymology or Derivation and what if it be taken from things created and very unlike to God So we may say Are all Words purified from their original Imperfefection But for the abuse of a Word or a Thing we must not leave the right use of it When Scripture saith there is One God this Oneness can relate to nothing but to the Being Essence or Nature of God for in this respect God is one so we have reason thereby to represent the Unity of the Godhead there is in Scripture mention of God's Godhead * Rom. 1.20 and of his Nature when they which by nature are no gods †Gal. 4.8 are excluded from being Objects of our Worship So when Scripture reveals there is Father Son and Holy Ghost it makes a distinction between them yet calls every one God have we not cause thereupon to call them Three Persons and affirm that in One Essence or Godhead are Three Persons Do not these Words express the thing without doing it any Wrong or Injury for they are neither profane nor unworthy of God if the Words Essence Unity Trinity be not in so many Letters in Scriptures no more is the Word Sacrament yet though the Name be not in the thing is But herein they are more peevish than their Father Socinus who tells Francis David * Vol. I. p. 778. that though the Terms of Essence and Person be not in Scripture if the Sense be 't is no matter and that they who went upon such Grounds exposed their Cause The Method which the Enemies to this Truth ought to take should be this Whether they own according to the Revelation the Father Son and Holy Ghost to be One God Which if they deny we want no Proofs but if they own it then let them proceed to a Debate whether they are One in Nature and Three in Persons or how the Case is to be stated for it is very unreasonable to dispute about Words and Explication of any thing concerning the Relations or Manner till the thing it self be plainly confessed or denied Now by the Grace of God we must proceed and though I love not a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Dispute about Words yet as Words do signifie Things so some are so fundamental to the matter in hand that something I must say about 'em the first is Essence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he which is what * Exod. 3.14 we call Essence or Nature is not an imaginary thing and existing only in the Mind as in an Idea neither is it a thing separated from the Persons but always inherent in them whereby they subsist so that if there were no Individuum of such a Species there also would be no Essence of that Species as in the case of Human Nature which comprehends a rational Soul and an organical Body then Humanity is that whereby every Man is a Man but this Nature doth not subsist without Men but is so inherent in Men that in case there were no Men there could be no human Nature or Humanity Thus in God the Divine Essence is not a thing Existing without Son Father and Holy Ghost as if it was a fourth thing wherein these Three be contained but as we say in Philosophy of the Soul est tota in toto tota in qualibet parte so divine Nature is whole in the Father whole in the Son and whole in the Holy Ghost and that in an infinitely more excellent way than either Nature or the Soul are in us for they are finitely in Men but infinitely in every Person of the Trinity and exactly and perfectly the same for indeed the Essence of God is nothing else but his Nature namely the Deity or the Godhead God is not divided into divers Essences but distinguished into divers Persons God cannot be divided into several Natures or Parts so the Persons which subsist in that One Essence are only distinct and not separate one from another He who saith a Person of the holy Trinity saith One Essence common to Three Persons Hereupon we must know how in the most Holy Trinity something is common to the Three Persons such is the Essence and something incommunicable and proper to every one in their respective relations We ought further to know how the Words Essence Substance and Nature though in some respect they may admit of some difference yet when spoken of the Godhead they are taken for one and the same Whereunto may be added Deity and God's being there is in Schools of Divinity and Philosophy but one Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be to signifie Essence and Substance and therefore let me speak to some by way of warning that they may multiply Substances no more than Essences for 't is but one and the same thing without running into Tritheism or the Blasphemy of Three Gods neither may they entertain the Notions of Three Minds Beings or Spirits for as there is but One divine Nature and Being and but One God so that same God is but One Spirit Wherefore in these times Men should follow the Christian Prudence and Moderation of the Doctors of the Church in former Ages who were very cautious not to rush into new Notions of their own about these Matters or rashly to run into new fangled Opinions or Hypotheses as they call them or Suppositions of their own when it would be much better for them to follow the Theses of the Text among Attributes of what we call Essence Metaphysicians reckon this to be one that it is to be participatively indivisible because 't is equally imparted to those whose Essence it is for if there was any Addition Diminution or Alteration it would not be the same much more and upon a better account doth this hold about that Divine Nature by the Apostle in the very words attributed unto God 2 Pet. 1.4 In the Godhead there is no Division only Distinction the Essence and Persons not really but rationally distinct for the Essence is whole and indivisible in every Person but the Persons be really distinct one from another by means of some incommunicable Attribute for the Father is not the Son nor the Son the Father nor the Holy Ghost either Father or Son The
Essence is as School-men say the Quiddity of the thing that whereby the thing is what it is concerning which this is to be observed the Essence neither begetteth nor is begotten it neither breatheth nor is breathed this is the Attribute of the Person not of the Nature nevertheless in the Generation and Breathing is the whole Essence because 't is indivisible communicated to the Person begotten the Son and to the proceeding the Holy Ghost and 't is true the Son is begotten of the Essence of the Father for he is God of God Light of Light and to his only begotten Son the Father hath given all things except to be Father according to that saying of our blessed Saviour * John 5.26 as the father hath life in himself so hath he given to the son to have life in himself CHAP. III. Of the Persons of the Godhead BUT this leads me to speak of the Persons and upon the matter 't is fit to know in general what a Person is namely one particular thing indivisible incommunicable living reasonable subsisting in it self and not having part of another the first because no general Notion is a Person the second because a Person may not be divided into many parts the third because thô one may communicate his Nature yet his Personality he cannot communicate the fourth no Person without Life and Reason the fifth because every Person is a Being that hath its own proper subsisting thus Christ's Humanity is not a Person because it doth not subsist in it self the sixth because that which is part of another is no Person thus the Soul of Man separated from the Body is no Person Now the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are of a larger extent than that of Person for they are spoken of any individual Substance but a Person is an individual Substance complete rational and as we said differing from another by means of some incommunicable Property Hence we say that a Person in the Trinity is whole God not absolutely or simply consider'd but by means of some personal Propriety 't is not a Species of God or of the Deity nor part nor a thing different from the Deity nor a bare relation or only a manner of being and subsisting but 't is the Essence of God with a certain manner of subsisting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither is it a Compound of the Essence or of the manner of subsisting So then a Person of the Deity is usually described to be an incommunicable Subsistence of the divine Essence for in One and most simple nature of God are several Persons distinct to whom the infinite and singular Nature of One onely God is common for Scripture doth teach us that there is but One God and Three distinct Persons to whom it doth attribute the Proprieties of God whence we may conclude that there is in God Oneness or Unity of Essence and Plurality of Persons This is matter of Faith to be believed and not of Fact to be cavil'd at Hence we find how in Scripture the word God is sometimes taken for the Essence and Nature of God and at other times for certain Persons of the Godhead as we shall have occasion to shew the Father hath his Essence originally in himself and from none other the Son and the Holy Ghost have the self-same increated Essence in themselves as well as the Father but not from themselves the Son and Holy Ghost are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the same nature with the Father not in the same sense as Men are among themselves for Men are divided one from another but the Persons of the blessed Trinity not so for they be absolutely undivided so that the Three are but One God The Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Person in the same signification as we use when we say the Person of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Now Scripture names them as things distinguished between themselves individual subsisting c. as we said just before if they be as they are working and acting then they are Persons according to the Axiome in Philosophy actiones sunt suppositorum Now if the Father be such if the Son and Holy Ghost be such what can hinder us from saying the Father is a Person the Son is a Person the Holy Ghost is a Person The Greek Fathers made use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in * Heb. 1.3 Scripture we find in the same sense that is Person as we use it where Christ is called the express Image of his the Father's person I say they made use of it against Hereticks who denyed Father Son and Holy Ghost to be Three things so different as that the one is not and cannot be the other though as I already said in Scripture we have not in so many Letters the Words of Unity Trinity Essence and Person yet we therein have the things themselves whence they be derived and the very Words we find used by many of the antient Fathers Now Person and Personality are in divine much different of what they are in human things because the one is infinite and the other finite human Nature is One but in Specie in many Persons as Peter James Paul but divine Nature is but One and the same in number existing in Father Son and Holy Ghost as far as we are able to apprehend the Person differs from the Nature not really but rationally as the manner of a thing from the thing it self as may be a degree of heat from the heat it comes to Divine Essence is whole in every Person but not as the whole is in its parts for 't is not divided as we said but indivisible now the manner of subsisting of the Divine Essence which is but One in number in Three Persons is incomprehensible and unexpressible and the manner how the Godhead is attributed to the Three is singular and wonderful which no Reason can demonstrate nor Example illustrate to which purpose saith our Saviour * Luk. 10.22 No man knows who the son is but the father and who the father is but the son and to whom the son will reveal him By virtue of that Revelation the manner of knowing the Father is not the same as is in the Son yet Nature doth not produce Nature nor Nature Person nor Person Nature but Person doth Person not of the Essence but in unity of the same Nature common to the Three Persons neither doth it produce without it self as in corporeal things because no Penetration of Dimension but within it self for 't is infinite Now the Father gives Nature to the Son and both to the Holy Ghost not by Alienation but by Communication which is so imparted to the Receiver as that it still remains in the Giver as one Light hath it from another without any Diminution Hence it is that one Person doth not subsist without the other as 't is in Men but all Three do one
Essence also they make a Confusion between being and the manner of it And they ask us why we do not rather multiply Essences in the plurality of the Persons than Persons in the Unity of Essence whereunto we answer that we therein follow the Doctrine of the Holy Ghost in the word and he who makes Three Essences doth also make Three Gods but he that saith there is One divine Nature in Three Persons doth not make Three Gods now Scripture and Reason teach us there is but One God and the same Scripture saith also Father Son and Holy Ghost are but One God and 't is to be observ'd how the word Father when used alone as 't is in the Lord's Prayer without relation to the Son is as well as that of God common to the Three Persons but when it signifies a Person of the Trinity first in order then 't is relatively to the Son Now the Plurality of Persons in One divine Essence is proved by Arguments drawn out of Five several Heads whereof the First doth consist in several clear Testimonies out of Scripture Secondly from the relatives or opposite Relations as Father Son Spirit to beget to be begotten and to proceed from the Father and from the Son Thirdly by distinguishing Properties as Creator to the Father Redeemer to the Son Sanctifier to the Holy Ghost Fourthly by peculiar Apparitions to be read in both the Old and New Testaments And Fifthly by different Operations the Four last I shall not insist upon only some of them I shall have occasion to speak of in some place of my Discourse but the first I intend by the Grace of God chiefly to enlarge upon These Scripture Proofs are of three kinds the first speaks of a Plurality of Persons in God the second of Three Persons and the third mentions the Son by himself and the Holy Ghost by himself for about the Father there is no Dispute yet to avoid Prolixity we shall make use only of some few places out of the many which Scripture doth afford We shall begin with that of Genesis * Gen. 1.1 In the beginning God created in the Hebrew the Word God is in the Plural Number not Eloah which is the Singular but Elohim the Plural surely there must be some reason why a Nominative in the Plural is joyned to a Verb in the Singular as Bara is that signifies created certainly this shews some kind of Plurality in the divine Nature we may well say it is not without cause that in a Tongue whereof in a special manner God is the Author and in which are many Names in the Singular Number yet this in the Plural is made use of to signifie God not only in this place but very often and in many more There are many other Names of God but none more frequently used than this in the Plural Why then if in the Godhead there be but One single Person should God delight so much in being called so often in the Plural I say farther that as the History of the Creation could not be written but by help of Revelation and that God chose Moses a Man of very great Wisdom so 〈◊〉 being inspired of God inserted therein nothing 〈◊〉 might be called rash and superfluous so 't was 〈◊〉 at a venture that he chose that Word amongst so many others to name God in the great Work of Creation which being terminated outwardly is common and belongs to the Three Persons of the Trinity and a thing very observable is that in that first Chapter of Genesis no less than Thirty two times that very same word Elohim in the plural is construed with a Verb in the singular when in the Second Chapter that of Jehovah which is a singular is Eleven times joyned to the Verb of a singular Number What else can the plural Number in God signifie but some Plurality The Name Elohim is the first given to God in Scripture and though it be plural yet 't is not personal but essential and according to the Hebrew Idiome is spoken both of the Nature and of the Persons hence there is only One Elohim not Three as in the Athanasian Creed 't is well observed that the Father is Almighty the Son Almighty the Holy Ghost Almighty yet not Three Almighties but only One now the Name Elohim being derived from God's Power there are not Three Elohims no more than Three Almighties wherefore 't is joyned with an Adjective singular Elohim Zaddik Deus juste O God righteous Psal 7.10 which they who are for Three Spirits and Three Substances are desired to take notice of and how their Hypothesis is herein contrary to the Athanasian Creed Farthermore in the beginning of the * Exod. 20.2 Decalogue this word Elohim is joyned with the Pronoun possessive in the singular thy though the word God be in the plural and †Josh 24.19 elsewhere we have it joyned with an Adjective in the plural and with a Relative in the singular he is an holy God he is in the singular God and holy are in the plural Nay we have it also prefix'd to a Verb in the plural where Abraham said * Gen. 20.13 When God caused this Verb is in the plural me to wander So we have it elswhere †2 Sam. 7.23 hence we may conclude how in the Text in hand not by chance but by a special divine direction the Name God is in the plural Number and in the place already quoted in the Preface of the Ten Commandments God makes use of the Lord Jehovah and God Elohim the one as it seems to declare the Vnity of his Nature and the other the Plurality of the Persons Adonai a Name of God also in the plural Number is frequently used either when God speaks of himself or Men to or of him Another Text to prove the Plurality of Persons in the Godhead is this * Gen. 1.26 Let us make man in our image and after our likeness which is an Exhortation to the other Persons that had a hand in the Creation the Verb and the Pronouns are used in the plural 't is not said let me but let us make 't is not said in my but in our image not after my but after our likeness This manner of speaking so different from the foregoing is not in vain but with a purpose to give us for whose sake that History was written a Subject to meditate upon I know they say God there speaks as 't is usual with Princes in the plural Number for Majesty and Greatness sake and what if great men do so must this through man's wandrings be father'd also upon God Princes do represent their People and also they comprehend their Counsellours whence it is that in every Proclamation we have that Form By the Advice of our Privy Council which God doth not want Let us more seriously consider this doth God speak it to no body I am necessitated to make use of that Expression or to some
Surely no man that hath any regard to God can say or think that in so serious a matter God speaks to nothing if to some then either to Angels or to some other Creature not to Angels for they are not of God's Council nor to any other of the Creatures which had neither Soul nor Reason and the next Verse doth decide the thing * Vers 27. So god created man in his own image in the image of God created he him and not after the Image of Angels or of any other Creature neither did God speak to the Souls for as yet they were not created To what I said of Angels I shall add that this could not be spoken to them for they neither principally or instrumentally had any hand in the Creation of Man for they could not the Work of Creation requiring an infinite Power but it must be to the other persons of the most holy Trinity the Word and the Spirit As to the Enallage or that manner of speaking in the plural for Greatness sake we own it hath place in some Languages but we deny it ever was in the Hebrew Tongue in the Old Testament no Man no person in Authority no Priest no Judg no King ever spoke of himself in the plural Number Well hath the Prophet said †Isai 40.12 13.7 Who hath directed the spirit of the Lord or being his counsellor hath taught him But for any one Grotius not excepted to say that the plural Number is used for Greatness or Majesty sake is certainly to prevaricate in the Cause of God for as 't is contrary to the Idiom of the Hebrew Tongue so to the practice of all those former times and it is but a modern Use and Invention which so support some Men contrary to all true Reason have forged in their imagination Besides that in these latter times wherein the Use hath been introduced no Emperor King or Prince in any Language useth his Proper Name or Appellative in the plural Number We Leopolds Williams Henrys Emperors Kings c. but always in the singular Leopold William Emperour King Well though no Man of what rank soever spoke after that way we find God hath in other places as after Adam's Sin * Gen. 3.22 Behold the man is become as one of us not as I but one of us then there is more than One person for God speaks of himself of the Deity not of Angels whom he makes no comparison with when in the Transfiguration the Voice came from Heaven saying †Mat. 17.5 8. This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased 't is observable the Apostles saw no Man save Jesus onely that it might appear it was not spoken of Moses or Elias but only of the Lord Jesus Another place there is also to the same purpose where upon the occasion of the building of the Tower of Babel †Gen. 11.6 7. The Lord said let us go down and there confound their language 't is not said I will but let us go â—â—wn in the plural Number as speaking of many which may not be understood of the Nature which is most singularly One but of the Persons Socinians say to this that though out of this we could prove Plurality yet we must not conclude for a Trinity but the Cavil is vain for 't is enough that the Name of God is in Scripture attributed only to Three Father Son and Holy Ghost to infer a Trinity and 't is well known how Three is the first Number of the plural Hence Hebrews and Greeks do distinguish the plural Number from the dual neither do we read of any more Terms or Words than two of divine Emanations namely of the Son by Generation and of the Holy Ghost by Procession Our second kind of Arguments consists of those Texts of Scripture which do expresly declare a Trinity as is that when our blessed Saviour sends his Apostles to * Mat. 28.19 baptize the Nations in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Hence the Son and Holy Ghost are proved to be Persons because we are distinctly baptised in their Name to baptise in one's Name is to make him disciple or initiate and bring him under the Discipline of him in whose Name he is baptized now if the Father in whose Name we are baptized be a Person so must the Son so must the Holy Ghost be because in every circumstance we are baptized in their Name as well as in the Fathers And observe it is not said in the Name of God whereby the Essence only might absolutely be taken but of the Father Son and Holy Ghost to shew that relative Equality which is between the Persons that have but one and the same Nature In this Text our blessed Saviour with his own Mouth declared the Trinity Another place very plain and positive to our purpose is this * 1 John 5.7 There are three that bear record in heaven the Father the Word and the holy Ghost and these three are one Here the Trinity of Persons and Unity of Essence are so clear that the Adversaries have nothing to say but first to call in question the Verse as if it had been inserted because it is not in some Greek Copies out of which the Enemies of the Truth did formerly take it away but we have it in so many others even before the Council of Nice in Cyprian's time that there is no just ground left to doubt of its being true and authentick which place was by Athanasius made use of against Arrius In this Text the Apostle doth treat of confessing and believing Jesus Christ to be the Son of God which he to confirm doth bring in the Article of the holy Trinity whereof he is the second Person and to any one that doth seriously consider the sense and scope of the place it will appear how without that Verse there would be a breach in that part of the Chapter to bear a proportion of Three that bear witness in Heaven with the Three that bear it on Earth Their next Cavil upon this place is upon the latter part of the Verse and these three are one that is say they not in Nature but in Mind and Consent which is as absurd as if one would say when Scripture affirms * Deut. 6 4. Mark 12.29 O Israel the Lord our God is one Lord the meaning is only the Consent of many Wills but doth not this Oneness of Will argue a Unity of Essence For how can there naturally and essentially be one Will and Consent if there be not one Essence and Nature How can it essentially be one Will if there be not one but many divine Natures Rather there shall be many different Gods whose different Wills shall oppose one another than the which nothing can be more absurd Again either those Persons are finite or infinite if finite then they have not divine Nature which is infinite if infinite then
they do penetrate one another for they most perfectly and infinitely know and love one another now Love is an earnest desire of Union so then they be most intirely united The Apostle makes the necessary difference of the Three on Earth he saith they agree in One but of the Three in Heaven he saith they are One. Moreover either one knows something which the other doth not or loves something which the other doth not love or can do something which the other cannot do or not if the former how are they God For God knows and can do all if the last then not only they have one Will but also one Mind one Power one Knowledg one Love Now let Man think upon several Natures of the same kind which mutually do penetrate themselves and by a mutual inclination do embrace and unite themselves inseparably and have the same Thoughts Will and Action doth not all this conclude for one and the same Nature And that there is no difference but in some manner of Existing which because they are such are distinct one from another without Confusion all which from Oneness of Will leads to Oneness of Essence for the Will of God is not a thing different from his Nature Another Text wherein the most holy Trinity is demonstrated and not only may be read but also be heard and seen is that about our Saviour's Baptism where the Father speaks from Heaven and calls him his Son Christ the Son is baptized and the Holy Ghost appears in the shape of a Dove if Men do believe Scripture this they must believe to be true S. Austin lookt upon this Text as a strong and convincing Proof of that divine and essential Truth Vade ad Jordanem c. saith he Go to the River Jordan and there thou shalt find the holy Trinity and be convinced of the Verity thereof Besides these we have a Cloud of other Witnesses to prove this Truth where the Three Persons are mentioned under their proper Names and first * Acts 2.22 23. This Jesus being by the right hand of God exalted and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost the Three Persons are plainly named Again the same Jesus Christ was declared †Rom. 1.3 4. to be the Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness Elsewhere the same Apostle saith ‖ Tit. 3.4 5 6. God saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost through Jesus Christ And in another place ‡ Gal. 4.6 God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts by the word God is meaned the Person of the Father * Heb. 9.14 How much more shall the blood of Christ who through the eternal Spirit offereth himself without spot to God Furthermore †Ephes 2.18 Through him Christ we both have an access by one spirit unto the Father Our blessed Saviour himself out of his own sacred Mouth doth plainly and positively speak to this purpose when he saith * John 14.16.17 I will pray the Father and he will give you another comforter the Father I the Son and the comforter whom he calls the Spirit of Truth are Three Persons which in the next Chapter †Chap. 15 26. is by him repeated But when the Comforter is come whom I will send to you from the Father even the Spirit of truth One Text more I shall bring to confirm this * 2 Cor. 13.14 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God that is the Father and the communion of the Holy Ghost be with you all And in the Text of another Apostle †1 Pet. 1.2 are contained the Workings of the Three Persons in the Trinity Elect according to the fore knowledg of God the Father through the sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ As the New Testament is full of Proofs to confirm this holy Doctrine for indeed these Mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation are more clearly and fully therein related so out of the Old Testament we have enough to confute the Enemies of this Truth and because we look upon Socinians in their Principles to be a sort of Jews and as well as they Blasphemers against our holy and blessed Saviour so we will bring such Arguments against them as we would if we were disputing against unbelieving Jew◠only a few Texts out of many We begin with the Book of Genesis Chap. 1. wherein is contained a relation of the History of the Creation which is a Work common to the Three Persons of the Trinity and though we may not look upon it as the clearer upon the matter yet in it is Light enough to shew the Truth we now assert I shall say nothing of the Name God under that of Elohim which already we have spoken of as representing the plurality of Persons in the most holy Trinity but we may say that though the Name God was there which it is not in the singular and taken for the Person of the Father yet the Son had a hand in the act of Creation for it is God said here is the word which is the proper Name of the Son our Lord Jesus Christ who in Scripture especially by S. John is so often called by that Name the Word God saying and speaking is that which made the World We read God said when any thing was created which being compared with what is spoken by John * John 1.3 All things were made by him that is the Word the Person of Jesus Christ for actiones sunt suppositorum acting is proper to Persons and without him was not any thing made that was made now that Word God said is that which created every thing so then here is the Person of the Son but we also find the Person of the Holy Ghost Gen. 1.2 the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters by his acting represented by motion to cherish give life and motion to things as a Hen doth when sitting upon her Eggs for the word in the Original signifies such a thing This sense is given by a competent Interpreter †Psal 33.6.9 By the word of the Lord were the heavens made and all the host thereof by the breath of his mouth Here we can read distinctly the Lord if it were to be understood only of the first Person about which there is no dispute the Word and the Breath or Spirit this though it be clear I could set in a greater Light with comparing it with other places which I now forbear to do because I shall have occasion to make use of them in some other branch of my Discourse Another Text is this * Isai 42.1 Behold my servant whom I uphold mine elect in whom my soul delighteth I have put my spirit upon him besides the Person that speaks namely the Father here we have the Son under the name
put our whole Trust and Confidence not only in the Father but also in the Son and in the Holy Ghost so thereby we own and declare them to be God as the Father and in the Lord's Prayer which is part of the Worship we render unto God though we name but One that is the Father yet we mean all for the Word is taken Essentially for Father Son and Holy Ghost and not personally only for the first Person because the whole Trinity are our Father in respect of Creation Preservation and Redemption for every such outward Work as said before is common to the Three Persons and so we address our Prayer to all Three Now I shall lay down some few Arguments to prove the Truth this is one he in whose Name we are Baptized is the True Eternal God but we are Baptized in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost therefore they Three are True Eternal God the major is clear for Baptism is a Covenant not with Man or any Creature but with God alone as it appears out of * 1 Pet. 3.21 Peter where Baptism is called a Stipulation or Answer of a good Conscience towards God Secondly They in whose Name we are Baptized do justify us but we are Baptized in the Name of Father Son and Holy Ghost wherefore they justify us and consequently they be True Eternal God for none can justify but †Rom. 4.5 chap. 8.33 God alone Thirdly They who regenerate us are the True Eternal God but they in whose Name we are baptized do regenerate us Ergo They are the True Eternal God such as Father Son and Holy Ghost if they deny those in whose Names we are baptized to justify and regenerate us we prove it for the Washing in Baptism signifieth our Justification and Regeneration which is performed by those in whose Names we are baptized which is clear out of St. Paul's Words That ‖ Ephes 5.26 be Christ might sanctify and cleanse it the Church with the washing of water by the word and in another place He * Tit. 3.5 saved us by the washing of regeneration and another Argument is this they who save us are True Eternal God but Father Son and Holy Ghost do therefore they are the True Eternal God the major Proposition is proved out of the Prophet †Isa 45.15 17 21. O God of Israel the Saviour also Israel shall be saved in the Lord with an everlasting salvation and I the Lord and there is no God else besides me a just God and a Saviour there is none besides me the Expression in the Name of the Father is observable for the Name signifies ‖ Malac. 1.6 Authority now because the Authority of the Father Son and Holy Ghost is but one and the same for we are equâ—lly baptized in their Name so the Dignity is the same if so then these Three Persons are but One God for none can have equal Dignity with the Father except he be God such a Dignity have the Son and Holy Ghost against this they object how the Fathers are said * 1 Cor. 10.2 to be baptized unto Moses but that 's not to the purpose 't is of a different Nature in that place the Design is to shew the Sacraments of the Jews to be the Types and Figures of ours but here the Question is about the Name and Authority whereby we are baptized they were baptized under the Ministery but not in the Name of Moses so now Ministers do baptize but not in their own Name or Authority CHAP. V. Of Christ's Divinity NOW I must come to the Third Classis of my Proofs out of Scripture namely those Texts which speak singularly of the Son as True Eternal God the like of the Holy Ghost As our Blessed Saviour from the beginning of the World to the time he was manifested in the Flesh was the Chief Object of Prophecies because in him through an eternal and unchangeable Decree was the Ground of the greatest of all outward God's Works for I look upon Redemption on some Account greater than Creation so from time to time God took care to renew and confirm the first gracious Promise of the Seed of the Woman under several Names of Shiloh Messiah Emmanuel the Branch c. and to describe him with several Names and Circumstances that when he was come there should be no just Cause to mistake or deny him to be he and the same and withal it was declared what he should be in his Person and do in his Office so also what he was before he came namely God by his Nature and Attributes all which after his Incarnation was so highly confirmed both by a farther Revelation and many Wonders but as †Luk. 2.34 he was set for a sign which should be spoken against so then he was opposed and so is now by the Enemies to his Person Offices and Doctrine but against such detestable Wretches he hath not left himself without Witnesses to make himself known to be what he really is even God blessed for ever wherefore our Saviour commands us to * John 5.39 search the Scriptures for they testify of him therein we shall find his Deity this course himself took when beginning at Moses and all the Prophets he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the Things concerning himself To this purpose the Word doth afford such a plenty and variety of Matter in such an essential Point of our Faith and so necessary to be known that indeed it would go near to run one into some Confusion except some Method be used to prevent it the Difficulty lays not in what to say but how to say it wherefore our Discourse and Arguments must be reduced under several Heads and Classes as may be Names Attributes Works and Worship of God Some Words used in this Matter are in Scripture as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Godhead which some would have to differ from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divinity as cause an effect the first the Essence the last a Gift communicated though in Scripture they be synonimous and both translated Godhead in Scripture are also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Three 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Subsistance or Person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is others are derived as from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Three are derived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Unity and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Trinity from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Being or Existing come 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Essence St. John alone calls the Son 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word and St. Paul alone or the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews calls him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Character of the express Image of the Person of the Father Of the Names of God some signify the Essence as Jehovah Proved from the Names Jah Ehejah others the Attributes as Elehim Schaddai Adonai c. and in the New Testament 〈◊〉
't is not appellative or common but proper for if it were not so God would not absolutely be one for that is common which belongs to many and proper that which belongs only to one and the Name of one only thing must needs be proper since Scripture teaches us there is but one God the Name of God must needs be proper and farther when a Name doth of it self belong to one and to others in relation only to that same one it must be accounted to be that one 's proper Name thus the Name of God of it self belongs to God alone not in relation to any thing else but to others it belongs only in relation to the only True God and as the Word God spoken of the True God is as already said taken Essentially or personally so is the Name Father either for the Essence of God or for the first Person of the Trinity now the Person is taken either abstractively or concretively when we say the Word God is taken personally we do not mean abstractively or separately from but concretively or joyntly with the Essence so the Name Father is taken either essentially or personally in the first manner when in the Lord's Prayer we say our Father and personally when in the Creed we say I believe in God the Father Thus far we in these matters do agree with the Adversaries that there is but One God and that * Isai 42.8 he gives not his Name and Glory to another for to whom God doth communicate the Honor of his Name and Titles to the same he thereby imparts his Glory Now there is a Name of God proper and another appellative this is given to the Creatures and 't is either properly or figuratively in the first Sence the Word is not always to be understood to be the absolute Being but a relative one as when some Nation doth through Error and Idolatry name to herself some Divinity or other in this Sense God and People are relatives so the Name God taken in the predicament of Relation and not in that of Substance may properly be spoken of a Creature thus I speak properly when I say Chamos is the God of the Moabites and Malcom of the Ammonites but when I come to examine the Opinion of those Nations it is very true that they are the Gods of such Nations but 't is not true that they are Gods in Nature and Substance they are but erroneously look'd upon as Gods by such Nations so this is not a substantial and absolute Truth only Relative which the Adversaries may not affirm of the Son and of the Holy Ghost as being feigned and invented Gods between which the Word of God makes a difference †1 Thess 1.9 Ye turned to God from Idols to serve the living and true God Now the figurative signification is when by reason of some likeness God's Name is attributed to some Creatures ‖ Psal 8. thus Angels are called Elohim and * Job 1.6 Sons of God by reason of the Excellency of their Nature Magistrates are called †Psal 82.6 Gods and Sons of God upon the account of the Dignity of their Office But here the Case is very different the question is Whether the Name of God be properly or improperly and figuratively attributed to the Son and to the Holy Ghost I mean the Name taken appellatively denoting in him that is so called the Divine Nature and Essence Socinians though they be brazen-fac'd enough yet not to that degree as to say that the Persons of the Son and Holy Ghost are called God only by way of Figure but they cavil that the Word signifies not a Nature but an Office so the proper signification of the Word they extend to Angels and Magistrates as if the Word God signified Governour Preserver and Benefactor c. but before their Heresy broke out no Man ever taught so then no Language gives that Sence to the Word for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek signifies the Nature for some accounted to be Gods are false ones * Gal. 4.8 which by nature are not Gods and Philosophers reckoned the Gods of the Heathens amongst the Animals 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 speaking and rational and the Hebrew Word Elohah doth certainly properly signify the Nature as being given to the supreme Being which is so called not relatively but absolutely when to the first Man the common Name is attributed he is not simply called Adam till that became his proper Name Now as to the Origin or Etymology of the Word 't is falsly deduced from the signification of governing helping and preserving but truly from the Notion of the word Worship and Adoration we must not think that our first Parents were so wanting in their Piety towards their Maker whom they worshipped so devoutly to call him by a common Name proper to Creatures as if afterwards it had been attributed to him by way of Excellency And is it likely that God had been so wanting in what related to his Honor as being himself the Author of the Hebrew Tongue the Knowledge whereof he infused into Adam and Eve as not to provide a Name proper to distinguish his own Nature For having instituted for himself a Religious Worship and Adoration he must need also have declared a proper Name incommunicable to any Creature whatsoever Now the Name of God is given the Son not only attributively †Joh. 1.1 the word was God and ‖ Rom. 9.13 Christ God blessed for ever but also subjectively * 1 Tim 3.16 God was manifested in the flesh and * Acts 20.28 God purchased his church with his own blood even in the Old Testament †Psal 97.6 7. The heavens declare his righteousness and all the people see his glory c. Worship him all ye gods Now the Adversaries do confess that as often as the Name of God is spoken subjectively as they call it it signifies a Substance and Person but of God the Father of Christ still they own it signifies a Substance and Person of the Godhead but why only of the Father of Christ that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meerly their Opinion without any Proof As to that which they say about the Article in the Greek I shewed already it is an idle Distinction for out of some places of Scripture I shewed how the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying the true God is sometimes with an Article and sometimes without as * 1 Tim. 3.16 God was manifest in the flesh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Thomas †Joh. 20.28 my Lord and my God he spoke to one whom he knew was to be worshipped with religious worship and he own'd it so yet Scripture commands and often repeats that the Lord our God alone is to be worshipped which our Saviour Christ confirmed * Mat. 4.10 with his own Mouth and Paul †Gal. 4.8 after him and
because infinite communicable without being multiplied in many persons To the same purpose they object in another manner God is One therefore cannot be Three so there is none but the Father The Answer is easie and we already have said something to it that which is one cannot be two or three in the same respect it cannot be one and many in the same sense What Christ says John 10.30 I and my Father are one is most true so that One is related to the Nature and I and Father to the Persons so then God is one as to the Nature and three as to the Persons Seeing the Nature or Godhead cannot be multiplied it follows that the Persons and Subsistences only are multiplied They say farther A simple Essence cannot be of three Persons otherwise it will be divided or multiplied But though this be true of finite it is not so of an infinite Essence neither doth it follow that because the Essence is common to three Persons it may be common to more for it were contrary to divine Revelation which only mentioneth one Father one Son and one Holy ghost the Father God the Son God the Holy Ghost God yet not three Gods but only one God Neither doth it follow that because divine Essence is common to three Persons therefore every Person shall be common and because the Persons are not common therefore the Nature must not be This is the cause of their Mistake that they do not mind the distinction of the Person from the Essence for tho they differ not really yet rationally they be distinguished It doth follow to say if the Essence be common to three Persons therefore the Persons are common no more than to say if Abel hath his Nature from Adam and is a Man therefore he hath his Posterity and is a Father from him The things say they that are separately numbered are not one in number and essence but the Father and the Son are separately numbered and are by themselves called one as one God one Mediator one God and Father one Lord wherefore Father and Son are not one only God or one Essence But I say Numeration doth not import a distinction of Essence for in finite things Essences being multiplied they are reckoned individual not in relation to the Essence but to the Persons that which is numbered is one neither is it one without the Essence yet for all that it is not one essentially or by his own Essence separated from any other whatsoever so then when the Father and Son are numbered they are not so essentially but personally also they are the same in number and essence contrary to what is objected whereof one is said to be with the other as the word was with God for in God to be one with another is only an hypostatical or personal distinction for as to be one with another doth import a distinction so the same Evangelist sheweth the Essence of both to be but one and the same when he addeth the word was God Furthermore they argue thus The Father and the Son are really distinguished for the Father is absolutely God that is the divine Essence for say they the words Father and God are synonimous or the same because the word God is explained by the word Father 1 Thes 1.3 therefore the Essence of the Son is distinct from that of the Father Our Answer is Tho' the Persons of the Father and of the Son be really distinct it doth not follow that their Essences are so as if the Essence of one was not that of another seeing the names of Father and Son are relatives which indeed signifie different Persons in the same Nature but rationally distinguished from the same If Father and Essence be synonimous what remaineth for the Son besides a shadow of the Deity For as the Paternity and Innascibility or not being begotten which are proper only to the Father are incommunicable that Essence if it be the same thing as is the Father cannot be communicated unto the Son It doth not follow neither that the Names God and Father are the same because the first is sometimes used for the last seeing it is attributed unto the Father in his Person to constitute the Deity by reason of the Spring and in the comparison and order of Persons and not because the Person of the Father is in no wise distinguished from the divine Essence Paul doth congratulate with the Thessalonians for their Work of Faith Labour of Love and Patience of Hope and because their Hope was in the Coming of the Lord Jesus these three he referreth in God whom he calls Father because he already had made mention of the Mediator But if the Names God and Father be the same by reason that Paul had to the word God joyned Father by way of explication Tit. 2.13 2 Pet. 1.2 then the Names Great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ are also the same because two Apostles explain the name of Christ by that of God our Saviour Besides the Argument is faulty for it hath four terms to the end that both Propositions be true in the major the Person of the Father in the minor his Essence are to be understood To this Argument answereth another The eternal Father is not the Son whom John calls the Word but the Essence of the Divinity or that one God of Israel is the eternal Father of the only begotten Son therefore the Essence or the God of Israel is not the Son called the Word The major is false for to have it true the sence ought to be this That Essence or that God which is the Father is not the Son that is the Person of the Father is not the Person of the Son This farther they say The Essence and one God are convertible but according to us in the Unity of God there is Trinity therefore in the Essence there is also Trinity But we say God who is one in Nature is three in Persons so in that onely Essence there is a Trinity that is wholly and indivisibly subsisteth in three Persons there are not three Essences The minor Proposition must be understood of a Trinity of Persons and not of Essences I observed before how they quarrel much with several expressions used in this matter as Trinity Essence Person c. which are neither prophane nor unworthy of God seeing in Scripture there are words which answer to them Rom. 1.20 Col. 2.9 Phil. 2.6 2 Pet. 1.4 as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both signifying Godhead and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Form of God and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divine Nature Also the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in Latin is translated sometimes Substance sometimes Essence sheweth the quiddity or nature of the thing As for the word Person Clastical Authors as well as Divines in this holy Mystery take it for a rational Subsistence or Father Son and Holy Ghost however out of these they
take matter of Argument against us for they say thus The Doctrin of God ought to be taught according to Scripture but those Names are not to be found therein therefore not to be used I answer the major Proposition with a distinction If they mean it of the sence of Scripture we own we ought not to depart from it but if of the letter and bare words we deny it for in the Church is the gift of Prophecy and of explaining the word And whereas Hereticks are apt to wrest the sence and under variety of words to involve and disguise the Truth it is sometimes necessary to make use of new words to hit and refute their false glosses and interpretations in defence of the Truth As to the minor about the several words we say Scripture speaks of one God whence cometh Oneness or Vnity and Divinity is attributed to three Father Son and Holy Ghost hence is Trinity Jah and Jehovah signifie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 him that is so from Esse we derive Essence all which words we are not Authors of but received them from the Primitive Church which by a publick consent used them almost from the Apostles time to these which they reject when themselves would bring in barbarian words to signifie their erroneous notions as God Essentiating and Essentiated Apostolical God Emphatical and articulated God Author and God Executor and the like Thus they make themselves really guilty of such things as unreasonably they would charge us with They must needs have a very great opinion of their own abilities seeing they would make us forbear the expressions used by the Church for so many Ages and impose their new-fangled words upon the World 'T is in them a blasphemous Impiety and a damnable Slander to charge us with bringing in new Gods under such words as are made use of to explain Scripture and they know well enough our meaning thereof as we so often explained it these different words do not change the sense so may not be called erroneous and tho' sometimes there be Variety in words and expressions the sense still remaineth the same so we do not consider them as Popish or Antichristian Forgeries Indeed they make a ridiculous Objection Jehovah the Essentiator Father is of the masculine Gender but Essence is of the feminine therefore not to be used But to say something to the purpose they must prove that in the nature of things according to the Rules of Grammar there is a difference of Sex Of the like nature is this no abstract Name signifieth a Substance but Trinity is an abstract Name therefore c. But the first proposition is false for when we call Deity or Divine Nature we understand a Substance seeing in God all things are Substance and no Accident So by the word Trinity we understand three Persons really subsisting 2 Sam. 23. We find David's mighty Men of Valour to be distinguished by three and three But as to their exception against the fore-named words once for all I say to them Tho' every Truth asserted be not in Scripture in so many Letters yet if it be therein implied and by a good and necessary consequence thence derived 't is to be esteemed the Word of God as if expressed because in it contained Thus Preaching is the Word of God because deduced out of it not as to the words but as to the sense hence it is that Preaching produces the effects attributed to the the Word as to quicken convert regenerate and sanctifie when sometimes in a whole Sermon few Sentences are repeated word by word And in several places of the New Testament the Evangelists and Apostles do quote out of the Old not in the very words but accoding to the sense and scope of the place upon such a ground our Translators do render the word Hypostasis by that of Person and so 't was among the Primitive Church which word we find used in the New Testament only four times thrice in the Epistle to the Hebrews Chap. 1.3 Chap. 3.14 Chap. 11.1 and 2 Cor. 9.4 yet every where in a different sense Some few words more I shall add to answer some other Objections in order thereunto I say In the Deity there is an Essence which is but one in that Essence do subsist three Persons really distinguished one from another but only modally from the Essence which doth not make any fourth thing in the Godhead As there is but one Essence so these three Persons are but one God which Name God is spoken not only of the Essence but also of every one of the three Persons Vnity in relation to the Nature and Trinity in respect to the Persons One Essence there is without which there is no God but the three Persons are this one God in Essence who subsist in that Essence Father Son and Holy Ghost The Adversaries are in an Error when they think there is no real difference except there be some difference in number and Essence they would have a Thing and a Substance to be the same when that which differeth by reason of the definition from another doth also really differ from it God in one number and essence admitteth of no renting or division and they are not three bare Names the Essence doth not as the Genus contain three Species but it doth subsist in three Persons in which all and in every one is the same Nature and Godhead To own three Essences were to assert three Gods and we say that Father Son and Holy Ghost as to the Nature are of themselves tho' not as to the Personality for on this last account we own the Son to be from the Father and the Holy Ghost from both I say again how the Essence maketh no fourth thing in the Godhead as if the three Persons were derived from it as from a thing pre-existing or as if it being common to the three was really distinguished from the three these we never said but are against The Essence is wholly and entirely common to every Person these Persons do not proceed from the Essence but we say they from all Eternity subsist in the Essence and tho' we own a distinction between Essence and Persons yet they are not as a thing abstracted from the Essence The great difficulty arising about this is in the case of the Incarnation which is justly called The wisdom of God in a mystery 1 Cor. 2.7 even the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the world unto our glory The Son was incarnated or made Flesh took upon him our human Nature now the Father and Holy Ghost having the same Essence with the Son how were not they both incarnated We know the Person and not the Nature was incarnated but how the Nature which is wholly in the Son as wholly in the Father and in the Holy Ghost was not made Flesh 't is a Mystery that passeth all understanding This is one of the secret things that belong to God which we
by †De Vnit Eccles Cyprian and also by Tertullian Ignatius c. This Text doth so well agree with that of the Evangelist to baptize all Nations in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost which it doth allude unto that none may doubt but it was suggested by the same Spirit and the name word particular to St. John doth sufficiently witness how those lines together with the rest came out of his Pen Non unus sed unum saith one of the fore-quoted Fathers Not one Person sed unum c. one Nature not only the unity of Testimony as they are three distinct Witnesses not only the unity of Consent and Will but also of Nature as I and the Father are one Joh 10.30 which the Jews understood very well for thereupon they accused him of Blasphemy and took up Stones to have cast at him the reason they give for 't is this Because thou being a man V. 33. makest thy self God In few words we cannot be baptized in the name of Father Son and Holy Ghost except the names of these three equal in Authority Dignity and Essence be called upon on our behalf and as I observed before 't is unlawful to be baptized in the name of any man The Israelites were baptized by the Worâ—â— or Ministry or as the Syriack hath it in the Hand of Moses but not in his Name Before we leave off these Objections against the most adorable Trinity for the better understanding of the matter I shall speak some few words more for indeed the point is of so high a concernment and affords such a plenty and variety of Discourse that we can never say enough of what is to be known in the case Tho' as we said they be the same in Essence yet they differ first in personal Names as Father Son and Holy Ghost Secondly in their Order Father first as the Spring then Son thirdly Holy Ghost Thirdly In their manner of Operation the Father doth act of himself the Son from the Father and the Holy Ghost from both Gal. 4.4 John 14.26 15.26 so the Son is sent by the Father the Holy Ghost from both Father and Son but we never read the Father was sent So there is a difference in the outward Works for tho' they be common to the three Persons yet Creation is properly attributed to the Father Redemption to the Son and Sanctification to the Holy Ghost Thus these three Persons have every one their personal unity in number they are distinguish'd yet are but one God in number of Essential and natural unity wherefore in God are not three Beings three Infinites or three Things Yet they object the names of Trinity Personality and Essence were not heard of before the Apostles time nor the Doctrin of the Trinity I answer to the first that tho' the Names were not yet the Things were and Words are to signifie Things that there is one God the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit as it appears out of the places quoted to prove the Divinity of the Son and Holy Ghost which here I need not to repeat and if the things be true why should Men dispute about words which do not in the least prejudice the Analogy of Faith on the contrary do explain and confirm it As to the Second I say that the Doctrin of the Trinity was mentioned of old as I proved it already out of several places of Scripture the Question is not about the Father but the Son concerning whom is the clear Testimony of Psal 2 whose coming as Jehovah and God of Israel for the Prophet speaks to Israel when he calls him your God was foretold Behold Isa 35 4 5. Mat. 11.4 5. Psal 51.10 11. your God will come with vengeance even God with a recompence he will come and save you which is applied unto Christ Of the Holy Ghost mention is made by David and in other places but that which under the Old Testament was under a Vail is clearly revealed under the New for the Persons are plainly named and their number expressed as in the places already made use of not only in the Baptism of our Saviour but in his Commission given his Apostles to baptize c. which as I shewed is unlawful to be done in any man's name As there is truth in Jesus so this is the truth of his Gospel which also hath in conformity thereunto been the sense of the general Orthodox Councils and of the Doctors of the Primitive Church however this must be said that tho' this Mystery of the holy Trinity be expressed in Scripture yet 't is such a one as exceedeth our understanding and capacity Again they say In most places of Scripture 't is said there is but one God and that this God is the Father of Jesus Christ I answer The Name God when properly spoken and of the true God is taken either essentially for Divine Nature or personalty for some of the Persons when taken in the first sense it doth not exclude but include the Persons only it is set down in opposition to Idols and false Gods which by Nature are not Gods the things absolutely spoken of the Oneness of God do not at all prejudice the Persons which are that onely God hence it is that not only the Father but also Son and Holy Ghost are called God In this Essential sense are taken the places they quote out of the Old and New Testament as for instance Mark 2.7 Luk. 5.21 that of Mark and of Luke which among others they make use of Who can forgive sins but God only The word God belongs to the Essence yet that power doth belong to the Son as to the Father for there Christ assumeth it to himself which same power is also attributed unto the Holy Ghost Receive ye the Holy Ghost John 20.21 22. whosoever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them When the word God is to be understood personally then there is a note of distinction joyned to know what Person is spoken of whether Father Son or Holy Ghost What we say of the word God the same we affirm of the name Father which doth not always signifie the first Person but also the Nature and three Persons Thus when God is said to be Father of all and in the Lord's Prayer we call him Our Father when we cry Abba Father c. in all Texts of that nature Father Son and Holy Ghost are understood As to the Particle besides me sometimes used it excepts nothing within tho' every thing without the Deity or that hath not the Divine Nature But one of the Arguments which most of all they ground themselves upon is this Joh. 17.3 And this is eternal life to know thee the only true God and whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ They would have Christ to be excluded from being the only true God which they restrain only to the Father but herein they are much
other but Divine as it appeareth of what Scripture saith sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not Heb. 10.5 but a body hath thou prepared me He certainly need have had a Being before this natural Body was prepared for him me then he was a Person before the Body This Inferiority must be understood of his Person in that voluntary humiliation of his in his state of exinanition yet this his being inferiour to the Father in respect of his Humanity doth not at all take away the equality between him and the Father in relation to his divine Nature for he is the Word Son of God tho' when he was made Flesh he was made that which he was not before with assuming human and mortal Nature yet he still remained that which he was before namely God blessed for ever there was no addition diminution or alteration in his divine Nature but continued the same Person of the most holy Trinity begotten of the Father from all Eternity Christ is less than the Father in respect to his Office of Mediatour We are in Covenant with God not upon our account but upon that of Câ—â—â—st who is thus become the Head of all Men that are in covenant with God and in relation to this he is called the Mediatour of the New Testament Heb. 9.15 wherefore we must observe how in Scripture the Lord Jesus is said to be made Lord and Châ—ist Acts 2.36 but never said to be made God which things are very different for by Nature God is Lorâ— but Christ by Will and Appointment in respect of his Personal Dominion and of the Oeconomical Kingdom belonging to his Mediatorship He is God absolutely but Lord and Christ relatively unto us God essentially and Christ accidentally In this last sense he was anointed with that Oyl and Gifts of the Holy Ghost for in the other sense he wanted no such thing he was not anointed simply as God but as Christ a Prophet a Priest and a King for our sake and for our good And all places in Scripture wherein the Father is said to be greater than Christ to be the Head of Christ to have made Christ Lord to have exalted and anointed him and the like ought to be taâ—â—en in this sense that is in regard of his human Nature and Mediatorship and not as to the divine for when this is spoken of our Saviour himself saith I and my Father are one John 10.30 there is no difference either in Nature or Power After this manner also is to be understood that place John 5.22 27. wherein the Father is said to have committed all judgment unto the Son and given him authority to execute judgment because he is the Son of man which hath a relation to his Office of Mediatorship in the Government of the Church and Judgment over the Enemies thereof His essential Kingdom he hath of himself but this dispensatory one from the Father not because he is the Son of God but because he is the Son of Man which reason tends to breed in us Comfort and Assurance in that we are to be judged by a Man one who having taken our Nature with its Infirmities Sin excepted will compassionate us for he was tempted as we are and in human Judgments 't is a Privilege to be â—ry'd by his Peers and Equals that is of the same â—ank and condition with us In this sense ought also to be taken the place where it is said The Son also shall be subject unto him that put all things ander him 1 Cor. 15.28 and deliver up the Kingdom into his hands the Kingdom of ruling governing and preserving of the Church This giving or dellvering up of the Kingdom is no sign of inequality for as the Son is to give it up to the Father so the Father gave it up to him without any diminution of his Power neither shall the Son receive any diminution of his he shall deliver it in a perfect Oeconomical administration having overcome all Enemies and brought all his Elect to be crowned with Glory so there will be no more to do no need of being a King in that respect By the words Then shall the Son himself be subicel is to be understood the account he is to give of his administration thereof and this is a kind of subjection which shall be swallowed up in that perfect Happiness wherein God will be all in all no more Enemies to fight no more need of a Mediator But for their last gasp they reserve a frivolous and insignificant Exception for some of them say our Arguments are not coherent sometimes we plead for Unity at other times for a Trinity but we form our Arguments according to the nature of the Matters and the Principles of those whom we do dispute against Against the Gentiles and Heathens we prove That there is but one true God against the Jews That besides God the Father there is also another Person namely the Son of God who is also true God We are to deal against several Adversaries to this truth Arrians Sabellians Samosatenians Socinians Tritheists c. and accordingly we frame our Arguments suitably with the Principles of those whom we dispute against If I deal against Gentiles my Arguments must not be drawn out of Scripture which they receive not but from natural Reason and out of the Writings of their Philosophers and other Authors as St. Paul did in Athens Acts 17.28 So if against Samaritans I must argue only out of the Pentatench or five Books of Moses If against Jews only out of the Old Testament because they own not the New and so of the rest This is the substance of what they say in opposition to these Heavenly Truths which to compass they are not ashamed to wrest Scriptures to force upon them a sense contrary to the Design of the Spirit of God and to the Analogy of Faith and in order to form a detestable System whereby they do what they can to overthrow the whole foundation of our holy Religion not only they for many Years rack'd their own Brains to extract all the Poyson which Satan could infuse and 〈◊〉 â—own natural Corruption suggest but also called for Help upon the most infamous and abominable Hereticks that ever were in the Christian World and out of all made a Quintessence of all that erroneously impiously or blasphemously can be forg'd or said against the Divine Nature Attributes Persons and Grace of God Yet not wholly trusting to this they have set up a Diana a God-Idol of their own even their own natural Reason that where abusing Scripture cannot serve the turn their unreasonable Imaginations may do 't wherein they seem to scorn being guided by the Word of God where it doth not answer their Ends but divine things must not be measured by our shallow Capacity And if we believe Scripture to be the Word of God then we must receive that which God teaches us therein and we must not
found alive at the last Day They would have Christ's Incarnation to be against Reason and Scripture they deny him to be truly God the like of the Holy Ghost That there is in One God no Trinity of Persons and that the Old Testament is needless for Christians c. All these and other Blasphemies are found in the Works of Socinus in the Racovian Catechism whereof Smalcius is the Author of Ostorodius Crellius Wolkelius Vaydovius c. but we shall by the Grace of God insist only upon some of their greatest Blasphemies Now to the Cause Matters of this high Nature and fundamental Concernment to our Holy Religion must not be prostituted to the captious scanning of Men of corrupt Minds nor the ways of God be made layable to the Judgment of Men rather humbly to be adored with Submission of Mind and Obedience of Faith to the Revelation declared in God's Word and herein we ought the more to be sober and cautious that we know Errors to be link'd together and to have a dependency one upon another he that strikes at the Grace of the Lord Jesus will afterwards make no Conscience to fly out against his Person he who denies him to be a Prophet will soon disown him to be a King and a Priest for as one Depth calls to another so an Arminian can easily become a rank Pelagian and Socinian Wherefore 't is necessary at the very beginning to oppose Errors defend every inch of ground against such as will daily grow worse and worse as do the * James 1.8 double-minded men that are for their own more than for the Truth 's Interest for they are unstable in all their ways and the more Hands orderly employed the better is the Effect like to be This Consideration makes me to appear amongst those who heretofore did and now do oppose false Teachers who not only privily but also in publick bring in again those damnable Heresies which of old Truth and Learning exploded and baffled out of the World The Divinity of Christ was the Stumbling-block to the Jews who could not endure to hear him call himself the Son of God absolutely and without limitation and thereat were enraged which made 'em take up Stones to cast at him John 8.59 and also at another time Chap. 10.31 the Doctrines about the Holy Trinity and the Person and Deity of Christ do stand and fall together In our Saviour's time it began to be oppos'd by the Jews and since from time to time continu'd to be so by the Devil's Instruments raised to that same purpose and within the last Age revived by the fore-named Blasphemers against the Rock of the Church which is built on the Confession that Christ is the Son of the living God not by any special Favour or any such Restriction for then there would be only a gradual difference between his and our being Sons of God but he is simply the Son of God yea his only begotten Before we enter upon this important Matter some things to clear the state of the Question must be premised so that we must shew wherein we agree before we speak of that wherein we differ as to the first this Foundation must be laid there is a God the Cause of all the Effect of none who hath made all and is made by none who hath given all things their Being and hath his own of himself This is not denyed so I shall not go about to prove it the Light of Nature the Book of Scripture and the Testimony of Conscience do sufficiently convince Men of it The next thing is what God is He being infinite cannot be defined but imperfectly described only according to what he hath in his Word revealed of himself how he is infinite independent self-sufficient eternal unchangeable But such is the blindness of some Mens Judgments or the Perverseness of their Hearts that they will cavil at the Nature Names Attributes and Works of this eternal and infinite Being But about this fundamental Truth our Faith must be directed by the Revelation which God hath made of it in his holy Word herein Men must not follow their own fancy for * 〈◊〉 Mat. 〈…〉 no man knoweth the father but the son and he to whom the son will reveal him Now the sum of this Revelation in the Word is that God is One that this One God is Father Son and Holy Ghost that the Father is the Father of the Son and the Son the Son of the Father and the Holy Ghost the Spirit of the Father and of the Son and that they are distinct one from another in respect of this their mutual Relation by this Rule we must be guided how to know believe worship love fear and obey him that is the Father One true God the Son One true God and the Holy Ghost One true God to be believed worshiped and obeyed Now for our Edification and further Instruction thâ—â— Doctrin admits of some Enlargement and Explanation to prevent undue Notions of God which by reason of the Blindness and Ignorance we are naturally involv'd in our Minds are liable unto thus out of the Revelation that God is One we easily deduce he is so in respect of his Nature Essence or Godhead and how being Father Son and Holy Ghost he doth subsist in these Three distinct Persons thence also is derived the manner of their Subsistence what are their mutual respects to each other and such like things by a necessary Consequence from the Revelation Upon these Grounds were compiled the Nicene Athanasian and other Creeds or Articles of Faith in opposition to the Heresies of those Times for therein was explained the true Sense of Scripture about those matters which were wrested by the Enemies of the Truth and though the Orthodox Doctors and Councils to oppose the Error and lay open the Venom made use of some Words and Expressions which in so many Letters are not set down in the Word of God yet they were not to blame for they were drawn out of it by lawful and necessary Consequences Men may lawfully conceive in their Minds what is the nature of the Things or the sense of the Words according to the scope of the Spirit of God in the Writings of the Prophets and Apostles and also as to the Analogy of Faith or else we are no better than Brutes So that if the chief Assertion contained in the Revelation be true so must also be whatsoever is therein included and in the Explication thereof drawn by a true and right Consequence Wherefore seeing God hath declared Father Son and Holy Ghost to be One God it necessarily follows they are One in Nature because therein only they can be One And this is the ground of any other Unity and seeing it is also declared they are Three it must be explained of three distinct Persons or Subsistences wherein only it is possible they can be Three The Revelation is clear there is One God this God is
within another this made our Saviour say * John 10.38 The father is in me and I in him and †Ch. 14.10 I am in the father and the father in me Yet this hinders not but that they are distinct among themselves for they are not so one in another as the Accident is in its Subject neither is one predicated and spoken of the other as Man is of John for the Father is not the Son nor the Son the Holy Ghost 't is enough they are personally distinguished and in their manner of subsisting the Father unbegotten begets the Son the Son begotten of the Father the Holy Ghost proceeding from both as this is ad intra inwardly and among themselves so outwardly though the outward Works be common to the Three yet it seemed good to divine Wisdom particularly to attribute unto the Father the Work of Creation to the Son that of Redemption to the Holy Ghost that of Sanctification Works of Power in Schools of Divinity are attributed to the Father of Wisdom to the Son of Mercy and Goodness to the Holy Ghost In these Works ad extra as Creation Salvation Sanctification essentially there is but One Cause and Principle for there is but One God but personally there are Three because Three Persons which not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do freely cooperate and as these Persons in subsisting are distinguished in order so also in their working one doth not operate without the other and this Operation follows the Subsistence the Father is and works from none the Son from the Father and the Holy Ghost from both yet this order of working doth take away the Equality of Persons no more than doth their Order of subsisting Now the Acts whereby the Father hath begotten the Son and both produced the Holy Ghost are in several senses voluntary and necessary the first because no Violence or Compulsion but very freely the second 't is not voluntary but necessary if we take Voluntary in opposition to Natural for Voluntary signifies Contingent that which can be or not be but 't is so necessary that the Father could not but beget the Son and both breath the Holy Ghost and this from all eternity otherwise some new thing had befaln divine Nature which is absurd And this Generation and Production are not as in human things where the Father is in time before the Son but here the Son is coeternal with the Father and the Holy Ghost with both not forcibly but necessarily as Light is from the Sun and Heat from the Fire so the Father is no more without the Son and the Holy Ghost than the Sun is without Light God is not without his Wisdom and his Virtue and this from all eternity I mean that called imparticipata or à parte ante and à parte post that is without beginning or ending incommunicable to the Creature and herein indeed doth differ this divine Production from that of the Light of the Sun and Heat of the Fire wherein is a succession and a difference the Light of the Sun to day is sometime different from that of yesterday but the Son is to day the same he was yesterday * Heb. 13 8. Christ the same yesterday and to day and for ever There is also an order among the Three Persons the Father is first as †Matth 28.19 Baptize the nations in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost thus the Father is named first * 1 John 5.7 the Son next then the Holy Ghost In the Creed the Father is also named first the Son the second the Holy Ghost the third the Father of himself the Son of the Father and the Holy Ghost as already said of both yet all Three may be called and are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 self God as we shall by Gods Grace speak of more hereafter Neither doth the divine Nature though subsisting of it self as single and individual make any fourth Person in the Godhead distinct from the Three because it subsisteth in a certain manner and only in the Persons of Father Son and Holy Ghost these Three Persons are not of another or different Nature nor of the like or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under which word the Arians would have shelter'd their Error nor of a common as Men who have a common Essence but not the same in Number but this divine Essence in Three Persons is the very same in number All this is a great Mystery revealed in the Word of God professed by the Church from Christ's time to this though Satan's Rage against the Son of God * 1 John 3.8 who came to destroy his works did from time to time raise up Instruments to blaspheme against it and we ought humbly and devoutly to adore and not presumptuously and profanely dive into it CHAP. IV. Of the most Holy Trinity ALthough the matter about the divine Nature and the Three Persons which we have already spoken of be but one and the same with that of the most adorable Trinity as indeed they in Discourse are Parts one of another and so twisted and connexed together that what we speak of one hath a Relation to and Dependency upon the other yet before we come to the Polemical or Controversial Part of these Points we by the Grace of God shall under the Head of the Blessed Trinity continue to speak of the Didactical or Doctrinal Part of our Discourse the more to inculcate into the Minds of the Readers less acquainted with these Disputes what Grounds they ought to go upon and to believe concerning these Fundamentals of our Faith and necessary Doctrines of our Salvation What we believe about it is above not against Reason for we believe not One God to be many Gods nor Three Persons to be but One Person If in Human Things I should say absolutely I James am Father and Son it were a Contradiction indeed but to speak it relatively there is none at all I cannot say I am Son and Father to my Father or Father and Son to my Son but I may very well say I James one Man am upon a different Account and in a different Relation Son and Father in regard to my Father I am a Son in relation to my Son I am a Father let the great Masters of or pretenders to Reason herein shew me a Contradiction no more can they when I say in the Godhead is one Essence or Nature subsisting in Three Persons and Three Persons existing in One Essence Unity in Trinity and Trinity in Unity This great Point is not only very hard and difficult by reason of the Mystery of the Eternal unspeakable and incomprehensible Generation of the Son of God by the Father but also of a most high Concernment First Upon the Account of God's Glory for to deny this Doctrine is to deny the True God because * 1 John 2.23 whosoever denieth the Son the same hath not the-Father Secondly
All things were made by him how they came to that knowledg I shall not be so positive as to determine but in the Verses father'd upon Orpheus the Creator of the World is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word so 't is in some of the antient Books of the Caldeans but we must draw out of purer Springs than these for our blessed Saviour the Son of God is in the New Tewament called 〈◊〉 the Name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word because as Speech of Word is the Production of the Mind so is the Son of his Father and as a Man declareth the meaning of the Heart by the Words of his Mouth so God * John 1.18 Heb. 1.2 revealeth his Will and Mind by his Son and because it is he whom the Father promised to Adam Abraham and Patriarchs to make his Promises of Salvation sure unto them The second Person is the Word of the Father begotten from all eternity by Communication of a personal Being from whom as from the Father proceeds the Holy Ghost Here the Word is not a thing such as Speech may be but 't is a proper Name of a Person in a Discourse it ever takes place of the Subject never of the Predicate 't is the Name * John 1.14 4. 13.16 Matth. 2.17 Rom. 14.2 1 Cor. 1.19 of the Son of God our blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ he is called the Word in relation both to his Person and Office as to the first because he is from God's Mind and is the Image of the Father wholly representing the Father as to the Office because by him all things were made and he declares the Father's Will to Angels and to Men he is known in three Capacities as God as Man and as both in which last relation he is the Head of the Church as God and as to his absolute Essence and Being he is of himself as to the manner he is from the Father always he was is and ever shall be begotten for absolute Eternity hath no term before or after and is always whole without succession he is called not barely the Word but Word of Life * 1 Joh. 1.1 because it contains Life in himself for in him was Life †Joh. 1.4 and is the Author of Life in others Now it becomes an Historian such as S. John is who in his Gospel writes the History of Christ if he will write things clearly and in order and not make a Romance to set down the true and proper Name of the Person whose History he doth pen specially when the Name is not well know nor much in use or else he will seem to have a design of imposing upon the Reader To apply this to the matter in hand if S. John when he was about giving the World an account of the Life Actions and Sufferings of our Saviour had called him by a Name that was not his own and proper Name but metaphorical as Socinians would have it far from being acted by a real desire to inform his Readers he might be thought to have intended to mock and deceive them for if the Name the Word which had been unknown under the Old Testament and was not used till by him was only a figurative improper and borrowed Name then not to say worse the Evangelist had not acted the part of a true and judicious Historian for in such things the first to be known is the true Name of the Person whose History is written and certainly if ever he intended to have informed the Reader and had his Gospel read he had thereby fallen into the readiest way to prevent it for as soon as it had been found out that without Reason and Necessity the Author had with obtruse and intricate Names drawn a curtain over the first Line then presently the Reader would have laid aside the Book thus far goes the Opinions of these unreasonable Men which how injurious it is to the Evangelist I leave any rational Man to judge how ever we must say that seeing of the Four Evangelists John alone before he made any mention of the Name of Jesus Christ in his first Line calls him the Word and goes on till past the 14 Verse we must own there was special cause for it no less than Divine Inspiration for we find in that part of the Vision he had in the Isle of Patmos that he who sat upon * Rev. 19.11 13. the White Horse called faithful and true representing our blessed Lord and Saviour 't is said there his name is called the Word of God but Socinians make this Opposition and rise all this Dust because to rob him of what they can they would have him called the Word only because he hath declared us the Will of God that he hath done it is true but not the whole Truth But this relating to the first Chapter of John we shall have a farther occasion to speak to it let this be observed how the Name Word signifies a Substance not a Sound in the Air and also only the Divine Nature in Christ The Name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord belongs and is proper to Christ to shew his absolute Dominion Third the Lord. the Septuagint rendered the Word Jehovah by this and so in the New Testament Evangelists and Apostles make use of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signify Jehovah which both are translated Lord it is taken either primarily and absolutely or secondarily and relatively in the first it signifies the infinite and independent Dominion by reason of Right and Extent as of Duration About this Socinians do mistake for they would have God's Dominion to be meaned when 't is with the Article and without it that of the Creatures but it appears how the Word when spoken of the Father hath sometimes the Article as Matth. 22.44 the Lord said unto my Lord and sometimes not as Mark 12.29 and when of the Son whom they would have to be a Creature it hath no Article say they but it hath John 20.28 so there is no reason to consider the Article in the Word but rather the Subject This Word against Socinus's Opinion is a Proper Name not an Appellative because in a strict Sense it is attributed unto God alone as in Deut. 6. Mark 12.29 The Lord our God is one Lord and elsewhere * 1 Cor. 8.6 to us there is but one God and Father of all and one Lord Jesus Christ c. and †Ephes 4.5 one Lord one Faith one Baptism God alone is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords ‖ 1 Tim. 6.15 When soever the Name Lord and God be absolutely taken they are reciprocal with one true Lord one true God the word Lord in the Subject when joyned with God doth signify the True God as when Christ says * Matth. 4.7 Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God the like Examples we have Gen 15.2 Isa 51.22 Mark 12.29 Joh. 20.28 which for brevities
in this Comparison of Persons all Things may be acceptable unto him but hence it doth not follow that Christ is not of the same Nature with the Father seeing they are not compared in relation to the Essenâ—â— but herein he doth condescend to their Capacity whom not owning his Deity he would by degrees bring to the knowledge thereof As to the use of the Name of God in Scripture the remaining Evidences are reduced under two kinds First In some the Name of God is absolutely taken for God the Father Secondly In others is added an exclusive Particle which is by some joyned with the Name of God and by others with the Things spoken of and attributed unto God Out of the first nothing may be deduced contrary to this Doctrine for in all those places by them quoted which anon we shall mention is a Comparison of the Persons wherein the Name of God is properly attributed to the Father upon the account of Order and Origin but 't is inconsequent to say that in every place where the Name of God is absolutely taken that is without Comparison of the Persons it is to be understood only of the Father for in several places where the Word God is indefinitely set down yet it is by no means to be reduced to the Father alone as to the other sort of Proofs wherein an exclusive Particle is expressed that exclusive Particle relates to the Creatures and to every thing which by Nature is not God whither they be things in Nature as Sun Moon and Stars which Heathens worshipped as Gods or else those which are Effects of Man's fancy and imagination such are several Idols by foolish Men worshipped as Gods wherefore seeing the True and Essential God is opposed to those which by Nature are not Gods it follows that by the Word God may well be understood Father Son and Holy Ghost likewise though sometimes mention be made only of One Person we must not take it as if thereby the other Persons were excluded but only that which by Nature is not God and that this is a right Interpretation it may well be proved out of several places of Scripture as for Instance when God saith by * Isa 43.11 the Prophet I even I am the Lord and besides me there is no Saviour and by another †Hos 13.4 For there is no Saviour besides me Here in the Adversaries Opinion Salvation is attributed to the Father but that the Son is not excluded it appears out of several places amongst the rest out of this ‖ Act. 4.12.10 Neither is there Salvation in any other that is in Jesus Christ who hath been crucified and we know Scripture doth not contradict it self and if out of the Prophet's one would exclude the Son he might as well out of this exclude the Father Again the Lord Jesus saith No man knows the Father but the Son now if all but the Son be excluded from knowing the Father as in the foregoing Text he would be excluded from being a Saviour so in this from knowing himself also the Holy Ghost would be excluded from knowing the Father though he be said To * 1 Cor. 2.10 search all things yea the deep things of God in this very same Sense Paul said ‖ Chap. 2.1 10. I determined not to know any thing among you save Jesus Christ and him crucified he doth not thereby deny that he determined to know the Father and the Holy Ghost but he meaneth he knows nor owns no way of Salvation out of Christ and v. â—1 The things of God knows no man but the spirit of God but in other places we read how * Joh. 5.20 the Father knows the Son and the Son knows the Father and the Father shews the Son all things that himself doth hence we may conclude how the Apostle speaks exclusively only of Creatures not of the Son nor of the Holy Ghost CHAP. VI. Christ is True Natural Son of God by Eternal Generation BUT we must by the Grace of God come to another Head as Scripture gives Christ truly properly and essentially the Name of God so it doth give him that of Son of God the First we shewed already the Second whereby he is declared the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity we must now speak of as we observed that the Word God in Scripture is spoken in several Senses as the True God properly Angels and Magistrates improperly and * Judg. 9.2 l. 46. Idols †2 Cor. 4.4 the Devil and the ‖ Phil. 3.19 Belly abusively So here I must say how the Name Son of God admits of Three different Significations for God hath three sorts of Sons for all others are reduced under these three Heads the First is by Creation and Preservation which is a continued Creation for * Act. 17.28 in him we live and move and have our being thus Adam is called †Luke 3.38 Son of God and Men ‖ Gen. 6.2 Sons of God on this Account God is Father of all Creatures whether in Heaven as Angels nay of the Sun Moon Stars of the Birds of the Air and on Earth of all Men Beasts Plants c. and of Fishes under Water this in relation to Nature and in general to the whole Creation The Second kind of God's Sons or Children is by Adoption and Grace such are his Elect and People of these in a special manner God is called the Father In a Third way Scripture speaks of a Son of God and of none else thus the only begotten from all Eternity namely our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ who is not Son according to the first manner which being common to all Men would make no difference between him and others and bring him into a Croud of the whole Work of Creation neither is he Son of God upon the account of Grace and Adoption which they would have him to be but if he be by Adoption how can he be the Only Begotten Son seeing that through Grace God hath adopted so many adopted Sons once and before their Adoption were not Sons of God which cannot be said of the Lord Jesus that the time hath been when he was not Son of God all and every adopted Son of God were once * Ephes 2. dead in trespasses and sins and by nature children of wrath even as others once †Colos 1.13 under the power of darkness and ‖ Rom. 5.10 enemies to God none of which things may without Blasphemy be spoken or thought of the Lord Jesus He is called Son not by Creation for * Colos 1.16 all things were created by him and one cannot be Creatour and Creature nor by Adoption for †Ephes 1.5 in him we are adopted nor by any Dignity or Eminency over inferiour Creatures as are Angels for the ‖ Heb. 1.4 5. Apostle denies it nor also upon the account of a personal Vnion or Incarnation as he is called Son
of Man because manifested in the Flesh he is not called Son of God upon any such account or in any of these Senses as Socinians would have him 1 Job 4.14.15 for they cannot deny the Lord Jesus to be called God Son of God for that Name is given him in so many places of Scripture and herein they would seem to agree but not sincerely for they cavil about the manner and disagree as to the true Sense he is called Son of God by reason of an Eternal Generation by the Father wherefore he is called God's * Rom. 8.3 32. own and proper Son and †Joh. 3.16 only begotten Christ is from the Father by Generation and the Holy Ghost by Spiration to be from the Father by Generation is to be generated or begotten by the Father long before the fulness of times and his appearing in the Flesh God absolutely said to him ‖ Psal 2.7 thou art my Son this day have â—â—begotten thee this represented with Comparisons as when called * Prov 8. Wisdom for as Wisdom is produced by the Mind so is the Son by the Father and in the New Testament by the similitude of †Colos 1.15 an Image of 〈◊〉 Father's ‖ Heb 1.3 Person and of the brightness of his glory and of the inward * Job 1.1 Word in the Mind for as an Image is not every likeness but the express Effigie or Representation of that whereof it is the Image so the Son in his Essence and Essential Attributes is so much the express Image of the Father that * Joh. 14.9 whosoever sees him doth see the Father also as the brightness of the Beam is from the Sun so the Son is from the Father as Light from Light as equally the glorious Image of his Nature as a Letter doth exactly represent the Character out of which it is drawn thus the Son doth exactly represent the Father by whom he is begotten as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word is conceived by the Mind and remains in it so is the Son begotten by the Father and remains in him and as the Wisdom Image Brightness the Word are one thing from another so the Son is of the Father from the Father not as an Essence is from another but as a Person is from a Person because he is the Character or express Image of the Person of the Father all these in created Things are accidents but in the Son who is in himself and by himself they are essential hence appears how in this there is a true distinction of the Persons begetting and begotten So then Christ is called the Son of God not by reason of any gracious Communication of Existence or of Power but upon the account of a secret and incomprehensible Generation of the Father of his Essence for he is the true proper only begotten highly beloved Son of the Living God and the prepositive Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Son frequently join'd to this Subject doth denote a Filiation or Sonship altogether of another kind from that of †Heb. 1.5 Angels or Men which can be no other than an essential one a True Son is begotten of the Essence of his Father but the Son of God is a True Son therefore he is begotten of the Essence of his Father Again the proper Son is said to be and is he that hath his proper Father now he is the proper Father who hath begotten his Son of his own Essence Farthermore the Only Begotten Son is only he that is begotten of the Substance of his Father which is demonstrated by the Opposition of natural and adopted Sons who are loved for the sake of the well beloved natural Son of God that Confession of Peter in the Name of the Disciples thou art not * Matth. 16.14 16 17. repeated John the Baptist nor Elias nor Jeremias who had been great in God's Favour nor none of the Prophets they were a meer nothing in Comparison of Christ but †Joh. 6.68 69. Ver. 17. thou art Christ the Son of the living God is not only in its true Sense approved of by our Saviour but he also there attributes it to Divine Revelation as of an incomprehensible Mystery Blessed art thou Simon Bar-â—â—â—as for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee but my father which is in heaven Isaac as they object is called * Gen 23.2 and Heb. 11.17 Only Begotten Son but he is not absolutely so called but relatively secundum quid because he was the Only Begotten Son of Abraham by Sarah in a lawful Marriage and thereby made his only Heir to the exclusion of Ishmael whom he had before by Hagar he was Only Begotten Son in relation to the Promise which is expressed in the following Verse ‖ Heb. 11.18 of whom it was said that in Isaac shall thy seed be called The excellency of Filiation is between those who differ in Degrees but here the Difference is greater than in the whole kind as Heb. 1.4 5. Isaac was a Type of Christ in relation to the Sacrifice but not of the Generation the Father hath begotten his Son thorough the Communication of his Nature and so of a true and proper Generation but not of a Physical or Natural such as Man's and of other animated Creatures but by a Supernatural whereby God begets according to the Truth of his Word for the more Excellent he is that begets so the more Excellent is the Generation as it appears by the Example of every thing that doth generate that which is esteemed a Perfection in natural Generation is in an infinitely most Eminent Degree attributed unto God as to beget that which is like unto himself and by the Communication of his Nature as to the thing it self the Generation besides its being asserted in the Word of God the secundity of God's Nature is a reason for it for it requites a Communication to several Persons according to that of the Prophet * Isa 66.9 shall I cause to bring forth and not bring forth or beget my self saith the Lord as if he had said shall I make others fruitful and be barren my self that in relation to the Son and to the Holy Ghost may be done in two ways after the manner of Spiritual Substances namely begetting the Son by a natural Intellection and by the same Will or Love breathing the Holy Ghost both consubstantial to himself and of the same Nature and Perfection distinguished amongst themselves and one from another only by their personalities and personal Attributes this consideration serves to demonstrate not only the Generation of the Son but also the Procession of the Holy Ghost and consequently the whole Trinity for Scriptures describe Son and Holy Ghost as existing of themselves as the Father working understanding witnessing sending c. taken not only passively which is of Things but actively which is of Persons for it belongs to none
of his Father's Person 'T is in vain that they cavil out of God's words Let us make man in our image and after our likeness for the Question is about Generation and not of Creation God made man that is created him as in that place of Genesis explained in the following Verse but 't is never said that God made but begat his Son as of Adam not that he made but begat Seth in his own likeness after his Image Thus the Son of God is truly and really begotten of the very Substance of the Father and this by Immanence and Communication Heathens feigned a Minerva the Goddess of Wisdom and Prudence to be born ex Jovis cerebro out of Jupiter's Head and Brain a dark Notion of this high Mystery as was their cara deûm soboles magnum Jovis incrementum as expressed by the Poet. The Lord Jesus is called not only * Heb. 1.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the express Image but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Brightness of the Glory of God by a Metaphor taken from the Sun Beams which if the Sun was eternal would be eternal too wherefore in the Nicene Creed is well called God of God Light of Light so not only like but also †Phil. 2.6 equal with God This eternal Generation to be look'd upon with the Eyes of Faith more than of human Reason is first not transient but immanent secondly terminated if we may use the word not in an absolute Existence but in the Subsistence or manner of subsisting for the Essence neither begetteth nor is begotten neither through this Generation is God absolutely constituted but the Son is relatively Thirdly It is eternal without any difference of time so that the Son may not be said begotten and not begotten existent and not existent but always begotten Fourthly The Begetter and begotten are always the same in Nature and in Time or rather Eternity Fifthly Through that same Generation the same Divine Nature is communicated to the Son not in Species but in Number not in part but wholly not to be or exist but to subsist in such a manner Sixthly The same is natural and so simply not voluntary nor involuntary that is necessary but not forced But as to the main thing 't is enough to know that Christ was before he manifested himself in the Flesh for therein he appears to be eternal which Eternity of his we shall have occasion to prove In the Scripture none but the Lord Jesus is in the singular number called God's Son Abraham is called his Friend Moses his Servant and in the Parable of the Vineyard and the Husbandmen * Luk. 20.9 10 c. to whom God under the name of the Lord of the Vineyard sent his Servants whom they beat and wounded then said he I will send my beloved son it may be they will reverence him when they see him but they said this is the heir let us kill him that the inheritance may be ours I say in that Parable where the Lord Jesus spoke of himself and against them as they perceiv'd it v. 19. we may observe what a vast difference he makes between himself and all that came before him who were all but Servants but he gives himself the Character of God's beloved Son whom they ought to have reverenced when they saw him who was the Heir of all things by his Nature and not by any Privilege of Dignity by Favour bestowed upon him as upon Men and Angels * Heb. 1.4 5. Being made so much better than Angels as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they what this Name is is expressed in the next Verse For unto which of the Angels said he at any time thou art my son this day have I begotten thee c. We see the difference of the Sonship a Son not created nor adopted but begotten for that Name comes to him by inheritance as in the Text that is by his own natural Right and Property and not by Grace Then the Lord Jesus is Gods natural Son because called his own and proper Son †Rom. 8.3.32 every one knoweth how those Sons that are naturally begotten by their Parents are called their own Sons and on the contrary those that are not so are not proper Sons but Strangers so that proper and Strangers are so called and distinguished according to Nature only therefore seeing Scripture doth not indifferently call Christ Son but God's own Son thus by this special Attribute distinguishing him from all others it means natural Son and of the same Essence the more because he calls God * John 5.18 his own Father for which cause the Jews would have stoll'd him for they well understood as express'd in the Text how thereby he made himself equal with God thus he is called God's own Son in opposition to adopted Sons one may adopt another to be his Son but can never make him his own natural Son begotten of his Substance and as Christ is God's own Son so is God his own Father then from Eternity or else there had been in time a new relation in God which had not always been that might be called a kind of an Accident so contrary to the simplicity of his Nature and according to this God had within these 1700 Years been made that which he was not before namely Father of his own Son whereby Changeableness is father'd upon him and his Immutability that is an incommunicable Attribute thereby overturned Now in the same Chapter the Apostle to express own Son makes use of another word which fully and clearly doth decide the Question which is Whether the Lord Jesus be properly God's Son for if he be properly so then all improper Applications are out of doors Now the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 used by S. Paul * Rom. 8.32 signifies proper so if the Lord Jesus be God's proper Son we must properly understand and believe him to be such although our shallow Brain can neither conceive in its Thoughts nor express in Words the incomprehensible and unexpressible manner of that Generation which is wonderful †Isai 9.6 as his name is yet we must believe it because God in his word hath declared it to be so The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proper they mis-interpret and do render by special or peculiar as if Christ was God's Son only in a special manner above others but none can be call'd proper Son to any one except he be begotten of his Blood and Substance which being not he may not be called such a one's proper Son Thus they would confound proper and peculiar which two words are very different for one may be a proper Son who hath nothing peculiar above the rest of his natural Brethren for when a Father hath many all are his proper and own Sons begotten of his Substance yet no one may happen to have any thing particular above the rest likewise one may happen upon a special
account to be call'd such a Man's Son yet not be his proper Son thus an adopted though he excel never so much above the rest yet that can never make him to be a proper Son To refute some Cavils of theirs one thing more we are again to take notice of upon this matter how the the word God is in Scripture sometimes taken essentially for the most holy Trinity and sometimes personally for one of the Persons as when 't is said * Acts 20.28 God hath purchased his church with his own blood which is meaned our Saviour the second Person of the Godhead In the first sense must be understood those places of Scripture wherein 't is said The name of the Lord is one and there is none besides him there is but one God and others to the same purpose to shew the Oneness of the Nature which as well as they we do affirm but as to teach well one must distinguish well so for want of observing this Rule that which is spoken of the Essence of God they mis-apply it to the Persons and so make a Confusion between things to be distinguished We already proved how the Unity of Nature doth not take away the Trinity of Persons nor the Plurality of Persons destroy the Unity of Nature which Mistake of theirs doth also hold in the Mystery of the Incarnation or of the Word being made Flesh and about our Saviour's Person in whom they confound the Natures so that which is spoken of his Humanity they mis-apply to his Divinity The second Argument whereby Christ is proved to be God's natural Son is drawn from the word only begotten which for greater confirmation is attributed to Christ in several * John 1.18 places wherefore in Scripture Christ is called the Son of God to shew he is the only begotten for that 's the signification of the word and †Heb. 1.2 vers 5. Paul's interpretation of it for he saith Such is the Son to whom only God saith Thou art my son this day have I begotten thee and other places of Scripture By the words God's only begotten Son do all mean Christ only The Adversaries would have him to be called so only in a special manner above the rest as we already have taken notice of in the instance about Isaac whereunto here we shall add that of Solomon which also they made use of called say they * Prov. 4.3 only begotten in the sight of his mother but they must not go about to impose upon us for in the original the word begotten is not in but only which in our Bibles is according to the sense of the place explained by beloved only beloved one may be the only yet not only begotten Son when of many Children one alone is remaining and the rest are dead as to Isaac we already observed he was the only begotten in relation to Sarab by Promise but Christ is so called God's only begotten Son that it was never said to any one else Thou art my Son c. whence we may conclude him so to be God's Son as to be the only begotten of him that is according to his Nature in the word he is properly and absolutely called the only begotten * John 1.14 We beheld his glory as of the only begotten of the Father the Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as is not comparative as only denoting a likeness but as Chrysostomus observes well is expressive of the truth as being really as if one willing to describe a Royal State and Carriage of a King should say as that is in a manner becoming and proper for a King and farther the Evangelist addeth v. 18. The only begotten son which is in the besom of the Father he hath declared him where Christ is called the only begotten 〈◊〉 it being his own proper Name signifying how besides him there is no true natural Son of God again ‖ John 3.16 God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son and * 1 John 4.9 God sent his only begotten son into the world See what a care the Spirit of God hath taken to confirm and make that Truth known how Christ is properly and absolutely God's only begotten Son now he is absolutely only begotten that is not only so called lookt upon and loved as such but that is really so and indeed we know our blessed Saviour is call'd †Joh. 20.17 Brother of his Disciples and of ‖ Heb. 2.17 Believers but not in a proper and strict sense The relation of Brotherhood hath a great latitude for among the Jews Persons belonging to any branch of a Family to a Tribe or to any of the Tribes were call'd Brethren * Gal. 1.19 James and John were call'd the Lord's Brothers and in another sense our Saviour calls †Mat. 12.50 his brother his sister and his mother whosoever shall do the will of God He is our Brother in that he hath taken upon him our human Nature all Men are Brothers in human Nature but Adoption cannot be the ground of his as 't is of our being call'd the Sons of God he is never called adopted as we are neither can he be adopted with us seeing we are adopted in him we are the Branches of the wild Olive-Tree that have been grafted in him who is the true natural Olive-Tree and thereby are become Members of his mystical Body How can our blessed Saviour be called God's only begotten Son if he be not partaker of the same Nature And the more to enforce this in that sâ—â—e Chapter and Verse John 18. 't is added which is in the bosom of the Father can he be in and from the Bosom of the Father and not be of the same Nature All other Children of God are made but this is begotten and only begotten none but he is properly begotten Our Third Argument is taken out of our Saviour's Question to the Pharisees * Mat. 12.41 41 4â— 44. What think ye of Christ whose son is he they say unto him the son of David he saith unto them how then doth David in spirit call him Lord By this way of arguing he shewed how in him besides human Nature there was another namely the divine according to which he by no means might be called David's Son but David's Lord which to the Pharisees proved an unanswerable Argument for upon this same 't is positively said v. 46. and no man was able to answer him a word one would think this should also stop the mouth of Socinians Indeed there the Lord proposeth the Question about the Nature of Christ or the Son whose natural Son he was Whereunto the Pharisees returned an imperfect Answer for only they said he was the Son of David but the Lord Jesus out of Scripture which they could not deny concluded that since he was by David's confession his Lord he must in him have another Nature besides human according to which he might not be called
many other things blasphemously spake they against him and Paul what before his Conversion he said or acted against he for that same calls himself ‖ 1 Tim. 1.13 a Blasphemer and when he made others to do as he did that he calls * Acts 26.11 2 Tim. 3.2 Act. 18.6 he compell'd them to blaspheme I believe the Spirit of God pointed at Socinians among others when he said by the Apostle that in the last days men shall be blasphemers as were those that opposed Paul when he preached Christ wherein they blasphemed We have many Heads more and abundance of Texts of Scripture to prove the Lord Jesus to be true natural Son of God begotten of the Father from all Eternity and these places we in the following part of our Discourse shall have occasion to make use of one of the fullest and plainest we shall begin with afforded by John †Joh. 1.1 In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God Which to corrupt the Heresiarch Socinus used his utmost wicked Endeavours the word is said to have been in the beginning not as if he then had begun to be but that then he was existing and so from all Eternity before any Creatures were made there was no time only Eternity Christ is call'd the Wisdom of God to shew he as well as the Father is from everlasting it were Blasphemy to think that ever there was a time when God wanted his Wisdom which speaking of himself saith ‖ Prov. 8.23 I was set up from everlasting and God by him manifested himself in the World in the Creation thereof That Christ the Word is eternal that is he was before his Incarnation before the Virgin Mary and before the Gospel began to be preached it appears out of John's Evidence In the beginning was the word out of which both his Deity and Eternity are proved the other Evangelists do write of Christ's Humanity in relation to his Birth or temporal Generation when he took upon him our human Nature and in time was born of the blessed Virgin Mary for in her Womb the word was made flesh and his Body therein formed out of her Substance without company of Man But John falls immediately upon his Divinity and calls him the Word for he was the Davar promised unto the Fathers now this was in the beginning that is before any thing was when things began to be made he then was when the World was not yet made afterwards he indeed was made Flesh but had a pre-existing Being Socinians cavil that by the beginning is meant the preaching of the Gospel which is clearly false for that doth not answer the scope of the Evangelist whose design is to prove the Word to be God which to do he draws his Argument from his Being in the beginning so by the word Beginning that must be understood which concludeth the Word to be God Their Interpretation agreeth with that of Arius That time had been when the Word was not and because it is in that sense taken in some places * Mark 1.1 Luke 1.2 for a temporal Beginning that is the time of his Incarnation it doth not follow that it is so to be taken in S. John for Mark begins his Book with these words The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ the Son of God he writes the Gospel for he is an Evangelist and in his very first words he gives the Contents of what he is writing but herein the Person of Christ is not immediately concerned he with other Evangelists gives an account of his Humanity but John speaks of his Divinity he alludes to Moses who had given the History of the Creation and begins his Gospel in the words wherewith Moses began his Book of Genesis In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth and he his Gospel In the beginning was the word But our Evangelist is not satisfied to say the word was with God but addeth in the next Verse the same was in the beginning with God and so v. 3. he falls upon speaking of the Creation for all things were made by him c. we know how in Scripture the word Beginning as well as several others hath different Significations but in this place such a sense destroys the Analogy of Faith and contradicteth those Texts which affirm the Eternity of God's Son which hereafter we shall have occasion to mencion as that of the Prophet †Isai 53.8 Who shall declare his generation 't is ab impossibili as if he had said no Man can declare it and elsewhere under the Type of Solomon 't is said * Psal 72.17 his name shall endure for ever c. not only of an Eternity à parte post but also à parte ante as without ending so without beginning as expressed in the Prophetical Psalm of Christ's Kingdom and Priesthood †Psalm 110.3 from the womb of the morning thou hast the dew of his youth And now I am upon this first Verse of the first Chapter of St. John I shall observe three Things much to our purpose the First that the word Beginning absolutely spoken doth in Scripture relate to the Creation or beginning of the World out of several places so well known in Scripture I shall now only quote one and more hereafter as I shall have occasion for hath it not been told you from the beginning have ye ‖ Isa 40.21 not understood from the foundations of the earth here by Beginning is signified the Foundation of the Earth The second Thing I observe is this the Word was with God here is a personal Distinction between God and the word who was with God as if he had said resided till he was made Flesh and in respect to this Incarnation he is said to have come down from the Father The third Thing observed is this the word was God the Person called the Word as it appears by the Article is the Subject here called and asserted to be God that is in the same essential Sense as the God with whom the word Was is said to be God that is by Nature for as in this Verse but one Word though thrice named is to be understood so but one true God in Nature though thrice named is meaned in the place Thus the Essentiality and Eternity of the word who is the Son with the Father are here evidently set forth but this is more at large set down in the next Reason But a second Reason is that John makes the Word equal with God when he saith the word was with God which hath a relation to his Eternity it was always with God for here not only he distinguisheth the Persons but makes the Word equal with God the Father he saith the Word that was in the beginning was one and God the Father whom he was with another the Persons of the Son and of the Father were distinct indeed but in making them
Words and Mind of those whom he discoursed with What could in so serious a Matter and of so high a Concernment as this is to make him alter his method and differ from himself when his main Design was all along to make himself truly known for what he was yet here as much as in them lays they make him say nothing to the purpose of the Jew's Question and Objection as they attempt to rob him of his Divinity so they would of that Heavenly Wisdom Gentleness and Readiness to do good which ever appeared in his whole Carriage here not only they make him not to speak pertinently to the Question but also they so mangle his answer that Men cannot tell what to make of it Is the Etymology or Derivation of Abraham's Name to any purpose here The Jews look'd upon it as very absurd that Christ so young should have been in Abraham's time the Lord doth plainly and to the purpose answer before Abraham was I am and with this very strong Asseveration by him used only in Matters of the highest Concernment Verily verily I say unto you not once but twice Verily now we know him to be †Rev. 3.14 Amen Amen the true and faithful witness Their Brains are fruitful in idle Inventions for upon this place they say one thing more wherein Arminians joyn with them How this before Abraham was I am is to be understood of a Divine Constitution or Pre-ordination that is in the fore-sight and fore-knowledge of God Christ was before Abraham but not really so in Existence but Christ here saith not he was fore-ordained but that he was and existed I am we deny not Christ to have been fore-ordained for * 1 Pet. 1.20 Peter saith he was but we deny that to be the Ground of his Divinity or that in this place Christ saith so when the Question is about his Deity being pre-ordained of God is no Prerogative of Christ for it is †Rom. 8.29 common to all believers Is it not ridiculous for one to say he is older than others because he was fore-ordained of God before they were born This I shall conclude with one thing more I must say to it how our Saviour in this place saith clearly and positively before Abraham was I am the Jews understood how thereby he made himself to have been before Abraham which could not be upon that account of his human Birth our Saviour doth not go about to shew they were mistaken which if it had been the Evangelist would have spoken of on the contrary he did run the hazard of being stoned and indeed he not only is before Abraham but also ‖ Colos 1.17 before all things and Persons Adam not excepted One place more I shall speak of and then shall have done with this Head I am * Rev. 1.8 Alpha and Omega the beginning and the ending saith the Lord which is which was and which is to come the Almighty As before Alpha there is no other Letter in the Green Alphabet which Language the Book is written in so before the Son of God there is nothing and as of all things that are Christ existed the first so he shall exist the last and herein the Metaphor doth exactly fit and is explained by the following words the beginning and the ending which though v. 4. be spoken of the Father yet it hinders not but is here attributed unto the Son neither is there any thing in the whole Verse but what is adapted to the Son as well as to the Father as to the Name Lord How often is the Son in the New Testament called by that Name As to the expressions which is which was and which is to come taken out of the * Isa 44.6 Prophet which are the explanation of the word Jehovah they belong to Christ as we have before proved the Name doth and so doth the Thing for in a place already quoted the Signification is applied to the Lord Jesus Christ the same yesterday to day and for ever he that is named Alpha the beginning and the first and which is may well be called he which was and he who is called Omega the end and the last may also be well called he that is to come which is properly and in a special manner spoken of Christ as it appears out of this †Heb. 10.37 yet a little while and he that shall come will come and this is spoken of him in ‖ Rev. 17. and 3.11 and 16.15 and 22.7 12 20. several places of this Book Besides that in this whole Chapter the Apostle's Design is to describe the Son not the Father as it doth appear by the foregoing and following Verses so 't is not likely he would in this v. 8. describe the Father only and seeing in this first Chapter he was to dispose the seven Churches to receive the Epistles by the Son to be directed to them with that Submission and awful Reverence as became them so to prepare their Spirits it was a due Course to make an ample and glorious Description of the Son for the Father doth not immediatly in his Person shew himself to or speak with Men but the Son doth therefore there is a kind of Necessity that he should make his own Description seeing therefore how the Words and the Things of the Description do belong to Christ why should not we say that the Description is adapted for him This Interpretation of ours is natural with the words and scope of the place it neither altereth taketh away or addeth thereunto as their Interpretation doth with wresting forcing and restraining it to the Person of the Father when the Son absolutely without any limitation or restriction calls himself Alpha and Omega beginning and ending first and last but it seems they would teach the Spirit of God how to speak though nothing can be said more fully and plainly than this is he doth not say only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 am but joyns the Person 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I so when in the several Epistles †Rev. 2.7.17.26 to him that overcometh he promises to give to eat of the tree of life and of the hidden manna Chap. 2.5.12.21 the white stone and the new name with power over the nations c. and * Chap. 22.17 the water of life freely to him that is thirsty he doth not send them to the Father but offereth it himself as to the †John 4.10 Woman of Samaria nay in his state of Humiliation he calls Men ‖ Chap. 7.37 38. to come to himself much more after his exaltation and glorisition But to conclude this Matt. 11.28 and at the same time shew how this is simply spoken of Christ not only in this 8 verse but also in the 11 and 17 it appears out of the 12 and 13 where he turned to see the voice that spake with him and in the midst of the seven Candleiticks he saw one like
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
as a demonstration of what he was and a proof of his Divinity which was the same question between him and the Jews as is now between us and the Socinians who though they impiously deny him to be true God by Nature yet must own him to be a very rational Man for indeed his works made him equal with the Father therefore he saith My Father worketh hitherto John 5.17 19.33.34 36. and I work and to the end they should not mistake his meaning as if the Father did work as God and he only as Man to shew there was no disparity between his Father's works and his own he affirmeth That whatsoever the Father doth that also doth the Son likewise and though John was a great man among them and had born witness to the Truth how he was the Son of God wherein by the by more and more to shew who he was and that he wanted no such evidences as being far above them he declared But I receive not testimony from man but these things I say that ye may be saved He said it only out of compassion and to condescend to their weakness for he had a more considerable Evidence I have saith he greater witness than that of John and what 's that the works which the father hath given me to finish the same works that I do bear witness of me that the father hath sent me And upon all occasions he doth appeal to these works John 10.32 37 38. Many good works have I shewed you from my father for which of those works do ye stone me And a few verses lower he offereth to be judged by his works If I do not the works of my Father believe me not but if I do though ye believe not me believe the works And to shew how all this tended to prove his Divinity he saith at the latter end of the verse That ye may know and believe that the father is in me and I in him And even when he was alone with his Disciples after he had eaten the Passeover he taketh notice how their not believing his works was a sign that they hated both him and the father And those very works which thorough hardness of heart and unbelief they would not be convinced by should at last be evidences to condemn them John 15.22 24. For if I had not come and spoken unto them they had had no sin but now they have no cloak for their sin and If I had not done among them the works which no other man did they had not had sin O the works of Christ though sometimes they are not attended with a convincing shall at last have both a convincing and condemning power against those who refuse to own him to be one with the Father and the Father to be in him and he in the Father equally with him God blessed for ever Now these works are of several kinds attributed to Christ first in general what things so ever the Father doth Joh. â— 19 these also doth the Son likewise This is absolutely and simply said without any limitation and restriction whatsoever and of whatsoever nature they be and this he doth without any let or opposition to hinder him according to the working whereby he is able to subdue all things unto himself all things without exception Phil. 3.21 Then divine works are in particular attributed to the Son as Election for the Elect at the last day to be gathered from the four Winds Matth. 24 31. from one end of Heaven to the other are called his Elect and Election is an act immanent so are also the acts transient which are of two sorts First of Nature Secondly of Grace Of Nature it is double either Creation or Providence which is Preservation Creation is an incommunicable work of God the power whereof he never imparted to any Creature but 't is proper to Christ who hath been declared the Son of God with power in those works that are truly divine and proper only to God as Creation is Isal 44.24 Job 9.6 7 8. c. I am the Lord that maketh all things by my self which Job testifieth in several particulars and this is given as a characteristical mark to distinguish the true God from all false Gods Jer. 10.11 The Gods that have not made the Heavens and the Earth they shall perish from the Earth and from under the Heavens But that very same distinguishing character is by the Apostles attributed unto the Lord Jesus All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made John 1.3 This is asserted first by an universal absolute Affirmative All things were made by him then by an universal absolute Negative vers 10 Without him was not any thing made that was made According to all rules nothing can be more positively and clearly exprest than this is all things even the world that knew him not and what other world 's there are Heb. 11.3 for the worlds were framed by the word of God in which place the name word is the same as by St. John is used to signifie the Son of God who is also called the Power of God and the Wisdom of God 1 Cor. 1.24 Psal â—36 5 Colos 1.16 and by his Power and Wisdom made the Heavens yea and all things visible and invisible under which two heads are comprehended all things whatsoever Bodies and Spirits such as Angels and to shew an harmony between the Old and New Testaments in that as well as in this about the work of Creation the name word is made use of Psal 33.6 for by the word of the Lord were the Heavens made and to shew how all the three Persons of the Holy Trinity had a hand in 't 't is added and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth Gen. 1. This relates to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dixit God said and it was so and the name Word is by St. John interpreted to be the true God even personally Now as in Genesis and in the Psalm God made all by his Word so in John all things were made by the word and as in the Psalm 't is expresly said Psal 33.6 by the Word of the Lord were the heavens made in a literal not allegorical Sence why should it not in John be understood of the natural created and not of spiritual things Since he speaks of things in the Creation long before not of things to be made hereafter at the preaching of the Gospel so that of Gen. 1. and Psal 33. with John 1. are three Texts parallel relating to the same thing Now the same manner of expression deuoteth the same thing The word used in the Creation was not Corporal because before there was any Creature but spiritual and so God and that word was not directed to Angels but to things themselves for God called them by his word that they should be whereunto answereth
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
by our Saviour belonging only to his Humane Nature which may be due and necessary from one in nature and quality inferiour to another but it was also an undue and meerly voluntary obedience which may be rendred by an Equal and some times by a Superiour as we read when Joshua said Josn 10.12 13. Sun stand thou still upon Gibeon and thou Moon in the valey of Ajalon so the Sun stood he was obeyed but there is in it more than this the Sun of himself could not stand nor alter or stop his Course a Superiour power to do 't was required and indeed we find that in the beginning of the verse 't is said then spook Joshua unto the Lord in the day when c. Sun stand thou still so let it be spoken with that awful reverence and to an infinite Majesty in some kind we may see how in this case the Superiour was pleased to obey the Inferiour so we may say a sort of obedience may belong to Divine Nature as when God commanded the World should be created and it was performed by his Son of this nature is Christ's obedience as spoken of by the Apostle concerning Christ Phil. 2.6 7 8. who being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God he humbled himself This was a voluntary obedience for he was not humbled but humbled himself he was not made but made himself of no reputation thus the obedience is valued according to the dignity of the person which obeyeth To be in the form of God is to be God for forma dat esse rei the form is the nature of the thing and makes it to be what it is But what this man granted before he is now willing to take away when he would have this worship not to be terminated in Christ but from him to pass unto God so this is but a relative worship Thus Papists say they worship images but they are mistaken for though God hath exalted him it doth not follow that Adoration should be only Transitory and not fixed So God hath exalted the Kings of the Earth but the Civil Worship or respect rendered unto the King is rendred unto a Man but not in the capacity of a Man but is terminated in him as he is a King so when Christ Man is adored he is not so under the notion of Man but as he is God of the same nature with the Father and that he is in the Father and the Father in him the Father may well be worshiped in him and he in the Father but making them as they do to be of different natures I see no cause why they may not be worshiped asunder one from another which yet doth but rend and divide the object of our worship with this new as they call it way of worship to adore God in a Man But they must say what they understand by him for both the Prophet and the Apostle make use of the word Is it one or a different person named by them if the same then Christ is the one God if not the same then the Apostle hath not well explained the Prophet If in the Psalm Christ be not spoken of but only the God of Israel of a nature altogether different then in the Epistle the words are made use of to no purpose for therein the design is to prove how Christ must be worshiped by all Angels Now he doth not answer his purpose when to prove one who is not the God Israel ought to be adored he brings a Text which commands the Angels to adore him only who is the God of Israel a great disparagement indeed not only to the Author of the Epistle but to the Spirit of God which directed him he saith in that worship exhibited unto Christ the Lord Jesus represents the person of God the Father how as an Actor upon the Stage doth represent a King After this rate Christ with all the worship given him would be without blasphemy let it be spoken but a Stage God If to reign doth signifie the Kingdom of Christ why shall not also the name Jehovah who reigneth belong to his person If he hath the thing why should he not have the name also Christs Kingdom is therein described Jehovah is the King why should not Christ be Jehovah which if he be it must be properly for Christ nor no one else was ever figuratively called Jehovah and the Kingdom of Christ under the name of God is described then if Christ be not God Jehovah then 't is Jehovah that indeed doth represent Christ so he must be the Type of Christ thus they unavoidably run into absurdities but in very deed Christ doth not act the part of the Father but his own He doth act the part of three persons upon the account of his three several offices of a Prophet of a Priest and of a King he therein exerciseth his own office and not that of the Father he doth what belongeth to him and not to others Joh. 17.10 and as all things the Father hath are his so the Kingdom Throne Scepter Power Majesty Ministry and Subjects are all his if he received the Kingdom from the Father he received it as only begotten Son and Heir of all things not as of anothers but as his own wherefore he doth not reign as a Servant or a Minister of the Farther so then when he reigneth he doth not represent the Father's person but his own not as his Vicar or Lieutenant but as God equal with him The first part of the verse Matth. 1.20 Luke 2.9 13. Matth. 28.2 5. and again when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world sheweth how at his first coming into the world he was worshiped and served by Angels for his Conception Birth and Resurrection were published by Angels and then it demonstrates there are two persons one that bringeth the other that is brought in the one is the Father the other the Son the first commanding the last to be adored for he saith not worship me but him There is an Emphasis in the word first begotten simply spoken to be understood of every Creature Col. 1.15 for 't is very just he should be worshiped by Angels as his Creatures and indeed in Scripture I cannot find any truth more clearly and fully proved than this is he was worshiped not only by Angels but also by Devils Mark 5.6 7. the Legion in the Body of the man possessed But as we proved the Lord Jesus ought to be worshiped by Angels so we now must shew he ought to be by men and the place is this That all men should honour the Son even as they honour the Father he that honoureth not the Son John 5.23 honoureth not the Father that sent him To understand the place well we must go up higher and take notice how from verse 17. to 23. our Saviour speaks of his equality with the Father as well understood by the
by the Prophet was foretold should come to his Temple how the Temple is the place for Adoration and the Lord of the Temple is to be adored and the worship proper for God is due to him We are equally baptized in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost for in the words of the Institution and form of Administration there is no other difference but of order the names are jointly used without any sign of distinction as to Nature or Power all three are therein called upon there being in them an equal Majesty and Authority I read how in the heavenly Jerusalem Rev. 21.22 the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the Temple of it yet but one Temple as they are but one God But that men were in the practice as by the institution they ought to be baptized in the name of Christ it appears out of what Peter said to the new Converts be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ Acts 2.38 where we see he takes notice only of Jesus Christ not to exclude either Father or Holy Ghost but strongly to insinuate into their minds and hearts how Christ was their God Lord and Saviour which to Preach and perswade was his great end and this he would have them to make open profession of in their being baptized in his name whereby he shews the necessity and comprehensiveness of Christ's name used in the administration of that holy Sacrament and the end thereof is for the remission of sins that is to obtain pardon of sins yea and to receive the gift of the holy ghost So when the Centurion's family was baptized Acts 10.43 chap. 19.5 1 Cor. 1.13 't is said only they were baptized in the name of the Lord. The name signifies the authority of the Lord which in this case Paul was so much concerned for upon the occasion of the contentions that were among the Corinthians which makes him so sharply expostulate with them were ye baptized in the name of Paul This point must needs be one of the highest importance in our Religion seeing he is so earnestly concerned as to say I thank God I baptized none of you c. and he gives his reason for 't lest any should say I baptized in my name Whence we may conclude that to baptize in the name of Christ is one of the most fundamental points of Christian Religion and I think it a rule and practice highly commendable in those Churches where in baptism the word name is prefixed before every one of the three persons thus I baptize thee in the name of the Father in the name of the Son and in the name of the Holy Ghost distinctly pronounced to prevent the abuse of some wretched Socinians which by reason of the affinity which in some Languages the words name and none or not have do confound them and to baptize in the name of the Father not of the Son not of the Holy Ghost Then it is Essential in baptism to have it administred in the name of the Son as well as of the Father wherefore John who by reason of this office is called Baptist did it not in his own name on the contrary declared himself but a Minister when he pointed at Christ and said I indeed baptize you with water but he that comes after me and is mighter than I he shall baptize you with the holy ghost and with fire as if he had said his Servant can administer only the outward sign but the thing and grace signified he alone can give Hence I conclude that Christ in our being baptized in his name is by us therein worshiped as our God equally with the Father Here they make a difficulty because 't is said the Fathers were baptized unto Moses in the Cloud but that signifieth not to be baptized in the name and authority of Moses but to be settled in the faith to be given to Gods word spoken by the Ministery of Moses Exod. 14.31 Joh. 5.45 46. so they are said to have believed the Lord and his Servant Moses Thus our Saviour saith Moses in whom ye trust and believe so they have Moses and the Prophets that is the Law and Doctrine of Moses When God saith a thing tho but once we ought to believe him as if he had confirmed it many times because in some places things are said which seemed to have been left out in others Another particular is we hope and trust in Christ Matth. 12.21 We hope in Christ Isa 11.10 Rom. 15.12 Ephs 1.12 13. 1 Cor. 15.19 in his name and in his name shall the gentiles trust as it had been Prophesied of long before in that day there shall be a root of Jesse which shall stand for an ensign of the people to it shall the Gentiles seck hope and trust in him for mercy As 't is by St. Paul explained in him shall the gentiles trust among others such were the Ephesians for saith the Apostle to them That we should be to the praise of his glory who first trusted in Christ if we must believe the same Apostle not only in this life but also in another to come we must and do hope in Christ or else we are of all men most miserable that is we cannot he happy except we hope in Christ for indeed that hope is the ground of all our Comforts and in that hope whereby we manifest our dependency upon him we own him to be he from whom we expect all manner of help and relief in our necessities for in him are all our Springs we hope in him for all and from him we expect all manner of good and therein we worship him as the Author and Fountain of all the good we receive and hope for now to trust in him is not only our duty but also our blessedness and happiness Psal 2.12 for blessed are all they that put their trust in him which is spoken of Christ the Messiah Now if he was a meer man far from being Blessed they would be Cursed for a dreadful Curse is thundred against any that trusteth in man Thus saith the Lord cursed be the man that trusteth in man Jerem. 17.6 and maketh flesh his arm and whose heart departeth from the Lord. These three several expressions signifie the same and go together for to depend upon the Arm of Flesh for Wisdom Strength and Help is to must in Man and whosoever trusteth in Man his heart departeth from the Lord it is incompatible to trust in God and in Man and the heart is not to be divided one of the two it must adhere to for to both it is impossible Wherefore in this same place as we see a Curse against Man-Trusters so there is a blessing for those who trust in God verse 7 Blessed is the man that trusteth in the Lord and whose hope the Lord is Here again we meet with detestable Socinus and his jugglings God saith he proclaimeth a Curse
against Man that trusteth in Man not in every Man or upon every account but against him that trusteth in Man not appointed by God to give help and relief that is which is not endued with divine gifts but if to be endued with divine gifts had been a sufficient ground to secure men from this Curse then we might have trusted in Moses Elias Daniel c. persons endued with divine and extraordinary gifts but God here makes it a general rule which admitteth of no exception for he simply saith in man it is a most abominable presumption for a man so often to attempt to make the spirit of God to speak in his own Language but suppose there be a man appointed of God to help yet we are not to trust in him for though a man hath divine Gifts and Power yet ceaseth not to be but still remains a man and if God speaketh truth whoever trusteth in man departeth from God though we should happen to know a man endued with divine power and appointed of God to the end he should help us yet we might not trust in him which if we do we become liable altogether to this Sentence of the Curse of God In the third place we do and must believe in him which not to do is sin We believe in Christ Joh. 16.8 9. 1 Joh. 3.23 Chap. 5.1 5 10. yet such an one as the Holy Ghost reproveth the world for It is our duty for there is a precept for it and this is his commandment that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ which is a sign we are born of God and whereby we overcome the world and have the witness in our selves for this end God sent him into the world 1 Joh. 3.16 17 18 36. that we should believe in him that we should not be condemned nor perish but be saved and have everlasting life now to believe is to do the work of God for this is the work of God that ye believe on him whom he hath sent Chap. 6.29 all our hope for glory is grounded upon the promise which is not perfectly made sure to us till it be sealed now the Seal is the Holy Spirit of Promise which is the earnest of our inheritance untill the redemption of the purchased possession but we cannot be sealed in Christ with the spirit till we have believed Eph. 1.13 14. for so saith the Apostle in whom also after that ye believed ye were sealed c. after and not before No man is the true proper object of our faith for to believe in one is to put in him his whole trust and confidence which we may not in any meer man whatsoever so though we believe in Christ except we believe him to be God our faith is vain and not true This makes the Apostle write his Epistles to whom and unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God Joh. 5 13. but for what end doth he write those things that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God reduplicative as he is Son of God true natural Son of God by whom all things were created in him ought our faith to be terminated for if he was only a medium and not the Object of it then we should believe in him only Ministerially not Principally but in Faith there is no subordination for 't is a Theological Virtue which as it comes only from God so it hath God alone for its object it cannot have two such different and infinitely distant Objects as are the Creator and the Creature To believe in Christ was the chief thing which the Apostles ever exhorted men to do For indeed 't is the whole end and substance of the Gospel but not as an imperfect Christ a meer man but as the true Son of God of the same nature this thing he always commanded men to do namely to believe in him about the time of his leaving this world he charged his Disciples to do 't whereby they should find a present remedy and comfort to those troubles of heart that might happen to befall them this he doth with a great Emphasis he doth not barely say believe in me Joh. 17.1 but he goes higher to shew what manner of Faith they ought to repose in him Ye believe in God believe also in me have in me the same Faith as you have in God if here the word God be taken for the person of the Father the Lord Jesus maketh himself equal with him seeing he will have us to believe in him no less than in the Father if the word God be Essentially taken then he doth affirm himself to be God while he attributes unto himself the same faith which all Believers have and repose in God alone for this fiducial honour God doth not communicate to another no other reason can be assigned why the Son would have us to believe in him as in the Father but because in Nature Power and Honour he is equal with the Father and consequently the primary object of Faith that in matter of worship he owned himself such it doth clearly appear in some instances the first of the man in the Gospel whose eyes he had opened whom our Saviour far from forbidding him to worship him he encouraged to it not under the notion of Son of Man but of Son of God for he asked dost thou believe on the Son of God Chap. 9.35 36 37 38. The man answered who is he Lord Christ replied thou hast both seen him and it is he that talketh with thee and the man said Lord I believe and he worshiped him If he had not been the true Son of â—od by nature I maintain this had been Idolatry which he was no savourer to The other instance is of Thomas who for calling Christ my Lord and my God in the Sense he did after his conviction that he was actually raised from the dead had spoken blasphemy in case he had not truly been Lord and God which far from being reproved for it what our Saviour after said unto him and the manner how he said it import an approbation of what Thomas had said and done and at another time all the Disciples together did perform the same for they came and held him by the feet Matth. 28.9 Luke 24.52 Act. 10.43 Luke 24.47 We pray to Christ and worshiped him In few words whosoever believeth on Christ shall have remission of his sins and he commanded his Disciples that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations Now we come to the fourth part of that religious worship which is due and paid unto him Namely Prayer this floweth from the foregoing for every Prayer should be made in Faith according to what the Apostle saith Rom. 10.10 how shall they call on him in whom they have not believed That to call upon and pray to God is a duty by men to be performed is
will but the will of him that sent me my Doctrine in not mine but his that sent me he that receiveth me receiveth not me but him that sent me he that believeth in me believeth not in me but in him that sent me all this to condescend to the Hypotheses of the Jews and the opinion they had of him namely that he was a meer man but seeing he was not come of himself but was sent by the Father he thereby would intimate unto them how they ought to look upon him to be more than a man since he had a being before he was born amongst them and was sent by the Father whereby they all understood well enough how he meant and so called himself the Son of God This Argument did his Apostles after his ascension so strongly and so often prosecute to prove him to be the true proper and natural Son of God Thus we see that as the first Person the Father is in relation to the second the Son called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so also the second Person is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Joh. 5.18 Rom. 8.32 proper or own Son as the other is proper and own Father and to shew this is not a Physical but Superphysical or Supernatural Generation not a partial communication of corporeal Substance but a spiritual one of an indivisible Essence therefore 't is called wisdom and understanding Prov. 8.1 Joh. 1.14 Col. 1.15 Heb. 1.6 and the word So this second Person is called the image of the first of the same Essence and Essential perfection in relation to this eternal generation called not only the first born of every Creature so no Creature himself but also absolutely the first born And he being also called the only begotten it sheweth that to him alone doth belong the generation we speak of he is the only begotten of the Substance of the Father and the first begotten not as if the Father begat any after but because he begat none before He is also called the Image and the Brightness of his Fathers Glory because the glory of the Father is expressed in the Son Another weighty Text about this matter is of the same Apostle who saith Looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ Tit. 2.13 Not only God but the great God the Infinite Being that is of Infinite Nature and Power for as life when attributed to God signifieth Immortality Wealth and Riches all Sufficiency Age Eternity and Strength Omnipotency so doth greatness Immensity This Text all Expositors whether Greek or Latin Ambrosius excepted did unanimously quote as formal and clear against Arrians The word Epiphany or glorious appearing is in no place of the New Testament attributed to any but to the Son and this glory is not in respect of Christ for he hath it already but in relation to the manifestation thereof unto us These expressions the great God and our Saviour is referred not to two persons but only to one as that wherein 't is said Ephes 1.3 the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ which is the idiom of the Greek Tongue seeing here is but one article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the great God and Saviour it doth clearly demonstrate it to be spoken only of one person for both predicates are referred to the same Subject as we have it so in other places as first by the commandment of God our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ 1 Tim. 1.1 the same person Jesus Christ is our Lord Saviour and God who verse 11. is called the Blessed God Tim. 1.3 3.4 so he is called God our Saviour Now here the same person is spoken of as in these other places so he that is our Saviour the proper title of the Lord Jesus is the great God Besides that as I already observed what is said of his glorious appearing gives a true Character of his person for thereby is meant his coming to judge the world at the last day and that this glorious appearing is meant of Jesus Christ 't is clearly demonstrated out of 2 Thes 2.8.1 Tim. 6.14 and 2 Tim. 4.1 8. To what I have said already how the Apostle by the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ speaks only of one person I shall add that this is the stile of Scripture in other Texts as well as in this as for instance this To the acknowledgment of the mystery of God and of the Father Celos 2.2 and of Christ after their way of interpreting here the Father is one person and God another so the Father is not God no more than Christ and the Father must differ from God as much as Christ doth from the Father So here three different persons must be asserted Take notice how in this place the copulative particle and which they would have to denote different things or persons is here after the word God and in the other after the great God so that I see no reason if in that of Titus the great God and Saviour Jesus Christ be different persons why in this God and the Father should not be so too This and many other difficulties might easily be removed if men would but give God glory to the acknowledgment of the truth how Christ is the great God and Saviour and the Father is God which name in this place to the Colos is taken essentially but the persons of Father and Son are named to the end that the hearts of Believers might be comforted being knit together in love and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding to the acknowledgment of the mystery For all these are the words of the Text for certainly 't is a matter of unspeakable comfort when we are to come to God whereof the Father is the Spring and first Person to hear Christ the Mediator named thorough whom in our approaches to the Throne of Grace we hope to obtain Mercy and find Grace to help in time of need These deduced out of Scriptures and the reasons thereupon grounded to avoid Prolixity I have only pointed at though they might admit of great enlargements Some thing more there is remaining which must not be omitted as being very material I mean the Texts wherein our Saviour speaks of his coming down from and going up again to Heaven whereupon we must observe how the coming or sending of God's own Son doth not signifie any local motion from Heaven to Earth but a manifestation of him in the flesh God sent his own Son out of his Bosom without our Counsel we desired it not we inquired not after it much less deserved it I must not omit to take notice of a false inference they make out of the Text quoted just before wherein our Saviour is called the first born of every Creature whence they would conclude him to be a Creature when the true inference is this that he was born before any thing was created seeing he
in the Firmament But to shew the falshood of their Assertion that the Son is not the most high God let us consider the following things The Angel said to the Virgin He shall be great Luk. 1.32 upon every account and absolutely so according to the Character long before given of him by the Prophet and Son of the highest that is of the true God v. 35 compared with v. 76 Isa 9.6 and so according to that Divine Nature the highest himself it ought to be observed how the word of the Angel he shall be called the Son of the Highest is the same as used by the Prophet His name shall be called wonderful Counsellor the mighty God c. As in the Prophet by being called is understood â—e shall really be so it must be in the Evangelist he shall be manifested owned and really be Thus Zecharias said of John And thou child shalt be called really and truly be the Prophet of the highest and when he spoke thus he was filled with the Holy Ghost and prophecy'd v. 67 as Elizabeth was when she said of the blessed Virgin Whence is this to me that the Mother of my Lord should come to me v. 41 43. How could he according to the flesh be her Lord before he was born In the second place seeing I already proved Jesus Christ to be Jehovah it necessarily follows he is the most high God Psal 33.18 for he whose name alone is Jehovah is the most high over all the earth Also I proved him to be he whom the People provoked in the Wilderness and Scripture calls him the most high whom they provoked in the wilderness The proper Son of God is God the Son of the Highest is the Highest And the words of Psal 107.11 Psal 78.17 56. do belong to the People in the Wilderness who rebelled against the word of God and contemned the counsel of the most high They would make use against us of that place where when Melchisedes blessed Abraham God is called the most high God whereby they would confine that Title only to the Person of the Father which before I refute I must by the by take notice how the word most high is thrice mentioned in three Verses Gen. 14.18 19 20. to shew how the Blessing upon Abraham was the Work of the three Persons in the Godhead as all three meet in the Conception of Christ in the blessed Virgin 's Womb and in his Baptism The same high God in whose name Melchisedec blessed Abraham is the same who called Abraham received him into favour and at that time had given him Victory over four Kings as it appears out of the place Now that most high God who called Abraham is the same as made a Covenant with him who afterwards commanded him to sacrifice his Son to himself who is that same Angel as before we have taken notice of who is called the Lord himself and upon that occasion said to him Gen. 22. By my self have I sworn saith the Lord that in blessing I will bless thee and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed Now the Apostle teaches that not only the Father but also the Son is Author of that Covenant when he saith The Testament or Covenant Heb. 9.16 was confirmed by the death of the Testator And I would have them to tell me who besides Christ hath with his Death and Blood sealed and confirmed that Covenant certainly none but that God that was manifest in the flesh Act. 20 28. that same God who hath purchased his Church with his own blood So that Melchisedec by the name of most high meant the Son as well as the Father who cannot be separated for as Scriptures bear witness the Son is always in the Father therefore every where in the Word of God the name most high is spoken of Father Son and Holy Ghost which with that of God of Gods and Lord of Lords is essentially taken and excludes indeed Creatures but never Son and Holy Ghost whom it doth truly and properly belong to Now we are come to the Objections that are directly against the Divinity of the Person of Christ which must be answered and in order to it we must here premise something which before we gave a hint of how the word God is taken in two senses first properly then metaphorically and the name God doth properly signifie the true God Now he is the only true God who essentially and by nature is such for every thing is called true by its nature as true Man true Gold true Silver c. as said before from the nature of Man of Gold and of Silver so that if only it be like a Man and like Gold then 't is neither true Man nor true Gold for simile non est idem the thing like is not the same If the true God be he that hath Gods Nature and Essence certainly he is the high and independent God seeing Divine Essence is in itself Chief and Independent Now secondly and improperly or metaphorically are they called Gods that in something are like God by participation and likeness as Moses was to Pharaoh so Angels and Men but these metaphorical Gods may not be called true God nor worshipt as such that which is somewhat like a thing may never be called the same thing Thus I do premise in opposition to Socinus's Notion how in Scripture the word God is taken for the high God independent from any other and for him who by the chief God is in some manner made partaker of the Divinity In the first sense God is God the Father called one in the second is Christ and some other Men he because of his Sanctification and being sent into the World where Christ as he would have it doth not affirm himself to be God but with dependency that is a titular a made and coined God as by vertue of that Sanctification and Mission when that very Sanctification and sending into the World shew him to be true God Joh 10.36 for in the place is meant that Sanctification which preceded his coming into the World for the Father sanctified first and then sent him which belonged to him not as a Man but had it before he was Man and before he came into the World for he saith first he was sanctified by the Father and then afterwards sent into the World that is he became Man for before he was made flesh he had been sanctified by the Father that is appointed and constituted Mediator and Head of the Church but Mediator he could not be except he were true eternal God As to his being sent into the World that also sheweth that his Being is not of this World but from above from Heaven whence he was sent into the World from the Bosom of the Father which argueth him to be above Man and to have had a Being before he was made Man for he was the Son of God in Heaven he was not Man but
brightness of the Father's glory to shew that as from a lightful Body proceeds Light so the Son as naturally comes from the Father and 't is one thing to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Image of God Col. 1.15 Heb. 1.3 and another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the express Image of the Father but Christ is called both He who is called the Image of God is thereby distinguish'd from God but he which is called the Character of the Father is distinguish'd from the Father not from God wherefore we say Christ as Mediator may be and is called the Image of God But this comes short of what is intended to express the eternal generation of the Son of God tho' our Adversaries would have that Filiation to be grounded upon his Mediatorship These few things which may have a place in our Discourse being premised I now directly answer the Objection To be begotten is to be understood as becomes God to be begotten in God doth not imply to have a beginning or to be made in time Secondly they say Divine Nature admitteth of no renting or division wherefore nothing doth proceed that is different in number from it I answer There is no Comparison between the Finite and Infinite Essence for this last is communicated to the Persons without multiplication separation or division Thirdly they go on That which is begotten hath a beginning I answer 'T is true in the Creatures but not in God Fourthly Nothing say they is wanting in the Father so it is superfluous to give him a Son I answer The Father is perfect therefore he hath a Son God's fecundity makes the Persons but borroweth nothing from without 5thly Whatsoever cometh from unity to plurality cannot be perfect except the substance be multiplied I answer God doth not come nor go with God there is no terminus a quo not ad quem no place from which and to which but God is always God is not divided but begets indivisibly 6thly If the Son be from the Father it followeth that all the Father hath is divided because it passeth into the Son so the Father hath given the Son part of himself and so the Son hath deprived the Father of something The Answer is The Son is not asunder from the Father for the Essence is the same There is no renting the Father with giving loseth nothing but retains all the Nature is whole in the Father and whole in the Son as one Candle lighteth another without any dimunition of its own light 7thly They say a man hath no Son before he hath begotten I answer Nor God neither but this I must say 't is a gross mistake to draw Consequences from human things to divine which is to measure God by Men God always begetteth as the Sun doth produce its brightness 8thly If God begets 't is either according to his Nature or to his Will not the first for then he would beget without consideration if according to his Will then the Father's Will was before the generation of the Son I answer He begets according to his Nature and that freely 9thly If the Son be born he had a beginning so is not from Eternity I answer The Father is eternal the Son eternal and the Generation eternal in things created to beget is indeed to produce that which is not but in divine and uncreated 't is otherwise 10thly A spiritual Nature doth not beget We say a Spirit created doth not but the Creator exceedeth the Reason of the Spiritual Creature 11thly If the Father hath begotten the Word either he hath begotten Himself or another but neither of these therefore He hath not begotten Himself He hath not begotten as granted nor another neither because there is no other God and so not begotten at all I answer the word he hath begotten alium non aliud another Person but not another thing He hath begotten another who is God but not another God 12ly If God hath begotten the Word either the whole Divine Essence hath begotten or only the Father's Person if the Essence then it hath begotten Himself or another both which be absurd if the Father's Person hath begotten either he is the only true God or else the word is not that Son of the only true God wherefore the Father hath not begotten the Son from Eternity We answer the Father hath of Himself begotten from Eternity there is no necessity for the Father only to be the true God 't is enough he is the only true God therefore the Son is the Son of the only true God not of two Persons but of the Father These Objections which I have set down in short and answer'd as briefly I look not upon as material because not taken out of the word of God the only Judge of those Controversies but herein they shew how they affect Sophistry to impose upon some sort of People but however some Advantage we get by it for out of all these it appears how this true Heavenly Doctrine is not contrary to the Principles of Reason They have three or four Cavils or Questions more which by the Grace of God we shall answer in few words First Whether the Father begat the Son when he was already a Son or before he was the Son I answer the Father is Eternal the Son Eternal and begotten from all Eternity which hath no Parts the Father could no more be without the Son than the Sun without Light or Light without Brightness Their 2d Questie on is Whether the Father after the Generation of the Son hath begotten any other because he is called the only Begotten if he hath Begotten none other then he hath lost the Power of Begetting But I answer that Generation is without time always perfect not successive without beginning or end The 3d is the Father hath begotten either unwilling or willing if unwilling then he hath suffer'd something which he would not if willing then his Will was before the Generation of the Son I say part of this Argument was answered a little before whereunto I shall add The Will of God was indeed before all Creatures for he hath done whatsoever he pleased Psal 115.3 but 't is not so of the Son for of him we read in Scripture he was and is with the Father so the Son is no Creature neither is he made by the Will as Creatures are he is born of the Father and is Co-eternal with the Person of the Father the Father's Will is in Him for in HIm he willeth and by Him He doth all things In those things which proceeded from Nature there is no Fore-counsel or Predeliberation yet the Father hath not begotten being unwilling for He begat with a Will not Antecedent but Concomitant thus the Father's Person is not because He was willing to be but because He is and willeth not Himself not to be so the Son is not born against the Father's Will neither doth the Fathers Will go before His Generation A
assert the Distinction of Persons but because they are distinct Persons it doth not follow that there is not one and the same Essence of the three Persons and that they are not one only God Father Maker and Preserver of all and out of the Texts they produce they cannot make out what they intend how the Father and the Son are never contain'd together under the Name of God for the Persons are distinguish'd where Scripture speaketh Relatively of God and doth oppose or compare them or describe their Proprieties Further they object they have distinct Essences whose workings are distinct but Father's and Son's workings are distinct therefore their Essences are so But we say the major Preposition is to be understood of Operations ad extra or outward for if whilst one doth work the other ceaseth then the Essences are distinct but as to the inward workings there is no distinction or difference of Essences far from it that the Generation of the Son and the Procession of the Holy Ghost do confirm the unity of Essence for by the Generation one and the same whole Essence of the Father is communicated unto the Son and by this same reason there is but one and the Essence of both Now the Minor Proposition speaketh of inward Operations and this Omonimy or Ambiguity of Terms brings in four Termini in the Argument contrary to Rules but if one and the same kind of Operations be understood then one of the Propositions is false the major is understood of those ad imra the minor of those ad extra and in the case of the Incarnation there are two terms to be consider'd a quo from whom and ad quem to or in whom tho' as thus it be terminatively in the Son yet a quo or originatively it is the work of the whole Trinity Another Argument of theirs is this the Essence unbegotten and begetting is not the same with the Essence begotten and not begetting but the Essence of the Father is unbegotten yet hath begotten the Son but the Son 's is begotten yet nor begetting therefore the Essence of the Father is not the same with that of the Son This Argument is borrow'd from the Arrians whereof the minor Preposition is false namely that the Essence of the Son is begotten the Names begotten or not begotten do not belong to the Essence but shew an Hypostatical or Personal Difference Should the Essence beget it would either beget it self and so should be begotten of it self so it would make many different Essences of the Godhead whence would follow many Gods Moreover as in natural things not the Essence but the compositum doth beget so in divine things the Person begets and is begotten which yet is not a vain Relation seeing it is not constituted without the Essence Now if it were true that the Divine Essence doth beget one could say either the Son doth beget or deny the Son to have the Divine Essence Again They say Two or three distinct Persons have so many distinct Essences for the distinction of Essences doth follow that of Persons so then Father Son and Holy Ghost being three distinct Persons they have three distinct Essences but the first Preposition is true only in natural not in Divine things besides they are in a mistake when they think there is no real Distinction except the things do differ in an Essential Number when there are several things that differ in the thing and definition which yet in Essence and Number are but one Here by the by I say the words like and likeness when a Comparison is made between the Persons is not convenient to be used but equal and equality which indeed containeth a likeness but something above Another thing I shall add here how some things are properly spoken of the Essence which also are properly spoken of the Persons for 't is properly said of the Essence and of the Persons Father Son and Holy Ghost that they are Spirit and Holy for the word Spirit is spoken of as common and essential John 4.24 God is a Spirit properly and personally of the Son Christ declared to be the Son of God according to the Spirit of Holiness Rom. 1.4 Heb. 9.14 â—Pet 3 18. and who thorough the Eternal Spirit offereth himself and elsewhere Christ was put to death in the flesh but quickned in the spirit So of the Father and Holy Ghost also to be holy is an Attribute of the Essence yet in particular and properly in Scripture attributed to the Father to the Son and to the Holy Ghost Upon this Matter one thing more I shall take notice of how Adjectives in the Plural may be attributed to God by reason of the Number of Persons and Substantives in the Singular only upon account of the Essence Further they object Christ hath a Father who is the God of Christ but the Father hath no God call'd his therefore Father and Son are distinguished in Essence the major they prove out of our Saviour's Word I ascend unto my Father and to your Father unto my God and to your God and my God my God why hast thou forsaken me I answer Christ hath a common Father and God with us in as much as the word was made Flesh and dwelt among us and in as much as the Man Jesus Christ is Mediator between God and Man yet so as in his Mediatorship he is true Man so he is true God This Discourse being intended for his Brethren he begins with the Profession he makes to own them as his Brothers Go to my Brethren all which to be understood of the Nature which the Brotherhood doth relate to and tho' the Father continueth such in relation to what the Son was when the Word was with God yet in the Birth and Incarnation the Father remaineth what he was God is the Father of all Flesh but not in the same manner and sense as he is the Father of the word in Scripture 't is declared in what sense and on what side they are Brethren to the only begotten Son of God Colos 1.18 I will declare thy Name unto my Brethren but he said before I am a Worm and no Man Psal 22.6 Christ is by the Apostle call'd the First-born amongst many Brethren also because the First-born from the Dead Furthermore they say if Christ when he speaketh of God stould mean also himself he would include himself in the mention he makes of God but he doth not but maketh a difference between himself and God whom he calls the true God so in the Apostolical Writings God and Christ are spoken of asunder which places I quote in the Margin c. John 3.16 and 17.3 d. Rom. 16.23 1 Tim. 6.13 14 15 16. 1 Cor. 15.24 Col. 1.3 Eph. 4.5 1 Thes 1.2 3 9 10. to shew we omit none of them So say they he not joyning himself with God sheweth he is not the same with God thus the name God absolutely taken belongeth only
to the Father I answer the name of God is taken either personally namely as he begets and as he is begotten and thus the Son is distinguished from the Father and upon this account the Apostle speaks of them separately Christ is distinguished from God both in Person and Office not in the Godhead or Essence or else the name is absolutely simply Rom. 8.31 32. 1 Tim. 1.1 1 John 5.20 Joh. 14.1 and essentially taken when the Question is about the Godhead then as to the Deity the Son is not distinguished from the Father as when Christ saith there is none good but God he doth not exclude himself from being good 't is as if he had said unto the Man if thou believest me to be good for so thou callest me thou must also believe me to be God for none is good but God and this was to have the Man to look upon him to be God Again When our Saviour saith Vnto God all things are possible and that God is able out of Stones to rise Children unto Abraham when the Apostles in their Salutations name first God and our Father and then the Lord Jesus Christ 't is no good Consequence to say that the Son is not of the same Nature with the Father for the Name of God is therein attributed unto the Father as the Spring and first in order of the Deity then the Son is proposed as Mediatour to lead us unto God for we are led by Christ unto the Father to worship and adore him together with the Father for he saith Ye believe in God believe also in me thereby shewing we ought to render unto him the same things we render to the Father wherefore in several places we read how when the Name Father is added yet that of God is immediately put before when generally something is taught which belongeth to Father Son and Holy Ghost then having named the Father the Mediatour is mention'd to breed in us Hope and Comfort thus the same Apostle opposeth one God to Idols where Christ is not excluded for immediately in the same Verse he declareth who that one God is namely the Father of whom are all things and we in him and one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things 1 Cor. 8.6 Ephes 4.5 6. and we by him thus in another place he saith there is one God as there is one Baptism Christ in whose Name we are baptized is not excluded from that oneness of Godhead Joh. 14.6 and because he would come to the Mediatour he very fitly nameth the Father to whom as the Head of the Deity there is no approach without the Mediator so by the Name Father is represented God essentially offended by Mankind and by the Son and Christ that Person of the adorable Trinity who hath undertaken to make our Peace and reconcile us unto God he is the way the truth and the life and none can come to the father but by him So when we read the word God we must not separate the Father nor the Son because the Divinity of the Father and of the Son is but one and the same Moreover they object the Father is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God of himself hath all of himself and acts of himself but the Son is not God of himself he is from the Father himself he saith he came from the Father and the Father sent him to this I answer They go upou a wrong Principle for they would have this to be of one self or of another to import a different Essence or Nature for even in created things that which is begotten is ever of the same Nature with that which hath begotten but by reason of Imperfection these are one only in Species but God the Father and the Son may not be said to be one in Species or Kind because thus they would make two Gods What they add how in Divine things he that begetteth and he that is begotten are not one either in Essence or Species because Men and Angels are called Sons of God which are not one with God either in Nature or Kind is very frivolous for 't is certain they are call'd Sons of God upon a very different account from that on which Christ is so call'd None is ever call'd God's own and proper Son only begotten come from the Bosom of the Father for unto which of the Angels or Men said he at any time thou art my Son Heb. 1.5 this day have I begotten thee and again I will be to him a Father and he shall be to me a Son Moreover they are mistaken to think that to be of another is to be of a different and inferiour Nature indeed he who receiveth not all but out of favour only part of what another hath may be said to be inferiour to him of whom he receiveth but he not so who hath all that another hath not by favour but by Nature and Generation They are farther much mistaken when they deny Christ simply and absolutely to be God of himself for he must need be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is a being or Essence of himself Life of himself Holy of himself Power of himself is good of himself Light of himself Truth of himself Wisdom of himself Righteousness of himself Perfect of himself and Glory of himself which all are Attributes of the Deity and to whom they belong So doth also Divine Nature all which Attributes were by the antient Orthodox Doctors of the Church and after them by the eminent Instruments of Reformation owned to be the Right and Property of the Son of God grounding themselves upon the Authority of Scripture in several Places especially that of 1 John 5.20 by me already quoted we are in him that is true even in his son Jesus Christ This is the true God and eternal life If we look upon the Son of God as he is from Eternity begotten of the Father and as he is the second Person on such an account we own the Son to be from the Father seeing he is true Son but if we consider him as God he is altogether self God and God of himself for the Divinity is wholly unbegotten and of her self knoweth of no beginning and needs not to borrow of others what it hath of it self and if to the Son one would attribute a Begotten and formed Essence this is from the Father to make a second God Lastly Many of the Places which the Adversaries do heap up do speak of Christ's Office of Mediator which they improperly misapply to his Divine Nature for though Christ's Humane Nature hath no Personality but is upheld by the Divine Person yet that upholding doth not confound the Natures otherwise Passion and Death might be attributed to Divine Nature On this Matter they form other Arguments grounded upon false Suppositions as sometimes they would have Father Son and Holy Ghost to be three Spirits and the words unbegotten begotten and proceeding
Upon the Account of our Salvation which by no means can be obtained without it let Arminians say on the contrary what they will For †John 17.3 this is eternal life to know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent And who is he but ‖ 1 John 5.20 the Son of God the true God and eternal life We say Trinity or Triunity not Triplicity for this last implies a Composition of Three Parts Father Son and Holy Ghost are alius alius not aliud aliud other and other but not other thing and other thing Three distinct Persons but One and the same Nature we distinguish the Persons saith * De Trin. Vnit cap. 11. Austin but divide not the Deity or Essence they are not distinct Essentially for there is but one Essence but personally that is one Person is not the other the Father not the Son nor the Son the Father and the Holy none of the other two Peter Paul and John are not only distinct amongst themselves but also divided one from another so they are three Men though but one specifical Nature because created and finite but in an infinite Being 'tis otherwise Father Son and Holy Ghost though distinct yet not divided for there is but one numerical Nature the three are Consubstantial or Coessential in Nature Coeternal in Time and Coequal in Power The Knowledge of One God may be had by the Light of Nature but that of the Holy Trinity only out of Scripture for the one is according to Reason but the other above it two ways there are to know God the 1st Nature the 2d Revelation that is defectuous this is perfect to which God tied his Church which alone knoweth and calleth upon God according to what he manifested of himself in his Holy Word and thereby her Religion is different from that of all the rest of the World and there is no other saving way to come to God but by Christ whose Gospel is preached as the only Doctrine of Salvation and we must not have of God such Notions as our Fancy or natural Reason suggest unto us but such as he hath declared in his Word for he is a voluntary Cause of all whose Ways and Methods we ought to observe and be guided by in our Religion for †Ephes 1.11 v. 5. he works all things according to the counsel of his own will and according to the good pleasure of his will Yet this Holy Mystery is a stumbling-block unto the Jews and unto the Greeks foolishness and both look upon it as Heresie though if God's Word be the Word of Truth this as we hope to shew is certainly the True Sound Doctrine because grounded upon it though unsound Men will neither believe it nor consent about it to the Faith of the Primitive Church and Orthodox Doctors of all Ages nor to the Confessions of Faith of all Christian Reformed Churches as if the Spirit of God and of Truth was departed from them All to be only amongst Socinians Second Substances do exist only in the First Man in general existeth only in James John that are individual and Words are what Use makes them an Indivisible and most single Essence abstractively considered may and doth concretively exist in Three Persons no Man may well say that an infinite Essence doth not admit of three Modes or Manners of Subsistence but he only which fancies within his shallow and finite Intellect to understand perfectly an infinite Nature with her Modes of subsisting which to pretend to implieth Absurdity and Impiety And to affirm that to be One in relation to its Essence and many as to the Modes is no more contradictory than to say the same Man is real in respect of his Essence and modal as to his Subsistence wherefore they who would terminate an infinite Essence only to one manner of subsisting so that it may not be communicated to another Person either they understand not what an infinite Nature is or else misTake the meaning of the word Terminate or Confine which is not to prescribe limits for that an infinite Nature doth abhor but the meaning is that an Essence as may be the Father's is so the Father's Essence as may not be the Son 's in the same manner but it may be in a different way Upon this Matter it ought carefully to be observed how the Divine Essence is considered either Absolutely or Relatively to the manner of existing in respect to both the Father is of himself in relation to the first the Son also is of himself but as to the second he is from the Father so is the Holy Ghost of himself in respect to the first that is absolutely consider'd but as to the second he proceedeth from both Father and Son Wherefore the Father is absolutely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 self God because both as to his Essence and as to his Person he is not from another but the Son and Holy Ghost are also Self God though not as to the Person the Son being begotten by the Father as the Holy Ghost proceedeth from both but as to the Nature because both are by that Essence which is not produced by another or depend upon another but that same which of it self and by it self doth exist from all Eternity the Three Persons have but One and the same Essence and they are not essentially distinstinguished The Son is from the Father by Generation not as to his Essence but in relation to his Person not absolutely as God but relatively as Son for the Son hath the same Nature and Substance as the Father Self God as he though not in the same manner the Father may not be called Essentiator if I may so say of the Son or Holy Ghost nor these Essentiated the Son is God of himself though not Son of himself the manner whereby theSon is said to be from the Father is in Scripture described by the word Generation which is nothing else but a Communication of one and the same Essence or Life that is Eternal and Indivisible as expressed Psal 2.7 and John 5. v. 26. which are not to be confounded with nor measured by physical Generation there being neither priority nor posteriority of Duration no mutation or passing from Power to Act from a not Being to a Being from a division and multiplication of Essence from a formal Reason of active and passive Generation from a dependency of him that is begotten upon him that hath begotten or from a greater to the lesser so there is no such Imperfections as are in Natural and Metaphysical in which are priority and posteriority of Nature though not of Time So there is no Consequence to be drawn out of one for the other thus though a natural begetter doth efficiently beget of himself materially from himself terminatively out of himself no such thing is to be conceived of this Generation of the Son of God for though in Human Things the
begetter and the begotten do sometimes differ in the genus sometimes in the species or kind in Divine Things they differ only in the modus or manner This Generation is without any Motion hath no beginning nor ending because he that begets and he that is begotten are Coeternal What we say of the Son may be affirmed of the Holy Ghost who is from the Father and from the Son by way of procession not as to the Nature but as to the Person for the Essence and Self-being of the Holy Ghost is just the same with that of the Father and of the Son he is Self-God Actually though not Originally Essentially though not Personally Now these Three Persons of the Godhead are distinguished by their Names Orders Attributes and Workings which Distinctions do not prejudice either the Unity or Simplicity of Essence for it is not composed of Persons which are not before it either in Time or Order but every one hath the whole Essence neither can the Persons be said to be composed of the Essence because it is not before the Persons neither doth the manner of subsisting induce any Composition into the Essence only a Distinction and is said to modificate not to multiply it Now the modus or manner is here improperly taken for commonly 't is posterior to the Subject it doth modifie But in this it is not so there is not in the Persons of the most Holy Trinity such a real Distinction as is between Things and Things for the Person is not a different Thing from the Divine Essence but 't is the very Essence with the manner of subsisting In some natural Things the manner of them is hard and sometimes impossible to be understood Can a Man upon sure Grounds find out how Grass and Corn grows How the Wind is formed Whence it comes and whither it goes and several such things in Nature we no ways doubt but that there are in the World those who pretend to know all things and pretend for most things to give Reasons such as they are But can a Man know how he himself was made and formed How his Soul came to be united to his Body This Ignorance in common Matters we daily see and feel to be in our selves and what must it be in those Spiritual and High Ones which are such as no Eye hath seen nor Ear hath heard nor ever entered into the Heart of Man and which 't is impossible for the Wit of Man to conceive which Consideration should curb the Idle Curiosity of vain Men who as with a little short Line would with their shallow Brains fathom the bottomless and unsearchable Depths of these adorable Mysteries when with the Apostle * 2 Cor. 12.4 that was caught up into Paradise and heard unspeakable Words they should cry out †Rom. 11.33 O the depth that cannot be fathomed Yet to shew we are not altogether unacquainted with the Notions and Hypotheses of others about these Matters in a stammering manner let us say that the ‖ Psal 147 5. infinite Vnderstanding of God never is or was Idle and as it is his very Being so from all Eternity it ever was taken up and this Understanding of God being All in All it cannot meet with any thing but himself so it did understand and conceive it self as in a Looking-Glass a Man doth conceive and beget a perfect Image of his own Face so God in beholding and minding of himself doth in himself beget a most lively and perfect Image of himself and this in the Blessed Trinity is the Son of God who is called * Heb. 1 3. the perfect Image of God just as if we may use such Comparisons Wax upon a Seal hath the engraven Form of the Seal so the Son of God whom his Father hath begotten of his own Understanding is the very Form of his Father's Understanding and when one is seen the other is seen also as he saith to Philip †Joh. 14.9 he who hath seen me hath seen the Father and under the Name of Wisdom he saith when there were no Depths and before the Mountains were settled ‖ Prov. 8.23 24 25. I was brought forth And as in God's Essence there is an Understanding so there is * Isa 46.10 a Will and by this Will God according to his own Mind applies his Power where when and how he thinks good and as his Understanding doth so his Will everlastingly works upon himself as it hath no other Thing to work upon but it self it delighteth it self in the Infinite Goodness which it knoweth in it self and that Delight which God or his Will hath in its own Infinite Goodness produces a Subsistance in God which is the Holy Ghost and that mutual Love whereby the Father takes Delight in his Son which is his own Image conceived by his Understanding and the Son likewise rejoyceth in his Father now this Action of the Will when it is fulfilled is Liking and Love as when a Man looketh in a Glass if he smiles his Image doth so too and if it takes Delight in it it takes the same in him for they are both One and from these Two doth result the Third all Three are in One Face of One Face and but One Face Thus if we will make use of our Reason in these Mysterious and Incomprehensible Matters we must stutter and stammer wherefore the best is chiefly and only to stand to and depend upon the Revelation thereof that God hath made in his Word beyond which Men ought not to presume for in Matters of so High a Concernment to speak true and certain Things there is some Danger of the contrary Herein we can give no Examples because there is nothing like God we have no natural Grounds and Principles positively to prove these Truths all Comparisons from the Sun the Soul the Rain-bow a Triangle and of my speaking as I my Word and my Breath are Three several Things different one from another yet I am but One Man and such like lame Comparisons fall very short of Illustrating these Mysteries if we cannot understand how Original Sin is propagated in us seeing our Soul is not ex traduce begotten by Parents how much less can we comprehend that Infinite and Eternal Being of One God in Three Persons After this is it not Just that Men should own how the Trinity is a High Mystery which falls not under Senses and is infinitely above our Understanding rather to be believed than felt or understood whereof the Revelation ought to be the sufficient and only Rule as when Scripture saith * 1 Joh. 5.7 there are three in Heaven the Father the Word and Holy Ghost and these three are one I must not puzzle my Brain to know how this can be thus when the Apostle revealeth there is to be a Resurrection of the dead when some Men will say †1 Cor. 15.35 36. How are the dead raised up and with what body do
of his Servant of his elect in whom his Soul delighteth whereby none may deny the Lord Jesus to be understood and the Holy Ghost or Spirit Nothing better than this can quadrate with the History of our Saviour's Baptism ‖ Matth. 3.16 And in another place of the same Prophet †Iâ—al 6.3 when he saw the Vision and heard that Trisagion or holy holy holy which long after was also heard by John * Rev. 4 8. that three-fold repetition of God's Name compar'd with the proper Hypotheses of the antient Jews ' that it signified three things in God is adapted to the Trinity of Persons in S. John's Vision we have some enlargement as to the Lord Jesus represented by the Lamb for the same Twenty four Elders and Four Beasts * Rev. 5.8 9 13. fell down before the lamb and sung a new song and every creature which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and such as are in the sea paid the same Worship to the Lamb as to him that sitteth on the Throne Again the same Prophet †Isai 61.1 The spirit of the Lord is upon me for he hath anointed me this to be understood of Christ as applyed Luke 4.18 and of the Holy Ghost by the anointing for he was anointed with the Oyl of Gladness that is the Graces of the Spirit These Three are also to be read amongst the last Words of David * 2 Sam. 23.2 saying The Spirit of the Lord spake by me and the Word was in my tongue here is the Lord the Word and the Spirit To the same purpose speaks another Prophet †Hagg. 2.5 according to the word that I covenanted with you when ye came out of Egypt so my Spirit remaineth among you the Father with the Word his Son and his Spirit made a Covenant with Israel There are several other Texts in the Old Testament of the Nature of One which I already made use of I mean of the thrice holy wherein the Name of God or Lord is thrice repeated I own I have such a persuasion of the infinite Wisdom of God as to believe there is nothing at all in his Word but what there is a particular reason for it to be in and in this belief of mine I am confirmed by what our blessed Saviour saith in earnest and with a strong Asseveration †Matt. 5.18 Verily I say unto you till heaven and earth pass one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled and I am sufficiently satisfied that though through the Infirmity of our Nature in the Ignorance of our Mind we cannot apprehend the Causes of many things in the Word of God yet therein is nothing without a Cause So out of that Principle I dare say God meaneth something when in the Blessing which he prescribed to be pronounced to the People the Lord's Name is thrice in it thus * Numb 6.24 25 26. The Lord bless thee and keep thee the Lord make his face shine upon thee and be gracious unto thee the Lord lift up his countenance upon thee and give thee peace and when God speaks unto Moses he dictates what he was to speak to the Children of Israel when he was come to them in his Name that is The Lord God of your Fathers one would have thought this had been enough but no for he addeth †Exod. 3.15 The God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob it was the same God yet thrice named So when the Law is given he saith ‖ Exod. 20.5 I the Lord thy God am a jealous God once Lord and twice God which is the same so in another place the * Psalm 136.1 2 3. Psalmist exhorteth thrice to give thanks to whom unto the Lord unto the God of Gods to the Lord of Lords One more I shall quote and 't is this †Isa 33.22 The Lord is our Judge the Lord is our Lawgiver the Lord is our King Why thrice and no more Surely God aims at something for as he doth nothing so he saith nothing in vain these things are not in by Chance and seeing with a full assurance I believe according to Revelation a Trinity of Persons in the Divine Nature Why should not I also believe that these things relate to it Now if one would seriously attend upon these quoted places and compare them with others of the same kind may be God would impart upon the Matter greater Discoveries than I for the present am able to give only this I shall add how the Name Jehovah called in Greek Tetragrammaton because it originally consists only of four Letters signifieth both God's Self-existence for the Root whence 't is derived doth denote to be and also his Eternity for it contains all times to come present and past one out of the two first Letters draws the Words beginning and to live and the third having a Vertue of copulating or joyning together is for Love whereby is denoted the Holy Ghost as by the two before are Father and Son and because the second Letter h is twice in he would have both Natures in the Second Person of the most Holy Trinity to be meaned tho' I have nothing to say against these mysterious Interpretations which may be well grounded yet we build not our main Arguments thereupon however knowing that essential and incommunicable Holy Name to confist of three different Letters I can see nothing to hinder me from believing that that same Nature is communicated to Three Persons and as the same Letter is twice in it doth signifie Two Natures in One Person especially it falling upon the Second Letter relating to the Second Person of the most blessed Trinity and as God is the Author of the Name Why may not he in his Infinite Wisdom therein denote some Mystery This I take to be Rational Here I must not omit for Proof of this great Truth to bring in our Creed called the Apostolical as an Evidence I meddle not with the others for the Adversaries will not own them though they ever were by better more Learned more Pious and Sound in all Ages than they are or I doubt can be I know the World hath afforded some Men who out of a vain-glory and to seem to be something through a tryal of their Parts have attempted to enervate with their Criticisms the Strength and Orthodoxy of these Creeds but as to this Socinians themselves can except against it no more than they do against the written Word of God whence this is extracted Father Son and Holy Ghost are all Three named in the Creed and as the Word God is expressed when joined with the Father so 't is understood of Son and Holy Ghost thus I believe in God his only begotten Son and I believe in God the Holy Ghost for to them it also doth belong and as there we profess to believe in that is to
be by virtue of a natural Privilege and of a divine Prerogative which is the same he had over David Solomon's Father whose Lord he was the same he had over Abraham Pre-existence before Abraham was I am which could not be as to his Humanity wherefore in him there must be another ground namely his Divinity only therein can lay the advantage he had over them all Not only he was greater than all these but also than the Temple it self a place so eminently glorious by reason of God's immediate Presence in it that it was called not only Holy but the inner part of it was called the holiest of all into which none but the High Priest might enter and that only once a year not without Blood yet saith our Saviour Matt. 12.6 8. I say unto you that in this place is one greater than the temple which can be said of none but of God there he also calls himself Lord of the Sabbath not as Man but as God Temple and Sabbath the two holiest things in Israel The second Text is this * Isai 35.4 5. Behold your God will come with vengeance even God with a recompence he will come and save you then the Eyes of the blind shall be open and the Ears of the deaf shall be unstopp'd which our Saviour applyeth to himself who when John's Disciples ask'd him †Matt. 11.3 5. Art thou he that should come or do we look for another Jesus answered them by this the blind receive their sight c. which were the Signes wherewith Isaiah had prophefied God would come these things he commands them to give John an account of wherein he lookt to the Prophet who foretold such things should be done by the Messiah whom in that place Isaiah calleth God when he saith God himself will come and save you which must not be understood of the Father for first we never read that God the Father came into the World to save us but that he sent his Son to do 't he that sends another in his place cannot properly be said to come himself Secondly there is an Energy in the word he himself whereby is meaned not that another in God's stead but God himself by himself would come and though God be said to come when he shews some gracious effect of his Power yet when he is said to send another 't is not to be understood in that same manner And tho Socinus denies him at that time to be God only that he was appointed hereafter so to be he is refuted by his being in that Text at that time call'd the God of Israel your God whom you worship The third Text is that wherein God saith * Mal. 3.1 Behold I will send my messenger and he shall prepare the way before me and the Lord whom ye seek shall suddenly come to his temple Now who that God is before whose face John prepared his way is clear enough that he spake of the Lord Jesus not of the Father's coming after him which he pointed at when he said †John 1 26 27 29.30 compared with Act. 13.24 There standeth one among you whom ye know not he it is that coming after me is preferred before me and to make it clearer he points directly at the Person of Christ for the next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him and saith behold the lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world which is he of whom I said after me comes a man which is preferred before me for he was before me Can there be a plainer Designation of a person than this To him alone by means of his Preaching he prepared the way and that which is remarkable our Saviour explains of himself the Text of Malachy This is he of whom it is written behold * Luke 7.27 I send my messenger before thy face which shall prepare thy way before thee and the word my face in the Prophet he renders thy face that is of Christ so he quoteth the place not according to the Words but according to the Sense †Luke 1.76 Thou child saith Zechariah of John shalt he called the Prophet of the highest a high Name proper to God for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways it is then most certain that John prepared the way for him that was to come after him and to converse with and dwell among Men not the Father but Christ came after John therefore he is that God that sent his Messenger as in Malachy Socinus his Phrase is no where in Scripture to be read that God came in Christ he sent Christ his Son but came not in him the Father is said to be and dwéll in Christ not to come in Christ he sent him in his own Name Though Christ under the Name Word be called God absolutely * Joh. 1.1 and without any restriction in the same manner as the True God is absolutely called God without any thing to pretext an improper appellation and the repetition of the Word God in the same Signification doth sufficiently demonstrate it †1 Joh. 5.20 nay though he be not barely called God but the True God whence we must necessarily conclude he is true essential God Yet they would have the Father alone to be God and that when the Name of God is absolutely set down it is to be understood only of the Father not of the Son nor of the Holy Ghost so they conclude Father Son and Holy not to be One God to which purpose they wrest some Scripture out of the Old and New Testament which in due time we shall by the Grace of God take an occasion to answer but because the Adversaries use their utmost pernicious Endeavours to oppose these Truths we to make clear these most important Doctrines which our Faith is grounded upon must somewhat more enlarge upon it though we take notice of some things we said before or to the same purpose First We say God is a Name of the Divine Essence or Nature as Man is of Human Nature but whereof there is a different Reason from that of all Names of other Natures for all Individuals are asunder one from another their Nature according to the mental Notion is one but not really so wherefore in them Nature is the species or kind which is predicated and spoken of every singular and individual Person as James is a Man and of many too as Matthew John and Luke are Three Men but as in God the Essence is but One in number and not only in the mental Notion but also is really and most simply One though in Three Persons this Name of God is not predicated as a species of every Person but according to the priority or posteriority of their Origin and Order as thus the Father is God but unbegotten the Son God begotten the Holy Ghost proceeding from both Now if the Name God was as species spoken of the Persons
but Persons endued with Reason and as I said before to Persons it belongs to act The high Names of God's Own Son Only Begotten c. which in Scripture are given the Lord Jesus are not upon the account of his miraculous Conception in the Womb of the Virgin as Socinians would have it we confess therein God had a special Hand and it was effected in an extraordinary manner but this is not enough to entitle him to the Filiation which the Question is now about to distinguish him from all others in the World called Sons of God as anon we shall have occasion to speak of Adam had also a miraculous Birth yet the Names of Only Begotten and God's Own and Proper Son do not belong to him in Christ's Conception and Birth God did not concur materially but efficiently with his Power but not with his Substance seeing Christ as to the Flesh was not of any invisible Seed of God but of the †Rom. 1.3 Seed of David what Brothers he had are quite of another ‖ Rom. 8.29 Heb. 2.12 Order and Quality they are such not by Generation but by Regeneration by Adoption not by * 1 Job 1.12 1 Joh. 3.1 1 Pet. 1.23 Jam. 1.18 Nature as the Texts quoted in the Margin which may be perused do declare wherefore Christ is Son of God in another manner than men are so he is called the Image of God and the Character of his Person in a most different way from that whereby Adam is said to be made according to God's likeness As in Creatures 't is a perfection to beget their similes or that which is like unto themselves that may not be denyed God now as we cannot conceive a communicability of a Nature which is spiritual and ad intra but by the two Faculties of Understanding and Willing whose Operations are immanent so it may well be said that there can be but two Processions in God one by way of Intellection whereby the Son is begotten who is called the Word Wisdom and Image of the Father and the other by way of Volition whereby is breathed the Holy Ghost who for that reason is specially called Love and though the Son doth also understand himself yet he begets neither himself nor another for he understands himself not of a notional Intellection to generate which belongs only to the Father but with a notional one which is common to the Father and to the Holy Ghost This is said not to prove our Faith but only to demonstrate that what we believe is not contrary to Reason though it be above it for all these matters as I observ'd before and as all Orthodox and learned Men that writ upon them are agreed are to be grounded on Scripture rather than upon human Reason The chief part of our Comfort and Salvation lies in the Belief of this Doctrine for as in Christ is but one Person so there are two Natures whereby he is in a capacity of perfecting our Redemption which otherwise he could not be in we own he is called Son of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 eminently and by Excellency but besides he is also called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beloved proper only begotten whereby he is distinguished from adopted Sons and by his being called Son of the living God distinguish'd from Elijab Jeremiah and such extraordinary Persons that had been in the World which concludeth his Consubstantiality with the Father for it had been a monstruous Generation if out of the Father's Bosom had come a Son of another Nature He that was to be born of a Virgin was to be called the Son of the Highest not by reason of a miraculous Conception as pretended by Crollius out of Maldonat the Jesuit but because of an eternal Generation chiefly as also by reason afterwards of a personal Union of both Natures for though upon that account he might also be call'd the Son of God yet that could not intitle him to be the only begotten because he is dear and beloved but he is dear and beloved because the only begotten of the Father Christ the first begotten in respect to adopted Brethren not because their Son-ship is of the same Nature with his but only thus far as Adoption imitateth Nature as Civilians say so their Adoption * 1 Pet. 1.23 and Regeneration is a kind of Imitation of his eternal Generation and to him belong all the Privileges of the First-born and is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the †Colos 1.17 18. Rev. 3.14 beginning of the Creature not passively but actively Christ is called the Beginning of the Creation of God or of all things by him created that is the beginner or the first efficient Cause of all Creatures according to a style used in Scripture when the Thing is set for the Person as when the Jewish Nation is called by the name of ‖ Rom. 4.9 Gal. 2.9 Circumcision the Act for the Agent and the Abstract for the Concret thus Christ is said of God made unto us wisdom righteousness sanctification and redemption that is he makes us wise unto Salvation makes us righteous for he is our Justifier Sanctifier and Redeemer thus he is often called * 1 John 2. and 4.2 the Popitation for our Sins and our Salvation for Propitiatour and Saviour Though there be an infinite difference between Christ's and human Generations yet herein they agree that it imports in him that is begotten a Communication of the Nature of the Begetter it is said of Adam †Gen. 5.3 that he begat a Son in his own likeness after his Image is this to be understood of a like Nature only and not of the same Undisputably he begat him out of his own Substance and his own Nature and no other he communicated unto him well represented by the words in his own likeness and after his image the word Likeness doth not shew any Disparity or Difference but an Equality and Sameness of Nature which here by the by I observe in relation to a thing I shall have occasion to mention about the Honour to be render'd unto Christ that all men should honour the Son as they honour the Father for they would have it only to be like but not equal or the same when here Likeness is taken for Sameness and Equality Now as of Seth so we must say of Christ the Son of God as the other was of Adam for as Seth had not been Adam's Son except he were of the same Nature so Christ could not truly and properly be God's Son except he were of the same Nature with the Father Seth was begotten after his Father's Image that is of the same Nature and the Lord Jesus more strongly to shew the Sameness in Nature with the Father which he had in a more eminent way than ever Seth had his from Adam is not said to be after his Father's Image but in more noble expressive and lively Words said to be the express Image
David's Son for if only upon some borrowed account or accidental reason he were David's Lord as may be some Power and Dignity above him then Christ's Argument would quite loose its strength which wholly lies in this if he be his Lord how can he be his Son Upon some extraordinary account and relation it may happen that a Son may become a Lord over his Father but here Christ is certainly asserted to be Lord over David and in some sense 't is impossible for David to become Lord over Christ which can be upon no other account but of his divine Nature besides that he was David's Lord in David's time and before his Birth of the Virgin Mary His Son he was according to the Fâ—esh and his Humanity and his Lord according to the Spirit and his Divinity The Fourth Argument whereby Christ is proved to be God's natural Son is taken out of the Words whereby he declares himself to be such a Son as is one with the Father not any other way to be understood than by Nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for this the Jews took to be his meaning and for that same cause called him a Blasphemer and would have stoned him and thereupon our Saviour did not go about to shew they were mistaken though his Life was concerned on the contrary he used Arguments to make 'em believe he was so though to them it seemed incredible and blasphemous Chap. 5. And in another Text he affirmeth himself to be such a Son of God as is of an equal Power with and can do the same Works as the Father so that what things soever the Father doth this also doth the Son likewise the Son doth nothing without the Father nor the Father without the Son by reason of their Oneness of Nature and Equality of Poweâ— Though the Jews out of these words of his v. 7. My father works hitherto and I work concluded he made himself equal with God yet though they were offended at it and he thereupon did run the hazard of his Life though he never was so uncharitable as to give any one just ground of offence nor so rash as unnecessarily to venture his Life yet he would not deny his Equality with the Father but on the contrary with several Arguments he confirms it from v. 19. to 22. and this not to be understood of an Equality only in some respects for the Unity of natural Power and Operation argueth an absolute Equality and as in Power so in Nature * John 10.30 I and my Father are one and v. 38. you may by my works believe that the Father is in me and not only so but I in him as for greater confirmation * ch 14.10 repeated out of that place of John I and the Father are one Augustine's †Pereant vaniloqui mentis seductores c. words are to be taken notice of let vain and Seducers Arrius and Sabellius perish Christ said not I and the Father am one but I and the Father are one when I say one let the Arian take notice of it and what I say we are let the Sabellian mind it let not the Arian divide one nor the Sabellian take away are one we refer to Nature are to the diversity of Persons The Fifth Argument is taken out of the Lord Jesus his own words and we know him not only to be true but truth it self †John 14.6 though he beareth record * c. 8.14 of himself this is when in a legal way being asked by Caiaphas and ‖ Mat. 26.63 64. adjured by the living God to tell whether he be the Christ the son of God * Mar. 14.61 62. the Christ the son of the blessed he owned it and said Thou hast said I am For which Confession he was accused of Blasphemy and condemn'd to death for said they to Pilate †Joh. 19.7 We have a law and by our law he ought to dye because he made himself the son of God so he suffer'd for owning himself to be the Son of God which Confession of his S. Paul takes special notice of in the Charge he giveth his Disciple * 1 Tim. 6.13 the meaning is that he was the true natural Son of God or else it would not have been accounted a Blasphemy for any Jew to have called himself Son of God no more than God's People Abraham's Seed by virtue of the Promises and Privilege of the Covenant and Grace and God they call their Father John 8.41 yet thought not they were Blasphemers for that therefore Christ's Words they took in another that is in a strict and proper sense Indeed the High Priest's Question was a Snare laid for Christ for though they sought false Witnesses and many came yet their Witness did not agree together wherefore they sought to have something out of his mouth wherewith to accuse him The Question was amongst other things grounded upon what our Saviour had said of himself in the Fifth and Tenth Chapters of John whether he was of the same Nature with God and in Power equal with him which is the same as to be natural Son of God and of the same Essence which he having affirmatively answered unto and said he was thereupon having gained their Point they rent their Cloaths and said What need we any farther Witnesses and upon this very Confession he was accused condemned and executed Hence I ask Socinians Did Christ speak the truth when he said he was the Son of God one with him or of the same Nature and to him equal in Power I farther ask whether the High Priest and the rest did not well apprehend this to be the true meaning of his words If so as certainly both are true if Socinians had been in the place of the Jews they would have used him as they did and would do the like if ever it were in their power for some of them when they write and give a Character of our blessed Saviour's Person they seem to take a pleasure to say he was by the Senate or Council of Scribes and Pharisees in Jerusalem condemned and executed for Blasphemy in that he had said he was the Son of God that he said so 't is most true out of John 10.36 but I ask again when the Lord said so did he speak the truth or not If the truth why do Men not believe him that is in the sense the Jews understood it true proper natural Son of God equal with God For this they took his meaning to be but if he was not what he owned himself to be then he must be supposed to have spoken a lye which is a Sin To such Blasphemers our blessed Lord speaks in defiance as once he did to the Jews * John 8.46 Which of you convinceth me of sin We know he suffer'd as a Blasphemer a Deceiver and a Transgressor but was he really so The Apostle saith †1 Pet. 3.18 He suffered the just
Coeternal he makes them Equal for them to say that the word being with God signifies that the word was known to God but not to Men doth them no good the knowledge of this doth comprehend the whole Mystery of our Redemption which the Son who is in the Bosom of the Father hath revealed unto us but to the thing if this imported no more but that Christ was known to the Father What could he thereby have more than we No Prerogative at all for before the Foundation of the World God knew us and We were present with him Christ was with the the Father that is had a real Existence did subsist in himself which cannot be said of us or of any Creature wherefore the Word must need have been before his Incarnation In the Third place 't is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Word was God which is properly to be understood as is * 1 Joh. 5.20 that other place we are in him that is true in his Son Jesus Christ that is the true God and eternal life and elsewhere †Tit. 1.3 God hath in due time manifested his word through preaching which is committed to me according to the commandment of God our Saviour repeated Chap. 3.4 and Chap. 2. he is called †Tit. 2.12 Rev. 19.17 the great God our Saviour Jesus Christ and in another place he is named ‖ 1 Tim. 1.1 God our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ now this God Lord and Saviour is but One and this is Jesus Christ whose Apostle he owns himself to be and the Gospel he preached * Gal. 1.12 he was taught by the Revelation of Jesus Christ who again is called †1 Tim. 2.3 God our Saviour There must be special Cause why the words God and Saviour are so often joyned together and both attributed to One Person the Lord Jesus he is God as truly and really as he is Saviour which we hope the Adversaries will not have the confidence to deny him to be in the strictest Sense though otherwise they rob him of what they can he is then a Saviour by Office and God by Nature to save Men from the Dominion of Sin from the Curse of the Law from the Devil Death and Hell requires a true real Divine Power which none but a Divine Nature is or can be possessed of Moses was relatively called God and Cyrus God 's Anointed or Messiah but they were but Types of the great Deliverer Every one knows Moses was not God nor Cyrus the Messiah but to say Christ Jesus is called God though he be not is the effect of a brazen faced Impudence of an invincible Ignorance of the Mind or hellish Perverseness of the Heart as good as to conclude that because 't is said he is of God made unto us †1 Cor. 1.30 Wisdom righteousness sanctification and redemption therefore he is neither nor God by Nature when he saith ‖ Joh. 15.5 without me you can do nothing which may not be said of Men. The Fourth Reason out of St. John is this * Joh. 1.3 all things were made by â—him and without him was not any thing made that was made certainly the Work of Creation doth evince the Eternity of the Word for the Workman must be before his Work and the Creator before the Creature now the Word being the Maker must need be before Mary here they would cavil and confine this making of Things within the Work of the New Creation or renewing of the Creature but the following Words without him was not any thing made that was made are universal and comprehend every thing Temporal or Spiritual Creation of the World or Regeneration of Men though we own the Creation of the World is the scope of the place compared with Coloss 1.15 All things were created by him and for him which doth appear out of ver 10. the world was made by him and God created all things by Jesus Christ Ephes 3.9 and to remove all grounds of Exception we have it in the Plural Number which doth include all †Heb. 11.3 the worlds were framed by the word of God Another Reason might be brought out of ver 14. of this same Gospel the word was made flesh but this we shall by the Grace of God bring in under another Head In Scripture we have several places which either do express or imply two Natures in the Person of our blessed Lord and Saviour the Prophet Isaiah doth among others afford us Two very considerable the first is this * Isa 7.14 Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son and shall call his name Immanuel this affords several things seriously but now briefly to be thought upon this Prophecy is a sign given Ahaz King of Judah to Comfort him when the Kings of Israel and of Syria came up against him with a Promise that they should not prevail and that he might be confirmed and assured of the performance he is bidden to ask a Sign which he refusing to do gave for Reason he would not tempt God whereupon is made this Gospel-Promise which was performed at the time of the Conception and Birth of our blessed Saviour whose Mother was a Virgin and whose Name was Immanuel a Name given him at that time by the Prophet through God's own appointment and when the Angel delivered his Message to Mary he makes use of some of the Words of the Prophet * Luk. 1.31 thou shalt conceive and bring forth a Son and shalt call his Name Jesus because he was to save his People and when the thing was fulfilled the Evangelist doth point at and quote this Prophecy adding the Interpretation of the Name ‖ Matt. 1.21 Immanuel God with us So there is no doubt to be made that this wholly and only related to our Saviour never any other Virgin did conceive and bring forth never was the Name Immanuel given any one else and cannot be wrested so as to be given to any Son to be born of Ahaz for some Reason which I presently shall produce Immanuel is God with a Divine Essence Christ is the Immanuel so we must conclude he hath the Divine Essence for God with us hath the Divine Essence and God with us is Immanuel the Name God is not spoken of Angels of no King or Magistrate of no Idols which are the several significations of the Word God used in Scripture wherefore he whom this Name is given to must be the true essential God and this same Evangelical Prophet in the next Chapter but one after this calls him by the Name used in this place and the Word El which makes the latter end of the Name doth not barely signify God but the Mighty God this Word makes part of that of Michael whose signification is who is like unto thee thou mighty God and he that beareth it is called * Jud. 9. Archangel Prince of Angels for Angels are called †Rev. 12.7 his and
him they Worship This very Name of Michael is given to the Messiah ‖ Dan. 12.1 and at that time shall Michael stand up the great Prince which standeth for the children of thy people which is a Prophecy of Christ's coming wherein he is called El Michael and the Great Prince to this Emmanuel relates what the Evangelist says of the Word that is Christ how being made Flesh he dwelt among us is not this the same as God with us And this not obscurely for he adds * Joh. 1.14 and we beheld his glory the glory as of the only begotten of the father he not only had Glory but is called Lord of Glory before his Ascension into and Glorification in Heaven and for certain the Name of Lord or King of Glory is proper to the true essential God if David †Psal 24.10 speaks Truth now this dwelling of God is not said to be in but with Men which doth import a Person living and conversing with Men fully expressed in the following Text ‖ Rev. 21 3. Behold the tabernacle of God is with men and he will dwell with them and they shall be his people and God himself shall be with them and be their God all this done not by proxy but in Person 't is said God himself so that great and infinite God whom the Heavens of Heavens cannot contain chose our Human Nature to dwell in as in a Tabernacle whereof the Tabernacle in the Wilderness was a Type as the Temple was afterwards we know there was a Vail this the Apostle alludeth to when he saith * Heb. 10.20 thorough the vail that is to say the flesh so that his Body and Human Nature is the place he chose to dwell in and that same Nature is as a Vail to qualify that Glory which no Man could behold for as the People could not behold Moses his Face when he came from God so that it was necessary he should put on a Vail How then could Man have beholden the Glory and Brightness of the Son of God and how could he have dwelt amonst and conversed with them except he had put on the Vail of his Flesh We must then necessarily conclude he was El the Mighty God before he was Immanuel God with us As to that great incomprehensible and adorable Mystery of the Incarnation of the Second Person of the most Holy Trinity whereby the Divine and Human Natures were mediatly and the Person immediatly united to the Nature 't is to be observed that 't is not by a Consubstantial Union such as the Three Persons of the most Holy Trinity are united one with another neither is it a Substantial Union only by Essence and Vertue as the Essence of Christ is present with every thing not by a presence of Grace only not Physical as Form and Matter are united not as one Friend is united to one another as the Soul of Jouathan was knit with the Soul of * 1 Sam. 18.1 David not mystical only or in the same manner as Christ dwelleth in Believers not Sacramental as Christ is in the Bread and Wine of the Lord's Supper but 't is a Personal Union and that without any Change of or in the Divine Person without a renting of the Natures against the Nestorians or Confusion of the same against the Eutychians also without any Change and Separation Now I am upon this high Mystery of the Incarnation by the Evangelist expressed in these words the word was made flesh I shall take notice of some few things doth not the expression which is parallel with this †1 Joh. 4.2 that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh mean that Christ the Word was in being before he was made Flesh or came in the Flesh and that this Being was according to the Spirit which in Scripture is opposed to the Flesh and that he had a spiritual Existence before he took our human Nature signified by the word Flesh for according to Scripture Flesh signifies human Nature so to be made Flesh to assume human Nature let one place serve instead of many ‖ Gal. 2.16 by the works of the law shall no flesh that is no Man be justified The Son of God was first afterwards he was manifested as to make use of a Comparison in a thing which admits none in matters of God's Decrees the Decree is before the Declaration of it for the Decree is from all Eternity but the Declaration only in time what is said of Christ * Gal. 4.4 that he was made of a woman is considerable for it implies that he was made Man and took upon him our Nature not out of the Substance of any Man but only of a Woman his Body was formed in the blessed Virgin 's Womb without any help of Man so he became Man only by the Woman's side but he was Son of God before he was made of a Woman and he must need have had a Being before he was sent forth he was with God before God sent him which is opposed to his appearing and being manifested to the World * 1 Joh. 1 2. we shew unto you that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested unto us he was with the Father existed and had a Being before he was manifested unto us dwelt and pitched his Tabernacle among us it is observable out of that place where it is said of our blessed Saviour †Heb. 2.16 he took on him the seed of Abraham the word took in the Original signifies also to take and lay hold or caught hold as he did of sinking Peter to save him from drowning so he caught hold of Mankind when it was ready to sink Against this they say there can be no such Union of Divine and Human Nature in one Person but that such an Union is not unpossible it may be illustrated out of the Union of our Soul with our Body which are of two different Natures spiritual and material invisible and visible immortal and mortal and tho' we cannot conceive the Reason it ought to be no Prejudice neither can we conceive the manner of their Union which yet is true and certain we most certainly believe some things to be tho' we do not at all comprehend the manner of it and altho' there be an infinite disproportion between God and Man yet that is no just Prejudice against the Union of Divinity with Humanity with harbouring such Notions Men do too much measure God by themselves who because they are evil are not capable of so much Goodness and out of Pride are apt to say so much Condescention becomes not God but God knows better than we what becomes him and what we cannot comprehend of him we ought to admire and adore God's Ways are not like our Ways nor his Thoughts like our Thoughts and tho' he condescends never so low yet is ever sure of his Greatness which nothing can take away from him This Humiliation or
and what John expresses thus the word was made flesh S. Paul calls it †1 Tim. 3.16 God was manifest in the flesh if by the word Flesh human Nature be meaned as certainly it is then this imports that God appeared made himself known and was manifest in assuming our human Nature and that the God that was thus made Flesh and was manifest is Christ Jesus the second Person of the Godhead who being in the Form that is in the Nature of God for the Nature is the being of a thing and the Form gives that Being well Jesus Christ in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God ‖ Phil. 2.6 7. because it was his right 〈◊〉 took upon him the form of a servant and was made in the likeness of men and being found in fashion as a man he was God before he was made in that likeness this is plain that a God became man he was made that which he was not yet ceased not to be that which he was That this God that was made Flesh and manifest in the Flesh and found in the likeness of men here is explained what we must understand by Flesh was the Son of God the second Person of the most holy Trinity is declared elsewhere * Rom. 8.3 God sending his own Son in likeness of sinful flesh All these representing Christ as God and as man doth clearly demonstrate him to be both God and man Another place there is much to our purpose 't is this †Rom. 9.5 of whom the Israelites as concerning the flesh Christ came who is over all God blessed for ever this restriction as concerning the Flesh doth imply that Christ came not from the Jews concerning some other thing this settles two Relations in Christ one according to the Flesh as expressed Acts 2.30 what must the other be Scripture usually doth oppose the Spirit to the Flesh and the Flesh to the Spirit so in Christ there must be a Principle that is spiritual or else this restriction according to the Flesh were frivolous and not pertinent one thing cannot be distinguished of it self a thing is in it self but one thing and Distinctions are between different things for no one thing doth differ from it self Now that as there is in Christ a principle concerning the Flesh and another according to the Spirit anon we shall by the Grace of God have occasion to speak of but now thus far we must say that as by the Flesh his Humanity is meaned so is his divine Nature by the Spirit for * 1 Joh. 4.24 2 Cor. 3.17 God is a Spirit The Text we now are upon is remarkable upon several accounts our blessed Saviour as 't is very well known was a Jew born of the Seed of Abraham of the Tribe of Judah and of the Family of David this is the Apostle's meaning when he saith of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came which doth necessarily imply he came not of them concerning some other thing in him the Pedigree of his Manhood was indeed derived from thence but it had been in vain there to have sought for another Genealogy of this Melchisedec The Article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 joyned with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shews how in him besides human Nature there was another for S. Paul who troubleth not his Readers with superfluous Expressions would not have added those words except in Christ had been another Nature or to what purpose say according to the flesh if he had been a meer man and herein chiefly lyes the Prerogative of the Jews that Christ who is God was born amongst them Their Priviledge doth not herein consist that Moses Joâ—huah Elijah John Baptist c. were born amongst them they all were but Men but that Christ was because he is God for this he addeth as the great reason and speaketh of his divine Nature who is over all God blessed for ever he saith not is called but is he is God over all the Fathers of the same stock thaâ— were born of the Jews before him or over all things whatsoever The words blessed for ever are in Scripture attributed to the true eternal God and even in our Saviour's time when the Jews said the blessed they meaned the true God Thus the High Priest asked the Lord Jesus †Mark 14.61 Art thou the Christ the son of the blessed which another Evangelist expresses thus ‖ Luke 20 70. Art thou the son of God In another place the same Apostle affords a convincing Proof of this Truth that in Christ are two Natures where he speaks of them thus * Rom. 1.3 4. Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh and declared to be the son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness by the resurrection from the dead Wherein S. Paul teaches in what respect Christ is the Son of God not according to the Flesh for thus he is the Son of man of the Seed of David but according to the Spirit of Holiness which is the Spirit of God's Nature and according to that Spirit he hath been declared to be the Son of God with Power Certainly the Opposition used by the Apostle sheweth he cannot be Son of God upon both accounts but only upon one for if he had been according to both Paul would have said declared the Son of God as to the Flesh and as to the Spirit and herein would have made no difference between the Son of God according to the Flesh and according to the Spirit for as it is contrary to * Rom. 9.5 Scripture to call the Lord Jesus God according to the Flesh for God and Flesh are opposite so 't is contrary to say Christ is Son of God according to the Flesh for by the same reason one is said to be Son of God by the same he may be call'd God as we see it both joyned †Psal 82.6 I have said ye are God's and all of you are children of the most high And we read where the Jews upbraided our Saviour ‖ Joh. 10.33 36. that he made himself God that is absolutely he renders the words thus I said I am the son of God Jesus Christ is said * Phil. 2.5 6 7 8. to be in the form of God and made in the likeness of men 't is not said Made in the form of God but being his being is related to God and made to man he was God but made man he was made in the likeness of men and form'd in fashion as a man certainly here are two Natures asserted divine and human whence we say that as by his Incarnation he was really man so as surely his being in the form of God signifies that he was really God before he became man as he was man after his being born of the Virgin Mary These Expressions conclude for both his Deity and Humanity and if
there was any difference the words for the first seem stronger than those for the last for to be in the form is more than to be in the likeness because forma dat esse rei a thing hath being from its Form or Nature but he gave sufficient and great demonstration of both Natures in him to those among whom he did converse Socinians would wrest the Text of Luke 1.3 〈◊〉 The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the power of the highest shall over-shadow thee therefore that also which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God They would have the Particle therefore to signifie the Cause wherefore Christ was to be called the Son of God that is that miraculous Conception by the Holy Ghost but no such thing may be deduced 't is not the Cause but the Consequence or Inference which is signified by the words therefore and wherefore by which Particles we usually draw Conclusions from Premises whether they be Causes Effects or Signs or that which upon any other account whatsoever may be deduced therefrom And in this place out of the scope thereof it cannot be demonstrated out of any Circumstances that the Conception by the Holy Ghost is the true cause why Christ was to be called the Son of God 't is not upon the account of that manner of his Conception for then for that same cause either Christ would call himself or be called by others Son of God else the Angel's Prediction should prove false by which reason he rather should not be called than called the Son of God even according to their Principles which deny the Holy Ghost to be true God but the words of the Angel do import not that he should be called once or by some few Son of God but always and generally by all that should own him to be the Son of God Besides this Exposition of theirs they can bring no Example to confirm it for in abundance of places we read Christ to be called Son of God but find none at all wherein he is called Son of God according to the Flesh And the Angel doth not say therefore he may happen to be but absolutely and publickly declareth he shall be called wherefore seeing he no where is called Son of God according to the Flesh we may necessarily conclude he is not such in that sense to be called is sometimes really to be as in that Text * 1. John 3.1 Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us that we should be called the Sons of God that is that we should really be owned and declared to be the Sons of God such as truly we are being adopted in Christ his true natural Son The word holy used gives a strong Evidence that Christ was to be called Son of God for a much better and higher reason than that he was to be born of a Virgin he shall be called Son of God because he is holy therefore not upon the account of the Flesh but by reason of his Holiness because the Holy Ghost coming upon the Virgin some holy thing was to be born of her that makes the Angel say Therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God not as to the manner of Conception but as to the thing to be conceived though by the Angel it be not expressed how great was that Holiness we may well conceive it to be that highest and infinite Holiness as becomes the Son of God wherefore Isaiah in his Prophecy of him calls him as already observed the mighty God Elizabeth calls him Luke 1.43 her Lord the Angel calls him ‖ Chap. 2.11 Saviour Christ the Lord and Daniel * Dan. 9.24 He was anointed the most Holy Before the wise Men fell down and worshipped him which they were sent to do and to that purpose guided by a Star †Mat. 2.2 11. and according to the Prophecies ‖ Psal 72.10 offered him Gifts and Presents as to a King for under that Name his Birth was declared to them and promised therefore the Holiness of Christ is the Holiness of God and of him who is by Nature Lord and King The Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and or also which follows therefore is not in vain but shews a Comparison and is related not to the word called but to be born and the sense is not only that word which from Eternity is born of God is Son of God but that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God because that eternal Son of God shall take human Nature and be born of thee And this is one of the things which the Holy Ghost coming upon the Virgin was to do namely that she should conceive without Man and conceive a Man him who from eternity is according to divine Nature the Son of God which could not otherwise be effected than with the Holy Ghost uniting human Nature which was to be formed out of her own Blood and Substance sanctified before and preserved from Sin and Corruption with the Person of the Son Men must not think there is in Scripture the least tittle or word without cause for the Holy Ghost doth and saith nothing in vain Another reason is the Angel saith Christ shall be called the Son not of the Holy Ghost but of God the Father Now if the manner of this Conception was the cause of his being called Son of God he should properly be the Son of the Holy Ghost not of the Father for he is said to be conceived by the Holy Ghost but they deny the Holy Ghost to be a Person yet actiones sunt suppositorum is a Rule in Philosophy and this Conceiving being an Act the Holy Ghost must be a Person for I defie them to shew any thing to be done but by a Person Scripture in the quoted place Rom. 1.3 the Question being about Christ's being the Son of God excludes the Flesh to attribute it to the Spirit but Socinians would have it according to both yet S. Paul's scope is to teach how he is Son of God according to the Flesh and how according to the Spirit as to the first he explains himself when he saith which was made of the seed of David as to be second he declareth his meaning when he saith he was declared Son of God with power whence we may conclude he saith Christ to be called and really be the Son of God not according to the Flesh but to the Spirit or else he had not sufficiently declared in what sense he is the son of God and 't is clear how he opposes the Flesh to the Spirit according to the first he was made of the Seed of David according to the last he was declared the Son of God Withal Scipture would have such a Son of God as is without Father c. such as Melchisedec no mention being made of his Father Mother or Genealogy
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
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
to wrest it the Question is about Christ's Age the Jews would measure it by what appears of him and as he is a Man in which respect he denieth not what in their Sense they say about his Age but he will lead them farther and make them look higher and consider him for what he was as he had said to them from the beginning namely the Son of God sent by the Father to save the World To that purpose upon this occasion he mentions that his appearing unto Abraham in the plain of Mamre for 't is said the Lord appeared Gen. 18.1 2. and Abraham knew him among the two Angels in the shape of Men by his addressing himself to him paying the respect of bowing himself towards the Ground and calling him my Lord this Visit under the Figure of a Man whereby he gave him earnest and assurance how he would dwell among Men when of his Seed he would be made Flesh this I say was a notable means whereby Abraham saw his Day and rejoyced the Day of that Visit he saw with the Eye of his Body and the Day of his Incarnation with the Eye of Faith which our Saviour in this present Text of John lays not upon the Promise of his coming but upon his pre-existence unto his Incarnation Now contrary to this scope of the place Socinians do forge this to be the meaning according to a transposition they make of the Words I before Abraham be made say to you that I am that is Christ not considering that Abraham was long before and dead as the Jews said but then they go farther with his being made they understand Father of many Nations I shall say but very few words as to the Grammatical Construction for indeed the Matter and true Meaning is plainly this I was existed and had a Being before Abraham was born but was renders the Sense when be or is doth alter it because it being spoken of Abraham doth relate to time past and not to come * Gen. 17. ◠Abram had his Name changed into that of Abraham signifying a Father of Nations a Thousand and several Hundreds of Years before Christ yet they would have him to be such only after the coming of our Saviour into the World as if he had not been so before when Paul calls him the Father of us all believers They rise a Difficulty also about the word I am instead of I was which is an usual Enallage in Scripture when the present time is used for the praeterit or past and here there is a Reason for it which is this that the present Tense is more proper than the praeterit to represent God's permanent Being besides that the Evangelist useth the present least Christ should seem to speak of a non-perpetual of a discontinued and interrupted Being and Existence by reason of the several Opinions about him as if he was John Baptist raised from the dead Elijah Jeremiah or some other Now the use of the present Tense was very proper to remove all Grounds of entertaining such Thoughts and to signify a constant permanent and unchangeable Being in Scripture we have Instances of this how when God is described the Verb I am in the present Tense answers together to the Verb of the praeterit as Psal 90.2 and Prov. 8.24 25. this doth most properly express an uninterrupted and immutable Being which passeth not away such is God's such also is Christ's fully and unquestionably described in all Tenses which is much to our present purpose †Heb. 13.8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday to day and for ever Abraham rejoyced at that Day when he invited and entertain'd in his House the Son of God under the shape of a Man for tho' there were three one of them he called my Lord and chiefly addressed himself to him Gen. 18. who promised of himself and in his own Name to give him a Son by Sarah shall I hide said the Lord from Abraham that thing which I do and afterwards communed with him surely Abraham was glad to see this day But when our Saviour saith before Abraham was I am he intended thereby to give himself some preference before Abraham the Name I am which on this occasion he makes use of is observable for it doth relate to that Name which God gave himself when he sent Moses into Egypt * Exod 3.14 Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel I am hath sent me which Name is proper to God whereunto in the New Testament answers that of Alpha and Omega Rev. 18.11 and 12.13 which the Lord Jesus attributes unto himself and if he created the World that is made of nothing as by God's Grace we shall prove in its place Heb. 1.12 he must need have been before Abraham and as he made so he shall destroy or change it whether as to the Substance or only as to the Quality 't is not material to our purpose but whilst Heavens and Earth shall wax old and be chang'd 't is said of him but thou art the same and thy years shall not fail by these different Expressions one and the same thing namely his absolutely unchangable and eternal Existence is intended which being joyn'd with his other Attributes for our good may prevent all the Fears and answer all the Doubts of those that trust in him But let us take notice of the Injury which unworthily they attempt to put upon Christ as if he were only in Jest and to trick the Jews with not answering the thing in question which is about the time when Christ was whether or not before Abraham What he was Whether something more Excellent and more Antient than a Man The Jews Objection was very specious How could one whom they look'd upon a meer Man not fifty Years old have seen Abraham Well our Saviour answers directly to the Point that he was before Abraham but Socinians with their wicked Sophistry would unworthily make him shuffle the matter for instead of making him to answer how it could be that within such a vast distance of time he and Abraham could have seen one another they bring him only as mentioning the time when he was speaking to them to this purpose before Abram be Abraham that is the Father of many Nations I say unto you I am the Christ this quibbling Trick I would think they learned of Papists though I take Socinians capable to forge as bad as any Papists who in the case of the Malefactor upon the Cross with altering a Comma do quite alter the Sense our Saviour thus speaking to him verily I say unto thee * Luk. 23.43 to day thou shalt be with me in paradise but to settle their Purgatory instead of to day thou shalt be c. they would have it I say unto thee to day I would find to know what a cause Christ hath given them to pass such a Judgment upon him who ever used to answer to the purpose to the
unto the Son of Man this could not be the Father and if any doubt should remain 't is cleared ver 17 18. for St. John having known him fell at his Feet he said not as the Angel see thou do not but he said to him fear not I am he that liveth and was dead which cannot be spoken of the Father who never died and these words I am Alpha and Omega the beginning and the end are spoken * Rev. 21.6 again and all the general Words spoken asunder in this Book are together repeated I am Alpha and Omega Chap. 22.13 the beginning and the end the first and the last and here as they began so they will end for they will own Christ to be the first because say they he is the first that shewed Men the way of Salvation But did not the Prophets and John Baptist before Christ was manifested and preached the Gospel shew Men the way of Salvation Which way did Patriarchs Prophets and Miartyrs go to Heaven and could be saved if they had not known the way to Salvation before Christ began to preach the Gospel And were not after his Ascension many things conducing to the way of Salvation declared by his Apostles If he be the first only because he first taught Men the way to Glory and Immortality he being the last as well as the first must also be the last to enter into it which how false it is let the Enemies themselves be the Judges There is one thing more material to prove the Eternity of Christ which I must not omit for as what I have said proves him to have been before Abraham and other Patriarchs so what remains will shew him to have been before the World it self the words are plain * 1 John 17.5 And now O Father glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world began Our blessed Saviour never spoke to Men any thing but the Truth much more to his Father but most of all upon this occasion when he was about leaving the World and going to him there is a Glory which Christ desired should be made known to all namely that of the Gospel which is called the glorious Gospel and this Glory of Christ was effected in the Preaching thereof all the World over Paul alone published it †Rom. 15.19 from Jerusalem into Illyricum the Gospel certainly tended to the Glory of God the Father's Mercy being highly revealed therein and of this he saith I have glorified thee on the earth and as he had glorified the Father making known his Name and Glory unto Men which before had never been done to that degree this work which the Father had given him to do being over he now speaks for himself and now O Father glorify thou me with thine own self To be glorified with God is to be glorified with the same Glory which he hath in Heaven with God in the Bosom and at the Right Hand of the â—ather with an equal Majesty and Honour with the Father served by innumerable Legions of Angels which is a Glory unknown to the World this is a Glory which the Son of God had before the World was This Stile of Scripture before the World was signifies Eternity for there was nothing created before the World seeing in the beginning God created Heaven and Earth and every thing therein contained but John saith not in the beginning the Word was made or began to be but was had his being consequently eternal for beyond the beginning of the World there is nothing but Eternity time began at the Creation I say if Christ had a Glory with the Father before the World was then Christ was before the World for a Glory he could not have except he had a Being but here Christ says he had a Glory with the Father before the World was and we believe he speaks Truth therefore Christ was before the World this cannot be understood of Human Nature which he took only in time long after the World was created therefore it must be spoken of a Divine Nature for before the Creation of the World there was nothing but God Notwithstanding this positive Truth they give our blessed Saviour the lye and say he had no real Glory before the World was but only by a Decree and Appointment he was ordained to have a Glory Good Lord When will this People let the Son of God have his own They go about to rob him wholly or in part of every thing he hath Christ says not the Glory which thou didst decree or ordain for me but which I had was in possession of and enjoyed To have a title to and be in possession of a thing are two very different things we defie them even to give any instance how to have absolutely taken signifies to be appointed to have if after this rate Men allow their Fancies such a latitude as to forge new and unusual Significations to the words of Christ we can be sure of nothing Whensoever any one is absolutely said to have a thing it implys him to be at the same time for he that is not can have nothing 't is true we are said * 2 Cor. 5.1 Heb. 10.34 to have a building of God an house not made with hands eternal in the heavens and to have in heaven a better and an induring substance Believers are indeed said to have such things but when are they said so certainly not before the World was nor before they were themselves but after they are What is said also * 2 Tim. 1.9 of the grace which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began makes nothing against us 't is one thing to have something given us and another actually to have it the first is the act of the Giver the second of the Receiver we have not now really that which is given us till after we received it one may have a Place in Reversion which may be he shall never have Lands may be given me by a Will which I cannot be laid to have till I am actually in possession thereof as it never was heard of that any one gave any thing before he was so none can receive any thing before he is besides in the Text now in question 't is not simply said that Grace was given us but given us in Christ Jesus now this Grace is so given us in Christ that he must have it before he can communicate it unto us so then we cannot be said to have a thing when we have it not though we be appointed to have it These two things are different Who may say that Paul was an Apostle of Jesus Christ had Faith in Christ Charity and brotherly Love when he was an Unbeliever Contra rationem nemo sobrius cont scripturam nemo Christianus cont Ecclesiam nemo pacificus a Blasphemer and Persecuter To Socinians we may apply this Saying No Man may be called sober
all men knowing him to be one with the Father may honour the Son even as they honour the Father whereby he demonstrates himself to be God for divine honour belongs to none else for thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve We must love honour and worship one person of the God-head as well as the other as we love God in the person of the Father so we must love God in the person of the Son and of the Holy Ghost for if any man loves not the Lord Jesus Christ let him be an Athema 1 Cor. 16.22 Maran-atha He who loveth not the Son loveth not the Father and he who loves not the Holy Ghost loveth not the Father nor the Son Here I bring in point of worship the instance of love because without it no true worship We ought not to worship God otherwise than he hath declared in his word he that woshipeth not God the Father Son and Holy Ghost doth not worship God as he ought 't is not enough to worship God as God essentially but also he must be in the three persons for all three are the object of worship or else our Religion is vain and we are to look not only to the object but also to the order of worship the Father through the Son John 16. and by the Son to go to the Father and so by the means of the Holy Ghost we go to both for we know not what we should pray for as we ought Rom. â— 26 1 Cor. 12.3 but the spirit helpeth our infirmities and maketh intercession for us Neither can one say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost And in giving glory to God 't is not enough to glorifie him except it be in the three persons Father Son and Holy Ghost And the consideration of this Mistery of one God in three persons which ought to be our guide in worshiping that eternal and infinite Being ought to teach us modesty and humility which is so essential in our serving God to adore the incomprehensibility of these high things the Majesty of God and the Mistery of his Son 's being made Flesh and be made sensible of our weakness and then endeavour to bring into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ 2 Cor. 10.5 Here I cannot forbear inserting the words of two eminent Doctors of the Primitive Church Ambros de fid ad gratian lib. 1. cap. 5. Mihi impossibile est saith one generationis scire secretum mens deficit voxsilet non mea tantum sed Angelorum licet scire quod natus fit non licet discutere quomodo natus sit illud negare mihi non licet hoc quaerere metus 'T is impossible for me to know the secret of that Generation my understanding faileth me my mouth is stopt 't is lawful not only for me but also for Angels to know He is born but 't is not lawful to enquire how he is born that I cannot deny but I am afraid to search into this The other saith filium esse a deo patre immortali genitum novi sed quemadmodum ignoro spiritum ex co procedere scio Chrisost hom de incomprehens dei natura sed quemadmodum nescio I know the Son to be begotten of the immortal Father but in what manner I cannot tell I know the Holy Ghost to proceed from him but how I know not These being just come into my thoughts though they exactly are not belonging to the present part of our discourse yet being much to the purpose of the whole I here have set them down Indeed in things of that nature men ought to yield an obedience of Faith and believe unity of Nature and Trinity of Persons for numero deus impare gaudet so we must worship one God in three persons Our present purpose is to prove Christ to be true Essential Eternal God because the same worship due only to the true Eternal God is rendred unto him as anon we shall by the grace of God make it appear But now somethings must be premised which can contribute towards the better understanding of the point first Christ's enemies are not agreed in this particular one Valentinus Gentilis by us named in the beginning of this Discourse and some others do flatly deny Christ this Divine Worship because they disown him essentially to be God and no divine worship is to be rendred to the Creature which to do is Idolatry but Socinus said he is to be worshiped but with such restrictions as such a worship is all most no better than none at all They would have him to be worshiped only after his resurrection and that the resurection was the standing sign and true reason why one whom God raised from the dead should be worshiped but if this be true then the Son of the Widow of Sarepta of the Shunamite 1 Kings 17.22 2 Kings 4.34 c. Chap. 13.21 and of the dead man that having touched the bones of Elisha was revived under the Old Testament and the Son of the Woman of Naim and the daughter of Jairus Lazarus Dorcas and Eutichus under the New are to be worshiped according to this rule of theirs Wherefore some other cause than this must be assigned why Christ must be worshiped they say he ought to be so as he is Mediator we own that Christ Mediator is to be worshiped but that honour belongs to him in relation to his Deity for when God bringeth in the first born into the world Heb. 1.6 he saith and let all the Angels of God worship him he is called first begotten not in relation to his humanity for many were Children of God before his Birth but in respect to his eternal generation He is to be adored by Angels though he be not their Mediator when we adore Christ as Mediator 't is not in relation to his Office abstracted from his Deity but as he is true God In this sence the Lamb that was slain is worthy to receive as he did by the Angels Rev. 5.12 the Beasts and the Elders honour and glory and blessing because in his humane nature dwelleth all the fullness of the God-head bodily Colos 2.9 The Ark was not worshiped but God in the Ark as not the Bush but God in the Bush not the ground which Moses stood upon but God in that place sanctified by his special presence and so in several other places of the Old Testament Indeed Christ is to be worshiped Phil. 2.7 though in the form of a Servant and made a little lower than the Angels though not as a Servant or as lower than the Angels by which all God would have him to be adored for no other cause but for his divine nature V. 6. the form of God whereby he shall remained equal with the Father in his state of humiliation As Angels are commanded to worship Christ so is the Church under the
Jews in his Nature and Power with making a parallel between the Father and himself the more because he useth not a pronoun relative but possessive not the Father but my Father my father worketh hitherto and I work not the Father that is a Common Father as God is to all but my Father in a most special and true manner who hath communicated his nature unto me Now that equality with the Father he on another account doth insist upon but he doth not in the least go about to shew that he made not himself equal with the Father which certainly he would have done if it had not been true and only a mistake in them and thereby he could have calmed their rage on the contrary he speaks to confirm this equality of his with the Father upon the account of his divine power manifested in his works one whereof upon occasion was the restoring the impotent Man that had the infirmity for 38 years to the use of his Limbs and perfect Health which none could deny to have been done by a divine Power Now none but God can have a power equal with God for God's power is infinite but that of any Creature is finite and so there is no equality between finite and infinite this equality of Power and Working is here clearly demonstrated For what things soever the Father doth these also doth the Son likewise That is the Father doth nothing but what the Son doth also and this he instanceth in the case of raising the dead which none but a Divine and Infinite Power can Effect For as the Father raiseth up the dead and quickeneth them even so the Son quickeneth whom he will That is without exception he can do what he will now 't is an Attribute of God Psal 115.3 and 135.6 to do what it pleaseth him in Heaven in Earth and in the Sea Because the Jews believed not our Saviour to be more than a Man he in the exercise of his Prophetical Office went often about both in his Discourses and Works to insinuate into them that he was God and in this place he presses it much upon them both by what I already said and by what he addeth in v. 22. The Father judgeth no man but hath committed all judgment unto the Son and the end which in so doing the Father and he in declaring it proposed unto themselves is this that all men should honour the Son even as they honour the Father as the Son in Nature and Power is equal with the Father so he ought equally to be honoured or worshiped as the Father is and this Divine Honour is so equally due to both that he which honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father for the Father cannot and will not be honoured that is worshiped without him for honour rendred unto God is the same as religious worship The Son must be honoured in the same nature manner and degree as the Father is One would think this to be plain and clear enough beyond all exception yet they Cavil thus the word as doth not import an equal honour but only a likeness and this they go about to confirm out of two places the first is every man that hath this hope in him 1 Joh. 3.3 1 Pet. 1.15 purifieth himself even as he is pure the other is but as he which hath called you is holy so be ye holy in all manner of conversation We answer first in the Text of Peter the word as is not sicut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but secundum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 't is a Preposition not an Adverb The word as doth not always signifie a similitude but some times is a Particle of Causality thus in the Gospel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Joh. 1.14 the glory as of the only begotten That is because he is the only begotten of the Father So in another place 2 Cor. 3.18 We all are changed into the same image from glory to glory even as by the same spirit of the Lord. Sometimes the word like signifies equality 2 Pet. 1.1 thus the like precious faith not only of similitude but of the same nature equally precious In the two objected places and in our Text there are indeed duties expressed but different in that of John here 't is in relation to God in the others as to our selves the first doth regard the worship of God the other holiness in our selves in our Text a parity and equality is implied which is not in the others the difference of the sense is grounded upon two things First of the scope of the spirit of God in those places Secondly of the Analogy of Faith To know the scope of the Text we now are upon one must go back to verse 18. the cause of the Jews hatred and seeking to kill our Saviour was because he made himself equal with God which he to shew they had no cause to take exceptions against it as we said before proves it by an equality of power in raising the Dead and of judging the world As to this last he goeth further for he saith the Father judgeth no man but hath committed all judgment unto him but what doth all this aim at The scope is to the end that all men should honour the Son even as they honour the Father God the Father will have all men to honour his Son as they honour him without any difference because his Son is equal with him and this affirmative is strengthned with a negative for he that honoureth not the Son Josn 14.1 honoureth not the Father so that to honour one is to honour the other and one cannot well honour the Father except he equally honoureth the Son this is the true sense of the place We ought to honour the Son in the same sense and manner as we must believe in him that is as much and as well as we are to believe in the Father that is to put our whole trust and confidence in the Son as in the Father so all the honour both in quantity and quality which we render to the Father must be given to the Son Now as to the Analogy of Faith that is that this sense doth not contradict but well agree with other Scriptures it appears out of this the Great Commandment and Duty of Man is as our Saviour saith Thou shalt love the Lord thy God Matth. 22.37 Mark 10.27 with all thy heart and with all thy Soul and with all thy mind and with all thy strength None but the true God the God of Israel is so to be loved obeyed and honoured And is not our Blessed Saviour thus to be beloved and honoured Love is the true Ground of honour We ought to love Christ before all things that are near and dear unto us Matth. 10.37 38 39. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me and he that loveth son or daughter more than me◠is not worthy of me he
that findeth his life shall lose it and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it Luke 14.26 Nay If any man come to me and hate not his father and mother and wife and children and brethren yea and his own life he cannot be my disciple Is not this the manner of love which God requireth of us and doth not this lay upon us a duty to love Christ with all our heart with all our soul with all our mind and with all our strength thus this honour is proper for and ought equally to be rendered to the Father and to the Son for all men ought to honour the Son as they honour the Father I hope the sense we give the Text is sufficiently proved how all men without distinction or exceptionare bound to honour the Son as they honour the Father and the manner is by our Saviour prescribed in spirit and truth Joh. 4.24 Now I must shew how the Texts they bring against us cannot admit of the sense which ours doth because 't is contrary to the Scope of the Apostles and to the Analogy of Faith First to the scope for the end of both Apostles 1 Thes 4.7 Luk. 1.74 75. Psal 93.5 Heb. 11.6 Heb. 12.14 is to exhort Christians to study and labour after Purity and Holiness which they are called unto All that are adopted Children ought to walk in holiness because holiness becomes the house of God and as without faith 't is impossible to please God so without holiness no man shall see the Lord. This great and necessary duty I say the two Apostles in these Texts do exhort men to strive and labour after not as to attain to such a perfection of holiness as is in God which is impossible for any Man for all that we can desire is that we may be partakers of his holiness Heb. 12.10 Mat. 5.48 and receive some degrees of it In the same sense is to be understood that other place Be ye therefore perfect as your father which is in heaven is perfect a duty we ought to study after because as much as we can we must be conformable unto God Secondly Such an interpretation would destroy the Analogy of Faith as contrary to the truth set down in other places of Scripture For though holiness be a communicable Attribute of God yet there cannot be so much as thought to be an equality between Purity and Holiness in God and those small portions he is graciously pleased to impart unto us Holiness is Essentially and Originatively in God nay Holiness is God infinitely and most simply holy and we are naturally unclean transgressors from the Womb conceived in Sin brought forth in Iniquity wallowing in our own Blood till God be pleased to wash and cleanse us to derive from himself and by his holy spirit to work some small degree of holiness in us God is most holy Luke 6.36 thrice Holy In the same sense we are commanded to be merciful as our Father also is merciful that is as far as God will be pleased to enable us we ought to follow and imitate that Pattern but not pretend or hope to arrive to the perfection of it which in both Mercy and Holiness were no less than Blasphemy wherefore such interpretations God's word doth abhor and in that place St. John saith not Every man that hath this hope hath purified in the Praetertense but in the Present purifieth himself to shew how he doth but aim at it and by degrees And St. Peter in the 16. v. explains the sense of the foregoing verse because it is written saith he be ye holy for I am holy he shews no equality or parity of holiness The word as which he used before he now renders by for as a motive and a cause why we ought to be holy Because God is holy To what I said before I shall now add at last how the word as doth in other places denote an equality as the Father knoweth me even so know I the Father John 10.15 which in the Greek word is taken for to love he equally knows and loves the Father with an Eternal and perfect Love as the Father knoweth and loveth him The words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when spoken of the Father and the Son denote an equality not a similitude as the Father hath life in himself so hath the Son life in himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Original Now to understand the foregoing places of an equality Chap 5. 26. is not contrary to other Scriptures nor to the Analogy of Faith but doth tend to the glory of both Father and Son for the rule is most true in the Text now in question he that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father that sent him but he that honoureth the Son honoureth the Father also which is a natural inference out of the place But that people who pretend to honour the Father have taken a quite contrary way to do 't which is dishonouring the Son Joh. 8.49 as he said to the Jews I honour my Father and ye dishonour me with robbing him if they could of his divine Nature and Attributes when 't is most true that he that honoureth not the Son Chap. 5.23 Chap. 12. We are baptized in Christ's name honoureth not the Father and the Father beareth witness from Heaven that he is glorified in the Son Having thus proved in general that divine worship belongs to Christ we must now come to the places which demonstrate it in the particulars As first we are baptized in his name Baptism is a divine ordinance whereby being admitted to be members of Christ's mystical body we take an Oath of Allegiance to him whereby we own him to be our God and Redeemer this is the seal of the Covenant Now no Covenant is in force till it be passed the Seal this Seal in Baptism is not only instituted by Christ but also administred in his name and authority whereby it doth appear that this is his Right which Right of his Matth. 28.19 he would make use of when he commanded all Nations to be baptized in his name None but God can institute Sacraments for none but he can bestow the grace therein represented none but the Lord of the House hath right to make Laws in his House now the Church is God's House and seeing the preaching of the Word and administration of both Sacraments therein is done by Christ's authority and in his name he is thereby not only owned but also worshiped as God and Lord of it wherefore the Church is called Christ's own house Heb. 3.6 I find indeed there was a subordination between God and Moses this being but a Servant but the same subordination between God and Moses was between the Son of God and Moses as is now of all Ministers of the Gospel under Christ Mal. 3. ◠for he is the Lord of the Temple who
expressed in Scripture the omission whereof is look't upon as a most heinous sin deserving the heaviest judgments see what character is given of those who neglect it The workers of iniquity have not called upon God Psal 53.4 'T is such a sin as deserveth no less than the wrath of God Pour out thy wrath upon the Kingdoms that have not called upon thy name And as for me Psal 79.6 saith David in another place and all that truely fear God with him I give my self unto prayer Psal 109.4 So that the best commendation under the Old and New Testaments that can be given of a man is what the Lord said to Ananias of Paul Acts 9.11 Behold he prayeth and how good a success Cornclius his prayers were crowned withall the Angel declared it unto him thy prayers are come up for a memorial before God Chap. 10.4 And it would prove a long work for one to demonstrate the necessity and excellency of that duty which I may say doth in some respect include every other thing which men owe God and hence we may conclude what a transcendent Eminency there is in Christ no less than his divinity seeing he is the proper object of a duty to be rendered to the only true God Unto the Lord Jesus as his due it is ascribed in the two branches thereof namely Prayer and Praise by Prayer we ask of Christ or of God through Christ the things we want and by Praise or Thanksgiving we return him thanks for what we received Call upon me in time of trouble Psal 50.15 I will deliver thee and thou shalt glorifie me wherein both parts are contained how many Prayers doth that chosen Vessel Paul put up to God and to Christ and how often in his Epistles doth he give thanks With us Prayer and Adoration differ not formaly only as to the Manner Order and like Circumstances but are the same in Nature diversified only according to occasion but still remaining the same as to the Essence Eyes Hands and Hearts not being lifted up upon any thing under Heaven where Christ sitteth at the right hand of the Father Socinians do thus distinguish between Adoration and Invocation the first signifieth only a reverent bowing to any one the last includeth a religious suing for help that is to be performed even by all Angels as being commanded and necessary but this only by men voluntarily yet lawful and expedient the ground of the first in Christ is Majesty as Power is of the last Thus they always clip one thing or other of his Prerogatives as if Men and Angels were not equally bound to adore and worship him for where we find let all the Angels of God worship him there 't is also written let all men honour the Son even as they honour the Father and men are as well commanded to act their part as Angels are to do theirs The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the original to worship is in the New Testament no where used but for the Religious Worship due to God alone and when 't is mentioned as done unto any but God it is remembred as their Idolatry as Rev. 13.12 15. or to forbid it as chap. 19.10 and 22.9 So the worship which God commanded Angels to render his Son is Religious by Virtue of his Authority which alone can make 〈◊〉 worship Religious Christ at his very first coming into the world and not only after his Assension was a fit object of adoration Now out of Scripture we prove how Christ was called upon and prayed to Acts 7.59 they stoned Stephen calling upon God and saying Lord Jesus receive my spirit He calls him Lord and God he was not the only one that called upon him though the circumstance of his being a dying when no help in men makes it very considerable many others called upon him for this description is made of Christians and Believers Acts 9.13.14 that they called upon him Thus Ananias Lord he hath authority Saul from the chief Priests to bind all that call on thy name all that made a profession of the Gospel Most of his Epistles Paul begins with wishing Grace Peace and Mercy not only from God the Father but also from the Lord Jesus Christ and often the same Epistles he concludeth thus the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all which is nothing else but to call upon him for Favour and Mercy for whosoever wisheth any one Grace and Peace from Christ thereby prayeth to Christ to bestow grace and favour upon such an one 2 Cor. 12.8 9. and in plain and clear terms he called upon and prayed to Christ For this thing I besought the Lord thrice and he said unto me my grace is sufficient for thee for my strength is made perfect in weakness This is to speak as God doth not only Paul called upon the Lord Jesus but saith there were some in every place that call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord 1 Cor. 1.2 to whom all as to the Church in Corinth he directed his Epistle And no wonder if they who are desirous of their spiritual wellfare do call upon the name of the Lord for he is so rich unto all that call upon him that he hath entailed Salvation upon the performance of that duty which I speak not as of my self Rom. 10.12 13. Acts 2.21 but two Apostles will be bound for it For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved saith one And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved saith another Joel 2.32 and both have a Prophet for security of what they say Now Prayer is a religious duty to be directed to none but to God all this is example But the reason is this he without whom we cannot call upon the Father must also be called upon but the Father we cannot call upon without Christ John 14.6 because none can come unto the Father but by him and he is the way But here is a command besides Chap. 16.24 hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name ask and ye shall receive There is a place in Scripture where three parts of worship due to Christ Acts 22.16 are contained and now saith Ananias unto Paul why tarriest thou be baptized and wash away thy sins calling on the name of the Lord in all three is the name of the Lord the first and last are plain but Faith is mean't by washing away sins which are washed when forgiven now our sins are forgiven when we are justified through faith in Christ Chap. 26.18 or when we are sanctified by faith that is in him Against this 't is argued out of the Preface of the Lord's Prayer our Father that there 't is spoken of the Father exclusively to the Son But in that place as in several others the word Father is not taken Personally but
Essentially exclusively not to Son and Holy Ghost but to Idols and Creatures the word Father is here taken for God as 't is when said one God and Father of all and abba-Abba-Father Ephes 4.6 Rom. 8.15 Also the Father of Spirits The words our Father are often taken for our God and Lord In those places the word Father is said relatively not to the Son Heb. 12.9 Matth. 10.21 29. Luke 30.32 John 14.13 Chap. 3.13 but to men whose Father God is The things in the Lord's Prayer asked and prayed for are asked of the Son as well as of the Father as the coming of his Kingdom the forgiveness of our Sins whence saith our Lord Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name that I will do And the words which are in Heaven do belong to the Son as to the Father and the Holy Ghost too as appeareth out of Psal 139.7 8. and Matth. 3.16 Nay as we said before the Son is called the everlasting Father And if we consider the Etymology of the word which in the Original signifieth to preserve all things we shall find he is a Father indeed by whom all things are upheld and preserved which the Holy Spirit within us beareth witness unto when our heart laying under the sense of some trouble or mercy doth on a sudden by means of an Ejaculatory Prayer either in thoughts words or both poure it self before him begging for help or giving thanks breaking out upon occasion into these or the like expressions Lord Jesus have pity on me or Lord Jesus make me thankful Thus I through the grace of God have under those several heads brought in proofs for our blessed Lord and Saviour's divinity of many more which Scripture affords I shall take notice but of few wherein he is properly and truly called God which to assert is the main drift of the word as it is the foundation of the whole Gospel for it was absolutely necessary he should be God by nature or else any man might have preached taught prayed given good example and made intercession as well as Christ and if he came into the world and dyed only to teach us good doctrine and give us good example he had done for us no more than the Apostles and Martyrs who taught good doctrine and gave good example so might as well be called our Mediators and Saviours If this had as they say been the whole work of the Mediator our redemption had been no hard matter to be performed But I say that his threefold office of Mediatorship Prophecy Kingship and Priesthood demonstrate him to be true Essential God for none of the three could perfectly have been performed but by a God himself As to the Prophetical to enlighten the understanding and effectually to turn the heart as to the Regal to defend Believers against the Power of Satan and as to the Priestly to obtain forgiveness of Sins favour of God and glory none of these could be obtained but by him who is infinite as in Power so in Nature there is an infinite distance between God who is infinite and every finite Creature no proportion between Infinite and Finite Scripture owneth nothing but God to be higher than Angels now Christ is higher and above all Angels Besides that the necessity of satisfaction to be given to Divine Justice doth argue a necessity for Christ to be God for the satisfaction could not have been adequate as it ought to be except he was God and this divinity in him doth prove the plurality of persons in the God-head which is the whole of the difficulty alledged against the most holy Trinity Certainly the great design of the Apostles and others was to preach Christ to be truely and really God Son of God whereby their Ministry was exalted this was the foundation they were to build upon Acts 8.37 The Eunuch must make this Confession I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God before he could be baptized so did every one else being converted to the Faith this in our Religion is the first thing to be known and preached thus Paul after his Conversion Chap. 9.20 the first thing he did was to preach that Christ is the Son of God for that was the great question the Jews denyed him not to be Man Son of Man but he went about to convince them how also he was God Son of God and he was by Nature God as certainly as by nature he was Man Wherefore he would raise the thoughts of the Corinthians from the consideration of Christ's humanity to that of his Deity when he saith 2 Cor. 5.16 though we have known Christ after the flesh yet now henceforth know we him no more after the flesh but according to the spirit not in the humane but in the divine nature according to which he is called by the glorious names of the holy one Act. 3.14 15. 1 Cor. 2.8 and the just the prince of life and the Lord of glory our Blessed Saviour who when he was in the world had so often declared himself to be the Son of God in a proper sense after his Ascension when he had a full possession of that glory as it were to confirm from Heaven what he had declared upon Earth in the Revelation he made to that disciple of his who doth so eminently bear witness of his divinity 1 Joh. 4.14 15. when he saith we have seen and do testifie that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world and whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God God dwelleth in him and he in God and not otherwise I say on that occasion the Lord Jesus from Heaven proclaims himself to be Son of God in the letter to the Angel of the Church in Thiatira with this glorious description Rev. 2.18 compared with chap. 1.14 15. These things saith the Son of God who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire and his feet like unto fine brass Tho his enemies would not hear him upon earth during the time of his humiliation when through his Passive Obedience he was about performing the first part of his Priestly Office to satisfie divine Justice and make expiation for our sins I think now they should when he speaks from Heaven whence he exercises his Royal Office I know well enough how what I say about his satisfying Divine Justice through his death doth not affect his enemies who deny he hath given satisfaction for us but what can his intercession on in Heaven which is the second part of his Priesthood be grounded upon but his own merits through his Sufferings and Death he thereby hath payed our Debts and by vertue of that payment he asks we should be released but that point I intend not to meddle with in this place In the New Testament the name Saviour is as proper to him as that of Christ as indeed that of Jesus the same with Saviour was given him by the Angel and
Father descended from Heaven where he is again to return c. This he owned openly and when he had said to the man sick of the Palsie Thy sins are forgiven thee some of the Scribes having said within themselves This man blasphemeth Christ called evil these Thoughts of theirs Mat. 9.4 Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts Another place in this same Chapter already mention'd Joh. 6.38 and to our purpose is this I came down from Heaven not to do mine own will but the will of him that sent me The words taken in their natural signification are plain enough and admit of no difficulty Christ speaks of himself what Heaven is we know 't is as his natural place whence he came down into a state of Humiliation in taking upon him our human Nature the End of his coming down was to do his Father's Will not his tho' we must not think that when he did his Father's Will he acted any thing against his own for whatsoever he did and suffer'd was voluntarily as he had said long before by the Prophet I delight to do thy will Psal 40.5 6 7. Sacrifice and Offering thou didst not desire Then said I Lo I come And when the Will of his Father was executed and the Work he gave him to do finish'd he went back if we may so say home again into Heaven The Difficulty then lies not in the words but about the sence Christ who spoke the words is true tho' every sence that is attempted to be given to the words be not true yet a true sence there is He makes mention of his Person and of his Flesh his Person is that which came down from Heaven his Flesh is that which was formed in the Virgins Womb that indeed did not come from Heaven however he speaks of his Flesh and Blood to intimate his Death and that Life which he promiseth to those that eat his Flesh He procureth it in two ways by Merit or Impetration and by Efficacy or Application The Merit by his Death consists in the Dignity of the Person which suffer'd it the Application and Efficacy in the Spirit which is in the Person By the Opposition he makes between himself and the Manna he sufficiently declares that he really came down from Heaven The Adversaries would have the coming down from Heaven to signifie no more than to proceed from God which to confirm they make use of some Texts as when our Saviour asked the Chief Priests whence was the Baptism of John Matth. 21.25 was it from Heaven or of Men Thus every good and perfect Gift is said to be from above and to come down from the Father of light Again This Wisdom descendeth not from above Thus John saith Jam. 1.17 3.15 Rev. 21.2 he saw the new Jerusalem coming down from God out of Heaven But none of these places is to the purpose for they are about Things and the Question is about Persons Scripture makes no dissiculty to say that Things whereof God is immediate Author come down from Heaven there being no danger to say so but it never saith it of Persons In the Word of God none besides Father Son and Holy Ghost and Angels none tho' never created or born in so eminent a manner is said to be come down from Heaven neither Adam nor Eve nor Isaac the Son of a Special promise and whose Birth considering the age of Abraham and of sarah was very extraordinary But that Christ came down from Heaven in a manner different from what is expressed in those places it appeareth out of the fore-quoted place What and if ye shall see the Son ascend up where he was before whereby is implied that he was in Heaven before he came down from it which he confirmeth in that other place No Man hath ascended up to Heaven but he that came down from Heaven even the Son of Man which is in Heaven whereof the sence is made known by the design of Christ who speaking to Nicodemus about being born again and Regeneration saith If I have told you earthly things and of such as are done in earth which by your own experience you may see and know yet ye believe me not how shall ye believe if I tell you of heavenly things that is such as are or be done in Heaven which ye neither can know of your selves nor by any one else but by me for I have been in Heaven and none else Besides that if what the Adversaries say in their sence were true it would follow that Christ is said to be come down from Heaven either in relation to his Person or to his Office As to the first it cannot well be said I mean as to his miraculous Conception or else the same might have been said of John Baptist who only by a Divine Power was born of an old and barren Mother an Angel having foretold his Birth and given his Name before-hand yet he far from saying he came or descended from Heaven speaks quite the contrary of himself when he affirms this of Christ John 3.31 He that cometh from above is above all he that is of the earth is tarthly and speaketh of the earth he that cometh from Heaven is above all And further Christ may not be said to be come down from I seaven upon the account of his miraculous Conception no neither by reason of his being born without the help of Man for this may also be said of Adam born not only without the help of Man but of Woman also yet for all that he is never said to be come down from Heaven on the contrary he is said to be of the Earth in opposition to Christ 1 Cor. 15.47 The first man is of the earth caâ—thy the second man is the Lord from Heaven As to the Office of Christ it is certainly from Heaven in that sence but it followeth not that because the Office is the Person must be so for neither 〈◊〉 whose Baptism was from Heaven nor none of the Prophets or Apostles were ever said to be descended from Heaven Now according to this Opinion of theirs Christ would have had no Advantage over the Manna which was every day miraculously created and rained upon the People yet our Saviour takes this Preference over the Manna John 4.31 33. that he was come down from Heaven the Manna not so Why doth our Lord deny that Manna was come down from Heaven but that himself was the Bread of God which came down from Heaven Our Lord's words I came down from Heaven to do the will of him that sent me do certainly contain more than barely I am created by the wonderful Counsel and Power of God herein he speaks as would an Embassador sent by his Prince wherefore the words imply first that Christ was in Heaven 2dly That he was sent from thence 3dly To do the Will and perform the Work of him that sent him And if it had not been in
this sence the Jews would not have murmur'd as they did as indeed there had been no cause for it And we do not in the least perceive he goes about to shew they were mistaken to give his words such as sence but on the contrary he goeth on to confirm what he had said according to the sence they gave it and that without any ambiguity but plainly and downright tho' he knew he thereby did run into a great danger Matth. 13.55 56 John 6.42 for the Jews did not know how to reconcile what they knew of him Is not this the Carpenter's Son Is not his Mother called Mary and his Brothers James and Joses and Simon and Judas and his Sisters are they not all with us How then can he say I am descended from Heaven To have his Extraction from thence and be equal with God this made them look upon him as a Blasphemer who according to their Laws was to be stoned They allow'd him to be a very extraordinary man who had done such things as had never been done before among them but to hear him say he was come down from Heaven as his natural place that they could not endure Yet we must take it to be true since neither he nor the Evangelist ever denied it They were so pleased with the Miracle of the five Barley Loaves and two small Fishes that they would have taken him by force and made him a King and after he was gone they could not be at rest till they again had found him out and then he said they follow'd him only out of love to their Belly because they had eaten and were filled whereupon out of his earnest desire for their good he takes occasion to exhort them to mind not that Meat that perisheth but that which endureth unto everlasting life which the Son of man said he shall give unto you And then he presseth the Argument and shews how he and none else can give it and in order to 't declareth first who he is namely the Son of God whom he calleth his Father four times then addeth V. 40.44 45 45. he is from God afterwards he attributes unto himself a quickening Power and to give everlasting Life for he doth not say he that believeth in God but on me neither doth he say God V. 47. but I will raise him up at the last day Could the Father have more highly and stately spoken of himself V. 40. or assumed a greater Power than he doth whereby we see this he saith to draw Men not to the Father but to himself as the Spring of Eternal Life whereby he insinuates himself to be such a one as is far more potent and excellent than Man upon which account he is truly and properly said to be come down from Heaven or else he had not answerd the Jews Objection to the purpose Which 't is very unworthy for any one to say This matter we shall conclude with one Argument more out of these words I came forth from the Father and am come into the world John 16.28 again I leave the world and go to the Father Where is the Father In Heaven Where is the World On Earth So then Christ was with the Father in Heaven before he was in the World on Earth This last Text I joyn with the two foregoing being to the same purpose because a threefold Knot is not easily untied The words are so clear V. 29. that thereupon his Disciples said Lo now speakest thou plainly 'T is to be wish'd every one was of their opinion as there is cause for it V. 30. By this we believe said they that thou camest forth from God This they said themselves and the Lord saith so of them They have known surely that I came out from thee and that thou didst send me But neither Socinus nor none of his Kidney can say and prove that they believed not there was a Divine Nature in Christ They explain the words I came forth from the Father only to signifie that Christ was a Man sent from God upon some special Errand just as he sent his Disciples into the World 1 Joh. 4.1 or as false Prophets are said to be gone into the world We know the Faith of his Apostles was weak but true and was encreased by degrees they sometimes doubted of things as may be Christ's Resurrection but this doth not argue that there was no Faith in them for there was tho' staggering and imperfect which our Saviour strengthened and themselves were sensible of when they said unto him Lord increase our Faith which we read so actually effected in Thomas who more than any one else doubted of this Resurrection that at last he gave an authentick Testimony of his Faith concerning it when he called him my Lord and my God and before that time Peter in their name had given eminent evidence of their Faith about him when he said John 6.68 69. Lord to whom shall we go Thou hest the words of eternal life and we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ the Son of the living God After so solemn a Declaration how dare any man say his Disciples did not believe any thing of Divine Nature in him As to his Disciples he sent them into the World but he dwelt upon Earth but his Father sent him upon Earth when himself was in Heaven And this we may say that as the Disciples were with Christ before he sent them so he was with the Father before he sent him As to the false Prophets they were gone out into the World but whence Out of the Charch John 2.15 of whom 't is said before They went out from us but they were not of us One thing more I shall observe upon this Text that if Christ really ascended up into Heaven as he did unquestionably after his Resurrection so he really descended from thence before his Incarnation and if he descended then he was before he descended this as said just before his Disciples believed literally not in a Metaphor or Figure and that they well understood his meaning our Saviour confirms when he saith v. 31 Do ye now believe and what That I came from the Father and must return to him and that I know all thing which none but God can Here I must give a general and necessary Warning against Socinian far-fetch'd and false glosses Indeed if admittance be given to all their Allegories there can be no room left for literal and proper sence So the deliverance out of Egypt possession of Canaan carrying into Captivity shall not be Matters of Fact and we may doubt whether there was ever a Noah a Flood or an Ark such men as Aaron Moses Joshua for 't is possible to turn all these into Allegories We know in Scripture there are some but to turn every thing into 't is a great Abuse When a Text expresses plainly a literal sence we must not trouble our heads
to screw it up into an Allegory nor when the Discourse is doctrinal and the words in it usual proper and suited to the things intended to be expressed this indeed is what Peter calls a resting the Scriptures to their own destruction The later part of the Verse doth explain the first for the words signifie Christ's Ascension into Heaven they were spoken upon the occasion of Christ's instructing encouraging and disposing his Disciples to that Separation which was suddenly to happen by his Death after which tho' he shewed himself alive by many infallible Proofs being seen of them forty days and speaking of the things pertaining to the Kingdom of God yet he conversed not with them in the same manner as before his Passion Acts 1.2 Now this occasion which they were spoken upon sheweth how he discoursed about leaving the World going to his Father and ascending into Heaven which reaily and visibly happen'd forty days after his Resurrection By these Expressions which were familiar with him of going up or ascending to the Father he signified the same thing and tho' the Father doth fill up Heaven which is his Throne and Earth his Footstool yet in Scripture he is said to sit and dwell in Heaven as in his home Joh. 14.2 wherefore our Saviour calls Heaven his Father's House Now as this later part of the verse signifieth Christ's Ascension from the Earth to the Father so the first signifieth his coming down from Heaven upon Earth Again the Opposition which is seen between both parts as I came forth from the Father with and go to the Father and I am come into the World with again I leave the World do shew that if to come from the Father doth denote to be sent from Heaven to Earth by the Father so to go to the Father signifieth the contrary to that namely to go from Earth up to Heaven to the Father Christ leaving the World is gone to the Father and going to the Father he hath left the World wherefore to go to the Father and leave the World are the same So likewise Christ coming forth from the Father came into the World and coming into the World he came forth from the Father And these two kinds of Expressions signifie the same thing Chap. 13.3 and as he was come from God so he went to God This coming from the Father and coming into the World do imply first a sending as the Lord declareth it John 8.42 I proceeded forth and came from God neither came I of my self but he sent me And then something posterior to the Mission and as it were belonging to the execution thereof for if one should ask Wherefore came Christ into the World it would be well answer'd to say Because the Father sent him So that he who is sent must come from him that sent him to the place whereunto he is sent Then the words I came from the Father must be understood of the execution of the sending rather than the sending itself It is a wrong sence given as to apply them to a divine production I came from the Father that is I am miraculously produced by the Father This Exposition doth confound things that are different for none can be sent before he hath a Being but that 's produced which hath no Being Production is before Sending Thus the words must signifie that Christ return'd to the place whence he came and ascended into that whence he descended before This he went about to inculcate into the Mind of the Jews in the opposition he makes of his Origin with theirs Ye are from benedth V. 23. I am from above ye are of this world I am not of this world but from the Father not from Earth but from Heaven He was not in the World by a natural necessity but voluntarily and by a determined counsel he came into 't as Embassador from his Father to reveal unto Men the Doctrin and Means of Salvation and for Judgment Chap. 9.39 For judgment am I come into this world and all the while he was here even very betimes he minded what he came about Unto his Mother after she found him in the Temple and asking him Why hast thou thus dealt with us he answer'd How is it that ye sought me wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business Luke 2.48 49. So that he continued upon Earth till that was over before which time he would not go back John 17.4 but before his departure he declar'd I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do whereupon he returned back to his Father from whom he was come before leaving Earth a place so disproportionate and inferiour to Heaven whence he had his extraction and consequently unworthy to contain him any longer This Reason he gives his Disciples whose Heart upon his declaring he was about leaving of them had been fill'd with Sorrow how it was not just he should always be among those that had used him so unworthily and withal it was expedient for them that he should go away or else the Comforter Chap. 16. â— 7. who was to be with them after his departure would not come After all that hither to hath been said may not I ask concerning the method and carriage of the Adversaries Is it fair about these fundamental points to turn the whole Scripture into an Allegory and make the Spirit of God never to speak properly to force upon and wrest out of the Word of God such Sences and Expositions as are contrary to the scope of the Spirit to the Deigns of the holy Writers and to the Analogy of Faith and if this cannot serve the turn to screw up and work their Bâ—â—ing how to contrive and forge an imaginary After son of Christ into Heaven about the 〈◊〉 of his Ministry and consequently a ceasing â—â—wn from thence after it yet at the same time deny that true and real descending of â—is upon Earth which is so much and so often assorted in Scripture which is as good as to say Tho' Truth and Scripture do not bear it yet we I now how to supply it of our own Flectere si nequco saperos Ae eroma movebo Now to strengthen what I have said to prove our Lords Divinity before I proceed to answer Objecting I shall add what followeth upon the forementioned Head of the Angel in the Old Testament I mean the increated Angel whose Person in appearance is Man in office Angel in nature God the second Person of the most holy Trinity I shall somewhat insist upon a most notable place and much to our purpose though I already said something about it for I can not willing to lay aside a strong and very useful weapon because I made use of it before for when once it hath been try'd we are the surer of and may better depend upon it On the occasion of the abominable Idolatry of the golden Calf God refused to go up
first-born into the world let all the Angels of God worship him before he was set upon his Throne after his Ascension So the Command was antecedent to that Session of his upon the Throne in Heaven And this sitting at the right hand of God puts me in mind now to add something to what I said upon that Text and it is this how we and our Adversaries ought to consider the usefulness and importance of that Testimony Psal 110.1 The Lord said unto my Lord Sit thou at my right hand for the confirmation of the Dignity and Authority of Christ the Messiah is evidenced by the frequent quotations of it in the New Testament as by our Saviour himself Matth. 22.42 by Peter in Acts 2.34 35 and by Paul in 1 Cor. 55.28 And Heb. 1.13 David was the Pen-man of the Psalm not about himself for him whom he therein doth treat of he calls my Lord as indeed the things therein spoken of belong not to him God did never swear unto David that he should be a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedek and the Jews knew well how David had nothing to do with the Priesthood as being not of the Tribe of Levi but of Judah We read That David was a King and a Prophet Jeremiah a Priest and a Prophet but the three Offices Prophet Priest and King never met in one Person but in the Lord Jesus CHAP. X. Objections Answer'd THough now and then on our way we refuted some of their Cavils yet now we must by the Grace of God come to the last part but one of our Discourse hear what they say against these Divine Truths and answer their chief Objections against the most holy Trinity the Divinity of Christ his eternal Generation c. As first They would have this Doctrin of the Trinity to be contrary to Reason Because it gives Turks and Jews an aversion against the Christian Religion But it must not be concluded that a Doctrin is contrary to Reason because some men by reason of the corruption of their Nature do not receive it When the Gospel was preached by our blessed Saviour and by his Apostles many refused to receive and believe it though it was very good and not contrary to Reason They that are Servants to their carnal Reason do not receive that which is above it and in this matter there are other Causes of the blindness and hatred of Jews and Turks Hereticks ought to be ashamed to joyn with Infidels to overthrow a Doctrin which in all Ages hath by general Consent been lookt upon as the Foundation of our Religion In four things they would have it to be contrary to Reason the first One is not Three yet say they we affirm God to be One yet Father Son and Holy Ghost to be God and yet the Person of the Son not to be that of the Father nor of the Holy Ghost The second A thing is or is not But say they you say the Paternity or Fatherhood really to be the same with the Essence and the Essence really with the Filiation therefore the Paternity is the same with the Filiation or Sonship and is not the same Thirdly By the Rule of the Tertium the things that are the same in another or in a third are the same among themselves Fourthly 'T is contrary to the Principle of the expository Syllogism which is this The Essence is the Father the Essence is the Son therefore the Father is the Son In these four things say they your Doctrin is contrary to Reason In answer to this First in general we say that such things as gainsay the Principles of true Reason are contrary to it but not those which exceed and are far above Reason Now things objected against by Antitrinitarians do neither fight against nor contradict Reason only are above it then these Principles or Rules are ill applied because they compare God the Author of Nature with natural things Now we answer in particular as to the First Axiom It is not overthrown inasmuch as there is no opposition according to the same thing nothing that is one as it is one and in the same respect may be called three but God is one in Nature and three in Persons the manner of subsisting doth distinguish the Persons but multiplieth not the Essence In the Second there is no Contradiction for the Paternity and Filiation are distinguished among themselves in one way and from the Essence in another it is only a modal distinction between Paternity and Filiation the least degree of distinction is between the thing and the manner of it between the Essence and the Paternity or Filiation wherefore Essence Paternity and Filiation are distinct but not different things We never said 'tis the same but 't is of the same and because they are of the same they differ not as thing and thing And if the Adversaries would argue thus the Father is the same with the Essence the Essence is the same with the Son therefore the Father is the same with the Son they would thereby conclude nothing against us for we affirm the Father and Son not at all to differ as to the Essence but the self-being of the Essence doth not conclude for the self-being of the Person wherefore we say it is and it is not in a different respect upon a different account As to the Third the Paternity and the Filiation are not the same with the Essence but Father and Son have the same Essence Now their Rule doth not here fit their Purpose for if they say Paâ—â—â—ity and Filiation are the same with or in the Essence it is incongruous for Paternity and Filiation are modes or manners of the thing that is in the Essence are not the same with the Essence because the thing and manner of it are not altogether the same But if they say Father and Son are the same in uno tortio inâ—â— third we agree they are the same in this third the Essence though not altogether As to the Fourth they are mistaken for this is no expository Syllogism for in that way of aâ—guing the middle term must be singular and incommunicable But here the term Essence is not simply but instead of an universal and is communicable so then the strength of the major Proposition lies in this Some who is or hath divine Essence is the Father Some that hath divine Essence is the Son Ergo if it be universally construed the proposition is false as thus Every one that hath the divine Essence is the Father or else they are meer particulars Besides that there are four terms for in the major the word Essence is unâ—erstood in relation to an active generation in the minor to a passive They would forge Contradictions where are none at all and the ground of their Error is that they would judge of an infinite Nature by a finite one when the reason of both is very different here the infinite Essence is individual
must never attempt to pry into this is a Mystery which most humbly and with an awful reverence we ought to adore and believe without any farther enquiry into it because God hath revealed it it is so namely that the Son not the Father nor the Holy Ghost was made Flesh In Religion there are several other things which we do simply believe tho it be impossible for our Reason to comprehend them as the Infiniteness Immensity and Eternity of God whereof the former is every where within and without the greatest and least things So is that union of both Natures in one Person incomprehensible Thus that which is spoken of the divine Essence may be attributed to the three Persons but to be understood of things which of themselves are competent to the nature of the Creatour Almightiness Eternity and such-like Attributes but not so in the things which belong to the Essence only upon the account of one Person for such things belong only to that Person for whose sake they are spoken of the Essence as the Incarnation of the Son the Voice of the Father from Heaven and the appearing of the Holy Ghost under the shape of a Dove We know how the Works ad extra or outward are undivided and common to the three Persons always excepting that wherein they destroy the proper Attributes of the Persons Thus the Son and Holy Ghost not the Father are sent the Son not the Father nor Holy Ghost was made Flesh tho' the Father and Holy Ghost had a hand in the Incarnation for the Angel said Luk. 1.35 The power of the highest shall overshadow thee and the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee Prov. 9.1 Rev. 21.3 and Wisdom whereby the Son is represented hath builded her House otherwise called the Tabernacle of God So then the work of the Incarnation is common to the three Persons but in the effect is terminatively only in the Son When the Apostle speaks of the Mystery of our Salvation in the adorable and incomprehensible Incarnation of the Son of God or his taking â—ur human Nature he saith 1 Pet. 1.12 Exod. 25.20.22 which things the Angels desire to look into alluding to the two Cherubims on the Mercy Seat towards which their Faces were as desirous to see into 't In th Tabernacle was the Ark and above upon the Art was the Mercy Seat as the most holy part of he whole for there God met with Moses and from thence he communed with him all which was disposed according to God's own appointment for the Mercy Seat was a Type of Jesus Christ in whom and by whom alone God doth neet and commune with Men in the way of Mercy and as the Ceremonial Law was as a School-master to bring us to Christ as to him that was the end of the Law so all Figures and Prophecies aimed at him After God had sent all his Servants and he would have no more Burnt-offerings and Sacrifices then he sent his only Son to offer up himself a Sacrifice unto him for Sin This most holy and blessed Son by the Mouth of the Prophet David long before his coming said Lo I come to do thy will Psal 40.6 7. Heb. 10.7 9. O God He knew the Will of God and declared he would come to do 't The words contain a particular emphasis different from any thing of that nature express'd in Scripture When the Prophets foretold Josiah's Birth 1 Kin. 13 2. Isa 44. 45. and Cyrus's Empire they are not introduced as saying any thing themselves only one was to be born the other to be holden and supported because at that time they were not But here the Son of God speaks as one who then was in being and as a person who delighted to execute his Father's Will as he effectually did both actively and passively and this he declared when come Joh. 6.38 I came down from Heaven not to do mine own will but the will of him that sent me and when upon the approach of the Hour wherein that Will was to be Joh. 12.27 his Soul was troubled he said For this cause came I unto this hour and when the bitter Cup which caused in him some Horror was put into his hand Luk. 22.42 he said Not my will but thine be done Let these words in the Evangelists with those in the Psalm be compared anâ— there will appear such a divine harmony as wiâ— convince they both came out of the same Persâ—â— only with this difference that in the Psalmis seen a steddy resolution such as became a divine Person and in the Gospel something of human Frailty the reason is because the first is expressed by a Prophet inspired by his Spirit and the last by himself in the days of his Flesh However coming is meant of a Person who pre-existed before that coming and in the time of the Prophecy And the circumstances oâ— God's having no more pleasure in Sacrifices and Burnt-offerings and his saying Lo I come which preceeded his coming do demonstrate in him a Choice and Resolution which is the act of a Person as the quoted place out of St. Peter's doth denote Christs coming into the World to be such a Mystery as the Angels so excellent and knowing Creatures desire to know and look into But I return to my Answer to their Objections These things being seriously considered will afford matter enough to answer and refute the Cavils of the Enemies to this Truth Before I proceed farther in answering some more Objections of theirs I think it will not be amiss for me because they make a scandalous Exception against that common place of the Apostle which proves the most holy Trinity There are three that bear record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost To add something more to what in the beginning I said about it They say it is wanting in some Greek Copies and in the Syriack but through the Fraud of the Arrians as saith Jerome and Erasmus Praefat. in Epist Can. whom Socinians would seem to appeal unto confesseth it to be in the most ancient Manuscripts of Brittany Spain and Rhodes and it is clear out of the Connexion of the Text V. 4 5 6. that it cannot be taken away without making a palpable breach and interruption of the sense for he hath just before spoken of God the Father of Christ and of the Spirit and to agree with what he saith v. 8 there are three that bear witness in Earth there must also be three that bear record in Heaven there must be Witnesses in Heaven as there are in Earth the three in Earth agree in one the three in Heaven are one We read it quoted by * Ad Theoph. lib. 1. in disp contra Aâ—rium in Conc. Nic. Athanasius so doth †Contra Varimadum Idacius so * Contra Arrian Fulgentius also it is quoted before the times of Athanasius in the Controversie against the Arrians
mistaken for the word alone or onely which they lay the stress upon doth not belong to the Subject thee but to the Predicate not to thee but to true God not to that which goes before but to that which followeth after 'T is not said to know only thee to be but know thee to be the only true God This we may look upon as one of their usual pieces of Sophistry our Saviour makes it appear that this is the true God whom Scriptures mention namely the Father who sent and the Son that was sent for the true sense of the place we cannot have a better Interpreter of than the Evangelist himself 1 John 5.20 here the true God and eternal Life are joyned in the same the same that is eternal Life is also the true God onely eternal Life and onely true God Now Christ is called true God and eternal Life His Son Jesus Christ John 10.28 this is the true God and eternal life And if here we consider eternal Life as the Gift of the onely true God doth not Scripture say in several places how eternal Life is the gift of Christ Let of many this one serve for all I give unto them his Sheep eternal life If the Son was not that onely true God why should he joyn himself with the Father And whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ to know thee and whom thou hast sent Jesus Christ to be the only true God This is the true order of the words whereof the true sense is resolved into this The Father is the onely true God and not the onely or Father alone is the true God The words in the original are not thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to know thee only the true God but thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to know thee the only true God where any one may see how the Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not belong to the Pronoun thee but to the true God and tho' the Particle was removed yet thereby Christ would not be excluded for the true God is said as I already observed not in opposition to Christ but to false Gods according to the stile of Scripture the word alone or onely doth not always give a general exclusion as we see it under the Old Testament when Jacob said unto Reuben My Son shall not go down with you Gen. 42.38 for his brother is dead and he is left alone he meaneth by the Mothers side and not by the Father's for all the rest were his Brethren And in the New in the Transfiguration Luk. 9.36 't is said And when the voice was past Jesus was left alone Certainly Peter James and John were not excluded for they were with him but Moses and Elias In the same sense are taken Martha's words to our Saviour Lord dost thou not care that my sister hath left me to serve alone Luk. 10.40 only meant of Mary and not of the Servants of the House And to the matter now in hand let it be known that Scripture never saith the Father only is the true God tho' it says the Father is the only true God so is the Son and so is the Holy Ghost Here Christ would not deny himself the honour of being the true God which in other places he attributes unto himself for the two words alone and true go with God not with thee and his meaning is how true eternal Life consists in this Gal. 4.8 1 Thes 1.9 1 Cor. 8.6 that men may detest Idols and false Gods and be converted to thee O Father who art the only true God by nature which Idols are not Thus when the name One Lord is given the Son 't is not to exclude the Father who also is Lord and the name Spirit given the third Person doth not exclude Father or Son who also are Spirit so this Text doth admit of the same construction as this when Paul saith 1 Cor. 9.6 I only and Barnabas have we not power to forbear working where it is plain that Barnabas far from being excluded is joyned and included in the same power with Paul And here the thing requireth it seeing eternal Life is made to consist in the knowledge of Christ as of the Father wherefore both are equally said to be the true God Those men who pretend to know better than God himself what becomes his glory are very apt to lay hold upon any thing like to favour their notions wherefore because 't is said God hath appointed his Son heir of all things Heb. 1.2 John 5.22 and hath committed all judgment unto him with other things to the same purpose they with the Jews do therewith entangle themselves and form this Argument It cannot consist with the Majesty of the God of Israel of the most high God to be appointed Heir by any one but God hath appointed his Son Heir of all things therefore his Son is not the God of Israel nor the most high God In answer to this Objection I say first that the Person of the God of Israel c. is not the Person of his Father but the same Dignity Nature and Authority he hath as already demonstrated common with the Father he is not made Heir of all things in reference to his Nature for he is such of himself by his own right and inheritance not by favour but in relation to his Office of Mediator in which sense he is not only God but God and Man and upon this account is all Judgment committed unto him by the Father but otherwise he is the God of Israel and the most high But secondly this Argument contains two branches which before I have spoken about yet to what hath already been said this I shall add to the first part That the Son of God the Lord Jesus above 3400 years before his being manifested in the Flesh Numb 24.17 Micah 5.2 Luk. 2.32 John 1.49 Acts 5.31 was called the Star of Jacob and the Scepter of Israel and long after the ruler in Israel after his birth the glory of Israel and after his Baptism the King of Israel which in that sense and place is as good as God of Israel as indeed in the same Verse he is called the Son of God that is of the God of Israel a Prince and a Saviour for to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins As to the other part That he is not the most high God we must in the first place take notice how they set up a high God that is Christ and a most high God the Father which is by such a comparative difference to make two Gods and they would have the Son of the highest not to be highest himself as to Essence and Power The word most high or highest is an Hebraism for in that Language God is called Helion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Supreme whence the Greeks borrowed the Name they call the Sun by because the chief of all Stars and Planets
was made so upon Earth We speak of the rising of the Sun which hath a Being before he riseth on our Hemisphere but only at such a time he appeareth unto us like the Star that guided the Wisemen to the place where he was born and of Christ it is said Thou hast the dew of thy youth from the womb of the morning As to what Socinus saith That Christ is said to be God but not that onely God we answer how Christ is not upon every account said to be God but only he is said to be such a God as true divine Worship is due unto who alone is to be worshipped and served as he saith Mat. 4.10 So he is no other but the onely God in Scripture called the true God They object the place where the Holy Ghost saith 1 Cor. 8.6 But to us there is but one God the Father of whom are all things who is distinguished from Christ who is one Lord by whom are all things But the Adversaries Prejudice makes that they either will not or cannot see how in the place St. Paul doth not separate one God from Christ nor one Lord from the Father for his scope is to teach us Christians how there are not many Gods nor many Lords but only one God and one Lord Now if the Father was one God and one Lord separately from Christ then there would be two Gods and two Lords which wholly overturns the Apostle's design so that of necessity we must say the Father and Christ are one God and one Lord consequently that God and the Lord are the same for there is no doubt but that God is the Lord and he who by Divine Reason is Lord and opposed to Idols as 't is the true sense of the place he also for certain must needs be God So then when Paul saith that onely God to be the Father he also owns him to be the onely Lord and when he saith the one Lord is Christ he owns him to be one God and as he excludeth not the Father from being Lord so he excludeth not Christ from being God 'T is a weak notion grounded upon these Particles of whom and by whom are all things for both the same in Scripture are attributed to God Rom. 11.36 Of him and through him and to him are all things so there is in them nothing to exclude Christ from being God for both belong to Father and Christ only one is chiefly attributed to one the other chiefly to the other 'T is an Error in the Adversaries to say the words by whom to signifie a second Cause seeing that very same Particle is elsewhere attributed unto God which in the same place we must also believe to be attributed unto Christ seeing the Apostle's mind is to shew there is only one God and one Lord But in Socinus's sense there would be two Gods and two Lords one of whom are all things the other by whom are all things tho' the same Apostle doth without any such Particles absolutely affirm There is one Lord one God and Father of all Ephes 4 5 6. wherefore Men must conceive no Mystery to be in those Particles to make a distinction between God and Lord one and the same Nature or Person is certainly God and Lord. Thus David saith Psal 85.8 I will hear what God the Lord will speak And if two be so one is no prejudice to the other Hence I conclude how no stress is to be laid upon these Particles of and by as if there were two different Natures and Principles as also in another place already quoted they would upon the Particle and where 't is said To know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ where they would have the copulative Particle to joyn different Natures and Persons to exclude him from being the true God but after this manner of interpreting the words God and Father must import two different Subjects and Natures so that God shall be one and Father the other for 't is said Gal. 1.4 according to the will of God and our Father which contradicts their Opinion of one onely God namely the Father but in that place the words God and Father are essentially taken for Father Son and Holy Ghost one only God Farther they argue thus If Christ be the Son of that onely God he is not the onely God himself or else he would be his own Son but he is not his own Son therefore he is not the onely God But I answer the Son is distinguished from that one God not as to the Nature but as to the Person for the Essence cannot be distinguish'd because the Son hath not part of the Nature but wholly together with the Father the Person must be distinguish'd for he is not Son of himself but of another tho' he be God of himself Hence followeth that as to the Nature the Son is that one God not as to the Person seeing in Nature it doth agree but must be distinguish'd as to the Person Another Objection is this If Christ be the Son of that only God then that one is not God the Father Son and Holy Ghost but only the Father so that onely God is not in three Persons We answer When Christ is called the Son of one God one God is there taken for the Person of the Father or as it subsisteth in the Person of the Father for Christ is the Son only of God the Father but when Father Son and Holy Ghost are said to be one God then one God is taken essentially They need not say where are one and three there are four as if the Essence and three Persons were four things really distinct But we answer Where are one Being and three Beings there indeed are four but not where are one Being and three manners of being This may be illustrated by an Example of Metaphysick where is one Ens or Being and three as properties or qualities unum verum and bonum one must not conclude there are four but unum verum bonum to be simply one Being Wherefore seeing in this most simple Essence the Persons are Subsistences or Manners of subsisting it follows that three Persons and one Nature do not make four in God As to the Rule of the tertium which I have taken notice of before it faileth here because the Essence is communicable for Divine Nature being infinite is so Now we come to some Objections relating to the Son of God's eternal generation The Father alone say they is not begotten but the Son and Holy Ghost are begotten and made so cannot be the true God We know how the relative Property of the Father is to beget of the Son to be begotten and of the Holy Ghost to proceed so the word God is attributed to Son and Holy Ghost that the Son is called only begotten because he is the natural Son and the first born as Mediator because he hath many Brethren he is called the
to the prejudice of this be guided by our own Reason which in such matters is but an ignis fatuus a false and deceitful Guide that will lead us to Rocks and Precipices that only must be our Rule which God hath revealed in his Word For an Instance Will not Human Reason suggest that if our Saviour instead of poor Fishermen unlearned and of no account in the World had called the Josephs of Arimathea the Nicodemus and men of good parts and of quality in the World the Gospel would hove gotten more ground and been more spread abroad in the World yet this is contrary to God's Method who hath hidden these things from the wise and prudent Mat. 11.25.26 1 Cor. 1.26 27 28 29 and revealed them unto Babes who hath chosen and called the foolish the weak and base things of the world to confound the wise and the mighty And why so first because so it seemed good in his sight secondly to the end that no flesh should glory in his presence Joh. 7.48 This confirmed by Experience for Have any of the Rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him So then to insist on this reason is no less than to arraign the Wisdom of God which no Man may or ought to do Farther some things there are taught by Philosophy of the Soul of the World of several things therein and of Man's Soul which to human Understanding appear to have no Truth in them yet in those things if upon the account of the Learning and Wit of those great Men we have a kind of esteem and reverence for their Opinions much more ought we to have a reverence for the Truth contained in God's Word and received by so many great and good Christians and suffer'd for by them in all Ages for never was any Divine Truth more universally and in all places and times received notwithstanding the opposition of some wicked men than the Mystery of the most holy Trinity As indeed not only the Offering and Preaching but also the whole Application of Salvation to be obtained in this and another Life do depend upon the truth of the holy Trinity because everywhere the Father works by his Son and this with the Father by the Holy Ghost which if we believe not we cannot have either the use or comfort of things relating to Salvation but God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit 1 Cor. 2.10 12. and we have received the Spirit which is of God that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God 'T is then our Duty and Comfort to know the Father in the Son and both through the Holy Ghost for the Spirit searcheth all things yea the deep things of God as Christ saith none knoweth the Father but the Son and to whom the Son will reveal him so John testifies that he that hath not the Son hath not the Father and Paul Mat. 11.27 1 Joh. 2.23 Eph. 2.12 that those that are without Christ are also without Hope and without God in the world 'T is said indeed how God at sundry times and in several manners spake in time past unto the Fathers by the Prophets but the knowledge of him and of Salvation then was in the dark till the last days when he spoke unto Men by his Son When we hear of the salvation which God sent into the World then at the same time the Son and Holy Ghost are mention'd because without them there is none Among several other places in Scripture wherein this great work is spoken of and wherein we find the three Persons mention'd that is remarkable wherein the Apostle joyneth them together Heb. 10.29 Of how much sorer punishment suppose ye shall he be thought worthy who hath trodden under foot the Son of God and hath counted the blood of the Covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing and hath done despite unto the spirit of grace All three are concerned so they were before salvation was actually effected long before when all was under Types and Figures 1 Pet. 1.11 12 compared with 2 Pet. 1.21 for by the spirit of Christ the Prophets prophesied of old so now in this great business the Son hath his part and the Holy Ghost his also As much as God hath been pleased to reveal unto us about this adorable Mystery we must study and enquire after but no farther where God is silent we must be so too and we ought to curb our Curiosity and Presumption and not to stretch our Brains to find out Proofs out of Comparisons with Sun Soul Rainbow Trees Triangle c. which are all lame and defective This I speak as to us who believe that high and incomprehensible Mystery upon God's Word wherein he hath revealed it unto us for as to the abominable wretches which out of Hell are broken loofe against it and not only make a Jest of and despise and hate it we must leave them to God if peradventure he will give them repentance 2 Tim. 2. â—â— to the acknowledging of the Truth As to our blessed Saviour whom they go about to rob of that Glory and Honour which Scripture declares do belong to him and which therein he assumeth unto himself and whom they would make a meer Man a Creature and if I dare speak it without blasphemy an imaginary and a mock God acting the part of a God as an Actor doth upon a stage that of a Prince when he is not such In Scripture the Names of God absolutely attributed to none but unto the true God and that also in so many places of Scripture whereof many we already quoted and others not We have given instances of all the incommunicable Names of Divine Nature appropriated unto him also we made it appear how all Attributes proper to the true God and never communicated to the Creature do belong to Christ as do all divine works truly such why then should not all own him to be true God by Nature seeing essential Attributes are inseparable from the Essence The Oneness of which Essence with the Father he doth attribute unto himself explaining in what sense he calleth God his Father not by Adoption or Grace or meerly by reason of his assumption of our human Nature John 10.30 38. or by vertue of any Office and Dignity but because of his eternal Generation and Co-essentiality with the Father in which sense he saith I and the Father are one Chap. 1.14 3.16 Rom. 8.3 32. Mar. 14.33 and upon the account of this oneness of Nature he saith The Father is in me and I in him And this eternal Generation in one Essence is denoted in Scripture when called only begotten of the Father Gods own and proper Son the true Son of God yea such a Son as is Heir of all things and in opposition to Angels as the Son is to the Servants which Sonship and Generation is more clearly expressed when he is called the Brightness and
express Image of the Father's Person because in him through that eternal Generation is expressed the whole Person and Glory of the Father for which Image of God he is called the First-born of every Creature that is begotten before there was any Creature and so from Eternity as in the Form and Nature of God to be equal with God who otherwise hath not and owneth none equal to himself 2 Sam. 7 1â— In these high and divine matters Men must not presume beyond what is written and revealed in Gods Word nor wrest the Delign of the Spirit of God or force an unusual and contrary sense to the words of the Text but we ought to keep our selves within the bounds of that holy reverence which becomes us in the contemplation of the Majesty of God In these very things Hierom as said before was very cautions about acknowledging three Hypostases in the Deity because he thought the word to denote substance When God was upon withdrawing the Spirit of Prophecy from among his People Chap. 4.4 he by Malâ—câ—y the last of the Prophets commands them to remember the law of Moses his servant So now when the Apostles immediately inspired by the Holy Ghost ceased so long since men should wholly acquiesce to the sound Doctrine which those Servants of his Son Jesus left for our use and instruction wherein we learn how God hath revealed himself and communicated his own infinite fulness unto his Creatures in all of them immediately by his own Son first in the creation of all things secondly in their providential disposal and rule thirdly in the revelation of his Will and Ordinances fourthly in the communication of his Spirit and Grace in none of which is the Person of the Father otherwise represented unto us than in and by the Person of the Son for the whole end of the Gospel is 2 Cor. 4.6 1 Tim 6.10 1 â—oâ—n 4.12 to give knowledge of the glory of God in the 〈◊〉 of Jesus Christ that is the glory of the 〈◊〉 visible God whom no man hath seen Now in that forenamed Prophecy of Malachy the same Chapter and two last Verses the coming of the 〈◊〉 which had often been prophesied of before is again promised yea of the Lord himself who then was and had been from all Eternity but was to come only at such a time which is called the great and dreadful day of the Lord for against the appearing and long before of that Sun of Righteousness all those Stars the Prophets were to disappear one only excepted like the Morning-star before the rising of the Sun Behold I will send you Elijah the Prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord By whom the Lord Jesus is meant as John Baptist is by Elijah so called because he came in the spirit and power of Elias for both were endow'd with a fervency of Spirit which made them spare neither Kings nor People And the Evangelist makes use of the words of the Prophet He shall turn the hearts of the Fathers to the Children Luke 1.17 compared with Matt. 11.14 Mark 9.11 12 13. That same Lord whose coming with such Concomitants as great and dreadful was Jehovah himself the God of Israel whose words tho' in his state of humiliation were so conspicuous glorious and great as he in one particular said himself to the man out of whom he had cast a Legion of Devils Return to thine own house Luk. 8.39 and shew what great things God hath done unto thee And the Evangelist who in the beginning of the Verse relateth Christ's words to the man doth in the latter end of the same declare what the man did And he went his way and published throughout the whole City how great things Jesus had done unto him he did it in the same words how great things only instead of God he said Jesus so that Jesus was the God that had done great things unto him This was in the Land of Judah where no other God but the true God of Israel was own'd and worshipped so the Lord Jesus was that same God whom the Father from Heaven calls his Son which is the Name mentioned Phil. 2.9 that is above every name and this name more excellent than any given the Angels Heb. 1.4 he hath obtained by inheritance not by favour according to what saith the Apostle for the name by him designed is that of Son of God Thou art my Son with the exegetical adjunct of his generation This day have I begotten thee Acts 13.33 which words Paul doth apply to the Lord Jesus This day of Eternity after the manner of time spoken in relation to God with whom are no parts of time as with Men past present and to come With God are not days but only one day which had no beginning and shall have no end It was never said to any Angel personally upon his own account Thou art the Son of God much less with the reason of the appellation This day have I begotten thee so in that place the Apostle doth not speak of the general Name of a Son but of the particular appropriation thereof unto the Lord Jesus upon his own account When the Apostle saith he is the first-born the thing it self is not meant of being the first begotten but the Dignity and Privilege that attended it Psal 89.27 Thus God saith of David I will make him my first-born explained in the later part of the Verse higher than the Kings of the carth Thus among Men one may say I will make such a one my First-born or my Heir which is the Privilege attending the Birth-right This is Christs Title by Nature and not by Office anointing was a Ceremony used to make and declare a King but that anointing made him not a Man for he was so before So the Lord Jesus was God before he was Christ CHAP. XI Some Animadversions upon a Book called Christianity not Mysterious WHAT I said somewhat before concerning Reason puts me in mind of a thing I promised about the middle of my Discourse namely to take notice of a Book with the Title of Christianity not mysterious wherein the Author undertakes to shew there is nothing in the Gospel or in our Religion against or above Reason And tho' I have hardly any room left yet to be as good as my word I must briefly say something to it We agree with him against all human Authority contrary to the Word and own Scripture to be the only competent Judge and allow of our Reason as long as it draweth out of that Spring and not otherwise Let us be sincere and avoid Ambiguities there is true and sound Reason whereof the Word of God is the right and standing infallible Rule for the Will of God is the measure of all Truth and Equity and our Reason to be Reason indeed must be guided by that or else it doth deviate from the Rule There is also that