Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

and wifdom of the Father, which are the very Father, because the Father can, in no refpect, be faid to go out from himself, and return to himself; fo it will follow, that they must be applied to the real Son of the Father, which Mr. Claggett calls thè human nature. And as they must be applied to him, I think, with fubmiffion, it must fignify one or other of these two things, either his coming into the world at his birth, or else at his entring upon his ministry. If the former, then his rational spirit must be in a state of existence antecedent to that time: and if fo, I think I faid truly, that he debased himself in his taking human nature upon him, or in his becoming a man, which is what I meant by that expreffion. But if his coming forth from the Father implies no more than his entring upon his miniftry, as John the Baptift was faid to be a man fent from God, and if his rational part did not exist antecedent to his coming into the world at his nativity, then I acknowledge, I have err'd: which error I am ready to retract, when it fhall be made appear to me, as I faid before. I have faid farther, upon this argument, that this is one effential character of the fupreme God, viz. that he is eternally and unchangeably the fame, without any addition to, or diminution of his perfection and glory: wherefore, if the Son has paffed thro' fuch a change as to be either leffen'd or encreas'd in his perfection and glory, the confequence is clear, that he is not the fupreme God. Now, if the glory of the Son was either leffen'd or encreas'd, (for either of thefe is fufficient for my purpofe) then it will follow, that he is not the fupreme God. But the glory of the Son was encreas'd, which Mr. Claggett allows with refpect to Chrift's human nature, which human nature is the whole and on'y begotten Son of

K 2

God;

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

God; and fo the ftrength of my argument is ftill remaining.

The fum of the matter is this; I have afferted and proved, by eight arguments, that the Son (by which I mean the real and only begotten Son of God) is inferiour and fubordinate to the Father; by which Father, I mean the Father of this Son. Mr. Claggett opposeth me with an imaginary fon, viz, the fubftantial power and wisdom of the Father; which are fo far from being the Son, that on the contrary, they are the very Father of God's Son, about which I have afferted nothing, or as Mr. Claggett truly faith, against which I opposed nothing, as in page 23. And therefore fo far as what he hath to fay in his book refpects this imaginary son, so far he is befide the queftion, with respect to my arguments; and if this be fubftracted from the reft, as it ought to be, I fuppofe himself will allow, that the strength of my argument is ftill remaining.

Laftly, I obferve, that as Mr. Claggett calls me idolater, blafphemer, one in fheeps cloathing (which implies a wolf) a robber, the old ferpent, and the like, without any provocation (for as to my calling those rude and bafe, which should object againft me, as Mr. Claggett faith, this is not true) I fay, as he hath thus abufed, and evil treated me, without any provocation given; fo I would defire him seriously to confider, whether these weapons of his warfare are fpiritual, as a chriftian's fhould be, or whether they are not carnal and diabolical. St. Paul advifed the profeffing chriftians at Corinth, 2 Cor, xiii. 5. To examine themselves whether they were in the faith. Know ye not faith he) that Jefus Chrift is in you, except ye be reprobates. And he faith, Rom. viii. 9. If any man bath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. What ufe Mr. Claggett will make of this,

or

or whether he will have any more to say of me, or to me, I know not. He may if he pleases go on, and sport himself and his readers, by laughing at and bantering that which is wholly out of his power to confute. He may go on to reproach and revile me. And tho' he has been pleased to fit in judgment upon me, and condemn me, yet I can fee no juft ground for uneasiness upon this account; because as he is not commended, whom men commend; but whom the Lord commendeth, fo neither is he condemn'd, whom men condemn, but whom the Lord condemneth.

[blocks in formation]

ΑΝ

APPENDIX:

Being an enquiry concerning the perfonal character of the Son of God, and what is neceffary to be believed concerning him; and likewise into the fenfe and meaning of our Lord's words, viz. Except ye believe that I am he, ye fhall die in your fins; as in John viii. 24.

A

S the perfonal character of the Son of God has been of late a fubject of controversy amongst us, so it becomes a question with fome, if the Son be equal to the Father, and is himself the fupreme God; whether all that believe him to be inferiour and fubordinate to the Father, are not in a damnable state? because they reft upon him for juftification and falvation as upon a creature, and exercife their faith and hope upon him as fuch; and feeing our Lord himself has declared, that except ye believe that I am he (viz. the fupreme God, as they underftand it) ye shall die in your fins.

For a clear and full anfwer to this enquiry I obferve, first, that if the name creature be properly applied, when applied, to every derived being, then in that fenfe the Son is confeffedly a creature, because the fcriptures declare that he derived his being from the Father. See John iii. 16. Ged fo loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, &c. John vi, 57. As the living Father fent me, and I live by the Father; fo be that eateth me, even be fball live by me. In thefe texts it is as plainly afferted as words can exprefs it, that the Son received or derived his being from the Father, and that he depends upon his Father for his continuing

LQ

to be; therefore, I fay, as before, if the name creature be properly applied, when applied, to every derived being, then the Son is confeffedly a creature, because he derived his being from the Father: but if the name creature, be applicable only to fuch things, as were produced after any certain particular manner, then the Son may very well be conceived not to be a creature,

Secondly, I obferve, that whatever different apprehenfions we may have of the Son of God, thefe apprehenfions make no alterations in him, but he ftill continues to be what he really is, notwithstanding our mistaken notions concerning him: from which it will follow, that if he is the Father's equal, and the fupreme God, whofoever trusts in him, trufts in the Father's equal, and in the supreme God, whatever mistaken notions they may have concerning him. All that can be faid in this cafe is only this, whoever thinks him to be, what he really is not, or that thinks him not to be what he really is, when they make him the object of their faith and truft, have only a mistaken notion concerning him their faith and truft is the fame whatever he is, and he is the fame which is the object of that faith and truft, and therefore all the difference must lie in this, viz. their mistaken notion concerning him, whom they make the object of that faith and truft and fo the queftion will rest here, whether this mistaken notion, will be a bar to our juftification and falvation.

For a clear anfwer to this queftion, I conceive we must go back to the chriftian covenant, becaule it is that alone which difcovers what is necessary to our juftification and falvation; and therefore, I fay, if the chriftian covenant hath made faith in the Son as the Father's equal, and as the fupreme God, neceffary to our juftification and falvation, then whoever thinks otherwife of the Son, is excluded

[blocks in formation]
« AnteriorContinuar »