ARGUMENT VI. Sixthly, It is the Son's express declaration in this matter, viz. that he is inferiour and fubordinate to the Father; and furely his teftimony is a fufficient foundation for our faith to rest upon; and confequently that be is in himself what he hath declared himself to be, and that the Father alone is the fupreme God. T HAT our Lord Jefus Chrift hath deciared thus of himself, fee Mark xiii. 32. But of that day and hour knoweth no man (or no one) no not the angels which are in heaven, ether the Son, but the Father. Here I obferve, that if we admit that groundless and unfcriptural diftinction, of two rational natures in Chrift, viz. a human and a divine, (as it is commonly expreffed) it will not help the cafe; because the Son, in his most exalted and highest nature, is declared ignorant of the Day and hour referred too. This will evidently appear to be the cafe, if we obferve the gradations, or several steps by which our Lord afcends from one fpecies of being to another, and declares them all ignorant of that day, till he cometh to him, who is Being of beings, or him who as being originally in himfelf, and is the fountain of being to all others, viz. God the Father; and he is declared to have the knowledge of that day peculiar tohimself, and exclufive of all others. That is, it isthe Father alone (exclufive of all other beings, even of his only begotten Son) which hath the knowledge of that day and hour (at least originally and uncommunicated) in himself; fo that if the Son had the knowledge of that day and hour, yet it was by communication from the Father. And, First, Our Lord afferts, that of that day and hour knoweth no man (or no one) confequently if it be admitted that Chrift had two natures, a hu man man and a divine, and if his human nature, in this place, is to be confidered in a feperate and diftinct capacity from his divine nature and if it be allowed that his human naturewas ignorant of what his divine did know, he would, as a man, or in his human nature, be included in this firft affertion. For, faith Chrift, of that day and hour knoweth no man. Then our Lord proceeds, by a fecond step to declare, that the knowledge of that day and hour was kept from a fpecies of beings fuperiour to man, viz. the angels which are in heaven; and which the text, to appearance, fuppofeth to have a greater measure of knowledge than man had, which is implied in those words, no not the angels, &c. Then he proceeds, by a third step, to a perfon which, to appearance, is confidered fuperiour to men and angels, as he is fpoken of after, and ftands diftinguished from them both, viz. the Son; and of him Chrift declares, that he is ignorant of the day, which can imply no lefs, than that he could not have the knowledge of it from himself, but from his Father; and if the Father had not revealed to him he was actually ignorant of it then. And, lastly, Chrift afferts, that the knowledge of that day was peculiar to the Father; which, to fay the leaft, muft fignify, that the father alone had the knowledge of that day, in and from himfelf, without receiving it by communication from any other, as I faid before. Again, John x. 27, 28, 29, 30. My fheep hear my voice, and they follow me. And I give unto them eternal life. and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my hand. My Father which gave them me, is greater than all; and none is able to pluck them out of my Fathers hand. I and my Father are one. In thefe words our Lord obferves, that his people are in a happy and fafe condition as they are under his care. care. I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any one pluck them out of my band. Then he fhews how they come to be thus fafe in his hand, and that upon a threefold account. First as they were a treasure, given or committed to his care by the Father. My Father which gave them me, &c. And therefore it was reafonable to fuppofe, that he would, out of respect to his Father, whom he loved and served, take care of a gift and treasure that his Father had committed to his care; and it was likewise as reasonable to suppose, that the Father would give him ability fufficient to discharge that trust. Secondly, His people were fafe in his hand, because the Father, who had committed them to his care, had power in himself fufficient to anfwer that end. My Father which gave them me is greater than all, and none is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. In these words our Lord feems plainly to imply, that his own power, when confidered feparate from the power of the Father, was inferiour or below the power of the Father; and therefore, tho' his people's fafety might be queftioned, when under the guardianship of his power only, yet there could be no doubt of it, when they were under the covert of the Father's alfo. And that they were fo he afferts, thirdly, that the Father did, and would communicate his power to him. I and my Father are one. Which is as much as if he had said, as the Father hath put the care of the church upon me; fo he has put his power upon me also, to enable me to discharge that truft, and therefore my people must be in a fafe condition in my hand. I and my Father are one. Not numerically, but one in the care and preservation of the church. The whole that I would obferve from this paffage is, that Chrift makes the power of the Father to be greater than the power of any other, even greater D than than his own, when his own power is confidered feparate from the power of the Father. For if his own power had been equal to the Father's, then there would have been no need of declaring, that the Father's power was engaged for his people's fafety, becaufe they would have been altogether as fafe without it. Again, John xiv 28. Ye bave heard, bow that I faid unto you, I go away and come again unto you, if ye loved me ye would rejoice, because I faid I go to the Father; for my Father is greater than I. In this verfe our Lord fhewed his difciples his diflike of that forrow, which they expreffed at the apprehenfion of his departure from them, and withal telleth them, that his departure was a proper ground of joy to them, if they loved him; becaufe every lover rejoyceth at the good, and exaltation, and increafe of happinefs that is conferred on his beloved. And that they might be fatisfied his going from them would be for his promotion and good, he declares, that the Father, he was going to, was greater than be, and confequently was able to give and confer on him whatever was neceffary thereunto. But if our Lord was a coordinate being with the Father, he could not receive any fuch benefit from him, as his argument here fuppofes. Nay he could not in his human nature (admitting that diftinction) for if his human nature was perfonally united to the higheft or fupreme God, by its union with the Son (as in this cafe it is fuppofed to be) then Chrift's human nature could not receive any thing from the Father, because it received every thing that was in the Father from the Son, by its union with him. Again, Matt. xxviii. 18. All power is given unto me in beaven and in earth. John v. 22. The Father judgeth no man, but bath committed all judgment unto the the Son. In these texts our Lord teftifies of himfelf, that the power or authority which he was poffeffed of was given or committed to him by the Father. Under this head of argument, may likewise be placed those texts, in which Chrift difowns the making himself equal with God, to be a juft confequence of what he at any time had faid. Thus, John v. 17. My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. From these words the Jews inferred, that he defamed the Father, by making himfelf equal to him; as in the words following. Therefore the Jews fought the more to kill him, because he had not only broken the fabbath, but faid also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. Then follows our Lord's reply in these words, Verily, verily, I say unto you, the Son can do nothing of himfelf, but what he feeth the Father do, for what things foever the Father doth thefe doth the Son likewife: for the Father loveth the Son, and fheweth him all things that bimfelf doth, and he will shew him greater works than thefe, that ye may marvel. In these words, ourLord doth not deny that blafphemy was a just consequence of his making himself equal with the Father; but he denies that his making himself equal with the Father, was a juft confequence of what he had said. And this he does by afferting, that he could do nothing of himself, independent of the Father, and that what he did was by the ability, direction, and appointment of the Father, and confequently that he was a Being inferiour and fubordinate to him; and therefore their inference was unjuft. And as they had taken offence at his faying, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work; he adds, that he should perform greater works than these, by the enablement, direction, and appointment of the Father, that they might marvel. This D 2 |