ther, and to be the fupreme God, then I acknow ledge my arguments confuted. But, alas, he is fo far from doing this, that on the contrary he owns this real Son to be inferiour and fubordinate to the Father; and fo allows all that I have afferted. It is this real Son of God whom I affirm to be the true Chrift; and if in fo doing I have fet up a falfe chrift, or preached another gofpel, as Mr. Claggett reprefents me to have done, then let him go on with his anathemas. It is this real Son of God, who in the days of his flesh was Emanuel, or God with us, as in Matt. i. 22,23, It is this Son of God who was the principal fubject of, and the fubftance of the promises which God had made to mankind; and fo he was Jekovah our righteoufnefs. When God was going to fulfil his covenant and promife which he had made to Abraham, Ifaac, and Jacob, by bringing the children of Ifrael out of Egypt into the good land of Canaan, he tells them, as in Exod, vi. 3. that by the name Jebovab he had not been known to them; but now they should know that he is to them Jehovah their God, that is, a God keeping or fulfilling his covenant and promise with them, as in verfes 7, 8. So when he fulfilled his great covenant-promife, in fending the Meffiah, this Perfon was to be called, Jehovah our righteoufnefs, as in Jer. xxiii. 6. that is the fulfilling of God's covenant for our righteoufnefs or juftification; not that this Perfon was properly Jehovah, or the covenant-keeper, but he was called Jehovah, as the covenant was fulfilled in him, the namė being transferred from him that had made and kept this covenant, to him that was the fubject or thing promifed. That names are thus tranfferred from one perfon to another, in the fcriptures, fee Pfalm xxiv. 6. This is the generation of them that feek him, that feek thy face [O Jacob]

here

་

here the name [Jacob] is transferred to the [God of Jacob] It is this Son, or Lamb of God, who is fet down with his Father in his throne, to whom the Saints return their thankful acknowledgment, for that he hath redeemed them to God, by his blood, out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation, as in Rev. iii. 21, and 5, 9.

If it fhould be here replied (from another quarter) that tho' the man Chrift Jefus is the only begotten Son of God; and tho' his Perfon is called by that name in the fcriptures, upon the account of, and only with respect to, his human nature; yet the man Chrift Jefus is not all, or that whole Perfon, which is called the only begotten Son of God; because that Perfon, which is fo called, is conftituted of the Logos or Word (which in fact is the very or fupreme God) and the man Chrift Jefus (which in fact is the only begotten Son of God) both being united in, and fo conftituting one and the fame Perfon, viz. the Person of the Meffiah, according to the teftimoof St. John, as in John i. 14. And the word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, &c.

ny

I answer, first, I have already obferv'd, that whatever is effential to, and conftitutes that Being which we call God, or the Father, that in reality is the very Father; and therefore, if the Logos or Word is in fact effential to, and (either in whole or in part) conftitutes that Being which is the very or fupreme God, then the Logos or Word is (in whole or in part) in reality, and in fact, the very Father of God's Son; because he is effential to, and in part conftitutes that Being which is fo.. For whatever union there may be betwixt the fupreme God and the man Chrift Jefus (which is. his only begotten Son) yet that union cannot be perfonal, fo as that thefe two being united can

stitute one and the fame individual Perfon; becaufe fuch perfonal union effectually destroys the relation of father and fon, it being a direct contradiction to fuppofe one and the fame individual perfon to be both father and fon to himself. The relation of father and fon neceffarily fuppofes two diftinct individual beings (as I have already obferved) and the fcriptures, when they speak of God and his Son, they reprefent them as fuch. Now if the very or fupreme God, and the man Chrift Jefus (which is his Son) are two diftinct individual Beings (as in the nature and reafon of the thing they muft, and as the feriptures reprefent them to be) then they are truly two diftinct individual Perfons, in the most proper fenfe of the word Perfon, whatever union there may be betwixt them; and therefore if the Logos, or Word, is the very or fupreme God, then he cannot be (in whole, nor in part) that Being or Perfon which is the Son of God; and confequently, whatever union there is betwixt the fupreme God, and the man Chrift Jefus (which is his Son) yet there is not, nor can there be any fuch perfonal union as is here fuppofed.

If it fhould be farther urged, that tho' the [Word] is the very or fupreme God; yet he is not the whole and all that Being which is that God; becaufe that Being is truly diftinguishable into three diftinct individual Perfons, viz. the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; thefe three slike partaking of all the attributes and effential properties of the very or fupreme God; and that the man Chrift Jefus, or the Son of God, was not united to that whole Being which is his Father, but only to the fecond Perfon of that Being, viz. the Word; and that this fecond Perfon, and the man Chrift Jefus, conftitute one individual Perfon in their united state.

I anfwer, as before, if the [Word] is effential to, and in part conftitutes that Being which is the Father of God's Son, then the Word himself is the very, tho' not the whole or all that is the Father of that Son; and if the Son was perfonally united to the Word, then he was perfonally united to that Being which is his Father. The diftinguishing of God into three imaginary Perfons makes no alteration in the cafe, becaufe it is that Being which is conftituted of thefe three, which is the very Father; and therefore what thing foever is united to either of these Perfons, that thing is united to the Being itself; and confequently, if the man Chrift Jefus, which is the Son of God, is perfonally united to the Word, then he is perfonally united to his own Father; and fo the relation of father and fon ceafes, or rather it never took place; because this fuppofed perfonal union began when the man Chrift Jefus (confidered as the man Chrift Jefus, or Son of God) began to be. But the scriptures have plainly declared, that the fupreme God, and the man Chrift Jefus, ftand in the relation of Father and Son to each other; and confequently, have plainly denied the perfonal union which is here fuppofed. But farther, upon the fuppofition that the Being which we call the fupreme God, is truly distinguishable into three diftinct individual Perfons, which alike partake of all the attributes and effential properties of that Being, then it will follow, that if the [Word] was perfonally united to the man Chrift Jefus, the Father and the Holy Ghost must be fo, they being alike omniprefent, filling up the fame place, at the fame time, and being prefent in, and with all perfons and things, in the fame manner, kind, and degree. And tho' in a triangle, one angle may touch, and fo be united to what the other two are pot, each

angle

angle being in a particular place, and neither of them being in the fame place as the others; yet with refpect to three fuppofed Perfons, who are alike omniprefent, the cafe is quite otherways, becaufe they all fill up the fame place, and where one is, there the others are in the fame manner, kind, and degree, and therefore to what one is perfonally united, the others must be alfo. If the [Word] was perfonally united to the man Chrift Jefus, the Father and the Holy Ghoft must be fo; and confequently, the man Chrift Jefus was perfonally united to the whole, and all of that Being, which we call the fupreme God. Upon this principle

I farther obferve, that as God is omniprefent, and fo fills all place, and is prefent in and with all perfons and things, in the fame manner, kind, and degree; fo from hence it will follow, that if he was perfonally united to the man Chrift Jefus, he must be so to all other men, because he is prefent in and with (and confequently is united to all other men) in the fame manner, kind, and degree, as he is to the man Chrift Jefus; for tho' God may, if he pleases, exercise or manifeft his attributes or effential properties at fome times, and in fome places, when he doth not at other times, or in other places; and tho' he may exercife or manifest thefe in, to, by, or upon fome perfons or things, and not in, to, by, or upon others I fay, tho' he may do this if he pleafes, yet as to his effence, or effential properties themfelves, they are not fubject to thefe changes or alterations, they being alike prefent in and with, and fo are alike united to all places, perfons, and things in the fame manner, kind, and degree. And if God's exercifing or manifefting of his attributes, or effential properties in, to, by, or upon any being, fhould be called his perfonal