« AnteriorContinuar »
sus Christ, is the God and Father of us all, and as our Lord Jesus Christ is in point of natural re . lation, not our Father but our brother, as having been partaker of the fame flesh and blood with us, liable to the fame temptations, and exposed to the fame sufserings, and for that reason he was not aihamed to call us brethren. Heb. ii. J I. 17. so from hence it will follow, that he cannot have, a natural right of dominion over us; and that the authority he is invested with, must be committed, to him in trust, by him who is the common parent of us all. And accordingly our Lord Jesus Christ declared, That all power or authority was given him, both in heaven and in earth. And that all judgment was committed to him by the Father, AsinMatt. xxviii. 18, and John v. 32."
The force of the present argument arises from hence, viz. if our Lord Jesus Christ be indeed and, in truth the real and very Son, and the begotten Son. <f God, and if tbt fulness of dominion, and of natural persections, which take place in him, are the gift, and are owing to the good pleasure of the Father, as it is manisestly declared in the texts above, then it will unavoidably follow, that our Lord: Jesus Christ is, in the strictest sence, inferior, inpoint of existence, agency, and all natural persections, and subordinate in point of authority to his Father. For as the Son derived his being, his agency, his natural persections, and his authority from the Father, so with respect to these lie is dependent upon and controulable by the power and will of the Father. It being, J think, a self-evi^ dent proposition, that whatever the Father has 3. power to give, and which gift depends upon his.' good pleasure, he has power and is at liberty either to continue, or discontinue, to restrain, or con* 'fro.ul, :as he pleases.
Argument II. '.
Secondly, "The Son received gifts and blessings from the Father, and consequently is inferiour and subordinate to the Father, according to St. Paul'j way of arguing in Abrahams and Melchisedeck'j cafe. Heb. vii. 7. Without all contradiction, the less is blessed of the betters
TH A T the Fa her hath bestowed his gifts and blessings on the Son, see Psalm ii. 8. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the utmost parts of the earth for thy pefsef/isn. Pfalm xiv. 6. y. Heb, i. 8. 9. But unto the Son he faith, thy throne, OGod, is for ever and ever •, a scepter of righteousness is the. scepter of thy kingdom; thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hatb anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. What this anointing is, and who are here faid to be Christ's sellows, is needless to enquire after; it being sufficient to my present purpose to observe, that he who received this anointing, is here characterized by the term God. Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever. This, I think, is one of the highest titles that scriptures give to the Son of God: and yet to this Being (great and high as he; isJt the Father is pleased to give his blessing, and to anoint him with the oil of gladness above his. sellows. John iii. 35. 'The Father loveth the Sonx and. hath given all things into his hand, Phil. ii. 9. 1Q. x 1. Wherefore God hath highly exalted him, and: given him a mme above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, and every tongue should confess, that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. In the proceeding verses St. Paul recommended to the Phillipians, an humble. condescending temper of mind, from the example of
Christ; Let the same mind be hi you, which was also in Christ Jesus; and then he shewed what that condescension was, which Christ had exercised, namely; in that he, who was in the form of God, condescended to take upon him the form of a servant, and .became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. And then the Apostle enforceth his exhortation to an humble condescention, from the advantage which attends such a conduct; by shewing, h ow .the Father had exalted the Son, as a reward so r his abasement, in the words I first cit-ed. Wheyefore God (even the Father ) hath highly exalted him, (even the Son, that Son who was in the form ef God antecedent to his abasement) and given him a name, which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee Jh.all bow, &e. Matt, xxvii. i$. All power is given unto me, both in heaven and in earth1 By all power is not meant almightenefs, but all authority; as is evident from the exercise of that power in Christ's commanding his disciples, as in the words following : Go yea therefore and teach all nation. Sec. which is as if he had faid, as I have received all authority from my Father, so, by vertue of that authority, I require you to go teach all nations, &c.
The force and strength of this argument arises from hence, vtZ. if our Lord Jesus Christ did in reality receive gifts and blessings, and in particular power and anthority from the Father, as is most expressly declared in the abovecited texts, then he must of necessity be inferior and subordinate to the Father. For as the being in a capacity of receiving gifts and blessing from, and of exercising authority under another, is an evident proof of dependency and controulabkness in such a being; so from hen.ee it will follow^ by a necessary consequence that as our Lord Jesus Christ did really receive gists and blessings, and jn particular power or authority from his Father, he is in point of ex'*.' istence, agency, and all natural persections below or inseriour, and in point of authority subordinate to his Father.
For tho men may mutually give to, and receive favours from each other, and so in many cases nothing can be concluded from thence, with regard to their superiority or inseriority to each other; yet the case is otherwise with respect to our Lord Jesus Christ and his Father, with whom (in the proposition I am now maintaining) he stand compared. "With them there is not a mutual communication of favours, nor giving one good thing for another; but one is the sole giver, and the other is only a receiver. The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand; but the Son does not give any thing to the Father; there not being one word which sounds like it in all the Bible, neither is it possible in itself. And all the return which the Son either did, or could make, was only an humble submission to his Father's will, and a thankful acknowledgment of his benefits. The Son likewise receives from the Father, all power or authority in heaven and in earth; but the Father does not, neither can he receive any thing from the Son. And this I urge as a farther proof, that the Son is inferior and subordinate to the Father, and that; the Father alone is the supreme God,
tshirdly, the Father is said to be the God os the Son, therefore the Son is inferiour and Jubordinate to the Father, and the Father alone is the supreme God.
TH A T the Father is the God of the Son, see Psalm xiv. 7. Heb. i. 9. Wherefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil os gladness above thy fellows. Matt, xxvif. '46. My God, my God, why has thou forsaken me. John xx. 17. But go to my brethren and fay unto them, I ascend to my Father, and your Father, and unto my God, and your God. 2 Cor. xi 31. The God and Father of our Lordjesus Christ, who is blessed for evermore, knoweth that I lie not. In these texts it is expressly declared, that the Father is not only the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, but also that he is God. And from hence I argue, that if the Fashes be indeed, and in truth, the God of the. Son, as is most expressly declared in the forecited texts, then it will follow, that the Son is inseriour and subordinate to the Father, whether the term God be used to express either dominion, or priority of existence and agency.
If it be used to express dominion, then the Son's inseriority and subordination to the Father, directly follows from the Father's being his God. For if the Father is the governour of the Son, then he is the Son's superiour in that respect and he is so likewise in all other respects, it being impossible that an agent, who is naturally subjected to the government of another agent who is selsexisting, and whose subjection naturally arises from, and is founded on his being derived from that other agent (which is the present case) should in point of existence, and all natural persections, be equal -^0 that necessarily .existing being, which he, by