to reason from the less to the greater, and assert the justice of his own claim to that title, he does it in language, asserting his right to divinity, in the highest sense. Observe, he founds his claim to be the Son of God upon three things.-1. Upon his sanctification and mission into the world. Verse 36. i. e. Upon the sanctification of his human nature, which was fitted for office by a union with the divine.-2. Upon his doing the works of the Father. Ver. 37. 3. Upon his being in the Father, and the Father in him. Ver. 38. A claim to a partici

God." John x. 30. "I and my Father are one." Verse 33. "For a good work we stone thee not, but for plasphemy, and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God."-Had the Jews understood no more by this term, than merely his professing himself to be the Messiah, in a language which laid no claim to proper divinity, they could have had no ground for a charge of blasphemy, even if they had disbelieved his pretensions. Or, if their charge had been founded on a misapprehension of the sense of the term, here was a fair opportunity to rectify the mistake, by explain-pation of Deity in the highest ing the title, which he claimed in its true sense. Or, though it be granted that our Lord did not, at all times, explain things to the Jews, in such a manner as to correct their obvious mistakes, yet, is it not probable that he would have done in this, as he frequently did in similar cases, i. e. explain the matter to his own disciples, who were, probably, in the same mistake, if it was one. But so far from retracting what he had advanced, or from insinuating that the Jews did not understand him right, he goes on, farther, to vindicate the justice of his claim to be the Son of God, from his doing such works as afforded infallible proof of his real divinity; though the Jews were, hereby, more and more exasperated. And although in John x. 30, he reminds the Jews, that they sometimes used the term in a lower sense, and from thence, urges the inconsistency of their charge of blasphemy, seeing they had been accustomed to use the term God, and Son of God in a lower sense; yet when he comes

sense. So far was this from correcting any mistake which the Jews might be in about the meaning of the title Son of God, that he admits, in the ful| lest manner, that sense in which they understood him.

It is farther worthy of notice, that Christ's Sonship is always supposed, even where it has no respect to his office. He is never said to be made a Son.He is said to be made a priest. Heb. v. 4, 5, 10. He is said to be made Lord and Christ. Acts ii. 36. He is also said to be raised up as a Prophet, to be set as a king upon the holy hill of Zion, and to be raised up as a Prince and a Saviour; but he is never said to be made a Son.His Sonship is always supposed, which, I think, shows it to be a divine title, expressing the essential dignity of his nature, irrespective of his office.

No time could be more proper to exhibit Christ by a divine title, than when he is held up to view as being entitled to equal honor and obedience with the Father and Holy Spirit, as is

the case when baptism is admin- | istered in his name. But here this is the title used. Matt. xxviii. 19. "Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

ous person, who had, in general,
some sublime relation to God,
and who was also to sustain the
character and office of the Mes-
siah, the Saviour of the world."
After rejecting the several other
senses, he prefers this as being
the true meaning of the term,
as it is generally used in the
New Testament; for this rea-
son, that the doctrine of an
eternal Sonship, implying a
sameness of nature in the divine
essence, as subsisting in Father
and Son, was too deep and mys-
terious a doctrine, to be propos-
ed to young disciples. But
what this sublime relation to
God is, which is something
different from either creation,
adoption, angelic likeness, or a
sameness of nature, we are left
to guess. The above-mention-
ed worthy author has not told
us, and Scripture, I apprehend,
gives us no light. It is a sub-
lime, unknown, undefined some-
thing, none knows what.
this will help the matter, so as
to render that article of faith
less mysterious, and better adap-
ted to the capacities of young
disciples, I know not. Indeed
I see not what we can make of
this glorious personage, who
had, in general, some sublime
relation to God, unless it be the
Arian notion of a super-angel-
ic being, and so strip the Saviour
of real divinity. So that, how-
ever friendly those who adopt
this idea of the Sonship of
Christ, may be to the real unde-
rived divinity of the Saviour, it
appears to me they lay them-
selves under great disadvanta-

How

Farther, to suppose Christ to be called the Son of God, on account of his being designated to the office of the Messiah, is, it appears to me, to fix a meaning to the title, not warranted either by the natural sense of the term, or the use of it in Scripture. It will, I believe, be a difficult task to mention a single instance, in which the title, Son of God, is used to point out an extraord! nary office. Angels are called Sons of God, because they derive their beings from him by immediate creation, and because, as holy beings, they bear his image; but they are never so called because they are appointed to important offices or missions. Adam was called the Son of God, on account of his immediate creation; and believers are called Sons of God, because they are spiritually begotten of him, and because they are adopted into his family, and are made partakers of the heavenly inheritance, by virtue of their union with God's eternal Son; but ministers or other office-bearers in the church, have never that title given them on account of their constitution in office. But a sense, perhaps, a little different, is preferred by a late learned and pious author, whose praise is in the churches.* After naming several senses in which Christ may be cal-ges in defending that doctrine; led the Son of God, he men- for if it is but once conceded to tions this with approbation.- an Arian or Socinian, that "The title Son of God, is used Christ's Sonship refers only to in order to point out that glori- his human nature, or is, at best,

• Dr. Watts.

vious to his conception in the womb of the virgin. He, on this account, speaks more particularly of his divine original.— The other Evangelists, having previously written the series of our Lord's generation according to the flesh, he set himself to write a spiritual gospel, beginning it with the divinity of Christ. And it is probable, that, both in his gospel and in his epistle, which were written in extreme old age, and at periods not far distant from each other, he had a particular view to these heretics, who, as they denied Christ's real divinity, must con

but a mere title of office, not implying real divinity, it appears to me he will be able to prove but such irresistible arguments, as can neither be gain-sayed nor withstood, that all those divine names, Titles, Attributes, Works and Worship, which are in Scripture applied to Christ, and have been introduced so successfully in defence of the real, underived divinity of the Saviour, are applied to him as the Son of God, and viewed in the relation of a Son to the Father, and are, in a manner, synonymous with that title.Consequently, if the title itself has no relation to any real disequently deny any divine Sonvinity, other names and titles, ship. Now, it is evident, no one given to him in the relation and of the inspired writers so frecapacity of a Son, can infer none, quently gives our Lord the title and must be explained in anoth- of the Son of God, The Son, by er sense, and Christ will be a way of eminence, and God's God and the great God, and only begotten Son, as this Aposeverlasting Father, by office tle and Evangelist. The other only, and not by nature, as well Evangelists more frequently call as a Son. him the Son of Man, to point his relation to our nature. But the titles Son of God, &c. are darling phrases with this Apostle; he uses them more than fifty times in his writings. But, if these were names pointing out his human nature, or are merely titles of office, it did not well agree with his grand de sign, (which was to exhibit the Messiah in his divine original,) to abound with this peculiarity. But if the name and title be ori

To this essay, already longer than I intended, I shall add, only this one remark more, viz. That errors, particularly with regard to the person of Christ, began, at an early period, to infest the church. The Apostle Paul tells us, that the mystery of iniquity had begun to work in his days. And the Apostle John, who survived him many years, doubtless saw more of it. That he saw much appears from his epistle. Ancient his-ginally divine, nothing could bettorians, quoted by Dr. Whitbey, ter promote that design than his Mr. Lowman and others, inform so frequent use of it. And his us that St. John wrote his gos- using this name in the same pel, at the carnest desire of the connection, and as synonymous bishops of Asia, with a special with other titles unquestionably view to obviate the early here- divine, puts it beyond all reasonsies of Ebion and Cerinthus, able doubt, that this was his inwho held our Lord to be a mere tention. man, having no existence preVOL. V. No. 4.

S

T.

proper to notice, that there is something vague and of uncertain meaning, in that part of the question, which is proposed, as if it were indisputable," Since God is always found of them that seek him not." There seems to be, in this expression, a reference to a passage of holy scripture, found in Isaiah lxv. 1. and quoted by the Apostle, Rom. x. 20. "I am found of them that sought me not."But then these words are imme. diately preceded by the following, "I am sought of them that asked not after me."

in the question, is very different from the scripture, to which it seems to refer, tho' the expression is nearly the same.The text, as used by Isaiah, and quoted by Paul, means no more, than that the heathen nations shall be brought into the fold of Christ, and that nations, which in past ages, had not sought the

to the same effect, are often used in the scriptures. They imply an exhortation or command, calling us to search, with cordiality and diligence, into the glorious nature and perfection of God, as they are revealed in his word and works. They imply a serious inquiry, from a loyal heart, into the duties which God requires of man-Lord, should seek after him and diligent endeavors, after that spiritual acquaintance with him, which consists in having the same spirit, and in holding communion with him in the Holy Ghost-application to him, and dependence on him, for holiness, pardon, comfort and an inheri-it, or that they obtain the other tance in gloryand desires to honor God, and promote his cause in the world. In this way the directions; of the word of God, and the examples of his people, recorded for our use, teach us to seek the Lord. This, if it were necessary in this place, might be abundantly proved.

This being the meaning of the directions to seek the Lord, so often repeated to us in the seriptures, it may not be im

find him. Besides, this is spo
ken of in the text, as out of the
usual course of divine adminis-
trations. It does not mean, that
people find out the perfections
of God, without inquiry;
his will, without seeking to know

blessings, such as growth in grace, joy in God, and the comforts of the Holy Ghost, without asking for them; but that nations, which had not known nor regarded these things, should diligently seek them and find them.

We are also taught in the scriptures, by precept, promise, threatening and example, that men find, in consequence of seeking the Lord; and that there is an inseparable connec

there is such a connection between seeking and finding, asking and receiving, that we cannot have God for our God, nor be saved from his everlasting wrath, without seeking and asking. These are reasons why all men, without excepting any, should be directed to seek the Lord.

tion between seeking and finding, and not seeking and not finding the Lord, or having him for our portion. The sentiment in question, esteemed unquestionable, ought not to be expressed in words, which are designed to implicate the patronage of the texts mentioned in Isaiah and Romans, and should not be asserted, without explanation and qualification. And yet, there is a sense, in which it is true God is found of the sinner, or rather God finds the sinner, and renews him, and begins to discover himself to him, before the sinner begins to seek the Lord in sincerity and truth. It is, however, required of all men, that they seek the Lord while he may be found. And this is particularly required of the impenitent. "Seek the Lord and ye shall live; lest he break out like fire in the house of Joseph-Ye who turn judged, sovereign mercy, is pleased, ment into wormwood, and leave off righteousness in the earth, seek him that maketh the seven stars."

The consideration that God does regenerate men, before they seek the Lord, which is introduced as an objection to the propriety of directing sinners to seek the Lord, before they are renewed, has no weight in it, because God is as worthy of the confidence, love and dependence of the unregenerate as of the regenerate; and they stand in as great need of the blessings promised to believers, and can no more enjoy them, without seeking, than believers can-and if God, of his mere uncovenant

in numerous instances, to regenerate those, who have never sought him, by giving them an heart to seek the Lord, this ought not to be considered as prohibiting, forbidding, or disenabling men to seek the Lord, or absolving them from all ob

The reasons why such should be directed to seek the Lord, are the same as those which make it the duty of the saints-some of which will be mentioned.-ligations to seek him, until God One reason is, that God is wor subdues them by his mighty thy of the confidence, depen- power. dence and honor, which are implied in seeking him. Another is, that God is our Father, and seeking him is no more than the filial spirit, which becomes children, towards such a parent.It is our duty to seek the Lord, because he is infinitely desirable as our portion, and we are in ex-perverseness. treme need of those blessings, for which he is to be sought because we are dependent on him for them-and because

That men are not absolved from their obligations to seek the Lord, because they never do seek him, until he thus subdues their hearts, is evident from the consideration, that there is nothing to hinder them from thus seeking the Lord, but their own

A knowledge that they are perverse and will disobey the command, is no evidence that the command is improper, or that it is not their