Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

EIGHT

ARGUMENTS

FROM

SCRIPTURE

TO PRO VE,

That the Son is a Being inferiour and fubordinate to the Father, and that the Father alone is the fupreme God.

ARGUMENT I.

Firft, The Son received his being and existence from the Father, as the first fupreme free cause of that being and existence: confequently, he is inferiour and Jubordinate to the Father, as every effect is inferiour to its first fupreme free caufe.

HAT the Father is the cause of the Son's being, fee John iii. 16. For God fo loved the World, that he gave his only begotten Son, &c. If the relation of a father to a fon, doth not imply the fon's receiving his being from that father; yet certainly the father's begetting of the fon, can imply no lefs. For whatever difference there may be betwixt begetting, creating, and making of a thing; yet they are all the fame in this, viz. that the thing which is begotten, created, or made, is by that operation really produced; and if fo, then it follows, that the Son received his being and existence from the Father. That the Father is the firft fupreme caufe of the Son's being, is here taken for granted; for if there be a first fupreme caufe, antecedent to the Father, then that first cause would justly claim the character of fupreme God. And,

As

As the Father is the firft fupreme cause of the Son's being, fo he is likewise the free caufe of that his being and exiftence. That is, the Father did not beget the Son by a neceffity of nature, but from the freedom of his will. And this is evident from the nature of the thing. For every thing that acts from a neceffity of nature, muft furely always act the fame, because always under the fame neceffity; or rather it would be one continued act through all eternity, when the being that acts is an eternal being, as the Being here referred to is fuppofed to be. But it is manifeft, that this is not the prefent case. Because when the fcriptures make mention of the begetting or generation of the Son, it is an action which is past; confequently, it was an act of the Father's will. For if the father begets the fon by a neceffity of nature, then the fon is always begetting, but never is nor will be begotten. The word beget implies the act or operation of the Father; the word begotten, implies the perfecting and finishing of that act, or of the thing which that act or operation produced, and confequently the ceafing or difcontinuance of that act. Seeing then the fcripture fpeaks of the Son, as a Being which is already begotten, it will follow, that the Father's act, in generating the Son, is past, and that the Son was begotten, not by a neceffity of nature, but from the freedom of the Father's will. So that, if there was fuch a thing as time, either before or after the generation of the Son, then his existence fprang not from a neceffity of nature, but from a freedom of will. But time has taken place fince the Son's generation, he having had a real perfonal existence long fince, and confequently, he owes his being to the Father's will and pleafure. Again,

John v. 26. As the Father hath life in himself, fo bath he given to the Son, to have life in himself. In this text there are three things afferted, viz. first, that the Father hath life in himself; fecondly, that the life of the Son is from the Father; thirdly, that the life of the Son is the Father's gift. Now every gift is free and voluntary, and procedes not from a neceffity of nature, but from the will of the donor. And, whether we confider the term life, as expreflive of that intelligence and activity which conftitutes life in, and to every moral agent, or as a power to convey that life to others, it alters not the cafe, because either of them excludes neceffary exiftence from the Son; it being equally abfurd, and an impoffibility in nature, for the neceffarily exifting Being, either to receive life and being from another, or a power to give life and being to others; fuch life and fuch power being neceffarily inherent in the neceffarily exifting Being. Again,

Col. i. 19. It pleafed the Father, that in him (viz. the Son) fhould all fulness dwell. By all fulness I think the Apostle must be understood to mean, a fulnefs of natural perfections, such as power, knowledge, &c. and a fulness of authority or dominion to be exercifed in, and for the good of the church. This, I think, is evident from the Apoftle's difcourfe, and this fulness in the Son, he declares to arife from the good pleasure of the Father. So that tho the Son is poffeffed of a fulness of natural perfections, and in him are lodged all the treafures of power, wifdom, and knowledge, yet it is manifeft from the fcriptures, that thefe are not in the Son, independent of the Father, but are owing to his good pleasure. And,

Tho

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

Tho there is a fulness of authority in the Son; yet it is manifeft, that it is not natural, but derived. For as the God and Father of our Lord Jefus Chrift, is the God and Father of us all, and as our Lord Jefus Chrift is in point of natural relation, not our Father but our brother, as having been partaker of of the fame flesh and blood with us, liable to the fame temptations, and expofed to the fame fufferings, and for that reafon he was not afhamed to call us brethren, Heb. ii. 11, 17. fo 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 truft, by him who is the common parent of us all. And accordingly our Lord Jefus Chrift 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, as in Matt. xxviii. 18. and John v. 22.

The force of the prefent argument arifes from hence, viz. if our Lord Jefus Christ be indeed and in truth the real and very Son, and the begotten Son of God, and if the fulness of dominion, and of natural perfections, which take place in him, are the gift, and are owing to the good pleasure of the Father, as it is manifeftly declared in the texts above, then it will unavoidably follow, that our Lord Jefus Chrift is, in the ftricteft fenfe, inferiour, in point of exiftence, agency, and all natural perfections, and fubordinate in point of authority to his Father. For as the Son derived his being, his agency, his natural perfections, and his authority from the Father, fo with refpect to these he is dependent upon and controulable by the power and will of the Father. It being, I think, a felf-evident propofition, that whatever the Father has power to give, and which gift depends upon his good pleasure, he has power and is at liberty either to continue, or difcontinue, to reftrain, or controul, as he pleases.

ARGUMENT II.

Secondly, The Son received gifts and blessings from the Father, is inferiour and fubordinate to the Father, according to St. guing in Abraham's and Melchifedeck's cafe. Heb. vii. tradiction, the lefs is bleffed of the better.

T

7.

and confequently Paul's way of arWithout all con

'HAT the Father hath beftowed his gifts and bleffings on the Son, see Pfalm ii. 8. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the utmost parts of the earth for thy poffeffion. Pfalm xlv. 6, 7. Heb. i. 8, 9. But unto the Son be faith, thy throne, O God, 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, bath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. What this anointing is, and who are here faid to be Christ's fellows, is needlefs to enquire after; it being fufficient to my prefent purpose to obferve, 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 the fcriptures give to the Son of God:

and

and yet to this Being (great and high as he is) the Father is pleased to give his bleffing, and to anoint him with the oil of gladnefs above his fellows. John iii. 35. The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand, Phil. ii. 9, 10, 11. Wherefore God hath highly exalted him, and given him a name above every name, that at the name of Jefus every knee should bow, and every tongue fould confefs, that Jefus Chrift is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. In the preceding verfes St. Paul recommended to the Philippians, an humble condescending temper of mind, from the example of Chrift; Let the fame mind be in you, which was alfo in Christ Jesus; and then he fhewed what that condefcention was, which Chrift had exercised, namely, in that he, who was in the form of God, condefcended to take upon him the form of a fervant, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. And then the Apostle enforceth his exhortation to an humble condefcention, from the advantage which attends fuch a conduct; by fhewing, how the Father had exalted the Son, as a reward for his abasement, in the words I first cited. Wherefore God (even the Father) bath highly exalted him, (even the Son, that Son who was in the form of God antecedent to his abasement) and given him a name, which is above every name, that at the name of Jefus every knee should bow, &c. Matt. xxviii. 18. All power is given unto me, both in heaven and in earth. By all power is not meant almightiness, but all authority; as is evident from the exercise of that power in Chrift's commanding his difciples, as in the words following: Go ye therefore and teach all nations, &c. which is as if he had faid, as I have received all authority from my Father, fo, by vertue of that authority, I require you to go teach all nations, &c.

The force and ftrength of this argument arifes from hence, viz. if our Lord Jefus Chrift did in reality receive gifts and bleffings, and in particular power or authority from his Father, as is most exprefsly declared in the abovecited texts, then he muft of neceffity be inferiour and fubordinate to the Father. For as the being in a capacity of receiving gifts and bleffings from, and of exercifing authority under another, is an evident proof of dependency and controulablenefs in fuch a being; fo from hence it will follow, by a neceffary confequence, that as our Lord Jefus Chrift did really receive gifts and bleffings, and in particular power or authority from his Father, he is in point of existence, agency, and all natural perfections below or inferiour, and in point of authority fubordinate to his Father.

For tho men may mutually give to, and receive favours from each other, and fo in many cafes nothing can be concluded from thence, with regard to their fuperiority or inferiority to each other; yet the cafe is otherwife with refpect to our Lord Jefus Chrift and his Father, with whom (in the propofition I am now maintaining) he ftands compared. With them there is not a mutual communication of favours, nor giving one good thing for another; but one is the fole 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 founds like it in all the Bible, neither is it poffible in itself. And all the return which the Son either

did, or could make, was only an humble fubmiffion to his Father's will, and thankful acknowledgment of his benefits. The Son likewife 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 inferiour and fubordinate to the Father, and that the Father alone is the fupreme God.

ARGUMENT III.

Thirdly, The Father is faid to be the God of the Son, therefore the Son is inferiour and fubordinate to the Father, and the Father alone is the fupreme God.

T

HAT the Father is the God of the Son, fee Pfalm xlv. 7. Heb. i. 9. Where

fore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. Matt. xxvii. 46. My God, my God, why haft thou forfaken me. John xx. 17, But go to my brethren and fay unto them, I afcend to my Father, and your Father, and unto my God, and your God. 2 Cor. xi. 31. The God and Father of our Lord Jefus Chrift, who is blessed for evermore, knoweth that I lie not. In these texts it is exprefsly declared, that the Father is not only the Father of our Lord Jefus Chrift, but also that he is God. And from hence I argue, that if the Father 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 inferiour and subordinate to the Father, whether the term God be used to exprefs either dominion, or priority of existence and agency.

If it be used to exprefs dominion, then the Son's inferiority and fubordination 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 fuperiour in that respect, and he is so likewife in all other respects, it being impoffible that an agent, who is naturally fubjected to the government of another agent who is felfexifting, and whofe fubjection naturally arifes from, and is founded on his being derived from that other agent (which is the prefent cafe) fhould in point of existence, and all natural perfections, be equal to that neceffarily exifting being, which he, by nature, is fubjected to; feeing he muft of neceffity be dependent upon, and be controulable by fuch a governour. And as the Father is the God or governour of the Son, fo the Son muft of neceffity be fubordinate to him also ; it being alike impoffible, and a contradiction in terms, for an agent, who is abfolutely fupreme in government, to have a governour over him, which is the prefent cafe. And,

Tho the Son is himself called God in the fcriptures, yet that does not alter the case, because every fubordinate governour is a god to thofe he has authority over. Like the centurion in the gospel, who, tho he was fet under authority, yet he had foldiers under him, upon whom he exercised a delegated authority, when he said to one man go, and he went; and to another come, and he came at his call. In like manner, our Lord Jefus Chrift is invefted with a delegated authority, and therefore he is a God; but then he himself is subject to another, who gave him all power or authority in heaven and in earth. Again,

« AnteriorContinuar »