Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

Matt. ix. 2, 6. Jefus feeing their faith, faith unto the fick of the palfy, fon be of good cheer, thy fins be forgiven thee. That ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive fins, he faith to the fick of the palsy, arife, &c. From hence it is urged, that as all fin is chiefly and primarily committed against God, so it is God only who can forgive it; and feeing our Lord did actually forgive fin, therefore he must be God, or the fupreme God. In answer to which I obferve, that to forgive fin is to remit or take away that punishment and condemnation, that is either inflicted, or threatned to the finner, as a just punishment for his fin. And as all fin is chiefly and primarily committed againft God; fo the forgiveness of fin, is chiefly and primarily in his hand. And farther I observe, that this God, or fupreme God, is God the Father; and that when the Son doth forgive fin, that is, remit the punishment due to the finner, as aforefaid, it is not by any authority or power which he hath originally and independently in himself; but by vertue of that authority invested in him by the Father; as he himfelf declared. John v. 22. The Father judgeth no man, but bath committed all judgment unto the Son. And the Apostle faith, that Chrift is appointed to be judge, both of quick and dead. Acts x. 42. And Christ himself prayed to his Father, for forgiveness for his murderers. Luke xxiii. 34. So that Chrift's forgiving the man's fins, by taking away the temporary punishment he lay under for them, do by no means bespeak him to be the fupreme God, or equal to him.

Matt. xxviii. 19. Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoft. From hence it is inferred, that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft, are three co-ordinate perfons, or Beings. In answer to which I obferve, that the chriftian religion is vriginally and primarily from God the Father, and that the Son, in revealing this religion, did but reveal the will of the Father. John vi. 38. I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will; but the will of him that fent me. Chap. xii. 49, 50. I have not spoken of my felf, but the Father which fent me, he gave me a commandment both what I should fay, and what I should speak. What foever I speak therefore, even as the Father faid unto me, fo I fpeak. And the Holy Ghoft, in confirming and bearing witnefs to this religion, did but confirm and bear witness to the Father's will. This being premifed, I fay, that baptizing in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft, muft fignify the authority of the baptizer, or the duty of the baptized. If the former be the cafe, then tho authority be derived from all three; yet the Father alone is the original fountain of that authority. And therefore not any thing can be inferred from hence, with refpect to their equality. And tho they are joined together in this commiffion; yet that does no more make them co-ordinate Beings, than St. Paul's joining the elect angels with the Father and the Son, does make thofe angels co-ordinate with the Father and the Son. 1 Tim. v. 21. I charge thee, before God, and the Lord Jefus Chrift, and the elect angels, &c. But if the latter be the cafe, viz. the duty of the baptized; then I fay, that it was an initiating them into that religion, which was originally from the Father, revealed by the Son, and confirmed by the Holy Ghoft, and fo was from them all. Thus baptizing into Mofes, as in 1 Cor. x. 2. was baptizing into that religion, that Mofes was the publisher of, and into that covenant which Mofes was the mediator

of.

of. But this does by no means imply, that they were co-ordinate Beings with the fupreme God the Father in either cafe.

John i. 1, 2, 3. In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God, the fame was in the beginning with God: All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made, that was made. In this text, the Son is called the word, and God, and is faid to be in the beginning with God, and to make all things that were made: and from hence it is infer-. red, that he himself is made of none, and confequently that he is equal to the Father. In answer to which there are feveral things to be confidered, as, firft, what is meant by the term beginning; by which I think at moft no more can be intended, than the beginning of the Mofaick creation; because St. John not only uses the fame phrafe of fpeech, that Mofes begins the hiftory of the creation with, but also seems to refer to that creation in the 3d verfe. Befides, we have no other beginning antecedent to the beginning of the Mofaick creation, which the fcripture has given any account of; and therefore there cannot be any other beginning antecedent to that, which the fcripture can reasonably be fuppofed to refer to. And eternity, furely, cannot be intended, by an expreffion which stands in direct oppofition to it. Secondly, It is to be confidered what is intended by the term word. With refpect to which I think not any thing can be inferred from the term it felf; and as it is here used to express a perfon, viz. the Son of God, our Lord Jefus Chrift, and as this person is elfewhere proved to be inferiour and fubordinate to the Father; fo the term word being applied to him here cannot poffibly prove the contrary. Thirdly, He is faid to be with God. But it will not follow from a perfon's being with God, at the beginning of the Mofaick creation, that he is equal to the God, which he is faid to be with. Fourthly, He is faid to be God. But to be God, or a God, proves nothing in the prefent cafe; feeing the godship of the Son is derived from the Father, as I have before fhewn. Fifthly and lastly, It is faid that all things were made by him, and that without him was not any thing made, that was made. And from hence it is inferred, that if the Son was made, he must make himself, which is an abfurd propofition. With refpect to which I observe, that if the term made, fignifies a different manner of production from the term begotten, then the word, or Son, was not made, but begotten. But if this term do fignify the fame manner of production, then, I fay, the Son was made, because the fcriptures fay that he was begotten; and yet he did not make himself, seeing he must be excepted in that creation, who did make all things then made. This is a way of fpeaking which in other cafes must be allowed to have an exception, tho it be not expreffed. Thus, when Abfalom murthered his brother Ammon, 2 Sam. xiii. Tidings came to David, that all the King's fons were dead. Now if this report had been true, yet Abfalom must have been excepted, who was the caufe and contriver of that murder. Thus, again, Heb. ii. 9. We fee Jefus who was made a little lower than the angels, crowned with glory and honour, that he, by the grace of God, might tafte death for every man. And yet Christ did not tafte death for himself tho he was a man; it being manifest that he is excepted who did tafte of death for every man. And, thus again, 1 Cor. xv. 26, 27. He (viz. Chrift) muft reign, till he hath put all enemies

under

under his feet. The last enemy that shall be deftroyed is death, for he hath put all things under his feet. And then the Apostle adds, when he faith all things are put under him, it is manifeft that he is excepted which did put all things under him. Thus, I fay, with equal reafon, that when St. John faith, all things were made by him, it is manifeft that he is excepted in that creation, who made all things that were then made. So that this text affords nothing to the objectors purpose.

John v. 25. And needed not that he should testify of man, for he knew what was in man. Here, Chrift is faid to know the hearts of men; and from hence it is inferred, that he is equal to the Father. In anfwer to which it is fufficient to obferve, that St. Peter knew the hearts of Ananias and Sapphira; and that as God gave him this ability, fo he could as easily have given him ability to know the hearts of all men: and if he had done fo, St. Peter would ftill have been but a man, and therefore no just confequence can be drawn from the extent of Christ's knowledge, or any other other natural power, to prove him equal to the Father. John iii. 31. He that cometh from above, is above all. Acts x. 36. He is Lord of all. Rom. ix. 5. Who is over all, God bleffed for ever. Here, because Christ is faid to be Lord of all, and over all, and God above all, and the like; from hence it is inferred, that he is equal to the Father. In anfwer to which I fay, that this must be spoken of him exclufive of the Father. For if the Father is included in this all, then the Son is not equal, but fuperiour to the Father, which is abfurd to fuppofe. And therefore as the Father must needs be excepted out of this all, fo thofe texts prove nothing.

John v. 23. That all men fhould honour the Son, even as they honour the Father Acts vii. 59. And they ftoned Stephen calling upon God, and faying, Lord Jejus receive my spirit. Phil. ii. 10. That at the name of Jefus, every knee should bow. Heb. i. 6. Let all the angels of God worship him. Rev. v. from verfe 7. to the end. In which the four beafts, and the four and twenty elders are faid to bow down and to worship the Lamb, and to fing to his praife; and every creature is faid to join in this fong of praife. In thefe texts Chrift is not only faid to be worshipped, and prayed to, but likewife honour and worship are required to be paid to him; and from hence it is inferred, that he is equal to the Father. In answer to which I obferve, that Chrift may very fitly be prayed to in all those cafes, in which he hears our prayers, and has ability and a difpofition to help us; and the admitting that he has fuch knowledge and power, does not prove him to be the fupreme God, or equal to him; because the Son's knowledge and power, in this cafe, is derived from the Father, to whom he owes his very being, as I have before fhewn. If it fhould be faid, that God only is the object of prayer; I anfwer, the nature of the thing fhews the contrary; because what makes an object of prayer in any cafe, is a perfon's hearing our prayers, and having ability and a difpofition to help us and therefore Chrift's being prayed to, in thofe cafes, in which he hears our prayers, and has ability and a difpofition to help us, cannot prove him to be equal to the Father. Again,

I farther obferve that honour and worship are the fame thing, and that it is but just we should render to every one the honour or worship which is bis due; and

and confequently, that it is but just that we should render to Christ, all that honour or worship which is due to his name. But then it will not follow, from our doing this, or from our being required to do it, that Chrift is equal with the Father. If it fhould be faid, that divine worship is payable to the supreme God only. I anfwer, if divine worship confifts in worshiping the fupreme God, as the fupreme God; then we have no precept, which requires us to worfhip Chrift with divine worship; because we are not required to worship him as the fupreme God. Neither have we any example of fuch worship being paid to him that we know of. If it fhould be faid that we are required to honour the Son, even as we honour the Father, and therefore it must be divine hoI answer, the text it felf fhews that this cannot be the cafe. For as the ground of this honour, which is payable to Chrift, is his being the Father's minifter and reprefentative (the Father judgeth no man; but bath committed all judgment unto the Son; that all men may honour the Son, even as they honour the Father) fo he muft of neceffity be differently confidered in the minds of men, when they pay their refpect to him, as the minifter and reprefentative of the fupreme God, which is the prefent cafe: it being, I think, impoffible for a man to have the fame high conception of him, whom he confiders to be the minifter and reprefentative of the fupreme God, as he has of the fupreme God bimfelf; and therefore, no fuch thing can poffibly be required from him. If it fhould be faid, that Chrift is the very fupreme God, and therefore he is to be honoured with divine honour. I anfwer, this is not probable from the text under confideration, seeing he is not here confidered as the fupreme God, but only as his minifter and reprefentative. And the honour which is here required, as payable to him, is not to him under the confideration of his being himself the fupreme God, but only as he is the minifter and reprefentative of the Father. John x. 30. I and my Father are one. But this text I have already confidered in my fixth argument, and therefore to that I refer my reader.

2 Cor. xii. 14. The grace of our Lord Jefus Chrift, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghoft, be with you all, Amen. Here, because the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft, are joined together in this benediction, therefore it is inferred that they are three co-ordinate Beings. To which I answer, that the fame Apoftle, 1 Tim. v. 21. requires Timothy before God, and the Lord Jefus Chrift, and the elect angels, to obferve what he then gave him in charge; and therefore if St. Paul's joining the Son, and Holy Ghoft, with the Father, in the forementioned benediction, proves the Son, and Holy Ghost, to be co-ordinate with the Father; then his joining the elect angels with the Father, and the Son, in the forementioned charge, proves the elect angels to be co-ordinate with the Father and the Son: but the confequence is not just in either cafe.

Philip. ii. 6. Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God, &c. I anfwer, God has no equal, and therefore I think that this cannot be the true reading, nor what the Apostle intended to exprefs. Befides, fome learned men fay, that the words fhould be tranflated thus, viz. He did not greedily catch, or prey to be equal with God. And this is perfectly agreeable to the design of the Apostle, whose words may be read thus, who being in the

G

form

form of God, by being his minifter and reprefentative, he did not proudly and vainly affume to be equal with God; but on the contrary, he humbled himself, by taking upon him the form of a fervant, and by becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross; wherefore because he thus humbled himself, God hath highly exalted him, &c.

Col. ii. 9. For in him, dwelleth all the fulness of the godhead bodily. From hence it is inferred, that our Lord Chrift is co-ordinate with the Father. To which I answer, that the Apoftle, in the preceding chapter, verfe 15. declares Chrift to be the image of the invifible God. And therefore, tho an image reprefents a thing; yet the image cannot poffibly be the thing which is reprefented by it. And as Chrift is the image or representative of God, as God has invested him with all power or authority in heaven and in earth; fo the fulnefs of the godhead, or godfhip (that is, all dominion) may be faid to dwell or refide in him and this, I think, is the moft that can be inferred from the Apoftle's words. For faith he, verfe 8. Beware leaft any man spoil you, through philofophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Chrift. And then he gives the reafons why they should not hearken to thofe falfe teachers, viz. first, because in him who was their king and head, dwelt all the fulness of the godhead bodily. That is, in him and in him only, it pleased the Father, that fovereign dominion and authority over all fhould be lodged; and confequently to him, and to him only, they ought to submit themselves, and not to hearken to, nor follow any of thofe falfe teachers, who would impofe any law upon them, befides that of Chrift. Secondly, He tells them, that they were compleat in him. That is, by their submitting themselves to his government, they were compleat chriftians, and fo were compleatly qualified for pardon of fin, God's favour, and eternal life; and confequently, it was altogether needlefs for them to be concerned to believe, or practife any thing, befides what the chriftian religion did require from them. And then the Apostle adds, faying, which is the head of all principalities and powers. From which words it plainly appears, that it was the fovereign authority and power over all, which was given to Christ, by the Father, that the Apostle is here referring to.

1 John i. 1, 2. That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, and our hands have handled of the word of life: For the life was manifefted, and we have feen it, and bear witness, and fhew unto you that eternal life which was with the Father, and was manifefted unto us. Here the Son is declared to be an eternal Being, and from hence it is inferred, that he is co-equal with the Father. To which I anfwer, that the life here fpoken of, may very properly imply not the perfon, but that doctrine of life and falvation which Christ published to the world. And fuppofing the perfon of Chrift be here referred to; yet feeing he is fometimes called life, not with refpect to what he is in himself, but what he is to others; (as in John xi. 25. Jefus faid unto her, I am the refurrection and the life.) Therefore he may very fitly be called eternal life, not with refpect to the duration of his own being; but with refpect to that eternal life which he is the proclaimer and the difpenfer of to mankind. And if the duration of his being should be intended; yet

ir

« AnteriorContinuar »