« AnteriorContinuar »
But I need not infift upon this. For in the Hebrew Text this Pfalm is exprefly addrefs'd to Jehovah. Now Jehovah is the incommunicable Name of the felfexiftent God, who was the God of Ifrael. Whatever latitude may be allow'd to Jeds, yet Jehovah is appropriat to that one God alone, in contradiftinction to all other of. This is the conftant ufe of Jehovah in Scripture. Accordingly, Mofes faid, Thou hast avouch'd (Fehovah, as 'tis in the Original, viz. the felfexiftent Being, diftinguish'd from all others by that Name; tho' we tranflate it) the LORD this day to be thy God, Deut. 26. 17. and again, The Lord Jehovah, the fame felfexiftent God) bath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people, ver. 18. C Thus the Pfalmift fays to him, that his Name is Jehovah, Pfal. 83. 18. Nay, God himself fays, I am the Lord ('tis Jehovah in the Original) that is my Name. If. 42. 8. And whereas, according to our Tranflation, God commanded Mofes, faying, Thus fhalt thou fay unto the Children of Ifrael, The Lord God of your fathers, &c. we ought to read thus, according to the Original, Jehovab, even the God of your Fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Ifaac, and the God of Facob, bath fent me unto you: This is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all Generations, Exod. 3. 15. So that the Word Jehovah is the Memorial, or the Name by which God wou'd be called and known; and not the following Words, the God of your Fathers, &c. which are only affirmed of him, whofe Memorial or proper Name is Jehovah. For fo the Prophet explains it, faying (not as we tranflate it, even
therein exprefly attributes the Creation of the World to him, which evidently belongs to the WORD, or the Son's Divine Nature, and can't poffibly be understood of the Son with refpect to his Human Nature.
Chap. XII. the Lord God of bofts, the Lord is his memorial; but) even Jehovah, the God of hofts; Jehovah is his memorial or peculiar Name, Hof. 12. 5. So that Jehovah does as ftrictly fignify the felfexiftent God, as any one Name can poffibly denote any one individual Being whatsoever.
I'm fenfible, it has been thought, that God's Angel is fometimes ftyled Jehovah, upon the account of his acting with Mankind in God's Name; and even the Orthodox Writers about the Trinity have been grievously puzzled to explain the Paffages urged for the Confirmation of that Notion. 'Twas indeed unhappy for them, that they were not fufficiently aware of that Cuftom, of Meffengers fpeaking in the Words of their Principals, which is fo notorious in the Scriptures, and of which I have largely treated (k) above. I dare promise, that whoever will be pleafed to confider what I have written concerning that matter, will find no Difficulty in those Texts, in which it has been supposed, that an Angel is ftyled Jehovah but readily grant, that Jehovah does, even in thofe Texts, as ftrictly denote the felfexiftent God, as in any one Text of the whole Bible.
I confefs, God fays, Behold, I send an angel before thee to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not: for he will not pardon your transgreffions: for my name is in him. But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I fpeak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adverfaries. For mine angel fhall go before thee, and bring thee in unto the Amorites, and the Hittites, and the Perizis viro
(k) Chap. 7. p. 51, &c.
zites, and the Canaanites, and the Hivites, and the Febufites: and I will cut them off. Exod. 23. 20,21,22,23. Now if any Perfon fhould imagin, that becaufe God's Name may be in an Angel, therefore an Angel may be called Jehovah: I anfwer, that I will not difpute, whether my Name does in this Place fignify my Power, or my felf, or the name Jehovah whereby I am called; but fuppofing it to fignify the Ľ name Jehovah whereby I am called (which is the very utmost that can be defired) ftill it does not follow, that a Being may be called Jehovah, merely because the Name Jehovah is faid to be pa in the midst of him, or within him, or (as our Translation words it) in him. For a Being's having a Name anpa never fignifys his being called by that Name. The utmoft therefore that the Phrafe can poffibly import, is, that the felfexiftent God Jehovah was with the Angel, enabling him to avenge the Tranfgreffions of the Ifraelites. And this Interpretation is agreeable to the known Idiom of the Old and New Teftaments.
Having thus fhewn, that Jehovah is the incommunicable Name of the felfexiftent God; let us now confider that Paffage of the Pfalmift, which is quoted by the Author of the Epiftle to the Hebrews. It can't be pretended, that tho' the Pfalmift directs himself, in this whole Paffage, to the felfexiftent God; yet he may be underftood to speak therein concerning another diftinct Being, 1 who may be God in an inferior Senfe. For 'tis manifeft, that as the whole Passage is addreffed to Jehovah; fo it relates to him alone. As the Pfalmift fpeaks to him, fo he speaks of him, and not of any other Being that can be efteemed a fubordinat God, in any part of it. From whence it follows, that the WORD, or Divine Nature of the Son, is
the very or felfexiftent God. For the Queftion at present is not, whether the Son be God, or no (that being not only agreed between our felves, but alfo moft exprefly affirm'd of him by St. John) with refpect to the WORD or Divine Nature united to the Man Chrift Jefus: but the Queftion is, whether the WORD or Divine Nature of Chrift Jefus, be the felfexiftent God, or no. And the Pfalmift has peremptorily determin'd this Queftion, by affuring us, that the Son (viz. the WORD, or Divine Nature of the Son) is Jehovah, which Name neceffarily fignifys, and is appropriat to, the one felfexiftent God, even the God of the Jewish and Christian Churches, who has challeng'd that Name as his own Property, and never did or would fuffer it to be given to any other Being whatsoever.
As for the two other Paffages quoted by this Author in the fame Chapter, and exprefly apply'd therein to the Son; I have already declar'd my Opinion, that they relate to the WORD or the Son's Divine Nature. And if the former of them (quoted v. 6.) be taken from Pfal. 97. 7. that Pfalm is exprefly directed to Jehovah; and confequently the WORD is thereby declar'd to be the Very God. And as for the latter of them (quoted v. 8, 9.) I have already (1) fhewn, that that part of it which makes the 9th Verfe, relates to Chrift's Humanity: and if that that part of it which makes the 8th Verfe, relates to his Divinity; as the Pfalmift who wrote it, directed it to the felfexiftent God, fo the Author of this Epiftle quotes it in the fame manAnd accordingly you your felf (m) allow,
(1) Chap. 6. p. 31, &c. (m) Script. Doct. p. 89.
that the Son is called God in this Text; which Conceffion, I think, is inconfiftent with the Opinion of those who imagin, that the Pfalmift originally meant this Verfe, as he did certainly mean a great part of the Pfalm, of King Solomon. But I need not enlarge any further upon the first and fecond of these three Quotations made by the Author of this Epiftle. If what I have written concerning the third of them, holds good; I dare truft any Man of common Senfe with the firft and fecond. For I am perfuaded, he will not be at the trouble of wrefting either of them to a different Senfe. And those that will not yield to the Force of that Argument, which I have drawn from the third of these Quotations, I fhall defpair of convincing by any Argument that I can draw from the firft or fecond, or indeed from any part of the inspired Word of God.
CHA P. XIII.
That the Holy Ghoft is the Very God.
Proceed now to the fecond Point in Controverfy between us, which relates to the Holy Ghoft or Spirit of God. And this I hope to bring to a much more fpeedy Iffue than the former.
That the Holy Ghoft is an intelligent Being, you all along declare; but the Question is, whether he is one and the fame Being with the felfexiftent God, or no. I affirm, that he is: and that you do deny it, I heartily wish I could not prove.
To confirm the Truth of my Affertion, I fhall argue from but two Places of Scripture.