« PreviousContinue »
time so conducted and affifted by the Holy Spirit, as no other Man ever was or shall be.
You urge indeed, that tho'this is true, yet ’tis of no great Moment ; for what Wonder is it, that God should be greater than a Man? I will therefore consider each Branch of this Plea. 1. Could not the Man Christ Jesus affirm this, because it is no Wonder ? His own Practice answers the Question. He had said before, My sheep bear my voice, and I know them; and they follow me. And I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my band. My Father which gave them me, is greater than all; and none is able to pluck them out of my Father's band, John 10. 27, 28, 29. I would fain know, whom he meant by the all and the none. He could not mean any thing greater than the Devil or wicked Men. Was it therefore any Wonder, that God should be greater than the Devil or wicked Men? And why might not the Man Christ Jesus, who was at that very time able by he Spirit's Aflistance to vanquish even Devils, as well say, My Father is greater than I; as he did unquestionably declare, that the Father is greater than the Devil or wicked Men, when he said, My Father is greater than all, &c. ? But, 2. could not the Man Chrift Jefus affirm this, because 'tis of no great Moment? Surely 'tis sufficient, if 'twas pertinent ; which can't be queftion'd. The truth is, this or any other known Maxim is always of great Moment to the Speaker, when it enforces an Argument for a Religious Practice; as even the most common and obvious Truths very often do. And accordingly, Elibu, whose Discourse you will not call flat or insipid, apply'd this very Maxim, saying, Behold, in in this thou art not just : 'I will answer thee, that God is greater than man, Job 33. 12.
: I confefs, had our Lord uttered these Words, My
Father is greater than I, as some wonderful Secrec ; and offer å it to his Disciples as a great Discovery, that God was greater than a Man: your Objection had been well grounded. But that can't be pretended. He only used that felfevident Proposition, as a Medium to prove something of great Consequence. He said, Ye bate beard, bow I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice ; because I said, I go unto the Father. For my Father is greater than I. The Father's being greater than the Man Christ Jesus; few'd, that the Man Christ Jesus would be much advantaged by going to the Father. And therefore, if they loved their Master, viz. the Man Christ Jesus, they would rejoice at his going to the Father. Because he that loves another, will prefer the Increase of that Person's Happiness to his own present Satisfa&ion. You see therefore, that this Saying was really of great Moment. For 'twas the Foundation of our Savior's Argument, by which he evinced to his Disciples, how it became them to act in those Circumstances.
4. Our Lord is frequently represented during his Ministry, as inferior to the Father or Very God. For-Initance, And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father bath appointed unto me, Luke 22. 29. The Father loveth the Son, and bath given all things into bis band, John 3. 35. For the Father judgeth no man; but batb committed all judgment unto the Son, John s. 22. I can of mine own self do nothing : as I bear, I judge: and my judgment is just ; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father that sent me, John 5. 30. Jesus said unto them, If God were your Fatber, ge would love me : for I proceeded fortb, and came from God; neither came 1 of my felf, but be sent me, John 6. 42. : Jefsu
knowing knowing that the Father bad given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God, John 13. 3. For the Fatber himself loveth you, because ge bave loved me; and have believed
that I came out from God. I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world; again I leave the world, and go to the Father, John 16. 27, 28. And this is life eternal, tbat they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou haft fent John 17.3. But these or the like Passages can create no Diffiulty. For it can't be concluded from them; that the WORD, or Divine Nature of our Lord Jesus Christ, is inferior to the Very God; Because the WORD being then quiescent, they relate merely to the Man Christ Jesus.
s. Tho'our Lord is frequently represented, after not only his Ministry, but even his Ascension and Glorification, as inferior to the Father or Very God: yet 'will plainly appear, that none of those Passages in which he is thus represented, can prove, that the WORD, or our Savior's. Divine Nature, is inferior to the Father or the Very God, if the following Particular's be considered.
First, Our Lord is expresly ftiled, even after his Ascension and Glorification, sometimes simply God; and sometimes fimply Man. You own, that he is fimply stiled God, Heb. 1. 8, where the Author of that Épistle applys to him that Passage of the Pfalmift, Thy throne, o God, is for ever and &c. and he is simply styled Man, 1 Tim, 2. $: where the Apaffle assures us, that there is one God, and one medi. ator between God and Men, the man Christ Jesus.
Secondly, As he is exprefly ftiled Man, even after his Ascension and Glorification, fo is he also called by other Names, which belong to his Human Nature. Particularly, I. He is called Jesus, which is the Greek for Foshuah, à common Name of a Man
amongst the Jews. And accordingly, tho? 'twas given our blessed Lord by Divine Command, because (as the Name Joshuab imports Salvation or Deliverance) he should be a Deliverer or Savior in a most remarkable Sense (for lie should save his people from their fins, Mait. 1. 21.) yet still it betokened thàt Man, whom the blessed Virgin miraculously "brought into the World, and imply'd nothing of an incarnat God in the Notation of it. '2. The Name Cbrist or Messiah, tho''twas frequently given in the Jewish Church upon other Occasions, yer is ceitainly apply'd to the Blessed Jesus upon the account of that anointing with the Spirit, by which he was evidenc'd to be that very Christ or Meffiah sgt Bogu', or by way of Eminence, whose coming was foretold by the ancient Prophets, and was so impatiently expected by the Jews. And tho' the -WORD was indeed, and ought to be (so the Di-vine Wisdom faw fit) united to the Man Christ Jesus ; yer as that anointing was poured out on the Human Nature only (for the WORD was not cápable of it) To the Name Christ or Messiah means no more, than that particular Man Jesus, who was thus wonderfully anointed by the Spirit without Measure, and who is accordingly called by St. Paul, -1 Tim. 2. 5. in express Terms, the man Christ Jesus. 3. Our Lord (as I have shewn already) is also Itiled the Son of God with respect to his Human Nature, viz! because he was in a miraculous Manner begorren by the Holy Ghost, and God was as truly and properly his Father, as a Man is the Father of his own Child. And accordingly, whenloever our Savior is ftiled the Son of God, or God is filed the Father of our Savior, that Appellation is (I think)
constantly given him upon the Account of his Human Nature.
For tho' I freely grant the Truth of what our Divines usually call the Eternal Generation of the WORD, or Divine Nature of our Lord; yet I do not find, that in the Phrase of holy Scripture, our Savior is call’d the Son of God, or that God is said to be his Father, otherwise than upon the Account of his being Man, or an incarnat God. The Certainty of this Observation will appear by this one Consideration, viz. that as our blessed Savior is in the holy Scriptures confeffedly called the Son of God, and God is also therein called his Father, upon the account of his Human Nature : so there is not one single Text of Scripture, wherein either our Savior is called God's Son, or God is called his Father, but what either necessarily muft, or very fairly may, be understood with respect to his Incarnat State. And I dare say, you'll soon be convinced of this, if you search for a Text, wherein the WORD, or Divine Nature of our Savior, is called God's Son, or God is faid to be the Father of the WORD, or Christ's Divine Nature, upon fome Account antecedent to the Incarnation Particularly you'll observe, that even in Matt. 28. 19. where the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft are so expresly mentioned, the Son denotes the incarnat Mefliah, whofe Disciples we are as he was incarnat ; and consequently he is not even in that Text called the Son of the Father upon any Account antecedent to the Incarnation.
As for these Words, who all declare his Generation, Acts 8. 33. and the Comparison of our Lord to Melchizedech, as being Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end