. 2.5-11

Phil.

Angels, fuch as were before in Nature and Degree vaftly fuperior to it self.

And indeed, 'tis exceedingly obfervable, that the Apostle had no fooner argued from the fuperior Dignity of him that promulged Chriftianity, but he fupports what he had said, by adding as follows, For unto the Angels hath be not put in fubjection the world to come, whereof we speak. But one in a certain place teftified Saying, What is man that thou art mindful of bim, or the Son of man, that thou vifiteft him? Thou madeft him a little lower than the Angels, &c. Heb. 2. 5, 6, 7. And then he goes on to prove from the Pfalmift, that Chrift's human Nature was to be exalted, and that it was at that time accordingly placed at God's Right Hand. Now the Apostle could not have done thus, if he had spoken before of fuch a Nature, as was always at leaft equal to what the human Nature of Chrift was made by its utmost Advancement. Whereas, if he spake before (as he certainly did) of the human Nature of Chrift, and fhewed the Difference between the fame Meffenger, when delivering the Law, and when delivering the Gofpel; what he fubjoins, is the most proper Confideration imaginable to ftrengthen what he had faid immediatly before. For thereby he proves, that the Scriptures foretold that very Advancement of the human Nature, from Chrift's actual Enjoyment of which he had juftly argued, that a Perfon fuperior to a bare Angel had promulged the Gospel.

In fhort, let any Man attentively read St. Paul's Words, and he can't but perceive, that the very fame intelligent Being which was rewarded, did alfo practise that Humility and Condefcenfion, for which he was rewarded. For 'tis faid, that God bath bighly exalted him, who being in the form of God, &c.

G 3

con

condefcended to fuffer Death upon the Cross; and God did therefore fo highly exalt him, because he fo greatly fubmitted, even tho' he was in the Form of God. Now I need not obferve to you, that we who believe the WORD, or Divine Nature of Chrift, to be the very God, dare not affert, that the WORD, or Chrift's Divine Nature, was thus exalted for leaving its former Glory. For did the very God ceafe to be in his own glorious State ? Was he afterwards exalted by himself, as by fome other diftinct Being, to that his former glorious State, as the Reward of his Humiliation? And was this an exceeding Exaltation to the very God? We cannot therefore affert fuch an impious Do&rin.

Again, What was this exceeding Exaltation? Why his having a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jefus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth: And that every tongue fhould confefs, that Jefus Chrift is Lord, to (or if you pleafe in) the glory of God the father. Could this be faid of the very God? Had not he before, had not he always, could he poffibly cease to have, a Name above every Name? Had he not neceffarily, is it poffible for him not to have, the fupreme Dominion over the whole Creation? Was a State of fupreme Dominion therefore a State of exceeding Exaltation to the Divine Nature of Chrift, upon fuppofition that his Divine Nature is the very God? Such are the wretched Effects of ufing bad Arguments in a good Caufe.

But this, you'll fay, does not affect Men of your Principles. True. But then, even upon your own Principles, if the fame Nature that was exalted, was formerlyaçon des and în ș, 'tis manifeft,

that

that the human Nature alone was er og Sex and To J. And confequently 'twas the human Nature alone, which practis'd that Humility and Condefcenfion, of which the Apoftle is to be understood in this Place now under Confideration. For I have demonftrated, that the human Nature alone was rewarded. And that the human Nature could not practife that Humility and Condefcenfion which the Apoftle infifts on, and which was manifeftly prior to the Incarnation, unless the human Sout did preexift; I prefume, you will not defire me to

prove.

μου

Nothing now remains, but that I obferve one thing, viz. that the human Soul of Chrift preexift, ed before the Foundation of the World. For our Savior fays in his Prayer to God, And now, O Father, glorifie thou me with thine own felf, with the glory which I had with thee before the world was (wej tetov nóc Mov, before this world was) John 17. 5. Again he fays, Father, I will that they also whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may bebold my glory which thou hast given me: for thou lovedft me before the foundation of the world, v. 24. 'Tis evident from hence, that our Savior did exift before the foundation of the world, or before this world was. And I freely acknowledge, and you will readily grant, that we who believe the WORD, or Divine Nature of Christ, to be very God, can't poffibly interpret thefe Paffages of the WORD, or Divine Nature. For 'tis manifeft, that when our Lord offer'd up this Prayer, he did not actually enjoy fome Glory or Happiness, of which he had formerly been poffefs'd; and that he begg'd of God to be reftor'd to it. Wherefore he could not mean that Glory or Happiness, which he had as very God. For the Glory or Happiness of the very God is effential to

G4

him

him, and infeparable from him. Wherefore we who believe the WORD to be very God, must neceffarily understand the former of these Texts of our Savior's human Soul, which exifted with God (that is, in God's Prefence, and beholding his Face, as Angels now do) before this World was. And if his human Soul did thus exift before the World was; certainly God's loving Chrift before the Foundation of the World, which is afferted in the later of these Texts, ought to be understood of his loving the Man Chrift Jefus, viz. his preexifting human Soul.

And as for your felf, who do not believe the WORD, or Divine Nature of Chrift, to be very God, I will not difpute with you, whether it be conceivable, that the WORD or Divine Nature of Chrift could, upon your own Principles, ceafe to enjoy that Glory or Happiness which he had before the World was: but what I infift upon with you, is this. I have by other Confiderations proved to you, that our Lord's human Soul did preexist. And if this be granted; I may fafely appeal to your felf, whether both thefe Texts do not naturally admit and require that Interpretation which I have given them.

However, I can't forbear adding, that Chrift is exprefly called the Lamb without blemish and without Spot, Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifeft in these last times, 1 Pet. 1. 19, This certainly refpects his human Nature. Now St. Paul fays, that God hath called us according to his own purpose and grace which was given us in Chrift Jefus, before the world began; but is now made manifeft by the appearing of our Savior Jefus Chrift, 2 Tim. 1.9, 10. He fays alfo, that God hath chofen us in Chrift before the foundation of the world, Eph. 1, 4. and that

he

2.

he promised eternal Life before the world began, Tit. 1. The fame Apostle cals the Wisdom of the Gospel the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory, 1 Cor. 2.7. I conclude therefore, that our Lord's human Soul was then made, when the very God was preparing the Habitation of Mankind, whom he then purpofed to redeem by Chrift, and for whofe fake Chrift was already decreed to be flain. And accordingly St. Paul affures us, that Chrift is πρωτότοκΘ- πάσης κλίσεως. For tho" I readily grant, that we may fignify him that has the jus primogeniti, when it appears by other Confiderations, that he who is ftyl'd gon; πρωτότοκΘ, was not the first in order of Birth: yet in the prefent Cafe we ought not to recede from the natural and obvious Senfe of the Word; because the Tenor of Scripture is so far from obliging us to it, that it manifeftly forbids it. And indeed, when our Savior fays of himself, that he is ʼn deg † xlionas rỡ deo, Rev. 3. 14. I can't but understand him in the fame Senfe, viz. as affirming himself, that is, his human Soul, to have been produced before any other created Being whatsoever.

Upon the whole, St. Paul is fo far from teaching (in this remarkable Paffage of his Epistle to the Philippians, which we have largely examin'd) that the WORD, or Divine Nature of our Lord Jefus Chrift, is inferior to the very God; that he does not therein fpeak one Syllable of the WORD, or his Divine Nature, but only treats of the Humiliation and Exaltation of his Human Nature, from whence he draws an Argument for our Practice of Humility and Condefcenfion.

CHAP.