O^i a O^ O^ <i^^ li^^S- 
 
 or TUK 
 AT 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 Q4f>. 
 
 X><J :V ^-V •*- I t> TV <J li- 
 
 SAMUEL AGNEW^, 
 
 (t F PHILADELPHIA, PA. 
 
 ■"^3<^^9; 
 
 I CV/.s7^,SICCP'vlsion.... I [_ 
 
 ■ V Book, . f 
 
 
 
I 
 
 A 
 
 DISCOURSE 
 
 Of the EVEREL FSSKD 
 
 Trinity in Unity, 
 
 yj^^ • W I T Ft A N 
 
 EXAMINATION 
 
 O F 
 
 Dr. CL J RK £'s 
 
 Scripture Doctrine 
 
 O F T H E 
 
 TRINITY. 
 
 By THO. BENNET, D. D. 
 Vicar of St. Giles's Crippkgate. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 Printed for VV. I n n y s at the Prince's Arms in 
 St. Taul's Church- Yard. 1718. 
 
To my mojl Honored Patrons^ 
 
 TheRev'Vr.UENRYGoDoiPiji^ 
 
 TfeanofSi.l'auVs, London, and 
 Pro-vojl of Eton College ; 
 
 Dean of bl. Afaph, the Rev'Dr.Jou^ 
 Younger 7)ean of Sarum, and the 
 Rc¥ Dr. Francis Hake Dean of 
 Woicerter ; the Refiderniarys of 
 St. PaulV, London. " 
 
 Gentlemen, 
 
 Y Defign in this public Addrcfs 
 IS to return You my humble!! 
 Thanks for lo remarkable an 
 Inftanceof Your Favor, as 1 want 
 Words to expreCs ; Your conferring up. 
 on me, m the moft generous and oblig- 
 ing Manner, one of the principal Paro- 
 chial BeneHces in the Kingdom ; in 
 which as 1 have Oj^portunity of doins 
 ?Ar 1^^ Share of our Great Maft,n-'s 
 Work, and thereby earning Everlaltina 
 
 Wage 
 
 s 
 
The T>ET>ICATION. 
 
 Wages (which is the moft valuable Con- 
 fideration) fo 1 reap the Advantage of 
 a plentiful Income, which affords me e- 
 ven a Temporal Reward for the Labors 
 of my prefent Station. 
 
 I am truly lenfible of this Your unde- 
 ferved Kindnefs to me ; and Oral] ende- 
 vor, by God's Affiftance, in fome Mea- 
 fure to anfwer Your pious Intentions 
 therein, by a fincere Difcharge of my 
 Duty to the beft of my Power. 
 
 May that God^ who gives Men Abi- 
 lity, and inclines their Hearts to pro- 
 mote his Glorv, amply recompence all 
 Your good Deeds ; particularly that 
 for which 1 (ball ever ftand deeply in- 
 debted to You. May he fhower down 
 upon You the Bleffings of this Life, 
 and crown You at length with endlefs 
 Glory. I am, 
 
 Reverend Sirs, 
 
 Tour mojl Ohliged^ moft Grateful^ 
 and mofl Obedient Servant^ 
 
 QrippUgatCy Londtn, 
 
 Tho. Bennet. 
 
THE 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 WHEN the Reverend Dr. Clarke 
 fublifljed his Scripture Doctrine 
 of the Trinity ; as I couU not 
 hut perceive and lament the natu- 
 ral Tendency of juch a Book (tfpecially conftdering 
 xrhat Credit the Author had gamed by his former 
 excellent Writings^ and confec^uently how powerjully 
 the Authority of his Name would recommend even 
 the mofi dinger ous Notions) jo I could not hut 
 obferve the Courje of that Controverjy^ which arofe 
 upon that unhappy Occafion, 
 
 Ezjery body knows, that many Writers, of differ^ 
 ent Spirits and Abilitys, attaqued the Doctor in dif^ 
 ferent Manners^ as their Inclinations or judg- 
 ments led them. But notwithflanding this Variety 
 of Oppofitton, 1 heartily wijh i could not Jay, that 
 what to me feemed in fuch a Cafe the moji defira- 
 ble^ or rather abfolutely necejjary^ was totally neg- 
 lected, tor thd*. much commendable X^al was fpent 
 againji the Book in general^ and diver fe Parcels 
 
 A 3 cf 
 
The PREFACE. 
 
 of it were f articular ly quefliorPd a'/jd taken to pie^ 
 ces : yet none of the D.ofhr's Adverfarys attempted 
 a Conju'taticn ot his whole ^Icheme^ and a thorough 
 Examination of every Branch of his Doctrtn, 
 
 Wherefore^ fi/ice 1 cotiid not hear, that a?iy one 
 Perfon tntendtd to prevent me, bj ino^agmg in jo 
 [eajonable an 'Undertaking ; and fince the Lontro- 
 'verfi about the Hdy Trinity^ ^vhich has lately been 
 revivcdy is of greater Confequence^ than thoje other 
 Matters trhich lay before me : 1 judged it rea- 
 JQihtble to poflpone what I (Jjculd otherwije have pro- 
 ceeded in^ and deter mind to write a full Reply to that 
 celtbrated Treat ife of my Learned tr/end. 
 
 Jccordingly^ as my Jjfairs would permit me^ I 
 ^ot thro'' the IVork^ and brought up with me eve- 
 ry Chapter oj it in Jsnuary i^ff, ^'^-^^n 1 lejt 
 Colcheftcr, and fixed my ft If in London, Jnd 
 1 fhould immediatly have puhltfucd it, had not my 
 Removal involved 7ne in jo much new Bufinejs^ 
 that 1 fcrnd it impoffiblc jor many Months, not 
 only to projecnte my Studys^ but even to review what 
 J had atlually written. And tho'* at Urigth 1 made 
 fjjift I . (raw Lp a fuort Argument .'g^nnfl the Non- 
 jurors Reparation {rvhich the rnofi prcjjing Neojftty 
 extorted f''Om me^ and then hoped to have work'd 
 cff thij i^ovk without jarther Delay : yet frejfj In- 
 terruptions aycf\ ^rom which I could not di/ent angle 
 my Jelf till about Widy la[i, when I rcjumed my lea- 
 vers ; ai.d then they jbould have Jech the Light, had 
 9J0t the Controverjy about the Bijfjop of Bnngor'j 
 Sermon preached before the Kjng, which t,\groffed 
 the Thoughts of all People^ obltgtd ?ne to jujpend 
 
 the 
 
The P R E F A C E. 
 
 the Fuhlictttion till mw ; // ferchince fome few may 
 even now be at leijure t9 feruje them, 
 
 I need not acquaint the Reader^ that in the whole 
 Controverfy concerning the Everblejfed Irinity^ the 
 principal Pointy and that which has been the mofl 
 largely and warmly debated^ is the Divinity of the 
 Son or Second Perfon. Upon this therefore 1 have 
 [pent the greater Part of my DilcouiTej wherein I 
 have carefully anfwered all Ubjecfwns ; and parti- 
 cularly the Learned will be perhaps not dijpleafed 
 with the Pains I have taken in ejiabUjJjir/g^ n^hat 
 our Greatefi Divines do generally either p^ppofe or 
 nfjertj, tho' tl/ey have been over faring in the 
 Proof of n ; / mean the Qute fence of the IV R D 
 during our Savior^s Miniflry. 
 
 Of what Confquence this Amotion is^ 'tis i7npohf}ile 
 for the mofl negligent not to perceive. It enables us 
 clearly to account for our Savior^s not knowing the Day 
 of judgment J which has hitherto been ejleemed the 
 great Difficulty : and it gives fuch a Turn to the 
 whole Difpute^ that I cant hut wonder^ how thofe 
 Divines, who have been necrffltated to (helter them^ 
 felies under it^ and have therefore fo frequently 
 fugg^fif^d and propofed it ; ffjould not difcern^ or at 
 leajl jo imperfeclly difpLij^ that Evidence of ity 
 which the Holy Scriptures afford us, I dare affirm^ 
 that whofuever impartially confiders what I have of- 
 fered (and truly I thought my felf obliged to en* 
 large pretty freely on a Matter of fuch Importance^ 
 efpeciilly when it has been too much neglected by 
 others^) will readily embrace a Truth^ which is fo 
 
 A 4 manifeji" 
 
The PREFACE. 
 
 wAnifejlly uftful in the Demonjlration of our hlef- 
 fcd Lord^s Divinity. 
 
 There is one things which (in the Opinion of fame 
 Verfons) may foffibly need an Afology. 1 have taken 
 the Liberty of mnntaining the Preexijlence of our 
 ^avior'*s Human Soul ; not hecaufe I am in the 
 leafl inclined to favor the Preexijlence of other Souls ; 
 hut hecaufe the Huly Scriptures^ I humbly conceive^ 
 do warrant that Pofition. I promife my Jelj^ that 
 the R eader will candidly weigh what I have advanced 
 concerning that Tenet. 1 affure him^ I have no 
 particular Fondnefs for it^ notwithjlanding it has 
 keen^ and flill is^ maintained by Great Divines, 
 I can't but think it the mofi rational Way of inter- 
 preting diver fe Texts of Scripture : but if any one 
 will fljetv me^ how to interpret thofe Texts without 
 admitting that Docirine, I fhall readily become his 
 Convert, This I am fure of, the Confubflantial 
 Divinity of our Lord is fo plainly taught in Scri- 
 pture^ that I would admit any Hypothefis^ provided 
 ' It were barely pofflblej rather than den) it : and if 
 thofe Texts can be explained fo^ as not to injure that 
 great Truth ; the Author of fuch Explication fhall 
 find me^ not his Adverfary^ but truly thankful^ for 
 imparting Juch valuable Secrets to me. 
 
 As 1 have been follicitous to obviate all Objecl ions ; 
 fo have 1 been depgnedly brief in the pofitive Part : 
 concerning which ^ as 1 am ferfuaded I have Jaid e- 
 nough ; jo I was unwilling to jay more than was in- 
 dijpenj'ably neceffary. ^Twill not be expechd there^ 
 
 fore 
 
The PREFACE. 
 
 fore^ that I fljould heap up all thofe Arguments^ 
 which have been urged by former Writers ; or that 
 I (Jjou/d irffifl upon all thofe Texts, wheretn the 
 fame Do^rtn is contained. 
 
 This Method 1 have pmpofely chofen^ that I might 
 not expofe the Doctor and m^ felf to infnit HW ang- 
 lings^ which do rather obfcure^ th,m confirm^ the 
 mofl important Truths, with refpecf to the Genera- 
 lity of People ; who are rather confounded^ than in- 
 flrucled^ by a Multiplicity of Reafonings, guarded a- 
 gainfl number lefs Exceptions^ thro' the whole Courfe 
 of which ^tis difficult for thofe who have not very 
 jlrong Hfadsy to fee every Confequence clearly.^ and 
 upon the Whole to form an exaSi Judgment, 
 
 I have therefore proceeded in fuch a Manner, and 
 
 ftlccied fuch Topics^ as will (I hope, thro' God's 
 
 /iffijlance) not perplex the meanefi^ but yet convince 
 
 the befl Vnderjiandings ; fuch as will not embarrafs 
 
 any^ but yet fat is fy every Reader, 
 
 Briefly^ if thofe Arguments which I have pitched 
 upon^ be conclufive ; the Caufe will not fuffer for 
 voant of others to accompany them : and if thofe Ar- 
 guments are not conclufive, 1 mufl for my felf con- 
 fefs^ that 1 know of none which have more Force in 
 them. 
 
 CRIPriEGATE^ LoNDONj 
 
 O^ob. 23. 1717. 
 
 THO. BENNET. 
 
BOOKS IVrittui by the Revcmfd Dr. Bennet^ Vicar of 
 St, Giles'i Cripplegare^ a7jd Sold by \V. Innys at the 
 Prince' J Armsiw St. Paul^ Church-Yard. 
 
 AN Abridgment of the London Cafes. The Fifth Edition. 
 A Confucation of Popery, m Three Parts. The Fourth 
 Edition. 
 
 Devocions : viz.. ConfcfTions, Petirions, Interceffions and 
 Thankfgivings, for every Day in the VVetk : and alfo Before, 
 At, and After the Sacrament; with Occafional Prayers for all 
 Pcrfons whatfoever. 
 
 A Difcourfe of Schifm. The Fourth Edition- 
 
 A Defence of the Difcourfe of Schifm. The Fourth Edition. 
 
 An Anfuver to Mr. Shepherd's Confiderations on the Defence 
 of the Difcoui fe of Schifm. The Fourth Edition. 
 
 A Confutation of ^^uakerifm. The Second Edition. 
 
 A Difcourfe of the NeccfTiry of being Baptiz'd with Watep, 
 and receiving the Lord's Supper ; taken out of the Confutation 
 o{ ^takcrifr/j. Price 'j d. or 20 s. a ico. 
 
 A brief Hidory of the joint Ufe of precompofed fee Forms of 
 Prayer. The Second Edition. 
 
 A Difcourfe of joint Prayer. The Second Edition. 
 
 A Paraphrafe with Annotations upon the Book of Qomrnsn 
 Prayer^ wherein the Text is explain'd, Objections are anfwer'd, 
 and Advice is humbly offcr'd both to the Clergy and the Layety, 
 for promoting true Devotion in the Ufe of it. The Second 
 Edition. 
 
 Charity Schools recommended in a Sermon preach'd at St. 
 Jani'2s\ Church in Colcbcfier, on Sunday March 26. 17 10. Publifli- 
 ed at the Requeft of the Trudees. The Second Edition. Pr. i d. 
 - A Letter to Mr. B. Ro^iw/ow, occafion'd by his Review of the 
 Cafe of Liturgies and their Impofition. 
 
 A fecond Letter to Mr. B. Kobinfon on the fame Snbjeft. 
 
 The Rights of the Clergy of the Chriftian Church. 
 
 Directions for ftudying, L A general Syflem or Body of Di- 
 vinity. If. The Thirty-ninj Articles of Religion. To which 
 is added, St. Jerojns Epiftle to Ncpotianits. The Second Edition. 
 
 An Elfay on the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion. 
 
 The Nonjurors Separation from the Public Ailemblys of the 
 Church of £«_g/j7/^cxamin'd, and prov'd to be Schifmatical up- 
 on their own Principles. Tlw Second Edition. 
 
 The Cafe of the Reform'd EpilCopal Cliurches in Great Poland 
 and Pdijh Prujfia confider'd, in a Sermon preach'd on Sunday 
 Nov. 18. 1716. at St. Laurence "Jewry, London, in the Morning, and 
 St-Olave'sSouthwark/in the Afternomi. The Second Edition^ 
 
 A Snittal Sermon preach'd before the Lord Mayor, Alder- 
 men, &c. o(Lo?idon, m Sc. Bridget's Church, on y^pril 24. 1717. 
 
THE 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 C H A P. I. 
 
 THE Occnfwn and Defion of this Difcmrfe, 
 Pag. I 
 Chap. II. 
 Of the F eternity of God. p. 5 
 
 Chap. III. 
 
 Of the Union of tf/e Divine and Humm Natures 
 
 in our Lord "^efuS Chrifi, i^,j 
 
 Chap. IV. 
 
 That God is theFatheroftheManJefe^Chrifl. p. 16 
 
 C H A p. V. 
 The State of the Controverfy between Dr. Clarke 
 and the Author concerning the WORD, or Di- 
 vine Nature of our Lord Jefus Chrijl, P* 1 9 
 
 C H A P. VI. 
 
 Of the Exaltation of our Lord Jtffus Cfj riff. p. 2 J 
 
 C H A p. VII. 
 Phil. 2. 5, 6, 7, 8, Q, 10, 1 1, explain d, p. 29 
 
 Chap. VIII. 
 
 That during the Time of our Savior"^ s Miniflry, the 
 Difciples did not believe^ that he was any thing 
 more than a mere Man conduced and ^fftfled by 
 the S fir it of God, p. c,o 
 
 C h a p. 
 
The Contents. 
 
 Chap. IX. 
 That iuring the Time of our Saviofs Minijlry^ the 
 WORD was quiefcent in the Man Chrift^ejus. 
 
 p. 125 
 
 C H A p. X. 
 
 Of our Savior'* 5 not knowing the Ddj of "judgment. 
 
 p. 151. 
 Chap. XL 
 Of Chrifl's faying, My Father is greater than I ; 
 with Rejieciions ufon diverfe other Texts, p. i 56 
 Chap. XII. 
 That the Holy Scriptures do teach^ that the WORD, 
 or Divine Nature of our Lord Jefus Chrijl, is 
 the Very God, ?• * 7 5 
 
 Chap. XIIL 
 That the Holy Qhofl is the Very God. P* 197 
 
 Chap. XIV. 
 Of the Trinity in Vnitj. P- 2 1 5 
 
 An Examination of Dr, ClarkeV Scripture Do- 
 cirine of the Trinity. p. 227 
 
 ERRATA. 
 
 PAg. z6. Hn. ult. read Phil. 1. 19, 14. p. 39. 1. 3. read thereby 
 wore happy, p. 64. 1. 6. read come, a;. 5. which, p. 87. 1. 18. 
 read t:^ ^^ ttjV. p. 89. 1. 10. read us, Col. i. 15. that. p. 108. 
 1. 22. I iid faying, John 8. y8. p. 158. 1. 20. read^jr the* 
 
( • ) 
 
 _.» — — - 
 
 A 
 
 DISCOURSE 
 
 Of the EVERBLESSED 
 
 TRINITY in UNITY. 
 
 CHAP. I. 
 
 The Occiifton a»d Defign of this Difcourfe. 
 
 To the Reverend 
 
 Dr. SJ MUEL CLARKE. 
 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 WHEN I receiv'd thofe Copies of 
 the feveral Pieces you have pub- 
 lifti'd concerning the Trinity, 
 which you were pleas'd to fend 
 me ^ as I could not but efteem them frefti Inftances 
 of your good AfFeAions towards me (of which I 
 have had much happy Experience in a Courfe of 
 many Years Acquaintance ) fo 1 am perfuaded, 
 
 B You 
 
8 The Occifion nncL Defign Chap. I. 
 
 You were far from expeding my Approbation of 
 them. On the contrary, as it became a Perfon 
 that loves you (Incereiy, I fignified to you, Ify 
 Letter and othervvife, my diflike of your Noti- 
 ons 'y and you condefcended to bear my ufual 
 Plainefs with that Patience, Candor, and Sweet- 
 nefs of Temper, which you conftancly difcover in 
 your whole Conduct. 
 
 You have well (a) obferv'd, that the Dodrin of 
 the Trinity is of the greateft importance in Religion ^ a 
 matter not to he treated of Jlightly and carelefsly^ as it were 
 hy Accident only^ after the manner of fuperfcial Contro'ver- 
 fies about PVords^ or of particular Occafional ^efiions con- 
 cerning the meaning of Jingle ambiguous Texts ,• but which 
 cught^ v^hen difcourjed upon at all^ to be examind thorough- 
 ly on all fides ^ by a ferious fudy of the whole Scripture^ and 
 by taking care that the Explication be confiflent with it 
 felf in every part. You (b) profefs that you have, ac- 
 cording to the Weight and Dignity of the SubjeB^ confidered 
 it throughout y as carefully and diflintlly as you were able ; 
 and deprt only, that the Reader^ when he begins the Book^ 
 would peruft it all^ and confider ferioufiy every Part^ and 
 compare the Pinhole of v; hat is here f aid ^ with other whole 
 Schemes y before he pajfes his Judgment upon it. For my 
 own part, I folemnly make the fame Profeflion 
 with your felf- and what you defire of the Reader, 
 1 have confcientioully performed : and yet I muft 
 alTure you, that after all the Pains I have beftow'd 
 in confidering this nice Subjed (both at former 
 Times, and fmce your feveral Books have been 
 publifhM) I am as throughly convinc'd, that you 
 are in the Wrong, as you your felf can be that you 
 are in the Right. 
 
 (*) P^^^*^^ ^0 youf Scripture DoBrine of the Trinity. 
 (i>) Ibid. 
 
 Now, 
 
Chap. I. of this Difcourfe. } 
 
 Now, fince the Subjed of thefe your Writings is 
 of fo great Coniequence, and the difference be- 
 tween your Sentiments, and thofe which, 1 firmly 
 believe, are delivered in the Holy Scriptures, is 
 fo exceedingly wide, that your Miftakes are 
 not lefs certain than dangerous, and preju- 
 judicial to our common Chriftianity ,• and fince 
 thefe fatal Errors are Patroniz'd by a Writer of 
 eftablifli'd Reputation in the Learned World ; 
 certainly thofe who retain any Zeal, in this 
 Lukewarm Age, for the Faith once delivered to 
 the Saints, and are perfuaded that an Orthodox 
 Belief is the only firm Foundation of a truly Chri- 
 ftian Pradice ,• can't but defire, even with fome de- 
 gree of Impatience, to fee your Notions fair- 
 ly examined, and fubftantially difprov'd ,• fo that 
 neither the Weight of your Authority in the Com- 
 monwealth of Letters, nor your excellent Ma- 
 nagement of what I can't but efteem a very ill 
 Caufe, may prejudice the Truth, difturb the 
 Church's Peace, and deceive the Unwary. 
 
 Befides, I can't bear the Thoughts of your be- 
 ing injurious to the Church of Chrift. God for- 
 bid, that you (hould in any Refped wound that 
 Religion, which you have in fo many Refpeds 
 adorn'd and defended. Farther, I am fully per- 
 fuaded, that you'll be glad to fee your Miftakes, 
 and that you will alfo readily acknowledge them, 
 if they appear to you. I think my felf therefore 
 bound in ftrid Duty to God, and in pure Friend- 
 fliip to your felf, to lay afide for a while thofe 
 feveral Ta^ks, which would otherwife have found 
 me full Imployment, for many Years ^ that I may 
 contribute what lies in my fmall Power, to the 
 clearing of the Truth, and your Convii^tion. 
 
 B z Thefe 
 
4 T^he Occafion and Defign^ S^c. Chap. f. 
 
 Thefe Confiderations^ and only thefe, have 
 engag'd me to undertake the prefent Contro- 
 verfy with you ; being fo abundantly fatisfy'd 
 of the Goodnefs of my Caufe, and fo eagerly 
 bent to do what little Service I can (particular- 
 ly to your felf) that I am refolv'd to rifque my 
 Endevors. And I humbly truft our great and 
 good Mafter, who will not deferc fuch as im- 
 partially feek to advance the Truths and aim only 
 at his GlorVj with the Succefs of my Labors. 
 
 May that God^ who knows the Secrets of both 
 our Hearts ; May that incarnat Savior^ who muft 
 judge us both at the laft great Day ; May that 
 bleffed Spirit, who works in Men both to will 
 and to do , fo direct and influence us both, that no 
 Prejudice or Intereft may blind our Underftan- 
 dings^no unmortify'dLuft may pervert ourWils, no 
 Defire of Glory or Reputation niay bribe our Af- 
 fedions : but that each of us may behave himfelf, 
 in the Courfe of this Friendly Difputation, as be- 
 comes thofe who live in a conftant Expectation of 
 giving an Account of all their Adions ; and are 
 pradically convinc'd, that whatever little Ends 
 -may be ierv'd in this World by Artifice, Shift, and 
 Collufion j yet nothing but the moft unbiafs'd In- 
 tegrity in our Condu6l here, can prevent our ever- 
 lafting Dirgrace,and infupportable Confufion here- 
 after. 
 
 Let us now, with a firm Dependence on the Di- 
 vine A lliftance, proceed to the Bufmefs lying be- 
 fore us. 
 
 CHAP. 
 
Chap. If. Of the Paternity of God. % 
 
 CHAP. II. 
 
 Of the Pater nity oj God. 
 
 THAT there is one felfexiftent, infinicly per- 
 fect and glorious Being, the Author and Pre- 
 ferver^ not only of Man^ but alfo of all other 
 Beings whatfoevcr^ which Being we call GOD; 
 X fiiall not prove. This Task your excellent Dr- 
 monjlration^ for which thti Chriftian World • will 
 ever be your Debtor^ has rendred perfedly need- 
 lefs. 
 
 But then, the Word God has alfo been us'd in , 
 other Senfes. Such Beings as deriv'd their very 
 Exiftence from the One felfexiftent Being ,• nay, 
 the mere Creatures of human Invention^ which 
 never did exift at all^have been dignify 'd with that 
 Appellation. And accordingly the Apoftle fays, 
 there be that are called Godsy whether in hea'vtn or in earthy 
 as there be Gods many and Lords many ^ i Cor. 8. 5". 
 Wherefore, that the One felfexiftent Being may 
 effectually be diftinguifliM from all thofe other Be- 
 ingSj which are Gods in Name only/and not really 
 fuch y I ihall frequently call him the ijery or true 
 God. 
 
 Now this very God is, in the holy Scriptures, 
 frequently call'd the Father -^ and that upon diffe- 
 rent Accounts. I fhall not be curious in the Speci- 
 fication of them. 'Tis fufficient to obferve, i. That 
 he is confeifedly the Father, not only of all Man- 
 kind, but even of the Univerfe ; becauie he crea- 
 ted all Things, and they owe their Exiftence to 
 him. So that whatfoever is, befidcs himfelf, pro- 
 ceeds from him, and he is therefore the Faclier of 
 it. 2. That he is alfo confcfledly the Father of 
 
 B 5 Chri. 
 
6 Of the Paternity of God. Chap. II. 
 
 Chriftians, by reafon of that Covenant which he 
 makes with them in and thro* our Savior Jefus 
 Chrift, whereby we become his Children^ not by 
 Creation (for I'uch are all Mankind) but by Ado- 
 ption ,• that is, he receives us into his particular 
 Grace and Favor, by which we are entitled to fuch 
 ineftimable Benefits, as we could not claim by that 
 Relation to him which his bare Creation gives us. 
 Thus the Apoftle fays. For ye are all the children of 
 God hy faith in Chri/^ Jefus, Gal. ;. 26. 
 
 But then, as the very God is the Father of 
 all Mankind in general, and of Chriftians in parti- 
 cular ; fo is he, in an efpecial Manner, the Father 
 of our Lord Jefus Chrift, whom the holy Scriptures 
 do commonly ftile the Son of God in an emphatical 
 Manner, and the Only Begotten of the Father ; which 
 Phrafes do neceffariiy imply, that the Lord Jefus 
 Chrift is -the Son of the very God, and con- 
 fequently the very God is the Father of our Lord 
 Jefus Chrift^ in lome peculiar and extraordinary 
 Senfe. 
 
 Briefly therefore. The very God is the Father 
 of all Mankind by ?i general Paternity, of all Chri- 
 ftians by a particular or federal Paternity, and of our 
 Lord jefus Chrift by a jptfcw/ Paternity. 
 
 p H A P. 
 
Chap. Iir. Two Natures are^ &c. 'y 
 
 CHAP. III. 
 
 0/ the Vnion of the Divine and Human Natures 
 in our Lord Jep^ Chrijl, 
 
 NOW for the ||ptter underftanding of this 
 wonderful Relation between the very God 
 and our Lord Jefus Chrift^ which arifes from 
 the fpecial Paternity of the very God, and con- 
 fequently the fpecial Filiation of Jefus Chrift 
 our Lord, it mud be remembred, that our Lord 
 Jefus Chrift h^s a twofold Nature united in him. 
 
 Firft, the hcy^^ or WORD of God, which was 
 with Gody and is God, was made Flejl), or was incar- 
 nat, and dwelt among us, in the Perfon of our 
 Lord Jefus Chrift. This is not only taught by 
 your felf, but exprefly aflerted by St. John, Ch. i. 
 •v. I, 14, ij. That this WORD is abundantly 
 fuperiorto, and confequently quite different from, 
 an human Soul, you conftantly fuppofe, and there- 
 fore you will not defire me to prove. Whether this 
 WORD is the very God, or a Secondary Being, 
 that derives his Exiftence from the One I'elfexift- 
 ent Being or very God, I do not at prefent in- 
 quire. This is certain, and allow'd by your felf, 
 that the WORD is fuperior to all created Beings 
 whatfoever. For all things were made by him, and 
 without him was not any thing made that was madey 
 John I. :;. And fince you" know and maintain, 
 that the WORD is exprefly call'd God, therefore 
 I join with you in calling the WORD the Divine 
 Nature of our Lord Jefus Chrift. 
 
 Secondly, Our Lord Jefus Chrift is very Man, 
 confifting of an human Body and an human Soul. 
 
 B 4 That 
 
. 8 Tm Natures are Chap. HI. 
 
 That our Lord Jefus Chrift has an human Body^, 
 is agreed between us. And indeed, 'tis as certain, 
 as that Julitfs Cafar had one. For we have the 
 fame Evidence of both. But perhaps we are not 
 agreed that he has an human Soul ; at leaft you do 
 not once affirm it. You (a) fay, On vjhichjide foever 
 that ^eftion (viz,, whether the Divine Nature fup- 
 ply'd the Place of the Human Soul in Chrift) be 
 determinedyit makes no Alteratmt at all in my Scheme, And 
 therefore y to a*void all needlefs Difficulties^ I neither affirmed 
 Tior (upPofed any things which will not hold eofually true 
 upon either Hy pot he/is. Whether your DoArin may 
 be maintain'd with equal Advantage upon either 
 Hypothefis, I do not at prefent difpute. But 'tis 
 plain, you have not appear'd willing to fpeak Tour 
 Thoughts freely about this Matter ; and therefore, 
 fince I think it of Importance with refped to the 
 Controverfy, you will give me leave briefly to 
 offer fome of my Thoughts. 
 
 I obferve therefore, i. That no Argument can 
 be -drawn from Reafon againft our Savior's having 
 an human Soul. His Adions never difcover'd the 
 Want of it. And therefore we muft intirely de- 
 pend upon the Holy Scriptures for the Determina- 
 tion of this Point. 2. That the Holy Scriptures do 
 not fo much as once exprefly fay, that our Savior 
 had not an human Soul. There is not one Text 
 alleg'd for chat Purpofe, that I know of. 3. That 
 tho' the word was made flejhy and dwelt among 74s ^ and 
 confequently was united to an human Body ,• yet 
 this does not prove, that our Lord had not an hu- 
 man Soul. For the WORD might as well be 
 united both to an human Body and to an human 
 Soul, as to an human Body without an human Soul. 
 
 U) Anlwer to the CifLop 0^ Chcflcry p. 219. 
 
 Where- 
 
Chap. III. Vmted in Cbrift. 9 
 
 Wherefore we have no reafon to deny our Savior 
 an human Soul^ alcho' the WORD was incarnat. 
 
 But the Holy Scriptures^ not only do not deliver, 
 but manifeftly oppol'e,and overthrow this Conceit. 
 For as 'twas ever believ'd, that a Man confifts of 
 an human Soul and an human Body united {[0 
 that if either of thcfe integral Parts be wanting, 
 the Man, that is, a true, perfed, and proper Man, 
 is not) fo the Holy Scriptures, which by a Man do 
 underftand fuch a compounded Nature, do repre- 
 fent our Savior as a Man, as fully, plainly, and clear- 
 ly,as any one other Man in the World. He is with- 
 out a Figure,and not in any borrowed Sen(e,exprefly 
 ftiled a v3-e<y7r©- and tfV«?, that is,^^W^w,both by himfelf 
 and the Sacred Writers. He himfelf faies. But now ye 
 feek to kill we, a man that has told you the truth ^ which I 
 have heard of God^ John 8. 40. And elfe where he 
 makes him as much a Man, and a Man in the fame 
 Senfe, as was Adam himfelf, faying, for fmce by man 
 came death ^ by man came aljo the refurrettion of the dead ; 
 for as in Adam all die^ even fo in Chrifi [hall all be made 
 alivcy I Cor. ij-ii, 22. And again, the firfi man is 
 of the earthy earthy : the fecond man u the Lord from hea- 
 ven^ V. 47. Nay, he gives him the very Name of 
 Adam^ faying, thefirfiman Adam w /is made a living 
 Souly the lafi Adam was made a c^uickning fpirit^ v. 4^ , 
 Nay, 'tis very obfervable, that the Apoftle declares 
 him to be as much a Man, and a Man of the very 
 fame Kind, as we our felves in general are. For 
 fays he. But not as the offence^ fo alfo is the free gift : for 
 if through the offence of owe, many be dead ,• much more the 
 grace of Gody and the gift by grace ^ which is by one man 
 J efus Christ yhath abounded (ei( TipMKf) unto many^ that is, 
 pnto many Men, Rom. 5. 15-. So that our Lord Je- 
 jTus Chri(t is as truly a Man as any of our felves- 
 
 the 
 
lo Two Natures dre Chap. III. 
 
 the Redeemer is the fame fort of Man as the Per- 
 fons Redeemed by him. Thus the fame Apoftie 
 faies, there is one Mediator between God and men^ the 
 wan Chr'ifi Jefus^ i Tim. 2. 5-. And again, he has ap- 
 pointed a day in the which he will judge the world m 
 rii^hteoufnefs^ by that man v^hom he has ordained : whereof 
 he has girjen ajjurance unto all men^ in that he has railed 
 him from the dead ^ Afe 17. 51, So that Our Me- 
 diator and Judge is as much a Man, as thofe for 
 whom he intercedes, and who iliall be judged by 
 him. To thefe I might add diverfe otherTexts. And 
 what is the plain Senfe of them ? What did our Sa- 
 vior and his Apoftles underftand by the Word Man ? 
 W^hat fort of Creature did they take Adam^ and all 
 other Men, to be ? Even fuch as was our Lord 
 himfelf. The human Soul is by much the princi- 
 pal Part of Man, and his chief conftituent Part : 
 and therefore to fuppofe a Man (a true, perfed, 
 and proper Man, and fuch as our Lord is notori- 
 oufly defcrib'd and affirm'd to be) without an hu- 
 man Soul, is the height of Abfurdity. 
 
 I will not enter into a Metaphyfical Inquiry, 
 what confticutes the Effence or Subftance of an hu- 
 man Soul or human Body. TheEifencesorSubftan- 
 ces of Things are little underftood by us. We can't 
 precifely determin, what makes an Identity of 
 Mature or Kmd. But tho' we can't precifely de- 
 termin, what makes an Identity : yet a fmall fhare 
 of common Senfe can difcern a manifeft DiverHty ,• 
 for inftance, that the WORD which created all 
 things, is not an human Soul. And confequently 
 for any one ro affirm, that the WORD joined to 
 an human Body makes a Man, is much more ridi- 
 culous, than to atfirm, that an human Soul joined 
 %o the Body of a Lion, is a Man. For there is a 
 
 wider 
 
Chap. III. Vnited in Chrift. 1 1 
 
 wider Difference between the WORD and an 
 human Soul^ than between the Body ot a Man and 
 the Body of a Lion. 
 
 Whofoever therefore affirms, that our Savior 
 wanted an human Soul^ muft not think to prove his 
 Dodrin true, by faying, that 'tis poffible in the 
 Nature of the Thing, for the WORD to fup- 
 ply the want of an human Soul in Chrift (for tho* 
 I do by no means yield, that fuch a Suppofition is 
 confident with the Scriptural Account of the Blef- 
 fed Jefus ,• yet if it were granted, 'tis no Proof) 
 but he muft give fome convincing Demonftration, 
 that tho' the Holy Scriptures do not exprefly fay, 
 that Chrift wanted an human Soul j yet, when they 
 call him Man, they certainly mean fomething dif- 
 ferent from what that Word does ordinarily im- 
 port, as it occurs in the infpired Books. 'Till this 
 is don (which is evidently impoffible) the Word 
 Man^ when fpoken of the Blelfed Jefus, muft be 
 underftood in the obvious, ufual and common 
 Senfe. And confequently it appears by the plain 
 Declarations of himfelf, and of the Infpired Wri- 
 ters, that our Savior had an human Soul. 
 
 Again, let us obferve, how the Author to th^ 
 Hebrews argues. Having (hewn in his firft Chapter, 
 that our Lord Jefus Chrift is a Perfon of greater 
 Dignity than the Angels, he infers from thence, in 
 the former Part of the fecond Chapter, the Necef- 
 fity of our Obedience to the Laws of the Gofpel. 
 Then he proceeds to evince our Savior's Exalta- 
 tion from the Old Teftament, by quoting fome 
 Words of the Eighth Pfalm, thus. But one in a cer- 
 tain place tefiified^jaying^ What is man that thou art mini^ 
 ful of him : or the fon of man^ that thou uijitefi him ? 
 ThoH madeff- hint a little lower than the Angels ^thou crown^ 
 
 f4(i 
 
12 Ttvo Natures Are Chap. lit. 
 
 edfi him with glory and honour^ and didfi fet him over the 
 v^orks of thy hands : Thou haji put all things in ftthje^lion 
 under his feet^ Heb. 2. 6, 7, 8. He then oblerves 
 the Univerfality of this Subjedion, faying^ For in 
 that he put all in JubjeBion under him^ he left nothing that 
 is not put ufjder him^ v. 8. He then concludes, that 
 this niuft be underftood, not of Man in General, 
 but of one Particular Man, vixj. our Lord Jefus 
 Chrift, faying. But now we fee not yet all things put 
 under him. But we fee Jefm^ ivho was made a little 
 lower than the Angels^ for the fuffering of death ^ crowned 
 with glory and honour^ that he hy the grace of God fnould 
 taft death for every man^ v. 8, 9. 'Tis notorious there- 
 fore,that Chrift Jefus was a Man in the fame Senfe 
 with other Men in General,that is,he had the fame 
 human Nature with our felves. Ocherwife the Apo- 
 flle's Argument is impertinent, and a mere Cheat 
 pur upon his Readers. Now if Chritt Jefus was as 
 much a Man as others, he certainly had an human 
 Soul, as well as an human Body. 
 
 But, what is ftill more remarkable, now follows. 
 He informs us, that Chrift ought to be of the fame 
 Nature wich cur felves, in order to his being the 
 .Redeemer of Maiikind. For thefe are hisWords^ 
 Wherefore in all thivgs it behoved him (of^ia^LZcu) to he 
 wade like unto his brethren^ that he might be a merciful and 
 faithful high prieft^ in things pertaining to Gody to make re- 
 conciliation for the fins of the people. For in that he himfelf 
 hath fufferedj being tempted^ he ts able to fuccbur them that 
 arc tempted^ ver. 17, 1 8. 1 confefs, this Paffage is the 
 ConcUifion of his Argument for the Neceffity of 
 Chrift*s having Flefh and Bloud, as we have : but 
 then, the Expreflions are fuch, as manifeftly fup- 
 pofe and imply, that he had alfo an human Soul. 
 For he fays,it behoved Chrift to be made like unto 
 his Brethren, j^ ^Ttt, in all thivgs. Now this does 
 
 indeed 
 
Chap II r. Vmted in thrift. i j 
 
 indeed demonftrat, that he ought to be cloath'd 
 with Flefli and Bloud, as we are (for if he had not 
 had Flcfh and Bloud, he would in that one thing 
 have been unlike his Brethren) but furely his be- 
 ing cloath'd with Flcfh and Bloud did not make 
 him like us, or of the fame Nature with us, in all 
 things. For the principal Part of our Nature would 
 be ftill wanting in him, if he had not an human Soul. 
 And fince his having Flefh and Bloud is but one 
 Inftance of Similitude, I would fain know, what 
 other he could have, upon Suppofition that he had 
 not an human Soul ; and conCequently with what 
 Propriety of Speech he could be (aid to be like us in 
 all things^ which muft imply two things at leaft. Be- 
 rides,if 'twas neceffary that he fliould have Flefh and 
 Bloud for this very Reafon, that he might be like 
 his Brethren, or of the fame Nature with them ; 
 'twas much more, or at leaft 'twas equally neceifa- 
 ry, that he fliould have an human Soul alfo, the 
 Enjoyment of which wou'd give him the principal 
 Likenefs to Mankind. So that, tho'the Apoftle did 
 indeed attempt to prove no more, than that our 
 Savior ought to have a Body like ours (for he did 
 not fufped, that any wou'd doubt of his having an 
 Human Soul j and therefore did not defignedly 
 guard againft that Error) yet the whole Tenor of 
 his Difcourfe, and the whole Force of his Argu- 
 ment, do necelfirily infer, that in the Apoftle's 
 Opinion, Chrift had an human Soul, as well as an 
 human Body. 
 
 Nay,the very End of his being cloath'd withFlefli 
 and Bloud demonftrats, that he had an human Soul. 
 For the Apoftle fays, in all things it behoved him to be 
 made like unto his brethren^ that he might be a merciful and 
 faithful high pricjf, in things pertaining to God^ to make re- 
 ccnciUiition for the fvs of the pecvle. For in that he him- 
 
 ftlf 
 
14 Trvo Natures are Chap. III. 
 
 [elf hath fuffered^ being tempted^ he is able to fuccour them 
 that are temped, V. 17, 18. Now thofe that deny 
 our Lord an human Soul^ affirm that the WORD 
 fupply'd the want of it. But this Conceit makes 
 the Apoftle's Argument ridiculous. For then, 
 how could Chrift be a merciful and faithful High 
 Prieft^ and able to fuccor them that are tempted^ 
 for this Reafon, becaufe he himfelf hath fuffered be- 
 ing temped ? Do not the Apoftle's Words im- 
 pfy^ that becaufe he was tempted like us, he is 
 therefore fenfible of human Infirmities, and will 
 pity us in the fame Circumftances ? Is not this 
 what the fame Author elfewhere urges in this very 
 Epiftle ? Does he not fay. We ha^ve not an high friefi 
 •which cannot be touched VJith the feeling of our infirmities ; 
 but was in all points tempted as we are^ jet without Jin ? 
 Chap. 4. V. I J. Does he not alfo fay, that Every 
 high priefi taken from among men, is ordained for men in 
 things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and 
 facrifices for fins : Who can have compaffion on the ig-^ 
 norant, and on them that are out of the way ', for that he 
 himfelf alfo is compel ffed with infirmity ? Chap. f. V. i, 2. 
 And does he not manifeftly apply this to Chrift ? 
 But how can this be, if Chrift had no human Soul, 
 but the WOR D fupply'd the want of it ? Could 
 the WORD, who is effentially fuperior to all cre- 
 ated Beings whatfoever, the Maker and Former of 
 all things, be tempted like us ?* 
 
 I confefs, thofe that allow Chrift an human 
 Soul, muft own, that there is fome Difference 
 between Chrift's Temptations and ours, upon the 
 account of our laboring under Original Sin, from 
 which Chrift was wholly free : but they are not- 
 withftanding perfedly confiftent with the Apo- 
 ftle^ becaufe they allow Chrift's Soul to be of 
 the fame Kind with our own j and therefore he 
 
 was 
 
Chap.lII. Vmted in Chrift. 1 5 
 
 was truly tempted as a Man, even as Adam and Eve 
 were in the State of Innocency, and he had there- 
 fore a true Experience of Human Frailcy j and 
 can make futable Allowances for our Degenera- 
 cy. But if the W O R p fupplyM the Defed of an 
 Human Soul in Chrift, 'twas impoffiblc that Chrift 
 could, in any tolerable Senfe, Meafure, or Degree, 
 be tempted like us, or have any Experience of our 
 Frailty. For that Power and Wifdom, which are 
 effential to, and infeparable from, the great Archi- 
 ted of the Univerfe, and the Creator of all intelli- 
 gent Beings, even the brighteft Angels themfelves, 
 could no more be influenced or wrought upon by 
 the Artifices of the Devil, or the Allurements of 
 the World, than a Fly (for Inftance ,• and even that 
 Compariibn is infinicly too low) can flop the Mo- 
 tion of the Spheres, and invert the Order of Na- 
 ture. Our Savior therefore certainly had an Hu- 
 man Soul, without which 'twas not poffible for him 
 to be tempted like us. For I prefume, no Man in 
 his Wits will dream of Temptations working upon 
 mere Flefh, without an intelligent Being to inform 
 it, and make it capable of Moral A<ftions. 
 
 I could offer diverfe other Confiderations : but 
 I think, what has been already fuggefted, is more 
 than fufficient to filence this Difpute. 
 
 You muft therefore fufFer me to aiTert, that our 
 Lord Jcfus Chrift was, and is, very Man, coniifting 
 of an human Body and an human Soul ,• and that 
 to this Man the WORD was, and ftill is, uni- 
 ted. For you will heartily yield, that what our Sa- 
 vior was, whilfl: he conversed upon Earth, the fame 
 he continues ever fince his AfC'enfion into Heaven, 
 and the fame will he be ac the laft great Day. 
 
 C H A P. 
 
i6 God is the Father of Ghap. IV. 
 
 CHAP. IV.' 
 
 That God is the Father of the Man Jefus Chrifi. 
 
 N'OW you well know, that the very God is 
 the Father of the Man Jefus Chrift. I 
 have already obferv'd, that the very God is the 
 Father of all Mankind by his general Paternity, 
 even becaufe he is the Author of all Beings what- 
 foever. But then, every body knows^ what we 
 mean by the Father of a Child in the ordina- 
 ty Acceptation of that Phrafe. Tho* the very 
 God is by his general Paternity the Father of 
 every Child, as he is the Original Author of all 
 Beings ,• yet he having appointed inferior Agents 
 to be the inilrumental and immediat Caufes of dif- 
 ferent EfFeds, has fetled fuch a Courfe of Things, 
 that Mankind is produced by Propagation ; and he 
 who propagats a Child, is call'd the Father of it, 
 as being under God the inilrumental and immedi- 
 at Cauie of that Child's coming into the World. 
 Since Adam and Eve were form'd, the fame Species 
 has been continued in this ufual manner, in every 
 Inftance except the BleiTed Jefus ; who tho' he is 
 very Man, of the fame Species with ourfelves, was 
 notwithftanding begotten in a different Way ^ and 
 tho' he had an human Mother, yet he had not an 
 human Father. For the very God was to him in- 
 Head of an human Father. 
 
 There can be no Difpute between your felf and 
 me about this Matter. However, for the fake of 
 others, let me prove it. 
 
 The Angel told the bleifed Virgin, that (he 
 fliould bring foith a Son, and call his Name Jefus, 
 Luke 1.51. Thoi [aid M.iry unto the Augel^ How f^ali 
 
 thts 
 
Chap. IV, the Mm ^fm Chrift. 1 7 
 
 this hCy feeing I know not a mnn ? And the Angel nnfwer^d 
 and fat d unto her^ The Holy Ghofijhall come upcn thee^ and 
 the power of the Hightfr (liall oz'erflvidorv thee : therefore 
 alfo that holy thing which Jl)all be horn of thee ^ \hall he caU 
 led the Son of God ^ v. 34^ 3^. The bleffed Virgin, ha- 
 ving never been known by Man, could not under- 
 ftand, how fhe (hould bear a Son. The Angel re- 
 moves that Difficulty, by telling her, that (he 
 fhould conceive by the Operation of the Holy 
 Ghoft, and that therefore her Child fliould be cal- 
 led the Son of God. 'Tis true, her Child was 
 call'd the Son of Man, as we (hall foon fee : but 
 then he is alfo call'd the Son of God, and particu- 
 larly for that very Reafon,becaufe he was begotten, 
 not by a Man, but by the Operation of the Holy 
 Ghoft. I confefs, 'twas only the Bod} of the blef- 
 fed Jefus, which was then begotten ; but yet, fince 
 an human Soul is of Courfe added to every human 
 Body, which is produc'd : 'tis certain, that God is 
 as properly the Father of the Man Chrift Jefus, as 
 any Man is the Father of his Child, when he be^ 
 gets his own Likenefs. And accordingly, tho' God 
 is the Father of all Mankind by his ^^T^fn?/ Paterni- 
 ty, and the Father of all Chriftians by his particular 
 or federal Paternity ,• yet he is the Father of the 
 bleffed Jefus by a fpecial Paternity, even becaufe 
 the bleffed Jefus was begotten by him in fo pecu- 
 liar a manner, as no other Man ever was. . 
 
 Nor can it be objected, that our Lord is fre- 
 quently call'd the Son of Man. No body knows 
 better than your felf, that that Phrafe imports no 
 more, than that he was of human Race, being de- 
 fcended truly and properly from the Jev^ifi ftock. 
 And fo he certainly was by the Mother's fide, al- 
 tho' God was his, Father. 
 
 C Vou 
 
i8 God is the Father of. Sec. Gliap.IV-. 
 
 You will give me leave to add^ that God is the Fa-^ 
 ther of the Man Jefus Chrift^upon the account of his 
 RelQiTedion alio. For^to ufe cheWords of a moil ex- 
 cellentf^JWriter^C/jri// muji therefore be ackno7i;ledgdthe 
 Son of Gody hecauje be is raifed immediately by God out of 
 the Earth mito immortal Life, For God hath fulfilled 
 the Promife unto us^in that he hath raifed up Jefus 
 again ,• as it is alfo written in the fecond Vfalm^ 
 Thou art my Son^ this day have I begotten thee. 
 The Grave is as the IFomb of the Earth ; Chrifi who is 
 raijed from thence ^ is as it ivere begotten to another Life ^ 
 and God, who ra'tfed him, is his Fnthcr. So true it mufi 
 needs be of him, which is fpoken of others, 7vho are thQ 
 Children of God^ being the Children of the Re- 
 furredion. Thm was he defined, or confticuted and 
 appointed, the Son of God wich Power, by the Re- 
 furredicn from the Dead : neither is he called fim fly 
 the fir ft that rofe^ but with a Note of Generation^ the firft 
 born from the Dead. 
 
 But then, it muft be remembred, that tho' 
 Chrift is for the prefent, yet he will not always 
 be,the Only Son of God, or the Only Begotten of the Fa- 
 ther, upon this Account. For all that ihall be rais'd 
 to Everlafting Life, will be the Sons of God in this 
 •Refped. However, Chrift is the firil born Son of 
 God upon the account of his Relurrc^Llon. For tho' 
 ibme others were rais'd from the Dead by God be- 
 fore the Refurredion of our Ford Jefus Chrift, yec 
 they dy'd again : whereas our Lord Jefus Chrift ne- 
 ver dy'd after his Refurredion. For as the Apoftlc 
 fpeaks, Chrift being raifed fro?n the dead, dicth no more ,• 
 death hath no more Dominion over him, F r in that he 
 died, he died unto fin once : but in that he liveth, he li* 
 
 (a) Bifhop Pearf/71 on the Crsed, />. io5. 
 
Chap. V. The Controverf^ comerning^ Sec. 19 
 
 'veth unto God^ Rom. f>, 9, to. Our Savior thereforo 
 is xht fir fi begotten '^n^ tht firfi bor^i from the Dcnd ; 
 becaule he is the very firft that was raisM by God 
 to eternal Life. 
 
 CHAP. V. 
 
 The State of the Controverfy between Dr. Clarke and 
 the Author concerning the WO R D, or Divine 
 Nature of our Lord Jefus Chrijl. 
 
 THESE things being premis'd^ wherein (I 
 hope) we are perfedly agreed, let us now 
 enter upon the Confideration of the firft Point in 
 Controverfy between us. 'Tis confefs*d on both 
 Sides^ I. That the bleffed Jefus has a Divine Na- 
 ture, viz.. the WORD. 2. That the WORD, or 
 Divine Nature of the bleffed Jefus, is call'd God. 
 But theQueftion is, whether the WORD, or Divine 
 Nature of the blefled Jefus', be the very God, that 
 is, the one felfexiftent Being. I affirm, that he is ,• 
 and You deny it, making him a Being diftinA from, 
 and inferior to, the one felfexiftent or very God. 
 That this is your Notion, I need not prove. ^I 
 heartily wi(h it did not appear too frequently in 
 your Writings concerning the Holy Trinity. 
 
 Now the Truth is, fince there are two Natures 
 united in the bleffed Jefus, that is, fincc the WORD 
 and the Man Jefus Chrift are united into one Per- 
 fon : we can't wonder, that the holy Scriptures do 
 fpeak of him in very different Manners j and af- 
 firm fuch Things of him with refpcA to the one 
 Nature, as can c poffibly be affirmed wiih refpec^t 
 to the other. 
 
 C 2 I et 
 
2o The Controverfy concerning Chap. V. 
 
 Let us but refled upon our felves. Each of us 
 has a Body and a Soul. Thefe conftituent Parts 
 arevaftly different from each other^ the one being 
 material^ the other immaterial. Now if any Per- 
 fon fhould affirm of a Man's Soul, that 'tis mate- 
 rial^ or of his Body^ that 'tis immaterial \ would 
 not thefe Affirmations be arrant Faldioods ? And 
 yet it may notwithftanding be truly affirm'd of the 
 Man, that he is material^ and that he is immaterial. 
 But then thefe Propofitions are true concerning the 
 Man in different RefpecSts. With refped to his 
 Body, he is material : with refpe»5l to his Soul, he 
 is immaterial. Wherefore we muft carefully di- 
 f^inguifh between what is affirm'd of him with re- 
 fpedl to his Soul, and what is affirm'd of him with 
 refped to his Body. Elfe what is really true, will 
 appear falfe ,- and what is really f.ilfe, v/ill appear 
 true, by a confus'd Mifapplication. 
 
 Even thus, fmce in the bleffed Jefus two Natures 
 are united, which are vaftly different from each 
 other : if a Man fhould affirm concerning his Di- 
 vine Nature, that 'twas Created ; and concerning 
 his human Nature, that it made the World \ thefe 
 Affirmations would be arrant Falfhoods. And yet 
 -it may notwithftanding, be truly affirm'd of the 
 blefted Jefus, that he made the World, and that he 
 was created. Thefe Propofitions therefore are 
 true of the bleffed Jefus in different Refpecls. His 
 human Nature was created j and his Divine Nature 
 made the World. Wherefore we muft carefull-y di- 
 ftinguifh between what is refpec^ively affirm d of 
 him upon the account of the Divine and human 
 Natures. Elfe we fhall blunder into numberlefs 
 Untruths, and make the holy Scriptures a mere 
 jumble of Contradidions. 
 
 No 
 
Chap. V. ChrljVs Divinity Jl.Ued, 21 
 
 No Man, that has confider'd the Controvcrfies 
 concerning the Trinity^ can be infcnfible of thofe 
 Miftakes_, into which Learned Men have fain 
 by not obferving this Rule. And indeed^ even 
 Zeal for the real Truth has too commonly betray'd 
 Men into grofs Errors^ and plung'd even the Main- 
 tainers of a right Caufe into infupcrable Difficul- 
 ties. For^ in Oppofnion to thofe againft whom 
 they have btftow'd their Labors^ they have gree- 
 dily canghr at every Text, that would^ ifunder- 
 ftood in a particular Senfe^ confound their Adver- 
 faries ^ and by this Means they have expos'd them- 
 felves to fuch Objedions^ as they could never get 
 clear of upon their own Principles, and without 
 retra(5i:ing what they had themfelves before ad- 
 vanc'd. Thus has the Dodrin of the Trinity been 
 rendred infinitly perplex'd and intricat ^ whi.'ft 
 fucceeding Writers have been afraid to part with 
 any one Argument, that has been urg'd in favor of 
 Orthodoxy by their PredecefTors in Controvcrfy. 
 
 We muft therefore lay afide our Prejudices, aiid 
 difentangle our felves from thofe Notions, which 
 we have received, not from the holy Scriptures, but 
 from fallible Writers. We muft have recourfe to 
 our Bibles, if we defire to be refolv'd, whether the 
 WORD, or Divine Nature of our Lord Jefus Chrift, 
 be the very God, or no. We are not left defticute 
 of lufficient Means for the Determination of this 
 Point. The infpir'd Writings are exceedingly clear, 
 and fpeak very plainly, concerning it. They have 
 fo manifeftly taught us, that the WO RD is the ve- 
 ry God, that could I find any one Paffage, which 
 implies the contrary, I fhould own the Scriptures 
 to be inconfiftent with themfelves, and not pre 
 tend to reconcile them. 
 
 C 3 Wha 
 
The Controverjy concerning^ S^c. Chap. V. 
 
 V. i,.;,. , : :i h.is created fuch fierce Difputes about 
 our Lo:.;". Divine Nature ? Why^ the holy Scri- 
 ptures do frequently fpeak of Jefus Chriil as infe- 
 rior to the very God ^ and fome Learned Men, 
 having unfortunatly thought that diverfe of thofe 
 PaiTages relace to his Divine Nature, have from 
 chence concluded (juflly indeed^ if that Principle 
 be granted) that the WORD, tho' exprefly call'd 
 Godj yet is not the one very felfexiftcnt God, but 
 a fecondary Being or inferior God. And they 
 have accordingly labor'd to put fuch a Senfe upon 
 thofe Texts, which fpeak of our Savior's Divinity, 
 as is agreeable to their Conceptions of an inferior 
 Deity. Whereas in Reality, tho' the holy Scri- 
 ptures do frequently fpeak of Jefus Chrifl as inferi- 
 or to the very God,* yet there is not one of thofe 
 Texts, but what either fairly may, or neceffarily 
 mufl:, be underftood of his human Nature. And 
 confequently they do not prove, that the WORD, 
 or his Divine Nature, is inferior to the very God. 
 Wherefore thofe Texts, which fpeak of our Savior's 
 Divinity^, mud be underilood in their natural 
 Senfe j Vv'hich effectually demonftrats, as will foon 
 -appear, that the WOPvD, or Divine Nature of our 
 Savior, is very God. 
 
 I hope, I have fiicwn the Difference between us 
 ih fuch an intelligible manner, that a Perfon even 
 of the meancfl Capacity will fully and diftindtly 
 perceive i:. I (hall therefore proceed toeftablifh my ' 
 ovv'n Affer ion, and to confute yours, by proving, 
 
 I. That the Holy Scriptures do nor teach, that 
 the WORD, or Divine Nature of our Lord Jefus 
 Chrift, is inferior to the very God. 
 ' 2. That the IToly Scriptures do tench, that the 
 WORD,or Divine Nature of our Lord Jefub Chrifl, 
 is the very God. 
 
 C H A P. 
 
Chap. VI. Of the Exaltation of, S:c. 2 j 
 
 CHAP. VI. 
 
 Of the Exaltation of our Lord Jefus Chrij?. 
 
 FIRSTihen, I fliall fhew, that the Holy Scri- 
 ptures do not teach, thnc the WORD, or Di- 
 vine Nature of our Lord Jefus Chrift, is interior to 
 the very God. This I (hall do, by examining all 
 thofe Texts, which are fuppos'd to teach it. 
 
 The firil is a famous Paffige of the Second Chnp-. 
 ter oftheEpiflle to the PhlU^ftans^ wherein the A- 
 poftle fpeaks very remarkably of the Humiliation 
 and Exaltation of our Lord Jefus Chrift. And to 
 prepare the Way for the true Explanation of that 
 difficult PalTage, I muft offer to your Confidera- 
 tion an Account of what the holy Scriptures (let- 
 ting afide for the prefent this Text in difpute) 
 do fay concerning our Lord's Exaltation. 
 • When he folemnly afcended from Earth in the 
 Prefence of his Difciples, we read that he was re-^ 
 ceived up into hea'ven^ and [at on the right hand of Gcd^ 
 Mark i6. 19. Soon after this, St. Stefhen the firft 
 Martyr, bei7Jgfiill of the Holj Ghofi, looked up ftedfaftly 
 into heaueny and faii^ the glory of God^ and Jn'-f^ frand- 
 ing on the right hand of God, And f aid, behold, I fee the 
 heavens opened, and the Sen of Man ftavding on the right 
 havdofGod^ Ads 7. 5-7, ^6. St. Vatd Mo, Row. 8. 54. 
 Col. ;. 1. Hth. 10. 12. and St. Peter, i Epift. 3. 22. 
 affjre us of his being and fitting at God's right hand, 
 or, as 'tis fometimes exprefs'd, at the right harid of the 
 throne of God, and on the right hand of the throve of the 
 -majeflie in the heaz'cns, Heb. 8. 1. Thus has God ex- 
 alted him to he a prince, Ads 5-. 51. By this he is 
 .made Lord, Ads 2. 36. even Lord of all, k6is 10. 56. 
 that is^ Governor of the whole Creation. Lor 
 
 C 4 ^od 
 
24 Of the Exaltation of Chap. VI. 
 
 God hdiSfut all things under his ftet^ I 'Cor. 15". 27. 
 He u tbt head of all pi incipalitj and poWd, Col. 2. 10. 
 A'ngtlsy .lutboritles^ and powers he rag rriudc juhjecl unto 
 Jnm^ 1 Pec. 5. 22. God has jet him at his ovjn right 
 bitid in the htavtnlj placts, Fstr above all principjlity ^ and 
 poirer^ and mighty and dominion^ and tvtry name that is 
 namtdy not only in thi<s wutld^ hut alfn in that which is to 
 come : And has put all things under hts feet^ and gave him 
 to he the head ova all things to the Churchy Which u hts 
 hodjy the fulnejs of him thai fillet h Jt m ally Lph. i. 20^ 
 21,22, 25. So that he might juftly lay, I am fet 
 dcwn with my father in his throne ^ Rev. 5. 21. And 
 accoicingly the lame Throne is the Throne of God, 
 and of the Lamb 3* For the Lamb which is in the mid(t of 
 the throne y flull feed thcm^ and jhall lead them unto living 
 fountains of waters : and God fliall wipe away all tears 
 from (heir eycs^ Rev. 7. 17. And he fieiPt'd me a pure ri^ 
 I'er of water of life char as chryjlal^ proceeding out of the 
 throne of God^ and of the Lamb. Rev. 22. I. And there. 
 Jljall he no more curfe^ hut the thro7ie of God a^idoftheLamb 
 flhJl be in if, and his ftrva?its fljallferve him^ V. 5. 
 
 Being in this glorious Station, he is our Media- 
 tor and IntercelTor, pleading the Merit of his own 
 Saci iPice in our behalf. He is the one mediator he- 
 tvecn God and men^ i Tim. 2. 5'. He maketh intercef- 
 fion for us^ Rom. 8. ^4. 
 
 In this exaked Condition he receives Religious 
 Worfl-iip. No fooner was he carried up into Hea- 
 ven, but it follows immediatly, and they wcrjliipped 
 /?iw^ Luke 24. 92. And accordingly St.' Stephen at 
 his Martyrdom pray'd to him, faying. Lord Jcfus re- 
 ceive my (pirit. And he kneeled down, and cried VHth a 
 loud voice y Lord^ lay not this fin to their charge, A(5ts 7. 
 ^9, Co. St. John alfo f^^ys, Unto him that loved us, 
 and Vhiftjcd us from our fins in his ow?i hloud. And has 
 7/Jade us kings and priefis unto God and his father • to htTn, 
 
 he. 
 
Chap. VI. our Lord, Jefe^ Chrijl. 25 
 
 he glory and domfmon for ever and ever. j4men. RcV. i. 
 c^ 6. 'Tis faid of him, that he came and took the 
 hook oHt of the right hand of hirn that fate upon the 
 throne, j^nd when l:c had taken the hook., the four henfls.^ 
 and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb., ha- 
 ving every one of them harp., and golden vials full of odcnrSy 
 which are the prayers oj faints. And they funq a. new 
 fong^ faying^ Then art worthy to take the booky and ta 
 open the feals thereof : for thoitwafi fain., and haft re- 
 deemed MS to Cod by thy blond^ out of every kindred., and 
 tongue y and people^ and nation •, And haft made m unto 
 our Cod kings and priefts^ and we flj^ll reign on the earth. 
 And J beheld^ and J heard the voice of many angels round 
 about the throne., and the beaHs., and the elders^ and the 
 number of them was ten thoufand times ten thoufand., and 
 thoufands of thoufands,, f^J'^g ^ith a loud voice., VVgrthy 
 iJthe Lamb that was Jlain^ to receive porver^ andriches^ 
 and wifdom., and ftrength., and honor., and glory., and blef- 
 fing. And every creature which is in heaven., and on 
 the earth, and under the earth,, and fuch as are in the fea^ 
 and all that are in them., heard I faying.^ Blejfing., honor^ 
 g^^^y-) and power be unto him that fit teth upon the throne^ 
 and unto the Lamb for ever and ever^ ReV. 5". 7 8 9 
 lOj 1I3 12 y 13. To him the Martyrs cned with a. 
 loud voice., fayitJg., How long., O Lord., holy and true.^ do ft 
 thou not judge and avenge our bloud on them that dwell on 
 
 the earth ^ Rev. 6. 10. The great Multitudes alfo 
 cried with a loud voice., f'^J^^'^-i Salvation to our God 
 which fitteth upon the throne., and unto the Lamb^ Rev. 
 7. 10. Infomuch that our Lord's Words were 
 then fignally verify 'd, that Men fliould honor the fon., 
 
 even as they honour the rather., that i5_, fllOuld pay 
 
 religious Adoration to him, John 5. 23 
 
 Then did our I,ord's great Power difplay it felf. 
 He fhower'd.down thofe Blcffings upon his Church, 
 vvhich God had enabled him to bellow, who then 
 
 adu- 
 
26 Of the Exaltation of Chap. VT. 
 
 adually poffefs'd^ by the Father's Gift^ all power in 
 hcni'CJt and in earthy Mat. 28. 18. The Apoftles rC- 
 preient him as the Difpenfer of Grace^ Mercy and 
 Peace3 in Subordination to^ and as the Son of^ the 
 very God. Grace he unto yon and pcice from God our 
 Father^ a>id from the Lord Jef^.s Chrifl^ Phil. 1.2. Grace^ 
 ir.erc)^ and feace from Cod the Father^ and the Lord Jeftu 
 Chrifl oitr Savior^ Tit. I. 4. Grace to yoH^ and peace from 
 God our Father^ and the Lord Jefns Chrifi^ PhiL 5. Grace 
 he with yoH^ mercy and peace from God the Father^ and 
 from the Lord Jef^.s Chrifi thefon of the father^ 2 John 3. 
 Grace he nnto yoit^ and peace ^jrorn him which is^ and which 
 was^ and which is to come, and from the feven fpirits which 
 are hefore iois throne : And from Jefis Chrift, who is the 
 faithful witnefs^ and the frfi hegotten of the dead^ and the^ 
 pri?7ce of the kings of the earthy Rev, i. /i.^ 5". 
 
 And indeed^ how fhould it be otherwife } For 
 our Ford^ immediatly after his Afcenfion,, began his 
 Spiritual Reign^ as the Vicegerent of the very 
 God^ over all created Beings. How truly might it 
 then be faid^ The kingdoms oj this world are hecome the 
 kirgdoms of our Lord^ and of his Chrifl^ and he fljall reign 
 for ever and ever ^ Rev. 11. 15" ? Now is come Jalvation^ 
 and flrenffth, avd the kingdom of oiir God'^ and the power 
 of his Chrifl^ Rev, 12. 10. He has on his veflnre^ and 
 pn his thioh a name written^ ^'^^'''^ ^f -^"^'^'^'f.--) ^^^''^ Lord of 
 Lords^ Rev. 19. 16. Then might all his Enemies 
 jurtly tremble and dread his Power. Well might 
 they fay to the monntair^s androcks^ Fall on its^ and hide 
 lis from (he face of hitn that fitteth on the throne^ and from 
 the wrath of the Lamb : For the great day of his wrath is 
 come^ and who fljall he ahle to jland? Rev. 6. 16^17. 
 And as his Enemies dreaded himj fo his, faithful Di- 
 iciples might well rely upon him. Accordingly 
 .St. Viid tiulled in him for what he hop'd to accom- 
 plifli, P.6/7. 2 % 2.U 
 
 The 
 
Chap. VI. our Lord ''Jefi-^ Chrijl, 27 
 
 The bleffcd Jefus fhall continue thus exalted till 
 the Confummation of all things^ when all Mankind 
 fliall ftand at his Tribunal^ and he fhall fentence 
 them to eternal Happincfs or eternnl Mifery. For 
 God fhall then judge the W'orld by Jefus Chrilt. 
 For the Father yudgctb no 7nan : but hath committed all 
 JHdgme7it unto the Jo7i, ]ohn 5: 22. It ts he which wns 
 ordained of God to he the judge of tjuick and dead^ A(5ls 10. 
 42. even the Lord J ejus Chrifl^ who JJjall judge the 
 quick and the dead at his appearing^ and his kingdom^ 
 2Tim. 4. I. This his general Judgment will be 
 exceedingly glorious. For the fon of man jJjall come 
 %n the glory of his father^ ivith his afjgels : and then he 
 jl}all reward every man according to his works ^ Matt. 16, 
 27. and again^ When the fon of man ccmeth in the glo- 
 ry of bis father with the holy angels^ Mark 8. ;8. 
 
 In this exalted Condition muft the Bleffed Jefus 
 continue^ till he has gain'd a complete Vit^ory over 
 all his Enemies. For this man^ after he had offered one 
 facrifce for fins for e'ver^ fate dojvn on the right hand of 
 God :• fro?n henceforth expecling till his enemies he made 
 his foot^Jtcoly Heb. 10. I2_, 13. For he muf^ rei^n^ till 
 he has put all enemies under his feet. The la ft enemy that 
 jljall he defiroy'd^ ts death. For he has put all things under 
 his feety i Cor. 15*. 25'^ 26^ 27. 
 
 After this general Judgment^ our Lord Jefus 
 Chrifl fhall ceafe to be the Adminiftrator of God's. 
 Kingdom. For then cometh the end^ when he flail ha^fc 
 delivered up the Kingdom to God^ even the Father ^ i Cor, 
 15". 24. And when all things flrnll he fuhdued unto him^ 
 then flail the Son alfo himfelf be fuhjetl unto him that 
 fut all things under him^ that God may he all in all^ V. 28. 
 I confefs, it may be objeded, that St. P^m fcems ta 
 affirm, Heb. 10. 12. that he fliall adminifler God's 
 Kingdom for evcr^ and confequently after the Day 
 of Judgment. But^ fays Dr. Whitby in his Com- 
 ment 
 
28 Of the Exdtatiofj of Chap. VI. 
 
 ment on tlirit Tex:, ^^ by comparmg this v/tth V. 14. 
 By one offering he has perfedted^ «f -n J)iivimr for 
 ever^ them that are fandifted^ and with v. r. where 
 it ts denied, that the legal Sacrifices could n^fi^atu «V to 
 J^miuiy expiate fins for ever^ and from the Strefs 
 the Jpr/tle her^y V. 10. and eljewhere lays upon this 
 *^ 'c?^^<T?o'jy' i^ctm^, oblation once for all^ I imagine 
 ^^ that thefe F/ords may be better rendred thus. This man, 
 '^ after he had offer'd one facrifice for fin for ever^ 
 ^^ is (ate down. 
 
 But tho' this Adminiftration by the Son (hall 
 ^hen ceafe^ yet doubriefs that Happinefs and Joy, 
 which the Son poffeffeth as the Reward of his Suf- 
 ferings, as it undoubtedly may (becaufe^ tho' by 
 God's Appointment 'tis at prefent join'd with it, 
 yet 'tis in its own Nature diftind from it) fo moft 
 certainly will, continue everlaftingly. 
 
 Thus have we confider'd the Bleffed Jefus as in- 
 veiled with, and exercifing, the Authority of the; 
 very God, from the time of his Entrance on thac 
 (ublinie OiTice, to the time of his Refignation of it 
 into the Hands of his Father, from whom he re- 
 
 ceiv'd It. 
 
 The only Obfcrvation I fliall rnake upon the 
 whole, is, thac tho' there are Two Natures united 
 in tlic Peribn of our Lord, yet this Exaltation re- 
 Ipeds his hum:n-i Nature only. 
 
 Now plain Fact demonftrats this Exaltation of 
 his human Nature. However, let us confider what 
 the Scriptures fay. The Lamb that was fiain. Rev. 
 ^. 6, 12. he whofe Throne is the fame with thac 
 of God, ReTJ.zi. I, :;. \s gone into heaven, and is on\ 
 the right hand of God, angels, and authorities, and powers y 
 heino- wade fuhjecl unto him, i Pet. 5. 22. Him that 
 was rais'd from the dead has God ft at his own right 
 band in the heavenly places, far above all principality, and 
 
 powcr,^ 
 
Chap. VL car Lord ^efod Chrijl. 20 
 
 VoweYy and jnight^ ond dominion^ and tuery name that is 
 named^ not only in this worlds but alfo in that which is to 
 come : And Lith put all things under his ftct^ Eph. i^ lo ^ 
 2I3 22. To him that role from the DcaJ^ was gi- 
 ven all fewer in heaven and in earthy Matt. 28. 18. 
 And at the Laft Day God will judge the World in 
 Righteoufnefs_, by that man whom he hath ordained^ 
 whereof he has given ajfurance unto all men^ in that he 
 hath raifed him from the dead^ A6ls 17. 51. For the fort 
 of man jhali come in the glory of his father^ with his an^ 
 gels : and then he jlhill reward every man according to his 
 'ivorks^ Matt. 16. 27. 
 
 Now he that fhall be our Judge^ is at prefcnt our 
 Mediator. For there is one mediator between God and 
 wen^ the man Cbrijl Jefr-ts^ i Tim. 2. 5". And to hini 
 that is at prcfent our Mediator^ and (hall hereafter 
 be our Judge^ we are requir'd to give Religious 
 Adoration. For it muft be obferv'd^ that the Fa- 
 ther hath given him authority to execute judgment^ for 
 this plain and exprefs Reafon^ viz. becaufe he is the 
 fon of Man^ John 5". 27. And becaufe the Son of 
 Man hath Authority to execute Judgment^ there- 
 fore he is thereby conftituted the Obje6i: of Religi- 
 ous Adoration. For the Father hath committed all 
 judgment unto the Son^ that all men jhould honor the Son 
 even as they honor the Father^ V. 22^ 25. that is^ (hould 
 give him Religious Adoration^ as they do to God. 
 For you have rightly {a) obferv'd^ that the Word 
 [;(^>A, even as'] in St. Joh?i't, Style^ never ilgnifies 
 an exad Equality^ but only a general Similitude. 
 Thus John 17. II. That they m.iy be one^ as i)(^^;'] 
 we are. Ver. 14. They are not of the world ^ even as 
 [y^^'j] I am not of the world. Ver. 21. That they 
 
 (a) Reply to the Bilhop oicheficry p. 260, i6i 
 
 '' :i 
 
^6 Of the Exaltation of Chap.Vli 
 
 '^^ all may he one^ as \j{^b^i\ thou^ father ^ art in me^ and 
 ^^ I in thee. Ver. 25. Thou haft lo^ed them^ as [y^-^oJ?] 
 ^^ thou haft loved me. ' Wherefore^ as you have (h) 
 elfevvhere explain'd thisPalTage^ ^^ the Meaning ts not^ 
 '*^ that the Sons Authority (you will now underftand 
 '' me of the Man Chrift Jefus^ whatever you your 
 *' felf intended to fignify by the Son in this Place) 
 ^^ Jhouldy like that of the Father^ he looked nfon as tmderi- 
 ^^ vedy ahfolute^ fufreyne and independent : hut that as the 
 ^^ Jews already believed in God^ fo they jJwuld alfo for the 
 ^^ future believe in Chrift^ Chap. 14. I. Js they already 
 ^' honour'' d God the Father (I mean the very God^ who 
 ^^ is commonly call'd the Father) fo they flwuld alfo 
 ^^ for the future {viz,, after his Exaltation) honor the 
 ^^ Son of God (who is alfo here call'd the Son of 
 ^^ Man^ viz.. the Man Chrift Jefus.) Honor him as 
 ^' having all Judgment committed to him ,* honor 
 ^^ him to the Honor of the Father which fent him ; ac^ 
 ^'^ knowledge him to be Lordj to the Glory of God the 
 ^^ Father. It is certain therefore^ that to him that 
 wafli'd us from our Sins in his own Bloud^ we are 
 bound to give Glory and Dominion for ever and cver^ 
 Rev. I. 5-3 6. 
 
 I (hall add but one thing more. The Author of 
 the Epiftle to the Hebrev^s quotes fome Yerfes of 
 the eighth Plalm, thus^ But one in a certain place te- 
 ftifed^ faying^ TVhat is man^ that thou art mindful of 
 him^ or the fen of wan^ that thou vifiteft him ? Thou, 
 ma deft him a little lower than the Angels^ thou crownedft 
 hi?n with glory and honor^ and didft fet him over the 
 works of thy hands : Thou haft' put all thiitgs in fubjeBion 
 under his feet ^ Fleb. 2. 6, 7^ 8. He then fhews the 
 Univerfality of Man's Dominion over the Crea- 
 tures^ adding immediaths P^^ i» ^l^-'^f ^^ f^^^ ^^^ i^ 
 
 {h) Script. Do£l. p. 132. 
 
 fubjcclion 
 
Chap. VI. our Lord Jef/^s Chri[l\ ^ i 
 
 fithjeBion iwder him^ he left rjothing that is vot put nrtdcr 
 him^ ver. 8. Then he proves, that this could not 
 be meant of Man in general, but muft be under- 
 ftood of our Lord Chrift in particular, laying. But 
 vow we fee not yet all things put ithder hun : Bat we fee 
 Jefm^ who was made a little lower than the Angels^ for 
 the jifjfcring of death^ crowti'd with glory and honor ^ ven 
 8, 9. This is fo manifeft a Declaration of the Exal- 
 tation of the human Nature of our Savior, that it 
 needs no Words to apply or illuftrat it. 
 
 But tho' the Holy Scriptures do fpeak fo exprefly 
 and fo frequently of the Exaltation of Chrift's hu- 
 man Nature ; yet there is not one Paffage in all 
 the Bible, which fpeaks of the Exaltation of his 
 divine Nature, or can't very fairly and clearly be 
 underftcod of the Exaltation of the human Nature 
 only. For even Heh, 1.9. Vv'hen duly confider'd, 
 not only well may (which would be luliicient for 
 my Purpofe) but neceffarily muft, be underftood 
 of the Exaltation of Chrifl's human Nature only. 
 
 To fet this matter in a juft Eight, I will repeat 
 the whole Paffage. The Apoftle quotes two Verfes 
 of the 45" th Pfalm, and affures us, that they are 
 fpoken unto the Son ; But imto the Son he faith^ Thy 
 throne^ O ( '>od^ is for ever and ever : a fcepter of ri^hte- 
 oufriejs is the fcepter of thy kingdom : Tho a hafi loved 
 right eoitfnefs^ and hated inicjuity •, therefore God^ even thy 
 God J hath anointed thee with the oyl of ^ladnefs ahvc tioy 
 fellows^ Heb. I. 8, 9. Now 'tis agreed, that the for-- 
 mer of thcfe two Verfes is manifeitly to be under- 
 flood of Chrift's divine Nature j but the Queftion 
 is. Whether the latter relates to the fame, or no. 
 I rxffirm, that it does not. 
 
 In order to the Proof of my Opinion^ I obferve, 
 that the Pfalmift was undoubtedly well acquainted 
 with our Savior's having tvv'o Natures united in 
 
 him. 
 
5 '2 Of the Exalt dt ion of Chap. VI. 
 
 him. That he exprefly fpake of his divine Nature 
 in the Pfalm now quoted by the Apoftle, is a- 
 greed : and that he ellewhere fpeaks of the human 
 ISlature alfo^ appears from thofe Verfes of the 8th 
 Pfidm quoted by this very Apoftle^ and by him 
 proved to be fpoken of the human Nature of Chrifb, 
 as I noted juft now. The fame appears from di- 
 verfe other PalTages of the Pfalms^ quoted in the 
 Kew Teftamentj and exprefly apply'd to Chrift's 
 human Nature, which (becaufe no body can con- 
 teft it) I omit for Brevity's fake. No wonder there- 
 fore, that the Pfalmift, vi^ho fo well underftood this " 
 Myftery, ftiould fpeak of the two Natures in the 
 fame Breath ^ even as St. ?aul does feveral times 
 join fuch things together, and affirm them of 
 Chrift in the fame Breath, as relate partly to his 
 divine, and partly to his human Nature. 
 
 This being premis'd, I defire it may now be con- 
 fider'd, that Men are call'd f^'-Top^o/ Xe^r?, that is (not 
 as we moil improperly render it. Partakers of Cbrifi, 
 as if Chrift were put for what he purchafed, and 
 denoted a Thing, not a Perfon ; but) as ^'tb;^/, or 
 ovyifAn^i, when it governs a Word betokening a 
 Perfon, notorioufly fignifies, the Cowf anions ofChrifi^ 
 or Partakers of the fame Happlnefs which Chrifi enjoy Sy 
 Heb. 5. 14. as we are call'd cvyKxneo/ofiot Xe/r8> joint 
 Heirs with Chrifi ^ Rom. 8. 17. So that Men are 
 cercainly fd-n^^^^i X£^r« with refpcd to his human 
 Nature, as they are alfo call'd dA^tpo'if his Brethren^ 
 -particularly by the Author of this very Epiftle, 
 Chiip, 2. ver, II, 12. in the fame Refpcd. This 
 Paffage therefore may, upon the plaineft Scripture 
 Grounds, particularly of this very Epiftle, be un- 
 derftood of Chrift's human Nature, which upon the 
 Account of his perfect Love of Righteoufnefs, and 
 perfed Hatred of Iniquity (he being free from all 
 
 Spot 
 
Chap.Vr. ordr Lord Jefus Chrifl. jj 
 
 Spot of Sin^ even from all Original Corruption) 
 was rewarded by God with a valtly greater Share 
 of Happinefs, than any other Man ; altho' every 
 Man, that ferves God as well as he is able ih this 
 corrupted State, fliall in fome degree or other, but 
 every one in a far lower degree than our Holy 
 Redeemer, partake of the very fame Happinefs. 
 WhatReafon therefore have we to feign an Exalta- 
 tion of the Divine Nature of Chrift^of which there 
 is not one Word fpoken in any other part of Scri- 
 pture 5 when this Text fo naturally admits the 
 fame Senfe with numberlefs other plain and clear 
 ones, which apparently fpeak of the Exaltation of 
 his human Nature ? 
 
 But farther, this Text not only fairly may, but 
 manifeftly muft, be thus underftood. For, 
 
 I. The WORD has in himfelf, even upon your 
 own Principles, all the Power that the Spirit can 
 be fuppos'd to confer ; and therefore was incapable 
 of that Undion with the Spirit,which gives the Son 
 the Title of Mefliah. So that if the Undion of 
 gladnefs be the Undion of the Meffiah ^ it can re- 
 late only to the Son's human Nature. But I am 
 perfuaded, the Undion of gladnefs is diftind from 
 the Undion of the Spirit, and did not denominat 
 him the Meffiah, but was the Reward of his dif- 
 charging the Office of the Meffiah. It manifeftly 
 betokens his Exaltation to God's Right Hand, for 
 having perform'd the Will of God upon Earth du- 
 ring his Humiliation, which Obedience is meant 
 by his loving righteoufnefs and hating i72icjuity. And 
 confequently this Undion relates to his human 
 Nature, which was certainly exalted upon that 
 Account, Whatfoever therefore this Undion was, 
 it (hews, that the Pfalmift fpake of his human Na- 
 ture only. 
 
 D 2. I 
 
34 Of the Exaltation of Chap.VL 
 
 2. I would fain know, who were theD^nan, the 
 (jiiTt^i, of our Savior Chrift (that is_, his Fellov;s^ Com^ 
 f anions^ or Partners) with refped to his Divine Na- 
 ture. Whereas 'tis notorious,, that Chriftians are 
 his Dn:in or fjiiTt^i (his Fellows^ Companions^ Partners^ 
 and .even his Brethren) with refped to his human 
 Nature. This Confideration therefore determins, 
 what Nature this Phrafe is applyM to. But for far- 
 ther Confirmation it mufi: be obferv'd, that the 
 Pfalmift manifeftly fuppofes, that he was chofen 
 from amongft others of the fame Nature with him- 
 felf, and that for his Obedience he was exalted a- 
 bove them. Tbot4 hafi loved right eoujnefs^ and hated 
 iniquity ,• therefore God^ even thy Gody has anointed thee 
 OZ'ith the oyl of gladnefs above thy fellov^s, NoW this 
 is ftridlly true of Chrift with refped to his human 
 Nature ; but 'tis unintelligible and falfe, if under- 
 ftood of his Divine Nature. 
 
 If it be faid^that Chrift was ^av^f^rQ-j and there- 
 fore the WORD might have uAiiyj^^ ■ I anfwer, that 
 tho' indeed it may be affirm'd of Chrift, that he 
 has i^ilox^^^ 35 he is biav^wTr^, yet it can be aftirm'd 
 with reiped to his human Nature only. For when 
 an}^ thing is affirm'd of Chrift, we muft always con- 
 fider, in what Refped, or upon the Account of 
 what Nature, 'tis affirm'd of him. Elfe we (hall 
 fall into endlefs Blunders and Abfurdities. Since 
 therefore Chrift has no (u%7X);^/ with refped to his 
 Divine Nature, but moft certainly has y-^Tv^t with 
 v/ith refped to his human Nature ; 'ti^ plain, that 
 this Verfe, which fpeaks of his t^i-m^fy muft be under- 
 ftood of his human Nature. And confequently the 
 Exaltation here mention'd, his being anointed 
 with the oyl of gladnefs, relates to his human Nature 
 only. 
 
 And 
 
chap. VI. our Lord Jeff-^s Chrijl, j 5 
 
 And indeed^ whoever perufcs the whole Pfalm, 
 will naturally underftand the main Body of it to re- 
 late to the Glory and Triumph of the Man Chrifl 
 Jefus. For, tho' fome Pair.iges which are directed 
 to God, were (as we arc now alTur'd by a Divine 
 Interpreter) addreiVd to Chrid's Divine Nature 
 (from whence I (hall afterwards infer his being the 
 Very God) yet the main Body of the Pfalm relates 
 to that Exaltation, which the Very God vouchfat'd 
 to his Human Nature. And the Plalmift, who well 
 knew the great Myftery of the Union of two Na- 
 tures in one Perfon, which was in God's due Time 
 to be verify 'd and declar'd in Fad, exprefles him- 
 felf in fuch a manner, as implies his adual Adora- 
 tion of the Divinicy, and his infpired Knowledge 
 of the Humanity, of which he gives a Prophetic 
 Defcription, fetting forth the Dominion and Spi- 
 ritual Kingdom, which the Mefliah fliould enjoy, 
 after that his Sufferings upon Earth were rcconi- 
 pens'd with his Exerciie of iupreme Authority over 
 the whole Creation, and efpecially over all Man- 
 kind, which fhould gradually become Members of 
 his Church. 
 
 You will forgive my adding one thing. St.Taul 
 fays, Gcdwas watjifi/l in the fiejh^ jufiified hi the Splrir^ 
 [ten cfangds^ preached unto the Gentiles^ believed vn in ihe 
 7Vorld^ rccei'ved up into glory, i Tim. 5. t6. If any 
 Perfon therefore fhould be weak enough to pretend, 
 that the Divine Nature of Chrift was exalced, be- 
 caule Gcd wjs received up Into gJary ^ I anfwer, thiK 
 the plain Meaning is, that Chrift, who is here fun- 
 ply called God upon the account of his Divine Na- 
 ture,ashe is elfewhere called Mnnipcn the account 
 of his Human Nature, tho' he is in reality both 
 God and Man ; was received up ^ and confequently 
 exaUed, in his Human Nature, the Exaltation of 
 
 D 2 which 
 
36 Of the Exaltation of Chap. Vl. 
 
 which is fo frequently and fully declared, and ex- 
 prefled by this very Phrafe tlviKi\<p^, The Context 
 it felf, not only allows, but leads to this Expofiti- 
 on. For the God who was received up, was manl- 
 fefi in the flejld j and as fuch, 'viz^. as a God incarnat, 
 he was received up. 
 
 VVhenfoever therefore the Exaltation of Chrift is 
 mentioned, it conftantly means the Exaltation of 
 his Human Nature only ,• of which alone 'tis ex- 
 prefly affirmed, or plainly fuppos'd, in Holy Scri- 
 pture. For as it can't be affirm'd of his Human Na- 
 ture, tho' united with the WORD in one Perfon, 
 that it made all Things • becaufe, tho"tis exprelly 
 pffirm'd of his Divine Nature, that it made all 
 Things, yet the fame is never once affirm'd or im- 
 ply'd of the Human Nature : even fo it can't be af- 
 firm'd of the Divine Nature, tho' united with the. 
 Human in one Perfon, that it was exalted ,• be- 
 caufe, tho"tis exprefly affirm'd of the Fluman, yec 
 'tis never once either affirm'd or imply'd of the Di- 
 vine Nature. 'Tis certain therefore, that Chrift 
 was exalted with refped: to his Human Nature on- 
 ly ,• and that his Divine Nature never was exalted 
 at all. 
 
 What has been already faid, is abundantly fuffi- 
 cient to eftablifli the true Dodrin of our Savior's 
 Exaltation. We ought not to exped a pofitive 
 Declaration in Scripture, that the WORD or Di- 
 vine Nature is not exalted. For we ought to re- 
 train Chrift's Exaltation to his Human Nature, 
 unlefs we have good Grounds to extend it farther ; 
 that is, unlefs we have fome clear Proof, that the 
 Divine Nature is exalted alfo. However, I fhall 
 now evince what I have been contending for, by 
 fuch a Confideration, as 1 think is equivalent to 
 an exprefs Refiridion of our Savior's Exaltation to 
 
 his 
 
Chap. VI. our Lord, "jefus Chrift. J7 
 
 his human Nature^ and an exprefs Exclufion of the 
 Divine Nature from the Participation of that Exal- 
 tation. 'Tis this. 
 
 TheEvangelift tels us, that all Things whatfo- 
 ever were made hy the WORD or Divine Nature, 
 John I, T^, So that the whole Creation, even the 
 mofl glorious createdBcingsvvhatfoever,derive their 
 Exiftence from him. Hence 'tis evident^ that he is 
 by Nature their Superior. Now the utmoft pitch 
 of our Lord's Exaltation is his exercifing iupreme 
 Dominion over all Creatures. For the failed and 
 moft pompous Defcription of it amounts to no 
 more. And confequently that Exaltation which 
 our Lord enjoys^ could be no Exaltation to 
 the WORD, or his Divine Nature, becaufe he is 
 neceffarily as great in himfelf, as that Exaltation 
 could make him. How then could Chrift be ex- 
 alted with refpecft to his Divine Nature.^ How 
 could that which Chrift is faid to be advanc'd un- 
 to^ be reprefented as an wJ^!^i;:^?, an exceeding Ex- 
 altation, if underftood of his Divine Nature ^ 'Tis 
 indeed an wi/%J^c77^, an exceeding Exaltation, of his 
 human Nature,- but 'tis no Exaltation at all to his 
 Divine Nature. Becaufe his Divine Nature (whe- 
 ther it be the very God, or an inferior Being) al- 
 ways was, even upon your own Principles, and be- 
 fore the Creation^ every whit as Great and Glo- 
 riouSj as the moft magnificent Scripture Defcri- 
 ption of Chrift's prefent Exaltation fuppofes him to 
 
 I can't frame more than one Objedion againft 
 this Way of reafoning ,• and 'tis indeed fuch, as I 
 would fcarce mention^ were I not unwilling to 
 negled any thing, that even a weak Mind may 
 ftumble at. Perhaps it may be pretended, that 
 how great foever the WORD effentially is (for 
 
 D 3 you 
 
3 8 Of the Exaltation of, Src- Chap. VI. 
 
 you fee, I don't as yet determin whether he be the 
 very God, or no) by reafon of his having made all 
 created Beings whatfoever ; yet the Exercife of 
 fupreme Authority over what he himfelf had made, 
 may be eileemM an Exaltation of him. To this I 
 anfwer, i. That fmce he is effentially above it, and 
 can gain nothing by it, his immediat Goverment 
 of the Univerfe muft be efteem'd a Condefcention 
 rather than an Exaltation. Becaufe it tends only 
 to the Advantage of his Subie(5t5, and not in the 
 lead to his own Advancement. 2. That the very 
 God himfelf exercis'd this Authority immediatly^ 
 and without the Interpofition of a Mediator, be- 
 fore Chrift^s Exaltation. But was the very God 
 exalted thereby ? Is it not Blafphemy to fuppofe 
 it ^ And why could not the very God be thereby 
 exalted : Even becaufe he is by Nature fuperior 
 to the whole Creation. And is not this the felf-r 
 fr.me Argument which 1 ufed before with refpeft 
 to the WORD ? If the WORD were not the very 
 God ; yet fmce he is (at the Icaft, and upon your 
 own Principles) vaftly fuperior to the whole Crea- 
 tion, his Adminiftracion of the Goverment of ic 
 can be no Exaltation, till a Way fliall be foundJ^ 
 whereby he may be fuppos'd the better by it. 
 
 If ic be faid, that the WORD is rendred thQ 
 more glorious in the Eyes of his Creatures by 
 having the Goverment of them in his own Hands ; 
 I ask, whether the very God can be exalted, by 
 the moft glorious Conceptions which Creatures 
 can have of him ^ Was not the very God as high 
 before the Creation, as he has been or can be 
 fince ? Were Creatures prpduc'd to exalt the very 
 God ? Or can he be in any refped exalted by 
 thepi ; I mean, as to his Condition of Happinefs, 
 ^^i his eflefiqal Gr^atricfs ? No furely. Accor^ 
 
 dingly 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. ^ — II. explained. j 9 
 
 dingly therefore^ the WORD can't be exalted by 
 the utmofl Honor the Creatures can pay him, or 
 by the nobleft Idea they can frame of him. There 
 is no real Exaltation^ unlefs the Being be rendred 
 the more happy^ than the Condition of its Nature 
 fuppofes. And yet the whole Account of our 
 Lord's Exaltation implies his being really the bet- 
 ter for itj and a Gainer by it ; his havings not only 
 more Honor from inferior Beings^ but more I'ub- 
 ftantial Happinefs alfo^ by his Exaltation, than 
 the Condition of his Nature could inveft him with. 
 'Tis plain therefore^ that Chrift is exalted only 
 with refped to his human Nature. For the WORD, 
 or his Divine Nature^ is effentially fuperior to, 
 and coniequently not capable of, nor does partici- 
 pate, that change of Condition, which his Exal- 
 tation has made with refped to his human Na- 
 ture. 
 
 CHAP. VII. 
 Phil 2. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 1 1. exfUin^d. 
 
 LE T us now examin the remarkable Text be- 
 fore mentioned. 
 
 The Apoftle fays, Thil 2. 
 Ver. ^. Let this mind he v. y. T«7t> 3S Qe^v^^ If »f- 
 in you^ which was alfo in fjy, tuht Xetrw *hff\ti 
 Chrifijefus; 
 
 6. Who being in the form 6. "Oj c# ««f^w 0»» <zsrdt' 
 cfGody thought it not robhe^ ^v ix ci^^r^L^v ^yrioa,n tS 
 ry to he ec^ual with God ,• f^ T<7a €>€«• 
 
 7. But made himfelf of 7. 'A^^' laxi-n'V laifani juof, 
 no refutation y and took up- ^Ujj S'uha hACavy c¥ oixomfxA- 
 
 en D 4 n 
 
40 Phil. 2.*; — II, 
 
 on him the form of a fer- 
 *uant^ and was made in the 
 likenefs of men, 
 
 8. And being found in 
 fafifiion as a ynan^ he hum- 
 bled him f elf ^ and became o- 
 hedient unto death^ even the 
 death of the crofs^ 
 
 9. WhereforeGod alfo hath 
 highly exalted him ^ and gi- 
 njen him a name which is 
 above every name : 
 
 10. That at the name of 
 Jefm every kneejlwtdd bow, 
 of things in heaven^ and 
 things in earthy and things 
 under the earth ^ 
 
 1 1 . And that ev.ry tongue 
 jljould confifsy that Jefus 
 Chrifi is Lord, to the glory 
 of God the Father, 
 
 Certainly never was a Paffage of Scripture more 
 unfairly ufed^ than this noble Paragraph of St Tank 
 It has been wrefted quite contrary Ways^ and to 
 oppofit Extremes. Some have from hence in- 
 ferrdj that the WORD^or Divine Nature of Chrift, 
 is the very God : Others^ that, his Divine Nature 
 is a Being inferior to the very God. Whereas in 
 Reality both fides are manifeftly in the wrong,- 
 roV" does the Apcftle fpeak one Syllable of the 
 WORDyor Chrifl's Divine Nature^ in this whole 
 Paffage^ as will foon appear. In order thereto, let 
 us fettle the Meaning of fome particular Phrafes. 
 
 As for the ^x <*'^'^y^^v h/nonviy feveral Commen-r 
 
 tators have given the true Interpretation of it. 'Tis 
 
 ftffi€i?RP /oj; {f^ Pfefenp Pi^rpofe to tranfcrjte 
 
 . " what 
 
 exfUin^d, Chap. V IL 
 
 9. A/S j^ Qili avT^v "^i- 
 
 10. "ha Iv Tl^ opo/Mi.7t*^»crvy 
 J 1 . Keu yrBicm, yhacjtt ef 0^0- 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. 5 — 1 1 , explained. 4 1 
 
 what Dr. IVhithy has written concerning it. His 
 Words are thefe ; 
 
 This Greek Vhrafe is only to he met with in Plutarch, 
 faith Grotius (though I cannot find it there) and in He- 
 liodorus , in which IVriter it plainly fi^nifies^ to ccvet 
 earneftly^ or look upon a thing as much to he defired^ and 
 fnatchcd at. Thus ivhen Cybcle went ahout to allure 
 Theagenes to the lufiful Emhraces of Arface, finding 
 him out of the Temple^ in a By-apartment ^jhe did (a J a^-m^- 
 ^lA 'mietv ibuj ^xiVTW/jLaj/ f that is^ Jl]e fnatch d at the Occa- 
 fion^ or looked upon it as a thing defirahle for her Purpofe • 
 and ivhen none of her Fropofals or Allurements ivould pre^ 
 %fail with Theagenes to gratifie the ^eens De fires ^ jhe 
 brake forth into this Admiration^ (h) What Averfenefs 
 from Love is this I A young Man in the Flower of 
 his Age thrufts from him^ or refufes, a Woman like 
 unto himfelf, and defirous of him^ ^ »X ^^'^^f^ vSi 
 i^ueuov i'ytiTttt 7c t^>a^, and does not look upon this 
 as a great Offer, and a thing very defirable : And 
 when file had found out^ that his Affedion to Chariclea 
 v^as the Caufe of this Averfenefs y fiie propofeth to Arface 
 the Death ^j/' Chariclea, as an expedient to gain his Afi^e^ 
 ^lion^ and (c) a^-m^ua, 75 p«Qli/ iTre/JiOTtTo m 'Aj^'xm, Arjace 
 embraces the Motion as a thing very defirable, or 
 
 to be coveted. So that a§'myfJLA «>eic5m, faith Scmi- 
 
 dius, is rern optatam perfequi, & ftudiofiffime oc- 
 cupare. 
 
 That you have (d) endevor'd to confirm the Dor 
 (ftor's Expofition by fome other Paffages pf Anti- 
 quity, I need not remind you. 
 
 (a) Heliodor. Lib. 7. Pag. 322. 
 
 W Pag- 340- 
 
 W Pag 337. 
 
 (flf) Script. DoQ:. ;>. 178, i79> 180. 
 
42 Phil. 2. 5 — 1 1. explained. Chap. VII. 
 
 In the next Place, to ufe the Words of the fame 
 Commentator, ii W "i^ ^^^ ^^ to be or appear as God^ 
 or in the Likenefs of God. So the WordUtt is adver^ 
 hially ufed frequently in the Septuagint, anfwering to the 
 Hebrew Caph. Joh 5-. 14. They grope in the 
 noon- day, Ija wkv, as in the night. Chap, 10. 10, 
 Haft thou not curdled me, Tcta tvj^, as cheefe? Chap, 
 II. 12. Man is born,Ta"ot ^ova fc?«/x<T^, like a wild Affes 
 colt. Chjp. 15. 12. Your remembrance is, W azTccTtfi 
 like unto aflies. And Ver, 20. He confumes_,'iVat cl(J)c$, 
 as a bottle. Chap, 15'. 16. Man drinketh in iniquity, 
 'Ua m-n^y as drink. Chap, 24. 20. Wickedness fhall 
 be broken, '«<?"^ ?t^^«> as a tree. Chap, 27. 16. He pre- 
 pareth raiment, Ija ^a«, as the clay. Chap. 28. 2, 
 Brafs is molten out of the ftone, I^a a/9?, as the 
 fione. Chap. 29. 14. I put on judgment, IV* cOt^ao* ^, 
 as a robe. Chap. 40. is*. He eateth grafs,T!rcc <^«<3-/V, 
 as an ox. Ifa,<;i. 25. Thou haft laid thy body, 
 W TM :).?, as the earth. JVifd. 7. i. J my felf am a 
 mortal man, icro;/ ^tt^oiv, like to all men ; And the 
 firft voice I uttered was, fi^<nv Ua yhamvy weeping 
 as all others do, iier, 5. 
 
 Whether k* does ever fignify an exaft Equality, 
 1 will not inquire: but what I have quoted, de- 
 monftrats, that ic does not neceflarily require, and 
 that very frequently ic will not bear or admit, that 
 Senfe. And therefore it is not to be forc'd upon 
 it here. However, i will freely grant, that 70 ^vai 
 %(m. ^To imports full as much, as cv n^of^? ^g» <^A^')^f. 
 And that ic can't polTibly fignify more, I am per- 
 lliaded, no Man in his Wits will defire me to 
 prove. 
 
 As for {'Jii-nv Uivun, you would have it tranflated, 
 he emptied himjelf. I will take the liberty of obfer- 
 ving, that it may as well be rendred, he made him- 
 filfmean^ vile^ or contmptibk. Either Verfion may 
 
 PC 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2 •; — 11. exflah'd. 45 
 
 be admitted : but I (hall not contend for either. 
 And indeed I'm of Opinion^ that they are in the 
 End and Confequence the very fame. 
 
 But the greateil: Difficulty is about Iv luof^? ^e3 
 \a-di:^'v- This Phrafe is exprefly apply'd to our 
 Bleffed Lord ; but Learned Men have interpreted 
 it very differently. 
 
 Such as would perfuade us, that Chrlfl: is a mere 
 Man^ and that he did not cxift before his Incarna- 
 tion, pretend, that his being h /:/6f^H Og* fignifies 
 his Power of working Miracles by the Finger of 
 God during his Abode upon Earth. But this Expo- 
 fition is utterly precarious. For tho' Chrift had 
 fuch a Power of working Miracles during his A- 
 bode upon Earth ; yet there is not the leaft Sha- 
 dow of Proof, that this is what the Apoftle meant 
 by cv f/flff? ^5» \isrets:i(0}V' Neither this Phrafe, nor 
 ^ny thing like it, has fuch a Signification in the 
 Scriptures: nor is it the natural and obvious Mean- 
 ing of the Words themfelves. Nay, on the con-p 
 trary, there are juft Objedions againft this Expli- 
 cation. fovtho^Mofesy and the Prophets, and our 
 Savior's Difciples, wrought fo many Miracles, and 
 their Power of doing fo is expreffed by fuch a Vari- 
 ety of Phrafes ; yet this Phrafe is never once us'd 
 to denote it by any Writer whatfoever. Befides^ 
 Chrift's being cv wof^w ^sk, is oppofed to his vuivaan, and 
 being hr f>tof^^ «r«AB. W^hat then can his vJvutni and 
 being h> u^om <^«^» fignify, upon this Suppofition ? 
 Did Chrift ever want the Power of working Mira- 
 cles ? And can his yuiyaan and being If fJLo^pn cTkak bear 
 fuch a Senfe ? Befides, if his being It (jL9§(p»^iv figni- 
 ftes his Power of working Miracles ,- how could 
 it be faid, that he did not earneftly defire to be 
 lau ^€cj, which is certainly equivalent to his being 
 if |AOf^? ^t4 ? Did not Chrift always Qarn^ftly de- 
 fir? 
 
44 Phil- 2. 5 — II. exfUirPd,. Chap.VIL 
 
 fire to continue pofTcfs'd of, and to exert^ that Di- 
 vine Power^ by which he demonftrared the Truth 
 of his Miffion ? But I need not fpend more Time 
 in the Confutation of this arbitrary Fanfy. 
 
 It may be imagined perhaps^ by others^ that 
 Chrift did therefore l/t ^o^tp^ ^i^ xc^^^y^m^ becaufe he 
 was the Great Prophet. For our Savior alTures us, 
 that the Pfalmift called, them Gods^ unto whom the 
 Word of God came, John lo. 59. And he confirms the 
 Pfalmift's Ufe of that Phrafe by fubjoining imme- 
 diatly, and the Scripture cannot he broken. Now thofe 
 unto whom the Word of God came, were inlpir'd 
 Perfons. Thus the IVord of the Lord came f^ Jeremi- 
 ah, Chap. I. Ver. 2, 4, 11. that is, God reveled 
 his Will to him by Infpiration. And accordingly 
 God faid to Mofes concerning Aaron his Brother, hz 
 jl)a!l be thy Spokefman unto the People : and he fiafl be^ 
 even he Jliall be to thee (HQ^, that is, as it fhould be 
 tranflated) a Mouth ; and thou jloalt be to him (D^n^KV^ 
 that is, as it fhould be tranflated) a God, Exod. 4, 
 i(>. And again, God faid to Mofes ^ See I have made 
 thee a God to Pharaoh^ and Aaron thy brother fiiall he thy 
 Prophet. Thou foalt [peak all that I command thee : and 
 A{*ron thy brother jhall fpeak unto Pharaoh ^ that he fend 
 the children of Ifr.iel out of his land^ Exod. 7. I, 2. In 
 thefe Places, Mofts is ftiled a God to Aaron and Pha-> 
 raoh, becaufe he was infpired, and they learned the 
 Will of God from him. And confequently our Sa- 
 vior, who received the Spirit without Meafure, 
 might more juftly have been ftiled a God upon that 
 Account, than any other infpired Perfon whatfoe- 
 ver. And if he might have been juftly ftiled a God 
 Vipon the account of his being the Great Prophet ,• 
 why might he not be faid cv ^^opj'^ ^g? varctfX"*' for 
 rhat R eafon ? 
 
 I 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. 5 if. explained. 41; 
 
 I anfwer therefore^ that tho' our Savior did cer- 
 tainly dcferve the Appellation of a God^ upon the 
 account of his being infpircd^ much more jultly 
 than any other Prophet whatlbcver ; nay, if that 
 very Appellation had been given him, upun that 
 'very account^ a thoufand times over (as it never once 
 is in all the Bible) yet it can't be (aid, that he was 
 hi ^of<pM ^2» upon the account of his being inlpired. 
 For, as I obferv'd before, the Apoftle oppol'es his 
 being cy /ixof^w -dg? to his K.4^«y(77f,jand being cy ^0??)? </^¥Atf . 
 If therefore his being ty ^o^f^ ^«k fignifies his being 
 infpired ,• what can his xit/«i77< and being h (^o^<pn J^^a» 
 mean ? Did Chriit ever ceafe to be infpired ? Can 
 any Chriftian bear fuch a blafphemous Suppofi- 
 tion ? Befides, 'tis faid, that when he was iv ujof(pn 
 bi^, he did not earneftly defire to be T^ ^ia ^ that 
 is, he did not earneftly defire to continue h fAo^tpn 
 ^gv," which is equivalent to «W W ^ew, but was 
 pleafed eawTcV niv^v, atid to take (^o^<pb2 cTbak. But is 
 not this deteftably falfe, upon Suppoftic n, that 
 his being h f^o^f'^ ^gs, and confequently his being 
 W -S-s^i, denotes his being infpired ? For did Chrift 
 ever ceafe to deHre the Continuance of the Spirit's 
 Prefence with him. ? Or did he ever throw it up, 
 or cait it off? This Expofition therefore cannoc 
 ftand. 
 
 And indeed, let Men ftrain their Wits as hard as 
 they pleafe, they will never be able to make ^ 
 /aof^M -^stf \jzirA(^xap applicable to our Savior during 
 his Abode upon Earrh. And accordingly, not only 
 your felf, but the Generality of Writers, efpecially 
 thofe who affirm that the WORD, or divine Na- 
 ture of Chrift, is very God, do unanimoufly and 
 zealoufly contend, that Chrift did Iv (jLo^rpn -d-iv -^df 
 X«i' before the Incarnation. The Truth is, this is 
 lb plainly the obvious Meaning of the Apoftle's 
 
 Expreflions j 
 
46 Phil. 2. 5- — —II. explained. Chap^VII* 
 Expreffions ^ that as the common Senfe of Man- 
 kind has led them to underftand him thus, fo one 
 would wonder,how any Perfon can think them ca- 
 pable of a different Interpretation. For is not that 
 State, wherein Chrift did h /^of<pJ» ^s? vcrct'f>:«i'> ma*- 
 nifeftly oppos'd to, and diftinguifh'd from, and fup- 
 pos*d inconfiftent with,that State in which he exift- 
 ed, after he had condefcended uai^nv yutv^y and {jlo^zIuH 
 «r»A8 \cLCeip ? And could he then be in thofe two op- 
 pofite and diftind, nay, inconfiftent States, at the ' 
 fame time ? And did he not lau/ToV x^p^u and yLo^^U 
 /KAtf hctCeiv, when he became incarnat, h oVo/^W?? 
 dv^uTTuv i/JOfj^©- ? For does not that Phfafe ma- 
 nifeftly mean his Incarnation ? Wherefore that 
 State, wherein he did h p.of (p? -S-s? yks-dfx^Vt was prior* 
 to his Incarnation^ and was left by him, when he 
 vouchfaf'd to take upon him Flelh and Bloud. 
 
 Befides, 'tis remarkable, that thefe Words, iv c[/.oi^ 
 tcudLv M^eoTTT^'V ipof^©-, are fo placed, that they are 
 neceflarily appropriated to that State, in which 
 Chrift exifted, after he did loxnvv Y^vh and iJ.o§(pUii cTs- 
 ?.« p^ctCwi and can't be extended to that State, in 
 which 'tis faid that he did cv ^?^m -&§» vTirl^yjiv. For 
 there are two oppofit Branches of the Apoftle's 
 Words, the latter of which begins at 'A>^.a, and is 
 thereby totally feparated from what goes before. 
 Now thefe Words, cv luoid^v dv^feoTmv •j^oo^©-, con- 
 cludes this latter Branch, and muft therefore ap- 
 pertain to it : But they can't be extended to the 
 former Branch alfo wich any tolerable Congruity of 
 Speech. For had the Apoftle meant, that our Lord 
 was cv oucieofxeLv dLv^^aTTiov, that is, Incamat, at that 
 time, of which he exprefly affirms, that he did 
 hf f^f^w ^2? vsrrtf7/<i', as well as when he had vouch- 
 faf'd itwiiv yj^vtv and (xo^(^luj cTkak xaCtlv : He \yould cer- 
 tainly have plac'd ci o.uW//a77 AP^^eoTmv iifjo/^Q- in 
 
 the 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. 5 ii.expUh'd. 47 
 
 the former Branchy and not have made thofc Words 
 the very Conclufion of the latter. He would have 
 faid thus, or to this purpofe, o( ^ of^vtv^tuv dv^^^Tn^v 
 
 7i) 'ijet '3'6», di»^ iduTiy ivAvan, k. t. A. This would na- 
 turally have exprefs'd his Meaning ; whereas the 
 prefent Difpofition of his Phrafes confines ^ IuokJ- 
 fuiv etvQ^uTnov o^o^O- to Chrift's Afterftare_, to his 
 Kivao-if, when he did uo^pIm J^^iKit ?^etC€~p: nor can we 
 faften any other Intention on St. Faul^ without ta- 
 king fuch Liberty, as his ufual Didion does not 
 warrant, and confequently we mud not arrogac 
 to our felves. 
 
 Nay farther, our Lord himfelf fays. And now ^O 
 Father^ glorifie thou me -with thine own felf^ with the 
 glory which I had with thee before the world was John 
 17. 5". This plainly fhews, that our Lord left a glo- 
 rious State, which he did not enjoy during his 
 abode upon Earth. Nay, this very Apoftle fays, 
 Te knov^ the grace of our Lord Jejus Chrift^ that thoug-h 
 he was rich^ yet for your fakes he became poor^ that ye 
 through his poverty might be rich^ 2 Cor. 8. 9. But was 
 Chrift both Poor and Rich at the fame time r Did 
 he not therefore leave his Riches, and become 
 Poor? Was he not then Rich, or Glorious and 
 Happy, before his Incarnation : and did he not 
 become Poor, that is, mean and miferable, by it ? 
 Thefe Texts are notorioufly pax-allel to that which 
 we are confidering ,• and they do all of them fpenk 
 of a prior State of Glory, which Chrift left • and a 
 pofterior State of Contempt and Sorrow which 
 he voluntarily alfum'd by being Incarnat. 
 
 Nay farther ftill, were the Apoftle's Words in 
 this difputed Place fairly capable of different Sen- 
 fes ,• yet we ought to underftand them in that Senfe, 
 which I have been contending for^ and which 
 
 Mankind 
 
4? Phil. 2. 5 1 1. expUirPd. Chap. VIT, 
 
 Mankind have ufually put upon them^ for this plain 
 Reafon. The Apoftle is prefSng his Difciples to 
 Humility and Condefcencion from the Example of 
 Chrift. And it can't be doubted^ but, that Chrift's 
 leaving a glorious State preceding his Incarnation, 
 merely to do us good^ and redeem cur Souls, 
 would make the Apoftle's Argument from his Ex- 
 ample much ftronger^ than if he urg*d only what 
 Chrift did upon Earthy without taking notice of 
 his leaving a preceding State of Glory. Since 
 therefore the Apoftle certainly knew, what ths 
 BleiTed Jefus left at his Incarnation ; we muft fup- 
 pofe, that he took into his Argument that Glory, 
 which Chrift enjoy'd before he was cloath'd wich 
 Flefh and Bloud ,• unlefs we can imagin, in fpight 
 of the good Manners due to an Apoftle, and in 
 nianifeft Contradidion to St. TauVs conftant Pra- 
 dice, of preffing every thing to the very beft Ad- 
 vantage, that he purpofely omitted what was moft 
 of all to his own Purpofe,and defignedly enervated 
 his own Reafoning. 
 
 Upon the whole, I think, *tis very clear, that our 
 Savior did h y.o^^p'i -^sk -^tt^x^^ before his Incarna- 
 tion I and that when he became Incarnate he left 
 that State in which he did cf /wof^H -^g? xssrelqx^^^ and 
 which he had till then enjoy'd. The Queftion 
 therefore is, in what Senfe Chrift did h u.o^<pln -a-g? 
 yisret^X^y before his Incarnation. 
 
 Thofe that affirm the WORD, or Divine Na- 
 ture of Chrift, to be very God, have endevor'd to 
 eftablifh that Dodrin by this very Phrafe. Foe 
 they imagin, that iv ^o^(pA -S-s? vsr^'fxw fignifies to be 
 really and truly God ; becaufe they fuppofe, that 
 being h //ofip? cT^ak fignifies being really and truly a 
 Servant. Now tho' none can more heartily be- 
 lieve^that the WORD, or Divine Nature of Chrift, 
 
 is 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. $ — 1 1. explained. '49 
 
 is very God, than I my felf ; and I hope^ in due 
 timCj to give you fufficicnt Demonftracion of the 
 Truth of that Dodrin : yet I mull own, I am ful- 
 ly pcrfuaded, that h uQqp\ ^"^ <!zs<l^x^v does not llg- 
 nify being really and truly God. For is this Phrafe, 
 or any thing like it, ever us'd in that Senfe in any 
 part of the Bible ? Or rather, if the Apoflle meant 
 to exprefs Chrift's being very God, would he ufe 
 this Way of Expreffion ? Is it in any meafuic pro- 
 per, or tolerable? Does not ,«c^^>j denote a Shape, 
 Form, Likenefs, or Appearance ? And couid he 
 that is very God, be faid to be Iv y-o^^vi -^sa . that is, 
 in his own y.o^!pn? Chrift might indeed be h oi^oiuuit," 
 77 dv^^uTTioVi and be found ^]^ti a^ Av^qcoTr©-, that is, 
 be a Man like others ; becaufe with refped to his 
 Manhood there are fo many others of the fame 
 kind, whom he refembles and appears like : But 
 'tis abfurd to fay, that a Being which has not any 
 other of the lame Kind, is in its own />^of^M, that is, 
 refembles or appears to be like it felt. Belides, 
 Chrift's being Iv [jlo^(p» -^2«, is oppofed to his Humi- 
 liation, and being Iv f>tof(?? c^tfA«. So that whilft he 
 was h yo^pi -S-gb, he was not cy /t^?*?? tr»A», and ince 
 'verfa. For Ioutov Mvcan {^o^pko cTsak hctCcoVi he ewptied 
 (or debafed) himfelf\ taking (or by taking, or ivhen he 
 took) ufon him the form of a fcruant. But can this be 
 faid of him that is very God ? Can the^very God 
 ceafe to be what he is ? It being cv ^^o?^m ^i^ is be- 
 ing the very God, could Chrift empty himfelf of 
 his {jLo^<pri ^{B at his Incarnation ? 
 
 But in truth, the very Ground of this Interpreta- 
 tion is utterly falfe. 'Tis commonly argued, that 
 being U luofi^H ^e» does therefore fignifj^ being really 
 and truly God, becaufe being hf wo??? cTaA^ (ignifies 
 being really and truly a Servant. But was Chriit at 
 any time during his Humiliation, really and truly 
 
 E a 
 
%6 Phil. 2. 5 ii: explained. Chap. VII. 
 
 a Servant? Nothing lefs. He did indeed condefcend 
 to be a Servant^ that is^ to perform fervile Offices^ 
 upon fome Occp.fions ,- but at the fame time he 
 claim'd the Authority of a Mafter over thofe very 
 Perfons, for or towards whom he performed fer- 
 vile Offices. The Condition of our Savior there- 
 fcre^ whilft upon Earthy tho' 'twas alw^ays mean^ 
 yet was not that of a Servant. And confequently, 
 lincQ his being Iv [lom ^»^» can't poffibly iignify 
 more^ than his ading fometimes as a Servant^ tho' 
 he was not fuch by Condition cf Life : 'tis plain,- 
 that his being Iv {xo^<py} ^i'^ can't poflibly fignify his 
 being by Nature the very God. 
 
 What then is meant by that Phrafe ? Why, one 
 would think, it fhculd fcarce need to be unfolded. 
 Every body knows that f/cfipi) ijgnifies a Shape, 
 Form, Likenefs or Appearance ; and confequent- 
 ly, to be h /woj^M ^i^ muft denote to appear as God, 
 the very fame which is meant by 'j£}1Vd ^ifS', I need 
 not obferve, that God being immaterial, cannot 
 have any fuch Form, Likenefs, Shape or Appear- 
 ance, as will admit of a vifible Refemblance of his 
 Divine Nature. And therefore Chrift's appearing 
 at God, muft fignify his appearing /^r, or in the fl-ead 
 cfy or as the Ember fjador of, the very God in fome fuch 
 manner, that the very God himfelf was then per- 
 fonated by Chrift. So that his being ly uo^pv -^sS? 
 fignifies his ading God's Part : even as his being 
 Cf fj.of(p^ cT^ak betokens his appearing as a Servant, 
 his condefcending to ad a Servant's Part, by per- 
 forming fervile Officcs,as he Ibmetimes did. Where- 
 fore the Being which was Iv fto^^M ^g», was not that 
 God, in whofe y.ofpj he was ,• as the Being which 
 was iv (j.o§(p7} /«/.«, was not really a Servant, that is, 
 a Servant by Condition of Life j but only sfc^ed as 
 
 fuch 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. 5 11. explam'l Y' 
 
 r^S^' n " ^n !?^ OccaHons. Now this Interpretation 
 I fhall jultify by the Holy Scriptures. 
 
 You wdl (0 obferve, that it is the conflant Do:. 
 anne of all the Primitive Writers of the Church, that eve^ 
 ry Jfpearance of God the Father, in the Old Teftament 
 ^^as am[h appearing in the Ferfon of th, Ruher (^y ^.o.^ 
 ^€«,) in the torm of God, as being the Image of the 
 invifible God, Col. i. i^. of Him, whom no Man 
 has leen at any time, Joh, i. i8. Of Him^ whom no 
 Man has leen nor can fee, i Tim, 6. i6. But I 
 fhall defcend to Particulars, that I may fhew, how 
 tar the infpired Writings do give countenance to 
 this ancient Notion. 
 
 I. Then, Let us compare the following Texts o£ 
 bcnpture. 
 
 And the angel of the Lord 
 cf feared unto him in aflame 
 of fire out of the midft of a 
 huj}}:andhe looked, and hehold. 
 
 And 'when forty years 
 were expired, there appeared 
 to him in the wildernefs of 
 mount Sina, an angel of the, 
 
 the hujh burned -with fire, and Lord in a flame of fire in a 
 
 the buJJ} was not confumed. bujh. 
 
 And Mofes faid, I will tVhen Mofes faw it he 
 
 now turn a fide, and fee this wondred at the fight : 'and 
 
 great fight, why the bufi is as he drew near to%ehold it 
 
 ^^^ ^/'^'' , , ^ the 'voice of the Lord caml 
 
 And when the Lord faw, unto him^ 
 that he turned afide to fee. Saying, lam the God of 
 
 God called unto him out of thy Fathers, the God of Ai 
 
 the midft of the buJJj, and 
 faid, Mofes, Mofes, And 
 he laid ^ here am l 
 
 braham, and the God of J- 
 faac, and the God of Jacob. 
 Then Mofes trembled^ and 
 
 And he Jatd, Draw not durfi not behold, 
 
 nigh hither: put off thy Pes Then faid the Lord to 
 
 from off thy feet ^ for the him. Put off thy fiwcs from 
 
 E 2 thy 
 
 (O.Sccipt.Doft. p. 101. 
 
52 Pbil.2. ^ II. exflairPd. Chap.VII. 
 
 flace ivhtreon thou fiandefiy thy feet : for the flace where 
 is holy ground, thou fiandefi^ is holy ground. 
 
 Moreover he faldy I am I have feen^ I have fan 
 the God of thy Fathers ^ the the affii^ion of my feopk 
 God of Abraham^ the God of which is in Egyft^ and I 
 ifaaCy and the God of Jacob, have heard their groaning^ 
 And Mofes hid his face : for and am come down to deli- 
 he was afraid to look ufon ver them. And now come^ 
 God. I will fend thee into Egypt, 
 
 And the Lord faid^ I This Mofes whom they 
 have futely feen the affliBion refus^d^ faying ^ Who made 
 of my people which are in thee a ruler and a judge ? 
 Egypt y and have heard their the fame did God fend to be 
 cry by reafon of their task- a ruler and a deliverer by 
 mafiers : for I know their the hands of the angel which 
 forro7VS, appeared to him in the bujlj. 
 
 And I am come down to Ads 7. 50^ 31^ 52, 3;, 
 deliver them out of the hand ^4^ j^. 
 of the Egyptians^ and to 
 bring them up out of that 
 land^ unto a good land and 
 a large y unto a land flowing 
 •with milk and ho72ey ;■ unto 
 the place of the CanaaititeSy 
 a7td the Hittites^ and the 
 Amoritesy and the Periz,- 
 %,ites^ and the Hivites^ and 
 the Jebufites, 
 
 Now therefore^ behold ^ the 
 cry of the children of Ifrael 
 is come up to me : and I 
 have alfo feen the opprejjion 
 71^ herewith the Egyptians op- 
 frefs them. 
 
 Come now therefore^ and 
 
 I will fend thee unto Pha- 
 
 raohy 
 
Chap.Vir. Phil. 2. 5- 
 
 raohy that thou mayfi bring 
 forth my feofle, the chiUre7i 
 oflfrael out of Egypt, Exod. 
 3- 2, 3, 4^Sy^,7, 8,9, 
 
 10. 
 
 And Mofes brought forth 
 the feofle out of the camp to 
 meet with God^ and they 
 Jhod at the nether part of 
 the mount. 
 
 And mount Sinai was aU 
 together on a fmoke^ hecaufe 
 the Lord defended upon it in 
 fire : and the fmoke thereof 
 afcended as the fmoke of a 
 furnace ^and the whole mount 
 quaked greatly. 
 
 And when the 'voice, (f 
 the trumpet founded long^ 
 and waxed louder and loud- 
 er^ Mofes fpake^ and God 
 anfwered him by a 'voice. 
 
 And the Lord came down 
 upon mount Sinai^ on the 
 top of the mount : and the 
 Lord called Mofes up to the 
 top of the mount ^ and Mofes 
 went up. 
 
 And the Lord faid unto 
 Mofes ^ Go down, charge the 
 people^ lefi they break through 
 unto the Lord to gaz,e^ and 
 many of them penjh. 
 
 And let the priefis alfoy 
 
 which come mar to the Lord, 
 
 [antlife 
 
 I J. explained. <| 
 
 This is he that was in 
 the church in the wildernefs, 
 with the angel which fpake 
 to him in the mount Sina^ 
 and with our fathers : who 
 received the lively oracles to 
 give unto us, ver. i^S. 
 
 Who have received the 
 law^ by the difpofition of an-- 
 gelsy and have not kept it^ 
 ver. yj. 
 
 E ; 
 
5 4 Phil- 2^ 5 1 1 . exfUm'd. Chap. Vlt 
 
 fanBifie themfelves^ lefi the 
 Lord break forth ufon them^ 
 
 And Mofes [aid unto the 
 Lord^ T'he people cannot come 
 up to mount Sinai : for thou 
 chargedefi us^ fyi^gy ^^^ 
 hounds about the mount ^ and 
 fanclifie it, 
 
 A?2d the Lord [aid unto 
 hlm^ Away, get thee downy 
 find thou jljalt come up^thou^ 
 and Aaron 7vith thee : hut 
 let Jtot the priefis and the 
 people break through ^ to come 
 up utito the Lordy lefi he 
 break forth upon them. 
 
 So Aiofes 71'ent down un^ 
 to the people^ and [pake unto 
 them^ Exod. 19. 17, i8_, 
 
 1,93 2.O3 21, 22^ 23, 24, 
 
 And God [pake all thefe The Law is faid to 
 'ivords^'.fayingy -' hzVQ htcn ordained bj an- 
 
 I am the Lord thy God^ gels. Gal. 5. 19. 
 ovhich ha've brought thee out The word fpokm by an-^ 
 of the land of Egypt , out of gels^ Heb. 2. 2. 
 the houfe of bondage. 
 
 Thou fhalt have ?io other 
 Gods before me^ Szc. Exod, 
 
 20. T^2^;3&C. 
 
 And the Lord fpake unto 
 you out of the midfi of the 
 fire, Deut. 4. 12. 
 
 Thou cameft dow7i alfo up^ 
 en mount Sifiai^ andjpakefi 
 7uith them from huavcn. 
 J^ehcm. 9. 13. 
 
 ?Ti5 
 
eiiap. Vir. Phil. 2. 5 II. expUirPd. 55 
 
 'Tis plain from hence, that what the LorJ^ viz,. 
 the very God^ is laid to have don and fpoken^ v\/as 
 in Reality don and Ipoken by his Angel, who ad- 
 ed in his Name and Stead, and Ipake the very 
 Words of God, like unto God himfclf, or after the 
 lame manner as if God himfclf had perfonally fpo- 
 ken them. 
 
 And accordingly we read, that an angel of the Lor I 
 came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and faidy I made you 
 to go up out of Egypt y and have brought you unto the land, 
 n'hich I fware unto your fathers ,• and I Jaidy I -ivill never 
 break my covenant with you. And ye jhall make no league 
 7i'ith the inhabitants of this land ; you jhall throve down 
 their altars : hut ye have not obeyed my ^joice. Why have 
 ye done this ? Wherefore I alfo faid, I will not drive them 
 out from before you : but they {hall be as thorns in your 
 JideSy and their gods f,jall be a fnare unto you. And it 
 came to pafs^ when the angel of the Lord fpake thefe words 
 unto all the children of Ifrael, that the people lift up their 
 voice and wept. Judges 2. i, 2, 5, 4. I dare lay, I 
 need not make any Obfervations upon this Mef- 
 fige. For, not to mention other Particulars, com« 
 mon Senfe will inform the meanefl: Reader^ that 
 the Angel could not call the Covenant with the 
 Ifraelitesy which Was fo certainly God's Covenant 
 with them, by the Name of w/ Covenant^ if he did 
 not thus fpeak the Words of God. 
 
 But I fhall give a Variety of other Inftances. 
 
 And the angel of the Lord found her by a fountain of wcu 
 ter in the wildernefs^ by the fountain in the way to Shur : 
 And he faid^ Hagar, Sarah*s maid^ whence camcfi thou ? 
 and whither wilt thou go ? and fiie faid^ I jlce from the 
 fice of my miftrefs Sarah, And the angel of the Lord 
 faid unto her^ Return to thy miftrefs^ and fubmit thy felf 
 under her hands. And the angel of the Lord faid unto her^ 
 J 71^111 multiply thy feed exceedingly^ that it Jlhill not he 
 
 E c\ vumhrcii 
 
5^ Phil. 2. 5^ II. explained. Chap.VII; 
 
 fiumhredfor multitude. And the angel of the Lord [aid 
 unto her^ behold^ thou art with child^ and fimlt hear a fon^ 
 and Jlialt call his name Ijlmiael \ hecanfe the Lord hath 
 heard thy afflitlion. And he will he a wild man : his hand 
 will he againfi every vian^ and every mans hand againfi 
 him : and he jJjall dwell in the pre fence of all his brethren* 
 Jind fl]e called the name of the Lord that fpake unto her^ 
 *Thou Godfeefi me : for floe faid^ have 1 alfo here looked 
 iifterhim that feet h me? Gen. i6. 7_, 8^ 9^ lo^ ilj il, 
 I^. And God heard the voice of the lad^ and the angel 
 of God called to Hagar out of heaven^ and faid unto her^ . 
 what aileth thee^ Hagar ? fear not : for God hath heard 
 the voice of the lad where he is, Arife^ lift up the lad^ 
 and hold him in thine hand ^ jar I will make him a great 
 fiat ion ^ Gen. 21. I7_, 18. And the angel of the Lord 
 called unto him out of heaven^ and faid^ Abraham j Abra^ 
 ham. And he faid^ Here am /. And he faid^ lay not 
 thine hand upon the lad^ neither do thou any thing unto 
 him : for now 1 know that thou fearefi Godj feeing thou 
 haft not withheld thy fon^ thine only fon from me. Gen. 
 22. 1 1 J 12. And he blejfed Jofeph^ and faid^ God^ before 
 whom my fathers Abraham and Jfaac did walk^ the God 
 which jed me all my life long unto this day^ The angel 
 which redeemed me from all evi^ blefs the lads^ and let: 
 I7iy name be named on them^ and the name of my fathers 
 Ahraham and Jfaac ^ and let them grow into a multitude 
 in the midfi of the ea'th^ Gen. 48. l^yi6, 
 
 Thefe Texts are plain Proofs of what I have be- 
 fore obferv'd. 
 
 Again^ in the Hiftory of Jojhtia we read thus, 
 'And it came to pafs when Jojljua was by Jericho^ that he 
 lift Up his eyes and looked^ and behold there flood a man 
 ever againft him with his fword drawn in his hand : and 
 Jofjua went unto him^ and faid unto him. Art thou for 
 USj or for our adverfaries ? And he faid^ ^^y^ hut as 
 faftain of the hoft of the Lord am 1 now come. And Jo^ 
 
Chap. VIT. Phil. 2. ? — 1 1 . explained. 157 
 
 Jluia fell on his face to the earthy and did worjhip^ and faid 
 unto him^ What fiith my Lord unto his fervant .' j^nd the 
 captain of the Lords hofi faid unto Jojlma^ Loofe thy fhoe 
 from ojf thy foot^ for the place whereon thou fiandefi is 
 holy : and Jofma did fo^ Jo{h. ^. l^^, l^y IS- 
 
 Thus ends the Fifth Chapter ; and then imme- 
 diatly follows a Continuation of the fame Ap- 
 pearance and Difcourle in thefe Words, Now Jericho 
 was ftraitly flmt Hp^ hccaufe of the children of Jfrael : 
 none went ont^ and none came in. And the Lord faid «?/- 
 to Jofljua, See^ I have given into thine hand Jericho^ and 
 the king thereof^ and the mighty men of valour^ Jofh. 6. 
 
 Farther3 God's Manifeftation of himfelf to Gi- 
 deon is very remarkable. And there came an angel of 
 the Lord^ and fat under an oak which was in Ophrahy that 
 pertained nnto Joafi the Ahi-Ezrite : and his fon Gideon 
 threJJjed wheat by the wine-prefs^ to hide it from the Mi' 
 diamtes. And the angel of the Lord appeared unto him^ 
 find faid unto him^ The Lord is with thee^ thou mighty 
 man of valour. And Gideon faid unto him^ Oh my iordj 
 if the Lord he with us^ why then is all this befallen us ? 
 and where be all his miracles which our fathers told us ofy 
 faying^ Did not the Lord bring us up from Egypt ? but now 
 the Lord hath forfaken us^ and deliver"* d us into the hands 
 of the Midiamtes. And the Lord looked upon him^ and 
 faidy Go in this thy mighty and thou [Ijalt fave Jfrael from 
 the hand of the Midianites : have I not fent thee ? And 
 he faid unto him^ Oh my lord^ wherewith fli all 1 fave Jfrael ? 
 behold^ my family is poor in Manaffeh^ and I am the leafi 
 in my fathers houfe. And the Lord faid unto him^ Surely 
 J Will be with thee^ and thou fhalt fmite the Midiamtes as 
 one man. And he faid unto him^ If now 1 have found 
 grace in thy fight^ then fijew me a fign that thou talkefi 
 with me. Depart not hence^ Ipray thee^ until I come un^ 
 to th^e^ and bring Jorth my prefent^ and fet it before thee. 
 
 And 
 
58 Phil. 2. 5 1 T . expkirPd, Chap. VIF. 
 
 j^nd he fald^ J will tarry until thou come again. And Gi^ 
 deon went in^ and made ready a hd^ and unleavened cakes 
 of an ephah of flour ; the fleflj he put in a basket^ and he 
 pfit the broth in a pot^ and brought it out unto him under 
 the oal^ and prefented it. And the angel oj God faid 
 unto him^ Tale the fleJJj^ and the unleavened cakeSy and 
 lay them upon this rock^ and pour out the broth. And he 
 didfo. Then the angel of the Lord put forth the end of 
 the ftaff that was in his handy and touched the flcjlj^ and 
 the unleavened cakes^ and there roft fire up out of the rocky 
 and confumed the fleflj^ and the unleavened cakes : then 
 the angel of the Lord departed out of his fght. And 
 rvhen Gideon perceived that he was an afjgel oj the Lord^ 
 Gideon faid^ Alas^ O Lord God : for becaufe I have feen 
 4in angel of the Lord face toface^ Judges 6. 11, 12^ l^^ 
 I4j 1 5", i6j 17, 1 8^ 19, 20^ 2 r^ 22. This is manifeft- 
 3y one and the fame Hiftory and Appearance ; and 
 'cis exprefly attributed to the Angela 1;. iij 12^ 20^ 
 21, tho' 'tis exprefly attributed to the Lord^ nj, 14^ 
 16. And tho' Gideon anfwer'd the Lord^ yet he 
 certainly ccnvcrs'd with the Angel^ v, 17^18^ 19^ 
 22. 
 
 I fhall only add the following PalTage of the 
 Prophet Zjechary, And he fuewed me Jojljua the high 
 friefr^ flanding before the angel of the Lordy and Satan 
 (landing at his right hand to refifi him. And the Lord 
 J a id unto Satan^ The Lord rebuke thee^ O Satan^ even 
 the Lord that hath cbofen Jerufalem^ rebuke thee : Is ?20t 
 this a brand pluckt out of the fire ? Now jfojljua oi^as 
 cloathed with filthy garments ^ and flood before the angd^ 
 Andhe anfwered^ and /pake unto thofe that flood before 
 him^ faying. Take away the filthy garments from him. 
 And unto him he [aid. Behold, I ha^ue caufid thine ini^ 
 equity to fafs from thee, and I will cloath thee 7vith change 
 of raiment. And 1 faid. Let them fet a fair mitre upon 
 his hend • fo they Jet a fair mitre u^on hts head, and 
 
 (loathed 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. •J 1 1 . expUirfd. 59 
 
 eloathed him ovlth garments ^ and the angel of the Lord 
 fioodby, Zech. 3. 1,2, %, 43 V- 
 
 The Truth is, 'twas ufual in thofe Parts for fuch 
 as deliver'd Meflagcs from others, to fpeak after the 
 fame manner, as thofe very Perfons would have 
 don, in whofe Names they came; and thofe thac 
 returned Anfwers by McfTcngers, fpake as if thofe 
 very Perfons were prefent, in whofe Names the 
 Melfengers came. The Hiftory of our Savior and 
 the Centurion furnifties us with a notorious Proof 
 of this. I or let us compare the two Evangeliits. 
 
 St. Matthew fays^ 
 
 And when Jefus was en- 
 tred into Capernaum^ there 
 came unto him a, Centurion^ 
 befeeching him^ 
 
 Add faying^ Lord , my 
 fervant licth at home Jick 
 of the palfie^ grievonJly tor^ 
 men ted. 
 
 And Jefis faith unto him^ 
 I will come and heal htm. 
 
 The Centurion anfwered 
 and faid^ Lord^ I am not 
 worthy that thou (Ijouldfi 
 come under my roof : but 
 fpeak the word only^ and my 
 jervant (Imll be healed. 
 
 For I am a man under 
 authority^ having fouldiers 
 under me : and I fay to this 
 man^ Go^ and hegoeth : and 
 to another^ Come^ and he 
 Cometh : and to my fervant^ 
 JDo thisy and he doeth it. 
 
 Whin 
 
 St. Luke fay S3 
 Then Jefus went with 
 them, And when he was 
 now not far from the houfe^ 
 the Centurion fent friends to 
 him^ faying unto him^ Lord^ 
 trouble not thy felf^ for I 
 am not worthy that thou 
 JJjouldfi enter pinder my roof 
 Wherefore neither thought 
 1 my fe If worthy to come un* 
 to thee : but fay in a wordy 
 and my [ervant fliall he heal'* 
 ed. 
 
 For 1 alfo am a man fet 
 under authority^ having un» 
 der me fouldiers^ and 1 fay 
 unto oney Go^ and hegoeth .• 
 and to another^ Come^ and 
 he Cometh : and to my fer^ 
 vanty Vothisy andhedoeth 
 
 it. Luke?, 6,7,8. 
 
^O Phil. 2. 5 — 1 1. exfUind. Chap. VII. 
 
 When Jeftu heard tt^ he 
 fnarveR^d^ and [did to them 
 that followed^ Fcrily 1 fay 
 unto yoH^ I have not found 
 fo great faithy no not in 
 JfraeL 
 
 j^nd I fay unto yoH^ that 
 many fljall come from the 
 tafl and rveft^ and ^ all fit 
 down with Abraham^ and 
 Jfaac^ and Jacob in the king" 
 dom of heaven. 
 
 But the children of the 
 hngdom fljall be cafi out tn^ 
 to outer darknefi : there floall 
 he weeping and gnafliing of 
 teeth, 
 
 jindjefta faid unto the 
 Centurion^ Go thy way^ and 
 M'thoH hafl believed^ fo be 
 it done unto thee. And his 
 fervant was healed in the 
 felf'fame hour. Matt. 8. 
 ^:> ^. 7^ S, 9:,I03 II:, 12^ 
 
 'Tis plain from the feventh Verfe of St. Luke^ 
 that the Centurion did not come to Chrift in Per- 
 fon \ but that all this was done by Meffengers. 
 And tho' the thirteenth Yerfe of St. Matthavs Re- 
 lation feems addrefs'd to the Centurion in Perfon ; 
 yet it muft be remembred^ that when Abigail re- 
 turn'd an Anfwer to David's Meffengers^ fhe fpake 
 as if David had been perfonally prefent. For we 
 read thus^ And when the Jeri/ants of David were come 
 to Abigail to Carmel^ they fpake unto her^ f^J/i^gi David 
 
 fent 
 
Chap. VII. Phil 2. $ 1 1. exfl^n'd. 6\ 
 
 fent us unto thee to take thee to him to wife. And jlie 
 arofcy and bowed her [elf on her face to the earthy and [aid 
 Behold^ let thine handmaid be a fervant to vajh the feet of 
 the fervants of my lord, i Sam. 2^. 40, 41. Our Sa- 
 vior therefore told the Centurion's Friends^ what 
 Anfwer they fhould return in his Name j and he 
 expreffed himfelf in the fame manner^ as if he had 
 fpoken to the Centurion himfelf. And according- 
 ly in the Holy Scriptures we often find Matters 
 deliver'd to Meffengers in fuch a Style^ as implys, 
 that they were to deliver the Words of their Prin- 
 cipals after the fame manner, as if their Principals 
 were pcrfonally prefent. Nay^ 'tis exceedingly 
 obfervable, that even Men have deliver'd Charges 
 from God in fuchWords^asGod himfelf would have 
 us'dj had he fpoken perfonally. For Inftance, we 
 read o^ Mofes^th^Lt he gazieJoJJnta thefon of Nun a charge^ 
 and fuid^ Be flrong and of a good courage : for thou fljalt 
 bring the children of Ifrael ifito the land which I fware 
 unto them : and I will be with thee, Deut. 51. 25. And 
 Jeremiah is commanded to fay to the J^^:^^ (without 
 any Preface of Thus faith the Lvrd^ or the like) thefe 
 very WordSj Like as ye have forfaken me^ and fer-ved 
 ftrange Gods in your land ; fo fliall ye ferve firangers in 
 a land that is not yours. Jer. 5". 19. 
 
 Thus you fee, that in conformity to the Eaflern 
 Cuftom, the V/ords utterM by an Angel fent from 
 God, are ufually the very fame, which God him- 
 felf would have fpoken, had he perfonally conver- 
 fed with Man. In fuch Cafes, the Angel ads in 
 the ftead of the very God, ufes his Expreffions, and 
 perfonats his Divine Majefty. And I am perfuaded, 
 that the Reafon, why Angels are {o often call'd 
 tr:^nb&), is becaufe they fo frequently tranfaded Mat- 
 ters with Mankind in the Name of the very God. 
 
 2. When 
 
62 Phil- 2. <) — - 1 1 . explam'd. Chap. VIT. 
 
 2, When the Lord did thus by his Angel converfe 
 withMan^we are fometimes told^and'cis feveral o- 
 ther times imply'd^ that the Lord appeared. And we 
 lindjthat in the very fame Relations^ Mention is in- 
 differently and promifcuoufly made^ fometimes of 
 the very God^ and at other times of his Angel This 
 is fo notorious^that I forbear to point at the particu- 
 lar Places of Scripture^ which evince it. Now 'tis cer- 
 tain^that the very God himfelf cannot bereprefented 
 by any bodily Shape: butyet^whenGod^thatis^when 
 God by his Angela did appear ; there was ufually 
 fome vifible Glory jBrightnefs^ or Form^ which was 
 truly and properly a fWf(?M r^«*, an Appearance of God^ 
 or that in which that Angel, who perfonated the 
 Divine Majefty, became in fome Senfe Vifible. 
 And the Angel that did thus appear in God's ftead,* 
 and converi'e with Man in his Name and Words, 
 was to that Man truly and properly, in the ftrid 
 and natural Senfe of the Words, Iv y^o^^» ^s» and 
 
 3. That our Lor^ Chrift is ftiled an Angel, even 
 the An^el (or as our Tranflation readeth it, the Mef. 
 fenger) of the Covenant^ is allowed on all fides ^ nor 
 can any Perfon doubt of it, who compares MaL 
 2. I. with M.itt, II. 10. Mark i. 2. Luke 1.16. and 
 7. 27. And therefore the Angel of God's prefence. If. 
 6;. 9. is juftly underftood to be our Savior Chrift ; 
 whom alfo, as you truly (f) affert, God meant, 
 when he faid. Behold^ I fend an Angel before thee to 
 keep thee in the waj^ and to bring thee into the place ii'hich 
 I have prepared. Beware of him ^ and obey his voice ^ pro^ 
 ^uoke him noty for he ivill not pardon your tra',:fgreJfions : 
 fur my name js in him. But 'if thou \halt indeed obey his 
 
 iP Reply to theBlfliop o£chc(icr, p. 2^6. 
 
 voice. 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. 5 1 1, es^platn^d. 6j 
 
 'voice^ and do all that I fpeak ; then I will be an enemy 
 unto thine enemies ^ and an adverjary unto thine adverfa^ 
 ties. For mine An^el ^liH go before thee^ and bring thee 
 in unto the Amor it cs^ and the jfilttites^ and the Pcriz,x.itef^ 
 and the Canaanites^ and the HlviteSy and the yebtifites : . 
 and I will cut them off^ Exod. 23. 20^ 21^ 22, 2j; 
 For God fpake thofe very Words by that very An- 
 gel, Ty/t.. our Lord ; and as you juftly {g) note^ It 
 M the fame Manner o[ ffeaking^ as occurs in all IVr iters ^ 
 when any one is introduced fpeaking ns the Reprefentative 
 of another y and mentioning him [elf (as Grar^marians fpeak) 
 in the third Perfon. Thus alfo we may interpret the 
 Hiftory of the Inftitution of CircumcifionjGtw, 17. 
 and that of the Angel's appearing to Abraham and 
 Loty Gen, 18. But concerning our Savior's being 
 God's Angel, there will be no Controverfy i and 
 therefore I need not enlarge. 
 
 Thus then 'tis certain, that when the very God 
 appear'd in the Old Teftament, fome Angel 
 did at thofe Times perfonac the Divine Ma- 
 jefty, and was confequently ht aof^?; ^'i and'*"^ ;^«. 
 Now fmce our Lord Chrift is fo often ftiled God's 
 Angel, and fo exprefly affirmed to have been ^/^og- 
 ?M -S-ss and i'^ ^i(?y which Phrafes are never once at- 
 tributed to any other Angel ; therefore I conclude, 
 that our Savior did, h (y.c^^» -^i^ -^dfx^i'f and was 
 Toa ^zr}, when he acted in the Appearances of the very 
 God, and then perfonated or reprefented the Divine 
 Majefty, which we do not find, that any other An- 
 gel ever did, tho' fo many of them have been im- 
 ploy'd as the very God's Embafladors to Men. 
 
 It may now be proper, before I leave this 
 Point, to confider one Difficulty. The Law is 
 ■ 
 
 (g) Ibid. p. 247. 
 
 ftiled 
 
64 Phil. 2. 5 11. examined, Chap.ViL 
 
 ftiled tht Wordffoken hy Angels^ Heb. 2.2. and is up- 
 on that account oppofed to the Gofpel, which was 
 delivered by the Lord^ v. 3 . and the Apoftle fays^ 
 unto the Angels hath he {viz., the very God) Jiot fut in 
 fubjeBion^ otK^^nv t^in^Mmy (that is_, the Gofpel State, 
 tho' we literally render it) the TvorU to come^ which 
 notwithftanding is fubjeded to Chrift. How then 
 could Chrift be that Angel which deliver'd the 
 Law, and did at that Time perfonat the very 
 God ? I do not mention this as an Objedion 
 which either of us can ftart againft the other,, 
 but as a Matter which deferves to be clear'd 
 upon this Occafion ^ and in the Solution of 
 which you and I Ihall agree, in cppofition to fuch 
 as are apt to make a very ill ufe of thofe Paflages 
 of Scripture, which they can't account for. 
 
 I fliall not therefore plead, that our Savior is ex- 
 prefly call'd *7N>)::, ayyi^Q-, that is, an angel (tho' 
 we tranflate it a Mejjenger) Mai. 3. i. as I have al- 
 ready noted (for the Difficulty will ftill return) 
 but I obferve, that ^isibD and a»£^©- do originally 
 fignify any Meffenger in general, even one Man 
 fent by another Man. Thus Jacob fent ao^ibtj, 
 tiyyv.)iiy fay the Septuagint (and we tranflate it Mef» 
 fengers) to his brother. Gen. 32. 3. Nay, St. John 
 Baptift is call'd l^^'^D. AyyiK©-, even from God to 
 Men, Mai, 3.1. Matt. u. 10. and elfewhere. From 
 hence thofe Spiritual Beings, whom God imploys 
 as his Meffengers and Ambaffadors to Men, are 
 emphatically call'd Angels, by the Appropriation 
 of a common Word to a particular Senfe. We 
 muft therefore always obferve, when DOiibo or 
 iyyiKot are mention'd in Scripture, whether the 
 Context obliges us to interpret the Word in a large 
 or a reftrain'd manner. Now our Savior, before 
 his Incarnation, might juftly be call'd an Angel, 
 
 upon 
 
Chap VII. PhlL 2. 5 11. explained. 65 
 
 upon the account of his being fent from God toMen, 
 when he perlbnared the very God ,• even the' he was 
 not a Spirit precifely of the fame Kind or Degree 
 with thofe^ whom God at other times imploy'd, 
 and of which there was a vaftly great and innume- 
 rable Hoft. But after he became incarnat, he 
 might very properly be diftinguifh'd from Angels ; 
 that Name being ulbally given to^ and underftood 
 of^ fuch Spirits as were not embodied. The Apo- 
 ftle therefore might well oppofe our Savior, when he 
 was at his Incarnation united to the WORD^ and 
 become the Son of God ^ and appointed Heir of all things 
 (and thereby dignified above all created Beings) 
 even to himfelf, when confider'd only as God's y^«- 
 gel or Meffenger to Mankind. And it might well 
 be faid^ that the Gofpel State is not fuhjeBed to An^ 
 gelsy as was that of theTaw, altho* the fame Per- 
 fon was the Angel under the Law^ who was the Son 
 and the Lord under the Gofpel. Becaufe the won- 
 derful Alteration of his Condition by his perfonal 
 Union with the WORD^ and his fpecial Sonfliip 
 to God^ and Defignation to the Dominion of the 
 Univerfe, gave the jufteft Grour ^ for that Anti- 
 thefis. For fmce the whole Strefs 0. what the Apo- 
 ftle fays, lies upon the Dignity of the Perfon em- 
 power'd to ad and govern, 'tis certain,that the Dig- 
 nity conferr'd upon the Man Chrift at his Incarnati- 
 on, made him in that refped: as different from him- 
 felf before that Dignity was conferr'd^ as if two di- 
 ftind Beings had been fpoken of. And whoever 
 confiders the Apoftles Words in the Places before 
 cited, will find, that the whole of his Reafoning 
 turns upon this one thing. 
 
 I think, 'twill be proper to add farther, that tho' 
 one Angel only is mention'd, ABs-j. ^^. as con- 
 cerned in the Delivery of the Law,- whereas the 
 
 F Deli- 
 
66 Pliil. 2. 5 — 1 1 . explam'd. Chap. VIT. 
 Delivery of it is attributed to A?jgeh in the Plural 
 Number^ "^^ 53- ^^^- 3- ^9- ^"^ ^^^- 2- 2. vet this 
 can create no Difficulty to us^ or be objeded a- 
 gainft our joint Affertion^ that Chrift was the An- 
 gel which delivered the Law. For^i.'tis well known, 
 that the Plural Number is often put for the Singu- 
 lar iff the Holy Scriptures. We have a remarkable 
 Inftance of this Kind^ Heh, 9. 23. It was therefore ne^ 
 ceff-rVy that the patterns of things in the heavens jlwuld he 
 purified with thefe ^ hut the heavenly things themfelves 
 7i>itb heher facrifices than thefe, 'Tis plain^ that the 
 hetter Sacrifices can mean only^, that one Sacrifice 
 which Chrift offer'd upon the Crofs. And ac- 
 cordingly Jngels in the Plural may be put for 
 Jngel in the Singular Number. Buc^ 2. Other An- 
 gels attended at the Delivery of the Law befides 
 our Savior^ who was the immediat Deliverer, and 
 the principal Being entrufted with that Affair , fo 
 that the literal Senfe is preferv'd^ and the Diffe- 
 rence in point of Number vaniflies of courfe. This 
 Expofition is warranted by Mofes's Words^ Deut. 53. 
 2. The Lord came from Sinai ^ and rofe up from Seir 
 unto them • he fljined forth from mount Varan^ and he 
 cstme with ten thoufands of faints : from his right hand 
 went a fiery law for them, 'Tis alfo confirm'd by the 
 Pfalmift's Words, The chariots of God are twenty thou- 
 fandy even thoufands of Angels : the Lord is among them 
 af in Sinai y in the holy place ^ Pfal, 68. 17. 
 
 Here 1 can't but repeat a very pertinent Obfer- 
 vation of yours. You {h) fay, that the following 
 Words [<«^^ec iouilv laivc-m- But emptied himjei;'] jhew 
 thofe immediaily foregoing^ not to he part of the preceding 
 Characler of Chrifi\ Great ncfs^ but part of the confequenf 
 
 (/;) Ihid. p. 178. 
 
 Account 
 
Chap. VII. PhiL 2. 5 11. explained. 67 
 
 Account of his Humiliation. For fo the Confirtdtion is 
 more ufual and natural^ and the Connexion plainer, [Tho* 
 he was in the Form of God, yet he was not gree- 
 dy of being honor'd as God ; but (on the contra- 
 ry) willingly emptied himlelf of his Glory.] But in 
 the other Interpretation the IVord [a.>0\a:] has not fo natu^ 
 ral a Place : [ He thought it not Robbery to be e- 
 qual with God ; but yet neverthelefs {not fo pro- 
 perly d^^A, but rather et^' o/ua^y or of^i 'j) he emptied 
 himfelfj &c. 
 
 You will now give me leave to obferve in my 
 turn (and I doubt not of the Concurrence of your 
 Judgment) that the whole feventh Verfe ought to 
 be literally rendred thus. But he emptied himfdfy 
 taking the appearance of a fervant^ being in the llkenefs of 
 men ^ that is, he divefted himfeU of that Glory 
 which he enjoy 'd ,• and when he was incarnat, he 
 condefcended to appear as a Servant. For c* huot- 
 auoLv etv^fUTTzop i^ofAoQ-^ tho' plac'd after /w^f^LoJ J'hkk 
 hACuv^ yet ought to be conftrued before it. Anti 
 then the next Verfe runs very naturally thus, KaJ 
 And (or as we fliould fay in our own Tongue ; Nay 
 farther^ or Moreover^ being found in fajJnon as a maffj, 
 &C. 
 
 Laftly, the Apoftle fays, 'that our Savior was 
 exalted §ii J'o^av -^^S Tjarpo^, to the Glory of God the Fa- 
 ther. For this beneficent Acflion towards Chrift Je- 
 fus, neceflarily redounded to the honor of God 
 the Author of it. Ihus that Phrafe manifeftly fig- 
 nifies ; and thus ic is ufed by this Apoftle, parti- 
 cularly in this Lpiftle, Phil i.n. Bei?ig filled with 
 the fruits ofrighteoufnejs^ which are by Jefus Chrift- unto 
 the pralfe and glory of Gcd. Thus alfo the fame Apo- 
 
 F 2 ftle 
 
6S Phil. 2. ^— — II ^Jc/Z^/V^. Chap. VII. 
 
 file expreffes himfelf elfewhere 5- for Inftance, 
 Row. 15". 7. Wherefore recehue ye one another^ as Chrijl 
 alfo received us y to the glory of God. i Cor. 10. 31. Whe- 
 ther therefore ye eat or drifik^ or v^hatfoever ye do^ da all 
 to the glory of God. 
 
 I will now fubjoin fuch a Paraphrafe of the 
 whole Paffage, as is agreeable to the Sentiments of 
 us both. St. P^ul is prcffing Humility and Conde- 
 fcenfion from the Example of our Bleffed Savior, 
 faying, 
 
 V. 5". Let this mind he inyou^ ivhlch was alfo inChrtfi 
 Jefus, 
 
 V. 6. Who being in the form of God^ that Is^ tho' he 
 appeared in the fl:ead of the very God himfelf, and 
 perfonated his Divine Majefty, yet he did not ear^ 
 veftly covet to be^ or defire ftill to continue, as God^ 
 viz.. as perfonating the Divine Majefty of the very 
 God : 
 
 v. 7. But emptied himfelf of that vaft Glory ( or 
 nfade himfelf vile afid mean) and condefcended fo far, 
 that when he was incarnat, and in the likenefs of 
 Other merjy he did not appear in great and fplen- 
 did Circum fiance?, but he even took upon him the 
 form or appearance of a fervant. For cho' his 
 Condition was not that of a Servant, yet he vouch- 
 faf'd upon fome Occafions to pertorm fervile A- 
 45lions. 
 
 V. 8. And farther ftill (or n.ty further) during the 
 time of this his Incarnation, btijig found thus in fifiion 
 as a Min, he humbled hij?ifelf to fuch a degree, that 
 he not only fometimes aded as a Servant, but he 
 was content to be debas'd yet lower, and became 
 obedimt unto a violent ^f^/;6 ; and that very Death 
 
 alfo 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. 5—1 1. expLtin'l 6c) 
 
 alfo was the moft ignominious^ for 'twas even the 
 dtatb of the crofs, 
 
 V. 9. Wherefore God alfo hath highly exalted him 
 who volumarily ceas'd to be in the Form of God"" 
 and vouchfafed to be Incarnar, and during that 
 Incarnation to perform the meancd Offices, and 
 even to die the Death of a Malefador^ God, I 
 lay, has therefore highly exalted him, and given 
 him a name which is above every name : 
 
 V. 10. That at the name of Jefus ever) Lvee jliould 
 how of things in heaven^ avd things in earth, and things 
 under the earth : 
 
 V. II. And that every tongue flmild con fejs, that Jefus 
 CImff is Lord^ to (or, if you pleafe, i^j) the glory of God 
 the father^ who has conferred fuch Dignicy on him 
 that he is now become Lord of the Creation and 
 the Object of Religious Worfhip. ' 
 
 Thus far, if I underftand you right, we are per- 
 ieaiy agreed. Tis evident at firft fight, and you 
 plainly acknowledge, that the Bleffedjelbs did ex- 
 lit before his Incarnation. For the Apoflle, in this 
 very place, afcribes his being Ingarnat to his own 
 tree Choice, and grounds his Argument for our 
 Pradice ot Humilicy and Condefccnfion, upon our 
 Savior s devefting himfelf of a glorious State, and 
 voluntary Debafement of himfelf, when be be- 
 came Man. The Qucftion therefore now depend- 
 ing betvyeen us, is, what that intelligent Beine 
 was, which voluntarily debafed or emptied it fe§ 
 ol a glorious State, and condefcended to be Incar- 
 nat, and to undergo fuch Temporal Hardfhips, and 
 even the Death of a Malefador, and was therefore 
 afterwards exalted by the fupreme God to a State 
 ot Power and Authority over all created Beings. 
 1 Jay, the Queftion is, what that intelligent Being 
 wa?,. That ic was not the very God, neither of us 
 
 r 3 needs 
 
70 Phil. 2.5 — II. exflnirPd. Chap. VII. 
 
 needs to be convinc'ct And therefore, thofe who 
 acknowledge the Divine Nature of Chrift to be the 
 very God^ muft be forc'd, in con(equence of their 
 own Principles^ to acknowledge, that 'twas the hu- 
 man Soul of Chrift. For there is no ot^er intelli- 
 gent Being in the God-man, befides his Divine 
 Nature, and his human Soul. 
 
 And indeed, lam amaz'd to think, that this Ex- 
 poficion has not been univerfally given by all the 
 Patrons of the Orthodox Dod:rin of the Trinity. 
 As for the Preexiftence of human Souls in general, 
 I am fully perfuaded, that 'tis (in the Words of a 
 (j) late judicious Writer) mere Suffichn and ConjeBure^ 
 7uithout any fojfibility of Proof ; and there is this flaln 
 Reafon againft it^ that no Man can he pwijljed for his A- 
 mendmmt^ who knows nothing of it. For it is incon/ifi^ 
 ent with the Nature and End of PuniJJjment^ that the Of- 
 fender fljoidld not be made fenfihle of his Faulty efpecially 
 ^hen the PunljJoment is defgned for his Amendment ^ as 
 it is faid to be in the frefent Cafe. But as for the Pre- 
 exiftence of Chrift's human Soul in particular, as 
 it can't be charged with the leaft appearance of 
 any one ill Conlequence ; as it can't be faid, that 
 "\is upon any one Account improbable, or that ic 
 elafties with any one Text of Scripture : fo the bare 
 Admiffion of ic ss an Hypothefis, Iblves many Diffi- 
 culties, which 'tis othervvife impoffible to give any 
 tolerable Account of upon any Principles vvhatfo- 
 ever, w^ithout making the Holy Scriptures incon- 
 fiftent with themfelves. 
 
 I need not oblcrve to you, what Influence this 
 Tmgle Conlideration has had upon diverfe learn- 
 'ed Perfons, who have diftinguillied themfelves by 
 
 (;■) Dr. jtjikhis's Reafonablenefs and Certainty of the Chrifti- 
 in Religion, fol. 2. Ch^p. 13. 
 
 their 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. 5 — ^ 1 1 . explain d. 7 1 
 
 their Writings on the Holy Trinity. The Courfe 
 of that very Controveriy, which your own Scri- 
 pure Dotlrlne of the Trinity has occalion'd, affords 
 US lufficient Inftances of it. The prefent Bifliop 
 of Chejhr frankly {k) declares^ That there jacms to 
 be great Reajon to l^elicTje the human Soul of Chrifi to 
 have exlfted before the IVorld ; many Texts of Scripture 
 being eafily explain d upon this Hypothcfis, which ^tis diff^ 
 cult to account for any other IVay, And the Author of 
 the Scripture DoBrine of the Trinity Vindicated (which 
 Book was uflier'd into the Worlds and recommend- 
 ed, by my late excellent Friend Mr. Nelfons truly 
 Chriftian Letter to you (/) lays. That the Angel or 
 Chrifi is a dlfiinct Subject^ or fubfiantially different from 
 the Name of God in him, not in refpeti of his Divine 
 Nature^ but of a created Nature afumed by the IVOR D 
 at the Beginning of all Things , as the firfi Fruits of the 
 Creation y and in refpeB of -which he may be more properly 
 and accurately denominated an Angel ^ inay be readily a]^ 
 fented to as a firong Probability^ not a little favored by the 
 Sacred ffritings. The fame Gentleman repeats the 
 fame Notion (m) afterwards. 
 
 'Tis true, thefe your Antagonifts have not en- 
 ter'd into the Detail of that Difpute ,• and confe- 
 quently they have not oblig'd you to return an 
 Anlwer to thofe Arguments by which the Pre- 
 exiftence of Chrift's human Soul is evinc'd : But 
 yet thefe occafional Affirmations do abundantly 
 fignify their refpedive Opinions ; and demonftrat 
 the Necellity of this Notion, in their Judgments, 
 for the clearing of many Texts of Scripture. 
 
 (k) Bp. GafircWs Remarks on Dr. Clarke's Scripture Do£lrine 
 of the Trinity, ;>. 47. 
 (I) ?6^. 
 W P' 103." 
 
7 2 Phil. 2. 5 1 1 . explained. Chap. VII. 
 
 I fiiall take the liberty of inftancing in but one, 
 which as it does not afFe^ the Controverfy depend- 
 ing between your felf and me ; fo it affords a preg- 
 nant Proof of what thofe your learned Adverl'aries 
 have juftly noted. St. Veter fays^ Fjr Chrlfi alfo bath 
 once fujf ere d for fins ^ the^jufi for the unjufi (that he might 
 bring m to God) being ^ut to death in the flefflj^ hut quicks 
 ned by the (Power of the) ffirit : By v^^hich (Power) 
 atfo he went and f reached unto the fpirits in prtfon ; Which 
 fo we time were difcbedient^ when once the Icng-ftijfmng 
 cf Gcd waited in the days of Noah^ while the ark was • 
 a preparing^ wherein few y that is, eight fouls were faved 
 by water. ^ i Pet. ;. iS, 19^ 20. In thefe Words the 
 Apoflle affirms, i. That Chriil went and preach- 
 ed to thofe Sinners in Noah's Days ; 2. That Chrift 
 did fo by the Spirit, that is, by the Affiftance of 
 the Holy Ghoft. 1 dcfire therefore to be inform- 
 ed, how, or in what Senfe, the WORD or Di- 
 vine Nature of Chrift, vvhich not only the Or- 
 thodox, but your feif alfo, do own to be at leaft 
 equal to the Hcly Ghoft, could go and preach 
 to thofe ancient Sir.ners, by the Affiftance of the 
 Holy Ghoft. That ChrilVs human Soul might do 
 it as. God's Angel (upon Suppofition of its Pre- 
 exiftence) will eafily be allowed. 
 
 But to return. Since this Notion of the Pre- 
 exiftence of Chrift's human Soul is fo perfedly 
 free from all Poffibiiity of doing Mifchief ,• cer- 
 tainly, if the Arguments alleg'd to prove, that 
 the WORD, or Chrift's Divine Nature, is the 
 very God, are unanfwerably ftrong (as I hope 
 4:0 iliew they are) and there is no ground of 
 Objection againft them, but what may fairly be 
 Tcmov'd upon Suppofition of this moft innocent 
 ^Afl'ertion j we are indifp^nfably bound to em- 
 brace 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. ^ ir. explained. 75 
 
 brace ic, as being virtually taught in all thofe 
 Texts, which can*c be clear'd without it. 
 
 I contefsj it lb effedually undermines and de- 
 ftroys the Opinion of thofe, who affirm the 
 WORD, or Chrift's Divine Nature, to be different 
 from, and inferior to, the very God ; that I can't 
 wonder at your (n) calling it a mere Fldion without 
 afjy Ground (tho' I am perfuaded, could you at any 
 time get quit of a ftrong Objedion againft a plau- 
 fible Opinion, by making fuch an Ilypothefis, yoa 
 would readily come into it, and no reafonable Per- 
 fon would blame you for aiferting and maintain- 
 ing it) But 'tis ftrange, that tho' feveral great 
 Men have purpofely afferted it, yet a great- 
 er Number have not efpy'd a Truth, which lb ef- 
 fectually fupports their own Caufe, and ruins that 
 of their Adverfaries. And yet I believe a good 
 Realbn might be affign'd (were it worth while) 
 for this Inadvertency. 
 
 However, waving bare Suppofds (which this 
 Dodrin does not ftand in need of) let us endevor 
 after Certainty. Since the BleiTed Jefus has but 
 two Natures, and confequently but two intelligent 
 Beings, united in his Perfon, 'vix.. the W O R D, 
 and his human Soul ^ 'tis plain^ that that Being of 
 which St. Vaul here affirms, that 'twas iv i^o^^'f :^«, 
 and i:ra ^$y and afterwards emptied or debafed it 
 felf by Incarnation, was either the WORD, or his 
 human Soul. That it was not the WORD, if the 
 WORD be the very God, is agreed between us. 
 For tho' the WORD was certainly Incarnat, and 
 the Incarnation of the WORD was unfpeakable 
 Condefcenfion in him (and fo is God's vouchfafing 
 to be reconcil'd to fallen Man) yet the Incarnation 
 
 («) Anfwer to the Diiliop of Chejicr, p.. 244. 
 
 cant 
 
74 Phil. 2. 5 1 1- explain'd. Chap. VII. 
 
 can't be that Humiliation by emfcy'wg or dthafmg 
 himjelf] which St. Paul here fpeaks of^ and declares 
 to have been rewarded with an exceeding Exalta- 
 tatrnty upon Suppofition that the WORD is the ve- 
 ry God. 
 
 Let us inquire therefore^ whether the WORD 
 might here be meant by St. ?aul^ upon Suppofition, 
 that the WORD were inferior to the very God. 
 For tho' I do by no means grant, that the WORD 
 jnuft be inferior to the very God, if the Apoffle 
 may be fuppos'd to mean the WORD here (be- 
 caufe I have other Arguments to prove, that the 
 WORD is the very God, and confequently that 
 this Expofition is impoffible ,• and I think the Evi- 
 dence of that Truth fo great, that it obliges us to 
 admit any other poffible Expofition of this Paffage) 
 But I fay, let us make Experiment, for your far- 
 ther Conviction, whether the Apoftle can be un- 
 derftood to fpeak of the WORD's being h f^f^"^ ^5? 
 and lew ^ia, and afterwards emptying or debafing 
 himrelf by Incarnation, and thereby meriting an 
 exceeding Exaltation ; upon Suppofition that your 
 own Opinion, 'uiz>. that the WORD is inferior to 
 the very God, be true. For if it be made appear, 
 that the Apoftle can't mean all this of the WORD,* 
 even tho' the WORD be fuppos'd inferior to the ve- 
 ry God : then you muft neceffarily grant, upon your 
 own Principles, that the Apoftle fpeaks of the hu- 
 man Soul of Chrift. And confequently we have 
 Scripture Evidence of the Preexiftence of Chrift's 
 human Soul, upon your Principles, as well as our 
 own ; that is, in fliort, Chrift's human Soul did 
 certainly preexift, whether your Notion of the 
 Trinity be true, or no. And therefore you can'c 
 pretend, that his Preexiftence is invented and af- 
 lerted merely to ferve ^ Turn, 
 
 Well 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. t^—ii, expUirPd. 75 
 
 Well then^ the Queftion is, whether the Apoltle 
 affirms in this PaiT^ge^ that tho' the human Soul of 
 Chrifl: was iv uof<;n :^« and 1^ ^S^ it afterwards em- 
 ptied it felf of that Glory^ ordebafed it felf^ by the 
 Incarnation. As for thofe^ that do ah'eady own 
 the Preexiftencc of our Savior's human Soul^ even 
 tho' they had formerly inferred it from other Texts 
 of Scripture, I dare fay, they will readily affent to 
 my Expofition of this Place, whatever their Opi- 
 nion of the'WORD, or Chrift's Divine Nature, 
 be. And as for thofe, who own the WORD, 
 or Divine Nature of Chrift, to be the very God, I 
 have already prov'd (and I doubt not but you'll a- 
 gree) that they are oblig'd by their own Principles, 
 to interpret this Paffage of Chrift's human Soul 
 preexifting before the Incarnation. My prefent 
 Bufmefs therefore is, to convince fuch, as affirm 
 the WORD, or Divine Nature of Chrift, to be di- 
 flind from, and inferior to, the very God, and 
 who do alfo flatly deny the Preexiftence of our Sa- 
 vior's human Soul,* I fay, my Bufinefs is to con- 
 vince thofe Perfons, that this PafTage of St. Paul 
 does mod certainly prove the Preexiftence of 
 Chrift's human Soul. And this I fliall do by (hew- 
 ing, that the Apoftle can't be underftood to mean 
 the WORD, or Divine Nature of Chrift, when he 
 affirms of our Savior, that he was c# .o*??? ^g? and 
 Ictt ^iu before the Incarnation. For, 
 
 Firfi, If the Apoftle meant, that the WORD was 
 ef t*of^? -^gi' and T^TK ^cS before the Incarnation ; 'tis 
 evident, that he purpofely weaken'd the Force of 
 his own Argument. To evince this, let it be ob- 
 fervM, I. That the WORD, or Divine Nature, is af- 
 firm'd to have been ^io(, God, Iv eisyjy ^^ ^^^ heginnivgy 
 which you own to mean before the Foundation of 
 the World. 2. That if th? human Soul of Chrift 
 
 di4 
 
^^ Phil. 2. «; — II. expUirPd. Chap. VIl! 
 
 did not preexift, you muft be forc'd by your own 
 Principles to acknowledge^ that the WORD left at 
 the Incarnation^ not only the Glory of being 
 iv (M^?(pH ^€« and TcTK ^i^, but even that Glory alfo^ 
 which he enjoy'd before the Creation of all things, 
 when he could not be h y.o§<pi ^5» and T^ .^5^, that 
 is^ perfonat the very God. This is evident from 
 Jolm 17. 4, 5-. where our Savior fays to God^ / 
 have glorified thee en earth : I have fini^ed the ipork 
 which thou gavefi ?vs. to do. And notv^ O father^ glori-^ 
 fie thou me with thine own Jelf, with the glory which I 
 bad 7vith thee before the world was, You well (0) ob- 
 ferve, that the Socinian Interpretation of this Vaffage^ 
 is very harjh and unnatural : who under Jtand it to Jignify 
 only the Glory ^ which Chrifi had in the Foreknowledge 
 and Freditermination of God, The plain and literal 
 Meaning of the IVords^ is that which has been before eX" 
 preffedy Nuwb. 5':; 5*. And what is that ? Why^ ex-' 
 "plaining the firll Words of St. j^o/?»'s Gofpel (viz. in 
 the beginning) you (p) fpeak thus_, In the beginning^' 
 Before all Ages ,* before the Creation of the World • before 
 the World was ^]o\\n 11. 5". AndYtrf. 5. ofthts Chap- 
 ter^ All things were made by him, and without 
 him was not any thing made that was made. And' 
 Ver, 10. The world was made by him. Thus was 
 this Vhrafe conftantly underflood in the Primitive Church : 
 And nothing can be more freed and ttnnaturaly than the 
 Interpretation of the Socinian Writers ; who underftand^ 
 in the beginning, tu fignlfy only at the ftrft Preaching 
 of theGoJpel. Wherefore, if Chrift's human Soul 
 did not preexift, this Paffage of our Savior's Pray- 
 er muft be meant of the WORD, or his Divine 
 Nature. And accordingly you ((j) fay, that at hts 
 
 (0) Script. Doft. 
 
 (p) Pag- 85. 
 
 (q) Script. Deft. p. 367, 368, 
 
 p. 112. 
 
 368. • 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. <; — 1 1 . ex^lM^. 77 
 
 Incarnation bf emptied hiwfelf [gyjyw^r IccutcV] of that 
 Glory ^ which he had with God before the IVorld was. 
 And if fo, 'tis evident, that his Divine Nature 
 was not, at the Time of our Savior's praying, pof- 
 fefs'd of that Glory, which it had before the Foun- 
 dation of the World ; but he pray'd to be reftor'd 
 to the Poffeffion of it. And confequently his Di- 
 vine Nature left, at the Incarnation, not only the 
 Glory of being of wof^Si ^ik and T^ -^j? (which was 
 necelTarily pofterior to the Creation) but even 
 that Glory which he enjoy 'd before the Creation 
 of all Things. ;. That an Argument for Humili- 
 ty and Condefcenfion, drawn from Example, is 
 by fo much the (Ironger, by how much the moro 
 excellent the Perfon is reprefented, and the greater 
 diftance there is between his proper Condition and 
 the Pradice he fubmits to. 4. That being even a 
 Secondary God, and the Maker of all created Be- 
 ings, argues a Perfon to be more excellent, than 
 being h i/.o^(p'? -^sa and T?a -S-ta, that is, the Being 
 which perfonated God ; which is the utmoft that 
 thofe Phrafes do or can import, as has been fully 
 fhewn. For any created Being can perforfat God ; 
 whereas being next in Nature to the very God, 
 •and being the Creator of the Univerfe, muft ne- 
 celTarily argue a vaftly fuperior Excellency of Na- 
 ture, than the perfonating of the very God amounts 
 to or implies. 
 
 Let us now confider the Apoftle's Argument for 
 Humility and Condefcenfion, as it ftands upon 
 your Principles. 'Tis drawn from the Example of 
 Chrift. And what is the Heighth of that Excel- 
 lence, which Chrift is faid to have laid afide ? 
 Why, the Office of perfonating God. But was this 
 all the Excellence that Chrift laid afide upon your 
 Principles ? Did he not Uavg that Glory,which he 
 
 had 
 
78 Phil. 2. ^^.::^^ij, explam'd. Chap. VII. 
 
 had before the Creation of the World, as he was 
 even h ct^x^, in the Beginnings ^zof, God^ and the Cre^ 
 ator of all things ? Would not this Confideration en-, 
 force the Argument from his Humility and Conde- 
 fcenfion vaftly more, than that of his ceafmg to 
 perfonat God, or be God's EmbaiTador to Men ? 
 Is not the Diftance between his being by Nature 
 next to the very God, and the Maker of all cre- 
 ated Beings, and the fervile Offices he difcharged, 
 vaftly gneater, than the Diftance between thofe 
 fervile Offices and his perfonating God^ which any" 
 other created Being is capable of ? 
 
 The Apoftle therefore, had he meant the WORD 
 or Chrift's Divine Nature^ would not have argued 
 thus. Let this mind he in you^ v^hich was alfo in Chrifi 
 JefttSy who Iv f/of^M ^i^ \!^et§}^v (ferfonating God) 
 did not earneftly dejtre to he^ or continue!^ -SgcJ (like 
 Gcdy I'iz.. in the aforefaid glorious Office) hut deha- 
 fed hlmfelfy or emptied himjelf thereof &c. I fay^ the 
 Apoftle would not have argued thus, and thereby 
 have in a great meafure enervated the Force of 
 Chrift's Example: but he would have exprefly call'd 
 him Stor, Gcdy as he does elfewhere, particularly 
 I Tim, 3. 16. and accordingly he would have faid^, 
 oi ^loi '^ti^:^Vi who being himfelf God ; and then he 
 would have lubjoinM, h» w Ikv^ 7a Wj/tw, tw h ttTh y^^j- 
 
 which are hi: own lofty Exprcffions in Col, i. 16, 
 17. or fomerhing elfe parallel to thefc Words, and 
 to what he fnys elfewhere.This would have demon- 
 ftrated a vaftly greater Humility and Condefcen- 
 fion than what the Apoftle defcribcs ; and the Fad 
 is as certain as the other that he exprelly infifts on. 
 Would St. Faitl therefore argue in this manner, if 
 
 he 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. 5 II. exj^Uin'd. 79 
 
 he meant the WORD, or Chrift's Divine Nature ? 
 Let any Man that has a Taft of that Apoftle's 
 Strength and Majefty of Stile upon other (cfpcci- 
 ally the like) Occafions, judge, whether he could 
 upon this fublime Argument write (comparatively 
 fpeaking) fo flatly, and fo unlike himfelf. For my 
 own part, I confefs, had I nothing elfe to oiFer, I 
 have a better Opinion of St. Paul's admirable Ge- 
 nius (fetting afide the Divine Affiftance) than to 
 think him capable of it. And this Confideration 
 alone would therefore oblige me to embrace any 
 other poffible Interpretation ,* fuch as that, which 
 makes him fpeak of the preexifting human Soul of 
 Chrift, moft certainly is • as I have fully fhewn. 
 But, 
 
 Secondly (what is far worfe) if St. P/?«/ meant, 
 that the WORD was h ^o^p^ ^£« and Toa -^fw", his Ar- 
 gument is utterly inconclufive and impertinent. To 
 evince this we muft take notice, that St. Paul ex- 
 horts his Difciples to imitate th.c Example of the 
 Bleffed Jefus ; and accordingly he reprefents to 
 them, I. What the Bleffed J elus did, 2. What Re- 
 cora pence he receivetl. He propofes therefore 
 Chrift's Pradice, and the Reward of his Pracflice ; 
 and enforces the one with the other. His Argu- 
 ment amounts to this, 1//2:.. that Chrift pradifed 
 the utmoft Humility and CondefcenJion, merely 
 to obtain and promote the H^ppinel: of us Men ,•• 
 and that for this amazing Inftmce of Love and 
 Compaffion, he was amply rewarded by Almighty 
 God ; and confequentiy, if we follow his Exam- 
 ple, we fhall be proportionably rewarded for fo 
 doing. How then did the Blelfed Jcfus condcfcend 
 and humble hinifclf fpr our fakes? and how was he 
 rewarded for fo doing? upon Suppolitioa that his 
 buman Soul did not preexift ? Why thus. The 
 
 WORD 
 
So Phil. 2. 5—1 1, explaitPl Chap. VII. 
 
 WORD left his Glory^ and became united to the 
 Man Chrift ,• and the Man Chrifl: was afterwards 
 greatly rewarded for this Ccndefcenfion and Hu- 
 mility of the WORD. This is our Pattern and 
 Encouragement^ upon your Principles. And what 
 Influence can this have upon a mere Man } Will. 
 not the Man reply^ that it does not at all afFed: 
 him, becaufe of the prodigious Diverfity of Cir- 
 cumftances ? He would be very thankful, if the 
 WORD, or any other vaftly fuperior Being, would 
 degrade it felf, and thereby merit for him an un- 
 fpeakable Reward,and fuflfer him to enjoy it alone^ 
 without partaking of that which was purchased by 
 its ownDefert. But how does it enforce the Pradice 
 of any mere Man's Humility and Gondefcenfion } 
 Or how does it fhew, that a mere Man fhall ever 
 be the better for his own Humility and Gondefcen- 
 fion ^ I confefs,the Man Ghrift Jefus did fometimes 
 fubmit to fervileOifices,' and this Part may be drawn 
 into Example by us : but what the Apoftle chiefly 
 propofes, is the WORD's devefting himfelf of valt 
 Glory, before the Man Ghrifl: Jefus had a Being ; 
 and the Man Chrift Jefus's receiving a vaft Recom- 
 penfe for the unfpeakableKindnefs of the WORD. 
 He lays the Strefs upon this; which is in reality 
 forein to the Purpofe. For tho' it may work up- 
 on fuch as are generous enough to transfer their 
 Merit to others ; yet it can't afitd thofc, who 
 would fain merit for themfelves, and enjoy the 
 Fruit of their own good Deeds. 
 
 And can we fuppofe, that St. P^/// would write 
 thus ? Would he argue befides the Queftion ? Was 
 this the manner of that infpired Difputant ? If 
 it ihould be replied, that after the Union of the 
 two Natures there was Communicatio Uiomatum^ and 
 that the BlciTed Jefus,being thus confider'd as God- 
 Man, 
 
Cliap VII. Phil. 2. 5 ii. expUin'd, Si 
 
 Man^ did pradifc the whole of this Humility 
 and Condcfcenfion, and was accordingly reward- 
 ed for the fame ,• I fay if this be rcply'd , I 
 freely grant, that by Virtue of this Union there 
 was a Connr2imicdtio Idioinatum^ and that in Con- 
 fequence thereof, the BlelTcd Jefus might properly 
 be rewarded in his Human Nature for what the 
 Divine Nature efFcded. But what is this to the pre- 
 fent Purpofe ? Still 'tis the Pradice of a diftincft 
 Nature, which chofe to debafe it felf before the 
 Union of the two Natures commenced. And 'tis 
 the Condefcenfion and Humility of the WORD 
 alone, in which the Man has no Share. And there- 
 fore it can't fairly be urged as an Argument to a 
 mere Man, who has not any other Nature (who 
 has not either the WORD^ or any other excellent 
 Being) united to him, that would beftow the fame 
 unfpeakable Favor upon him, as the WORD be- 
 ftow'd upon the Man Chrift Jefus. In (hort, ac- 
 cording to this Interpretation, 'tis an Example 
 drawn from a wrong Topic. 'Tis manifeftly aa 
 Example of the Bounty of the WORD to the Man 
 Chriftjefus, with whom the WORD vouchfaf'd to 
 be perfonally united : and not an Example of whac 
 the Man Chriftjefus gain'd by his own Pradice as 
 a Man. And yet nothing is more cerrain, than that 
 the Reward of the Man Chriftjefus (for the Man 
 only was capable of, and did enjoy, the Reward) 
 is proposed in this Place as an Encouragement to 
 our felves ; becaufe we our felves, as the Man 
 Chrift Jefus did, fhall reap great Advantages by 
 our Humility and Condefcenfion. You fee there- 
 fore what wretched Sophiftry we make the Apoftle 
 ufe, if we fuppofe, that he affirms the WORD to 
 be hf (/.o^<p» ^i^ and Jon ^s-sr?, and afterwards to have 
 empty'd or debas'd himfclf by the Incarnation. 
 
82 Phil. 2. 5 —II. expUw'l Chap. VIL 
 
 TbirJlj, We are agreed, that our Lord was the 
 Angel that delivered the Law, and that upon this 
 account he was hf f>tc?<pM -S-g?, and confequently IVct 
 •^ew- This you (q) fully acknowledge, and I hear- 
 tily affent to it. Weil then, the lame Nature of 
 Chrift, which was God's Angel, was that very 
 Nature which was h [^o^(pv ^^^y and confequently 
 i!7a ^s&). Now 'tis evident, that Chrift could not 
 be God's Angel with refped to his divine Nature. 
 For the Apoitle fays. Therefore we ought to give the 
 wore eariiefi heed to the things ivhich 7ve have heard ^ kji . 
 at - any time vje pjould let them flip. For if the word 
 fpoken by Angels was fled fa fi^ and every tranfgreflion and 
 difohedience received a jnfi recompenfe of reward '^ how 
 (hall we efcape^ if we negleB fo great falvation^ which at 
 the firfl- began to be fpoken by the Lord^ and vfas confirmed 
 unto us by them that heard him ? Heb. 2. i, 2, 5. You 
 fee, the Apoille argues upon this Principle, viz,. 
 that the Perfon who deliver'd the Gofpel, was of 
 greater Dignity, than the Angel who deliver'd the 
 Law. Now if he that deliver'd the Law, was the 
 WORD or Divine Nature of Chrift, this Principle 
 is notoricufiy falfe.Becaufe,tho' the Human Nature 
 of Chrift is now vaftly exalted above all created Be- 
 ings whatfoever, and is confequently fuperior in 
 Dignity to them all ; yet 'tis not even now fuperior 
 to what you own the WORD always was : and as 
 for the WORD orDivineNature,it never was exal- 
 ted, as I have largely proved ; but was every whit 
 as great in Dignity at the Delivery of the Law, as 
 it was at the Delivery of the Gofpel. Wherefore 
 the WORD, or Divine Nature of Chrift, was not 
 the Angel v/hich deliver'd the Law. 
 
 Upon thefe feveral Accounts 'tis plain, that the 
 WORD, or Divine Nature of our Lord Jefus 
 
 (f) Script. Doa. &c\ p. 1 5, 102, 1 14. Chrift 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. 5 1 1. exjjUirPd, 85 
 
 Chriflj was not ^v uc^^p} ■^5? and W ^iZ before the 
 Incarnationj even upon your own Principles^ who 
 fuppofe that his Divine Nature is inferior to the 
 very God, And therefore^ lince the Apoftle does 
 exprefly affirm^ that Jcfus Chrift was ht ^??>ii -^sS 
 and W ^gw before his Incarnation , 'tis evident even 
 to Demonftration^ that he was cv ^f^? 5t« and i^rrc 
 :^tS with refped: to his human Nature. And confe- 
 quently his human Soul (for his Body was not as 
 yet in Being) preexiited before the Incarnation. 
 
 And indeed^ the Admiffion of this (which I now 
 t^ke the liberty of calling an evidafct) Truths makes 
 the Apoftle argue like himfelf in this controverted 
 Place 5 and alio throughly clears^ what we read in 
 the fecond Chapter of the Epiftle to the Hebrews. 
 For, 
 
 1. The Apoftle infers Humility and Condefcen- 
 fion from the Example of the Blefled Jefus ; and 
 he fets before them, that Chrift, 'viz., his preexift- 
 ing human Soul, peribnated the very God; and urges 
 his voluntary Debafement of himfelf by Incarna- 
 tion, when that State of Glory was freely exchan- 
 ged for a mean Condition upon Earth, in which 
 he fometimes difcharged lervile Offices, and at laft 
 fufFered Death upon the Crofs. So that the Apo- 
 ftle exprefly mentions the utmoft Pitch of Glory 
 which Chrift's human Soul left, and the loweft: 
 Pitch of Humiliation which it fubmitted to. And 
 confequently the Example could not be prefs'd 
 more home to the Confciences of his Difciples, 
 nor could any more prevalent Pattern be ofFer'd to 
 them. 
 
 2. This makes the Apoftle's Argument truly con- 
 clufive, and exadly pertinent. For 'tis drawn from 
 what Chrift's human Nature did, and 'tis Tupported 
 by what his human Nature recciv'd as the Reward 
 
 G 2 of 
 
84 thil. 2. 5-^ — I r. eyiplam'l Chap. Vlt 
 of it. So that every Man was thereby encourag'd 
 and provok'd to imitate fo bright a^Patt'ern ; fince 
 he was fure to receive the Recompence of his own 
 Adion, and muft not otherwife expert it. 'Tis as 
 if the Apoftle had faid thus. Do you imitate the 
 Example of the Man Chrift Jefus, whofe Soul^ thd* 
 it preexifted before his Appearance in the Flefh^ 
 and had the honor of perfonating God ,• yet when 
 he conflder'd the fad Condition of poor MortalSj 
 and the Neceffity of an unfpotted Sacrifice in or- 
 der to their Redemption ,- of his own Choice he- 
 devefted himfeff of that great Glory, and became 
 in all things like unto us, being cloath'd with Fle(h 
 and Bloud ,• and even when he was upon Earth_, 
 he did not afFed State and Pomp, but fubmitted, 
 when Occafion cffer'd, even to fervile Employ- 
 nientSj and at laft was content to be murder'd up- 
 on the Crofs for us. Wherefore God has highly ex- 
 alted this incarnat human Soul, 'viz,, the Man 
 Chrift Jefus, &c. Do ye therefore ad:, as much as 
 your Circumftances will permit, in like manner ; 
 do ye voluntarily fubmit your lelves for the fake 
 of others ^ and God will accordingly beftow a 
 bleifed Recompenfe upon you. 
 
 3. The Author to the Hebrews might, upon thefe 
 Principles juftly argue, that the Gofpel was deli- 
 ver'd by a greater Perfon than he that deliver'd the 
 Law. For the bare human Soul of Chrift, thoMt 
 had indeed the Honor of perfonating God^ deliver'd 
 the Law : but when that fanie Soul voluntarily be- 
 came incarnat, 'twas united to the WORD it felf^ 
 the Creator of the Univcrfe j and even the Man 
 Chrift Jefus became God's own Son^ and was 
 appointed Heir of all things, and the fupreme Go- 
 vernor of all created Beings, even of the higheft 
 
 Angels-, 
 
Cliap. VIT. Phil. 2 5-11. exfUin'l 8 5 
 
 Angels, fuch as were before in Nature and Degree 
 vaftly luperior to it felf. 
 
 And indeed/tis exceedingly obfcrvable, that the 
 Apollle had no fooner argued from the fnperior 
 Dignity of him that promulged Chriilimiry, but 
 he lupports what he had faid, by adding as follows. 
 Fur unto the Angels h.^th he not put in fubjection the ivorlA 
 to come^ whereof ve fneak. But one in a certain fhce 
 tefiified faying^ What is wan that thou art mindful of 
 hiWy or the Jon of wan^ that thou vifitefl- him ? Then 
 wadi'ft him a little louver than the /hgds^ &C. Heb. 2. 
 5", 6y 7. And then he goes on to prove from the 
 Pfalmiftj 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 Apottie 
 could not have done thus, if he had fpoken before 
 of iuch a Nature, as was always at lead equal to 
 what the human Nature of Chrift was made by its 
 utmoft Advancement. Whereas^ if he fpake 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 mod proper Confideration imaginable to 
 itrengthen what he had faid immediatly before. 
 Tor thereby he proves, that the Scriptures foretold 
 that very Advancement of the human Nature, from 
 Chrift's adual Enjoyment of which he had juftly 
 argued, that a Perlon luperior to a bare Angel had 
 promulged the Gofpel. 
 
 In (liort, let any Man attentively read St. PWs 
 Words, and he can't but perceive, that the very 
 fame intelligent Being which was rewarded, did 
 alio pradife that Humility and Condefcenfion, for 
 which he was rewarded. For 'tis faid, that God hfith 
 highly exalted hiw^ who heing in the form of God^ &C. 
 
 G : con- 
 
86 Phil. 2.5 — ^11. e:cpUm'd. Chap. VII. 
 
 condefcended to fuifer Death upon the Crofs ; and 
 God did therefore lb highly exalt hiiii^ bccaufe 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 Stare ? 
 Was he afterwards exalted by himfclf, as by fomc 
 other .diftind Being, to that his former glorious 
 State, as the R'eward of his Humiliation ? And 
 was this an excetdhg Exaltation to the very God ? 
 We cannot therefore alTcrt fuch an impious Do- 
 dlrin. 
 
 Agair, What was this exceedhg Exaltation? Why 
 his having a name which is above every name : That at 
 the name of Jefm every knee jl)cuU bow y of things in 
 heavc?jj and thtiigs in e.irth^ and thi?igs under the earth : 
 And that every t07igue jhould cGnftfs^ that Jefus Chrift is 
 Lordy fo (or if you p\t3.ic in) the glory of God the fa^ 
 ther. Could this be faid of the very God ? Had 
 not he before, had not he always, could he pofli- 
 bly ceafe to have, a Name above every Name ? 
 Had he not necefllirily, is it poffible for him not 
 to have, the Supreme Dominion over the whole 
 Creation.?, Was a State of fupreme Dominion 
 therefore a State of exceeding Exaltation to the Di- 
 vine Nature of Chrlft, upon luppofition tiiat his 
 Divine Nature is the very God? Such are the 
 wretched Effeds of ufing bad Arguments in a good 
 Caufe. 
 
 . .But this, you'll fay, does not afFed Men of your 
 Principles. True. But then, even upon your own 
 Principles, if the fame Nature that was exalted, 
 wa^ formerly if Lco^fA ^w and Tow ,^^^, 'tis manifeft. 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2/ 5 1 1 . exfUmd. S7 
 
 that the human Nature alone was c* (^j^>i diw and 
 laxi ^i(Z, And confequcntly 'twas the human Nature 
 alone, which pradis'd that Humility and Conde- 
 fcenfion, of which the Apoftle is to be underftood 
 in this Place now under Confideraiion. For I have 
 demonftrated, that the human Nature alone was 
 rewarded. And that the human Nature could not 
 praclife that Humility and Condefcenfion which 
 the Apoftle infills on^ and which was raanifeftly 
 prior to the Incarnation^ unlefs the human Soul 
 did preexift ^ I prefume, you will not deiire me to 
 prove. 
 
 Nothing now remains, but that I obferve one 
 thing, x'k.. that the human Soul ofChrift preexift- 
 ed before the Foundation of the World. For our 
 Savior fays in his Prayer to God, And now^ O Fa^ 
 thery.glorifie thou me with thine own j elf ^ 7vith the glory 
 which 1 had with thee before the world was (o^^ rk'nv xcV- 
 /ucfli), before this world v^as) John 1 J. <;. Again he 
 fays. Fat her y I will that they alfo whom thou hafi given 
 me^ be with me where I am j that they may behold my glo^ 
 ry which thou hafi given me : for thou lovedfi me before 
 the foundation of the wcrldy v. 24. 'Tis evident from 
 hence, that our Savior did exift before the foundation 
 of the worldy or before this world was. And I freely ac- 
 knowledge, and you will readily grant, that we 
 who believe the WORD, or Divine Nature of 
 Chrift, to be very God, can't poffibly interpret 
 thefe Paffages of the W^ORD, or Divine Nature. 
 For 'tis manifeft, that when our Lord offered up 
 this Prayer, he did not actually enjoy fome Glory 
 or Happinefs, of which he had formerly been pof- 
 fefsM ; and that he begg'd of God to be reftor'd to 
 it. Wherefore he could not mean that Glory or 
 Happinefs, which he had as very God. For the 
 Glory or Happinefs of the very God is effential to 
 
 G 4 him 
 
88 Phil. 2. 5 ii.expUm'l Cliap.VIT. 
 
 him^ and infeparable from him. Wherefore we 
 who believe the WO R D to be very God^ muft 
 neceffarily underftand the former of thefe Texts 
 of our Savior's human Soul^ which exifted with 
 God (that iSj 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 oftheWorld^ which is afferted in 
 the later of thefe Texts^ ought to be underftood of 
 his loving the Man Chrift Jefus^ ^iz. his preexift-" 
 ing human Soul. . • 
 
 And as for your felf^ \vho do not believe the 
 WORDj 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 cculd^ upon your own Principles^ ceafe to . 
 enjoy that Glory or Happinefs which l\e had be- 
 fore the World v\;as : bat what I infift upon with 
 you, is this. I have by other Confiderations pro- 
 ved to yoUj that our Lord's human Soul did pre- 
 exift. And if this be granted ; I may fafely appeal 
 to your felf, whether both thefe Texts do not na- 
 turally admit and require that Interpretation which 
 I have given them. 
 
 However, I can'c forbear adding, that Chrift is 
 exprefly called the Lamb wirhout hlemijh and 'ivithout 
 fpoty Who ^verily was foreordabied before the foufid^ition of 
 the worU^ but was manifefi in thefe laft times ^ i Pet. i. 
 19, 2o. This certainly refpeds his human Nature. 
 Now St. Pj«/rays, that God hath called us according 
 to his own purpoje and grace which was given us in Chrijt 
 Jefiis^ before the world began ,• but is novy made manifeft 
 by the appearing of our Savior Jefus Chrifi^ 2 Tim. 1. 9, 
 10. He fays alfo,' that God /->/i//j chofen us in Chrifi- 
 before the foundation of the wcrld^ Eph. i. 4. and that 
 
 he 
 
Chap. VII. Phil. 2. 5. — it. explMA. 89 
 
 he promijcd eternal Life before the world begav^ Tit* i. 
 2. The fame Apoftle cals the Wifdom of the 
 Gofpel the hldde^i v^ijdum^ which God or da wed before the 
 world unto our glory ^ I Cor. 2.7. I conclude there- 
 fore, that our Lord's human Soul was then made, 
 when the very God was preparing the Habication 
 of Mankind^ whom he then purpofed to redeem by 
 Chriftj and for whofe fake Chrift wa^ already de- 
 creed to be flain. And accordingly St. Taul alTures 
 us, that Chrift is 'Tr^aroivK©- otzotj? Kliaia)^. For tho' I 
 readily grants that 'Tr^coTi-nicQ- may fignify him that 
 has the jus frimogenni^ when it appears by other 
 Confiderations, that he who is ftyl'd T^s;7r)7z;x©-, 
 was not the ftrlt in order of Birth : •yet in the pre- 
 fent Cafe we ought not to recede from the natural 
 and obvious Senle of the Word ; becaufe the Tenor 
 of Scripture is fo far from obliging us to it^ that ic 
 manifeftly forbids it. And indeed^ when our Sa- 
 vior fays of himfelfj that he is « 1^-)^ ^f y^icnai t6 3t?, 
 Re'v. 5. 14. I can't but underftand him in the fame 
 Senre_, viz.. as affirming himfelf^ that is, his hu- 
 man Soul, to have been produced before any other 
 created Being whatfoever. 
 
 Upon the whole, St. Vaul is fo far from teach- 
 ing (in this remarkable PafTage of his Epiftle to 
 the Fhilipptans, 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 ^nd Exaltation of his Human 
 Nature, from whence he draws an Argument for 
 our Practice of Humility and Condefcenlion. 
 
 CHAP. 
 
90 Chrijl efieem'i a. mere Mm Chap. VIII, 
 
 CHAP. VIIL 
 
 HloAt during the Time of our Savior'* s Minijlry, the 
 Difciples did not believe^ that he was any thing 
 more than a mere Man^ conduced and affijled hj 
 the Spirit of God, 
 
 BEFORE I proceed to the Examination of 
 the fecond Text of Scripture_, which is fup- 
 pos'd to teach, that the WORD, or Divine Na- 
 ture of our Lord Jefus Chrift, is inferior to the 
 very God ; 'tis«neceffary for nie to prove, i. That 
 during the Time of our Savior's Miniftry, the Di- 
 fciples did not believe, that he was any thing more 
 than a mere Man, conducted and affifted by the 
 Spirit of God ,* 2. That during the Time of our 
 Savior's Miniftry, the WORD, or Divine Nature, 
 was quiefcent in the Man Chrift Jefus. 
 
 FIRST then, during the Time of our Savior's 
 Miniftry, the Difciples did not believe, that he 
 was any thing more than a mere Man, conduced 
 and affifted by the Spirit of God. 
 
 Whether you will grant me this Propofition, I 
 know not. You exprefly (a) declare, that Chrift^s 
 Difciples bad not any the leaft Thought of his claiming 
 to he God in any Senfe^ when he utter'd what we read 
 in John 5-. 18. Nor do I remember, that you have 
 any where faid or fuppofed, that they had after- 
 wards, during the Time of his%liniftry, different 
 Senciments. If I guefs aright, you will rather al- 
 low, that they continued of the fame Opinion till 
 
 (a) Reply to Mr. Nelfons Friend, p. ?35. 
 
 his 
 
Chap. VIII. during his Minijlry. 91 
 
 his Miniftry was ended. However, fince you have 
 not intorm'd us, whether you do grant this Propo- 
 fition or no ; and becaule 'tis certain, that too 
 many others will not grant it : therefore I think 
 my felf obliged to evince the Truth of it. In order 
 thereto I obferve, 
 
 Ftrft^ That there is not in all the New Tefta- 
 ment any one Paffage, which either afferts or im- 
 plys, that the Difciples believed him to have had 
 any Divine Nature during his N^niftry. They did 
 indeed efteem him a great Prophet, even the Mef- 
 fiah, the greateft of Prophets: but yet at the fame 
 time they efteem'd him a mere Man ,• and did noc 
 apprehend, that another Nature, fuperior to thac 
 of a Man, "viz.. the WORD of God, was perfonal- 
 ly united to the Man Chrift Jefos. 
 
 I can't think of more than one Text, that can 
 poffibly be alleged againft this Affertion, 'vix,. John 
 16. ;o. where the Difciples fay, JS/o?/^ are 7ve fure^ 
 that thou knowefi all things. And if any Perfon fliould 
 conclude from hence, that the Difciples then be- 
 liev'd him to be ftridly Omnifcient, and that con- 
 fequently he was more than a mere Man conduct- 
 ed and affifted by God's Spirit ^ I anfwer, i. That 
 the fame Spirit which did fo certainly difcover the 
 mod fecret Things to him and his Difciples, might 
 difcover, if he pleas'd, even all Things in the moft 
 abfolute and unlimited Senfe, altho' our Savior 
 himfelf were at the fame time no more than a 
 mere Man. The Text does not fay, that the Di« 
 fciples thought, that Chrift had inherently in him- 
 felf, by the Neceffity of his own Nature, a ftrid: 
 Omnifcience (which would indeed have proved, 
 thac he difcover'd himfelf to be the very God) but 
 it fays, that they thought he knew all Things (we 
 w^ill now fuppofe in the utmoft Extent of the Ex- 
 
 preflion) 
 
gz Chrijl efieenPd a mere Man Chap. VIIL 
 
 predion) and fo might a mere Man by the Com- 
 munication of the Spirit. 2. That the Words of 
 the Difciples do by no means imply, that they 
 thought out Savior endued with a ftrid Omnifci- 
 ence. For let us obferve the Context. Our Savi- 
 or had faidj A little while and ye JIjjU not fee me : and 
 again ^ a little while a9id ye jhall fee me^ becauje I go to 
 the Father^ v.^i6. His Difeiples did not underftand- 
 this Saying, and therefore had fome privat Dif- 
 courfe about it, w^iich they did not fpeak fo loud, 
 as that our Savior fhould hear them. For fays the 
 Evangelift, Then faid fome of his difciples among them^ 
 felveSj What is this^ that he faith unto m^ A little while 
 and ye jh^ill not fee me : and again ^ a little while and ye 
 fijall fee me : and becaufe I go to the Father. They faid 
 therefore y ivhat is this that he faith ^ A little while ? We 
 cannot tell what he faith^ v. 17, 18. Our bleflcd Lord 
 therefore, who knew their Hearts, prevented their 
 asking a Solution of the Difficulty that puzzled 
 them', and which they w^ould gladly have heard 
 him refolve. For the Text fays, 'No^v Jefm knew^ 
 that they were defirom to ask him^ and faid unto the??? ^ 
 Do ye enquire among your fel'ves of that I faid^ A little 
 while ajulye pall not fee we, and again a little while and 
 ye pall fee me^ v. 19 ? And then he proceeds to ex- 
 plain himfelf in fome following Verfes. After which 
 his Difciples faid unto him, Lo, now fpeakeft- thou- 
 plainly y and fpeakefi noVro'verb, Now are VJe fure^ that^ 
 thou knoweji all things ^ and needefi not that any man 
 fijould ask thee : by nhis we believe^ that thou camefi forth 
 from Gody V. 29, 11,0. 
 
 The all things therefore, which they perceiv'd 
 from this Fa6t that our Lord knew, were only the 
 Secrets of their Hearts (for they could conclude no. 
 more from that Inftance of his Knowledge) and 
 the following Words declare as much. For he, in 
 
 theii: 
 
Chap.VITt. during his Minrfiry. 9j 
 
 their Opinion^ therefore knew all thlfigs^ becaufc 
 he knew what they were defirous to ask^ and gave 
 them inftantly a mod apt Anfwer to their intend- 
 ed Inquiry ; lb that he needed nor^ that any fhould 
 ask him. By his knowing all things therefore^ they 
 can't reafonably be underftood to have meant 
 niore3 than that he had a vaft Knowledge, even 
 of fuch things as are infcrutabie to mere Man. 
 
 And accordingly^ 'tis certain, that this Phrafe 
 is ufed in a very limited Senfe in both the Old and 
 New Teftament. Thus, when -the wife Woman 
 faid to Da'vid^ My Lord is wife according to the wifdom 
 of an Angel of God ^ to knoiv all things that are in the 
 earthy 2 Sam. 14. 20. and when St. John faid to his 
 Difciples, But je have an unHion from the holy one, 
 and ye knoji/ all things^ i John 2. 20. and again, the 
 fame anointing teacheth you of all things^ V. 27. no Man 
 in his Wits can conceive, that either of them 
 meant more by all things^ than a great deal, or a 
 very extenfive Knowledge. In the fame Senfe 
 St. Vaiil faid to Timothy y The Lord give thee underjtand- 
 ing in all things^ 2 Tim. 2. 7. Nay, we ourfelves 
 in common Difcourfe ufually fay, fuch an one knov)5 
 every thing ; but furely we don't mean, that the 
 Perfon is flridly Omnifcient. 
 
 What has been already faid, is fufhcient to clear* 
 the abovefaid Text. Bat rhere is one other Confi- 
 deration, which demonft'-ars the Truth of my In- 
 terpretation. The Difciples had no fooner faid, 
 '^uiv are ive fure that thou knowefi all things^ and needeji 
 7wt thzt cnty man jJjculd ask thee ^ but they immediac- 
 ly fubjoin. By this we believe ^ that thou cameft forth 
 from God. Now by Chrift's coming forth from God is 
 meant his being a true Prophet. For the Diffe- 
 rence between true and 'iMf^ Prophets is this. That 
 the true ones are fent by God, and the falfe ones 
 
 are 
 
94 Chrift efleenid a mere Mm Chap. VIII. 
 
 are not fent by him, but come of themfelves. Ac- 
 cordingly our bleiled Lord fays, I proceeded forth 
 (15«A^T)F, the fame Word which in this other Place 
 is rendred, came forth) and came from God: neither 
 came ir (iSi y6 Ihrthv^y for I did riot come) of my felf^ 
 but he fent me, John 8. 42. You fee, our Lord 
 proves, that he came forth from God, becaufe he 
 did not come of himfclf, but God fent him. And 
 confequently hisproceeding forth from God iignifies his 
 being a true Prophet^ in Contradiftindlion to what 
 he would have been, had he come of himfelf, withr 
 out God's Miffion. Now his Difcipies conclu- 
 ded, that he proceeded forth from God (that is_, 
 was a true Prophet) becaufe he knew all things, and 
 needed not that any man jljould ask him. And indeed, 
 this miraculous Knowledge was a good Proof of 
 the Truth and Certainty of his Divine Miflion, 
 But then,fince from this his miraculousKnowledge, 
 they inferred nothing more, than that he was a 
 true Prophet ^ 'tis manifeft, that they did not from 
 this his Knowledge infer, that he was more than a 
 mere Man conduced and affifted by God's Spirit, 
 and confequently more than a true Prophet. 
 
 Whether the fame Phrafe, as ufed by St. Teter in 
 that remarkable Declaration, Lord, thou knowefi all 
 things ^ thou kno-wefi that I lo'ue thee, John 21. 17. 
 does admit or require the fame limited Interpreta- 
 tion ; I need not determin. Becaufe 'twas fpoken 
 after the Time of our Lord's Miniftry was ended, 
 even after his Refurredion ; and confequently 'tis 
 beyond the Bounds of our prefent Inquiry. But, 
 
 Secondly, As there is not in all the New Tcfta- 
 ment any one Palfage, which either afferts or im- 
 plys,that the Difcipies believ'd him to have had any 
 Divine Nature during his Miniftry ;; fo 'tis very re- 
 markable, that the whole Courfe of our Savior's 
 
 won- 
 
Chap. VIII. during his Miniflrj. 95 
 
 wonderful Actions affords no Proof, nor even the 
 fmallefl Intimation, of his having any Divine Na- 
 ture at all. And confeqacntly the Difciples could 
 not infer from thence, tliat he was any thing more 
 than a mere Man conduced and afSfted by God's 
 Spirit. 
 
 'Twas prophefy'd of the Meffiah, that God's Spi* 
 rit (hould be poured on him. Thus, when our 
 Lord concealed himfelf, the Evangelift obferves. 
 That it wight he fulfilled ivhich was fpoken by Efaias the 
 Frophet^ ffJ'itJg, Beheld^ my fewant whom I ha've chofen^ 
 my beloved in whom my foul is well f leafed : 1 will put my 
 fpirit upon him^ a?id he jhaH fliew judgment to the Gentiles. 
 He jJjall not fi-rive^ nor cry^ neither jhall any man hear bis 
 voice in the flreets, A bruifed reed jhall he not break^ and 
 fmoaking flax pall he not (Quench ; till he fend forth judg^ 
 mefjt unto vi^ory. And in his name jliall the Gentiles 
 trufi^ Matt. 12. 17, 18,. 19, 20, 21. St, Luke Mo 
 gives us the following Relation, And he came to Na^ 
 z,zrethy where he had been brought up , and as his cuftom 
 was J he went into the Synagogue on the Sabbath day^ and 
 flood up for to read. And there was delivered unto him the 
 hook of the Frophet Efaias^ and when he had opened the book, 
 he found the place where it was written^ The fpirit of the 
 Lord is upon mc^ becaufe he hath anointed we to preach the 
 Gofpelto the poor ^ he hath fent me to heal the broken hearts 
 ed, to preach deliverance to the captives^ and recovering of 
 flght to the blindy to fet at libnty them that are bruijedy 
 to preach the acceptable year of the Lord. And he clofed 
 the bookj and he gave it again to the Mlniflcr^ and fat 
 down : and the eyes of all them that were in the Synagogue^ 
 were fafiened on hiw. And he began to fay unto them. 
 This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears., Luke 4. 
 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21. And accordingly St. Feter 
 declares, that God anointed Jcjus Chrifl of Naz^areth 
 with the Holy Ghofl, and ivith Fewer ^ Ads 10. 38. 
 
 This 
 
^6 Chrijl cfteenPd a mere Man Chap. VIII. 
 
 This folemn Undion by the Spirit was perform'd 
 immediatly after his Baptiihi. FortheEvangelift tells 
 us^ that Jef^i 'when he was baftiz^dy went up firatght- 
 way out of the water : and lo^ the heavens 7vcre opend 
 unto hinfy and he [aw the Spirit of God defcending like a 
 dove^ and lighting upon him. And lo^ a 'voice from 
 hea'vefi^ fayiiig^ This is my beloved Son^ in whom I am 
 well pleafedy Matt. 3. 17. And accordingly St. John 
 Baptifl:^ who adminiftred Baptifm to him^ bare re- 
 cordy fayi?Jg, I faw the fpirit dejcendij^g from heaven^ like 
 a dove^ and it abode upon him. And I knew him not : 
 but he that fent me to baptiz^e with water ^ the fame faid 
 unto me^ Upon whom thou jJialt fee the Spirit defcending 
 and remaining on him^ the fame is he which baptiz,eth 
 •with the Holy Ghofi, And I faw^ and bare record that 
 this is the Son of God^ John i. 52_,333 34. 
 
 Now we are told^ that God giveth not the Spirit by 
 meafure unto the blelTed Jefus^ John 5. 34. that is, 
 God poured the Spirit upon him in a moil plenti- 
 ful and abundant Manner. But then, it muft be 
 remembred, that our Lord Jefus Chrift is the Head 
 of his Body the Church, and we receive divine 
 Communications from and by him. Accordingly, 
 as in the natural Body, when Oyl is plentifully 
 poured upon the Head, it muft run down to the in- 
 ferior Parts (thus the Pfalmift fays. It is like the precis 
 cus ointment upon the heady that ran down unto the beard^ 
 even unto Aaron s benrd^ and went down to the skirts of 
 his clothings Pfal. 133. 2.) So when our Lord Jefus 
 Chrift was plentifully anointed with the Holy Spi- 
 rit^ his Difciples, the Members of his Body, received 
 a Share of thofe Spiritual Gifts, which that anoint- 
 ing conferr'd on him. For whatever Gifts of the 
 Spirit our Lord exercis'd during his Miniftry, his 
 Dilciples exercis'd the very fame^ parcly during his 
 Abode with them, but efpecially after his Afcen- 
 
 fion. 
 
Ghap.VIII. durirjg his Msnifiry. 97 
 
 fion^ when the Baptifm of the Holy Ghoft was by- 
 cur Lord's Million of the Spirit conferr'd on them. 
 For let us defcend to Particulars. 
 
 Our Lord knew the Thoughts of Mens Hearts. 
 Of this we have a general Declaration in thefe 
 Words ; Now when he was in Jerujalem at the pajjov&y 
 in the feajh day^ inany belie'ued in his nahJe, when they 
 faiv the miracles which he did. But Jefus did not com- 
 mit himfelf unto tbew, hecattfe he knew all men^ and 
 needed not that any jhould teftifie of man : for he knew 
 what was in man^ John 2. 2:53 24, 27. But he gave 
 many particular Inftances of this Knowledge. Je^ 
 fits knowing their thoughts ^ Matt. 9. 4. J^jus knew 
 their thoughts^ Matt. 12. 25-. Jefm percei^'d in his 
 fpirity that they fa reafoned within themfehes^ Mark 2. 
 8. Jefifs ferceiving the thought of their hearty Luke 9. 
 47. Jefus knew in himfelf, that hts difciples murmur d 
 at it^ John 6. 61. Jejm knew^ that they were defirom 
 to ask him^ John 16. 19. J^f^f^ knew from the begin* 
 ^ingy who they were that believed not^ and who jhould be* 
 tray him^ John 6. 64. For he knew^ who jlwuld betray 
 bim^ John 13. II. Nay^ he knew Things diftant. 
 Nathanael faith unto him^ Whence k?iowefi thou me ? 
 Jefus anfwered and faid unto him^ Before that Thilip call- 
 edthee^ when thou wafi under the fig-tree ^ I faw thee, 
 John I. 48. He knew alfo^ that the Samaritan Wo- 
 man had had five Husbands, and that he whom (he 
 had at the Time of his talking with her, was not 
 her Husband, John^. 18. Nay, he probably was 
 acquainted with the Courfe of her Life, at leaft 
 with the principal Paflages of it. For the Woman 
 faid to thofe of her City^ Cowe, fee a man 
 which told me all things that e'ver I did^ Vet. 29. Our 
 Lord alfo foretold Things to come^ of which many 
 Inftances are recorded in Holy Scripture. 
 
 H Arid 
 
98 Chrijl ejleem'd a mere Mm Chap. VIII. 
 
 And his Difciples were evidently endued with 
 the fame wondertul Knowledge. One of the Gifts 
 of the Spirit was that of Mjfceming Spirits^ i Cor. 
 12. lo. that isj a Knowledge of the Hearts and 
 Inclinations of others ,• which Knowledge they de- 
 monftrated in feveral particular Inftances recorded 
 in Scripture (not to mention fuch Fads as the Pri- 
 mitive Writers have recorded) 'viz.. in the Cafe of 
 Ananias and Sapphira^ Acis y. ;, 4, 9. that of 5/- 
 mon the Sorcerer^ Acts 8.21. that oi Ely mas the 
 Sorcerer^ Acis i;. 9^ 10. to which I may add that 
 of the lame Man^ AHs 14. 9. And as for their 
 ProphefieSj the Inftances are fo notorious, that I 
 forbear to mention Particulars. Thus alfo the an- 
 cient Prophets, not only foretold Things to come, 
 but alfo knew the Secrets of Mens Hearts. Abijah 
 underftood the Intentions and Errand of the Queen 
 oHfrael^ notwithftanding her Difguife, i Kings 14. 
 6. And Elijha difcover'd to the King of Ifrael^ what 
 the King of Sjiria fpake in his Bedchamber, 2 Kings 
 6. 12. Now as this Knowledge does not prove, 
 that the Prophets and the Apoftles had any Divine 
 Nature ,• but only that they were conduced and 
 affifted by the Spirit of God : fo neither did the 
 fame Knowledge^ tho' in a greater Degree, (hew 
 to the Difciples, that our Lord Jefus Chrift was 
 more than a Man conduced and affifted by God's 
 Spirit, or that he had any Divine Nature ac all. 
 
 Nay, 'tis very obfervable, that when a Woman 
 that was a Sinner, fiood at his feet iehiml him weep- 
 ingy a7ul began to wajh his feet with tears y and did wipe 
 them v/ith the hairs of her head^ and kifjcd his feet ^ and 
 anointed them ivith the eintme?^^ Luke 7. 38. the Pha- 
 rifee which had bidden him to the Entertainment, 
 at which this was d.one, [pake within himfelf faying^ 
 This many if hs vers a Trcphety wculd have hicw^ywhoy ■ 
 
 and 
 
Chap. VIII. durifig his Minijfry, 99 
 
 and what mariner of woman this is^ that toucheth him -.for 
 jhe is a/inner^ ver. 59. So that as the Blefled Jcfus, 
 wh6 was the greateft of Propiiets, knew the 
 Thoughts of the Pharifcc, even tho' he Jpaks (or, 
 as the Word may well be reiidrcd, according to 
 the Ufe of the Hebrew IDN^ he thought) vnthin blm^ 
 fdf; as appears by what he faid immediatly to 
 St. Feter : fo the Jews were of Opinion, that this 
 Knowledge might ordinarily be expeded and found 
 in ProphetSj whom notwithflanding they never 
 fuppos'd to have a Divine Nature, but only to en- 
 joy the Spirit's extraordinary Affiftance. 
 
 It may be objeded perhaps^ that none of the 
 Apoltles knew Things diftant^ as our Bleffed Sa- 
 vior fo certainly did. And I confefs, I do not re- 
 member^ that any Inftance of it is recorded. Hov/ 
 ever, i. Tho' the Object is different ; yet the 
 Knowledge of Things diftant is of the fame Kind, 
 and is communicated the very fame Way^ with the 
 Knowledge of Things future, and the Secrets of 
 Mens Hearts. For the Spirit of God reveles them 
 all. And confequently, if the Knowledge of the 
 Secrets of Mens Hearts, and of Things future, does 
 not 3 then neither does the Knowledge of Things 
 diftant, difcover the Perfon to be more than Man 
 affifted and conducted by the Spirit. 2. Elijlia knew 
 what Gehaz^i did at a diftance^ and upon his Return 
 faid to him, PFeiit not 7nine heart v/tth thee^ when the 
 man turned again from his chariot to meet thee ? 2 Kings 
 5". 26. And he feveral times informed the King of 
 Ifrael^ that the Syrians were adually come down to 
 certain Places at a diftance from him, 2 Kings 6. 9, 
 10. Thefe Inftances are parallel to what our Sa- 
 vior faid to Nathanael and the Samaritan Woman ; 
 and ihev/, that the Knowledge of Things diftant is 
 no Proof of the Perfcn^ having a Divine Nature, or 
 
 H 2 thac 
 
joo Chrifl ejieerh^d a were Mm Chap. VIIL 
 
 that he is more than a Man conduced and affifted 
 by the Holy Ghoft. 
 
 And accordingly 'tis very obfervable, i. That 
 
 Nathanael did not conclude from what our Savior 
 
 faidj that the WORD was perfonally united ta 
 
 him : but only reply'd^ Rabbit thou art $he Son ofGod^ 
 
 thcu art the King oflfrael^ John r. 49. that is, thou art 
 
 the Mefliah, whom we exped for our King^ and 
 
 whom the Baptift has proclaim'd to be the Son of 
 
 God, -v. 54. Thefe Titles our Savior conftantly 
 
 affum'd and own'd ; tho' 'twas never once inferr'd 
 
 from thence by his Difciplesy that Chrift thereby 
 
 pretended to be the Son of God otherwife than 
 
 with Refpeca to his Human Nature only. 2. The 
 
 Sawaritan Woman concluded nothing more from 
 
 what our Savior faid to her, than that he was a 
 
 Prophet, or the Meffiah, John f. 19, 29. 
 
 In the next place^ our Lord Jefus Chrift wrought 
 many Miracles by healing Difeafes, cafting out 
 Devils, and likewife by railing the Dead. Inftan- 
 ces of thefe forts I need not give. Now his cafting 
 out Devils is exprefly afcrib'd to the Spirit by our 
 Savior himfelf, who fays. But if I cafi out Je'vils by 
 the fftrit of God ^ then the kitjgdom of God is come unto yoUy 
 Matt. 12. 28. And the other mighty W^orks were 
 manifeftly perform'd by the fame Power ^ which is 
 alfo elfewhere declared to be the Power of God, 
 and the Power of his Father, in a great Number of 
 Places. Particularly our Savior fays, the works that 
 I do in my Father's name^ they bear witnejs of me^ John 
 10. 29. And again, the Father that dwelleth in rm^ 
 he doeth the -works, John 14. 10. And St, Feter fays, 
 J ejus of Naz,areth, a man affrcved of God, among you, 
 by miracles ya?ul wonders, andfigns, which God did by him 
 in the midfi of you, A(5ls 2. 22. And again, Godanoint- 
 td Jefu^ of. Nftx^arQth with .the Holy Ghoft, and with fow- ^ 
 
 er 
 
Chap. VIII. during his Minifiry. lOi 
 
 tr 5* v^ho VJent about doing good^ ana healing aU that were 
 oppreffed of the devil: for God was with him, Acifls lo. I^S. 
 Now that the very fame Power enabled his Difci- 
 ples alfo to do the very lame Things in every kind, 
 ismanifeft from the Holy Sciiptures, as well as from 
 the primitive Writers. Nay, 'tis very remarkable, 
 that as we read of the BlelTcd Jefus, x.\\zt there -went 
 virtue out of him ^ and healed them all, Luke 6. 19. and 
 that he perceived, that virtue had gone oat of him, and 
 healed the Woman that touched his Garment, Mark 
 f . 27, 28, 29, 30. Luke 8. 44j 45", 46. and that he 
 healed the Nobleman's Son at a diik^nco, John 4. 46. 
 So we read, that they brought forth the fick into the 
 ftreets, and laid them on beds and couches^ that at the leaji- 
 the Jhadouf of Peter pajljing by, might overjludow fome of 
 them. Ads f. If. and alfo that Go^ wrought fpecial 
 wiracUs by the hands of Fad : So that from his body were 
 brought unto the ftck handkerchiefs or aprons, and the di- 
 feafes departed from them, and the evil fpirits went out of 
 them. Ads 19. II, 12. And confequently, fince the 
 Difciples were no more than mere Men conduced 
 and affifted by the Spirit of God, notwithftanding 
 what Miracles they wrought : fo 'tis evident, that 
 the Miracles performed by ourSavior during hisMi- 
 niftry, did not difcover him to be more than a Man 
 conduced and affifted by the fame Power ; aor did 
 thofe Miracles give his Diiciples any Reafon to 
 imagin, that he had a Divine Nature perfonally 
 united to his Manhood. 
 
 Laftly,OurLordJefusChriftfaid to theSick of the 
 Palfy, and to the Woman that was a i'mnQv^Tbyfins 
 are forgiven, Matt.9. 2jf. Mark 2.5-^9. Luke y.20,2;. 
 and 7. 48. Now whatever is meant by that Phrafe, 
 'tis certain, that Chrift's forgiving Sins was no Dif- 
 covery of his Divine Nature. 1 (hall not argue 
 from God's remarkable Charge to the Ifratlitesy Be^ 
 
 H : kold^ 
 
lo^ Chriji efieettPd a mere Mm Chap. VIII. 
 
 hoUj I fend an Angel before thee to keef thee in the ivay^ 
 and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared, 
 BevKnre of him ^ and chey his 'voice y provoke him not : for 
 he will not pardon your TranfgreJJions : for my name is in 
 bim^ Exod. 2;. 20^ 21. In which Words 'tis ma- 
 nifeftly implyM, that an Angel is capable of for- 
 giving Sins ; fo that a Creature^ and confequent- 
 ly a mere Man^ may do it, if God pleafes. Bur 
 what I infift on^ is, that the Apoftles could forgive 
 Sins. For Chrift faid to them, TVhofefoever fins ye_ 
 remit J they are remitted unto them ^ and whofefoever fins 
 ^e retain^ ^hey are retained ^ John 20. 25. And furely 
 no Man will fay, that the Apoftles had any Divine 
 Nature, becaufe they exercis'd this Power. 
 
 I confefs, the Jews cbjecaed Blafphemy to our 
 Savior, becaufe he pretended to forgive Sins, al- 
 leging, that none but God could do it, Matt.^, 5. 
 M<ir^ 2. 7. Luke 5-. 2 1. And what if their Objedion 
 was ill grounded ? Vm fare, you'll grant it was. 
 For by the God who alone could forgive Sins^ 
 they undoubtedly meant the Very God. And con- 
 feqyently, if they objedled juftly, then (upon your 
 Principles) the WORD, whom you fuppofe 
 inferior to the Very God, could not forgive Sins. 
 And yet Chrift did in Fad forgive them. But in 
 triith,' our Savior's conferring on the Apoftles the 
 Power of forgiving Sins, demonftrats, not only the 
 FaUTiood of the J«^••f Pretence, but alfo that a 
 mere Man may forgive Sins in the very fame Senfe 
 in which our Savior forgave them ; unlefs it can be 
 fliewn, that that Phrafe is apply 'd to our Savior in 
 one Senfe, and to his Apoftles in another quite 
 different from it. 
 
 If it be objeded, that the Apoftles forgave Sins 
 by a delegated Power, whereas Chrift forgave 
 them by the original and inherent Power of his 
 
 Pivine 
 
Gliap. VIII. titiri}7g his Mhii/lry. loj 
 
 Divine Nature; I Jinfvver, i. That this is only 
 begging the Queftion. For the Scriptures do not 
 warrant our making this Difference during his 
 State of Humiliation. 2. That Men of your Prin- 
 ciples will fcorn this Plea ; becaufe you fuppofe, 
 that all the Power of the WORD is delegated to 
 him from the Very God, as from a diftind Being. 
 5. W^ith refped to the Orthodox, I anfwer, that as 
 our Savior's Miracles are (as I before obferv'd) ex- 
 prefly attributed to the Father, and to the Spirit : 
 lb he roundly affirms, in the moft general Terms, 
 The Son can do nothbjg of hiwfelfy John f. 19. and a- 
 gain, lean do nothing of my felf\ ver. qo. And COn- 
 iequently all that fuppofe the WO R D to be Very 
 God, muft acknowledge, that tho' the WORD has 
 an original and inherent Power of forgiving Sins ; 
 yet our Savior during his Humiliation forgave 
 them only as a Man, viz,, minifterially, and for that 
 Reafon his forgiving Sins was no Indication of a 
 Divine Nature. 4. That I may at once efFe(5lually 
 filence this Objedion, the Evangelift exprefly tels 
 us, that 'ivhcn the multitude [aw it^ they marvelled^ and 
 glorified Gody VJhich had given fuch foiver (td/j a.v^^umti) 
 unto men^ Matt. 9. 8. So that that very Multitude,, 
 fome Perfons in which had lately thought, that 
 none but God could forgive Sins, Mark 2. 7. Luke 
 7. 22. were by this very Fad convinc'd, that God 
 had given unto Men that Power of forgiving Sins, 
 which 'twas fuppos'd he had referv'd to himfelf. 
 And confequently our Savior's forgiving of Sins, 
 was no Proof of his having a Divine Nature. 
 
 If it be faid, that during the Time of his Mini- 
 ftry, Chrift not only wrought Miracles himfelf, 
 but alfo gave others a Power to do the fame (for 
 Tvhen he had called unto him hts twelve difciples^ he gave 
 them power againjt unclean fpirits^ to cafi them out^ and 
 
 H 4 ^* 
 
I04 Chriji ejleemd a mere Mm Chap. VHI. 
 
 to heal all manner cf fichnefsy and all manner of difeafe^ 
 Matt. lo. i.jj I anfwer^ that Chrift's conferring on 
 others a Power of working Miracles^ was no Ar- 
 gument of his having a Divine Nature (and con- 
 lequently his Difciples gould not from thence in- 
 fer^ that he had a Divine Nature) unlefs it be alfo 
 granted^ that the Apoftles had a Divine Nature^ 
 who conferred on others the very fame Power^ as 
 appears from the following Texts of Scripture. 
 Then laid they their hands on them^ and they received the 
 Holy Ghofi. And "when Simon f aw that through laying on 
 of the AfoftWs hands^ the Holy Ghofi was given y he offer- 
 ed them money ^ {^J^^^^ Give me alfo this power^ that on 
 whomfcever I lay hands ^ he may receive the Holy Ghofi ^ 
 A6ls 8. I7j 1 8^ 19. While Peter yet fpake thefe words], 
 the Holy Ghofi fell on all them which heard the word. And 
 they of the circumcifion which believed were afionijh^d^ as 
 many as came with Feter^ hecaufe that on the Gentiles alfo 
 was foured out the gift of the Holy Ghofi, For they heard 
 them fpeak with tongues^ and magnify Gody KdiS 10. 
 44j 45^^ 4^). lVhe?i Paul had laid his hands upon them^ 
 the Holy Ghofi came on them ; and they fpake with 
 tonguesy and prophefiedy Ac^s 19, 6. For I long to fee 
 youy that I may impart unto you fome fpiritual gifty 
 Rom. I. II. 
 
 In fhorr^ the Man Chrift Jefus was condud:ed 
 and aflifled by theSpirit^ from his very Conception 
 to the time of his Death. The lame Spirit that be- 
 gat him^, did alfo preferve him^ both from original 
 Corruption^, and from voluntary Tranfgreffion. For 
 through the eternal Spirit he offer d himfdf without fpot to 
 Gody Heb. 9. 14. that is, he offered himfelf to God 
 without Spot through the eternal Spirit^, which 
 preferv'd him clear from all Spot^ either of actual 
 Sin, cr vitiated Inclination. He was led hy the Spi- 
 rit into the wilderncfs^ heing forty days tempted of the 
 
 DeviL 
 
Chap.VIIL during his Minijlrj, iq5 
 
 Devil^ Luke 4. I J 2. and he returnM from thence 
 in the power of the Sprit ^ ver. 14. And the perpetu- 
 al Prefence of the fame Spirit appears in the whole 
 Courfe of his Adions. And accordingly you truly 
 affirm^ that (i') during the Time of his Incarnation^ h^ 
 •was at along under the ConduB of the Holy Spirit . And 
 again you (0 fay, the Holy Spirit is defcrih^d in the 
 new Tefiawenty as the immediate Author and Worker of 
 all Miracles y even of thofe done by our Lord himfelf ; and 
 as the Conducler of Chrifi in all the ABions of his Life, 
 during his State of Humiliation here upon Earth. And 
 again, fpeaking of the Holy Spirit, you (d) fay. He 
 is defcrih'd as being the ConduBer and Guide of our Lord 
 during his State of Humiliation here upon Earth, Nor 
 did Chrift ever perform any thing throughout the 
 whole Space of his Miniftry, which might not b& 
 perform'd by a mere Man conducted and affifted 
 by the Holy Spirit. And confequently, during his; 
 Miniftry, his Difciples could not learn from his 
 wonderful Adions, that he was God as well as 
 Man. 
 
 Thirdly, Thofe Declarations which our Lord was 
 pleas'd to make concerning himfelf, did not caufe 
 his Difciples to believe, that he was more than a 
 Man conduced and affifted by the Spirit of God. 
 That this may appear, I (hall go through them 
 diftindly. They are of three different Sorts. 
 
 F/V/, In diverfe of them he declares what was 
 paft at the time of his fpeaking. 
 
 I. He faid feveral times, that he came down 
 from Heaven. 1 need not obferve to you, that 
 thofe who fuppofe the WORD to be the Very 
 
 (b) Script. Doftr. p. 197, 19S. 
 
 (c) Ibid, Prop. 28. ^.301. 
 l<i) Jbid. Prop. 42. ^3 52. 
 
 God, 
 
io6 Chriji efimn^i, a mere Man Chap. VIIL 
 Qod^ can't pofTibly interpret feveral of thofe Texts 
 of the Defcent of Chrift's Divine Nature, without 
 the Affiftance of fuch forcible Strains, as (I hope) 
 I fhall never dare allow my felf the the Ufe of. But 
 fince I have ftiewn, that Chrift's Human Soul pre- 
 exifted, they are all of them very plain and eafy. 
 For let us examin Particulars. 
 
 Our Lord fays. No mati hath afcended up to heaven^ 
 hut he that came down from heaven^ t'vtn the Son of wan 
 oavlffToS i^v^ (that is, not as we tranflate it, which 
 is in heaven^ but) which 7vas in heaven ^ John 5. 13., 
 For 'tis notorious, that the Participle iv muft ibme- 
 times be conftrued in the Vreter Tenfe. For the 
 Proof of this I need go no farther than the ;ifl 
 Verfe of this Chapter, where the Baptiffc fays, 
 
 *0 etva^v i^'jJfJ^Q- iMtva Tidviwv ^V. *0 av on '^ yT^s, ox. 
 
 'ndvTwv ^'. Now 'tis certain, that i^yc(h<9- ought 
 in this Place to be rendred,./jf that came ; and con- 
 fequently, a>v U '^ >'»?, which Phrafe is manifeftly 
 oppofed to ^ -7^ ^epfH ff;^VV(^» muft be rendred, 
 he that wds from the earth. Thus a'ifo the Participle 
 ft^r is us'd elfewhere. For Inftance, lvip\i( av «f7> 
 ^Mttu, whereas I was hlmd, 1 now fee^ John 9. 25'. 
 Ksy oi/TTitj Vi[j2i VcKf^i 701 f (^^."STjaf/xKn (jvvi(^(ti07rot\i\n 7&» Xe/r«9 
 which ought to be rendred thus. And us^ who were 
 dead in [ins ^ hath he cjuickened together with Chrifi^ Eph. 
 2. 5:. And accordingly the Baptift's Meaning is 
 plainly this ; He that was from the earthy is (or con- 
 tinues ftill to be) from the earthy that is, a common 
 Man, &c. So that our Savior's Words are very 
 clear and intelligible. For his Meaning is, that 
 the Son of Man, which was in Heaven, becaufe 
 his Human Soul preexifted there, came down from 
 Heaven, when his preexiftent Soul was cloath'd 
 with a Body, and convers'd amongft us as a Man. 
 
 Again, 
 
Cbap.VIII. daring his Mimjlry. 107 
 
 Again, Chrift rays3 the bread of God is he -which 
 cometh down from hea^uen^ and givstb life unto the worldy 
 John 6. 55. ^nd^gRiUy I came do7vn from heaven ^ not 
 to do mine own wiU^ but the will of him that fent me^ v. :58. 
 Thefe Texts mean, that the Man Chrift Jefus be- 
 came incarnat, that he might perform God's Will ; 
 and that the fame Man Chrift Jefus gives Life to 
 the World, by Virtue of that Authority and Power, 
 which God has given for that Purpofe. 
 
 Thus alfo, when he fays. What and if ye (Irall fee 
 the Son of man afcend up where he was before ? v. 62. 
 he means, that his human Soul was in Heaven be- 
 fore his Incarnation. 
 
 But there is one Verfe, which (I think) requires 
 another Senfe. Our Lord fays, lam the living bread, 
 which came down from heaven : if any man eat of this 
 bread ^ he jljall live for ever : and the bread that I 7vill 
 givc^ is my flejlj, which I will give for the life of the 
 worlds V. ^ I. In this PalTage our Savior afferts, that 
 his Flefli came down from Heaven. But did his 
 Body then exift before the Incarnation ? And did 
 his preexifting Body defcend thro' the Bleffed Vir- 
 gin's Womb ? No ; but as I have (e) elfewhere ob- 
 ferved, by coming doiim from heaven in this Place is 
 meant, being begotten by the immediat Power of 
 God. For our Savior's Flefh, tho' born of the Vir- 
 gin Mary^ was conceiv'd in her by the Overflia- 
 dowing of the Holy Ghoft. And thus the Jews 
 underftood our Savior. For they knew, that by his 
 pretending, that his Flefh came from Heaven, he 
 meant that he was not born of the Will of Man; 
 and therefore they objected his having Earthly Pa- 
 rents, and could not underftand, how he could be 
 
 (e) Confutation of ^lahrifmt Ch^ 12. p, 153, 
 
 faid 
 
icS Chrifl efitem^d d mere Man Chap. VIII. 
 
 faid to come down from Heaven with refped to his 
 outward Man. This is plain from the Text, which 
 fays. The Jev^s then murmured againfi him^ hecaufe he 
 faidy I am the bread ivhlcb came down from heaven. And 
 they faidy is not this yefus the Son ofjofe^h^ whofe father 
 and mother we know ^ How is it then that he faith ^ I 
 came dovm from Heaven ? V,4i, 42. So that our Blef- 
 fed Savior came down from Heaven with refpe<^ to 
 his Body as well as his Soul. His Soul preexifted 
 there, and his Body came therefore down from . 
 Heaven, feecaufe it was begotten by the Will and 
 Operation of God. Thus St. Johns Baptifm was 
 laid to htfrom heaven^ Matt. 21. 25". that is, to pro- 
 ceed from God, and to be of Divine Original ,• in 
 Oppofition to its being of Men, that is, inftituted 
 by human Authority. 
 
 2. He fpeaks of the Glory, which he had with 
 the Father before the World was j]o\\n 17. 5:. and of his 
 Father's Loving him before the foundation of the world^ 
 V. 24. Thefe PaiTages have been already explained 
 of the Preexiftence of his Human Soul in the Se- 
 venth Chapter. And as for hi§ faying. Before Abra- 
 ham wasy I am (or as it ought to be rendred, Iwas^ 
 by a known Scriptural Figure) it moft evidently re- 
 lates to the fame Preexiftence of his Human Soul. 
 
 Secondly y Other Declarations of the BlefTed Jefus 
 relate to the then prefentTime. 
 
 I. Our Lord cals himfelf the only begotten Son of 
 Go^, John 5. 16, 18. and this he truly was with re- - 
 fpec^ to his Human Nature. For tho' Adam is 
 call'd the Son of God , Luke ;. 59. yet that was upon 
 the Account of his Formation out of the Duft, and 
 not becaufe he was really begotten of a Woman by 
 the Holy Ghoft. Adam could not be faid to have 
 been begotten by God : but our Lord Jefus Chrifl: 
 was as truly begotten by God, as we are by our re- 
 
 fpec^ive 
 
Chap. VIII. durifjg his Minijlr), IC9 
 
 fpe<5^ive natural Fathers. Nor was any orlier Maa 
 ever fo begotten by God ,• and therefore Chrift is 
 God's only begotten Son as to his Human Nature. 
 
 Whether he is not alio the only begotten Son of 
 God as to his Divine Nature, I do not now inquire. 
 What I at prefent alTert, is, that his declaring him- 
 felf to be the only begotten Son of God, did not 
 difcover to his Difciples or others, that he was 
 more than a Man, or had any Divine Nature at 
 all. 
 
 2. He fpeaks of the intimat Union between God 
 and himfelf, and declares, that God was in him, 
 and he in God, faying, I and my Father are one^ John 
 10. 50. Though je belie'ue not we^ believe the works': 
 that ye may know and believe^ that the Father is in me^ 
 and I in him^ V. 3 3 . At that day ye jJiali know, that I 
 am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you, John 14. 
 20. And now I am no more in the world, but thcfe are in 
 the world, and 1 come to thee. Holy Father, ktep thro* 
 thine own name, thofe whom thou hafi given me, that 
 they may be one^ as we are, John 17. 11. That they all 
 may be one, as thou Father art in me, and 1 in thee ; that 
 they alfo may be one in us : that the world may believe, that 
 thou hafl fent me. And the glory v^hich thou gavefi me I 
 have given them : that they may be one, even as we are 
 one, I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made 
 ferfeH in one, and that the, world may know, that thou 
 hafl fent me, and haft loved them, as thou hafl loved me 
 V. 21, 22, 25. Now it mufl be obferv'd, that the^ 
 very fame Phrafes, which exprefs the Union be- 
 tween God and Chrift, do alfo exprefs the Union 
 between Chrift and his Difciples, and between 
 ihe Difciples themfelves. As God is faid to be in 
 Qhrifl, and Chrift in God, John 10. 38. fo Chrift 
 is faid to be in his Difciples, and his Difciples in 
 him^ even as God is in Chrift/john 14. 20. And as 
 
 Chrift 
 
110 Chrijl efleenPl a mere Mm Chap. VII I. 
 
 Chrift declares^ that God and he are om^ John lo. 
 50. lb he prays, that his Difciples may be om^ even 
 us his Father and hlmfelf are one, John 17. ii, 22. And 
 their being ene is manifeftly the fame as, or neceffa- 
 rily fuppofesj their dyvelling in each (?r;&fr, whether the 
 Phrafes be applied to God and Chrift, or to Chrift 
 and his Difciples. For indwelling implies the (f) Fa- 
 vor and Protedion of a Superior, and the Obedi- 
 ence of an Inferior, And being otje denotes a per- 
 fe(5t Union of Affedions and Goodwill. And ac- 
 cordingly Chrift prays, that they all may he one^ as thou 
 Father art in me^and I in thee ; that they alfo may he one fn 
 tts^ John 17. 21. I in them^ and thou in m&y that they may 
 he made perfe^ in one^ V". 2;. Now there moft cer- 
 tainly was this admirable Agreement and Union 
 between God and the Man Chrift. God really 
 favor'd and prote6ted the Man Chrift, and the Man 
 Chrift was abfolutly obedient unto God. And 
 there was undoubtedly between them a moft ar- 
 dent reciprocal Love. But none of the Expref- 
 flons before mention'd did any way difcover, that 
 the WORD or Divine JVature was united to the 
 Man Chrift. 
 
 5. Our Lord fays, Tipa^.a m \fM,> ?^ ^ive^tntOfxtu -^ 
 
 John 10, 14,15:. Thefe Words, as you rightly f^j 
 obferve, ought to be tranflated thus, 1 know my 
 jheepy and am known of mine. Even as the Father kno7V- 
 eth me, I knovj the Father, This Knowledge there- 
 fore, which is attributed to the Sheep, as well as 
 to God and Chrift, can^t impl}'', that Chrift ap- 
 pear'd more than Man. The Phrafe plainly figni- 
 fies, that as God and Chrift did entirely love each 
 
 (/) $ee the Confutation of Quakerifm,, Chap,-^, p. 25. 
 U) Script. Do^. P^js- 99' 
 
 Other, 
 
Cliap.VIir. dicing his Minijlry, JH 
 
 other, fo there was an entire mutual Love between 
 Chrift and his Sheep. For that co huzv frequently 
 fignihes to love, to be pleas'd with, to favor, and 
 to obey ; and that God is thus (aid to know Men, 
 and Men to know God, 1 need not prove to a 
 Perfon lb converfant in the Scriptures as your felf. 
 However, for the fake of others, I will tranfcribe 
 three Texts. For the Lord kmweth the -xvay of tht 
 righteous : hut the VJay of the ungodly jJhiU perljhy Pfal. 
 I. 6. And this is life eternal^ that they might know thee 
 the only trtte God^ and Jefus Chrift whom thou haft fenty 
 John 17. ;. And hereby we do know^ that we knov) 
 him^ if v)e keep his commandments^ I John 2. *> ^ 
 Wherefore Chrift's Knowledge of the Father or 
 Very God, and being reciprocally known by him, 
 was no Argument to his Difciples of his being 
 more than Man. 
 
 4. Our Lord fays. If ye had known me^ ye ^wuld 
 have known my Father affo ^ and from henceforth ye kyiow 
 him, and have feen him, Fhilip faith unto him. Lord, 
 fjew us the Father, and it fufficeth us, Jefm faith unto 
 him, have I been fo long time with you, and yet haft thou 
 not known me, Philip ? He that hath feen me, hath feen 
 the Father *, and how fay^ft thou then, jlie^v m the Father ? 
 Believeft thou not, that I am in the Father, and the Fa^ 
 ther in me ? The words that I fpeak unto you, Ifpeak not 
 of my felf : but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth 
 the ivorks. Believe me, that I am in the Father, and the 
 Father in me ; or elfe believe me for the very works fake, 
 John 14. 7 II. Now from the Difciples know- 
 ing and feeing the Father by knowing and feeing 
 the Son, it can't be inferr'd, that the Son difco- 
 ver'd his Divine Nature. Becaufe thefe Phrafes 
 manifeftly import, as the Context fhews, fuch a 
 Knowledge and Sight of God, as is gain'd by the 
 Son's Revelation of his Will, and doing Miracles 
 
 by 
 
112 Chrift efteem^d a meye Man Chap. VIII. 
 
 by his Power. For that the Spirit's Affiftance, by 
 which he wrought Miracles^ was his Father's Pow- 
 er, is manifeft from nuraberlefs Places, and grant- 
 ed on all Hands. Now the Son might revele the 
 Father's Will, and do Miracles by his Power^ even 
 tho' he had no Divine Nature, as the Apoftles and 
 others did, who were mere Men, tho' condui^ed 
 and affifted by the Spirit of God. 
 
 5'. Our Lord faid^ The Son can do nothing of him- 
 felf ; hut what he feeth the Father do. For -whatfoever 
 things he doth, thefe alfo doth the Son likewlfe^ John ^* 
 
 I beg leave to explain this Paffage in Dr. Whit^ 
 hys Words, who fays. The Jews concluding Chrift to 
 be a falfe Trophet^ hecauje he in this peculiar Manner ftyl^d 
 God his Father y Chrift here undertakes to JheiVy Firft^ That 
 he exercised his Frophetick Office according to the Will of 
 the Father, Secondly^ That he conftrnCd it by Miracles 
 
 done by the Tower ofGid refidi^tg in him,- —As to fpeaH 
 
 nothing ofhimfelfy is to [peak nothing of his own Inftin^ 
 and WiU^ without Commiftion from God-^ — -S<? to do no-' 
 thing ofhimfelfy is to do nothing without Commiffion from, 
 and Knowledge of the Will of God ^ that he Jljould do it^ and 
 fo refpechth bis frophetick Office^ and things done in Con- 
 firmation of it ; and then the Words following y unlefs he 
 fee the Father doing them, muft bear this Senfe^ Un- 
 lefs he by the Spirit of the Father refiding in him^ 
 fee that the Father would have them done by him ; 
 For what the Father mi'^y would have done, he doth 
 according to his Willy or as he ivould have them to be 
 done. And this Import of the Words feems to be confirmed 
 from the following Words ; For the Father loveth the 
 Son, iy -mvTTt (fu'xj/uffip 'omn^ «, djjiif 7n»/«, and flieweth 
 him all things which he (the Son) doeth ; and he 
 will fhew him greater Works than thefe (which are 
 t^ be done by him, evsn that ofniijing the Dead, v. 21.) 
 
 For^ 
 
Chap.VIir. during his Miniflry, nj 
 
 For, hec^ufe we receiz'e all our KnowUire from our Eyes 
 
 and Ears^ therefore Chrlft fpeakmg of the Execution of his 
 
 Propbetick Office, ufeth thefc Metaphors, declaring, that he 
 
 jpake and tejHfied what he had feen, Ch:ip. 5. 1 1. what 
 
 he had fcen with the Father, Chap, 8.38. And fo the 
 
 ■Baptifi faith. What he hath feen, he tcftifieth : Jnd 
 
 again, that he fpake what he had heard from the 
 
 Father aj/). 8. 16, 40,-^-1^, i^. Jnd becaufe they 
 
 ^Tvho teach or declare things, do by that Jljew t hew' to us ; 
 
 therefore Chrifi ufeth this Metaphor here, and faith. Chap. 
 
 8. 28. I do nothing of my felf • but as my Father 
 
 hath taught me, ih I fpeak. Jnd again. Chap. 12. 
 
 49, so. I have fpoken nothfhg of my felf, but as 
 
 the Father who fent me, gave me commandment 
 
 what I ihould fay and fpeak ; the things therefore 
 
 Nvhich I fpeak, as the Father faid to me, fo I fpeak. 
 
 Novj that he fpake this with refpeB to the Spirit of Pro^ 
 
 phefy, with which he was anointed, and by the Father fent 
 
 to preach the Gofpcl to the Poor, &c. Luke 4. 18. the 
 
 Baptifi teacheth in thefe Words ^ What he hath feen and 
 
 heard that he teftifieth ; for he whom God hath 
 
 lent, fpeaketh the words of God ; for the Father 
 
 giveth not him the Spirit by meafure. Chap, 3. 
 
 23,24. And he himfelf intimates by faying. Chap. 14. 
 
 10. The words that I fpeak to you, I fpeak not of 
 
 my felf ^ the Father abiding in me, he doth the 
 
 works. Thus far Dr. M^hitby, 
 
 Wherefore the Son's doing whatfoever the Fa- 
 ther did, was no Difcovery of his being more than 
 a Man conduded and aflifted by the Spirit. Efpe- 
 cially if it be conHder'd, that as general as this 
 lixpreflion is concerning the Son's Works, yet the 
 Son never did any fort of Works during his Humi- 
 liation, which his Difciples did not alfo at fome 
 time or other perform. And confequently it might 
 be truly faid of his Difciples, that whatfoever God 
 
 I did. 
 
114 ChnJ{ ejleem'*d a mere Man Chap. VIII. 
 did, they did the fame. And yet 'tis plain, that 
 ^he Difciples were not more than mere Men, but 
 only had the Afliftance and Guidance of a Divine 
 
 Power. /. r , IT 
 
 6 Our Lord affirm'd himfelf to be greater than the 
 Temple, Matt. 12. 6. and Lord of the Sahhath V. 8. 
 And thus the Difciples might well think of him, 
 becaufe he was the greateft of Prophets, and the 
 Son of God ; even tho' they had not the leaft Sul- 
 picion of his being God-Man. 
 
 TbirMy, With refped to what was then future, 
 I Our Lord affirms, that he hath life in himfelf^ 
 even as the Father hath. . But let us read the Context. 
 Vtrily verily 1 fay unto you, the hour is coming, and novf 
 ^ vfhen the dead jhall hear the voice of the Son of God: 
 and they that hear, jlndl live. For as the Father hath 
 life in hlmfilf: fo hath he given to the Son to have life 
 in himfelf ]ohn ^ 2^, 26. You fee, our Savior 
 proves, that the Son (hall raife the Dead at the lalt 
 creat Dav ; becaufe the Father hath given to the 
 §on to have Life in himfelf, as the Father alfo 
 hath. So that to have Life in himjelf, manlfeftly 
 fienifies to have a Power of raifing the Dead. But 
 fince he declares, that he (liould raife the Dead by 
 his Father's Power ; ^tis certain, that he did not 
 thereby declare himfelf to be more than Man. For 
 a mere Man affifted by the Spirit might alfo raife 
 the Dead ; as the Apoftles themfelves did. 
 
 2, Our Lord fays. All things that the Father hath, 
 (ire mine, John 16. if . For the Explication of thefe 
 Words, 1 fnall recite tWo parallel Texts. All tbmgs 
 are ddivered unto me of my Father, Matt. 1 1. 27. The 
 Father loveth the So^i, and hath given all things into his 
 hand,]o\m 5. ^9. The Meaning plainly is, that God 
 ^las given the Son all manner of Power and Authori- 
 lY to dirca and govern theChurdv Chrift is fpeaK- 
 
Chap. VIII. during his Mmijlry. 115 
 
 ing of the Spirit's Defcent to inftrud his Difciples 
 fully, and to guide them into all Truth ; and eels 
 them_, that he jhall not [peak of fAmftlf : hut wbatfocver 
 he jljall hear, that he jlhill fpeak^ and he 7vill (hew you 
 things to comfy V. 12. i;. adding. He Jhall glorify me: 
 for he jl}jll receiz^e of mine ^ and he Jljall jhe:if it tmtoyou, 
 V. 14. That is, I will fend the Spirit to revclc 
 to you whatfoever it fliall be fit for you to hear 
 concerning me and my Kingdom. This will there- 
 fore tend to my Glory j becaufe he fhall acl as lent 
 by me, and deliver my Meffi^ges. And that you 
 may not doubt of my being able to perform this 
 Promife, I aflure you, that I am fully empowered 
 to fend the Spirit. For the Father has committed 
 to me all Power and Authority relating to the 
 Church ; and therefore what the Spirit fhall do in 
 that refpe(a, will be performed by him as fent by 
 me for that Purpofe. But how did this difcover to 
 the Difciples, that Chrift was at that time more 
 than a Man ? He foretels indeed what he fhould 
 certainly be able to do ,• and he fpeaks of the fame 
 in the PrefentTenfe, to denote the Certainty of itj 
 ss the JewijJ) Manner was ; and all this he afcribes 
 to the good Pleafure of his Father, from whom he 
 fhould receive fuch wonderful Abilities, at the 
 time of his Exaltation, which he frequently prophe- 
 lied of. And this he might well fay to them, with- 
 out caufing them to believe, that he was at that 
 time any thing more than a Man conducted and 
 aflif^ed by that very Spirit, which he himfelf fhould 
 afterwards pour forth upon his Difciples. 
 
 ;. Our Savior fpeaking of the Perfecutions of his 
 Difciples after his Exaltation, bids them not be fol- 
 licitous about making their Defenfes, faying. Settle 
 it therefore in your hearts , not to meditate before^ what ye 
 P)all anfwer. For I ivill gi've you a mouth and wifdovn^ 
 
 I 2 which 
 
1 1 6 Chri[l epem^d a mae Man Chap. VIII. 
 
 -which all your Adversaries ^all not he ahle to ga'wfay nor 
 reft/ly Luke 21. 14, i j. This again is only a Decla- 
 ration of what God would enable him to do for 
 them after his Exaltation (and well rpight he do 
 itj who could pour forth the miraculous Gifts of 
 the Spirit on them) but the Difciples could not ga- 
 ther from thence^ that their Mafter had a Divine 
 iNlature. Efpecially confidering^ that his Difciples 
 themfelves conferr'd the extraordinary Gifts pf the 
 Holy Ghoftj as I noted befpre. 
 
 4. Our Bleffed Lord declares^ that he (hall raife 
 the Dead at the Day of Judgment. This is the -will 
 of him that ftnt me^ that every one which Jeeth the Son ^ 
 and belkveth on him^ may have everlafting life : and I 
 V^ill raife him uf at the haft day^ John 6. 40. Ivhofo eat- 
 eth my Jlejhy and drinketh my bloody hath eternal life, and 
 Iwill raife him tip at the Lift day, V. 5" 4. This indeed 
 Ihews^ that he fliould at that time fully exercife 
 that Powell, which he exercised in feme meafure 
 vvhilft upon Earth, and which his Difciples alfq 
 exercis'd by the Affiftance of God. But the Difci- 
 ples could not from thence conclude/ that he actu- 
 ally wa5 more than Man at the time when he fore- 
 told this Initance of his Spiritual Goverment. They 
 could not but conclude^ that he fiiould be then 
 much greater than he appeared at that Inftant of his 
 fpeaking , but they could not conclude^ that at the 
 Inftant of his fpeaking he had a Divine Niiture. 
 ' Hitherto I have been confidering fuch Declara- 
 tions of our Lcrd^ as might have been ftrictly true, 
 and coDfcquently might (had God pleased) have 
 been made by him, even tho' he had been nothing 
 more than a mere Man conduced and affifted by 
 God's Spirit, and had not had a Divine Nature per- 
 fbnally united to his Manhood. I proceed novy to 
 p)me Declarations of a different kind. Firft,\\^_ 
 
 forctels 
 
thafi.VIIL during his Mini jlry. lif 
 
 foretels his receiving of Religious WorfTiip, faying, 
 The Father jud^eth no man^ but hath committed all jtidg^ 
 ment unto the Son : That all men (l)ould honour the Son^ 
 even as they honour the Father. Tie that honoureth not the 
 Son^ honoureth iJot the Father ii^hich hath fent him^]o\'\iX 
 f . 22, 25. Secondly, he foretels his Prefence with his 
 Difciples even after his Afceniion, faying, ?r/;crg tivo 
 or three are gathered together in my name^ there am I in the 
 midfi of them ^ Matt. 18.20. Thirdly ^ he aflures them, 
 that he would anfwer their Prayers, faying, /''/^'/jjf/o- 
 e'ver ye jJ}all ask tn my name, that will I do, that the Fa^ 
 ther may be glorified in the Son. If ye fJiall ask any thing 
 in my name, I will do it, John 14. i^, 14. Now,be- 
 caufe the great Myftery of the Union of the Di- 
 vine and Human Natures is fo fully revel'd to us in 
 the Holy Scriptures ; therefore we juftly infer, thac 
 the Truth of thefe Declarations is built upon that 
 Union, ^nd the meaning of them is very dear and 
 intelligible to us, by reafon of that Difcovery. And 
 accordingly I grant, that the aforefaid Declarations 
 (and perhaps there may be others, of the fame 
 fort) did hint and imply our Lord's having a Di- 
 vine Nature. 
 
 But yet it does not follow from hence, that the 
 Difciples did, during his Miniftry, believe him to 
 be more than a mere Man conduded and affifted 
 by God's Spirit. For how does it appear, thac 
 they took the aforefud Hints, that they appre- 
 hended what was imply'd, or underftood thofe fur- 
 prizing Speeches ? 'Tis certain, they were very of- 
 ten at A Lofs, and knew not what to make of their 
 Mailer's Sayings. They perceiv'd not the Mean- 
 ing of them, when they were delivered ; tho' they 
 p&rcciv'd it afterwards, particularly when the Spi- 
 rit ^as poured on them. Thus \ye are exprefly 
 told, thac they underftood not what he fpake con- 
 
 I 3 cerning 
 
ii8 Chrifl ejleem^d a mere Mm Chap.VIlL 
 
 cerning his Death and Refurrftdion (which Mat- 
 ters were certainly more obvious to their Under- 
 ftandings^ and more level to their Capacities, than 
 his having a Divine Nature) till after his Sufferings 
 were accomplifh'd, Mark z. ;2. Luke 9.49. and 18. 
 54. John 2. 19, 20j 21, 22, 2;. Sometimes they 
 were afraid to ask for Interpretations ; at other 
 times our Savior did not give them; and indeed 
 they v/ere not qualify 'd, during his Miniftry, for 
 the Reception of many fublime Dodrins, which 
 fhould in due time be declarM. You well know 
 thefe remarkable Words of Chrift, 1 ha've yet many 
 th'wgs to fay unto you ^hut ye cannot hear them now, KoiP* 
 heity ')vhen he the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you 
 into all truth, John 16. 12, 13. No wonder then, 
 that they did not for the prefent apprehend our 
 Lord's having a Divine Nature, which is certainly 
 the greateft Myftery of our Religion, and what 
 they would leaft of all fufped, and moft of all be 
 fhockt at. Nay, 'tis abfurd for us to imagin, that 
 they believ'd this aftonifhing Article of Faich du- 
 ;:ing Chrift's Miniftry, without undeniable Evi- 
 dence of their believing it ; which I dare fay, no 
 Man in his Wits will pretend. But when the Com- 
 forter was come, they throughly underftood what 
 they had formerly no tolerable Notions of. For 
 the Spirit refrefh'd their Memories at the fame 
 time thpt he enlighten'd their Underftandings. 
 For our Lord faid, Thefe tim^gs ha've I fpokcn unto you, 
 being yet prefent with you. But the Comforter^ which is 
 the Huly Ghajt^ whom the Father vnll fend i» r/ty nawCy 
 he fljuU teach you all things^ and bring all things to your 
 remembrance^ whatfocver I ha've faid unto you^ John 14. 
 2^, 26. So that by comparing his Difcourfes with 
 the Events, they perfedily comprehended them ,- 
 
 and 
 
Cbap.VllI. during his Minijlry. 119 
 
 arid accordingly they might well know and be- 
 lieve^ that their Mafter had a Divine Nature. 
 
 I muft add, that if they had believM him to have 
 had a Divine Nature during the time of his Mini- 
 ftry j 'tis utterly unconceivable, that there fhould 
 be no clear Indication of it in Scripture. The Be- 
 lief of that one Propofition could not but have dif- 
 cover'd it felf numberlefsWaysin the whole Courfe 
 of their Adions. It muft have forced from them 
 ibme open Acknowledgments and Expreffions of 
 that Belief. Ic muft have led them into a quite 
 different Condudt from that which the whole Hi- 
 ftory of the Gofpels difcovers to us. And yet there 
 is not the flighteft Intimation of this Nature. 
 Wherefore, tho' 'tis fufficient for my Purpofe, that 
 we have no Evidence to the contrary ^ yet I can c 
 but efteem this fingle Confideration Wiz.. the Si- 
 lence of Scripture in fd Momentous a Part of Sa- 
 cred Hiftory) a plain and pofitive Demonftration 
 of what I have been proving, 'viz.. that during the 
 Time of our Savior's Miniftry, his Difciples did 
 not believe him to be more than a mere Man con- 
 duced and aflSfted by the Spirit of God. 
 
 I muft now intreat your Patience, whilft I dif- 
 patch three Particulars, which fome Perfons, lefs 
 learned than your felf, may poffibly flumble at, or 
 raife Objedions from. 
 
 I. St. John the Baptift faid of Chrift during hi$ 
 Miniftry, He ts abcve all, John J. ;i. and again. The 
 Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things^ into his 
 band, V, 5f. Now if any Man Ihould imagin, that 
 the Baptift thereby difoover'd Chrift's Divine Na- 
 ture,and confequently Chrift's Difciples might per- 
 haps believe it, even during his Miniftry j I anfwer, 
 I. That if the Baptift's Expreffions did certainly im- 
 ply, that Chrift had a Divine Nature ; yet how 
 
 I 4 ftiall 
 
I ao Chrift ejleenPd a, mere Man Chap. VIII; 
 
 (hall k appear, that Chrift's Difciples reach'd the 
 full Meaning of them ? Why muft they be fuppos'd 
 to underftand the Depth of the Baptift's Difcour- 
 fes, better than they did thofe of their own Ma- 
 iler ? But, 2. The Baptift's ExpreffioniS did by no 
 means imply, that Chrift had a Divine Nature. For 
 doubtlefs the Man Chrift Jefus was, even during 
 his Miniftry, fuperior to all other Prophets, to 
 whom the Baptift's Words muft neceftarily be re- 
 ftrain'd, if underftood in the then Prefent Tenfe. 
 But I am perfuaded, that they ought to be under-" 
 flood in the then Future Tenfe, fo as to denote the 
 then future Exaltation of the Man Chrift Jefus. 
 Thus when St. Vaul fays, in the Prefent Tenfe, The 
 he'iTy as long as he is a child, diffareth nothing from a fer- 
 'uant^ Kjuet©" mr/t^v uvy tho^ he be lord of all ^ Gal. 4. r. 
 he muft necelTarily be underftood in a Future . 
 Tenfe. For the Heir is for the prefent Lord of ail, 
 no otherwife than by theDefignation of his Father ; 
 and ftiall not be adually Lord of all, till he enjoys 
 the Inheritance. And accordingl}' the Baptift faid 
 in the then Future Tenfe, he (Chrift) ts above all; 
 meaning that he fliould moft certainly be fo at the 
 Time of his Exaltation, which tho' he was not at 
 that time adually poflefs'd of, yet he fl:<.ould infal- 
 liby receive of his Father ; of whom the Baptift 
 alfo faid, he hath given all things into bis hand, that is, 
 he hath abfolutely determin'd fo to do. For that 
 our Lord did not actually exercife all Power both 
 in Heaven and in Earth, till after his Afcenfion, 
 every body knows. 
 
 2. St. John the Evangelift fays, 0=Jy «/&<f l^e^n 
 
 V^nyn^mTOy that is, according to our Tranllation, No 
 wan huth Jeen God at any time ,• the only begotten Son^ 
 which is in the boj'om of the F^Jtkcr^ he hath declared him^ 
 
 John- 
 
Chap.VIIT. durh?g his Mini fir j. I2I 
 
 John I. i8» Now thefe Words were undoubtedly 
 fpoken after our Lord's Exaltation j and confe- 
 quently^whatfoever they declare concerningChrift, 
 it is (properly fpeaking) forein to the prefenc 
 Queition. For upon Suppofition, that Chrift's be- 
 ing in his Father's Bofom did really imply his hav- 
 ing a Divine Nature ; yet it does not follow, that 
 becaufe St. John affirmed after his Afcenfion^ that 
 he had a Divine Nature, therefore the Difciples 
 believ'd that he had a Divine Nature during his 
 Miniftry. But in Truth, that Phrafe is ftridly ap^ 
 plicable to the Human Nature of Chrift. For if 
 av be rtndred who was^ytt 'ris certain that his be- 
 ing in the Bofom of the Father, fignifies in the 
 JewijJ} Expreflion, being exceedingly belov'd of 
 him, the neareft to him, and the moft intimat 
 with him^ as the Human Soul of our Savior cer- 
 tainly was, before he came from Heaven, whilft 
 he was in the Form of God (fpr his Father lovedi 
 him before the Foundation of the World, John 17, 
 24.) and alfo after he came into the World, even 
 during his Miniftry, above any Prophet that ever 
 was fent by God. 
 
 But I am perfuaded, that the Apoftle fpake of 
 what then was, when he wrote ,• and n^rm'd, that 
 Chrift, who was at that Time- in the Bcfom cf his 
 Father, was he who declar'd the FailiCr^ thf^.: is, 
 was his Interpreter to Mankind, and the Reveler of 
 his Will. And Chrift vvas undoubtedly at that 
 Time in his Father's Bofom with refpe^t :o his Hu- 
 man Nature, which had afcended into Heaven^ 
 and adually fat at the Right Fiand of God, and 
 was placed in Authority next to, and in Conjun- 
 dion with, the Very God. 
 
 3. Our 
 
M^ Chrift eJleenPd a mere Man Cfiap.VIII. 
 
 :;. Our Savior is charg'd by the Jews with mak- 
 ing himfelf equal "with God, and with making himfelf 
 God^ John f. 1 8. and lo. 33. And if he thus difco- 
 rer'd his Divine Nature to the Malicious Jews du- 
 ring his Miniftry ; how can we imagin, but that 
 his Difciples believ'd it at the feme Time ? Now 
 this will inftantly appear a trifling Plea^ if we 
 confider^ what Occafion our Lord gave the Jews 
 for this Accufation. It feems he had called the 
 Very God 3 wottj'? /uk, John 5-. 17. Now becaufe he 
 call'd the Very God %^qv mrle^y hii (or if you pleafe 
 'tis own) Father y therefore they infer, that he made 
 himfelf equal with God. Now they underftood 
 not the Myftery of God^s being the Father of 
 'Chrift's Human Nature^ by begetting him in fuch 
 a manner, that God was to him 11=/)©- -itd-w^^ as pro- 
 perly as any other Man is the iIcO©- ^tj^> of his Na- 
 tural Son. And therefore, becaufe when a Man 
 begets his own Likenefs, the Son is fpecifically 
 equal to his %^& Tntt^^^ they conclude, that Chrift 
 made himfelf equal to God by calling God Uav 
 
 What has been faid, may eafily be applied to the 
 ether Te^ct. Our Savior call'd God his Father, 
 John 10. 29. Then the Jews took up ft ones again to 
 ft one him, J^tis anfwef^d them^ Many good works have 
 I jhewed you from my Father ^ for which of thofe works do 
 ye ftone me ? The Jews anfwered him'^ f^)^^^) For. a good 
 work we ftone thee not^ hut for hlafphewy^ and becaufe that 
 thouy being a man, make ft thy felf God. Jefus anfwered 
 themy Is it not written in your law^ I faid ye are Gods ? 
 If he called them GodSy unto whom the word of God came^ 
 ^nd the fcripture cannot be broken : Say ye of him, whom 
 the Father hath fan^ified and fent into the world. Thou 
 blaffhemeft, becaufe I faid, I am the Son of God ? v. 31. 
 
 3^3 ?3> 34> ST^ 3^* ^^^ f^^ by our Savior's An- 
 
 fwcr^ 
 
Chap. VIII. duriffg his Mifnjlr^, 12 j 
 
 fwer, thac all he pretended to, was that he was tho 
 Son of God ; and he prov'd, that he dcibrv' d thac 
 Charader, bccaufe the leather had I'andified him, 
 and fent him into the World, v. ^6, Here is not a 
 Tittle of his Divine Nature racntion'd : and the 
 Jews made the very fame falfe Inference as before. 
 
 I confcfs^you have given thele Texts a diflfcrent, 
 but not an oppofit Senle. You (g) (ay. The Jews, 
 willing to take any Handle (tho never fa tinreafonahle) 
 of acctifing bim^ infer (John <;. i8.) by way of Calumny^ 
 not by way of ftritl Reafoning^ that his calling God his 
 Fathtr [0 OTtTiif f/»] was as much as affuming to himfelf^ 
 that Gody who was the common Father of them all^ was in 
 a higher and more peculiar manner [^fntri^^ le/isi^J his own 
 proper Father : and fro?n this^ and from his joining and 
 comparing his own Works with his Father s Works in ons 
 and the fame Sentence^ they infer further^ in the next ft e^ 
 of Calumny y that he made hi mf elf equal with God : mean^ 
 ing thereby y not that he claimed to himfelfto be God indeed 
 in any Senfe ^ (for neither they nor his own Difciples had 
 as yet any the leafi Thought of that ;) but that by Con^ 
 fiquejue (which angry Accufers draw very hafiily^) he af- 
 fum^d to himfelf a Tower and Authority like that ofGod^ 
 The Exprejfion is the fame^ and meant in the fame Senfe^ 
 as that other Accufation^ John 10. ;:;. Thou being a 
 Man, makeft thy felf God : which was fpoken after 
 the fame Manner ^ as Men fay to an ajfuming Verfon^ You 
 make your felf King ,* when they intend to charge him 
 with taking upon himjelf not the Ferfon^ but the State of 
 a Prince. And (h) again you fay. That the Jews 
 meant to accufe hifn, not of affirming himfelf to be the 
 fupreme^ felfexijlent Deity '^ nay ^ nor Jo much as of taking 
 upon himfelfto be a divine Perjon at all ; but only of af 
 
 (g) Reply to Mr. Nelfons Friend, p. 13 j, ijtf- 
 (h) Pag i47» 148. 
 
 fuming 
 
5 124 (^^^ift efteenPd a mere Man^ S^c. Chap. VIII. 
 
 fuming to himfetf the Tower and Authority of God. For., 
 their Acctifation^ thou niakeft thy felf God^ was mt 
 founded upon 'his affirming himfelf to be one with the Fa- 
 ther ^ (which Thraje it does not appear they thought at all 
 difficult to be underfiood'y) but the Accufation was founded 
 upon bis fining God his Father ^ [^'^Sy 29^ and 30'.] and 
 confequently making himfelf the Son of God, This appears 
 flainlyfrom theAnfiver our Lord ga^e them in the IVords 
 immediately following^ V. 34, ;f^ 36. Is it not written 
 in your lawy I faid, ye {Rulers and Magi /rr ate si are 
 Gods, [_and Children of the mofi High ?] If he call'd 
 them Gods^. unto whoni the word of God came^ 
 and the fcripture cannot be broken ; fay ye of him 
 whom the Father hath fan6lified aftd fent into the 
 world. Thou blafphemeft, becaufe I faid, I am the 
 Son of God ? From thefe JVords ^tis evident]^ that their 
 Charge againfi him of Blafphemyl for which they went 
 about to ft one hirhy was founded upon his 'calling God his 
 Father y or declaring himfelf to be the Son of God; which 
 they, in their Anger ^ reprefented by way of Aggravation^ 
 as fjfaking himfelf God, , , ■ ^ 
 
 Whether your Interpretation of thefe P^ffages 
 be preferable to mine, let others judge. If my In- 
 terpretation be allow'd, thtjews drew a wrong 
 Conclufion from what our Savior faid i becaufe ei- 
 ther they did not, or vv^ould not, underftand his 
 true Meaning. If your Interpretation be allow'd, 
 their Malice improv'd what he faid into an arrant 
 Calumny. But either Interpretation ihews, that 
 it can't be concluded from the Accufation of the 
 Jeivsy that our Lord at that time pretended to i. 
 Divine Nature, or to be more than a Man con- 
 duced and affifted by God's Spirit. 
 
 Finally therefore, tho' the WORD or Divine 
 Nature was .moft certainly united to the Man 
 Chrift Jefus during the Time of his Miniftry ; yet 
 
 his 
 
Chap. IX. Tfje IVOR D quiefcent, &c. 125 
 
 his Difciples did not in the leaft apprehend that 
 wonderful Union^ nor were they aware of their 
 Mafters real Dignity, till his Humiliation was 
 ended, and clearer Manifeftations of his Excel- 
 lency were imparted to them, either by his own 
 Difcourfes after his Refurredion, or by that mira- 
 culous Effufion of the Holy Ghoft on the Day of 
 Pentecoft, whereby they were led into all Truth. 
 
 ' ' ."' ■ — x-'T- — -^ '■ ' — ' — 
 
 CHAP. IX. 
 
 J hat during the Time of our Savior^ s Minijlry^ the 
 WORD was c[Uiefcent in the Man Chrijl Jefus. 
 
 SECOND LT^ r muft now (hew, that during 
 the Time of our Savior's Miniftry, the WORD 
 was quiefcent in the Man Chrift Jefus. 
 
 Now when I aflert, that the WORD was ^«/- 
 efcent (for I chufe to continue the Ufe of that 
 Term, which 00 Irenaus firft introduc'd, and is 
 confequently almoft as old as Chriftianity it felf) 
 my Meaning is, that the WORD did,notwith{land- 
 ing the Perfonal Union, forbear to communicat 
 his extraordinary Influences (to wit, fuch as other 
 Mortals, who are not Perfonally united to the 
 WORD, do not receive from him ; I fay, the 
 WORD forbore to communicat thofe his extraor- 
 
 Adv. H«r. lib. 3. cap. 21. p. 250. Edit. Grab. 
 
 dinary 
 
1 26 The IVOR D qaiefcepjt in Chrifi Chap. IX. 
 
 dinary Influences) to che Man Chrift Jefus^ during 
 chat Space. 
 
 Wherefore I can by no means be underftood to 
 affi.rnij that the WORD ceas'd^ during that Space, 
 in any Meafure or Degree^ to enjoy his own 
 former effential Wifdom or Power,* or that the 
 Original Splendor and Blifs of the WORD were 
 at all eclips'd pr diminifli'd by ov during the aforefaid 
 Quiefcence. For doubtlefs the WORD retain'd, 
 and flill continued to difplay, all his glorious At- 
 tributes^ and enjoy'd the Perfedion and Happi- 
 refs of his own Nature^ jufl as he did before his 
 perfonal Union with the Man Chrift Jefus. For 
 the Actions of* the \yORD did not depend upon 
 that Union^ nor was the Felicity of the WORD 
 either increased or leffen'd thereby. I only alTert, 
 that during the aforefaid Space, the Human Na- 
 ture of Chrift did not receive and feel thofe extra*- 
 prdinary Influences,which its perfonal Union with 
 the WORD muil of Neceflity beftow on it, when- 
 Ibever the Wifdora and other Excellences of the 
 W^ORD, fhould be fully^ freely and perfectly com- 
 municated tOj and fhine through, the Man Chrift 
 -Jefus, by a reciprocal uninterrupted Intercourfe of 
 the Divine and Flurnan Natures. This Quiefcence 
 of the WORD therefore, was not ahfolute, but r<?- 
 f^eBi-ve. 'Twas riot a Quiefcence in the WORD 
 himfclf ,- but a Quiefcence in relation to that 
 Man, with whom he was perfonally united. Nor 
 was ic a Quiefcence as to thofe ordinary Influences 
 of the WORD, who is the Creator of all Things^ 
 which the Man Chrift Jefus enjoy'd in Common 
 with all other Men in general : but a Quiefcence 
 as to thofe peculiar and extraordinary Influences 
 on the Man Chrift Jefus in particular, which no 
 other Man ever did enjoy, and which he could not 
 
 derive 
 
Chap. IX. during bis Miniflry, 127 
 
 derive from the WORD othcrwifc than by apcr- 
 fonal Union with him. 
 
 Now that the WORD was thus quicfcent during 
 our Savior's Miniflry^ I (hall evince by the follow- 
 ing Confiderations. 
 
 I. Whatever the WORD is (whether the Very- 
 God, or a Being inferior to the Very God) yec 
 fince we are affur'd, that the WORD was maJeflcjh^ 
 and dwelt among us, John i. 14. 'tis plain, that the 
 WORD was Perfonally united to the Man Chrift 
 Jefus in his Infancy, even from his very Birth. 
 Again v^e are affur'd, that Jefus Increafed in Wifdom, 
 as truly and properly, and in the fame Senfe, as 
 he increafed in Stature, Luke 2.^2. Now none can 
 believe, that the Man Chrift Jefus was, as foon as 
 ever he was born, endued with that Wifdom^ 
 which the WORD was undoubtedly pofTefs'd of 
 from the Beginning : or that he ever did or could^ 
 notwithftanding he increased in Wifdom as well as 
 in Stature, attain to greater Wifdom, than the 
 WORD (who was the Archite(5l of the Univerfe, 
 and Maker of all created Beings) had in himfelf, 
 before he became united to the Human Nature. 
 'Tis therefore demonftrably plain, that the Man 
 Chrift Jefus was for fome while Perfonally united 
 to the WORD, even tho' that Wifdom, which was 
 in the WORD, before the Perfonal Union with 
 Chrift's Human Nature commenced, was not 2i% 
 that Time communicated to him. And therG,» 
 fore, 
 
 2. 'Tis evident, that notwithftanding the perfo- 
 nal Union, the WORD might be quiefcenc in the 
 Man Chrift Jefus at any time during his Miniftry. 
 for fince I have already ftiewn, that the WORD. 
 was quiefcent during his Infancy, and the time 04 
 his Increaf^ in Wifdom : ic can't be queftion'd, buc 
 
 chat 
 
1 28 The WOR D quiefcent w Chrift Chap. IX. 
 
 thatj it being very poffible in the Nature of the 
 Thing, therefore there might be in F'^dt, if God 
 pleas'd, fuch a Quiefcenge of the WORD in the 
 Man Chrift Jefus, at any other time during his 
 Humiliation, atid confequently at any time during 
 hisMihiffry. Now^ 
 
 3. It can't be demonftrated from the Scriptures, 
 that the WORD was never in Fad quiefcenc 
 during our Savior's Miniftry. For I have fully 
 Ihewn, that during his Miniftry, our Lord never 
 performed any o'ne Miracle, but what might be' 
 performed by a mere Man conducted and affifted 
 by the Spirit of God ^ ^ and that all his Miracles 
 are expreily attributed to the Spirit of God. And 
 therefore it can't be demonftrated, that the WORD 
 did ever exert himfelf in all that Space. So that 
 the Scriptures do permit us to fuppofe, that the 
 WORD might as well be quiefcent at any time 
 during his Miniftry, as it undoubtedly was before 
 it. Wherefore, • . 
 
 4. If we can't giye any tolerable Account of 
 our Savior's not knowing the Day of Judgment, 
 without fuppofmg the Quicfcence of the WORD ; 
 and if all the Difficulty that can be pretended, does 
 inftantly vanifh upon the Admiffion of that fingle 
 Suppolicion : 'tis certainly our Duty to embrace it 
 heartily, and without any Hefitation to believe 
 and maintain, that the WORD was quiefcent in 
 our Savior, when he declar'd, that he knew not 
 the Day of Judgment. But 1 need not infift upon 
 this (tho' this alone were fufficient) For, 
 
 5-. The Hiftory of our Savior, as recorded in the 
 Holy Scriptures, affords us pofltive Evidence (not 
 only upon my Principles, who believe the WORD 
 to be Very God ; but even upon your own, who 
 believe him inferior to the Very God) that the 
 
 W^ORD 
 
Chnp. rX. daring his Mi?2i(lry, 1 29 
 
 WORD was foraecimes (at leaft) quicfcent in the 
 Man Chrift Jefus, between his Baptifni and his 
 Death, that is, during his Miniftry. 
 
 To fet this matter in a true Light, I muft prc- 
 mife (what every body will grant) that if the 
 WORD was not at all quiefcent during our Sa- 
 vior's Miniftry ; then there muft coriftantly have 
 been, during that whole Period, fuch a full, free^ 
 and perfed Intercourfe, and reciprocal Communi- 
 cation between the WORD and the Man Chrift 
 Jefus, that the elTential Wifdom and Power of the 
 WORD, muft have been imparted to, and exer-- 
 cifed by and through, the Man Chrift Jefus. And 
 confequently all the Actions of Chrifti during his 
 Miniftry, muft have proceeded from, and oughc 
 to be imputed to, the God-Man, as being either 
 the Principle, the Subjed, or the Objed of them 
 all. This is fo manifeft, that I need not prove it, 
 or enlarge upon it. Let us therefore fee, whether 
 this be confiftent with fome Particulars, which 
 were certainly don or faid, by or to, our Savioi; 
 in the Portion of Time before mention d. 
 
 I begin with his Temptation, which immediatly 
 follow'd his Baptifm. We are told, that the Devil 
 prompted him to turn Stones into Bread for the 
 Relief of his Hunger. Let us therefore confider 
 this Propofal, Could the Devil (think you) make 
 it to the Creator of all things, even to the Author 
 of his own Being ? Could he doubt of the WORD's 
 Ability to turn Stones into Bread ? Could he ima- 
 gin, that he who firft produced all Matter, and 
 formed it into fuch a Variety of Shapes, was not 
 able to alter the Texture of its Parts ? On the 
 dther hand, if the WORD was quiefcent, the De- 
 vil's Projed was very tvell contriv*d. For he 
 might plaufibly tempt the bleffed Jefus^ whofc 
 
 K Abiliry 
 
 > 
 
I J o The WORD quiefcent in Chrifl €hap. IX. 
 
 Ability to work Miracles at other times he did not 
 queftion, to try, whether God would empower him: 
 to fupport himfelf under that particular Neceffity> 
 by turning Stones into Bread. ' ;'"• j' ' • 
 
 Afterwards the Devil placed our SivlSf ixpoh a 
 Pinnacle of the Temple, and prompted hini to call 
 himfelf down from thence, quoting to him that 
 Text of the Pfalmift, He fljall give his Angels charge 
 concerning thee^ and in their hands they flail hold thee up, 
 lefi at any time thou dajl) thy foot again fi afione. But 
 could the Devil fay thii to the WORD ? Did the 
 Devil conceit, that the Angels could prevent the 
 word's falling into Mifchief ? Or did he fanfy, 
 that the WORD could not, or would not, fecure 
 the Man Chrift Jefus (tho' at that very time he 
 was hypoftacically united to him) without the An- 
 gels Affiftance ? On the other hand, if the WORD 
 was quiefcent, the Devirs Procedure is perfe(5tly 
 natural and intelligible. 
 
 At length the Devil took our Lord up into an 
 exceeding high Mountain,, and fhew'd him all the 
 Kingdoms of the World, and the Glory of them, 
 faying. All thefe things -unU Igive thee^ if thou wilt fall 
 down and ojjorfiip w^. Matt. 4. 9. But Could Satan 
 tempt the WORD^ who made all thofe Kingdoms, 
 and all the Glory of th^m, even all created Beings 
 in Heaveh and Eartli'*'^ I.fay^ could Satan tempt 
 the WORD with fuch a Bait as this ? And could 
 he tempt him with fuch Trifles to worfhip the 
 Work of his own Hands ? Were the Devil capable 
 of . tempting at this filly rate, I think, a Man of 
 common Senfe might bid Defiance to all his Tem- 
 ptations. Whereas, if the WORD was quiefcent, 
 every thing is plain. For then the Devil's Bait was 
 a proper Allurement to the Man Chrift Jefus, who 
 
 was 
 
Chap. IX. iurifig his Minijlrj, 1 5 1 
 
 was actually laboring under the greatcd Straits and 
 AfHidions. 
 
 'Twill be pleaded perhaps in Excufe for tha 
 Pevilj that he did not know the Union of the two 
 Natures, and that he was not aware of his having 
 a God-Man to deal with. Sut how does this ap- 
 pear ? Have we any Proof^ that the Devil was 
 thus ignorant ? 't'is plain, that the Devil pretend- 
 ed to know him. For the unclean Spirit cry'd our, 
 I know thee who thou. art ^ the holy one of God^ Mark r. 
 ^4. and Devils alfo came out of tn.wy^ <^Yp^g ^«^ ^''^^ 
 iafif^g^ Thou art Chrlfi the [on of God ^ Luke 4> 41-' 
 
 'Twill be faid perhaps^ that vye have only the 
 Devil's Word for this Extent of his Knowledge. 
 i add therefore, that C\\v'i^ fuffcred not the Devils to 
 ffeaky hecaufe they knew him^ Mark l. 34. and he rf- 
 buhtng them\ fuffered them not to fpeak ; for they knew 
 that he w^s Chrlfi y Luke 44U1 J For I think the 
 ih) Original will not fairly admit the Readings, 
 which our Tranflators have put in the Margin of 
 thofe Places ; as if the Words did not imply, that 
 the Devils really knew him 5 but that our Savior 
 woilM not fuffer them to fay, that they did fo. 
 , But if the Devil did really know him, it may 
 ttill be urged, that he only knew him to be the 
 Meffiah j and might therefore notwithftanding be 
 ignorant of the Union of the WORD with the 
 Man Chrift Jefus. Now the truth is, ^ when I re- 
 fled upon the Manner of the Devil's tempting 
 Mankind, which is certainly don (in too many 
 Inftances) by fuch an Influence upon our Souls, as 
 
 {h) Kai Ik riipn X^iTk Tit ScuolvidL^ eft rJUTav fluuTcV. Our 
 Margin reads. To fay that they knew him. ^ ^ ^^ 
 
 Our Margin rcadsi To fay that they knew him to btChrifl. 
 
 K 2 mud 
 
I J z The WOR D quiefcent in Chrijl Chap. IX. 
 muft needs imply a thorough Knowledge of them, 
 and Acquaintance with them ; I can't conceive, 
 that Satan cou'd be ignorant of that fuU^ free and 
 perfect Intercourfe^ and reciprocal Communica- 
 tion, between the WORD and our Savior's Soul, 
 which thofe Perfons muft neceiTarily grant, who 
 deny the WORD's Quiefcence. For furely that 
 intimat Correfpondence between the Divine and 
 Human Natures, when exerted in an uninterrupted 
 Series of Anions (which is now fuppofed) could 
 not but difcovet that Union which was the Foun- 
 dation of it, to a Being which underftands, and 
 can (as we find by woful Experience) operat on^ 
 human Minds. And therefore, unlefs you fuppofe 
 the WORD to have been quiefcent during th6 
 Temptation, the Devil could not but know, not 
 only that the Man Chrift Jefus was united to the 
 WORD, but alfo that he was fo perfedly wrought 
 on, and aduated by, that Divine Principle, that 
 no Temptation could poffibly affed him. And 
 Whether the Devil could be foolifii enough to 
 tempt our Savior, when he knew him to be fo im- 
 pregnably fortify 'd, Vm content that any Perfon 
 of common Senfe (hould determin. 
 
 However, if it be infifted on, that the Devil 
 did not know, that the WORD was united to the 
 Man Chrift Jefus ; then it muft be confefs'd, that 
 my Arguments from the Devil's Way of tempting 
 our Lord, will not be conclufive in the Opinion 
 X)f thofe, who may be refolved to flielter themfelves 
 under the Devil's (fuppofed) Ignorance ,• which as 
 they themfelves can't evince, fo Will be difficult 
 for me demonftrably to difprove. 
 
 Let us therefore confider, how our Savior bc- 
 hav'd himfelf under thefe Tryals. When the De- 
 vil prompted him to turn Stones into Bread for the 
 
 Relief 
 
Cliap.IX. during his Mtnijir). iJJ 
 
 Relief of his Hunger, he anfwer'd_, It is written, 
 Alan flj all not live by bread alone ^ but by every word that 
 froceedeth cut of the mouth of Gody Matt. 4. 4. But 
 could this Anfwer proceed from the WORD ? 
 Could the WORD give fuch an Anfwer, as futed 
 none but a mere Man ? Could the WORD com- 
 fort himfelf with fuch a Text of Scripture, as is 
 cxprefly reftrain'd to mere Men, and applicable to 
 none befides ? Whereas, if the WORD was qui- 
 efcent, this Difficulty vaniflies. For then our Lord 
 might rationally reply as a mere Man, and flop 
 the Tempter's Mouth with fuch a Text, a^ was 
 ftridtly pertinent to his Cafe. 
 
 Again, when the Devil placed him upon a Pin- 
 nacle of the Temple, and prompted him to cafl 
 himfelf down from thence, quoting to him that 
 Text of the Pfalmift, He jJoall give his Angels charge 
 concerning thee^ and in their hands they Jliall bear thee up, 
 lefi at any time thou dafi) thy foot againfl a fione • our 
 Lord replies. It is written, Thon jl)alt not tempt tin 
 Lord thy God, But could this Reply become the 
 WORD ? Certainly, if the WORD had not been 
 -quiefcent, Chrift could not but have fpoken to 
 this Purpofe, I 7vho made all Things ^ can prevent my 
 being in Danger, or receiving Mifchief, in any refpeU 
 whatfoever. Nor do I need the JJJifiance of any Angels 
 (for they are all but my Creatures) to fecure my Jelf On 
 the other hand, if the WORD was quiefcent, our 
 our Savior's Reply was perfectly Natural, and fuch 
 as his Duty obliged him to make. 
 
 Laftly, when the Devil took our Lo r tup into 
 an exceeding high Mountain, and fliewed him all 
 the Kingdoms of the World, and the Glory of 
 them, faying. All thefe things will I give thee, if thou 
 wilt fall down and worfiiip me. Matt. 4. 8, 9. What 
 did Chrift reply ? He faid. Get thee he?}ce, Satan. 
 
 K 3 ^^'' 
 
I J 4 The WOR D juiefcent in Chriji Chap. IX, 
 
 For it is written^ Thou jhalt uforjhip the Lord thy God^ 
 and him only jlialt thou ferve^ Matt. 4. 10. Does he 
 not withftand the Tempter with a Command given 
 to mere Men ^ Would the WORD have anfwer'd 
 thus ? Or racher, was it poffible, that the WORD^ 
 if he had not beeip quiefcent, fhould never exert 
 or difcover himfelf in this whole Aifair of no lefs 
 than forty Days Continuance ? Whereas, if we 
 fuppofe, that the WORD was quiefcent, every 
 thing is eafy ; and our Lord's Reply was the very 
 fame, which a good Man, tempted to Idolatry in 
 exceedingly hard Circumftances, ought to make. 
 
 In Ihort, if the Devil he fuppofed (tho' againft 
 all Reafon) to have been at that time utterly igno- 
 rant of the Union of the two Natures ; yet I can't 
 conceive, that our Savior would acf^ fo odd a Part 
 even by the Devil himfelf, as he rauft have don^ 
 upon Suppoficion, that the WORD was not qui^ 
 elcent in him during his Temptation. For tho* I' 
 will not fay, that he was ftridly obliged to acr 
 quaint thePevil with the Excellency of his Na- 
 ture, and to quafli his Temptation by declaring his 
 own Omnipotence: yet certainly I 'may affirm, 
 that if the WORD was not quielcent in him, it 
 was rather beneath the Dignity of our Savior's 
 Charafter, to encourage the Devil's Procedure, and 
 invite him to frefh Attempts, by perfonating, for 
 the Space of no lef? 'than forty Days, what in re- 
 ality he neither was n6r c6uld be, f i;^. a Man lia- 
 ble to thofe Temprarions which the Devil offered. 
 Tor, if the WORD was not at' that time quiefccnt^ 
 our Savior was, and knew himfelf to be, beyond 
 the reach of any Stratagerns, which the Devil ei- 
 ther adually ufed, or could poflibly invent or im- 
 plpy. Wht,rca'^, pri the other hand, if the WORD 
 ^v'^s ciuicicent inihn^ ^r^d tie a(5ted only as a mere 
 
 Man 
 
Chap. IX during his Mtntfirj. JJ5 
 
 Man conduced and affifted by <he Spirit of God; 
 he really was what he appeared, 'vizj. liable to the 
 Devil's Temptations. And confequently hjs wh6le 
 Behavior was agreeable to his Charaifter, and he 
 acquitted himfelf, during the Courie of that fevere 
 Tryal, in the manner which perfeAIy became 
 him. \' 
 
 Hithertolhavebeen arguing from therefpcAive 
 Condud of ourSaviorandrhcDevil in this remarka- 
 ble Tranfadion. And the Conflderations I have of- 
 fer'd^ are in my Opinion fo ftrong, that if they do 
 not ftriaiy evince my Affertlon, yet they make jt 
 at leaft highly probable, and are therefore (efpeci- 
 ally fince nothing can be urged,, with ajiy Appear- 
 ance of Strength, on the other fide) (ufficien't to 
 carry the Point, and challenge our AiTent. But 
 there ftill remains one other Obfervatlon, which 
 alone determins the Controverfy. 
 
 St. MatthcvJ fays. Then -was Jefus led up of the ffirit 
 into the ivildtrnefs to he tempted of the Devil ; and 
 St. M^rk fays^ rhefpirlt dr'rueth .hjnt (^x?*>;.i<, .^afteth 
 him out) into tbewildernefs^ and he v;as there in- the, 
 •ivildernefs forty days tempted of Satan, 
 
 By the way, upon Suppofition that the WORD 
 was not quiefcent, it may be worth while to exa- 
 hiin, how the Holy Spirit of God, which is upon 
 your own Principles not fuperior to the WORD, 
 could be faid to lead^ and even to drive^ or cajt out, 
 the WORD into the Wildernefs for this Purpofe. 
 Whereas no Difficulty can be imagined, if the 
 WORD was quiefcent. For then our Savior was 
 intirely guided by the Spirit only, to which hi. 
 Human Nature was undoubtedly inferior, and ab- 
 folutly fubjed. . , c • • 
 
 But what I infift upon, is this. The ho y Spuit 
 of God ledChrift into the Wildernefi for this venr 
 
 K A End, 
 
1 3 6 The JVOR D quiefcm in Chrifi Chap. IX. 
 
 Fnd, that he might be tempted of the Devii ,- and 
 Chrift was accordingly in Fad tempted by him. 
 Now, how ignorant foever the Devil might be of 
 |he Union of the Divine and Human Natures , 
 how capable foever he might confcquently be of 
 attempting what could not poffibly fucceed ; ho\y 
 little foever our Savior might think himfelf bound 
 to difcover and exert his own Excellency, and 
 confequently how eafily foever he might elude the 
 Devil's Artifices : yet ftill it is certain, that he was 
 ^dually tempted, and that thofe Inftances which are 
 particularly recorded, were true, real, and proper 
 Temptations to him. And fuch they might well 
 be^ as every body will acknowledge, upon 
 Suppofition that the WORD was quiefcent : 
 WhereaSj if the WORD was not quiefcent, Chrift 
 was not capable of being temptea at all ,• much 
 lefsi <;ould fuch things have been Temptations to 
 him^ as he is exprelly faid to have been tempted 
 
 For let us confider the Circumftances. If the 
 WORD was quiefcent, then the Mj^n Chrift Jefus 
 was manifeftly and confeffedly liable to all Tem- 
 poral Difafters^j as much as other Mortals^ notv/ith- 
 ftanding his perfpnal Union with the WORD: 
 even as during his Infancy, he was fubjedl to the 
 ufual Weakneifes and Imperfedions of that State, 
 altho' the WORD was, even during his Infancy, 
 as certainly united to his Manhood, as during his 
 Miniftry. There is therefore no Difficulty upon 
 ^his Hypotheiis. But the Difficulties upon the other 
 Hypothecs are infuperable. For if the WORD 
 vv^s not quiefcent, but there was a fullj free, and 
 perfe<^ Intercourfe^ and reciprocal Communication 
 between the two Natures, and the Wifdom and 
 ^lowet of the WORD were imparted* to, and exer- 
 
 Cifed 
 
Chap. IX. during his Mifiijiry. ijy 
 
 cifed by and through, the Man Chrift Jefus : then 
 the. Man Chrift JeiUs, even all his Facultys and 
 Powers both rational and corporeal, muft have 
 been more perfedly influenc'd, direded and adu- 
 ated by, and more perfedly fubje<5t to, and more 
 perfedly filled, comforted and fupportcd with, the 
 Divine WORD, than any other Man's corporeal 
 Facultys and Powers can be influenced,direded and 
 actuated by, fubjed to, filled, comforted and fup- 
 ported with, his rational Soul. What Temptation 
 therefore could poflibly afFed the Man Chrift Je- 
 fus in fuch a State ? He could not feel any Allure- 
 ment to fin, but what muft afFed the WORD it 
 felf. For not only the WORD and the Man were 
 infeparably one ; but the Man was fo perfedly 
 governed and aduated by the WORD, that he 
 could not be for one fingle Moment liable to any 
 ImprefEon, but what the WORD did willingly 
 admit of, and allow him to receive. The Man 
 Chrift Jefus muft therefore have been abfolutly im- 
 peccable (as he is undoubtedly in his prefent glori- 
 fy 'd State) and 'twould have been as impoffible for 
 him to chufe what the WORD could not approve, 
 as 'twould be for any other Man's corporeal Facul- 
 ' tys to make a voluntary Tranfgreffion, in fpight of, 
 and in dired Oppofition to, his rational Soul. For, 
 if the WORD were not quiefcent, the Man Chrift 
 Jefus could no more ad without the WORD's 
 Concurrence, than any other Man can perform a 
 voluntary Adion by his barely corporeal Facultys, 
 without the Concurrence of his Soul. And con- 
 lequently the Man Chrift Jefus could not poflibly 
 be tempted to fin, unlefs the WORD were quief- 
 cent in him. And yet th^ Holy Scriptures do ex- 
 prefly affurc us, that he was adually and really 
 ^^mptcd to Sin i and coflfcquemly, tho'he did not 
 
 commit 
 
J j8 The WORD (miefcent mlQhrift Chap. IX, 
 
 C.ojmmitit^ yet he was capab^, g>f <;ommit;ting it^ 
 ja^d of faDingbyit. . " ' '". \ ' 
 
 But farther^ let. us refled i^ppn ,the Nature of his 
 Temptations. They were rnaiiifeitly fuch, as de- 
 liioxiftrat^ that the WORD w^j quiefcent, when 
 they aflaulted him. For me Purpofe, he was 
 tempted to turn Stones into Bri^ad for the Relief of 
 his Hunger^ to caft Himfclf down from the Tem- 
 ple/ and to prasjtife Idolatry for temporal Advain- 
 tage. Thefe "were fuch Temptations, as he was 
 certainly capa^li? of, if the WpRD wasquiefcent 
 in" him. Bur if the WORD was iiot quiefcept, Ke 
 was as certainly • incapable ^.of t}iem. For could 
 that Man who felt himfelfrup^oirtea by a perfonal 
 tJnion wich an ^Imighty Beiiig,. could he thro* 
 Whom Op3f Ipptjence dirpjLay'4 it felf, and who 
 icould confeguently create, jnV^-n Inftant wh^tfo- 
 ,jBycr he defired^ be tempted* fp.)in by the Cravings 
 of hisStqmachVor apprehend ijl Gonfequences fropi 
 a Fall, or 'wbrfliip the Devil fgr temporal Ends ? 
 Would. you fay, that a great prjnce w2ls tempted^ 
 Jf a Rropcf^^ was made him by his own Vaflal to 
 refign his dominions for the Lucre of a Feather, pr 
 for a fingle Hair of his own Head, or for a puff of 
 the Breath of his own Mouth ? Is it poffible for 9- 
 py Prince to accept fuch an Offer ? Could it even 
 induce him to deliberat upon it ? And yet this ve- 
 ry Offer might much more rationally be made to 
 the greatell of Brinces, and tHere would be jufter 
 Expedations pf his clofing wiph it ,• than could be 
 fuppofed with refped to thofe Temptations, which 
 the Devil .ply'd our Savior with, upon Suppofirion 
 |hat. the WQilD was not quiefcent. For a Fea- 
 ther, a fingle ,llai,r,pf his ow;i;Head, a puff pf^iis 
 own Bi;Qath!,,pi:,a^tiy the q^eapeft Trifle imaginable, 
 ,.if,qjjc>fe^qft?jVl^.f(? rt9.£reatqft prince, .^^.{Rore 
 ;:rnr:io'> "^ 
 
Chap. IX. Jf^rwg his Minifiry, . 1J9 
 
 fit to be purchas'd by him at the moft extravagant 
 Rate_, even at the Price of his whole Dominions • 
 than a little Bread (for inftance) or even the largeft 
 Empire, could be to him, thro' and by whom the 
 Divine WORD did at that very time difplay his 
 infinit Wifdom, Power, &c. and who confequent- 
 ly could every Moment fpeak into Being, whatfd-^ 
 ever he wifhed, or had occafion for. -' 
 
 Briefly therefore, if the WORD was not quief- 
 cent, Chrift was not capable of any Temptation 
 whatfoever ; much lefs could he be tempted by 
 thofe Baits, which the Devil propofed. And 
 yet, if we may credit the Evangelifts, Chrift wa^ 
 truly, really and properly tempted by^ thofe very 
 Baits : and tho' he pioufly withftood, and tri- 
 umph'd over, his Adverfary ; yet he was undoubt^' 
 edly under fore Tryals, and endured fevere Con- 
 flilfts with hin>. And confequently the WORD 
 was quiefcent, as long as the Courfe of Chrift*s 
 Temptation lafted. 
 
 I proceed to the Hiftory of his Agony. He 
 kneeled doivn^ and frayed^ f^j'^^g^ Father^ if thou be wiL 
 ling J remove this cup from me : neverthelefs not my wiJly 
 hut thine he don. And there appeared an angel unto him 
 from heaven^ ftrengthening him. And being in an agony 
 he prayed rrforc earnejlly : and his fweat was as it were 
 great drops of bloud falling down to the ground^ Luke 22. 
 41, 42, 45, 44. And we read in St. Matthew, that 
 our Lord fayd. My foul is exceeding forrowful^ even tm^ 
 to death. Matt. 26. ;8. Now you will readily o\^n, 
 that if the WORD be Very God (which you know, 
 I heartily believe and contend for) this Prayer 
 could not proceed from the whole God-?vlan. For 
 tho' tlie Man Chrift Jefus might truly fay. Father, 
 if thcu' he willing, remove this cup fro^ me; neverthelefs 
 pot my ivill^ but thine bedoiie : yet the WORD could 
 
 not 
 
1 40 The WOR D quiefcent in Chrijl Chap. IX. 
 
 not fay the fame. But you'll fay. This pinches on- 
 ly thofe who believe the WORD to be Very God. 
 True I what I infift upon therefore,- is this. 
 
 We jointly acknowledge, that the WORD crea- 
 ted the Angels. If therefore the WORD was not 
 quiefcent, I defire to be informed, how an Angel 
 could ftrengthen him, or how the ftrengthening 
 of ah Angel could be needed by him, who incef- 
 fantly felt and en joy 'd the full and free Comfort, 
 and Support of the WORD operating in him. 
 Could a Man thus fortify'd by the Communicatioa 
 ofthe Wifdom and Power of the WORD, fay;. My 
 foul is exceeding forrowfuly even unto death ? Or could a 
 Man thus fortify'd feel fuch an Agony, as to fweat 
 what was like great Drops of Bioud falling to the 
 Ground ? And could an Angel adminifter Relief 
 at laft, even when his own indvA^elling WORD 
 fail'd him ? What inextricable Difficulties do fuch 
 odd Fanfies plunge Men into? Whereas, if the 
 WORD be fuppofed quiefcent, all is perfectly 
 clear and eafy. An Angel from Heaven was a ve- 
 ry proper Comforter of a Perfon in fuch Diftrefs as 
 our Savior was in. For the plentiful Communica- 
 tion ofthe Spirit, which enabled him to work Mi- 
 racles, and revele God's Will, is perfedly confident; 
 with the loweft State of Temporal Afflictions : and 
 that Perfon who is the mod highly favor'd by God 
 with the one, may be the moft deeply afflided by 
 him with the other. 
 
 Again, when St. Feter cut off Malchu5*s Ear, our 
 Lord faid, iTjinkefi thou that 1 cannot now pray to my 
 father^ and he jhall frefently gizre we wore than twelve 
 legions of Angels ? Matt. 26. y 3 . But could thofe 
 Words bp fpoken by the Creator of Angels ? 
 Whereas^ if the WORD^ the Creator of Angels, 
 
 wa> 
 
Chap. IX. JurirJg his Mimjlrj, 14% 
 
 was quiefcent ; norhing could be more properly 
 fpoken by our bleffed Lord. 
 
 Again, whilft he was hanging upon the accur- 
 fed Tree, he cryed out. My God^ mj Ged^ why bajt 
 thou forfaken me ? Matt. 27. 4^. This bitter Cry 
 manifeftly imply s, that God had deliver'd him into 
 the Hands of his Enemies ; and left him utterly in 
 their Power, to execute their Malice upon him. I 
 need not obferve to you, how impoffible 'twas for 
 thofe Words to proceed from the Very God to the 
 Very God. I rather ask, how they could poflibly 
 proceed from fuch a Being,as you own the WORD 
 to be. Was he that made all Creatures, given up by 
 God into the Hands of his own Creatures ? Or had 
 thofe Men who crucify 'd our Savior, an irrefiftible 
 Power over their own Creator ? Who can enter- 
 tain fuch Abfurdities ? Whereas, if the WORD wa^ 
 quiefcent, the Man Chriftjefus was truly, proper- . 
 ly and ftridly deferted at that time by God ; that" 
 is, he was for a while delivered up to the Rage of 
 his Enemys, whofe malicious Vengeance God had 
 not enabled him to efcape or avoid. 
 
 SomePerfons perhaps, not only of thofe wha 
 believe the WORD to be Very God, but alfo of 
 thofe who believe the WORD to be inferior to the- 
 Very God (for you can't but perceive, that my 
 prel'ent way of arguing reduces either fort to the 
 very fame Straits ,• 1 fay, perhaps fome Perfons) 
 may hope to account for all thefe remarkable Paf- 
 fages of our Savior's Life, by faying, that we may 
 underftand them to relate to, proceed from, or be 
 tranfaAed by, the Human Nature only ,• and fup- 
 pofe, that the WORD did not concur in them, 
 nor was concerned about them. But in reality, the 
 very fame Difficulties will return ,• or elfe this Non^ 
 comHTunce and Un<ion(:€rnmm of the WORD muft 
 
14« The WOR D qiiiefcm in thrift Chap. IX. 
 
 riiean, and be the very fame, as what I call (in the 
 Phrafe of Irenaw) the WORD's Quiefcence. Foi* 
 if the Human Nature of Chrift did really a(5t alone 
 in thofe Inftances j if thofe A<5t:ions did not pro- 
 ceed from^or appertain to^ the Divine as well as the 
 Human Nature : then, notwithftanding the Perfo- 
 nal Union of the WORD and the Man, the extra- 
 ordinary Influences of the WORD were not, in 
 thofe Inftances, communicated to the Man Chrift 
 J^fus; which is all that is meant by the WORD's 
 Quiefcence. But if, on the other haild, the Inter- 
 courfe between the WORD and the Man was at 
 that time free, full and perfcd, and the Communi- 
 cation reciprocal ,• fo that the WORD and the 
 Man ought even then to be reputed as one Agen^ 
 (which is the Opinion received by many on both 
 (ides, and the otilySuppofition that, can be conti'a- 
 -diftinguiflied from the Quiefcfence of the WORD) 
 then thofe who affert, that fuch Paffages regard 
 the Human Nature only, notwithftanding its inti- 
 ttiat and uninterrupted Communication with the' 
 WORD^ ought ferioufly to confider, that in Con- 
 fequence of their Opinion they greiatly injure our- 
 Savibr, and charge that inimitable Pattern of all'^ 
 Gbodnefs,patticulaHy of Simplicity in A(5tion,with 
 fuch a Condud, as is (to fpeak *in6d9ftly) very un- 
 worthy of him. \^ " .^ '; ^ 
 
 For thePurpofe, fri the Affair of the Tempta- 
 tion^ as they muft make' theD^vil tempt the Man 
 as diftind: from the W^ORD ; tho* at the fame time 
 the Man could not receive the Temptation with- 
 out the word's Cbmplyance, and was fo forti- 
 fy'd by the Wlfdom and Power of the WORD, as 
 not to be capable of liftening to it, or falling by it, 
 (which would ihdeed be a likely Story, could they 
 proVfc the D^Vit to be as ftupidly fooUfli, as he is 
 -' eagerly 
 
Chap. IX. iufing his Miniftry. i^j 
 
 eagerly malicious) fo on the other hand, they muft 
 make our Savior* carry on a ftrange Collufion, and 
 encourage the Tempter to proceed ih his Attaques 
 by refifting him in a manner becoming none but a 
 mere Man, and not difcovering in the whole Space 
 of forty Days Terhpcation (if the Devil himfelf 
 could be all this while fuppofed ignorant of it) 
 that his Human Nature was all ^h'at time abfolutly 
 fecure^ ^nd incapable of any bad Impreffion, by 
 reafon of its unlimited Enjoyment of the irreliftibla 
 Wifdom and Power of the WORD. 
 
 They muft alfo turn the Hiftory of bur Savior's 
 Agony into a Scene of mere Griniace. For he who 
 was utterly incapable of feeling an Agony, mult 
 feem to be deeply afflided with one Jle whofe Hap-* 
 pinefs was fo unfpeakably great, that he could not 
 forrow at all ; muft declare himfelf exceeding for-. 
 rowfulj even unto Death. He who was at perfedt 
 Eafe^ and whofe infinit Strength was Proof againft 
 all Poffibility of Pain ^ muft fend forth fuch Sweaty 
 as fhould make others believe him to groan under 
 the moft infupp6rtable Preflures. And to courtte- 
 nance this Train of . falfe Appeai-ancies^ an An- 
 gel muft feem to ftreiigthen him, who created the 
 brighteft Angels themfelv^es. This is the Progrefs 
 of what I can'jt but call a downright Inipofture^ 
 Upoit thofe Principle's. "Forl'appeal to any Pef- 
 fon of an honeft Mind, whether he that atSlually 
 enjoy'd, and incefftntly felt, the free, full, and 
 perfed Intercourfe, and reciprocal Communica- 
 tion between the WORD and his own Human 
 iQature (which is now fuppofed) could in any 
 Senfe, Meafure or Degree, really endure^ what 
 our Lord Jefu$ Chrift appeared to undergo^ and 
 (bleffcdbe his un weary 'd Love) did certainly fuffer,, 
 to, the utmoft Extremity^ a'rid ijTi^ the leveretl* 
 ''^-^ ■ Truth. 
 
144 TheWORD C[mefcent inChriji Chap.IX. 
 
 Truth. For fueh Impreflions, as really created 
 him the moft exquifit Tortures^ and would have 
 harafs'd a Man of Icfs Patience than our dear Re- 
 deemer even out of the World, without the addi- 
 tional Violence of a Crucifixion ; I fay, fuch Im- 
 preffions could no more afFed, or difturb the Feli- 
 city of, a Perfon fo throughly elevated above the 
 feveral Accidents of Human Nature, by a com- 
 plete Enjoyment of the Wifdom and Power of 
 the WORD, the Framer of all thofe Works which 
 fo loudly proclaim his own immenfe Glory ,• than 
 the Breath of a Fly, for inftance, can rend afunder 
 the Firmament, or the Anger of a Worm can afflid 
 an Archangel. 
 
 What has been already faid, may be fo eafily ap- 
 ply'd to what our Savior fpake to St. Veter^ and to 
 his bitter Cry on the Crofs, that I forbear enlarg- 
 ing. The Truth is, I am utterly unwilling to re- 
 peat fuch Expreffions, as I could not think it law-, 
 ful to ufe fo much as once, did I not know the ab* 
 folut Neceffity of them in order to clear the Truth, 
 which (I hope) is fufficiently fecured by what I 
 have don already. ^ 
 
 I will now fubjoin one Argument of another 
 Nature. We learn from the Author to the Hebrews ^ 
 that our Lord was made a little lower than the angels, 
 Heb. 2. 7, 9. Now the Dignity of the WORD (as 
 this very Author has prov'd) was always fuperior to 
 that of Angels. For the WORD made the Angels^ 
 as well as all other created Beings. And therefore 
 €ver fmce the WORD was made Flefli, the Digni- 
 ty of our Savior's Perfon has been greater than 
 that of any of his own Creatures. So that with 
 refpe^t to the Dignity of his Perfon he never was 
 made lower than the Angels, The Apoftle therefore 
 mesuiSj that our Savior was made lower than the 
 
 Angels^ 
 
V Chap. IX. duri/tg his Mitjifirj, 14^ 
 
 Angels, not as to the Dignity^ but as to the Condition 
 of his Perfon ; that is, he was made lower than the 
 Angels in Glory and Happinefs. 
 
 Now his Condition of Glory and Happincfs has 
 ever fince his Exaltation been manifeftly fuperior 
 to that of the Angels : and confequently, fince the 
 Apoftle means his Condition after his Incarnation, 
 cis plain^ that our Saviter was made lower than the 
 Angels during the time of his Humiliation. From 
 hence therefore I infer, that during his Humili- 
 ation (and confequently during the time of his 
 Miniftry) the WORD was quiefcent. Becaufe 
 'twas otherwife impoffible for our Savior 
 to be, during that Space, in a lower Degfee of 
 Glory and Happinefs than the Angels. 
 
 For let any intelligent Perfon judge, whether 3 
 Man, that enjoy'd, as a Confequence of his per- 
 fonal Union therewith, a full, free, and perfe6fc In- 
 tercourfe, and reciprocal Communication, of the 
 Wifdom and Power, of the WORD (fuppofing the 
 WORD to be nothing greater than you your felf 
 allow) could poffibly be in a lower Degree of Glo- 
 ry and Happinefs than the Angels. For that Glory 
 and Happinefs, which the eflential Splendor and 
 Blifs of the W^ORD muft neceflarily create in a 
 Man, who is throughly enrich'd with it, is fuch, 
 as no Debafement whatfoever, which the Human 
 Nature is capable of, can poffibly fo far qualify or 
 diminifh, as to render that Man's State of Glory 
 and Happinefs, upon the whole, inferior to the 
 Glory and Happinefs of Angels. Wherefore the 
 WORD was certainly quiefcent during the Humi- 
 liation (and confequently during his Miniftry) 
 when the Man Chrift Jefus moft certainly be- 
 came lower in Glory and Happinefs than the An- 
 gels, notwithftanding his perfonal Union with the 
 
 I. WORD. 
 
i^6 The PVOR D^:qmefim in Qbfift Chap. IX; 
 
 WOll^D. tor tho'': that* Union re^ftdred the Digni- 
 tyof Chrift's Perfort fuperior to thst of the Angels:' 
 yet^ *becaufe the Mart Chrift Jelus did not feel and 
 and ^njoy the Splendoi*and Blifs 'of the WORD, 
 to whom he wasperfonally united; therefore as to^ 
 State and Condition, as to Glory and Happinefsy 
 he was really made lower than the Angels; 
 
 If it- be ask'd, whether this Qui&fcence of the 
 WORD was totar or partial ; that is> whether 
 the WORD, during the Time of his Mihiftry, did 
 confla^ntly forbear to Gommufticat any particular 
 Kind^T his extraordinary Influences to the Man 
 Chriff Jefus; or whether he only forbore at cer- 
 tain TVpiei to communicat them all ; or whether 
 at certain Times he communicated fome of themj 
 tho'at 'the, fame Time's he forbore to communicat 
 others^r; 1 anfwer^'-Jtliat' I fuppofe (for I need not 
 affefi 3* becaufe I fliall'build nothing upon the Dei 
 terniina-ciofi ofthis Point \ and therefore I (hall on-^ 
 lydecla^r^itto be ifimy-Opinion highly probable) 
 th2(t'ithe' QuiefcencS" WAS total during the whole 
 Mifii'ftry. : Fot; i.' MiSd itbeen o^herwife, I can'e 
 Coni2e-iv.'fe,-but*that^''W'e*mutt have had an Account 
 t)f theoWO^vD's difcaveribg himfclf thro' the Man 
 Chrift Jefus at f6me time or other. Whereas I 
 havd largely demonftrated J that during that Space, 
 our'^LbrdiJefus Chrift never did any thing, but 
 whar might be don' by a inere Man conduced and 
 afrifted.by:jeod's Spim.- -2. Ifthe WORD did ever 
 exero himlelf "during tlmt Space, I can'^t conceive3 
 why our''S:aVior fliould, or indeed how he could, ht 
 conftantly 'reprelVnted as wholly'iODder the Con- 
 dud of the Spirit. 5. Chrift's State during his Mil 
 niftry is reprefcnt&d as a 'State of Tempration. He 
 -fay^'- himfelt, J<? are.the^ which have' contivufd with me 
 
 in n^ ttnjitdtions ^ Luke ^3;, 28, And the Author to 
 ' ■' '■ the- 
 
Chap. IX. during his Mimjhy, 147 
 
 the Hehrcwi fays. We ha^ve not an high priejf Vfhlch can- 
 770t be touched with the feeling of our infirmities ; hut uuis 
 hi all points tempted like as we gre^ yet v/ithout fin^ Ileb. 
 4. 15-. Now unlefs the WORD was totally quief- 
 cent, I believe 'twill not be poflible to fuppofe 
 Chrift capable of Temptations, it' what I have (c) 
 already fuggefted, be duly confider'd. 4. Since 
 there is full Proof of the WORD'S Quiefcence at 
 certain Times, particularly at the beginninj^ and 
 clofe of his Miniftry ; and not the leafl: Intimation 
 of the contrary at any time, in any one Part of the 
 ihtermediat Space : 'ris reafonable to conclude^ 
 that the WORD was totally quiefcent during the 
 whole Period. 
 
 Whether you your felf have written any thing, 
 which implys your Acknowledgment of the Quief- 
 cence of the WORD, either total or partial ^ I 
 (hall not inquire. I think, fome of your Expref- 
 fions feem to hint, that you believe at leaft a par- 
 tial Quiefcence : but if you do not allow our Sa- 
 vior an Human Soul, ycu can't poffibly acknow- 
 ledge a total Quiefcence, I fhall not therefore en- 
 devor to afcertain, what were your Notions con- 
 cerning this Point. But I am willing to hope^ you 
 are by this time convinc'd, that the Quiefcence of 
 the WORD, during Chrift's Miniftry, is evident 
 from Holy Scripture. For we are therein, affured, 
 that the WORD was made Flefli ; and confequent- 
 ly was perfonally united to the Man Chrift Jefus at 
 his Incarnation ; and that accordingly that perfonal 
 Union continued during the Miniftry. But then 
 It appears, that the Influences of the WORD were 
 fufpended, and did not fliew thernfelves through 
 the Man Chrift Jefus. For as the rational Soul 
 
 L t does' 
 
1 48 The WOR D quiefcent in Chrifi Chap. IX. 
 
 does not difcover it felf in a new born Child^ but 
 gradually exerts its Faculties^ till at length it dif- 
 plays its whole Power; and even afterwards it is 
 frequently fufpended by Sleep, notwithftanding 
 'tis always perfcnally united to the Flefh from the 
 very Birth: even fo we may conceive, that the 
 WORD, tho' perfonally united to the Man Chrift 
 Jefus, forbore (fo the Divine Wifdom thought good) 
 to communicat his extraordinary Influences to him 
 during the Space beforemention'd. 
 
 But after the Exaltation of the Man Chrift Jefus, 
 ever fmce the Very God govern'd the whole World 
 by and through him; that Plenitude of Excellen- 
 cy, which is eliential to^ and infeparable from, the 
 WORD, fiiines thro* the Man ; and the Godhead 
 not only does dwell, but is alfo known and ap- 
 }3ears to dwell, in the Man ffu^.vmi^ the Man 
 Chrift Jefus being, in Confequence of his perfonal 
 Union with the WORD, much more ftridly and 
 properly the Temple of God^ than we are able to 
 comprehend. This Scheme, the Footfteps of which 
 are fo manifeft and fo eafily traced in the Holy 
 Scriptures, by an attentive Reader of them_, exact- 
 ly anfwers to all the Appearances of our Savior'^ 
 Condud and Circumftances, during his Abode up- 
 on Earth, and fmce his Afcenfion into Heaven. 
 
 Tho' I can^t forbear adding^ that the depth of 
 his Humiliation ended at his Death. For his Re- 
 furredlion opened a Way to the Poffeflton of his 
 prefent happy and glorious Condition. He de- 
 clared, that he fhculd raife himfelf from the Dead. 
 Vov Jefus an [were d and [aid unto them^ Dejtroy this tew- 
 fie J and in three days I v^iU ra'ife it up. Then [aid the 
 Jevn^ Forty and fix years was this temple in buildings 
 and wilt thou rear it up' in three days ? But he [pake of the 
 rcmpls of his body, John 2, 19^ 20, 21. And again, 
 
 • Therefore 
 
Chap. IX. during his Mwijlry. 149 
 
 Therefore doth my Father love me^ becatife I lay down wy 
 lifey that 1 might take it again. No man taketh it fro7/J 
 mCy but I lay it duivn of my felf: I have power to lay it 
 doTvn^ and I have power to take it again, This command- 
 ment have I received of my Father^ John 10. 17, 18. 
 I conceive therefore, that the Human Soul having 
 been anointed with the Spirit in the moft plentiful 
 manner, had a Power of uniting it felf to its former 
 Body, given it by the Very God, who poured the 
 Spirit on him. Nor is this, upon any account, 
 more wonderful, than his being enabled during his 
 Life time to raife others from the Dead. For his 
 Soul, being the principal part of the Man Chrift 
 Jefus, might continue endued with this miraculous 
 Power atter its Separation from the Body, made 
 by his Death upon the Crofs, as well as during its 
 Conjundion with it. 
 
 He feems.alfo to have been under the Condud: 
 of the Spirit even till the time of his Afceniion. 
 For St. Luke fays. The former treatife have I made, 
 Theophilus, of all that Jefus began both to do and 
 teach, until the day in which he was taken «/>, after that 
 he thro* the Holy Ghofi had given commandments unto the 
 Apofiles whom he had chofen^ Afe 1.1,2. So that he 
 gave Commandments to his Apoftles through the Holy 
 Ghofl- after his Refurredion ; and accordingly we 
 have no Proof, that the WORD exerted himfelf 
 before Chrift's Afcenfion. And therefore, tho' he 
 faid before his Afcenfion, All fewer is given unto me 
 in heaven and in earth. Matt. 28. 18. yet he did not 
 adually cxercife that Plenitude of Power, with 
 which he was rewarded for his Sufferings, till ho 
 was adually afcended into Heaven, and placed at 
 God's Right Hand ; whicli Phrafe manifeftly Signi- 
 fies his being actually inverted with the utmoft 
 
 L 3 Auth<v 
 
J 50 The WORD quiefcent, &c. Chap. IX. 
 
 Authority^ and being m^de the great Governor of 
 all created Beings. 
 
 From this Afcenllon therefore we muft date his 
 Exaltation ; the Space between his Refurredion 
 and Afcenfion beings tho' not a State of Suffering, 
 "^'et nothing more than an Introduction to immenfe 
 Glory^ and a gradual Difcovery of that excellent 
 Brif.htnefs, which would foon break forth in its full 
 Luftre. And accordingly in this intermediat Space, 
 hefpake of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God ^ KdiS 
 I. :j . And beginning at Mofes and all the Frcphets, he ex» 
 pomtded unto them in' all thefcriptureSy the things concern^ 
 ing himfelfy Luke 24. 27. Then opened he their tinder^ 
 fiandingy that they f:7ight under fi and the fcript tires ; and 
 fatd unto them^ Thus it is written^ and thus it behoved 
 Chrifi to fujfer^ and to rtfe from the dead the third day : 
 And that repentance and remiffio?t of fins jljould be preached 
 in bis vamey among all nations ^ beginning at yerufalem^ 
 V. 4f J 46^ 47. Then did he, 1 prefume, revele to 
 them his Divine Nature^ and the Excellency of 
 his Perfon ,• infomuch that when St. Thomas was af- 
 iured it was the blefted Jelus himfelf, he gave in- 
 tire Credit to all that the Brethren had reported 
 concerning him, and without any Hefitation cryed 
 out. My Lord and my God^ John 20. 28. as he might 
 juftly do, when he knew that the WORD was 
 in him, of which St. John affirms (I do not as yet 
 inquire in what Senfe) that it 'was God^ John 1. 1. 
 
 CHAP- 
 
Ghap. X. Of QjuY Savior'' J mty . &c. 151 
 
 C H A P. X. 
 
 Of our Sdvior'^s not kfiorvif7g the Day of'Jud^ment.'^ 
 
 HAVING thus prepared the Way, , by the 
 Proof of the tvyo foregoing Propofuions, let 
 us now examin the fecond of thofe Texts, which 
 are fuppofed to teach/ that the WORD or Divine 
 Mature of our Lord Jefus Chfift, is inferior to the 
 jVery God. Our Lord fays. But of that day ami that 
 hour knoweth no man^ no not the Angds which are in hea~ 
 "uen^ neither the Son^ but the Fat her ^ Mark i;. 32. 
 From hence it has been inferred, that fince the 
 Father, viz., the Very God, does know the Day of 
 Judgment, and the Son does not know it ;; there- 
 lore our Lord Jefus Chrift, who is the Son, and 
 confequently the WORD or Divine Nature of our 
 Lord Jefus Chrift, is inferior to the Very God. 
 
 For the clearing of this Difficulty, 1 offer the 
 following Particulars. 
 
 1. Mere Man can't by the Light of Reafon 
 know the Day af Judgment. And confequently 
 the Man Chrift Jefus, had he been neither united 
 to the WORD, nor illuminated by the Holy Spirit, 
 muft neceffarily have been ignorant of it. 
 
 2. Tho' an infpired Man may know the Day of 
 Judgment, if God reveles it to him : yet plain Fad: 
 proves, 'that 'tis very poflible for an infpired Man 
 to be ignorant of it. For no infpired Perfon ever 
 yet knew it. Nay, tho'our Lord Jefus Chrift, who 
 is the Son of God, received the Holy Spirit without 
 rfjeafure ; yet he himfelf affures us, that he did not 
 know it. That Expreflion therefore does by no 
 means imply, that the Man Chrift Jefus became 
 
 L 4 ftridN' 
 
152 Of our Savior'* s not havhg Chap.X, 
 
 ftridly Omnifcient by the Revelation of the Spirit: 
 bat only imports, that the Spirit was given to him 
 in a moil plentiful manner ,• that is^ in a manner 
 fo plentiful, that never did any other Mortal enjoy 
 the like ,• tho' not lb abfolutly plentiful, but that 
 God himfelf might have communicated Something 
 more to him, had it pleafed him fo to do. For the 
 Father, ^viz,, the Very God, who knew it himfelf^ 
 was certainly able, had he judged ic fitting, to dif- 
 cover the Day of Judgment to the Man Chrift 
 Jefus. 
 
 3. Confidering the Circumftances of the Man 
 Chrift Jefu5 during his Miniftry, there was certain* 
 ly noNeceffity of his knowing the Day of Judg- 
 ment, in order to any of thofe things which it be- 
 hoved him to do or finifh during that Space. Nay, 
 had there been any fuch Necellity, doubtlefs God 
 would have reveled it to him by the Spirit. And 
 confequently the Man Chrift Jefus could not poffi- 
 bly have been ignorant of it, even tho' it might be 
 fuppofed, that the WORD does not effentially and 
 neceflarily know it. 
 
 4. Since the WORD, during our Savior's Mini- 
 ftry, was either totally (which is-by much the moft 
 probable) or at Icaft partially quiefcent ; the Man 
 Chrift Jefus might not know the Day of Judg- 
 ment, even tho' the WORD himfelf did know ic. 
 Wherefore, 
 
 y. It does not follow^ that the WORD did not 
 know the Day of Judgment, becaufe the Son, 
 'vit. the Man Chrift Jefus, in whom the WORD 
 was (fornetimes at leaft) quiefcent, did not know 
 k. And therefore, 
 
 6. Since this Text does not teach , that the 
 WORD did not know the Day of Judgment ; 'tis 
 plain, that xhU Text does not teach, that the 
 
 WORD 
 
Chap.X. the Day of Judgment, 15J 
 
 WORD is inferior to the Very God, even the Fa> 
 ther, of whom it affirms, that he doth know that 
 Day. 
 
 But 'twill be objeded, that Chrift is the Son of 
 God, with refped to his Divine, as well as his 
 Human Nature ,• and therefore fmce our Savior 
 himfelf fays, that the Son did not know the Day of 
 Judgmenr, it follows, that neither the Divine, nor 
 the Human Nature of the Son knew it. For o- 
 therwife Chrift muft have pradis'd fuch an Equi- 
 vocation, as was utterly unworthy of his holy Cha- 
 rader. I3ut I anfwer, that how certainly foever 
 Chrift may be the Son of God with refped to his 
 Divine, as well as with refped to his Human Na- 
 ture ; yet he did notwithftanding mean nothing 
 elfe but his Human Nature, when he declared, 
 that the Son knew not the Day of Judgment ,• and 
 that in fo doing he ufed the utmoft Sincerity and 
 Plainefs of Speech, and was confequently by no 
 Means chargeable with the loweft Degree of Equi- 
 vocation upon that Account. 
 
 To ftate this Matter truly, we muft obferve, that 
 his Difciples inquired of him, when thofe Things 
 which he had fpoken, (hould come to pafs ,• and 
 what he fays in this controverted Text, is part 
 of the Anfwer he returned to their Inquiry. Ngw 
 Was his Human Nature alone that fpake at that 
 time, upon Suppofition that the WORD was qui- 
 efcent. And the Difciples did not then fufped, 
 that the WORD was united to the Man Chrift 
 Jefus, or that he had any other than a merely Hu- 
 man Nature. Therefore, fince our Savior and his 
 Difciples did by the Son jointly underftand the Hu- 
 man Nature only ,* well might our Savior affirm, 
 that the Son knew not the Day of Judgment. For 
 
 he. 
 
1 54 ^/ ^^^ Savior* s not knowing Chap. %* 
 
 he ufed that Phrafe in the fame Senfe, in which 
 he was fure the Difciples would underftand it. _■ , 
 
 'Twas not at that time our Savior's Duiy or In- 
 tention to inforrn his Difciples^ in how many diffe- 
 rent Senfes he might be called the Son of God ; or 
 to make known to them the hypcftatical Union of 
 the WORD and the Man Chrift Jefus, which My- 
 flery they were as yet perfedly unacquainted 
 with : but he refoived to return a proper and in- 
 telligible Anfwer to their Queftion. And accord^ 
 ingly he did not inform them^ that the Son ^ when 
 that Phrafe is ufed in fuch a Senfe as he had never 
 once hitherto ufed it iq ,• and confequently in fuch 
 a Senfe as his Difciples had never heard of, ar^d 
 were abfolutly Strangers tp^ and would moll cer-- 
 tainly not underftand him in j I fay^ our Savior 
 did not inform thern_j that the Son infuch a fecret 
 Senfe, or that the Son in any poffible Senfe, knew 
 not the Day of Judgnient : but he plainly and 
 roundly inform'd thern, that the Son^ in that Senfe, 
 which he therefore meant, becaufe they would ir^- 
 fallibly fo underftand him, that is, the Man Chrift 
 Jefus, knew it not. 
 
 Before I leave this Head, I fhall touch upon one 
 thing, which fome Perfons have efteem'd a confi- 
 derable Difficulty. Our Savior's Words run thus, 
 O^ that day .and that hour knowetb no man^ no not the 
 AngeU which are in hea^vcn^ neither the *So?;, hut the Fa- 
 ther, Mark 13.52. So that the Son is placed after 
 the Angels ; and riiuft therefore, in Conformity to 
 our Savior's Climax, be fuppoled at that time fu- 
 pcrior to them. Wherej^s the Son, fay they, was not 
 at that time fuperior to the Angels ptherwife than 
 with refped to his Divine Nature. And confe- 
 quently our Savior muft mean, that the Divine 
 Nature of the Son knew the Day of Judgment, no 
 
 more 
 
Chap. X. the Day of '[Judgment, 155 
 
 more than the Human Nature did. To this I re- 
 turn a double Anfwer. 
 
 1. One would think, that fuch Objedors have 
 never read the Epiftlc to the Hebrews^ wherein the 
 Man Chrift Jefus, upon the Account of his being 
 appointed Heir of all Things (which manifeftly re- 
 lates to his Human Nature, which alone was exalt- 
 ed) is declared to have been, and confequently 
 was when thefe Words were fpoken, fuperior to 
 the Angels in Dignity, tho' at that time he was 
 inferior to them in State and Condition, in Glory 
 and Happinefs. And therefore our Lord's Grada- 
 tion is ftric3:ly juft^ if the laft muft needs be efteem- 
 ed the moft worthy Perfon. But, 
 
 2. We ought to remember, that (to our own un- 
 fpeakable Comfort) the Man Chrift Jefus (hall be 
 our Judge at thaf great Day ,• and he conftantly de- 
 clar'd as much to his Difciples, even when they 
 little thought of his having a Divine Nature. So 
 that the Difciples might more reafonably exped to 
 be inform'd by him, when the Day of Judgment 
 fhould come, than by the moft exalted Seraph ; 
 becaufe it much more concerned him to know 
 that Day, than the brighteft Angel whatfoever. 
 Our Lord's Gradation therefore is truly natural,, 
 even tho' the Son had no^ beeo at that time fuperi- 
 or in Dignity to the Angels. For 'twas our Lord's 
 Deiign to place that Perfon laft, not barely who 
 was fuperior in Dignity (tho'even that alfo was 
 the Son's Right at that very Time) but who was 
 moft likely to be acquainted with that great Secret, 
 and confequently might moft probably have the 
 Power of imparting it to them. His Words do 
 not only bear, but neceffarily require, this Senfe. 
 *^*^ Whereas ye defire to know the Day and Hour 
 " of Judgment, and that I ftiould impart that Se- 
 
 " cret 
 
11^6 Reflexions m diver fe Texts, Chap. XL 
 
 " cret to you ; I affure you^ that no Man knows 
 '^ of that Day and that Hour. Neither do the 
 " Angels themfelves^ which are in Heaven, and 
 " always in God's Prefence, and who may there- 
 '^ fore be fuppofed in a great meafure Partakers of 
 " his Coiinfels ; even they do not know it. Nay, 
 ^' what is ftill more furprizing, neither do I my 
 '^ felt, tho' I am the Son of God, and the very 
 '^ Perfon who fhall then judge the whole Race of 
 " Mankind (and might for that Reafon have that 
 *^ Day and Hour imparted to me, rather than the 
 ^^ molt glorious Angel that ever was created ,• be- 
 ^^ caufe that Day and Hour do concern me infinit- 
 ^^ ly more than any of thofe bleffed Spirits) even I 
 " my felf do not know it. This Divine Decree 
 " has never been communicated to any Being 
 *^ whatfoever. None but God himfelf (whom you 
 *^ have fo often heard me call my Father) is ap- 
 *^ priz'd of it. 
 
 CHAP. XL 
 
 Of Chrifl'^s fAytngy My Father is greater than I ; 
 mth RefleB'tofis ufon diver fe other Texts, 
 
 THERE remain diverfe other Texts, which 
 are fuppofed to teach, that the WORD, or 
 Divine Nature of our Lord Jefus Chrif^, is inferior 
 to the Very God. Thefe I Ihall briefly confider and 
 explain. 
 
 3. Therefore, our Lord faid. My Father is greats 
 than /, John 14. 28. Now if the WORD was qui- 
 efcentj when this Declaration was made ,• then it 
 
 pro- 
 
Chap. XI. Reflect ions on diver fe Texts. x 57 
 
 proceeded from the Human Nature only. And 
 confcquently^ fmce the Dlfciples did not at that 
 Time in the leaft fufped, that the WORD was 
 united to th^ Man Chrift Jefus ,• but efteem'd their 
 Mailer to be a mere Man^ only conducted and 
 affifted by the Holy Spirit : why might not both 
 our Savior mean, and his Difciples undcrftand him 
 to mean, that the Father or Very God was greater 
 than the Man Chrift Jcfus } 
 
 You {a) tell us indeed^ that this Expoficion 13 
 flat .ind tnfiftd. But for what Reafon ? Why^ you 
 {b) fay, that v^hen any Perjbn affirms another to be greats 
 er than himfelf^ he mufi of necejjity^ mean^ greater than he 
 himfelf is in hi? greatefi Cafacity, But I pray, have 
 you any where proved, that the aforefaid Declara- 
 tion proceeded jointly from the Divine and Human 
 Natures? Or that 'twas made by the WORD, as. 
 well as by the Man Chrift Jefus? Or that the 
 WORD was not at that time quiefccnt ? Or 
 that the Difciples could undcrftand him otherwife 
 than in this, which you efteem a ^^f and inflpid 
 Senfe ^ Till you have evinced thefe things (the 
 'contrary to all which, I hope, has been evinced 
 above) you will be obliged to grant, that the Ex- 
 pofition I contend for, is really juft and true. Fof 
 tho' he that then fpake, muft mean, that the Fa- 
 ther was greater than himfelf in his greateft Capa- 
 city ; yet it muft be remembred, that 'twas only 
 the Man that fpake, the WORD being quiefcent. 
 And you will readily allow, that the Father, or 
 Very God, was greater than the Man Chrift Jefui 
 in his greateft Capacity ; even tho' he was at thac 
 
 (a) Script. Doft. />. 157. 
 
 (h) Reply to Mr. t^ilfons Friend, p. i 
 
 time^, 
 
i 5& R efle5tms on diverfe Texts: Chap. XL 
 
 time fo conduced and aflifted by the Holy Spirit, 
 as no other Man ever was or fhall be. 
 
 You urge indeed^ that tho' this is true, yet 'tis 
 of no great Moment j for what Wonder is it^ that 
 God fhould be greater than a Man ? 1 will there- 
 fore confider each Branch of this Plea. i. Could 
 not the Man Chrift Jefus affirm this, hecaufe 'tis no 
 Wonder ? His own Pradice anfwers the Queftion. 
 He had faid before^ My jloeep hear my voice^ and I 
 know them ,• nnd rhey foUow me. And I give unto them 
 eternal life^ and they jlmll ne'Ver perijh^ neither jha II any 
 fluck them out of my hand, , My Father which ga-ve them 
 tnCy is greater than all ^ and none is able to pluck them out 
 of my Father s hand, John lO. ij; 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 Won- 
 der, that God fhould be greater than the Devil or 
 wicked Men ? And why might not the Man Chrift 
 Jefus, who was at that very time able by he Spirit's 
 Affiftance to vanquifli even Devils, as well fay, My 
 Father is greater' than I; as he did unqueftionably de- 
 clare, that the Father is greater than the Devil or 
 wicked Men, when he faid. My Father is greater 
 than ally &Q. ? But, 2. could not the Man Chrift 
 Jefus affirm this, J^^^^^e 'tis of no greM Moment I 
 Surely 'tis fufficipn^,. if 'twas pertinent ^ which, 
 can't be queftion'd.^. The truth is, this. or any other 
 known Mfixim is. always of great Moment to the 
 Spe?.ker, when it enforces an Argument for a Re- 
 ligious Practice j as even the nioft common and 
 bbvious Truths very often do. And accord ingly^^. 
 Elihu^ whofe Difcourfe you will not call 'flat or 
 }l>7^/?j^, appiy'd this very Maxim, faying, Beholdyin 
 in this thou art not juft : I 'will anjwer thee, that God is 
 greater than many ]oh ^'^, 11. 
 
Chap. XI. R'efieciions on diverfe Texts. 159 
 
 I confefs, had our Lord iictered thefe Words, My 
 father is-^^rcattt than /, as lome wonderful Secret j 
 and offer d it to his Difciples as a |[^reac Difcovery, 
 that God w?<s grearer than a Man : yourObje6tion 
 had been well grounded. But that can't be pre- 
 tended. He only ufcd that I'eUevident Propofition, 
 as a Medium to prove ibmeching. of great Conle- 
 quence. He find, Ta bj've hejrcl^ how 1 [aid unto you ^ 
 I go uw.j ^ and come i^g^am unto yo it. If ye lonjed we, ye 
 would rtf i'.e • iftCiiUfe I faidy L 'go unto the Father, For 
 ^y Fthen li greater th.:7t /; The Father's being 
 greater th^n the Man Chrlft JefuSj (hew'd, that 
 the Man Chrift Jefus would' b.i 'much advantaged 
 by going to the Father.." And therefore, if they 
 loved their Ma fter^'-u/as. the. Man Chrift Jefus, they 
 would rejoice at his going 'to the. Father/ Becaufe 
 he that loves another, wilL prefer the Increafe of 
 that Peifon's Happinefs to his own prefent Satisfa- 
 <5i:ion. You fee rhereture, thatjithis Saying was re- 
 ally of great Momeuc. FcId 'cwas the Foundation 
 of our Savior's Argument, by whicn he evinced to 
 his Difciptes, how it became:tiherh to ad in thofe 
 Circumfbances, ' *"^ ; / > '-i 
 
 4. Our Lord-is frequently reprefcr ted during his 
 Miniftry J. as- inferior to the Father or Very God. 
 For Inlfarice, Afid I appoint utito you a kingdom , as 
 my .Father h.ith tippni?ucd tUftto rrt!^ Luk'C 21. 29/ Ths 
 Farter lo'V£:h the Soiiy and hath' gvven all thbjgs Jnpo hit 
 handy John (J'. ':^(^. For the Father judgeth no man ^ but 
 hath committed all judgment unto the Son, John f. 22^. 
 I can of mine own ftlf do nothivg ) as I hear , I judge : and 
 ^y judgment'is^ jufi'.^-'becaufe Ljeeknot mi92e 04,^ will , hut 
 the v/ili rftlk F:tlkr that fent fntj John <^. 30.' "Jefffsfaid 
 Unto thtm, If'Godwereyouh'Ffitheryye woiil.4 (•-.ve me : 
 for J proctedtd forth , and came /from God ; 7 1^ her cawc 
 I of wy jiify but he fent w^^ John 8. 42, , Jtfi^t 
 
 a- knowing 
 
j6o k efleEiions on diver fe Texts^ Chap. XT. 
 
 knowing that the Father had given all things into his 
 hands y and that he was eome from Gody and went to Gody 
 John 15. %. For the Father himfelflo'veth you y hecaufe 
 ye have loved mey and have believed that I came out from 
 God. I came forth from the Father y and am come into the 
 world: again I leave the world y and go to the Father^ 
 John 16. ijy 28. And this is life eternal y that they 
 might know thee the only true Gody iind J ejus Chrifi whom 
 thou hafifent John 17. 3. But thefe or the like Paffages 
 can create no Diffiulty. For it can't be concluded 
 From thenii that the WORD, or Divine Nature of 
 our Lord Jefus Chrift, is inferior to the Very God ; 
 Becaufe the WORD being then quiefeent_, they 
 relate merely to the Man Chrift Jefus. 
 
 f. Tho' our Lord is frequently reprefented, after 
 tiot only his Miniftry, but even his Afcenfion and 
 Glorification, as inferior to the Father or Very 
 God : yet Will plainly appear, that none of thofe 
 PaffagLS in which he is thus reprefented, can 
 prove, that the WORD, or our Savior's Divine 
 Nature, is inferior to the Father or the Very Godj 
 if the following Particulars be confidered. 
 
 Firfiy Our Lord is exprefly ftiled, even after his 
 Afcenfion and Glorification, fometimes fimply Gody 
 and fometimes fimply Man, You own, that he is 
 fimply ftiled Gody Heb. i. 8. where the Author of 
 that Epiftle applys to him that Paffage of the Pfal- 
 mift. Thy throney O God, is for ever and every &c. and 
 he is fimply ftyled Man, i Tim. 2. f . where the 
 Apoftle affures us, that there is one Gody and one medi- 
 stor between God and Adeny the man Chrifi Jefus, 
 
 Secondly y As he is exprefly ftiled Man, even after 
 his Afcenfion and Glorification ; fo is he alfo cal- 
 led by other Names, which belong to his Human 
 Nature. Particularly, i. He is called Jefus, which 
 is the Greek for Jojhuah^ a common Name of a Man 
 
 amongft 
 
diap. Xr. Reflect iofjs on diver fe Texts. i6\ 
 amongft the J^-ws. And accord in,n;ly, tho' 'twas 
 given our bleilcd Lord by Divine Command, be- 
 caufe (as the Name Jo^iuah xmypoas Salvation or Dc^ 
 llveraijce) he lliould be a Deliverer or Savior in 1 
 moft remarkable Senle (for he fhculdp'L'e his people 
 fro7n their fiTis^ Matt. I. 21.) yet flill it betokened 
 that Man, whom the bleffed Virgin miraculoufly 
 brought into the World, and imply'd nothing of aa 
 incarnat God in the Notation of it. 2. The Name 
 Chrifl- or Mejfiah^ tho' 'twas frequently given in the 
 Jnrijh Church upon other Occafions, yet is cer- 
 tainly apply'd to the Bleffed Jefus upon the ac- 
 counc of that anointing with the Spirit, by wliich 
 he was evidenc'd to be that very Chrift or Meffiah 
 yj.r 'dio^, or by way of Eminence, whofe coming 
 was foretold by the ancient Prophets, and was fo 
 impatiently expeded by ihcjtu^s. And tho' the 
 WORD was indeed, and ought to be (fo the Di- 
 vine Wifdom faw fir) united to the Man Chrift 
 Jefus • yet as that anointing was poured out on the 
 Human Nature only (for the WORD was not ca- 
 pable of it) fo the Name Chrifi or Mefjlah means no 
 more, than that particular Man J^V'-^y who was 
 thus wonderfully anointed by the Spirit without 
 Meafure, and who is accordingly called by Sz.Pauly 
 I T1777. 2. 5". in exprefs Terms, the man Chrifi Jefus. 
 ^. Our Lord (as I have fhewn already) is alfo ftiled 
 the Son 0^ God with refpe(fl to his Human Nature, 
 ^iz,. becaufe he was in a miraculous Manner be- 
 gotten by the Holy Ghoft, and God was as truly 
 and properly his Father, as a Man is the Father of 
 his own Child. And accordingly, whenfoeVer Our 
 Savior is ftiled the Son of God, or God is (filed tht? 
 Father of our Savior, that Appellation is (I think) 
 
 M con- 
 
1 62 Refiecfio^s on diver fe Texts, Chap. XL 
 
 conftantly given him upon the Account of his Hu- 
 man Nature. 
 
 For tho' I freely grant the Truth of what our 
 Divines ufually call the Eternal Generation of the 
 WORD3 or Divine Nature of our Lord ; yet I do 
 liot find^ that in the Phrafe of holy Scripture^ our 
 Savior is call'd the Son of God, or that God is faid 
 to be his Father^ othervvife than upon the Account 
 of his being Man^ or an incarnat God. The Cer- 
 tainty of this Obfervation will appear by this one 
 Confiderationj 1;/:^. that as our bleffed Savior is in 
 the holy Scriptures confeffedly called the Son of 
 God, and God is alfo therein called his Father, up- 
 on the account of his Human Nature : fo there is 
 not one Tingle Text of Scripture, wherein either 
 our Savior is called God's Son, or God is called his 
 Father, but what either neceffarily muft, or very 
 fairly may, be underftood with veSpt6t to his Incar- 
 nat State. And I dare fay, you'll foon be convin- 
 ced of this, if you fearch 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 Chrift's Divine Nature, upon fome 
 Account antecedent to the Incarnation. Parti- 
 cularly you'll obferve, that even in Matt, 28. 19. 
 where the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft are fo ex- 
 prefly mentioned, the Son denotes the incarnat 
 Mefliah, whofe Difciples we are as he was incar- 
 nat ; and confequently he is not even in that Text 
 called the Son of the Father upon any Account an- 
 tecedent to the Incarnation. 
 
 As for thefe Words, v^ho fljall declare his Generation y 
 Acts 833. and the Comparifon of our Lord to 
 Mdchiz,^clech^ as being Without father^ without mother, 
 without (lefcent^ having neither hegimiivg of days, nor end 
 
Chap. XL RefieBiofJS on diver fe Texts. i5} 
 
 of life j hut rrjiide like unto the So?j ofGod^ abidcth a priefi 
 continually^ Heb.7. 3. thefe Texts do nianifeflly 
 relate to Chrift's Human Nature^ rhe former of 
 rhem being pare of the Account of his Sufferings 
 in the Flefh^ and the latter affirming the fame of 
 Melcbiz,eJech^ which is affirmed of Chrift. And con- 
 fequently neither of them can be ftrained to figni- 
 fy the Eternal Generation of the WORD, or Di- 
 vine Nature of Chrift. 
 
 Thirdly^ Becaufe our Lord, even after his Afcen- 
 fion and Glorification, is called fcmetimes God and 
 fometimes Man^ and at other Times denoted by 
 fuch Titles, as belong to him refpeAively upon the 
 account of either his Divine or his Human Na- 
 ture ; 'tis plain, that in his prefent exalted State 
 neither of his Natures is deftroy'd, nor are they 
 confounded ,• but he continues perfed God and per- 
 fect Man. Wherefore, 
 
 Fourthly^ Since the two Natures are ftill diftincfl 
 and diverfe in themfelves, tho' fo clofely united to 
 each other,- therefore thofe thinp may Ifill be 
 fpoken of him as Man, which can t be fpokenof 
 him as God ,* and thofe things may ftill be fpoken 
 of him as God, which can'c be fpoken of him as 
 Man. And accordingly. 
 
 Fifthly^ When any thing is fpoken of him under 
 the Name of Man, or under any of thofe Titles 
 which belong to him as Man, we ought not to un- 
 derifand thofe things of, or apply them to, his Di- 
 vine Nature : and when any thing is fpoken of him 
 under the Name of God, or under Ibme Title which 
 belongs to him as God, we ought not to underftand 
 thofe things of, or apply them to, his Human Na- 
 ture. I fay, we ought not to ftretch what is thus 
 refpedively fpoken, to that Nature which ic is not 
 
 M z prima- 
 
164 Refleciions on diver fe Texts. Chap. XL 
 
 primarily applicable to, or grounded on ,• unlefs 
 there be manifeft Reafon from the Context^ or 
 from the Islature of the things fpoken^ lo to do. 
 For, 
 
 Sixthly y By reafon of the Union of the two Na- 
 tures, fome things are affirmed of the God^ which 
 are true o\ the Human Nature only ; and other 
 things are affirmed of the Man, which are true of 
 the Divine Nature only. For Inftance, 'tis affirm- 
 ed of the God, that he was received up into glory, 
 I Tim. ;. 16. which evidently regards the Exalta- 
 tion of the Man Chrift Jelus, as 1 have (c) already 
 Ihewn : and 'tis affirmed of him, through ivhofe blood 
 we have redemption, Col. i. 14, 20. and who is the fir fi 
 horn fnm the dead, v. 18. (which Particulars do ma- 
 nifeftiy point at, and belong to, Chrift's Human 
 Nature) that by him were all things creaied^ Col. i. 16. 
 which was certainly don by the WORD or Divine 
 Nature. In thefe Cafes, the plain Meaning is, that 
 fuch things are affirmed of that compounded Per- 
 fon, who becaufe he has two Natures, is therefore 
 fignify'd by the Names or Titles of either of them, 
 as the Divine Penmen thought mofi: proper ; there 
 .being no Name given to Chrift by ini'pired Wri- 
 ters, which denotes both Natures united in one 
 Perion, fuch as ^dvQ^^^Q-j God-Man, T^oyav^^ecTrQ-, 
 Word-Man, or the like. For tho' the Name Emma- 
 nuel, which feems pretty nearly to denote the two 
 Natures united, is apply'd to our Lord, Matt. i. 23. 
 yet 'tis notorious, that he is not elfewhere called by 
 that Name, or by any other of the fame Import. 
 But then. 
 
 (c) Chap. 6. p. 35. . 
 
 Seventhly^ 
 
Chap. XI. Refleclioris on diverfe Texts, 165 
 
 Se^enthly^ It is to be noted, that when the in- 
 fpired Writers fpeak of our holy Redeemer, they 
 give him fuch a Name (whether implying his be- 
 ing God or Man) as the firft thing chey mention 
 of him, does require, or the principal thing they 
 have in view, diredts them to. And whit ever 
 things are afterwards mentioned of him un'ic • the 
 Name or Title or that Nature, to which they lo 
 not originally and properly belong, are (by a I'ort 
 of Cacachrefis) predicated of the fame SubjeJ 
 confider'd in a different Capacity, merely to avoid 
 the Inconveniency of giving quite ditfcrent Names 
 or Titles to the fame Subjed:, at the fame time, 
 upon the account of" the different Capacity s *tis 
 confidercd in. . 
 
 An Example or two will make this Matter ob- 
 vious to the meaneft Reader. St. ?aul fays, IVnh^ 
 out ControTjerfy grejt is the my fiery of godlinefs : G.'d was 
 ntanifeft in the flejl), jujiified in the Sfirit^ feea of An^ 
 gels, preached unto the Gentiles^ believed on in the ivnrldy 
 received up into glory y I Tim. 3. 16. In this PafTige 
 God is the Subjed. For why ? Being manifefted 
 in the Flefli is moft truly affirmed of God ; and in 
 order to exprefs this Affirmation, God mud needs 
 be the Subjed. And the principal View the Apo- 
 ftle had, was to reprefent the Greatnels of the My- 
 ftery of Godlinefs, of which the Manifeftation of 
 God in the Flefh was the moft evident Dcmonftra- 
 tion. But then, becaufe the Manifeilation of God 
 in the Flefh was not the whole of that Myftery, 
 but diverfe other Particulars did moil: juftiy de- 
 ferve our Notice, which are all of them true of 
 that compounded Perfon, who is juitly Ityled God 
 by reafon of his Divine Nature • therefore the A- 
 poftlc continues the Predicat without altering the 
 
 M : Name 
 
1 66 Reflections on dsverfe Texts, Chap. XI. 
 
 !Name of the Subject, and proceeds to affirm of 
 him (tho' thofe Affirmations regard him not as 
 God^ but as Man ,• that is^ becaufe he was God 
 manifefted in the Flefii, or God-Man) that he was 
 
 jujtifed in the Sfirit^ feen of Angels^ freached unto the 
 GentileSy belkijtd on in the world^ received tip into glory * 
 that iSj the Man Chrift Jefus {even the other Na- 
 ture united to God, and become one and the fame 
 Pericn with God, and therefore fufficiently point- 
 ed at under the Name of the fuperior Nature) was 
 juftiiied, or dcmonftrated to be what he pretended, 
 in or ^7 the Spiric, &c. 
 
 Again, St. PWfays, that God hath tranflated us 
 into the kingdom of his dear Son'^ In 7vhoryi we have re^ 
 demotion through his blocd^ even the forgivenefs of [ins, 
 Wb'j is the im^ge of the invifihle God^ the firfi-horn of 
 every creature. For by him were all things created^ that 
 are in heaven^ and that are in earthy vi/ible and invlfiblej 
 Tvhether they be thrones y or dominions^ or principalitiesy or 
 powers : all things were created by him^ and for him^ &c. 
 Col. I. I ^, &c. You fee, the Subjed is God's Son j 
 and Chrift is undoubtedly God's Son as to his Hu- 
 man Nature. And the firft thing affirmed of God's 
 Son is, that in him we have redemption through his 
 bloody whicii manifeftly relates to his Human Na- 
 ture. 'Twas therefore neceflary, that the Sub- 
 \^Ct (hould be denoted by fome Name or Title 
 which belonged to him as Man. But then, becaufe 
 the principal View of the Apoftle, in that glorious 
 Charader which follows, was to reprefent the Dig- 
 nity of that Man, through whole Bloud we have 
 Redemption j therefore he proceeds to affirm (by 
 way of Predicat to the fame Subje^^l) fucli things 
 of God's Son, as manifeftly relate to his Divine 
 Nature^ and can't poffibly be underftood of, or re- 
 late 
 
Chap. XL Reflexions on diver fe Texts ^ 167 
 
 late to, his Human Nature ; faying cxprefly, that 
 by him ivere all thht^s created^ that iire in hcavev^ avd 
 that are in earthy 'vifible and inijifibky v>hethcr they be . 
 thro7teSy or dominioyts^ or principalities ^ or powers : all 
 things vere created by him^ and for him. That is, the 
 Apoftle affirms fuch things of him, whom he at firfl 
 characSterizes as a Man, which can be true of him 
 only as he is God. 
 
 Bfiefiy then, whenfoever our Lord is fpoken of 
 under the Name or Title of a Man, we mud un- 
 derftand his Human Narure only ; and when he is 
 fpoken of under the Name or Title of God, we 
 muft underftand his Divine Nature only : except 
 we arc obliged to do otherwife for the Rcafons 
 already given. That is^ we muft always reflrain 
 (when the Context and Circumftances will permit) 
 what is refpe(5lively fpoken of each Nature, to the 
 Nature it properly belongs to, confidered not as 
 adually feparated from, but only as it is in it felf 
 really diftind from^ tho' at the fame time infepa- 
 rably united to^ the other Nature. For, as I have 
 already obferved^ none of the feveral Names or 
 Titles given in the Holy Scriptures to our Savior, 
 does include or denote his two Natures united in 
 one Perfon : but each of them does refpe61:ively 
 fignify that Nature, upon the account of which it 
 does originally appertain to him. 
 
 By this great Numbers of Texts become perfed- 
 ly intelligible, and confiderable Difficultys are very 
 eafily removed.. For if this Rule be duly obferved, 
 many Pafl^^ges will inftantly appear to be fpoken 
 of the Man Chrifl: Jefus only, wichout any Rtgard 
 to the WORD or Divine Nature, which^ if un- 
 derftood of theWO R D or Divine Nature, or of 
 the whole God-Man, would really imply, that the 
 
 M 4 WORD 
 
1 68 Refieclions on diver fe Texts, Cbap. XI. 
 
 WORD, or Chrift's Divine Nature, is inferior to 
 the Very God. Such are thefe which follow, yirid 
 ye are ChrijFj : and Chrifl is God\<^ i Cor. 3. 25. But 
 to US there is hut one God, the Father, of whom are all 
 things, and rre in him *, and one Lord Jeftii Chrift, by 
 whot/i are all things, and we by him, i Cor. 8.6. ^^P 
 J would have yon know, that the head of every man is 
 Chrift \ and the head of the woman is the m.w, and the 
 head of Chrifl is God, i Cor. II. 3. Then cometh the 
 end, when he fl^all have delivered up the kingdom to Cod^ 
 even the Father • when he fiall have p^t down all ntUy 
 and all authority and power. For he mnft reiqn till he hath 
 flit all enemies under htsfeet. The lafi enemy that jhall be 
 deftroyed is Death. For he hath put all things under his 
 feet. But when he faith, all things are put tinder him, it 
 is manifefi thiU he is is excepted, which did put all things 
 under him. And when all things fljall be fahdued unto hnn, 
 then jhall the Son afo himfelj be fubjcB unto him that pHt 
 all thi?7gs under him, that God may be all in all, 1 Cor. 
 
 If. 24 28. For ye know the grace of our Lord 
 
 Jefus Chrifl, that though he was rich, yet for your fakes 
 he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich^ 
 1 Cor. 8. 9. Now that he afcende^l, what is it but that 
 ■ he aljo aejcfnded into the lower parts oj the earth ? He that 
 defended. Is the fame alfo that afcended up far above all 
 heavens, that he might fill all things, Ephef. 4. 9^ lo. 
 For both he that farUifieihy and they who are fanSlified (^viz,. 
 as you your felf id) explain it, Chrift and all good 
 Chriitians) are all oj- one (viz,, as you rightly fay^ of 
 Goa) for which caufe he is not ajhamed to call them bre- 
 thren, Htb. 2. II. For it is not poffible that the blood of 
 bulb and of goats^ jjjould take away fins. Wherefore when 
 
 (d) Sciipt. UoQi. p. 189. 
 
 he 
 
Chap. XI. Refle^HorJS on diver fe Tesits. 169 
 
 bt Cometh into the xvorld^ he faith. Sacrifice and offering 
 thou rvoMeji riot^ hnt a body hafi thou prepared me : In 
 burnt offerings andJMcrifices for fin thou h^fl had no plea- 
 fur e : Then jaidl, Lo^ I come (in the volume of the booh 
 it is written of me) to do thy will, OGod. j4bove, when 
 He faid. Sacrifice^ and offering, and burnt offerings, and 
 offering for fin thou wouldtft not ^neither hadfi pie afure there- 
 iti^ (which are offered by the law) Then faid he, I.o^ I come 
 to do thy will^ O Cod, He taketh away the firfi-^ that he 
 may eflabliflj the jecond. By the which will we are fanEli- 
 fied, through the offering o'' tioe body of Jefus Chrifi once 
 
 for all, Heb. 10.4 10. 
 
 Thus alio are thofe Texts to be underftood_, in 
 which the Very God is ftyled f '-f God^ the Father, or 
 the God and Father of Our Lord Jefus Chrift. That ye 
 may with one mind and one r.iOinrj olorifis C.-od, even the 
 father of our Lord Jefu^s Chrifl, Rom. 19.6. Bleffed be 
 Cod^ even the Father'of our Lord 'jefiM Chrifl, the Father 
 . of mercies, and the God of all comfort, 2 Cor. 1.3. The 
 God and Father of our Lord Jefm Chrift, which is bluffed 
 for evermore, knoweth that 1 lie not, 2 Cor. ii. ir, 
 Bleffed be the God and Father of our Lord fefu4 Chnft, 
 who hath bleffed us with all fpiritud bleffing^ in heavetjly 
 places in Chrifl, Ephef. i. 3. That the Cod of our Lord 
 Jeftu Chrift, the Fuiher of glory, may give unto you the Spi' 
 rit ofwifdom and revelation, in the knowledge of him, v. i 7. 
 We give thanks to God, and the Father of oitr Lord Jefiii 
 Chrift, praying always for you^ Col. 1.3. Bleffed be the 
 Cod and Father of our Lord Jefpvs thrift, which accordinp- 
 to his abundant mercy, hath begotten us again unto a lively 
 hope, by the refurre^ion of Jefm Chrift from the dead, 
 I Pet. 1.3. And hath made m kings nndpriefls unto God 
 and his Father ; to him be glory and dominion for ever and 
 ever, Amen^ Rev. i. 6. 
 
 Thus 
 
1 70 RefleBfons on diver fe Texts. Chap. XI. 
 
 Thus alfo is our blefled Savior himfelf to be un- 
 derflood in thefe remarkable Texts. Jefus faith un- 
 to her^ Touch me not : for I am not yet afcended to my "Fa- 
 ther : hut go to my brethren^ and fay unto them^ I afcend 
 unto my Father^ and your Father ^ and to my God^ and your 
 Gody John 20. 17. Him that overcometh^ Tvill I make 
 a pilar in the temple of my God^ and he fliall go no more 
 out : and l-iviU 7vrite upon him the name of my God^ and 
 the name of the city of my God^ which is new Jerufalem, 
 which Cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will 
 write uf on him my new name^ Rev. 5. 12. 
 
 To thefe I may add the following Paflages j And 
 he was cloathed ivith a 'vefture dipt in blood : and his name 
 is called J The Word ofGod^ Rev. 19. 13. Jnd out of his 
 mouth goetb a jharp fwcrd^ that with it he jhould fmtte the 
 Nations : and he jhall rule them with a rod of iron : and he 
 treadeth the wine-prefs of the fiercenefs and wrath of Al- 
 mighty Gody V. I 5- . 
 
 I confefsj there are fome other Particulars affirm- 
 ed of our bleffed Lord v/ith refpecft to his Human 
 Nature^ which have been too commonly under- 
 ftoodofthe WORD or his Divine Nature , and 
 which vvou*d, if that Interpretation were juft, 
 fairly prove^ that the WORD or Divine Nature 
 oi Chrift, is inferior to the Very God. Upon 
 thefe therefore I fhall bellow a few Obfervati- 
 ons. 
 
 Our Lord is called the Image of the Jnuifihle God^ 
 and the firfi bom of e'very Creature^ Col. I. if. But 
 how does it certainly appear^ that thefe Phrafes 
 j-elate to the WORD or his Divine Nature ? 
 God is faid to have created Man ift his own image ^ 
 Gen. I. 27. and he is accordingly the image and 
 glory of Gody i Cor. 11. 7. particularly as he is the 
 Reprefentativc of God^ exercifing Authority in 
 
 God ;V 
 
Chap. XI. ' Refleciions on diver fe Texts. i-yi 
 
 God's Name in this lower World ,- and thus is 
 Chrift the image of God^ z Cor. 4. 4. even the image 
 of the invifihle GoJ, Col. I. 1^. by beings even in 
 his Human Nature, God's Rcprelbncacive ,• be- 
 caufe, I. His preexiftenc Soul did in the old Times 
 perfonac the Divine Majefty ; and 2. The Man 
 Chrid Jefus does now exercife God's Dominion 
 over the whole Creation. And accordingly *tis ob- 
 iervable, that the Apoftie ftyles Chrift the Image 
 of the invifible God, plainly intimating, that the 
 Image it felf is ^ifwU ,• and confequently that 
 Phrafe muft be underftood as I have already ex- 
 plained it. And as for the other Phrafe, the Man 
 Chrift Jefus is moft certainly the flrjt bom of every 
 creature, not only, I. becaul'e his Human Soul was 
 created before all other Creatures, as I have (e) al- 
 ready faid 5 but alfo, 2. becaufe he is now infla- 
 ted in the acflual Poffeffiori of the yus Primogeniti 
 (which the WORD, or his Divine Nature, is 
 efTentially incapable of receiving) as being ada- 
 ally conftituted, and in Fad become, what he was 
 not before his Exaltation, viz^. the Governor of 
 all created Beings. 
 
 Again, 'tis affirmed of Chrift, Col. 2.9. that in him 
 dwelleth all the fulnejs of the Godhead cmf^Tjaai (that is, 
 not as we tranflate it, bodily ; but as <7w^, is cppofed 
 to oKiA, V. 17.) really or truly. Now this may be 
 moft juftly affirmed of the Man Chrift Jefus, For 
 if the Fulnefs of the Godhead fignifys the WORD 
 or Divine Nature ,• it really and truly dwells in 
 the Man to whom 'tis perlbnally united. But if 
 ^^o-nif fignifys the Dominion of God, as you (f) con- 
 
 (e) Chap. 7. p. 89. 
 
 (f) Reply to Bilhop GaJireU, p. 283. 
 
 tend 
 
172 RejIeBions on diver fe Texts, Chap. XI. 
 
 tend it does ; 'tis certain^ that the Man Chrifl: Je- 
 fus does acflually exercife it at prefent in the mod 
 ample Manner, as God's Vicegerent in his King- 
 dom of the Creation. 
 
 A-gain we read^ that God kith in thefe lift days 
 fpoken unto Zis by his Son^ whom he hath affointcd heir of 
 all things y by whom aljo he made the 7Vorlds, IVho being 
 the brightnejs of his Glory ^ and the exfrefs image of his 
 perfon^ and upholding all things by the iverd of his power ^ 
 when he had by himfclf purged our fins^ fat down on the 
 right hand of the Majejfy on high : Being made fo much 
 better than the Angels^ as he hath by inheritance obtained 
 a more excellent 'Name than they. For unto which of the 
 Angels (aid he at any time^ Thou art my Son^ this day 
 have I begotten thee 1^ And again^ I will be to him a Fa- 
 ther^ and he fhall be to me a Son ? A/id again^ when he 
 hringeth in the fir ft born into the World ^ he faith ^ And 
 let Ml the Angels of God worjhip him. And of the Angels 
 he faith, Who maketh his Angels fpirits, and his minifiers 
 a flame of fire. But unto the Son he faith , Thy throne^ 
 O Gody is for ever and t'v&r : a [ceptre of righteoufnejs is 
 the fceptre of thy kingdom : Thou haft loved right eoufnefs^ 
 and hated iniquity ^ therefore God^ even thy God hath a^ 
 nointed thee with the oyl of gladnefs above thy fellows. 
 And thou. Lord, in the beginning hafl laid the foundation 
 of the earth ^ and the heavtns are the Works of thine hands. 
 They fljall pzrifh, but th'>u remaimfi : and they all fl)all 
 wax eld as doth a Garment ,• And as a veflure flndt thou 
 fold them upy and they fliall be changed : but thou art the 
 fame, and thy years fhall not fail. But to which of the 
 Angds fa id he at any time. Sit on my right hand^ until I 
 make thine enemies thy footftool ? Are they not all mini- 
 jiring fpirits, fent forth to minifitr fur them ivbo jl^all be 
 heirs offalvation ? Heb. 1 . 2 14. 
 
 Now, 
 
Chap. XI. Reflt^ions on diverfe Texts. 1 7 j 
 
 Now, as I have already proved, that thefe 
 Words, Taou hafi loved rlghteoufvijsy and bciicd iniqui- 
 ty • therefore Gody even thy God hath anointed thee with 
 the oyl of gladncfi above thy Fellows, v. 9. do relate to 
 the Human Nature ; fo I grant, that thefe Expref- 
 fions, by whom alfo he mads the fVorldsy v. 2. and thofe 
 Quotations from the Pfalmift, v. 6,8,10, 11, 12. 
 do relate to the Divine Nature. And 1 am perfua- 
 ded, nobody will pretend, that any of thefe Parti- 
 culars do prove or imply, that the WORD, or Di- 
 vine Nature, is inferior to the Very God. But 
 then, as for the other ^ffirmations concerning the 
 Son, let them never fo plainly prove or imply aa 
 Inferiority to the Very God, yet they are mod fair- 
 ly and manifeftly to be underftood of the Maa 
 Chrift Jefus. 
 
 For Inftance, the Man Chrift Jefus is God's Son^ 
 and is appointed heir cf all things, v. 2. He is the 
 ATnv'^AiTtJjcLy the brightnefs of God's glory, and the exprpfs 
 image of his perfon or Subltance ; that is, he is the 
 glorious vifible Reprefentative of the invifible Ma- 
 jefty of the Very God. And he upholds (or as ^sj^j' 
 (g) ought in this Place to be rendred, he governs) all 
 things by the word of his power, or his powerful Word ^ 
 that is, the whole Creation is at his Command. 
 He when he had by himfelf purged our fins ^ fat down on the 
 right hand of the majefiy on high : Being made fo much 
 better than the Angels, as he hath by inheritance ohtained 
 a more excellent nafne than they, v. 5,4. By his Refur- 
 redion thofe Words of Vfal, 2. 9. were verify'd. 
 Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. For 
 St. Taul fays, We declare unto you glad tidings, how that 
 
 ig) See Grotiui on the Place. 
 
 tht 
 
174 Reflect ions on diver fe Texts. Chap. XI. 
 
 the frcwije which was made unto the fathers^ God hath 
 fulfilled the [awe unto us their children^ in that he hath 
 raifed up Jefus again; as it is alfo -written in the feeond 
 Tfalm^ Thou art my Son^ this day have I begotten thee. 
 Ads 13. ;2^ 53. To him thofe Words are apply 'd, 
 I will be to him a Father , and he jhall be to me a Son, 
 V. f. To him God faid^ Sit on my right hand, until I 
 make thine enemies thy footfrool^ V. 13. For Chrift him- 
 felf has explained that Paffage of his Human Na- 
 ture^ by faying to the Pharifees, What think ye of 
 Chrifi ? Whofe Jon is he ? They fay unto him. The fon of 
 David, He faith unto them^ How then doth David in 
 fpirit call him Lord, fayivg. The Lord faid unto my Lord, 
 Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy 
 footfiool ? If David then call him Lord, how is he his Son^ 
 
 Matt. 22. 42 45". 
 
 In fine, I muft now take the Liberty of affirm- 
 ing, that there is not one Text, which fpeaks of 
 our bleffed Savior in fuch a manner, as implies his 
 being inferior to the Very God, but what either 
 neceffarily muft, or moft fairly may, be underftood 
 of the Man Chrift Jefus, or our Savior's Human 
 Nature only. And therefore I conclude (and I 
 hope you are by this time fenfible) that the Holy 
 Scriptures do not teach, that the WORD, or Di- 
 vine Nature of our Lord Jefus Chrift, is inferior to 
 the Very God. 
 
 CHAR 
 
Chap. XIL That the WORD is^ &c. 175 
 
 CHAP. XII. 
 
 That rfje Holy Scr'tftures do teach^ that the IVORD^ 
 or Divine Nature of our Lord 'Jefus Chrtjl^ is 
 the Very God. 
 
 SECONDLT, I fhall now prove, that the Holy 
 Scriprures do teach, that the WORD, or Di- 
 vine Nature of our Lord Jefus Chrift, is the Very 
 God. And, 
 
 FirJI-^ the Evangelift fays, 'Ey d^x? ^ « ^o>©-, t^ 
 
 ^oy^-VS f^^jg r ^ovy J9 ^oi Im Ao>©-, hi the begin- 
 nivg was the WORD, and the WORD 'ivas with God^ 
 artdtheVJOKD was God^ John i. i. That the one 
 felfexiftent Being is meant by ^00 God, in the fe- 
 cond Member of this Verfe, as you your felf do 
 grant, fo no other Perfon denys, that I know of. 
 And that the WORD is affirmed to be Mu God, in 
 the third Member of it, every Man's Eyes will de- 
 monftrat to him. But then it is queftioned, what 
 is the proper Signification of St^?, God. That the 
 one felfexiftent Being is infinitly perfed: and glori- 
 ous, the Author and Preferver, not only of Man, 
 but alfo of all other Beings whatfoever ; and 
 that he is truly and properly called 3*i<, God ,• is 
 confeffed on all hands, particularly by your felf 
 and me: but then, whether the Name -^s^o God^ 
 when given to the one felfexiftent Being, does 
 either, i. imply his Selfexiftence, or 2. denote the 
 infinit Perfedion and Glory of his ElTence, or 
 3. exprefs his Relation to us, as our Creator, and 
 confequently our Lord and Governor ^ I perceive^ 
 you and I fhall not eafily agree. 
 
 In 
 
, ,6 Thit the WORD is Chap XII. 
 
 In your (^a) Opinion, The Word God, -when fpokeft 
 of the Either himjclf (viz,, the one felfexiftenc Being) 
 is m'uer intendtd in Serif ture to exprefs Pbilofophically bis 
 ahfiraB Metciphyjical Attributes : but to raife in us a 
 lection of his y^t tributes relative to us^ bis fupreme Domi- 
 nion^ Authority^ Po-iver, Jufiice^ Goodnefs, &c. And 
 again (/')'you lay. That the Word dto^, God, has i?i 
 Script we ^ avd in all the Bocks of Morality and Religion^ a 
 relative Si^aniflcation ^ and ?;of, as.in Metaphyseal Books^ 
 an ablolure one. As is evident from the relative Terms ^ 
 7vhicb iv Moral Writings may always he joined with it» 
 For hj'i :nce^ in the fame manner ai lue fay^ my Father^ 
 my Kr^gj and the like : fo it is proper alfo to fay^ my 
 God^ /.^g Go^of Ifrael, the Go^ of the tJniverfe, and 
 the like I which Words are exprefflve of Dominion and GjOt 
 •vernment. But in the Adetaphyfical Way it cannot he faid^ 
 my infinite Suhfiance^ the infinite Suhfi^ance of Ifrael, or 
 the like. Now whether this Notion of yours be true^ 
 I v/ill not difpute. For indeed 1 need not do it. 
 
 You (c) own_, that the Scripture^ when it mentions 
 God ahfolutely and by waj of Eminence^ always means 
 (what you call) the Verfon of the Father^ that is, the 
 one felfexiftenc Being, whom I call the Very God. 
 TSIow be pleafed to obferve the following Particu- 
 lars. Firfi^ The S jriptures of the Old Teftament 
 do all along declare, chat there is but one God^ 
 vix^. the one felfexiftent Being alone, whom the 
 Jews worlliipped. Mnfcs aiHired them, that the Lord 
 he Is God^ and that there is none elfe befides him^ Deut. 
 4. 3)". 2indi Know therefore this day^ and confider it in 
 thine hearty tb.it the Lord he is God in heaven ahove^ and 
 upon the earth beneath ; there is none elfe^ v. :i^^. And 
 
 (a) Scripture Doftr. p. 29^. 
 
 (f?) Rtp]y toUii\\np Gajirell, p. 284. 
 
 (e) Scripture Doftr. p. 16$. 
 
 h(% 
 
Chap. XII. the Very God. 177 
 
 he introduces God himfelf uttering thefe Words, 
 See fjov'y that ly even I am he^ and there is no God v^tth 
 me^ Deut. ;2. :59. Hannah alio fays in her Prayer, 
 There is none holy as the Lord ; jor there is none be fide thee^ 
 I Sam. 2. 2. And God himfelf fays by the Pro- 
 phet, I am firjly and I am the lafi : and hefides me there 
 is no Gody Ifa. 44. 6. and prcfcntly after. Is there a 
 a God hefides me ? Tea, there is no God. I know not anjy 
 V. 8. And again, I am the Lord, and there is none elje ; 
 there is no God be fides me, Ifa. 45'. 5". And again, I am 
 God, and there ts none elfe ; I am God, and there is none 
 like me, Ifa. 46. 9. Secondly, During the Time of 
 his Miniftry, our Savior himfelf declared, that his 
 Father, viz.. the God of the Jews, or the one felf- 
 exiftent Being, is the only true God, John 17. 5. 
 Thirdly, After our Lord's Afcenfion, his Difciples 
 every where preached, that there is but one God, 
 viz.. the felfexiilent Being. Particularly St. VauL 
 fays. We know, that an idol is nothing in the world^ and 
 that there is none other God but one. For tho there be that 
 are called Gods, whether in heaven or in earth (as there 
 he Gods many, and Lords many) But to us there is but one 
 God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him : 
 and one Lord Jefus Chrifi, by whom are all things, ami 
 we by him, i Cor. 8. 4, 9, 6. 
 
 You fee, how fully and exprefly it has been de- 
 clared, both under the Law and under the Gofpel, 
 that there is but one God. And what muft all 
 thefe Declarations mean ^ What is the natural 
 Senfe and Import of them ? Why, you would fain 
 (^) perfuade us, that the Reafon, why the Scripture, th(/ 
 it jliles the Father God, and alfo ftiles the Son God ; yet 
 at the fame time alv^ap declares, there is but one God ; is 
 becauje, in the Monarchy of the Univerje, there is but one 
 
 (d) Script. Do£l. Part 2. Prop. 39. />. 331* 
 
 N Aurho^ 
 
178 The WORD is Chap.XII. 
 
 Authorit}^^ Original in the Father, Deri'vative in the 
 Son, &c. Now by the Father you mean the felf- 
 exiftent Being, whom I call the Very God: and by 
 the Son you mean our Savior Chrilt with refped 
 to his Divine Nature, that is, the WORD. So 
 that in your Opinion, the Reafon why the Scri- 
 pture, tho' it ftiles the felfexiftent Being God, and 
 alfo ftiles the WORD God, yet at the fame time al- 
 ways declares there is but one God ; is becaufejin 
 the Monarchy of the Univerfe, there is but one Au- 
 thority, Original in the felfexiftent Being, Deri- 
 vative in the WORD, &c. And confequently you 
 would have us underftand the feveral Paffages be- 
 fore recited, not of a Numerical Unity of Being, 
 but of an Unity of Authority ,• that is, you think, 
 the Scriptures do permit us to believe, that there are 
 in Number more Gods than one (the one Supreme, 
 and the other Subordinat) tho' there is but one 
 Authority in them, communicated from the one to 
 the other. 
 
 But this Notion is utterly irreconcilable to the 
 plain Words of Holy Writ. It muft indeed be 
 granted, that when there is a Subordination of 
 "Governors in a Monarchy, there is but one Autho- 
 rity in them all, original in the Monarch, and 
 derivative in the inferior Magiftrates, by what 
 Names foever they may be called. And accord- 
 ingly, if there were a Plurality and Subordination 
 of Gods, there would be but one Authority in 
 them all, tho' there would be more Gods than one 
 in Number. But then, no Man knows better than 
 your felf, how great a difference there is between 
 a Numerical Unity of Being, and an Unity of Au- 
 thority. And in the feveral Palfages before recited, 
 the Unity afcrib'd to God is moft manifeftly, not an 
 
 Unity 
 
Cliap. XII. the Very God. 179 
 
 Unity ofAuthority^bct a Numerical Unity of Being. 
 For'tis not faidj that che AuchoiityofGdd is one, or 
 that there is but one Authority of God ,• much lefs 
 is it faidj that there is but one Authority in diverfe 
 diftind Gods : but 'tis laid, that God is one, and 
 that there is but one God. Now the Word God does 
 never fignify God's Authority, nor can it be {train- 
 ed to fuch a Senfe j much lefs can it lignify an Au- 
 thority vefted in diverfe diftind: Gods, fubordinat 
 the one to the other. No ; it conftantly denotes 
 the Being himfelf vi^ho is called God ,* and not 
 what that Being who is called God, is endued or 
 invefted with, or what he pofTelTes or enjoys. And 
 therefore, when we are afTured, that there is but one 
 God ; we are undoubtedly allured, not that there 
 is but one Authority in diverfe diftind Gods,- or 
 that of the Gods that are, there is but one Supreme : 
 but (in dired Oppofition to all Plurality, or even 
 Duality of Gods, whether equal or fubordinat the 
 one to the other) that there is but one God in 
 Number, 'uiz.. but one Being who is God. 
 
 But farther, if fuch an Interpretation were other- 
 wife poflible, and confident with the Scriptural 
 Ufe of the Word Go^ ^ that is, if fuch Phrafes as 
 thefe, there is hut one God^ and the like, might figni- 
 fy (in fpight of Common Senfe) there is an Unity of 
 Authority in diverfe diftinB Gods^ fubordinat the one to 
 the ether : yet the feveral Declarations before reci- 
 ted do flatly contradid your Notion, and affert a 
 Numerical Unity of God, viz. that there is but one 
 Being who is God. For it muft be remembred, 
 that thofc Declarations were made to fuch Perfons_» 
 as either profeffed, or at leaft adually lived a- 
 mongft thofe who did profefs, a Plurality of Gods, 
 tho' they allow'd a Subordination of the one to the 
 other, and that there was but one Authority a- 
 
 N z mongft 
 
i8o The WORD is Chap. XII. 
 
 mongft them all. Wherefore^ when we are told, in 
 Expreflions<lire(5l-ed to luch PedbnSj and in fuch 
 Circumftances, that there is but one God : we 
 muft underftandj not that there is but one Autho- 
 rity in diverle diitincft Gods, fubordinat the one to 
 the other (for the Idolatrous Jev;s^ and even the 
 Heathens themfelves, readily own'd all this) but 
 that there is but one God in Number, ^ulz^. but one 
 Being who is God. 
 
 And indeed the Expreffions of Scripture are fuch, 
 as will admit no other Senfe : nor couldWords have 
 been invented,which fliould more determinatly con- 
 tain this Affirmation, ^ulz.. that there is in Number 
 but one God, than thofe which are adually made 
 ufe of in thofe Declarations. Nay, I appeal to your 
 felf, and intreat you to fhew me, how it was pof- 
 lible, if it had been never fo certainly intended, to 
 teach us more clearly in Scripture Language (or 
 indeed in any Language) the Numerical Unity of 
 God, than we find it already don in the Texts be- 
 fore quoted. Be perfuaded once more to read 
 them carefully over, and to weigh them exadly. 
 Does not Mofcs fay, that there is m God be fides the 
 Lord ? and that there is rjo?7e elfe befides him ? Does not 
 the Very God fay, that he himfelf k?jows not any God 
 befides himfelf 1 Does not Chrifl: fay, that his Father 
 (1^/2:,. the felfexiftent Being) is the only God? Does 
 not St. Faul fay, that there is no other God but one ? 
 Can thefe Expreffions mean, that tho' there are 
 diverfe diftind Gods, fubordinat the one to the o- 
 ther ; yet there is but one Authority amongft them ? 
 If thefe Declarations do not demonilrat, that there 
 is in Number but one God ; I am fure, 'tis impoffi- 
 ble for Words to teach that Propofition. 
 
 Well then ; I hope I may now affert, that the 
 Holy Scriptures affure us, that there is in Number 
 
 but 
 
Chap. XI r. the Very God. 18 1 
 
 but one GocI^ x'/'t,. the felfcxiftenc Being. Novy 
 it muft be noted farther, that this one God is 
 defcribed as the Creator of all Things, in both 
 the Old and the New Teftamenrs. Particular- 
 ly, the felfexiftent God declares concerning him- 
 felf, that in Jix (Liys the Lord m.ule hejvcn and earth, 
 the feay and all th.it in them is, Exod. 20. it. and 
 St. ?aul and St. Bim.-.bm^ declare concerning the 
 lame God, that he made heaven and earth, and the fea, 
 and all things that are therein, A (^5 14. if. So that 
 the whole Jev/ijlj and Chriftian Churches were 
 fetled upon this Found Kion, and primary Article 
 of Faith, 'uiz,. that there is but one God, one and 
 the fameObjea of their Worfhip, and that he is 
 the one felfexiftent Being, who is the Author of 
 all things. 
 
 Now after all this was don ; after fo great 
 a Variety of Books was penned, and fuch repea- 
 ted Declarations were made, both under the 
 Law and under the Gofpel, by God himlelf, by 
 our Savior, and Perfons Divinely infpired ; and 
 after this Dodrin was univerfally iprcad : we find 
 even the beloved Apoftle exprefly teaching, that 
 In the beginning rjas the IVORD^ and the IWRD was 
 with God, and the TVORD v^as God, John i. i. and 
 then proceeding more particularly to affirm, that 
 the WORD was the Creator of all things. For he 
 fays. All things were m \df hy him, and without hi?n was 
 not any thing made, that was made, V. 5. 
 
 I befeech you to conlider, how the Chriftian 
 Church muft needs underftand thele Paffages of 
 St. Johff, when he firft publifhed them. The felf- 
 exiitent God himfelf, and a vaft Train of infpired 
 Writers in all Ages down to thofe very Times, 
 had moft folemnly alTured Mankind, that there is 
 but one God, vix, the felfexiftent God himfelf. 
 
 N 7, And 
 
i82 The WORD is Chap. XII. 
 
 And St. Johii^ who owns his Belief that the felf- 
 exiftent Being is God, adds in the very fame 
 Breath, even in the very next Words, ^W the WORD 
 -urns God, Nay he particularly declares, that the 
 WORD was God in the beginnings that is, even be- 
 fore the Creation, as you your felf interpret that 
 Phrafe ; and that all things were made by the 
 WORD, without admitting the Exception of any 
 one Particle of the whole Creation. 
 
 In thefe Circumftances, 'tis notorious, that the 
 Church cou'd not but underftand St. John to mean, 
 that the WORD is the one felfexiftent Being. For 
 fince they knew, that there was but one God^ St. 
 Johns affirming to them, that the WORD ti^os God, 
 and that he was God in the Beginnwg, nay, that he 
 was the Creator of all things^ was in their Opinion 
 the very fame, as if he had affirmed in Terms, that 
 the WORD was the one God of t\\Q Jews 2Ln6. 
 Chriftians, even the one felfexiftent Being. For 
 they had received no Notion of any other God ; 
 nay, the Preachers and Writers of the Chriftian 
 Church had affured them in the plaineftTerms^ 
 that there was but one God. And St. John is fo far 
 from making known to them thatDiftindion which 
 you fo carefully inculcate, between the fupreme 
 and the fubordinat God ; and thereby introducing 
 and opening to them a Dodrin, which was not on- 
 ly wholly new, and undifcover'd to either the Jtw^ 
 ifi or the Chriftian Church, but diredly oppofic to 
 the primary Article of their Faith ; that on the 
 contrary he confirms the obvious meaning of his 
 Words^ and that fenfe in which they wou'd moft: 
 certainly be underftoou by all his Readers, by fub- 
 joining, that the WORD (of which he had already 
 affirmed, that it 'n^as God, even in the Beginning) 
 created all things j which Creation of ail things 
 
 had 
 
Chap.XIT. the rery God. i8j 
 
 had been conftantly nrcribiucd to the one felfexift- 
 ent Being in both the Old and the NewTcftament^ 
 and was accordinG;ly become the conftanc and 
 known Character ot the one reUexiltcnt Being. 
 
 Wherefore they muft neceffarily believe^ either 
 that the WORD is the felfexiftenc Beings the one 
 God of the Jews and Chriltians ; or elfe that there 
 was in the Beghjning another God befides him^ who 
 was the God of the Jnvi and C^hriilians, even be- 
 fides the felfexiftent Being. They mud unavoida- 
 bly conceive, either that rhe one (clfexiflcnt Being 
 had ipoken falfly, and directly againft his own 
 Knowledge, when he pretended, that there was no 
 other God befides himfclf ,• and that he had purpofe- 
 ly fuborned a great number of infpired Wirnelles to 
 atteft and propagac the fame Untruth, both under 
 the Law and under the Gofpel, in every corner of 
 the Earth : or elfe char St. Johns new DoClrin of 
 the word's being God, was a downright Impo- 
 fture, becaufe 'twas manifeltly repugnant to the 
 conftantly received Faith of both Jcvm and Chrifti- 
 ans, in the grand and fundamental Article of it. 
 
 But farther, befides that there is a fiat Contradi- 
 ction between the wholeTenor of Scripture and the 
 firft Verfe of St. Johns Gofpel, according to that 
 Senfe of it, which the Perfons he wrote to, could 
 not but underftand him in, unlcfs the WORD be 
 the very God, or one felfexiftent Being ; I (ball 
 now fhew, that unleis you admit the aforefaid Do- 
 ctrin, there is no poilibility of reconciling this Text 
 with the other Scriptures, whatfoever you fuppofe 
 the Name God to fignifie^ when apply'd to the 
 WORD. 
 
 For if you will not allow, that the Name God^ 
 when apply'd to the WORD, does mean the one 
 felfexiftenc Being ^ then it muft llgnifie a Being en- 
 
 N 4 dued 
 
i84 The WORD if Chap.XIL 
 
 dued with all thofe Perfedions (fetting apart Self- 
 exidence only) which the one felfexiftent Being is 
 endued with. And the WORD muil be termed God^ 
 as confidered, either abfolutely in himfelf^or (which 
 is your Opinion) relatively to his Creatures, or 
 both abfolutely and relatively together. Now I 
 affirm, that there is a flat Contradidion between 
 the Doc^rin of both the Teftaments, and this Verfe 
 o^Sit.John^ whatfoever is meant by the Name God^ 
 when apply 'd to the WORD, unlels you will own 
 the WORD to be the one lelfexiftent Being, whom 
 1 call the very God. 
 
 For tho' egof, Gcd, be foppofed to fignifie a Being 
 endued with all thofe Perfedions, which the one 
 felfexiftent Being is endued with (except Selfexift- 
 ence it felf, which is now fuppofed not to be in- 
 cluded) and tho' it muft indeed be granted, that 
 two dilHnd Gods may then be imagined to exift 
 without any Impoffibility in the Nature of the 
 Thing (becaufe they are both equally Gods^ in this 
 fuppofed Senfe of the Term, when polTefTed of the 
 lequifit Divine Pcrfedions, notwithftanding the 
 one derives them from the other ,* even as amongft 
 our feives, a Father and his Son are equally Men) 
 Yet ftill it muft be remembred, that the one felf- 
 exiftent Being is truly and properly ^M^ a Qod : 
 and that whether he is ^q^, a God, as confidered ab- 
 folutely, or relatively, or both ; yet ftill he is ^zh, 
 2iGod,\n that Senfe which conftitutes him truly and 
 properly fuch. No\v the one felfexiftent Being, 
 who is undoubtedly a God^ and whom therefore we 
 cannot but believe, exprefly declares in his own 
 Perfon, and his Writers of the Old and New Tefta- 
 ments exprefly declare alfo, that there is no other 
 God befides himfelf, in the Texts abovementioned. 
 They never diftinguifli upon the matter,- they do 
 
Chap. XII. the Very God. 185 
 
 not fo much as once inform us^ that tho' there Is 
 but one fupreme, yet there is another fubordinat or 
 fccondary God: but they roundly alTure us, that 
 there is no other God befides the (elfexiftent Being. 
 The lelfexiftent Being himfelf fays^ 1 know not any. 
 And confequently if the WORD be not the felfex- 
 iltent Being, whom I call the very God ,* he is not 
 ^sof^ a God at all. And yet St. John exprefly de- 
 clares, that he is God^ and that he was fuch in the 
 Beginnings even before the Creation. He mull there- 
 fore be the very or felfexiftent God. 
 
 But farther (till, that this Contradi(5lion, which 
 your Dodrin introduces and makes, between the 
 whole Tenor of Scripture, and this Verfe of St. 
 John^ may appear yet more manifeftly, even upon 
 your own Principles ; I beg you to confider what 
 follows. 
 
 You would fain have us believe, that the Word 
 ^ioi, God^ does in Scripture Phrafe denote the being 
 'tis predicated of, confider'd relatively to his Crea- 
 tures. The Paflages juft now quoted abundantly 
 prove this to be your Opinion ; and indeed your 
 Scheme of the Trinity requires you to be zealous 
 for it. But then, if .^sof, Gody has this relative Sig- 
 nification 3 you'll do well to remember, that the 
 WORD (whom you fuppofe a diftind Being, and 
 confequently a really different God, from the one 
 felfexiftent Being, whom I call the Very God) 
 could not but be ^ioi, a God, to the Jews^ and muft 
 neceffarily always have been fo to the whole Crea- 
 tion. For St. John exprefly declares, that all things 
 were made by him^ and without him was not any thing 
 made that was madc^ v. ;. and St. Taul fays of our 
 Savior (wich refped to the WORD doubtlefs ^ for 
 it could not be meant of his Human Nature) that 
 by him were all things created^ that are in heaven^ a?id 
 
 that 
 
i86 The WORD is Chap.Xir. 
 
 t/Mt are In earthy 'vifthle and invifihle^ "ivhether they be 
 thrones^ or dominions^ or principalities ^ or powers: all 
 things were created by him and for him^ Col. i. i6. And 
 tho' the felfexiftent God is faid to have created all 
 things j yet you rightly obierve and own, that he 
 did it by the WORD. Fcr you (0 fay, that by the 
 Operation of the S^n (you can mean nothing but the 
 WORD) the Father (by whom ycu manifeftly mean 
 the felfexiftent God) both made and governs the 
 World, 
 
 Now I fhall not inquire, wRether (upon Suppo- 
 fition of the Truth of your Dodrin) the felfexiftent 
 God could fo properly be faid to create the World, 
 and could confequently be fo properly, in the rela- 
 tive Senfe, ^ih, a God^ to Mankind, upon the ac- 
 count of the word's creating the World by a 
 Power derived from the felfexiftent God : but this 
 ascertain, that the WORD is, and ever was, truly 
 and properly ^iUy a God^ to the Jews, and to the 
 whole Creation, upon the account of that Rela- 
 tion^ which the very A6t of Creation gave him, 
 and which no Confideration whatfoever can dif- 
 folve. Upon this Foundation the Law of Nature 
 becomes the pofitive Law and Command of the 
 Creator, as you your felf have largely (f) demon- 
 ftrated. And indeed, the Scriptures do cxprelly 
 declare, that the felfexiftent God himfelf is there- 
 fore to be worfliipped by us, becaufe we are his 
 Creatures. For St. John himfelf, who in his Gofpel 
 attributes Creation to the WORD, does in his Re- 
 velation (when defcribing the Worftiip given to the 
 felfexiftent God) report, that the four and twenty el- 
 
 (e) Script. Doft. p 197, 
 
 (7) Difc. concerning the unchangeable Obligations of Nat. 
 Rcligipn, Prop. 2. 
 
 deri 
 
Chap. XI f. the Very God. ^87 
 
 dars fall down before hlWy that fat on the throne^ and "wor- 
 fljjp him that li'veth jor ever and ever, and cafi their 
 croivns before the throne, faying^ Thou art worthy, O Lordy 
 to receive glory, and honor, and power ; for thou baj^ crea* 
 ted all thl7igs, and jor thy pleafure they are, and were crea^ 
 ted. Rev. 4. 10. II. And confequently the Law of 
 Nature is the pofitive Law and Command of the 
 WORD^ and the WORD has an unalienable 
 Right to the Worfhip of all his Creatures \ becaufe 
 they are mod certainly the Work of his Hands, and 
 he is a God to them. 
 
 But will the Scriptures allow this, or can this be 
 true, if the WORD be a different Being from the 
 felfexiflent God ? Did the Jews ever worfhip the 
 WORD, as well as the felfexiltent God ? And yet 
 was not the WORD a God to the Jews ? And did 
 not the fclfexiftent.God declare notwithflanding, 
 that he himfelf was their only God? And did he not 
 ftraitly charge them to worfhip no other God, fay- 
 ing in the very Firft Commandment, T/:>^«jJjj/; have 
 no other God but me ? And after all,when the WORD 
 was made known under the Chriftian Difpenfation, 
 does not the New Teflament declare, that we 
 Cbrlftians have but o?ie God, even the fame God 
 that the Jews had,i//2:,. the felfexiftent God ? Muft 
 noc we ChriHians therefore worfhip the WORD, 
 notwithftanding we are fo plainly told, that he 
 
 ^<!was God, even in the begiiining ? Are we not permit- 
 ted to worfhip him, who ever had an unalterable 
 Right to the Homage of all Mankind by Creation, 
 and whofe Deity is now fo fully manifefted even 
 
 by Revelation from the felfexiftent God ^ Do we 
 ever find a Diftindion made, even in the Scri- 
 ptures of the New Teflament, betwaen the two 
 
 Gods, the one Supreme and the other Subordinat, 
 the one Selfexiftenc and the other Derived i And 
 
 do 
 
i88 The WORD is Chap.XII. 
 
 do they at the fame time difcharge us from the 
 Worfhip of the one^ and confine us to that of the 
 other ? Nay^ thefe very Scriptures of the New Te- 
 ftamcnt do always declare^ that there is but one 
 God, as fully as thofe of the Old Teftament^ or 
 indeed as 'cis poflible for Words to exprefs. 
 
 Wherefore, fmce St. John exprefly declares, that 
 in the hegimii7tg the WORD was Gody and attributes 
 the Creation of all Things to him, which the felf- 
 cxiftent God had all along claimed to himfelf, and 
 which was conftantly believed of him by his true 
 Worfhippers ; he could not but be fenfible, that 
 thofe for whofe fake he penn'd his Gofpel, would 
 underftand him to mean, and confequently he him- 
 felf muft intend that they fliould believe, that the 
 WORD was in the beginning the very or felfexiftent 
 God. Nay, if the WORD was God in the Begin- 
 ning, and his Creation of all Things gave him an 
 indifputable Right to the Worfhip of all Mankind : 
 either the felfexiftent Being, and his Scriptures of 
 Truth (both of the Old and New Teflament) muft 
 fpeak falfely, when they aifure us, that of old there 
 was, and ftill is, but one God ; or elfe the Scri- 
 ptures do teach us, that the WORD is that one 
 God, even the felfexiftent Being, whom I call the 
 Very God. 
 
 You tell us indeed, that this Expofition of 
 St. Johns Words (g) is a Contraditlion in Terms, 
 Now for my part, if there muft needs be a Contra- 
 di<5tion in the Cafe, I would as willingly fuppofe, 
 that St. John wrote a Contradiction in Terms, as 
 that he wrote a Contradidion to the whole Tenor 
 of the other Scriptures, by afferting a Plurality of 
 Gods (partly fupreme,and partly fubordinat) which 
 
 (t) Script Do6i;r. p. ^6, 
 
 the 
 
Chap. XII. the Very God. 189 
 
 the Writers of both the Teftaments do fo frequent- 
 ly^ fo unanimoufly^ and fo zealoully deny and op- 
 pofe, even after, as well as before, the great My- 
 ftery of the WORD's Incarnation was declared. 
 And I mufl own to you, I'm fully convinced, that 
 no poffible Expofition or Senfe of the Word God 
 can reconcile the Contradidion, or clear the In- 
 confiftencyj between this Verfe of St. John and the 
 other Parts of the Bible, without admitting that 
 the WORD is the very God, or felfexiftent I3eing. 
 So that either we muft give up all the reft of the 
 Canon of Scripture, or elfe we muft rejed the 
 Gofpel of St. Johijy as introducing what you juftly 
 call (h) the Impiety ofFolytheijWy fubvertivg the firfi and. 
 great Foundation of all Religion both Natural and ReveaU 
 edy the Unity of Gcd. 
 
 But I pray, why muft the aforefaid Expofition be a 
 Contradiction inTermsPEven for this fingleReafon^ 
 it feems ; becaufe the Apoftle fays, that the WORD 
 was ^< r ^ht with God. But will it follow from 
 thence,thac the WORD is a diftind Being from 3*3^, 
 the felfexiftent God ? If we confider the Context^ 
 the word's being <sroi r ^h, is oppofed to his 
 Adanife fiat ion; when a6>©- <m.^^ ly^'iTn, :^ loxnvanv If 
 n(SiVf the 'WORD was made fit fh^ and dwelt among us^ 
 V. 14, and when confequently the WORD was 
 ac^\ J7^f, with m. The WORD was m^i r ^hy with 
 Gody till the Time when ^U Ipcui^cJ^ cr c^?;)^', God 
 was manifefi in the fleflj^ r Tim. 3. 16. We know, 
 that Godisinhimfelf*o£$e]©-, invJJible, i Tim. i. 17. 
 he dwells in the light ^ which no man can approach unto^ 
 and is one whom no man hath feen^ nor can jee^ i Tim. 
 6. 16. But by the Incarnation of the WORD who 
 is God, by the Union of the WORD to the Man 
 
 (/;) Ihid. 
 
 Chrift 
 
J90 The WORD is Ch^p.XlI. 
 
 Chrift JefuSj God is become (in a Senfe) vifible^the 
 Man Chrift Jefus being «W;/ rk ^^rkdoeir^y^he (vifible) 
 image (or refemblance) of the invifibleGod^ Col. i. if. 
 i.Tfdv)cLaii.!t ^J)j^iu,the brightnefsofglory^OY2i gloriousBeam 
 (hot forth from that effential Light which no Man 
 can approach unto^ as well as 7(?'e^^^nu the refrefen^ 
 tation or Picture '^ •Oan>$aWj lurnyof his fubfiance^ who 
 is the Majefty on -high, and whom the Eyes 
 of Mortals cannot behold in himfelf, tho' they 
 can fee him in fuch his Appearance. In fliorr, 
 the felfexiftent Being became manifeft^ vinble 
 and open to the Eyes of Men^ by the Union 
 of his WORD with the Man Chrift Jefus ,• in Con- 
 fequence of which Union^ ^il^y God was, becaufe 
 Ao>©-> the WORD wasj <aai ^i^u with us ; and our 
 Savior juftly deferved the Name of 'E<^<*mU> -which 
 being interpreted is luS" w^ • '3"2o?, God Tvith us^ Mat. I. 
 25. And accordingly 'tis obfervable, that the fame 
 Apoftle St. John faySj Eternal Life -was ^s^i r Trnip^^ 
 in oppofition to that Difcovery of Eternal Life, 
 which was made, when Eternal Life lipAVi^eJ^ tif/tvy 
 Ef. I. ch. I. 'V. 2. 
 
 You fee therefore, that there is no Neceffity of 
 making St. John's Expreffions contain, either a Con- 
 tradiction in Terms, or a Contradiction to the con- 
 ftant Doc^lrin of the other infpired Writers of the 
 Old and New Teftaments. For by granting that 
 the WORD is the Very God, or the one felfexift- 
 ent Being, we preferve the grand Article of the 
 Unity of God, which the Holy Scriptures do fo 
 earneftly prefs and inculcat : Nor does his being 
 <G^i T ^soV, who is himfelf ^s^^, mean more, than 
 that God was not as yet ©£?« AvQ^d^^if, as by the In- 
 carnation of the WORD he certainly was^ even 
 God manifejt in the flejh. 
 
 You 
 
Chap.XIL the Very Gol 191 
 
 You will give me leave,I dare fayjuft to mention 
 one Objedion more • which you indeed have paffed 
 over in filence, becaufc (I am perlUaded) you were 
 ienlible of its Weaknefs. It has been oblerved, that 
 when St. John fays, the WORD u'af God^ there is 
 no Article in the Original before ^zo^y as there is 
 very commonly when the felfexiflent God is 
 meant. But I anfwer^ that tho' the Article is often 
 placed before ^ih^ when the felfexiflent God is 
 meant , yet 'tis alfo omirted at other times^ when 
 ^5of certainly and confeffedly bears the very fame 
 fenfe , particularly 'tis omitted no lefs than four 
 times in this very Chapterj-x'ii::.. in the fixth^ twelfth, 
 thirteenth and eighteenth Verfes. And therefore 
 notwithftanding this Remark, when the WORD 
 is called -^eof , the meaning is^ that he is the very or 
 felfexiftent God. 
 
 Secondly y St. Vatd fays. There is one God, and one Me- 
 diatoY between God and Alen, the Man Chrift- Jefm^ r 
 Tim. 2. y. The Context and Scope of the Apoftle 
 fhew, that by afferting there is «< ^iU^ he means, 
 that there is hut one God, even as there is but one 
 Mediator. So that «? is not barely unusy but unkm : 
 not merely one (for the Heathens themfelves had 
 one God in that Senfe, at the fame time that they 
 had fo many more than one) but the only God, in 
 contradiftindion to a plurality of Gods. And ac- 
 cordingly the Apoftle expreffes himfelf more plain- 
 ly in a parallel Place, faying, there is none other God 
 but one ^ for tho there be that are called Gods^ whether in 
 Heaven or in Earth (as there be Gods many^ and Lords 
 many) But to us there is one God^ the Father , of whom 
 are all things ^ and we in him • and one Lord Jeff/s Chrijty 
 by whom were all things y and Ufe by him^ i Cor. 8. 4,9,6. 
 The «f ^i^i therefore, the on'i God^ fignifys the felf« 
 
 cxiftenc 
 
192 The WORD is Chap.XIL 
 
 exiftent Beings as you your felf (0 allow ; and the 
 Apoftle aflures us^ that the felfexiftent Being is the 
 only God. Now this one and only God^ 'viz,, the 
 felfexiftent Beings is declared to be the one and 
 only Godj in contradiftin6tion to the one and only 
 Mediator between God and Men^ the MAN 
 Chrift Jefus. And therefore the Apoftle can't 
 mean, that there is but one fupreme God^ and that 
 the WORDj who is perfonally united to the Man 
 Chrift Jefus, may notwithftanding be an inferior 
 or fubordinat God. For this exprefs oppoficion of 
 the only God^ not to the WORD or Divine Nature 
 of our Lordj but to the MAN Chrift Jefus, does 
 either deny that WORD is God, in dired contra- 
 diction to St. John I. I. or elfe demonftrat, that the 
 WORD is the felfexiftent and only God. 
 
 Thirdly^ The Author of the Epiftle to the H*?- 
 hrews affures us, that three Paflages of Scripture, 
 which he particularly recites in his firft Chapter^ 
 are meant of the Son, 'vix>, our Lord Jefus Chrift. 
 Thefe Paflages, as I have already obferved, do all 
 of them relate to the WORD or Divine Nature of 
 our Savior : but I chufe to argue from the laft of 
 them only, in which the Author aflerts, that fome 
 Words of the lozd Pfalm {viz^. Thou^ Lord^ in the 
 beginning haft laid the foundation of the earth : and the 
 heavens are the work of thy hands. They Jliall perip^ hut 
 thoujloalt endure : they ad flmllwax old as doth a garment ^ 
 and as a 'vefiure jhalt thou change them^ and they Jhall he 
 changed : hut thou art the fame^ and thy years jhall not 
 fail) are fpoken of the Son, i/. 2 j, 26, 27. 
 
 Now that the Paflage above recited relates to the 
 WORD, or Divine Nature of the Son, is evident 
 from this Confideration, viz^. that the Pfalmift 
 
 _. ^ kl - 
 
 (0 Script. Doa, i>. 6, 3(J. 
 
 there* 
 
Chap. XII. the Very God. 19} 
 
 therein exprefly attributes the Creation of the 
 World to him^ which evidently belongs to the 
 WORDj or the Son's Divine Nature, and can't pof- 
 fibly be underftood of the Son with refped to his 
 Human Nature. 
 
 But I need not infift upon this. For in the Hebrevj 
 Text this Pfalm is exprefly addrefs'd to Jehovah. 
 Now Jehovah is the incommunicable Name of the 
 felfcxiftent God, who was the God of Ifrael. What- 
 ever latitude may be allow'd to -^so?, yet Jehovah 
 is appropriat to that one God alone, in contradi- 
 ilindion to all other ^iol. This is the conftant ufe 
 of Jehovah in Scripture. Accordingly, Mofe s Caid^ 
 Thou hafi avouched (Jehovah^ as 'tis in the Original, 
 viz,, the felfexiftent Being, diftinguifh'd from all 
 others by that Name ; tho' we tranflate it) the. 
 LORD this day to be thy God, Deut. 26. 17. and a- 
 gain. The Lord (Jehovah, the fame felfexiftent God) 
 hath avouched thee this day to he his peculiar feople, ver. 18. 
 Thus the Pfalmift fays to him, that his Name is 
 Jehovah, Pfal. 85. 18. Nay, God himfelf fays, I an$ 
 the Lord {Ws Jehovah in the Original) that is my 
 Name. If. 42. 8. And whereas, according to our 
 Tranflation, God commanded Mofes, faying, Thttf 
 jlmlt thou fay unto the Children ef ifrael, 7 he Lord God of 
 your fathers, &c. we ought to read thus, according 
 to the Original, Jehovah, even the God of your Fathers^ 
 the God of Abraham, the God of Ifaac, and the God of Ja- 
 cob, hath fent me unto you : This is my name for ever, and 
 this is my memorial unto all Generations, Exod. 5. if. 
 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 Memo- 
 rial or proper Name is Jehovah. For fo the Pro- 
 phet explains it, faying (not as we tranflate it, even 
 
 O thi 
 
194 The M^ORD is Chap. XII. 
 
 the Lord Qod of hofts^ the Lord is his memorial ,* but) 
 €ven Jehovah, the God of hofif ^ Jehovah is his rnemoriat 
 or peculiar. Name^ Hof, 12:.^. So that Jehovah 
 does as ftridly ngnify the felfexiftent God, as any 
 one Name can poflibly denote any one individual 
 Being whacfoever. ; 
 
 I'm fenfible, it has been thought, that God's An- 
 gel is fometimes flyled Jehovah^ upon the account 
 of his ading with Mankind in God's Name; and 
 even the Orthodox Writers about the Trinity have 
 been grievoully puzzled to explain the Paffages ur- 
 ged for the Confirmation of that Notion. ^Twas 
 indeed unhappy for them, that they were not fuf- 
 ficientty 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 promife, that who- 
 ever will be pleafed to confider what I have writ- 
 ten concerning that matter, will find no Difficulty 
 in thofe Texts, in which it has been fuppofcd, that 
 an Angel is ftyled Jehovah : but readily grant, that 
 Jehovah does, even in thofe Texts, as ftridly de- 
 note the felfexiftent God, as in any one Text of 
 the whole Bible. 
 
 I confefs, God fays^ Behold^ I fend an avgel before 
 thee to keep thee in the vhiy^ and to bring thee into the 
 'plac€ zvhich 1 have prepared. Beware of him ^ and obey hfs 
 voice J provoke him not : for he 72^ ill not pardon your tranf- 
 grejfions : for my name is in him. But if thou fl)alt indeed 
 obey his voice, and do all that I Jpeak ; then I 'will be an 
 enemy unto thine enemies^ and an adverfary unto thine ad^ 
 verfaries. For mine angel jl}all go before thee^ and bring 
 thee in unto the A'morites^ and the Hittires^ and the Periz- 
 
 , V , rr; .rf ; , ; ' '■' - 
 
 (k) Cl«p. ^^pVp, &:. 
 
 z,itesy 
 
Chap. XII. the P'^ery God, 195 
 
 z^itcs, a7jd tJ)C Canaanites^ and the Hlvites^ and the Je- 
 hufites : and Iirillcut them cjf. Exod. 25. 20,21^2232;. 
 Now if any Perlbn fliould imagin, that bccaufe ' 
 God's Name maybe in an Angel, therefore an- 
 Angel may be called Jehovah : 1 arifwer, that I will 
 not difpute, whether w/ Name does in this Place 
 llgnify Tfjy Vowcr^ or my [elf] or the name Jehovah 
 whereby I am called ; but fuppodng it to iignify the 
 7J<?W6' Jehovah whereby I am called (which is the very 
 utmoft that can be dedrcd) ftill it does not follow, 
 that a Being may be called Jehovah^ merely becaufe 
 the Name Jehovah is faid to be nnpD in the midjt 
 of him, OX within him ^ or (as our Tranflation words 
 it) in him. For a Being's having a Name n^pn 
 never fignifys his being called by that Name. The- 
 utmoft therefore that the Phrafe can poffibly im-' 
 port, is^ that the felfexiftent God Jehovah' was' 
 with the Angel, enabling him to avenge the Tranf- 
 greffions of the Ifraelites. And this Interpretatiori ' 
 is agreeable to the knows Idiom of the Old and > 
 New Teftaments. 
 
 Having thus fhewn, that Jehovah is the incom- 
 municable Name of the felfexiftent God^ let us 
 now confider that PafTage of the Pfalmift, which 
 is quoted by the Author of the Epiftle to the 
 Hebrews, It can't be pretended, that tho' the 
 Pfalmift direds himfelf, in this whole PafTage, to ' 
 the felfexiftent God , yet he may be underftood 
 to fpeak therein concerning another diftind Being, 
 who may be God in an inferior Senfe. For 'tis 
 manifeft, that as the whole Paffage is addreffed to 
 Jehovah ^ fo it relates to him alone. As the Pfalmift 
 fpeaks to him, fo he fpeaks of him, and not of any 
 other Being that can be efteemed a fubordinac 
 God, in any part of it. From whence it follows, 
 that the WORD, or Divine Nature of the Son, is 
 
 O 2 the' 
 
1 g6 The WOR D is the Very God. Chap. XII. 
 the very or felfexiftenc God. For the Que- 
 ftion at prefenc is not, whether the Son be 
 God, or no (that being not only agreed between 
 our lelves, but alfo moil exprefly affirm'd of hitn 
 by St. John) with refped to the WORD or Divine 
 > Nature united to the Man Chriftjefus: but the 
 Queftion is^ whether the WORD or Divine Na- 
 ture of Chrift Jefus, be the felfexiftent God, or no. 
 And the Pfalmift has peremptorily determined this 
 Queftion^ by affuring us^ that the Son {viz.. the 
 WORD^ or Divine Nature of the Son) is Jehovah, 
 which Name neceflarily fignifys, and is appropriat 
 tOj the one felfexiftent God, even the God of the 
 JeTplflj and Chriftian 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, 
 whatfoever. boi> r -r 
 
 As for the two other PaiTages quoted by this Au- 
 thor in the fame Chapter, and exprefly apply'd 
 therein to the Son.; I have already declared my O-t 
 pinion, that they relate to the WORD or the SonV 
 Divine Nature. And if the former of them (quoted 
 V, 6.) be taken from Vfal. 97. 7. that Pfalm is expref- 
 ly directed to Jehovah ; and confequently the 
 WO RD is thereby declar'd to be the Very God.- 
 And as for the latter of them (quoted v. 8, 9.) I 
 have already (/) fhewn, that that pare 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, direded it to the felfexiftent God, fo the. 
 Author of this Epiftle quotes it in the fame man- 
 ner. And accordingly you your felf (w) allow, 
 
 '^/) Chap. (5. p. iiy&c. 
 L Qw) Script. Doft./;. 89. 
 
 -. that 
 
Chap.XIII. The Holy Ghojl U the Very GoL 1 97 
 
 that the Son is called God in this Text ; which 
 Conceflion^ I think, is inconfiftcnt with the Opi- 
 nion of thofe who imagin^ that the Pfalmifl origi- 
 nally 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 firft and fe- 
 cond of thefe 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 
 thofe that will not yield to the Force of that Argu- 
 ment, which I have drawn from the third of thefe 
 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 infpired Word of 
 God. 
 
 "N f'^- 
 
 CHAP. XIII. 
 
 ThAt the HolyG^ofliflk't^^jGoL 
 
 I 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 IlTue than the former. 
 
 That the Holy Ghoft is an intelligent Being, you 
 all along declare , but the Queftion 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 wifti I could not prove. 
 . To confirm the Truth of my Anertion, I (hall 
 argue from but two Places of Scripture. 
 
 O I I. Then, 
 
198 The Holy Ghojl is Chap. XIII. 
 
 I. Then, St. P^m/; that he might fatisfy his Dif- 
 ciples, how he came to know tho(e Myfteries, 
 which the greateft Wits could not difcover, fays_, 
 Cod hath reveled them unto its by his S fir it. For the Spi- 
 rit fearcheth all things ^ ye'a^ the deep things of God. For 
 ouhat man knoweth the thiyigs of a man^ Jave the fpirit of 
 map 'which is in him ? evenfo the things of God knoweth 
 (iM(') none hut tht Sprit of God ^ i Cor. 2. lo, 11. 
 You fee, he afcribes his Knowledge of thofe hidden 
 things, thofe Gofpd Myfteries, to the Holy Spi- 
 rit^ who imparted the Knowledge of them to him : 
 and he fh'ews the Corinthia?7Sy that the Spirit himfelf 
 muff therefore be fuppofed to know them, becaufe 
 the Syirit fearcheth all things^ yea^ the deep things of God ^ 
 that 1S3 the Spirit knoweth even the greateft Secrets 
 of 'God himfelf. But how does this appear ? How 
 are we fure, that the Spirit knoweth God's greateft 
 Secrets ? Why, the Apoftle fubjoins a Demonftra- 
 tipri, that it muft needs be fo, faying. For jvhat man 
 kno-weth the things of a man^ fave the fpirit of man v^hich 
 is in him ? Even fo the: things of God knoweth none hut the 
 Spirit of God '^ that is, as none knoweth the Secrets 
 of any particular Man's Heart, fave the Man's own 
 Spirit, which is in him, or the Man himfelf; even 
 fo none knows the Secrets of God, fave God's Spi- 
 rit, or God himfelf. ' 
 Now it muft be obferv'd, that when the Apoftle 
 fays,' none kno7i's the things of a man, fave the mans own 
 fpirit ; and confequently when he fuppofes, that a 
 Man's own' Spirit does know the things of a Man, 
 viz,, the Secrets of his Heart : he certainly means a 
 primary, immediat, and neeelTary Knowledge ; and 
 iiot a fccondary or derived one. For otherwife his 
 Reafoning is manifeftly wrong ; becaufe any other 
 Perfon befides the Man himfelf does know a Man's 
 SecrQts,when theMan revgles them to him. And ae- 
 
 C^ordingly,, 
 
Cliap. XIII. the Very God, 199 
 
 cordingly, in the oppofic Branch of the Compari- 
 ioDy when the Apoftle fays^ none knows the th'mgs of 
 God, but the Spirit of God ; he certainly means a pri- 
 mary, immediate and neceffiry Knowledge^ as con- 
 tradiftinguifhM from a fecondary or derived one. 
 For (blciVed be God) by a fecondary or derived 
 Knowledge, not only St. Paul did, but even we our 
 felves do, know the fecrct things of God. 
 
 When therefore St. Pj/// afferts, that the Spirit 
 knows the fecret things of God, even as a Man 
 knows the fecret things of his own Heart, 'viz,, by 
 a primary, immediat and necelTary Knowledge, in- 
 herent in himfclf, and not derived from any other 
 Being : he manifeftly declares, that the Spirit of 
 God is as much that God whofe Spirit he isj as the 
 Spirit of a Man is that Man in whom it is,- and 
 that the Spirit of God does therefore know the Se- 
 crets of that God whofe Spirit he is^ becaufe he is 
 that God himfelf, and not another or diftind Be- 
 ing, which cou'd not know God's Secrets, other- 
 wife than by a derived Knowledge ; even as the 
 Spirit of a Man does therefore know the Secrets of 
 the Man in whom it is^ becaufe the Spirit is the 
 Man himfelf, and not another or diftind Being, 
 which cou'd not know the Man's Secrets otherwife 
 than by a derived Knowledge. And confequently, 
 fmce the Word God in this Place does confelTedly 
 lignify the felfexiftent Being • 'tis evident, that the 
 Spirit of God (becaufe he is the fame God who is 
 here ipoken of, and not another Beings which cou'd 
 not know the Secrets of God otherwife than by a 
 derivedKnOwledge)isthe felfexiftent Being, whom 
 I call the very God. 
 
 If it fliould be objecfbed, that the Spirit is faid 
 t^djVAVj to fearcb or inquire into the deep things of God ; 
 and is confequently a different I3eing from that 
 
 O 4 God, 
 
200 The Holy Ghofi U Chap. XIIL 
 
 God^ whofe deep things, tho' he does fearch or in- 
 quire into them, yet he has not a primary^ imme- 
 diat and neceflary Knowledge of: 1 anfwer, i.That 
 whatever the original Notation of it is, yet the 
 Word i^dvSiv is fometimes ufed, when 'twould be 
 Blafphemy to fuppofe any proper fearch or inquiry, 
 or any thing lefs than a primary, immediat and ne- 
 ceflary Knowledge. Particularly this very Apo- 
 ftle fays, Rom. 8. 27. that God does l^djva.v (which 
 muft undoubtedly mean, that God does, not fearch 
 or inquire into,but throughly underfiandfjiz>,hy a prima- 
 ry, immediat and neceflary Knowledge) the Hearts 
 of Men. 2. 'Tis remarkable, that in this very In- 
 ftancCj the Apofl:le proves that the Spirit does \^d,v£¥ 
 the deep things of God, becaufe he knows them 
 as a Man knows his own fecrets, viz,, not by in- 
 quiry, but by a primary, immediat and neceflary 
 Knowledge. So that it may as well be pretended, 
 that the Spirit of a Man is a different Being from 
 the Man himfelf, becaufe the Spirit of a Man 
 knows the Secrets of a Man ; as that the Spirit of 
 God is a difi'erent Being from God, becaufe he does 
 ^(^ycLv the deep things of God. 
 
 2. The Angel told the bleflfed Virgin M/7, that 
 her Son ftiould be called rhe Son of the Highefi-^ and 
 the Son of God^ that is, the Son of the felfexiflent 
 Being, Luke 1. 52, 55-. And for what reafon ? 
 Why, for that Reafon which the Angel exprefly 
 gave, when he faid, The Holy Gho/t Jliall come upon 
 theCy and the power of the Highefi fljall o'verjljadov^ thee : 
 therefore alfo that holy thing which jJjall he born oftheejjhall 
 be called the Son of God^ v. 39. You fee, the Man 
 Chrifl: Jefus is therefore the Son of the moft High 
 God, becaufe the Holy Ghoft begat him. 
 
 ow 
 
Chap. XIII. the Very God. 201 
 
 Now if the Holy Ghoft is not the very God him- 
 felf, but another and different Being from him ; 
 then the Man Chrift Jefus's Generation by the Ho- 
 ly Ghoft made him no otherwife the Son of the ve- 
 ry God, than you and I are. Becaufe you and I 
 were, as much as the Man Chrift Jefus was (upon 
 the aforefaid Suppofition) begotten by the very 
 God. For the very God did not (upon that Suppo- 
 fition) beget the Man Chrift Jefus, otherwife than 
 by the Mediation of another and different Being 
 from God himfelf,whichBeing derived his Exiftence 
 from God. And in that Senfe you and I were be- 
 gotten by God, and are his Sons. Neither the dif- 
 ferent Quality of the immediat Father, nor the 
 number of intermediat Defcents from the original 
 felfexiftent Caufe of all things, does in any wife 
 alter the Cafe. For in this Notion of Sonfhip, a 
 Begger's Child is as much God's Son, as if the high- 
 eft Angel had begotten him : and you and I are as 
 much God's Sons, as Cain or Abel^ whofe immediat 
 Father Adatn was the firft Man. 
 
 The felfexiftent God therefore is the Father of 
 the Man Chrift Jefus by ^[fecial Paternity (as I di- 
 ftinguifli'd in the beginning of this Difcourfe) and 
 the Man Chrift Jefus is accordingly the Son of the 
 very God by 2i [fecial Filiation, of which there is no 
 other Inftance. And for this reafon is he called 
 God's only begotten Son. This necelfarily imports, 
 that the felfexiftent God was his Father in fome 
 fenfe, in which he was not a Father of any other 
 Mortal. He was therefore the immediat Father of 
 the Man Chrift Jefus ,• that is, he begat him, not 
 by the mediat operation of a Being different from 
 himfelf (for in that fenfe he is every whit as much 
 your Father, or mine) but by his own immediat a(5t, 
 even as a Man is the Father of his own Child. 
 
 Now 
 
202 The Holy Ghofi is Chap. XIII. 
 
 Now the Scriptures alTure us, that the Founda- 
 tion of this Relation between the Very God and 
 the Man Chrift Jefus, was the Generation of the 
 Holy Ghoft ,• that is, the Very God was therefore 
 the immediat Father of the Man Chrift Jefus, be- 
 caufe the Holy Ghoft begat him. And confequent- 
 ly the Holy Ghoft is not another different Being 
 from the Very God, but the Very God himfelf, or 
 the lelfexiftent Being, which is the Father of the 
 Man Chrift Jefus. 
 
 Till thefe two Arguments are fairly anfwer'd, I 
 need not produce any others. I ftiall therefore now 
 examin thofe Texts, which have been luppofed to 
 teach, that the Holy Ghoft is a different Being 
 from the Very God, derived from him, and fubor- 
 dinat to him. 
 
 • 'I. He is called the Spirit of God, Matt.. 5. 16. 
 ^ Cor. 3.16. and in diverfe other Places. But this 
 Phrafe cannot import, that he is a different Being 
 from the Very God, much lefs that he is derived 
 from him, and fubordinat to him ,* unlefs it be alfo 
 granted, that thefpirit of man, i Cor. 2. 11. denotes a 
 different Being, derived from, and fubordinat to_, 
 "the Man whole Spirit he is. 
 
 2. There are many Texts, which fpeak of the 
 Spirit, as a Meifenger fent from God, and fent by 
 Chrift. Thefe are fuppofed to teach a Subordina- 
 tion of the Spirit to the felfexiftent God, and to 
 the Divine Nature of Chrift ,• and confequently^^ 
 that the Spirit is not himfelf the felfexiftent God. 
 
 For the right Explication of all luch Texts it 
 nnift be obferved, that when the World lay in 
 Darknefs, G(xl was pleafed to enlighten thehi by 
 that miraculous Fffufion of the extraordinary Gifts 
 of the Holy Ghoft on the Day of Pentecoft, where- 
 by the Apottlti were enabled and qualify 'd for the 
 
 la- 
 
Chap. Xlir. the Very Gol 205 
 
 Inftruclion and Converllon of Mankind. The holy 
 Spirit of God therefore, who always reveled his 
 Will in old Times, but was now to do it in a molt 
 plentiful manner, is defcribed (by a ftrong Allego- 
 ry) as a Meffenger Ibnt forth by God for this great 
 Purpofe. And becaufe the Effufion of the extra- 
 ordinary Gifts of the Holy Ghoft was not to be 
 made till after Chrift's Alcenlion ; therefore Chrift 
 is reprefented as going to Heaven to difpatch away 
 this Meflenger, and fend him abroad on his Errand. 
 Therefore do we fo often read of the holy Spirit's 
 being lent from or by God and Chrift. Therefore 
 is he faid to go forth ^ to corne^ and the like. But all 
 this is mere Metaphor, according to the Ufage of 
 that Country and Age. For the plain meaning is, 
 that thofe Gifts and Graces which proceed from 
 the Spirit, or which God beftows by the Spirit, 
 are then adually conferred by God on Men. 
 
 There is abundance of fuch ftrong Figures in 
 Holy Scripture. The felfexiftent God himfelf is 
 faid to go do-ivn^ and fee 7vhat was done. Gen. 18. 21. to 
 come dovm to deliver his people^ Exod. 3. 8. to come down 
 on mount Sinai y Exod. 19. 20. to write the ten Com- 
 mandments in two tables offione^ Deut. 5". 22. to fend 
 his wordy Pfal. 107. 20. to fend forth his commandment ^ 
 Pfal. 147. 15". to awake as one out of Jleepy and like a gi~ 
 ant refeJJjed with v^ine^ Pfal. 78. 66. And Chrift fays, 
 his Father ('viz.. the felfexiftent God) and himfelf 
 will come to a Man, and make their abode vjitb him^ 
 John 14. 2;. Nay, after his Afcenfion he fays. Be- 
 hold ^ 1 fand at the door and knock. If any man hear my 
 'Voice y and open the door^ I will come into him, and fup 
 With him^ and he v^ith me^ Rev. 5. 20. But the moft 
 remarkable Inftance, and that which comes near- 
 eft to this of the Spirit's Miflion from God, is that 
 admirable Vrofopopma of King Solomon^ who introdu- 
 ces 
 
204 "The Holy Ghoji is Chap. XIII. 
 ces God's Wifdom (which furely is not another and 
 different being from himfelf) as crying in the 
 Streets, &c. and, after many others, uttering thefe 
 Words, The Lord pojjejfed me in the beginning of his way^ 
 before his works ofold.Iwasfet up from t^verlafting^ from the 
 beginnings or ever the earth was. When there were no depths^ 
 I was brought forth ; when there were no fountains abound- 
 ing with water. Before the mountains were fettled ^ before 
 the hills 7vas I brought forth : While as yet he had not made 
 the earthy nor the fields ^ nor the highefi part of the dujl of 
 the world. When he prepared the heavens y I was there • 
 vi^hen he Jet a compafs upon the face of the depth : When he 
 ejlablijljcd the clouds above ; when he firengthened the foun- 
 tains of the deep : When he gave to the fea his decree^ that 
 the waters fiould not pafs his commandment * when he ap- 
 fointed the foundations of the earth : Then I was by him as 
 cne hrought up with him ^ and I was daily his delight ^ re- 
 joy cing always before him : Rejoycing in the habitable part 
 of his earthy and my delights were ivith the fons of men^ 
 Prov. 8. 22 % I. But what do all thefe, and in- 
 numerable other Examples of the fame kind, im- 
 ply ? Shall we fuppofe, that fuch Expreffions are 
 literally true ? Particularly, can thofe be under- 
 ftood literally, which relate to the felfexiftent 
 God ? You know the old Rule, ^a dicuntur dv^pa^ 
 rromt^f, intelligenda funt -D-eoT^STTWf. 
 
 Accordingly, tho' the Metaphors relating to the 
 Spirit, and the Allegory arifmg from the whole 
 Chain of them, are indeed very furprizing, after 
 the Eaftern manner ,• yet are they not more fur- 
 prizing than others which frequently occur in the 
 Bible, and are mod exprefly apply'd to the felfex- 
 iftent God himfelf. When therefore the Spirit is 
 compared to a Meffenger fent by God or Chrift,* 
 we are to underftand no more, than that God or 
 Chrift beftows the Gifts and Graces of the Spirit, 
 
 that 
 
Chap.XIIL the Very God. 20<; 
 
 that is^ God confers, and Chrift diftributes, thofe 
 Gifts and Graces, which come from God thro' the 
 Spirit ^ or the holy Spirit vouchfafes to fhed his 
 Influences according to the Will of the felfexiftenc 
 Being, and the Man Chrift Jefus difpofes of them, 
 as his A-poftles alfo did ; that is, the Spirit imparts 
 'his Gifts in fuch Manner and Circumftances, that 
 the Diftribution of them is attributed to Men in 
 the fame Senfe, in which Men are faid to work 
 thofe Miracles, which are notwithftanding wrought 
 by the Spirit's Operation. Thus alfo, when the 
 Holy Ghoft defcendcd in a bodily Shape on our 
 Lordj the meaning is, that when that Appearance 
 was made, the Gifts and Graces of the Spirit were 
 adually imparted to the Man Chrift Jefus ^ as the 
 Holy Ghoft defcended alfo on the Apoftles, that 
 is, the Gifts and Graces of the Holy Ghoft were 
 poured on them, when the Cloven Tongues fat on 
 their Heads. Thus do all thofe Metaphors become 
 perfedly eafy ; nor does any one of them imply (in 
 any the leaft meafure or degree) fuch a Derivation, 
 Subordination^ or difference of Nature or Being, 
 as thofe who deny the Spirit to be the felfexiftenc 
 God, would fain infer from them. 
 
 3. The Confideration of this noble Allegory 
 (wherein the Spirit is compared to a Meifenger) 
 which is fo frequently touched upon in Scripture, 
 enables us to explain a very ditiicult Paifage, on 
 which too many great Interpreters have written 
 very odly, and from which fome heterodox Wri- 
 ters have endevor'd to prove, that the Holy Ghoft 
 is not the fe'fexiftent God. 
 
 Our Lord lays, / have yet many things to fay untoyotiy 
 hut ye cannot hear them now. Ho-wbeit^ when he the ffirit 
 of truth is come^ he will guide you into all truth. For he 
 fmll not fpeak of himfelf ; but whatfoever he jljall hear, 
 
 that 
 
2o6 The Holj Ghofl is Chap. XIII. 
 
 that fiall be /peak : and he will /Ijew you things to come. 
 He jhall glorify me : far he jltaU recei've of mine^ and fliall 
 fjew it tmto you, All things that the Father hath^ are 
 vnne : therefore (aid I^ that he j})all take of mine, and (Ij all 
 fimv it unto you, John i6. 12 — 15-. In this PalTage 
 Chrift lays of the Spirit, Hejljall not fpeak ofhimfelf; 
 and again^ whatfoe'ver he jljall hear, thatfljall he fpeak ; 
 and again, he (liall recei've of mine. And from thence 
 the Spirit's Inferiority to the Very God, and his 
 Subordination to Chrift's Divine Nature, have 
 been deduc'd. Whereas our Savior never meant a- 
 ny thing like it. For let us defcend to Particulars. 
 
 Our Lord faid to his Difciples, Iha^e yet (7ro^x<t) 
 many things to fay unto you : but ye ca7inot hear them now ; 
 that is, I have many things relating to my Spiritu- 
 al Kingdom to fay unto you, which ye are not at 
 prefent rightly difpofed for the Reception of. How^ 
 beit, when he the fpirit of truth (or the Veracious Spi- 
 rit) is come, he v/ill guide you into all truth j that is, he 
 will teach you all thofe things relating to my Spiri- 
 tual Kingdom, which I do not think it proper to 
 deliver to you at prefent. Then our Lord proceeds 
 to prove, that the Spirit of Truth, or the Veracious 
 Spirit, fhould lead them into all Truth (or teach 
 them luch Particulars relating to his Spiritual King- 
 dom, as he at that time was pleafed to concele) by 
 this Argument, For he jlmll not fpeak of himfelf; but 
 whatfoe'ver he jl)all hear, that jliall he fpeak. 
 
 For the Explication of which Reafon here given 
 by our Lord, we muft have recourfe to the Allego- 
 ry of a Meffenger. When a MefTenger delivers 
 what his Principal gives him in Charge, he is then 
 a true, or veracious, and faithful Meffenger : but 
 when he devifes things of his own Head, and deli- 
 vers them in the Name of his Principal, he is faid 
 to fpeak of himfelf and he is then an untrue, or ly- 
 ing. 
 
Cbap.XIir. the Very God. 207 
 
 ing, and unfaithful MelTcnger. Thus our Lord 
 himfelf^ the great Prophet or MeiTenger from God 
 to Men^ fays, //' any Alan will do his v^ill, he f'lall 
 know of the DoSlrin^ v^hether it be of God^ or whether I 
 jpeak ofwyfelfy John 7. 17. In this Text [peaking of 
 hlmfelf is oppoled to his Doc^lrin's being of God ^ who 
 was Chrift's Principal. Again, he that fpeaketh of 
 hlmfelf, Jecketh hts own Glory, ver. 18. that is, a lying 
 Meflenger, who devifes his own MefTage, feeketh 
 his own Glory, and not the Glory ^f his Principal. 
 Again, the words that I [peak unto you, J [peak not of my 
 [elf, John 14. 10. that is, I did not invent my Do- 
 drin , but I deliver to you what my Father gave 
 me in charge. Accordingly, when Chrift fays of 
 the Spirit, under the reprefentation of God's Mef- 
 fenger, th^it he Jljall not Jpeak of himfelf but what foever 
 he jliall hear, that jljall he {peak ; the meaning is, that 
 he fhould not impofe upon them by delivering Fall- 
 hoods of his own inventing, and lb be a lying Mef- 
 lenger ; but he fhould deliver to them what he 
 fhould have heard from, and been intruded with by, 
 God his Principal ,• and confequently (hould be a 
 faithful MeiTenger, and juftly deferve the Chara- 
 «^er of the Spirit of Truth, or veracious Spirit. 
 
 This therefore is an evident Proof of what Chrift 
 had afhrmed concerning him. He had alTured his- 
 Difciples, that the Spirit (hould lead them into all 
 Truth 5 that is, make known to them all things re- 
 lating to his Spiritual Kingdom. For (as our Savi- 
 or immediatly fubjoins) he jl}all not fpeak of hlmfelf; 
 but whiiSfjoe^er he jJjall hear, that [Ijall he fpeak • that is, 
 he fhall faithfully difcharge the Office of God's 
 Meffenger to you. Then Chrift adds, and he will 
 \hev> you things to come ,• that is, he will not only in- 
 ftrud you fully in matters relating to my fpiritual 
 Kingdom , but he will alfo make known to you fu-- 
 
 ture 
 
2o8 The Holy Ghojl is Chap. XIII. 
 
 ture Tranfacftions in the Church, and what (hall 
 come to pafs in after Ages, the difcovery of which 
 fliall evince that God employ'd and fent him. 
 
 Thefe feveral Affirmations therefore concerning 
 the Spirit do by no means imply, that he is a dif- 
 ferent Being from the felfexiftent God, and fubor- 
 dinat to him : but do only carry on that well known 
 Allegory of the Spirit's being God's Meffenger. 
 And the plain Truth deliver'd under thofe Figures 
 is, that when God fhou'd by his Spirit pour forth 
 thofe extraordinary Gifts and Graces, the Perfons 
 endued therewith fliould be thereby fully and faith- 
 fully inftruded in all things relating to Chrift's fpi- 
 ritual Kingdom, and fhould alfo be able to foretel 
 fuch future contingent Events, as none but God is 
 able to difcover beforehand. By this means he 
 fiiould abundantly confirm the Truth of Chrift's 
 Miffion. For our Lord knew beforehand what the 
 Spirit fliould difcover to them ; and the whole of it 
 wou'd manifeftly eftablifli his Dodrin, and prove 
 him to be the true Meffiah ; and the Glory of the 
 Spirit's Revelations wou'd confequently redound to 
 our Lord. 
 
 His next Words are thefe ; He fliall glorify me. For 
 he fhall receive of mine y and fliall fliew it unto you. All 
 fhings that the Father bathy are mine. Therefore [aid J, 
 that hefljalltakeofminey and fliall fliew it unto you. For 
 the Explication of thefe Expreflions it muft be no- 
 ted, that the Subftantive to Wk7«, which we tranf- 
 late all things in the fifteenth Verfe, is manifeftly 
 the fame as the Subftantive to ttdMa, which '\kre tranf- 
 late many things in the twelfth Verfe, viz., the things 
 relating to Chrift's fpiritual Kingdom . Where- 
 fore, when Chrift fays. Ail things that the Father hath, 
 are mine^ his meaning is, that all things that God 
 hath relating to Chrift's fpiritual Kingdom, are 
 
 Chrift's i 
 
Chap. XIII. the Very God. 209 
 
 Chrift's )• that is, God hath fully communicated to 
 Chrift all that Power and Knowledge, which he 
 ought to be endued with for the Management of 
 his fpiritual Kingdom, of which the Holy Ghoft 
 was to be, after Chrilt's Afcenlion, the prime Mi- 
 nifter. So that whatibever the Spirit fhould after- 
 wards ad or have in charge, was from Chrift. 
 And therefore Chriit lays, he JIjjU receive of mine ; 
 that is, he fhall receive Inftrudions from me, and 
 difplay that Power and Knowledge, Vv^hich the Fa- 
 ther has given to me, as being the principal Ad- 
 miniftrator of my I'piritual Kingdom. And he ^mll 
 pnv^ itj or declare this Power and Knowledge, un- 
 to you my Diiciples, by numberlefs Miracles and 
 Revelations. 
 
 Thus our Lord's Expreffions are clear. Says 
 he. He (i/i2^. the Spirit) jhall glorify me^ or make 
 me appear truly glorious, by demonftrating that I 
 truly am, what 1 have all along pretended to be. 
 Kr he^ whom I fhall fend unto you, and who will 
 work fo many Miracles among you, and fo fully 
 difcover to you the whole Will of God, ^)all re~ 
 cei'ue of mine^ even of that Power and Knowledge 
 which is already mine by the Gift of my Father, 
 and he ^hill pew it unto you by exercifing it among 
 you. For you muft underftand, that all things re- 
 lating to my fpiritual Kingdom, -which the felfex- 
 iftent God, who is my Father^ hath or pofleiTeth, ars 
 mine, being communicated by him to me. Jljerefore 
 [aid i, he jhall take (or receive^ for 'tis the fame Verb 
 in the Original, as in the 14th Verfc) o/that which 
 is already wine ; that is, he fliall then have that 
 Power and Knowledge entrufted with him by me, 
 with which I am already entrufted by God ,• and 
 Jl}aU jhew it J or make it evidently known, unto you. 
 
 P 4. The 
 
«io The Holy Ghoft is Chap. XIII. 
 
 4. The Spirit is called the Spirit to ^ -rS ."^k, ii^hicb 
 isofGod^ 1 Cor. 2. 12. This ExprcfEon does alfo 
 relate to the Al'.egory of his Miflion^ being the 
 fame as t^^ c^ -ra St» Itc-m^dofA^cy, And therefore it 
 can't imply, that he is a ditterent Being from the 
 Verv Gcd, much lefs derived from him^ or fubor- 
 dinat to him. 
 
 f . As the Spirit is very frequently compared to a 
 Meffenger ,- fo is he at other times compared to 
 Watei\, Oi to Trealures. Therefore is he faid to be 
 f cured forth or given ; that is_, his Gifts and Graces are 
 bef^ovved^particularly either by God^or by the Man 
 Chrid Jefi.Sj oi by the Apofties. God has an ori- 
 ginal Power of beilowing the Gifts and Graces of 
 the Spirit, that is, of conferring Gifts and Graces 
 by his own :5pirii:: and the Man Chrid Jefus, or 
 his Diiciplcs, are then faid to beftow them, when 
 the Spirit (or God by his Spirit) vouchfafes to con- 
 fer them by their Miniflration ; even as they are 
 faid to have wrought Miracles, when the Spirit in 
 Reality performed them. But furely thefe Figures 
 don't prove, that the Spirit derives his Being from 
 God, or is fubordinat to him, or that he is a diffe- 
 rent Being from him. 
 
 6. The Apoftle faySj The grace of the Lord Jefifs 
 Chrifl^ and the love of Gud^ and the communioit of the Ho- 
 ly Ghofi, he ivith yvu all^ 2 Cor. 15.14. In this Paf- 
 fage the Word Sfirit does fo manifeftly fignify the 
 Gifts of the Spirit, and not that Being from whom 
 they flow, that I can't forbear wondring at the In-- 
 terpretation which is ufually forced upon it. The 
 plain Meaning is only this, M/7 the grace. Favor or 
 Good Will,, of our Lord Jefm Chrifi, and may alfo the 
 Jove of God whom Jefus Chrift has reconciled to us, 
 and may alfo the communion or Participacion of the 
 Gifts of the Holy Gbvfi^ which Jefus Chrift has pur- 
 chafed 
 
Chat). XlIL the Very God. 2 1 1 
 
 chafed for us, and fheds upon the Members of his 
 Church ; May thefe ineftimable and mod defirable 
 Blsflings he with yctt all ^hy being bellowed upon, and 
 continued with, you all. Wherefore no Derivation 
 or Subordination of the Spirit can be inferr'd from 
 this PafTage. 
 
 7. Our Lord has commanded, that his Difciples 
 fhould be baptiz'd in the name of the Father , atulofthe 
 Scn^ and cf the Holy Ghofi^ Matt. 28. 19. It may be 
 urged therefore, that if the 56» does in that Place 
 betoken the Man Chrift Jefus (as I have declared 
 above) the Spirit muft accordingly denote a Being 
 as really diftind from the Very God (who muft be 
 meant by the Father) as the Son or Man Chrift Je- 
 fus is. To which I anfwer, that being baptized in 
 the name of a Ferfcny does certainly denote being by 
 Baptifm made that Perfon's Dilciple. This Notion 
 I have eftablifh'd (a) elfewhere. Our Savior's 
 Meaning therefore is barely this^ ^viz,. That Men 
 ihould by Baptifm be made the Difciples of God 
 (who is ufually ftyled the Father) and of Chrift^ 
 and of the Spirit ,• they fhould be by Baptifm made 
 Profeffors of that Religion^ which is taught or 
 made known by God, by the Miniftration of the 
 Mefliah, during his abode upon Earth, and after 
 his Afcenfion more completely reveled by theEfFu- 
 fion of the Spirit. Whatever Attempts have been 
 made upon this Text, to ferve the Ends of con- 
 tending Parties, there is nothing more than this 
 contained in it. Wherefore let any indifferent Per-^ 
 fon judge, whether the Spirit can be prov'd from 
 hence to be a different Being from that God whofe 
 Spirit he is^ becaufe God does by the Miniftration 
 
 (a) Con(ut.o^ ^aktrifwi Chap. 24. p. 287, &:, 
 
 P 2 of 
 
212 The Holy Ghoft is Chap. XIII. 
 
 of the Spirit (of which Metaphor I have already gi- 
 ven an account) make known his Will to Mankind. 
 The Son and the Spirit therefore are not diftindlly 
 enumerated here upon the account of the Diverfity 
 of their Beings^ but upon the account of the Diver- 
 l"ity of the Difpenfationj or rather the Diverfity of 
 the Parts of the felf fame Difpenfation^ which was 
 perfected by the Effufion of the Holy Spirit. 
 
 8. The Apoftle fays^ Likejvife the Spirit alfo helpeth 
 cur infirmities. For ive know fwt ii^hat ive jhoukl fray 
 for as we ought : hut the Sprit it [elf waketh intercejfion 
 for us with groanings^ v^hich cannot he uttered. And he 
 that fearcheth the hearts^ knoweth wh,'t is the mind of the 
 Spirit. Becaufe he maketh intercejfion for the Saints accord^ 
 ing to the willofGod^ Rom. 8. 26, 27. Now the Spi- 
 rit in this Pafege does not fignify that Being who 
 infpir'd the Prophets^ &c. but only the Spirit of adop^ 
 tion^ which tho' 'tis the Gift of the Spirit^ yet I have 
 (h) elfcwhere proved to be nothing more than a 
 Temper or Difpofition of Mind becoming the a- 
 dopted Sons of God. And confequently nothing 
 in this Paffage can be alleged to flievv, that the 
 Holy Ghoft is a different Being from the Ve- 
 ry Godj or derived from him_, or fubordinat to 
 him. 
 
 9. We read of the Spirit ofChrifi, the Spirit of God's 
 Sen, 8zc. Gal. 4. 6. Phil. i. 19. and elfewhere. Now 
 thefe and the like Phrafes can import no more, 
 than that Chrift has Authority to confer the Spirit, 
 'uiz,. his Gifts and Graces^ or that Chrift himfelf 
 en joy 'd the Spirit^ ^iz,. his Gifts and Graces^ in the 
 moft plentiful manner. But nothing of this Nature 
 
 Q) See the Confutation of §luakerifrny Chap. 6. p. 7 1, &c. And 
 the Difcourfe 0/ the Gift of Prayer (annex'd to the Brief Hijiory of the 
 J9int Ufe offet Firms of Prayer) Chap. 8. p, 424, ^c. 
 
 can 
 
Chap. XIIT. the Very God. 2 t j 
 
 can imp y, drat the Spine himfelf, who^e Gifts and 
 Grace:. Cnriit clchcr . : joy'd or beilowM, as Jid al- 
 fo his ApoOltSj IS a B' iug diftinct Frcm^ oi luborJi- 
 nat to, chc Very God. 
 
 10. St. John wifhcs Grace and Peace to the ^^^^tvi 
 Churches /row him jvhicb is, which vuis^ and which is 
 to come ,• and from the (t'ven Spirits vhtch are before his 
 throne; and from Jeftts Chrip:^ &c. R*"^, i. 4_, 5-. YuU 
 have rightly (c) obferved, that wheiher this he mewnt 
 
 of the Hoi) Gbcjt^ is not agrttd by Interpreters. Now if 
 this is not meant of the Holy Ghoft, then no Ar- 
 gument can be drawn from hence in tavor of your 
 Dodrin, or againft mine. But if it be meant of 
 the Holy Ghoft, yet it can't be inferred from hence, 
 that the Holy Ghofl is a Being diftind from God, 
 notwitnttanding the particular Enumeration of 
 God, the Spirit, and Jefus Chrift ; any more than. 
 it c;^n be inferr'd, that a particular Man's Spirit, 
 Soul and Body are not one Being, becaufe the 
 Apoftle fays, I pray God your whole fpWit and f nil and 
 hod) be prefer'ved hlamelefs unto the coming of our Lord Je- 
 ftts Chrijh^ I Their. 5'. 23. It may indeed be rightly 
 inferr'd, that there is a real Diftindion in one 
 and the fame Being j as there is a real Diftinc^i- 
 on in the Man, who notwithftsnding is one :^nd 
 the fame Being : but it can't be inferr'd, that God 
 and the Spirit are diftind and feparat Beings ,• much 
 lefs that the one is derived from, or fubordinac to, 
 the other. 
 
 1 1. We read, that the Spirit and the hride fay, Comfy 
 Rev. 22. 17. From hence it has been inferr'd, that 
 the Spirit is not the felfexiftent God, but a being 
 fubordinat to him. But how does it appear, that 
 
 (0 Pag.2i«. 
 
 P 3 by 
 
2 1 4 The Holy Ghojl is the Verj God. Chap. XI 1 1. 
 
 by the Spirit in this Place we muft underftand that 
 Being who infpir'd the Prophets ? 'Tis much more 
 re.Tfonable to underftand it of the extraordinary 
 Gifts and Graces of the Spirit, which the fame A.- 
 poftle (d) cals (he UnElion^ which taught the Chrifti- 
 ans of thofe D'^ys^ i J*t'hn 2. 20, 27. And confe- 
 quently ihe Spirit may fignify the Perfons endued 
 with the extraordinary Gifts and Graces of the Spi- 
 rit, 'viz. the Teachers of the Church, as contradi- 
 ftinguifn'd from their Flocks. So that the Mean- 
 ing will be, that both the infpir'd Teachers, and 
 alfo their People, ^iz,. the Church which is the 
 Bricle^ do fay come ; that is, they earneftly defire the 
 Appearance of Chrift. This Text therefore is fo- 
 reign to the prefent Purpofe. 
 
 What other Texts remain, may eafily be reduced 
 to feme of the foregoing Heads ; and the fame 
 Anfwer will ferve. Wherefore (to avoid needlefs 
 Repetitions) I fnall add no more about this Point, 
 w^hich (I think) has been fufficiently cleared al- 
 ready. 
 
 (<0 Comi}diXQ Confut. of ^akerifnif Chap. 6. p. 6i, &c. 
 
 CHAP. 
 
Chap. XIV. Of the Trinitj in Vnitj. 2 1 5 
 
 CHAP. XIV. 
 
 Of the Trinitj in Vnity. 
 
 IH A V E hitherto been fhevving (I hopc^ to your 
 Saiibi.'Ction and Convidion ) rh^c^ t .the 
 WOR D cr Divine Nature of our Lord Jelus Chrift, 
 2, the llc'y Spirit^ are the feltexiftcnc or very 
 God, and conftqucntly one and the fame Iking. 
 
 But then 'tis evident, that the Holy Scriptures do 
 notwithftanding nvrn^cftly diftinguifli the WORD 
 from the Spiric. The whole Courfc of the New 
 Teftament is a continued Demonftration of this. 
 However, let us refied upon one Confideration. 
 
 Tne Apoftle declares, that the WORD 7vas made 
 fiefh^ John I. 14. So that the WORD was as truly 
 united to the Man Chriil Jefus, as the Spirit of a 
 Man is united to his Body ; And during the whole 
 Courfe of his Miniftry this Union lafied. And yec 
 all this while, the Holy spirit ^ as you truly (.0 ob- 
 ferve, is defcriy^d in the New Tefiament as the immediate 
 Authcr and IVorker of all Miracles ^ even of thofe done by 
 our Lord h;mjelf; a7id as the Condacier of Chrifi in all the 
 Anions of his Life, during his State of Humiliation here 
 upon Earth. Again, 'twas not the WORD, but the 
 Spirit, which preferved our Lord from Sin ,• for 
 thro' the eternal spirit he offered himfelf without fpc.t to God^ 
 Heb. 9. 14. And tho' the Union of the WORD 
 and the iiuman Soul continued after the Separation 
 of the Body from the Soul by Death ; yet the 
 WORD did not raife the Body again ; but 'twas 
 
 (a) Script. Doft, p. 301, 
 
 P A ffukkned 
 
2 1 6 Of the Trimty in Vnitj. Chap. XIV. 
 
 quickned by the Spirit^ i Pet. 3. 18. This clearly 
 fhews, that the WORD and the Spirit are as really 
 diftind in the fame felfexiftent Being, or very 
 God ; as the Soul and the Body are really diftind 
 in the fame created Being, Man. For the WORD 
 and the Spirit arc conftantly reprefented as diftind 
 Principles of Adion ; and the Spirit aded, in the 
 mofl eminent manner, in and thro' the Man Chrift 
 Jefus, at the fame time, that the WORD was qui- 
 cfcent in him. 
 
 But farther, as the Holy Scriptures inform us, 
 that the WORD and the Spirit are really diftind 
 in the felfexiftent Being or very God : fo do they 
 plainly diftinguifh the felfexiftent Being, or very 
 God, both from the WORD and from the Spirit. 
 Particularly the WORD is called the M^ORD of God, 
 2 Pet. %. <;. Rev. 19. 13. and the W^ORD is faid to 
 have been 7i'ith God m the heginning^ John. I. r. And 
 as God made all things by or thro' our Lord, 'uiz,, 
 his Divine Nature, i Cor. 8. 6. Col. i. 16. Heb. i. 2, 
 JO. fo God is faid to have made all things by or 
 thro' the WORD, John i. ;, 10. The Spirit alfo 
 is cMd thQ Spirit of Gody and thereby diftinguifli'd 
 from God, whofe Spirit he is, in feveral Pla- 
 ces. And confequently the WORD of God, and 
 the Spirit of God, are in fome Senfe diftinguifli'd 
 from God, whofe they are. 
 
 From hence it follows, thaftho' neither the 
 WORD nor the Spirit is a diftind Being from that 
 God, whofe WORD and Spirit they are ; any more 
 than the Spirit of a Man is a diftind Being from 
 the Man, whom the Spirit of a Man eftentially be- 
 longs to : yet there is in the Divine EiTence or 
 IMature fomething diftind from the WORD and 
 the Spirit ; and which together with the WORD 
 and the Spirit, conftitutes the whole Divine Nature 
 orEffencr, Now 
 
Chap. XIV. Of the Trimty in Vnity. 2 1 7 
 
 Now it muft be obferv'd^ that tho' the 
 WORD and the Spirit are God, that is, elTential 
 to, and conftitutivc of, the felfexiftent Being ; yet 
 that which together wich the WORD and the Spi- 
 rit docs conllitutc the Divine Nature or Effence, 
 is not known to us by any other Name, than 
 fuch as expreffes the felfexiftent Being, which 
 it (together with the coeiTcntial WORX) and Spi- 
 rit) conftitutes, 'vlz.,. by the Names Gml Father^ &c. 
 And becaufe the WORD was made Flefti, and per- 
 fbnally united to the Man Chrift Jcfus, whofe Ge- 
 neration by the Holy Ghoft made him the Son of 
 the felfexiftent Being ,• therefore the WORD may 
 well be term'd the Son of God upon the Account 
 of this /^w^cr^/ Generation. And as io^ x.\\q eternal 
 Generation of the WORD (tho' that Phrafe is not 
 found in Scripture, nor is God therein ever called 
 the Father of the WORD, nor the WORD called 
 ihe Son of God, upon any Account antecedent to 
 the Incarnation : yet) becaufe the WORD fubfifts 
 eternally (becaufe neceffarily) in God, not as a di- 
 flind Being from God, but as one and the fame 
 Being wicn God ; and becaufe God (or that which, 
 befides the WORD and the Spirit,is inGod,or effen- 
 tial to God) is all along reprefented fo, as that the 
 WORD is his, and he" is not the WORD's : there- 
 fore we juftiy think of the whole Divine Nature c r 
 Effcnce in fuch a manner, as that God, or (if you 
 will fuffer me fo to fpeak j for our Ideas be- 
 ing fo imperfect, and our Language fo defec^live, I 
 hope, I may be excufed fuch a Figure or Similitude) 
 fo much of the Divine Nature or EfTence, as is not 
 by any more particular Name diftinguifli'd in Scri- 
 pture from the WORD and the Spirit, and which 
 is conceived by us as Prior in order of Confidera- 
 tion to both the WORD and the Spirit, is very 
 properly term'd the eternal Father of the WORD, 
 
 which 
 
2 1 8 Of the Trinity in Vnity. Cha p. XI V. 
 
 which WORD is accordingly very properly term'd 
 his eternal and coefTenciai Son. 
 
 Kow the Father (in the Senfe juft now admitted) 
 the Son or WORD^and the Holy Spirit^ are com- 
 monly called the Three Perfons in the Godhead^ or 
 Divine Nature or EfTence. What is the original 
 Notation of the Word Perfon, what various Accep- 
 tations it has had, and in what Senfes it has been 
 apply'd to I^^her^ Son^ and Holy Ghoft ; I (hall 
 not inquirer* ^Tis true, the Word Per/^w^when apply'd 
 to the Son and Holy Ghoft^ does not fignify a di- 
 ftinc^l intelligent Being feparat from the Father, 
 For tho' we can't exactly define what a Divine Fer^ 
 [on is,yet we can fay what 'tis not. And confequently 
 the three Perfons of the Godhead are not three Per- 
 fons in the fame Senfe^ in which three Men are three 
 Perfons. There is therefore noReafon^why wefhould 
 wrangle about a Phrafe. The aforefaid Diftindion 
 in the Divine Nature or Effence, is what we mean 
 by Perfonality : and the thing diftinguifli'd_, is the 
 Perfon. Whether the Terms are properly ufed^ or 
 no 5 'tis needlcfs to difpute. I only deHre, that the 
 ufe of them may be continued^ till better can be 
 fubftiruted in their room. W^hat is meant, is pretty 
 generally agreed, viz,, that the Father, the WORD, 
 and the Spirit, tho' they are truly and really di- 
 ftind, fo that one is not the other, yet are not fe- 
 parat Beings, but one and the fame Beings which 
 Being is the felfexiftent or very God. 
 
 Briefly therefore, the Father (in the Senfe alrea- 
 dy given) the W^ORD, and the Spirit, are one and 
 the fame Being with each other. That is, tho' they 
 are diftin(5l in, yet they are coelTential to, and ne- 
 ceiTarily conftitucive of, one and the fame Being. 
 Even as the Soul and the Body are diftin(5fc in, tho' 
 coelTential to, and necelTarily conftitutive of, the 
 fame Being, Man. I do by no means fay, that the 
 
 Father, 
 
Chap. XIV. Of the Trinity in Vnity. 2 1 9 
 
 Father, the WORD, and the Spirit, arc different 
 Subftances, as the Soul and the Body a'-e in a Man 
 (the Body being a material Subftance, and the Soul 
 an immaterial one) but furcly if the Union of di- 
 ftind Subrtances may conftitute one and thefc^mo 
 Being-, Man: certainly the Farher, the VV^OKD, 
 and the Spirit (of whole joint Subftance I ;^iiirm no- 
 thing, becaufe 'tis not known) may conf^itute one 
 and the lame moft fimple and uncompcunded Being, 
 'viz.. the very or felftxiftent God. 
 
 The manner of this Diftincftion in the 'cry Gcd, 
 I think, 'cis impoffible to allien or comprehend ^ be- 
 caufe the Divine Subftance is net underftooJ by us. 
 But fmce \vt know lb little of the Subtle rice of any 
 thing,- methinks, we fiiould readily believe, what 
 God himfelf has reveled concerning his own Sub- 
 ftance ; tho' at prefent perhaps our Fi^culties are not 
 qualify 'd to form any tolerable Idea of it. This we 
 know, that God is immaterial. But Immateri^licy is 
 only a Negation. There may be thoufands of imina- 
 terial Beings, whofe Subftances may be as different, 
 as the Subftance of the human Soul is different from 
 that of the Body. How then can we hope to find 
 out the pofitive Subftance of God ^ 
 
 Had we been as little acquainted wich Matter, 
 as we arc with the pofitive Subftance of God ; and 
 had a Triangle then been made known to us, not 
 by a Name which expreffes its pofitive Nature, 
 but by fome other Name as little exprefiive of its 
 pofitive Nature, as ^iU (for Inftance) is of the pofi- 
 tive Nature of God : I doubt not but wx fhould 
 have found it as difficult (tho' the Comparifon is 
 by no means adequate) to conceive the real Di- 
 ftincftion of the Angles A, B, C, in the Unity of the 
 Nature of the Triangle, to which each of them is 
 coeflemial ; as we do now find it to conceive 
 
 the 
 
220 Of the Trinity in Vnity. Chap. XT V. 
 
 the real Diftindion of Father, WORD^ and Spirit 
 (the Three Perfons of the Trinity) in the Unity of 
 the Godhead, to which each is coeffential. 
 
 The Simplicity of God's Nature can afford no 
 Objedion againft what I have written. For God's 
 Simplicity only denies and excludes a Compofition 
 of ieparable Parts : Whereas the Father, WORD, 
 and Spirit, are neceflarily infeparable and coeffen- 
 tial to the Godhead ,• and may therefore conftitute 
 the moft fimple Being. 
 
 As for the Incarnation, it can by no means ftag- 
 ger the Faith of any reafonable Man. For fince 
 the Perfons of the Everbleffed Trinity are really 
 diftind ^ the WORD, or fecond Perfon, might well 
 be incarnat, altho' the Father and the Spirit, 'ui'z.. 
 the firft and third Perfons are not. God is indeed 
 incarnat ,• but by his fecond Perfon only : Evea as 
 a Triangle touches a Point given, if B touches it, 
 at the fame time that A and C do not touch it ; 
 notwithftanding A and C, together with B, do co- 
 effentially conftitute the Triangle. And why may 
 not God, by his WORD, be united to a Man, as 
 well as the Body and Soul are united in each of us ? 
 We readily allow the Union of the Body and Soul ; 
 tho' we can no more comprehend or account for 
 the manner of it, than we can for that of the Uni- 
 on of the Divine and Human Natures. I think, I 
 can as eafily conceive, that God by his WORD, is 
 perfonally united to the Man Chriit Jefus, and now 
 governs the whole World by and thro' his Human 
 Nature , as I can conceive, that the Soul ads 
 by and thro' the Body. Tho' God could, and did 
 govern the World before the Incarnation, immedi^ 
 ally ; even as a Soul may ad without the Body : 
 yet God may alfo (and we contend, that he at pre- 
 sent adually docs) govern the World by and thro' 
 
 the 
 
Chap. XIV. Of the Trinity in Vnitj. 221 
 
 the Man Chrift Jefus^ whom he has vouchfafed to 
 unite CO himfelf by the Incarnation of his WORD. 
 
 And in confequence of this Mediatorial Govern- 
 ment, the Perfon of our Saviour Chrift (he being 
 Godman) is as truly an Objetft of Religious Adora- 
 tion, as the Perlon of an earthly Prince is the Ob- 
 jed of Civil Honor. 
 
 The Difficulty as to the Belief of the Trinity, 
 when reveled (tho' tis ftill equally a Myftery as to 
 our Comprehenfion of the manner) is in Reality 
 none ^ unlefs we can find out fome good Reafon to 
 affirm, that whatever the pofitive Subftance of the 
 felfexiftent Being is, yet that Subftance will not 
 admit of any real Diftindion internal and neceffa- 
 ry (not /row, but) in it felf. 
 
 But I fhall not enlarge. You are fo good a Phi- 
 lofopher (not to mention your Skill in Divinity) 
 that you can't need being convinc'd of the Reafon- 
 ablenefs of believing what is above our Compre- 
 henfion, or attended with fuch Difficulties as we 
 are not able to clear. Nay, 1 do not remember a- 
 ny one Writer, that has exprefs'd himfelf upon that 
 Point, more fully and judiciouily, than you your 
 felf have don in diverfe of your Books. I will take 
 the Liberty therefore (for the Reader will find caufe 
 to thank me for icj of reciting fome of your Words, 
 which tho' not penned with any View to the Do- 
 dtrine of the Trinity, may notwithftanding be moft 
 properly apply'd upon this Occafion ^ becaufe they 
 do io exacitly either obviat or anfwer the Cavils of 
 thofe Smatterers in Knowledge, who love to decry 
 all Myfterys in Religion, and pretend that we 
 ought not to believe any more than we can frame 
 adequate and complete Ideas of. 
 
 In 
 
24 2 Of the Trimty in Vnity. Chap. XIV. 
 
 In your Demonfiraticrt of the Bdng and Attribtites 
 of God (h)y you have what follows. Since in all 
 ^idfiions concerning the N^'irttre and Verfeciions of God ^ or 
 conc€rn'tr,g any thing to which the Idea of Rpernity or Infi- 
 nity is foimtd ^ tho" we can indeed demonfhat^ certain Tro- 
 pojttiofis to be true ; yet it is imfojJlbU for us to comprehend 
 or frame any adequate or compieat Ideas of the 'bA^mTXtr, 
 How t-he Things Jo demonfiraied can be : Therefore whejt 
 tnce any prrpojition is clearly demonfirated to be true ^ it 
 eught not to difiurh us^ that there be perha-fs perplexing Oh^ 
 jeiiions on the other fide ^ which for want of adat^uate Ideas 
 ef the Manner of the Exijfence of the Things demonfirated^ 
 fire not eafy to be anfwer^d. Indeed were it pofiible there 
 fijQuld he any Vropofifion which could equally be Demon*- 
 ftrated on both fides of the .^efiion^ or which could on 
 •both fidts be reduced to imply a Contradidion , This 
 it mufi be conjtjfid^ would alter the Cafe : Upon this abfurd 
 Suppofitiony all Difference of True and Falfe^ all Thinkipg 
 and Reajoniffgy and the ufe of all our Faculties^ wcttld he 
 tntirely at an end. But when to Demonfiration on 'the one 
 fide^ there are oppofed on the other ^ only ObjeBions raife^ 
 from our want of having ad^equate Ideas ef the Things 
 themfelves ^ this ought not to be efieemed a Real Difiliculty, 
 ^Tis directly and clearly demovfira-hk, that Something has 
 been from Eterfiity : All the ObjeBions therefore railed a- 
 frainfi the Eternity of any things grounded merely on our 
 want of havirig an adequate Idea of Eternity^ ought to he 
 looked upon as of no real Solidity, Thus in other the like 
 In fiances : ^Tis demonfirable^ for Ex'imple^that Sonnet hing 
 mufi be aBually hfinite : All the Metaphypcal Difficulties 
 therefore^ which arife ufttally from applying the Aieafiures 
 -and Relations of Things Finite^ to what is Infinite ; a^nd 
 from ftfppofing Finites to be Parts if Infinite, when i^t^ 
 
 (h) Prop. I. 
 
 deed 
 
Chap. XIV. Of the Trinity in Unity. 22} 
 
 deed they are not froferly foJ;ut only as Mathematieal Points 
 to ^antity^ "which have no Proportion at till ; oyght to be 
 efitewed vain and of no Force, y^g^^in^ ^tis in like manner 
 derncnftrabk^ that J^{ ant ity ts infinitely Dl'vlfible : All the 
 Objections therefore raifed by cowparipg the imaginary E- 
 quality or Inequality of the Number of the Parts of 
 Unequal .^antities^ whofe Parts ha-ve really no Number 
 at all J they all having Parts without Number ; ought 
 to be loukt upon as weak and altogether inccnclufive. 
 
 In your fecond Defenfe of an Argument made ufe of 
 in a Letter to Mr. Dodwell^ you (c) wriie thus ,• there 
 are many Demo7jJhations even in ^.bjir.iCt Mzthematicks 
 themjtlves^ 7vhich no Man who undtrfi-ands them, can in 
 the leaft doubt of the certainty of\ which yet are attended 
 with difficult Confequences that cannot perfeBly be cleared, 
 T)^e infinite Divilibility of Quantity, is an Inftance of 
 this kind. Alfo the Eternity of God, than which nothing 
 is more felf-evident ^ and yet the Difficulties co7ifequent up^ 
 on it^ arc fuch as have reduced mofi- of the Schoolmen to en- 
 tertain that unintelligible "Notion of a Nunc Stans. And 
 his Immenfity, attended with much the like Diffjcuhies. 
 
 And {d) again. Even abfiraB Mathematical Demon- 
 ^rations; as thofe concerning the Infinite Divifibility of 
 Quantity, the Eternity of God, and his Immeniity j 
 have almofi infuperable Difficulties on the other fide : And 
 yet no Man^ who underfiands thofe Matters^ thinks that 
 thofe Difficulties do at all weaken the Force^ or dlminijl) the 
 Certainty of the Demonfirations. 
 
 In your third Defenfe of the fame Argument, 
 you (0 fay • Difficult Confequences that cannot 
 perfe^bly be cleared, may be^ and very oft-en are^ found 
 to attefid Things which are Demonftrated to be True, The 
 
 (r) Pag. 38, 39. of the firfl Edition. 
 
 id) Pag. 54. 
 
 W Pag. f 2. of the flrft Edition. 
 
 Reafon 
 
224 (^f ^^^^ Trinity in Vnity, Chap. XIV. 
 
 Reafon is ; hecaufe Difficulties that cannot perfect- 
 ly be cleared^ do not (like Abfurdities and Contradi- 
 ^ions) arife from a Perception of the Difagreement 
 of Ideas, but barely from the Defed or Imperfedneis 
 of the Ideas themfelves. Our Reafon is able to ap- 
 prehend clearly the Demonfiration of the Certainty of the 
 Exigence of fame Things ^ 71^ here the Imagination is not 
 able to comprehend the Ideas of the Thi?7gs themfelves. 
 This is plainly the Cafe of the infinite Divifibility of 
 Quantity, of Infinity and Eternity in general^ of the 
 Adions of Immaterial Subftances upon Matter, and' 
 of many other 'Things, 
 
 And in your fourth- De/e^/^ of it, you(/) fay; 
 A Difficulty which cannot be ferfeBly cleared^ is a Difficul- 
 ty ari/i?7g^ ?jot from the Ferception of any Difagreement 
 of Ideas ^ but from the Want or Defecliveneis of Ideas in 
 ?/je Imagination ; 7vhich therefore ive c.mnot compare fo 
 as to Imagin diftintHf how they agree, though we can 
 hy our Reafon and Underftanding demcnfirate it is im- 
 poffible they flwuld difagree. This is pliinly the Cafe in 
 mofi ^efiionsy concerning Eternity, Immenfity, &c, 
 
 Thefe feveral Palfages do abundantly demon- 
 ftrat,that how widely fotver we may differ in other 
 Refpeds 5 yet what 1 have advanc'd, ought not e- 
 ven in your own Opinion to be therefore rejeded, 
 becaufe I don't pretend throughly to explain th© 
 Dodrin of the Trinity, 'lis fufficient, if I have 
 fliewn, that the Holy Scriptures do teach it. For 
 if that appears, I am lure, you are a better Scholar, 
 as well as a better Chriftian, than to make any Ob- 
 jection againft it, upon the account of fuch Diffi- 
 culties, as this great Myftery muft needs perplex 
 us with, whofe Capacitys are fo narrow, and whofe 
 
 If) Pag. 15. of the firfl Edition. , 
 
 * Facultys 
 
Chap. XIV. Of the Trinity in Vmty. 2 2 ? 
 
 Faciiltys are fo dull, chat we are conftancly puzzled 
 even with thole Objects which arc moft familiar to 
 us, and which we have the beil Opportunitys of 
 being intimately acquainted with. How then 
 ihou'd the wifeft Man in the World throughly 
 comprehend the Nature of the felfexiftenc and 
 infinicly perf^d God ? 
 
 Thus, Dear Sir, have I given you my Thoughts 
 upon this nice and important Subject ,• and 1 am 
 willing to hope, that they may work that good Ef- 
 fed, for which, I can truly fay, they are moft fm- 
 cerely intended. 
 
 Whether there be any Solidity in my Reafonings, 
 and whether my Notions be erne, as you muft judge 
 for your felf, fo the World muft judge between us 
 both. God grant, that when we are at any time 
 bufy'd in forming our Judgments, we may duly 
 confider and remember, that we fhall anfwer for 
 our Opinions as well as our Practices (becaufe Opi- 
 nion is the Foundation of Practice) at his Tribu- 
 nal, about whofe Divinity you and I have been a- 
 micably contending j and who will pafs a final Sen- 
 tence upon us, according to, not the Strength of 
 our Heads, but the Integrity of our Hearts. 
 
 Here I ftiou'd have releafed your Patience, had 
 thefe Paper? been communicated to you in a privac 
 manner. But fince 1 am obliged to addrefs them to 
 you from the Prels, I ought not to forget, that very 
 few Readers have Abilitys equal to thofe which 
 God has bleffed you with ,• or will beftow fuch a 
 meafure of Attention, as you naturally afford even 
 to Matters of far lels concern. And therefore, tho' 
 you wou'd eafily apply what has been already faid, 
 to the feveral Parts of your own Scheme,* and 
 
 'Q wou'd 
 
226 Of the Trinity in Unity. Chap. XIV. 
 
 wou'd inftantly difcern what my Sentiments are 
 touching every Point of it : yet I can't but efteem 
 it neceffary, for the fake of moft other Readers^ 
 to fubjoin a ftiort Examination of your Dodlrin^ 
 and therein to fignify what I think concerning each 
 diftind Branch^referring backwards to thofe Places, 
 in which I have more largely handled fuch Particu- 
 lars^ as we may happen to ciafh with each other a- 
 bout. By this means^ what I have digefted into a 
 regular Difcourfe in a Syftematical way, will be 
 immediatly transform'd into a Perfonal Contoverfy 
 with your felf ; and the meanefl Reader vvill be a- 
 ble to find, without any Trouble or lofs of Time, 
 a diftind Reply to whatfoever you have advanced 
 in oppofition (as I verily think) to what the Holy 
 Scriptures do teach concerning the EverblelTed 
 Trinity in Unity. 
 
 j'Ji\-iii-^ '■■■■ ■■ -''. t^ c- 
 
 A N 
 
( 227 ) 
 
 A:,lSf 
 
 EXAMINATION 
 
 O F 
 
 Dr. C LJ R K E's 
 
 Scripture Dodrine 
 
 O F T H E 
 
 TRINITY. 
 
 Y 
 
 Of the DoHor'^s Preface. 
 
 OUR Preface, as 'tis very fliort, fo 'tis cer- 
 tainly very inoffenfive, and what no honeft 
 Man can objed againft. 
 
 Of hi6 IntYoducfi'on. 
 
 Your Introduction is of confiderable length. 
 Touching the Contents of it I need only lay, 
 I. That no Man docs more heartily own the Holv 
 Scriptures to be the Rule of Faith^ than my ielf. 
 
 Q 2 ^- That 
 
2 28 An Examination of Dr. ClarkeV 
 
 2.. That I have fully exprelTed my Mind as to the 
 Point of Subfcripcion to our Church's Articles^ in 
 my Ejjay on them. 5. As to our Comply ance with 
 other legal Forms^ I fliall wave all Difcourfe con- 
 cerning it, for a Reafon which I (hall give, when 
 I come to your Third Part. 
 
 Of his Firji Pan. 
 
 Your Book is divided into Three Parts. You 
 fay (a)y that hi the Firfi Fart of it (that it might appear 
 what was^ not the Sound of Jingle Texts^ which may he 
 eafily mifiukeny hut the whole Tenour of Scripture) you ha've 
 collected all the Texts that relate to the Dccirine of the E'ver- 
 hlejjed Irinity (which you are not fenfihle has heen done he- 
 fore) and [et^ thtm before the Reader in one View^ with fuch 
 References and critical OhfervationSy as may (^tis hoped) he 
 of confiderahle Ufe towards the Underfianding of their true 
 Meaning. I fliall therefore take no further notice of 
 this Firft Part, than as I (hall find my ielf obliged 
 in the Examination of your Second, which refers 
 backwards to, and depends upon, your Firft ,• and 
 wherein y you (i?j fay, is £ollethd .into methodical Propo- 
 fitions the Sum of that Dothine^ which (upon the carefullefi 
 Conjideration of the whole Matter) appears to you to he fully 
 contained in the Texts cited in the Firfi Part. So that by 
 examining your Second Part, I fhall of confe- 
 quence examine your Firft alfo, as much ?s the Na- 
 ture of my Dedgn requires ; which is to rectify your 
 Notions relating to the Holy Trinuy, .md co iliew 
 whst the Hotv scriptures do really teach concern- 
 ing ir. 
 
 (a) IntroduSl. p. j 
 (I) Ibid. 
 
 Of 
 
Scrij)ture Docfrwe of the Trimty. 229 
 
 Of his Second Part. 
 
 Your Second Part confifts of rifcy five Propofici- 
 ens, each of which I fliall con lider diilindly,.. Only 
 I muft advertife you of one thing. "'''^** ?r-;:/i - 
 
 You (c^ fay, Tuu have llluti rated each Frofopion (you 
 fhould have faid^ the greatefi Number of chem) -ivith ma- 
 ny Teji'imov.hs out of the antient Writers^ bjb before and 
 after the Council c/ Nice.; effp.cjally otft of A&i':\n^^mi 
 <27;^ Bafil ; of which are fevtral not tdkeri notice ^df either 
 by Petavius or the Learned Bi^inf Bull. Concerning all 
 which ^ ycudefire it may be ' cbfervddy that they are not 
 alledgd as Proofs^ of any of the Prrpofitions (for Proofs 
 are to be taken from the Scripture alone) hut as Illufira- 
 tions only ; and to JJiew hov^' eajy and natural fhht Notion 
 mnf^ be alloived to be^ vjhich fo many JVrittrs could not for- 
 bear expreffingfo clearly and difi^inHly^ evc7j fh€juent!y -^when 
 at the fame time they were abuut to affirm^ and endeanjour- 
 i77g to prove y fomething not very confiftent 7)Htlyit\ Now_, 
 whether you have truly reprefenced chofe -Wfiters', 
 vvhofe Teftimonys you have alleged, 'tis perfectly 
 needlefs for me to inquire. For why fliould we 
 nrgue about^ or appeal to, the Teftimonys of thofe 
 Perfons^ whofe Words you do not allege as Proofs_, 
 for the Eftablifliment of any Propolicion3 and 
 whole Judgment you are relblved beforehand noc 
 to abide by ? 
 
 Wherefore, whether you have juO: Grounds to 
 -flffert^ that (d) the greattjl fart of the HYtters before 
 and ?.t the time of the Council <9/ Nice, were really of that 
 
 (c) Introdu£l. p. 17. 
 (a) Inrrodu^.p, i8. 
 
 Q 1 Opinion 
 
2^o An ExAmimtion of Df. Clarke'^ 
 
 Opinion (tho^ they Jo not: always j peak 'very clearly and con- 
 fijhntly) Tvhicb you hanje cndea'votir^d to jet forth in your 
 Second Part , I ftiall not examin for the Reafon al- 
 ready given. Befides, what does a cloud of Wit- 
 neiTes fignify, unlefs they are confiftent ? But as to 
 the Writers after that Council^ you (e) declare, 
 ih^iZ the Reader mufi 7iot wonder^ if many FaJJages net 
 ccnjijlcnt with {nay^ perhaps contrary to) thcfe which are 
 by you cited ^ Jhall by any one be alleged out of the fame Au- 
 thors, For^ you fay^ you do not cite V laces out of thefe 
 Authors^ fo much to jhoip what ivas the Opinion of the 
 Writers themfelves^ as to ^hw hoiv naturally Truth Jome- 
 times prevails by its own native Clearnefs and Evidence^ 
 even againft the Jh'ongeflr and mcft Jet tied Prejudices : ac- 
 cording to that of Bafil : I am perfuaded (faith he^ as 
 quoted by you) that the Strength of the Do6lrine 
 deliver'd down to us, has often compelled Men to 
 contradi(5t their own Affertions. Now^ if this be 
 the Cafe wich refped to thofe vjho wrote fmce the 
 Councilof Nice^ then we may by your own Con- 
 fcffion divide thofe Writers between us. And what 
 will the Caufe of Truth gain^ by our.fharing fuch 
 oppofit^andfcllcontradiding Authoritys ? 
 
 You ice therefore^ that tho' 1 do by no means 
 Give up either i\iQ Antinice?ie or 'Poftnicene ^^ xxttxs ^ 
 yet 1 juftly wave an Inquiry into their Sentiments, 
 purely to fhorten our Diipute, and that I may 
 Ipeedily bring it to an Iffue, and obtain a Verdid: 
 from the Word of God, which alone can infallibly 
 decide the Difference between us. 
 
 (e) Introdu£l. p. i8. 
 
 0/ 
 
Scripture Dochwe of the Trhiity, 2 j i 
 
 Of the Doctor'^s Fir ft Profofition, 
 
 Thefe things being premifed^ I fhall now pro- 
 ceed to your fevcral Propoficions. 
 
 The tirft of them is contained in thefe Words ; 
 
 cc 
 cc 
 
 There is One Supreme Caufe and Original ofThingi ; 
 One Jimple^ uncowpoundtJ^ nndi'viiledy intelligent Be^ 
 ngy or Ferjon ; who is the Antbor of all Beirrg, and 
 the Fountain of all Pov-er. 
 
 1. In this Propofition you m.Tnifeftly make, as 
 you do alfo elfewhere, intelligent Betng and Ver[on to 
 be lynonymous and convertible Terms. Now 'tis 
 very true^ that in common Speech Intelligent Be- 
 ing and Perfon are convertible Term.s ,- and in 
 this fenfe the one fupreme Caufe of all things, 
 whom 1 call the Very God, is undoubtedly a Per- 
 fon, and hut one Peri on : buc then the one fu- 
 preme Caufe or Very God may be, in a diffe- 
 rent fenfe, three didind Perfons, according to 
 what has been already faid in Chap. 14. p. 218. and 
 in this fenfe, tho* the one luprcme Caufe of all 
 things is an intelligent Being, yet he is wore than one 
 Perfon, even three Perfons. Wherefore in your 
 fenfe of the Word Perfn, I grant the Truth of your 
 whole Propofition, which you juftly fay, is the Fir (l 
 Principle oj Natural Religion^ and e-verj where Juppojed in 
 the Scripture Revelation. 
 
 2. I need not obferve to you, that none of your 
 References are intended to prove your fenfe of the 
 Word Perfon ; and therefore none of them can fur- 
 nifh an Argument againft my fenfe of the Word 
 Perfon, 
 
 Q 4 //'•' 
 
2J2 A?t ExAminAtion of Dr. Clarke^' 
 His Second. Profofnion. 
 
 
 With this Firll and fupreme Cauje or Futher of all 
 Things^ there has exiftedfrom the Beginnhgy a Second 
 Divine Perfon^ which is his WORD or Son. 
 
 I. I have (/) already obferved, that the WORD 
 is never called God's Son in Holy Scripture ; tho' I 
 have (g) fhewn^ that that Way of Ipeaking is al- 
 lov^^abie in other Writers. 
 
 z. That the WORD of God has exifted from the 
 Beginnings is unqueftionably true. ■'; 
 
 3. 'Tis alfo equally true^ that the WORD has 
 exifted from the Beginning with the firft and {\i- 
 preme Caufe or Father of all Things^ ^iz^. the 
 Very God. But then 1 have {h) ftiewn, that the 
 word's exiiting with Gcd^ does not in Scripture 
 Phrale^ import that he is a diftindl Being from that 
 God -with whom he exifted from the Beginning. 
 On the contrary I have (i) proved from Scripture^ 
 that the W O R D is one and the fame Being vi^ith 
 the Very God, with whom he always exifted. 
 - 4. The WORD therefore is not ^ fecond Divine 
 Perfon in your fenfe of the Word Verfon, that is^ 
 the WORD is not a fecond intelligent Being coex- 
 ifting with the Very God, and diftindl: and (eparac 
 from him : but yet the W O R D is a fecond Divine 
 Perfon in my icnfe of the Word Perfon^ ^iz,. as 
 exifting neceilarily in^ and coeilential to, the Ve- 
 ry God. 
 
 (/) Chap. u. p. i6r,e>>'. 
 (g) Chap. 14. "p.:ii7. 
 {h) Chap. 12. p. 188, c'n. 
 ( i) Chap. 12. p. 17 5; ^f- 
 
 y. The 
 
Scripture DoElrine of the Trinity, 2 ^ j 
 5*. The Texts you build this Propoficion on^ are^ 
 
 N05-67 1 
 
 
 'John I. I, 2." 
 
 
 -ch 
 
 .127 
 
 .175,^^. 
 
 f68,^69 
 
 /<i/jw c.i8.' 
 
 
 
 8. 
 
 120,121 
 
 574 
 
 
 JoJm 3 . I V 
 
 
 
 8. 
 
 106 
 
 ^84 
 
 
 j^t/j« 6. 38. 
 
 
 
 8. 
 
 107 
 
 5-86 
 
 ^in 
 
 John 6. fi. 
 
 
 
 > 
 
 
 8. 
 
 107 
 
 5-88 
 
 
 John- 6. 61. ^£ ^ 
 
 8. 
 
 107 
 
 f9r 
 
 Johns. SB. ; r. 
 
 i 
 
 8. 
 
 108 
 
 607 
 
 ^ 
 
 y(?/^» 17. f. 
 
 (L) 
 
 
 7. 
 
 87,C^r. 
 
 612 
 
 
 John 17. 24. 
 
 ' 
 
 
 7. 
 
 87>c. 
 
 619 
 
 1 
 
 /fc-?i8. ^3. 
 
 
 
 II. 
 
 162 
 
 1 
 
 Phil.2.S-ll. 
 
 ' 
 
 
 7. 
 
 39,C^^. 
 
 
 iHch.y.^. J 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 ir. 
 
 163 
 
 In fhortj all thefe Texts, except the (irft, do re- 
 late to Chrift's Human Nature ; and confequently 
 they do none of them prove^what you have affirm'd, 
 and I have deny'd. And as for the firit of them, 
 viz., John I. ij 2. I have largely explained it, and 
 freed it from your Interpretation, in the Place re- 
 ferred to. 
 
 His Third Propofttioj?. 
 
 ^^ With the Father and the Son there has exifted from 
 '^ the Beginning a Third Divine Perfon^ ivhich is the 
 ^^ Spirit of the Father and of the Son. 
 
 I. That the Spirit of the Father or Very God 
 (who is alfo called the Spirit of the Son or the 
 Man Chrift Jefus, becaufe he was moft plentifully 
 enjoyed, and is beftowed, by him, as I have 6b- 
 ferved above, ch. ,1^. /?. 203^ 212.) has exifted from 
 the Beginning, i^ granted. But that this Spirit is a 
 third Divine Perfon in your Tenfe of the^AVord Ter^ 
 
 fon. 
 
2J4 ^^ Exam'tmtton of Dr, ClarkeV 
 
 fon^ that is, a third Being diftinA from God and 
 his WORD, I utterly deny ; tho' I grant him to 
 be a third Divine Perfon in my Senfe of the Word 
 Terfon^ as exifting iteceiTarily in, and coelTential 
 to, the Very God. 
 
 2. The Scriptures do not fay that the Spirit ex- 
 ifted with the Father and the Son from the Begin- 
 ning ; tho' if they did, it would prove nothing for 
 your Purpofe, as is evident from what I have faid 
 about the W O RD's being in the Beginning with 
 God. See chaf. .12, />. 188, &c. 
 
 3. The Spirit's proceeding from the Father and 
 the Son denotes his Temporal Miffion : And I have 
 largely explained the whole Allegory in Chap. 13. 
 />. 202, &c. 
 
 4. As for the Texts you refer to^ touching 
 
 Wxi2^>^\yohn 15-. 26. 7%^Ch. 13. p.20i,&c. 
 ji4.^y% l^Matt.^, -^6. SS^ 13. 202. 
 
 In Numb. 1132*, which is Hf^. 19. 14. he is only 
 
 called the Ettrnd Spirit, which furely can't prove 
 him a di{lin6t Being from the Very God. 
 
 His Fourth PropoftttQn. 
 
 " What the proper Metaphyfical Nature, Effence, or 
 ** Subftance of any of tbefe Divine Perfons is^ the Scri- 
 *^ pture has no where at all declared ; hut defer ibes and di- 
 ** fiinguif,)es the?/t always by their perfonal Charaders, 
 ^' Offices, Powers and Attributes. 
 
 To this Propoficion (fuppofmg the Word Perfons, 
 and confegiiently /^ct/ow^/, to be taken in my fenfe ; 
 
 and 
 
Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity. 2^5 
 
 and you do not here offer any thing to eftablifh 
 your own fenfc of them) I oppofe nothing. 
 
 His Fifth Propofuion. 
 
 ^^ The Father (or Firft Perfon) alone is fclfexift- 
 ^^ ent, underived^ unoriginaccd^ independent ; 
 ^' made of none^ begocten of none, proceeding 
 ^^ from none. 
 
 This Propofition is certainly true of the Very 
 God, whom you mean by the Father. But then_, 
 whereas you call him thQ Fi>fiPerfo?t^ I muft obferve, 
 that the Very God is not a Perfon diiiind from the 
 WORD and the Spirit^ in your fenie of the Word 
 Perfon^ as fignifying an intelligent Being ; and con- 
 fequently the Father^ as contradidingLiifhed from 
 the WORD and the Spirit, is no: alofie felfexiftent, 
 &.C, But the Father, with his WORD and Spirit, 
 as three coeffential Perfons, in my fenfe of the 
 Word Verfon^ is the Very God j which Very God, 
 who is three Perfons, is alone (as contradiftin- 
 guiflied from all other Beings) felfexiftent, &c, . 
 
 His Sixth Propofition. 
 
 ^^ The Father (or Firft Perfon) is the fole Origin 
 ^^ of all Power and Authority, and is the AiKhor 
 
 and Principle of whatfeever is done hy the Son or 
 '^ by the Spirit. 
 
 1. That the Very God, whom you mean by the 
 Father y is the fole Origin of all Power and Autho- 
 rity, is certain. 
 
 2. Touching the Father as the F/Vy? Ver forty fee 
 what I have faid on the Fifth Propofition. 
 
 V The 
 
2^6 J ft Examination of Dr. ClarkeV 
 
 3. The Very God is undoubtedly the Author 
 and Principle of whatfoever is done by the Son. 
 For the Man Chrift Jefus derived his Power from 
 the Very God^ who is his Father ; and the Very 
 God did whatfoever was done by the WORD or 
 Divine Nature of the Son. For by the WORD 
 God made all things. But it does not follow from 
 thence^ that the WORD is a diftindl Being from 
 the Father or Very God ; any more than a Man's 
 underftanding by his Soul^ or touching by his Bo-. 
 dy^ proves that the Soul or the Body is a diftind 
 Being from the Man. ' 
 
 4. The fame may be faid with refped to the Spi- 
 rit. ;; 
 
 5". Your Texts are very numerous under this 
 Headj ^iz., from N*" 7^6 to N"" 99^^ which relate 
 to the Son, and from ]Si° 1148 to N° 1197, which 
 relate to the Spirit, It may fuffice however to note^ 
 that where the Son is reprefented as fubordinat to 
 the Father^ the Human Nature of the Son, wz.. 
 the Man Chr'ifl Jefus^ is manifeftly meant; And 
 that Index of Texts which I fhall fubjoin to thefe 
 PaperSj will readily refer to an Explication of any 
 Text in which any Difficulty may be apprehended. 
 And the i;th Chapter furnifhes an Account of all 
 thofe, which may feem to imply the Spirit's Sub- 
 ordination. 
 
 His Seventh Propopion. 
 
 ^^ The Father {or Firft Perfon) alone, is In the 
 ** hightjlr^ ftr'iBy and proper fenfe^ ahfoUitely Supreme 
 " over all. 
 
 I. This is granted of the Very God, whom you 
 mean by the Father. 
 
 2. Touch- 
 
Serif tare Doctrine of the Trinity, 2 :} y 
 
 2. Touching the Father as Flrfi Verfon^ fee the 
 Fifth Propofition. 
 
 His Eighth Propofition. 
 
 " The Father (or Firft Perfon) is^ ahfolutdy [peak- 
 ^^ ing^ (he God of the Univerfe ; the God of Abra- 
 ^"^ ham, Ifaac and Jacob ; the God of Ifrael ; of 
 " Mofes, of the Prophets ^W Apoftles,- and the 
 ^^ God and Father of our Lord Jefus Chrift. 
 
 1. This alfo is granted of the Very God. 
 
 2. Touching the Father as the Firfi Perfon^ fee 
 the Fifth Propofition. 
 
 5. The Very God is never called the God and 
 Father of the WORD, tho' he is undoubtedly the 
 God and Father of the Man Chrift Jefus, or the in- 
 carnat WORD. 
 
 His Ninth Propofitio/i. 
 
 *^ The Scripture^ vfhen it mentions the one God, or 
 '^ the only God, always means the fupreme Perfon of 
 " the Father. 
 
 This is true of the Very God, who (as I have 
 fo often faid) is three Perfons, viz,, the Father vi^ith 
 his WORD and Spirit. See Ch^p. 14, p, 218. 
 
 His Tenth Fropofttion, 
 
 Whenever the JVord^ God, is mentioned in Scripture 
 " -with any high Epithet, Tide, or Attribute annexed, 
 to it ; it generally (if not always) means the Perfon 
 " o/the Father. 
 
 It 
 
2^8 An Examination of Dr. Chvkt^s 
 
 Ic always means the Very God, who is Three 
 Perfons, as in the Ninth Propofition. 
 
 His Eleventh Frofofition, 
 
 
 ^^ The Scripnirey when it wentions G O D, ahfolutely 
 avd by way of Eminence^ always means the Perfon 
 of the Father. 
 
 I anfvver as to the Ninth Propofition, 
 
 His Twelfth Propofition. 
 
 '^ The Son (or fecond Perfon) is not felfexiftent, 
 
 hut derives his Being or ElTence, and all his Attri- 
 butes^ /row the Father, as from the fupreme Caufe* 
 
 1. How the WORD may be called the Son of 
 God, fee Chaf, 14. p. 217. 
 
 2. The WORD is the fecond Perfon (tho' not in 
 your fenfe, as a diftindl: Being from the Very God, 
 whom you mean by the Father) according to (S^haf. 
 14. f. 218. 
 
 5. Tho' the Human Nature of the Son, viz.. the 
 Man Chriftjefus, derives his Being or ElTence, 
 and all that he ever did or does enjoy, from the 
 Very God, as from the fupreme Caufe ,• and confe- 
 quently can't be imagined to be felfexiftent : yet 
 the WORD, or Divine Nature of the Son, is ef- 
 fential to, and neceifarily exifts in, the Very God ^ 
 jmd is in that fenfe felfexiftent , nor does he there- 
 fore, or can he, derive his Being or Eflence, or a* 
 ny Attribute whatfoever, from the Very God, as 
 from a diftin6l Being, or the fupreme Caufe of 
 himfelf^ he being one and the fame Being with 
 
 the 
 
Scripture Doclrine of the Trinity. 2^9 
 
 the Very God, who is the luprcme Caufe of all o- 
 thcr Beings whatfoever. 
 4. Whereas you refer to 
 
 ' 619-1 
 
 
 py4(^/8. ;;. 1 
 
 
 pC/^. II 
 
 p. 162 
 
 769 
 
 
 Mark I. I. 
 
 
 
 161 
 
 798 
 
 tft 
 
 Tohn 6. 77. 
 
 <!> 
 
 
 1^9,160 
 
 80 1 
 
 r" 
 
 yo/;»7.2A9. 
 
 > 
 
 
 
 1J93I60 
 
 937 
 
 r,"^^ 
 
 Co/. I. i^. i>-^<^ 
 
 II 
 
 ij9,i6o 
 
 9^0 
 
 
 Hfi'. I. T^,&c, 
 
 
 
 
 1723^^^. 
 
 9J5 
 
 Heh.z.ii. 
 
 0^ 
 
 
 168 
 
 986 
 
 
 I j^f?^;; 5-. I. 
 
 
 >- " 
 
 i6i 
 
 992 J 
 
 
 ^Rez;, 3. 14. J 
 
 
 
 89 
 
 His Thirteenth Propofition. 
 
 <c 
 
 In ivhat particular Metaphyfical Manner^ th? 
 Son derives Bewg or EjJ'ence from the Father^ the Scr:^ 
 ptHre has no where difiinBly declared ; and therefore 
 Men ought not to prefume to be able to define. 
 
 1. Till it be proved^ that the W O R D (for the 
 Queftion is concerning the Son's Divine Nature) 
 does derive his Being at all from the Very God, 
 whom you mean by the Father ^ this Propofition 
 drops. 
 
 2. Touching 
 
 . _ (-which is<< ^^ , Clee^ 
 
 6j8^ lHeb.7.1. S 
 
 :h. II 
 
 11. 
 
 p. 162 
 
 165 
 
 (S 
 
 His, Fourteenth Propofition. 
 
 They are therefore eejually worthy of Cenfure^ who ei- 
 ther on the one ^and prefume to afjirrn^ that the Son 
 
 " was 
 
240 ^n Examimtion of Dr, ClarkeV 
 
 **" was made (^i »;c Iviwv) out of Nothing ,* or^ en the 
 ^^ ether band^ that he is the felfexiftent Subftance. 
 
 They are certainly worthy of Cenfure^ who 
 prefume to affirm, that the WORD (or Divine 
 Nature of the Son) was made out of Nothing : but 
 they are certainly in the Right, who fay, that the 
 WORD is eflential to, or neceffarily exifts in, and 
 in that fenfe is, the felfexiftent Subftance. 
 
 His Fifteenth PropoJitionJ' ^ 
 
 ^^ The Scripture^ in declaring t hi Son'^ Derivation 
 *^ from the Fat her ^ never makes mention of any Limit a- 
 ^^ tion of Time ; hut alwajs fuppofes and affirms him to 
 ^^ have exified jvlth the Father from the Beginning, 
 ^^ and before all Worlds. 
 
 1. The Scripture never declares the WORD*s 
 Derivation from the Very God. 
 
 2. The Scripture fuppofes and affirms, that the 
 WORD exifted with, and is, the Very God, from 
 the Beginning, and before all Worlds. See Chap. 12, 
 
 His Sixteenth Proportion, r. 
 
 vi-i;j.i 
 
 *^ They therefore have alfo jufily been ^cenfured^ 7vho 
 " pretending to he vjije above ivhat is written^ and in- 
 ^' truding into things v)hich they have not jeen ,• havt 
 ^^ prefumed to affirm [077 «f 071 «x, h] that there was 
 
 ^^ a time when the S< 1 was not. 
 
 I heartily aften •,' this, provided by the Son be 
 meant the WORL_ or the Son's Divine Nature. 
 
 Bis 
 
Scripture Dooirim of the Trinity. 241 
 
 His Seventeenth Propojition. 
 
 '^ Whether the Son derives his Benig from the Father^ 
 ^^ by neceffity of Nature^ or by the Power of his 
 ^^ Will, the Scripture hath no -where expefly declared^ 
 
 The WORD does not derive his Being from the 
 Very God, as from a Diftind: Being ,• but neccfla- 
 rily exifts in him, and is effential to him. 
 
 His Eighteenth Propofuion, 
 
 ^' The [ao>©-, the] Word or Son of the Father y 
 ^^ fent into the IVcrld to ajj'ume our Fieflj^ and die for the 
 ^^ Sins of Mankind '^ was not the \hiy©- kvcfid^l©-, the] 
 **^ internal Reafon or Wifdom of Gody an Attribute 
 *^ or Power of the Father ; but a real Ferfon^ the fame 
 ^^ v/ho from the beginning had been //je Word, or Re- 
 ^^ vealer of the Will, of the Father to the World. 
 
 1. The WORD of the Very God did aflame our 
 Flefli. 
 
 2. The Scriptures, tho' they declare that the 
 Man Chrift Jefus was fent, yet do never fay thac 
 the WORD was fent. 
 
 3. The WORD, by reafon of the Flefli he af-, 
 fumed, did die for the Sins of Mankind ^ that is^ 
 the Human Nature of that Perfon, which was per- 
 fect God and perfed Man, did die for them. 
 
 4. I do not affirm, that the WORD is the in- 
 ternal Reafon or Wifdom of God, an Attribute or 
 Power of him ; becaufe the Scriptures have not de- 
 clared any fuch ,thin,^ : but I deny his being, in 
 your fenfe, a real Perfon, that is, a Being diftindt 
 from God ; tho' I own him a renl Perfon in my 
 
 R fenfe. 
 
2^2 An ExmtnsLtion of Dr. ClarkeV 
 
 fenfe^ as fubfifting in the Very God. See Chap, 14; 
 p. 218. 
 
 5-. It does not otpp^arj that the WORD was from 
 the beginning the Reveler of God's Will to the 
 World. That Office was^ in a great Meafure at 
 leaftj difcharged by our Saviour's preexiftent Hu- 
 man Soul. See Chap. 7. Thus I underftand your 
 
 N°6i67 
 
 617 rviz.y4^J7. 30^5 1^32^3 5-^58. See c/:>.7.p. 7 i^d'i:. 
 618J 
 
 6. Others alfo of your Texts relate, not to the 
 WORD^ but to Chrift's preexiftent Human Soul. 
 For Inftance^ touching 
 
 N^6o7l (John 17. T. "^ ^ (Ch. 
 612 I .i5 John 17. 24. J > 
 
 SsA'£iJohn6.^S, ^V 
 
 SS6\ 
 588J 
 
 1 John 6. <;i. 
 \JJohn 6, 62, 
 
 
 7. 
 
 7 
 8 
 
 p. 87^ &c. 
 87. &c. 
 106 
 
 8 
 
 107 
 
 8 
 8 
 
 107 
 107 
 
 7. I have alfo largely fhewn, in the Seventh 
 Chapter^ that lvi° 6:;8. which is P/3/7.2. j — 11. re- 
 lates not to the WORDj but to Chrift's Human 
 Nature. 
 
 8. So do diverfe other Texts here quoted by 
 you j particularly concerning 
 
 N° 63 i^^.iS ("'2 Cor. 4. 4. 
 641C -^^Co/. I. 1J5 16. 
 ^J^r-^^He^. I. 3,&:c. 
 672 j^C^«'^. 3. ^4. 
 
 9. The 
 
Scripture Doclrine of the Trinity, 2^j 
 
 9. The fame mud be faiJ of N' 694. which is 
 Heb, 2. 16. Compare what I have wruccn in Cha^, 
 
 ^. p. lly&C. 
 
 10. As alio of N° ^6^, which is John i. iS. See 
 Chaf, 8. p. I20j 12 r. 
 
 11. There remain therefore but three of your 
 whole Number, which relate to the WO R Dj or 
 the Divine Nature of the Son. 
 
 The (irft is N" 959. that is, John 1. i. which 
 proves thst the WORD is the Very God , and con- 
 fequently not a diftind Being from him. See the 
 i2thChapterj ^. 175-3 &c. 
 
 To this may be reduc'd your fecond, viz,. N''68o. 
 that is. Rev. 19. 13. 
 
 Your third is N° 642. that is, CoL 1. 17, 18, 19, 
 20. of which fee Chaf. 11. p. 164, 166, 171. 
 
 In fliort , the Apoftle there fpeaks partly of 
 Chrift's Human Nature, and partly of the WORD 
 or his Divine Nature. But in all that he lays of 
 the Divine Nature, there is not the leafl: Shvido^v 
 of Proof, that ''tis a diftind: Being from the Very 
 God. 
 
 His Nineteenth Propojition, 
 
 " TJje Holy Spirit (or third Perfon) is not felfex- 
 ^^ iftenr, bitt derives his Being or Effence from the 
 ^^ Father {by the Son) as from the fupreme Caufe. 
 
 I. The Holy Spirit is not the T^ir J Perfon in 
 your fenfe of the Word Terfon ; that is, he is not a 
 Being diftind and feparat from the Very God and 
 the WORD, but one and the fame Being with the 
 Very God and the WORD, that is. In the Very 
 God there are (in my fenfe of the Word, already 
 often mentioned) three Perfons, viz.. the Father, 
 
 R 2 the 
 
244 -^^ Examination of Pr. Clarke'; 
 
 the WORD and the Spirit ; all wich do neceffarily 
 exift in the Very God^ and are coeffential to each 
 other. 
 
 2. The Holy Spirit therefore does not derive his 
 Being from the Very God (whom you mean by the 
 Father) as from the fupreme Caufe ,- and confe- 
 quently he does not fo derive his Being from the 
 Very God by the Son^ or WORD : but is, in the 
 fenfe before given, felfexiftent ,- that is, he exifts 
 neceffarily in, and is coeffential with, the Father 
 and the WORD, in the fame Very God. 
 
 3. Touching your 
 
 N01148? ^Matt. 2.16.?^ Cc^.i2.f. 202. 
 
 rwhichis^^^, ^ C^^^< j 
 
 4. Your other Texts, 'viz^ from N° 1149 to 
 N° ii97j are accounted for in Chaf. 13. 
 
 His, Twentieth Propojition. 
 
 '^ The Scripture^ fpeaking oftho Spirit of God, vever 
 " mentions any Limitation of Time, when he deri'ved 
 ^^ his Being or Ejjence from the Father ; but fuppofes him 
 " to have exified with the Father from the Beginning, 
 
 1. Since the Scripture never mentions the Spirit^s 
 deriving his Being or Effence from the Very God ; 
 "'tis certain fhat it does not mention any Limitation 
 of Time, when he derived it. 
 
 2. Of the Spirit's exifting with the Father^ fee 
 the Third Propofition. 
 
 H/r 
 
tc 
 
 Scripture Doctrine cf the Trinity. 245 
 
 His Tmnty firjl Propofuion, 
 
 In vjhat particular Metaphyfical Manner th^ 
 Holy Spirit deri'ves bis Being from the Father, the Scri- 
 pture hath no where at all defined, and therefore Men 
 ought not to frefttme to be able to explain. 
 
 Very true. For the Scripture fays nothing of 
 any Derivation at all. See the Nineteenth .^ropo- 
 fition. 
 
 His Tmnty fecond Propoficwn. 
 
 '^ The Holy Spirit of God does not in Scripture gene^ 
 *^ rally fignify a mere Power or Operation of the Fa- 
 *^ ther, but a real Per ion. 
 
 1. I do by no means afferr, that the Holy Spirit 
 of God does in Scripture generally fignify a mere 
 Power or Operation of the Very God^ whom you 
 mean by the Father: but your own Exprelljons 
 imply, what is indeed very -true, 'viz.. that fomc- 
 times it does. 
 
 2. That the Holy Spirit of God, even he who 
 infpired the Prophets, condudcd Chrift, &c, does 
 ever fignify a real Perjon in your fenfc of the Word 
 Ferfon, that is, a diftind Being from the^Very God 
 whofe Spirit he is ^ I utterly deny : tho' I grant it 
 fignifys a real Perfon in my lenfe of that Word, as 
 exifting neceflarily in, and being coeffential to, 
 the Very God, according to what I have faid in 
 Chap. 14. p. 21S, 
 
 3. Thole of your Texts, which may be thought 
 moil plainly to prove, that the Spirit is an in- 
 telligent Being ; yet can't be thought to prove him 
 
 R 3 a 
 
24^ ^^ Examwation of Dr. Clarke^^ 
 
 a diftind Being from the Very God, vvhofe Spirit 
 
 1a 
 
 IS 
 
 This is a fufficient Reply touching your 
 1017 1 fiCor. 12. 8-11. 
 
 1052 
 1043 
 104^ 
 1046 
 1048 
 IOJ9 
 1144 J 
 
 o 1129 1 
 
 >pii47 
 u;ii7l I 
 
 John 16. 15. 
 ^ I^^j8.29. 
 \-^l^ABs 10. 19,20. 
 
 
 J> <^ <1 cA.13. p.215 
 
 p.198,199' 
 
 p.2II. 
 
 p.2I0. 
 
 
 ch.l^. p.2I2. 
 U/^.i;. p. 2 12. 
 
 j:; I ^6^; 11. 12. 
 ^ A^i 13.2. 
 1 I Cor. 12. II 
 iJE/j/^. 4. ;o. 
 
 " I Or. 2. 10,11.1 
 
 ,^ A/^rf. 28. 19. 
 '2 2 Com;. 14. 
 ;> .y <! Re^. I. 4. 
 
 ^o^w 16. 15. 
 Rom. 8. 26. 
 {Rom. 8. 27. 
 
 As for K° 1077, which is Jolm 14. 16. confider 
 V)&. 13. f. 202 — 209. 
 
 His Tmnty third Profofit'ion, 
 
 ^^ They who are not careful to maintain thefe perlonal 
 ^^ CharaBers and Difiinciiuns^ but while they are folici- 
 tous (on the one hand) to avoid the Errours of the Ari- 
 anSy aff.rv7 (in the ccfitrary Extreme) the Son and 
 Hoiy Spirit to he (jiidividually with the Father) the 
 felfexiftent Being : Thefe, jeemi?ig in Words to 
 magnify the Narrie oftht Son and Holy Spirit, in Re- 
 ality take away their very Exiftence ; and fo fall 
 unawares into Sabcllianifm (which u the fame with 
 Socinianifm.) 
 
 I. That the WORD, or Divine Nature of 
 Chrift, and the Holy Spirit, are individually with 
 fhe Father, or the firit Perlbn, the felfexiftent 
 
 J3cingj 
 
Scripture Docirim oftheTrwitj. 247 
 
 Being'- has been phiinly proved in the 12th and 
 13th Chapters. Nor do the Holy Scriptures attri- 
 bute to the WORD or ^Spirit any perfonal Chara- 
 <aers or Diilindlions repug;nant to this Dextrin. 
 And confequently we muft not deny this Do(^irin 
 for the fake of any fuch pretended perfonal Cha- 
 racters or Diftindions, the belief of which (bc- 
 caufe the Holy Scriptures do not teach them) can't 
 be either neceffary or reafonable for the Mainte- 
 nance of the Truth againft any fort of Heretics. 
 
 2. Thofe who affirm the WORD and Spirit to 
 be (individually with the Father) the felfexiftenc 
 Being, do not in any wife take away the very 
 Exiftence of the WORD and Spirit ; unlefs aflrirm- 
 ing them to be Very God, or the ielfexiftent Be- 
 ing, can be conftrued a Denial of their very Exift- 
 ence ; as if the Very God, or felfexiftent Being, 
 could not exift ; which (I am fure) you will by no 
 means fay. I confefs, thofe who affirm the WORD 
 and Spirit to be (individually with the Father) the 
 felfexiftent Being, do in Reality (as in Reality they 
 ought) take away their very Exiftence as Beings 
 diftindl and feparat from the Very God or felfexift- 
 ent Being : But furely the denying of their diftinA 
 and feparat Exiftence, is not taking away their ve- 
 ry Exiftence, or faying that they do not exift at 
 all. 
 
 5. Whether SaheUiamfm be the fame with Soci^ 
 nianifwy I need not inquire. The Queftion at 
 prefent is, not what the Sabdlliins or the Socinians 
 teach, but what the Holy Scriptures teach. 
 
 4. If thofe who afliirm the Dodrin above main- 
 tained, did really fall into Saklliamfm -^ 'twou'd be 
 no Argument againft their Dodrin, provided 
 the Holy Scriptures do warrant it. Nor would a- 
 any Maa that fliould revive the Ari^n Notions, 
 
 R 4 eftecm 
 
24S An Exawwdtion of Dr. Clarke'^ 
 
 efteem it a good Argument againft his Pofition^, 
 that they were formerly maintained by Jrlm, and 
 condemned by the Church as much as the Tenets 
 of Sahellim were. He would fay, and indeed juftly, 
 that we muft receive for Truth, not what has been 
 eftablifli'd by Councils, but what the Infpir'd Wri- 
 ters have deliver'd ,- and that we muft not be afraid 
 of owning the Truth, becaufe it has been formerly 
 condemned, and branded under the Name of fome 
 eminent Patron. 
 
 5". That the Dodrin abovemaintained is by no 
 means Sahe.Uianifm^ but a flat Contradiction to it, I 
 I could eafiiy prove, were I not refolved to a- 
 void all fuch Digreffions, as will only amufe and 
 prejudice the Reader, without fhewiog him what 
 the Holy Scriptures do teach, which are the only 
 Rule of Faith. 
 
 His Trve}ity fourth Profofition. 
 
 
 The WorcJ^ God, in the New Tefiament^ forrjetlmes 
 fignifies the Fcrfon of the Son. 
 
 1. The Word God does fometimes in the New 
 Teftament undoubtedly fignify the WORD or 
 Divine Nature ofChrift; and Chrift the Son of 
 God is fometimes in the New Teftament undoubt- 
 edly called Gcd upon the Account of his having the 
 WORD, or his Divine Nature, united to his Hu- 
 man Nature. 
 
 2. Whether the Divine Nature of Chrift be 
 meant by the Word God^ in all the feveral Texts by 
 you referr'd to, it matters not. 'Tis fufficient, that 
 ^tis certainly meant by that Word in fome of them, 
 particularly John i. i. which is your N*" ^35'. 
 
Scripture Doiirine of the Tr'mity, 249 
 
 His Twenty fifth Profojttion. 
 
 ^^ The Reafon why the Son in the New Tefiawent is 
 fometimes filled God, is not fo much upon account of his 
 Metaphyfical Subftance, how Divine focver ; as of 
 his relative Attributes and Divine Authority over 
 
 " us. 
 
 It is not worth while at prefent to inquire^ upon 
 what Account, or upon what Account chiefly, ttie 
 WORD, or Divine Nature of Chrift, is ftited God 
 in the New Teftament. 'Tis fufficient^ that he is 
 fo (tiled, and that his being fo (tiled impiys his 
 having Authority over us ; whether the Appellation 
 were originally given him upon that Account, or 
 upon the Account alfo^ or chiefly ^ of his Metaphyfi- 
 cal Sub(tance. 
 
 His Twenty ftxth Propofition. 
 
 
 By the Operation of the Son, the Father both made 
 and governs the World, 
 
 By his WORD God made the World ; and God 
 by Chrift, that is, the God-Man, now governs the 
 World. 
 
 His Ttventy feventh Propofitio^. 
 
 " Concerning the Son, there are other the greateft 
 ^^ things fpoken in Scripture^ and the higheft Titles 
 " afcribed to him ; even fuch as include All divine Pow- 
 " ers, excepting abjolute Supremacy and Independent 
 *^ cy, which to fuppofe Communicable is an exprefs 
 *^ Contradiction in Terms, 
 
 There 
 
2 ^o An Examination of Dr. Clarke'^ 
 
 1. There are in Scripture fuch things fpoken of^ 
 and fuch Titles afcribed to^ the W O R D, or Di- 
 vine Nature of Chrift, as do include all Divine 
 Powers. For he is exprefly called God, See the 
 24th Propofition. 
 
 2. Abiclute Supremacy and Independency are 
 never deny'd of the W O R D^ or Divine Nature of 
 Chrift, in the Holy Scriptures. 
 
 5. To fuppofe abfolute Supremacy and Indepen- 
 dency communicable from oneBeing to another di- 
 ftind: and feparat Beings, is an exprefs Contradi- 
 dion in Terms. 
 
 4. There may be, without any Appearance of a 
 Contradicfrion, a W O RD and a Spirit, infepara- 
 ble from, and coeffential to, that Being which is 
 felfexiftent, and confequently abfolutly fupreme 
 and independent. 
 
 ^. Under thisPropofition you have collected a great 
 Number of Particulars, which are affirmed of Chrift 
 in Scripture. The far greateft part of them do not 
 imply any Divine Power inherent in him : but ma- 
 niteftiy relate to him, partly as the Meffiah or 
 -Great Prophet, and partly as the great Governor of 
 the World, which he moft certainly is as God- 
 Man. I need not diftin^tly prove this, and fo go 
 thro' all the Particulars you have coUecled ; be- 
 caufe I am perfuadcd, that Index of Scriptures 
 which I fliall annex, will be a fufficient Diredion 
 even to a mean Capacity. As for fuch PafTages 
 of Scripture as relate to rhe WO R D or Chrifl's 
 Divine Nature, none of them does imply any In- 
 feriority of it to the Very God, as will appear to 
 any Perfon who confiders what I have written in 
 the i2ih Chapter. 
 
Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity. 2$i 
 H/V Tmnty eighth Profofition, 
 
 " rhe Holy Spirit U defcrlhed in the New Tefiawent, 
 '' as the immediate Author and Worker ofk\\ Mira- 
 '' cles e'ven of thofe dve by our Lord himlclf; and as 
 " the Conduaer of Chrifi in all the Actions of his Life, 
 " daring his fiate 0/ Humiliation here upon Earth, 
 
 This Propofition is true. See the 8th Chapter. 
 
 His Tmnty ninth Propofition. 
 
 " The Holy Spirit is declared in Scripture to he the In- 
 '' fpirer of the Prophets and Apoftles, and the great 
 '' Teacher and Direder of the Apoftles tn the ivholc 
 ^^ IVorkof their Minifiry. 
 
 This Propofition is true. 
 
 His Thirtieth Propofition. 
 
 '' The Holy Spirit is repreferUed in the New Tefia^ 
 " ment, as the Sandifier of all Hearts, and f/?e Sup- 
 '' porter and Comforter of Good Chriftians under aL 
 ^^ their Difficulties, 
 
 This Propofition is true. 
 
 His Thirty firfl Propofition. 
 
 '' Concerning the Holy Spirit there are other greater 
 " thinss fpoken in Scripture, and higher i:xt\&sa!cnbed 
 " to him, than to any Angel or Other Created Being 
 ^'^ whatfoevcv. • 
 
 This Propofition is true. 
 
 His 
 
2 52 An Exammation of Dr, ClarkeV 
 His Thirty fecond Frofojition. 
 
 
 The Wordy God^ in Scripture^ no jvhere Jignifies the 
 Ferfon of the Holy Ghoft. 
 
 Of the "Perfon of the Holy Ghoft fee Prop. 22. 
 
 Since I have fhewn, that the Holy Ghoft is Very 
 God^ it is not worth difputing, whether the Word 
 Gcd does any where in Scripture fignify the Holy 
 Ghoft. 
 
 Hss Thirty third Propoftiofi, 
 
 ^^ The Wordy God_, in Scripture y never Jignifies a com- 
 ^^ flex Notion of more Perfons than one ; hut always 
 ^^ means one Perfon only, viz. either the Ferfon of the 
 ^^ V^thzv [inglyy or the Ferfon of the Son /ingly. 
 
 The Word God in Scripture does indeed never 
 ilgnity a complex Notion of more Perfons than 
 one, in your fenfe of the Word Ferfon ; that is, 
 the Word God does never in Scripture fignify a com- 
 plex >iotion of more Beings than one : but always 
 means one Being only, 'uiz., the Very God, or 
 the WORD, who is one and the fame Being 
 with the Very God, as I have largely fliewn. 
 
 I need not remind you, that I have fhewn in 
 Chap. 14. p. 218. how the Father and the WORD, 
 tho' one and the fame Being, are diftind Perfons 
 in my fenfe of the Word Ferfon, 
 
 His Thirty fourth Propojitio/;. 
 
 ^^ The Son, vjhatever his Metafhyfical EJJence or Sub- 
 fiATice bey and whatever Divine Great nefs an. I Dignity 
 
Scripture Do^rine of the Trinity. 25} 
 
 is afcribed to him in Scripture ; yet in this he is evident ^ 
 ly fubordinace to the Father^ that he derives his 
 Being ^w^ Attributes from the Father, the Father no- 
 thing from him. 
 
 See Vrof, 6. Art, f. and Vrop, ii. Art. 3. 
 His Thirty fifth Profofition. 
 
 
 Every Action of the Son, hoth in making the 
 World, and in all other his Operations ; is only th& 
 Exercife of the Father's Power, communicated to him 
 after an ineffable manner. 
 
 See Frop, 6, Art. 5. and Trop. 12. Art. i, 5, 
 His Thirty fixth Propofition, 
 
 
 The Son, "whatever his Metafoyjical Nature or Ef- 
 fence be ; yet^ in this whole Difpenfation, in the Creation 
 ^^ and Redemption of the World ^ atis in all things accord- 
 *^ tng to the Will, and by the Million or Authority of 
 *^ the Father. 
 
 1. God created the World by his WORD, which 
 is the Divine Nature of the Son. But that the 
 WORD created the World according to the Will, 
 and by the Miffion or Authority of the Father, is 
 not the Language of Floly Scripture. 
 
 2. The Human Nature of the Son, viz>. the Man 
 Chrift Jefus, did in the Redemption of the World, 
 ad in all things according to the Will, and by the 
 Miffion or Authority, of the Father, viz., the Very 
 God. 
 
2 54 -^^ Examm^tion of Dr. Clarke'/ 
 
 His Thirty feventh Propoftio^, 
 
 The Son, how great foe'uer the Metafhyfical Dignity 
 of his Nature was ^ yet in the vjhole D iff en fat ion entirely 
 direBed all his Aciions to the Glory of the Father. 
 
 This is true of the Human Nature of the Son^ 
 viz,, the Man Chrift Jefus. 
 
 His Thirtj eighth Propojitio^. 
 
 '^ Our Saviour y Jefm Chrifi ; as^ before his Incarna- 
 
 *^ tion^ he was fent forth by the Will a7ul Good Pleafitrey 
 
 *^ and with the Authority of the Father ; fo in ihe Flejh^ 
 
 " both before and after his Exaltation^ ?ictwithfianding 
 
 ^^ that the Divinity of the Son ivas perfonally arfd infepa^ 
 
 ^^ rably united to it^ he^ in Acknowledgment of the Supre- 
 
 '*" macy of the Verfon of the Father ^ always prayed to 
 
 ^^ him^ and returned him Thanks^, filling him his God_, 
 
 1. We do not read, that God's WORD, or the 
 Son's Divine Nature^ was fent forth before the In- 
 carnation, by the Will and good Pleafure, and with 
 the Authority, of the Father. 
 
 2. The preexifting Human Soul of Chrift was 
 fent forth before the Incarnation by the Will and 
 good Pleafure, and alfo by (for I do not care to fay 
 -with) the Authority of the Father, or Very God. 
 
 5. The Man Chrift Jefus, or the Son's Human 
 Nature, during his Abode upon Earth, when the 
 WORD was quiefcenc, did, notwithftanding that 
 the Word was perfonally and infeparably united to 
 him, pray, &c, to the Father or Very God. 
 
 4, The 
 
Scrifture Doctrine of the Trimtj. 255 
 
 4. The Scriptures do by no means teach, that 
 the WORDj or the Son's Divine Nature, did ever 
 pray, &c. to the Father or Very God^ in Acknow- 
 ledgment of his Supremacy. 
 
 His Thirty ninth Pro[ofition. 
 
 ^^ The rsafon why the Scripture^ tho* it ft lies the Father 
 God^ and alfo jl'iles the Son God^ yet at the jame time 
 always declares there is hut one God ; is hecaufe^ in the 
 Monarchy of the Univerje^ there is but one Autho- 
 rity, original in the Father, derivative in the Son : 
 the Power of the Son beiijg^ not another Vowcr op- 
 pofite to that of the Father, nor another Vower co- 
 ordinate to that of the Father ^ hut it J elf The Pow- 
 er and Authority of the Father, co?ijmunJcated to, 
 manifefted in, aiid exercifed by the '^on. 
 
 1. The Scripture does therefore declare, that:, 
 there is but one God, notwirhftanding it fliles the 
 Father God, and alfo the WORD (or Divine Na- 
 ture of the Son) God ; becaufe the Father and the 
 WORD are, not diftinct Gods, but one and the 
 fame God. See Chaf. 12. p. 177, &c. 
 
 2. If by the Son wq underftand the Human Na- 
 ture of Chrift, which is perfonally united to the 
 WORD, and exalted to the Dignity of being 
 Vicegerent of the Father or Very God ; it is un- 
 doubtedly true, that in the Monarchy of the Uni- 
 verfe there is but one Authority, original in the 
 Father or Very God, derivative in the Mediator ; 
 the Power of the Mediator being, not another 
 Power oppofit to that of God, nor another Power 
 coordinat to that of God, but it felf the Power and 
 Authority of God, communicated to, manifefted 
 
256 -^^ Examination of Dr. ClarkeV 
 
 in^ and exercifed by, the one Mediator between 
 God and Men, the Man Chrift Jefus. 
 
 His Fortieth Propojitiopt. 
 
 ^^ The Holy SpintyVJbatever his Metafhyfical Nature^ 
 Ejfence or Subjirnce he i and 7vhatever Divine To7ver 
 or Dignity is afcribed to him in Scripture ^ yet in this 
 ^^ he is evidently fubordinate to the Father ; that he de- 
 ^^ rives his Being and Powers from the Father^ the Father 
 nothing from him. 
 
 The Holy Spirit does not derive his Being and 
 Powers from the Father or Very God (fee Vrop, 19.) 
 but is one and the fame Being with him, coeffen- 
 tial, and confequently not fubordinat to him. 
 
 His Forty fir Jl Profofition. 
 
 ^ The Holy Spirit, whatever his Metafhyfical Nature^ 
 ^^ Ejfence or Suhfiance be • and whatever Divine Powe^ 
 " or Dignity is afcribed to him in Scripture ; yet in the 
 '^ whole Difpenfation of the Gofpel^ always aBs by the 
 " Will of the Father, is given ^w^ fent ^^ him^ in- 
 " tercedes to him^ &c. 
 
 See the 14th Chapter. 
 
 His Forty fecond Propofttion. 
 
 " The Holy Spirit, as he is fubordinate to the Fa- 
 ^^ ther ,* fo he is alfo in Scripture reprefented as fubordi- 
 ^^ nate to the Son, both by Nat we and by the Will of the 
 
 Father ^ excepting only that he is described as being the 
 ^^ ConduBer and Guide of our Lordy during his fiate of 
 
 Humiliation here upon Earth, 
 
 I. The 
 
Scripture Do^ri^e of the Trimty. 2^7 
 
 1. The Holy Spirit is not fubordinat to the Fa- 
 ther, or to the WORD. Sec Vrop. 19, 40. 
 
 2. The Holy Spirit was the Conduder and Guide 
 of the Man Chrift Jcllis during his State of Hjmi- 
 liation here upon Earthy when the WORD was 
 quiefcent in him. See the 8ch and 9th Chapters. 
 
 His Forty third Fropoftio/J. 
 
 
 upon thcfe Grounds, abfolutcly fupreme Honour 
 is due to the Ferfon of the Father finglj^ as being alons 
 the fupreme Author of all Being and Poti^u: 
 
 Abfolutly fupreme Honor is due (not to the Fa- 
 ther, as diftinguifh'd from the WORD and the 
 Spirit ; but) to the Very God (in whom there are 
 three coeiTential Perfons, the Father, the WORD, 
 and the Spirit) as being alone the fupreme Author 
 of all Being and Power. 
 
 His Forty fourth Propofitio/;. 
 
 '^ For the fame Reafon, all Prayers and Praifes ot^gbt 
 " primarily or ultimately to he direBed to the Perfcn of 
 *^ the Father, as the Original and Primary Author 
 " of all Good. 
 
 All Prayers and Praifes ought primarily and ulti- 
 matly to be direded to the Very God, in whom are 
 three coefTential Perfons, as the Original and Pri- 
 mary Author of all Good. 
 
 His Forty fifth Profofition. 
 
 And upon the fame Account^ whate'ver Honour // 
 [I paid to the Son ivho redeemed, or to the Holy Spiric 
 
 S " who 
 
2^8 An ExamifJition of Dr. Clarke'^ 
 
 who fancfifies us^ muft always he underftood as tending 
 ^^ fnally to the Honour and Glory of the Father, by 
 ^^ whoje good Pleajure the Son redetwcd^ and the Holy 
 *^ Spirit J an 51^ i fie s us. 
 
 1. Whatever Honor is paid to the Very God, is 
 paid to the Father, WORD and Spirit, who are 
 one and the lame Being. 
 
 2. Whatever Honor is paid to the Son as Incar- 
 nat Mediator, that is, whatever Honor is paid to 
 Chriil, who redeemed us, and now governs the 
 World as God's Vicegerent, muft always be under- 
 ftood as tending finally to the Honor and Glory of 
 the Very God, to whofe WORD the Man Chrift 
 Jeibs is pcrfonally united. 
 
 His Forty fixth Profofuion, 
 
 ^^ Fory the Great Oeccnomy, or the jvhole DJfpen- 
 ^' fdtiun of CiOil towards Mankind in Chrifi^ confifi's and 
 '^ termiijaies in this • that as all Authority and Power 
 ^^ is origirir-ll} /'&' tie Father, and from him derived to the 
 Son, and exercijed according to the Will of the Father 
 h)' the Operation of the Son, and by the Energy of 
 the Holy Spirit,* and all Communications from 
 God to the Creature, are conveyed through the Inter- 
 cellion of the Son, and by the Infpiration and 
 Sandificacion of the Floly Spirit : So on the Con^ 
 trary^ all Returns from the Creature, of Prayers 
 and Praifes, ^/'Reconciliation and Obedience, of 
 Honour and Duty to God ,• are made in and by the 
 Guidance and Affiftjnce of the Holy Spirit, 
 through the Mediation of the Son, to the fupreme 
 Father and Author of all Things. 
 
 If 
 
Scripture DoHrine of the Trinity. 2^9 
 
 If (to avoid Ambiguity) inftead of the W^ord F^- 
 
 rW you wou'J read Go^i, and inlle.d ol the Word 
 
 Son you wou'd read Cbnft, or \Udlator^ or Ma7i 
 
 Chrift Jefus • this Prcpofuion would be exactly true. 
 
 Ht$ Fo}ty jtventh ?ro^o[ition. 
 
 '^ The Son, before his Incarnatiov^ 9;.'jj with God, 
 
 '' was in the Form ot God, andh^i^ Glory with the 
 '' Father. 
 
 This Propoficion is true of the God-man, with 
 refped: partly to his Divine, partly to his Human 
 Mature. As for your 
 
 584 
 ^88 
 
 591 J>-g<^' 
 
 607 X ' 
 
 612 ^ 
 
 616 
 
 617 
 
 618 
 
 658J 
 
 [John I. I, 2. 
 3. 13. 
 6. 38. 
 
 62. 
 
 8. ^8. 
 
 17. ^ 
 24. 
 
 A?; 7.30,5 I, ;2., 
 LP^i/. 2. 5-— II. J 
 
 ■6'^.i2.p.i7f-i9r 
 8. 106. 
 
 8, 
 
 
 8. 
 
 1 
 
 1" 
 
 7. 
 
 107. 
 
 ibid. 
 
 ibuL 
 
 108. 
 
 76.87. 
 
 108. 
 
 29, d^^. 
 
 His Forty eighth Profofitwn. 
 
 *' Tet he )^.?.i wor /^ew diftind Worfhip faid to him 
 in his own Perfon, but a^feand only as the [Sheci- 
 nah or] Habitation cf the Cylory of the Father ; in 
 -which, the Name of God -was : The Diamaneis^ 
 and Dignity of his Perlbn, and the true Nature ^>/ 
 /;/; Authority and Kingdom, not b.mg^a revealed. 
 ^ S 2 I. No 
 
26o Jn ExAm'wxtion of Dr. Clarke^^ 
 
 1. No wonder, that the Son had not diftinc^: 
 Worfhip paid him in his own Perfon before the In- 
 carnation. For the WORD, or Divine Nature of 
 the Son, is not a different Being from God : but 
 yet was certainly worfhipped j becaufe he was ef- 
 Te^tially in God, and the fame Being with the Fa- 
 ther, or Very God, who could not be worfhipped 
 fcparatly from his VV O R D. And I dare fay, na 
 body will imagin, that the Preexiftent Soul o£ 
 Chrift, was an Objed of Worfhip before the In- 
 carnation. 
 
 2. The WORD was not, but Chrift's Preexifl- 
 ing Soul was, before the Incarnation, the Sbecinah 
 or Habitation of the Glory of the Father, or Very 
 God, in which the Name of God was. See Chaf. 
 
 7. 
 
 5. TheDiflindnefsofthe WORD in the Very 
 God, the Dignity of the God-man, and the true 
 Nature of bis Authority andKingdom,were not ful- 
 ly and clearly reveled before the Incarnation. 
 
 His Forty ninth Propoftio^. 
 
 ^^ At his Inccnnation he emptied himfelf [Wtpunv 
 iojuTvv] of the Glory, 72'hich he had with God be- 
 fore the World was, and by Virtue of which he is 
 dejcribed as hazfivg been in the Form of God : And 
 in this State of Humiliatio?}^ fufftred and died for the 
 Sins of the World. 
 
 1. How the Preexifting Human Soul of Chrifl 
 emptied himlelf of his Glory, what Glory he had 
 with God before the World was, and on what ac- 
 count he is laid to have been in the Form of God, 
 fee Chaf. 7. 
 
 2. Chrifl did in his State of Humiliation fufFer and 
 die for the Sins of the World. Hac 
 
Scrffture ho^rine of the Trinity, 2 6 1 
 His Fiftieth Profofttion. 
 
 <c 
 
 After the AccomfUjliineiit of which Difpenfitlcv, he 
 ^^ is defcribed in Scripture as invcfied v^ith diftind: Wor- 
 "*^ fhip in his own Perfon ; his Original Glory nnd 
 Dignity being at the j.ime time re-veaUd^ cuul h^s Ex- 
 altation in the Human Nature to his Mediatorial 
 Kingdom declared : Hlmfelf litting tfpon his Father's 
 ThronCj at the Ri^ht Hand of the Mnjefy of God ; 
 and receiving Prayers and Thankfgivings^ frcin his 
 Church. 
 
 This Propofition is true of the God-man, who 
 was thus exalted with refpci^t to his Human Nature 
 only, the WORD not being capable ot any (uch 
 Exaltation. See Chaf. 6, 
 
 His Fifty frfl Profofuion. 
 
 ^^ This Honour the Serif ture dlreHs to be paid to Chrijl ; 
 not fo much upcn account of his Metaphylical EfTence 
 or Subftance, and abftrad Attributes , as of his 
 Actions and Attributes relative to us ; his Conde- 
 Icenfion in becoming Man^ -who was the Son of God ,• 
 his redeeming, arJ interceding for, us; />ij Au- 
 thority, Power, Dominion, ^«^/ fitting upon the 
 Throne of God his Father, as cur lawgiver, cur 
 King, our JudgQy and our God. 
 
 I. Chrift is to be honored as God ,• bcciufe the 
 WORD is Very God, and has the Metaphyfical 
 Effence or Subftance and abflradt Attributes of the 
 Selfexiftcnt Being. 
 
 S 2 2.Chrifl: 
 
 <c 
 <c 
 <c 
 
 a 
 
262 An Examin^ition of Dr/ClarkeV 
 
 2. Chriil is co be honored as Mediator upon the 
 account of his A6tions and Attributes relative to us^ 
 his Condefcenrion in becoming Man, &c. 
 
 3. Chrift is not called our God in Scripture upon 
 any orher Accounr^ but thac of his Divine Nature, 
 the WORD being perfonally united to the Human 
 Nature. Compare Frof. 25'. 
 
 4. How Chrift is the Son of God^ fee Cha^. u. 
 p. i6ij 162. 
 
 His Fiftf fecond Propofitiofi, 
 
 " The Honour f:iid In this manner to the Son, wufi 
 (^ •.« hef'jre) ahvays be underft-cod as redounding ultimate^ 
 ^^ Ij to the Glory of God the Father. 
 
 The Honor paI3 to Chrift as Mediator, redounds 
 ultinr :lv to the Glory of the Very God, vvhofe 
 WORD is perfonally united to the Man Chrift 
 
 Jcfas. 
 
 Hrs Fifty third Profcfition, 
 
 cc 
 
 The Honour which Chrlfllans are hound to par pe- 
 culiarly to the Perfon of the Holy Spirit, is exprejfd in 
 thefe Texts fcU.u^in^ ; -^'herein v-e are direSledy either hy 
 VrecepT , or by Kx.-rt7fle^ 
 
 To Baptize in his Name^ Szc 
 
 1. The Holy Spirit is not in your fenfe of the 
 Word, a diftinci: P-ifon, tiiat is, a different Being 
 from the Very God. 
 
 2; Wherefore^ when the Very God is honored, 
 the Holy Spirit is honored ; even as when a Man is 
 honored, his Spiric is honored, which is tiie fame 
 Perfon with himfeif. 
 ' ' ;. Thofe 
 
Scripture Doclrine of the Trinily. 26 J 
 5. Thofe Texts, wherein we are dirccfled, cicher 
 by Preceptj or by Example^ to Bapcize in the Spi- 
 rit's Name, &c. do noc infer any Honour peculiar 
 to the Holy Spirit, as a dillind Being tVom the Ve- 
 ry God ; any more than meniioning clic :>pirit ot a 
 Man^ or Adions relating to the Spirit of a Man, 
 does imply, tliat the Spirit of a Man is a diftind Be- 
 ing from the Man whole the Spirit is. 
 
 HJs Fifty fourth Propcfition. 
 
 ^^ For flitting up Prayers and Supplications dh-eRly 
 and exprejlj to the Perlon of the Holy Spirit, it muji 
 be ackmivUJged there is no clear Precept or Example 
 pture. 
 
 in Scri 
 
 See Vrop. ^^. Art. r_, 2. 
 
 His Fifty fifth Propofiticn. 
 
 ^^ The Titles grjcn in the New T-flament tn the 
 Three PerCons of the everhlejjcd Trinity, ij^hen all 
 mentioned together ,* are as fllox^s. 
 
 You then fubjoin an enumeration of Particulars. 
 What I (hall remark, is only this. Of the Phrafe 
 Three Verfons^ fee Vrop. ;;. Whether the Three Per- 
 fons, in my fenfe of that Phrafe, be mentioned in 
 each of the Texts you quote, ic matters not. 'Tis 
 certain, that none of thofe Texts does prove, that 
 the Father^ tV O R D and Spirit are Three Perfons 
 in your fenfe of the Phrafe. 
 
 S4 0/ 
 
2^4 An Exmtrtdtton of Dr. Clarke^ 
 
 Of his Third Part. 
 
 Nothing remains, but your Third and laft Part ; 
 vberein (you (a) fay) is^ firfi^ brought together a 
 great Nptmber of Fajfages out of the Liturgy of the 
 Church 0/ England, wherein the DoBrine ftt forth in 
 the former Parts is expreJJy affirmed ; and then in 
 the next Place are colleHed the principal PaJJt^ges^ 7vhich 
 
 cc 
 
 may jecm at fir fi fight to differ from that Doclrine : and 
 thefe latter (you fay) J^t* ha've indeanjour'd to recon- 
 cile with the former J by jljewing how they may be un- 
 derfiood in a Senfe confifcnt both with the Doctrine of 
 Scripture^ and with the ether before cited Exprcjjions of 
 the Lituirgy. 
 
 Now as to this Point much needs not to be faid at 
 prefent. For my Inquiry is, what the Holy Scri- 
 ptures do teach concerning the Bleffed Trinity in 
 Unity: and not what our Church has delivered 
 concerning it. For tho' cur Church teaches the 
 very Truth , yet her Public Forms are not the 
 Standard of our Belief. For we are to believe 
 what our Church profeffes, not becaule fhe pro- 
 feffes ij, but becaufe the Holy Scriptures do teach 
 it. Wherefore, if our Church did never fo ex- 
 preily r.ffirm your DoArin, yet I (hould oppofe it 
 notwithftanding j becaufe I efteem it (and I think 
 I have proved it) to be inconfiftent wich the Holy 
 Scriptures. 
 
 (a) Introduft. ]>. 19. 
 
 This 
 
Scripture DoBrtne cf the Trinity. 465 
 
 This were fufficient ; efpecially fincc I nm of O- 
 pinion, that thole who do not think your Dodrin 
 contained in the Scriptures^ will never fanfy that 
 they find it in our Church's Liturp;y ; and that 
 thole who do think it contained in the Scriptures, 
 will alTcrt and defend it, even tho' they (hould 
 chance to believe, that our Church Litui\G;y is a 
 flat Contraction to it. So that an Inquiry into the 
 Conliftency of our Church's Liturgy wich what 
 you have written concerning the Holy Trinity, 
 cannot be at prefent efteem'd neceffary. 
 
 Rut I will further add, in Juftice to our Holy 
 Mother, that (tho' I do not at prefent enter upon 
 that Debate, becaufe 'twould enlarge the Contro- 
 verfy to no great purpofe ,• yet) I am firmly per- 
 fuaded, that yxxef Dodrine is not either exprefly 
 affirm'd, or lo much as intimated, in our Liturgy, 
 and confequently there is no need of reconciling 
 her Paffages relating to the Trinity, either to the 
 Scriptures, or to each other. And as I am firmly 
 perfuaded, you are a Perfon of fo great Integrity, 
 that you will not venture (notwithftanding your 
 Attempt for explaining) to repeat your Subfcri- 
 ption, &c. till you have altered your Sentiments 
 touching thefe Points (which 1 pray God may be 
 fpeedily efFeded) fo I hope none of thofc Perfons 
 who efpoufe your prefent Sentiments, will be iTT- 
 fluenced by what you have written, to think your 
 Senfe of thofe Paffages tolerable. I really tremble 
 at the Apprehenfion of that Guilt, which fuch a 
 Collufion muft pollute them with ; and I can't but 
 earneftly intreat you to do what lies in your Pow- 
 er, in the mofl: public Manner, for preventing 
 fuch an Interpretation of our Liturgy, as muft (I 
 fear) neccffarily lay waft the Confciences of the 
 Complyers, and pave the Way for a Man's fub- 
 
 fcribing 
 
^66 An Examimtion of Dr. Clarke'/, &c. 
 
 fcribing and ufing^ fuch Forms of Devotion as 
 thwart'the Senfe of his own Mind. 
 
 But I have don May the God of Truths and 
 Lover of Souls, iUuminace and direct us both ; and 
 may that Bleffed Spirit, without whofe Aid we 
 can do nothing that is good, guide us by his Grace^ 
 and condud us fafely to that glorious State, in 
 which, how much foever we differ in our Opinions 
 here, we ihall be perfedriy united in holy Love to 
 all Eternity. I am, with the fincereft Affedionj 
 
 Tour wgJI Faithful Friend^ 
 and mofl Humble Servant^ 
 
 T H O. B E N N E T 
 
 THE E N X>. 
 
A N 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Of the TEXTS Explained 
 in this Book. 
 
 Genesi s. 
 
 chap. 
 
 I. 27. — 
 16. 7-13- 
 
 17. — 
 
 18. — 
 18.21. — 
 
 21. 17, 18. 
 
 22. I r, 12. 
 
 Chap. 
 Pag. 3^-39- 
 
 170 33'^. 
 
 Pflg. 
 
 Ill 
 
 66 
 
 55» 56 , 
 
 53 Joshua. 
 
 il?id. 5.13,14,15. 5^» 57 
 
 — 203 6. I, 2. <>7 
 
 : <?6 
 
 //'/fl^. Judges. 
 
 32. 3. - 
 i^8. 15,16. 
 
 <^4 2. 1—4 - 
 5^ 6. 11 — 22. 
 
 - 5? 
 
 57»58 
 
 Exodus. ISamuel. 
 
 5. 2— ic. ?i,5^>53 2.2. > »77 
 
 8. 
 
 '5- — 
 4.16. - 
 
 7- I, 2- 
 
 19. 17—25. 
 
 20. — 
 
 20. I, &c. - 
 II. 
 
 23. 20—23, 
 
 203 25.40,41. 60,61 
 
 19) 
 4+ II S A M U E L. 
 
 53» 54 
 
 " 203 
 
 — 54 , 
 
 - 181 H 
 
 14. 20. 
 
 - 93 
 
 I Kings. 
 6. 93 
 
 II Kings. 
 
 
 — 62,63,102, 
 
 »94> 195 ^ ^ ^ 
 
 Deuteronomy. J- •^' ^ 
 
 4 12. ^4 ^9''° 
 
 C. 22. 2^1 , 
 
 N E H E M 1 A H. 
 
lo. ic. 
 
 I I. 12. 
 13. J2. 
 
 24. 20 
 
 27. 16, 
 
 28. 2. 
 
 29. 14 J 
 32. 12. 
 40. 15. 
 
 The INDEX. 
 
 OB. MaLACHI. 
 
 P^^. Chap. Pag. 
 
 4= 
 
 Psalms. 
 
 1. 6. - 
 
 68. 17. - 
 78. 66, — 
 83. 18. ~ 
 
 97. 7. — 
 107. 20. — 
 J33. 2. — 
 
 J47. l^ - 
 
 pROVtRBS. 
 8. 22—31. - 
 
 Isaiah. 
 
 42 «. - 
 44. 6, 8. 
 
 45- <• - 
 46 9. 
 51. 53. 
 63.9. - 
 
 Jeremiah. 
 
 I. 2,4,11. 
 
 5. 19- 
 
 H O S E A. 
 
 J58 
 
 42 
 
 iir 
 66 
 
 203 
 193 
 
 203 
 96 
 
 204 
 
 195 
 
 177 
 
 4^ 
 62 
 
 44 
 6i 
 
 194 
 
 Zechartah. 
 
 3.1—5. 
 
 Wisdom of Solomon. 
 7. 1,3 • 
 
 4^ 
 
 M 
 
 A T T H E W, 
 
 1. 21. 
 
 23- 
 3.16. 
 
 4. 1- 
 8.5- 
 9. 2. 
 
 3- 
 
 4- 
 s:. 
 
 8 . 
 I. 
 10. 
 
 ^7- 
 6, S 
 
 17- 
 
 28. 
 
 27- 
 
 20. 
 
 2^ 
 42- 
 38. 
 
 53. 
 46. 
 18. 
 19. 
 
 — 164, 190 
 
 95 
 
 ■II. — 129, &c. 
 
 13. 59,60,61 
 
 — lOl 
 
 • — 102 
 
 97 
 
 ■ lOl 
 
 103 
 
 10. 
 II. 
 
 12. 
 
 16. 
 18. 
 21. 
 
 22. 
 26. 
 
 27. 
 
 - 10} 
 62,64 
 
 - IJ4 
 
 - il^id. 
 
 - 95 
 97 
 
 — ' 100 
 
 27, 29 
 
 117 
 
 108 
 
 - i39>Scc. 
 ■ 140 
 
 141 
 
 26, 29, 149 
 
 - 162, 211 
 
 Mark. 
 
 1. 2. 
 
 5. 
 
 uz. 
 
 24. 
 
 34- 
 
 2. 7. 
 8. 
 
 58 
 
 62 
 
 lOI 
 
 i3«? 
 
 - 131 
 
 ibid. 
 
 102,103. 
 
 - 97 
 
 9. 
 
D E X, 
 
 7(5, 216 
 
 John. 
 
 1. 1.— 7,76,i5o,i75,&c.2i^ 
 2. — ^ J89, 190 
 
The INDEX. 
 
 chap Pag. Chap. p»g. 
 
 8.27. — 200 4.9,10. — ■ 168 
 
 34. • ^3,H • 
 
 15.6. 169 Philippians. 
 
 I. z. 25 
 
 I Corinthians. 19. -12 
 
 17. 89 2.5— II. 39, Sec. 
 
 10,11 ■ 198, '99 ^'y- — " 89 
 
 j2. — 210 19. — 16 
 
 .3. 168 
 
 8.4,5,^." 191 C O L O S S I A N S. 
 
 6. ■ 168, ii<5 I3,&:c. ■ 166 
 
 II. 3. — 168 14. 164 
 
 7, 170 15. 170,190 
 
 12 10. ' 97 i*^- — 78,164,186, 
 
 15.21,12. "- 9 ;:i6 
 
 '24-18. ' 168 17. ---78 
 
 24. 27 18. 51,164 
 
 25. 26. • ibid. 20. 164 
 
 27. 24> 27 29- • 171 
 
 45. ' 9 17- 171 
 
 II Corinthians. I Thessalonians. 
 
 1.3. — 169 5.23- ' :ii3 
 
 4.4. 171 
 
 8. 9. 47. l68 I T I M O T H Y. 
 
 11.31. 169 2.5. — 10,-4,19,160,161,191 
 
 13.14 ' 210 3.16. 35,78,164,165,189 
 
 6.16. 5«,i89 
 
 Galatians. 
 
 3.19. — 54,66 II T I M O T H Y. 
 
 26. — 6 1.9. ^^ 
 
 4.1. 120 1.7. — — ■ 93 
 
 6. ■ — - 212 4.1. ' ■ 27 
 
 E p H E s I A N s. Titus. 
 
 1.3. ■ — 169 1. 2. - — • 89 
 
 4. — ■ — 88 4. — 26 
 
 20,21,21. 29 
 
 10—13. "— "4 Philemon. 
 
 1. 5. — ic6 3. -— — 2^ 
 
 He- 
 
H 
 
 chap. 
 
 1. 2. 
 1-14. 
 
 6. - 
 
 8. - 
 
 9. - 
 
 10. - 
 
 2J,2(5, 
 
 2. I. 
 
 The INDEX. 
 
 E B R E W S. II P E T E R. 
 
 Pag. Chap. Pag. 
 i- . 1116 3. 5. • ai6 
 
 172, Sec. 
 
 195 1 J O HN. 
 
 - 31, &c. 160,196 J , 193 
 
 31, &c. 19^ 2.3. III 
 
 l^^ 20. 93. 2H 
 
 27.- J92,&C. /^/^. 
 
 82 ' 
 
 54,64,66,82. II J O H N. 
 
 64,82 -^ , 
 
 64,85 3. =6 
 
 'T. .^Y^ff^Vxll Revelations; 
 11,12,30,31,85,144, 
 
 145 1.4, 5. — ^0,213 
 
 11,12,30,31 i^.C, 24,25,30 
 
 n>li,3o.3i>i44»i4? 6. — 169 
 
 168 3.4. ' 89 
 
 • 32 12. ' ' 170 
 
 12,13,14 20. • 203 
 
 14,147 21. — ■ '— 24,68 
 
 14 4. Io,ll. 187 
 
 163 5. 6, 12. • — — 28 
 
 23 7— n- — • — ' i5 
 
 104,215 6.10. — • ihid. 
 
 66 16,17. — 26 
 
 168,169 7.10. — — — 25 
 
 23, 28 17. — — 24 
 
 27 11,15. — — — -26 
 
 28 12. lo. ihid. 
 
 19. 13. 170 
 
 Peter. 15. '^^'^- 
 
 — , — . 169 16. -*— 26 
 
 — S8 23. 216 
 
 72, 216 22. 1. 24,28 
 
 23,24,28 17. 2i3^2H 
 
 THE END'