i m I. m ■>r. ■^- iKWffi j;^.MM v^ i;^ 5:^ 5::=^ s:o. .^^ i:^. "^2- OK TUK PRINCETON, N. J. SAMUEL AONE\V, OF PHILADELPHIA, PA. q4^o P?l^:^iyiyC^ ^'d^^J^^Sr, \\ Case, Division "o. Shelf, r_^ (i\ ■" ■ Section \) Book, se*- S'€''t-9'v»," ^kitib ^ ■^ A C L E AR D I S P L A Y O F T H E T R I N I T Y, FROM DIVINE REVELATION. -^ 4. hJ. Hf ♦ 4- 4»4 4.^41 4 4. ^4. 4,.^ 4. 4. 4.4.4.44.4.4.4.4.4.^ 4.4,4k *'«► ♦ V '*•** V*- * V '^V *'♦ *** •♦■'^ * '♦ 4^> <*►'■♦ ■♦•> 4-V H^'^ ♦'♦ A / y^ X lkik»t.. A CLEAR D I S P L A Y O F T H E ///r.-/v^ C^////^ TRINITY. FROM DIVINE REVELATION: WITH An impartial Examination of fome Traditions con- cerning GOD, in Syftems contrived by Councils, Affemblies, and Synods, and impofed upon Man- kind as Articles of Faith. INTHREEPARTS. I. The Divine Charader of a Plurality in Deity proved. li. The oeconomical CharaAer of Father^ Sorij and HolyGhoJl^ illuftrated. III. The Scholaftic Dodtrine of the Trinity examined. To which i3 added, by Way of Preface, An ADDRESS to Enquiring CHRISTIANS* The whole written in an eafy and familiar Manner. By A. M. A Layman. ^1 *T^r » 1 . . . .. ' -^ , . 'jiear, 6 Ifrael, Jehovah, oitr El o him, Is one Jehovah. Deut. ▼i. /^.—IVhofoever Jhall confefs that Jesus is the •'^on of God, God d^wellethin him, ayidhefn God. i John iv. \$.— Whether it be right in the Sight of God, to hearken unto Men more thanv.nto Gov, judge j/e? — We ought to obey GoD rather than Men. ■\<5ts iv. 19.— v, 29. LONDON: Printed for the Author, and fold by G. Robinfon, in Pater- noftcr Row; and W. Nicholl, in St Paul's Church-yard; G. Elhot, in the Par- liamcnt-Clofe, Edinburgh; and T. Slack, in N«wcaftk. MDCCLXXIII. cBsoJooJocjooiJpojooJ^cJSooJopijooJo A N ADDRESS To the free enquiring Chrijlians of Great-Britian, who mi t ate the Example of the '^oble B e r e a n s , in re- ceiving the Word of God with all Readinefs of . Mi?id, and fear ching the Scriptures daily, whether . the Dodri?7es taught by Men are agreeable thereto. Brethren, (^^^©OTWITH STAN DING all the dlfcourge- ^ -^ ^ ments that have been formerly in the way of free ^ ^ enquiry into religion, there are many of our fel- ^^ sti<^ low chriftians, efpecially in Britain, who now fee it to be the duty and privilege of every individual chrif- tian, to enquire as far as he is able, into every thing that his religion requires him either to believe or praiSbife : And if there be any, to whom providence hath given a capacity and opportunity of enquiring into truth, with more ieifune and exaclnefs than others, they ftiould ufe the talentt> hea- ven hath blelled them with, tho' not merely for themfelves, but for the inftruftion of others, who have not the fame advantages which they have. A s chriftians ftiould be exemplary for virtue and good- nefs, fo they ftiould be diftinguiftied fro^j a corrupt world, by a diligent fearch after //-////;, and an honeft and open pro- fefllon thereof, notwithftanding the difficulties and difcou- a ragements ( " ) ragements they are liable to upon that account, which, with purity and holinefs of life, — univerfal love, to mankind,. — and patience under fufferings which they cannot honour- ably avoid, will recommend the truth and caufe of their crucified mafter, who fufFered before them in the caufe of truth. By fuch methods, the do&ine of Chrl/i prevail- ed in the hands of a few weak, inconfiderate men, without power, riches, or learning ; in oppofition to the leading in- terefts of this v/orld, in the hands of felf-interefted priefts, pov.-erful princes, proud philofophers, the wifdom of men, and the prejudices of the people, under the influence of fuperftition and heathen darknefs. A DILIGENT fearch after ^r;^'if/; is themoft com.mendable exereife of a chriftian. It is a precious treafure when found, and fhould be purfued for its own fake; liftened to with at- tention, temper and charity 3 to it we fhould give an open ear, candid mind, and ingenuous heart. As it carries with it the evidence of its own divinity, we fhould pay it the re- fpeft it deferves, not only by an inward conviction, but an open declaration of its perfpicuity, force, and efficacy. Every man that would be free, honeft, and wife, has an in- timate concern in the fuccefs of truth ; and is under a moral obligation to contribute all in his power, to the fuccefs and fervice thereof. A s truth cannot be wrong in itfelf, fo it cannot lead to any thing wrong. It is our indifpenfible duty to lie open to the evidence of truth, and lay afide every bias and prejudice that may hinder us to embrace it. Above all things it fhould engao-e our ferious regards. Truth is the rule that God himfelf follows, he is engaged to defend it, and for this end fent his Son into the world to bear witnefs to the truth. All our comfort in life and death depends upon our knowing •and embracing the truth. Be not then difcouraged, Brethren, in your diligent fearch i iii ) fearch after truth, .and corcijal eipbracing of jt wlji^iv fbu;^j| bccaufe, perhaps, it agrees not with the,i:jeceiy:9d ppiij^ionb- of great men, uiiethcrancieritpr modern,;.'. nf>r .with fcberaqs of relio-ion, whetliei- "Tiuthorize J d^ greater or leiTer autho- rities, eitabJiflied in naticnarl churches^, pr adofxted by diflcnt- inff parties ; none cf thefe is. the : rule pf. .your faith. The fcriptufes alone claim that honour. Whatever is ..added,, by human fche'mes or interj)retations, fhoulc^.b^ .|)exen:ip^ofil,y relented as dangerous innovations. . -^ , , -. z.:J o; thera^' you may certainly judge of \vhafthey taughrt wi'th the fame liberty, ag of any other writers: Yeti, ths negleift of them can have no bad confequence, fihce the divine rtile,- Yifhich teacheth ^ that is rieeellary-, is "coniplete without thiem. ' The Fathers iti the fii'ft three centimes, ■ had no fettled fyftems of religion but the fcriptures, on which every orife" had his own fpeculations, which differed as much as in any age fince. On the do<5trine of the Trinity efpecrajiyi they gave their imaginations great latitude, whicii appears from their expreffions and explications of fcriptur.e on that point ; fo that it would be difficult to determine, what "was the fettled notions of thefe times, fince they not only' differ- ed from one another, but with themfdves. But at the fourth -century, in the heat of furious'' zeal and oppofition, amojig proud contending parties, the do£trine was reduced to articles, which were armed with fanciions, and the civil powers called in to enforce them, xinder the fevereft penal'jt' ties; fo that whom church authority could not convince,' the fecular power might compel, without any regard to fcripture at all. Having affumed the power of dictating ta fellow chriftians, there followed every kind of unchriftiaa'_ treatment towards dilfenters from the fchefftcs they had eft'a- , blifhed, and perfecution v/as carried on in the name of the Lord Jesus, the king of peace: And as it was ncceflary they fhould be thought to have the countenance and ap- probatioa ( iv ; probation of heaven, inllead of fcripture authority, the doc- trine of miracles, pretended to be wrought by themfelves or predcceirors, was propagated, which ifTued in all the fuper- llition and fervile wdrlhip of the Romijh Bcaft. W H A T E V E R weight was laid upon miraclous powers in the firft centuries, and continued in th^e Romifh church, to make their other dotftrines and practices pafs for truth j and whatever reverence Our modern Doctors may pretend is due to the dodlrines of the ancients on that account, it will appear evident to every impartial enquirer, that no argu- ment can be taken from that quarter, to favour the fchemes invented by the ancients, but what equally tends to fup- port and countenance all the impoftors of the church of Ko?ne fmce that time : Nor can any argument be drawn from this, or any other thing but the fcriptures, to make any doftrine pafs for truth, but what takes juft as much au- thority from revelation, which alone, without any other help, authenticates the truths we ought to believe in reli- gion. 'Tis a ftrange compliment Proteftants pay to Papifts, in their avowed adherence to human traditions, in oppofition to the fcriptures as the only rule of faith ! 1 N fuch a deplorable fituation was religion from the fourth century, for many hundred years under all the ty- ranny, fuperftition, ignorance, and craft of the Beajty that the advocates for human authority among Proteftants, find Jittle but what they are afliamed of, till the reformation from popery. " The Reformers, as a late author fays, gave a violent fliock to popery, by feparating from the church of Rome^ calling off the Pope's fupremacy and infallibility, tfanftating the fcriptures into the vulgar tongues, and aflert- ing t^eiii alone to be the only rule of faith and do&ine. But having been born and educated in the error and fuper- ftition o{ popery,, we cannot fuppofe, at their firft emerging out of that profound darknefs, their minds were at once completely illuminated. Many grofs errors they rejected, fome ( V ) fome they retained. But the grand miftakewas, after they had drawn fchemes of faith irom the fcriptures, hontftly no doubt, to the belt of their abilities, either they or their fol- lowers, as if they had delivered the whole fcTJpture truths without any mixture of error, erected thofe fchemes, tho' differing very much from one another, into rules, to be uni- verfally received." I T feemed fomewhat contradi£lory and very partial in in our Reformers from popery, that they fhould teach the people t& exercife their own judgments in rejecting the do6trines and worfhip of Rome ; but at the fame time, not allow them the exercife of their private judgments, in chu- ling or refufing the fch-mes of religion formed by them- felves. . It is true, the fcriptures were permitted to be read, but only in the fenfe of thefe fchemes : Any that difputed them, were loaded v/ith party-names ; and chriftian profef- fors were again led to hate, to caft out, and feparatc from one another, on account of the difference of fentiments ; in which they could not but differ, fmce a free and peaceable ftudy of God's word was not allowed them. I N Proteftant fchools, they that were educated for the . miniftry, were taught the dodrine they were to preach, not from the holy fcriptures, but from fyfiems of divinity, after the model of the popifli Ichool-men, and taken chiefly from them. Their abftraftmetaphyfical notions, terms of art, and diftin6lions, were retained, and ffill applied to chriftian principles. Their feveral creeds and churches were efta- bliftied by the fecular power, and the magiftrate required his people to believe after the particular confeffion, or arti- cles he efpouftd. Subfcriptions to human fchemes were demanded, — men wcr-e ccnftituted judges of fcripture doc- trine for whole nations and communities, and confcience was again made refponfible to earthly tribunals. Worldly emoluments were annexed to a fuppofed right belief, and heavy penalties infiidted upon rccufants : Except when the magi- i vi .) , 'nvagiftrate pleafetl on fome occafions, and und^i: eertiiin IiV 'itiitations,' to grant a toleration, f ; nT'H I s was only a change of Popes, but the popery re- mained. For tho' they reformed in fevcral valuable fefpe&, -in this they were more inconfillenfthan thofe they feparatcd from ; to renounce infallibility, and yet impofe aiid' perfe- cute as infallible, — rejedl human authority,, and in many cafes plead and reft upon it, — permit the fcriptures to be read, but not undei flood ; or, which is the fame, to be underftood only in the fenfe of fchemes formed and eftablifh- ed by rnen. - To tell us that thefe fchemes were formed by the ableft divines, is no ways to the purpofe, and perhaps not alto- gether, true. For if they had not only been able hut infallible^ they had no right or power to do what the divine Spirit had already done, and v/hich no creature fliould ever have any hand in, after he had finifhed revelation as a rule of faith. They might be the ableft for the tim.es they lived in, and yet but comparatively weak. For being educated at popifti fchools, in times of great ignorance with regard to the • fcrip- f I T fecms ftrange, however it came into the heads of chriftians, who profciTed to make the fcriptures the rule of their religion, to think that a civil magiftrate could have any power either to Ihmt or fo/fw/e religion. He cannot /i/w/V it, for human fandions, which can reach no further than outxvard appearances, cannot in the kaft influence what is foldy attained by aman'sown fcntiments and choice. Had God defigned the arm of magiftrates to make chriftians, he ■would have endued tiiem with penetration fuitable for the know- ledge and influence of hearts. And as for tolerat':o;^, there is fomething extremely humbling in its craphafiS ; as the right of private judgment, the privilege of a man's underftanding and determining for himfelf, is the unalienable charter of every rational creature attefted by God that created him, who has put it beyond the power of any man upon earth to think or judge for him : Muft it not then be ftrange to fay, the magi- ftrate indulges the man's weakncfs, in allov.'ing him the exercife of an unalienable right and privilege i (( vii ) fcrlpturcs, it cannot be fuppofed that fuch as were newty come out of this fituation, could be To perfe<5l in what was in a manner new to them, as is commonly pretended. But however eminent they might be, the taflc was far tod great for them, to compofe and determine the precife rules of faith in their own words for all chriftians. It needs no more evidence to prove their pride and weaknefs, than that they impofed their own decifions upon the confciences of their fellow chriftians, concerning the faith and thepradlice of religion. Thiswas to lead chriftians off the foundation and principle of religion, fubjeftion, and allegiance to Chri/i^ the Lord and Law-giver : And deftroy that fundamental principle of the reformation, that the fcriptures are a com- plete rule both of faith and pra6lice ; and as fuch, are clear and intelligible in all necefi'ary points, to every private chriftian. Now, if the fcriptures are a fufficient rule, we do not want men in any age as guides ; and if they are clear, they are not neceflary as interpreters. The enquiring chrif- tian cannot lofe much by the neglcft of them, as the fcrip- tures teach every thing clearly, that is neceflary either t« "be believed or pradlifed. W E fhall grant thatthofe who have gone before us, whe- ther ancient or modern, were good, virtuous men ; yet,- for reafons that might be given, they might not fee the truths that yet are obvious in revelation j and fhall their knowledge be the precife ftandard of ours ? What letters- pateht,.what fpecia! privilege oi divine mdhority can they plead, to ftop'the progrefs of divine knowledge, and to en- grofs our belief for all times to come?' Or rather muft the the truth God hath made known, be limited by any hu- man underftanding whatfoever ? If they had known' much lefs, was there any nereflity upon us to feck for no more knowledge ? And why might not thev' be under the fame prejudices againft examining for themfelvcs as we are, — pay the fame refped for the opinions of others,- that ( viii ) that we are difpofed to £hew for their's ;— or imagined points of faith fuiHciently fettled by predcceflbrs, whom they jreverenced ;> — Or perhaps like many of us, hold fome truths ib facred, and fo far above human cotnpreheniion, as they durft not examine them ; — Or fo clear by the interpretation pf others, as to need no examination ? Whatever one or more of thefe, or other unmentioncd prejudices affe£led them, it is certain they were under the fame temptations to be hiafed with others, at beft were fallible, and therefore Ihould not have the honour due to Chriji^ whom we arc to follow as Our mafter alene. M E N, of whatever character or denomination, ancient or modern, whether many or few Hnce the Apoftles, are by no means the rule of faith. Ther is no chriftian can have any power to rule over other chriftians, as judge of their con-» fciences and religion : And whoever ufurps fuch a power, muft be JnticbriJ}^ and puts himfelf in the place of God: And as much as any fubjedts his underftanding and heart to any man or church upon ear^h, he is guilty of idokitr.y. No, Brethren, our Dear Lord forbids us to call any maij matter, and every chriftian has a divine warrant to examine ^adjudge for himfelf. " i TheiT. v. 21. Piove all things, hold faft that which is good, i John iv. i. Believe not every fpirit, but try the fpirits whether they are of God. Phil. i. 9, 10. And this I pray, that your love may abound, yet more and nwre in knowledge, and in judgment, that ye may approve ( try , mafgra) things that are excellent. Gal. i. 8, 9. If we or an Angel from heaven, — and again, if any man preach any other gofpel unto you than that ye have re- ceived, let him be accurfed." If the do£lrines of Angeh and Apoftles were to be examined before received, it muft be un- accountable ftupidity to receive, without examination, the dictates of aqy fince the Apoftolic times. Our Lord exprefsly taught the doflrlne of private judgment. "Lukcxii. 57. Yea, and why even of yourfelves judge ( ix ) judge ye not what is right?" The J ewijh R:ihh\es ima- gined that their diftates and traditions were as binding as the written law, but our Saviour bids the difciples " be- ware of this leaven, or corrupt do£l:rine of the Pha ifeesy* and lets them know they had a rio-ht to judge for thcmlcives. John V. 39. *' Search the fcriptures. — if any man have not the Spirit of Chrl/I^ he is none of his. — He that is fpiritual, judgeth all things." And the Apoftles followed their divine mafter, enjoining the fame duty. " Judge in your- .felvcs.— I fpeak as to wife men : Judge ye what I fay. i John V. 10. He that believeth on the fon of God, hath the witnefs in himfelf." It fnould read, '■'■ holds the te/timony for hvnfcip'' Which points out the neceflary connection betwixt a perfon's believing in the Son of God, anci exa- mining and knovv'ing the teftiinony or record ot GoD con- cerning his Son, on which his faith is built, for hhnjcf. The Bereans were highly commended for fearching the fcriptures, to fee if the ApolUes' dodrine was agreeable thereto J and have the epithet of mhle or remivned^ and ho" tiourable, given thern for fo doing. Whereas the Lord finds fault with fueh as blindly follow the dictates of men, " Hof. V. II, 12. Ephrahn is opprcllcd, and broken m judgment ; becaufe he willingly walked after the command- ment. Therefore will I be unto Ephraim a moth, 5cc. The commandment here is that mandate of ^Jcroboam^ with his corrupt council of pricfts and princes, to worfliip the calves at Don and Bethel \ which was not only fmful in them to appoint, but fo in the people to comply with. 1 hofe who will follow men in matters of religion, may expert to meet with the judgments of God, whom they reject as their guide. I T muft be highly commendable for every chriftian to fearch the fcriptures, and compare the doctrines of men, witl) the pure word of God. There is no way of finding the faith once delivered to the faijits, but by diligent fearch b into ( X ) into the word. In receiving doctrines by tradition, we make void the love and goodnefs of God, and involve our- felves in the guilt of the Pharifecs^ who made the command- ments of God of no efFe61: through their traditioas. Wc are ready to blame the Papifts for believing implicitly ; but what are we better, if we take religion upon truft, without evidence from revelation. itfelf? I T is a fault that prevails with mofl:, that they negletfl: the fludy of the fcriptures in genera], and content them- felves with a few fcraps, the meaning of which they take fronfi others, and confsquently ^o not underfland them ; yet thefe they make the teft of truth to them, and the ground of their principles, in contradidion to the whole tenor and icope of revelation. By much the greateft part of mankind, have no other evidence for their hdkf of Revelation itfelf ^ than general received opinion ; what has been held by their fathers, and all their acquaintance, pali'es for truth, and produces refoluticns and adions. Truth is but one, it cannot be mouldered and de- fined as our prejudices, paifions, temporal interefts, or fan- cies v/ould riiggeft : Nor can it be altered, mended, fuppref- fed, or eilablifhedjby nations, fynods, affemblies, congrega- tions, or the agreement of parties. It is not what a divine may invent, or a focieiy approve ; nor does it change to fuit circumftances, as the times change. Like its author, it \s. unchanf>-eablv the fame, in all a2;csand venerations. Truth was very early corrupted by ignorant and fii- perftitious men, who, from felf-conccitednefs, were unfatis- fied with the plainiicfs of it : And it is flill mifunderflood in many particulars, by fuch as account themfelves the true proteftants, and moft perfed reformers : Nor will any one find it in its original purity, but by a free, diligent, and im- partial ftudy of revelation, in which its genuine principles are certai nly explained -., Aadwliat ever pains it may coft, the difco- very ( xi ) very of a trcafure (b valuable as native truth is, will richly reward the free enquiivr. But whatever afTiftance is ufcd, the work iVfclf, no other perfon can do for us, every chril- tain muft do it for himfelf, if he would have a religion that he can call his own. But inflcad of taking religion from the Bible, if we »| take human fyltems and decifions, or our own conceits and / fuppofitions for our guide, like one who haslofl his way in the dark, and led by a falfe light, we will wander in the maze of error and delufion, — lofe the beauties of truths — and live unacquainted with that divine temper of foul, — thdt love, goodncfs, comfort, and holy courage, v/hich the knowledge of the truth infpires the mind with,' which, like the natural fun in the world, difFufes ks genial light and heat through the foul and converfation of him, who is pof- fefled of it. It creates a joy, which Itrangcrs to the exer- cife of fearching the fcripture3, do not intermeddle with, nor experience. I CANNOT imagine how it fhould never enter into the a \ minds of fuch as neglect to fcarch the fcriptures, how they think to anfvver to God at ^he great day, for turning over fo many volumes of human compofitions, while they, per- haps, never ONCE in their life, clofcly and ferioufly read over the Bible, which above all others, contains the moft ex- cellent knowledge; and which above all others, every chrif- tian is under the deepeft obligation from God, and their owii real intereit, to ftudy conllantly, aiid know thoroughly. I F any one would know the truths he mufl certainly be acquainted with the rule of judging what is truth. I'hat man's religion is uncertain and precarious, who is not ac- quainted with the fcriptures. He may read books on reli- gious fubjects, and hear fermcns without number ; but how fliall he know what is truth or error, while he ncglecls to bring them to the ftandard, by which alone they can be trieU and known. He may j".i'ii!.e of what gne man f?ys, by ( xii ) by what he hath heard from another, whom he thought he could credit, which is far too frequently the cafe, but ftill Jie may receive error in place of truth j and it is the more likely, as by this kind of judging, he puts the dodtrincs of men m the place of God's word, by which alone dodlrincs can be tried. What opinion would we have of a man, who ihould fct himfelf up to determine the moft important caufes in the civil courts of a nation, while he was ignorant of the ftatute and ftanding laws of the nation, to which all judges muft have recourfe in their decifions ? Would any onechufe to rifk a caufe that nearly concerned him in fuch hands ? Much more inconfiftent and dangerous is it, for any profefled chriflian to pretend to judge for himfelf, (v/hich every one fhould do) without acquaintance with the laws and ftatutesof Christ's kingdom, which are the only cri- terion of truth, W HATEVER is built upon the foundation, (for all pretend to make the fcriptures the foundation) mull be tried by the pure truth therein revealed, whether it be gold, fil- "Ver, precious ftones, wood, hay, or ftubble, to which the Apoftle compares the doftrines of men. All muft be tried by the fire of truths before we can know of what fort it is. What will not abide the trial, muft be rejected, tho' he whofe work it is, may be faved by the fame tntth^ which deftroys his work. '* llie fire Ihall try every man s work of what fort it is. — If any man's work be burnt (as not fit to abide the trial) /;<: ftiall fuft'er lofs, but he himfelf Ihall be faved ; vet fo as by fire." By that truth which deftroys his work, W I T H o u T judging by this rule, there can be no re- ligion at all : For he that docs not believe truth upon his own pcrfuafion that it is fuch, after trial and examination, docs not believe, but only fays fo. llevelation is given to individuals, not to men merely as collective bodies j and he who ( -^i" ) who docs not enquire and believe for hlmfclf, is an unbe- liever of" G's.'/'s word^ whatever foundation he othervvife ref}-s his faith upon. B u T as the bonks of fcripture, which are perfetflly adapted for all the purpofcs of man's falvation, and ealV to be undcrflood, arc really the revealed will of God to men what power or authority can frame the leaft fupplemeiit to them, cfpccially contrary to the fcope and tciior of the doctrines therein made known, wichouc incurring; the hiaheft guilt, and being anfwerabJe for all the fouls they miilead? I T is a iirange infituatlon which thoukinds are under, who fpend their time and parts iii the ftudy of other books while they totally neglect:, or but very fuperficially read the fcripturcs ! It is a dangerous error in practice, to o-jve the preference to the works of men, whether heathen orchrilHaii writers, ancient or modern, in point of frequent ufe and attention, while the fcripturcs have every thin'j; that can re- commend them to the daily ftudy of a chriflian. Any one who has looked over the remains of ancient learning philo- fophy, and the religion of nations ; and has alfo but taken acurfory view of the Bible, muft be filled with a ilron'- prepoilellion in its favour, if he is not under the ftrono-eit infatuation. In the former, nothing is to be met with but folly and impertinence ; no tolerable view of the Deirv none of the duty of man from good principle and true mo- tives ; none of the chief and peculiar felicity of man, in tht; enjoyment of the favour of God, But in this Book the praifes of God are every where to be met with, as one ipiritual, inlinite, eternal, merciful, long-fuft'crintr, pcr- fe(5l, he. l"hc duty of man is placed where it ouo-ht, and his felicity defcribed to confift in the enjoyment of (yOD through that medium which he in infinite iiracc and cnndc- fccnfion hath provided and revealed to '.hem. i'his is the fpirit and lanLJ-uairc of the whole. If ( ^'V ) I F God had not revealed it, how could man have known that his fin could be pardoned ? Is there any thing in the lic-ht of nature to teach a man certainly, that the infinite, perfect, immutable, jufticeof God, will pardon, connive, or wink at fin, which is a tranrgrefiion of the eternal law of order, in fetting up another fovereign, Vv'ithout fome caufe, or confideration of infinite moment to interpofe ? Or, could nature find out that there w^as truly the interpofition of fuch a caufe, as the atonement found out by infinite mercy, to fatisfy immutable juftice ? The whole that the wit of man can difcover concerningthe nature, ways, and will of God, muft be acquired, not by imagining vainly what is proper or improper for him to be, or to do ; but by con- templating what he has done, and the fcrious confideration of what he has revealed of himfelf in the fcriptures. I F we (hall atternpt to learn religion, from the various fyftems into which the contending parties among profeifed chriftians have manufaiSlured it, and follow the intricate difputes they have maintained about it, we will in the iilue lofe our pains. For fev/ are qualified for this fearch, or competent judges in it : And when the taflc were at an end, (if poffible) we would flill have chriftianity to learn, and might probably conclude, that religion had not been at the bottom among the difputants. But if we fincerely apply to the fcriptures, we fhall find chriftianity in its purity and fimplicity, from the docSlrines and practice of ChrlJ} and his Apoftlcs, without any danger of being led afide by any bias in the rule itfelf. It is no reafon why we Ihould neglect the ftudy of the fcriptures, bccaufe the learned have differed fo much about the fcnfc of them ; but rather a reafon why v/e fhould exa- mine and judo;e for ourfeives. Tho' they differ, it does not follow that truth is not clearly, taught in fcripture, or that it is impoflibie to find it. They have differed about the ^^i\(t of ancient'authors of every kind, however plain in thcni- ( XV ) themfelves : And the fcriptures have the advantage in point of perfpicuity, that no other book has the leaft right to, namely, that they v^ere indited by the wifdom of God, for the general inftrudlicn of all mankind, in thino-s necef- fary to be known and pradtifed : And if they are not fuffi- ciently plain for that purpofe, it is a grofs reflcdion upon the wifdom of God, as well as his goodnefs, who cer- tainly can make his mind known as intelligible as one man can do to another, in fuch things as he requires every man to know; but this would be contrary to equity and juftice, to require the knowledge of what he had not plainly re- vealed. The different comments on fcripture, no wavs afFe<5fc the truth and evidence of chriilianity, as contained in reve- lation. 7"ho' all the different fchemes of religion, contain- ed in the wnole group of bodies of divinity, and other hu- man compofitions contrived by men, fhould be called in queflion and proved falfe, chriftianity would by no means fuffer by it ; for this plain reafon, becaufe religion neither in whole, nor in part, is fundamental, as it ftaiids manufactured in thcle human compofitions, bat as it is recorded in fcrip- ture, which would be the fame, tho' the other were con- ftgncd to oblivion. Confequently, whatever difi'erenccs there are, they no way affesSl chriflianity, but the human explications thereof. Differences among the learned, have often had this falutary elfcft, that they have occaiioned en- quiring minds, after being bewildered by human difputes, to look back to the fcripture, v/here they have found the truth more clear than by all the laboured arguments of dif- putants, who by their fubtility render things unintelligible to common capacities. But the truth remains in its native fimplicitv, and open to the view of every diligent and im- partial enquirer in revelation. A M o K G all the inventitms of the Devil, there never \ a was one I'o well calculated to render the fcriptures ufelefs to they ( xvi ) the generality of chriflians, as the charadler commonly given them, that they are dark^ tihjlrufe^ and ill to be un- (krjicod. A more horrid fallehood canr.ot bs uttered, nor a greater afiVont offered to the God of truth. Yet this is the foundation of all the pretended right of fome didtatino-to others in matters of faith. — It hath been productive of all the fchcmes that have been impofcd upon mankind — And, J may fay, of ail the blood that hath been filed among reli- gious zttalpts and devotees Lo fyitcms invented by men.-*'It is the vgry foundation of popery : For once admit the prin- ciple, and we arc more than half way to Rcmc, where we will find ample provifion made for this great defeit in the fcrlptures, by having an infallible interpreter to depend upon ; v>hich is certainly nectUary if revelation is fo dark, i:s after diligent enquiry, the things belonging to falvatioa cannot be underftood from them. T II A T the fcriptures arc not eafily underftood, if the fenfe of them is to be taken from the various explications that have been made of them, may be readily granted : But to maintain they are fo in themfclvcs, is fubverlive of the great end for which they were given to mankind. God hath provided for the falvation of the vulgar, by making his reli'iion plain and cafy to their undcrftandlngs. It is an affront to our reafon iticlf, to depend upon men for the mean- ing of that on v/hich our falvation refts, who at the fam^ time that they would be confided in .is the truflecs of the fecrct councils of heaven, in their great humility difclaira the character of infJlibility, and fo by their own confent, may deceive us in all that is dear to us. Such as rcprefent the fcriptures to be myftcrious, (hould fliev/ what it is that God requires chriflians to be- lieve, that is not clearly revealed in his word. There is not one text that will prove &h«t any fuch article of reli- gion exifts. But if they ihouid produce an article nc/t dearly revealed, they liavc next to prove, that it is neccf- farv ( xvii ) fary to falvation, which they can never do, feeing it is not ib revealed J for all things neceflaiyare clearly revealed in the fcriptures, otherwifc they coujd not make the man of GoD wife to falvation. I T is not only the grofleft refledion on the ivifdom of God, who indited and impofed the fcriptures upon man- kind as a rule of faith and pradice, while they needed the afiftance of fome of the creatures who were to be ruled by them, before they could be intelligible to others : But alfo upon the £ooclnefs of GoD, to command conformity to a rule, upon the pain of damnation, v/hich was not in itfclf fo clear and plain as to be understood by thofe who were bound by it ; and that lie is refolved to damn his creatures for want of capacities to know what he himfclf had made above their capacities. I T is a ftrange conceit men have of themfelves, and ftijl firangcr opinion of their maker, that he fhould not fpeak in a book defigned for the inftru£tion of all, fo as to be wnderftood by them, whom he intended to inftru*^: by it ! Does not God, who made man, know what will fuit their capacities, better th?n any number of men met in a fynod or council ? Every attack upon the perfection of revelation, is an attack upon the perfections of God himfelf, and plainly faying, he is not fo capable to teach his creatures, as they are to teach one another. N o fooner did men think of duSlating to others, than they propagated this opinion of the fcriptures, to which, in a great meafure, may be attributed all the ignorance that has prevailed among the generality of profeflcd christians. The people being once perfuadcd that the fcriptures are dari^ and above their capacities, are eafily led away from the ufe of them to other booh, which they think are necelTary to make them plain, and unfold the myfterics v/hich thev fup* pofe are othcrwife inccnprehenfible to them. c To ( xviii ) f T o mend this fuppolcd defeit in the fcriptures, fome men have fummcd up religion in fyitems, and by autho- rity impdfed th^m upon whole nations, as tefts of ortho- doxy to the adult, and rules of religious education for youth, who, by their parents and tutors, are taught to lay up thefe fummaries in their minds, as the only necefiary truths to be known, which it is criminal to forget, or in the leaft -t^ call in queftion. The ground-work being laid in their ac- quaintance with human direftories, they are confirmed ^n their adherence to them, by being admitted to all the pri- -vileges of the church they belong to, by fhewing a very fu- perficial knowledge of what they have been taught in their childhood : From that time, they hold themfelves bound to believe and maintain all the doiSlrines adopted by the church or party they belong to. Hence, they reft fatisfied with what they have attained, and confequently are as wife at fixteen years old in religion, as ^i ftxty^ which is far too frequently the cafe ; And if they ufe the fcriptures, it is with a ftrong bias on their minds, in favour of what they have already received as undoubted truths j what is not agreeable to thefe, they pafs over fuperficially, or pervert the obvious meaning of the texts, and force them into the fervice of their caufe. Thus they take the very reverfe method to finding the truth. For, whereas all dodlrines fhould be tried by the fcripture, before they are received as truthy they firft receive the dodrines, and then make the kn{t of fcripture agreeable to them. For the fenfe of fcrip- * ture is neither more nor lefs, than what fuch men and books f^ave faid it is. Such fearchers are not likely to find the %ruth^ nor yet embrace it when it evidently appears. What ^is -plain, ,^d eafy to a free enquirer, is dark and obfcure to . ■ TiH,E.K..E ^Fe piany, w^ho under the influence of this ^4 :9P^"^"" % th&^Griptures, that they are above their ca- P^v^iss,.- concIu4« ; tjticmfelves ^n gre^t humility (as t-bey ( xk ) think) unfit to judge for themfelves, and determine to be guided by certain men and books^ which they approve of. Such pcrfons do not remember, that at the fame time they are fo felf-diffident, they are judging for themfelves in a manner that requires greater qualifications, than learn- ing religion from the word of God itfelf. P'or, is not the choice of fuch 7ncn and books an aft of their judgment ? And who taught fuch ignorant perfons, as they reckon them- felves, to judge fo precifely, in fo many things, where there was the greateft danger of being miftaken ; and yet could not judge of doftrines laid down in the cleareft man- ner, by the unerring wifdom of God ? There is one fpeclal confideration which merits uni- verfal attention; that as divine jealoufy v/ill not remit without puniftiment, the heinous crime of parents, who train up their children in religion by precept or example, without (hewing them the evidences from the word of God in fupport thereof; fo the plea of inftruftion and example made by children and pofterity, will be a very infufficient apology for their having received principles of religion from their fathers, without ufing (when capable) their own underftandings, in examining them by the word of God. T o the obfcurity of the fcriptures, there is commonly added another popular objection againft people judging for themfelves, viz. That by allowing every one to judge for iiimfelf, the greateft confufion would take place, herefies would abound, and there would be as many religions, as there are perfons to judge. It is necefiary therefore, that the learned in councils or alTemblies, fhould reduce the true religion to certain heads, and require the conformify of the common people thereto, to preferve them from error and divifion, and to keep peace and good order among them. Such precaution might be very commendable in a fe- nate of a common-wealth, to contrive laws for the fecurity ( XX ) of its peace, and prevent dangers that might rent and divide it : But to argue theneceflity of fuch methods in religion, is making it a political tool, to keep up the fpirit of obe- dience among the people. If allowing men to judge for themfelves, v^ould naturally introduce difference in religion, and errors ; then it muft be certain, that confent and agree- ment in religion, and keeping in the truth, flow from the conftraint of this liberty. Such a religion may do for pa- pifts, but it is a fhame for proteftants to own it as their's. How would thib maxim do in trade, phyfic, or philofophy ? They would be reckoned infatuate, that would be fond of buying goods in the dark, v.'hcre they could not examine their qualities : To take that for gold, which they were not allowed to try : To call that a fine face, which they were not allowed to come fo nigh as to know whether it was painted. This is the reafon why falfe religions have fo many followers, as that of Mahomet^ becaufe none of its votaries dare examine it J and this objedion infmuates, that the ffofpel fliould be embraced for no better reafon. This is paying a poor compliment to the chriftian re- ligion, if it has not arguments in itfelf to prove the truth, and energy to influence the belief of it ; but mult have r.uxilliary aid from men, whofe diminutive conceptions of k' are fuch, as would almofl perfuade us, themfelves do not believe it. It is the honour of chriflianity, that it needs no foreign aid to vindicate it. llie evidence is in itfelf, not m what men can frame to eltablifh it. The laws and rules in itfelf, are fufScient to preferve its friends from fuch im- portant differences, as would overthrov/ the foundation of their hope, and manage leffcr differences which are not of fuch ccnfequence. To fuppofe any other way fnore fuffi- cient, is. to imagine that God fhall conftantly work a miracle in making fome men infallible to direft tlie reft ; which in fa£t, is at the bottom of all that affumed power to form laws and rules, other than what are laid dowQ in fcripture to dire^ men in religion. AWD ( xxi ) And it is much to be fufpefted, if their fear about dif- ferences in religion, be not rather a fear that men (hall fee the weaknefs of their pretenfions to fuch power, and be led to take their religion from the fcriptures alone, inde- pendent of their decifions, which to them would be of fatal confequence indeed ; but is a genuine efFedl of people judg- ing freely for themfelves. All directors in religion have experienced this, and no wonder they are afraid of what would deftroy their power of keeping the people folely un- der their diredlion. But what if fome men fhould abufe the privilege of judging for themfelves, muft means be ufed to prevent this which are not of God's appointing ? He hath no where told us of this remedy, that fome men fliall have power to dictate to others. Nor can even this remedy anfwer the end; for tho' the church of Rome pretend to be under an infallible guide, yet they cannot prevent differences in their communion : And what is more, differences abounded in the Apoftles' times, who were really infallible in their dic- tates to the churches. God does not want either the power or policy of men to preferve the unity of his church fo far as he wills it fhould be preferved : God hath faid there muft be herefies, but men have faid there muft be none. What can be fuppofed more dangerous, than for men to put it out of their own power ever to corred: an er- ror, tho' of the mofl dangerous nature, by eflablifhing it 35 a rule, never to acknowledge a fault in the fyflem men have compofed for them, and bind themfelves by folemn oath, t« defend every article, right or wrong, for ever f This is not only firfl fuppofmg the fyflem infallibly right ; but for ever depriving themfelves of tlie means to know the leafl error, in what they have once, with very little, or perhaps no examination, determined on. This is making Gods of men, and believing ihey can neither deceive nor be deceived. Such perfons would do well to confider, before they rifk too much, the import of that commination, " Thus faith the Lord ( xxii ) Lord, curfed be thef man that trufteth in man, and maketh flofh his arm, and whofe heart departeth from the Lord." Allow me, Brethren^ to clofe the confideratiort of this fubjedi: at this time, by a fhort addrefs to thofe people, who frxcufe themfelves from the duty of fearching the fcriptures, and the tife of rtteans to enable them to judge for themfelves, by pretending that providence puts them in fuch fituations of life, that they have no time to ufe fuch means, being ob- liged to labour and care for the neceliaries of life. Thus the people excufe themfelves, and the teachers are willing to admit it as fuflicient, B E aftoniihed, O heavens, at the audacious reproach caft upon the vvifdom and goodnefs of thy creator's provi- dence ! Who, O man, has been fo cruel as to condemn thee to this flavery ! Not the meek and companionate Jesus, who bids us iirft feek the kingdom of God, and his righteouf* nels,and hath promifed that all other things Ihall be added,— ^ forbidden us to take anxious care for the things of this world, for we know not what a day may bring forth. — Not the Apofile^ who direfe- us to feek thofe things which are above, to fet our affedlions on things above, and not on things on earth. Ponder the divine queftions, ** What is a man profited, if he Ihall gain the whole world, and lofe his own foul ? What fliall a man give in ex- change for his foul ?" Pray, for what end was you fent into the world ? What is your moll material con- cerns in it ? Is it not to learn to know, and to do the will of your creator ? Con fider, whether all the time God hath given you, hath been well ufed, before you charge God foolifhly. What became of the time of child-hood and youth, when God hath fo ordered it, that man is unfit for work and care, pointing it out as the time for inftruc- tion ? Why was you not taught the do&ines of the gofpel, and the grounds of the chriftian religion then ? Let parents, teachers, and yourfelves fliare the guilt of this neglefl : God's -providence is clear. — What have you done on all the Sahhaih. ( XTLill ) SahhaiJis you have had, in which, by the laws of God and the land we live in, we ceafe from labour ? Here is one fevr.th of your life free of the entangling cxcule. Add to the foiiner, ail the days and hours fpent in fcafling, gam- ing, drinking, fporting, pleafures of different kinds, and perhaps a great deal in indolence and floth, it will be found the higheft injuftice in men, to complain for want of time, who can fpare fo much to fuperfluous, trifling, and often wicked purpofes. When that time, which is now devoured in vain purfuits, anxious ot inordinate cares, idle extrava- gancies, and vicious pleafures, is reftprcd to you, you will have enough to anfwrcr all the calls of religious enquiry. You will profecute your callings with chriftian diligence, and "find the fweeteft refrefhmentsj in fuch days and hours as you appropriate to the momentuous concerns of an ever- laftincrftate. ^ As to the following work, be allured. Brethren^ .that to aiuft you in the further exercife of that commendable duty of enquiry after trutj), I have fpent fome time in illuftra ting from revelation, fome points in religion, which the gene- rality of profefled chriftians feem either to negle6l the ri^ht underftanding of, or by certain means" have miftaken notions about : And as the right knowledge of God, is the true foundation of all the right underftanding we can have in religion, I thought proper, /r/?, to prefent to your confi- deration, what I find revealed concerning God. This I have done in the Jir/i and y^^cW parts : But as my fenti- ments on that fubjevSt, do not coincide with the common eftabli^ed doctrine in the fchemcs of religion, adopted By profefled chriftians, it was therefore necelfary to examine thefe, thtit the reafons may appear why I dilFer from them. This makes a third part. I HAVE not faid any thing more in any of the parts than truth obliges me, according to the mofi fcrious view I can at prefent take of itj and I hope no confideration whatever fhall ( xxlv ) Jhall prejudice me fo far, as to make me deny or diflcmble, what the conviction of my own mind from the word of God requires me to confefs. 1 have made revelation alone the rule of my judgment, not any opinions or fchemes of men. Notwithftanding, I do not maintain, that I have every where either fully or infallibly given the fenfe of revelation ; the weaknefs and imperfedlions of the man will appear m all his endeavours, to fet things of this kind in a clear light, however honeft and impartial he may be. But I am fatisfied, you will not find any of thefe fubtle arts commonly employed, either to colour a bad caufe, or perplex a good one. Intricate refinements, forced conftrudions, and evafive diftindions, are carefully avoided. Plain reafoning, founded on fcrip- ture evidence, and adapted to plain and honeft minds, is ftu- died throuoh the whole. But if any of my readers are fo wedded to any particular fchcme, as to think it finful to .offer any further light on the fubjeil, they may let this book alone : For I can aflitre them, it is not adapted to any fcheme, further than I judged they agree with revelation. B U T as to you, my Brethren.^ v/ho dare think clofely and ' i, freely, I hope you will accept in good part what is well meant. If you receive any profit, return th.inks to God, to whom alone all praife is due : But if you judge that I have fallen fhort oithe truth, or mixt it in any particular; in this cafe, you will mind the common rule of juftice, to do to me, as rcafon and revelation will tell you, I ought to do to any of you, were you the author, and I the reader. I do not thus befpeak my readers, becaufe fo fcrupulous with re- ,mi'ne, — I pretend i>o$ to be perfedt :-e-The jtruth I. conteni for, »is, 1 am full)vpfer- fuadetl, clear of all inconfiftency or felf-contradi6lion Notwithstanding the difficulties that attend th« inveftigation of a fubjciSl, where the fcriptures have been generally mifapplied, — the learned much dividey,'— involved in intricacy and contradiction by eftablifhed fyftems, — and fuppofed by the bulk of mankind to be under the veil of ineffable myftery : Yet^ leaving human conjec- ture, we turn to the word of Gcf-D, as the only guide, with* humble confidence, being perfuaded that He h^th not left ' that truth in impenetrably darknefs, which He. haith made^ necelTary for us to know and underftand ; More we do not. expedt to fipd ; And if we are fo happy as to point out tp. the candid reader, the clear ajid determined fenfe which the Spirit of Gon hath, conveyed -on this fubjeft, (which- by his afliftance we hope to do) .pur labour will not be in,' vain. But let God "^have the praifei " zi'^o "^^//^ V;6^« 'ih»^ fool'ijh , things of this ivorld^ to confound tha vjife^-i—tfje weak things oftbii world y to confound ihevnght^i — thatnofiejhjhould, gJoryt m:bis p>efenc^ir-rds it is M/rittent, he that glorieth^ let him' glory in^ tfje ■ LoRD,-.^zt;Z>tf • hath hid thefe things from the- zvifs' and prudent y andyruealed them unto babes : Even fo, fatbtr, ff Joitfeemed'gVod'in.thyfght.''* j2s .»t CONTENTS. INTRODUCTI ON. But two ways of knowing God.^^Our noticns of Spirit all negative. — Revelation the only rule, — Speculations of the fchools unnecejjary. — The general tntent'um of the work. PART I. Sect. i. p. 7. Texts that prove there is hut one God. ' •-r-One Almightly and Omnipotent^ — Infinite., — Eternal and Ijnchangeable, — One Being to be worjhipped. S E c T. II. p. 11. That there is a divine PLURALITY. —Jehovah and Elohim not properly tranfated. — Elohim Wicked called fons oj men, — the world,— the Devil,-^.dark- nefs and difobedience,—- wrath and the curfe^ — JBeJial and per- iiian. ( XXX ) iit'ton. Saints fons of God^ how.—Chofen, l^c.—of light, — wifdom, — prcinife.,—refurreSiion, U'c. — —General ideas of fonjhip applied to Chrift.— Begotten^ barn, a child, firjl-horn^ how, fuhmijfmi, — obedience, honouring and manifejiing his fa- ther's name . — B £ N , zVj meaning . — N i n , the ?neaning . — Chriji, Corner fione, hoiu. His fonjhip includes trior e than being be- gotten. — All ideas of fonf^ip imply inferiority, i^c. . S £ c T. 111. p. 140. Chi i /I called (on of man, ivhy. • Common reafons defective. Others fo called, why. — rChriJi tailed Son of God, importance of . The tmaning — denotes ex'cellen(;y,-r-refpeSis his offices— Put for MeJJiah. — Ten argU" rncnts to prove his fonfiip ti be oeconomical. (i) Frotn the va- rious ideas of fonfhip, as derivation, fubordination, dependence^ fubtnijfion, a di/linSi being, building his fathers houfe, tranf- mitting his naim to pojrerity. The name of God reprefented by the life of Chrifl. ( 2 ) As fon of inan notes relation to mayi ;. his being called Son of God, points out hisfublime relation to God^ ( 3 ) From the meaning of Old Te /lament paffages, where he is called Son. Pfa. ii. 7. particularly confidered — Not applied to ChrijTs refurreSiion in the New Tejlament. (4) From texts in the Ncvo Tefla7nent, that are exegetic of the term fon of God. (5) From the fame things being predicated of him under the name Jefus Chrift, as under the title Son of GoA.— Head of the church, all things tnade and upheld by him, fent, born of the virgin, author of the gofpel, his faith juflifiesfinners, his blood made peace, obje£f of faith, fellowflnp with him, died, rofe from the dead, was exalted, Jhall judge the luorld.—The Apojiles ^x- prefsly affirm that J dus Chn^ is the Son of God-— Not fi- gurative expfeffions. (6) From the charaSlcr he takes to himfelf when inditing the epifijes to the. fev^n A(xzn churches.. (7) From his beittg called the image of the invifiUe God,— as he is- man, -as Emmanuel,— z'« his dominion as God's ambaffiador and reprefentative. (8j From the neceffity of believing in him, as the Son of God. — All religion pra£fical,—no myferies in things nee effary,— oeconomical fonjhip clear. (9 J There mujl be that in his foijhip direcily fui table to the finfuljlate of mankind. — -Pure. Deity has rw relation to mankind. — All we knoiu of God in Chr.ijt. God out of Chrift not fcripture doSlrine. ■ (10) Sotifl/ip of Chri/l theground of our adoption -^—neceffiary fon- jhip makes ours fo, — de/iroys the 'fovereign love of God. — Na analogy betwixt faints' fonfoip, and a neccfjary forijlnp in Chrift. Obje^ion from the diffirence letwixtChriJi as a Son, and s^ftrvant^ anfwend. ■ Called a jlrvant,kow.—Abfolut8 Deity has ( xxxi ) has no relation to creatures.— We Jhould not too cntualfydJjJingui^ the names and titles of Chni^. ObjeSiion fro7n Chrift and Son being mentioned together, anfivered. Chrift and Son the faiiu ihjeh of worjhi-p,— Whether Chrift is a term of office. —'tVhen ■joined with Son of God, the meaning. — Relative eharaSier oj Chrift, the fum of religion.-— Keys of the kingdom of heaven^ what. — No ambaffadors of Chrift now \ nor fuccefj'ors of the Jpofiles. Sect. iv. p. igi. Of the title Word as applied t* Chrift. — Schoolmen's notions void of ideas : — In what fenfe ap- plied in feveral texts. — "The ?neaning of the term Logos, — oeconomically ufed throughout the fcriptures — By tt the Jetut meant the Meffiah. Sect. w. p. 205. The term Holy Ghoft oeconomical, — Vroojs for eternal procejfton confidered. — Proctjfon from the Son rejected.— Scripture meaning of the Holy Ghofi and Spirit 9f God — lllujlratcd from the appellations given him.— -Holy Spirit, Spirit of God, of truth, adoption, freedom, ivifdom, re- velation, life in Chrift, judg?nent -.-—From his Million : What it does not include — The import of— -how oeconofnical. Works oftl^e Spirit oeconomical. Works relating to Chrift before and after his coming-— 'B&dinng witnefs tQ him, how The man- ner and timi—Gloniymg of him, ho-iv, — In the greatnefs of the gift, confirming the truth of his refurreciion, wiping off the ignominy of his life and death ^ proving all accufations falfe, erecting a kingdom for him, and bringing fubjeSis into it, con- forming them to his image, Jheiving them the greatnef of his merit, love, iSc. enabling them to fuffer for him, and perfect ing them for glory. The gofpd, the favour of death unto death, and life Ufiio life, hoiv. Other parts of the Spirit's work briefiy men- tioned. Inferred that all his work is oeconomical— The great agent in the go/pel oeconotny. PART III. Introd./>, 232. Inventions of men ufelefs iii religion— Their apinions ?nade theflandard of the fenfe of fcripture.-— Contrivers ef fyjhms not conjiflent,— every conftquence 7iot to he imputed tt them.— The part to be examined.— An extraii from a popular fyJiematic—The ideas therein relate to heathen mythology. S E c t.. I. p. 243. (i) Of the terms Firft, Second, and Th\T-.dc%:< ^vQj-ks (including the pi evidence) of God, he hath manifeftcd himfelf in fuch a manner, as to leave every rational fpeclator inexcufable who fhall doubt of his exiftence, or fet up any creature be- fore, or befides the creator as the object of their reverence and efteem. This the Apoftle teaches the ilow^«j-,when he fays, " The invifible things of Him (God) ai'e clearly ieen, being underftood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and God-head (Deity) ; fo that they are (that they may be) without excufe.'* But, tho* by reafoning from the works of crea* tion, we come to the knowledge of the exiftence of a firft caufe ; yet, by this way, we can never come to have any direct or fmiple idea of God. The greateft length we can go, is, to remove from our notions of the creator, all the imperfections we find among creatures, and attribute to him, all their perfections or good qualities : And, that the Su- preme Being we thus conceive of, may be as^/r/V- 2inl as may be, ^^-^e particularly attribute to him the perfections of our mi?ids ; and after all, conclude that thefe are in him in the abjira^l^ but not fo in A us. ( 2 ) us. This is only faying, the perfections in the Supreme Being are of a different /pedes from our*s, and fo cannot admit of comparifonm any degree. ,By all our reafoning, we cannot pofttroely determine any thing concernin gy^/nV .• The notions we have thereof are all negative. We may call it an im- material fuhjlance^ fomething that is not matter ; w^hich is the fame as to fay, we know nothing about it. How adequate the conceptions of mankind might have been of God, from the contemplation of created objects if they had remained innocent, I ftiall not pretend to know : But it is evident beyond difpute, that the works of creation are utterly infuf- ficient to diied mankind to that knowledge of God, which is neceffary for them in their fallen or finful Jiate. Therefore, God, of his unbounded goodnefs, hath mercifully fupplied the great defect, by giving mankind a verbal revelation of his character, every way fuited to the ftate and weak capacities of fm- ful men. This revelation of God is contained in the Old and New Teftaments, which, taken together, is the riile^ the only rule^ to us in all things concerning faith and falvation. When we approach thei^e facred ora- cles for inftruclion, we fhould be ftript ot all preju- dice and prepofTeiTion to received opinions from men, and be ready to receive what the divine author dotli teach, upon his own authority only, which is fut- flcient teitimony to the truth of every thing con- tained tiicvein. And with relpect to the manner of iov[\c things which may be niyfterioua, we ought humbly to keep \sithin the verge of divine revela- tion, and not venture to iound the depths of divine mylterics, (that is, things unrcvcaled) by the fliort line of our finite underftandings, which is infinitely too fi)ort tomcaiiire tlie heigiit and depth of the fecret ( 3 ) fecret things of the Moft High. Here it is more be- coming the chriftian to adore and admire, than curioiifly to fearch and enquire. It is no ways neceffary in religion to know what God hath not been pleafed to reveal. One particular doclrine, the reality of which God hath been pleafed to reveal, tho' the manner of it continues a fecret, is, that he himfelf is one, and that he is three. The truth of this is indif- putable, if we can credit his teftimony who has re- vealed it to us : But if we reject his authority in this inftance, we may with equal propriety refufe it in every other part of revelation, and fo render it wholly ufelefs to us as a rule of either faith or pradlice. If God hath told us that it is fo, the ob- ligation to believe it is binding upon us, tho' the manner how it is remains only proper for his own infinite mind to inveftisrate. 'o*- But there is a very wide difference between what is revealed in fcripture, and the nice fpecula- tions of the fchools concernino: the dodlrine of the Trinity. The fchcolmen, who abounded in wit and leifure, have been very fpeculative and acute in ftarting a great number of fubtilties concerning it, which no chriftian is bound to trouble his head about ; much lefs is it neceflary for him to under- ftand thofe niceties, which we may reafonably prc- fume thofe who invented them, did themlelves never thoroughly underftand ; anc;!, Icaft of all, is . it neceffary to believe them. The raodefty of chrif- tians is contented in divine things, to know what God hath faid concerning them, and has no curio- lity to be ivife above what is written- What God reveals is enough in thefc matters ; but if any will venture to fay more, every other man fureiy is a^ liberty to believe as he fees caufe. A ( 4 ) A s our knowledge of God in this world is more properly converi'ant about what he is not^ than what heisinhimfelf J the utmoft care fhould be taken in all our conceptions oi God, to remove every thing tliat is not agreeable to what he hath made known of himfelf in his own word ; which is all we can know of him with certainty, and of real ufe to us, on this fide the full enjoyment of himfelf in glory. T H o* there is much difficulty at prefent, to af- certain the full and true import of the feveral titles whereby the Great Creator of heaven and earth is defigned, in any language ; yet, this we may ven- ture CO fay we are fure of, that they never were in- tended to give us a cleai^ and full comprehenfion of the divine nature, or the precife manner in which the Supreme Being doth exift. This is what even the moft glorious and extenfive finite reafon can never poffibly comprehend to perfection. It muft then fol- low as a neccffary confequence, that the words in all languages by which it has been endeavoured to be explained, muft be as defective as our cOmpre- henfions are. Were it poffible for us fully to comprehend all the properties which neceflmly diftinguilh the Su- preme Being from all beings, and to have adequate words to exprefs our conceptions, it is likely difTen- tions on this head would be at an end. But as this, in the nature of things, is not to be expeded; and as many, by attempting it in words of their own conceiving, have but darkened counfcl ifvdth words without knowledge, the beft way is, to confine our- felves to the holy fcriptures, and fay no more of God, than he bath been pleafed to teach us. But as to the manner of his exiftencc, I do not find from re- velation that he hath taueht us any thing at all. Wheu ( 5 ) When Mofes a&ed him what was his name, he an- fwered by a word Iam, or, Iwillbe; which does not convey any notion of the manner how he exifted, (as has been often pretended) ; tho* it impHes ab- folute exiftence, as well as irrefiftable power to ac^ complifli what he had promifed, or was pleafed to do. But this does not in the leaft degixe favour the empty fpeculations that have been framed con- cerning the nature and exiftence of God. His na- ture being infinite and incomprehenfible, the mode of his exiftence muft neceflarily be above the in* veftigation of every finite capacity. Here all analogy and companion are utterly ufelefs and trifling. Two things in general are intended in the fol- lowing work. Firft, To draw out to the confideration of the enquir" ing chrijlian, a brief conneBed view of what thefcrip- tures fay concerning the Trinity^ or the three that are ONE. Secondly, To Jhew how little regard is due from chrif-^ tians, to thefubtle dijiindions invented among 7uen con: cerning that fuhjeB, The firft of thefe, for the reader's eafe, and greater diftinclneis, I fhall divide into two parts, and each of the parts into feclionSp as the matter treated of fhall require. PART PART FI RST. ^■^-^"X N this firft part, 1 iliall endeavour to fiiew ^ I *£ plain fcripture evidence for thefe three par- >:(f^^k ticular points : Firft, That there is but one God. Secondly, That there is a plurality in God, ;and that it is limited to three. Thirdly, That each of the three hath afcrib- ed to him in fcripture the names and perfections proper only to God. Or that the names and per- fections proper only to Deity are common to three that are one. SECT. I. THE firft thing undertaken is, to prove that there is but one God. Here I might tire the reader's patience, by a long train of arguments, commonly advanced to prove that there can be no more than one God : But as ( 7 ) as I have engaged to keep to fcripture evidence^ and this being a point never queftioned by any de- nomination of chriftians, let it luffice to name a few texts concerning the tmity of God, and the perfec- tions pecuhar to him for proof of it. (a) " I am the Lord (Jehovah) and there is nojie elfe, there is no God hefidesme. (Z>) T/joz/, even thou art Jehovah alone, {c) That men may know, that thou luhofe name alone is Jehovah, art the ?}w/l high over all the earth, (d) Know ye that the Lord he is God, it is he that made us. {e) Who fhall not fear thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name, for thou only art holy, (y) And there are diverfities of operations, but it is the, fame God, luho worketh all in all. (g) The fame God over all, is rich unto all that call upon him. (Z?) Hear, O Ifraei, the Lord our God is one Lord. (/) Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. (i) \Vc know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is ?w?ie other God but one. To us there is but one God, the father, of whom are all things. (/) For thou art great, and doft wonderous works : Thou art God alone, (jii) But the Lord is the true God, he is the living God, and an ever- lafling king, (/z) For there is om God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Chrifi Jefus. (o) Thou believeil that there is one God ; thou doll well. Where the perfections pecuhar to DcvVj are men- tioned in fcripture, the 7/nity thereof is either ex- prefsly taught, or neceffarily underftood ; exclud- ing in the plaineft terms every idea of -x plurality cf Gods. Reve- (fl) ir^. xlv^ 5. {I) Neh. Jx. 6. (r) Pfa. Ixxxiii. 18. () " / am the almighty God ; walk before me, and be thou perfect, {q) I am God almighty ; be thou fruitful and multiply, (r) And they reft not day and night, iaying, holy, holy, holy, Lord God almighty , which •was, and is, and is to come, (j) And I heard as it was the voice of a great multitude, faying, alleluia : for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth. (f) He doth according to his ivill in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth : And none can ftay his hand, or fay unto him, what dojltbou? {zi) Whatfoever the Lord pkafed, that did he in hea- ven and in earth, in the feas, and in all deep places. (y) He makcth all things, ftretcheth forth the hea- vens alo?ie, and fpreadeth abroad the earth by him- felf. {w) Upholdeth all things by the word of his pcnver. [x) God who quickeneth the dead, and cal- leth thofe things that be not as tho* they were," Infinite.— ^Which includes incompre- HENSIBLENESS, IMMENSITY, and OMN IPPvESENCE. (>) " Canll thou by fearchingfmd out God? Canfl tliou find out the Almighty to perfection ? High as heaven, what canft thou do ? Deeper than hell, what canit thou know \ {£) How little a portion is heard . of him ? The thunder of his power who can un- derftand ? "^ Behpld God is great, and we know bim not, neither can the number of his years be fearched out. Heaven, and the heaven of heavens cannot contain thee^ — () Job xi. 7, 8. (z) ibid. xxvi. M. aiiki XKXvi. ;6. * 1 Kings vjii. »7- (<») iTa. xl. is, »2' ( 9 ) of the earth in a meafure, and weighed the moun- tains in Ibales, and the hills in a balance. — He iitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grafshoppers ; that ftretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and fpreads thein out as a tent to dwell in. — (b) Great is the Lord, and of great power : His underftanding is infinite, — great- ly to be prail'ed ; and his greatnefs is unfearciiable. — (c) Am la God at hand, faith the Lord^ and not a God afar off? Can any hide bimfelf in fecret places that I iliall not fee him ? Do not I fill heaven and earth? faith" the Lord. • Eternal. — Without b kg inning, ENDj"cr SUCCESSION.— (d/J "From- eveiiafting to everlafting thou art God. — {ej Thou, O Lord,lhalt endure for ever, and thy years fliall have no end. — ffj One day is with the Lord as a thoiiiand years, and a tlioufand years as one day.'* Unchangeable. -^(^^) " I am. the Lord, and change not.— (Z^) The fadier of lig'h^s,' witli whom is no variablenefs, neither fhadow of turn- ing. (/) The fame yefterday, to-day, and for ever." , • There are many texts \^'hich point out the o?ie divine Being to be ai.l-sufficient, absolutely GREAT, GOOD, and INDEPENDENT ou any other being in his perfeclions and operations. He is the creator of heaven and earth, w-ith all that they contain, — the prefervcr of all — by him all things confiflj — in him they live, move, and have their being — he opens his hand liberally, and iatislies B the {b\ Tu. cxivii. 5, and cxiv. 3. (r) Jcr, xxi>i. 1;, 24, [d) PTm. xc. 1. fi?) ibid. cii. iz, 27. {f) a ir't.-i. iii, 2. ig) Maj. iii. 4. [k) Jam. i, 7- {l\ H^b- xiii. 8." ( >o ) the defire of every thing that lives — his kingdom ruieth over all — he is the governor among the na- tions — the one law-giver, who is able to fave and to deftroy— -there is none good but one, that is God. Now, as it is abundantly evident from thefe texts, (and reafon alfo teacheth us) that there is but one jirji caufcj and ultimate end of all things—- o;?g injinite^ eternal^ unchangeable Beitig — one almighty and omni- fotent, whom no being can oppoie orrefift — one, who created and uniformly governs all things to one cer- tain end — one^ who poiTefi'es all thele perfections which the fcriptures attribute to Deity. I fay, lince ihere can be but one Beings who is the author of all things, and the ultimate end of them, it muft fol- low, that there is but one divine Being, who is to be ivorjhi^ed as th.(^ fupreme objeSl of all religious adora- tion — one, who is the chief good and center of happi- nefs — who is to be ferved and loved with all the heart, foul, and flrength, and confequently but 07ie God, Hence, everyone who credits revelation, (with thofe who do not, I have no bulinefs at this time) may join with David in faying, (i) *' O Lord, ther^ is no7ie like thee, neither is there any God befide thee, according to all that we have heard with our ears. [k) I Chro. jivii. xo. SECT. SECT. IL TH E next thing promifed, was to fhew that the Icnptures teach us there is a divine PLURALITY, and that it is limited to three. Infinite wifdom and divine prudence, appear confpicuoufly in the revelation of the fcripture cha- racter of God. a divine plurality is copioully pointed out, and at the fame time the divine unity every where llriclly taught and maintained. This would have appeared with brighter evi- dence, if the Tranfiators of the Bible into Englifh had given us the words Jehovah and Elohim ^^'lierc they occurred, without any tranllation : Or told the Englijh reader, how he fliould know when the words Lord and God, which they have tran- ilated them by, had Jehovah and Elohim for their originals. But as they have given us theie words, not only from Jkhovah and Elohim, but from other original words of another meaning, the reader not only lofes the peculiar beauties pointed forth in thofe words that Lord and God are taken from ; but is bewildered in feeking the fcope and ineauing of many pafiligcs where they are pro- mifcuoufly ufed : Whereas, if a diftinction had been preier\^ed in the tranllation, or the words exprefled from the original, and the fenfe of them once pointed out in the margin^ confe?its, or othertvi/e, the <3ld Teftament would have appeared a more in- tclHgible book to the enquiring Ejiglijh reader, or hearer, than it has often done. One, among many inftances which might be given. ( 1^ ) given, is that text which fliouid read, (/) " Hear, O lirael, Jehovah, our Elohim, is one Jehovah." Which is rendered, " Hear, O lirael, the Lord our God is one Lord/' It does not affect my prefent argument, how- much diiliculty the Englijh reader of this text v.'ill be in, to know whether the word Lord here be taken from Jehovah, which is pecuhar to. .Deity; or from Adoni, which imphcs lordjhip^ dominion^ or government ^ and is not pecuhar to God alone j tho' by retaining the word Jehovah, as in fcveral othei" texts, it would have been evident. What efpecially concerns my purpofe, is the evidence of a divine fluraUty fo plain in the face of the text, had it not been obfcured, or rather quite loft, by uiing the word God, which is by no means a proper tranllation of the word Elohim. Nor need I here ftay to prove that Elohim is of a plural iigniiication. This is acknowledged by the Jezvs^ who beft knew the meaning of their own language; and likewife by chriftians, who know the Hebrezv, and arc under no temptation to impofe a falfe meaning upon it. Any thing that has been advanced to the contrary is fo trifling, as to be unworthy of notice. Even the impartial EngUflj reader Avill readily fee, that the very fcnfe of the phraie nec-rfTarily leads him to feek for a -plural interpretation : Eor if the word Elohim in the text be of a fiuiuuir li inihcation, then the word G(>f/, by v/nichitistranilatcd,v»'ill evidently point out the nn'ity of the dJ'/?ne Beinjr, and fo would introduce an mnpid repetition of the fame thing. The text v/ould convey no -other idea, than that the one divinc U) D.:u:. vi. 4, ( '3 ) d'lvim Being, is the one divine Being, It muft ap- pear to be a low conceit of the coniummate wifdom of God, to imagine that he would give us a reve- lation of fo fmall confequence. For if the word Elohim is Angular, the text is no more than a reve- lation that ONE is ONE. But as it is demonftratively evident that Elohim is of a plural fignification, it muft follow, that the word God cannot convey a luitable idea of the feiife of this expreilion ufed here by the divine fpirit. T H E true fenfe of this term, if attentively con- lidered, is of great importance in the prefent ar- gument of proving a divine fluralify, which it puts beyond difpute. It is aifo a key to open many palFagcs of i'cripture, which, without the right underftanding thereof, appear dark, and ready to be mifapplicd. B u T as there are feveral falfe ideas, which fome may perliaps affix to the word Elohim as a plural, it will be therefore neceilary to remove thefe, that the true fenfe may appear v/ith more evidence to be tlie only one, and of that confequence it really i;;, for the right underftanding the character of God 'invcii us in revelation. o r. As Elohim is a plural, it cannot be a gene- ral name to denote tlie cne divine Bein^, llich as the word God is ; nor can this be a proper tran- liation of it, ibr thefe two reaibiis : Firjl, As Elo- HTM is plural, it muft of ncceffity convey the fame idea toX\\c Hebrcxus, that Gods do to E?igli/hnen; w'hAcli introduces a palpable contradiction into re- velation, that the divine Being fhould conftantly teach therein, that there is only one God ; and yet v.'herever hefpeaks of himfclf, to call himfelf Gods. It ( H ) k is a poor fhift to alledge, that the author of reve* iation took up with the word which he found in ufe among men, to convey the idea which the word God doth to us. For, befides that it will be hard to fay what that idea was, or how they came by it, previous to revelation : The plural ter- mination would ftill fo perplex the idea of itn'ity he was inculcating, that had all the fubtle Dodors and metaphylical divines, which have been lince the Apoftles days, exifted at that time, their whole fund of definition could not have furniflied a faivo. But ficondly^ Another reafon why the divine Being would not adopt a plural word to denominate himfelf by, is the remarkable pronencfs of thefe a£;es to polytheifm , Would not Ix) undlefs wifdom and '^oodiiefs carefully avoid every word or phrafe that favoured their corrupt bias ? A bias which was fo offenfive to him, and which coft liis people lb dear, on accoimt of their obftinacy in that very point : Or M'ould he not only ufe the plural word, which carried fuch a fnare in it, but have embar- rafi'ed the idea of unity ftill more, by conftruding it with plurals, lx)th verbs and nouns? May wc not venture to determine it is impofTible ? 1. Now, as ELonnr cannot be a name that (lands for the unity of the divine Being ; neither can it be a word fubftituted to ex pre (s the different chai-aclcrs of Fniher^ Son, and Ho/y Gboft^ in which the divine Being has mar.ifeftcd himfelf in revela- tion. Thefe are fo diftinguiilted by the diflerent lio^hts in which omnipotence is difplayed by each ot them, that one common name is not fuilicient to convey an adequate idea of thefe diftinclions. — They are deiigncd to be kept alv/ays intelligibly diftinei ( '5 ) diftind in the conceptions of mankind ; whereas a common name can convey no feparate views of their peculiar charavflers and operations. 3. Neither can the name Elohim import all, or any of the perfections or attributes conmion to each of the three who are one ; for that wouldl infer all that might be faid of the impropriety of the word Gods. And fure nobody would chule to fay infinite Wisdoms, or infinite Good>j esses, anymore than they would fay Gods. Whether we exprefs attributes feparately or complexly, it ftill runs us up (when we confider it wdth attention) to the fame idea of a plurality of beings, poffeifed of thefe perfections : Andftrongly infinuates, that there are more than one to be worlhiped and adored. And fince none of thefe can be the fignificatioa of the word Elohim, there is only one we can poflibly reft in, which is, that in its lignification it refers to a transaction common to all the three who are ojie j and muft be a common defignation of all the THREE, as ftated in that transaction. I fay, a tranfaclion (for it cannot allude to attri- bute or perfection) common to all the three, and which thoy themfelves acted in with regard to one another. 1 fay with regard to one another \ becaufe all tlieir actions towards men, are applica- ble to one or other of the different relations they manifeft themfelves in to us. And this transaction, fo plainly intimated in divine revelation, is the balls of the whole future manifeftation of the divine glory difcovered to, and applied for the benefit of man. And as the word Elohim intimates the Qhligation of that tranfa^ion among the divine three, lb it always fuggefts tlie cha- ra£ler- ( I6 ) meter of God in revelation to us in that view, as the moft comfortuble, and at the fame time, aw- ful light in which he can ftate himfelf to mankind ; and may with fome propriety be expreffed by tlie Englijh word, the swearers, f which, on the whole, makes an undeniable argument for a dhlne flurality* . The ftrength of this argument in favour of a divine plurality^ will appear ftill more confpicuous, from the different forms of conftruclion in which the word Elohim is found in revelation. The manner of fpeaking the feveral penmen have ufed, lead naturally into the notion of a divine fhirality. This is moll remarkable in Mo/es, a great part of whofe writings are evidently deligned to guard againft polytheifm, or a plurality of Gods, which the Jews f The 2enius of the T/t-z^rriu language is fuch, that fignjficant v/ords are always framed from roo's which have fome cer;ain and fixed idea, and ihertby convey a detcrmiriHte meaning. The root Elah, means an oalh or adjuration, an execration made to tAi^ the breaker of a covenant. And as jhe fin;;ular admits of this meaning, er^e that hath taken upon him an oath, the plural, Eh- hbut muft denote niore than one under that obligation, or entering into covenant or agreement together. This idea may leem ftrange at firft view, but it will become more familiar, if Wc ccnfider that on many occalions in f,imfelf the God bound by aaiht enpaped by mutual obligation to fuKil his promifer. This plainly accounts for the fcriptnre phraleology^ of joining relatives to tlie tern-, Elohim. — Why Jehovah defcribes himicif as the Elohim of Abrah^iin, Ifanc, Jacob, &c. and why his people call hirii my. thy, ont\ their Elohim. And if Jehovah is pleaf- cd to reprefent liimfclf under ihe obligation of a covenant, for the benefit of mankind ; furely the wddielfing him under the xtxnx Elohim, denoting the notion of Exderatcrcj, mtifl command their ferious attention, — raiie their niolitb-'Okful fentimpnts of h»s mercy and gcodnefs, — ftrengtiien their confidence in his favour, — and at the fame time, warn theci of ihe great danger of tranfgrfiEng hi« ■divine laws. ( 17 ) . Jews were far too fond of : Yet his ftilc in mani- fold inftanccs plainly conveys the idea of a divine plurality. The firft appellation he gives to God, is plural, (^) " Elohim Bara," (Gods created); and in the Ihort hiftoiy of the creation, repeats it about thirty times, befides feveral hundred time;^ more in his other writings. I T need not be imagined, that it was for want of -^fiiigular name, that he was obliged to ufe this flural ; he might have taken Jehovah, which has no -plural^ or Kloah, the fmgular of Elohim, the laft of which he ules in fome inftances : But as he generally makes ufe of the plural Elohim, it cei'- tainly was to convey fome idea of a dttine plu- rality.^ And tho' Elohim is in feveral texts joined with a fmgular verb, no doubt to guard againft the notion of a plurality of Gods : Yet, it is many times in conftruclion with verbs, adjeclives, and participles, plural, (b) " And it came to pafs, when the Gods (according to the ordinary tranf!a*"ion of Elohim) caufed me to wander from my father's houfe. — {c) And he (Jacob) built tliere an altar, and called the place El-Bethel, becaufc there the Gods C (Elohim) [a] Gen. i. I. [h) Gen. xx. 13. [c) ibid. x>;?jv. 7. •(-Since Elohim Ixas a fingular, whici) is fometimes nfed in fcriptnre, it would be Ibange in ihe facred writers, commonly to ufe tlie plural out of clioice, and not of neccflitv, if there was not fome particular inffrndion intended to be ronveyed ty it as a plural ; and tliHt a u'ord more {i: to miilsad ihAr\ inform, fhonld be ufed by God in bis written inftiuclions to men. — Elohim is owned to be a plural by the Jenvs, who (ince their captivity in Ba/)yh», h.ive tbe idea of pUiraiiiy 'n the j-vcnteft contempt ; and m their tranfjations make u very ridiciiloii« dillinftion, by render* ing die lanie fpeciHc word in tlie fingular, when they ihink it re- lates to the true God, and plural, when it rela'.cs to ibe idols which were the objeds of ihc Pa^an worfhip. ( 18 ) (Elohim) appeared to him. {d) What nation is there io great, that have Gods (Elohim) who are fo near unto them? (e) What one nation in the eaith is hke thy people, even like Jfrael, whom the Gods (Elohim) lent to redeem for a people to him- felf ? (/J For who is there of all flefli, that have heard the voice of the Ih'mg Gods (Elohim) fpeaking out of themidll of the fire, and lived ? {g) Ye have perverted the words of the living Gods (Eloi^im.) (h) But the Lord is the true God ; he is the living Gods (Elohim.) (i) And Jojhtia faid unto the peo- ple, ye cannot ferve the Lord ; for he is an holy God^ (that is, the /j^/y Gods (Elohim) is he.) {k) Verily there is a God that judgeth in the earth. (Gods^ Elohim, that judge.) To thefe might be added, that expreffion fo frequent in fcripture, '' The Lord thy Gods," (Jehovah Eloheka.) There are feveral other rioims befides Elohim, that are to be underllood of the being of God, which, being exprelTed in the plural, mull imply a divine -plurality. — (/) " I neither learned wifdom, nor have I the knowledge of the holy, (Jjoly ones^ (vi) Where is God my maker, (jnakers.) (n) If I be a mafier, (if I am majlers.) (c) Remember now thy creator, (creators.) (p) Let Jj'rael rejoice in him that made him, (in his makers^ (q) For thy maimer is thy hufband, the Lord of Hoils is his name." Here both maker and hujland are plural. The plural exprcllions ufed in revelation by God, when ipcaldng of hjmfeif. do further prove a divine (£/)Deut. iv. 7. (^) ibiH. X. 10. (/') Jos. xx;v. 19. {jC) Pi'a. Iviii. 11. (7) Pro. XXX. 3. (w) Job XXXV. ic. («) Mai. i. 6. {.0] Ecd. xii. I. (p) rfa» cxlix. j. {q) Ifa. iiv. j. ( =9 ) a divine plurality. — (;-) And God {Ehomsi) faid, let us make man in our image, after our likenefs. (j) And the Lord God faid, (Jehovah Elohim laid) behold the man is become. like one of us.f [t) And the Lord God faid, let us go down and tiicrc confound their language, (ii) I heard the voice of the Lord, faying, whom Ihall I fend, and \\\\o will ^o for us ? ly) Produce your caufe, faith tr.c Lord ? let them bring forth, and fhew us what IhalV happen, — let them fficw the former things, that' we may confider them, &c.'* . I F it is poffible for language to convey the idea of -plurality:, thefe texts in the above pages cer- tainly do it. And as they arc all I'poken of the droine Beings beyond contradiction , they prove a divine phirality. Such as deny it,' will find it im- poflible upo.n any other plan, to reconcile the texts 'with common fenfe, or fhew what other idea can be formed from the plural exprcliions ufed inthen'i. ' .twiii '-E E D, againft the evidence of a divi?ie ph- rality, from the laft cited texts, it has been objccl:- .ed, by fuch as are no friends to the doclrine, that it is only a 'Jigurative way of fpeaking, taken from the cuftom of kings in Eaftern countries, who ufed to exprcfs themfelves in the plural, to ihew their dignity. This (r) Ger. i. 36. (/) ibid. iii. %z. [t) ibid. xi. 6, 7. (a) Ifa. ▼1. 8. (f) ibid. xli. az, 23. ■ f The expreflion io this text is fo diftinft and unarrpbignotrs, as no force of figure or example can twill ii to the J-^nxjijh conftri'ftion. One af us, necelTarily implies more than one. The enemies to a divitit; plurality are terribly put ab. ut for a meaninR to this text. They fay Jehovah is fpe-ikinR to the angels, bringing them upon a level witii himfelf. Althoujih this did not imply an abfurditv» which it does, there is no reafcm to imagine he does fohere, fince! he 00 where elfe in fcripture does fo, and the plural word Elo- niM iaimediately preceding, determines who the us were, and r'urbi'Jsthe application of that pronoun to any other being". ( " ) ^ r T H IS objection is without foundation. For^ ' can any one luppofe that God would borrow his manner of fpeaking from a kingy before any man was upon earth ! But if this, however abfurd, we iliould grant to be poflible, yet the objection is not to the purpofe. For tho' a king may fay us and WE, common fenfe tells us, that there is not the leaft ipropriety in faying one of us, when he fpeaks of himfelf ; the phrafe. is deftitute of meaning, if there is not more than one fuppofed. Therefore, this man- ner of ex prefiion, ("z^) " The Lord God faid, be- hold the man is become as one of us," muft ci- ther be void of fenfe, or it mirfl; imply a dhbie ■plurality \ the firft, no chriftian will alledge, if the latter be true ; then all the other texts, as they are in a ftile fimllar to this, muft be admitted as fair proofs of the fame doclrine. : I might have illuftrated this point, from a num- ber of teftimonies in revelation ; but as the texts, brought together in the next feclion, equally prove this point, with that Avhich they are brouglit in vindication of, I Ihall only add here, a veiy fcv^^ texts, to prove that this divine plurality (for ought we can learn to the contrary) in fcripture, is- limited to three. (.v) "Holy, holy^ holy, is the Lord o/" hoflsy (_)') John applies this text to Jefus Chrifi, and {z) Paid applies it to the Holy Ghofiy- from which, if the pafTages are carefully conlidered and com-, pared, it will appear, that the divbie plurality is-in- tended by the repetition of the word Holy iit the text, as well as by the fame repetition of it in the {a) revelation to St John j and its being repeated juft {iv) Gen. lii. as. (.v) Ifa. vi. 3. 0') Jolin xii. 41. {nj Afts xxviii. 3j. [a) Rcv. iv. 8. ' C " > fo often, and no more, in both places, feems to teach us, that the -plurality imphed in it is limited to three, (b) I will pray the Father, and he lliall give you ANOTHER COMFORTER, that Hc may abide with you forever: Even the spirit of truth. (<:) How much more Ihall the blood of Christ, who through the Eternal Spirit, offered himfelf without fpot to God, purge your confciences from dead works, to ferve the living God ? {d) The Lord dired your hearts unto the love of God, and the patient waiting for Christ.'* The Spirit is called the Lord here, as well as by (e) EzeBel. (/) " Go and teach all nations, babtifmg them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. {£} There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghojl, (Jj) The grace of our Lord Jefus Chrift, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghofiy be with you all. Amen'' This point alfo, is not only'manifeft from the above texts, but from thofe cited in thebe- ginning of the next fection, I fhall not therefore en- large upon it here : But before I proceed, 1 hope the reader will allow me a little to reafon, the cafe, upon their own principles, v/itli fach as rcjed the doctrine I have been endeavouring to prove, be- caufe they cannot comprehend unci delcribe the manner and reafon of it. , T H E greateft difficulty concerning the Trinity is, that we cannot account upon philofophic prin- ciples, how one fimplc infinite nature can act in three pcrfonal identities, with ec^ual glgry. But the [b] Johnxiv. 16, 17. [c) Ikb, ix. 14. {d ) s ThefTo. iif. 9. [c] Ezik. viii. I. 3. {/) Matt. jcxTJii. 19. {g) ; Jbh.n.v. 7. f/? 0. «^r. xjii. 14. C =2 ) the ground of this diiEculty lies, in reafoning from what we know of a nature that is finite and limit* ed, to one that is infinite and incomprehenfible, and beyond the reach of definition. The nature of men is the fame, yet perfonal identity is vari- ous, according to the number of individuals ; and if human nature was injiiiitelf ftmple, we do not know but one nature, and one power, might act in all the individuals. It is not inconfiftent with any rule of reafdn, that a nature which is infinite and fimple, may act in a plurality of diftinct iden- tities without divifion. If it is infinitely fimple, it cannot be divided, and if it is infinitely power- ful, holy, juft, and good, it is no abfurdity to fay, it may ad in diflinft perions, and be one, according to- the fimplicity of nature. The word nature^ when applied to God, mAift (according to the rules which revelation affords us to judge of that blefTcd Being) be underftood in the moll fimple and ab- folute ienfe, remo_ving from our thoughts, all the grofs ideas which our acquaintance with, corpo- real things fuggeft to our minds. If we can by reafon conceive, that there is an imrriaterial and infinite nature, it is no way imreafonable to fup- pofe that nature capable to acl quite beyOnd all the rules \vhich we have learned from |Our. obfer- vations of ///«// t'fi natures. '' ''"""" However, it muft be unreafonabfe m reject the dlv'me teftimony, which afiirms that God is one, and exprefleth himfelf by a plurality, and in each claims the fame honour, worfhip, and reverence, and aiTumes the fame names and attributes ; be- caufe wc cannot account for the manner of- fuch an union and diilinclion. We may conceive of the mofi; diincult tiling concerning the Trinity, as a piatlcr of revelation, if it is allirmed therein, as well .a«; ( =3 ) as any other doclrine, i. e. we may conceive that God has informed us that it is tnie. But if by conceiving thereof be meant, that we fhall know the manner and reafons how it is true, that is quite another thing, and natively tends to pro- fanity ; the fame as to fay, we will not credit the Almighty, 'till we be as wife as himfelf ; and that it is neceifary for us to be Gods, before we be- lieve that there is one. We can juft as little con- ceive of the manner how God exifls at all, as we can conceive how he exifls in a plurality, and if we will not believe his exiflence, 'till Vv'-e know the manner of it, we muft be Atheifts for ever, T H E R K are fome who deny the doctrine of the Trinity, becaufe they cannot underftand it, who yet pretend to know feveral things as difii- cult to underftand ; as for inftance, that a creature made the v^orld, and liimfelf alfo. If Jefus Chrift made all things, which they dare not deny, iince the Apoftles have told us fo often in fo plain terms, and he himfelf be a creature as they aflirm, then he is the maker of himfelf, which is as incon- ceivable as any point concerning the Trinity. That the divine three are one^ is demonftrable from fcripture, in as much as the divine attri- butes and periedions are afcribed to.the /Z?r^^, who, if poiTeffed of divine perfedions, muft be poftefi'ed of the divine nature ; for there is no feparating the divine nature and perfections ; and as the di- vine nature is but cnc^ confequently they muft be Gne God, I do not pretend to prove from reafon, that God is three and cnc, this ■\^•ouid be foolifli ; for no man can prove ?. priori, tliat fuch a thing muft be in God. It ( H ) It muft he proved from revelation, and if it is found there, every rnan that owns revelation is divine, is obliged to acquiefce in whit God fays of himfeif, unlefs he is fo prefumptive as to pre- tend to know the infinite Being better than he 'does himfeif. Nor do I pretend to tell /joiu, and in what re- fpechs God is three and one. The beft anfwer I fuppofe that could be given to this queftion is, that God has not revealed it, and therefore no man can tell. Words have been ufed, and we are ob- liged to ufe them ftill, to exprcfs this matter, not fo much for their propriety to the fubjccl, as for want of better, and for the fake of diibourfe ; as that there are three, commonly cd.^]cd perfo7is, in one elJence or nature. But, we have no notion of Ferfon or EJfence as to God, and fo no notion of either Trinity or Unity in this fenfe. Notwith- ftanding, we muft not refufe, on this or any other account, our affent to-^vhat God affures us is true, as to the reality of the thing itfelf, tho' not in the words which men have devifed to exprefs it in. Should we do this, we might with equal pro- priety deny that God made the world, for we cannot tell how he created all things of nothing : Nor can we tell how God is immenfe without ex- tenfion, or eternal without fucceilion, or growing older. How fpirits work on bodies, — nor how our fouls are united to our bodies ? Yet to deny all thefe, and ma.ny other things which we know are real, tho' we cannot, comprehend or defcribe the manner or reafon of them, Vvcre to commence fceptics, or rather mad men. God may oblige us to bcHcve the exiftence of this or that thing, and give us no account how, or in v/hat manner it does exift. If God tell us that Jefus Chrijl is God and man. ( '5 ) inan, in a true and proper fenfe, we are to believe the reality of it as a truth, tho' he tells us not the , manner, or wherein the unity confifts. We arc not told that he is God and man, in the. fame refpecl, but that he is God and man, tho*, in different refpefts, which is no contradiction, and therefore reafon it/elf mujl be fatisjied. There are fome who pretend to found their fcheme of religion upon reafon, and maintain that nothing is to be admitted but what they can affign a reafon for : Or rather what agrees with the ideas they have formed for themfelves. The humble chriftian agrees with them as far as right reafon goes ; but believes that there are things of which he neither has, nor can have adequate ideas : That fome things may be true, tho* he does not juflly know hoio or why, they are fo ; and for the truth of fuch things as do not depend upon rea- fon, or fall within his knowledge and inveftiga- tion, he mufl depend upon fuch evidence, as is fufficient to induce the belief of any matterj of facT:. . When we confider how little wc know of matter, which we fee, feel, and tafle, and on which fo many experiments have been tried by the wit of the greateft geniufes, which have been certainly- believed for fome time, but denied and fucceeded by others : How little Vv^e know of the mechanifm of ourfelves, or the fyftem we are in : And how much lefs of the nature of our own fouls, or of any other fpirit, except the little we feel tranfacting in us. When we farther refieft, how infinitely above our comprehenfion the De'ity muft be ; can we view without aftonifhment, the prefumption of D thofe ( 25 ) thofe men, who, by their knowledge, would de- fine the nature and manner of exiftence of the in- comprehenfible Deity j — peremptoiily decide what God is, or what he is not, and make their defi- nitions the teft and ftandard to others of divine things. Hence, the doftrine of the Trinity is rejected by many, becaufe of the diificulty of comprehend- ing the ho%u and wherefore in it, as commonly expreffed in the fyftems, which carry fome more than the appearance of contradiction in the terms, and make no fmall difficulty to conceive what is meant to be believed. But this apparent or real contradiction, is not owing to the revelation of that doctrine, from which the knowledge of it ftiould be taken ; but to the folly and vanity of church DoSiors, who, puffed with too great an opinion of their ov/n parts, would pretend to define what re- velation does not ; and coin terms not ufed in fcripture, to exprefs their imperfect conceptions. To thefe terms, and the application of them, the difficulty of believing the doctrine is chiefly owing. But on this, I fliall fay no more in this place, as I Ihail have occafion more particularly to handle it afterv/ards. SECT. { 27 ) S E C T. Ill, HAVING Ihewed from fcripture evidence, that there is but onb Gop — That there is a DiviNfc PLURALITY J — ^.and fo far as we can under* Hand the fcope and meaning of many paffages in revelation, the plurality fo plainly taught, is limited to THREE. I now come to the next thing pro*- pofed for this ftrj} part, which wa8 to fhew, that tQ each of the divitie three^ is afcribcd in revelation the NAMES and perfections proper ow/jf to Goo, Or, that the names, perfections, works, and -WORMiiP, proper only to Deity, are common to the threk who are one. . B u T as no profefled chriftian calls in queftiotl the proper Deity of the Father, it would anfwer no valuable end, to fpend time in uling aroumentfe to prove it. The proper Z)) TItou^ even thou^ art Lord (Jehovah) aloney - 1^ H E Lord Jefus Chnjl is called Jehovah, {c) *' This is the name whereby He fliall be called, the Lord our righteoufnefs." Rather as in the mar- gin, Jehovah Tsidkenu. The Holy Gbofl is called Jehovah. (jT} " The Lord (Jehovah) took me, and the spirit lift me up. ((?) The SPIRIT of the Lord (the spirit Jehovah) came upon Samp/en, — the Lord (Jeho- vah) departed from him. (fj The spirit of the Lord (the spirit Jehovah) is upon me, for the Lord (Jehovah) hath anointed me, &c." The name Lord in an abfolute fenfe in the New Teftament, is proper only to Deity. {g) " The fame Lord over all, is rich unto all that eall upon him." T H I s is given to Jefus Chrift, {h) " For unto you is born this day, in the city of David, a Savi- our, who is CbriJI the Lord.** (i) "Now the Lord is that fpirit. — ^We are changed {a) Pfa. Ixxxiii. j8. {(>) Neh. ix. 6. {c) Jer. xxiii. 6. (^) Ez?k. viii. I. 3. {e) Judg. xv, 14. — ibid, xvi. ao. {/•) Ha. Ixl. I. {g) Romans x. ix. {J>\ Luke ii. n. (_/) a. Corm. iii. 17, iS. ( =9 ) changed from glory to glory, as by the Lord, the fpirit." Margin, { T o the Spirit, (k) " For who hath known the mind of the Lokd ? (/) Who hath directed the Spirit ?" The name God, in a proper fenfe, belongs only (-f)Rom.xi. 3,4. fU Ifa. xl. 13. :}: Some readers will be furprifed thai I apply this text to Jeftif Chriji, which has been univerfally applied to the Holy Ghoji, and reckoned by the orthodox on the Trinity, an inconteftable proof of his Deity; whertas, it is plain from the fcope, that iht Holy Ghojl IS not intended by the term Spirit, in any pan of the chap- ter ; nor ftiould it be underftood perfonally, as is commonly fup- pofed. From the 6th verfe, the Apoftle fhews the excellency of the New Teftament difpenfation, which he calls the Spirit that giveth life, above the Mofaic difpenfation, which he calls the Letter that killeth. To thofe who looked no further than the out- fide, or the external part of that difpenfaiion, without regard to the Spirit, intent, and gofpel fignification thereof, it was J^at/} — " circumcifion is that of the heart, in the Spirit, and not in the Letter" The law, without ChriJl, who is the end of it for right- eoufnefs to them that believe, is death, a killing Letter : But the la'W of the Jpirit of life, in ChriJl Jefus, makes free from the law of lin and deaths The fpirit of life — the fpirit that quickeneth, is the truth concerning t'j^rj/?, who is the lubftanceof the whole Mofaic difpenfation, which the A^o^\t aW^ fgures, Jhado'ws, &c. But the fubflance is ChriJl, the laft Adam, who is a quickening Spirit. After he had compared the letter with the Spirit, he tells the Corifithians, ** Now the Lord is that Spirit : And where the Spirit, the L$rd is, (there is no pofle/Iive in the text) there is liberty." And who the Lord is, he tells them immediately after, "We preach Jefus Chriji, the Lord." He fpeaks of the Mofaic ceconomy, as under a veil, which made it difficult to look to the end of that which isaboiilhed : ** But we (under the New Teftament) all with open face, beholding as in a glafs, the glory of the Lord ( Jefui ChriJl ) are (ftianged into the fame image, from glory to glory, by the Lord, the Spirit." Tho' the ceremonial dilpenfation, efla- bliflied at Sinai, had much outward pomp, yet it had " //o glory,^^ that is, very little in comparifon of the ''glory that excelleth," in the oew difpenfation, wherein ChriJl in all his fullnefs is revealed in more clear, powerful, and extenfive manner, as the Spirit ol the old. and the Lord of the new difpenfation, in the moft proper and fpiritoal fenfe, therefore with the greateit propriety called, '* itic Spirit, theLordt aod ihe Lord, the Spirit.** ( 3" ) only to Deity. (/;j) " Thou fiialt have no other Gods before me. (n) Thus faith the Lord, befides me tha'e is no God. (o) For there \s, me God, and there is fione other but he. (p) There is none Other God but one. — But to us there is but one God." This name is often given to Je/us Chr'ift. (q) *' And Thomas anfwered and faid unto him (Jefus) my Lord, and my God. And the Word was God. (r) God was manifeft in the Jiejh. (j) But unto the Bon, he faith, thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever, {i) For unto us a Child is horn, unto us a Bon is given, and the government fhall be upon His flioulders : And his name fliall be called, won- derful counfellor, the MIGHTY God. («) Whofe are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the llefli Christ came, nvho is over all, God, blejfedfor ever. Amen. ^ (v) And we are in him that is true, even in his Son, Jefus Chrijl, This is the true God^ and {f?t) Exo. XX. 3. (w) Ifa. xliv. 6, {0) Mark xii. 43. [p) i Cor. till. 4, 6. [q) John XX. 28. ibid. i. i. (r) i Tim. iii. 16. (/) Hcb. i. 8. ((/) Ifa. ix, 6. (a) Rooi. ix. 5. [y) i John v. ao. * This is fo plain a proof of the proper Deity of our I,(?r^7- is always confidered as inviiible. Btlidcs, 6"^;/// IS emphatically called the hope of his faints; which two words bcins joined tof?ether in the text, Iin>iis the term Great God to Jefus Chriji, whofe appearing the faints hope and long for, — and who (fays the Apollle in the very next verfe) '* Gave himfelf for us, th''! he might redeem u<; from all iniquity." This puts it beyond difpute, that Jefus Chriji is called the Great God, and not the Father, as is commonly fuppofed, and which inattentive rea- ders may eafily be Jed tp think, froni the word ufiandment 6\A Paa/ become an Apoftle ? Throut^h ivhqfe righteoufnefs do we obtain falvation ? And 'who does Jude fay the fcofFers of his time denied ? Not that there was a Cod, — which muft be the fenfe, if the copulative be admit- ted ; but they denied the truths taught by the Apoftles, concern- ing the chara(5ter and kingdom of Jefus Chrijl. Now, fince the things predicated in the texts, are conftantly applied to Jefut Chriji in other fcriptures, what reafon can be afligned, why the Aprftles (houid apply them to any other, in thefe texts under coniiieration. Befides, admitting the copulative* a«i in thefe and other texts conveys a very ftrange idea of what is predicated of the Great Cod and Jefus Chrijl, as if there were one appearing of the Great God, another of Jefus Chrifl-^One commandment of the Great God to make Paul an Apoftle, another of Jefus Chrifl. — One righteoufnefs of God, another of Jefus Chrifl, and fo of all the texts where it is found. Whereas the appearing, command- ment, righteoufnefs, denying, &c. mentioned in the texts, is but one appearing, &c. therefore it muft be one and the fame fubjeft or perfon they are predicated of. Such confiderations kept in view, in reading many pa/Tages of the New Teftament, would make the fcope and meaning of them aburidanilv more clear; and fet the proper Deity of Jefus Chrifl in the plaineft point of view that language can poflibly exprefs it : But otherwife, the texts are either prefled as arguments againft the Deity o': Chriji, oral leaft, fubjedt to the criticifms of fuch as "are no friend's to ;t. ( 33 ) Ired uiito men, but unto Got>. { {/) All fcripfure is given by infpii-ation of God. (^) But holy men of God fpake as they were moved by the Hol"^ Chost. {h) Know ye not, that ye are the templeJ of God, and that the Spthit Of God dwelleth in you ? If any man defile the temple of God, him fliall God deftroy j for the temple of GoD is holy, which temple ye are* Know ye not, that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost?'* Creation work is propet only to God* (k) *< The Lord he is God, it is he that made us. (/) Thou, even thou^ art Lord (2^«(?, thou haft made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their hoft, the earth, and all things that are therein, the feas, and all that is therein* {pi) He that built all t^nngs is God." But creation work is afcribed to Jesus Christ* (n) " All things were made by him (the Word) $ and without him -wis not a?2y thing made that Was made, (o) By him (Jf.su 9 Christ) were all things created t\\3Lt afe in heaven j and that are in earth-, viiible and invilible, whether they be thrones or dominions, or principalities, or powers i All things E i,vere (/) 4 Tim. Hi. i6. [g] z Pef. J. 21. {h) 1 Cor« ili. i^, 17, eut. vi. i6. * la this text, as weli as feveral others, (which we will have occafion to notice aHerwards) there is no pofli-flive pronoun tode- r.oce a relation to any other; which n>ak<;;s it a clear proof that ■ ifisfpirit ii God ; and that creation work is properly afciibed t» him. ( 35 ) The fame is ftid of Chnft. — {b) " Bear ye one another's burthens, and fo fulfil the law of Chriji^ {c) Neither let us temp Chrift, as feme of them alfo tempted, and were deftroyed of ferpents.** O F the Sptrif. — {d) The law of the fpirit of life in Chrijt Jifts, hath made me free from the law of fm and death, (e) How is it that ye have agreed together, to tetnpt the ftirit of Godr Eternity is a perfe6lion propel*, only to God.—^ (f) " Even from everlafting to everlafting, thou art God. Cg) The eternal God is thy refuge, and un- derneath are the everlafting arms." Attributed to Jefus Chnjl.^(h) « Unto us a child is born, unto us a fon is given, — and his name fiiall be called — the everlafting Father^ (the* father of eternity^ if) I (the redeemer) am t}\tfrjly and I am the la ft. (i) 1 am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending. (/) Jefus Chrijl, the fame yeflerday, and to-day, 2iYi6.for ever** To the Spirit. — (?ii) " How much more fiiall the blood of Chrift, who through the eternal Spirit offered himfelf without fpot unto God." . Immensity is another perfection proper only to Deity. — (ji) " Can any hide himfelf in fecret places, that I ftiall not fee him ? faith the Lord : Do not I fill heaven and earth ? faith the Lord.'* This {b) Gcii. vf. a. (c) i Cor. x. 9. {d) Rom, viii. ^. {e) Afts r, 9. (/) Pfa. xc. a. {g) Dcut. xxxiii. a?, [h] Ifa. ix. 6. (i) ibid. xliv. 6. [k) Rev. 1. 8, and %%, 13. {I) Heb. xni. 8. {m) ibid. ix. 14. («) Jcr. xxiii. 24. ( 3« ) This Is alfo attributed to Jefus Chrijl, who is « — (o) " head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fuUnefs of him {Chrijl) t\\2X. fillet h all in aiir -. ^ To the Spirit. -^{p) « Whither fiiall I go from thy Spirit ? Or whither fliall I fly from thy prefence ? If I afcend up into heaven, thou art there : If I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there, &c." H E that is prefent with all the faints, and dweU leth in them, is God. (q) " Ye are the temple of the living God ; as God hath faid, I will dwell in them. (/) God is in you of a truth." But Jefus Chrifl dwelleth in them.^^i/) " Know ye not your ownfelves, how that Jefus Chrift is in you, except ye be reprobates ? {t) That Chrijl may dwell in your hearts by faith.'* ■ To the Spirit. — (u) " Even the Spirit of truth, he d%velleth with you, and fhall be in you, (v) But if the fpirit of him that raifed up Jefus from the dead, dwell in you : He that raifed, up Chri/l from the dead, fliall alfo quicken your mor- tal bodies, by his Jpirit that dwelleth in you." Gop only is holy. — (w) " Who fliall not fear thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name ? for thou only art holy.. — ' » " This perfedion is afcribed to Jefus Chrift. ■ (o) Eph, i, -i, 23. /'/)') P fa. ex xxix. 7, 8. {q) % Cor. vi. 16, (r) 1 Cor. XIV, 15. [j) 1 Cor. xiii. 5. (/) Eph. iii. 17, (a) John XIV. 17, [y] Rom, viii. ij. (w) Rev, xv. 4. ( 37 ) Cbrift.-^{x) " But ye denied the holy one^ and the juft. {y) Thefe things, faith he that is holy^ he that is true." Even Jefus Chriji who indited the epiftles to the feven churches. A N D to the Hely Ghoft, — {z) « But ye have an unction from the holy om, and ye know -.11 j-i,;^^r. >» all things. God only is the fountain of life. — {a) " That thou may*ft love the I^rd thy God — for he is thy life, (b) The Father raifeth up the dead, and quickeneth them." This is attributed to Jefus ChriJ},-^{c) " When ChriJl who is our life, fliall appear, then fhall ye alfo appear with him in glory, (^d) Even fo, the Son quickeneth whom he ivill. {e) But ye denied the holy one, and the juft, — and killed the pri?ice (margin, author) of I'tfeJ'* A N D to the Spirit. -—Cf) " The body is dead, becaufe of lin ; but the fpirit is life, becaufe of righteoufnefs. But if the Spirit of him that raifed up Jefis from the dead, dwell in you ; he that raifed up Chri/l from the dea^, ihall alfo quicken your mortal bodies, by his fpirit that dwel- Jeth in you. (g) It is the Spirit that quickeneth,*' f God only is pofieffed of ablolute unlimited ^ power, {x)A^siu.JA- (>) Rer. iii. 7. (2) i John ii. 70. (^) Deut. 3CXX. ao. {l>) }yUny.2i. (r) Col, lii. 4 (rf) John v. ax. le) A^^n. 14, 15. (/) Rom. viii. 10, 11. (g) Johnvi. 63. t If by the term Spirit, in any of thefe texts, be meant the frut/j rather than the //• Gr>r./}, (fee Note, p. 29) this will by ho tne-tns weaken the evidence in favour of his tiivinity, fo matlifeft in many other texts, where he is clearly meant. ( 38 ) power. He only can raife the dead. — (F) « Power belongeth to God. (i) Thou haft made the hea- vens and the earth by thy great poiver ; and there is nothing too hard for thee. (J) God hath both raifed up the Lord^ and will alfo ra'ije us up by his own power J* Attributed to Jefus Clmft.—{1) " Moft gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmi- ties, that the power of Chrift may reft upon me. {ni) Deftroy this temple, and in three days / will raife it up. But he fpake of the temple of his body." To the Spirit. — («) " To make the Gen- tiles obedient by word and deed, through mighty ftgns and wonders^ by t\i^ power of the Spirit of God. {o) Chrijl being put to death in the fiefli, but quickened by the Spirit.^* All fpiritual and divine operations muft be from God. — (/)) " There are diverfities of operations, but it is the fame God^ that worketh all in all.^^ The Apoftle faith,-~(^) " But Chrift is all in all:'' And adds, (r) « But all thefe worketh that one and felffame Spirit, dividing to every man fe- verally as he will:* From thefe, and many others, that might have been collected, it is plain from fcripture teftimony alone, that the fame attributes, perfections, and works ^ which are proper only to Deity, are afcribed to the Lord '(A) Pfa. Ixii. II. (/) Jer. xxxii. 17. {k) i Cor. vi. 14. f/) 3 Cor. xii. 9. [m) fahn 11. 19, 21. in) Rom. xv. 18, 19. [o) i Pet. iii. 18. f/-) I Cor. xii. 6. l^j) Col", iii, 11. (r) i Cor. .sii. Ji. ( 39 ) Lord Jefus Chrift and the Holy Ghoft, And as the evidence is in fcripture language, (without com- ment) and fo not liable to the weaknefs or mif- apphcation that often attends evidence, which de- pends upon human confequences, drawn from fcripture by men ; I do not imagine, how it is poflible to avoid the force of fo ueceflary a eon- clufion from them, as, that Jefus Chrijl^ and the Holy Ghojl, are truly and necejfarily God, I T may be obferved here, as I hinted above, that thefe texts thus collected, do not only prove the proper Deity of the Lord Jefus, and the Holy Ghofi, but alfo clearly point out the truth of a divine flurality, and not obfcurely that it is limited to three. And as the fcriptures fo copioully afcribe divine names, perfedions, and works to a plurality'^ and yet peremptorily, and in the cleareil terms aljert, that there is but one God, tliat is one divine Being, poiTeffed of thefe iiames and perfidions^ and no where give the leaft hint concerning the mari" tier of this plurality and unity, or how the divine three are one : It becomes all chriftians to check the lirlt emotions of curious inquiry into what is not revealed concerning this lubject. That thefe three, are ofie we know, becaufe revealed, but how, we kiiQW not. SECT. ( 4«> > SECT. IV. BXJ T as it was propofed in the beginning of the laft fedion, to prove the Deify of our Lord Jefus Chrijl^ and the Holy Ghojl, by comparing one text with another, and deducing the neceffary con- clulionsjl fhall make that the fubjed of this fedion ; 2.ndjirft begin with thefe arguments of this kind/ which prove the proper Deity oixho, Lord Jefus Chri/}* Is A I AH faith,-^(j) " Mine eyes have leen the! King, the Lord of Hosts." John fays, this waS Christ whom Ifaiah here fpeaks of. — Q) " Thefef things, faid Efaias, when he faw h is glory, and fpake of HIM." Therefore Jesus Christ is the Lord of Hosts. (u) "Thus faith the Lord (Jehovah) the i^ing of Ifrael, and his redeemer (goal) the Lord of Hosts, I am the firft, and I am the lafl, and be- fide me there is no God." He who is the re" deemer (Goal) thtfirj} and the laft, is Jehovah, the Lord of Hosts, befide whom there is no God : But Jesus Chri st is the redeemer, — {v) " In whom we have redemption through his blood." And the titles jfr/? and laft he takes to himfelf.*-^ (w) " I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, theory? and the laftl" Therefore he is Jeho- vah, the Lord of Hosts, and befide him there is no God. {x) " I am Jehovah, and bclide me there is na Saviour." But Jefus Chrift is the Saviour. — (_y) " Grow (j) Ifa. Ti. s- [f] Jobn xii. 41 («) If-i* xliv. 6. [v) Eph- u 7. (ov) Rev. xxii. 13. (x) Ifa. xliii. 11. (j) a Pet. iii, 1.8.., ( 4' ) *•* Grov' in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jefus Chr'ifiy Thciefore 'Jejus. j ChriJ} is Jkhovah«. (2 V Sanctify the Lord or Hosts himfdj\ and let him be your/c(7r and' yaiir dr^^icL He ihall. l)e for a fantluary^ and for' wjhne of flu?nbllng^ and for a reck of offence to both thehoufes of IJraeiy. He who was to be a fiumbling ftonCj aqd a rock of offence, Ifa'iah calls the Lord of Ho:^>ts, and bids the children of Jf-ael fanclify {}j.cnow\ icorjhip^ • and magnify J bini, and make bini their fear and dread. Fear is here put for the qhjc^ of fear, vi-hich.. is God ; but the ApoiHes Fa id and Peter, apply this exprefsly to Christ, (a) "They ftumbled at the fumhiing (lone \ as it is writtea, behold, I ' lay in /Aon^ a f}innhUng (Ion?, and rotk rf offence ; jind whofoevcr believcthin blm (Cbrifr) Ihall not be afliamed. (/;) Unto you therefore who believe he. {Jefus Chrifl) is precious ; (an honour, as in the mar- gin) but unto them who are difobedient, thcfiortc which the builders diflillowed, the fame j^ made the head of the corner, and -^ flone of fliwdfing, and a rock of offence to them v/ho ftumble at the word.'* Therefore Jesus Christ is the Lord of H>'>sts — is to be fan^ifedj (ivorjhipped and magnified) ar^d is the true chjecl of religious fear and reverence. That glorious and magnificent defcription in the ninety-feventh Pfalm, is of one, who in fevc- ral parts of it \% called (f) J.EH0VAH,-r-.and ivcrfhip commanded to be given to him. (d) " Worlhip him all ye Gods.'* But the Apoftle if) fays, if was the fyON of God who is fpoke;i of in that' F facrccl- (2;) Ifa. viU. T?,i4- {a) Rom. ix, jz, 3j. [}) t Per, ii. 7, 8^ {f\ ver. \, I, 8, 9, 20, i:. '\d] ver. 7. (^) Helj. i. a. ( 4^ ) . facred hymn: Therefore he h Jehovah, foivhcm divine worjljip is due, and of ivhom the glorious things in that Pfalm are faid, proper to none but the true God, Another majeftic defcriptioh we have in the hundred and fecond Pfahn, where feveral divine afcriptions are given to Jehovah, which cannot with any propriety be apphed to any other, — as di- vine worjlnf — eternity — injinite power — and unchange- ablenefs. (f) " But thou, Lord, (Jehovah) fhalt tndiire for ever, and thy remembrance unto all generations. The heathen fhall fear the name of the Lord, (Jehovah) and all the kings of the earth thy glory. Of old haft thou laid the founda*- tioiis of the earth : And the heavens are the work of thy hands. They Ihall perilh, but thoufljalt en- dure : Yea, all of them fliall wax old like a gar- ment ; as a vefture Ihalt thou change them, and they fhall be changed. But thou art the fame, and thy yfars Jhall have no end** Eut the A poftle giv- ing the character of Christ to the Hebrews (^g) tranfcribes thefe verfes, and applies the contents of them to him : Therefore, after the Apoftle, we may fafely conclude, that the name Jehovah, with ail the perfe^lions attributed to him in that Pfalm, ai"e properly applicable to our Lord Jesus Christ. (/j;) "^ The Lord (Jehovah) is my fhepherdP The Pfalmift fays, Ivis f:epherd is Jehovah : But Iesus Christ aiiirms of him felf, that Z:?^ is tlie fhepherd', — (i) " I am the ^^ood fhepherd : The good Jhcpherd giveth his life for the fheep.'* Therefore Jesus Christ is Jehovah, Heie it may be proper (f) ver. 12, T5, 45, 26, 27. {g) Yi.h. i. ip, 11, xz. [h) Pfa. 5fxi:i. I. (/■) _|ohn X. II. ( 43 ) proper to add, that Chrift calls the church his* (/) JJjeep, andPt'/^r calls them the (J) /lock of God : There- fore Chrijl is God. (ni) "Thy mahr is thy hujhand^ (the Lord OF Hosts is his name :) and thy redeemer the holy one of IJraely the God of the whole earth f mil he be called.'' The hufhand or hridtgroom of the church, and her redeemer is here called the Lord OF Hosts, and the God {Elohim^ or Jud^e) of the whole earth : But Jesus Christ is hujband or bridegroom^ and redeemer of the church ;— f «) *' The bufband is the head of the wife, even as Chrift is the head of the church, {o) Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him : For the mar- riage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herfelf ready. (/) Come hither, and I will fhew thee the bride ^ the Lamb's wife. (^) Chrifl hath re^ deemed us from the curfe of the law, — (/ ) in whom we have redemption through his blood. {/) Ye -were not redeemed with corruptable things, as filver and gold, but with die precious blood of Chrift.'* Therefore Jesus Christ is the Lord of Hosts, the God of the whale earth, (f) " The Lord God of the holy Prophets fen t his Angel, to fhew unto his fervants the things which muft fliortly be done." The Angel men- tioned here, is the Angel of the Lord God : But he is the An^el of Jesus Christ, and fe?it by him. (u) " I Jesus, h^Nzfent mine Angel to teiHfy unto you thefe tilings in the churches.'* There- fore Jesus is the Lord God of the holy Prophets. Tt> {^) J"hn xxl. i6. (/^ I Pet. V. 2. (w;) iCa. liv. j, («) Eph. v» a,3. (5) Rov. xix. 7. ^p) ibid. xxi. 9. (^) G.f// when applied 10 John f\^s Bapiijl. Matt, iii. 3. Mark ^3. Luke iii. 4. John i 23. Now, Ifa'tah I'-ys, cKap. xl. 3, 9, 10, u'l " The voice of hirn tiiat crieth in the wildernefs, (whtre John preached) prepare the way of the Lord, (Jehovah) make ftraight in the defarr, a high way for our God. — O Jerufaleni, that bringeftigood hidings, (thou that telJeft good tidings to Jcrufahvi, niargir^ fay unto ( 45 ; (a) " I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, faith the Lord, which is, which ivas^ and which is to come, the almighty." Every character in this text proves the Deity of the fpeaker ; but that Jesus Christ is the Jpeahr, is plain from his own teftimony in the fame paragraph. (b) " And I {John) turned to fee the voice of him that fpake with me. And in the midft of the feven candlefticks, one like unto the fin of man, — and when I faw him, I fell at his feet as dead : And he laid his right hand upon me, fayin ■ unto me, fear not, I am x\\efirjl and the laft : I am he that livetb, and was dead ; and, behold, I live for evermore. Amen ; and have the keys of hell and of death/' Therefore the charaders in the text belong to Jesus Christ, and prove his Deity beyond all difpute, (c) "God was in Chrift, reconciling the world to himfelf" Here God is the reconciler, and that to himfilf \ But Jefus Chrift is the reconciler, — [d) " You that were fometimes enemies, hath he {Jefus') reconciled in the body of his flefli through death.** Therefore Jefus Chrift is 'God, the ob- ject of whom the reconciliation was made. {e) "Who cz-n forgive fins but God cnlyT'* — But Christ ca-td. forgive fins , (f) " Even as Christ forgave you, fo alfo do ye." Therefore he is God. It unto the cities of Ja^rt^, behold ^oMr God. Behold, the Lord God will come with a ftrong hand, and his arm fhali rule for him : Peh' Id, his reward is \v\(h him, and his work before him. He fhall feedhis flock like a Ihepherd : He Hiall gather the lambs with his arm, and carry them in his bofom, and fliall gentlv lead them that are with younft." All this can be applied to no other than Jesvs Christ, thebfhop of fouls, and R<^od fliepherd of the fhecp ; it is therffore /if who through iliis pafTage is calied Jehovah— i]je Lord God — the Qq-q of Ifrael. (^) Rev. j. 8. (3) ibid. i. 13, 13, 17, i8, (c) a Cor. v. 19. id) Col.i.ji, »3. (f)Markii. 7, (/) C^ol. iii- 13. ( 4^ ) If is God only that fearcheth the heart.- () ** T H E life was manifefted, and we have feen it, and bear witnefs, and Ihew unto you that eternal {g) I KiiTgs viii. 39. [h] Rev. ii. 18, 23. (/) Pfa. Ixviii. 17, 18. [k) Eph. iv. 7, 8, 9. (/) Zaci), xii. 4, 10. [vt) John xix. 34. in) A) Phil. \. 10. (ii'j Mai. iii. 6. (x) Heb. xiii. 8. (j) Exod, xvii. a. (s) Pla. Ixxvlii. 36. {a) x Cor. x. 9. {V) Ju^e 24,' 25. \c) Eph. V. %T. % This tffxt the Ar'ians interpret of the doflrine, not of the pef- fon of. Jefus Chriji; becaufe. to preach Chriji in feveral other re.xts, means to preach thedoftrines of Chriji ; lience, fay tliey., .•' this text points cut ^^■Jiu Chriji, as the lume faviour, and his gofpel the fame to them of old,— to the Hebrews thijn,— -and would be the fame te all generatiops that were to come. ' liven in thlsfenO, by an tafy confequence, it is a clear proof of the Dairy of Jefus Chriji, as it proves that he governed the world in general, and the church in particular, in all ages, which none but the fupreme God coyld do. This, 1 fiiali prove at large in the fequel. C 49 ) himfelf a glorious church, not having fpot or wrinkle, or any ibch thing/' Therefore he is the ONLY WISE God our Saviour, to whom (in the words of the Apoftle) we afcribe {dj " glory and majefty, doininion and power, both now and ever. Amen'* Many more texts might have been compared in fupport of the proper Deity of the Lord Jefus Chrift ; but I thought it beft to take only fuch under this head, as when compared, the inference would be obvious at firft light to the meaneft ca- pacity. The reader will now fuffer me, in the fame manner, to prove the proper Deity of the Holy Ghojl, by a few plain examples from fcripture. The fame Lord of Hosts that Ifaiah faw, /aid unto him, (e) " Go and tell this people ; hear ye indeed, but underlland not, &c." But the Apoftle faith exprefsly, that thefe were the words of the Holy Ghost. CfJ « Well fpak the Holy Ghost by the Prophet Ifaiah, faying, go unto this people, and fay, hearing ye fliall hear, and fhall not underftand, &c.'* Therefore the HolY Ghost is the Lord of Hosts. The people of I/rael is often in the Old Tefta- ment faid to rejijl and rebel againft Jehovah : But Stephen fays, it was the Holy Ghost they refifted. (^^) " Ye ftifF-necked, and uncircumcifed in heart and ears, ye do always refijl the Holy Ghost : As your Fathers did, fo do ye." There- fore the Holy Ghost is Jehovah. G The ((/) Judc ver. %s. (-?) Ifa. vl. 9. (/) A(fls xxviii. aj, »6. (^) ibid. vii. ji. ( 56 ) THfe fpiritnal birth h the work of God. {b) ** Whatfoever is born of God, overcotneth thfc world, (i) To thera gave he power to become the fom of God,-—yfjh6 were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flefli^ nor Of the will of man, but cf God.'* But this is the work of the Spirit.-^ (i) " Except a man be born of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flefh, is flefti ; and that i;rhich is born of xht fpirity is fpirit." Therefore the Spirit is God. H % whom ChriJ} teacheth us to pray to as our heavenly Father, is the object of ivorfhip, and muft be God. But he muft be our Father, of whom w'e are begotten and born, in the ftile Of fcripture, 5ind that is the Spirit, as the laft article proves : Therefore the Spirit is included in the term ivz- ther, as the objeSt of ivorfhtp, and xHiiifequently muft be God. T o God only are we to fray, who alone hath power to fend forth labourers into his harveft. — (7) " Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harveft, that he would fend forth labourers into his har- veft." But the HotY Ghost fendsvthem forth. {ill) ** So they [Barnabas and Faid) htm^fent forth by the Holy Ghost.'* Therefore he is the objed -(f ffaytr,- — 'he Lord of the harv'eft,-^z.nd tnuA be the true God. H T. is the Supremt' Being, whom thfe Saints have Vv'orfhipped under the divine titles of Lord and God.— (;z) " Then he '^(Simeon) b/ejt^ God, ^^ndfzid. Lord ^ {h) X Jclin V. '4. (/) John i. is, it3. {^) ibid. iii. 5, 6. (/) Matt, fx'. 30, (ff?) A<5is xiii. 4, («} Luke ii, 38, 59. ( 5t ) Lord now letteft thou thy fervant depart in p,eac§i according to thy word. For mine eyes havp lieeij thy fahation.''* But it was the word of the Koly Ghost heherefpeaks of. — (o) " It was revea/^d unto hirii (Simeon) by tht Holy Ghost, thathe(houl4 not fee death, before he hadfeen the Lord*sC/jriftJ* Therefore the Holy Ghost, who is here worfhip- ped under the facred titles of Lord and Gop^ i^ the Supreme Beittg, T PI E calling and work of the Apoftles were un- der the fole direction of God. — (/>) " Noma.n ta^etlj this hoRom'to himfelf, but he that is called of Xiod." But this calling and' work were under the direction of^ the HotY Gjhost. — (jf) " The Holy Ghost faid, Jeparate me, Barnabas 2t:nd Saul^' {or the work whereunto / have cajled them^^ Ther^r* fore the Holy Ghost is God. H E who qualiHed the Apoftles, and fijrft propa- gators of chriftianity, with fuch a diverfity of ex- traordinary gifts.oi .{r) wifdom — know ledge— faiiJp — working of miracles — healing all difeafes — prophecy — difcerning of fpirits — interpretation of to?igues-^2iid fpeaking divers kinds of languages to the different kinds of people where they came, muft be not only omnipotent, or he could neither beftow the gfts, nor fupport them to whom they Vv'ere given in thp due and regular exercife of them ; but he imift be omniprefent alfo ; at the i^me time prefent in all places, however diftant : This the Apoftle faitli, is [s) " the fame God that worketh all in all ;" and at the fame time iiiys, (/) " But all thcfe worketh Xh.2Lt one '^nd the felf-fa?ne Svirit^ dividing to ((j) Luke li. a6. (/>) ILb. v. 4. [q] A6ls xiii. 2. (r) at Cor- xii. 4, — IX. i,/j.Tc'. 6. (/) ver. it. ( 5^ ) to every man feverally as he will.*' Therefore the Spirit is God omnipotent^ and every where frefent^ I F the laft cited texts are compared with what the Apoftle faith, — (k) " God alfo bearing them (the Apoftles) witnefs, both with figns and won- ders, and with divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghojly according to his own willJ* It will fhew the ftrength of the former argument in another point of view, viz. That the fame things are done by the loill of the Spirit, that are faid to be done by the will of God : It muft follow, that as they have but one will^ they are but one God. The fcriptures were indited by God. — (tj) " All fcripture is given by infpiration of God." But it was the Holy Ghost that infpired the penmen who wrote the fcriptures. — {w) " Holy men of God, Ipake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.'* Therefore he is, God. God only is the author of all fpiritual comfort. — (a*) " BleiTed be God, — the God of all comfort ; who comforteth us in all our tribulations." But the Holy Ghost is the comforter^ in whofe com- fort the churches reft. — {J) " But the comforter^ which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will fend in my name, he fliall teach you all things. (z) Then had the churches reft, — walking in the fear of t\ic Lord, and in t)\z , comfort oi the Holv Ghost." Therefore he is God. It is God that dwelUth in believers. Who^ (?/) Heb. ii. 4. (') a Tim. iii. i6, (ouy/ a Pet. i. ti. (.v) a. Ci»r. i.5, 4. (j') John xiv. a<5. (2) Ads ix. 31. < 53 ) {a) " Wliofoever fliall confefs that Je/us is the fon of God, God dwelleth in him-i ^rid he in God> (^) God is m you of a truth." But it is the Spirit that dwelleth in believers. — (<:) "The Spirit tif God dwelleth in you. {d) The Spirit of Truth dwelleth with you, and ihall be in you J* Therefore he is God. I T is God who teacheth the faints.— (^) " They fliall be all taught of God.'* But it is the Holy Ghost that teacheth them. — (/) " Not in the words which man's wifdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teachethJ' Therefore he is God. The Apoftle fays, {g) " It was the long-fuffering of God, that waited in the days of Noah :" But Mofes fays, (/?) " It was the Spirit that didT^m-^ with the men of that generation." Therefore the Spirit is God. None but one infinitely wife can know the deep things of the counfel and purpofe of God. — (/) " O the depth of the riches, both of the wif- dom and knowledge of God ! How imfearchahle are his judgments, and his ways fafl fiiiding out / For who hath known the mind of the Lord, or who hath been his counfllor ?" But this the Spirit can do.— (/^) " The Spirit fearcheth all things, yea, the deep things of Got>. The things of God know- eth no man, but the Spirit of God*' There- fore the Spirit is infinitely wife, and fo muft be God. The {a) I John \v, ij. {h) X Cor. xIt. 35. (f) ibfd. iii. 16. (\ Gen. VI. 3, to Rom. xi. 33, 34, l^k) i Cor.ii. 10, 11. ( 54 )■ The Apoftles fay, (/f) It was God,' — the Lord God, the maker of heaven and earth, thefea, ani all that therein is : who /pake by the mouth of hjs fervant David. But Peter fays, (/) it was the Holy Ghoft that fpake by the mouth of his fervant David : Therefore thefe divine names and works are properly attributed to the Holy Ghoft, from which it is manifeft that he is the true and fu- preme ^ God. T o conclude thefe arguments for the Deity of the Spirit, I muft let the reader know, how plain and indifputable this truth would have appeared, if all the texts where the phrafe fpirit of God, — and fpirit of the Lord, occurs, had been properly tranflated. We have generally the word of which denotes paifeffionj put betwixt Spirit, and Lord ov God, v/hich pofl'effive commonly in Englifh ligni- iies property, and implies fubordination of one to another, if applied to different ptrfons. And if ■one perfon only be fuppofed, then the phrafe his Spirit, iigniiies his mind or power. Thefe ideas feem moft natural, when fuch exprefiions are applied to God as his Spirit, the Spirit of God, which, without the help of a figure, cannot fo evidently prove the proper Deity of the Spirit, \\^hen fuch polTeffives '■zre ufed ^ but muft rather refer to the cecoziomical character (i) Ads iv, 24j 45. (/) A(fls i. 16. Alfo compare Luke I. 6,Sr ^o, with Adts XJ^viii. 25. *'Bec"aufe fo many have ufed the phrafey//p;v«) The Spirit Jehovah refts vipon me. (^) The Spirit, the Lord Jehovah, is upon me, tor Jehovah hath anointed me to preach good tidings.'* In like manner, wc might mention above a dozen places, where fuch expref- fions are ufed without any pofleflive. It is there- fore beyond contradiction, that Spirit and God are the fame, where they are joined in thefe texts, throughout the Old Teftament. This idea fets the Deity of the Spirit in the cleareft point of view, It (r;) Gen, i. z. (-a) ifeid. jtli. 38. {0) Jobxxxiii. 4. U) Il>.. x?f .%, ^-q) ibid. Ixi. i. i S6 ) It is a general rule in all languages, that two names or words, not diftinguifhed by any article, prepofition, or other word, commonly belong to the fame thing. The not attending to this, has been the occa- fion of many foolifli and unworthy conceits con- cerning the Spirit. Hence, a very learned and ingenious critic, tho' he cites the words in Gen. ii. 2, in Hebrew characters, which is Ruach Elohim, and tells us, that it is fo in many other places, yet makes this obfervation thereon, " That as Elobim is plural, it fhews that he (tl\e Spirit) proceeds from more perfons than one." On this he builds the procellion of the Holy Ghoft from the Father and the Son. A very ftrange foundation indeed ! A s Ruach is in the fmgular number, and Elohim is plural, as we proved above, the one muft imply the fmgular charafter of Deity, as the one infinite eternal Spirit : And Elohim, a pkiral, muft be ^'iew- ed in that relative light in which God hath revealed himfelf to men. I muft again put the reader in mind, that I by no means pretend to tell the modus of divine exiftence, or anfwer that curious queftion, which fome may afk here, " How can thefe things be ?" 1 find revelation joins El OH I M, a //,^r^/, and Ruach, a finq^ular, to point out the fame divine Being ; but how this plurahty fubfifts in Deity, becaufe not revealed, I leave to infinite intelligence ; but that it is fo, remains a truth while thefe words ftand in the Bible, Jehovah Elohim, — Ruach Elohim. — Thefe three are one. Having noSv proved, frft, by a collection oi fcripture ( 57 ) fcrlpture texts, that the names, attributes, per- fections, and works, proper only to Deity , are afcribed to the Lord Jefus Chrifty and the Holy Ghoft. And fecondly, demonftrated the truth of their Deity y by comparing one text with another, from which the conclufions are both eafy and ftrong in favour of the point. I fhall next, as propofed, illuftrate the truth of Chnjl*s proper Deity, by conlidering the f.,ope of fcveral paffagcs in revelation, which have a relation to that fubjed. H SECT. ( 58 ) ; S ,E C T. V. IF it can be made appear from fcripture, that our Lord Jefus Chrifi created all things, — go- verned the world in general, and the church in •particular, both under th6 Old and New Tefta- jnents^*— was manifefted' by all the god-like appear- ances under the Old l^eftainent to the Patriarchs and Prophets, and under the New to the Apoftles ; — did all the mighty works we read of among his ancient people, the J'^wj,— alTumed the names and titles, and claimed the worfhip and homage due only, to Gad .* And whom not only the Jews wor- fhipped as their God and king, — but whom chrif- tians on earth, and both faints and Angels in hea- ven do account worthy to receive all worfhip, ho- nour, glory, and praife. If thefe things are evi- dent in fcripture, none that credit revelation can doubt, that he is the true God. That Jefus Chriji created all tilings, "^as proved fjom feveral plain texts, in page 33, and were it neceffary, many more might be added. And as we muft admit it as a truth, from fuch abundance of divine, .teftimonies, that all things were made by Jefus Chrifi^ ■ it muft be undeniably true, by a very natural confequence, that he is the ruler and governor of them ail. For the very no- tion of creature exiftence, implies in it a depen- dence upon the will and government of the creator. And if we fuppofe the creature to be rational, and confequently under a law^ then its exiftence as fuch denotes not only dependence upon the will of the creator, but that it is accountable to him as the la\v'-giver, ruler, and judge. Cre^'^'^" and creature are relative terms, and imply the neceflity of ( 5? ) of rule and government : Unlefs we could imagine (which would be contradictory, if not blafphemous) that the creator Ihewed fo much wiidom in the making of creatures, without any defign to rule and govern them : Or, in Ihort, that he was not able to mana^ the things he had made. Seeing then it is infallibly true, that by the immediate agency of the divine ivord (Jtifus Chrijl) all things were made ; He muft be the immediate ruler of the world in general, and of Angels and men in particular. This will be further mani- feft, from a confideration of the fcripture account of his chai'acler, who governed the church in all ages. And here we are in a great meafure confined to the rule and government of the church : Be- caufe revelation is a hiftory not fo much of the world, as of the church, and takes no more of the affairs of the world into the account, than is necef- faiy fome way or other to compleat the hiftory of the church. So that the Bible iii general, may be called God\ hiftory of the church in all ages. And it hath thefe two properties, which no other hiftory can pretend to, frft, that all the fads are infallibly related by him who was an eye witnefs, and directed the whole. Secondly, this hiftory is not confined to paft facts, which all others muft be, but extends to all future periods, to the end of time, with the fame exactnefs as if they were paft. Yet, from the account we have of the church, we learn, that he who guided and governed it by his wifdom and power, alio ruled the world in gene- ral, tho* in very different refpecls. I D o not propofe to take under confideration, all the ( ^J- ( 72 ) which will put the general point 1 am pleading for, entirely beyond all difpute. And I am fur- prized, that none of all the difputers for the divi- nity of Chrijly ever took any notice of it, viz. That wherever the word Angel is joined with Jeho- vah, there is no pojfeffive prefixed to them in the Hebrew, What we have tranflated the Angel of the Lord, is the Angel Jehovah, which certainly proves them to be the fame. And through all the Old Teftament it is fo, when they are joined to- gether. For the reader's fatisfadion, the follow- ing texts may be confulted in the original, which he will find without any poiTeffive fign. Gen. xvi. 7, 9, 10, 11. Chap. xxii. 11. Num. xxii. 23, 24, 25, 27, 31, 34, 35. Judg. ii. i, 4. Chap. xiii. 3, 16, 18, 20, 21. Chap. v. 23. Chap, vi. II, 12, 21, 22. I Kings xix. 7. 2 Kings i. 3, 15. Chap. xix. 35. I Chro. xxi. 12, 15, 18, 30. 2 Sam. xxiv. 16. Pfa. xxxiv. 7. and xxxv. 5. Zech. i. II, 12. Chap. iii. 5, 6. Chap, xii. 8. with feveral others. T H o* there be no poffeilive fign prefixed to Angel, when joined to Jehovah, yet there is, when it is joined with "^ Elohim, which is tranflated God . This may point out to us the humble de- pendent charadier, in which the Mefiiah a<5ted as the me fenger of Elohim, which is a plural. Not- withftanding, fince the word Angel is joined with Jehovah, without the pofleilive fign, it fliews that . his ftate of dependence was voluntary, and that he lofes no claim to fupremacy by that voluntary de- pendence : It fairly points out, that our Saviour, the * Exo. xiv. 19. I Sam. xxix. 9. a Sam. xiv. 17, 20. Char. xix. %'. In Judg. xiii. 6> ii waots the ponVfTive. ( 73 ; the Angel, or mejfenger for us, was never lefs than Jehovah, and that in both characters, as to their lignification to his church, he is equally re- lated to them. But when Angel is joined \vith Elohim, it fhews that the Angel Jehovah humbled himfelf to be a meffenger by oeconomy oiF Elohim to guilty men, to inftrud them in heavenly wifdom. In the character of the Ang el Jehovah, our Saviour Ihews his one-nefs or lu.iiy, as Emmanuel ; but in the character of the Ang el of Elohim, he fhews his parcnerfliip in the fcheme of man's redemption with the Father and Holy Ghoft. We may therefore conclude, that as Cbr'ijTs name, as the Angel or melTenger, and that of Jehovah conitantly fignify the fame perfon, in the Old Teftamcnt, the Meffenger and Jehovah muft be one, tliat is, Jcfus Cbrijl the 7nejfenger is Jehovah. And tho' he be the mejfenger of Elo- him, in the way of partnerfhip in the fcheme of man's fa|vation, yet as Emmanuel, he affumes one of the fupreme titles th?it is attributed to Deity in fcripture. As there are but two texts, Gen. xxviii. 12, and xxxii. 1. where the word Angel, -^.s d. plural, is joined to Jehovah, in which it is hofl qv armies ^ there is no fear of miftaking the meaning for want of the poffeilive. When Angel is joined with Berith, or covenant, it has the poflelTive, Mai. iii. i. Per- haps for the fame reafon that it is i'o when' joined with Elohim. » H a VI N G thus far cleared the fubje(!^, I come now to fhewthat Jesus Christ was tliis Angel Jehovah,- — this God, — -the Almighty God, — the King of Israel, whom they ivDrfJ/ipped and adored. It would be far too tedious to confult the K narrative ( 74 ) liarrative of all the appearances he made in tji? Old Teftament, and Ihew how they may, or really are applied to him *• Or enter particularly into all the arguments that might be advanced in proof of this point. I Ihall only felecl a few, which I prefumcj^ if impartially confidered, may not only ferve as a j^ey to the reft, but to the fcope of the Old Xeftament. I NEED not ftay to prove th2.t Je/us Chrifi wgs that image of God, after which man was created ; this is manifeft from the text itfelf, compared witS the New Teftament chai^ader of Chrifi, as the image of God. But this we muft obferve, that as tTie image after which man was made, in a parti- cular manner referred to that dominion man wa$. endowed with over the lower creation j it muft ne- ceffarily infer that Jefus Chri/l, the image of God, after which he Vv'as made, had a real and univerfal dominion over all things. And it feems as evident tliat God appeared to man at firft in his own fhape, which could not fail to convince him, that even as to his body he was made in the image of QoD, that is, in fuch a form as God did at that time, and would frequently after affume, in order to converfe with men. This he did v/ith 4da?n while innocent, and alfo ^fter he fmned,— with 0?/«, who is faid to go out from the prefence of the Lord after the dialogue betwixt God and him,—- ^a Abraham, Jacob, Jofhua, Gideon, Mamaby Ezekiel, Daniel, and feveral other of the Prophets. This could be no common vViigel, for he is always called JE.HQVAK, — not the Father, nor the Spirit, for rea- sons given above ; therefore it muft have been Jejus Chrift, v^'ho made thefe appearances in human foim, yet called the Lord' God, as a prelude of hi? ( 75 ) his appearance in real fielh in the fullnefs of time, whom the Apoftle fays, was (&od manifefted ih the ftefli. When he who ap{)eared is promifcuoufly cal- led GdD and Angel, it is plain that J ejus Chrifl is meant. In that inftance of Jacob bleffing Jafeph*^ fons, it was proved that God and Angd are the fame, and it is equally confpicuous that Jefus Chr'ift is meant by both, from the terms which Jacob expreffes himfelf in, which are only appli*- cable to Jcfus Chrift^ in the common language of revelation. "The Angel" or meflenger, tliis is emphati*' cally applied to Chr-ift by Malachl — {a) " The Lordy whom ye feek, iliall fuddenly come to his temple : Even the mejfenger of the covenant^ whom ye delight in.'* The Angel that redeemed me,^ my km/man redeemer. This is a name peculiar to Chrifty of whom that inftitution of redemption by kinfmen. among the Jews, was a fliadow. Job, who lived in thefe ancient periods with Jacob, makes an ex- cellent difcovery of the fame character of Cbrijl.'^-^ {b) " I know, faith he, that my redeemer liveth, (I know my kinfman redeemer) and that he ihali itand upon the earth.'* (The omega Ihall rife from the earth.) This is certainly applicable to none but Chrifl, whofe day both Jacob and Job, (as well as Abrahairi) faw afar off, and was glad. I T is further evident that Chr'ijl is meant in the text, from his character of a Jhepherd being fo plainly exprelTed in it. This Cbrijl himfelf chal- lengeth as his oiHce, in a peculiar manner,—" I am ia) Mai iti. i. [b] Job xlx. aj. ( 76 ) am the good fhepherd." The Pfalmift and Pro- phets often fpeak of him under this name.— " The Lord is my Ihepherd. He Ihall.feed -his flock like a fhepherd." And Jacob calls him " the mighty of Jacob , t]\t fhepherd, the ftone of 7/?^.** Jacob, and his feed, are denominated the J^oci of ChriJ}. « Thou leddeft thy flock, by the hand of Mofes and Aaron ;" whicli privilege, Jacob on his deathrbed very thankfully acknowledgeth his part of: " The God, before whom my fathers Abra- ham and Ifaac did viralk, — -the God that fed vie, all my life long unto this day, — the Angel that redeemed me from all evil." It is hence evident,that yefis Chrifi led and guided Abraham and his poflie- rity in all their peregrinations, and it is he w^hom they worfliipped as their God and king* God £iid to Mofes, if) " Behold, I fend an An- gsl before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared* Beware of him, and obey his voice ; provoke him not, for he will not pardon your tranfgreflions, for my name is in bimJ* (in the midft of him.) This, with what remains of the paragraph, comes in fo •abruptly in this chapter, Vvdthout connection with what goes before or follows it, that fome are of opinion, it properly belongs to the 3 3d chapter, where Mofes is begging of God to let him know how the people fllould be guided into the land he had proniifed them. God tells him " his pre- fence fliould gov/ith them," and here he promifes to fend his Angel to lead them, in whom his name is. Now, as his prefence muft mean Imnfelf ; fo the name of God is put for himfelf by the Pfalmift, " The name of the God of Jacob defend thee.** And (r) Exo. xxiii, 20, ii. ( 77 ) And as his najiie was in the Angel, it mufl intimate a real in-dwelling of Deity in him. There can no reafon be given, why Chrijl might not have Deity dwelling in him in his angelic characfler, as well as after he became flefli, when it is faid, " in him (kvelleth all the fuUnefs of the God-head (Deity) bodily^ That is, in him who now had a real body. B Y the name of God, we are to underftand that defcription he hath given of himfelf in revelation, whereby he is known to men ; and this, is only in Jefiis Chrift, whofe character is the fum of revela- tion. The name of God is fo in him, as he can be known only by him. This Chriji affirms him- felf. " No man knoweth the Father, but he to whom the Son doth reveal him." Malacbi fays, " The jiame of the Lord fliould be great among the Gentiles ; and that in every place incenfe and a pure offering fhould be offered up unto his 7ia?Ji€ by the heathen.'* This muft refer to the clearer and more general difcoveries of Jefus Chrift in the gofpel, and the homage and worfliip given to him by the great number of Gentile converts to chrif- tianity. When Chrift prays the Father to "glo- rify his iV('/;;;ed to lead them agairift the formidable nations,which he had fornierly promifed to drive out before them. 'This chafa(fter is fo much the fame with the '*' Captain of falvation,** given to Chr'ift in the New Teftament, that none can doubt it was he who appeared to joJJma. H E alfo appeared to Manoah^ and called himfelf by a name^ which, by the Prophet Jfalah^ is given to Jefus. (^fj " Why alkeft thou after my name (faith he to ManoaJS) feeing it is wonderful ?" as in the margin, {g) " His name (even the child that Ihould be born, and the fon given) fliall be called WONDERFUL." _^oj^^^- From (/) ludg. xlii. ig. {g) Ifa, ix. 6- ( 82 ) From thefe examples, it is plain that it was J ejus ChriJ}^ who made the appearances, and claim- ed the honom's of Deity. And were it necelTary, we might, to the teftimony of the Apoftles and Prophets, add the fuffrage of the ancient Jews and chriftian Fathers, who afcribe thefe expreflions of fcripture to the word of God,— the Me?nra or Logos, — and often to the Me^ab, where he is re- prefented in a vifible rhanner converfing with men, or coming to fave them. Now, among the an- cient Jews, the Memra or Logos, (that is the word of God) often fignifies God himfelf, — fomething in and of God, — fome divine -principle belonging to the effence of God, whereby he tranfacls his affairs with creatures : It alfo with them fignified a glorious Spirit, fuperior to all angels, in whom God put his name, — in whom' he re/ided in 2i ■pecu\i2LV manner, as in a habitation, which they called the Shekinah. Both thefe ideas may be united in the MeJJiah. ITowever, it is certain, that thele fcriptures, where God is reprefented in a viiible manner, eminently, 'as a Saviour to his people, have been interpreted concerning C/^r//?, by ancient Jews, chriftian Fa- thers, and the Apoltles themfelves. From which we may conclude, that proper Deity is included in his charad:er : For thefe ^ ancient Jews and facred writers, * The Jeij! fuppofed fcmefhing very extraorcJinary and divine in \ht letters which make the word Jehovah, and the higheft profaaanon tor any to pronounce them, but the h'tgh-priejl once a ^•ear ; they therefore ntrer wrote or pionounced the word, but fubftimtea the word Adonai inftead of it. And this conceit they Cdiried lo tar, hs io in)^}.;ine that whoever could pronounce them tr.olv, might wo.k miracles, and coniroul nature at pleafure. Hence they pretend to account for the power our Saviour had to ■work. mTacles bv this forged iTory ; \\\^a he gaining admiflion into the ten'ple, itole liie r.ame jEHCVi^ n, tightly wrote and pointed, ■as it fiiould be prononced, and by virtue of this divine fecret wrought his ninacles, and eiigiit hav« wrtught as many as he would. ( 83 ) writers, had fuch an awful fenfe of the tranfcend- ent excellency of the Great God, and of his jea- loufy for his own name and honour, that they would not dare to attribute his moft fublime titles, characters, and glories to any mere creature, or to any thing which had not true and proper Deity. Therefore to deny thefe glorious titles, Jehovah, Lord God, the God of Ifrael^ &c. to be- long to Chr'ifi, or to interpret them into fuch a diminutive fenfe as may belong to a created being, without unity to Deity, is to deny the moft plain and obvious fenfe and meaning of both the jacrcd 'writers and ancient "Jews, B u T I muft remove another difficulty, which fome perhaps will reckon infurmountable on this plan. " He who fuftains the character of God under the Old Teftament, often fpeaks of another of an inferior chara<5ter, and promifes to fend him^ which is no other than J ejus Chrift. Now if Chrijl be the fpeaker, he muft fpeak of himfelf^ — promife to {cndhimfelf, &c." The difficulty here is far tiom being jnfiipera- ble, if one thing is duly attended to, that wherever he is promifed, as thc/eed of the icoman^ — of Abra- ham or Davidy — as the righteous branchy — a fon, or fervanty — or whatever other name, they all refer to that part of his oeconomical character, in which he appeared to be inferior to God, in that ftate of humiliation he had to undergo for the lalvation of mankind. There is tlierefore no incons-ruitv .' . . . . o < m his afluming the majefty oi Deity ^ and yet fore- telling his tranfaflions in that low and abafcd cha- racter, which he waj to appear in as the fervant of God, and Saviour of men. This idea will appear ftrange, ( 84 ) ftrangc, perhaps, to them who have not accuftomed themfelves to read the Old Teftameint in that view : But a little ferious attention will reconcile them to it as a truth, which is intelligible and plain in itfelf. Let fuch only conlider thefe paffages of the Old Teftament, where Jefus Chrifl under the title of Jehovah makes promiies, and foretels events concerning what he would do for the church in" future times, which he ijefiis Chriji) performed and fulfilled in his own peribn, and are exprefsly applied to him in the New Teftament. This will clearly fhew, that while he was fuftaining the ma- jefty oi Deity, as the God and king of Ifrael, and ipeaking of another, (as it would appear at firft iight to the inattentive reader) that it was himfelf under another charad:er, in which he was to appear for the fulfilling the great purpofes of God con- cerning mankind. A few examples will make this abundantly evident. (^) "And ye fliall know that I am the Lord your God, — I will pour out my Spirit upon all iiefli, and your fons and your daughters fhall pro- phefy, — and whofoever fliall call on the name of the Lord (Jehovah) fliall be delivered ; for in Mount Zion and in Jerujahm fliall be deliverance, as the Lord hath faid ; and in the remnant whom the Lord Ihall call." The Apoftle Feter apphes the whole of this to that extraordinary effufion of the Spirit at Pentecoil, which Chrift had promifed that he v/ould fend when he went away. And Paul exprefsly applies what is faid by Jehovah in Joel to Jefus Chriji. Having mentioned thefe words, — " Who- (/>) Joel ii. 2,7,-31. ( 85 ) (/) " Whofoever fliall call on the 7iame of the JUadj ih-sM be faved,'* he prel'eatly accommodates them to him who brought glad tidings of good things to both Jews and Gentiles, in whom they Ihould be- lieve, which can be no other than {k) Jefus Chriji,, After the Pfalmift had given a fummar}^ of God's wonderful works among the children of Ifrael, he fays, {I J " This is the hill God defireth to dwell in ; Jehovah will dwell in it for ever ; The chariots of God are twenty thoufand, — the^ Lord is among them as in Mount Sinai, — thou haft aicended on high, thou haft led captivity cap- tive, and received gifts for the rebellious alfo, that the Lord God might dwell among them." This in the very words of the Flafmift is applied to (jri) Jefus Chrift by the Apoftle. («) " Jehovah reign eth, ' let the earth be glad, — confounded be they that ferve graven images : WOi'fliip him all ye Gods.'* This paflage points out the glory of the Gentile nations, when falvation fliould be brought to them by Jefus Chrifl, and their idolatry deftroyed by the fuccefs of his gofpel. Then the commandment is to the Gods to worfhip him. It no ways aftecls the pre- fcnt argument, whether the Gods mentioned here, are Angels, or princes of the Gentiles ; it is plain, that whether or both be meant, they are command- ed to worlhip Jehovah that reigneth. But the Apoftle interprets this of Chrift, (o) and applies the very words of the Pfalmift to him. A G A I N, (i) Rom X. X2, 13. {k) Cim. Ifa. Ixi. i, c. with Luke iv. T7, I?, 19. (/) Pla. Ixviii, 7,— i2. (w) Eph. iv. 7,-11. [r] Pla. xcvii. 1,— 7. ((?j Heb. i. 6. C 86 ) ■ Again, the Pfalmift foretelling the glory of that time, when Jews and Gentiles Ihotild be one church under Chnft^ fays, (f) " The heathen fhall fear the name of the Lord, and all kings of the earth thy glory: The Lord fhall declare his «^;«£? in Zion^ and his praife in Jerufale?n, when the peo- ple are gathered together, and the kingdoms (of the Gentiles) to ferve the Lord . Of old haft thou laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of thy hands ; they fhall perifti, but thou' art the fame, &c. This is alfo applied to {q) Chr'ift % the fame Apoftle. It is univerfally acknowledged, even by the Jews^ that the 2d Pfalm is a defcription of the kingdom and government of the Mejfiah. And as kings and governors are there required to yield obedience to him, or be punilhed for rebelhon againft him, their fovereign, it is evident^ he is not only king in Zion, but governor over the heathen to the utmoft ends of the earth. The way the feventy render this paiTage, makes it more plain. (r) " But I am appointed king under him, upon his holy hill of Zion, to make known the confti- tution of Jehovah : For Jkhovah hath faid un- to me, &c." From which it appears, that all go- vernment was then in the hand of Cbrijl, as well as it is now, which he affirms himfelf. " The Father iudc^eth no man ; but hath committed all judgment (government) unto the Son.'^ The Pfalmift fays, — " Thou art my king, O Gob, conunand deliverances for Jacob.'" ?la. xliv. and in the fame Pfalm adds, '• For thy fake we arc (p)Vii.6.i. jj, 16;— aj. {q) Heb. i. 10, 11, i;. (r) Pu- ii, 6, ?. ( 87 ) are we killed all the day long,\v(eare counted as-flieep fo^ the .flaughtcr." , Paul cites thefe words, when h'e.is .flipwing how impofllble it was to feparate him and" the belie-sdng Romans from the love of Chrift. "Wliich fhcws that he who was the God and king of Ifrael^ is the fame Jefus Chrift^ for whofe false the faints mFau??> time-fuffered tribulation, diftrefg, perfecution, &c. Rom. viii. 35, 36. ■,t; I T is obvious to every attentive reader, that one of the moft ftriking defcriptions we have concern- ing God in revelation, is given by Ifaiah, (s) Whofe glory, faith he, filled the earth,— whom feraphs adored as Lold. of the whole earthj—rwho is called the king, the Lord of hofts.;;^ Yet this is applied in the plaineft terms to Jefus Chrift by John, (/) "Thefe things faid Ifaiai, when he faw his glory and fpake of him.'* ■rr ; r! .; ;■ , .j' .. . . ' (u)- "The wildernefs, and: the folitary place fhall be glad, the defart Ihall rejoice and blolfom as the rofe^ the glory of Lebanon ihall be given to it the excellency of Carmel 4nd Sharon, they fliail fee the glory of the Lord, and the excellency of our God. Your God will come with a recompenfe, he will come and fave you. The ears of the deaf fliall be unftopped, and the eyes of the blind fhall be opened, &c.** This plainly refers to the mira- cles wrought by Chrift, and fo applied by him- felf. (t-) (-u;) " B E H o L D, I will fend my meffenger, and he ihall prepare the way before me : 'And the Lord, whom ye feek, fliall fuddenly come to his temple : Even (v) Matr. XI. 4, 5. (ouj Mai. in, i. ( m ) Evm the meffetiger of the covenant, whom ye de- light in : Behold, be fliall come, faith the LoTip i*i|f Hosts/* This text is a demonftrative proof V)f what I am pleading for, and a fair anfwer to the objection propofed above. For without ad- emitting that he who is fpoken of, is alfo the -fpeaker, it is irapoffible to make it good fenfe, or agreeable to the fcope of revelation. The mon- ger or Afigel of the covenant, is no other than the Lord Je/us, whofe way Johi was fent to prepare ; -yet the Lord of Hosts fays, " I will lend my melTenger, and hefhall prepare the way before me." Therefore the natural meaning is, that the Loup O^ ttosTs is declaring howfoon he would appear '•in the character of the Mes.siah, who had been roften promifed to the jfeiusj TLnd whom they vv^ere at this time waiting and wifhing for. I SHALL only add one inftance more to this pur- pofe. The eleventh chapter of Ifaiah is a glorious defcription of the charafter and kingdom of the MeJ/tab, there called the ftem and root of Jeffe, But after we are told what great things he would -do in his church, by the Spirit Jehovah refting upon him ; in the 1 2th chapter (which fhould not have been divided from the former, if the fenfe had ibeen attended to by him that divided them) we are told, what the church would fay in confe- -quence of fuch privileges. "Behold, God, my fahation : I will truft, and not be afraid ; for Je- hovah, Jehovah, is my ftrength and fong, he alfo is become my falvafwn (]esvs). Therefore with joy Ihall ye draw water out of the wells of falvation." This is the great change! He who .bore the character of Jehovah, is become Jesus the faviour, whofe promifes, charader,. and work, ^re wells of falvation, out of which, h^ people ( 8? ) fliall for ever draw water with joy. The conclufiOn is, " ling to Jehovah ; for he hath done excel- lent things : This is known in all the earth. Cry- out and ihout, thou inhabitant of Zio7i : For great is the holy one of Ifrael in the midft of thee«" By Jehovah becoming Jesus, he lofes neither the titles nor glory due to Jehovah. This being fo plain here, and in many other paffages, that it will be hard to find what profitable ufe can be made of them, if they are taken in a different point of view. I T feems pretty evident to me, that he who h fo often called the holy one of Ifrael^ is the Lord Jefus Cbrifi, The epithet holy one^ is frequently given him in both Teftaments. In view of his fufferings and death, he fays, (a-) " My fleih fhall reft in hope, for thou wilt not leave my foul in hell | neither wilt thou fufFer thine holy one to fee cor- ruption." This is not fpoken of David, for Peter exprefsly tells us, that it u-as fpoken (y) " of the refurredion of ChriJ}.'* And Paul Hiys, " it could not be faid of David, who fell afleep, was laid unto his fathers, and faw corruption : But he ( Jefus) whom God raifed again, faw no cor- ruption. Thou fpakeft in vifion to thy holy one^ and faidll, I have laid help upon one that is mighty, &c.** The fequel of the Pfalm, and the ufe the Apoftle- makes of the paflage, fhew that Jefus, Davitl^i feed, is here intended. (2) " I know thee who thou art, the holy one of God. But ye denied the holy one, and the juft. But ye have an unclion from the holy one" This was the fon of Gop, who is fo defigned : Now, fon of God, and king of Jfraely M wer«^- (x) Pfa. xvi. 9, 10, (y) Ads ii. 27, 31. ibid. xiii. 35. 36, 37, Pfa. ixxxix. 19. (z) Mark i. a^. Aits lii. 14. i Julin H.'ao. { 90 ) were titles of the fame perfon. Hence the Jcivs upbraided our Lord upon the crofs, " if thou be the fin of God, come down from the crofs : If he be the king of Ifrael, let him come down from the crofs." Perhaps fome of the fame multitude, who a little before cried Hofanna, blcffed is the king of Ifrael, &c. Nathaniel is exprefs to this purpofe, " Rabbi, thou art the, fin of God, thou art the king of Ifrael.'* The fin of God is the king of Ifrael, who is the fame with the holy one of Ifrael j for thefe are frequently given as titles of the fame per- fon, and even in the fame verfe, " I am the Lord, your holy one, the creator of Ifrael, your king.'* With this title is alfo joined that of redeemer, which determines who we are to underftand by the holy one of Ifrael. {a) " Thus faith the Lord, the re-' deemer of Ifrael, his holy one. For thy maker is thy huiband, (the Lord of hofts is his name) and thy redeemer, the holy one of Ifrael.''^ The Pfalmift fays, they tempted God, and limited the holy one of Ifrael ; and the Apoftle fays, it was Chrift they tempted. Thefe things conhdered, put it beyond doubt, that by the holy one of Ifrael, is meant the Lord Jefus, the king and governor of the Jeivifh Theocracy, From which it muft follow, that all the cha- racters that are joined with this, as belonging to the iiimc perfon, properly belong to the Lord Jefus, As the name Jeho'vah. (b) " Thus faith Jehovah, the holy one of Ifrael, and his maker, &c. As for our redeemer, the Lord of hojls is his name, the holy one of IfaeL TJie heathen fliall know that I am the Lord, (Jekovah) the holy one of Ifrael. ^^ He [a\ Ifa. xlix, 7, and Jiv. 5. '(^j ifa. xlv. ti, and ^ivi:. 4 Ezc. rxxix. 7, ( 9' ) He was the objeftof tfraeVs worfKip. — (r) " Untd thee will I fing with the harp, O thou holy one of Ifraciy He was their defence, hope, and ftay.— id) " For the Lord is our defence t And the holy one of Ifrael is olir king." Againft him they fin- ned in all their departures from the laws he had given them. — {e) " They provoked the holy one of ifrael unto anger. They have caft away the law of the Lord of hofs, and defpifed the word of the holy one of IfraelJ*^ This argument, if properly confidered, will amount to a Ifrong proof of the Deity of Jefus Chr'ift^ in" as much as he was the God and. governor of Ifrael^ who had given them laws, and punifhed them for their frequent rcbel-^ lions,— whofe holy prefence they cquld not endure when difpofed to hn, and therefore cry, " caufe the holy one of Ifrael to ceafe from before us.'* These ate but a few of the many inflances that might be given, to which, thofe in the lail fcction relating to the fame fubjecl may be added^ to flicw that he who fpeaks, or is fpoken of by thq facred writers, and is called Jehovah, Lord God^ the God and king of Ifrael^ kc, is no other than Jesus Christ : For as the fame things which are Ipoken of, or by him in the Old Teftamcnt, under ' thefe fiicred titles, are applied to Jefus ChriJ} in the New Teftamcnt, it mult be him "who bears thefe titles in the Old. And by a fcrious and impartial attention, we will lind, that in all the Old Tefta- ment, efpecially the Pialms, and fome of the Pro- phets, wherever Jehovah, God, or any other term by which the fupreme Being is expreffed, there is fomcthing predicated of him, tliatis either eiSprefsly (c) PU. Ixxi. 3Z fy) ihid. Ixjcxix. iS, fee alfo Ifa. x, cso,— xi:. i6,— xvii. 7,— xxix. 19,— xli. 44. {e) Ih. 4, 4.-7. 24. fee' ebap. XXX. 11, iii^— xxxi x. ( 92 j exprefsly applied to Chrijl in fome other text, ot is a part of his character and oiEce in the oeconomy of grace and providence. Take for inftance, all thofe epithets given to Jehovah of a rock^ ^^fi^g^^ redeemer^ deliverer^ defence, Jhepherd, Jhield, J^^^oug hold, faviour, helper, healer, light, leader, guide, holy one, horn of falvdtion, hope^ inheritance, law-giver, judge, king, Szc, all which are fo many parts of Chri/l's character. And hence, by a general rule, which muft hold, if the fcriptures are intelligible, the whole Old Teftament will be found a defcription of the charader and works of Jesus Christ. That wherever there is any part of a Pfalm, or other pafTage, applied to Jefus Chrijl in the New Teftament, as fpoken either of, or by him in the Old Teftament, then, not only the whole of that Pialm, or other paffage, but every other Pfalm or paflage, that is parallel to thofe which are ex- prefsly applied to Chrift, muft as certainly be fpoken of, or by him, as that which is exprefsly applied to him. If the fubject be the fame, or has ji relation thereto, the perfon muft be the fame who fpeaks, or is fpoken of. This rs the true a?ialogy- of faith, to lead into the fcope and fenfe of fcrip- ture, with refpecl to him who is the leading fub* jed of the whole. W H A T I have been endeavouring to illuftrate, would have appeared perfedly clear, if the word rendered falvation in the Old Teftament, had been read Jesus, which it really is. As for example, Ifaiah fays, — (f) " The Lord Jehovah is my- ftrength ai^ fong, he alfo is become my falvation, (Jesus), {g) « In that day fhall this fong be fung m (/) Ifa. xii. ». {g) ibid. xxvl. i. f 93 ) in the land of Judah, we have a ftrong city, fal- vation will God appoint for walls and bulwarks J** Keep out the words God and/cr, which are only fupplements of the translator, and it readsv— " Salvation (Jesus) will appoint walls and bul- wax'ks.'* It would have been as plain in fuch texts, of which there is a great number, that Jesus was Jehovah the ki7ig of Ifrael^ as that he died and rofe again, appear in the gofpels. The moft ftub- born prejudice could not then have denied, that he had an exiftence before he was conceived of the virgin, — or believed him to be only an inferior Deity. While the Old Teftament could fcarcely be opened any where, but they might find him fpoken of in charaders fuitable only to Almighty God , — Afcriptions which obvioully point out Deity^ agreeably blended with others, which imply his character and office as the redeemer and Savio^ur of men. Thus, as Emmanuel, he is as certainly, tho' not with the fame degree of clearnefs, defcrib- cd in the Old Teftament, as in the New, and in fuch terms as cannot be applied with any pro- priety to any other but Jesus Christ, I SHALL now only mention a few textfi froni the New Teftament, which prove that Jefus Clyrift exifted as the God and king of the church, under the old difpenfation, — the guide and hope of his people in all ages. When our Lord told the Jews, that " Abr^y ham rejoiced to fee his day : And he faw it, and was glad ;" They reckoned it impollible, and told him, " Thou art not yet fifty years old, and haft thou feen Abraham ?" Yea, replied our Lord, '* he^ fore Abraham was, I am." He does not deny, that aa a man, he appeared to be lefs than fifty yeai's old. ( 94 ) old, but at the fame time aflerts his fre-exijlence before Abraham, and in the fame words, which he did under the title of Jehovah, the God of Ifrael^ to Mofes, whom he commanded to fay, "I am hath fent me unto you/* And as Chrifl oftener than once calls himfelf fo, after he appeared in flefh, it cannot be doubted that he is the I am that fpoke with Mofes, And this is further clear from what the Apoftle fays of Mofes, that "■ he choofe rather to fuffef affliclion with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleafures of fin for a feafon ; efteeming the re- proach of Christ greater riches than all the trea- sures of Egypt. ^* In what fenfe Mofes going with the people of God, can be called the reproach of Christ, without admitting the truth I am plead- ing for, I cannot underiland. The reproach of Chrij} has always been the fame. Thofe who bear at, muft forfake their attachments to the leading interefts of this world. As Mofes forfook the trea- fures of Egypt, fo the Apoftle exhorts the Hebreivs to go forth unto Chrifl without the camp, bearing his reproach. The Corinthians are admonilhed not to tempt Chrifly as fome of the Ifrael'ites did in the wilder- nefs, which certainly fuppofes that Christ was their leader. Peter, fpeaking of the falvation which the ancient believers looked and longed for, fays, *' The Prophets (from Adam to that period) pro- phefied of the grace that fliould come, fearching what manner of time the fpirit of Christ which was in them did fignif^y^, when it teftified before hand the fufferings of Christ, and the glory that fhould follow." The fame fpirit of Cbrijl, that taught the Apodles in the New Teftament, in- fpired C 95 ) fpired the Prophets in the Old. Hence, CJmJ} is the author of all the religion we have in the Bible : The fole guide of thofe who were the cliofen in- ftruments of publifliing it : The univerfal fliepherd of the church, — this is his characler in both tefla- ments : The door by which Prophets, as well as Apoftles, Old as well as New Teftament faints have entered into the fold, — by whom they were faved, conducted, and inflrucled in the knowledge of God . From the lirft to the laft faint on earth, their knowledge of God muft come through this medium, — " Chrijl the fower of God, and the wif* dom of God.''* The power of God, in creating all things, and governing them,— in pardoning, fanc- tifying, fupporting, and comforting his people in all ages.— The wifdom of God ; not only as he is perfectly acquainted with the whole will of God ; but as he hath revealed and made it known to men. Hence, faid to be " madfe of God unto us wifdom. In him dwell all the treafures of wifdom and knowledge," perfonally and ceconomically. He is not only poiiefled of infinite knowledge and underftanding, whereby he can view the whole length and breadth of the mind and will of God , in the moft perfect manner : But infinite wifdom and prudence, to execute the purpofes of God in creation, government, and redemption, with un- erring fitnefs and Ikill ; v/hereby he brings the will (.f God to the view of intelligent creatures ; and for this reafon is fo often called in fcripture the WORD or Logos of God, a name by which the Jews knev/ him who governed the world in general, and the afl'airs of their church and nation in particular ; and to whom, in the New Tefta- ment, is afcribed, the,"crcating and difpofal of all •things. The i 96 ) The Apoflle's defcription is fo plain and full, that it's furprifmg any fhould refule to aflent to this truth. He tells us, that all things in heaven and earth were made by him, and for him : And add§, " he is before all things, and by him all things coniift. And he is the head of the body, the church ; who is the beginning, the firft-born from the dead, that in all things he might have the pre-eminence, for it pleafed the Father that in him Ihould all fulnefs dwell.'* In favour of this caufe, feveral other names which are given to jfefus Cbri/l, may be applied with* great propriety. As A/j}ha and Omega, — the beginning and the ending, — the Jir/l and the h/i. All thefe, I humbly conceive, have an immediate refpeet to his creatitTg and governing all things, — his managing all the difpenfitions of God, and bringing them to a glorious conclulion at laft. The word Amen, which will bear no tranfla* tion, and is therefore the fame in all languages, is of the fame import with " the truth,'" a deiignation which Chri/l appropriates to himfelf, denoting that he ivS the author, as well as the fcope of all the truth contained in revelation. The attentive confideration of the firft twelve Terfes of John\ gofpel, will convince any cne of the truth I have been illuftrating. Jefus ChriJ}, who is there called the Word, is defcribed as hav- ing exiftence with God before any thing elfe exilled, and his giving e^xiftence to all things,— being the light and life of all in general, — his an- cient relation to the Jewijh nation, v/ho ai'e called his own, — ^his divine power in giving the right and privilege of adoption to thefe who are made the chil- dren ( 97 ) drctt of God. That all thefe are faid of him, before his appearing in flefli, is plain from the narrative itfelf, and the way this paragraph is clofed, by adding, " And the ivord was made FLESH, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, &c." To add this, had been a manifeft impropriety, if the things formerly faid, had not referred to a time prior to his being made flefli. Beiides, it is further added, " No man hath feen God at any time ; the only begotten Son, which is in the bofom of the Father ; he hath declared him." This plainly fhews, that all the knowledge ' ever any had of God, m any period oi ^imc, came' by him, who, iince he alfumed flefli, is common- ly called the Son of God* I AM perfuaded the impartial reader will be fatisfied from fo many fcripture teftimonies, that Jefus'Chrift not only made the world, but hath governed all things, and the church in particular in all ages, — did all the mighty works, and aflum- ed all the titles due only to God. I should more particularly prove, that the feints under both Teftaments worfhipped him as their God and ^mg. Having proved that he was the God, and king of Jfrad^ it follows, that they worfliipped him as fuch; Nay, they were exprefs- ly prohibited from worfliipping any other than the holy one^ who is called the creator of Ifracly and their king^-^their redeemer, — the king of glory ^ — the king^ the Lord of hojls, — the king of Zion. All which are applied to Jefus Chrift^ who owns himfelf to be the king of the Jeivs : And approves of Na- thaniel% addrefs, " Thou art the Son of God, thou art the king of Ifrael,** The proper enjoyment of N thefc ( 98 ) thefe titles,?, by right, giy^s him rthejuilcft claim' to the iworfhip and praifes of IJrad,' W H A T -evafion will be : fomid, if inftaijceg ar**- pr^bduced of the pirophefies concerning the worfliip that ihould • be given to God; literally fialfiUed in ] him ; and the moft folemn ads? of wOrfliip imme- diately directed to him ? The Pfalmift fays, " Out • of the mouth of babes and fucklings haft thou ■ ordained ftrength, becaufe of thine enemies, ,&c/* This was fulfilled in the moft ftlriking manner in ■ the praifes of the children;, who cried, *' Hofannay : to the Ion of Davids Which honour being qu* vied by his eiiemies, the y(*zi;j, he refers them to this prophecy in the Pfalms, a9> fulfilling in their prefence- r iL F TE R- the Pfalmift,, in a- moft ! aniiT\atilng de- fcripfeion, had fltewed the rbeai^ty) and grace of i the church, and the majeily ^of her-i/'/?^'^, he,:.ad<^ij: " Thc;-i/;?^.£hall greatly de^relthy beauty _r..Fo^Jije'. is thy Lord ^ and %vorfiip.thod:'li^my.y, :>rij lln b'j .What e v e r relation that magnificent de- feriptioh in the yad, Pfalm m'iy 'haye:tO'«S'o//?»w^i 33 the title would infinuate, I. fhall not determine ; \^t it is certain, the afci^iptiDns are fuch as will ofily fuit a charafter that .is,:truely ditin^, ;The pcrpetu'al and univerfal'donlinion, mentioned there-* in, is only apphcable to Cbrift^ whofe " dominion is an everlafting =dominioA,-and. whofe V kingdom ruleth overall." And what'isfaid concerning; the bringing of prefentS, and offering gifts by^eaftern kiTigs, was literally accompliftied at his birth, whert the fages from the {b) eaft^ptefcnted their gifts^ "3(10.6. ivorjhipped hhn, " O cbiMi), •/' Matt. il. IX, ( 99 ) {c) <' O CQME,. let us worihip and bow down : Let us kneel before the Lord (Je-HOvah) our , maker : for he is our God, and we are the people ..cf his pafture, and theiheep of his hand : to-day •if ye will hear his voice, &c.'* If the charaderof ^ ^^ej)berd, fo plainly implied here, is reckoned not iufficient to limit the worflnp to Jefus Chrift^ it will certainly put it beyond doubt, when the Apoftle , applies the paffage exprefsly to him. {d) In the'New Teftament, we. find divine worlhip given him by faints, both in earth and heaven. I fhall not take notice of all the inftanccs of wor- fliip and homage given him by the people, when they were under furprize from the grcatnels of his miracles : This, perhaps, would be reckoned by fome too low a kind of worihip, to argue the Deity of the objed from : But I ihall feled an exam- V pie or two of divine worihip folemnly dire(5ted,to him ; one is, that remarkable inftance of Stephen^ who, when his enemies were floninghim to death, could venture his departing foul, with every con- cern of his, in eternity, to the care of Jefus Chrijfy and with his laft breath, addrefTed him in folemn prayer, in behalf of hirafelf and his murderers - \e) " And they ftoned Stephen, calling upon, and faying, Lord Jefus recehe 7ny Spirit. And . he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lordy lay not this fm to their charge.'* I liave omitjted the word God in this text, becaufe it fliould not be there ; and the EngUfh reader will fee that the tranilators, who fupplied it, have been fo fair as to put it down as a fupplement. But for what reafon it fhould be there at all, is more than any friend (c) Pf;i. xcv. 6, 7. {i) Hcb. iii. ;, 8. and iv. ?.. («) A<5ts vIk 59» 6o- { 100 ) friend to the Deity of fefus Chrift can account for, as it weakens the e\'idencc in the text for Qhrijl being the object of Stephen* s worfliip, which is fo conlpicuous without it, as the greateft enemy to Cbriji*s divinity cannot deny it, if he will admit that Luke fpoke good fenfe. His words are literally thus, " And they ftoned Stephen^ cryifigy Lordjefics receive my Spirit** Another plain text to this purpofe is, what Titer concludes his fecond epiftle with. *' Grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jefiis Chrift t To whom be glory , both new and tvsrmore. jimenJ* | A N D the inhabitants of heaven do alfo account the Lamb worthy of divine adoration.— (y) " And I beheld in the midft of the throne, a Lamb, as it had been flain, — ^and when he had taken the Book, the four Beafts, and four and twenty Elders fell dcivn before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which arc the prayers of the faints,^ — hym^, with a loud voice. '...,. [f) Rev. V. 6.— 14. t JiiflV 1.54. ^* Thou, Lord, who knoweft the hearts, ffiew wheihcr of ihefe two ihou haft chofeo, &c." That it was Ckriji' who is here folemnly addreHed feems plain. (iftO From his challenging the fame perfe(5ti©n of knowing the reins and the hearts, Rev. i'. 23, aj. whieh is here attributed to him. (sd.) From the fubjefl of tlie petition, viz. the appoiotirg an Apoftle» which was his office rs Lord and hetid of the church, and whon> Paul tell-iiis, h'id Cnlled him and all the oiher Apoilks to their (fliccs. Theic are many otler texts, which point cut t!ie worfhip of .f /;/{//,« few of them 1 fliail here cite. Matt, xxviii. 19* Luke xxiv.ji.jz. JohnT.sa,a3. A6l$ ix. ij, 14, 21. — 15.17. 1 Cor. i. a. Afls xix. 13, — iii, 6.^vii. 59. a Cor. xii. 8. Phil. ii. 10, 11, 19. ('ol. iii. II.— 17. a Thcff. ii. i6, 17. ' Tim, i. 12. c^ Tim; iv. j8, ^^. Ti«. i. 4. Heb. i. 6. 2 Pet. iii. 18, Pvtv. v. 6. 8,9, 10, II, i3.-^vii. 10. ( lOI ) voice, worthy is the Lamb that was flain, to receive fower, and riches^ and wifdom, and Jlrength^ and honour^ and glory ^ and bleJlng^-^Tind the four Beads faidj Amen. And the four and twenty Elders^// down (ind worjhipped him that liveth for ever and ever** lliefe laft words are part of the charadber Chrijl took to himfelf in the firft of the Revela- tions ; and therefore we may conclude, it is he who is meant, when they are fo often repeated in that book, and always with the higheft worlhip, adoration, and praife afcribed to him, both by ^mgels and men. A T the clofe of thefe revelations, Jefus, the divine, author of them, certifies John concerning the ac*- complifhment of the events. — {g) " He who tefli- fieth thefe things, faith, furely I come quickly." To which John replies in a mofl folemn addrefs, which every one who is longing for the coming of their Lord will join him in. Amen, Evenfo^ " come Lord Jesus." Were itnot that this fecbion is too long already^ the utility and advantages of this truth might be fhewed to the right knowledge of revelation, and the praftice of religion. It renders many texts plain and agreeable to the general fcope of fcrip- ture, which have been tortured ■w'ith unnatural expofitions, and been reckoned unintelligible, with- out the afliftance of figures and metaphors, a^ prolepfes (fpcaking of things before they were done)" or catachrefes, (calling God a man, angel, mef- fcngcr> captain, &c. without aclual unign to hu- man nature) which not one of a hundred that read the Bible knows any thing about. It makes an agreeable 4-1 Rev. xv.ii, ao, %i. ( 161 agreeable . c6nne:si6n. betwixt the Old. and "New Teilainent, aud' brings the fcope of both into an eafy point of view; "j arid cohfequently recohimends the duty of fearching the fcriptures to the un- ledrned part of mankind. The multiplicity ^f in- terpretations by commentators, and their contra- riety, have not only incumbered the fenfe of many palTages ; but given adverfaries occafion to- infult, as if the Bible was a volume of abfurd and incon- iiftent things, which muft difcourage fnany lincere inquirers after truth. Whereas the fcheme of revealed truth, par- ticularly what relates to Chr'ijl, is harmonioufly connected ; and the further light we get into any part ol his character, never fails to flied divine brightnefs over 'all the other parts taken in con- nexion : The terms which exprefs the character of Chrijl become familiar and plain, which have appeared dark, if not unintelligible. When we read of the light, fire, bright cloud, &c. in which God fpake,-— of his being light, — of his face, pre- fetice, glory, the- power of God, the w'lfdom of God, and many others, we know what idea fhould be prefixed to them, as various parts of /j/V character, who has managed all the difpenfations of provi- dence, grace, and mercy to the children of men. ^It tends greatly to exalt the character of C/6r//? in our conceptions, as it fpreads a luftre overall the parts of his glorious admiriiftration, in the various^rnnfaclioiis recorded in revelation. The more \^ ai-e acquainted with his government, the more juft honour will we put upon him : And be mo.re compleatly furniflied with anfwers to the ad- verfaries of his proper Deity, — fupport this part of pur chriftian profeflion, — .vindicate the honours of our ( ^n- ) our blefled Lor^i— invite fudi as havei appofed it through the prejudice of education, ^Joid others who are ignorant thfougk inattention to embiraccj the.tcut^h*, I;T nliuft alfo raife our; views of his wifdom and:; and Ipowev to. admiration. There- have been many. migli4t;y monarchies upon- earth, . but none in a pro-i pier fenjfe coiild ever bei called univer&I, but that o§ jff/us C/priJI, ■ who Ins without interruption been^ fupreine: ruler over all. He alone ■ continued ta reigin in^ fpite of deatli itfelf, which puts '■ a peiiod to the rule of other monarchis. In infinite wiidom;^ a^difncontroulable: power he has managed all na- tions, in all- then" various r.viciiiitudes that hav^e b0$n upon earth,. withou^t neglecting' the interefts ©^f^eityiadividualin the univerfal fyftem. And tho* .ti^e read[bnable part of his fubjecfs have al- waijrs acted as .free, agents, yet, byi the: providence ©f this fiipreme ruler, every thing has been fo direfted, as toianfwer the gi'eat ends of his gO" vernsnient, which- extends to the moft minute a^bns-. Nor hath the change of times oi' circumftances, — oppofiticn greater or lefler, ever made the leaft de- fed: in the unalterable principles on which he car- ries on his government, as well over the intellec- tual pov/ers of the mind, as the external adions of the body. H I s paternal love and care over his churcl., appear in raoft lively colours, through all the pe- riods of his adminiftration : Counterplotting 5^/^/7, the declared enemy of his people, by means every way fuited to their falvation and fafety, — raifing tip one Prophet after another, — and frequently lionourin'g them with appearances and manifefta- tions ( 104 ) tions of himfelf for their direction and comfort. Thus actually rejoicing in the habitable parts of the earth, and delighting to converfe with the fons of men : And in the fulnefs of time, conckfcended fo low, as to diveft himfelf of the form of God, the glorious Shickinah, in which he appeared, fpoke, and acted in the charader of God ; and take upon him the form of a fervant, — ^niake himfelf of no re- putation, and fiibrait to the ignominious death of the crofs. Here the Devil, and the powers of tliis world, his combined enemies, were permitted to wreck all the premeditated vengeance which their hellifli cunning could invent, or their tyranny- could execute. Notwithitanding, he ihewed their wifdom to be folly, and their power impotence ; he triumphed over death, the Devil, and all his agents : Rofe from the dead,- — eftablifhed upon the foundation of his own blood, the unerring plan of his future government, and perpetual reign over a kingdom of kings and priefts, who ihall for ever triumph in him as their king, who hath taken im to him his great power, and doth, and fiiall for ever reign. .■- FART r-S^^^f ^^^«^ ^^^^M ^-^ PART II. E C T L ?^K>S^ N this fecond part, I fliall endeavour to J£j J )2i fliew that the 7iames, or relative cha- S ]g[ raders, Father, Son, and Word, k.§0^j«( Holy Ghost, or Spirit, are defcrip- tive of the diftind parts they fiiftain in the DIVINE oeconomy,} revealed in the/acred word. O The :f The word occonomy, fo frequently ufed in this work, efpe- cially in the two laft pans, is compounded of two Greek words, oiKOS, which (Ignifies -i. honjc, and nomos, which fignifies a rule ox lavj. In its fenfe, it is a fcriptoral phrafe, ufed by God hiinfelf, Eze. xliii. lo, ir, iz. *' Thou fon of man, fhew \\\t houfe to the houfe of Ifrael, — (hew them the la'ws thereof, — and ai the erdifiances thereof. Behold, this is the law of the Houst,'* Oeconomy, or what God hath revealed concerninp his licufe, the church. The ideas commonly prefixed to it in Eng/iJIj are, ti) The management or government of a family or houie. (») Good hufbandry, or frugality in expence. (3) The method ufed in governing or ruling. (4) The cifpofition or arrangement of the parts of a work. (5) The taking meafares rightly for pjiring a fabric a convenient form. When 1 fpeak o( the divine (economy ^ 1 include the mod of tbefe ideas, as far fts they itave any re- lutioa ( 'o6 ) The divine fcheme of religion, which is only known by revelation, was gradually opened up from one period to another throughout the Old Teftament. At different times God furnifhed his people with frefli difcoveries concerning himfelf. Every age was bleft with fome new revelation of his characler, which, like the morning light, fliined more and more, until the noon-day glory, mani- fclled in the New Teftament, by the fun of righ- teoufnefs, the Lord Jesus Christ: "Whofe com- ing was foretold in every age, from the time that the original pair refided in paradife, to the preach- ing oi John the Baptifi, his immediate fore-runner. Among the many fublime things, faid by the Prophets concerning him, and the peculiar advan- tages that fhould attend the difpenfation of his gofpel, I have often admired the beauty of Ifaiah's defcriptions ; in otie of which, when fpeaking of the privileges the kingdom oiChriJl fliould enjoy, he fays, lation to.w'iat God hath revealed concerning the order and go- vernment of his works in general, and the church in particular, which in fcrip-ure is called his houfe : Or the whole of God's revealed di/penfation concerning Angels and men : And by Oeco- NOMiCAL, I underitand, what belongs to the regulation or ma>« iiagement of that difpenfation. Hence this term, in its (ignifica- lioB, points out the terms Father, Son, and Holy Ghoj}, as relative names, gracioufly a[luvicdtnfovereig7icondejcenfion in carrying on the great plan rtvealed by God in his ivord : And is oppofed to the common notion of thefe names, being natural or neeeffary, and ejjential in Deify, vjhich at once dettroys the freedom and fove- ie;gnty of God in all his difpenfations, wliich have any relation to thefe nanies. This much J thoo^ht recelTary, for the fske of fiich readers ^s migliinot be oCqiu;nt:t! wish the meaning of the word o economy, and in what fenle it is applied to this fuhjcd. And, I earneftly deli re the reader, before be goes further, to have a clear concep- tion of the idea dcfjgned by the ufe of the word, and carry it along with him attentively, in the further conlideration of this work, i 107 ) hys, (a) " It fliall bloffom abundantly, and rejoice, even w^th joy and finging; the glory of l^ebanajs fliall be' given into it ; the cxcell,ency of Cartml and Sharon.'" Then h^ introduces a iurprifing climax ! Not only fhould the fubftance of the moii Hvely fbadpws among the Jt^ivs be the privilege of this kingdom, tven their temple and conlcr crated things, which they boafled _of as the glory of Lebanon, Cannel, and Sharon : But, as if thefe were Im all things, he afcends to the quint effence of excellency and glory.—" They &all fee the glory oi tli-e Lord (Jehovah) t\\ii excellency o^ ^x^ God (Elohim).'* A more glorious difcovery than the moft llriking appearance of the Jeiv-ijh temple. They fhould fee him who is the divine jnedhnn^ that reprefents all the infinite perfections of Jehovah, — " They fliall fee the o-Zory of JehOiS VAH." Him, whofe character and work exhibit the glorious relations in which the d'nnne three ar^ made known to the church : — " They fhall fee th^ excellency of Elohim." W h e n we confider Jefus ChriJ? -as the medium of that knowledge we have of the divine perfec- tions, our ideas are confined to the notion of unity : For we cannot fuppofc more than o?2e pof" fefTed of infinite perfections or attributes. So that whatever we learn of divine perfections manifefted in ChriJ}, leads us to the unity of Jehovah, who alone i^ infinite, vnchangcable, and eternal. But when we learn the revealed relations GO0 ftands in to us, which are alfo made known in Chrift, re- velation leads us to the knowledge of a plurality pointed out in the M'ord Elohim, and clearly ex- prefi'ed in three particular relative names or cba^ racers i ya) ITa. XXXV. 4. C io8 ) rasters, which confine our ideas to the notion ot a flural'ity. To each of the three, revelation afcribeS a particular work, in the execution of the divine purpofes concerning men. In this Oeconorriv there is an inequality of character, a manifeft iub- ordination among the divine three, which muft be limited to the names they bear,— the work which revelation afligns to each, in the plan of redemption, — or to the relation each Hands in to mankind, as the objects of that redemption. I N this refpect, we may fafely, being agreeable to revelation, conlider a fuperiority and inferiority among the three, who, with relation thereto are called Father^ Son, 2.i\dHoly Ghoft. Notwithftanding, this revealed diftinction does by no means deftroy the unity of Deity ; nor does this ceconomical fubor- dination deftroy the equality of the divine three ; that is confpicuouily fupported throughout the fcrip- tures, which afcribe to each the na?nes, attributes^ works^ and ivorjhip, proper only to Deify, and which would be derogatory to the wifdom and honour of God, to allow any being but what is purely divine. With refpect to thefe, the wifdom of God is peculiarly difplayed, in the manner of fcripture phrafeology, and in no inftance that I remember more than in the phrafe, fo very common in the Old Teftament, Lord God, or Jehovah Elohim : Which at the fame time points out a plurality in the word Elohim, and the equality of that plura- lity, by being expreffed in the fame term. This would be very incongiuous, if there were the leaft inequality among thefe implied in the term. And aJl is confiftent with the unity of Deity, exprcffed in the word Jehovah. So that the divine wiity, plurality. ( 109 ) plurality^ equality, or famenefs, are all pointed out m the expre/Tion Jehovah ELoni>r. But the reader will fufFer me to clear this a little further, as it has an immediate relation to the fubjedl jn hand. A s it is very certain that the plural Elohim is not ufcd by chance, but is tiie fruit of choice, and fo muft be fignilicant, the greateft care is taken in fcripture to prevent folytheifm from being grafted on an expreffion which feems fo naturally to lead to it. Therefore that text, " Hear, O Ifrael, Jehovah, our Elohim, is one Jehovah,*' was to be of the gi'eateft moment among the Jews : They were to lay it up in their heart, — cauie their children to learn it, — write it on ^the pofts of their houfes, and front of their gates, — wear it as a lign upon their anus, and frontlets between their eyes,— lb important, that all their laws were ufliered in with it. And the value of this precept to that people, appears further from what our Lord fays of it, when interrogated. Which was the JirJ} and greatefl commandment ? he readily gave the prefe- rence to this, as the fiiil and higheft of the law, " Hear, O Ifrael, Jehovah, our Elohim, is one Jehovah." Now, as the noun Jehovah is fingular, and has no plural, there was not the leaft occaiion for fo folemn a declaration, that Jehovah is one^ — is no flural^ if it were not for the plural word Elohim, which might lead into a miftakc; to prevent which, this folemn declaration was given, and fo many inftructions concerning the importance of it, that they might never forget, tho' there were dillinct Elohim, yet but one Jehovah ; which is allow- ing a plurality, but not of dlftincl Deities, for Jehovah is one. 1' h o* ( "° ) T H o* the unity of Jehovah is exprefely fet- tled by this, and many other texts, yet we read of diilind agents to whom the name and perfec- tions of Jehovah are afcribed ; as the Name Jeho- vah, the Word Jehovah, the A}?ge/ Jehovah, the Spirit Jehovah. And however unwilHng. the jfeu-'s and fome others are to fee the particular emphafis in the plural Elohim, it is moll certain, the word itfelf carries fome idea in it, defcriptive of fome cbarader, fome relation, the being def- cribed by that name bears to man. This is plain from the ufe made of it in fcripture, where the relatives my, thy, our, their, his, &c. are commonly joined with Elohim. A s the word- implies relation, it fhould have been tranflated by fome word that pointed out that fenfe. But it is rendered by God or Gods, Avhich, as far as we know by the derivation, car- ries no idea of relation to us, or to any being elfe. If the word God is ufed as a found only, to raife the idea of the infinite, eternal Being, without any ligniiicant meaning in itfelf ; then the applying that word by the relatives, my, thy, his, their, &c. is improper ; for the eternal Being, abfolutely con- fidered, has no more relation to one, than ano- ther. If the term ever had any fignificatiQn_of relation originally, it has been loft before the St'pfuagi?2t tranflation. Nor do we know any. meaning the Saxon word God has, but to denote the fupreme Being. Elohim fliould either have been ti-anilated by a word that fignified relation, or re- tained the Hebrew term, rendering it totidem litems ^ giving the fame letters in the tranflation as are done in proper names. If this would have partly left men in the dark, it would have been ftill fafer than to be fo milled by an authority which is too inipHcItly followed. T h o* ( III ) T H o' a divine plurality is very clearly pointed out in the Old Teftament, in a variety of exprei- fions, which cannot be properly interpreted othev- 'wiie : Yet this is one glory peculiar to the New Teftament, that this pluraHty are clearly diftin- guilhed by the different names, Father, Son,' and Holy Ghost, which appears neceflary in the further execution of the divme plan, at the com- mencement of that period, and gives the clear eft difcovery to men, of the difiincl parts they a^ the Father, of whom are all things.- — {d) " One God and Father of alli, who is above ail, and. through all^ and in you all. — {e) Shall we not much rathi,T l?e in fubjedion unto the Father gf ^pintSj, and live V* J E H V A H, a^ an evidence of his boundleft grace and benevolence, hath condefceudcd to cona^ under the endearing relation of a Father^ in a fpe* cial manner, to his elec^ children. — (/) " AndwiU be a Father unto you, and ye ihall be my fons and, daughters, faith the Lqrd Ai.M ighty.-— (^^) But ye have received the fpirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father''' He is al(o a Father to the man ChriJ} Jefus, wliich he manifeiled in fi>;ing his love upon him.— (/^) " Behold, my fervant, whon> lup- {a) Matt, vu 9. (3) Mal.iM. »o. [c) i Gur. vni. «. {d) Ep%. IV. 6. (p) _ Hcb. XII. 9. (f) 3 Cor. vi. x8. (.^). KoO). , viii. 14^? \,h) Ifa. xhl. I. com, Willi Matt, xiu i8. ( It^ ) I uphold, mine elect, In whom myfouldeligliteth.'* This is applied to Chrijl by Matthew, But if we find that Jefus Cbrijl hcAts the name Father, it will certainly prove, that it is not peculiar to one, and fo cannot in any fenfe be def- criptive of the manner he fubfifts in Deity. It was proved above, that jfefis Chrijl governed the church in the wildernefs, of whom Mofes fays, — (}) " Is he not tl^y Father that bought thee ? . hath he not made thee, and eftablilhed thee V* Ifaiah is exprefs to this purpofe. — {k) " Unto us a chUd is Born, unto us a fon is given, (which is no other than Jefus ChriJ}) and his name fliall be called, — the everlnfiing Father, (/) Doubtlefs thou art our Fa- ther, — thou, O Lord, art our Father^ our re- deemer, thy name is from everlafting." The Al- ■plja and Omega (jfcfus ChrijT) alTumes the character of Father, when he fays, — (ni) " He that over- eometh, fhail inherit all things, and.Iwill be his GoD', and he ihall be my Son."* In like manner k is faid, — ■(«) " They are the children of God, being the children of the refurredion.'* But Chrijl fays, " I am the refurreftion and the life." Therefore he is their God and leather, and they are his 'children. Hence it appears, that the term Father, is not given to diftinguifh one from ano- ther, as they flibfiil: in Deity : But is rather- a term of relation between God and man, which will be very evident, by ccnfidering in what fenfe God is called a Father m icripture. • The fen^j of the term Father, as applied to God J muft be learned by analogy, or we can have . no (/■) Deut. xxxii. 6. {k) Ifa. ix. 6. (/) ibid. Ixiii. x6. (w)Rev. xjji. 7. («) Luke xx. %(>, ( 117 ) no knowledge thereof at all. This is one grea^ evidence, how far the divine Being hath condef- ce«ded to the weak capacities of men, in making himfclf known to them in a language which hath analogy to what they know among themfclves.. And tho' the analogy in many refpeds is but faint, yet where there is none, ideas muft fail, and in- quiries fliould ceafe, in fuch terms as Father^ applied to God. What knowledge we pretend to more, if it is not revealed in fo many plain words, is mere uncertainty, and cannot be reckoned any part of that fyftem of neceflary truth which God intended to teaih us. G o D is called a Father, becaufe he is the crea- tor of all things ; he brought them into being and exiftence, — preferves them by his power, — and fuftains them by his bounty. — (a) " For in him we live, and move, and have our being ; for we arc all his offspring, {b) Have we not all one Father ? Hath not orie God created us all ? {c) He maketh his fiih to rife on the evil, and on the good, and fendeth his rain on the juft, and on the unjuft." A s children bear the image of their Father, fo God made man in his image. — {dj " For man is the image and glory of God . {e) In the image of God made he him." They are called Fathers in fcripture, who were the fidl inventors of things which were for the general benefit of mankind. This idea may with great propriety be included in the charafter of God as a Father:, who, through infinite wif- dom, found out a method to favc linncra, — renew his \//a Chrifl^ who, according to - his' <^/) Ep!i. ■. 3,— J. (?) 1 J.'ihn iii, I, (/.} z Cor.vi.i8. (;^ ;Per. i. 3. ( "9 ) his abundant mercy, hath begotten us again unto a lively hope, by the refurredion of Jefus Cbrift from the dead, (/f) Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth. (J J And I looked, and.lo^ a Lamb iftood on Mount Zion, and with him a hundred and forty and four thoufand, having his fat her* s nams •yvritten in their foreheads, {pi) He that overcometh, I will write upon him the 7iame of my God,— -new Jcrufaleniy which cometh down out of heaven from my God : Artd my new name." Asa Father he feeds them with fpirituai food. — (;/) " My Father giveth you the true bread from heaven." H E has the love of a Father to them ; and permits them to have the freedom and fcJlowfiiip of children with him. — (o) " If a maa love me-, he will keep my words, and my father will lo-ce himv (/)) The Father liimfelf /cu^'/^ you. (j') Truly our fellowjhif) is with the Father ^ and with his foa Jefus Chr'ifir H E bears with their weaknelTes, and forgives their offences — (r) " And I will fpare them as aman fparcth \i\%fon that fexveth him. — {f) Your iwiavenly Father will alfb forgive you.'* H E has the fympathy, care, and teiidernefs of % father, — (/) « Like as a Father pitieth his. children ; So the Lord pitieth them that fear him. (k) Even the very hairs of your head are all numbav cd. (-y) A Fa T H E R of the Fatherlefs, and a judge of the widow, is God." "H e _[k) Jam. i. i8. (/) Rer. xiv. r. {r?) ibid. iii. la, («) John *:. 3»- (c) ibid. xiv. 23. (ft) and xvi. 37. {q) i John i. j. (r) Mai. iii. 17. is) Mau. vi. 14. [t) Pfa. ciii. 13. («) Luke xii. 7. {v) Pfa. 68.5. ( 120 ) H E is acquainted with all their wants, and giv- eth them all neceffary things. — (w) " Your hesi- venly Vat HEK knoivetb that ye have need of all tbe/e things, (x) How much more fhall your Fa- ther, who is in heaven, give ^(?(7^ /^z>2^j to them that a(k him." He correSfs them in love when they offend. — Cy) " What fon is he whom the Father chafteneth not ? (2) I will vifit their tranlgrcflions with the rody and their iniquities with Jlripes J* -. He is a pattern to all his children.— (^) " Be ye therefore perfeft^ even as your Father who is in iicaven is perfed." H e challengeth paternal authority and refpe^V. — (Z") " If I be a Father, where is mine honour ?'* H e infpefts the deportment of his children^' and rewards them accordingly. — (c) " Thy Father who feetb thee in fecret, himfelf fliall reward thee openly." H k provides an inheritance for them, — ogives it freely to them, — and makes them all meet for the enjoyment thereof. — {dj " Come, ye bleffed of my Fat her, inherit the kingdom prepared for you. {e) It is your Father's good fleafure to give you the kingdom, (/) We give thanks to the Father, who hath made us meet for the inheritance of the faints in light." H E (w) Matt.vf. 34, (jf) ibitf.vif, II. (;>) Heb. xii. ?• (^} IPfa- Ixxxix. 32. {a) Man. v. 48. {h) iMal. i. 6. (f) Mitt. ir. 6^ (ibid. XXV. 34. U) Luke xii. 31. (/) Col, i. la. < "■ ) H E hears their humble prayers, and anrvvep^ them. — {g) " As touching any thing that they lliall afk, it fhall be done for them of my Fathkr, who is in heaven. (/?) How miich more flwll your heavenly Father give the holy fpirit tQ- them that afk him." H E is the oh]eS: of their worQiip. — (?) «' After this manner therefore pray ye : Our Father, who art in heaven, (k) The true worfhippers ihall wor- fhip the Father in fpirit and truth : For the Father feeketh liich to worfhip him.'* T H E s E, and many other privileges they en* joy, through the ivell-beloved Son 6/ God, by whom they have the knowledge of their Father, and in whom they approach acceptably to him. — (/) ^* No man knoweth the Fatp^er but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him.r — {m\ I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man Cometh unto the Fath er but by me. (ji) Through him we have accefs by one fpirit, unto the F^.- ther.*' With refped to ^Jefus Chrlft, the fcripture re-, prefents God as a Father, hi his being God'^ jirft-born, — \ his image,-— the head of all his ways,— ^ the repofitory of all his purpofes, — in the ancient, Icve he had to him, — the choice he made of him, and all the elei^t in -him. — {o) *« Giving thanks to Q^ the t By refemblance and reprcfcntatiorti forit b a contradiAioh fri Jerms, to_ fay a So;i as fuch, can be the ma£^ of ijis Falhtfr as fuchi ^illation is no ima^e of P) I will make him, TCij fr'ft-born, higher than the kings of the earth, (^) But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thoufands of Judah, out of thee iliall he come forth unto me, that is to be ruler in Ifrael : Whofe ^wVzg-j- ji^r^^ have been from of old, from everlafting." (r) This is applied to Chrijl both by Matthew and John. {/) The Lord poflefTed me in the beginning of his ways, before his works of old. I was let up from ever- lafting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was* - — then I was by hun, as one brought up luith him : And I was daily his delight, rejoicing always be- fore him. (t) BlelTcd be the God and Father of our Lord Jefus Chrijl ^ who hath bleffed us with ^11 fpiritual bleflings in heavenly places, in Chrijl: According as" h,^ hath ch of en us in him, before the foundation of the world, {li) According to the ^ eternal purpofc, which he piirpofed in Chrijl Jefus our Lord. According to his own purpofe and grace, which was given \xs in- Chriji Jefus ^ before the world becan." '^"'W i T H refpect to ChriJlH birth of the virgin, iand^ a|)pearaAice,^ Son of Got>. He Ihall be great, and fhaii be called /Z/r Son of the highejl, (•tD-) And the" word was made ilelli, and dwelt among (f),^Vi' Ixxxix.a?.. \q) Mic. V. a. (r) Matt. il. 6. John vit. 4a'. (i) Prov. viii. aa.— 31. (/"> Kph. i. 3, 4. ^«) ibki. i\\.li. C 123 ) * among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father) full of grace and truth." As a Father commits the charge of all his affairs to his only Son ; fo the Son of God is made governor over all things. — {x) " The LoRp (Jehovah) hath faid unto me^ thou art my Son, this day I have begotten thee. Afk of me, and I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance^ and the uttermoft parts of the earth for thy pojjejion. Cy) Unto us a Son is given, — and the government fliall be upon his flioulders : — of the increafe of his government and peace, there Ihall be no end. {z) All things are delivered unto me of my Father. (^) The Father judgeth no man, but hath com- mitted all judgement (government) to the Son. The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into bis hand J'* Asa Father, he owns and makes known Jefus Chrift as his Son. (Z*) " This is my beloved fon, in whom I am well pleafed. (c) Simon Peter faid, thou art C/?n}'? the Son of the living God. Jefus anfwered, — flefh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father, who is in heaven." Asa Father, he fent the Son to fulfil his will in accomplifhing the work of redemption, — prepared him for that great work, — fupported and inftiTid- ed him therein, — and rewarded him after it was finiihed. — (dj " I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that fent me* [x] Pfa. if. 7, 8. ( >•■) Ifj. rx. 6, 7. {z\ Matt, x', a?, [a) John V. az. ibid, ill, 35. "(^) Matt. in. 17. ^=4 ) i^ij. (c) Wherefore when he cometh into tlie world, he faith, lacrifice and offering thou wouldft not, but a Body haft thou prepared me : Then, faid I, Lo^ I come to do thy ivili, O God * ffj Say ye of him, whom the Father liath fan^ijted, and fent into the world, thou blafphemeft ; becaufe, Haid, I am the Son of Goo. (g) He fliallcry unto me, thou art my Father, my God, and the rock of my fahatio?!. I have found David, my fervant : With my holy oil have I anointed him, with whom rny hand fliall be eftablifhed : Mine arm fliall alfo ftrengthen him. (/>) I do nothing of myfelf ; but as the Father hath taught me, I fpeak thefe things. (;') He humbled himfelf, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the crofs, wherefore God alfo hath highly exalted him, and given him a name above every name ; that at the name of Jefus every knee fhould bow, &c.** To thefe we might add manifold inftances, where Chrift addrefles God as his Father, in behalf of himfelf, — ^his friends, — and his enemies. We might turrt to Paul's epiftles for illuftration of this fubjed, where, one thing is remarkable, that in his falutations at the beginning of every epiftle, he carefully fupports the diftin6tion betwixt God as a Father, and jfe/us ChriJ} as a Son. And to conclude all, tells us, that when he fhall have finifhed the whole adminiftration, which God hath cntrufted him with, as his Son, and brought all whom the Father gave him to glory, then he fliall deliver up the kingdom to God his Father, and God fliall be all in all. The executive part of the divine oeconomy being liniflied, — there is no further U) PTcb. X. 5, 6. (/) Jofin x. 56, [g] VU. IxxxiX- !»6,.»o, »J» , C>*j John viii. »8. (/) Phil. ii. 8, 9^ 10, ( «^5 ) fiirther ufe for the oeconomical authority and fub- jeftion, the fuperiority and inferiority impHed in the paternal Tiiid filial charaders. ^ From the whole, I may venture to affirm, that there is not one idea which can with any propriety be prefixed to the term Father as appHed to God, in the whole revelation, but what has a plain re- ference to the works of God, either in ereationy providence^ or redemption* I T may perhaps be of ufe to fome of my rea- ders, to give the reafon that feems moft probable to me, why God as a Father is always faid to be in heaven, or called the heavenly Father. This is a facred phrafe, I am afraid, tho* very often repeated in the New Teftament, yet but very lit- tle underftood. It not only teaches us, that as Jefus Chriji is now in heaven, who is the true me- dium of all our intercourfe with God,— our wor- fliip being only of a right kind, when direded through •^I muft here obferve, that bv not confidering the fcope aod im- port of the Apoftle's exprellions in i Cor. xv a8 the text hath been improved as an argument aKainft ttie pr( per Dei'V of the Lord Jefus ChriJl. The Apoflle is there fpeakingof ihe ftaie of Chrijl'z kingdom, after the refurredion, when he as mediator, into whofe hand God'% ciiofen were given to redeem, govern, and bring to glory, Hiall dehver therti without ipot to God : And are different ; I may alfo infift that God and Father are alftr dilFertnt ; for the words read in vftrfe 24, " God awi the Father,'' according to our ordinary tranfldtion of K«;, which v/ould infer, that the kingdom muft be delivered up to one who is God, and another who I's Father, and wouhl make as clearly agamft the Deitv of the Father as the Son. But by confidering it as above, the tcKt is clear, and free of that arnbifiuity which it is commooly cJ9udcd with. ( 126 ) ^ through him, and all the privileges God beftows upon us come in the fame channel,— ^and therefore our praifes and prayers fliould be directed to our Father in heaven, fince he is there, in whom they are acceptable. B u T it hath a fpecial reference to the difference in point of excellency there is betwixt Old and New Teftament ivorjhip. The former, according to the Apoftle's ellimate, confifted in meats, and drinks, and divers wafhings, and carnal ordinances impofed upon them, until the time of reformation. He calls them weak, beggarly elements of this world, under which the Jews, like children, were held in bondage : Figures for the time then pre- fent, — patterns, and lliadows only of heavenly things,— -confined to an earthly tabernacle, and temple made with hands, where the worlhippers were obliged to attend, and if unavoidably abfent, or at the greateft diftance, to perform their wor- fiiip with their faces toward that place. U N D E R the latter, the worfiiip \sfpiritual, un- limited, and heavenly, not wrapped up in dark iigns, figures, and ihadows ; not confined to times, places, a particular nation, and external modes. He who is the fpirit of all Jewijh v/oi-lhip, the fubflance of all the figns and fhadows being come, and having fulfilled all the ancient promifcs and prophecies concerning him, has opened a way into the holieft of all, through his own blood, — taken down the partition, — fo that believers, who are a holy prieil-hood in every time, place, and nation, oifer up fpiritual facrifices, acceptable to God through Jefus Chrifl, \v\\o has entered into heaven itfelf, now to appear in the prefence of God for us^ The ( 127 ) The chinch iioiv^ is called the heavenly Jerufalem, in oppofition to the earthly Jerufalem, the feat and center of worfliip among the Jews, Hence, fays the Apoftle, (k) " Ye are not come to the mount that might be touched, and that burn- ed with hi e, nor unto blacknefs and darknefs, and tempeft, &c. But ye are come unto Mount Slori, and unto the city of the Hving God , the heavenly Jerufalem, &c." To the lame purpofe our Savi- our tells the Samaritan woman, that neither on Mount Sa?naria fhould the Sa?Jtaritans, nor yet at Jerufalem Ihould the Je^us woiihip : " But that the hour Cometh, and noiv is, when the true worlhip- pcrs Ihall worfliip the Father, infpkit and truth,** The fpirit and truth here, does not mean, as is commonly fuppofed, that they fliould worlhip in their hearts and in fincerity, (true worfhippers al- ways do fo) in oppofition to worlliipping with the body, and in hypocrify-, was this the fenfc, it might then be inferred from our Saviour's words, that none of the Old Teftament faints worfliipped God with their hearts, and in fincerity ; and tliat chrif- tians are not to worfliip God with their bodies • whereas they are commanded to " ferve God with their bodies ind fpirit s, which are his, — and to pre- fcnt their bodies living facrifices, holy, and accept- able to God, which is theu' reafonable fervice." But Chrifl here teaches, tliat chriflians were to worfhip the Father in him, who is the fpirit of all the figns and fhadpv.'s, and the truth of all the promiles and prophecies in the Old Teftamcnt, with refpecf to holy times, places, and things, 1'he Fa- ther having declared himfclf weil-pleafcd luith him, {k) Hcb. xii. x8,-»;^, ( "8 ) all their worihip muft be through him, by whom they have accefs with boldnefs to the throne of grace. (/) " The Lord is that Spirit ; And where the Spirit the Lord is, there is liberty, (m) The tejiimony of Jefus (the doctrines concerning him in the New Teftament) is the Spirit of pro^ fhecy" (what was foretold of him in the Old Tef-^ tament») - . And 2s>he who is the head, and reprefentative of tht whole church, (that is, the faints both in heaven and earth) is in heaven, and every privi-^ lege that pertains to them as fuch, is heavenly, — • their birth,— the image they are formed after, — the bleflings they enjoy,-^their calling, — .their in- heritance—their converfation, — their hopes, — their •ifFeftions and deiires,^^ rthe country they are tra- velling to, (for here they are ftrangers and pilgrims) and fmce all the ads of their worfhip muft be di- reded through the heavenly medium,— —him who is their afcended Lord, no wonder if the New Teftament reprefents their Father, who beftows all thefe bleftings upon them, and whom they love and adore, as in heaven, and fp frequently calls, him their />^d:^^«/y Father, (/) ;t Cor, jii, jy. {tn) Rev, xii. lo. fee note, ^a. 49.. « E c T, ( 129 ) SECT, ir. I SHALL now confider the feripture fenfe* of . the term SoNj as applied to the Lord Jefus Chrijt, It is fliewed above in feveral particulars, in what fenfe God is called the Father oi Jefus Chrift. And as Father and Son are correlates^ that is, one that ftands in art oppolite relation to another, aay impartial and unprejudiced reader may eafily conceive in what fenfe Jefus Chrifl is called the Son of God. But as I ani prfctty certain that the greateft part of my readers^ through the prejudice of edu- cation, and a bias in favour of other notions con- cerning this point, will, on that account, not fo readily fee the conclufion concerning the fonflnp^ of C}mjl\ which natively fk)ws from the feripture ac- count of God as a Father : For that reafon, I {hall be obliged to open this fubject in a more par- ticular manner, that no room may be left for en- tertaining prepoifelled opinions, fo contrary to the feripture account of that great article of the chrif- tian faith. And, let me beg my reader to diveft himfelf as much as he can of any bias in flivour of party opinions formerly received, that he may impar- tially weigh the evidence from revelation, againft the traditions of men ; and I make no doubt which iide he will be determined to take, as he wall plain- ly fee, the opinions of men in this matter arc at- tended with too little evidence to reft an article of faith upon, fo inter eft ing, and of fo gi'eat con- fequence to liimfelf. R 'Allow ( \s^ ) Allow me then, Jir/l, to give a ver^' brief account of the feveral ideas relative- to the term Son, as applied to other things in fcripture than Jefus Chrij}, which will in a great mealiire lead to a more dillind notion concerning the ufe of the term, as applied to J?//?i. Besides the ideas of lineal de/cendants, whe- ther immediate or more remote, even to the third and fourth generation of a man'^ feed, who are com- monly called his fans, there are feveral other ideas of fonfhip in fcripture. -ylN eaftern flile, ■ the inhabitants of a city or country were called they^^j- or children of that city or countiy. This is frequent in the Old Tefta- jriient. That which froceeded from another thing, whether" animate or inanimate, was called "dx^fon of that it proceeded from, and aJ:^ays denotes deri- y.afion. In this fenfe, tht. /parks are called the/ons ef the burning coqL- — (a) And Jons, are called bran- ches or boughs, {h) " Jofeph is a fruitful boughw (c) The branch thou madeft ftrong for thyfelf,— r ihtfon of man thou madeft ftrong for thyfelf. (^) And there fliall come out a rod out of the ftem of jejfe^ and a branch out of his roots." rn A SUCCESSOR in g-overnment, was called the y^-^ of him or them who went before him. — (e) " How fay ye unto Pharoah, I am the fon of the wife, the Jon of ancient kings.'* Adam {a) Job V, 7. (3) Gen. xlis. 32. {c) Ffa. Ixxx. 15, 17. (a') \k. xi. I. {e) ibid. xIk. 11-. ( '3' ) A D A M is called the fofi of God, becaufc he was made after his image, and had his being' imme- diately <3'd'n'w(:/ from him without tlie inftiiimentaliiy of human generation. For much the fame reafon are Angels called the fons of God, being created by God a dignified rank of beings, endowed with ex- cellent fpiritual powers and perfedions, not derived from eacli other by fiicceflion, but immediately brought into being by God himfelf. Magi s t r a t e s are called yo/zj- of the moft high, becaufe of the power and authority they are raifed to, that in fomerefpecl is the image of God*s power and government, which makes them a terror to evil doers, and a praife to them who do well. Such as were appointed to death are called fofis, or children of death. — (/) " Preferve thou thofe that are appointed to death, (g) Hear the. groanings of the prifoner, to'loofe thofe that are apjpointed to death." In both texts, it reads as in the margin, y3«j- or children of death, as doth alfo that which Saul laid concerning David^ (/j) " Wherefore now fend and fetch hinl unto me, for he fliall furely die." He is 2.fon of death. W H E N a fuperior would cxprefs his love and regard to an inferior, he commonly addrelTed himi in the language of 2. father, by calling him \i\^fon. In like manner, when an inferior would cxprefs his dutiful affeftion and fubmiiflioFi to one he acknow- ledged hh fuperior, he did it by calling him father, T n K term fon is alfo ufed to point olit the fub- ordinatc character of iuch as were under the car^ of (/) Pfa. Ixxix. ir. {g) ibid. 6\, %o. [h) i Sam, ^k jr. ( '32 ) of others for inftnidion : So Eli calls Samuel his /o?2 ; and others were called /ons of the Prophets, For much the fame reafon. Paid calls Thnothy and 'Philemon^ whom he had converted to the truth, his Jons. And to point out the ufeful, fubmifiive, and obedient-characler of T/Vwc//^;', he fays of him, (z)" As 'xfon Yvith his father, he hath ferved with me in the gofpel." When one was adopted into another family, he was then called a Son. Thus AIc/^j is called they^;z of Pharoah\ daughter. It alfo fignifies one that builds up his father's houfe^ — and tranfmits his name down to pofterity. But thefe I Ihall have occafion to notice afterwards. I fhall next mention feveral ideas oifonfhip, applied to the wicked and the fai?its, peculiar to their different characters in fcripture. T H E wicked part of mankind are called fons ^nd children of ?nen. The coramandments of 772^;?, being the matter of their faith, and the rule of their worfhip. T\\tfinful cujloms of men, the pat- tern they imitate. And the praije of men, their higheft end. O F the world. — They are not born from above. They wallow in the wickednefs of the world,— chufe it for their portion, — its pleafures are their higheft felicity, — and their chief ftudy is to fulfil the lulls and defires thereof. O F the Devil. — They bear his image, being thoroughly qualified with the wickednefs he introduced into the world, — refemble him in ma- lice and fubtilty, — and cheerfully imitate, ferve, and (<) Phi]. JI. t%t ( 133 ) and obey hi'm as Tif.n his father . — Our Lord fays of them, " Ye are of your father the Devil, and the lufts of your father ye will do/' O F darknefs and difobedience. Their minds are in ignorance of the truth. Their works are the fliameful works of darknefs. Their hearts are enmity, and their aaions a fcene of rebellion and treachery againft God. -»^ O F ivrath and the curfe» — By nature they are heirs of wrath, and by their wicked deeds they merit the vengeance of God. They area curfe upon earth, and accurfed for ever in the world to come. Of Beliat, 0£ perdition,— Without law. ufelefs^ unprojitahle^ — abandoned to crimes^ — loft to every fenfe of real good, — run headlong to de-* ftruction, and are for ever loft. The fcripture chara<-ler of faints as fons and children of God. — As they are the early objects of his love, — chofen and predeftinated in Chrifl J'^fusj his well-beloved fon, to the adoption of fonsy and to be fellow heirs with him of the fame inhe- ritance. — {h) " Having predeftinated us unto the adoption ef children by Jefus Chrijl to himfeif. (i) And if children, then heirs-, heirs of God, and joint heirs with Chrijl ^^ As they are converted by the power of the truth, — begotten again, — made fons of God^ real members of his fpiritual family, — have the image of thcii* heavenly father drawn upon them through (/;) Epb. i. J. [}) Rom* Tiii- 17.. ( 134 ) through the energy of the fplrit, — and entitled to innumerable privileges. — (i) " As many as re- ceived him, to them gave he power to become the fo?2s of God. (/) Ye have received the fpirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Ahba, Father, (m) Be- loved, now are ye the /ons of God, and it doth not yet appear what ye fhali be ; but we know, that when he fhall appear, we iliall be like him, for we Ihall fee him as he is.'* — — Children of li{rbf. — Becfotten of '^' God the fountain of light, — pofleffed of a true and diftincl knowledge of God their father, by the pure light of his word, — walk in the light of his countenance, the path that fhines more and more unto the perfect day, — fhine as children of the light, and the light of their good works Ihines before men, 'till they are made meet for the in- heritance of the faints in hght. O F "cfi/dom. — That is of Chrljl, who is the luifdom of God • made known to men. His feed they are, who travailed for them in bloody agonies unto death, — -bequeaths to them the fruits of his purchafe, — and in confummate ivifdom guides them to glory, where he fliall with delight fee them as hhfeed, the travail of his foul, and fhall be fatisfied. O F the prom'ife. — By which they are quickened, gathered, comforted, ftrengthened, re- ftored, and infallibly fecured of the enjoyment of God their father for ever. O F the refurreciion. — By the truth oiCh rifles refitrreclion they are begotten again, and confirmed in [k) John !. J 2. (/) Rora. viii, 15. («} i Jdin iii. a. (135 ) in the faith and hope of their own glorious refur- reclion, to enter upon the full pofleffion of their inheritance as Jons of God. — («) " Bleffed be God, who according to his abundant mercy, hath be? gotten us again unto a lively hope,, by the refur- recbion oi Jefus Chrift^^ The faints are alfo called yowj-. and children of the free ivotnan- — of Zion, — of Jeri(faie7n,-:-oi the kingdom, &c. pointing out the freedo?n, honour^ feaccj fafety, glory,. &c. of the church of Chr'ift, in which they are born, nourilhed, inftrucled, and prepare4 for the kingdom of their father, which was pre- pared for them before the foundation of the world. I NOW come to mention fome general ideas of fonfliip apphed to Jefus Chr'ifl ; one is, that of his being begotten. — (o) " Thou art my fon, thip ,day have I begotten thee. (^) The word was madfe fleih, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld hiij^ glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the fa- ther) full of grace and truth.'* Another general idea included in his fonfhipa is his being called a child, and faid to be horn - {(j) «' Unto us a child vs born, (r) That holy thing that fliall be barn of thee, ihall be called the fan of God.'* H E is called thcfrft born. — The fir/l born among the ancient Jezvs had a primogenial light to parti- cular privileges in the family* So Cbri/l is called the firft born, not only with refpecl to priority, or hdng before all others that are called fonsof God, this (») I Pet. '. 3. {0) Pfa. ii. 7. fp) John i. 14. fee alfo John J, 18. and iii. 16, 18. i John iv. 9. (7) iCa. iv. 6 (r) Luk-j i. 25. ice aiio Afls iv. »7, 30.. lyiatt. ij. a. John xviij. 37, * this he alfi3 is, " thtjrfl horn^af^^^ry creature :" But he is called fo with refpect to e^Mm^cy and dignity, (^) " I will make "him my ^rfi borjiy higher than the kiftgs, of the earth/* A right of iftheritance^ frieft'bmd^ ^nd government over his '^brethren. — (/) " God hath in thefe laft days fpoken to us by his Jon, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, (u) Jefus Chrijl, the firft begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth, (•z?) And he is the head of the body, the church, who is the be- ginning, the JirJ} born from the dead ; that in all ■things be might have the pre-eminence^* The jirfl hotn of old, in whofe ftead God made choice of the Levites, had not only a double por- tion of inheritance, power, and pre-eminence a- bove their brethren, but were particularly loved and honoured of their fathers-, had refpecl; and fubmiffion from their brethren, and miniflered iti holy things for the famUy. So Jefifs Chrift, the fir ft born of Go J>, had the fpirit without meafure given him, — was declared to be the pcculiary^T'- •vourite of God, — had the governnwtt of all things committed to him, — Angels and men commanded to voarjhip him, — and conftituted the great high- prieft over the houfe of God, by no left folemnity than the oath of God confecrated for evermore. Submission, obedience, and reftgnation to the will of the father, is one idea infeparable from the character of a dutiful Son, In this refpec^, the ^on of God was the moft perfect pattern. — {w) <' Jefus faith unto them, my meat is to do the will of him that fent me, and to fiuiih his work, {x) Ifeek {i) Pf*. Ixxxix. 27. (^) Heb. :. I.. %, (»*) R-er. i. 5- [y] Go!, t. iS. (iw) John iv. 34. {A ibid. V. 30. I feek not mine own will, but the will of the father who hath fent me. (x) I'ho' he was a Son, yet learned he obediencey by the things which he fuHer- cd. {y) O Father, if it be poliible, let this cup pafs from me ; neverthclefs, 7iot as I ivilly hut as thou wilt, {z) Lo, I come to do thy will, O God.*' . In honouring and glorifying his Father^ he has given us the raoft finiihed example. — {a) " I honour my Father, — I feek not mine own glory. (/?) I have glorified thee on earth : I have finiihed the work thou gaveft me to do.'* H E manifefts and makes known his Father's name, glory, and love to his younger brethren. — {/) " I have manifefted thy name unto the men whom thou gavelt me. I have declared unto them thy 7iame, and will declare it : That the love wherewith thou haft loved me, may be in them, and I in them.** Among many other general ideas of fonfliip, applied to Chrijl in fcrlpture, I fliall only mention other two. The word Ben, which in the Old Teftament language lignifies a Son, comes from a word that fignifies to build up, and the Greek word which anfwers to it in the New Teftament, is ren- dered Son for the fame purpofe, becaufe a Son builds itp bis Father^ houfe. This idea of fonfhip is pro- perly applied to \\\Q.fon of God, who builds up or edifies the church, which is the houfe of Gor, his heavenly Father. He is the foundation, theedifief, S the (x)H;:b. V. 8. (y) Matt. xxvl. 39. (;;) HeN. y. 7. (bid. xvii. 4. (r) and xvii. 6, 8, a6. ( I3S ) the fupporter, and chief corner ftone f of this build- ing of God. Another fimilar idea is included in the word NiN, which alfo fignifiesa So7i that tranfm'its his fa- ther' s name down to pojlerity. This is exprefsly ap- plied to the Son of God, — (d) " He f/yall be as a fon to continue his father'' s name for ever.*' And he him- felf fays, (e) " I will declare thy name unto my bre- thren, in the midft of the church will I ling praife unto thee. — (f) I have declared unto them thy name, and ivill declare it'* Now, from feveral of thefe fcripture ideas of fonfliip, as applied to Jefus Chrift, efpecially the two laft, it is clear that they have not the leaft relation to begetting in any fenfe the word can be taken in. It muil then be true, that the fcripture account of Chrifl' s fonfhip, includes more in it than we can learn from his being begotten. And (^) Pfa. Ixxii. 17. mar. (^) Heb. ii. 12. (/") John xvii. a6. f It IS an idea 100 limited, (and not worthy the iiibjeft, that be- eaufe Chrijl is called in a general way the cor7ier Jlone^ in the fin- guia number) to fuppofe, that he is ccmpared 10 fomeone ftone in fome comer. "When the Apoftle mentions it, Eph. ii. ao. he is comparing the church in genera) to a vaft temple, and lays, it was founded on the doctrines of the Prophets and Apofties jointly ; conkquenily, he means the church in the moft comprehenfive ienf', taking io ?.ll good men in all ages, from the beginning to the end of time : And fo muftfpeak r f Chriji in his relation to the chur,h, ic a fecfe that is equally larpe and compieheolive. Cor- ner ftones in great edifices, unite and join together the walls on all IJdes, below, and above ; cement, ftrengthen, and adorn the whole building, from ti.p to bottom. Thus only can we form any genuine noion if Chrijl, t)eing compared to corner ftones. He is the foundation, coMier. and iimfliing part of the fuperftriidure. That expreflion of God to J'A>, " Whereupon arc the foundations oftheedrth faflenetl ? Or, who laid the corner ftone thereof?" rouft denote the finifhing of i's creaiion : So Chrjjl being called the corner ftoBe of the church, when compared to a buildinp, mufi denote that he is the ftrength, fecurity, glory, and perfctflion cf the whole in ail times : Which, lir,ce his appearing in ilelh, he has made more corfpicucus to all men. The reader may confult i Pet. Ji. 6, 7. Ifa.xJtviii, 16. Pfa. cxviii.aa. Adtsiv. 11. Luke xx. 17. Maikxii. lo. Malt. xxi. 43. Job xxxviii. 6. ^39 ) And it is alfo evident from a due confideration of the whole of thefe fcripture ideas of foyijhip^ that either derivation^ dependence^ fuhordinat'ion^ or inr ferkrity, is neccflarily implied in every notion that can be conceived of it, from any one inftance lingly, or the whole taken together. I may therefore ven- ture to affirm, that there is not one idea oi fonjhip confidered as fuch in the Bible, but what points out the inferior character of that perfon or thing it is applied to, with refpect to the oppofite ox fuperior character of that perfon or thing they are faid to hzfons of. Whatever tliey may be in other refpecls, thefenfe in which they are called y^/zj^, confines the idea (ac- cording to the fcope of revelation, and the bed conceptions we can have of it) to the notion of inferiority. One may be an equal or fuperior in other refpects, but in that part of his character, in which he is a Son, he is certainly inferior. As for example ; a magiftratc, as fuch, is equal to thofe iu the fame fl:ation, and fuperior to fuch as are under his government ; but as he is called a fon of the mojl high, in that refpecl he is inferior. As a magif- trate, he may be fuperior to his natural Father, but as a fon he is inferior to him. And with refpe6t to Jefus Chrift, the fcripture holds him forth to be Jehovah, God over all, as was proved above; but all the ideas which revelation aftbrds us of his character as a fon, imply inferiority : And therefore by the light of the divine word, we are led to view his fonfrnp in another chai'actcr than pure Deity, Wluch brings me to a more direct and particular anfwer to this qucftion, in what fenfe Jesus Christ, in fcripture, is called the Son of God. S t C T ( 140 ) SECT III. TH E Lord Jefus Chrijl, while in this world, generally fpoke of himfelf under the title of the fon ffman. I do not remember that he is called fo by any other, except the Ffahnijl, Daniel, Ste- fben, and John, {a) " Let thy hand be upon the man of thy right hand, upon the fon of man, whom. thou madeft firong for thyfelf. (b) And behold, one like the fon of man, came with the clouds of heaven, — and there was given him dominion and glory, that all people, nations, and languages, Ihould fer^''e him. (c) Behold, I fee the heavens opened, and the fon of man {landing on the right hand of God. (d) And I looked, and behold, a white cloud, and upon the cloud one fat, like unto theffn of man, having on his head a golden crown, &c. (e) And in the midfl of the feven candlefticks, one like unto the fon of man, clothed with a gar- ment down to the foot, &:c." The magnificent defcriptions that are given him, who is called y^w of man in thefe texts, leave the reader of them at no lofs to know that it is Jefus Chrif, as an exalted mediator, who h meant through the whole. r NoTWiTH STANDING the facrcd penmen were fo fparing in giving this title fo7i of man to Jefus Chrifl, he feems to delight particularly in it himfelf j for we feldom find tliat he calls himfelf by any other name. As this part of his condu E R I V A T I o N is one idea of fonfhip, which is necelTarily implied In his being begotten of God, and his firfl born : And with refpecl to the offices he bears, the fcriptures plainly Ihew that they arc (derived from God, as he was chofen, appointed, fent, and authorized hj God, -Likeness, is another idea of finfhip, in which refpect he is the image of God, — the only me- dium of all the knowledge w^e can have of God ; but this idea is intirely confined to his complex cha- ra(^er, as we fliall fee afterwards. Subordination, dependence, and submis- sion, are manifeft in his charafter ^j- ^y^;/. Hence he fays, " The Father is greater than I, — I live by the Father, — ^The 5c« can do. nothing of himfelf, — I inufi: be about my Father*s hufmefs, — The Father \\\\6fent me, he doth the works." -AlUhefe prove his eharafter to be inferior as a Son. T Vi K Son is a diflinct individual being from the Father. This idea is juft, when applied to Chrijl in his oecouoinical chara«5Lcr as a Son, which is cleajr ( H7 ) dear from his praying to the Father^ — and laying, " I feek not mine otvn will, but the will of the Fa* ther that fent me. Not tny iv'tlt, but thine be done.** The will of God is but one, yet here are two wills , diftincl from each other, mentioned. If the will of the Father, be the will of God ; and the will of the Son, diftincf from the Father's, the Son mull be a diitincl being from the Father, or he could not have a diftincf will and confcioufnefs from the Father, as the above expreilions of his plainly prove he has. Now, we muft either conclude that he is a Son, in an oeconomical fenfc, in which it is ne- ceffary for him to have a diitincl Vv^ll : Or, vC'e muft maintain that there aref'/tco Go'ds, each poflelfed pf diftinct powers of wiUing and confcioufnefs. Another fcrlptnral idea of fonJJnp, is one that hxiilds up his Father's hoafe. We Can be in no • doubt in what fenfe this is applicable to the fon mf God, as it miift be limited to his official charafter as the Saviour of men. God tdh David, by Nat ha?i, " I will let up thy feed after thee, — ^and I will efta- blifh his kingdom. He Jball build an houfe for my^ name, and I will eil:ablii}i the throne of his king- dom for ever. I will be his Fathe.', and he fliall be my Son** The whole of this undoubtedly refers to the promifed feed of David -y and whatever re- fpccf it had to Solomon, the particulars mentioned, are ll:riclly true of none but the /on of God, who is alfo called the fon and feed' of David, whofe king- dom and reign is for ever. Of this wo ar(i abfo- lutely certain, fii)ce the Apoftie hath applied the words cxprefsly to the fon of God, when proving his character to be more excellent tlian the xVngels, becaufe God had laid of him, " I will be his I' a-; ther, and he lliall be my Son.". That is him, of whom it was laid, " He fiall build a houfe for my name., I hs ) vame. Sec." A ihortj but clear defcription of the diilincc parrs the Father and Son fuftain in the oeco-. nomy of redemption. The Son of God rears fuch a fuperflruclure, in ' fuch a ivay^ and vAth.fich materials, as ftiall eternally ?i exalt the glory of his Father's love, ivfdom, mercy ^ '■ znd grace. He laid the foundation in his own blood, ii which he gave as a price to redeem them who were ' children of uTath,- — dead in trefpaffes and fins, — enemies to God in their minds by wicked works, — J-, walking after the lufts of the fi^fh, and fulfilling ' the delires thereof ; By the powerful efficacy of his word, he gathers them out of all nations, — quickens arid fanctifles them by his fpirit, and fo makes them polilhed living flones in the fpiritual building of God, which is wholly intrulied to his care, as the great arcliitccl of this fabric of mercy, which is begun, carried on, and finiihed to the eternal praifc of God, by him " who is faithful in all things over this his own houfe, as a Son.'* I SHALL only mention one idea more of y^;;/^/^, which is that of one tranfmitt'nig his Father's name down to pOjJer'ity^ Tq what was faid above on tliis, r fhall juft add, that as the name of God, is in his ion Jefus Chrif, fo it is made known by him.^ We can have no faving knowledge of God, but as revealed in him, who is not only the mediu?n of our ^nowkdge, but the means of our accefs to God. He is ^Pfa. xci. 14. which we have tianflatsd,-^ " Bccauf^ he hath tnown my n.t:iie," — reads literuilv, — "I will fei him on high, htciiitie it? Aaif: Diadc- tny name hio-ivn,^' A prcmife fefpcifting ,ihe exaltation of" Chrijl, aJter fzlonfying his Father in his hutn-.l.a- tion upon earth. T' t life oi Chrijl, was a vifibie repreieniaTioi! ot the name of God, and the cleartlL dilpiay of the divine perfec- tions, That pv)\ver by which he d:d lb many flupendous wotksj^ Was thealmighiy power cf God : K; gave the clcarsfl difpla-y of divios ( m:? ) is with the grcateft propriety ciilled, " the image of the invifiblc God . No man knoweth the Fa- ther, but he to whom the fon dcth reveal him.'* A'Vhen Fhilip wanted to fee the Father^ J^fi^ iaid to him, " Have I been fo long time with you, and yet fay eft thou, Ihew us the Father f He that hath jhn me, hath feen the Father. No man cometh to the Father, but through him." All this is certain- ly laid of him as the mediator betwixt God and men. From the confideration of thefe, and other ideas of fori/hip, being fo clearly applied to Jejus Chrijl as Emmanuelt the all-fufficient Saviour of meji^ it amounts to one good argument, that in that fenfe he is called tlie Son of God. 1, It may be obfer\>ed as another argument, that as he is called the fon of man, to point him out to us as the Mejfiah, fignifying his relation to men in an eminent fenie, as the promifed feed of the wo- ' man, and chief of^ ail the fons of men : So he is called the Son of God, as he is the MeJJiah, m- eluding thtLt fublime relation to -God, by which he is in a more eminent fenfe, the Son of God, than any other who are called fo. T II E firft promife that was made of the Me/fiah, was, divine benevolence or good will to men, in I'vlnf and ) " Lo, I fee four men loofe, walking in the midft of the fire, — and the form of the fourth is like the fon of God.** Any one but tolerably acquainted with the Bible only, will fee that it was the manner of fpeaking in the eaftern countries, to call almoft every thing Father, Son, or Daughter. Hence, for a proud or wicked man, we read the fon of pride, the fon of ivickednefs ; and for mighty men, the fons of the mighty. It is alfo obfcrvabie, that the term God, is often ufed to heighten the idea of the thing fpo- ken of, as, " the trees of God, &:c." Why then might not 'Nebuchadnezzar, at the fight of fo glo- rious a perfon, call him theyo« ^ God, or one whofe glory was above the appearance of men, — one of a more divine and God-like form than the other three, whom he afterwards calls the An?el or mejfenger of the God of Shadrach,Mefhach, and Abed- nego. This was like the language of a heathen king, who fuppofed that men might be deified, for he calls him {o] Pro. XX ^. 4. (p^i Dan. iii. zj. ( '55 ) him a ?nan as well as the other, but more like the notion /ji? had of a God. It cannot be imagined with any probability, that this idolatrous prince knew any thing of ChriJ}, tho* fome would have him know more than many of his Aftoples did, all the time Chriji was among them. There is one text more in the Old Teftament,- which claims our particular attention, becaufe cur- rently interpreted of the. fon as he is Go^, which is dired- ly contrary to the fcope of the paffage itfelf, and the life which the Apoftles make of it in the New Tef- tament. — {q) " I will declare the decree, the Lord hath {liid unto me, thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.'* It is evident, that the general fcope of this Pfalm, is a prophetical defcription of the character of the Mejiah, in fome things parti- cularly relating to his fiiferings, refurredion, king- dom, and conquejl over his enemies. The raging of the heathen, and vain imaginations of the people, are exprefsly applied by (r) Feter and John to Herod, Pontius Pilate, the Jeivs and Gentiles, that were gathered againft Christ. Thefe Apoftles in- terpreted this Pfalm, with refpect to the counfel and determination of God, concerning what Ihould happen to Christ. When the Apoftle would con- vince the J^^'u^'j, that the fame Jesus, whom they had condemned and crucified, was the Mejfiah pro- mifed to the fathers, he fays, — (j-) " We declare unto you glad tidings, how that the pFomife th at was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the fame unto us their children, in that he hath raifed up Jesus again : as it is alfo written in the fecond Pfilm, " ThQU art my Son, this day have I begotten thee:' iq) Wj. ii. 7- (r) A<^i iv. 25.-39. (/) ibid. x'm. 3a, 33. ( IS6 ) thee." Now, to deny that by the Son in this text, is meant the MeJJlab, is in plain terms to fay, that the Apoftle, or the Spirit by which he was infpired, did not underftand the meaning of it ; feeing it is fo exprefsly apphed to him in that character, yea, brought as a proof of his being the Mess i ah : And not only here, but in other places, it is accommodated to the fame purpofe. It is certainly fufficient to limit human curiolity, when the matter is determined fo expli- citly by a divine interpreter. The text itfelf is the language of the Son, ■who fays, — " I will declare the decree, the Lord hath faid unto me, &c." Now the Apoftle tells us, he became our high prieft in purfuance of this de- cree, (J) " No man taketh this honour to himfelf^ but he that is called of God, as was Aaron: So alfo, Chrift glorified not himfelf, to be made an high-prieft ; but he that faid unto him, thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee." What kind of reafoning would this be for an Apoftle, if t\\^fonJhip in the text referred to the manner of his divine exiftence, under which confideration, he could not be fet apart .^ appointed, confecrated, or per-- felled', nor could any office be prefcribed to him. But the Apoftle affirms all thefe of the Son, men- tioned in the text, and therefore he muft be fo defigned with reference to his oeconomical cha- r after. Christ muft certainly be eonfidered under the fame charader in the ytli, as in the 8 th verfe of this Pfalm, where it is laid, " Afk of me, and I ihall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermoft parts of the earth for thy pof- feffion.'* {t) Heb. V. 4. S. ( 157 ) fefllon." To ajk and receive an inheritance arid poffeflion, are terms quite agreeable with his in- ferior charader, as Mejftah : But abfolutely incon- liftent with Deity. As God, he has an original right to all creatures, the heavens and earth arc his, and all they contain. The word Day in the text, is fuppofed to mean eternity ; and fo the Son is concluded to be an eternal Son. The beft reafon I could ever hear for this conjedure was, that fome men have- thought fo. But the Apoftle furely thought other- wife, when he applies the text to things done in tvme : And alfo joins it with another fimilar paifage, which is fpoken in the future time, and very much elucidates this, " I ivill be to him a Father, and he Jhall be to me a Son.^* This cannot mean either eternity, or the pure Deity of Chriji, Be- hdes, there is not one inftance where the phrafe to-day fignifies eternity in all the word of God. Many commentators apply the text to the re" furreBion of CbriJI, from what the Apoftle fays. Ads xiii. 32, 33. " The promife which was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the fame unto us their children, in that he hath raifed up Jefiis again ; as it is alfo written in the fecbnd Pfalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.** Tho' the application of it to Cbrift's refurrecHon equally favours my argument ; yet, I think by ^lofe attention to this paffage, it will be found, it rather refers to the fending of Chrijl in the flelh, as the fulfilling of thofe promifes made to the fathers. The Apoftle had been giving the Jews at An' tioc/j, a demonftrativc account of Je/us being the txyxQ ( '58 ) true Mejfiah promifed to the fathers, in which he intro- duces theteftimonyof J7o/;;^ the Baptift^ — charges his death upon their countrymen, proves his refurre ) be his Son ! Biit it Is eafy to conceive how he might receive honour and glory in his inferior character as God's fervmit, ^—^thG promifed lAeJjiah^ by being io folemnly owned to be the " beloved fonofGod, in whom b^ was luell pleajid^** And as it is with Chrift^ as Mediator^ that God is well pleafed, it muft be in that fenfe, he is here called his Moved Son. This is further clear from a parallel text,— (z/) " Behold my fer^ vant^ whom I uphold^ mine eled., in whom my foul delighteth : I have put my iplrit upon hjni, he fhall bring forth judgment to the Gmtiks^ &c.'* . All this, with fevei'al other things that are in the context, certainly belong to him as Mediator. The term fervent, as applied to him, is the fame with i^MeJJiah, and that of EkSf. Matthew renders {v} " B^loivd in ivhim I am well pleafed,^' when he ap- ' plies the paflage at large to Chrlft, which is the lame v/ith the text we are confidering, and fliews them to be of the fame import. And whereas we are commanded to hear the Son, it is plain in what fenfe we are to underfland that title, from an ancient prophecy of Chrijl by Mofes, — {lu) " The Lord thy God will raifeupunto thee a Prophet from the midft of thee, of thy bre* thren , like un to me, hitn/Imllye hear .'* The {x) A poftle tells us, that this was foretold of Jefus Chrijl, From thefe confiderations it is indiiputable, that his being called the beloved Son in th* text, is 'meant of his complex character as Mediator, the Saviour of men. In him as the beloved fen of God, are we accepted, having made peace through the X blood , («) Ifa. xlii. I. (u) Matt, xii. it. (-u-) Peu^ x'^"'* ^S^ (x) Ads ii.. zi. ( l62 ) blood of his crofs. He is the great Prophet and teacher of his people, whom tliey are to " hear in all things whatioever he fliall lay unto them/' For ''God, (fays the Apoftle) in thefe lalt times hath fpoken to us by his Sok.** W e have heard the teflimony of the Father ^concerning C/jriJi's fonjbip ; the next inftance Ihall be a fliorc commentary upon this term from his own mouth. Having cured a man that w^as bom blind, whom the J:wijb rulers, through their blind- nefs, hac- excomnuinicated for receiving his cure lOn the labbath, and laying, that his phylician was a Prophet, and had cured liim by the power of Got). , Our Lord, to Ihew the regard he has to thoie who are perlecuted for telling the truth, -found out the man, and opens more fully his cha- rafter unto him. " He faid unto him, doft thou beheve in the fon of God f He anfwered and faid, -tf/?(? is he. Lord, that I might believe on him f And Jefus faid unto him, thou haft hoth feen hiniy and it is he that talketh ivith thee^ Our Saviour very rarely, if in any inftance biit this, exprefsly called himfelf the Jon of God. But here he does it in fuch a manner, as the meaneft capacity may underftand that his human nature •muft be included in his own defcription of himfelf as the fon of God, Whoever is lo poffeffed with prejudice as to deny this, do in effect fay, that our Lord cither gave fuch a defcription of hisfotifhip to the man, as he could have no ideas of, — could tmderftand nothing about, and fo impofed upon him : Or, that the lips of truth told the man a plain and undifguifed fallhood, by faying, in anfwcr to the man's queftion, " Thou haft both feen him, {the fin. of God) zn^-k is he that talketh with thee. ''^ I T ( i«3 ). I T is very remarkable to our purpofe, how the Ethiopian Eunuch came to the knowledge and be- lief of thtfon of God. Having read that prophetical account' of ChrijPs fufferings, — O'y *' He was led' as a fheep to the flaughter, and like a lamb dumb before* his (hearers, fo opened he not his mouth, &c." He alked Fhiiip who the Prophet was there fpeaking about ? We are told that Fhilip from that text, preached Jesus unto him, and from thel evidence of the truth, that Jesus was the perfoil fpoken of, he defired to be baptized. Fhilip toM him he might, if he believed with all his heart*' "He anfwered, I beheve that Jesus Christ is the SON OF God.'* The Eunuch had been at- Jerufalem to worfliip, where he, no doubei, had been' told the current news oFthe nation at that time, con- cerning J^f/z^j and his followers ; but it is plain, he did notunderllandhis charaeler as the Saviour, til) F'^i/ip informed him of the accorapliihment of theie pro- phecies which he - had been reading, in the fufi'cr- ings, death, and refurrcclion of Je/iis, as^ the Mejfiah and Saviour of men. This knowledge was the ground of the faith which he exprefled, " That Jefus (the man of whom he had heard among the Jews, and whofe real character Fbilip had now .in- formed him of) was they3';z of God :" the promifed' MeJJiah, whofe fufferings he had been reading-, but did not know who to apply them to. This muff; be t\\t fenfe of the paflage, or we can find no con- nection betwixt Philip^s preaching Jefus unto him, and his believing on the. fon of God : Nor could his confeliion of fuch faith in any other fenfe give him a right to baptifm, the badge of the chriftiaii religion, Christ fy) Ila. Ilil. 7. «. ( i64 ) Christ having finiflied the work of redemp- tion on the crofs, — rifen from the dead, and about to afcend to heaven as the reprefentative of his redeemed feed, he fays to Mary, — (z) " Go to my brethren, and fay unto them, I afcend unto my Fa- ther, and your Father, and to my God, and your God.'' Here Chrifi as a Son, not only intimates his rela- tion as the covenant head to his people, as cove- nant children, in their united relation to God, as th«ir God and Father : But it is manifeft, that he fpeaks of himfelf in the fame oeconomical con- lidcration, when he fays my God, as when he fays MY Father. And as the one refpecls him as Emmanuel, engaged in the work of redemp- tion, fo muft alfo the other. This is indifputably true, as well as plain, from the two phrafes being joined not only here, but in what is faid concern- ing his confidence in God, when engaging in the work of falvation. — (^) " He fhall cry unto me, thou art my Father, my God, and the rock of 9}iy falvation.'* 5. I F it can be made appear, fix>m what is faid concerning our Saviour in the New Teftament, tliat the fame things are predicated of him under the title Son, as under the names Jesus and Christ; — that the names jfefi/s ChriJI and So?iy are ufed promifcuoufly as fynonimous terms, when any thing is affirmed of him that relates to the oeconomy of falvation : It will certainly prove, that as the names Jefus and Chri/? are ceconcimical, that the title fon- muii be fo alfo, fince they are ufed indifxci cntly without diilinclion, that is, the fame things \vhicl\ are faid of Jefus ChriJI in one place, Jure faid of the Son in another, & control. This, I iliall (.t) John XX. I J, (•) Pfa. Ixxxlx. 26. ( 1*5 ) ihall illuftrate by feveral examples, from which it will appear, that by. the ttrms-Jefus Chriji and' Son^ in the New Teilament language, we have pre»-' fented the fame object of faith, hope, and £on- Jidence, T o give all the texts at large which relate to- this fu^ecV, would be to copy a great part of the New Teftament. I ihall only felecl fome that re- Ipecl the capital doctrines of chiiftianity, write out one for proof of each particular, and leave others equally to the purpofe, to be compared by the reader at his leifure, Christ is called the head of the church.-— {a) " CbriJ} is the head of the church : And he is the Saviour of the body." So is the Son, — Qi) " Giving thanks to the Father, — who hath tranfr lated us into the kingdom of his dear Son,— he is the head of the Body, the church, who is the begin- ning, the firft born from the dead.** All things were made, and are upheld by Jefus CbriJ}. — -(c) " But- to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him ; and one Lord Jefus Chri(}, by whom are all things, and lue by him.'* Applied to the Scn.'—{dJ " For hy him (God's dear Son, the antecedent in the context) were all things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, vifible and invifible, whether they be thrones or dominions, or princi- palities or powers : All things were created by him, and for him. And he is before all things, and by him all things confift." Jesus (a) Rpli. V. a-3. (^) Col. i. la, ij, i8. alfo com. Matt, xxiii. 8, XG. with Hcb. iri. 6. (c) iCor. viii. 6. [d) Co\.\. i6, 17. alfo com. Eph. iii. 9. with Ikb, i, z. f i66 ) , . J E s u s C H n I s T was fent into the world for man's falvatioh. — (e) " This- is .life eternal, that tljiey might know thee, the only true God, and JeftLs Chrif}, whom thou haft fent J' — The Son of God was fent, — ffj " When the fulnels of the time was come, God fent forth his Son, made Q£,a:Woman, made under the law.'* H E is called Jefus Chr'ift^ who was bom of the "virgin .-^(^) " Behold, thou Ihalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a Son, and fhalt call his name Jesus. — Unto you is born this day, in the city of David, a Saviour, which is Chrifl the Lord.'*^ He is called the Son 0/ God .—(/:;)" He fliall be great, and Jhall be called the Son of the highejl. That holy thing which fhall be born of thee, fhall be called //:? they live. — (m) " The life which I now live in the fleih, I liv^ by the faith of the Son of God." It {e) John xvii. 3. (/") Gal. \v. 4. alfo com, A(fls iil. 20. Rom^ ih 3. I Tim. i. 15. wiih As xvi. 31. (z?) John iii 36. ailo com. Ac^s x. 36, 43. and xix. 4. \Vith i John iii. 43. (r) I John i, 3. i Cor. i. 9. co.u, C^i!. ii. 6, with I J"hn v. i%, (/^Rom.v. 6. (/) ibid. V. 10. com. i Cor. 1.13. PLom. xiv, 9. iThcfT. iv. 14, with Rom. 8. 3z. (a) A(51s ii, 31. 32. {v) Rom. 1.4. com. Rom. xiv. 9. Col. iii. i. Eph. i. ao. with i Thtfl", i. iO. ( 168 ) power, according to the Spirit of holinefs, by the i^urreclion from the dead." Jesus Christ is exalted at God^s right- hand, having all power and authority given unto him. — (w) " Wherefore God hath liighly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee Ihould bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth ; and that every tongue iliould confefs, that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." The fame glory and dignity is attributed to the Son. — (.v) .*' God hath in thefe laft days fpoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things,-^ upholding all things by the word of his power, .when he had by himfelf purged our fins, fat down on the right-hand of the majejly on high. — Unto the Son he faith, thy throne, O God, is for ever and >ever ; a fceptre of righteoufnefs is the fceptre of ■ thy kingdom J* Jesus Christ fhall come in great glory to judge the quick and the dead. — {y) " In the day when God fliall judge the fecrets of men by Jefus Chri/l, according to my gofpel." Now our .JLord tells us himfelf, that (^) " The Father judgeth .no man ; but hath committed all judgment to the Son." .^ What puts this matter wholly beyond difpute is, that the Apofties did not only make it the fame, to (w) Phil. li. 9, lo, II. (x) Heb. i. I.— 2. com. Aifls ii. 36. Col. iiii. I, Matt, xxvii'. 18. Rev. xi. 15. Epb. i. 10. with A(5ls i'i. 13. John v. aj. Heb. iv, 14. {y) Rom. ii. 16. (rj 'John V. zz. com. Col. iii. a- 2 Cor. v. 10. A;s. 1 Their, j. 7. wUh.sThtfl*. ». 10. \l8tr. xxv. 31, &c. 16? ) to believe hi Jefus Chrijt and the Son of God} but they teach it as an exprefs article of his religion, that Jesus Christ is t/j£ Son of God. — (a) Whofoever fhall confefs that Jesus is the Son of God,. God dwelleth in him, and he in God. {bj Whofoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is horn of God. if) Thefe are ivritten, that ye ?night believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. {dj Who is he that over-cometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus Christ istheSoi^ of God? This is HE that ca?n€ by water and blood, .even Jesus Christ, {e) And to wait for his ^oii^i from heaven, whom he raifed from the dead. Even Jesus> who delivered us from the wrath to come" Here is plain divine teftimony in abundance, cxprelTed in as llrong terms as language will bear. From thefe particulars, and many other that might be mentioned on this head, it plainly ap- pears, that whatever is faid of Jesus Christ, is alfo faid of the Son of God. The writers of the New Teftament knew no fuch difference in the ufe of thefe terms, as writers after them have invented : And feeing all things concerning the oeconomy of falvation, are particularly attributed to the Son of God, we muft either admit that he is called Son with reference to that oeconomy, or that the account the Apoftles have given of him, is ex- tremely dark and perplexed ; — very unlike the plainnefs and fimplicity of the men, — and more unworthy the wildom and goodnefs of the divine Spirit that infpired them. Perhaps it will be fiiid, (which is the lall iliift of fuch as love to deal in 7n\Jleries) that there Y ' is a {a) I John ir. 15. [b) ibid. v. i. {c) John xx. 31. {d) i Joha ▼.5,6. ( in this light> he is a comforting fight to a poor^ perifhing^ convinced ftnner^ who is void of all hopes of falvation any other way» When the wretch, purfued with the curfe, and liung with a fenfe of poignant guilt, beholds the glorious Emmanukl, appointed a Prophet to enlighten his darkened foul, — a Prieft to atone for his number- lefs fins, and manage his caufe by appearing in the prefence of God for him, — a kitig to rule, in- fluence, and defend him againll all the combined powers of fin and hell, — and alUfufficient for thefe lacred pin'pofes j how happy mull the poor foul be^ who is thus through the power of his divine Spirit determined to truft in him, who is eveiy way fuitablc for all he wants, or gan defire in time and for ever ? 10. T H E ground of our adoption, and right to the privileges offons, are laid in the filiation or fori- fhip ofChriJ}, taken in connexion with t\\tfree love of God, as the fpring of his chufing us in him, to be heirs of God, and joint heirs with C/j;//?. The fcriptures prove this ; but I can no ways agree with thofe, who make it an argument for a natu* ral and ncceffary fojijhip in Cbrijl ; for the propoli- tion if once admitted to be true^ proves the con- trary. Z If the words, nor the fontimenis ihey convey, are in revelation, but like many other things, which ciiftom only hath made Canoni- cal. I meniioii tliis, to fhew the danger of taking thin>»s upon truft, and i)ej,;lecting to examine tlic feniiments we have been rurlifd up in, many oF v/liich are ngt aMthenticated from fcrip- turc. ( 178 ) > If helievers fonjhip is founded upon a necefjary fonfhip in CbriJ}, it will necelTarily follow, that their fonlliip is necejjary alfo : For a neceilary caufe, muft produce a neceflary effect. It mull; alfo follow, that the falvation of finners wasneceifary in God. Where then will we find room for the leaft veftige .of the fovereign love, — the free ivill, or even the mercy or grace of God f If the fonfhip of Cbrijl was natural and neceffary, it could in no wife depend upon the ivill of God : And if the fonfliip of be- lievers is an ejl'd of this natural fonfhip, then it .muft not depend on the ivill of God, more than the caufe from which it doth flow. This makes our adoption, Vvith the w^hole of redemption by Chrij} Jefus, to flow from neceffity, not from the . good phafure of the ivill of God. All God's children are made fo by difpofition, founded in fovereign love and grace ; but is there, or can there be any connexion betwixt a natural fonfhip of Chrijl, and a fonfhip founded in love and grace f unlefs we can fuppole that Chrijl^s relation - to his people, is natural and neceffary to him, in the fame way as his fonfhip is pretended to be. But in this cafe, it would unhappily follow, that it would no longer be a difpofition of grace, but of necejfty ; which not only overthrows the whole ■ plan of redeeming love and grace, but is a plain • contradiction in terms. Jesus Christ in the tranfaction which he .voluntarily affumed, became the kinfman and elder brother of all who v.'cre chofeii in him, as the ob- jects of Jehovah's love, — fons and children by immutable promife vuide to him, and who in time fhould be actually adopted, — taken into the family of God, and made partakers of all the privileges of fons, r 179 ) fons^ by virtue of that infallible engagement of Jehovah (who had chofen them) to his Son, theiir head and reprefentative ; and through the divine efficacy of that redemption wrought for. them, ia Ihedding his precious blood, that they might adual/y enjoy the favour of GoO, and fellowlhip with him. Thus they are made partakers of a div'me nature', and poflefTors of the inheritance they were chofen to in Chrijl Jefus, which they had incapacitated themfelves for the enjoyment of, being alienated from the life of God,' and by apoftafy liable to the curfc ■; all which, the Sen of God, their kinfman, came down to redeem .them from, by being made a curfe for them. . . In this light there H a connexion fupported by revelation, betwixt thtfon/Jjip of ChriJ}, as the elder brother in the family of Go D, and the iaintsyow- Jhip, as yotmger brethren, heirs ofQod, and joint heirs luith Chrifl. This will appear ftill more obvious, by a little attention to the different characters and privileges of the faints, as yc;zj- ofGod,-A\\\}^c\\, have relation to fome '7ik?ne^ ' appellation^' ov office given to Chrift in fcriptiire. Are they called t\\p redeemed, ranfomed, faved, purchafed f Or, is re- deniption, falvation, and liberty their privileges ? He bears the names and offices of Kinfnian, Redeemer, Saviour, Goal, &c. Are they called bride, fpoufe, flock, Zzz ? He is the Bridegroom, Hufhand, Shepherd, Sec. Are they begotten of Gob ? He is the only be- gotten Son of God. Are they fons and childrenf He is the holy child, fefus, the beloved' Son of God. N o \v ' if thcfe, and all the other privileges of the faints. refer to, or flow from fome one part or other of' the complex character of 'Emmanuel, aS they ( ISO ) they indifpiitably do, why {hoiild not this of their hcing/ofis of God, have a reference to hiin under the lame confideration ? There is a ftrict analogy betwixt ihtfonjfnp of believers, and the fonjhip of Chrijl in his oeconomical character. They are in fome meafure reciprocal and corre/ative, as the exiftence of the one depends upon the cxiftencc of the other. They are both of the fame fainily^ — both heirs of th.e/a?ne inheritance : He is not afhamed to call them brethren!, — and th.e/a?ne God is the Fa- ther of both. Hence he fays, " I afcend to my Fa-^ i her ^nd your Father^ to;;yGoD andjyowr God." But no one can have the leaft idea of any ana- logy or connexion bet^^dxt the fonfhip of faints ^ and an eternal, natural^ and neceffary fonfljip^ It is not bccaufe God is eternally, naturally, and ne- ceffarily holy, jufl, and good, that his people arc made holy, juft, and good ; but becaufe he hath of his fovereign love and good pleafure made them ^o in his San Jefiis ChriJ}, All that the faints enjoy, "flows from theyr^^ will of God, and not from ne- cejfity in his nature^ which Mould be the confe- quence if their fonfliip depended upon a natural fonftiip in ChriJ}. ' 1 MUST now confider fome texts, from which arguments are drawn againft the doctrine I have been endeavouring to maintain : And, I prefumc the impartial reader M'ill fee, not only how little they are againft this fenfe of Chrift's loniliip ; but how ealily the texts may be accommodated to the fupport of it ; and therefore may be confidcrcd af -ib many more arguments in its defence. Ob j eel, T H E objection that moft weight feems to be laid on, is taken from what the Apoflle lays, Mofei ( i8' ) — {a) " Mofes verily was faithful in all his houfe, aa Vifervant. But Cbrift, as a fon, over his own houfe: Whofe houfe are we.'* From which it is thus argued, that to limit the fonfhip of Chrijl to his complex character as Emmanuel, muft deftroy the diflinclion betwixt Chrijl as a Son, and as a Ser- vant, and fpoil the beauty of the antitheiis betwixt Mofes and ChriJ} in this palTage." Anf. I T has been made manifeft above, that to believe in Jefus Chril}, and to believe in the Son of God, are of the fame import; both muft include his complex character. So to l^ehold him as 2ifervant, which wc are commanded to do, — (b) " Behold, nxyfervant, whom I uphold," — ^ii'iuft be of the fame import with beholding him as the Lamb of God, — and hearing or believing in him as tlie Son of God in New Teftament language. — • (r) " Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the fins of the world.— This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well plcafed : Hear ye him." In all thcfe characters, he is the object of our faith, and the fccurity of our flilvation : For the confideratioa of fiiith in ChriJ}, as it refpccts falvation, muft in- clude the coniideration of his complex character, whether he be viewed as a Son, a Servant, a Savi- oi/r, or whatever other name the icriptures rcprc- fent him under to us, as in that character he fi- ll ifhed falvation for us, and alfo befiiows it up- on us. His being called a Servant, points out the • abafed condition he humbled himlelf unto, in go- ing through the work of our falvation ; in which, tho* he as Emmanuel, was rich in the enjoy- ment {a) Hcb. Hi. 5, 6. (^) Ifa. Klii.i. {c) Joha i, 29. ( 182 ) ment of all that is divine, — in him were hid all the treafurcs of wifdom and knowledge,— in him dwelt the fulnefs ,of Deity bodily, — he was the bright reprefentation of Jehova'h's glory^ — ^yet for our fakes, he made himielf of no reputation, — became fo poor, as to be more deflitute than the beafts of the earth, — calling himfelf a worm, and no man, — having no form or comelinefs why he Ihould be defired, — defpifcd, and rejected of men, a man of forrow, and acquainted with grief, — was wounded, bruifed, opprefled, afflicfed, and at laft humbled to the duft of death. Thus Em- manuel's glory, who was in the form of God, and' thought it no robbery to affume the names, the glory, the worjhip of God, was veiled, and ap- peared in the form ni -ifervant, upheld by the arni of God in the infinite work of man's falvation, w^ho now (his fervitude in iuffering work being finifhed) " hath crowned him with glory and ho- nour, far above ail principality and power, might •and dominion, &:c. And hath put all things tmder his feet, and given him to be the head over all tilings to the church, which is his. body, the ful- nefs of him that fiUeth all in all." To anfv/erthe obieclion, we need go no further than the text on which it is founded, which makes directly againft it ; and will be found one of tlie plaineft arguments in favour of C'jriJFs oeconomi- cal fonfhip. The text fays, it is as a So7i that Cbrijl is over his ozvn houfe. By the houfe here, imiii; be meant the church, over which he is the governor and head. His right to rule, and the ipeciiil relation he hath to the church as a Son, is expreiTcd in its being called nis own. The anCi-. tiieiis is not betwixt Cbriji as a So;!^, and a firvant, as ( >83 ) as the objection would infinuatc : But betwixt Mofes CIS a Jh-vant, and Chrijl as a Son. The former is highly commended for his faithfulnels as 'Sifer-' vaut : But Chrifl Jefus, fays the Apoftle, was count- ed worthy of more glory than Mofes, not only be- caufe he was faithful to him that appointed him the Apofe/e and high-prlejl of our profelhon, but becaufe he had built the houfe, and being a Son, thcfrjl-boni, the right of rule and inheriting was his over his oicn hoife, which he had this double right unto. Now, in whatever Hght we view Chr'ift\ rela- tion to the church, whether a:j their head^ gcal^ k'lnfmaiu and redeemer : Or, as their Prophet, FrieJ}, King, &:c. we nnift include the conlideration of his complex character. For the confideration of his being clothed with human nature, adually or ^rc- leptically by participation, is the foundation of his relation to the church, as the members of his body chofen in him, and his right as their goal to re- deem them : Therefore, the fonftiip in the text, muft have a refpecl to him as Emmanuel, feeing it is in that character he is related to the church, and a Son over it as his own house. But to fuppofe CbrijVs, fonfiiip in the text to fignify (as the objccTiors would have it) his Deity abltractedly, makes the paiTage wholly unintelligi- ble to us. As a Son, he has a ipecial right and relation to the church, as his oiun houfe.; but what relation can we luppofe any of the divhie three hath abltractedly, more than another ? Hath abfolute Deity (\vhich is what we know nothing about) any relation to creatures at all ? Or, is it elicntial to the Deify of our Lord Jefus Chrifl to be the head of the church ? Once to fuppofe t!iis (which yet is I 184 ) IS an klca inreparable from tlieir notion of fonfliip) would be to deftroy the fever elgnty of Jehovah's i&ve, in chufing the church in Chrijc : And theyor^ re'tern, voluntary condefcenjwn of EMM/SiSUEL, in be- coming the heaii.f hujhanci^ and redeemer of his church. Under that character, he is her head, and ihe hi;> jnembers, Abfolute Deity, for ought" we know, is at an abfohite diftance from any con- nexion with, or relation to the creature, in any ienfe whatlbever. A s we ought not to conceive notions of God that are not revealed; neither Ihould Ave too cri- tically dillinguifl: the revealed names and charac- ters of the glorious Emmanuel; but rather be- lieve, and humbly admire his infinite condefcenfion, in becoming fo fuitably related to us in his com- plex character as Emmanuel, in which he exhi- bits the divine glory and perfections, — executes all the divine purpofes concerning men, — and is the glorious medium through which the love, grace, and "loiy of Jkhovah arc, and fhall for ever be maniVefted to his chofen. Thus he is revealed, and fo they believe, and fhall for ever behold the Son o/'Goo, in divine refulgence, having all things fubdued unto him, who himfelf, as a Son, " ihall be fubjecl or placed in order to him, that put all tilings under him, that God may be all in all." Ohjccf. Another objection is taken from thefc texts, where Cbrifl, iind Son of God, are both mentioned, particularly what Feter fliys, (^dj "Thou iTtChr'iJI, the Son of the living God." From which it is inferred, " that as the term Chrili refers to his office, the tenxi Son muft refer to his divine perfonahty, or there v;ould be a mani- . , . feft {^dj Maw. xvi. 1$. ( >«5 ) feft taittotogy in this, and fnch like texts, as if Peter ihoiild fay, " tlioii art the mediator^ the 7ne- diator^ And this abjection is reckoned unanfvver-" able, if the text is read as fome critics tranflate it, diftinguifhing the terms by what they call the. Greek article that, " Thou art that ChriJ}, that Son of the living God.** Anf, That the terms Chnft and 5c;;, pre-, fent us with the fame object of faith as they arc ufed in the New Teftament, is proved above: But to give the objeclion its full weight, we fhall firil conlider how Chnft is a term of office, — next, what is fignified by the term So7i in the text, — and then wliat ftrength the ufe of the Greek arti- cle affords the caufe. A s to Chr'ijl being a term of office, let it be ob- lerved, that it is agreed on all hands, that Chr'tf} and MeJJlah are terms of the fime import : Mejftah in the Old Teftament, is the fame with ChtiJ} in the New. Now, ihould I alk the objedor, whe-" ther he whom the Jeivs called the Mejftah, was a Ferfon or office f It v/ould be reckoned of the fame confequence, as if I fhould afk, whether a Ferfon be a Ferfon or not ? Concerning the Mejfiah it is faid, — {e) " The rulers took council againft the Lord, and his anoint ed^^ {Mejfah or Chriji.) This paffage Vv'ould read, " They took council againft the Lord, xndhh office .'* The fame Perfon who is called las Meffiab or ChriJl, in the beginning of this Pfalm, is a little after called his king, and his Son, which is anfwer enough to the objeclion. But further, Daniel tells us, that the (fj " Mejfiah^ the prince, Ihould be cut oft, but not for himfelf^ 'I'his he could not fay with propriety of an office, A a Befidcs, (0 Pfi. li. I. (/)Dan.ix. 26. ( i86 ) Befidcs, when Feter fays, " Thou art the CbriJ}** it would mean no more in that fenfe, than if he had faid, " Thou art the office,^' But there is nothing more plain than that the names Khig^ Priejl^ and Frcphet, point at perfons vefted with thefe refpeclive offices ; in hke manner, the name Cbriji points out the peribn authorized by office, for the difcharge of the great work he was appointed to : And if it be granted, as com- mon fenfe requires it ihould, that the term Chrift is not confined to the ojjcey but to the Ferfon bear- ing the office, then the controverfy is at an end, and the whole caufe yielded, in as much as it has been proved above, that the fame official charac- ters are afcribed to the Son, as to Christ. The plain confequence is, that both terms point out the cojuplex peribn of the glorious Redeemer, clothed with fuch offices, who is no other than the blelTed Emmanuel ; for it is only as fuch, that he does, or can faftain any office in x\\t bulinefs of man's redemption, L E T as next fee what is moft likely to be the meaning of the phrafe, " Son of God," in the text. This will appear exceeding plain, if thefcope of the palfage is attended to, Our bleifed Lord had aiked the difciples what the people's fentiments concerning him were. They having told him ; he next re juires their own ; Vv'hen Fetcr^in the name of the other difciples, anfwered, '*^ Thou art Christ, the Son of the livipg God." Now, it muft be at leaft fuppofed, that the anfwer which Feter gave, was direct tp the queftion his mafter afked in fuch a plain nianner ; But the queftion was, with refpecr to the character of Christ as come in the /lejhy '^ \Vhom fay ye, that I the Son of man am ?" ( '87 ) am ?" Therefore the terms in the anfwer, muft include his human nature, or they would be no direft reply to the queftion alked. But that the anfwer reipe<5led his character as Emmanuel, the ALL-SUFFICIENT Saviour, is evident from our Lord's reply to Peter, and the fequel of the paf* fage. ** Flefli and blood hath not revealed this un- to thee, but my Father, which is in heaven.** "What was it that Peter had revealed unto him ? Surely the characffer of the perlbn who was fpeak- ■ing to him. The fame that all God*s children hear and learn of their heavenly Father, " That he hath fent his Son, whofe name is Emmanuel, to be the Saviour of the world." This is plain from what our Lord adds, " Upon this rock will I build my church : And the gates of hell Ihall not prevail againft it." What is this rock oil which the church is io fccure ? Surely the truth concerning the character of Christ, the Son of the living God, which the Father makes known to all his children, as well as to Peter, "For other foundatia?i can no man lay, than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Brought unto the church, they " are built upon the foundation of the Apoftles and Pro- phets, (the doctrine they taught concerning) Jesus Christ himfelf, being the chief corner ftone ; iii M'hom (as a Son that builds his father's houfe) all the building fitly framed together, groweth into an holy temple in the Lord." The relative character and work of Jesus Christ, fbe Son of God, is the fum of the chrif- tian religion , and tiie foundation of the church's fecurity and privileges, againft which the powers of hell and earth are combined, but according to his promife, they ihall not prevail. He next ac- quaints the Apoftles, with a facred truft that fliould ( 1^8 > Ihould afterwards be committed to them, which at that time, they very Httle underllood, viz. the opening up and making known to the world the doctrines, laws, and oi^dinances, of his king- ^dom, both with refpect to loofing the obHgation to Mofalc rites and ceremonies, and the eftablilhing dhriftian ordinances, whicli fhould never be altered. This our Lord calls the keys of the kingdom of hea- ven. Thus they fliould hind and loafe by the doc- trines which they lliould infallibly be directed to teach. I But as the fuitable time was not yet come, for fuch an open declaration of his characler, " he charged them, that they Ihould tell no man that he was Jesus, the Christ.'* This muft have a direct reference to what they had confefTed him to be ; and fhews that the fum of their faith, as they exprefTed it, was, that they believed him to be the true Mejfiah or ChriJI, if we will allo\y t}\tiV7nafteK to be a proDer interpreter of their creed. I? ' f I know this way of difpofing of «he keys-, will not pleafe the kingdom of the Clergy, whofe dominion over rrien is principally fupported upon a notion, which they have in all ages taken great pains to cultivate, viz. That they are the Apoft-les Jiiccejfon, — Ambaffadors of Chrijl as the Apoillas were. — have the keys of the k'n:gd'.vi cf heaven corrtmitted to thetn, and fb can open and (hut at pieafu.e ; all which, are fdinvjods impofed upon the credulous njultuude, to keep up tliai revei-jnce and fubifction expecfted f ron^ them, to fuch as are more Yik^fpuitual Lords, thzufpiritual leaders. If they are fuccejfors to the Apoftles, which of them was cal- led, feiic^and ordained to this office immediately by Jejus Chr>J}. Wiuch of thiim has ihr po-ver of working miracles as a proof of Jiis miflr^o ? If they a^e Amhajfadors. — !t;t them fhew their com- niifiion from heav,:n f) make any ne-^u Li-ws^ or ahet ihofe already 'Uiadc — what new revelatior. they h^vc i:i trult to men. — And to fay the\ have the ,^q'/ or ihc kin^idovi of heaven, is manifeftly to oh Chrijl, — ufurp i)is throne,- niid intrude upon his kingly office, who alone " hath the i^v of David, he openeth, and «p Vian ^v\ \z\\\ , ^ad fhur.eth, and /;? wff^ openeth. Behold, I h' Word, which is given him. As it is owing to the prejudice of education, that the term Son is fo Htdc under- flood, I fuppofe, it will be found, that on the fame accpunt, the term Word is applied to Christ in a wrong fenfe : Whereby the lignificant ideas which are conveyed by the ufe of it in the facred volumes, are in a great meafure loft to fuch as are accuftomed to take things of this kind upon truft, as handed down to them, without being at the pains to confult the fcriptures impartially to find the true import thereof. T II. E fcuoolmen's definitions of this term, as applied to Christ, are fuch as no man can have any ideas of, without firft fuppofing him to be a mere creature ; as they are inconfiilent with any notions that revelation affords us of Deity. Even they themfelves pretend not to know what is meant by the terms they ufe, and are therefore obliged to put this into the number of the great myfteries in religion, which cannot be underftood, and fo iliould not be inquired into. This is a fate which riany of the plain truths in revelation have been fubjected to. Many critics have attempted to re- concile the inferior characters of the Word to true and eternal Deity, by fuppofing that both a real derivation, and fome natural as well as oeconomi- cal inferiority may be allowed to belong to the Logos, even in his divine nature. But this, with other ( 193 ) other things of the fame kind, I leave to thofe who can defend the doctrine of a derived God. I T M'-ould be of fmall advantage to examine the fiibtle diftinclions, which have been advanced oa this point : Nor dare I depart fo far from the prefent purpofe. I fhall endeavour to make it ap- pear, that the term Word, is part o£ th.c oecono* mical character ^Christ in the New Teilament, and fo muft be of pecuHar advantage for every chriftian to confider and know. John ufes this title of Christ oftener than the other writers of the New Teftament : But wherever it is mentioned, it is plainly meant of his oeconomical character. Luke, in the preface to his gofpel, lays, the difciples " were eye-witneifes, and minifters or fervants of the Word." That by the Word here, is meant Jesus Christ, and not the gofpel, as fome fuppoie, is evident from the words ; for' with the greatelf propriety might the difciples be called eye-zvltnejje^ of Christ, as Feter alfo fpeaks of their being " eye-wittieff'es of his majcfty.'* But it muft be a very forced con- ftrudion, and in efFcd: laying, that Luke did not write good lenfe, to call them eye-witne(fes of the gofpel, which would rather been ear-wit nejjes^ had that been the fenfe. Besides, it would feem very ftrange in Luke, to write a preface to the hiftory^ of the life and actions of Christ, and not mention to Theo- ^hilus, (to whom he" wrote it) any name or title of the perfon whofe hiitory he was about to write : But this nmft be the cafe, x'i Jksus Christ is not intended by the term Word in the preface, B b for ( 194 ) for there is not any other word that points him put in it. Now, as the Word here means Jesus Christ, (for I can fee nothing of any confequence againft it) this is one inftance wherein he is called the Word, in his oeco7iomical charader ; or the gofpel of Luke is not a hiftory of him under that conli- deration, which none will prefume to fay. The Apoftle, in his epiftle to the Hebrews, fays, (^?J " The Word of God is quick and power- ful, and fliarper than any two-edged fword, pier- cing even to the dividing afunder of foul and fpirit, and of joints and marrow ; and is a difcerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.** What is here predicated of the Word, cannot with fuch propriety belong to the written word, as to Jesus Christ, the ^'■living Word {a) Htb. iv. 13, 13. [h) R.<;v. ii. 3|, ( 195 ) . fides, it is added, this word is the " great high^ friej}, that is pafled into the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God." This, with what the Apoftle had formerly faid concerning the Word, he malces an argument for the fame thing, to encourage theni in perfeverance and fteadfaftnefs. "Let us labour therefore to enter into that reft, left any man fall after the fame example of unbelief. For the word of God is quick and powerful, &c.'* Seeing the Word is fo powerful, — ^ftrict in judgment, — irre* Jiftable in operation, — critical in difcerning th^ heart, — whofe intelligence pervades over all,- whofe eye beholds every fecret thing, — to whom all ihall give an account, — and who is paffed into hea- ven in the character of the gieat high-prieft of his people, Jesus the Son of God, ^' Let us hold faft our profeflion/* Now as it is pretty clear that it is JesUs^ Christ, who is here called the Word, it can- not be denied that he bears that title with refpect to his oecono?nical chara^er* The Apoftle taking his leave of the Ephcfian church, fays, — (c) " Now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, who is able to build you up, and to give you an in- heritance among all them who are fan<^ified/' What is here laid, agrees much better with Christ, than the ivritten ivord or the gofpel, which is only the means or inftrument for the purpofes mcn^ tioncd. It is Christ who builds up his people by the Spirit : He builds this fpiritual temple, and bears the glory. The gofpel is the glafs in which they (c) Aifls XX. 32, ( 196, ) they fee their Inheritance : But it is Jesus Christ: that gives it, and puts them in pofleffion thereof. Paul in all his falutations to the churcher., joins God and the Lord Jesus Christ toge- ther, and therefore it is agreeable to his own •phrafeology, toconfider Jesus Christ as intend- ed, by the term Word, in the text : And it is the jnore probable, as it argues his equality, which 5Vpuld not be agreeable wjth refpect to the turit- ten wordy to be put on a level with God, info folemn a recommendation. To recommend the iaints to Christ,, is an honour which is due to Jlinri, and no diminution of the glory of God : But it iwould appear otherwife, if the gofpel was here meant. The Epheftans are here commitfed to the care of God, and the Word ; but the faints are never committed to the care of the 'written ivord \ for, from feveral other texts, we find it is committed to them. The faints are under the care of Ch ri st their Jhepberd, bujl^and, and Saviour^ M'ho ihall at laft prefent them to God v/ithout fpot or wrinkle. None but one pofTeifed of divine per- fed:ions is capable to take the charge of the faints . They never commit themfelves or others to the care of any but Chrif}, and with the Apoftle reft fatisfied with their choice. *^' I know whom I have believed, and am perfuaded that he is able to keep that 1 have committed to him, againft that day." And at death, they are all of the fame temper with Stephen, who with his laft breath, and the greateft confidence, could coramit his departing fpirit to the care of Jefits Chrift, faying, " Lord Jejus, receive my fpirit*'' From thefe confiderations, we ( ^97 ) wc may conclude that 'jcfus Chr'iji bears the title Word in the text ; and that this is one inftance more of his being called fo in his oeconomkal cha* raster. A s it would be tedious to be fo particular on every inftance, I lliall only mention tw^o or three more texts, in which I think the term VxTord is ufed in the fame fenfe. 'Peter fays, — {d) " The faints arc born of incorruptable iz<:di^ by the word OF God, who liveth and abideth for ever." Now ^efus Chrift alone is the living word of God. He tells us, that the icofleis in his time were {e) " wil- lingly ignorant, that by the v/ord of God the heavens were of old, and the earth ftanding out of the water, and in the water, — but the heavens and the earth which are now, by die fame Word are kept in ftore, refervcd unto fire, &c.*' Paul fays, Cf) " Through faith we underftand that the worlds were framed by the word of God." The fame Word by whom John fays, — {g) " All things were made, and ^^^ithout him was not any thinr* made that was made." Paul charges Timothy to (A) " preach the Word." The words are, " preach the Logos," which muft always be interpreted of Chrift : And we may be very fure that Pi/ul N\''ould charge Timothy to preach the fame he did himfelf, but he fays, " wc preach Chrift crucified." I N thefe, and fome other texts, this title of Chrift is barely mentioned, and we can only learn in v.hat fenfe it is apphed to him from the fcopc and contexts, or comparing them with others of limilar import. Wc fliali now confider John's ac- count [dj iPer. ;. aj. (.-) z Pet. i.i. 5, 7. ff) Ihb. XJ. 5. C^) J^lio 1, 3. (../') z Tim. IV. 2. C ips ) count of the Word, which in fcveral places is more explicit. I T is a veiy needlefs inquiry which feme have laboured much in, how John came by this term. If* we beUeve the books which Jie wrote, to be part of the infpired writings, we need be in no doubt how he came by the whole, w^ithout the afliftance of Vlato^ Fbilo, or any other whom he is fuppofed to borrow this term from. My pre- fent bulinefs is to fhew in what fenfe he applies this title to Jefus Cbrift^ which he does more fre- quently than in all the New Teftament befides. If the pafl'ages are attended to, it will appear, that in every inftance, the complex character of our Lord is included in the term Word. About to prove the truth and excellency of the MeJJiab's character, and that Jefus of Nazareth was he, John mentions feveral names applicable to him, whom he intended as the great fubject of the gofpel he wrote, which he begins with this title the. Word or Logos. "In the beginning was the "WORD, and the word was with God, and the word was God. The fame was in the be- ginning with God.'* Here he declares three glo- rious facts. " In the beginning was the word." The fcriptures copiouily point out the ancient re- lation of Chrift to the church, as the medium of communication betwixt God and men ; in this capacity he was in the begihn'wg^ or the beginning itfelf as fome would render the text. "He was ftt t^p from ever la/ling^ — his goings forth were of old" And in this relative capacity, John fliys, " he was -Mith God," .and adds, " the word was God." By which he afiinus the Deity of him he was fpeaking of. This divine, by a character of Em- manup:l. ( ^99 ) ' MANUEL, leads us to the knowledge of God. It had been well for the church, if thele called Divines in all ages lince, had taught by the fame rule. From the fcope of the whole chapter, it is- evi- dent that the character of Emmanuel is the fubjecb, whom he calls the Word. No other could be laid to be in the beginning with God, which expreflion the Evangelift repeats, to fliew the cer- tainty of the truth I am now contending for. It was he who came to his own, and \i\soii>n received him not, — gives the privilege of adoption to thofe that believe, — dwelt among the Apoftles, whofe glory they beheld, — wlio was full of grace and truth, of which they were made partakers. — He whom John the Baptijl bare witnefs to, as coming after him and preferred before him, the latchet of whofe fhoes he was unworthy to loofe, — of whom he faid, h^oldiho. Lainb of God, that taketh away the fm of the world,- — w^hom he faw the fpirit de- fcending upon, — and of whom he bare record, that this is the So7i of God. — The fame Son of God, who declares and makes him known, — of whom Andreiv faid to Simon, we have found the Mejftahy which is the Chrijl ; — and the fame of whom Fhilip faid to Nathaniel, that Mofes and the Frophets did write. In Ihort, he whom John calls the Word, fiiys himfelf, that they fhould fee the Angels of. God afcending and defcending upon him, which can be no other than Jefus Chrijl, the Saviour of men, to illuftrate whofe character as fuch, John declares he wrote his whole gofpel. " Thefe are written, fays he, that ye might believe that Jefus is the Chrifl, the Son of God, and that believing yc might have life through his name.** That no doubt might remain concerning the ienfe ( 20O ) fenfe of the term Word, which John mentions ia his gofpel, he explains himfelf in the cleareft man- ner in his firft epiftle. — {t) " That which was from the beginnings which we have heard, which we havey^f-^ with onr eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled of the word of life ^ for the Ife was manifefted, &c.'* He refers to the ■vtvy fenfes for evidence, that the fame Jefus, whom they had heard, feen, -^Vid felt, was the word of life, or the living word : And if we once admit that John is to be credited, fophiftry itfelf cannot evade the force of his teftimony. It is clear, and needs no comment. An o T H E R pafTage of his is equally confpi- cuous. — C'^)"! faw heaven opened, and behold, a white horfe j and he that fat upon him was called faithful and true, and in righteoufnefs he doth judge and make war : His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns ; and he had a name written, that no man knew but he him- felf : And he was clothed with a vefture dipt in blood : And his name is called, the word of God." This defcription is applicable to no other than the once humbled, — now exalted Jefus, who is flill called the Word, and of whom John tells us, he bare record. — (/) " The revelation of Jefus Chrlfl, v/hich God gave to his fervant John, who bare > record of the word of God." I SHOULD alfo here confider that text in i John V. 7. where the word is mentioned, but as that text ,is made an argument for the names Father, Wordy and Holy Ghojl, being natural and effentlal to Deity, I ihall refer the confideration tlu eor, *till the argu- ments in favour of Inat opinion come to be anfwered, (;■) I John i. i, a. (^)Rev. jiU. ii, 12, rj* (0 ibid. i. i, s. ( 201 ) anfwered, and fliall very briefly add here, what I underftandby the name, title, or appellation Word, as given to Jefus Chrifi, Logos, which is rendered Word, is a fcrip- tural name given to Jcfus Chnft., in both Old and New Teftaments. Ihe proper meaning ot it is. An outTcard declaration »f God's ivifdom and will to men : And as applied to Chrift, the Mejfiah, the Jew^s and Apoftles both meant, that he was that glorious peribn by \t'hom Gk)D was pleafed fully and plainly to difcover his will to men, as being acquainted with all his counfels, and impowered by him ttj give laws to the world in general, and the church in particular, and rule them accord- A G k E £ A B L E to this account of CbriJ}, as the WORD OF God, the Apoille calls him^ (?«) **• the power of Gody and the zvifdom of God.''* And fays, " that of God be is made unto us wlfdoin. In him are hid 111 the treafures of wifdoni and know- iedgit (ji) By him i^ made known the manifold wif- dom of God." With reference to this fenfe of hisj name, Jobn fays, he is the (o) " ligbt ot men, — the ligbt that ligbteneth every man that cometiunto the world, — (/>) He that believeth on him, no longer abid- eth in darknefs. — {q) He is the way ^Xh& truth, and the ///>,** as he afErms of himfelf. The way to the knowledge and enjoyment of God.— "No man Cometh unto the Father bu£ by ?}ie.'*^ . The' fpiri} and truth of all the Old Tcftameat pfti'mifes, pro- phecies, declarations, S:c. concerning 'the Me/fia/p, Hence it is faid, " The tcUimony' or y^/i,'is the C 2 fpirit (w) I Cor. i. 14, 33. (;;) Eph. iii. 10. (>) Joh 1 i. 4, 7. ^/>)ibi..f, xii. 46. {q) ibid. X!V.6. , . ( 202 ) fpint of prophecy," — the revealer, beftower, and exemplar of all divine truth, — the author and finifh- ter of faith, — full of grace and truth. — The life^ (r) " I am the refurreclion ' and the life: He that believeth in me, tho' he were dead, yet Ihall lie live, (j) I am that bread of life. (/) In him was life, and the life W2.?> the light of men. («) The \vords I fpeak 2iT^ fpirit and life, (v) He that hath the Son, huth life, (jw) The purpofeand grace of God in Cbrifl before the world began, is now made manir- feft by the appearing, of our Sa\'iour Jefus Chrifly who hath abolifhed death, and brought life and hnmortality to light, through the gofpel,'* And further, agreeable to this ferife of the title Word, being applied to Chrifl, he is called the image or vifible reprefentation of the invifible God. — ? {x) " The exprefs image of his gloiy.'* He makes known the invifible God to men ; hence he fays, (y) " He that hath feen me, hath feen the Father. {z) I will declare thy name unto my brethren, {a) I have declared thy name unto them, and will de-r clare it. No man hath iztxs. God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in -the bpfom pf the Father, he hath declared him.'* Thus it is evident from revelation, that Jefus P^/■i/? is called the word of God, becaufe by hirn Go d 'reveals himfelf to men. He is the great me- l^ium oi all communication betwixt Jehovah and creatures. — In him ail the drifts of God are beftowr ed. — By him the grateful fervices of his people iire acceptable v>dth God. — In him are all the coun- fel§ and purpofe^ of God. — By. him they are al} executed (r) John xi. aj. (/) vi. 35.— (0 »• 4. («) *•• ^3- (^) i John V. la. (iw) 2 Tim. i. 10. (;v) Col.' j'. 15. Heb. i. 3. {^J j[otia xiy, 9, (z) Heb. ii. la. {a) John xvi. 26. ibid. i. 18. ( 203 ) executed with infinite wifdom and prudence. — *iJe is the fcope of the written word of Got). — His character runs through the whole of revelation.— All that wc now know, or ever Ihall learn of God, is in and by his own Son J ejus Chr'ift.* — He may therefore with fuch propriety as only divine wif- dom could dictate, be called the Word, the liv- ing WORD of God, Were it of any advantage to this argument, it might be fhewn, that the Jews generally meant the Meffiah, when they wrote of the Word or Logos. This is abundantly evident from their writings, tho' the palTages would be tedious to cite : And it is alfo evident, that John made ufe of the term Word, from the common acceptation of it among the Jezus, to exprefs him whom they expected as the promifed MeJJlah. { But I think a ' point X The Jewj had /itc difTerent ideas of the Lo^ot. (l) That it fignificd UOD himfelf ; hence they ^fcribe the words and adions of God to the Memra, or nvord. {%) It fignififd fomething in, or of God, whereby he iranl3«5led hs divine affairs. (3) It is taken tor that Angel who appeared {o ofien, and aiTomed the names and titles o* Jehovah, &c. and was worfliipped by the faints. (4) They frequently called iiim tlie Ton of Cod, And (i) The Mejfiah. — We might faiiH coil-ft all thefe ideas from the fcripiure account of Chrijl. John plainly calls him Cod. "The woid Wis God," And tiie Apultie as plainly calls him tiic ivifdom and puiver of Gon. He' is called the An^el, or nief- fenper of the covenant, bv Ifaiah and Malachi : Anu in many pLces ciilled the Son oj Cod and Meffiah. From the whole, the Logos or Word, is the revealsr of divine wifdom to men, the wi?- dlum o^ divine manifellations, and divine tranfa<.T:ions : This he was before his appearing in flefh, and fliall continue to be till the oeconomy of God is finiflied. It is rematkuble in fcripture, that tho' the term ftf/z^^r often includes the divine tliree : And it is faid God is holy, and God is a Spirit, wliich are likewife Inclufive terms : Yet the terms Word and So^f, never include any more than o«^, and are ■peculiarly applied to him onlv. This feems to point our, that the meaning, of thtfe names muft be fought in a certain refpecf^, where- in he that bears them is peculiarly diftinguifhed ; and that is cer- tainly ( 204 ; point of doctrine fo very evident, from revelation, needs no afliftance from human authorities, either Jezi'ijh or chrij}la7i* taitily ID his being Emmanuel, and the offices he fudaias in «hat charafter, to which, together with what he did in it, a!l fuchr icrms as ^orJ, S»n, Jefus^ I\'eJ/iah, &c, are properly applicable, as well ab his beinp faid to be begatent fent, glorified. Sec. The Dames he afTumed are all I'uited to the eeds and wants of linners, and have a relation to his charafler as oikonomos, a fteward or difpenfer of grace, — oikodomos, a builder of his chinch, the boufe of God, — or Logos, a revealer of the mind and will of God. All belonging to the oeconomy of faving fin- ners, fettiog them a: libertv> and beftowing gracious gifts upco them. '^.mMj^ SECT. ( 205 ) E C T. V. HAVING fliewed what the fcriptures teach us concerning the oeconomical characters of Father and Sony the next inquiry fliould be into what we learn from them of the Holy Ghojl, I have proved that he is God, from the 7iames^ ■per- fections ^ and ivorks, proper only to God, being afcribed to him : And lliall now very briefly hint fome tljings, to fliew that his fcripture character is oeconomical. As to the notion commonly received of a natural, necejfary, and eternal procejfion of the Holy Gbojly from the Father and the «So«, it is what I cannot find the leaft authority for in revelation. Th e only text all edged for proof of eternal procejfion is what our Lord fays, — (b) " When the comforter is come, whom I will fend unto you- from the Father, even the fpirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he Ihall teflify of me." The Spirit proceeding from the Father here, is mani- feftly fpoken of his TiuJJion, not of his " e/fence or- dlvhie perfcnality^^ as is fuppofed. Our Lord is there telhng his- difciples, how inexcufable the "Jews were in continuing their hatred and nefent- ment againft liim, after he had done fo many great works before them, which were fufficient to con- vince them that he was fent of God, and the true Mejfiah, had not their inveterate prejudices fo blhided them to eveiy kind of evidence. At the fame time he intimates to them, what they might expect from the Jews, for bearing teftimony to the trutli of nis chamcler : But for their comfort in view (^) John XV. 26. ( 206 ) view of fiicli difficulties, he informs them, that he would " fend the comforter as another ivitnefs from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, who proceeds or comes out from the Father, and hejhould tejlify of hijn." The whole refpecls tlie greatnefs of the evidence, which he promifes to add to what he had formerly given, concerning the truth of his being the Mejfiah. I T is very ftrange how fo plain words fhould be fofar miftaken, as to be applied to any other pur- 'pofe : But it is Hill more ftrange to find a meaning impofed upon them, which neither they, nor any other text in revelation have the leaft relation to. But the text muft be clouded -wdth myfter.y, that thofe who deal in rayfteries may find out the hu' man myftery of eternal procejjion from it, or that doctrine would be without Hiadow of proof in fcripture. It might be afked, how it comes to be imagined, that our Saviour, fpeaking of his fending the f pi I it from the Father, and the fpirit coming from the Father, fhould not be underftood in the fame fenfe ? The one muft be oeconomical ; why not the other ? The fupporters of this doclrine will have the Spirit'ito proceed naturally and eternally from the Son, as well as from the Father, tho' there is not the leaft hint thereof in this text, nor any other. If they reft the procejicn from the lather, upon the word proceedeth in the text, the pre (ejfon from the Son has not even this {lender foun- dation ; for the Spirit is no where faid to proceed from the Son, A very learned divine proves the point by the following remarkable argument. " When God is faid to fend foith the Spiiit of " his Son, it is evident that the Spirit is called the '* Spirit ( 207 ) *' Spirit of the Son, not on the account of his " million, for that is afcribed to the Father, but on *'- fomc other account ; and what can that be, but hi3 *' proceeding from him as one in nature with him, " and in order of nature, though not of time^ " being after the Son." Thia is all the evidence he can give for the trutli of an article which he reckons neceflary to falvation. But I fuppofe any- one of common fenfe will fee, that he fays nothing at all to prove it. A s the word proceedeth in the text is made the ground oi eternal prccejjlon, I alk why the ^rc;-. cejjlon of the Son by nature and necejftty from the Father, is not made another article of religion ? For there is the fame rcafon for the one, as for the other, if our Lord is to be credited, who faith, "I proceeded forth and came from God.'* Now, this is never applied to the divine perfon of Chrift : No, nor (by any that I know) to what they call his' eternal generation : But is univerfally under- ftood of his vufjwn, and coming forth from God, with commijQion and authority as his mimfter : And common fenfe tells us, that to come from the Father, and to be fent by hi?n, are terms of the fame import. Is it not then ftrange ! that the proceeding and coming forth of the Spirit from the JFafher, fliould be fcrewed up to an argument for his eternal procejfion, any more than the other. As the proceeding and coming forth oiChrijl, lignifies his vtijfton into the world : So that of the Spirit, muft refer to his official character, as a fanclifier, and comforter, which part he acls in confurnmating the great -svork of man's falvation. But it is im- poflible that one of the divii.e three can exift by proceeding from another^ confillent with thtir equality and co-eternity. It ( 208 ) ' I T is maintained, that the tenn Holy Ghoft or Spirit is natural, and peculiar to one of the divine three y butluch as do lb, ihoiild iniorm us in what fenfe he is pecuharly holy, or a Spirit, that the other two are not. It is a pity that men' fhould pretend to fee fo far beyond revelation, and yet Can render no reafon for what they h ooldly affirm. The fcriptures fay that God is a Spirit, and that God is holy j which iniift include all that is called God. The name. Holy Ghojl, can therefore be no definition of any diilinguiihing efl'ential property of one in the divine plurality : And fo can have no reference to the internal unity or distinc- tion among the divine threk. Holy Ghost and Spirit of God are terms of the fame lignification in the New Teftament ; and dire exprefiive of that part he ads in the divine oeco- noniy revealed to us infcripture. He is called Holy Spirit or inspirer, becaufe fent by the Father and the Son, to {anclify and quicken th€#' with a principle of fpiritual and divine life, M/hom he enables to receive his teftimony in the word. In thisfenfe, the Father by office, (or the part he- fuftains in the great oeconomy) fends him as a ivitnefs and comforter, — In this fenfe, the Son by offia, requells the Father to fend him. — And in this fenfe, the Holy Spirit by office, proceeds or conies from the Father, The whole of this will appear manifeil to the im- partial reader, from a fuccincl view of the Appel- lations, Mission, and Works attributed to the Spirit infcripture. He is called Holy Spirit, not t.) exprefs the manner of his divine relation to th^ Father and Son, or his exillence in Deity, as ' is commonly aflertcd \ this we have no authority for in fcripture : But ( ^P9 ) But rather becaufe lie is infallibly /jo/y in hmfelf^ and has infpired holy men to wnte the word of God , full of holy Midfpiritual truth, by which he works holy and Jpiritufil principles, qualities, and affe^ions in his people, enabling them to perform the holy- and fpiritual' exercises or duties required therein. — — The Spirit of God. — Becaufe lie is fent by God to carry von- the (piritual operations, which are ncceffary for completing the great oeconomy pur-^- pofed by him. — And the Spirit of Cbrijl, hQC-xuio. ient by him to execute the appHcation of the • fpiritual wark of man's redemption. -The Spirit cf truth. — He is the author of 2)! fpiritual truth, and the infallible teacher of it to others. Spirit of adoption. — He brings firmers into th.Qfa- viily of God, — conforms them to the image of their fpiritual Father, — and witnefi'eth the truth of their fpiritual adoption, to them. Free Spirit. — Sove- reign and free in all his operations,— -dehvers his people 'jSsom all fpiritual bondage,— givt^ them free- dom "iSf^Sj^ritual exercifes, and accefs to their hea- venly Fuither.- The Spirit of wifdom and revc' Az/^'fj/z .-^Infinite in wifdom himfelf, he beftows oft his people eminent degrees of ivifdom and under* ftauding in fpiritual things by means of revelation, which he is the author of. Spirit of life in jefus Chrift. — Kis people dead in trei'paffes and fin, lie quickens, gives thQin fpiritual life^ in union to Cbrijl the living head, — maintains, reftores, in- Creafes, and at laft perfects their fpiritual life in glory with him. H E is alfo called the Spirit of judgment, -—Faith, —^Love, — HoHnefs,-—a found mind, — of fipplication, — g/ace and glory. All which appellations evidently refpect the oeconomy of redemption : > So that we D d may ( 210 ) may conclude, that thefe, with all the other names the Holy Ghojl gets in fcripture are oeconomical. In the fame fenfe are other words to be taken, which are predicated of the Spirit : Such as his being fent, given , poured cut, coTnirig upon men^ or falling upon them. But as thefe fall under the next head, I only mention them here. The fcripture account of the Mission of the Holy Ghojl will furtlxer prove his character to be oeconomical.-^But it ihouid be obfen^ed, that this fending, or what is commonly called the MiJJion of the Holy Ghojl, does not include the many great works afcribed to the Spirit in the Old Teftament, nor what is faid of him with refpecl to the concep- tion and life oijefus Chriji. Tho' thefe were great works, what is properly called the MiJJion ovjend- ing of the Spirit muft be pofterior to all thefe, for Chriji always fpeaks of it as ^. future event, which fhould take place after his afcenfion. Nor does the MiJJion of the Spirit imply that he is not God, as the enemies to his Deity would in- fer from it ; for fay they, *^ As he is fent by God, he is inferior to God, and confequently cannot be God in a proper fenfe.** This argument would conclude equally againft the Deity of the Son and Holy Ghojl : And like mofl of the arguments from tl^at quarter, is built upon a miftake concerning the oeconomical character of the Son and Holy Ghojl. Eut I have Tirade it evident from fcripture, that '^ef/s Chriji and the Holy Ghojl are God, fo that nothing can be ipferred from his being fent to prove that the Spirit" is not God. Befides, the argument is not univerfally true even among men, fince by confent and agreement among equals, one may be delegated to a certain v/ork for others, whoj (- =■> ) who, yet, arc not fuperior by nature* Whatever may be in this, it is certainly unfair to argue againft plain fcripture evidence in favour of the Deity of either the Son or Spirit, becaufe they are fent in that character to fulfil their part in the oeco- nomy of man's falvation, in which particular re- fpect, it might be fafely granted they are inferior, without infringing their right to the honour and glory of Deity, Moreover, as the SpiHt is God, his being , Jent cannot imply a local mutation, or change of place. This would make him a circumfcribed being, and confequently not God : Nor can it imply the idea of conjlraint or necelTary fervitude^ as the cafe is betwixt a matter and fervant* The Spirit is free in all his operations, and cannot be compelled. Neither does the fending of the Spirit infer his want of abilities with refpect to the work, either in contriving, chooling the means, or ac- compliihing it, which is often the cafe with one who is employed to execute the dellgns of another. What Chrift fays of the Spirit makes nothing againft this : " He fhall not fpeak of himfelf, but whatfoever he IhaU hear, that fliall he fpeak." From which fome would infer, that he cannot fpeak the truth without being firft taught it. Whereas the Apoftle tells us, that " the Spirit fearcheth all things, yea, die deep things of God." When it is faid, *' he fliall not fpeak of himfelf the meaning is, he fliall not forge what he fliall fay, — ' or £iy any thing contrary to what Cbrijl had fpoken. That this is the idea conveyed in the words, might be proved from a critical confideration of the ori- ginal : But we have a plainer proof for the unlearned reader at hand, for John fays, " The anointing teacheth you all things, and is truth,^ and is no LIE ^■" Tho ( 212 >) T H o' the Spirit had infph-ed the Prophets, • witneffed to Chrijl at his baptifm, and tho* Chrift '* breathed on his difciples, and faid, Receive ye the Holy Gbojl^* yet none of thefe is meant by the fending or mijfion of the Spirit, " The tioly Ghoji was not yet given, becaufe Cbriji was not yet ■ glorified." He was not given in thztvifibie, abun- dant, convincing, and ghrious manner, as after the afcenfion oi Clmjl, Every previous fending, gift, or work of the Spirit, is as it were loft in fcrip- ture account, when compared with that at Pente- cojl ; which was as Feter interpret^ it^ the fulfil- ling of Joel's prophecy, delivered in fuch amazing -language. — («) " And it fhall come to pafs after- wards, that I will pour out my Spirit upon allflefh, and your fons and your daughters fiiall prophefy , your old men ftiall dream dreams, your young men fliall •fee viiions : And alfo upon the fervants, and' upon the hand-maids in thofe days, will I pour out my • Spirit : And 1 will ihew wonders in the heavens, and in the earth, blood arid fire, and pillars of • fmoke. The fun fhall be turned into darknefs, and the moon into blood, before that great and ■ terrible day of the Lord, &c." It was Cbrijl's bap- tifing his difciples with the Holy Gboft, and with fire,-^a divine evidence to the truth of his charac- • ter, and his being enthroned at God's right hand, and alfo of the Spirit's entrance, (fo to fpe^k) upon the actual miniftration and management of all things neceilary to the kingdom oi ouv Lord Jefus Cbrifl. Yor thefe and other weighty reafons, it is • called //j^" fending, tbe giving, or the coming of the ' Holy Gbvfi, by way of eminence. Tho' this pour- ' irig out of the Spirit, was more ftriking arid vifible in the effects at PentecoJ}, and in the , Apoftolic times than afterwards, . yet, it exteads to all the chiarcjiea \a) JqqI z, 28.— su r 213 ) churches oiCbnft in all ages; for he Wasproinifed to abide for ever. He accompanies the word, and tnakes it effeduarfor' the great ends for 'which it is feilt. The Spirit feparated from the "vjt^ord, ren- 'dfers it ineffedual to thdfe who Ufeit.^ ■ ^W'E need not;&y'to prove the f/e'deffity of fend- ing the Spirit, iince our Lord tells the difciples, ** It is expedient for you that I go away ; for if! go not away, the comforter will not com^ ; but if 1 depart, I will fend htm unto you.** Notwith- ftanding all the pains he had been at . to . teach the difciples the nature of Ms kingdom, and what they 'had to do and fuffer for him, yet they remained fo remarkably ignorant 'of thefe things, through the reigning J^e'ic;//?', prejudices in favour of a tem- poral grandeur, which they expected by the Mejfiak^ that when he was about to leave them, they faitj, '" Lord, wilt thou at this time reftore the kingdom *to Jfrael'* But by the effiifion of the Spirit^ 'theii' prejudices were removed ;— they then under- ' flood what C/^^y? had taught them,— and were pre- pared "for the great work andrfujfferinsrs allbttecl •fhein. ^ ' ^^" r; They were , extremely fond of the bodily pre- ■flhce. of Cbrifi\, hnt as they were to be difp^rfed abroad in the world, he could not be bodily prefent . witb each of them : But the Spirit was lent to be with them at all tinges, and in ail pi aces. His pre- Ipnce itifpired them with gifts fuitable for ' them as witn^effes, to carry their teflimony. to the uttermoft 'parts • Of the eatth, enlightening their, minds, and confirming them in the divine truth they taught,— .endowing them^vvith fuch fortitude as they feared 'ilo kind of fuffering ; — they trampled upon tor- ments, \i ( "4 ) ments, and the threats of kings and rulers of this world, — preached the gofpel in the face of death, and were regardlefs of what men or Devils could do to them. Now, all that grace, and all the extraordinary gifts which the Spirit was fent to pour out upon the Apoftles, and other inftruments employed in propagating the gofpel, taken together, make only one great link of the divine chain, — apart of the oeconomy of man*s falvation, wherein the Juftre of the love and grace of God appears to men ; Which leads me next to obferve. That the miffion of the Spirit is a blefling of the covenant of promife, and comes from Chrijl, as the head of the churchy confequently it mull be- long to the oeconomy of redemption. As it is the -promife of the Father to Chr'ift^ he claims the -power to bellow it ; accordingly he tells his difciples, that they Ihould be witnefles of his d«jth and refur- reftion, and in his name they fhould preach repcn* tance and remiflion of fins unto all nations j and for their encouragement, he adds, {h) " Behold, I fend upon you the promife of the Father : Tarry ye at Jerufalem, until ye be endowed with power from on high." A s all the promifes are in Chrijl^ yea, and in him, Amen ; fo muft this great promife of fending the Spirit. Hence fays the Apoftle, " becaufe ye are fons, God has fent forth the Spirit of bis Son into "your hearts. — According to his mercy he laved us by thewalhing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghoft, which he fhed on us abundantly through Jefus ChriJl our Saviour.*^ Believers are " built an habitation of God through the Spirit. — And being fitly (3) Luke xxlv. 49. ( 215 ) iitly joined and compacted together, they grow up unto hira in all things, who is their head^ eveu Chriji:' The promile of God is, " that he wiJf put his Spirit within them.'* This Chr'ijl accom- plifhed when he afcended as head of the church, in fending the Spirit to apply the great bleffings he had promifed and purchafed. The order of this oeconomy is pointed out by the Apoftle.- {c\ " Eled: according to the fore-knowledge of God the Father, through the fanclification of the Spirit, and fprinkling of the blood of Jesus." A s I formerly hinted, the benefits of this mijjlon of the Spirit extend to the church in all ages. Chr'ift promifed that he fhould abide for ever, and it continues a diftinguiihing character of the world from the children of Chr'ift^ — {d) " If any man has not the Spirit ofChriJ}, he is none of his.** Thus the mijfiofi, ov fe)iding of the Holy Ghoft, proves his character as fuch to be oeconomical. But to make this ftill more evident, we fhall take a very Ihort view of the works afcribed to the Spirit. It was proved above, that creation work is attributed to the Spirit Jehovah, and it muft necefi'arily follow, that providence is ano* ther work in which he is intimately concerned. !For it cannot be fuppofed, that any other carries on the fucceflion of individuals, — orders the various parts, — reftores their harmony and beauty, — and directs to the end , they were defigncd for, but him who at firft created them. Hence^ fays the PfalmiJ}, " Thou fendeft forth thy Spirit, and they are crea^i^d j thou reneweft the face -of the earth.'* T H E (0 I Pet, i» 2. ( perfect, — wife to falvation,- — and thoroughly fur- niftied to every good work." Upon this founda- tion the church of CbriJ} is built in all ages : And not withftan ding that fallible men were made ufe -of in writing the fcriptui'es, they were fo cou;- du6ted by the divine wifdom of the Spirit, as to be iree of error or miftake, in what was intended for the facred canon of revelation, which is the fure word of prophecy. " The things which we fpeak, fays the Apoftle, we fpeak in the words of the Holy Ghaflr Another work of the Spirit is, the giving to thofe whom he fent on extraordinary occafions the power of working miracles, as a teftimony of their being fent of God. None can work miracles but by the power of the Spirit, therefore the- Apoftle puts miracles among the gifts of the Holy Ghoft : yea. ( 2-7 ) yea, with refpecl to his human nature, C/j;-//'? fpeaks of himlelf as the inflrwiunt of the HcAy Gbo/t^ " I, fays he, caft out Devils by the Spirit of God/* Ai\ th.t ftgns, ivonders^ and miracles done by Ste^ pbe?i, Philip, and the Apoftles are attributed fco the Spirit. Paid, when telling the Ro?nans what he had done, fays, all was wrought by the Spirit of God. God only, who governs the world, can turn the works of nature into an extraordinary channel,—- do things above or contrary to tiie common courfe of nature. A GREAT part of the Spirit's work mentioned in fcripture, has a particular relation to Cbrijl him- felf. Before his coming in iieili, the Spirit had given moft clear and glorious defcriptions of him. " To him gave all the Prophets witnefs.'* He tells his dilciples, that the " things which were written in Mofes, the Prophets, and the Pfalms con- cerning him, muft be fulfilled. — And he expound- ed to them, in all the fcriptures, the things concern- ing himfelf. Search the fcriptures, faith he, for they are they which teftify of me." It would make a volume itfelf only to mention the defcriptions of Chrifl in the Old Teftament : But I cannot help taking notice of one thing, which is too much c(ver-looked, that the book of Pfalms is in general a defcription of Chrifl ; and if it were read in this point of light, it would be much more profitable than to apply the fubftance of it to David, Solomon^ OY others. See page 91. - A s Chrifi fent the Spirit when he afcended, it would fecm that the Spirit /f/2/^ him at his appearing in Hefli j for when fpcaking of that time by Ifaiah, he fays, " The Lord God and his Spirit hathyt-w/ me.'* The Holy Ghost framed the body of Christ, in the womb of the virgin. Hence fhe E c is ( =I8 ) is faid to be " with child of the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost fliall come upon thee, and the power of the higheftfhall overftiadow thee/* When he was to enter upon his pubhc miniftiy, the Spirit led him forth to begin the combat with the Devi! ill the wildernefs. I N the power of the Spirit, he returned from his victory over the Devil, and begun his miniftry, — opening his commiflion with a folemn declara- tion, that the Spirit had qualified and fent him to the work. — (^* This defcent of the Spirit in fuch a manner, was an extraordinary tcftimony to Christ, an honour never eonfared upon any before, and ihewed him to be the hrAy one of God , the anointed from above, thfe- king of God-'s people, and the heir of all things. But the fpecial time of the Spirit's teflifying of Christ, was after his afceniion, when at Pente- coft he appeared as cloven tongues of fire upon the Apoftles, and caufed them to bear witnefs for Christ in fo extraordinary a mianner, as to amaze all thefpeclators. No talents are competent to defcribe the wonderful effecls of the eifuiion of the Spirit, ■^ a more ilriking manner, than he hath done ■feimfelf, by Luke and the Apojlles in the iNewTelta- •ment ; the whole of v/hich, after the four goipels, is only an account of what be enabled them to teach, •write, and fu tier, as witnefies for Christ. This ( 221 ) This pouring out of the Spirit, was a plain demonftration of the omnifcience aiid divine vera- city of Christ, in accomplilhing his promife fo, punctually, and in- a manner far beyond theii' ex- pectations. It was likewife an ample fulfilling the Fa- ther's promifetofcndthe Holy Ghost. Both thefe •are included ill P^/^t's account of thatfolcmn event- to the wondering multitude, and muft be am oft glorious teiliraony given by the Spirit, to the truth of the hmfiab\ character.— fX; " This Jefus hath God railed up, whereof we are all witneiles. Wherefore being by the right-hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promife of the Holy Ghost, he hathCied forth this, which ye now fee and hear.'' The Spirit was further a witnefs to Christ^ in bellowing extraordinary gifts upon the Apoiflea and others, whei-eby they were quahfied to be pe- culiar witneffes for Christ. Now, they could fpeak the languages of the different nations in- telligibly without learning them, — teach the truths concerning Christ vrith fuch power and energy, as l^cter by a fmglc difcourfe converted three thou- fand. This is one remarkable inftance of the ac- compiiflimcnt of what Christ had told them, " That they fhould do greater works than they had feen him do." The converts to chriftianity were but few while he was among them, but now converts are made by thoufands. The Spirit iii- fpired them with fuch Ibund doctrine, as it fliould be worthy to complete the canon of revelation, and be called the icord of God, whicli will in all ages be a glorious tcftimony to Christ, in con- verting and comforting his children, and con- founding ( 222 ) founding all his and their enemies : And fo abfo- lutely fure, that if an Angel from heaven teach any- other doclrine, the Apoftle fays, let him be ac- curfed. T H R effufion of the Spirit, at and after Fente- cej}, — the doctrines he taught, — the miracles he wrought, — the predictions he gave forth by the Apoftles, — the gifts he bellowed, — and the infinite power he exerted in bringing thoufands to the kingdom of Christ, make up fuch a teftimony to the truth of our Saviour's chara6ter, as his combined enemies, the Devil, the World, and the j^ejh, can never prevail againft. With refpe6t to the extraordinary gifts which feemed necelfary to the Spirit to beftow at that time, the Apoftle gives a comprehenfive view of them, — (g) " Now there are diverfities of gifts, but the fame Spirit, — to one is given by the fame Spirit, the word of wifdom, — to another the word of knowledge by the fame Spirit ; to another faith ; to another the gifts of heal- ing ; to another the working of miracles ; to ano- ther prophecy ; to another the difcerning of fpirits ; to another divers kinds of tongues ; to another the interpretation of tongues : But all thefe worketh that one and the felf-fame Spirit, dividing to every man feverally as he will, &c." I SHALL only add one particular teftimony more which the Spirit gives to Christ, that is, his re- vealing Christ in the fouls of his children. He takes the things of Christ and fiiews to the mind, — removes the habits of antipathy, — prefents him in all his beauty, ai^d allures the heart to love, honour, {g) I Cor. xii. 4, S,— ir. ( 223 ) honour, and obey him : Hence, the Apoftle tefe us, that " no man can call Jesus, Lord, but by the Holy Ghost." Another great part of the Spini*s ivork with reference to Christ, is included in his o^/orz/J'/w^ him. When Christ was promiling to fend the Spirit, he fays, " He fhall glorify me : For he fiiall receive of mine, and Ihall fliew it unto you." The coming of the Spirit 2iS the gift of Chris t^, and by his appointment, glorified him. The great»- nefs of the gift, fhewed the height of glory and honour he was exalted to. It iliews what divine power, — what unfpeakable favour he had in hea- ven, when he could fend fuch a meiTenger as the divine Spirit. It was the cleareft demonllration of his being the true MeJJiab, and the truth of what he had lb often faid concerning the glory he was to be exalted to. But further, the Holy Ghost glorified Christ, by confirming the truth of his refurredion from the dead. The Apoftle makes the whole of the chiiflian religion turn upon the truth of Christ's refurreclion. It was the great conteft betwixt the Apoftles and the Jews, who held Christ to be an impoftor, and his refurreclion fabulous : And it niuft bi? allowed, that if this truth is taken away, it is im.poffible to prove him the Mefftah, or that the New Teftaracnt is any more than a devifed fable : But the fending of the Holy Ghost put that matter beyond doubt- This was the ufe the Apoftles made of it to th« admiiing multitude ; the evidence of which was fo pov/crful, as to convert fome thoufands of them to the belief of it : And we find the Spirit direrl- ed ( 224 ) ed the writers of the books contained in the New Teftament, to be fo careful on this poinr, that there is not one of them in which this truth is not aflerted, or proved at large from inconteftable evidence, as being the leading argument to prove that Jefus of Nazareth was the Son of God, and the Saviour of the ivorld^ who was dead, and is alive, and lives for evermore. To doubt here, is to call the whole of the chriftian religion in queftion. T H E Holy Ghost glorified Christ, bytak- ing fuch an effectual method to wipe off the igno- miny and reproach he was fubjed to in his life, and at his death. This was done with fuch divine wifdom and power, that even many of the Priejls, his inveterate enemies, were convicted, — fuch as relifted the truth were amazed and confounded ; — Satan fell as lightening from heaven, — his kingdom ftiook to the center, and his captives were led captive by the power of the truth. — " So mightily grew the word of the Lord and prevailed !" The Holy Ghost, as an advocate for the glory of Christ, proved all the accufations and reproaches of his enemies to be impotent malice ; and vindicated the innocence, righteoufnefs, and ho- nour of the divine Redeemer againft all accufers; making his friends to triumph, and praife the *' Lamb who had beenflain, as worthy of all power, and riches, and wiidom, and ftrength, and honour, and glory, and bleffing.'* The Spirit glorifies Chri st, in erecting a king- dom for him, and bringing fubjects under his rule and government. This he does in oppofition to ail the power, malice, and craft of hell and earth, — in oppofition to all the difgrace he was under, and the popular prejudices which were fo Itrong againft him — ( ^25 ) him, — the natural or acquired enmity of the mind, and the difconformity of the powers, pohcy, laws, honours, culloms, profits, and pleafures of this world, to the kingdom of Christ. Notwith- ftanding thefe, and other infuperable diflicultics to all created powei', the Holy Ghost erects a kingdom for Christ, enthrones him in the heart's of men, whom he makes willing, loving, and obe- dient fubjects, " built together a habitation for him through the Spirit, who infpires them with courage and honefty to propagate the glory of his kingdom, praife him as king of faints, and with holy fubmiilion fay, "The Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our king, and he will fave us." To this we may add, That the Holy Ghost glorifies Christ, by conforming all his fubjecls to his image. He prefents the glory and excellence of Christ in fuch a point of view, as the enmity of their hearts is melted down, and they allured through the pre- cioufnefs of his character revealed in the gofpel, where the knowledge of Christ is made manifeft, which in them who are ready to perilh, is the fa- vour of life unto life ; and to them who are fived from the reigning powerof fin, is the favour of death unto death, or the mortification of remaining pre- judices, evil atfeclions, or corrupt paflionsin them.f F f They f Tho' the fenfe in which I take this exprefTion of the Apo* file, is diredly contrary to the common inierpietatlon of it, yet I humbly think it is the proper meani ng ilieieof. He fays, ■j Gor. ii. 14, 15, i6. " Now thanks be umo God, who always caufetli 09 to tiiumph in ChriJI, and m; that ixc /aved, and in them thatperiQi* (are ferijhing as it flinuld be rendered) To tlie ore, we ate the favour of death luslo death ; and to the other, ;hc favoar of lip unto life." According to the plain connexion uf the p^fTage, the manifedaiioa ( 226 ) They " behold as in a glafs the glory of the LoRpr, are changed into the fame image, from glory to glory, by the Lord the Spirit," As So/cnwnidya, " they are more excellent than their neighbours," . — all glorious within, -r-filled with his grace, they fulfil the good-pleafure of his will, and the name of the Lord J ejus is glorified by them. The for- mer haughtinefs of their minds is brought low, and Chrijl their Lord is alone exalted. Created fctt" his praife, they increafe in holinefs, love, and good manifeftation of the knowledge of Chriji was in the faved, the favour of death unto death, (not death In the '\uorJi Jenje , i^ \.\\e. cornnion opinion is, but) a death iiritofi?t of all kinds, which the faved in Chriji die daily iinio, and which the knowledge oi (Ihrijl in tlie gofpel is the powerful caul'e of, agreeable to many iimiUr expreffionsof the Apcftles Rom. vi. i, a, 7, ?, ix. " Shall we (believers in Chriji) continue in (in, that grace may ab.und ? God forbid ; how /hall we that are dead tojin, live any longer thertin i For he that is dead, is freed from fin. Now if we be dead with Chriji, we believe that we (hall sifo live with him: Likewife reckon ye alfo yourfelves to be dead indeed unto fin ; bu« alive un- to 6^^(/, through 7i?/«/(7/6r/// our Lord. Chap vii. 9. For I was •alive Without the law once; but when the commandment came, fin revived, and I died, Coi. ii. 3. For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Chrijim God. 1 Pet. ii. 24.— Who his own felf •bare our fins in his own bodv on the tree, that we being dfad to Jin, Ihould live umo righteoufnefs." So that the death in the text, is the progreflive work of mortification of fin, which is the fpecial privtiejje of all who have the true knowledge of Chriji, lilid which is nfweet favour to God tkrongh him. . But thi? knowledge of Chrifl m the gofpel, is alfo the favour of life unto Hfe'm them that iiM periJJjtng. The poor, deftitute, pe- xiihing finner, flung with guilt, pu fued with the curfe, and void llf all hopes of faivaton f om every other propofed remedy, has the knowledge of (he all-fufficient Saviour in all his fulnefs pre- sented to him in the gofpel, which, by the power ol the Spirit, is made a principle of new life in him, — deftrovs all thofe vain hopes which wrought death in his foul, and makes him live a life of fai'h on the Son of God. This is \ht death and the life which are native fru ts of the power of divir.e truth, manifeftcd in the pofpe! 0^ C hrtji , znA z particulat p;vrt of theSp rit's wok io the divine oeconomy, for which, the Apcftle gives thanks unto Cod, and wh ch is a fnveat favour unto Cod of Chrji. But how Oiocking are the inferences which have been dr;iwn f . 1 m fh'S p-f- ^ge ! As if the If oowiedge of Chriji in ibe gofpel, was the means of . ( 227 ) good tvorks. The chief end of their aftions is his gloiy ', and their highett defire whether in life or in death, is, that C^r//? may be glorified in them. They hav£ all the fame fentiments concerning Chrifl and his kingdom : This is a work by which Chriji h glorified, which neither the power nor po- licy of this world could ever bring about, by all the fchemes eftablifhed churches have been founded on* It could never be faid of any of them, that all the members " were of one heart and mind, — that they with one mind, and one mouth glorified God." This of impeniteticv and unbelief, and confequent'v of death and dam" nation to them that perifh. A thought tvefy way unworthy of the gpodnefs, mercv, and grace of 6"(?^, ma ni felted in the good tidings of falvation by Chrift Jcfuu There is another text, which for war(r of due attention, has been mifreprefented in the fame manner, % Gar. iv* 3. " If our gofpel be hid, ir is h:d to tfiem that are hfl In whom the god of this world haih blinded the minds of them which believe not, &c." Not to fpeak. of the abufe this paffage hath met with from .the corrupt uft which has been made of it< the way it is rendered, is neither agreeable to tie Apoftle's fcope, nor is it good fenle : Whc-eas there is no pafTage of fcripture plainer, if the fcope is attended to. In the former chapter, the Apoftie fliews the excel- lency of the ^'c/p^/difpenfation above the Mo/^i/r, and begins this with a dec)aiatioi> of the honefty, zeal, and freedom of the Apo- ftles, in preaching the truths of me gofpel. " But (fays he) if our Rofpel be hid, it is hid among the things that are ahollJ}}ed\ by 'vjhich, (things) the God of this world ha:h blinded the minds of them who beh'eve not, left the light of the glorious gofpel of ChriJI, — fhould fh:ne unto them." Bv the things which arc abo- Jifhcd, it is plain, he means the JeAviJh oer^^monies, -^carnal com« mandmenis, the fhadows and figures, together with the Levitical priefthood and iaws concerning ir, tiiat were aboiifhed and done away in ChriJI, wh:ch things being mixed with the trmhs of his gofpel, made it daik, obfcure, and of no eiTefptl of ChriJI, which have been founded upon th's, ard fome other texts.- Tiio' the brevity of a note will not fufTer me to fet this matter in fo full a view, as to convince fuch as are ftrongly prejudiced in favour of the com- mon interpretation of fach texts ; yet, by this fhort hint, thecan- did inquiring reader, will at Icaft, fee the necvflity of i'ea'^cling the fcripture for himfolf, and the danger of taking religion upofj tru(i without examination, which too many are difpofed to tto. ( 228 ) TJiis unity is the peculiar privilege of the churches '^bf ChriJI, framed by the Spirit y upon the princi- ples of truth in the word. f * The Spirit glorifies Chri/i, by making known ^0 his people the exceeding greatnefs of his merit, righteoufnefs, mercy, love, grace, and condefcen- fion ; through a fenfe of which, they magnify him who hath brought in an everlafting righteoufnefs , by which they are juftified and do glory. They fay with Paul^ " I was a blafphemer , perfecutor, in- jurious ; but I obtained mercy ^ and the ^riar^ of our HoKD Jesus Christ was exceeding abundant to- M'ards me." They receive a fulnefs of gi'ace that reigns through righteoufnefs to eternal life by Jesus Christ : And knowing all to be fovereign and free, it fweetens their eternal praife to him who loved them, and redeemed them unto God by his blood. C H R I s T is glorified by the Spirit, enabling his fervants to fufferfor his name. 'Tis theftrong- efl: mark of loyalty in a fuhjecl to give his life and all he has for his prince. By this niethod, through the Spirit's aid, the fubjeds of Chrifl have carried his praife to the ends of the earth. But to conclude this, •;: The Holy Ghost glorifies Christ, in per- fecting all tlie members of his body, making them meet to be partakers v/ith the faints in light, — ail ready to attend their Lord at his coming, when lie fliali be glorified in all his faints, whom the Spirit had taken from the depths of moral corruption • and alienation from God, — dcftroyed the Devil's ■'mageinthcm, — conformed them to the image of the Son ( 229 ) ) Son of God, — wafhed theni in his blood, and- now they are before the throne without fpot, praif-» ing him, world without end. Were it not that I will be thought too prolix on this fubjed already, many other things might be obferved concerning the ivork of the Spirit ; for the fcriptures afford evidence fufficient to extend aa account of this kind to many more particulars than are yet mentioned ; particularly that great end of his ynijjioriy which our Lord mentions, *' To reprove the world of fin, righteoufnefs, and judgment," which, with the fhort comment he gives of thefe three parts of the Spirit's work, afford undeniable evidence to the oeconomical charadter of the Holy Gbojf. W E might alfo have noticed tlie convincing work of the Spirit upon the redeemed, — his uniting them to Chrijl^ — his work in their juftification, adoption, regeneration, and progreilive fandifica- tion, in their confolation, perfeverance, and growth in grace : — In his witnefTmg the truth of their adoption, foaling, leading, and guiding them, — in his giving them power to mortify evil habits, lufls, and pafnons, — refifl the Devil^ the world, and the flefli, and overcome temptations of eveiy kind, — his ftrcngthening their moral powers to undcrfland and mind the tiuth, from which as a living principle, they bring forth the peaceable fruits of righteoufnefs,' — his alTifling them in prayer, and other fpiritual excrcifcs of religion. Thcfe, together with what tiie Apoftlc mentions as fruits of the Spirit, " The fruits of the Spirit is love, jov, peace, long-fufTering, gcntlenefs, goodncfs, faith, inccknefs, temperance :" But to treat of all thefe particularly^ ( 230 ) particularly, wouM be more like writing a treatife on the works of the Spirit^ thart defending a parti- cular argument. I ihaU therefore conclude this account by obferving. From what has been briefly- hinted concerning the Appellations, Miffion^ and Works of the Spirit^ 'ft is abundantly plain, that the character of the Holy Ghofl^ which we have in revelation, is wlioUy eecQUomisal : And th^t hei^ called i:/ij/)t Spirit, and Spirit of -'God, from the nature of his work, which is all the internal and fpirituai part of the great oeconomy, which Gor> hath purpofed to carry on in all ages, till the' whole is confummated in the complete felicity of th^ cbofen objecls of his love, in the full enjoyment of himielf. And I think it will be impoffible for the friends of a natural, necef- fary, and eternal procejfion of the Holy Ghoft, to find any thing laid of him in the Bible, that in the leaft favour their notion \ or that is not applicable to the; fcripture account of the oeconomy of God.'* I T may be further obfer\'ed, that the Spirit is the fovereign agent. Lord, and adminijlrator of the whole gofpel oeconomy. The doctrines of the gof- pel were immediately revealed by him, — preached by the gifts he beftowed, and accompanied in many by external miraculous works done by his power, and made effectual as a renewing, active principle by his divine energy. The Apoftlc when com- paring the gofpel dilpenlation with the law, calls the whole of it the miniftration of the Spirit. — {h) " How fhall not the miniflration of the Spirit, (com- pared {h) i Cor. iii- %. '( ==3' ) pared v/ith the letter under the ceremonial difpen- fation) be rather glorious ?" Which mchides the whole of that fpiritual work the Hciy Ghoft came to accoinpliih in the oeconomy of man*s ialva- tion. The Holy Gbojl fpeaks of himfelfin the cha- racter of governor in the church, when he faid, (J) " Separate me, Barnabas and Saul, for the v/ork whereunto I have called them.** He carried on the work of Chrijl, and perfects that falvation which he was promifed to be to the ends of the earth. — (Jc) " The comforter, the Holy GboJl, whoia the Father will fend in my name, he Ihall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remem- brance, whatloever I have faid unto you.** He had promifed to be with his people to the end of the world, but foon after left them ; yet Chrijl*s pro- mile is fully accomplifhed by the Spirit^ who comeS in his name, and " takes of the things of Chrijl^ and fhews them unto them.*' (?) Ads xiii. a. (/(I John xir. 26. ^ ^ ^ PART. PART III. )SC/*"H)5( AVIN G in the two former parts given an l|^.H ^ account what the fcripturcs fay concern- 1^ ,^ ing the Trinity ; I fhall in this part, as ^jX^MtIK ^y^g promifed, fhew how little regard is due from chriftians, to the fubtle diftinclions in- vented among men concerning that fubjeft ; and the difficulties that have occurred to me, in the conlideration of a pretended explication of that doctrine, which has been held pretty orthodox for many years paft, and generally impofed as an ar- ticle of faith. I T is manifeft how copious and conclufive the fcriptures are on this point, and fufficiently ex- plain themielves by comparing one text with ano- ther, as far as is necellary for us mortals to know, without the leaft neceffity for the ftretches of hu- man wit, to devife dark and perplexed explications of this doftrine ; which human inventions, are fo far from being clearly taught in fcripture, that many of them arc dircclly contrary thereto. Of ' ( 233 ) 10 F all the doch-ines in revelation, there is the leaft room here for man's invention : For the moft elevated ftrains of genius are utterly loft in pro- fotmd darknefs in attempting to wade beyond the line ot revelation, there being nbtliing we can "kndw of 'Got), but >yhat he is pleafed to reveal of himielf ; ^X^hich every chiiftian fhould humbly, dili- gently, and devoutly learn from his own facied word. While the ftrains of pliiloibphical criticiim are bulled in defining a Deity, the mere product of proud imagination ; which fbaring fpirit in Ibme men, that will be wife above what is written, will ■not allow them to fubmit to the plain intelligible account Gob hath given of himfelf: And what notable difcoveries do they make, who thus dive into the fecrets of. the moft high i* Why, they chBnge the glory of the incorru-ptabk Gob into an 'image of their own fancy, and the truth of Goo into a lie, worflnpping this creature of their oivnbrain^ injlead of the creator^ ivho is Goi) overall, bkffed for ever. Most part of meii liave their minds fixed in certain notions, which in the early piriods of their life they were taught by their tutors, or have re- ceived through the influence of a party, or out of refpecf to cluirch authority, without examination ; thcfe they believe as undoubted truths ; what is not agreeable thereto, they readily conclude to be falfe : And in every recourfe to the diA'ine word, thcfe notions are the rules by which they explain it. Hence it is, that all parties appeal to fcripture, and pretend to find their own notions there, by forcing it to fpeak agreeable to the opinions they hold. Thus, received opinions are the ftandard of the fcnfc of fcripture, which is divefted of the ho- nour of being the rule of faith. But as this is viii- G g bly ( 234 ) bly owing to prejudice, in favour of things receiv- ed from men, which are believed to be unqueftion- ably orthodox : If we would be right inquirers after truth, we fliould come to revelation free and difengaged, — read and meditate, as under the con- . duel of an unerring guide, the divine Spirit, with- out bias and partiality, without regard to human authority, parties, intereft, or education, waiting upon the Lord for divine aid, who only can open our underftandings to know the truth revealed in the fcripture. With refpecl to religion, I chufe to reft my faith upon the divine tejlimony only^ which I am cer- tain will never deceive : But dare not follow hu- "pmi explications through the maze of dark, fubtle, and perplexing diftinclions, in which fo many of the contrivers of religious fyftems have bewildered themfelves ; and much lefs dare I receive doctrines . devifed by fbort-fighted mortals as articles of faitlu ■ The "v^^'ord of God we may give an implicit affent unto, being confident that the dictates of heaven are abfolutely unerring : But devices of men in matters of faith, we Ihould approve and receive no farther, than upon examination we find them agreeable to the divine Oracles^ I F any perfon be inclined to think that I treat thofe things, which fo many have received , and admired, with too much freedom, (and perhaps what fome will call contempt) let him confider, tliat it is not a matter of divine revelation which is at prefcnt under confidcration ; but an hypothe- iis entirely human, only fupported upon the totter- . ing foundation of pretended antiquity, and the multitude of its votaries. I claim no more in this cafe. ( =35 ) cafe, tliari the privilege of every chnftian, which is to examine all fuch fyftems by the woTd of God, and finding any part of them contrary thereto, is at Uberty to reject the fame as any part of his faith. I AM far from fa)dng that tha. inventors, or maintainers of this fyftem, a part of which I am to examine, are chargeable with all the confe- quences that have, or may be drawn from it as principles of their's. Therefore, allow me once for all to fliy, that it is not men of any denomina- tion I find fault with, but a Human Explica- tion of the Trinity, which, tho* rigom^oufly im- pofed as an article or faith, cannot be reconciled with the facied records : And for this reafon, I fhall in the following remark?, take the liberty to call it the Human Scheme. T H E R E are fo many parts of this human ftruc- ■ture, fo many things faid to be natural, neccffaryy :xnd efential to God, without authority from re- velation, that 'tis nothing ftrange for one to be at a lofs where to begin or end in the confideration of them. As the human fchcme feems to repre- fent the characters of the divine three in contrail, I ihall follow it a little on the plan which the llretchecl imaginacions of men have reprefented them in. But mull firft obferve, that the following extract, is not taken from the fentiments of any fingle authors, who have wrote upon the fubje6l, but from a lyftein as much in repute among Proteftaht eftablifaed churches, as any I know, in which it is all'erted, "That it k peculiarly proper to the divine pcribnality of the Father to be of mm ■ That he. alone ( 236 ) ^lone of the three divine perfons is the first : Thai lie hath his being and perfonality of /jimfeif, being neither begotten by, nor proceeding /mvz ^«o//j^r. But, that it is peculiarly proper to the divine perionality of the Son to be of another^ viz. the father : That, he alone is the second : That he Ijath not his being, fubfiftence, and perfonality of himfelf ; but as i divine perfbn i^ begotten oi. the Far- ther, by an act of eternal Generation, A N P J that it is peculiarly proper to the divine perfonality of the Holy Ghojl to be of the Father and the Son,-r.—'Th.2.thQ alone is the third, — That he hath not his being and perfonality of himfelf but as a divine f erf on proceeds from the Father^ and the Son^ by an eternal procession. That it is the perfonal property of the Fa- ther, to beget a Son in his own nature. — That it is the perfonal property of the Son, to be be- gotten in the Father'' s nature. — -That it is the per- ional property of the Holy Ghojl, to proceed from both tlie Father and the Son^ That paternity is natural, and neceffary to the fubiiftence of tiiy Father as a perfon in God-head :. Or, that be is a Father, as he is God, and that thefe are fynoniraous ccnvertable terms.-^Tliat filiation is natural, and necelfary to the fubfiftence of the Son, as a perfon in God-head : Or, that he is a Son, as he is God, and that thofe are fynoni- mous convertable terms.r — That the name Holy Ghoft is natural, neceffary, and peculiar to his fubiiftence as a perfon in God-head : Or,, that this character is proper (Jw/y to him, as he is God, excluiive of the ether two .perfons ii^ the God'head, Th at 237 ) That it is the peculiar property of the Fa- ther, to communicate the zobole of the divine effence to>the Son, by which communication he is a Father in God- head. — That it is the property of the Son to have the whole divine effence communicated ie him, by which communication he is a Son in God-head, —That it IS the property of the Holy Ghofl, to have the ivhok divine efience communicated to him from the Father and the Son, by wJiich communi- cation he is a per/on in God-head. The s e, and many fuch, are the off-fpring of human invention, (except a particular or two con- cerning the Father) for which there is not the leaft countenance in the word of God ; which will ap" pear by comparing the particulars of this human fyftcm, with the fcripture account of the Trinity, in the former parts of this work : And indeed, thefe are foft things, when compared with many other fubtle philofophical niceties, which fome have fpun from their ov/n brains, and prefented to the world as explications of the Trinity. Out of many, I Ihall only trouble the reader with one fliort note of an orthodox Divine. He fays, " The frj} way of the divine effence aEling npon itfelf, produceth the fir ft per Jon ; t\icfeco?id way of its affing upon itfelf, produceth the ftcond perfon ; and the tf?ird way of its aBing upon itfelf, produceth the third perfonJ* This is a difcovery indeed ! for which we are wholly indebted to the fchools : But I could not fay much in favour of his common Icnfe, or knowledge of the icriptures, that could admit it as a dehnition of the God he worihipped. I HAD no intention of taking any further notice in this place, of the fentiments of particular Di- vine? ( 238 ) vines on this fubjed, had not the firft volume of ii work, now printing, come in my way, called " An illiiftration of the doctrines of the chriftian Religion, comprehending a complete Body of Di- vinity, by the late Reverend and Learned Mr Thomas Bofton, minifter of the gofpel, atEttrick.'* From which it was proper to give the reader this fhort extract, to Ihewthe neceffity there is of fetting this fubjed in a fcriptmal light, and of expoling the abfm'dity of men's inventions thereon. It is evident from this extract, which is in the Author's own words, that the moft admired writers among the fyftematics, even in the prefent age, do ftill on this fubjed follow the llime unfcriptural plan firft contrived at the council oi Nice, ind further manu- fadured in the Popilli fchools, which the reform- ers from Popery adopted implicitly into their fyf- tems, and has been generally received as ortho- dox without examination. H E fays, p. 189, " I am to explain the terms ** the God- he ad, and a Ferfm. By the God- head, is *' meant the nature or efl'ence of God, even as by *' manhood, is underftood the nature of man. A ** divine perfon, or a perfon in the God-head, is *f the God-head diilinguiftied by perfonal proper- ■ •* ties' : For coniider the God-head, as the fountain ■*' or principle of the Deity, fa it is the jirft per/on ; *' confider it (the God-head) as begotten of the la- *■'' iher, it \^ \h.^ Jccond \ and as proceeding irovn the '*•' Father and the Son, // h the third perfon, — 191, *• They are diitinguiilied by their order of fublift- *' ing, and tlieir incommunicable perfonal proper- " ties. 'In refped of the order of fubiiftencc, the *' Father' 13 the firft perlbn, as the fountain of 'the " Deity, having the foundation of perfonal fubfift- *• ence in himiclf j the Son is the fecond perfon, and ( 239 ) " and hath the foundation of perfonal fubfiftence " from the Father ; and the Holy Ghofl is the " third perfon, as ha\dng the foundation of per- *' fonal fubfiftence from the Father and the Son.-— " 192. Thi^ generation of the Son and Holy Ghoft *' was from all eternity, — and to deny it, would *' be to deny the fupreme and eternal God-head *' of all the glorious pcrfons.—- They are not only *' of a like nature or fubflance, but one and the " fame fubftance ; and if fo, they are and muft be " equal in all eflential perfed:ions. — Each of the *' three perfons hath the one whole God-head, or *' divine nature. — This myftery of the Trinity is " fo interwoven with the whole of religion, that " there can neither be true faith, right worfhip, " or obedience without it. " Pa. 522. Unless Chrift had been the Son *' of God by eternal generation, he could not have " been our mediator and redeemer, nor could he " have obtained a throne and kinsrdom as fuch. " — $2-2^. He is the Son of God, in a moft proper ." and fmgular manner, viz. by the Father's com- *' muni eating the divine cjfence to him by eternal gene- " ration. — 524. The nature of this generation, our " blefled Lord himfclf doth explain to us, John *' V. 26. As the Father hath life in himfelfa ^^c' " hath he given to the Son to have life in himiclf. " Which doth nccclTarily import a communication "of the fame individual cflence. For to have life " in himfclf, ivas an eflential attribute of God ; " /. can know what is meant by God-head, effence, deity, father, fon, or any other term in the whole of the pretended definition, I KNOW not which is to be moft wcaidered at and lamented, how fo many great men could aflumc fuch a prerogative, as to load this doctrine with fo many unfuitable, unintelligible, and unmeaning diftinctions : Or, that fuch multitudes of people have without examination been difpofed to. receive thefe diftinclions as undoubted truths, without feeing their difagreement with revelation » It is a pity the one fliould have fo much prefumption, an(i the other fo void of attention. I T would be too tedious a taik to enter minutely into the particular parts of this human fcheme concerning the Trinity; I fiiall ^ly give fome hints of the moft glaring abfurdittes and contra- didions therein,— anfwer the moft plaufible ar- guments in favour ot it ; and endeavour as I go along, to caft fome further light upon the oeop- nomical names or charaders of Father, Son,, and Holy Ghost* SECT. ( 24i ) SECT. I. t SHALL begin with the terms first, second, and THIRD, which are commonly applied to the divim three^ as characters natural and ellential to the manner of their fubfiftence in Deity : But upon what authority {tradition excepted) I know not. The fcriptures no where teach that the Fa- ther is FIRST in fubfiftence in Deity, the SoiT SECOND, and the Holy Gbojl third. It is written " there are three, and thefe three are one^* and more we know not ; for there is not one exprefiion in the Bible which fpeaks of the Father, that calls him the first. ^htLord Jefus Chrift, faith of himfelf, " I am Alpha and Omega, the beginnl?]g and the end, the Jirfl and the la/l,** No, lay the fupporters of this fcheme, thou art the second, the perfon of the Father is the first : Is not this teaching him to fpeak, who gave a mouth to man ? Or rather giving the lie to the God of truth ? The only reafon I ever heard advanced for ^his part of the fcheme is, " that the perfons are mentioned in that order in fcripture." It muft be granted, that in fome places the Father is firft men- tioned, the Son next, and the Holy Ghoft laft, but not under the terms Jtrjl, fecond, and third : And if the order of mentioning them fo in fome texts, had been to teach us in what manner they fubfifted in Deity, then certainly the fame order would always have been obferved : But that order is frequently inverted, and in fome texts the Lord Jefus Chrijl is mentioned firjl, in others, the Holy Chofl, (/) Therefore it may bcjuilly conclude4> that (/} s Cor. 13, 14. aThcfT. ii. 16, and iil. J- ( 244 ) that this order of mentioning them in fome texts, is not to teach us any thing concerning the man- ner of their fubfiftence in Deity. Yet this order of mentioning them may be improved to edification, if confidered as expreflive of the order of operation in the divine oeconomy of man's redemption, in which the Father is repre- fented as fuftaining the majefty of Deity, chuling and fending the Son ; and exacting from him fatis- faclion for the fin of the elecl company he was fent to redeem. The Son in undertaking, and giving that fatisfadion : The Holy Ghoft in applying the bleflings, which Cbrift^s fatisfaclion hath made an egrefs for, to the chofen objects of divine love. I fay, in the order of divine operation, the terms JirJ}, fecond, and third may have fome meaning, but no way infer that they fubfifl in this manner in the divine nature. I T is indeed prefTed as an argument in favour of thofe terms, " That the order of operation among the divine perfons, is intended to teach the internal order of their fubfiflence in Deity." But this is gratis dictum, for no fuch thing is revealed ; how then came men by the knowledge of it ? As God has not revealed the manner of his being and fubfiflence, it muft be the mofl daring prefump- tion for mortals to pretend to know, or attempt to explain it. Besides, if this proportion could be gi ant- ed, then thofe called Arians, have always been right in maintaining that ChriJ} is an inferior, fubordinate Deity ; for they argue thus : " As the divine per- fons are reprefented in going through the work of man's falvation, fo they are in the divine na- ture ; ( 245 ) ture ; but Chrijl is reprefented in that work to b'e the Father's lervant, inferior to, and depending upon the will of the Father : Therefore, he is in- ferior and ilibordinate to the Father in the divine nature.'* If the premifes are good, the confe- quence is undeniable. Let the fupporters of fuch a propofition anfwer for giving fuch an advantage to the adverfaries of the Deity of the Son and Spirit, for the fame confequence holds with re- fpecl to both : And it is evident, if the propofition is maintained, the proper Deity of both muft be given up. But in fact, the terms frj}, feco?id, and third will admit of no fenfe, but what import either priority and pofteriGrity, or fiiperiority and inferiority. For 1 know no other fenfe the word first will bear as applied to a perfon, but the following, viz. Him that is earlieft in exiftence : Him who is be- fore all other in fome order : Him who is nobleft in dignity : Or, him who exceeds in excellency. And if the term first be appHed to any one in the Trinity, with refped to the other two in any of thefe ienfes, it will neceffarily conclude againft their equality, or eternity, if not both. Tho' the Lord Jefus Chrijl calls himfelf the first, he is not then comparing himfelf with the Father or Holy Ghoft, and fo does not fuppofe any of them a second, in that fenfe in which he calls himfelf the first ; for in the fame fenfe that he is the first, fo are the other two; therefore, there can be no second and THIRD, with rcfpcctto the Deity of xSxt three ivho are one* These terms fo applied, lead eycn friends to the doctrine of the Trinity, into low and unfuit- able conceptions of one in Deity being before^ and another ( 24« ) another after^ which are the natural ideas the terms convey : And at the fame time, furnifti ene- mies with arguments againfl the co-eternity and equality or lamenefs of the divine three. Were it not for thefe confequences, which natively flow from the ufe of the terms fo applied, I fhould not hell- tate to ufe them, were they intended merely for diflindions fake in fpeaking of the divine three: But yet, I think it is fafeft to fpeak of them under the diftinguilhing characters which the divine word hath given them, viz. Father, Word, or Son, and Holy Ghost, or Spirit. 2. Again, I obferve in general, that the fup- porters of this fcheme allow, " That the three di- vine perfons are one in the divine effence or nature ; and that each divine perfon hath the whole of the divine effence.'* Yet in the fame fcheme^ there is not only a diftinclion among the perfons, (which muft be admitted becaufe the fcripture calls them three) but there is a very different manner of fub- fifting in the fame effence afligned to each perfon. Now, if this different manner of fubfifling is in- ternal, natural, or neceJTary, as isafferted, how then is it pofUble, that the fame perfections in the fame refped can be in each divine perfon ? It is a truth, that the divine three exifl natu- rally, necejfar'ily, and eternally ; but there are many things in the human fcheme evidently contrary to this. " That one divine perfon is of none, nei- ther begotten nor proceeding ; but hath his being and fubfiftence of himfelf.'* All this is true ; but are not the other two the fame ? No, fliith the fcheme ; but the direct contrary." A firfl perfon communicates the divine effence, and a fccond and third receive the effence by communication." Can there C' 247 ) there be a more abfolute difFerence fuppcrfed, than is here affirmed among the divine three f What can differ more than un-originated, feif-exijlence^ and • derived^ communicated extjlencef Is it not affirming in the plaineft terms, that one perfon is felf-fuffi- cient for bis own exiftence and perfedions ; but " the other two are not fo ; but depend upon the communication of them from another ? Doth it r not degrade them to the level of creatures, whofe diff J\^t^ tinguiftiing character is^ that have they all communi- /A<^ C , cated to them ; but cannot iay they have their fruA''^ being, or any thing they enjoy of themfelves ?— / Does it not make the divine three differ as much as vmtability and time differ from immutability and eter* nity? For he who is felf-exiftent, and hath his be- <- ing and perfections of himfelf, muft be eternal and hn?nutable : But on the contrary, he vi^ho hath his perfonality and perfections communicated to him-, '' muft be mutable ; becaufe he is a dependent bein^ *•- in having that communicated to him, which is ne- * ceffary to Kis exiftence, and which he had not ori- ginally of himfelf : And. as to eternity^ he can have no claim to it confiftent with common fenfe ; for it is a contradiction in terms to fay, a being i^ eternal, who hath his perfonality and perfection* communicated to him from another. It is the diftlngui&ing characteriftic betwixt fupreme Deity and created exiftence, that the one is felf-fuffic;ent for his own exiftence and perfec- tions, and the other is not, but depends upon the will of another for the communication of them. The communication of them from one to another, as I hinted juft now, is a flat contradiction to the eternity and immutability of him to whom they are communicated : For as foon as the felf-exiftent being ( 249 ) being did communicate any kind of perfedion from himielf, to another diftincl from him, twie com- menced with that communication, and he to whom it was made, is declared mutab/e, in as much as that is communicated to him, which he had not originally of himfelf. A derived being, or perfon who is not felf-originated, is juft, in other words, a dependent creature. Of this kind muft our Lord Jefus Chrift be, if his effence or perfonaUty is com- municated to him, which is plainly taught in the dodlrine of the fcheme we are conlideiing. T o fuppofe the term begotten to iignify that he derived his exiftence or perfonality (as it is com- monly called) from the Father, and in the mean time to lay he is properly God, is direftly con- trary to the known principles of philofophy and natural realbn itfelf, which there is not one article of truth that contradifts ; for it fuppofes fomething derivative, and which is not felf-exiftent in Deity ; than which there can be nothing more repugnant to the felf-eyident notion, which reafon itfelf fug- gefts to us of true and proper Deity ; for if we exclude felf-exiftence and independency out of our conceptions of Deity, (which muft be the cafe with refpeft to the Deity of Jefus Chrift upon this plan) we leave nothing whereby it is diilin* guifhed from created exiftence : At leaft, we ex- clude the chief thing which diftinguilhes the one from the other in our notions of them. B Y this part of the fcheme, the proper Deity of the Lord Jefus and the Holy Ghoft^ is unavoid- ably betrayed or given up to the enemies of that doctrine. It is impoflible to defend it upon fuch a principle : And not only fo, but there is the moft glaring abfurdity and contradiction in it. For, firfti ( 249 ) firft, it is affirmed, that tliefe fo very different prq- pcrties are natural to the manner in which the divine three exift in the effence ; and yet their famenefs in the effence is afferted ;-^that they are the same in fiibftance, perfedion, and glory. Which affirma- tions are as different as any two propolitions can be that contradict each other. Th ere can be no argument formed to pirove !| that there are different properties in the divine three, whom revelation declares to be one. A3 far as we know thcfe qualities, properties, and per- fections afcribed to G o d in fcripture, which appear different to us, may be one and the fame inthe view of God : And we are fure, that all perfections, — all that is afcribedtoDeity, isafcribedtoeach of the di- vine three. Where then is either foundation for, or propriety in afcribing fuch different qualities or properties unknown in revelation to each of them, and then afferting in the ftrongeft terms, that thefe are as natural and neceffary to each, as to be God, This muff be fliocking, when we coniider that among men, thefe qualities which are afcribed tg them admit of degrees ; blit how is it ppffible, that any thing of the kind can be afcribed in that man- ner to the infinite Jehov>^h ? Who is abfolutely beyond all degrees of comparifon. T H o* the unfpealcable. condefcenfign of God is manifcft, in revealing hirnfelf under relative cha- racters ; and exprcffmg what he defign'ed we fhould know of him by diftincl (and to the carnal con" ception very different) attributes. — Yet we muft not conceive, that thefe are in God, as qualities are in creatures, in whom povvcr is Uiffercht from wifdom, and fo of all otticr. In God there caji- 1 i not ( ?50 ) not be //;// and /to perfeclion, or different attri- tribute, who is a fimple, uncompmndedy indlv'ifible, divine Being. It is faid, thefe properties are only ,the ;w(?^^j of perfonal fubfiftence : *Tis certain th,ere a^e,. three in Deity ; but thefe three are one in hanie, nature, and glory. What ground is there then to believe fuch a very different manner of fubfiftence, as .evi- dently infers different degrees of perfbnal perfec- tions ? Is not each of them all that God is ? From whence then have we ground to believe fuch a difference of the divine nature in one more than "in another ? By a neceffary confequence from the doctrine in the fche?)iey. the divine nature primarily belongs to One perfon, and muft be communicated to the other two. This not only introduceth a difference of perfonal glory among the divine three ; but in effed fays, there is none of them (at leaft the Son and Spirit) properly God ; And if admit- ted, it muft be at the expence of the equality or ■famenefs, and cq-eternity of the three who a.ve one ; which can never be fupported upon the fuppofi- tion of thefe fo very diiferent qualities, . or proper- ties mentioned in the human fcheme, being applied to the divine nature of the' Father, Word, arid Ho/y Gho/I ; who ^are the /a?}2e in fubftance, equal in na??ie, perfedions, arid glory. A N D as there is no authority in revelation for "^ny fuch' /W^/'«^/, natural, 'or ne c ejfa ry 'diftmctions, Vhicli arfe f6">ery d/jfereht, arid yet epnf7a[^tojh^lr jS^rforiat fubfinierict; as are" all'edged in the fcheme ; I cannot fee how any man that has no other rule q'f faith than the fcriptures,"can obtain evidence jTufficierit ;toVcO;nma;rid, M)) "^ent to Tuclitci^rijis fp ^plied: ■ ■'■"■' ' ' '" ' '''""" •''"■ ' It ( 251 ) It is , abundantly evi(;lent from fcripture, tb-zt with "God; there is ' ndthtr prior, nor pojlertor ; no'' fupienor/ otinfefic&-', :^het]..'we fpeak ot perfon or fubfiftfence': But it will be difficult to determine, how this can be reconciled with the terms in the fcherne,' asy^r/?, y^foW,„'and third, ccjiimunicating of the efjence; - begetting 'in the effence,- &c. no part of which has the leaft countenance in revelation ; but invented by men, to account for the diftinclion of the divine peribns ; While fuch terms reftri^ted to. Deity, (if they haye any meaning at all fo ap- plied) deftroy the proper Deity of each divine per- fon. For fuch terms have not the leaft analogy to proper Deity, or what is commonly called felf- exiftence, except we were to judge by the rule of contraries, and ior frft, ficond, and third,^-—xt2.^y neither Jirfl, fecond, nor . third ; for ' communicated, read, uncommunicated, &c, which conceptions are more agreeable to any account the Supreme Being hath given of himfelf in the facred records, than thefe terms fo much infifted on by the advocates for the divinity of the human fcheme, ■ ■■ 'juoq.'b;;; ^'> .■■'■. ■ ^-^''j Must it not be the higheft prefumption in tnen to fay fofttively more" concerning God , than he has been pleafed to reveal of himfelf, by at- tempting to give definitions of his nature, or the manner of his exiftence ? A fubjecl confeffed by all, to be infinite and inconceivable. " Surely it muft be darkening wifdom with words without knowledge ; and talking foolifhly for God.'* Lan- guage itfelf muft fail, in every attempt to exprefs the fubhmity of it. Would the unmeaning prat- tle of an infant, be fuftained as a clear dcmonftra- tion of the abftrufe problems among aftronomers ? Infinitely lefs is the quinteflencc of all languages uader { ^52 ) under heaven capable to demonftrate this incon- ceivable divine fubj eel : And they certainly dif- credit the truth of its inconceiveablenefs, who be- gin to inveftigate or define.it in terms .of human invention : For that moment any one is capable; to conceive it, he muff either be endowed with infinite capacity ; or // muft ceafe to be an infinite ttiyftery. 'I "' T H E nature of God is not a fubjeci: of defini- tion 5 nor can. it be apprehended by one adequate conception or notion. All definitions limit the fubj eel defined ; but God is infinite, and cannot fee limited by definition. Nor can the compound finite capacity of creatures apprehend the fimple, infinite nature of God. Confequently to attempt a. definition of the nature of God, muft be a daring infult . upon his infinite majefty, — an at- tempt to limit him within the bounds of finite comprehenfion,— ^nd fuppofes him only a creature like ourfelves. Can any one then imagine it equi- table, for any number of men to compofe an ex- plication of this fubject, independent on revelation, and impofe it on the confciences of their fellow men, by requiring an implicit belief of it as a term of communion in the church of Cbri/i ? JL •■ S'iE C T. i.u C 253 I' S E 'C T. TI. I SHALL, now more particularly obferve Ipme things relating to that part of the fchemc^ which concerns the fonfhip of the Lord Jefus Chrijl: And frj}^ I obferve, that the terra GoDt, wheiSi ufed in fcripture to denote the Supreme Bdng, ge^r herally includes the three fpecial denominations o£ his character, by which he difcovers himfelf to us in the work of our falvation ; which are thefe of Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft, unlefs when one of. thefe denopiinations is predicated to point out one gf the facred three. T H E fcriptures intimate, that the divine plura-i lity are as neceffary, according to what they teachr us concerning the Being and exiftence of God,; as the divine nature which is but one : And as the word God points out to us, all that is in God ;. then it muft follow, that one perfon cannot be a caufe in any fenfe whatfoever of the perfonality or exiftence of another : And none of thefe perfons can be called the Son of God, in that fenfe which it is neceffary for him to be God ; feeing he muft be included in the term God. This does not hin- der him from being Son of God in another fenfe^ viz. the relation he undertook in divine condefcen- fion, to fulfil the purpofes of Jehovah concerning men, which was not abfolutely neceffary to the Being, and exiftence of God . N o w, where CbriJI is called the Son of God, if the term God be taken for the Deity, this will deftroy the/cheme, for then he will be the Son of the qffcnce : But according to it, he is the Son of one C '54 ) one perfon in the efience, by a communication of the eflence. If this is fo^ it muft follow, that wherefoever the Son of God is mentionedj the term God muft be reftrifted to one perfon, viz. the, Fa-, ther, excluiive of the other two. \ Does not this plainly fuppofe, that tlie Father rni/y- is God ? That is to fay, he is God in fuch a fenfe, as nei- ther of the other two perfons are ; which is the very foul ofthatdodrine commonly CdMed An'ani/m ; for men of that denomination grant the Word and Ho/y Ghaft to be Cod, not in the. fame, but an inK ferior fenfe to that in which the Father is Gop'; hence, agreeable to this fcheme, they reafon thus : *''• Chr'ift is the Soh of God as to his- divine perfon ;' but the term God is to be reftricled to the perfbii' of the Father : Therefore, he only is God in the higheft fenfe of the word/* Now, if thefe pre- mifes hold, the inference is good ; for if C/:>r?/'?, as to his divine perfon, is the Son of another perfon in Deity, he cannot be God in the fame fenfe as a Son, that the other who begat his divine perfon is as a Father, " - • '• '■ ' '" f; Thus it is evident, that the Arian dochine by necelfary confequence is countenanced in the pre- tended orthodox fcheme : But, I hope the Ihame of thus yielding the glorious caufe of Chrifi^s proper divinity, by fuch incoherent notions fo far from jfcripture, and beyond the fphere of human con- ception, as not to be made either good divinity or ffood fenfe, will route the lovers of his honour to the vindication of it from revelation itfelf where it is abundantly evident to every unprejudiced in- quirer. * .. ,;:,?^ "' uw ■ A 2.'I T is maintained in the fcTieme, that itisp6-' culiarly proper to the Lord Jefus^ to have his di- , vine ( ^55 ) vine perfonality /rw?2 a?iother. If this is fo, it mull be either from the divine ejfence, or from the Fer-> fun of the Father : If the former, tiieii he is the Son of the ejfence^ and is no more from the Father* than the Father, is from him: And if the divine eifcnce is the Father of our Lord J ef us, then he is as much the Son of himfelf, and the Holy Ghoft^ as of the Father : Since the eiTence or divine na- ture is common to all the three. But tho' this is allowed in one part of the fcheme, it cannot be admitted confiftent with this part of it 5 lor here the perfonality of the Son is limited to the com- munication of the eflence from the Father, which not only contradicts fome other parts of it, but manifeftly velts a fupremacy in the Father, and- appropriates a derived perfonality to the Son, which deftroys his proper Deity. I T cannot be denied, that every effeB muft in point of time be pofterior or after its caufe. Con- sequently every effed: muft have a beginning. Ft-* liation or fonfliip is an ejfed, and therefore muft have had a beginning. Now, if one in Deity be naturally and neceflarily a Son, it will as necefla- rily follow that his nature is derived \ iince that is affirmed to be natural to him which is an effed:, and muft be derived. Every kind oi derivation fup»- pofeth the beginning of the thing ^mw^/,- But^fwf- ration, (according to all the ideas we can have of generation) is one kind of derivation, and muft ne- ceftlirily flippofe a beginning of that which is ge- nerated. Confequently to ^ut eternal to generation with reference to time pafl, is a direct contradic- tion, and is the fame as if we ftiould fay, the be- gi'ininglefs beginning of any thing ; which is no more a contradiction in terms than e/ernal generation is. I F ( 25^ ) I F the Lord Jefus Chrljl had the divine nature communicated to him, — ^if he is naturally and ne- ceffarily a Son, — and was generated as a divine perfon, he muft be derived, as he is not without an external caufe of exiftence, and fo cannot be felf^ exiftent : And if he is not without an external caufe of exiftence, he muft have had a beginning, — ^is pofterior to fome other being, and confequently is not eternal a parte ante. '■"^There are but two ways any perfon can exift ; either naturally, neceffarily, and indepen- dently, which we call felf-exiftence : Or, by fome external caufe, at the pleafure and will of another. It is an abfolute truth that the Lord Jefus Chrijl lelf-exifts, as I proved formerly. But a commu- nicated perfonality, is the direft oppofite of necef- fary exiftence : Hence, there is no tolerable fenfe the terms -in- the fcheme will bear, but that the Lord Jefus Chrift is a derived Being, who exifts at the pleafure of God his Father; which is themoft that ever any Arian did plead for. qj. The argument mentioned, pa. 174, in favour ofChri/Fs oeconomical fonlhip, effeclually deftroys 4:he notion offonfhip by an eternal generation. All the fundamental articles of faith neccflary to falva- tion, are plain, familiar, eafy to be underftood, and clearly revealed in the word of God ; but the belief of Cbrif being the Son of God, is made neceffary to falvation : Therefore, it muft be eafy to be underftood, and clearly revealed in the word of GoD« Now, to take his fonfhip for an eternal generation of the divine perfon of the Lord Jefis, by the perfon of the Father, is what no man ever profefted to undei-ftand any thing about : But even by all the fupporters thereof, it is acknowledged to . be ( 257 ) be an ineffable, unconceivable myftery : Which, nevertheleiSj would not make it falfe, was it mat- ter of divine revelation. Had God made known the truth of it, we w^ere then bound to believe it, tho' we could not define the manner of it. But for my own part, I freely confeis, after many years fearch, I never could find, and I fuppofe it would puzzle the whole world to find, the leaft hint of any eternal generation in all the w^ord of God. There is not one text, where the Lord Jefus is called the eternal Son of God, or that he was begotten from eternity. That he is the eternal God, is manifeft from abundance of fcriptures; but that he is an eternal Son, the divine Oracles no where infinuate. Eternal generation is merely the producl of man's invention j for it cannot be ga- thered from revelation by the rcmoteft confequcnce. 'T I s true the do6lrine of the Trinity, — the union of the nature of God and man, in the per- fon of Emmanuel, — and the union of the Saints with Chri/l, commonly called by the fyjlematics, the hypojlatic, and m.yftical unions, are myfteries as to the manner of them, yet they are to be believed ;, but why ? Not for their myftcrioufnefs, but becaufe it is clearly revealed in the facred pages that they are ; and tho' the manner of them remains a fecret to mortals; yet theteflimony of the Lord ofhofls, is fufficient warrant for our believing the truth of them. There is nothing can be called a myjlery that is revealed in any text of fcripture. A revealed inyjlery is no better fcnfe than eternal generation* Had we one text for the eternal fonfliip of ChriJ}, we durft not hefitate a moment in receiving It as an article of faith, tho' we did not underftand the manner of his being begotten. We are bound to believe revealed truths on the veracity of the un^ K k erring ( =58 ) erring Spirit of God, without daring, to bring them to the bar of our viciated reaion, to judge of their truth, by what we can can learn of the manner of them. I F eternal generation be a truth, it requires ex- prefs revelation to fupport it ; nothing fhort of a divine difcovery could poiTibly make it known : "Without this, every thing concerning the 1 rinity is beyond the reach of the moft intelligent to in- vefligate by reafoning and implication. Here crea- ted capacities are limited, and at their neplus ultra. This is one glory of divine revelation, that it dif- covers things otherwife imfearchable. But where is that text which teacheth us eternal fonfhip ? Or, that the divine perfon of the Lord Jefus \vas begotten by an ad of eternal generation f Now as this docT:rine is not taught in the word of God, and even con- trary to reafon and common fenfe ; mufl it not be adulterating the precious truths of God, — abufing the reafon of mankind, — and doing violence to the rights of their conlciences, who will not be ruled in matters of faith by the dictates of men, to prefs upon them fuch a notion as a fundamental article of th.e chriflian faith? 4. I would obferve, that there is nothing can be more evident, if the fcope of the New Teftament is confidered, than that this was the great queftion in that period : Whether Jefus Chrifi was the pro- mifcd, expected Mejjiah, the great Saviour pro- phefied of in the Old Teftament ? This was the cri- terion of the eftriftian rehgion, the teft of difciple- fhip, and term of communion in the church ; the believing and confcffing this, gave a title to the chrillian character and communion. The moft prejudiced in favour 'of any fcheme, cannot well deny this: ( 259 ) this : And to recount the evidence particularly, would be to tranfcribe more than half of the New Teftament. Our Saviour himfelf calls in the teftlmony of his Father, hi.s own preaching and miracles, the Old Teftament Prophets, with the voice of his fore- runner, John the BaptiJ}, to confirm this truth. The joint teftunony of the difciples, with thofe con- verted during Chrijih abode here, efpecially the Samaritan woman, with her fellow citizens, are manifcft to this purpofe. The method which the Apoftles tooktoinftrucl the infant churches, proves this point. As a fpeclmen, the reader may confult iV^r'sfermons, recorded in the 2d, 3d, and lothch. ofthe Adls, and PauFs in the 17th. Thefe, with many other places in the Acls and Epiftles, put the matter paft doubt to the meaneft capacity. To which might be added, the manner of baptifing profclytes to the chriftian religion, efpecially from among the Jews, which was always in the name of Jesus Christ. N o w, tho* both the Apoflles and Other converts freely and very frequently confelled their fai^h in the Son of God, (which is proved above to be the fame with believing in Jefus ChriJ}, in New Tefta- ment language) yet, it is ftrangc, that neither ChriJ}, his Apoftles, nor any other, whofe fouls were filled with the Spirit and grace of God, ever gave the leaft hint of eternal generation : Or, that the divine perfon of Cbri/i was begotten ; and that he had the divine nature comnmnicated to hi?n from the Father, 8zc. Is not the doctrines of Chrijl, and the Apoftles, fufficient ground for our faith, with- out fo many different ideas as the wifdom of men have prefumptuouily added thereto ? Th ou g h ( ^6o ) T H u G H the divinity of Chnft fliines clearly in every page of the New Teftament, and muft be included in his character as the all-fufficient Savi- our, by every one that believeth in hirh ; yet, the witdom of God directed the Apoftles net to break in upon the prejudiced Jeivs, and blinded Gentiles^ with the blaze of the Deity of Chrijl : But to lead them by degrees from the knowledge of Jefus of Nazareth, the ion of man, to the knowledge of jfefus the Mefftah, the Son of God, their Prophet^ Frie/l, and jking: From the revelation of Chrifl, the Saviour, to the revelation of Chrifi, the true God and eternal life: From the difcovery of the prefence of God with him, as fent for the falva- tion of men, to the doctrine of himfelf, being the true and eternal God. Thus they taught, and thus they believed ; without limiting his character as a Son to his pure Deity; much lefs to an eternal generation, being begotten as he is a divine perfon, or having his divine nature communicated to him. ' Eternal generations is an invention of men, who pretend to be ambafladors of Chrijl, that they may rank with the ApoftlSs ; and not content with this, they will alTume the power of dictating arti- cles of faith, and introducing their myfleries into religion, befides the myfteries and counfel of God, which the Apofde bad in commiffion, to open up and declare to the churches. Paul tells the Corinthians, tliat the Apoftles were {a)jlewards of the myfteries of GoD : And in a very folemn maimer declares to the elders of the church of Ephefus, (/;) " That he had kept back nothing tliat was profitable to them — But had declared to them all the counfel of ^a) I Cor. iv. I. ' (b) Adls xx. so, ^^> ( =61 ) ofGoD**' Now, as the Apoftle never mentions eternal generation^ nor any thing hke it, in his epiftles to thofe or any other of the churches, it muft be conckided by every one who is difpofed to believe the Apoftle, that etertial generation is none of the my/leries of God, — no part of bis cowifel made known to men, — nor any way profitable to them. The making it an article of faith, muft therefore be a proud attempt to add to the counfel of God, — an impeachment of the Apoftles, with the crimes of fafehood and unfaithfulnefs, in affirming that they had declared all the counfel of God, while they kept back that momentous point eternal genera- tion. Their conduct is more than a bare inftnua- tion, that the fcriptures are fufficient for the pur~ pofes wliich the Apoftles affinn they are. — [c) " All Icripture is given by infpiration of God, and is profitable for doflrine, for reproof, for correction, for inflru6lion, in righteoufnefs, — able to make the man of Gqd perfed:, — wife to falvation, — and thoroughly furnifhed unto all good works J' 5. We may further obferve, that in thefe tc^ii where Chrijl is called a Son, v/e cannot fuppofe his Deity abftracfedly is, or can be defigned, ac- cording to the juft and moft natural interpretation of the texts. We fliall mention only a few for example, and hint the inconftftency of applying the term Son, exprefled or underftood in them, to the pure Deity of our Lord Jefus Chrifl^ He fays, — {d) " As the Father gave me com- mandment, even fo I do.'* To fuppofe one in the divine plurality commanding, another obeying, without relation to their oeconomical charad:crs, is (t4% Tira\. iji, 15, x5,T7- (^} John iciv. 31. ( 262 ) is wholly inconfiflent with their equality orfamenefs and felf-exiftence ; as the will, power, and glory of the three are one in the fame nature. The ivill of the facred tJjree in Deity is 07ie ; but we often find the Son as fuch, mentioning bis will as diftincl from that of the Father. — (i) " Fa- ther, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me : Neverthelefs, not my iviil, but thine be done. I feek not mine own will, but the will of the Fa- ther who hath fent me." But the learned call this diftincl will of Chri^/I his human will, or the will of his human nature onl^t. This is diftinguifhing ra- ther too nicely, and if it is juft, then he fuftained the character of our redeemer, as he was ?nan only. 2\11 things he fays of himfelf, or are faid of him, which imply fubordination and fubjection to the Father, are meant of his human nature only. What then becomes of the value of his obedience and death, — Q£jTi.aji!fi,r£d£mptionj — or in fliort of the chriftian religion ! B u T there is a particular confequence infepara- ble from this notion of Chri/l*s human will, which the profefl'ed orthodox will perhaps diflike as much as any, tho' far from having the fame danger at- tending it. It cannot be denied, that Cbrij?, brought this diftincl will he fo often mentions from heaven with him ; for he fays, — ff) " I came down from heaven, not to do mine owa will, but the will of him that /e?2t me." Now, if this be the will of his human nature only, then the fre-exiftence of his human foul, before he was manifefted inthefleili, muft be granted. There is no avoiding this confequence, without the affift- ance (e) Luke xxH. 4»." ' John v. 30. (/) Joha yi. j8. ( 263 ) ance of (bnic bold figure to explain thofc texts, M^hicli is the common refuge of the learned in cafes of fuch diftrefs. For my own part, I fee no danger in admitting this laft confequence ; tho' I think the plain meaning of the texts, points out Chrift in his oeconomical character, in which he was fent the Son of God, and Saviour of the world ; in that refpecl he may have a ciiftincl will from the Father. (g) "Father, glorify me with thine own felf, with the glory which I had with thee before the world began/* To confine the fonfliip implied here to the divine pcrfon of Chrijl, would make one divine perfon pray to another, and that for the reftoration of a glory which the fame divine perfon once had, and is at that time divefted of, all which is impoilible in pure Deity ; for, — {h) " He is without variablenefs, or fhadow of turn- ing." .(/) "The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand/* As a So??, he i^- ceives all things from the Father, but as be is Gody he can receive nothing ; he hath an original right to every thing : Therefore, Jie is not a Son, as he is God. W H E N the Centurion, and thofe who attended Chrift on the crofs, beheld the awful fcenc, — {k) '' They laid, truly this was the Son of God r Did they here mean they fiw the eternal invifible God hanging dead upon the crof, ? Neither their words, nor the circumftances of the aftair will admit of fuch a fenfe. By a deduction of what they law Of C?) John x\ii. 5. (/.) Ja. i. 17^ (i) John iii. 35. ^>;;5ftttt. xxvii. 54. ( 264 ) of the man Upon the crofs, and the interpofition of divine providence in fo flriking a manner on his behalf, they apprehended a relation betwixt him and God ; that he was a. favourite of heaven : And if we confider how the other EvangeUfts record this matter, it will be evident, that the meaning muft be as above ; and by no means, that they thought the Son they fpoke of was God. Mark fays,—- (/) " When the Centurion faw that he cried out, and gave up the Ghojl, he faid, truly this man was the Son of God T And Luke fays, — (w) " Now when the Centurion faw what was done, he glorified God, faying, certainly this was a righteous 7nan" It is I'ery plain the EvangeUfts had no fuch notion of the Centurion's words, as many divines fince have had, who would perfuade the world, that they are a^ notable proof that Cbrij? is God, as he is a Son : Whereas the diiecl cohtrary is not obfcurely intimated, if we will admit the Evangelift Ltike to interpret what is m.eant by the Son of God in the other two EvangeUfts. It is admirable, what pitiful Ihifts the advocates for that opinion have fled to. One of them on this fubjecl, finds he can- not reconcile the EvangeUfts to his caufe, and ra- ther than yield to them, he bcldly contradicts them, by alledging " that what fome of them have faid, is not the language of the Centurion, but of thofe who were with him,'* though all the three micntion t!ie Centurion particularly : And tho' it were even eranted asfainfl: the Evansrelifts, it would not in the ieaft help that tottering caufe. I SHALL only mention one text more, as I think the matter is abundantly clear. — (;?) " When all things (/) MatJt XV. 39. (w) Luke xxiii. 47. {») i Cor. xv^ 28. ( ^6s ) th^gs fliall be fubdj^^d unto him (Chrift) ; then fhall the Son alfo himielf be fubjecl unto him that put aU things under him) that God may be all in all." To take fonfhip here for the divine nature of our Lord Jefus, uiuft infer, that he has no ori- ginal right tp the things which are put under him ; for this is faid to be done by another : But as he is God, he has the fame underived claim to all tilings with the Father ; if it be owned that he is of the fame natii^re, power, and glory. 'Tis here faid, " Then fhall the Son bhifilfho. fubjed," (accord- ing to our tranfl^tion of the text) — Which plainly Ihews, that as a Son lie is fubjed ; but as to his D,eity, he is (o) " God over all, bleiled for ever." Subjection is proper to his character as a Son ; but fbvereign and abfolute dominion is natmral to him as he is God : Therefore, as he is God, h^ caanot be a^§pN. Many more texts might be brought in here, to Ihew the weaknefs of confining the fonfliip of Chrift to his pure Deity, or an ad of eternal ge- neration, whereby his divine perfon was begotten by the Father ; the abfurdity of which is evident from every text in the facred records, that men- tion any tiling concerning him as a Son. The reader may join thefe few with others mentioned, at p. 159, as equally clear in favour of oeconomical fonfliip, which will be flill more confpicuous from the confideration of thefe texts, commorily ad- vanced to prove that kind of fonfliip 1 am hi re dif- claiming : But before I proceed to thefe, I fliall ob- ferve furtlier here, 6. T II A T it is a fufficient reafon to reject any human fcheme introduced into religion, which hath L 1 not (0) Rom. ix. 5. ( i(>6 ) not the ftamp of divine authority, when it is ufed with more advantage by adverfaries againft the truth ; than it can be by friends in defence thereof. What countenance thofe of the Arian perfualion have in this fcheme, is evident from the advantage they have taken from it to difhonour the Lord of life. To this is owing their fuccefs, fince fome of their modern advocates have refined the Avian hy- potheiis, by grafting on a flock fo near of kin to this fcheme, that they take occafion from it to in- fult the faith of chriftians, and reproach the doc- trine of the Deity of our Lord Jefus^ as if it had no better arguments to fupport it. The affinity betwixt this fcheme and the Arian hypothefis, fliews it to be a very unneceflary oppo- fition which the Arians have maintained for many years againft it, • which is only founded on the dif- ferent ideas the contending parties affix to the fame words. For there is very little in what is called the orthodox explanation of the Trinity, to hinder the ftrideft Arian in the world to fubfcribe it. The words ufed in it, cannot by the unprejudiced be underftood in any other fenfe than what the Aria?js contend for : And perhaps the moft intelligent among them, would find fome difficulty to ex- prefs their own fentiments in ftronger terms than the pretended orthodox have done for them, which incoherent, unfcriptural notions, have contributed more to the growth of AriamJ}n, than all other means befides. - There are indeed fome phrafes thruft into the fcheme, merely in oppofition to the Arians, without any regard to fcripture, or their connection and agreement with the other parts of it ; which only make the whole appear the more inconfiftent, and ( 2«7 ) and tend to confirm the enemies to theDeityof the Lordjefus and the Holy Ghoft, in their oppolition to a truth maintained in a manner fo void of fcrip- ture ideas, and fo contradiftory in itfelf, as to ren- der the whole fcheme unintelligible to any impar- tial inquirer* I N fuch a mind it begets a mighty prejudice againft the belief of the Deity of Chrift^ when he finds it maintained ^at he is a Son, as he is God :— That his divine ferfonality is begotten : — That his Deity depends upon his Sonjhip : — That his divine nature is communicated to him. Which is all of a kind ; not a word of truth in the whole j and amounts to no more than that his Deity depends upon his derived, dependent character. For the notion of a Son in all languages among mankind, imports derivation and dependence ; and the fcheme infmuates in the ftrongeft terms, that Chriji*s divi- nity is of this kind, fince he receives it by com- munication. Whereas the notion of proper Deity imports independence, inorigination, and felf-exif- tence, which to the impartial inquirer, carries a contradiction in the very terms : And there is the greateft probability, if fuch a perfon had no other means of learning the Deity of Chrift, than by this human fcheme of doctrine, he would either prove an Arian, or conclude it beyond his conceptions, from the contradictions fo manifeft in every part of it: And that it may appear, I do not fay this out of any ill-grounded prejudice againft this fcheme, I fhall conclude the reflections in this fection, with a fhort account of a few of the felf evident contradidiotis therein. The firft leading contradiction, which I take to be the foundation of all others, is. That tho* 'tis acknow- ( 268 ) acknowledged, that revelation only teacheth us the true knowledge of God : That nothing is matter of divine faith, but what hath a divine teftimony : That we are to believe nothing concerning the Trinity, but what is clearly revealed in fcripture : That God alone is author of all the knowledge we can have of himfelf ; and that this is coritained in his word of revelation. Thefe propolitions are ftrictly true, and confelTed to be i'6 by the pro- fefled orthodox, who, yet, are fond of a fcheme iii v^hich there are many things faid of God not re- vealed by him, but devifed, and impofed by men ; who take it upon them to correct the divine elo- quence, as if he who holds the fabric of nature in his hand, did not know how to accommodate his doctrines to the capacities of his creatures : And will teach him to fpeak who gave a mouth to man. But what notable difcovery do ihey ihake, who are thus wife above what is written, in their addi- tions to the divine Oracles? Why, they are fo honeft as to tell us, that the words they ufe, are liot to be taken in any fenfe that mankind is capar ble of undeiftanding them in. Now, what pre- fumption is this, for mortals to clothe divine truth with modes of exprefiion which they themfelves are ignorant of, and know not how they are appli- cable to the fubjccl which they pretend to explain by them ! This is jiift to form a fcheme, and then tell the world it mull: be believed : But the M^ords it is compofed of, are void of fenfe and meaning when fo applied ! Howdiimal had the cafe of man- kind been,, had God dealt thus in inditing his fa- cred revelation ? B u T ( 259 ) But further, they tell us that the 72afure of God is an ineffable myfiery, beyond the comprehen- fion ot all creatures : Yet in this fcheme, there is a demonjlrat'ion of it, a dejinition of the internal tnodes of fubfiitence of all the perfons in Deity. Here we are alfo taught, that the divine per- /\ fon of the Father is first, the Son second,- and the Holy Ghost third ; — Yet none of the perfons are either afore or after another.- . That the Father ccmmuni tales the lu/jole of his ejence to the Son, and Holy Ghoft :-— Yetj it is impoffible that the divine elTence can be communi' cated at all, either in lahole^ or in part: For God is a fimple, infinite, indivijible Being. He com7minicates hhwhoXt essence : — Yet, his eflence is himself; his very indivifible felf : So that to communicate his essence, muft be to commu- nicate or give himself. H E communicates his efTence, whereby he BECOMES A Father : — Yet was always the SAME. — By the communication of the eflence to another, he becomes a Son : — Yet from all eter- nity the same. The one perfon communicates ; the othzv receives hy commmuni cation the divine eflence : Yet all the perfons are the fame in the eflTence ; and impoilible that there can be any change in {:\\h.QX perfons or ejj'ence. Those among the fupporters of the fcheme who fpeak plainly, fay, that Chrijl in beconmig a Son, became God : But others reckon themfelves more modeft in faying, that his divine perfon was begotten. But in faci, the laft fcntiment is the fame with the other, which is plain from the following Ihoit argument. As Cbrijl is a divine perfon, he is ( 270 ) is God ; but as a divine perfon, he is begotten : Therefore, he is begotten, as he is God. This is the language of the fcheme, which compared with other fentiments in the fame well contrived fyflem, is pregnant with contradiclions. Christ, by being begotten a Son, he becomes God : — ^Yet he is God over all, eternally the fame with the Father. The Son as a diflind perfon thus generated, is God of God :— (that mufl be, one would think, another God diflinct jfrona the God he is of) Yet, there is but one God. — The divine ferfon of Chrijl was begotten : — ^Yet, not his Deity begotten. —J ejus Chrijl is the Son of God, according to his divine nature :— - Yet, the divine nature of the Son, is no more be- gotten, than the divine nature of the Father. One of the perfons is begotten, in the divine na- ture of another perfon, and not begotten in his own jiature : — ^Yet, the divine nature is but €ne, and common to all the perfons. — — Jesus Christ is the Son of God by eternal generation of the substance of the Fa- ther ; — ^Yet, he is not the Son of the essence ; nor is the Father's substance the matter out of which he is begotten. The ferfons are begotten in the effence : — Yet, but ojie perfon is faid to be begotten. Th e Son is a second perfon in Deity, the Holy Ghofl a third : — The Son was begotten in the Father's elTence, — received his perfonal fubfiftence by generation and communication ; and the Holy Ghoft, by froceffion and communication from the Father and the Son : — Yet all the perfons in ( 271 X in Deity are, and will h, what they always wercy eternally, unchangeably the fame. ' The Father is of none ; he hath the eflence of himfelf', the Son is from th^ Father* s effence; and the Holy Qho^from both : — Yet, no effentlal diffe- rence among the perfons ; they are the fame infub- fiance or effence ; no fuperlor or inferior j no frior or fojlerior. ■ The divine ferfonalities of the Son and Holy Ghojl, are derived by communication ; the one by generation, the other by froceffion : — Yet all the perjfons in Deity are felf-exiftent. (All that is in Deity mull neceffarily and eternally exift.) The Son is all that the Father is : — Yet, he is not of himfelf, which the Father is. — Not unbe- gotten, which the Father is. — The Son can do all that the Father does : — Yet cannot beget a Son in his own nature, which the Father does. There is no end of abfurdities here ; however, I fliall only mention one more. Jesus Christ was a Son previous to, or before he was a mediator : — Yet Jefus Chriji was anointed as mediator from all eternity. Many fuch contradidions might be colle^ed from this human lyllem j and ftill more from the works of fuch as have appeared in defence of it. Thefe few are fufficient to fliew how contrary it is to itfelf, and alfo to the revelation God hath given us. Self-contradidion is a fure evidence of a falfe hypothelis, whether philofophical or divine. Such are the iniprovements made upon the dodrine of the ( 272 > Ttinity, by the profound ftretches of thejj- wit, who have been prying into this iacred doftrine be- yond what is revealed by God, who knows beft what meafure of knowledge therein was necefTary for our imperfect ftate. Such philofophical demonftrations of this doc- trine are the effects of proud, corrupt nature : And a confounding of reafon by a mifapplication of it. Yet, thefe human inventions are fathered upon divine revelation ; which is charging the God of confummate wifdom with folly, — and a moil notorious reproach upon the chriftian reli- gion in general. ^ SECT. C 273 ) S E- C T. III. Arguments in favour of the natural and neceffary Son- ■ finp of Chriji, or^ nvhat ts commonly called eternal ii ge^icration, confidered. AFTER all, it is but fair to give an impartial hearing to what the advocates for this fcheme, which they pretend is of fuch confequence, have advanced in defence of it : And as they fometimes endeavour to prove it by general propofitions, and fometimes from fcripture texts, I liiall confider thefe feparately, left I fhould do their . capfe in- juftice, by allowing any e\niden(^e they produce for it to efcape unnoticed. f ...... f - . F i ji-s ¥i,' it is aliedged, *' Thataf the fcii df '■than denbtes the human nature' oi Chrifl, or Chat he is really tnan ; fo the naiue Son of G^.d muft fig- 4iify his divine riatute, or that he is truly and pio- ^■perly 'God.'* Anf'^'%iiE cafe differs very widely; for the name 'aS^;^ of man is never applied to any person who is not true and real man ; but the name '^on ofGod\% often applied to both Angels and men.' yet -they are not truly and properly God. So thai the argument proves nothing to the purpofe for v/IuLh it is brought ;' and only infers, that ias his bsing ci^zdi the fhn dfuYdrL, fiiews him to be the chief of the fons of nien ; 10 his being called Son of God, -points him out' to be the moft eminent of all who are fo called, both in character and office. BLiidcs, I know not one text where he is called yfi»« of man^ sto fliew that he is real man, or where the lenfe is ^to be reftvicted to his human natuj^e without in- * JM n^ eluding ( ^74 ) eluding his office ; ^ nor do I know one where he is called So?} of God, to denote his pure Deity : And as he is called fo7i of 7nan^ without including the idea pf his human nature being begotten by MAN, why may he not be called Son of God, with- out the coniideration of his divine perfon being BEGOTTEN BY GoD ? Another argument is, " That the word Sm among men, properly fignifies one of the fame na- ture with the Father ; thaefore Son of God, when applied to Cbr'ifl, muft fignify one of the fame na- ture with God the Father, Jn/i,y^lirUyE word 'Ss'/Mimong men has feveral ideas J as, derivation fromtheFathcr, fubordination, or inferior relation to the father; — Likenefs to, or imitation of^tl^€ father ;•— A, Being of the fame fpe- cies or kind with the father ;-yr-A%iRdiv;4'Ual being _diftinc1: from the father. ..There are- .j©*wof thefe 77/. Jde^s ca.n- with 'J?i'Opiiel^ be _ applief ' ; "> 'th^ ^ ; divine perfon of'Cbn/l in relation of nature v\itlitlie Father : But ^.cveral of them may be applied to him in his fubordirute ch^iracler, as' M.ej]mh, hj^'^beir^g* ap- pointed. ahd^fejU, -by the FathGr,\,,hi5) being vie e- gerant in the kingdom,, &c.^ ;Beiides, Angds;and men are called^ Son{ tf G^i^y ff) yc^^ft V'^^}'^ i^iX.fiid Ap. be begotten^ of God-,- {cj^ ,yet" peither -of ihefe arc of. the fame nature' with God their Father in that ibnfe tiiey wQ.uJd liave-jC/j/v//,. ibccaufe he is called the &^vo/^G6/^,j ppr.is itpoliibleit^can be fo^ 2 . W « -}i R -E pow ; ajiiong,;[raenvj^ G|enotes fanj.^-, nefs of nature, it.iignifies, ^^he i-^v\^fpficifie fici' and V. r.. ■ *■ I ' : .'. * Set' p. 141. fcH" the fenl'^i of the tt- rm /07/ df^nan*t'^''7cp^YKCi. to ( -75 ) tare, or one of the fame kind and fjpccks \ but never means the fame vidlvidual nature. It conftantly denotes a dlJlinSf, individual being. So if the parallel in the argument muft be fupporttd, *tis time for chriftians to look to the necellary con- fequence thereof, /'. e. that ChriJ} in his divine per- fon is a dj/lincl, individual bvijig, of the fame kind with the Father, which necefiarily makes them TWO Gods. 3. There is alfo another confequcnce that attends this argument if it hold, which I hope the friends of ChrijY?, proper Deity will be very un- willing to grant, viz. As the term 5o;7, in all lan- guages among mankind, carries in it the idea of derivation and dependence ; to infill on a parallel here, gives the caufe wholly to the Arians ; who fay, that as he is God, he is a derived, de^erident Being. Th e philofophical gentlemen, who prefume to account for the manner of the exiftence of God, having got eternal generation and proccilion into their Icliemc, are lb confident of their orthodoxy on that head, that one of them tells us, " There *' is one confideration, which, when thoroughly " purfued, will obviate all objeclions againft it, — *' that is, that as time is a mode of all creature ** exiftence, lb eternity is a mode of uncreated *< exiftence.'* Anf. T H F more I purfue this propofition, the more 1 find it an imaginary phantom. Some modes are very precarious and uncertain, fome are inva- riable : but it will perhaps liiit the philofophet better to diftinguifli them into accidental, and elfen- tialj—i-or into accidents and qualities. Now, if eter- nity ( 276 ) nity is a mode in the fame fenfe to the Almighty, that time is to creatures, then it is merely acci- dental to him ; for creatm'cs, as Angels and men, ihall exill when there is no time, when days, years, and all manner of duration by meafure ihall come to an end : And as time will ccafe to be a mode of creature exiftence, being thus accidental, if eter-^ nity be the fame to uncreated exiftence, (which muft be the fenfe of the propofition, if it has any) then the Almighty will (at leail: may) ceafe to exift, when creatures enter upon an endlefs ftage of exiftence, and time is no more a mode of exiftence to them. But if we confider time and eternity as effen- iial modes of human and divine exiftence, the na- tural confequence is, that man will never get out of time; and eternity to them will never com-, mence.' Thus, if we confider thefe modes as acci- dental, the propofition lands us in Athe'ifm ; and if ejjenttal, we muft give up immortality. Again, if a mode be confidered under the no- tion of an accident, then it cannot with any pro- priety be applied to the Deity ; for there is nothing accidental in God , or to him : And if it is con- sidered as a quality, then it fuppofes iovat fubjlratim, and fo "-/e are juft as far from the nature in which it adheres as wt were. I N the fenfe this philofopher feems to underftand modeii, time is a mode of prefent exiftence to both God and man j for both exift in time ; and eter- nity muft be a mode of human exiftence, in as much as it flinll exift in eternity, when time is no more. So that the propofition proves nothing to the purpofe for which it was brought : And take C 277 ) it even in its utmoft latitude, the terms have no regard to the nature of either Gt)D or man abftracl- edly confidered. In time and eternity beings exift, and if eternity be a mode of the divine nature^ as time is of the human, then it is no more than con- tinual exiftence. Eternity is not a property of nature^ more than time is of the human nature. But the difpute is not at all concerning the meafure of duration ; but the internal operations of the divine nature, which are two very different things. Tho* we fhould grant that eternity is a mode of divine exiftence, will it follow, that ge- neration and proceflion are other two modes of it ? Is there any connection neceflary betwixt thefe ideas ? Tho* the fcriptures affirm that God is eter- nal, they do not lay he begat a Son from eternity. "When eternity is called a mode of divine exiftence, it ftill fuppofes a nature that exifts, and the quef- tion is not about modes, but operations of the di- vine nature. It might be afkcd, whether there are three modes, or three natures that exifted from eternity ? And whether every one of thefe modes equally partake of the divine nature : Or, whether every nature hath not diftincl modes ot fublif- tence ? However, if thefe modes exifted from eter^' mty-ihy paternity, generation^ Tmd proceJJ'iony we may conclude according to any ideas our language affords, or words to exprels the fubjecl, that the Son and Holy Ghoft are eternally dependent upon, and inferior to the Father. When our philofophical thoughts enter into eteinity, either before or after time, they, like a drop of water in the ocean, are loft. Our ideas of* eternity are relative, and refpccl Ibme meafure of duration. When v/e apply them to exiftence be^ fore ( 278 ) fore time, we cannot tell what it is. Our views can reach no further than fome beginning of ope- ration. We may go fo far back as the creation of dependent beings, when God is iliid to have be- o-uii his works, but then we arc within the limits of time or meafurablc duration. Aftep further we cannot go, without lofing ourfelves in conjecture. The modes of divine exiltence we cm know no farther than they are difplaycd in that plan, where the defigns of his government are e: cofed to our view, even the holy fcriptures, whica are the un- cmng guide concerning the knowledge of God. But I muft follow this gentleman one ftcp further. He fays, " That in the exiftence of God, *' as well as in his cHence, there is a non-fuccejfiv'ity^ " whether fucceflion be applied to time or fpace ; *' ai)d in refpect of this non-fucceilivity, eternal *' o-enei'ation can never imply or infer ground for «' any of the objections made againft it." Anf. I CANNOT flay to examine this propofi- tion critically, any further than it refpecls the pre- fent purpofc : And tho' it is produced for an ar- oTiment in favour of eternal generation, I think it makes directly againft it. For where there is no fiuccjj'ion^ there can be no generation, fo far as we have any ideas thereof ; and where there is gene- ration, it indifputably implies fucCeihon. By all the fupporters of eternal generation, it is main- tained that it is by communication of effence % now docs not communication imply fticceffion ? Siircly. -^As' there is no" ///Vr^^wr/^' the' divine eilerlce or nature, there can be no communication' of -X\it divine nature. . Wherever there is a communication of tiic liiind nature, "there rauft be A fatceihon. There ( 279 ) may be a creation, without a fucceflion in the crea- tor ; for the creature does not partake of the n^ ture of the creator : But In begetting, the Son par- takes of the fame nature j yea, in the prefent cafe, it is maintained that the whole nature is commu*- nicated to the Son^ by or from the Father ; and' if fo, fucceflion muft be a necefliu'y confcquehcc thereof. How can that perfon beifelf-exiftentor non-fuccefiive, who derives his very 'fcrjon from another?' 'Tis no prefumption to afk this of a philofopher, wlio dares inveftigate . the unieaarch* able things of God. .'; vl-.ilv.' ':•/ ^,];i-; Jij.' P:H'i l o s o p II y could not afford a better ar- gument againft eternal generation. Language does not afford us any idea of generation to a being, where there is not fucceflion : And unlefs the fcriptoirei inform us-exprefsly of its being attributed to GodI, no arguments behde can pro\'e it. There is no warrant from fcripturc to apply generation to Deity, but inferences, taken from the words begci- ■ien. Father J and »S(?^;,. which 'terms in fcripture lan- guage do not imply generation ; but do rathet exprefs acts of power, goodncfs, &c. and are ap- plied to feveral'perfons befide Chrift. *' Is he not thy father that Ipought thee ? Have Ave not all one Frtth^i- .? I have begotten thee by the gofpel. Oneft^ fnusy whom I have begotten in m.y bonds. Who hath begotten us again to a lively hope, by the re- furredion oi Cbri/Hrom the dead,&rc."' But the phi-afe eternal generation or eternally begotten, is Oo wherein rcvclatioh, nor any t(^ma that ii^ the leaft imply it. V ^ W.KR T^i tlie fupporterc of this fcheme are prcfled, Tivith Certain difficulties that attend it, they frc- ..-.[> . ,. : , qvcntly ( 286 ) ,|.^ quently tell us, that " Eflence doth not beget l\ eflence, but the perfons in the efTence.'* The' I ' have often both read and heard this, yet I could never learn the meaning of it, or in what refped it favoured their caufe. " ElTence doth not beget eflence," that is, 1 fuppofe, one Deity doth not be- get another Deity, which is an abfolute truth ; here we are agTeed. — " But the perfons in the eflfence.'* This pafleth my underftanding. If they mean by it, that the elfence begets the divine per- sons, then all the divine perfons muft be begotten ; but this will wholly deftroy the fcheme, for accord- ing to it, only one perfon is begotten : Nay, the Father is exprefsly faid to be of none, neither be- gotten nor proceeding. To make this tally, we muft fuppofe only two perfons begotten in the eflTence : Still this will infer, that the Hofy Ghoft has a two-fold manner of fubfiftence. — That the divine eflence exifted prior to the divine perfons : *— That there is a difference betwixt the perfons and the eflence in Deity : Willi many other 'fliocking •confequences too grating to chriftian eai's to men- . tion ! : But as confldering it in this light is fo veiry ,inconliftent,. let us view it in a glafs of their po- Jifliing, who arc the fupporters of the fchemfr. .*' But the perfons in the eflenee i" That 'is, fay they;, " The divine eflence felf-^xilis • in the peifon of the Father,^ and the . divijpie perft^n. ^ of Chnft^ is begotten by/ the Father." :;iNot -to ^enti€»n:iho\V, ill. the .explication .^agrees \^^i.fthe- proportion in terms ; the one fays the perfons are y begotten, the other that only one perfon is begotten, which .makes ittieceflafyitb' provide "'aa^theV noftnnti to ■ account for the fubfiftence .c£.l]ifMoly Gbojl ; but eteni;al proceflion is at hand for this purpofe. Then, I. I MUST ( =81 ) 1. I MUST obferve, *tis marvellous ! that fuch a demonftiative account can be given of the manner the Son and Holy Ghoft fubfift in Deity ; but none of the Father's fubfillence, further than that he hath it of himielf, which is denied of the other two divine perions ; this certainly carries the direft idea of inorigination in the Father, and a derived perfonal fubfiftence in the other two perfons in Deity. 2. I OBSERVE, that it is impoflible upon thii foundation, that the perfonal glory of the Lord Jefus can be equal with the Father's. For if the divine eflence felf-exifts in the perfon of the Father, neceflarily his perfonal glory muft be effential, and felf-exiftent : But if the divine perfon of the Lord Jefus is begotten of the Father, his perfonal glory can neither be ejfetit'ial, nor felf-exiftent, but co7n- municated^ derived glory from another ; which may be called relative ; but not felf-exiftent glory. When there is fuch an ejfent'ial difference in the manner the divine perfons ftibfift in Deity, it is impoflible the y^/w^" /c/t'/a/zV^/ glory can belong to all the perfons. The Father muft have a lupreme glory in Deity, which neither the Word nor Holv Ghoft have ; how then can they be . equal or the fame in perfecfion and glory ? This leads me fur- ther to obferve, 3 . That here the maintainers of the fcheme, and the Arians are almoft at one. The Ar'uins fay, the divine perfon of the Lord Jefus was created ; the others fay, he is begotten : Now, let the honeft inquirer fearch the fcriptures and tiy, if he can find fuch a diflierence betwixt a created and a be- gotten being, as we are bound to believe there is betwixt the higheft created or begotten glory N n an ( 282 ) and the felf-exiftcnt, unorlginated glory of the Lord Jefus. There is a near analogy betwixt what is faid of the ads of God in creating and beget- ting; but none between any thing created or be- gotten, and felf-exiftence. In this cafe, the Ana?is are the more conliflent of the two, in denying the felf-exiftence of the Lord Jefus, while they hold that he was created : But the others, while they hold that he was begotten, and had his perfonality communicated to him, at the fame time fay, that he is felf-exiftent > which is a manifeft contradidion in terms. i' I MUST acknowledge here, that I have met with a modern author, an advocate for the fcheme, more coniiftent than the reft. He wrote againft the Arian hypothecs, and finding it impofBble to reconcile the terms in the fcheme with felf-exif tence, which the Arians objccl, he very complai- fantly (or rather blafphemoufly) yields the felf- exiftence of both Word and Holy Ghost, and writes a chapter, intituled, " Tbe div'me ferfon cf the Father only self-existent." — Aftonifhing ! That m.en to fiipport their darling notions of the Lord Jefus being a So77, as he is God, or that his - divine perfon was begotten, which they can never prove from revelation, fhould thus give up his di- vine and felf-exiftent glories into the hands of ad- verlaries to his proper divinity ! Tell it not in chriftian churches, left Aria?is ,Socinians, yea, Atheijls^ rejoice ! There are fonie other things faid in favour of eternal generation, but they are fo trifling, and fo little to the purpofe, that 1 fhall not detain the reader with thcni, but come to the confideration of the only argument that can be produced in fa- vour ( =^83 ) vour of that doctrine, viz. " The Antiquity of it, and the multitude of its efpouferSj" which I iliall coniider together. Anf. I T fhould be well obfeived, that revela- tion is the true antiquity : And vrhat God hath revealed and prefcribed therein, has more authority for binding the confcience, than the dictates and tra.- ditions of multitudes in every age. There is a wide difference betwixt the primary antiquity and autho- rity of the fcriptm'es, and that which is traditional, flowing only from the cufcom and obfervation of men. There is often too great regard paid to tra- ditional antiquity, human authority, and the prac- tice of multitudes, to the diflionour of the facred luord. A N T I Q. u I T Y, full ply conlidered, can never add ftrength to a cavife, nor honour to any pro- feilion. Sin deferves not applaufe, becaufc com- mitted in paradije, and bears date with the ancient records of Mofes. Nor f[>ould the Roiiujh hcaft be held in repute, becaufe the myftery of iniquity be- gan to work in the Apoilolic age. Human autho- rity, if it has any weight, it is owing to tlic word of God ; confequently the divine teftimony, which is more ancient than any other, is fufiicient with- out it. 'Jlie celebrated Htrvey hath a very notable remark to the prefent purpole. *• Human autho- " rity,'* lays he, " compared with the oracle of " revehition, is like a range of cyphers connecled " with the initial figure, which, vvcrc they de- *' tached, would be iniignificant ; but in fuch fub- " ordination are confiderable." , A multitude of votaries cannot dignify a caufe, nor prove any doctrine to be true. If it could, Chrijl's little fiock muil C 284 ) muft have been wrong in all ages, for they were always the feweft. Antiquity, a great number of efpoufers, and the fentiments of great, learned, ^nd good men, have, like pilgrims* ftaves leaning againft the walls of the noble ftrudure of divine revelation, been too often, by unthinking multitudes, miitaken for the pillars that fupported the magnificent fa- bric. It Ihews a caule to be weak indeed, when no better arguments can be brought to fupport it. Every argument of this kind will ferve the Vopijh caufe agiinft reformation, as we\\ as eternal ge- neration : Butthe reformers defpifcd the weapons of antiquity, learning, and multitudes of votaries, and betook themfelves to the " Sword of the Spirit, ivhich is the ivord of God.'* Had they obferved the fame rule in forming their own fyjlems, as in oppoling Popery, Proteltants at this time would liave known lefs about eternal generation, than they know ol tranfubftantiation : Such as were dif- poied to fupport the one, would have found it as dilScult as Papift's did to maintain the other. The fum of all that can be faid for either is, that it is old, and has been countenanced by all thofe who are beft plcaied with that in religion, which cofts them leait trouble to examine. I think a ftriking parallel may be drawn betwixt thele lifter myfte- ries, tranfubflantiation and eternal generation : But I muft return to miy argument of antiquity in favour of the latter. I CONFESS it is a very ancient method of plead- ing, but always in favour of error and deluHon. "The Jevjs refolved to (r) " bake cakes, and burn incenfe (r) Jer. vii. 18. ?.nd xliv, 17. ( =85 ) incenfe to the queen of heaven, as their princes and fathers had done, &:c.'* {s) I'he Samarita/is could plead the cuilom of their fathers, worlhipping m that mountain, for the ground of their own prac- tice : — And how evident is it, that the jews moil fatally preferred the (j) traditions of their RaObies, to the doctrine of the blcfled Jesus. They thought it a lutficient reafon to reject him, bccaule none of the rulei-s and Pbar'ifees believed in him. But if we inquire into the antiquity of this hypothelis, and find it fail fhort of the period in which revelation was compiled and completed, it muft be of human i?2vention, and with refpect to re- ligion, defei-ves to be antiquated. Besides the fcriptures, in the firft two cen- turies, there were no fettled forms of this doclrine of the Trinity. Every one had his own fpecula- tions, w^hich were very different, and fome parti- cularly odd. As Dr Cave fays, " Things were not denned then as they are now, by explicit articles, and nice propofitions.'* They not only differed from one another in their explications ; but their beft writers cannot be made orthodox, according to what we ?wzu call ftandardfyftems^ without forced and unnatural comments. To believe and agree in the fcrjpture account of the Trinity was thought li^icient," without differing about philofophical diflinHions concerning the manner of it : Till the SabelUan notion broke out, wliich feemed to explain the doclrine quite away; the fupporters thereof fuppofing the Father, Son, and Holy Ghofl, to be only three modes of operation : Or rather, one Beijig, under tw^o modes of operation : Making the 6'i'// and Spirit mere attributes, or emanations from f.tj John iv. »o. f tj Matt. XV. 15. 3, 3. John vii. 48. ( 286 ) from the Supreme Being ; the Son the wifclom or reafon of the Father, by which he made the world, &:c. The Spirit a mere operation. This fcheme was fet up by Fraxeas, about the end of the fe- cond century, at Rome : Afterwards by Noetus, at Ephefus. And about the year 257, it was fprcad by Sabellius, at Fentapolis : From him it takes the name of Sahellianifm, The rife of this feet gave occafion for the church to be more exact in their terms and exphcations. — Notwithftanding, even in the middle of the third century, there feems not to be any fyftematic notion of the Trinity agreed upon in the church, which is evident from Diony- fius of Alexandria, who fell into herefy in writing againft Sahellianifm, not knowing what to fet up againft it, till better informed by Diotiyfius of Rome, The general opinion of thefe ancients, con- cerning the Son, was, " That he exifted in the Fa- ther from eternity, and at the creation, the Father put him without him, to create the world j which they called a bringing him forth, frolation, or ge7ie- ration. Whilft he was in the Father, he was God from eternity, as every thing that is in God, is God ; but by his coming out from the Father, as he became the Son of God, ib from thence they ftUed him God of God.** If they had any notion of his exiilirig as a perfon from eternity with the Father, it was either potentially, as Eufehius reprefents it in his account of the Nicene faith ; or, according to TertuUian's diftinftion, as^the ratio or reafon of the Father from eternity, 'tiil'broiight forth into fermo or ivordy and fo became dillincl from the Father, d as fuch a Son. That this was the sreneral an o^ doclrine of the three firft centuries, is allowed by Dr Water land, who cannot be fafpe*ftcd any -ways inclinable ( 287 ) inclinable to betray the caufe of eternal generation. In this doctrine, the reader will obferve, we have nothing of an eternal, but a temporary generation only. That this was the notion which prevailed at. the council of Nice is manifeft, in that they anathe' matifed all who fhould fay, " That he did not exift before he was begotten^* The word begotten here, is not to be underftood of his generation of the Virgin, for this decree was made againft the Arians, who never denied his exifting before that ; but it refers to the generation defcribed above. Arius and his followers, having explained this temporary generation into a real creation, maintaining Cbrijl to be a mere creature ; the Jynod, in oppofition to this, brought in the word confubftantial, to Ihew, that tho* they thought the Son generated, yet he was not created as other creatures ; but that he was God from eternity in the Father; tho' as a Son, he was generated and brought forth as above. This was tlie faith of the NiceJie council in the fourth centur)'- ; fo that no fuch notion of eternal generation was in the church for 300 years, as it is now explained. A s to the orio-inal of the docl:rine of eternal generation, I will not poiitively determine, but if we may depend upon the authority of fome, well acquainted with the antiquities of thofe periods, jt was the invention of apoltate Jews \ " which felf- contradiclory notions, (faith a very eminent au- thor) with other things of their produftion, have more confounded the chriftian faith, than any other pofitions :" And further fays, " that Feter Gala- tine cites the perfon whofc manufaclurc this doc? trine wa^.** H o \v E V E \ ( 288 ) However, it is certain, that the dodlrines of the piHmitive fathers are not the rule of our faith. I fuppofe very few of the greateft advocates for an- tiquity will acquiefce in that notion of theirs, " Of the Fathkr bringing forth the Son of himfelf at the creation, and putting him without him j" tho' it was general among them. But if the antiquity of this doctrine ihould ftill be thought worthy of regard ; and that it fliould have a place in our credmda^ for its goodly age of 1400 years ; hen we are no more to judge of doctrines by their evidence, and agreeablenefs to fcripture ; but by their age ; and if fo, it would have been much to the advantage of this, that it had been 373 years older. Indeed 1400 years is a great age ; but if it began no fooner, it is not the true antiquity, and no more true for being of that age, than if it had been only 14 days old. Still, fay its friends, it is venerable for its age. — But fhould this be granted, fome grey-head- ed errors, will for the fame reafon, claun the fame refpecl. Sabelliamfm prevailed both in the eajlern and weftern churches, 100 years before the council of Nice ; 'till Arianifm took up the ball, and turned the waters of contention into another channel ; this was confinned in feveral councils, and kept the feat of orthodoxy for many years. Now, 'tis certain thefe errors have a better right to the an- tique title, as the latter was the very occalion of inventing this hypothecs. — I do not know what is meant by the ftream of ant^iquity, fo much boafted of in favour of this fcheme, if it be not that it has been favoured by the ftrongeft party, and conti- nued long; and if this be the rule to meafure truth, the ancient errors Ihould be naturalized among ( 289 ) among our fyftems : This is a fine argument in i?i- vour of popery, which, it feems, the longer jt , laflsi, will be the better. Having anfwered the arguments in favour of eternal generailon, before I proceed to coniider the text J jprodu-ced for proof of it, I muft remove a prejudice which fome are ready to be overtaken with. It perhaps will be all edged, that tho' I have been finding fault with this fchenie, becaufe the terms therein are unfcriptural : Yet, in treating of the fame doctrine, I ufe terms not to be found in fcripture. To tliis I anfwer, That tho' it would be highly commendable, in filch fublimc doctrines, if evei'y one would both fpeak and write in the language of revelation as near a5 poffible, fuice the truth is in danger, in a number of human confequcnces ; yet, it lliould be care- fully obferved, that there is a great difference be- twixt one bringing forth all the evidence he can for the illuftration of any particular truth, that others may be invited to embrace it, upon the evidence offered which hath perfuaded himfelf :— > And another perfon or more, farming a fchem® of human deductions for a rule of faith to be im- pofed on others, upon the pain of damnation, whe- ther they have any evidence to believe them or not. A miffake in the fii'ft cafe remains with the author ; none is defircd to believe further tlian they fee evidence to fupport the truth: — But an error in the latter cafe is fundamental, and of the raoft dangerous confequence. B E s I D E Sv I do not altogether reje<^ the terms in the fcheme, becaufe they are not in fcrip- ture ; but for their being ilich as will bear no tole- O o rable ( 290 ) rable meaning confiftent with what is revealed of that doctrine. For the fame reafon, I diflike fome explications of fcriptural phrafes, becaufe they have not the leaft degree of analogy with the texts they are pretended explications of : And tho* I have ufed fome terms not expreffed in fcripture, yet the fenfe is included therein by neceifary confequence. As for example, the words plurality and 'Trinity, tho* not in fcripture, yet the plain and undeniable meaningof them is — "Thefe three are one/' The fame may be faid of the terms being, essence, EXISTENCE, &c. As to the tcrms subsistence, and person, which I have fometimes ufed, not becaufe I think in a ftricl fenfe they are properly applicable to the fubjed, but for want of other words more proper in their ftead ; and becaufe they will be beft underftood, long cuftom having efta- blilhed the ufe of them. It might give uneafinefs to the minds of fome chriftians to introduce any new terms into this doctrine, and fo lofe that ad- vantage propofed from any clearer ideas included in them. I CONCEIVE it will be acceptable tomofl of my readers, to be informed on what occafion thofe terms came to be applied to this fubject. For this pnrpofc let it be obferved, that about the fecond century, the prevailing part of the leaders in the church, in oppolition to the Sabellian doctrine, adopted the word Hypojlafts to exprefs the doctrine of the Trinity by, which was not till then ufed in that doctrine : And to appear as far contrary to- Sabellianifm ?s poiuble, they made it to fignify fubjlance, which is the direct oppofite to i\\?l opi- nion they wanted to dellroy. But the difliculty which this arbitrary deiinition involved the caufe in foon appeared, from the necellity of guarding againlt { 291 ) againfl the other extreme : For the term fi{hjlance \ led immediately into the notion of" three Beings or Gods. In the heat of oppoiition, a general coun- cil was called, where it was determined, that the ttxvcifubjlance, as applied to the Trinity, fliould not hgnify a diJl'uiSi beings or feparate fubjlance, but fomething more than a name ; that is, fomething real or fubjlantial, which afterwards was called fubfijlence* This was ftill defining without autho- rily irom revelation : But the Latin church, not fa- tisfied with the word Hypojlafis being applied to the Trinity, brought in the word Ferfona or Ferfon,- which continues to this day, tho' as little coun- tenanced from fcripture, in this application of it, as the other. | The word indeed is in our tranflation of Heb. i. 3. No doubt in conformity to feveral hundred years cuftom before. But that Hypojlafis^ the word from which Ferfon is taken, has no relation to that fubje<5l ; and that ferfon is not a proper tran- flation of it, I fliall Ihew when we come to confider that text. Only allow me to obferve here, that the word perfon, is not applied to any of the divhie three in any place of fcripture : But for as mucli as the properties f If the word perfon'is applied to the Trinity in that fenfe which it is underftood, and applied to finite beings, among whom it always implies a diftind underftanding and will, as well as a diftindt indi- vidual Being, and as the perlbns are mullipled, fo are the diftindt Beings : To aflert three perfons in Deity in this fenfe, and yet but one God, would be a grofs contradidton. Arians take the advan- tage of this difficulty in the ufeofthe woxdi per/on, againft the or- thodox ; and the method they take to extricate themfelves, only in- volves them in more difficulties, being liable to the fame, and other exceptions. They fay, that the divine CiTcnce fubfifts in a diffe- rent manner in each of tho three perfons, which is the foundation of their diftin(^ perfonality : Or thus, the ditierent rrianner that ea ch perfon podcifeii the divine efTence, the one as a Father, the other as a So)i, and a third as Holy Ghojl, is the foundation of their diftinift perfonality. This certainly implies a difference of pcrfonal glory, and can never be maintained, but at the expence of the proper Deity of both the Son and Holy ChoJL C 292 ) properties of real being and exiftence is attributed to each of them, the ancients no doubt thought they might fafely ufe the word hypofiafis with the above limitation, and the moderns the word fjibfijhiice, which they reckon the import of it fo limited : And thefum of all that can be faid for the ufe of the v<7ord perfonh, that real perfonal properties, powers, attributes, and works, are affirmed oieach of them, and nothing faid that is inconiiftent with perfon- ality. Tho* all this Ihould be granted oeconomi- caliy 5 yet it will by no means favour the ufe that is commonly made of the term ; nor make it necef- fary that it fhouldbe ufed at all, finceitis not foufed in revelation. God hath revealed terms fufficient to exprefs all he defigned we fhould know of him : But if others will add to thefe the inventions of jne», we muft leave them to take their o-cvn^ way. An© obferve further, that fiich terms as have been fanclified by men j— received upon their au- thority, aiftd held facred in religion, (tho' only the product of unguarded zeal, and oppoiition among parties, in which every one adopted fuch terms as feemed moft contrary to the opinions they would have condemned) have been of ill confequence, both to fucli as have believed them, and thofe who have zealouliy oppofed them. By the former, thefe t-erms have been received implicitly, without know- ing how they were applicable to the fubjecl ; and yet fo zealoufly defended, as often to iffue in per^ fecuting to death fuch as would not follow them in the dark. On the otlier hand, many of thofe who oppofed the ufe of thofe terms, from the wrong application of them, have carried their op- pofition too far, not diftinguilhing betwixt the truth as ipade known in revelation, and as cloathed ' •'■ ''-''■-■ with ( =93 ) with dark and unmeaning phrafes by men. Con- fequcntly, the truth being abufcd by the one, have occaiioned the denial o£ it by the other. To this caule, I refer all the oppofition which has been made to the proper divinity of JefasChriJl by tliofc called ^rw/zj-, and others, which took its rife upon the firil: application of inch terms to the doclrine of the IVinity. Had they reflricled thdr pppolition to fuch innovations, it had been laudable ; but tlie hiitory af 1400 years fliews the cafe to be other- wife. T H p s E who have been called the orthodo^^ have alfo occaiioned endlefs controveri^es concern?^ ing the Deity of Jefus Chrijl^ by not properly dittinguifliing betwixt what is fliid of him in icrip- turiSj, -with relation to his inferior oecoi^omical cha-, racier, and the proofs which fuppprt his proper Deity. Having accuftomcd themfelyes to confouii4 thefe. Anus, and his followers, took the advajtir, tage of their applying the terms whi^h belonged to the official oeconomical character of Cbrijl tp* the proof of his Deity ; and from thefe, as pre?^' mifes, very jullly concluded the arguments of^the; orthodox weak ; :\iid the confequence they di-ew was, that jefus CljnfiwAH not properly God. The orthodox, inllead of mending the fault in their own hypothefis, invented -j. gemratio?2, ov begetting of bis cfivi?ie perfon from all eternity^ which rather ftrength- ened than anfwered the objections of the Arians, iince X.\\-xt fHiation plainly implied the derivation of his ferfon. For tho' the generation or begetting be carried into eternity, (which is without autho- rity from fcripture) the terms thcmfelves ftill prove it to have had a beginning. The prcmifes the Arians build upon arc grant- ed ( 294 ) ed by the orthodox : Here both are miftaken. The former are right in their conchifion from fuch pre- mifes ; but inconliftent with fcriptnre by the mif- take in the choice of their premiies. The latter are right in maintaining the proper Deity of Chriji ; but inconliftent with tbemfches in the manner they pretend to fupport their caufe. The error of both lies, in not attending to the diftinction betwixt what relates to the inferior occonomical character of Chri/l, and the palfages from which his Deity may be more directly proved. The Arians com- monly argue from the former, and thence conclude his inferior Deity to the Supreme God, which their premifes will very well bear ; and which the orthodox might, and fliould grant without any danger to the truth, while there are other in- eonteftable evidences of his proper Deity, which is not liable to the exceptions commonly brought againft it. All the advantage the Arians have gained, is from the orthodox pretending to prove their caufe from arguments which have not the leaft relation to it : And the Deity of the Spirit has been denied and oppofed from the fame prin- ciples. Such are the woeful effects of the ancients, adding their own inventions to religion, and ira- poiing them on the confcienCes of others ! b E C T. ( 295 ) SECT. ly. TH E next thing to be confidered, is the paf- fages of fcripture generally brought to prove the eternal generation of the Son of God, and that the terms Father, Son, and Holy GhoJ}, are 7iatiiral^ neceffary, and iriternal characters of Deity. Here the advocates for this do^lrine are ftrangely divided in their fentiments. There are fome texts applied as clear proofs of it, which others of them fay have not the leaft relation to the fub- je£b. Yea, fome of them are fo felf-denied, as plainly to contradid themfelves in different parts of their own works. — " A kingdom divided againft itfelf cannot ftand." — As there is no need to fay much about fuch texts as themfelves doubt of, — I fliall endeavour to make it evident, that fuch as are generally fuftained proofs of that dodrine, are nothing to the purpofe ; but rather favour that oeconomical fcnfe, which the fcripturcs reprefent thefc terms in. The firft that fiiould claim our attention is that in the fecond Pfalm : But as I have fairly de- monftrated, that it refers to Chrifi\ oeconomiciil fonfliip, in p. 155. I fhall only defire the reader to read what is there faid over again. I MUST here notice, how ftrangely a learned critic has tortured a palTage. in the iioth Plalm, to make it favour the caufe of eternal generation. The text fays, " From (or of) the womb of the (early) morning, thou haft (to thee, or thou ftialt have, marg.) the due of thy youth." But he makes it read tlius, — " Of nmc own efjencc Infore the early morning, ( 29^ ) tnorning, or before the world was, thou hadft the due of thy youth, or birth ; as noting his eternal generation before all worlds." Here the words " ?nine own ejfence, before the early morning,'* or as he interprets it, " before all worlds," are thruft into the text, contrary to the very fenfe and fcope of the palTage, that it might appear a proof of that doctrine which hath no better foundation in revc' lation to fupport it. This is one text which our modern advocates for eternal generation acknow- ledge has no relation to it. Another we have in the Proverbs, {x) " I WAs/et up from everlailing, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. When there were no depths, I was brought forth : — Before the moun- tains were fettled ; before the hills, was I brought forth.'' A learned modern Doctor affirms in one part of his writings, that this " is to be underftood " of the eternal generation and fonfhip of Chrift j *« and the repetition of the phrafe brought forth, " partly (hews the importance of it ; it being a " matter of infinite moment and concern, and de- *' ferving the Jlridefl attention and obfervation : « And partly fhews the certainty of it ; the eter- " nal generation oi Chrifi being an article of faith « mofi furely to be believed" But in another part of his works, the fame author fays, " This paflage "is a glorious proof of Chriji's eternal^ e^iflsjj££^ <' tho' not lb clear a one of his eternal Sonflnp. «' The \i\\Y2St^oi fettingup, poffejfmg, bringing forth, " and bringing up, feem rather to refer to his inedior- «' torial ojfice/' The Doctor's candor is very com- mendable, in making lb fair a retreat. In great humility he would rather contradid himfelf, than expofe (x) Prov. viii. aj, 24, aj. ( 297 ) expofe an article of faith moft furely to be believ- ed, — a matter of infinite moment, — to the charge of felf-contradicfion. The terms in the paflage fuit fo ill with his leading fentiment, " That Chrifi is a Son, as he is God, — that he was begotten as God, &:c." if applied to it would wholly deftroy the important truths It was neceflary either to ap- ply them another way, -or call in the afliftance of figures, (or myfteries, the only remedies in fuch cafes of diftrefs) which can never be accommodated or explained on fuch a principle, and muft only involve the author in endlefs criticifms and de- bates, about words that Iiave no meaning at all when fo applied. W E have another fuppofed proof of eternal ge- neration in the Proverbs, (y) " What is his name, and what is his Son's name, if thou canft tell ?'* Which the fame Doctor paraphrafes thus, " What *' is his name ? That is his nature and perfeftions, " which are incomprehenfible and ineffable : And *' feeing he is a Son of the fame nature with him, *' fay what is his nature and perfections ? Declare *' his generation, and the manner of it, his divine ^'^ filiation, and in what dafs it is/* The Dodor makes a very unfuitable fupple- ment to the tej^'t, that it may feem to favour his caufe. It fays nothing about generation or filiation. Nor has it any relation to God, or Jefus Chrifl, his Son, at all. ■\ But tlio' we fhould grant they are intended here, and by name is meant nature, the queftion will only refer to his nature and perfec- tions, not his generation, and the maimer of it, — not his filiation^ and in what dafs it is ? Befides, if ge- P p neratioD. (y ) Prov. XXX. 4. f See p. 154' C 2cp8 ) neratipn muft be forced into the text, the queftio^t relates as much to the generation of the one, as the^ other. I fay, if name here fignify generation^ as the Doctor fays, it muft refer to the generation of the Father^ as well as the generation of the Son ; which efFeclually deftroys all his fine paraphrafe. What Ifa'iah faith, is held as another proof of eternal generation. — {£) " He was taken from piifon and from judgment : and who fhall declare his ge- neration ? For he was cut off out of the land of the living.'* This middle claufe is very differently applied by commentators. Some to the incarna- tion of Chrift : — Some to the eternal duration of his life after his refurreclion : — And others, both ancient and modern, apply it to his numbeilefs off- fpring, or fpiritual feed. Any one of thefe is more coniiftent, than to fcrew up the meaning of the expreilion to an eternal begetting of the divine perfon of the Lord Je/us, as many infinuate ; which neither the words themfelves, nor thefe going be- fore or following them, will by any means allow. The verfe before, and this, are a ftriking defcrip^ tion of our Redeemer's furpafling humility, under tlie feveral fteps of the Jews ftubborn cruelty to- Vv'ards him. Therefor e, taking the words in connec- tion, 1 think the following fentiment is clearly pointed out : " Who ihall declare his generation r" Who fhall declare the perverfe obftinacy, the wick- cdneis, and injuftice of that generation in which he lived ? — So cruel as thus to opprefs the inno- cent Lamb of God ; againft whom their ftretclied invention, tho' aflifted v/ith diabolical malice, could find fzj Ka. liii. S. ( 2^9 ) find no cliargc worthy of piinifliment, or death. The Prophet therefore adds^, " He was cut ofr out of the land of the Uving, (yet not for him felf, as Daniel fpeaks, for no crime of his own, but) for the tranfgreflion of my people was he fmitten." Which is a plain reafon for both the depth of his humility in his voluntary fufferings and death for his people, and the unaccountably cruelty of that crooked and perverfe generatioii the Jciv's^ and Roman governors, who confpire^ to triicify an innocent perfon, in whom they could find no fault. This fcnfe of the text is highly- favoured by the character Mofcs gives Ifrae'l in Jiijj time, whom lie calls a (3 > gotten by the living God. In both, the tema living God is fuppofedto be peculiar to the Fa t her, ex- clufive of C/jriJ} and the Spirit. Dr Clark, the modern champion for the Arian caufe, lays it down as a maxim, " that the word God in fcripture, " never lignilies a complex notion of more perfons " than one; but always means one perfon only, viz, *' The perfon of the Father lingly, or the perfon « of the Son fmgly.'* Now, if this is granted them, all other diiE- culties they reckon eafily furmountable in proving the inferior Deity of Chrifi ; for, Ciy they, " all thele terms, livi?ig God, only ivife God, one God, great God, &c. muft be limited to the Father only, con- sequently all that is faid oi Chrijl as God, is in an inferior fcnfe, as the Father's fervant, inflrument, Zzc. And the fupporters of the other fcheme alfo, muft in confiftency with their own terms, explain every text where the So7i of God is mentioned in favour of the Arian hypothelis. For if the divine perfon of Chrifi be included in the term Uvitig God, or in the term God, where he is mentioned as the Son of God, then their whole fcheme is de- ftroyed ; and all I have been contending for grant- ed, viz. That it is under another confideration that he is called Son, than that wherein he is called God. The Holy Ghoft by this hypothelis, muft be alfo excluded from the glory of this title living God. Peremptorily to exclude him, is the fame as to fay, he is not tlie living God, Yet for the honour and lafety /)f this fcheme, excluded he muft be, let the confequence be ever fo dangerous to truth ; for to include the Holy Ghoft in this term, makes the divine C 304 ) divine perfon of the Lordjefus, to be the Son of the Holy Ghojl, which will wound this human fcheme in a very tender part, viz. that of his being begotten only by the perfon of the Father. Now, let the admirers of this fcheme, chufe whether they will degrade the divine pcrfons of the Word and Spirit, by denying them the honom- of this title the living God, which is the fame with faying they are not God ; or expofe their human hypo- thecs to the charge of felf- contradiction, which, if maintained, fets revelation at variance with it- felf. Every impartial reader muft account it an amazing infatuation in favour of that darling no- tion, which has not the lead: countenance in fcrip- ture ', that to fupport it, they will give up the glory of Chrijl into the hands of fuch as affirm that he is not properly God. As for my own pirt, in all the 25 texts where this term Hving God is mentioned, I fee no reafon why the divine three may not be included, without doing violence to the analogy of faith, or the fcope of the palTages. There are two paflages in John, — (JS) which a great deal of weight is laid upon, in fupport of Chrifi being a Son, as he is God. Our Lord, in the courfe of his teaching had afferted, that God was his Father. The Jews, through their malice and prejudice, charge him with blalphemy ; for ac- cording as they drew the inference, by laying that God was his father, he made himfelf equal with God : And taking it for granted, that their infe- rence was juft, the advocates for eternal generation conclude, that Chrift is God, as he is a Son, ■ Anf.li^ (h) John Vr iS, 19. and X. 30,-39. ( 3^5 ) Anf, I F our Lord\ anfwers to the Jews in both places be carefully attended to, efpecially the firft, which ferves to explain the other, it will appear quite different from what either the Je^vs or their modern friends do fuppofe. As to the firft, we are told that Jefus faid, " my Father worketh hi- therto, and 1 work." For this the Jews fought to kill him, becaufe he faid God was his father, making himfelf equal v/ith God. Now, hear his defence, " Then anfwered Jefiis^ and faid unto them, verily, verily, I fay unto you, the Son can do nothing of himfelf, but what he feeth the fa- ther do. — For the Father loveth the Son, and Hicweth him all things that himfelf doth : And he will fhew him greater works than thefe, that ye may marvel. — 1 can do nothing of myfelf-, I feek not mine own v^ill, but the will of the father that fent me." In this reply of our Lord^ it is very plain that he contradi<5ls their inference, by de- claring in the ftrongeft terms his inferior character, as a Son. As God, he knovv^s all things of him- felf, — can do all things by his own power and will, — is fupreme and independent, — and his know- ledge, will, and power are the fame, not different from, much lefs fubordinate to the Father's : But all this he exprefsly denies of himfelf as a Son ; therefore, if we will believe Jesus, rather than the malicious Jeics^ he is not GoJ, as he is a Son : Or he muff befuch a God asfomc think he is, fubordi- nate, inferior, and dependent, for thefe are plain in his character of himfcljF^ as a Son. So that tiiis paffage is a dii'ecl proof of his fonfliip belonging to his inferior character, and therefore may be added to the other arguments to that purpofe above. A s to the otiier paffage, it muft be of the Lrae impoit, if one place may be allowed to explain (^q another. ( 3o6 ) another. Here alfo they accufe him for calling himfelf the Son of God ; and he had certainly the fame notion of his own fonihip now as formerly, fo that we might here fiiew his fenfe of fonfliip, from hivS former anfwer to a fimilar charge againft him ; but as he replies in other tei'ms, we fhall confider how far they favour the caufe they are brought to fupport. I T is obfervable, that tho* the character of the Mejfiah be fo exhibited in the Old Teftament, that fome among the Jews might probably know he was God, as well as man : Yet they were in gene- ral fhamefully ignorant of his true character. For had they thought of his Deity, that queftion of our Lord, would not have lilenced them, " If the MeJJtah be Dav'uVs Son, how could David call him Lord ?'* Or, " If D^ai^zW calls him Lord, how is he his Son ?" The leaft thought of his Deity, would have eafily refolved this difEculty ; but it is evident they had no fuch notion of the Mejfmh. The defign of thefe wicked Jews, was to bring the higheft accufations againft our Saviour, and to load him v/ith the grofleft calumnies that their wit or malice could draw from his words or actions, " Lavinj^ wait for liim, and feekinsr to catch fome- thing out of his mouth, that they might accufe him." If he fpake of his kingdom, it is fedition and rebellion, he is an enemy to Cafar : — If he calls God his Father, their malice conftrues it blafphemy, in making himfelf equal with God : And fliall aconfequencc ftrained from our Saviour's words by miaiicious Jews, be fuftained an only warrant for a " doctrine of the iitmojl confeqiience, an article of faith moft fui'^ly to he believed, on- wliich tlie falvation of our fouis depends V* " And ( Z^l ' ) ^' And that the confequence was ftrained, is evi- dent from our Lord's reply, " J^fi^'^ anfwercd them, is it not written in your law ; I faid, ye are Gods ? If he called the?n Gods, unto whom the word of God came ; and the fcriptures cannot be broken : Say ye of him, whom the Father hath fandllfied, and fent into the world, thou blafphc- meft, becaufe 1 faid, I am the Son of God ?'* Where we may obfcrve, (i) That he doth neither plainly own nor deny himfelf to be the true God . — . Yet, (2) If he had not been the true God, he would have renounced their conclulion of equality with God ; but he only denies the juflnefs of theirinfe- rence, that his calling himfelf the Son sf God, was in confequence making himfelf God. Since he admits the one, we may fafely conclude he is God ; and feeing he denies the other, we may fairly infer that his fonjlnp does not denote his Deity. For (3) it is plain, his dcfign in the anfwer he gave, was to refute the calumny of the Jezvs, and Ihcw the weaknefs of their inference, that the name Son of God does neceffarily lignify one equal iv'ith God. The argument our Lord ufes here, is what is called a ?m?2ori ad inajus ; putting the reafon of his more unqueftionable right to this title, upon the fuperiority of liis character and mifllon, or his. more immediate commiffion from thc^Father, than thofc Prophets, Kings, and Judges, who were cal- led Gods, from the word of God coming to them. The argument plainly runs thus, They who were originally in and of this world, were made Pro- phets, Teachers, and Kings, merely by the word of God coming to them, receiving tlieir commif- fion by fonic voice, vifion, divine meflage or in- fpiration, and they were called Gods: Therefore the Mefiiah, who was not originally of thi;? world, but ( 3o8 ) but was fandified, or anointed, fet apart, and fent immediately by God himfelf into this world for fuch incomparable purpofes, may furely be called the Son of God, without danger of blalphemy. In ihort, if they were called Gods, the Melliah may well be called the Son of God. (4) It is very re- markable, that tho' the Jeivs built part of their accufation upon his faying, " I and my Father arc one,'* yet our Lord does not directly anfwer to thefe words, becaufe they bear an intimation of his Deity : But applies himfelf to anfwer that part of it, taken from his calling God bis father, and him- felf the Son of God ; denying the charge, and re- futing their inference, no doubt, to teach them and us both, that the term Son of God, does not prove equality ivith God. Indeed, if the character Son of God here, means his Deity, it mull infer his equality with God, as the Jews inferred : But befides the diffi- culty, or rather impoffibility of the divine nature of ChnJ} being fandified, or anci?7ted, 3.nd fent ; which lie fays he was, as a Son \ it plainly deftroys the whole force of our bleffed Saviour's argiiment, and concludes his defence trifling ; and confequently, leaves the accufation of the malicious Jews in full force againfl the Lord Jefus Chrijl ! ■ T o illufirate this a little further, it fhould be obferved, that the queftion betwixt our Lord and the J'r.vs, was not whether the Meiliah was a di~ 'vine perfon or not ; but whether he to whom they were fpe.iking, was the Melfab or not. Therefore, when he affumed an epichet, which, asufed in the Old Teftament, was characrerifticil of the Mcffmb, they charge him with blafphemy ; for, he as they fuppoicd, being only a mere man, had ailumed a title ( 3^9 ) title which the fcriptures appropriated to the pro- miied Mcfjuw^ v/honi the lame icriptures call the m!, who had embraced chriflianity ; yet were fo far prejudiced in favour of.Ahfaic rites and ceremonies, as to think them neceffary to be joined to the gof- pel of Chrijl. On account of their profefiing chriftimity, they fufi'ercd a kind of perfecution fj'om their crainfliving: brethren, which, with their own prejudices, were ready to weaken their at- t'.ichment to, and endanger their apoftatizing from the profeluon of the chriflian rcHgion. To pre- vent this, and remove their prejudices, theApoftle introduces a variety of arguments to prove the chiiflian difpenfation to be tranfcendently more excellent C 319 ) excellent than that under the Old Teftament. He gives them a glorious defcription of Chnjl in his complex charader as Emmanuel, — in his offices as the great Legijlator and Admimjlrator of the oeco- nomy of God in creation, providence, and re- demption ; and particularly in his offices of Fro- fbet, Friejl, and King. He proves at large that Chrijl was greater than Angels : — A greater law- giver than Alo/es : — A greater Prieft than Ja/on : A greater prince than Melchifedec, He points out to them the fatal confequences of Apoftacy, the bleilingsof perfeverance in the faith, and concludes the whole with a pathetic exhortation to ftead- faftnefs. I N this firft chapter he profecutes a part of this great plan, and mentions feveral things concerninc^ Chrijl^ who is the great fubjed of the epiftle, which infer moft evidently that he is truly and properly God, as well as man : But as the Apoftle*s fcope is to fliew the excellency of Emmanuel above Angels, Mofes^ &c. the whole of his reafoning niufl be viewed as defcriptive of him in that charadcr, as God maiiifeft in Jlefh, with a connotation of his offices, and the term Son of God, mufl be limited to that fenfe, coniiftent with the fcope of the epiftle. Should it be alked, what is the ApoftIe*s fcope in this firft chapter ? The anfwer is briefly given in the contents of our Englijh common Bibles, " Christ preferred to Angeb:* ChriU, the Son of God, is the fubjecl, the whole is a defcrip- tion of him. But if he is fpoken of as God under the title Son, then the whole is a defcription of Deity abfolutely confidered. Now can any one ever ( 320 ) ever imagine, that the Apoftle would write two whole chapters to prove that the eternal God was greater than Angels, and a third to prove that he was greater than Mofes ? What occalion was there for it ? Who ever denied that God was fuperior to all thofe the Son of God is contrafted with in this epiftle ? The queftion with the unconverted tie- brezus was not about what God was ; but who Jefus of Nazareth was ? Whom they fuppofed only a 7nere man, and none of the beft neither; not the promifcd MeJJiah, but an impoltor : And if we will not grant that the ApolUe is here vindicating the character of the Mejiab from the falfe charges of thp Jews, but will coniinc the term Son to his Deify, we plainly affirm, that he took all this pains to prove what no body denied, and what had not the leail relation to his purpoi'e ; except we ab- furdly fuppofe, that he defigned to inculcate the notion of two Gods. W E fliall now more particularly confider the phrafes ufed here by the Apoftle, which have been commonly fo rendered and interpreted, as to make his meaning included in them quite obfcure ; and like the dark lide of the cloud which was turned towards the Egyptians, the ciraracter of CAr//? given from them, has been rather confounding than edify- ing. They have been generally forced in as proofs of his eternal generation, whereas if they are care- fully conhdered, they will be found to prove a very different doctrine : For our ideas are confined to the character of Chrifl as Emmanuel, concerned in the work of our falvation, from the confider- ation of thefe very expreffions being applied to him, which have been fo inadvertently perverted to other purpoles. In ( 321 ) In verfes ift, and 2d, the Apollle tells the He- hreias, tliat " God who Ipake m times paft to their fathers by the Prophets, hath in thefe laft days fpoken by his Son, vjbom he hath appointed heir of ^11 things J' — It was furely Jesus Christ, as come in the flcJJj^ who is here i'aid to fpeak to them, who could not be appointed heir purely as God, for it was God who appointed iiini as /j/V Son ; and delegation muft imply inferiority ; for tho' the perfon appointed or delegated, may be in other refpecls equal to him or any of them who fend, . impower, or communicate authority to him ; yet, •in that particular refpect in which he is appointed, mdhoriz-ed, fent^ or deputed^ he is certainly inferior. Therefore the Son being appointed as heir, muft: refer to that part of his character in which he is inferior^ 2Lnd fubjecl to the paternal authority of God, difplayed in the divine occonomy, and .evidently implied in the acl of appointing or comniU' «/V^2//;?^ the power, right, or privilege of heirfhip. Hence, C/6ny^ himfelf iays, ^^yiy father who gave them me, is greater than all." But this Ifhall con- iider a little further, when we come to the 4th verfe. And before we enter upon the 3d, 1 muftobferve, •that there are manv who with re'j^ard to receivins: fentiments in religion, act with more indilTerence than they would do in purchaling the mcaneft trifles in the world. In the latter cafe, they chufe to go if pollible to the firft hand, and careful to have their goods pure and unfophifticated, without , adulteration ; but they are far from being fo circumfpedt with^ regard to religion, which they can receive adultc-^ rated with the inventions of men, — admit the meaning of pailages from interpolations and com- ments, which rather lliew the fentiments of the S f tranflator ( 3^2 ) franflator or interpreter, than the mind of God! revealed in them. Thus the fcriptures are forced to fpeak the language of fyilematics. Amoiig many paflages that have fuffered by fueh methods, this text is a moil glaring examplcj which com- monly runs thus when cited, " Who is the bright- nefs of his father's glory, and the exprefs image of his perfon." — And according to this reading, has been fuftained an undoubted proof of eternal ge- neration ; or Chrift being a «Swz, as he is God. But if the reader will pleafe to take his Bible, he will fee that the -wdx^"^ father and h'ls^ are not even in the Englilh verfion. The tranflators have fupplied the word his^ and cuftom only has added father to it, which is a grofs corruption of the text, and tends to obfcure the obvious meaning of it. II The firft claufe reads thus, " Who being the ' brightnefs, fplendor, or refulgence of that glory.*' The glory here refers to the divers manners in which God fpake to the fathers at fundry times, men- tioned in the firft verfe : And the plain eafy mean- ing is, that the Son, by whom God had fpokenift the laft days, was the brightnefs or refplendence of ail the glory exhibited, promifed, or prophelied of in the Old Teftament difpenfation. The glory that was then revealed^ was but like the dawn of the morning in comparifon of the noon-day fplen- dor of the lun of righteoufnefs : Such morning rays only announced the approach of the refulgent fun, who fpread abroad the glorious light of divine tinth through the world, in the moft open, clear, and confpicuous manner. Jefus Chrift was the fpiiit and fuiiftance of all the glory manifefted in the declarations, appearances, tabernacle^ temple, prieft-hood, and pompous fervices. They all cen- ter in liim whofe character and work is the meri- diau ( 323 ) (dian luflre, the excelling glory of \vhat M'ns more diiikly laid and iliadowcd oi' him under the Old Tclhiment. The glorious appearances which were luade, the glory of the tabernacle, temple, and, prieil-hood, and ei'peciidly that glory which ap- peared from off the mercy-feat, (to which this phrafe in the text may perhaps particularly allude) was externally ftriking to the fenfcs, and often furprized the beholders : But not to be compared wjth that permanent, fpiritual, and divine glory, which fhone fo confpicuoufly in the whole charac-* ter of Jesus Christ. Tho' the latter JeiciJ/j temple wanted many rf things that tended to enhance the glory of the firlt, as we are told by Haggai. — OOi" ^'^^ois among you that faw this houfc in her Jirji glory f and how do yc lee it noiv f Is it not in your eyes in co?npan/m of it as 7iothing f Notwithftanding this preference with refpect to external glory, and feveral valuable privileges fuited to that difpenfation, which were wanting in the latter temple ; the fame Prophet tells us, — (w) " I will fhake all nations, and the dc-* fire of all nations lliall come, and I will fill this houfe with ghry, faith the Lord of hofts. The glory of this latter \\oviic fhall be greater than the for- mer, faith the Lord of hofts.'' The prefcnce of ' God manifeftcd in flefli, did more than make up ;iU defects in the latter temple, and made it ex- ceedingly excel the former in glory : Yea, with, rcfped to all the glory of the Jeiviflj o.economy, the Apoftle lays, — (a-) " That which was made glo- rious, had no glory in this r^fpecl, by rcafon of the glory that excelleth. For if that which waSi tlQne (v) Ilag.ii. J. (wj ver, 7, 9. ( .s ) a Cor. iU. xo, u.» C 3^4 ) clone away was glorious, much 7nore thai ivhich re^ fnainel/j .^^■— The life of Chrij} here, was a moft glo- rious exhibition of the moral perfections oS God, — his death an amazing declaration of the love, mercy, and condefcenlion of God, — his refurredion the cleareft difplay of the omnipotent power and unerring faithfulnefs of God, — his exaltation at God's right hand, — kingly dignity, univerfal do- minion and government, and giving fuch holy and divine laws and ordinances for the perpetual order, comfort, and eftabliihment of his church, make up fuch a refulgence of glory, as made Jfa'iah, under a prophetic view thereof, cry out to the church with admiration, — (y) " Arife, fliine, for thy light is come, and idciz glory of Jehovah is rifen upon thee. — Jehovah fliall arife upon thee, and his glory fliail be feen upon thee. — Rejoice ye with jerufalem, and be glad with her, all ye that love her, rejoice ■ for joy with her,' — and be delighted with the abundance of her glory J* Not the boafted glory of Sharon, Camiel, and Lebanon, which the Jews delighted fo much in : But the quinteffence Rnd excellence of all glory. " The glory of Jeho^ VAH, the excellency of Elohim.'* He, who is the medium or mirror of all the divine perfedions, — who exhibits all the glorious relations which Jeho- vah ftands in to his church. Hence, fays John,—^ (^z) " The word was made flefli, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the father) full of grace and truth.'* Paul tells us, {a) " In him dwelleth all the fclnefs of Deity bodily." Therefore he fays here with the utmoft propriety, *' Who is the BRIGHTNESS OR REFUJUQENCE O? GJ-ORY.'* The (y) Ifa. Ix. I, a. ibid. Ixvi. lo, ir. (^) Johai. 14. {a) Col.ii. 9, ( 3^5 ) T H E next claufe in this verfe is rendered, " The exprefs image of his perfon." The ordi' nary i'eni'c impofed upon thefe words fo tranflateJ is, " That C/jriJI as a Son, is the ejjential image of t\\Q father*! ■perfon'* The inconliftency of this fen- timcnt I confidercd above. I SHALL here fhew that neither fuch words nor ideas are in the text. The Greek word x''i'^'>^\ charader, which is not that I know of in the New Teftament, except in this verle, fignifies Hterally a dijlingmjhing mark : And fTroc-T^^? is a word com- pounded of hypo, under, and Jlafis, 2iJ}ation, and fo literally fignifies an under jlation, or foundation : And according to the ufe of it in this place, may be juftly exprefTed by the Engliih word condefceu' fion. So the text will read, " Who is the brightnefs Qr Jplendor of glory, and the diflinguifhing mark of his condefcenfwn."^ Tliis can have no relation to perfon at all. The word hypoflafis, here tranflated per- fon, is other four times in the New Teftament, in three of which, it is rendered confidence, and in the other fuhflance ; neither of thcfe can liave any re- lation to perfon ; nor is any of them the proper meaning of the word. But what makes it pretty evident that foundation would be a better tranfla- tion of it is, that this word agrees better with the fcope of the Apoftle, in every placewhere it is ufed, than any other word it is rendered by. As for example, (y) "Faith is \^t firm foundation of things not feen,-&c." In the other three texts, if) it is conficUnce, hut foundation would read much better, as the reader may fee by confulting the pafTages. Whatever way ccclefiaftical wiiters may render this word, there is no claiUcal author that make^ (b) Heb. xi. i. (r) z Cor. ix . 4 and xi. i;, IJcb. iii, 14. 0^- ( 1-6 ) makes ufe of it to fignify per/on. Revelation would Jiave appeared more clear, if Divines had taken words in their neareft fignification ; and not bor- rowed for them a remote fenfe, that they might be eafier adapted to fyftems compofed by themfelve? or others, as the meaning of Revelation. In this inftance, it is plain the text is wrefted to favour fome fuch purpofe, whereas the obvious meaning . of it is agreeable to the fcope of Revelation in gene^ ral, a glorious difplay of the character of ChriJI our Saviour, and conveys the ftrongeft idea of the great Jove and condefccnlion of God, expreffed in C/jr//? coming to fave linners. This is here fet forth as a moft interefting part of his character. That he who was heir of all things, — by whom the worlds were made, — who upholds all things, — who was thebrightnefs of glory, fhould humble himfelf to that b-jo Jlation he was in here, fubmit to a fliameful and ignominious death for finners, out of voluntary and matchlefs condefcenfion ! And that this is the idea included in the phrafe, is evident from what immediately follows, which is another branch of liis character as the Saviour of men : '"^ When he had by himfelf purged our fms, fat down on the right hand of the majefty on high.'* I N this view of the pafTage, the ideas are con- nected, and quite agreeable to the fcope of the Apoftle, in prefenting to the Hebrews a defcription of the Son of God, as the fubftance and fplendor of all that difpenfatibn, in which they gloried fo jiiuch, — his coming to fave fmners, the 7?io/} diftin- (Tiiifhed mark of divine condefcenfion ': And having finiflied his humiliation work, was adva,nced at GoD*s right hand, " being made (as in the 4th verfe) fo much better than the Angels, as he had bv ( 327 ) by inheritance obtained a more excellent nam6 than they." Whatever myfter'ies others may think they fee in this paffage, as eternal generation, — i^atu- ral fonJJnp, — Chrift the ejfential image of the father^ s ^per/on, &g. according to the plain meaning of the words, and the delign of the Apoftle's argument in this part of the epiftle, the impartial examiner will fay with him, — {dj " We fee Jesus, who was made a little lower than the Angels, for the fuffer* ing of death, crowned with glory and honom\" This is the beft comment on the paffage, giveii by the Apollle himfelf. ^ In (djYith.u.'}. * I hope the iitipartial reader is fully Convinced of the propriety of thefe obfcrvations, and that we have novf attained to a clear and determined fenfe of this paffage, which hath been not a little excruciating to interpreters. The embarraffment they have beeo under, was owing to their departure from the fenfe of fcripture terms, which are clearly difcovered, and impofing a meaning upoa them to favour dodtrines, which could not otherwife find any coun- tenance in fcripture: And in this inftance, as well as fome others, which we have had occafion to notice before, it is eafy to fee, how far they have departed from the plain fenfe of the terms : And alfo how eafily the inattentive may be mifled by traditions and fyftems. When once words acquire a meaning, which the writer did not intend they fhould convey, it is nothing ftrange, if the paf- fages where fuch words occur, appear dark and perplexed. In fuch cafes, the reader generally brings ideas to the palTiiges, which the writer was a ftranger to, and no wonder, if they are then in- tricate, and perhaps contradidory to him. There have been many- complaints about the darknefs of fcripture, which the readers have occafionedto themftlves, by ftrivirigto reconcile them to their own pre-conceived notions, which never were in the fcriptures; but learned from f^items compofed by men, who feem to have paid more regard to the traditions of their fathers as a rule, than the fpirit and fcope of the fcriptures. The veil that has been upon many palfages for centuries paft, is a moft glaring proof of this la* mentable fadl : And, 'tis no way furprifing, that the veil of errof hath io long remained over texts, which have been once mifcon- ftrued in favour of do*5trines invented by men : For the falfe inter- pretation being once received, — error fubftituted and eftablifhed. for truth, it is afterwards taken .for granted, and continues a re- ceived dodtrine without examination. Hence tranfubftantiation, purgatory, 6cc. continue among Papifts, and other fifter myfteries m the reformed churches,— gloiied over by interpreters, and incul- eati4 ( s^s ) 1 N the 4tli verfe, the Apoftle tells Us, that " he was made much better than the Angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. For unto which of the Angels faid he at any time, thou art my Son, this day have I be- gotten thee? And again, I ivillht to him a father, and he /hall be to me a Son.'* It is here faid, that he OBTAINED the name Son of God by inheri-^ tance, which is direftly contrary to an eternal fon^ Jhip, by an aSt of generation. Were he natu- rally, and eternally a Sen, it could not be faid with • any propriety that he obtained thh name by inheri- tance ; but this the Apoftle fays he did, while others in effect fay, he did not, but it was natural to him as he is God. The inquiring chriftian may detei^- mine for himfelf, which of thefe fentiments he ihould hold for truth j both he cannot, as they are diredly oppoiite. I T is manifeft on the face of the text, that by his obtaining this excellent name by inheritance, he was made Jo much better than Angels. Now, this muft be fomething not eternal, for then it were not obtained, nor he made thereby better than Angels, who were not in being. — And how ridiculous is it to fuppofe, that God obtained a name by inheri- tance, to make him better than Angels f which is the plain language of the Apoftle, if it is true, that Christ cated as neceflary truths by leaders in religion, they have been fwal- lowed for ages with very little ceremony, and held equally, facred Tvith the abuled texts, which they arc fuppofed to be taken fiom. But when this, or any other text, is refcued from the perplexed, incoherent ideas Qommonly prefixed to it ; and prefentcd to the reader in that fimplicity and plainnefs fo peculiar to the fcriptures, clearly connedted with tlie writer's fcope, and the charader of C/p.i/I in revelation, it muft ftamp a value on the difcovery to all who love the truths of God, exhibited in their own original beauty and di- vine poxrity. C 3-9 ) Christ is a Son, as he Is God. Biit it is evident from this text, that his fonflilp belongs to his oeconomical characler, in which the Ai^softle is treating of him here, and with the iitnioft pro- priety fays J '* He was made Jo mucb^ better' than the Angels y as he hath by 'inkeritance""obtalned a mor^ excellent name than theyJ'^ It flioiild here be remarked, that vrhat the fcriptures fay concerning Chr'iji as an Heir, (tr Firjl-born, which are terms of the fame import when applied to him, moflly refer to fome part of his exalted character after his death, This is pretty clear from the Apoftle*s reaibning, in this, chapter. " God, — hath in thefe laft days fpoken by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of alt things, — who is the hrightnefs of glory, and the diftinguifhing mark of his condefcenfion, when he had by himlelf purged our fms, fat down on the right-hand of the niajefty on high : Being made fo much better than Angels, as he hath by inheri- tance obtained a more excellent name than they.— -- Thou haft loved rightcoufRHs, and hated iniquity 5 therefore God, thy God hath anointed thee with the oil of gladnefs above thy fellows." He told his. difciples after his refurreclion, " That all power in heaven and earth was given unto him," which was the accomplifhment of the promife made concern- ing him in the Pfalms,- — (e) " Alfo I will make him. my firft-born, higher than the kings of the earth." -[; T t The fej Pfa, Ixxxix. a 7^ f The tranflators have tliought fit to fupply the word mv ip, this text, but it i^vidently majs thefenic, as it makes it contain on- ly one promife,— and luppofes the firji-born to be the pcrfon con^. cerning whom tliis promife is given, of being " made higher tJiaJV the kings of the earth." Whereas it is plain that the text, witlioul^ this fupplementj jnclwdes two promiies; th« one, " 1 "vyUi piakc- ( 330 ) The next verfe of this chapter I had occafion to coniider before, and fhall not detain the reader any longer on a fubjccl fo clear : B tJ T come to another text in this epiftle, which is made an argument for eternal fonihip, — /) '* The law maketh men high priefts which have infirmities ; but the word of the oath which was iince the law, maketh the Son, who is confccrated (or as in the margin, fcrfecfed) for evermore.-* From this text they reafon, " that as thole \vho> " had infirmity were men before they were Priefts ; *' fo Chrijl was a Son before his inveftiture in the " prieftly office ; confequently his Ipnfiiip did not " arife from his priefthood.'* Anf, ff) Heb. vii. aS. him firfl-born; the other explanatory of the former : I 'vvill make him \\ic\\ K f.rft-born, as to be higher than the kings of the earth. This is clear from the fcope of the whole paflage, beginning at the soth veife, where we have the dclignation of ilhrijl to his work of mediator, which is followed by feveral promifes of aid and fiipport, in going through the arduous work of humiliation, with the faith and con!iden.ce he fhould exprefs in Gou, as his father, and the rock of his falvation ; then follow feveral promifes that refpedt his cxaliation, '•'■ Alfo, faith Go J, will I make himfir/l-boni" What him ? Thephraieology points it out as another propiife made to the fame perfon m.entiofied before : And this primogeniture was to be of fuch a fort, as to admit of no equal. He Ihould be heir to an inheritance of fuch glory, j;xtent, and duration, as every way to excel the kings of the earth. Hence, it is faid, " I will fct him on high, becaufe he hath made my name known." To the fame pur- pofeare the other tesi-s, where he is called /r/?-Z'or??, " ye/us Cbnjt the jirji begotten ci the dead, and the prince of tjie kings of tl\p earth. — lie is the head of the body, the church:' AA'ho is the be- ginning, ihti frjl-bjni from the dead; that in all tilings he might have the pre-eminence," Now, if this primogenial right confer- red on y-fi'.s Chri/}, refers Ip his exaltation after he had finifl)ed the work of nian's redemption, as revelation plainly declares it rioes, how can it have any relation to a natural and nece[fary primur gtnitv.rc y or to his being a Son, as he is God? This by no means v-ii'Jhoys the idea of priority included in that text, " He is the firf^- born of <^very creature." The ideas are very diri.ia\5t : The one re- fcry ( 33^ ) Anf.. T H E argument here is merely fpcclous, it may amui'e tlie unwary, but has no relation to the point it is brought to prove. For the quciHon is not, whether he was a Soyi before he adlually en- tered upon the office of priefthood ? But whether his divine perfon was eternally begotten, and io an eternal Son f I not only grant, but hold it as a principle, that the confideration of his fonfliip, as Emmanuel, was neceliary in order of nature (to fpeak as men) before even his ordination to his office as mediator, | much more his adual invefti^ ture in the office of priefthood ; which is more than, can be drawn from the text : But what does even this fay for eternal generation, which the text is brought to prove ? The moft that can be alledged from it is, that he was a Son before his in veiU- ture in that office, by the word of the oath, which w^LsJince the laiv, this might be even after his in- carnation* As to what the Pfalmift fays of hi^ prieft- fers to his early exiftence : The other to his being put in polTcffion of the power and privileges of God's firft-born, aftel- he had finilh- ed the work the father gave him to do. There is a moft emphatical idea of the extent of the Mffflab's, kingly power and government, expreHed in an ancient prophecy by Baalam. Num. xxiv. 17. "I fliall fee him, but not now; I fiiall behold him, btit not nigh : There (hall proceed a ftar out of Jacoh, and a fceptre flitill rife out of Ij'rael, and Ihall fmite the cornerr. of Moab, and dejlroy all the children of Seth" Scth was the fon of u^^^w, whom God gave him, inftead of J^f/, whom C^in Hew. As jjll Cain's pofterity was deftroyed by the flood, it was the race of Seth only, that was faved in the Ark* Therefore the' whole world is now the children oi: Seth. The idea then, that is conveyed by the laft claiife ofthe verfe, as\ve have it tranfiated, is, that tlie Mejfiah Jhould dcjlroy tfx (ivhole ivorld of mmikind ! But it reads, he fliall vti- w A L L , or h.ave uninlerrupted dnmiiiion and power over all the children lof Scthy which refpe(Jts his univcrfal rule and government over the whole world, and is agreeable to many other pronhefies and and promifes concerning him. Pla« Ixxii. 8. " He ftidll have dO'^ minion from fea to lea, and from the river to the ends of the earth. Pfa. ii. 8. Afk of me, and I fliall give thee the heathen for thine in- heritance, and the uttern\olt parts of theeaithfor thy pofleflion." All v.hich refer to that exalted ftate of government he was raifed to, after his fufferings here, and refurreiition from the dead. X 'See p. ii}3. ( 332 ) prierthooct, it may be to point out his excellency above figurative priefts ; and exhibit his character that he might be known when manifefted in lieih, as the end and fiibftanee of Melchizedecian and Aaronlcfll prieilhoods : And tho' Ipoken in the pre* fent tenfe, yet refers to things future : But will as natively prove iilf/cZ'/2:(f{/i^6' to be an eternal man^ as that Chnft was eternally begotten. The text fsys, the Son v/as confecrafed to be a Pried ; but will any fay his pure Deity could he confecrated or perfected ? Or that he could he our Prieft, without the conlideration of his human na- ture, which niufl be included in every idea of his appointment to, or undertaking and alfumption of this ofSce of prieflhood. So that inftead of tiie text proving eternal generation, (like all the reil:, as I hope the reader plainly fees) it is an evi^ dent proof of his being a Son, in his, comple^x character as the glorious Emmanuel. There yet remain two texts, which are not only reckoned proofs of Chrijl\ natural fonlhip, but are fuppofed fuflicient to prove the terms Fa' ther, Son,JVcrd, and ifc/y G/?<5/?, natural, neceffary, and elTential in Deity. One is our Lord's com- mand to his Apoftles, — (y) " Go ye therefore and teach ail nations, baptifing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoft.'* From which it is argued in favour of Cbrij? being a Son, as he is God, " That as baptifm is a Iblemn. " act of divine v/orfhip, it mufl be adminiftered in ** the name of a divine perfon, therefore Son '** in the text muil cxprefs his divine nature. " Whereas if the term Son refers to one, as he is " m^diator^ fj] Matt. xxvii!» 19- ( 333 J ♦* mediator, then we are baptifed In the name of '* two divine perfons in their higheft titles ; and ia " the name of the other, in his lower and inferior " title and character.'* Anf. This reafoning is extremely weak, for it takes for granted that the terms Father and Holy Ghoft, are titles that exprels the divine nature of two perfons ; but thefe I have fhewed to be occo- nomical, confequently the argument is without any" foundation, and can conclude nothing in favour of natural fonfhip : And I think by conlidering the fubgeft a little, it will appear a fair evidence of the names Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft being oecono-' mical. As this was the way our Lord command- ed his Apoftles to initiate the Gentile nations into, the chrilHan religion, in or inio the name of the Father^ Son, and Holy Ghoft, thefe names muft have a fpecial relation to the religion they were to take on the badge of, or the ufe of them would be infignificant in that ordinance, efpecially to hea- thens, who had no notion of three coniiftent witH the unity of Deity, nor the religion they under tliefe charafters' were difplayed in. To fay they w-ere baptifed into the belief of a Trinity abftractedly confidered, is faying they were baptifed into what neither they nor the Apoftles knew any thing about, feeing there is no fuch re* velation in Deity. Bcfides, this would not have been baptifmg into the chriftian relip^ion ; as it is moft certain, that abfolute Deity is equally related to Jewifty and chriftian rehgion, that. is, has nd manner of relation to either. The knowledo-e we have of God, is in what he hath revealed; faitli in- God is founded upon that knowledge we attain from revelation, which is a difplay of his perfec- tions C 934 ) tions in creation, providence, and redemption ; iii the laft of which, he hath made himfelf known as' three diftind: agents, under the names of Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft, each repreiented as having peculiar work in that divine tranlaction. So that the whole of redemption is contained ill the work of the Father, the ivork of the Son, and the wor^ of the Holy Ghofl 5 confeoucntly being baptifed into their names, is profeiiing to believe the whole of the chriftian religion, which thefe names are fo neceffarily connected with in every part, as to be the fum of the whole, and in fuch manner, as every chriftian may fay, take thefe names from my religion, and what have 1 more ? The other text is, — (z) " There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghoft : And thefe three are one/* Asl have proved the terms Father, Word, and Holy Ghoft, to be occonomically appHed to God, it might here f-jfilce ; for if it is a truth, there is no text in revelation that v/ill contradict it. But left the friends of the other opinion Ihould imagine they are left in full poffefiion of this text, I Ihall very briefly Ihew how little it is to their purpofe. Here again I meet with the philofophical gen- tleman formerly mentioned, who deduces feveral arguments from this text, to prove his beloved tenet eternal generation : and as he reduces his rea- foning into the form of fyllogifms, I fliall lay them before the reader, who may judge how much they are to his purpoie. *' T H E Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghoft,, *' are (%) I John V* 7- ( 335 ) " are tlie three fubjects fpoken of in the text, i John M V. 7. — But the three iubjcds fpoken of in the text, " are fpoken ot as perfons in God-head. — Ergo, " The Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghoft, are " fpoken of in the text, as perlbns in the God^ ** head : That is, one as a divine perion is called " the Father, another as a divine perfon is called " the Word, and a third as a divine perfon is cal- " led the Holy Ghoft.'' *' T H E fubjects or divine perfons fpoken of in «*' the text, I John v, 7. are fpoken o{ as they are. — *' But the fubjeets or divine perfons fpoken of in f' the text, are the Father, Word, and Holy Ghoft. " — Ergo^ the lubjeels or divine perfons fpoken of " in the text, are fpoken of as they ate the Father, « the Word, and the Holy Ghoft.'* Here, reader, is a brace of fyllogifms for you. : — Carefully view the two great pillars on which a fundamental article of religion ftands, — fo abfo- lutely neceflary in this gentleman's account, that to deny it, he fays, is to " make iaith vain, — fal- " vation void,— a chimera, — all chriftianity a mere ^' phantom, — to fap the foundation of all chriftian *' religion, and enervate the hope of eternal hap- « pinefs.^' But one would think as the whole of religion flepends upon this article, it would be fo clearly revealed in the word of God, that every one, the (clown as well as the phi'ofopher, might know and underftand it. Is it then mentioned in exprefs words ? No. Can it be found by comparing texts together ? No, not without forced interpretations. Is there any other revelation than the Bible, to cer- tify us ofittj truth- aud importance? No, without wc ( 336 ) we take the didates of men for a revelation. What evidence then is it attended with to merit om* cre^ dit ; and how fhall we come by that evidence ? We miift become Logicians, and learn to reafon inetaphylically : Coniequently the beft Logicians are the beft chriftians : Or, it is Logic that makes the chriftian. This cardinal point muft then (as I dare fay it does) remain unintelligible to the gene-? rality of mankind, fmce it requires a train of fyllo-- giftical reafoning to bring the evidence on which it rcfts to their view : Or they muft (which is a much •il^orter way) believe it upon the authority of the learned ; but ftill this will not be their faith, but the Logician's : And if they pretend to judge for thcmfelves, they lie open to impolition, as 19 pf 20 among profeffed chriftians do not know the difference betwixt a well formed fyUogifm upon , rules of ratiocination, and a fophifm artfully com-r .pofed ; fo that they are ftill at the mercy of the Rabbles* How miferably has religion been tortured by learned contenders for th.& faith delivered to fyftem- atics, who have muftered great numbers of lyllo-r .gifms pro <& con^ adorned with all the trappings of •inood and figui'c ; and by all appearance, rather contending who ftiould appear the moft acute rea- foner or beft Logician, than who fhould moft elu- cidate the truth, which has been left buried under the iiibbilhof fcholaftic fubtilties ? What advantage hito religion received from ail the dialectical fubtil- ties of Tbo, Aquinas, Duns Scofus, and other m.odern Clitics, v/ho have attempted to reduce it to a fyftem of' fchoiaftic niceties, fitter to be the fport of ichool-boys, than the ftudy of fober minds ? Thanks be _tpjgx>r> that all . neceflary truths in xeligion are . clearly revealed in his own word. On Z" ^ ^"' ■•.-<-.-^..-.. -— ■■■ ^^.^ ( 337 ) this ail our hopes and comfbrt depend. The evi- dence ariling fVom inch abftrule rcalbning in fa- vour of religion, which riOt one in a hundred knows any thing about, will give tlie immoital loul very little latistaclion, upon a lerious coniide- ration in view of death and judgement. A s I write not for the Literati^ but to further tlie inftruclion of fuch as can and do read tiieir BibJe^ and chufe it for their guide, it would be entirely bcfide my plan, to enter into a courfe of inti'icate reafoning ; I only beg their leave to ftep alide for a moment to fpeak with this gentleman, ill his own llile. S I R, your fyllogllms cannot be admitted as fair arguments to prove the point you maintain. The. firll, you found upon there being three fubjecls in the text, whereas according to your own method of realbning there are four, A Logical fubjecl is that of which fomethiftg is predicated. Now Unity is as capable of pretlication as Trinity : For it is as true that the i/nity in the text is three, as that tiie three are oj7e. No%, as there are four fubjects in the text, your fyIlog\,rm, Sir, fliould have run thus, " The Father, the Word, the Holy Ghoft, and the Unity, are the four .iiibjects fpoken of in the text, 1 John V. 7. But the four fubjecls fpoken of in the text, are fpoken of as perfons in the Cod-head. — Er^jo^ the Father, the Word, the Holy Ghoft, and the Unity, are fpoken of as perfons in the God- head" — Thefc premifes are full as pood as the lor- mer, and confcqucntly thetoncluiion. This makes void your argument in it'j iiiit form.. U u E V T ( 33?) B u T ilioiild both your major and minor be dc r.icd, the conclulion nuift fall of coiirie. Themajor^ • upon the iiuthority ot the text itfelf, which lays, *■' Thefe three are one." So that there is but one iubjccl in the text. The minor, I have fliewed to be hiUe, by proving at large from fcripture evi- dence, tliat the terms Father, Word, and Holy Ghoft , are oeconomically applied to the divine three, and fo are not natural and eiTential to them as perlons in Deity. With equal propriety, Sir^ you may dra\y fueh conclufions from every text, where any of the covenant characters of the facred three are mentioned j but would it not be abfurd to infer from thence, that all the names they bear in fcripture, are elfentiiil ta their nature as perfons • in Deity ? But feeiffg this inconveniency, I fuppofe, and to avoid it as much as your caufe would allow, you formed the fyllogifm in a different drefs, in which the weight of the argument depends upon the words as they are. But pray. Sir, who denies that the ilicred three are fpoken oi as they are ? The text fays they are Father, Word, and Holy Ghoft, but what is that to eternal generatkn, or natural and eternal procejficn^ which you were to prove from the text ? Therefore, to fpeak in the dialectical IHle, your argument, ,Sir, is Ignoratio Eknchi \ for it has . no connection with the matter in difpute : And as in both forms of the argument, you chufe for pre- . inifes what is not granted, and what you have not proved to be true ; I may, agreeable to the rules , of Logic, reject your conclulion, and tell you the argument is only a fophiim, commonly called Petitio- Frincij)iiy or what goes by the name of begging the 'jciji^ejfioiu If better arguments cannot be found to liip- ( 339 ) f^inport your caiifc, it nuifc foqn be very low in die cilccm pi all who iriipartiiiliy lc:irch tlic icriptures. Now, Pvcader, I d^re fliy you nrc not mrch wiler either by this gentleman's i)'l}()ol('ms, or my remarks upon' them, Sueh has- been too often tlic ciTecl of the fcholalfic manner of difputina: about rehgion//w/2 texts, that is, never coming near them : And that we don't err iii the fame manner, let us return to the text. Interpreters have commonly detached this verfe f]om. the Apoltle's fcope, and confideredit as "a definition of Deity, andthcman-r ner how the divine perfons exift in the divine na- ture." If there is any thing of this kind in the text, it mufl be in the laft claufe, " thefe three are one," which is a fa.61 divinely attcfted ; but how the o?7e is three, or the fbrw one, pr how either exifts can be collecled from the words, is far be- yond my comprehcnfion, and muft be referred to curious wits, who are fond of knov»'ing what no, man can know J and fubjectingthat to a definition, which is infinitely beyond all definition . J^oor clods pf du ft, ^t_hat will prgfurne to define the G o d that niade_them ! Deity is not^tke fubjecl of definition. All definitions limit things, but Deity is unlimit- ed, and cannot come within the laws or limits of itiefinition. I F the Apoftle's fcope is attended to, it will ap- pear evident that he is proving the truth of the character of the hleljiah, and the rehgion \vhich lie eftablil'hed : Or, as'he iiiys himfelf, {a) " That Jefus is the Son of GodJ* He produces fix witnefics^, three of which arc in the text, " There are threq^ f «()^> •V^ CON- ( 34' ) CONCLUSION. O \Y, reader, as I am done vAth. thefe texts, ^ ^ and have not to my knowledge overlooked any one that is commonly taken to favour eter- nal generation : So I hope it appears evident, that none of thefe have any relation to it. It is matter of wonder how any confiderate perfon Itiouldlayfuch weight upon this as an eflential article of religipn, ■while it hath no countenance at all in revelation : Whereas were it of fuch confequence as fomc would have the v,'orld believe, it might be expected tcx be clearly revealed, as all articles of religion necef- iary to falvation really are, From the whole, it is abundantly clear, that the appellations or titles fo frequently given our Lord 2.nd Saviour in revelation, Word^ — Son of God, — Son of nian^ — Mejfiab, — Chrifi Jefus^ — Lamb of God, — only begotten, — -Jirfl-born, — Heir, See. are fy^ nonimous in the general idea which they convey of the perfon fpoken of, all relating to him as Em- manuel the Saviour : And if any unprejudiced per- fon Ihall keep this in his eye in reading the fcrip- ture, efpeciaily the New T^flament, where they moft frequently occur, I may venture to promife :t more eafy, plain, and fatisfaclory account of the, charafter of Chrijl, than he ever faw before, when falfely conceiving fome of thefe terms to have a refped to pure IJeity, or what is commonly called eternal generation. This C 343 ) This mattef concerning tlie character of CbriJ} being fet in a fair light, and eftablilhed upon fcrip- ture arguments, takes off the force of many pre- tences againft his proper Deity, arifing from tlie fuppofed derivation of one divine perfon from ano- tlier in Deity, and a fuppofed act of eternal genera- t'lGfi producmg a co-eilential, eternal fon; whicli things are not exprelied or implied . in any part of revelation, and are acknowledged on all fides to be great and incomprehenlible diiS.culties. A GREAT part of what is obje?(3ted againft the Deity of Chr'ijl, is founded upon the human defi- nitions of God. Some haughty mortals have un- dertaken to tell what God is,* and becaufe the complex character which we have of him in fcrip- ture, does not anfv/er their definitions, they can- not apprehend how he can be Goo. By con- founding of things they confufe theh' own ideas, and lofe tne truXh. If Jimilitude j^^^^ ar- gues a /amenefs of moral rcftitude and characfler, 5^J^n£tujres_h3ve fairly determined Jffus Chrij^ to^^be^OD ; for there is not any revealed attri- bute or perfection of God, but what is in the plaineil terms afcribed to him. But what the phy- fical efience of God is, the Books of revelatioi:! have no where declared. All attempts are vain to define the manner of the exifteiice of a fupreme caufe. This far in ge- neral we may argue with certainty, that a caufe or being, that has in nature no fuperior caufe, and therefore is alfo unproduced, and independent, muft be felf-cxiftent : That is, exiftence muft be efiential to him ; or, fuch is his nature, that he cannot ]->ut be. Evtry being muft either cxift cf ■it/elf, or not of iffejf : That which exifts Bot of it- felf. ( 344 ) feifj muft derive its exiftence from fome other^ and fo be dependent : But the Being mentioned above is independent, and uncaufed. The root of his exiftence is no where but in his own nature : To fuppofe it any where elfc, is to fuppofe a fupe- rior caufe to the fupreme, which is a contra- diction. Such a Being muft be eternal and infinite. Eternal, becaufe there is no way by which fuch a being can begin, exiftence being of his nature. Infinite, becaufe his exiftence cannot be limited by any other. / Such a Being is above all things that come under our cognizance ; and therefore the manjier of his exiftence muft be above all our conceptions. He neceflarily exifts. But there is nothing falls Nvithin our comprchenfion of that kind. We know of no being, but what we can imagine it not to be 'without any contradiction to nature, but this Su- preme Being hlmfelf. With refpecttohimjwe know byreafoning, that there 7;/z^^/? Z?^ one Being,who cannot be fuppofed not to be, as certainly as we know any thinp' at all: Tho* at the fame time we cannot know him, and bozu be exijis. Adequate ideas of eternity and infinity are above us, who are Finites. Wliat relation or analogy there is betwixt time, which is a fucceftion of moments, and eternal, un- changeable exiftence ; — how any being fhould be no older noiv, than he was five thouland years ago, &c. are fpeculations wliich involve finite minds in infuperable difficulties. , A s our minds are j^f^/Vc, they cannot without acon- i tradiction comprehend Vv'hat is infimte. What tho* they were enlarged to ever fo great a capacity, yet fo long as thev ( 345 ) they retain their general nature, ard continue to be of the fame kind, they would by tiiat be only ren- dered capable to apprehend more and morcfimte ideas ; out of which, however increafed or exalted, no pofitive ideas of the perfeclion of God can ever be framed. In the nature of a perfect infinite being, there can be nothingy?;z/Vf, nor any compontion of' jinites. Tho* we cannot comprehend iiis eflence and manner of being ; yet we may fay with cer- tainty, that he is free from all defects. I T is extremely inconfiftent for us to talk about" how the fupreme incorporeal Being exifls, as if we comprehended his nature, v/hile we do not com- prehend the nature of the moil inferior fpirits ; nor have any conceptions even of matter itlelf di- veiled of its accidents : When we cannot turn our- felves any way, but we are accoiled with fome- thing above our underftandings, bcfides the num- berlefs undefcried regions, with their feveral Itates and circumftances, v/hich our philofophy has never yet frequented. — If we cannot penetrate fo far as to difcover the nature and efi'ccls of tbon, is it to be expected that we fhould, that v/e can, fee the myf- teries of his nature, who is the fupreme caufe of all? W E may and ought in our conceptions of God, to remove from him what are defects in ourfelves, as want of life, .ignorance, impotence, acting in- con lift en tly with truth, and the like J thefe are de- fects in us, and would be much more fo in him, therefore cannot in any fenfe be afcribcd to him. For as ignorance is the fame in every fubje<5t, we underftand what it is, and may literally deny tliat ' it belongs to God : The like may be faid of his power, etc. Tho* we do not underftand how he X X knows (346 ) knows tilings, and his manner of operation. Thus \vc may fpeak, without pretending to comprehend his nature. In like manner we may drawconclufions from the conlideration of his works, in the production and government of the world, without pretending to comprehend the manner of his exiftence. bo ^ar from this, that a juft contemplation of his works, will lead to the neceflity of acknowledging, that . there muft be an incomprehenfible Being at the head of them: And tho' we do not comprehend the mode or manner in which the world depends upon him, and he influences and difpofes things, bccauie this enters into the knowledge of his na- ture, the one cannot be underilood without the other : Yet when we fee things, which are not fel -exiftent, and plainly obferve an oeconomy and delign in the difpoiition of them, we may conclude t\\ti e. h fome Being, upon whom their exiftence de- pends, and by whom they are modelled and managed. But great care Ihould be taken in all our beha- viour towards God, that we make no falfe repre- fentation of him. We muft take cai'e not jo_re- prefent him by any picture or image, either men- tal or material, for this is to deny at once his in- corporiety, and incomprehenlible nature^ S^c. So far from this, the language we ufe when we fpeak of him ought not only to be well chofen, but alfo imderftood in the moft fublime fenfe poilible : And the fame care is neceffary with refpeci: to our thoughts. For tho' our terms be the moft reve- rent and proper that we can conceive, he is ftill fomcthing above all our conceptions. For as the mode of his exiftence and eflential attributes are in com- ( 347 ) incomprehenfible by us, our words and phrafes, and the objedls of our faculties, mufl be inadequate ex- preflions of them. A s for example, when we fpeak of his mercy^< we muil not by mercy underftand what is called i , c^mpaflion in us, which is attended with a certain f unealinels, and therefore cannot be afcribed to God i in that fenfe we afcribe it to ourfelves, whofe y affections are moved by pathetic arts of rhetoric, f / or tears of importunity ; but there can be no al" m teration fuppoled in the Deity, tho* from the weak- • nefs of our underftanding, we denominate the per- fections of God varioufly, as he exerts himfelf on ' this or that occafion. Perhaps it may be affirmed upon good • grounds, that among men there is nothing that re- fembles the mercy of God. J So difierent are the ideas we have of what is called mercy among men, as to the objects, extent, caufes, and nvannc; of ihewing it, that there is not any example which feems to have the leaft relation to the true idea we ought to have of God\ mercy revealed in his word. Among criminals they are pardoned who appear to be leaft guilty \ — in ihewing mercy, the preference is given on account of fome circumftances in the crimes, or in the perfons who commit them. Men fhew mercy in pardoning luch as injure them, when the offender repents, and perhaps mufl crave forgivenefs. Mercy is iliewed to the miferablc, from the impreflions the nature and degree of the mifery hath upon men*s feelings, which depends upon the art of reprefenting the c:ife, or the dif- pofition the perfons are in to be aft'ecled with it. Bu T ( 348 ) ^(i But the mercy of God js extended to the chief of r iinners, the mo/l guilty y — not becaufe they repent, nor / on account of any good quahties in them more than others ; but the mercy contained in his promife, all Jhvereign, 2indfree, being {hewed them in forgiving their offences, moves them to repentance ; Or, ra- ther (to fpeak more agreeable to the gofpel) is the caufe of that gracious change in them, and thefe hew difpoiitiohs to love God and hate fin, which is an effect peculiar to the divine caufe, the ?jiercy of God.- — Nor i? this mercy fhewed, becaufe of any feelings their mifery can excite in God from any form of reprefentation ; (which I doubt we too often imagine) ; this were to bring God on a level with men, w^hofe weaknefs and imperfections are the caufes of their partiahty in fuch cafes. When we fpeak of the knowledge of God, we muft not mean, that he knows things as lue doy that intention or operation of mind muft produce it, — that he apprehends by impreflions made upon him, — that he reafons by the help of ideas, — or that even what we call intuitive and immediate know- ledge in us, comes up to the mode in which he knows things, as fome have fuppofed ; who, not capable to bring the creature up to God, have at- tempted to bring him down to them, rather than be thouoht not to know what God is. The raoft we can fay is, that there is nothing of which he is. Or can be ignorant, and that is all we can fafely fay. T H o' men have accuftomed themfelves to fpeak of God, in terms taken from fuch thmgs as they in their weaknefs admired, and have incorporated fuch ideas into their language as divines ; and tho* conlidering what defects there are in our way of fpeajking and thinking, we cannot well part with them ( 349 ) them all : Yet we fliould remember in the ufe of thefe terms, to take them in themoft exalted fenfe poflible, and annex aj2i£/zM/j9,\iali.fication to the uic of fuch epithets and ways of fpeaking, as are in- troduced by cuftom, antiquity, or by neceffity, from the narrownefs of either the jninds of men or their language* But when God reveals any thing concerning himfelf, it becomes us creatures to give credit to what he fays, tho' we cannot comprehend the man- ^ ner of it. It is eafy to conceive, that there maybe perfections in the divine nature, which finite crea- tures cannot comprehend, as to the manner of their exiftence : And it muft be the higheft pitch of arrocance in any creature of the moft perfect kind. To call in queftion the truths revealed by God concerning himfelf, becaufe he cannot com- prehend the manner of them. Does God lay thefe things are fo ? There is no further queftion as to the certainty of them, however dark they may be as to the manner hew they are. God is the fupremc truth, — his word alone is the infallible rule, the unerring oracle to guide and inflrud us in the knowledge of every thing that is fuitable for us, or poilible to be known with certainty concerninp- himfelf. | ^'-Tbefecret th'wgs kelotig u?ifo the Lord our God : But thofc things which are revealed belong unt§ us, and to Gur children for ever»** t Deut. xwx. 19. A D D E N- ADDENDA. THERE is a particular fentiment which I have frequently hinted in the foregoing work, being willing the reader fliould always keep tk it in view, viz. That the character we have of God tiiin revelation is relative, or oeconomical :■ — That (( -we have no definition of the iimple or abftrad na- f, ture of Deity in all the fcriptures : And notwith- ftanding I differ in this from the Jew'ijh Kahbies^ and chrijlian critics^ I can fee no caufe to retract ; as I know no name or deiignation afcribed to God, but v/hat is fome way or other a characleriftic ap- pellation of him, under fome relation to his crea- tures : Nor can I conceive of what ufe any name or title of God could be to them, or what ideas they could have of fuch name or title that had no >lelation to them. But! find it necelTary here to remove an ob- jection to this, which I was not formerly aware of, " That the name Jehovah is directly and im- mediately defcriptive of the divine effence and na- ture, without any proper relation to us — a name of ejfence^^ as it is called by JVtcj and chriftian critics. But if it is fo, this name muft define his effence, which of confequence muft be limited ; for every definition fets bounds to the thing defined : But God t ( 351 ) God cannot be limited, and therefore there can be no definition of his effence. As we cannot know his effence, it is prefumption to enquire after the name of it, which is beyond the capacity of finite intellects. He does but confound himlelf, '- that prefumes to know more of God than he re- ij veais of himfelf; but he has revealed no name that-- defines his eilence ; fuch revelation would be of no >) ufe to creatures, as they could have no underftand- • ing of fuch names, confequently they would be un»-^ ' neceffary in a religion fuited to their capacities. ' I OWN the name Jehovah is peculiar to the divine Being, and is not applicable to any creature ; but wherever it is ufed, there is fomething predi- cated of the Supreme Being under that name, which has fome relation in particular to his church, and people. Even the fenfe which both Jews and chriftians imagine is imported in the letters, which the word is compofed of, viz. the tune fajl, prefent^ ' ' and future, have a relation to creatures ; for with refpecl to God, ftriclly fpeaking, thefe terms can have no exiftence, further than they refpecl his re- vealed relations to men. With God there is no change of times. " He is Vv^ithout variablenels or Ihadow of turning :'* And the times pa/}, prefenty ' ^ Tiud future, are but a poor definition of God's eter* >- 7ial exiftence, which they are fuppofed to be in ^^ this cafe, for none of the terms, nor any meafure - • of duration can be applicable to eternity. Bu T if thefe terms (if they are pointed out in ^ the name Jehovah) are viewed with refpecl to his • power, faithfulnefs, mercy, and care, exercifed ' about his church, — that in every revolving gene- - ration, he is to them prefent, ^vhat he has been to thofe This tends to their ediiication and com- fort ; and is a conftant ground of praife to Jeho- vah, whofe mighty acts done tor his people, and gracious promifes upon record, certify thtm what he /j, and will be to them^ Jehovah, a fure dwel- ling place in all generations. f. That the name Jehovah refpeds his revealed relation to his church, is plain from its being join- ed in thofe facred infcriptions, which were defign- ed to ftrengthen the faith, hope, and confidence af his people, as Jehovah-Jireh, the Lord will fee-, or provide^ — Jehovah-nisi, the Lord is my Banner \ — Jehovah-rophi, the Lord healeth\ — Jehovah-shallom, the Lord will pcfe^, or {tnd peace •, — Jehovah-shammah, the Lord is there ; all which have an immediate relation to what he has been, is^ and will be to his people- The intimation Jehovah him felf gives, why he would be called by that name, is fuilicient to limit our curiofity, and inftrucl us in the ufe and meaning thereof to the church. He had made himfelf known by the name of God-Almighty to the ancient Patriarchs, making promifes which fuftain- ed their faith in his Almighty power, without receiv- ing the thing promifcd : But to their children, he fays, he would be known by the name Jehovah, in eiScaciou^ly giving being to, ^nd. fulfil ling his pro- niifes made to their fathers : So that they fhould not only experience his pozuer ; but alfo his divine veracity, goodnefs, -^nd mercy. Accordingly we find them celebrating the praifes of Jehovah, and at- tributiiig their deliverance fiom the Egyptians t6 hina j ^ " Then fang Mofes and the children of Jfrael *^xo. XV. I, a, 3. ( 353 ) 7/r^ he fays, was btcomc his, Jesus, beep. 92, X Exo. x>;. a. >> ( 354 ) At the fame tim^, that every repetition thereof put them in mind of the power md prerogative of Je- hovah, to give out what laws, ftatutes, and ordi- nances he pleafed, and require their obedience and conformity to them in the manner he directed. — It gave them the ftrongeft alfurance of the infal- lible performance of alt the promifes he had made. It fecured to them the enjoyment of fuch bleffings as he in fovereignty had added to their dutiful obedience to the laws he had given them, — and was a divine certification, that the comminations he prefixed to the violation of thefe ftatutes, fhould be as certainly executed. When he fays, " I am Jehovah your God," it muft certainly denote the relation he ftood in to them ; and that he would aid and protect them in the exercife of their duty, and amply reward them for it. This was not like Egyptian bondage, of making brick without ftraw; for ac the fame time that he impofes the duties, he intimates the gra- cious relation he was come under to them, in names every way fignificant and expreflive of that divine aid neceffary to their right performance of the duties required. ThuSj the fame go^el.ja:^s preached to them as to us^ in whom the power oF divine truth, expreffed in the names and relations in which God in his fovereign mercy and grace has revealed himfelf to us, is the all-powerful caufc of that love and conformity we ftiew to tiie com- mandments of the LoKD our God. True believers were then, as well as now, diftinguiflied from fuch as only profefled to believe, by the power of truth contained in thefe declara- tions made by Jehovah, of what he was to them, •and what he would do for them, included in fig- nificant ( 355 ) nificant names, promifes, propheHes, figns, facrifices, &c. the fpirit and intent of which being known and believed by them, was a principle and caiii'e of that love and filial obedience they expreiled for the honour and glory of him, who had conferred fuch valuable privileges upon them. The truly righteous in all periods ^ have viewed the duties re- quired of ^them, . in the light of privileges conler- re4,upQjQ,_Xll&mi^ JBut the other, who law no fur- ther thci,n the letter ^yjdiS void of that knowledge on whjili belief is founded, confequendyj their obe- dience \vag jwithout principlcj, arid had no highef^ gnd than ^/f under fome conFd^ration or other : And the great reafon is frequently given, " They knew not the name of Jehovah, and therefore they did not regard the words of his mouth. — But they that knew his name^ put their truft in him.'* This fubjecl is capable of exempHfication from a variety of palliiges, but 1 lliall only notice one in y/^/V//>, j- where Jehovah declares feveral things con- cerning Chrift, the faviour, and tlie great work he fhould perform, efpecially the extent of the privi- leges of the gofpel to the blinded Gentile nations -, and to command credit to thefe fovereign decla- rations, he fays, J '•'' I am Jehovah, that is my name, and my glory will I mi: give to another.'* — The glory of bringing to pafs thefe great events, which- were as certain as to their accomplilhment, as other promifes made formerly, which M^ere already ful- filled, therefore he adds, " Behold, the former things are come to pafs, and new things do I de- clare, before they fpring forth I tell you of them.** His glory as Jehovah is pledged for the perfor- mance J and the Gentile nations are invited to re- joice t Ifa. xlii. fver. 8. ( 35« ) joice in Jehovah, who had thus engaged hlmfclf for then' ialvation : And to confirm then' hopes, he declares the divme caufe and method of bringing to pals the grand event. '^"Jehovah is pleafed for his righteoufnefs fake, for he Jhall magnify the law ^ and make it hc?iourable" by bringing into being, and actually accomplifhing what Jehovah had cngag-cd the honour of his name for. The word Tor ah here rendered Laiv, might as well be Dodrine^ Injlitu.t'ion^ or Difpcfition. The word Adar iignifies llluftnous^ Eminent, Magnir ficent. The verbs, as in many other declarations of Jehovah, are in the Hiphil conjugation, which is always expreffive of the caufe, — is the fame as if h-e had faid, " / ivill caife to he ;" and with refpect to his proraifes, points out the abfolute certainty of their accompliihment. The verfe reads, " Je- hovah is plealed to manifeft his faithfulnefs : He Vv'ill caufe his inftitutions to be magnified : He will caufe his lav/ or doctrine to be illuftrious." Jeho- vah is rcpreicnted as the efficient caife of the pro- mifes m.ade refpcfting the fiilvation of men being accompliihed, which plainly fiicws the .connexion betwixt the nanie, and the falvation promifed. W h k n Divines fpeak of Chnft fulfilling the Laiv, it is generally reftricled to what is called the woral law, or ten coram.andments, which he perfect- ly obeyed in his life, and is commonly ' called his adivc obedience. But the law. here muff be taken in- a larger fenfe, including what gives inftrucrion, as'well as v»'hat implies obligation, and extends to every thing in the Old Teftament concerning hin;, whether doctrines, promifes, frophefies, types, figns, fhadoivs, * Ifa. xlii. ai. ( 357 ) Jimdo'ws, &c. all which are fidnlled with unerring exaclncfs in him. — Every circumftancc concerning him in the New Teftament, (many of which per- haps feem very trilling to a carnal conception) was a luiiilling fomething that re^rred to him in the Old. Hence it is io oiten faid, — " As it is ivritte):-— That the Si'ripti/res might he fulfil led. ^^ In this man- ner Jkhovah rnanifeited his faithfulnefs, and made his inftitutions, doclrine, or law, magnilicent and illuftnous, every tittle whereof being fidfilled in Jesus Christ : And of fo great importance was it to the glory of Jehovah, that Jesus Christ could not difpcnfe with the leaft circumflance, w^ithout the flricieft conformity and moft perfect obedience thereto, not only in the letter^ but the fpirit and intent of it : And his mind being capacious enough to invef-iigate the extenfive fubjecl in every necefiiiry point of view% — the principles of obedience and fprings of action in him, being commenfurate to the extent of the law in its utmofl latitude, anct adequate to the dvjmcfpirituality thereof, gave fuch worth to his obedience, as when viewed by the impartial eye of Jehovah, who fent him to fulfil all righteoulhefs, the fentence of approbation is proclaimed from heaven in his favour, " This is my ielcved Son, in ivhoni I am '■d:eil pleafed^ B u T to make this point ftill more evident, let it be confidered, that the name Jehovah is given to Jesus Christ in the Old Teftament, joined with the common names of Saviour, Redeemer, &c. which certainly belong to the oeconomy of re- demption : And to confirm the faith of the cliurch, it is promifed, that he fliould be called by this name, joined with another peculiar to him as our redeemer, and which is declared by Jehovah in - the ( 338 ) the "before cited text, to be the capital ground of his being pleafed with us. — ^" This is the name iv hereby he jhall he called^ Jehovah-Tsidkenu, the Lord cur righteoufnefsJ' f This refers to the time he fhould appear in fleili. Accordingly, as Jehovah cannot be rightly pronounced in the Greek tongue, it is commonly rendered Lord in the New Teiiament, and by way of fpeciality given to Jesus Christ. || *' This day is born unto you a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord : Or the Lord Christ. The word which God fent to the children of Ifraely preaching peace by Jefus Chrift^ he is Lord of all. To this end Chrift both died and rofe, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living : And he hath on his vefture, and on his thigh, a name \iTitten, King of Kings ^ and Lord of- Lord s .'* The attentive reader will mind that it was prCvcd at large, part L fed. 5th. That what is (aid of Jehovah in the Old Teftament, is applied to Jesus Christ in the New : To which I fliall only * Jer. xxiii. 6. t We have a flranrre tmnflation of a fimilar text, Jer. xxxiii. i6» " In thofe days fliall Judah be faved, and yerufa!,-m ihall dwell fafely: And this is the name whereby fhe fliall be calkd, the Lord our righteoufnelE." Not to expofe the gUrir.g incongruity of the erms, " She fliall be called the Lord," the fcntiment conveyed by the-.n deftroys the foundation of our acceptance with God, by attributing that to the church, which is the peculiar prerogative of Chri/i o'jv Redeemer, who is "made unto us nghteoufne/s,— \vhQ brought in an e'verlafting righteoT.rncfs .~\\-\'\\\ which Jehovah is faid to be well pleafed'."— The idea in the text, as it is tranflated, fuits that church well in which there is a ftock of merit fuppofcd to be lost, — j£^'S the Lord, — Christ "7>/j^ Lord, — Saviour me Lord, — Spirit the Lord. And this phrafcolo^ is not confined to the New Teftament, for Ifaiah expreffes this connexion in very plain terms. § " I will truft, and not be afraid ; for the Lord Jeho- vah is my ftrength and ibng ; he alfo is become my falvation.'* Jesus, as in the original, And * Eve fecms to have thought that TEH0V4H,who proclaimed the giad ti^dings of falvatiou by the feed of the w ;man,fliou!d be that feed himfcrf: Or, that he who was the promifed feed might be called Jehovah. For, fhe fuppofing that herfirft child was the feedpro- mifedj fetid with exultation,--" I have gotten the man, the Jeho- vah,' as Gen jv. I. reads. Tho' flie was miftalc^en in thinking that Cain, her firft-born, Avas the promifed feed; yet fhe can- not be fuppofed tq' lijove mifunderftood the promife itfelf {o far, as to apply the name Jehovah to the fe^id promifed, if it had no re- lation to it. She fcems to have rather underllood this divine con- nexion better than many fince, notv/ilhftanding their having the whole of i-evela'don to learn it from, which Ihews plainly, that he who made this and all other proniifes refpe.2;ing the fahation of of men, under the charader of Jehovah, was tlje efnciej::! him- felf,— and in the fulnefs of time appeared in infinite comlcftenriou aTthe yi/z of man, — the promifed feed of the woman, conapteatiy fulfilling every thing that pointed at him in tl>?.t humble character and rdated to that falvation which he as Jehovah had promifed to the church. , X Com. liev. i. S. iv. 8. xi. 1 7. with Ifa.xli. 4. xliv. 6. xlvili. 12. See p. 96. § Ifa. xii. a. See p. 9a. ( 3<5i ) A N D according to every notion and acceptation of the word, h^ bears the name Lord in the nioit proper fenle pollible, whether we confider the ap- pellations which imply or exprefs Lordship, or the risfht and foundation thereof. V^Tith regard to the firil, he is called King, Prince, Mafter, Captain, Ruler, Lawgiver, Leader, &c. And with refpect to the other, — if uncontroulable power and abi- lity to govern, be a ground of Lordship, he moft julUy claims the title Lord in the higheft refpect ; And alfo., as he created, prel'crves, upholds, main- tains, and provides for all. If conqueft gives any title to dominion, he has every right this way. — If purchafe or primogeniture gives a right to rule and government among men, how much morels it due to Christ ? He planned and creeled the church, inftituted laws and ordinances for her government, — guards her from all enemies, — brings members into her by his power, — he is the Lord, head, huf- band, fupreme teacher, direclor, governor, and fource of endlefs happinefs to all her members. This is a fubjecl too copious and extenfive to be properly difcufled in a fliort excuriion of this kind ; yet from thefe few fliort hints, it is plain, that the name Jehovah in the Old Teftament, and the name which anfwers to it in the New, are defigned to inftrutt us in the knowledge of fomc relation he that bears them ftands in to his church : And as I have (hewed above, that the other names aflumed by thie divine Being, refer to the great oecomony he is cariying on with rcfped to his church ; we may fafely conclude, that thtife is no abftracl name or definition of the Supreme Being in revelation : And confequently that all thciinefpeculations on that head, are without foundation In fcripture. Z z By the Table here fuhjolned, ■ I doubt 7ict hid I Jljdll oblige many of'?ny readers, efpecially fuch as have their minds formed to relifi the beauty of di- vine truth, fo plainly revealed in the facred records* Befides the g^reat number of texts barely cited, the following either differ from our common tranflation^ and is marked ^ ; Or, are more or lefs explained, and marked f . If the fame text is fome way illuflratedy ' and differently tranfiated, it Is marked § J. chap. ver. page. Ge N\ * i. I. '/• » 2. 55»5'J' ■•♦ 26. 19. t iii. 15. 150. %x- 22. 19, 20. §|iv. I. 360. * XX. 13- 17- * xxx\ '• 7' * xji. 38. 55- -j Ixviii .15,16. 6H,75. Ex 0. f iii. 2,4,6. 67. r ~~~ 14. 5- t vi. 3- 35?- t — / • 353' t XXlli . 20,7.1 70. Nu. M. xxir, D £ u r. %X XXIV. XJII. XV. XX. / • 26. 4- 10. 12, 109 J s. 19. 18. Jtr D G. 1%. 81. f|.. 28. 1 S A M.' - 3^- n^ chap. VII. V. xix. xxxui. 4. xxxv. 10 II. * Iviii. * Ixxix. t Ixxx ver. page. 2 S A M. 13, 14. 147. 23. 18. Job 7. 130. 25. 75. 34- IS. Ps A. 6,7. 86,155. II. 18. II. 131, '7- 150- §Xlxxxix. 26,27. 136,152,329 § X xci. 14. 148. t xcvii. 1—7. 85. : ^\ 3- 295. * CXilX. 2. 18. Pr 0. tviii. 23,24,25 . 296. § X XXX. 3, 4. 18,154,297. K C C L. * xii. I. 18. I S A. t vi. 3. 20. t vii. 14. 152. * ix. 6. 35- + - 7- ^SZ- * xi. 2. 55- t — 10. 88. * xii. I, 2. 360. A TABLE of Texts. chap. vcr. page. * xxvi. I. 92. § X XXXV. 2. 107. t xlii. I. 161, 181. §t-- 8,27. SSSjSS"^- * xliv. 6. 40. t xlv. 3, 6. 353. § X liii. 8. 296. * liv. 5. 18. t Ix. I, 2. 324. * Ixi. I. 28, 55. * Ixiii. 9. 78. * 14. 216. J E R. * X. 10. 18. X xxiii. 6. 28, 358. * — _^ 26. 18. * xxxiii. 16, 358. E Z E K. f xHii. 10—12. 1C5. Dan. t iii. 25. 154, 300. Hos. t V. II, 12. 9. Addrefs. Jo E L. t ii- 27-32. 84. M 1 C A H, f V. 2. 300. H A G G A I. fii- 3»7'9- 3^3- M A L. * i. 6. 18. t — III 77- t iii. I. 87. M ATT. t vi. 9. 77,115- t XVI. 16,17, 18. 184, 302. t xvii. 5. 159. t ^'^iiJ-' 37 359- t xxvii. 54. 263. fxxviii. 19. 332. chap. ver. page. t i. .. t xxil. t i- t 77" f iii. f iv. t v. + — f vi. t viii Luke. 2. 42. John. I, 2. 198. 193* 262. 14. 35- 24. ,19. 30- 38. 58. t IX. 35^3^,37 t X. 30-39. t xii. t xiv. t T- t XV. f xvi. t xvii. + XX. t i. t ii- t V. * vii. t viii t xiii. t xiv. t XX. §ti. * t viii. §t ix. 97- 263. 127. 304- 147. 262. 93- 162. 3^4- 221- 261. 205. 2J1. 263. 164. Acts. 24. 100. 34- 12. 31- 26. 3- 5- 17- I. 3'4- 59' 60 37- 32,33 ii» 32- Rom. 1—6. 20. 32- 5- 212. 33- 99. 163, 62. 195. 310. I. 3H* 0. I C O R. t i. §t XV. 24. 95, 28. 125, 2 C O R, §tii. I4jI5'36. 225. t iii' 8. 230. 264. 9^ ' i'^ A TABLE of T E X T S. ehap. ver. page. chap. ver, page. t iif. 10,11. 323. t V. 4, 5- 156. §i- I7>i8. ?9. t vii. 28. 330. ^tiv. 3. 227. * xi. I. 325. * ix. 4- 325- t — 26. 94. * xi. 't7- t xii. 25, 26. 76. E P H. t xiii. 8. 48. i ii. 20. 138. 1 Pet. Col. * iii. 18. 218. * i. 13. 121, 317- 2 P E T. f — 15. 172. * i. i. 31. 2 T HE S S, t — 17. 160. t iii. 5- 21. I John. I Tim. t i. I, 2. 200. * i. I. 31. t V. 7- 334- 2 T IM. §t- 10. 9. Addrefs ♦ iv. 2. 197. J U D E. Titus. * ver. 4- 31- ^t". '3- 31- Rev. Heb. t ii. 18. 170. Sti. I 2,3,4. 321. t iv. 8. 20. t iii. 5,6. 181. + xix. 10.- 128. * H- 3^5- ^_._n ,12,13. 200. iiv. 12,13. 194. f xxii. 20,21. ici. E R R A T a. Bcfitlrs avay fenv literal errorsxif no great moment, the reader iv'ill phafc to corretl the follorjjtng : — P. 29, 1, 4, from the bottom, put a before more. — P. j6. for Gen. ii. a.r. Gen. i. a — P. 103, 1. 6, ddeand, — P. 142, I. 16, dele i/?e,ktfore foB of man. — P. 155. 1. 5, for AJloples r. JpoJles.—~ P. 161. 1.16, for the period after eleft, fubftitiite a comma. — P. 174. 1.3 2, for knorjo, Y. knonvs. — P. 247,1. 10, for ba-ve they, r. they have. P. »6i. 1. ij. ior fufpcient , x , ivfiifficient .— Y . 279, 1. 15, put ap' filed after generation.— P. 297^ 1. ai, for is, x.has.—V. 310, 1. 42, for terms, r. turns. The firll ientence of the laft paragraph in p. 256, read interrogatively, " Is it truth, that the divine three cluit naturally y Meccjfariljy and eternally F" FINIS Vindication of the Facts I N T H E Free Enquirer's Letter^ A N D T H E Mifreprefentations in the Reply thereto confidered. AddrelTed to the AUT H O R of the REPLY. ALSO, AN EXAMINATION O F T H E Difguifed Quaker's Dream j IN WHICH His Criticisms are deteded; and his Reafoning in Favour of Human SyftemSy to the Difcredit of the Authority and Ufe oi Divine Revelation, expofed. By A. M. Author of a View of the Trinity in the Glafs of Divine Revelation^ &c. NEWCASTLE: Printed for the Author : And fold bv the Bookfcllers in Tov/o and Country. MDCCLXVII. [Price SIX- PENCE.] I' . "\ i.^ T O T H E READER. /Humbly conceive J that the occafion cffo many different and dijhonour- able opinions concerning the Lord Jesus, is the want of due at- tention to the fcope of the Divine Oracles, in which He is the leading fuh]e£l. Hence fofne violently contend, out of pretended zeal to the ho- nour ofC H R I s T , that the relative names He hears, are proper and peculiar properties of his perfon, as he is God ahfira£tedly ; and that fuch are as natural and necejjary to him as to be God. Theje per fans do not remem- ber how little countenance the fcripturcs give to fuch an opinion, nor what improvement t-je enemies of Christ's Deity and Selt-exiftent glories make upon fuch conceffions, as thus at once deliver into their hands the whole caufe. — And as the Arian gains advantage on the one hand, ^i6^ Socinian triumphs on the other, while they fee the pretended orthodox Jlripping the Lord Jesus of the titles and names he hears as EMMANIJEL, the Sent of God, and Saviour of finners, to fupport a fcheme which never was revealed by God to men, viz. How the three Divine perfons fubfifl in the Divine nature, or God- he ad, zuhile the terms they ufe are for ever incompatable with Deity abjlra^edly con- Jidered.* J am alfo afraid, that thro* the fame inattention to Divine revelation, there are many who conjider the Lord Jesus in no other view than that of a Saviour, as the Father's Jervant, fulfilling the work he had given him to do. But the contemplation of what is revealed of him, will lead us to fom.ething of a higher conf deration concerning the LoRjj Jesus, thaji merely that of his being a Saviour : For tho' conftdered purely in his relation to finners, as clothed with his faving office in its feveral branches, he is worthy of our grateful acknowledgments, and snofi ardent gratitude : Tet the confideraiion of his faving office, will lead us up to the tranfcendent dignity of his glorious Person, by luhich he was able to procure and confer fo great falvation. In his Perfon we contemplate the myflerious conjlituiion of it, as the God-man, the incomparable EMMANUEL; in him, as fuch, created and un- created glories fjine ; he is the produSi of eternal council and prudence j the glafs of Divine perfediions ; the objeh of the Divine, iinmenfe com- placency and delight j the final caufe of the glorified creation \ yea, of that * This is cvideAt from the method a modern author takes to confute the Annn hypothefis, which ohjecSls againfl the confifteucy of fuch terms with felf-exiftcncc : he lees it impoflihle to reconcile them, arid therefore daringly (I had ainioft faid blafphemoufly) endeavours to prove, that t!)e Divine ptrfon of the Father is only SEH---EXISTENT. — Aflioniihiiig! that men to fupport their darling notion of the Lord Jesus being a fon as he is God, or thu his Divine perfon was begotten, which they can never prove from revelation, fliould thus give up his Divine and felf-exiflent glories into the handr of adverfaiies to this important trutl)! Tdlitnof in tilt churches, left blafpheiaing yiriawi rejoice^ iv. To the R E A D E R. that fav'ing office, with which he is vejied. — In fuch predominant re- gards, he receives the "zealous adoration and applaufe of (thofe that ars lea ft related to him as a Saviour) the augujl arch-angelical fpirit's that furround the throne. In this rejpe£i the united aJfembMes of angels and redeemed, eternally behold and admire the face of the Divwe EM- MANUEL, the glorious, well-beloved, and only begotten Son of God, in ivhojn fhines all the perfeSiions of Deity \ yea, in him " dwells " all the fullnefs of the God-head bodily." BUT as this is not thefuhjeSf I intend to purfue in the following pages, any tvho inclines to fee it more fully difcuffed may perufe what I formerly t)ublijl:ied,\ which 1 thought fufficient to anfwer Mr Nimmo'i- '^ Reply, ivithout taking 7iotice of the author; and afo to Jl^eiu how fslfe thefe reports were which have been indiiflrioufly circulated to my preju- dice. But after keeping them from the prefs feveral months, I found that not only what refpe£ls my principles required regard, hut the mat- ters of fa£i alfo. IVhich, upon the hare authority of the author, have {much to my difadvantage) paffed for truths vjith the obfequious multi- tude, as if the clerical charaSter endued per fons with that virtue, which the poets feign of a Lydian kiyig, of turning all things by their touch, not into gold, but into truth, which is more precious. — It became there- fore neceffary, either to Jhew the weaknefs of alledging fuch things a- gainfl ?ne and others by a direSi Reply j or lie under the reproach ofbe- inf«.>f).;j3^4:*^^ VINDICATION, ^c. Rev. Sir, jwlk^^^ were pleafed to find your firft fentlments fo favourable ^ ,^. jMT concerning the letter to you and your feffion, as that you JM( ^ were no ways apprehenfive that either religion or your "^jJIfltt^liir charadter could fufFer by it. We wifh you had either kept in the fame opinion, or given us no reafon to judge otherways concerning your reply ; which, we muft be fo free as to fay, is not much to the credit of either religion, or any perfon's charadler concerned in it. As whatever relates to the doftrines of religion in your's is fully anfwered in the dilTertations : What follov/s, is intended only as ihort remarks on fome matters of fadl, wherein we differ widely from you in the account you give in your true reply. And indeed. Sir, we for your fake blu{h to write freely, what we certainly know; yet the truth, and our own characters, will not allow us to be alto- gether filent. These feveral charges we lay againft your reply, (i.) It is far from anfwering the character the author has affumed, the true replier ; there being feveral falfhoods therein. (2.) There are many things mifreprcfented. (3.) Many remarks foreign to the point, merely to amufe the inconiiderate reader, and throw a gloom upon our conduct or principles. ,4.) Several very in ecent remarks not on- ly upon us, but fome others no ways interefted in the affair. We (hall only mention a few of thefe thmgs there are no foundation for in truth. Page 2d, That the affair ^viz. our herefy, as you call' it) was publifhed by us, long before your public declaration complain- ed of. — That it was beiore others befide your Rev. brother, that two of us vented and defended it in your own houfe. — That it was not knov/n that any of us e.ntertained thefe principles 'till after the middle of fummer 1765. — Page 3d, Thai you mentioned that text, "John ii. 23. or any other in your deciaracion. — That all you ate from Mr Erjklne in the Reply, (or the third part of it) or any of A the ( 2 ) the texts you include there, were mentioned in your public declara- tion. — Page 5th, Th.it we impugn thefe truths the Martyrs lealed with their blood, and avouch thefe principles they bore a teftimony againft. — That we took brow-beating, infolent, and overbearing meafures with you. — Page 6th, That we brought forth the old ex- ploded arguments of Soc'mians to lupport our caufe. — That it was upon the point of difference that we by a letter craved a converfa- tion with you. — That you fent for one of us to your houfe, who brought another along with him : And that you converfed fame hours with us on that occafion. — Page yth. That you converfed on ihat point vAth. the nioji of us more than once or tiuice before it came to the feffion. — 'Page 8th, That we wanted liberty to fpeak all our- felves, and the felTion fhouid take all f< r truth we fhould advance. — That it v/as to us who were fuftained panels at that feflion, that text Heb. vii. 28. and the reafoning from it was mentioned. — Page joth, Thatwe craved 'a copy of your mmutes, and not of our charge or libel. — Page nth. That the things contained in the copy we got was marked in our oxvn words. — Page 12th, That y. G — 's minute was read Vv^ithout thefe paragraphs from the Con- feffion of Faith, which he and the feiTion did not difFer about ; an4 which was the alteration he craved to be made in it. — That hun- dreds knew it was read v.Mth the required alteration. — That fome of us appeared that day to have fury and fcorn filling our breafts. — That we condemn your intention.- — That you held a conference in your own houfe with y. G — upon the difference, before G. S — y, — Page 14th, That we fet up confcience, not the word of God, as the infallible rule of our duty. — Page 17th, That we are guilty of rejecling Divine truths, and of imbibing and venting grievous errors. — Page 21ft, That there zvefeiu things in the letter you reply to, but what are indifputably l^ilfe. Now, Sir, Thefe with many other of the kind you affirm as truths, but we humbly conceive they would more properly bear another name. — It is eafy to fee the im.portance you affume as a hiftorian in your reply j no doubt expecting your authority was fuf- ficient to authenticate every thing advanced by you. Whilfl: a thoufand fuch as us reclaiming, mult pafs for nothing. Efpecially as you have taken care not only to aflirm roundly j but alfo to offer the fan6lion of your oath as a fence to your afleverations ; and fo- lemnly protelled againll taking ours. What is left for us .'' No- thing, but by filcncc to fay Amen : Tho' we fhould give the lie to our confciences, and even our fenfcs in doing fo. To deny is ufe- lefs. — To recriminate is to accufe you ; but not exculpate our- felves. — To give our oath you have told us will be perjury. — What remains? Guilty we muft be; merely becaufe you have faid fo. But as your evidence is incompetent for our convi(5tion, we muft be allov/ed to diilent, and fliall propofe an appeal, which certainly* will ( 3. )- . will be agreeable tp you. — We offer to produce the evidence of o- ther perfons befide ouri'elves, for proof of jome particulars in quef- tion. — Undeniable circumftances in fupport of (?//»^r5. — And, as for what comes not under thefe heads, we {hall refer it to you, whether you will give your own oath, or be fatisfied with foine of your own fellion, whom we fhall name to you, giving their's. But if you re- jedi: this propofal, v/e have but another, viz. That we are willing to abide by the truth of what is advanced in the letter you reply to upon oath. So that you have your choice either to fubmit to the above, or be content to bear the juft reproach of what is alledged againft you in the letter, and of propagating things in print which have no foundation in truth. For we know no other way of de- ciding the difference concerning thefe matters of fa6t. We (hail next confidcr, and very briefly, fome of the things you have mifreprefcnted. And tho' we put not thefe among the things you have advanced without any foundation, yet we reckon them as contrary to your afTumed charadfer of a true replier. As an inftance of our venting and publiibing that herefy (as you term it) before your declaration, you fay, page 2d, " That one *' of us vented and endeavoured to defend it, before a company in *' his own houfe." Here you would infinuate that the perfon de- fended it as a principle of his own; but unhappily for you, we can produce the witneffes prefent to prove, that before he would fptak on that point, he told them, that they were not to confider what he faid as his own principles ; but as there were fo many Divines prefent, he thought Mr Allans dodrine might be tried how far it was agreeable to the word of God. Accordingly, a divine pre- fent and him took one fide of the queftion : And we are perfuadcd none prefent had any other view of the conference ; tho' now made a vcntifig grievous errors. But this reproach will equally af- fe6l the other Rev, Gentleman, who has often declared he had not the remotell thought of fpeaking on that fubje*5f as a principle of his own. — Thus, Sir, you ftuinble at the thrclhold, which in ibme cafes would be held ominous, efpecially as this mifreprefentation lies in the fame womb (or fentence) with three f — f — ds, wiiich of jiecefTity mull: make an im 1 birth. You fay one of us put a rellridlion upon your miniderial free- dom, in faying the congregation would not be rent, " in cafe you ** did not teach that doctrine that was contrary to our opinions." If the matter will look a little worfc by interpolations, we find you are not reftrided there. The perfon's words w&rG thefe, *' in cafe ** you did not rent the congregation with your preachino-, he «* fhould never do it with his opinions." The plain import of which is, that he intended to keep.his opinions to himfclf; this was no refiridtion of your miniftry ; but perhaps too much fo of his own chriftian liberty. However, rather than you would not have ( 4 ) have a ftroke at thefe opinions where none in prudence could re*- ply, you would rifk the fate of the congregation in bringing it to the public by your declaration : Which you fpend feyeral pages feekirg an excufe for : Accordingly in page 3d, You fay, by your leduring on Rom. viii. 32. " New trouble was brought upon you, by converfations, reading of papers, and requiring a fight of your notes." — If you converfed fo often, it was with none of us. — As for papers there were never any read to you but one on the fubjeit, which was after your declaration, tho' by a jcind of fatality you make it a caufe thereof: Forgetting the ufe of that paper, which was to reprefent the bad efFedls your declaration was like to have upon the congregation, and characters of thofe fo traduced therein. Had we chofen to give you trouble, Sir, you gave us fufficient ground to do it otherways than in the humbleft manner to let you knov/ we were injured by the reports which you were the fole occafion of railing. The perfon who wrote and prefented the above-mentioned par per, alfo fignified, that if you would give him out of your notes the arguments you had ufed for eternal Sonfhip, he would either give you anfwers to them, or own the doctrine. We humbly conceive this was no great infolence in him ; and not below the importance of a fervant of JESUS CHRIST to grant ; at leaft the Apoftle thought it not grievous to write the fame things for the edification of church members.— It is evident how hard you have been pinch- ed to find rgafons for that warning, (as you call it) when every triflp muft be made fo } efpecially when effeiis mufl be turned intp caufes^ as you haye done here. You go on to tell the world, that " all this was extinguifhed *' in a little time, and two of thefe had children bapazed, and *' came under folemn engagements to bring them up in an agree- " ablenefs to the word of God, and to the doctrines laid down in ** our CopfeiTion of Faith and Catechifms." Were there no more in all your reply that required an anfwer, this could not be omitted. The fcope is to inform your readers that we had now giyen up thefe principles formerly maintained, and come under engagements to the Confeffion of Faith and Catechifms ai you hold thetn. But you will not deny, we hope, that both thefe perfons made excep- tions agajnlt coming under thefe engagements as you ordinarily lay ihem on, viz. To be bound to the Conicilion, Catechii'ms, and other human compofttions (commonly mentioned by you on fuch oc- cafions) without any difference made betwixt them, and the word of God. And without you would grant to put all thefe human compofiticns in fubordin,adon.to the fcriptures, (which you never do in laying on baptifmaf vows) they both declared they had no free- dom to prefent their children to baptiim. — This you granted to do, and adlually did fo to theni both, \Vhere then is the ilrength of this .( 5 ) this mighty argument againft us ? But tho' you have mafk'd this relation with all your art to make it bear upon us, your readers have not been fo blind as not to fee that it recoils upon yourfelf. How came you (who are fo very regular in difcipline and government) to admit perfons to fealing ordinances whom you knew had been venting^ defending, and Jupporting grievous, unfcriptural hereftes ; re- Jlri£iing your mimjlerial freedom ; traducing the doSfrines of the Con" fejfton of faith as traditional, and not Jupported by Divine revelation : Yea, and guilty o'i fpreading this infe£iion in the congregation ? — All which were, according to your own account, prior to the baptizing thefe children, which was done without fo much as a queftion con- cerning the matter in difpute. Befides, one of thefe two was or- dained an Elder, who not only to yourfelf in private, but in the face of the congiegation, reclaimed againft being bound to human compofitions as expreffed in the queftio.s of the formula, any fur- ther than he faw they bore evidence from the word of God. Why fo lax. Sir. as admit fuch a nonconformift? Was our herefy fogrofs as to deferve excommunication a little after, and fo innocent now as with it to be admitted to fpecial privileges and offices in the church ? We muft think. Sir, that filence on this part of the affair would have been more prudent in you, as well as on that part of your warning in which you charged us with adopting fuch horrid principles to pleafe ourfelves ; which, we fuppofe, was too glaring an encroachment upon Divine omnifcience to admit of any excufe, ^nd therefore you offer none for it. W E cannot under ftand what you mean by a new outbreaking, if it be not your unexpected declaration. And now you fay, w« *' ufed means to impofe on the weak, fpread the infection through the congregation, and trouble others." This is a great part of the charge againft us, and what you make the leading motive for bring- ing the affair to the public. Indeed you charged us with it before the fefTion ; but did we not refufe the juftnels thereof? You were riot then capable to prove it ; and as an evidence that you relin- quifhed this part of the charge, it is not fo much as mentioned in the copy of the minute we got, which fliould certainly contain the whole of the charge againft us. If it was juft, why was it not minuted ? if groundlefs, why were we charged with it at all ? And why now expoie that to the world as our ciime, which you could not prove at our trial ? Neverthelefs, of your induftryf to find us culpable herein, we challenge you to produce the perfons in the congregation whom we perluaded to emb:ace, or impoled our opi- nions f One infbnce of this, was your aflerting that A-ch-d E — s tok\yoti, it was thro* Oiu- influence and perluafion tlut ht finned the declinature : But he is fo honcR as to deny that ever i.c faid fo. \\ e arc ion y you engngcd your own credit for the truth of it ; and that you did oot rather report it among other hcarl'ays. ( 6 ) ftions upon. If you find none, be content to bear the blame o* bringing it unneceffarily to the public in your warning : And now expofing us to the world for faults that never had exiftence, that your unaccountable treatment of us may have fome fhadow of cxcufe. Page 5th, you firft interpolate the words of the letter, and then triumphs: You make the author fay, " That for nine or ten ** Sabbaths run. ing, he never touched the point." Such a fen- tence is not in all the letter. He fays, page 3d, " It is none of " my bufmefs to confider how you acquitted yourfelf on that fub- *' jecl. — And that you produced the monftrous doftrines of Soci- *' nus^hz. and anfwered them, without touching the ^(j/w/jw/^^mn " they differed from you." What need you then afk what point he meant ? Did' you not know wherein we differed from you ? We own it was likely you did not, in fubftituting things fo very remote or rather contrary to our opinions in their room, as Arianifm, &c. But we think you ihould have been better informed, before you fpent fo many Sabbaths in endeavouring to reconcile things as different as light and darknefs are. The firft fentence in page 6th, we know not whether you in- tend it as the words of the letter or your own : They are not in the former, and if your own, they are againft you. However, we Ihall adopt this orphan claufe, viz. Nor could you tell in all your difcourfes upon t-hat fubjcft, that the principles which we held, did « — land in Arianif7n^ Sabellianifm^ or Socinianifm j nor have yet feen caufe to change our opinions herein, /'. e. you cannot tell yet in your reply, except the world take your word for the whole. B UT to come to the promifed conference, in which we are more likely to agree, as you have been fo fair in relating it from the making of the promife, to the charging us as delinquents inftead of . performing it : However, we fhall here infert both accounts. The free enquirer fays, " In extraordinary com.plaifance, you were plea- " fed to promife them a conference with your brethren who came ** to aflift you at the facrament ; this promife you fo far kept as to «* invite them to it, and appointed the time and place, which by *' them was viewed as uncommonly lenitive, and readily com.plied *< with. — How were their hopes with your fidelity wrecked at *' once, when inflead of fo much as offering an excufe for denying ** them the privilege of this promifed conference, you conftituted *« the court, and called them as panels to the bar." The true Replier fays, page 7th, " Being loth to do anything *' raftily, I was v.illing to defer the affair until fome brethren came " to aflift me in facramental-work, and promifed tbe?)i a conference " about the matter at that time. This was agreed unto with ap- " parent fatisfa£lion by all parties. — The feffion met on Thurfday ** evening before the facrament; and was conftituted." Now ( 7 ) Now, wherein lies the difference betwixt thefe accounts ? Both own the conference was promifed, and agreed to by all parties. Both acknowledge the lellion was conftituted, and we charged as panels without giving us the conference. And this is the very thing complained of by the free enquirer. As the replier's relation of it is the fame, what fairer light has he reprefented it in ? How can you complain of being falfly accufed in this matter ? We with you lliall fubmit it to the impartial, whether the promifed confe- rence fhould have come before making us panels, or after ? Could that be a free conference when one party was firft made delinquent, and the other in the capacity of judges ? We muft ftill conclude according to your conceffion, Sir, that this was a more ridiculous conduft than all the former ; and that the free enquirer has but done you juftice in charging you with a breacn of faith. To create matter of triumph to yourfelf, you brmg in the en- quirer, alledging, that for us to " defire this conference would have *' betrayed a bafenefs of mind." He fays no fuch thing, but af- firms that on the condition you propofed, viz. That we would de- clare we were uncertain of the truth of thefe principles maintained by us, which we had learned from the word of God, and under- taking to prove them from it. To comply with this would have betray- ed a bafenefs of mind. But let us afk you, Sir, was this condition, or any other, mentioned, when you firfl: propofed the conference ? No, it was to be a free conference. Why then would you at the feffion affix fuch a condition to it ? Which, we affirm with the enquirer, bore the face of a fnare in the feihon to require : And was much like that cruel and reproachful condition of agreement ih-^itNahaJhy t\\tA?mnonite^ propofed to the men of Jabijh-Gilead, I Sam. xi. 2. " On this condition will I make a covenant with you, that i may " thruji out all your right eyes., and lay it for a reproach upon all *' Jfrael." You might as well have told us we fh uld have no con- ference, as add a condition to it which .;o honeft man that knew his principles could accept of. Beildes, the condition was inconfiftent with the nature of the conference : That one party muft renounce their evidence for, and certainty in, the truth of thefe principles they are about to defend. This is manifeltly giving up tiie caufe before they begin to plead it. " Strange! fay you, they did not defire a converfation, yet " were undertaking to prove, that their opinion was agreeable to " the word of God ! This muft be a palpable contradidion, or " that they wanted to force their principles upon us." — This, Sir, like many other extatic admirations flows from the force o; imagi- nation. You firft imagine we did not defire the conference, then begin to wonder, and draw confequenccs. But is it not more ftrange. Sir, that you fhould infer from our rejecting the converfa- tion embarraflcd with your entangling condition, that we did not defire ( 8 ) defire it at all ? When we not only craved it as was prorfiifed : Sut put you upon performing your promife in the face of the feflion. Or does it infer the forcing our opinions upon you, that we were willing to {hew fcripture evidence for what we believe? And where is the contradidion, in a panel to give evidence for the truth of things he is charged with as as errors ? Your defign at that meeting was not to confer with us from fcripture: But to fit judges of our fentiments and condemn them judicially. Which is evident, (i.) From you conftituting the fef- fion, and propofmg rhat matter as the end of its being conftituted, (2.) From denying us the conference, if we would not accept of the unreafonable condition annexed to it. (3.) From your hafty de- terminations.* (4.) From your refufing to hear what fcripture e- vidence we had to offer for our fentiments. And (5.) From your producing the ConfelTion of Faith to try our faith by, and refufing to read the fcripture proofs for the articles we differed about. Pa^e 7th, You reckon it defamation to call the Confeffion of Faith a hu?nan fyjlem. Pray, Sir, do you call it a Divine fyflem ? It is likely, when you put it in the place of God's word to try people's faith ; and call it a teft of orthodoxy : — A form of found words ; as if the fame which Timothy was enjoined to hold faft* Thefe are characters only proper to the unerring word of Godj which it is a greater pity to dilcard than, all human fyflems upon earth. But more of this afterwards. I N pao-e loth, you fay, " Had we required a copy of our libelyoM *' could not have refufed it, but we were the firil: ever fought a " copy of ffiinutes.^' The perfon you mean, as foon as called before the feflion, re- quired a copy of the charge againfl him, (not your minutes). The Rev. Mr bJijumo replied, " There was no libel formed againft him, *' he was called there to fee if he would adhere to the doctrines in *« the Confeluon of Faith formerly read to the three elders," who had been at the bar before him. How can you fay *' you could not have refufed," when you mufl be fenfible now readily we can., prove that you obflinately refufed the copy of a charge which lay before "our lelTion for three years. — But here the replier tells the truth, tho' to the difcredit of the fellion ! — " in ecclefiojiical courts " nothing is more ordinary, than to lerve the ^2lxX.-^ fummoned with «* a copv of the charge laid againit them, unto which they are to " anlwer." This you acknowledge is juft, as no doubt it is. Why then, Sir, guilty of fuch injultice to us, as neither to give us a * An elder, who was not known to be of our fentiments, owned it in tlie feffion, and was that niom> nt fiflerld as for *' him." Now fince conicience, and evidences from the word of God are both excluded ; v'>hat remams, but to give up all to the judo-ment and discretion of our teachers ? — But what muft poor fouls do who cannot fee the propriety of their interpretations ; and in the mean time are aftured by the great God, that they muft hz accountable to him themfelves as individuals, for every thing they believe or profefs ? One would think they ought to be fatisfied in theirown judgments before they afl'ent to thefe interpretations. — i But alas ! if they fearch the fcriptures to fee if thele things are fo, and find evidences to the contrary, they are brought to this woeful dilemma, either to be pronounceJ heretics in dillenting from the opinions of their leaders j or profefs and believe contrary to their confciences and the evidences of revelation. — This, Sir, is the cafe betwixt you and us. And let your Reply be rightly attended to, it will not.obfcurely point out this dodtrine ot implicit faith. There is another point you labour mrch in thefe pages, viz. That we were in communion with you whe; you excommunicated us. It may be afi^ed, Sir, if it be poifible for a perion to leave your communion when once he is in it .? Your reafoning would infer it •was not. Our declinature was given in writing, fubfcribed by us, and the caufes mentioned ; tho' not fufficient to you, they were fo to us J it v/as received in a conftiiuted feilion, read, and kept with- out any anfwers returned. By your own confent then, we were no longer under your jurifdiclion when you accepted the declinature, in which we explicitly renounced your authority over us. Had you ( '5 ) you thought it unjuft, it fhould have been rejeiSte^ or anTwered. You could not but know after reading, that it was intended to difiblve our connexion as members of your fociety ; and in as much as you accepted thereof, the fcparation was mutual on both fides. We could expect no further privilege in communion with your congregation 'till we had withdrawn our declinature : How could you pretend to have ftill authority over us as if in full communion with you ? — Sir, as to expofe this, and the way you take to defend it as they eafily might, would be too like a defign to expofe you and your feffion j wc fhall only add this refledlion : That when any degree of perfecution is recommended to the world in print, it is the duty of every friend of chriflian liberty to appear againft it. And as the principles couched in your Reply, make it evident the;e is only the want of countenance from civil power, (which we may thank God runs in another channel) to deftroy the chriftian liberty which God hath made the privi- lege of every individual that comes not up to your flandard, or meaning, impofed upon the fcriptures. We fliould think it ftrange if men were fo infatuated, as not to hold fuch principles in detefta- tion. In vain have proteftants caft oft the yoke o( Romijh iizLverv^ if they are obliged to take on another equally fevere. Every chrifti- an muft certainly think himfelf free in his choice of what do6lriaes he is to believe behde the fcriptures. He cannot be diveited of that power the Almighty God hath endowed him with, of judging for himfelf in things of the laft confequence to him, and for which he himfelf, and not another for hiin, muft be judged, accordin^^ to the ufe and improvement he makes of the rights and privileges be- ftowed upon him : Therefore, fhould beware of giving up his judgment and confcience to be governed by any man or fociety, 'till he can find fecurity from them, that they fiiall anfwer at the bar of God for what errors may be in his faith ; and for his affronting the Majefty of heaven, in rejecting his Divine command of judging for himlelf J and letting up fallible mortals in the throne of God, as lords over his confcience. W E muft now dilpatch the Reply, and fupercede what was fur- ther intended upon it, to give place for lome remarks upon a later performance. Therefore ♦fliall on y remark on the 4th general fault we find to your Reply : That it was certainly indecent in you. Sir, to treat the gentleman fo, whom you fuppofed to be the author of the letter : And particularly fo, wucn 11 is conlidered, that you had all the certainty which any perfon could require that he was not the author of it, previous to your writing the Reply. Did you not defire a Rev. gentleman, to enquire at the fuppoled author whether he was lu or not ? This he did, and was certified in the ftrongeft terms, from his own mouth, that he was not. Did not this gentleman return you an anfwer, alTunng you the other he enquired ( t6 ) enquired at was not the author ? Was not this fufficient to Satisfy any reafonable perion ? But you would ftill fuftain him the author, in fpite of the clearell: evidence to the contrary j and fo fport your- felf with the gentleman's evidence, and your own incredulity : For it feems you did not intend to credit his information, tho' you fent him to obtain it for you. But if you afk why the true author concealed his proper name ? We anfwer, it was to fave you the labour of throwing out perfonal refie£tions, and that you mJght have only the fubje6t itfelf to g^n- fider. And you have given evidence that his jealoufy was well founded, fince rather than you would not be diffedling chara6lers, you would fubftitute an author which you were affured had not the leaft hand in writing the letter. But left you ihould repeat your error, we certainly inform you, that the real author is the fame with the author of the difi'ertations.* — And now perhaps you have fufficient matter for a- nother reply, containing all the hearfays concerning him. And in- deed we are forry to hear fo many fay, that this is a department a- mong the literati which you feem peculiarly qualified for. As hearfays make but lame arguments, had you in place of them, and other difparaging chara£^eriftics, fubftituted fome better arguments in defence of your own and feffions' conduct towards us ; your can- dor would have been more confpicuous, and your Reply perhaps had more admirers. Being nov/ to conclude, permit us. Sir, to exprefs how deeply we lament, the many unhappy and unchriftian-like confe- quences that have attended this difference betwixt you and us !' What occafion enemies to religion take to infult it, with the pro- feflors thereof in general, v»fhen they find the ftricteft of them, in cbnftant ftrife, who ihall be moft a<5live in deftroying the reputations' and interefts of others: Making detraction and defamation the bufinefs of their lives ; and all under colour of zeal for religion, as if it were now become a fanttuary for the grofleft immoralities, and an excufe for the deftru£lion of all that is dear to their fellow chriftians. ' ■ Suffer us alfo, to lament our own fate, in the very hard treat- ment meafured out to us : Who for embracing truths, v/hich ap- peared fo to us, not from any principles of prejudice, education, or party ; but from evidences drawn immediately from the word of God ; which v;^e could not recede from, without offering violence • to our underftandings, confciences, and duty to God ; and mani- ' feftly betrayino- the privilege he hath granted us, of believing for ourfelves what we fee the ftrongeft evidences from revelation to fup- port. For this, as it were the greateft crime, we muil be brought un- der the difmal necefTity of either renouncing what we were perfuiad- ed in our own judgments were the truths of God : Or in refufing to * A Pamphlet, entitled a View cf the Trhiily, &c. , ( 17 ) to renounce them, be denied communion, pointed out a" the X'ileft of heretics, expofed to all the ridicule and reproach which wit or malice could invent, and be iuhjeiSted to all the infamy thofe could caft upon us, who would have a£ted more like chriftians^ had they mourned over our fall (as they fuppofedj ; and ufed means for our recovery ; than with all the vehemence of declared enemies, to ^o about and traduce and calumniate us as tlie vileft of men. This practice muft be furpriftng to every perfon of candor ; and a dif- honour to chriftianity itfelf : That the religion of the meek and lowly Jesus, fliould be ufed as an incitement to the pafiions of men, fo vifible in the acrimonious party quarrels, which have been lubftituted in the place of chriftian piety and brotherly love, which are effential ingredients in the heaven-born religion of the prince of peace, Hov/ inconfiderate a part do they act, who proclaim how little themfelves dcferve the name of chriiiians, by tl^ir for- wardnefs and diligence to ruin the chriftian charatlers, and even civil interefts of others ? Manifold are the examples we couid pro- duce ; but as we chufe rather to lament their weaknefs, and wiih their reformation, than recriminate : So we take this opportunity to declare our real forrow, that you. Sir, whom wc always perfuad- cd ourfclves,were far otherways inclined, ihould in fo many inftances have been fo nearly connected, But as far as we kr.ow our own hearts, and thefe things concern us, we llncercly forgive you, and others who have fo manifeftly injured us. And defire to pray th.it God may grant forgivenefs ; and grace to preferve you all from fm, and every fnare of the devil ; And that at laft you may be made poffeilbrs of the peaceful regions of immortal blifs. \Vhen all the jarring fentiments of Christ's dii'ciples fliali be for ever loft in oblivion, and they eternally united in harmonious concord, ce- lebrating the praifes of God and the Lamb : — That we may all live here as expedtants of that pure inheritance, into which notiiing can enter that defilcth or maketh a lie, and be ready for the enjoy- ment thereof, when time with us fhall be no more i is the prayer of us, who rcmaiii. Rev. Sir, TOURS, kc. Note, The above is exprejfed in the plural^ hecaufe fonie others are conccrredy ivho approved of pnhlifning it; and knowing inoji ofthefa£is here vindicated^ iH e ready on any proper occafion to attsjt the truth oj them. ^^ a Q c^<^^ ,\ >^ 101 iO! oi €>i':^J! -' !oi !oi -^ $1 101 101 ;0i ;ei '01 .-cji ioi i€i <^i lei .01 m m 101 ^j^ 101 :0i ■0ii0!ic?l^i i^l i«i i"^'! liSi raiSliOlM !0i 101 101 101 l^^l 101 101 '01 i0l 101 101 101 A N EXAMINATION, ^r. Dreams are hut interludes^ which fayicy makes ; When ?nonarch reafon Jleeps^ this mimic wakes. Compounds a medley of disjointed things, A court of cohlers, and a mob of kijigs. Drydek, When apparitions fill the mind. The foul's unnerv' d, and reajons blind. R . ji^^^ S dreams are but fitSlions, the efFecfls of a difturbed brain ?^ A k^ *^'' 'maQ;inatlon, it might be reckoned as prohife in me ^ -i^ to be particular in replying to fuch vifionary fables, as "^^^|Hr it was in the pretended quaker to publifh his dreamvS : But as " his waking thoughts" are added, which are as fi(£litious, at leaft fpecious, as what he calls *' the viilons of his head" upon his bed, allow me to make the following fhort remarks upon the whole. The characSler of a quaker is fo ill fupportcd through the whole of the performance, that he mull be wilfully blind, or very little acquainted with quaker principles, who does not fee it to be coun- terfeit : In this refpe^t the author has not only expofed his own wsaknefs ; but moft grofly abufed the people of that party; who univerfally hold thefe things in the greateft deteftation, which this metamorphofcd quaker is here made to defend. This impotency is not only obvious in every page ; but any ordinary reader will fee, what iignals of diftrefs, like a fhip in a ftorm, this dreamer Hiews, and like the Pfalmilt's deftitute mariner, ftaggers to and fro, and is at his wits end, for v/ant of matter in Mr M — ys letter to find fault with. This makes me think he had better configned three-fourths of it to oblivion, with what was culled from it after his manulcript was fhev/n to his friends, owing to a tendernefs in fome of them to the ch.uaiTcers of other men, which it v/ould feem this Dreamer has got a very fmall ihare of. As ( 19 ) A s the dreamer fays he had read Mr M—y*s letter before he " dropped faft aflecp," let me afk him, why he did not detect that lying demor. which appeared to him, while he utters with fuch demonian rage fo many things that are not in the letter, and fo de- mon like, throws fuch a reproach upon the facred word of God, and the inlpir.ed Solomon, a penman thereof, in calling his words, " a lift " of the very opprobrious names given by Mr yl/--yr'" it would appear that either the dreamer ads in concert with this lying fpirit, which here exhibited the true character of fatan the father of lies : Or that he intended to expofe this apparition, by publifhing his lies and abufc of revelation to the world. I F Solomo7j had aftrorited Mr A^ — «, why does he not take him to tafk for it ? And not with impudence, peculiar to demons, cal Solomons language the words of Mr M—y. By this rule of his, every text that is ufed in either the Reply or this performance of the dreamer, are not the words of God, but the words of the Re- plier and Dreamer. But let me not accufe the demon for what he is not guilty ofj when I read again, I find they are not the apparition's words, but a comment of the fictitious quaker, or rather Mr N — o, who it feems challenges the honour of writing the notes. Now, I cannot help exprefTing my forrow, that any of his cha- rafter and profefTion fliould have in the leaft countenanced, much lefs corrected, printed, and written notes of approbation to fuch a heterogenious jumble of incoherent and iiidecent reveries, as are contained in this performance of the Dreamer. How ludicrous muft it be among the fcoffers at religion and every thing ferious ? How grating to the chriftian ear, to find the facred word of God, and the privileges of chriftians fo fhamefully treated ? Who could ever imagine how it could enter the heart of any chriftian to com- pare the right of private judgment, to a right o'i pijfmg in another's face ! Which plainly inunuates there is no right of private judg- ment at all, feeing none can be fo void of common fejife as to pre- tend a right for the other. Such language could hardly be ex- pected from profelled enemies to religion, who muft certainly con- clude, that whatever is preached and profeftcd about reliirion and piety is all a folemn mockery, when they find the greateft devotees thereto, who, by a blazing profefTion, fay ftand by for we are holier than you; yet ("porting rhemfclves wantonly with the inftitutions of heaven, which are fo plainly taught in the word of God, fo often fealed with the blood of martyrs, and the very diftinguilhiu'^ cha- raCteriftics of protcftants ! But this part of the dream is not only ludicrous and profane, but it is nonfenfe. What comparifon can we fuppofe betWixt tlie right a man has to think for himielt in matters ol" religion, ajid a brutal and more than impertinent action, which for any one to do to ( 20 ) to another, ofFers violence to common fenfe ? Is there no difference bet^vixt a nvan thinking he hath a right from the word of God to juuge what he fuould receive from men as matter of f-Ku j and do- ing that lo his neighbour wiiich would expoic his own ihame, be ruoe, unmannerly, and indecent in the higheft degree ? He who - would attempt (uch an a6lion, only cjeferves to have Horace's rule applied to him, Tc/ics laud amque falacem demeteret ferrnm. There are fo many lineaments of the Replier in this Dreamer, that one would be ready to think it is the fame perfon : But the Dreamer's declared connecSlions with familiar fpirits, fo:bid me in charity to think it is fo; However, theie is an uncommon agreement of fentiment pre- ■v'^ils thiough both performances. The Rcplicr, page 4, concludes fome that di/rered irom him to be fcU-murderers of their own cha- raiterf, and glories in his own humanity in laying a grave-ftone upon them.. And this Dreamer brings A-Ir M — y in guilty oi fela de ffi, or fclf- murder, (pretty language for pious profeiibrs indeed) ! and no doubt accounts it an act of charity to bury his character alfo. But with their leave, the verdict of the coroner's inquell was neceff- fary for both, before they had found them guilty, much lefs buried them. This perhaps may be fuiticiently lupplied by the authority of the Replier and his fcilion, who upon the fame principle, may bring in all the people of Britain that differ in opinion from them guilty of felo de fe ; but this will be fo far from proving any man guilty, that every one of common fenfe muft laugh at their folly. But what makes Mr M — y a felf-murderer ? Why, it was hjs being fo credulous as to believe that the Replier pointed him out as ti^e author of the letter he replied to. This he had very good ground for, not only from the fcope of the Reply, and citing and mifconflrucling a paffage from the preface to his fermons : But irom the united voice of the Replier's congregation, who were fond of certifying all they had accefs to, that he was the very perfon in- tended. Bat if all are felf-murderers that thought Mr M — ■;- point- ed at in the Reply, there will be work enough for both Replier and Dreamer in burying and laying on grave-floncs : B^t unhappily for theReplier, he muft do this good ofhce for the moft of his ov/n con- gregation who are under the fam.e predicament. M R AI — y needs not be much offended with the ch^radier which this IC' ng quaker hath given him, while there have been fb manv that have ffjined in the church much longer than he, v/itti fair and unbleir.ifhcd chara£ters, yet being Jb unhappy as to differ from tliat party, muft go down to the grave with all the odiurri tney could caft upon them. It feems to be held as a peculiar right, to which Ic — ers are only intided, to abufe and reproach thofe that differ from theni, who yet have no right to defend thcmfelves ; but fnul]: remain content with the characters of liars, Arians, &c. or , Vv'hat ( 21 ) what the godly prelates of that party Ihall pleafe to impofe upon, them ; which leads me to obferve, That both Replicr and Dreamer make a mighty noife about j^rianiffTi, Sodnianifm^Sic. being called words of courfe and without meaning, when applied to perions they have no relation to. Tho' the meaning of words are generally fettled by cultom, yet when perions ufe words they neither know the meaning of, nor why they apply them to fuch perfons, certainly thefe mull be words of courle to them. — Suppofe fome of the Replier's congregation fliould call the men that lately diftered from them Arians, Sabcllians^ &c. and being afked, as fome of them were, what thefe names m.eant, fhould anfwer they did not know ; would not thefe be words of courfe and void of meaning to them ? Ira fcceder fhould be afked the meaning of the word Latitudi^ jiarian P If he could not tell, pray what was it more to him than a word of courfe in his fwearing againft it in the bond of the co- venant ? But the Dreamer goes on with his witlefs criticifms, and is (b fond of reproaching, that even the printer's boy cannot efcape him, who now muft be blamed for the ungrammatical citation from Mr Jld — ^;''s preface, and no doubt for changing the Latin participle cramhe reco£ia alfo. But the Dreamer did not mind, I fuppofe, that Mr Ai — y has the Replier's angry letter, vindicating recoxta to be the proper conftru6fion, and withal defires him to go to his Dic- tionary again, or borrow one of his friends if he had none of his own. This wholly clears the printer of the charge ; and fo the trifling criticifms of menacing pedagogue, man of the rod, &c. might have been fpared : Which laft, I fuppofe, will be as fmgular phrafeology as cramhe reccxta ; But I hope this difguifcd quaker will find us examples the next time he dreams. As for groundlefs furmifes being incapable of faiBcient evidence, it may be oblerved, that many things mav have no truth in them- felves, which to us have the highell probability. Thus many ji.dges have been impofed upon by evidence which they could not reieit:, being brought to prove things which in themfclves were without real exifcence, and fo muil: be groundlefs. I fuppofe had two or three perfons whom the Replier could credit, told him they faw Mr M—y v/rite the Free Enquirer's letter, he v/ould have reckoiled .this fufficient evidence, tho' in fact it was a groundlefij furmife. The Dreamer enquires, how Mr M—y will " account for his " fuppofmg that eitlicr a weak man or a ftrong man can believe *' without evidence r" But he lays no fuch thing, only fuppofes that the Replier had believed without fujjiclent evidence. V/hich is too common among many in matters of much greater concern than the charadter of Mr M-^y i as for inflance, there are many whq . ■ ^\ ' ( 22 ) who believe that^he DIVINE PERSON of the LORD JESUS was BEGOTTEN, and that his PERSONALITY with all his DI- VINE PERFECTIONS were communicated to him from the Father. I would be obliged to the Dreamer, would he produce fufiicient evidence for this doftrine from the fcripture. But to go on. Mr M-^y hath thefe words, " I am afhamed to think that any *' perfon, who aflumes the name of a teacher of nghteoufnefs, *' {hould publifh a report of perjons, they are not acquainted withy *' from hearfay^ and the uncertain voice of fame , which have fo often " been found at fault," O N this fentence the Dreamer learnedly obferves, that it is like a crooked Ram's horn ; why, (i.) Mr M — y ftumbles by joining a fmgle perfon to a plural verb. (2.) Hedefileth his confcience by vain repetitions, a fin againft the precepts of both the gofpel and grammar. (3.) He writes found at fault. Grievous crimes in- deed ! But as to the firft, the quaker is fo into?ficated with the fpi- rit ofcriticifm, that he cannot fee an antecedent ftanding immedi- ately before a relative, but brin^^s a falfe one from the beginning of the fentence. The fentence is intended to fliew how uncharitable it is, to publifh reports upon perfons without firft acquainting them, that they may have opportunity to difallow them if falfe, or confefs them if true. So that it is only a dream that " a *' finole perfon is married to a plural verb ;" And the fecond is like unto it : For none can fuppofe that writing to Mr N — 0, and praying to God are of the fame confequence ; in the latter we are in danger of defiling our confciences by vain repetitions ; but I think not in the former. Befides, the acl concerning the do£lrine of grace ( 2, jeccding jlarJard) tells us there are no precepts in the eoipel at all : How then can Mr M — y fin againft them ? And he is die firft certainly that has found this nev/ way of finning againft 2;ramrnar. But with thole that can make fins and duties at plea- lure, it is eafy to make it an aggravated ofl'ence, to mention hearfay and the voice of fame in one fentence. And were it not for fear of finnino" againft grammar, I would fay they are very often different; for I have heard itfaidt that a quaker wrote the Dream ; but the voice of common fayne fays a feceding minifter wrote it : Now is there no difference betwixt a feceding minifter and a quaker ? The Dreamer betrays his own ignorance in faying he knows no wan ant for writing " found at fault." For befides many other unexceptionable grammarians, he will find it [njohnjonh and Ri- ders Diclionaries, and in Dt Swift's works, fuch idioms are oftener than once. And no lefs does his folly appear in putting the quef- tion, " "Were ever the names of hercfies applied to perfons ?" Sure- }y, or how came Clark^ JVhifhn^ &c. to get the name of Arians ptherways j their names were Samuel Clark, and John Whifton ; but when ( 23 ) when they are C3.]hdJrlans and Sociniansy this muft be an apph'ca- tion of heretical rfames to perfons. But let us fee how he vindicates the Replier in applying here- tical names to perfons not tainted with the herefies. Well, it's by fetting up the Replier as equal with the apoftle John in the pro- priety of applying herefies to men : Or rather brings down the apoftle to the Replier. For he fays, that John had no knowledge of any perfon in Pergamos that could be accuf'id with holding Ba~ laatns herefy. But tho' this fhould be granted, will it infer that Jesus Christ did not know who in Pergamos this herefy was ap- plicable to, for it was him that fent John to deliver the meflage to that church ? Now, if the Replier be as certain that the perfons he applies thefe heretical names to are Arians, and Socinians, as Christ was in the other cafe, then the Dreamer gains his point, otherways he muft be dreaming ftill. But it is likely he imagined it was fomething Divine that infpired him in his fleep, for he fpeaks with equal certainty concerning his revelation, as John did of his ; fay- ing, we may with equal propriety interrogate the Apojik as the Re^ plier. — Amazing ! I N page 6th, we have the Dreamer's vindication of the Replier's vow or covenant. And fure Egyptian bondage, nor gaily flavery were not fo unnatural, as the forcing this quaker to vindicate that which deftroys the whole of his own principles, and apologize for that oath in which quakerifm is renounced. But how is he re- compenced ? With the charatfter of a malicious ilanderer by him whom he fo aukwardly is attempting to excufe. The Dreamer fays twice that theReplier had vowed to extirpate error. No, faith the Replier in his note, the word extirpate is not to be found in it and therefore is a viaiiciom Jlander. A poor reward indeed ! But as humanity obliges to protedl the injured, I muft let the Replier know that the quaker is in the right, for he will find the word ex' tirpation in the 2d par. of the Solemn League and Covenant, and the words root out in the National Covenant, with many other of ftronger emphahs. 1 hcrefore it is a flander both upon quaker and covenants to fay the words are not to be found in them. B UT to come to the Dreamer's defence. He givts us a defini- tion of perfecution, which I find no fault with ; but he entirely fails in clearing the management of thefe covenants from penecution, which was his principal puipofe. For it is well known that thefe covenants were enforced bv tne higheft pains in law when the civil power happened to be on that fide : And no fecedcr will deny, that the manner ihefe covenants were impofed was the occafion of much perjury and profanation, efpecially from 1638 to 1650, when many tHoufands were forced to Iwear, who had no kiowledge or faith about what they were fvvearing. Then both church and ftate con- fpired to force every oue under the obligation of thefe covenants : Which ( 24 ) Which is evident from the acts of the Afiembly at Edinburgh, Jug. 3 » 1639, SefT. 23. By which they not only by their authority order all to fubfcribe the ConfefTion of Faith and Covenants under pain of the higheft church cenfures ; but petition the Prissy Council • to add their authority : And alfo petition the Parliament to enjoin tlie fubfcription under all civil pains. Accordingly the Privv Coun- cil ordained the fubfcription of them, Jug. 30, 1639. And thePar- liament, June ii, 1640, ordains and commands all his Majcfty's fubjedts, of what rank and quality foever, to fubfcribe the Confef- fion of Faith and Covenant, under all civil pains. Char. I. Pari. 2, A6t 5. Could this be called a voluntary fubfcription when people vere obliged to fwear, however different their private fentiments were, and in fwearing fay as the covenant begins, " We proteft, *' that after long and due examination of our own confciences in <' matters of true and falfe religion, we are now thoroughly refol- " ved in the truth by the word and Spirit of GoD ; therefore we ** believe with our hearts, confefs with our mouths, fubfcribe with ** our hands, and aiHrm before God and the whole world, that this *' only is the true chriftian faith, &c." Was not this perfecution, to force fubje£ts to fwear in the moft folemn manner to what they were io-norant of, or very much difmclined to, and that under the hicheft cenlures and punifliments ? But the Dreamer will perhaps fay, what is all this to the Replier ? The feceders do not enforce them by civil penalties ; and they have changed the obligation to the Covenants, therefore cai»* not be chargeable with (uch perfecution. As to the firft, there is good reafon fotit, the civil powers are not of their party. But were circumftances to fuit, as the note writer fays, page nth, they woula a6l the fame tragedy ; which is plain from the prefbytery lamenting in their anfwers to Mr Nairn's diflent, page 39, *' Nor are v.'e (o fituated as our reformers, in havino- the concurrence of the civil powers, for managing neceilliry and lawful procefs againll malignants." In the fame aniwer, they efpoufe that a6t of Parliament whereby princes were obliged to fwear, " That they ftiould be careful to root out of their lands. and empire all heretics, that fiiould be convicted by the kirk." They alfo fay, *' that it was not fuitable to their prefent circumftances, to blend civil and ecclefralHcal matters in the oath of God in renew- ing the Covenants." From all which 'tis plain, there requires no more than a change of circumftances to renew the old Icene of conwianding, enforcing, ordainifig, and compelling all to fubfcribe, aS the zealous reformers had done before. But they have altered the covenants and the obligation to them.. This no doubt is a Jlep of reformation I The Dreamer defines the covenant to be a '* promife to obey all the commands of God," U> muft be of the fame import With that of Ijrael^ Excd, >:ix., 8. " All that ( ^5 ) that th<^ Lord hath fpoken, we will do." The laws of God norie will deny, are of perpetual obligation j and leceders conftantly teach that the Covenants are of moral, and fo of perpetual obligacioni upon pofteritv, whether they fwear to them or not, and thli cer- tainly the laws of God are : — Yet they have changed the articles of the Covenants ; and the note writer fays, " they are to be fuited to rimes, places, and circujg]i||ances." But wRefe "goTThiey an^aiS^ tKorlty tl3'artef'tTie Taws' of God, "oFchange the obligation to that which is morally binding ? — It muft be either the fubrtancey or manner of exprefTing the Covenants that is binding. If the firft, that is the laws of God and Christ, as the Dreamer favs, which were morally binding, antecedent to either making or mending the Covenants, and could not be lubject to alteration. If the latter, it muft follow, that the moral obligation of the Covenants in their former form of expreiiion muft ceafe when it is altered, they cart- not be both binding at the fame time when fo different. How {hall we then knov/ whether it is the Covenants made by the AlTenv- b!y, or thofe mendeti by leceders, that is binding upon the fucceed- ing generations ? If a church judicature hath power to make one alteration in perpetual obligations., they mav make a thoufand, and go on ad infinitu7n ; and fo we fliall be for ever uncertain what is binding, and what not. M R M-^y fays, the Replier had fworn to root out all opinions but his own. The Dreamer fays, he is fworn to extirpate all error.- Now we cannot doubt that the Repliefthrnks every opinion erra- neous but his own ; and therefore is fworn to extirpate all that do Bot agree with him. So that Mr M—y fays no more of the Re- plier than the Dreamer does. What 1 have faid is not direftly againft Covenants ; but the abufe of them : And fhews how fictitious the Dreamer's account is of the Replier's vow; which by an uniuititiable ufe of it^ ha!;h been the occufion of more perfecution than ever \\ as m Britoiirt behdes. • M R M — y fays, " the word ofGoD, without the e onfider.itian of conftience, has no more fitneis to diredl men than other ^ani- mals." The Dreamer fays^ " The word of GoD is the inralliWe rule among rational and moral agents." Which plainly 'uppofrth it can be no rule to any other. Here they are agreed. For with- out a princple of confcicntioufnefs, no being can be cal'ed latioiial or moral. Wherem men agree with animals, the word of God can be of no ufe to them, without we fuppole Tome other Confi- dcration, viz. underftanding and confcience, by which men are ca- pable of ufing it. This is plain from the Dreamer's own fenti- ments : But he is fo fond of differing, as to fix a contrary meaning to the words, viz. ** That confcience muft fix a meaning to the ** word of God before it can be fit to direct meu more tnaa beafts." D And ( 26 ) And this he proves to be the true meaning, by quoting a golden fen* tence, as he calls it, from MtM — ^'s letter, which was never in it j and fo makes him fay, that a '■'■ man may judge and reteivc what he thinks jit from the word of God." Mr M — y is fpeaicing of human dodlrines, and inferences held forth by men to be believed, of which every man has a right to receive as much and no more than he thinks right or agreeable to the word of GoD ; but the Dreamer will have the word of God itfelf intended here. Is not this a grofs perverfion ? It was not poflible any perfon awake and in his fenles could fo miftake without defign. The fame juftice he docs to this fentence, page 14th, where ' having cited this claufe from the letter, '* every man hath un- *' doubtediy a right tojuogefor himfelf concerning the meaning of " fcripture, and cannot receive it but by an afl'ent of his own *' judgment." Which the Dreamer fays no man in his fenfes will deny. But what way will he find it faulty ? He takes a part -of this fentence, and a part of another, tranfpofeth both parts, points it to anfwer his purpote, and then barefacedly cites them as -Words of the letter, and the meaning of the other fentence. Is this juftice, Mr Dreamer? To put a bad fenfe upon a.perfon's words .when they will bear, a more favourable one, is bafe : But to tranf- pofe, interpolate, -and change the pointing, to make an author fpeak nonfenfe or error, is an atiront to religion, reafon, and common . fenfe. By the ufe of this method the Dreamer's beft fentences might be made blafphemy ; and the moft elegant compofition, un- intelligible jargon. - I WOULD a(k the Dreamer, how he came to approve of the Con- feffion of Faith ? Was it not becaufe he was perfuaded in his own ' confcience that it was agreeable to fcripture ? Or how came th^ Replier's fociety to fix the meaning of fcripture ? Did not their conlciences tell them that their inferences were juftly drawn fron>. fcripture ? If they did fo, how come others to be guilty in ufing the fame pri\ilege ? If they did not, then they have believed im- plicitly without any judgment of their own. B U T I mull not omit that marv^elous definition of confcience o-iven by the Replier in his note : He fays, it is " an intelleitual power, by which an aflent is given unto the principles of moral ope- rations." Which is right in genus, but wrong in fpecies and ufe. That it is an intelledual power is right. But that it always aflents to the principles of moral adlion is falfe. Thefe principles are ei» ther external, or internal ; the word of God is the external princi- pleof moral operation ; but this many confciences have not yet affent- ed to. If motives of aftion in the mind are internal principles, the confcience often diflents from thefe ; for the Apoftle tells us that our hearts or confciences condemn us. Besides . it is not the work of confcience to alTent, but to judge of ( 27 ) of motives and adions. When the mind afTents, it is called the underftanding or will ; when it judgcth, it is the confcience. To' alTent is t6 believe, not to judge. This definition belongs to the underftandingj if" the Replier ftill holds by the fchool definition cf faculties in the foul ; but perhaps he has forgot, and fo fubftituted the confcience in room of another power of the foul, as he feems to have done with the Greek word ^iiyrr.r/t?ir he ufes, which is not in the language. The printer's boy has perhaps been found at fault again, it would be needful either to ufe a Lexicori^ or never trouble Greek or Lathi languages. Page 8th begins with fonie terms extremely delicate, and very decently applied to Mr M — y j fuch as fire, frying-pan, pope, popery, devil, bottomlefs depths, fcepticifm, &c. From his culi- nary phrafes fome might imagine he had been cook j however, fuch kitchen ftufFis tolerably innocent: But fuch a circle of fright- ful Vv'ords together, from one who was fo lately converfing with demons, looks fo conjuration like, that I muft fay, from pope, de- vil, and bottomlefs pit. Libera 7ios Dojnhe. A T the bottom of this fenfible page, the Dreamer quotes a paf- > fage from Mr M—ys letter, and roundly tells us that no proteltant will differ from what he faith : Yet immediately calls it a noify parade of words, an invidloujly deftgned fentence. From whence we infer the Dreamer is no proteftant. He blames Mr M — y forjudg- ing Mr N — upon evidence. But here he repays him with in- terefl, without evidence. He cannot find fault with the pafl'age it- felf, therefore falls upon the author's defign. This muft be un- charitable prefumption indeed ! Who boldly fleps into the throne of God, now, Mr Dreamer ? From whence were you endued with fuch penetration, as to diflet^ the intention of the fpcaker, when his words are without exception ? He fays, " the Replier and his feffion never fet up for di^^^ators for every individual upon earth." This is fine Logic ; every 'indi- vidual upon earth, are not in theReplier's congregation ; therefore there are no individuals in it. But if they diciate to any one indi- vidual, it is the fame prefumption as to kind, with pretending to didfate for the whole. B UT I muft pafs over many things in thefe pages, to come to the particular purpofe intended in writing thefe remarks, which v;as to fliew the wcaknefs of the Dreamer's fubtle and fpecious rca- foning in favour of human fyftems, to the prejudice of chriifian li- berty, and the Divine authority and ufe of the facred v/oid of God. But before I proceed, it muft be obfcrved how apt the fimili- tude is which the Dreamer produces, to prove that men are ac- countable to others than the Almighty, for what their confcienccs receive from the word of God. It is no lefs than that of Ki»g Charles ( 28 ) Charles the firji^ who, becaufe he ftretched the prerogative, Impofed upon his fubjeils, and fubverted their facred and ciyil rights and privileges, was therefore by the Iav\'s of the land, accountable for thefe depredations to his fubje(3:s whom he had thus fo manifellly injured. — So that becaufe one man is accountable to another for the injuries he does to him, contrary to religion, reafon, and common fenfe ; therefore he is accountable to him fo; his inward fentiments, and what his confcience receives from the word of Gop. Can any one poffibly find the leaft connecSlion here ? What, no diftcrence betwixt the fentiments of a man's mind whjch he gathers from the word of God for himfelf, and his a6lions with relpecl to fociety ! If his reafoning hold, God is not alone Lord of the confcience, But to keep to the fimile, which is admirably iuitod to the author's pupofe ! And I cannot help thinking that the hand of the Replier is therein, from its likenefs to thefe of the fchoolmalter apd fchclar, &c. in the Reply, which were as ingenioufly applied in a fimilar cafe. I am periiiaded^ if King Charles had made no more of the preropative and liberties of his fubje^ts than a cafe of confcience or niatter of fcntimept, he might have gone to his fathers in peace for them. He was condemned for what he did, not for what he be- lieved. In all King Charles's fentence before me, I find not a word of his confcience. A man's confcience lies without the reach of human laws. Pray, Mr Dreamer, what could his Ma- jefty's fubje£ls do with his confcience ; do you im.agine they be- headed it with his body i You confefs yourfelf, laft page, to be the unfitteft man in the world to pafs judgment on the Replier's fimi- lies, you fliould have been better qualified before you had fo ex- pofed your own weaknefs in drawing any. I Nthat dull parenthefis immediately before this memorable ac- count of King Charles, he fa>s, a man and his confcience cannot be parted : But here be puts a fpecial difference betwixt the King and his confcience, telling us in Italics, left we fhould not obferve it, that hijN, and his corjiieiue both were called to an account for his depredations. Unhappy Dreamer, thus to contradict yourfelf fo exprclly in the fame paragraph ! B u T as there are iome very fevere things confidently afferted concerning theie that diflented from the Replier's congregation ; I cannot help correcting a little, the Dreamer's mixtake. He calls the Free Enquirer an anonymous libeler, and unknown buffoon ; this would have been more to the purpofe, had he not appeared in fiich dii'guife himfelf: But I think the author of the letter will be as readily known by the name of a Free Fnquirer, as the Dreamer will by his titles CHiaker, and Benjamin Broadbrim. Befides, the Free tnquiier faid nothing inconliitent with the charadler he took} but this Dreamer is fo unhappy as to fay nothing conliftent with the principles of a Quaker. As for the term Buffoon, (or Merry-, Andi ew) { 29 ) Andrew) if his performance has not merited him this title, it is none of his fault, for his nonfenfe, witlefs cnticifms, and contra- di6lions ; together with his blending things facred, civil, and pro- fane, cannot mifs to be ground of contempt among the ferious, and matter of fpor-t with De'ijls and profligates. But to come to the charge againft thefe men, page nth, he fays, " They fwerved from it (viz. the Replier's fociety) in the *' moft fundamental doctrines of chriftianity." But dees not tell what they were till page 14th, where he fays the " congregation a- greed to the fenfc of Scripture as in the words of the Confeinon of Faith ;" he fhould have added the Ad and Teftimony, and Doc- trine of Grace, which are ftandards as well as the other. But *' a *' few men took it into their heads to differ from the con^reo-ation." —How knows he but it was in their hearts alfo ? This is the fame as the Replier's faymg it was to pleafe thet)ifelves. Whojudgeth now, Mr Dreamer ? But " they differed from their former felves." — There is no difhonour in changing fentiments (which I fuppofe he means hy felves) if it be for better : But take his word for it, 'tis far otherways ; why, 'tis from the received fenfe of Scripture he means, to be fure, as it is in the above ftandards, which he fays *' rcfpeds i\\Q origifial bafts oi ch.x\9i'\2nntyj' This intimates there are others ; but if he keeps to the fenfe as in theConfeffion of Faith, we have a notable dilcovery, viz. That chriftianity commenced when the Affembly fummed up the fenfe of Scripture in their Con- feinon ! I have heard of chriftianity a^ old as the creation ; but never that it was no older than fince 1648. But let us come to the charge, What do the men aflert ? Hear his own words, they *' aliert things which appeared to thee ; thy *' fellion and congregation, to remove all the revealed grounds of *' the perlbnal diftindion among the three perfons of the GoD- '' Head, to overturn the eternal generation of the Son, and to in- " validate the Mediator's right of redemption." An awful charge indeed ! But they may comfort themfelves a little, that they only *' appeared to be fo to the Replier and his fefiion," who are not iniailible judges of ether men's fiiith. The parts of this charge are, Hrft, they " remove all the revealed grounds of the perfonal dif- *' tinctions among the ;hrce pcrlons of the God-Head." I am at no Imall ftrait t •■ know what he means by revealed grounds. If by grounds he means the fundamental caufes'or rcafons of this- perfon- al diftindcion, it is more than ftupid toexprefs himfelf fo j for there are no luch thing r^-veakd, nor can all the divmes that exift fhew tiom revelation the cauits or realons of this diftindion. God ne- ver did, and perhaps never will, reveal the caule of his being three perfons in one God-Head. Ix this be what he intends by the word grounds here, ii has no meaning but a blalphemous one ; to fuppole any caufe pf the being of God, is to fuppofe him ixo God. ■ And ( 3° ) And as the perfons in JEHOVAH are as natural and necefTary in their exiflence as the being of God, they muft be ablblutely beyond all caufe. B u T I would favourably judge, that by grounds here he means thefe principles upon which we found our faith of the perfonal di- ftincSlion, which are only revealed in the word of God. Why then does he call them fo emphatically revealed grounds, as if there were tinrevealed grounds for our faith in this point ? And why does he fay thefe perfons removed thefe revealed grounds ? Will the Re- plier, or any of his fcfiTion and congregation, fay that they refufed any thing revealed concerning the Trinity ? N,o. Here is the ground of the difpute, they conftantly affirmed that revelation alone was the foundation of all we could know or fhould believe con- cerning God. Had he faid they were for removing fome human inventions concerning that myffery, it would Jhave been truth : But that they believe a diftindion of perfons in the God-Head any one may be fully fatisfied by looking into the firft Diflertation of a work entitled, a View of the Trinity in theGlafs of Divine Reve- latien. So that this part of the charge isvifionary, and agrofs flander. The fecond is, they " took it into their heads to overturn the *' eternal generation of the Son." If the phrafe revealed grounds be connected with this, it would have been a fpecial favour had he intimated the place in revelation where this do6lrine is taught. But as I never could find it, the Dreamer will excufe me if I fay, that its appearing true to the Replier and his feffion is not fufficient (;rround of my faith : For as he grants, every man hath undoubted- fv a right to judge of the meaning of Scripture for himfelf. But thirdly, they " took it into their heads to invalidate the *' Mediator's right of redemption." He adduces nothing for proof, but afferts ftrongly. I fuppofe he dreamed this with the Replier's letter before him, where 'tis faid thefe men were a-kin to SocinianSy the one aiTerts without proof, and the other follows ; but this is no reafon why any of them fliould be believed, when aflerting things that never entered either into the heads or hearts of thefe they are fo traducing. But the hand of the Replier is vifible in every part of this charge, only a change of v.'ords. The fuppofed denial of a diflinCtion of perfons, is the fame with the Replier's Sabellianifm : To deny eternal generation makes an Arian with him : And hav- ing fuppofed them a-kin to Socir.iansy it was eafy to infer they de- ried the Mediator's right of redemption. But the next time any p: thefe e;entlemen writes, they will pleafe to lay afide bare afler- tions, and take to proving thefe men guilty from the word of God, X^ot from what they are pieafed to impute to them. But the Dreamer having got into the way of telling falfhoods, he o-ives us a bundle of them together. " When thefe men were *' required by thee and thy feffion, v.'ith the concurrence of thy fo- *' ciety, ( 3' ) ** ciety, either to fhew that their new tenets were more agreealjle *' to the tenor of Scripture than thofe which they oppofed, or elfe ** return from that oppofition j they could not do the hrft, nor " would they do the laft." I cannot but obferve how nearly re- lated the Replier and Dreamer are as hiftorians, none of them fcru- ples at turning matters of fadt into the contrary, when it will beft iuit them in that drefs. The Dreamer could not have told any thing more contrary to truth than this; for th.fe men at the feflion. May 22, 1766, often propofed to Ihew that their principles were a- greeable to Scripture ; and requefted the feflion to prove what they read of the Confellxon from Scripture. The Free Enquirer hath told the anfwer they got, viz. ** That they had no time to read any proofs." This the Replier hath not thought fit to deny ; Why then Ihould the very fault of the feffion be imputed to them ? Thefe men might have been fet at liberty had they not appealed to Scrip- ture for determination of the matter in difpute. But this is vin- dicated againft the Replier above. The Dreamer imagines he hath fet all things in order, and con- fidently puts the queftion, " Where is there, in all this, the ieaft " foundation for the charge of impofition." I fliall briefly tell you, Mr Dreamer : It was in the feflion infifting on thefe men renouncing their opinions, without giving them leave to fhew what evidence they had from fcripture to fupport them : — And impofing the terms of a human compofition upon them, refufing to prove the terms to be agreeable to fcripture. And then denying thefe perfons communion for not renouncing the one, and embracing the other, without fcripture evidence. And your own impofition is no lefs confpicuous, in impofuig upon the world a fcheme of thefe men's principles they never held. — In tranfmitting the very fault of th© ieflion upon them, and irom thence concluding it was rio-ht in the feflion to exclude them. But it fhews you had little to accufe them of, when their guilt muft be inferred from other people's faults. I SHALL not further detain the reader with the weaknefs of his reafoning againft Mr M-^y^ or them that differed from the Replier; as the contKV'-rfy in his remaining pages is not fo much betwixt him and them, as betwixt revelation and hianan fyjiems. And here, the J)reamcr will excufe me in changing my addrefs to thofe, who, Berean like, fearch the fcriptures To fee if thefe things are fo. Such cannot but obferve what a preference this author gives the latter, to the prejudice of the authority, honour, and ufe of the former, by his weak endeavours to prove that they are " the only *' credible profelfion of chiiftianity, the only prefervative againfl *' error, the rule to condud fecial worihip and fpiritual harmony, " and ( 32 ) *« and which chriftian churches ought in duty, and may with fafetv* *' reft fatisfied with." I HOPE you will agree with me, that the fcriptures were calcu- lated by God for thefe noble ends. This he refufes, by maintain- ing that every fociety may and ought to compofe a confeflion, or agree to one already compoi'ed by others to anfwer all thefe purpofes, by which that fociety, and every member thereof, is to be directed jn matters of faith and worfhip. At what bar (hall we try this controverfy ? We would incline the fcriptures fhould he judsje. But he no doubt will then think the favourite fyftem of his fociety dilhonoured. Here I fhall not differ with him ; but fhall admit the fyftem he pleads for, and his own fentiments too into the evi- dence. Only with his leave, I muft be allowed to make revela- tion the leading evidence in its own favour. Hence it is faid, " To the law and to the teftimony : if they ** fpeak not according to this word, it is becaufe there is no light ** in them."* Here the fcriptures are rnade the unalterable ftand- ard of whatever is faid concerning God or our duty : The leaft variation from theni is an evidence "of darknefs. Only that which is taught in fcripture can be iure, edifying, and profitable to make us wife unto falvation ; and lead to eternal life. Thus our Savi- our anfwered the lawyer. — " What is written in the law, how " readeft thou ?t" And thus Paul to Timothy, — " From a child " thou haft known the holy fcriptures, which are able to make *' thee wife unto falvation.' | Ignorance of the fcriptures is the ^oad to error, as our Lord faith, — " Ye do err, not knowing the *' fcriptures. "II But let us hear how comprehenfively the Apoftle Paul fums up the authority and ufeof the icriptures. " All fcrip- *' ture is given by infpirationofGoD, and is profitable fordo6trine, *' for reproof, for correction, for inftrudtion in righteoufnefs : that *' the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furniThed unto all *' good works. "§ Do we chule an. unerring guide ? Here is one indited by Divine infpiration. Do we want rules iufficient to conftitute a credible profeffion of chriftianity ? The fcriptures are profitable for dodlrine and mftruviiion. Are focial worlliip and fpiritual harmony chriftian duties? This Divine fyftem thoroughly furnifhes the man of God for thefe good works. Are any in error ? This word of God is for reproof and correction. Is it a duty to be guarded againft error, and defend the truth ? On this facred ground we may iafely ftand, and be completely furniflied for this, and all other <^ood works. Is it the church's duty to cut off" errors ? Lo, here is the '^ fword of the fpirit, which is the word of God."* As it is impoffible to colledl all the evident tcftimonies JEHO* VAH gives iii favour of his word, let it fuffice, to hear its charac- ter * Jfa. viii. 10. \ Lide X. 2$, a6. f Z Tim. iii. IJ. H Malth. xxii. a?. § % Tim. iii- ■ j6, 17. * E^h. vi. 17. ( 33 ) ter from the fcraphic Pfalmi/f. " The law (ot as in the margin, *'-the doctrine) of the Lord is perfedl, converting, or relloring the *' foul : The tcftimony of the Lord is fure, making wile the ** fimple. The llatutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart : ** The commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes. *' More to be defircd are they than gold. Yea than much fine *' gold (or all human fyjhtns) : Sweeter alfo than honey, and the *' honey comb. Moreover, by them is thy fervant warned : And *' in keeping of them, there is great reward, &c."t Can any fuch charadlers be given to the beft compofed fyftem on earth befides the fcriptures ? May not the wit of men and devils be challenged to produce a fingle inftance, wherein the fcriptures are deff£l:ive for anfwering all the purpofes God hath revealed, as to the duty, in- tereft, or privileges of the church, and every individual member of the body of CHRist in their militant 'ftate. And to fhew where God hath given the leaft hint that his mind was to be known any other way : Or^ that any other rule was necelTafy for trying doc- trines, and guarding his people from errors. But let us hear what the JVeJiminJler Confeflion faith, which by this author is fo grofly abufed in his fetting it up to rival the fcrip- tures. *' The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought ** to be believed and obeyed, dependeth not upon the teftimony of *' any man, or church; but wholly upon God (who is truth it- *' felf) the author thereof; and therefore it is to be received, be- " cauie it is the word of GoD. — The whole Council of God con- *' cerning all things neceflary for his glory, man's falvation, faith *' and life, is either exprefly fet down in fcripture, or by good and ** neceflary confequ^nce may be deduced from fcripture : Unto *' which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new re- *' velations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.— All fcriptures are *' not alike plain in themfelves, nor alike clear unto ail : Yet thofe ** things which are neceflary to be known, believed, and obferved *' for falvation, are fo clearly propounded and opened in fomc *' place of fcripture or other, that not only the learned, but the ** unlearned, in a due ufe of the ordinary means, may attain unto *' a fufficient undcrfliandin^ of them. T'hc infallible rule of in- ** terpretation of fcripture, is fcripture itfelf; and therefore when *' there is aqueftion about the true and full fcnfe of fcripture ^ which ** is not manifold but one) it muft be fearchcd and known by other ** places that fpeak more clearly. The Supreme Judge, by Which *' all controverlies of religion are to he determined, and all decrees *' of councils, opinions of ancient Writers, do£lrines of men, and " private fpirits are to be examined ; and in whofe fentence we are " to reft ; can be no other but the Holy Spirit fpeaking in the ** fcripture.^':}: E Much t Pjal. xix. 7, 8, 10, II. \ Chap. I, P^r 4, fi, 7 9, 10 ( 34 ) Much more to the fame purpofe might be cited from the Weft-' ntinjier Conf. But let us hear what this author fays himfelf, P. 8.. " Is not the word of God itfelf the infallihle rule of all religious ** fentiments ; and, at the fame time, the infallible and catholic *' INTERPRETER of its own meaning (Ifa. viii. 20.) among " rational and moral agents ? Is not the word of God fufficiently " determinate in its meaning ; elfe, where is the perfpicuity of the *' fcriptures ? Yea, where is there any revelation at all ? An unre- *' vealed revelation is a contradicStion. — The word of God hath " fufnciently determined its own fenfe ; and the Almighty author *' thereof hath bound every man's confcience to fubmit unto that " meanina:? without bringing his own fenfe unto it. God hath " not mocked us with an indeterminate or unrevealed reve- " lation." Now, when the Spirit of God, the JVeJlmlnJler AfTembly, and even the author himfelf, hath given their verdi6l fo explicitly in favour of the fcriptures ; who could have imagined he would have fpent fo many pages, endeavouring to prove that the Confeflion of Faith, not the fcriptures, is the only credible profejfion oi chrljiian'ity ? "Which is in the plaineft terms to fay, that it is not he that pro- felTcth chriftianity as taught in the fcripture, but he that profelfeth it as taught in the Confeifion of Faith, that is the chriftian. And that chriiHanity is better taught in the latter, than in the former. His words will bear no other meaning, or I fliould be glad to give it. To profefs chriftianity, is to profefs the truths or doctrines of Christ laid down in his word. The word credible fignifies that which is w^orthy of credit, aflent, or belief. The word only taken as an adje£tive, fignifies this above all other : As an adverb it figni- fies, fingly^ or this and no other. So that the natural conftrudf ion of his words is, that the ConfeiHon of Faith is that book and no other, that contains the doctrines of chriftianity. It only is worthy to be believed and credited. It oi^ly can preferve from error : And it only the churches may. and ought to reft fatisfied with, as the only form of found words ^ and rule^ to condu6t them in worfhip and fpi- ritual harmony. Now, could we be lo infidel as to credit this author, there is no further ufe for the Bible j feeing this fyftem is ojzly fit to anfwer all the purpofes that concern chriftiansj which it feems fool ifh men have dreamed the fcriptures were ^w/yfufTicient for. But let me tell this author, that in thus exalting any fyftem under heaven, tho' the whole fund of wifdom that men and angels are endued with was included in it, into the place of the facred word of God, is only blafphemous j and tends to divert unthinking men from a due at- tention unto, and regard for the oracles of the living God ! I A M not here condemning the Confelfion of Faith and other ufeful { 35 ) ufeful fyftems, which may tend to elucidate the meaning of fcrip- ture, and have no doubt been bleflcd by God as means of ir.uiuc- tion concerning the knowledge of his will revealcil in his word : But difapproving the conduiSl of men who let them up as competi- tors for prerogative with the Divine word, from which they ought all to be framed, and kept in due fubordination thereto: Since the difference muft always remain fo great, as betwixt the unerring di£tates of the inhnitcly wife JEHOVAH, and the words of finite, frail, and worm man. T H I s I defire the reader to keep always in vievv\ — If the doc- trines of chriftianity be fimple, plain, and eafy to be underflood, which the author grants : Whether does it mod honour God, to hold forth the eafy and plain words of his fon Jesus Christ and his apoftles, as the only credible profeflion of chriftianity, teft of or- thodoxy, and term of communion, which are lure, unerring, and cannot deceive ? Or, to hold forth for thefe purpofes the manufac- tured explications of men, who are not only liable to error„but are COfiftantly divided in their opinions concerning the kn(^ of icrip- ture; and many of them deflroying in one period of their lives, what themfelves have laboured hard to build up in another. Ilay, whether are the woi'ds of Christ himfelf, or thofe of fallible meh- mofl worthy of credit and belief? Can any be at a lofs to kno'vV whether the Vv'ords of God or men merit ourairent ? Should it be faid, by clothing the doftrines of revelation in words of man's deviling, they become more familiar to the unlearn- ed. But is it not granted that the fcriptures are lb plain, that even the unlearned through a due ufe of the means m.ay ;^ttain the know- ledge of all that is necefTary to falvation ?f Befides, this is a grofs refledlion upon the wifdom of God in inditing the fcriptures, and impofing them as a rule of faith and prad'tice, while they, needed the afTiflance of the creatures who were to be ruled bv them, to render them intelligible. It reflects on the goodneis of G CD, to command conformity to a rule on the peril of damnation which was not in itfelf fo plain as to be underflood. It ftrongly infinii- ates, that chriflianity was never properly profefled or underflood till the IVeftminJicr Confeilion was compiled ; ajid that fuch as had no other means than the Bible to teach them chriftianity, could not know or profefs it aright. Certainly then, fuch as are called chriftians in the New Teftament did not delcrve the name, feein^- in their time, not only the canon of fcripture was incop.iplete, but they wanted that which only can be a credible profeflion of chrifti- anity, viz. fyftems compofed by particular focietles. Should it be faid, every fociety muft agree in what they judge; the fcnfe of fcripture, to be a rule for admifTion of members, and ground of cenfuring delinquents, I grant that as every man, fo every f Chap. I. par. 7. Conf. Faith. ( 36 ) every focicty have a right to judge for themfelvcs what is the fenfe of fcripture : But this no way infers that their fenfe of fcripture is the only credible teft of chriflianity, and the only term of com- munion in the church of Christ. This determination is either necejfary to the church's edification, or it is not. If it is not, then there is no need to lay fuch weight upon it. But if it be necefTary, then either the fcriptures have provided for it, or they are not a perfe£^ rule, and fufficient for all things ncccjfary to the edificatioii of the church. I F this fociety fuppofed be a part of the church of Christ, it certainly ought to have no other terms of admiffion than Christ hath made, could terms of Chrjst's making be reckoned credible. And I would be glad to know, what fcripture authority can be pro- duced for any fociety fo far to new model the government of Christ's church, as to fuit times., places, and circumftances, which power this author fays every lociety hath, Are the inftitutions of Christ the lawgiver fo defecStiye as they need to be fupplied ? Or are they fo intricate as riot to' be underftood ? If the firft, then Christ has not been faithful in all things over his own houfe, and it muft be fajfe, that the fcriptures are fiifficient to make us wife mito Jalvatisn^ and furnijh thoroughly for every good work. If tne laft, then there could be no chriiUan church without other dire6tories than the fcriptures ; and fo the faith of the church depends not up- on the word of God, but upon the {gvi^q. every particular fociety is pleafed to affix to it, which may be right, but cannot unerringly be fo, without fuppofing infallibility in that fociety. B UT I would rather think fuch a fociety did not belong to the church which hath ope head or lawgiver, and one law j but it feems this fociety may and ought to make laws for itfelf, to entitle to, and exclude from, the privileges thereof: Therefore, when it cafts out a member, it is but mocking of Christ to do it in his name, they ought to do it in the name of the fociety whofe laws the perfon hath offended againft. Tho' we read in fcripture of the Royal law, the law of Christ, and the law of liberty, yet v/e do not read of any particular laws made by particular focieties for their own govern- ment. No, they all continued iledfaftly in the apoftles do(Strine, which it feems is not fo fufficient now ; times, places, and circum- llances being changed, the doctrines of the gofpel muft be dreflecj in another tpfm, before they can be the only credible profeffion of chrilVianity. V h e perfpp who receives this fenfe of fcripture, thus framed, and held out jay the fociety, either fees it to be authorized by God from his word, or he does not. If the firft, what does it add to his faith, that this fociety or all the fons of Adain fhould fay it is the true fenle, when he only receives it upon the evidence the fcriptures afford of their own fenfe ? It may add to his comfort that ( 37 ) that many embrace it ; but his faith would be the fame tho' none entertained that fenfe ; as it is not the wifdom of man, but the au- ttiority of God that is the foundation of his faith. But if he does not fee evidence in fcripture for that fenfe, and yet receives it, his faith is but human, not divine ; feeing it is only the authority of the fociety that is the foundation thereof; for tho' it may be the true fcnfe, yet as he receives it not upon Divine authority and evidence, it cannot be to him a Divine faith. Both the fociety, in impofing it as the only fenfe of fcripture, becaufe they judge fo, and the perfon who receives it upon fuch grounds, plainly refufe that the word of God is the only and infallible interpreter of its own mean- ing, and the rule of religious fentiments. For if it hath fufficient- iy determined its own fenfe, why (hould not every one apply di- rectly unto it for that purpofe ? — Should it be plead that it is to pre- vent herefies : This argues that the fcrrpturcs are not fufficiently provided for that end : But as was hinted, if this be a good worky they furn'ij}) thoroughly for it. And the apoftle P^«/lets Titus know, that the way to convince gainfayers, %vas, ts *' hold faji the faithfiil ** xvord^ as he had been taught J' \ What can give greater advantage to the enemies of truth, than, give them ground tothinlcwefufpe£l thefufficiency of thefcriptures, by having recourfe to human forms as tefts of our faith ? Where the words of fcripture are plain, there is no need for explications or tefts of our underftanding of, and adhering to them. And if in any thing the Spirit of God hath thought fit to leave it not fo plain, it muft be prefumption in men to make their explications of fuch points a teft of faith. Xo_p.ut dpftrines neceflary to falva- liQfl^.^upqn anj^jher foundation than the fcriptures, is to betray thern intP the hands of enemies ; and prejudice pious chriftians a- eainft the beft compofitions of men, when they find them thruft into the place of GoD*s facred word^ The gracious defign of God in committing revelation to writing Jjy inipired men is, that W9 inay have the knowledge of all thing? nece/Tary to falvation in fuch words as were moll fit to expxefs them, and fo moit proper for us to^keep to : And that we might be delivered from the uncertainty of tradition, and from the attempts of enemies to draw us ofFfrom the true foundation, to build our faith upon human authority, and words of men's invention. We ought therefore, to regard the ad- vice which Eliphaz. gives, " Receive, I pray thee, the law from *' his mouth, and lay up his words in thine heart. "§ The fcrip- tures were indited by God, and given to men as the ftanding rule of their faith, and that upon the view of all the herefies which were to take place, by men's perverting the words, and corrupting or mifconftructing the fenfe j yet he hath provided no other rule or ftandard but his own word j no where hinted that other fyftems lhoul4 f TUui i, 9. § Joh xzii "M. ( ss ) ihould be compofed to prevent errors. And muft it not be Arrange then, to fay men have no other v^^ay to teflify that they do not wrong the fcripture fenfe, than by adhering to a fyftem of words not in the fcriptures ! If the fcriptures have a determinate fenfe of their own, as this author grants, then they are every way fuffici- ent as a teft of faith, and no other is to be preferred to them : But if it be neceffary that explications determine the fenfe for them, then they have not a determinate fenfe of their own, and their fuf- ficiency is entirely given up. I T muft be mighty obliging, to put an addenda to the rule of faith, and finifh the work of God, as if imperfe£i: ; to fortify re- velation with bulwarks, without which it could not be faved from error ! It muft be a prodigious favour done the church, to provide her with means to catch thefe foxes that fpoil her vines ; to fecure her from, or enable her to deftroy thefe enemies to truth, her peace and fafety, yea, fecure a i'ecd to the church in fucceeding genera- tions ! *"" No doubt but ye are the people, and v/ifdom fhall die with you. "J God hath faid, *' there muft be herefies."|| No, faith this fociety, we \^ill agree upon the fenfe of fcripture, fence it with church authority ; and to make it impregnable againft all enemies, it fhall be fortified by civil laws, enforced by the higheft penalties, which fliall be executed on the guilty wretch that will not believe it to be the fenfe of Icripture ; yea, arid/wear too never to think or fpcak otherways : But he who is capable of fuch mfo- lence as to refufe his alTent, or fpeak unbecomingly of this fyftem, fhall fee the demerit of his crime in the confifcation of his efFedls, the imprifonment of himfelf, and maybe thankful a gibbet does not finifh him with hisherefy. This is a part of the plan for preventing hereiy ! But where have we in the word of God either precept or example of forcing men into religion, and employing the arm of the magiftrate to punilh fuch as will not comply ? What have we from Christ or his apoftles to favour the modelling the church fo much after the fafliion of the kingdoms of this world ? The apoftle faith, " The wifdom that is from above, is firft pure, then peace- *' able, gentle, and eafy to be entreated, full of mercy and good ** fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrify. The fervant <* of the LoP-D muft not ftrive ; but be gentle unto all men, apt " to teach, patient, or forbearing, in meeknefs inftrucling thofe " that oppofe themfelves, if God peradventure will give them " repentance to the acknowledging of the truth j and that they *■' may recover themfelves out of the fnare of the devil, who are '*• taken captive by him at his will."* It is needlefs to fay, that this compulfive method is not intended hereby preventing of herefies. What is then intended ? This was the method taken to crulh herefy when the civil pov/er favoured the fyftem I Job xii. 2. [| I Cor. xi. IQ. * Jams iii. 17. » Tim. ii. 24, 25, 46. ( 39 ) fyftem plead for ; and if this is not ufed, how fhall it anfwer the end ? If every one is left to his own choice, what influence can the fenfe fo agreed on, have to prevent error among thofe who are difpofed to embrace it ? I T is agreed that the true fenfe of fcripture is but one-; yet al- moft every fociety hath a different fenfe ; and as they cannot all be the true fenfe, what is th« beft method a perfon fhould take who is for finding the true fenfe ? To confult the parties, each accounts their own the only one. To compare them, is an endlefs tafk ; befides the danger of being prejudiced thro' the fuperior talents of the com- pilers, who have ufed their whole art to undo all others, and ren- der their own moft acceptable. Would it not then be fateft to fearch the fcriptures, and chufe his religion upon their own evi- dence, and the authority of their Author, who has fuited the reve- > lation of His will to the capacities of his creatures that are moral J agents : And take juft fo much of human fyftems, as he found a- * greable to this unerring rule ? ^ "• Does not binding the members of a fociety to that particular fenfe of fcripture they have once agreed upon, limit the Spirit of God in his teachings ; and difcouiage the induftry of chriftians in fearching after fpiritual knowledge ? For whatever any perfon may- be privileged with through the bieifing of God upon his feajching the fcriptures, tho' perfuaded of the perfpicuity of the evidence, yet, if it be not agreeable to the knk already admitted by the foci- ety, he muft neither believe nor profefs it : For the full fenfe is fettled, the matter of his faith is limited, fo his enquiries are need- lefs, and wherein he believes more, or otherways, iie is a heretic. He has all in the fyftem needful ; to learn more is dangerous. But the fociety hath a right to judge of the (cnii^ oi fcripture ' for themfelves. This is granted. But has not every individual the fame right after ufmg diligent and confcientious enquiries? The author grants this, but will not allow the profelfino- the words of fcripture to be a credible profcHion. — Let me afk, if the lovers of the fcripture can imagine, how the fenfe of fcripture is to be con- veyed in human fyftems without words ? If it cannot, as muft be granted, how then comes it to pafs that the fenfe as contained in words of men's devifing is fo profitable, which it cannot be in the words that God hath chofen ? The Holy Ghost hath held forth the fenfe in words calculated by his infinite wifdom and goodnefs. Men put the knk in other words, and call that the oiily credible^ro- fcihon of truth. Why ? The author fays, the words of God may be taken without the fenfe ; true, but may not the words of men be taken without the fenfe aifo ? None can fuppofe but the words ^ of men are more liable to mifconftrudion and diiferent interpreta- »i tions than the words of God ; ^and certainly every one will think himfelf more at liberty, to impofe his own knit upon the words of men ( 40 ) men than thofe of the Holy Ghost. Can it be fuppofed, that evety individual among the thoufands who have founded their profefliori upon fyftems, is thoroughly acquainted with the fenfe the compilers held forth or intended by thefe words ? Nay, how can it be, when they feldom and perhaps never read them ? Yet a profeiled adhe- rence to them conftitutes fuch a profeflion of chriftianity, as the greateft knowledge in, and conformity to the fcriptures are in- capable of ! Is not this a direft attack upon the perfe£^ioh of revelation, yea, on the perfe6lions of God himfelf ? 'Tis plainly faying, JEHO- VAH is not fo capable to teach his creatures as they are to teach one another : A difcrediting his authority in the intelligence he hath given in his facred word : A fetting up human fyftems to rival revelation. For that muft certainly be the moft preferable which is moft capable to teach us the mind of God in the fcrip- tures ; this they are not fufficient for in themfclves, becaufe the words and fenfe may be parted ; this human fyftems are capable of, for in them the fenfe is fixed ; therefore they fhould be called the Divine Books, fmce they have a perfection which the word of God is not endued with ! What advantage hath the fcriptures in having God for their author, when compofitions of men are more to the purpofe ? I T is ftrange thefe men do not fay that Christ (hall judge the world by fuch fyftems ! One would think it naturally follows, that what is the only teft and ftandard of his faith and profeflion here, would be that by which he fhall be judged. ** Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right f"* I know not whether to call fuch do£\:nne De if m or Atheifm. IfGoD has not difplayed his Divine perfe£lions in his word, he has no where done it j for he hath mag- nified his word above all his name.\ If we cannot depend upon the fcriptures themfelves, we are yet without any certain guide of God's giving : And for human fyftems, the moft perfe(9: of them are every period changing ; fo in fadl we have no fure rule of religion at all. — Amazirrg ! I F heretics will make a bad ufe of revelation, who can help it ? But as Solomon underftood the true mother by her tendernefs towards the child, fo the true children of the church, are beft known by their tender regard for the fcriptures, and praiflical conformity to them. Such are not for dividing the authority of fcripture betwixt God and men ; giving God the honour of fpeaking to the church 5 and men the honour of fixing the meaning of JEHOVAH's words for the church. This canuot in any refpe£l agree with the fcrip- tures having in themfelves a determinate fenfe ; And that they fuf- ftciently explain their own meaning, which is granted even by this author. Bur ♦ Gen. iviii. %$• f I'f'il- cxxxvlli. 3. ( 41 ) But perhaps this may be thought to militate agairift the office of minifters preaching the gofpel, and explaining the Icriptures : A difcouragemeiit to people to attend the preaching of the word ; and a rejecting fcripture confequcnces. 1'hough this is none of the Dreamer's objections, nothing of his bears fo much the face of an argument, yet it may occur to others. 1 SHALL therefore oblcrve, that none of thefe cah follow from keeping the word of GoD, and the works of men in their proper places. P'or tho' it be the duty of miniflers to bring forth the truths revealed in fcripture, and by all means difcover the fenfe^ and elucidate the fame with all the perfpicuity they are capable ofj and endeavour by all the arguments in their power to convince the people that luch is the true fenfe : Yetthe confequcnces they djaw, however clear to themfelves, are' noF the ftandard of thfe people's faith ;..n.i ugh lefs is their feeing them to be juft cOnfequen- cesj a fufficient reafon for any to receive them with equal credit as exprefs revelation. The limiting the fenfe of fcripture by a fo-* ciety as a tefl: of orthodoxy, plaiiily lays a reftraint upon minifters that belong to it ; for then they mull: preach nothing as the fenfe of fcripture, however clear it appears to them, but what is agreeable to that fenfe already fixed. Being thus confined, they muft either crufli what frefli di(coveries they obtain from fcripture ; or in bringing them forth, be declared heretics for deviating from the received faith of the fociety. I T is alfo the duty of every chriftianto ufe all the helps he can^ 7^ as ferious readings comparing fpiritual things with fpiritual, earneft prayer to God for direction by his fpirit in fearching the fcrip- tures, and uling other means that he may " grow 111 grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." That he may " be noUrilhcd in the words of faith, and of good doc- tt trine," That his " love may abound yet more and more in know- !j ledge, and in all judgment." That he ** may approve things that i| are excellent*" And that he may have his "fpiritual fenfesex-l| crcifed to difcern both good and evil«"t But whether the chrillian >. ufing his liberty of fearching the fcripturcs, and receiving the truth 1 i from its own evidence, and the authority of God ; Or, his taking ^. all things as fettled by the fociety he happens to be connected withj ^ and fubmitting his judgment thereto, without further enquiry ; b§ ) the method to attain thefe noble ends, let every impartial perfon ^\ judge. As to fcripture confequences,there are two kinds of perfdns I chink they are binding upon. Firft, Such as fee them to be neceilarily con* nected with fcripture; to luch they are the i't^nfc of lcripture,and no- thing can excufe fuch perfons from an obligation to believe them* They are alfo obligatory on fuch as have had fufficient means to fee F and j a P(t. iii. 18. I Tim. iv. 6. Fhil. i. 9, 10. Heb. v. 14. ( 42 ) and know this connexion, but have either thro' carelefiiefs, orobfti- nacy, negledied the ufe of thcfe means. For none can be innocent who have the means of attaining knowldge, and yet continue igno- rant. — Butluch a perfon as ufeth ail the means in his power confci- enciouilvjyet cannot fee consequences drawn by acourfe of reafon- ing from fcriptura to be neceilariiy connedled with revelation ; I cannot think fuch confequences are obligatory upon him. I APPREHEND nothing of any feeming ftrength can be brought againft this, except what follow s : That if a perfon be not bound to belreve fcripture confequences, becaufe he does not fee them ; it follows, if a perfon does not fee.evidence for Divine revelation, it will difcharge his obligation tb believe the fcriptures themfelves. This objedtion certainly includes a confcientious enquiry by the perfon fuppofed, or it is rfierely fpecious : For he that fmfully indulges a neglect of fearching the fcriptures, cannot be expelled to ■know either theoneor the other,asthe Icriptures carry their own evi- dence. But when the perfon does make diligent and impartial en- quiries, theremaybe manyconfequenccs hecannotcometothe know- ledge of : But 'tis more than probable, that an inftance cannot hap- pen in the other cafe. As the fciptures are fo full, and every way ib well accommodated by Divine wifdom to all capacities, and con- taining fuch indifputable atteftations to the truth of the gofpel, if the perfon's enquiries were fair and confcientious, he could not reje which all the people of God are united, and ever will be, {o far as they are guided by religion. Gofpel churches are framed by rules upon record in the book of God, which make them golden can- dleflricks, among which the Divine Redeemer delights to walk.§ Th e difquifitions of reafon and philofophy, with the ingenious conjefSlures of exalted talents, tho' boaftingof flights beyond the ftars, and excurfions into the invifible world of fpirits, have thro' the pre- valency of cuftom, or fafhion, been efleemed and flourifhed for a feafon ; but at laft gave way to others in their turn. They ac- quired to their authors the reputation of fubtle wits, difcoverers of truth, irrefragable reafoners ; but how are heaps of thefe curious volumes forgotten? And tho' they have efcaped the ruins of time, yet they are turned over with the fame fmile of pity, which a few years hence, will be the only regard reckoned due to the admired works which have fucceeded them. Revolutions of time terminate the o-lorv of human fyftems. " For all flefh is as grafs, and all the glory " of man, as the flower of grafs : but the word of the Lord en- *' dureth for ever. And his truth endureth to all generations."*— No procefs of time can alter the nature of the everlafting gofpel ; The fame Divine evidence in itfelf thro' all ages inviteth to em- brace it. When DeiJIs have fpent their fophiftical wit, and meta- phyficians loft themfelves in the maze of abftraftions, revelation will continue the fure pledge of JEHO VAH's love, the pure foun- dation of faith, the unerring rule of pure religion, the chriftian's comfort in life and death, and the fame " power of GoD unto fal- «' vation, to every one that believeth."t What was faid concerning God's peculiar people, may with the utmoft propriety be applied to his /acred word ; " Surely there is " no mcha7itment again/} Jacob, tieither is there any divination againji « IfraeirX This author, Page i8th, wonders " how a dodrine is Divine, *■'• fo lono- as it is Jfanding in the ivords offcripture unknown, and *' unthcugbt of\ and becometh human as foon as it is conceived by *' the human underftanding, and is expreffed in any other words than <' thofe of fcripture!" But who fays that Divine words become human when conceived by the human underftanding ? Or that vi- tiated human minds can fully conceive the fenfe of them ? This is an imaoinaticn to favour his own fchcme. Divine words will be lb, whatever the underftanding conceives about them, or wherever they are put. But when men change the Divine words for others 'of their own, and call thefe the fenfe of fciipture, which, tho' it may be, yet it is but imperfedly fo, as men's underftandings cannot comprehend the full fenfe, nor their words exprefs it : And there- fore may be juftly called human. Does it not offer violence to the common fenfe of chriftians, to tell them, that the words contrived by § Rev. ii. I . * I Fct. i. a J. PJ'al, c. J. f Rm. i. l6. | Numh xxiii. JJ.., ( 51 ) by any map or afTembly, which they chufe to exprefs fcripture truth jn, are Divine words ? Can they bfe called the words of GOD which are not in his word? If they are Divine wordsy why is not the Conr felTion called the word of God? It may be called the words of di- vines ; but no more of it are Divine wordsy than what are taken from revelation in exprefs words. But here I muft wonder in my turn, and I think every lover of God's word will join with me. However it entered into the mind of any chrifirian, (if this author be one) that the Divine doc- trines contained in the words of fcripture as God hath expreffed them, muft continue unknown and unthought of till their fenfe be collected by men, and written in a Confeffion of Faith ! — Surpriz- ing! This is at once rendering the Bible ufelefs in itfelf, till manu- failured by men. What a miferable condition muft they have been in, who never faw the fenfe of fcripture thus colleiled, with- out which the fcriptures are unknozun and unthoiight of! What a pity it is that the author fbould have fpoke fo much truth in his 8th Page, whereby he is fo manifeftly contradicted ! What has nowbecomeof the perfpicuity of the fcriptures? How confiftent with this is it to fay, "The Bible is the catholic interpreter of itfelf, and *' fufRciently determines its own meaning ? Yea, where is there *' any revelation at all ? For an unrevealed revelation is a contra- " didlion." But may I not venture to eafe this author's wonder- ing mind, by informing him why doclrines as they ftand in the fcriptures are fo little thought of? It is becaufe other fyftems com- pofed by men, are fet up and countenanced by church authority, as tefts of dodlrine, ftandards of orthodoxy, rules for admitting in- to, and excluding from church communion ; yea, made the (?«^ credible profeflion of chriftianity, prefervative from error, and that which churches may, and ought to acquiefce in, and reft fatistied with, as the form of found words, to conduct them in focial wor- fhip with harmony. This is the reafon why the Bible becomes of fo little ufe, fo much unknown and unthought of ^ Though I value the Wcjlminjier Confefiion, as one of the beff^ fummaries of dodtrine extant, I muft be excufed from admitting it into the place of revelation, as to authority, purity, perfection, title, ufe, &:c. and muft be ftill allowed to call it a Human Syjlem : In which I think I am countenanced, not only by the Aflembly themfelves, but alfo the beft v/riters that have either defended or ex- plained it ; which I think are Mr Erjkine and others, wha, yet in their preface to the catechifm explained, exprefly call it a Human Co7npofure. But fpeaking of the fcriptures, queft. 14, they fay, their authority cannot depend upon the church, " becaufe the true " church of Christ depends, in its very being, on the fcriptures; *' and therefore the fcriptures cannot depend upon it, as to their *' authority, Eph. ii. 22," And fpeaking of the incomparable ex- cellency. ( 52 ) cellency, and ufefulnefs of the fcriptures, qucf!:. 48, they fay, ''They <* are the well-furnifhed difpenfatory of all fovereign remedies ; the «« rich magazine of all true comfort ; the complete armory of all *' fpiritual weapons ; and the unerring compafs to guide to the <* haven of glory, P/al. cvii. 20. Rom- '^v. 4. Eph.\\. 13, — 18. 2 Pet. i. 19," Thefe fentiments are clearly againft the dodrine of this performance of the Dreamer, and muft be a juft reproof to both the author, and alfo the Replier as i??iprimator. These who put the fp^ejiminjier ConfeiHon in the place of the fcriptures, do it fuch a fervice as the friends of Lady Jane Gray did to her, v *^ ADDENDA. AS the Replier has confidently engaged not to reply again, tho* a thonfand fiich fcurrilous letters as the Free Enquirer's fliould be written ; and the Quaker has followed his dictator, and told us, that inch fenfelefs epi/iles as Mr M—y's he will hold unworthy of his notice. Therefore, it may fafcly be concluded, whatever any of them replies to, will, in their own judgment, be neither fenfelefs nor fcurrilous. And if any thing I have donfe, get fo far into their good graces, as to deferve their public notice, I may prefume it will be the fame as if they recommended it as zfenfible perform mcc; and which on that account, no doubt, will merit more regard from others. However, fo many are the difficulties and contradidlions that attend the human explications of the Trinity, that a fair refo- lution and reconcilement of them, upon a foundation that hath the authority of God, would, I own, be fuch a mafter-piece as I ap- prehend has no precedent. If this mighty genius^ the Quaker, (hall undertake this tafk, and acquit himfelf honourably, I fhall no more account it ftrange that he thinks himfelf or others have a right to compofe Divine fyji ems \ for nothing fhort of a new revelation can complete this difcovery, as the volumes of revelation we are already bleft with do not furnifh us with any fuch accounts of that my- ftery, as the fertile inventions of men have annexed thereto. This would be an acquifition that might juftly claim the regard of all, but efpecially thefe focieties that have made thefe things terms of their communion ; then they would know what better foundation they had to believe fuch things themfelves, and impofe them upon others, than the written word of God. This is intelligence ex- tremely much wanted at this day, when the prerogative of focieties, to make articles of faith, is fo far extended, and the people taught it as their indifpenfible duty to fubmit to rules, framed by fociety, as the only credible profejfion of chrijiianity. I A M perfuaded fuch adepts in demonftrating Divine my- fteries, without the aid of revelation, will be at no lofs for a clear refolution of all the difficulties that can occur. To fuch vaft ca- pacities as can with fuch eafe demonftrate in what manner the three Divine perfons fubfift in one JEHOVAH — That the Divine EfTence is communicated — That there are days in eternity, &c. &c. I fay, to fuch, nothing can appear difficult. He muft be wifer than mortals that can propofe any thing, which fuch perfons are not capable to inveftigate. I F thefe eagle-eyed Thcologifts, that can fee beyond the limits of revelation, give fatisfailory accounts of what they pretend to be fo well acquainted with, they may be certain the world will be /«- fdel enough to give to their works that refpeft and reverence due to fuch oracular difcoveries* Nayj fuch pew information concerning facred . ■ ( 5+ ) ^acred .myfterles, would even merit the attention of beiags whofe intelleiSts are not encumbered with mortal bodies. I SAID infidel e7iough, bccaufe, whoever pretend to teach more concerning the nature of God, than what he hath revealed in his word, they muft be diverted of chriftianity that vi^illbelieve or regard theai. All fuch attempts v^^irh this perform.ancc of the Q^iaker's (to borrow a favourite term of the Replier's) tend only to deiftn and inftdelity. And if the Replier will employ an infidel amanuenfis, and favour his excurfions againft chrlftianity, by patronizmg his de- iltical conceits, in publiihing them to the world with comments, he cannot but expe£l to fliare with him in what he and his works only deferve, which at moft is but fatyr or contempt. Aete r the Dreamer had faid. Page nth, that thefe men were " allowed to make the beft of their belief in any fociety that fhould *' pleafe to join with them in it :" How much to the purpofe mull it be for the Replier, from the pulpit, to continue his railing againft them, and any fociety that fhould receive them? May we not won- der what he has now to do with them, or any they may be connected with : But it is moft likely, he and the Quaker (if they are different perfons) have both adopted that Popijh maxim, Throw calumny enough, fotne of it wiiljiick. But 'tis time enough to pronounce our principles SabelUanifmy when he proves them to be fuch ; and to find fault with other fo- cieties, when he accounts fome betttr for the condu61: of his own, than he has done in his Reply. One would think that fociety aiSled more like chriftians, in receiving one of us into communion with them, upon an explicit declaration of his adherence to the prin- ciples of truth as contained in Divme revelation ; than the Re- plier's fociety, in receiving anotner (whom they had fuppofed gi'ilty cf the fame .rrors) upon a bare fubfcribing an article of a human compofiiion. ,This ftill fhews that human fyftems, with them, are preferable to thefcriptures : And that errors, which they reckon grofs blafphemy when the perfon goes from their fociety, turn pretty innocent tnfies if he will but return to it again. F I N I S. .ti m' ^"^ i^ ^ '•« f^l