Answ.Though we allow, that whatever is done in Christ’s name, must be said to be done by his authority; yet we cannot allow that his being in the midst of them is to be taken only for his being so by his authority; for we must not suppose that our Saviour, in these words, makes use of a tautology; and, indeed, it would be a very jejune and empty way of speaking to say, that where two or three are met together in my name, that is, by my authority, there am I in the midst of them, by my authority. Certainly, Christ’s being in the midst of them, must be taken in the same sense with that parallel scripture before referred to, in Exod. xx. 24. where God’scoming to his people, in those places where he records his name, is explained, as having a very great privilege attending it, namely, hisblessing them, which he is said to do, when he confers blessedness upon them, and gives them a full and rich supply of all their wants; this therefore must be the sense of our Saviour’s being in the midst of his people.
Moreover, as God is said to be present where he acts, so Christ’s powerful influence, granted to his people in all places, which supposes his omnipresence, contains a great deal more than his being present by his authority; and if that were the only sense in which this scripture is to be taken, it might as well be alleged, that all the scriptures, which speak of the divine omnipresence might be taken in that sense, which would be to set aside all the proofs we have from thence of this perfection of the divine nature; therefore this objection seems to be rather an evasion, than an argument, to overthrow Christ’s divinity, taken from his omnipresence.
Object.2. Others suppose that Christ being in the midst of his people, when met together in his name, implies nothing more than his knowing what they do when engaged in acts of religious worship.
Answ.We observe, that they who make use of this objection, that they may militate against that argument, which is brought to prove his Deity from his omnipresence, will, for argument’ssake, allow him to be omniscient, not considering that that equally proves him to be a divine Person, as will be considered under our next head. Now, to prove that Christ’s being present with his people, is to be understood of his knowing what they do, they refer to that scripture, 2 Kings v. 26. in which Elisha says to Gehazi, as knowing what he had done, when he followed Naaman, the Syrian, for a reward;Went not mine heart with thee, when the man turned again from his chariot with thee?But since this scripture signifies nothing else but that this secret was revealed to him, which is, in a figurative way of speaking, as though he had been present with him, it will not follow from hence that the prophet pretended to know what was done in all places, and that at all times, which is more (as will be farther observed under the next head) than what seems communicable to any creature: but this is intended by Christ’s knowing all things, and more than this, doubtless, is meant by his being in the midst of his people, whereby he encourages them to expect those blessings, which they stand in need of, from him, in which respect he promises to be with them in a way of grace; and certainly he that is so present with his people, must be concluded to be, in the most proper sense, a divine Person.
There is another scripture, which is generally brought to prove Christ’s omnipresence, and consequently his proper Deity, to wit, John iii. 13.And no man hath ascended up to heaven but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.For the understanding of which words, we must consider their connexion with what goes immediately before; thus by,No man hath ascended up into heaven, but he that came down from heaven, It is plain our Saviour means, that no man has a full and comprehensive knowledge of heavenly things, of which he had been speaking in the foregoing verse, but he that came down from heaven; in which he asserts his divine omniscience[145], as the person in whom all treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hid, as it is expressed elsewhere; or none knows the mysteries which are hid in God, but he that is in the bosom of the Father, who came down from heaven; or, as the apostle expresses it, 1 Cor. xv. 47. who isthe Lord from heaven; and then, as a farther proof of his Deity, he adds, thathe is in heaven; that is, while he was on earth, in one nature, as being omnipresent, he was in heaven in the other nature; and, agreeably to this sense of the scripture, he is said tocome down from heaven, as his divine nature manifested its glory here on earth, when the nature was united to it, which is the only sense in which God is said to come down into this lower world; as we have the same mode of speaking, in Gen. xi. 7.Exod. iii. 8. and other places; so that if he is thus omnipresent, we must conclude that he is a divine Person.
The Arians give a very different sense of this text, especially those words,The Son of man, who is in heaven;[146]for, they suppose, the words ought to be rendered,was in heaven; and that it does not argue his omnipresence, but that nature, which they call divine, first resided in heaven from the beginning, when it was produced by the Father; and afterwards in his incarnation, by a removal from heaven to earth it was said to come down from thence. But, before we allow of this sense of the text, they must prove that Christ was the first creature, and that, in this finite nature, he resided in heaven till his incarnation, and that he afterwards, by a change of place, descended into this lower world; and, if they could make this appear, there is yet a difficulty in the expression, as they understand the words; for it is not usual to say, I came from a place, and was in that place before I came from it; therefore whether their exposition of the words, or ours, be most proper, I leave any one to judge.
As for the Socinians, who deny that Christ had any existence before his incarnation, these are very much at a loss to account for the sense of this scripture; though Socinus himself, and many of his followers, have concluded from thence, that Christ was taken up into heaven some time after his incarnation, which they suppose to have been in some part of those forty days in which the scripture says he was in the wilderness tempted of the devil; but how he could ascend into heaven, and yet be in the wilderness, where one of the evangelists says he was all the forty days, as Mark i. 13. cannot be easily understood, or accounted for; and, indeed, the scripture is altogether silent as to this matter: and it is very strange, if it had been so, that when we have an account of other circumstances in his life, which are of less importance, no mention should be made of this, which, had it been discovered, would have been a great inducement to his followers to have paid the highest regard to his doctrine; for they suppose he was taken up into heaven, that he might be instructed in those things which he was to impart to the world. And, instead of a proof hereof, they only say that this is a parallel instance with that of Moses, who was called up to the top of mount Sinai, which was then the immediate seat of the divine presence, and there received the law, which he was to impart to Israel; so, they suppose, it was necessary, that our Saviour should ascend into heaven, that he might there be instructed in that doctrine, which he was to communicate to his church.
But we cannot but conclude, that being omniscient, as willbe proved under our next head, he had no need to receive instructions, and having, in his human nature, had an unction from the Holy Ghost; or, as it is expressed, John iii. 34. thatGod gave not the Spirit by measure unto him, therefore it was necessary that he should ascend into heaven, to receive the doctrines from thence, which he was to deliver. Moreover, according to this conjecture, his coming from heaven, in the end of time, to judge the world, should have been called histhirdcoming, (as his first coming from thence was in his incarnation, and his second coming is supposed to be his return to this world, after he ascended into heaven, during this interval of time) which is contrary to that text of scripture, in Heb. ix. 28. which calls it,his coming the second time, without sin, unto salvation. And, indeed, it is so ungrounded a supposition, that some of the Socinians themselves reckon it, at most, but a probable conjecture, but do not pretend to say that it is sufficiently founded in scripture; and therefore we cannot think that this will have any tendency to enervate the force of our argument, to prove Christ’s Deity, taken from the above-mentioned sense of that text;The Son of man, which is in heaven.
4. Our Saviour’s Deity may farther be proved, from his being omniscient: thus the apostle Peter says, in John xxi. 17.Lord thou knowest all things, thou knowest that I love thee.This is too great a glory to be ascribed to any creature; and had it been spoken of the Father, the Anti-trinitarians themselves would have owned, that it is as great a proof of his Deity, as any contained in scripture, as importing the same thing with what the Psalmist says, Psal. cxlvii. 5.His understanding is infinite.But, besides this there is another expression that abundantly proves this matter, wherein he is denominated the Searcher of hearts, which is a glory that God appropriates to himself, in Jer. xvii. 10.I the Lord search the hearts, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways; and elsewhere, 1 Chron. xxviii. 9.The Lord searcheth all hearts, and understandeth all the imaginations of the thoughts; and all creatures are excluded from having any branch of this glory, when it is said, in 1 Kings viii. 39.Thou only knowest the hearts of all the children of men: now such a knowledge as this is ascribed to Christ; sometimes he is said to know theinward thoughts and secret reasonings of men within themselves, Mark ii. 8. And, if it be said, that this is only a particular instance of knowledge, such as he might have had by immediate divine inspiration, and therefore that it does not prove his Godhead; there is another scripture, that speaks of his knowledge, as more extensive,viz.that he knows the thoughts of all men, John ii. 25.He needed not that any one should testify of man, for he knew what was in man; and thishis knowledge does not only respect men’s present, but their future thoughts, which are not known to themselves: thus it is said, in John vi. 64. thathe knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. And if all this be not reckoned sufficient to prove him to be the heart-searching God, nothing can be expressed in plainer terms than this is, concerning him, in Rev. ii. 23.All the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts; and I will give unto every one of you, according to your works.
Object.1. It is objected to this argument for Christ’s omniscience, taken from Peter’s confession above-mentioned,Lord, thou knowest all things, &c. that nothing else is intended hereby, but that he had a very great degree of knowledge; not that he was strictly and properly omniscient, as supposing that it is an hyperbolical expression, not altogether unlike that of the woman of Tekoa to David, in 2 Sam. xiv. 20. when she says,My lord is wise, according to the wisdom of an angel of God, to know all things that are in the earth.
Answ.It is true, this expression of her’s is either an unwarrantable strain of compliment, or flattery, occasioned by David’s suspecting that Joab had employed her to plead the cause of Absalom; or else it is a sincere acknowledgment of his great wisdom, without supposing him to be absolutely omniscient, as though she should say, thou knowest all things that are done in the land: there is no plot or contrivance, how secret soever it may be managed, but thou wilt, some way or other, find it out, as thou hast done this that I am sent about. But what reference has this to Peter’s confession? Does it follow, that because there are hyperbolical expressions in scripture, as well as in other writings, that this must be one? or because a wise governor may have a conjectural knowledge of what is done by his subjects, when considering the various circumstances that attend their actions, that therefore the apostle intends nothing more than this? It is plain he appeals to Christ, as the heart-searching God, concerning the inward sincerity of his love to him, as well as of his repentance, after a public and shameful denial of him, which might have given just occasion for its being called in question; and it is as evident a proof of his omniscience, as that is of the Father’s, in Psal. cxxxix. 23, 24.Search me, O God, and know my heart; try me and know my thoughts, and see if there be any wicked way in me, &c.
Object.2. Others, especially some of the Arians, do not so much deny Christ’s omniscience, as the consequence deduced from it, to wit, his proper Deity; and these make use of a more abstruse and metaphysical way of reasoning, and accordingly they suppose that a creature may know all things, thatis, all finite objects, and consequently all things that are done in the world, namely, all creatures, and all their actions, since the object of this knowledge is, at most, but finite; therefore it is possible for a finite mind to be so enlarged, as to take in all finite things, or to have the knowledge of all things communicated to it, since the object and the recipient are commensurate with each other. Therefore our Saviour may know all things; and yet it will not follow from hence, that his understanding is infinite, or that his knowledge is so properly divine as the Father’s is; and consequently this is no sufficient argument to prove his Deity in the sense in which we understand it.
Answ.This method of reasoning might as well be used to evade the force of every argument, brought from scripture, to prove the Father’s omniscience, or, indeed, to evince his infinite power, since all effects produced, which are the objects thereof, are but finite; and therefore it may as well be said, that it does not require infinite power to produce them, nor prove his eternal power and Godhead.
Moreover, as this would tend to destroy the infinite disproportion between God and the creature in acting, so it supposes that God can communicate a branch of his own glory to a creature, by enlarging it to such a degree, as to take in all finite objects. There are some things not so properly too great for God to do, as for a creature to be the subject of: we do not pretend to set limits to the divine power; yet we may infer, from the nature of things, and the powers of finite beings, that it is impossible for any one, below God, to know all things past, present, and to come, at one view; which our Saviour must be supposed to do, or else this attribute of omniscience is not justly applied to him; nor would he be fit to govern the world, as will be observed under a following head; therefore we must conclude, from hence, that he is truly and properly a divine Person.
To what has been said, concerning Christ’s omniscience, we may subjoin those scriptures that speak of him, as thewisdom of God, the Fountain of all communicated wisdom,the light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world, as he is called, in John i. 9. And it is supposed, by many, thatwisdomspoken of in Prov. viii. is to be understood of our Saviour, as the personal wisdom of God, inasmuch as there are several personal characters ascribed to him: thus it is said, ver. 23.I was set up from everlasting, &c. and ver. 30, 31.Then, to wit, before the creation of all things,I was by him, as one brought up with him; and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him, rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth, and my delights were with the sons of men. This cannot properly speaking, be applied to God’s essential wisdom; it must therefore bea description of an eternal divine Person, distinct from the Father.
But since many suppose, that whatever is spoken of wisdom, in this and some other chapters of this book, is only metaphorical, or a beautiful description of divine wisdom, as the instructor of mankind; though we cannot see how this, if nothing else be intended by it, can agree with some of the personal characters before mentioned, which seem applicable to our Saviour; yet we find that he is elsewhere called thewisdom of God, in a sense, that can by no means be supposed to be figurative: thus when we read in Luke xi. 49.Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, &c. it is certainly understood of our Saviour.[147]To which, if it be objected, that, by thewisdom of God, is meant there the wise God, to wit, the Father; it may be answered, that another evangelist, referring to the very same thing, explains what is meant by thewisdom of God, and represents our Saviour as speaking in his own Person, Matt. xxiii. 34.Therefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes, &c.
5. The next divine perfection that is ascribed to Christ, is almighty power. This attribute is appropriated, by the Arians to the Father;[148]and accordingly they suppose, that it implies not only his supremacy over all creatures, but over the Son and Holy Ghost; and therefore they peremptorily conclude it is never applied to them, and consequently that the Deity of our Saviour cannot be proved by it; and that they may turn our own weapons upon us, or improve some unwary concessions, made by some very considerable writers, who have, in other respects, very well defended the doctrine of the Trinity, they seem to insinuate, as though this were a matter to be taken, as it were, for granted, though it might easily be made appear, that they strain the sense of those expressions, from whence they conclude them to have given up the cause to them, beyond what they ever intended; and there are many others, who are far from making such concessions.
As for the word παντοκρατωρ,Almighty, there is nothing in the derivation thereof, from whence it may justly be inferred, that it is a perfection, that contains a greater display of the divine glory, than the other perfections, that are attributed to all the Persons in the Godhead, though indeed it contains in it an idea of the universal extent of divine power, with respect to the objects thereof; yet this is not to be separated from the sense of the word, when power is ascribed to God in those scriptures,where he is calledthe Almighty; therefore, if we can prove that Christ has power ascribed to him, that is properly divine, this will evince his Deity, as much as though we could produce several scriptures, in which he is indisputably calledthe Almighty; and this we shall first endeavour to do, and then enquire whether we have not as much, or more reason to conclude, that he is called Almighty, than they have to deny it.
That power, such as is properly divine, is attributed to Christ, may be proved from that scripture before-mentioned, which is evidently applied to him, Isa. ix. 6. where he is called,the mighty God; and, in Psal. xlv. 3. which, as has been before observed, is spoken concerning him, in which he is calledmost mighty; and, in Phil. iii. 21. we read of hischanging our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body; which is such an effect of power, as plainly argues it divine, as much as the production of all things out of nothing could do; and this is said to be done,according to the working, whereby he is able to subdue all things to himself. We might observe many other things, which he has done, and will do, that require infinite power, which we shall have occasion to consider, when we prove his deity from his works under a following head.
But since all this is to no purpose, with respect to those who deny his proper Deity, unless we can prove that he is calledAlmighty; and the whole stress of this argument is laid upon it, for no other reason, as I presume, but because they think it impossible for us to do it: I shall attempt it; and I hope to make it appear that we have greater probability, on our side, that he is so called, than they have ground to deny it. Here I shall take notice of this perfection of the divine nature, as we find it in the book of the Revelations, in which this attribute is mentioned nine times, and, in some places, seems to be applied to the Father, but in others to the Son.
The first we shall mention is in chap. i. 8.I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty; which seems to be spoken of our Saviour,
1. Because he is described at large in the three foregoing verses; and there is nothing which gives the least ground to question its application to him, unless that character s being given to the Person here spoken of, which is given to the Father, in ver. 4.which is, and which was, and which is to come; but since we find in other scriptures, the same divine glories ascribed to the Son that had before been ascribed to the Father; as in John v. 21.As the Father raiseth the dead, and quickeneth them, even so the Son quickeneth whom he will; and in Tit. iii. 4. the Father is calledGod our Saviour, as appears by comparing it with the 5th and 6th verses; and so is Christ called,chap. ii. 10, 13. therefore, why may not the Father and the Son be each of them described with this character,Which was, is, and is to come? and that more especially, if we consider, that the ascribing this to Christ, is, in effect, the same with what is said of him elsewhere, Heb. xiii. 8. where he is saidto be the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever.[149]
2. It farther appears, that this text, in which the Person spoken of is calledAlmighty, is applied to Christ, because that character,AlphaandOmega, seems to be applied to none but him in other places, where it is used. We find it four times in this book,viz.not only in this verse, but in ver. 11. in which it is indisputably applied to him, as will appear, by comparing it with the followings verses. And, in chap. xxi. 6. he is again calledAlphaandOmega, which, that it is applied to him, appears from the context; it is he thatmakes all things new, or puts a new face upon the affairs of his church; and it is he who commands John to write what he saw and heard;He said unto me, Write these words, ver. 5. We may observe, that whereever John is commanded, in this book, to write, it is Christ that gives forth the command: thus he said to him before, chap. i. 19.Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter; and he is again commanded to write,Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord, by him who is called the Son of man, chap. xiv. 13, 14.
Again, in chap. xxii. 13. he is calledAlphaandOmega, who is described in the foregoing verse,as coming quickly, whose reward is with him; which is undoubtedly meant of our Saviour; for it is said concerning him, ver. 20.Surely I come quickly, Amen: even so come, Lord Jesus.
That which I infer from hence, is, that if Christ be styledAlphaandOmega, in all other placed in this book, it is more than probable he is so in this 8th verse of the 1st chapter, in which he is said to bethe Almighty. And as he is calledAlphaandOmega, so the explication of these words, wherever we meet with it in this book without the words themselves, is applied to Christ: thus he is called, chap. i. 17. and ii. 8.the first and the last; and, chap. iii. 14.the beginning of the creation of God: from hence, I humbly conceive, we have more ground to conclude, that Christ is called theAlmightyin this verse, than the Arians have to deny it.
Again, there is another place in this book where he seems to be styledthe Almighty, chap. xv. 3.And they sing the song of Moses, the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvellous are thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints.This triumphant song is occasioned by one of the greatest victories which thechurch expects to obtain in this world: by the song of Moses, I humbly conceive, is meant the church’s celebrating the glory of God, for the greatest victory that ever was obtained under the legal dispensation; and the song of the Lamb, is an acknowledgment of the greatest that is, or shall be obtained under the gospel-dispensation; and, in celebrating the Lamb’s victories, they set forth the praises of the mighty Conqueror in the following words,Great and marvellous are thy works, Lord God Almighty: it is the Lamb that is every where described in this book, as fighting the church’s battles, and obtaining victory for it; therefore it is his glory which is here set forth.
And as he is always described, in this book, as thus fighting the church’s battles; so it is he who is described as taking vengeance on its enemies, which is the just consequence thereof. Therefore I cannot but conclude, that he is spoken of, in chap. xvi. 6, 7. as havinggiventheir persecutorsblood to drink, for they were worthy; and, in ver. 7.Even so Lord God Almighty, true and righteous are thy judgments.
Again, in chap. xvi. 14. we read ofthe battle of that great day of God Almighty; and then it immediately follows,Behold, I come as a thief in the night, &c. which expression is known to be elsewhere applied to our Saviour, and to none but him; and that it is he who fights the church’s battles, is evident from chap. xvii. 14.These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overthrow them; and from chap. xix. 12, &c. where it is said,his eyes were as a flame of fire; as he is elsewhere described, chap. i. 14. to denote that the great day of his wrath was come; and his name is called, in the 13th verse of this 19th chapter,the Word of God; and we read of thearmies which followed him, and thatout of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that he might smite the nations. From whence we may conclude, that since Christ is represented, in so many places in this book, as fighting with, and triumphing and reigning over his enemies, inflicting his plagues upon them, and delivering his church from their persecution, which is a work of divine power, he is fitly styled in several places,Lord God Almighty.
We might consider several other divine attributes ascribed to Christ, which prove his Deity,viz.holiness, truth, and faithfulness: thus, in Rev. iii. 7.These things saith he that is holy, he that is true; and he is farther described in the following words, as having uncontroulable power;who openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth. That this is spoken of him, is beyond dispute; and in chap. vi. 10.They cried with a loud voice, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell upon the earth?to whom did they cry but to the Lamb, who is said to have opened the seals, or to have discovered the mysteries thatwere thereby revealed, as in ver. 1.? And when he had opened the sixth seal, he is described, as hearing his church’s prayer, and avenging their blood, and so is represented as coming to judgment, in a very terrible manner; upon which occasion it is said,the great day of his wrath is come; and therefore it is he who is described asholy and true.
But if it be replied to this, that creatures are sometimes called holy and true, we may farther add, that it is Christ to whom it is said, chap. xv. 4.Who shall not fear thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name, for thou only art holy; for all nations shall come and worship before thee, for thy judgments are made manifest.This I infer from what has been before considered, that it is he who obtains victory over, and pours forth his judgments on his church’s enemies; and it is he whose praises are celebrated in the song of the Lamb, mentioned in the verse immediately foregoing.
Having considered several divine perfections, as ascribed to our Saviour, and these so glorious, that nothing greater can be mentioned to set forth the glory of a divine Person; yet we may add hereunto, those glorious titles that are given him with a design to excite in us adoring and admiring thoughts of him: amongst which we shall only mention some which are either the same with, or are equivalent to those which are given to the Father, which they who deny Christ’s Deity, cannot but own to be distinguishing characters of a divine Person, when so applied. Thus, is the Father styled, in Heb. xiii. 20.The God of peace? our Saviour is styled, in Isa. ix. 6.The Prince of peace; and he is said, Eph. ii. 14. to beour peace; and as peace includes in it all the blessings that accompany salvation, Christ’s being styled the Author thereof, denotes him to be the Fountain of blessedness, which he could not be, were he not a divine Person.
Again, as God is calleda Sun, anda Shield, Psal. lxxxiv. 9. so Christ is called, in Mal. iv. 2.The Sun of Righteousness; and, in Isa. xxxii. 2.An hiding place from the wind, a covert from the tempest, and the shadow of a great rock in a weary land.
Again, it is said of God the Father, Deut. xxx. 20.He is thy life, and the length of thy days; our Saviour says, concerning himself, in John xi. 25. compared with chap. xiv. 6. that he isthe life; and, Acts iii. 15. he is calledthe Prince of life; and, in Colos. iii. 4.our life. Again, is the Father called, in Psal. lxxx. 1.The Shepherd of Israel? Christ is called, in Heb. xiii. 20.That great Shepherd of the sheep.
Moreover, is God often described in scripture as a glorious King; as in Zeph. iii. 15.The King of Israel, even the Lord in the midst of thee? our Saviour is styled, in Isa. vi. 5.TheKing, the Lord of hosts; and, in John i. 49.The King of Israel; and, in Rev. xix. 16.King of kings, and Lord of lords.
Again, is God styled theHope of Israel, Jer. xiv. 8? our Saviour seems to be so called by the apostle, when he says, in Acts xxviii. 20.for the Hope of Israel, I am bound with this chain, that is, for Christ’s sake, who is the object of his people’s hope. However, whether he is intended thereby, or no, in that scripture, he is called elsewhereour hope, 1 Tim. i. 1. compared with Coloss. i. 27.
Moreover, is God the object of desire, so that there isnothing in heaven or earth, or within the whole compass of finite beings, that is to be desiredbesides, or in comparison withhim, as the Psalmist says, Psal. lxxiii. 25? our Saviour is called, in Hag. ii. 7.The desire of all nations.I might refer to many other glorious titles that are given to him in the 2nd and 3rd chapters of the Revelations, in the epistles to the seven churches; every one of which is prefaced with such a character given of him, as is designed to strike them with an holy reverence, and esteem of him, as a divine Person. Thus concerning those proofs of Christ’s Deity, which are taken from the names, attributes, and titles which are given to him; which leads us to consider,
III. The next head of argument taken from those works, which have been done by our Saviour, that are proper to God alone. Divine works argue a divine efficient, or that he has infinite power, and consequently that he is an infinite Person, or truly and properly God, who performs them. Now these works are of two sorts; either of nature and common providence, or of grace, to wit, such as immediately respect our salvation; in all which, he acts beyond the power of a creature, and therefore appears to be a divine Person.
1. He appears to be so, from his having created all things. He that made the world, must be before it; and therefore since time began with the first creature, as has been before observed, it follows that he must be before time, that is, from eternity.
Again, he that created all things, must have a sovereign will, for whosepleasure they are, and were created, Rev. iv. 11. And it follows from hence, that he has an undoubted right to all things, and that he might have annihilated them, had it been his pleasure; and also, that he has a right to dispose of them as he will, as the potter has power over his clay. All these things are consequent on the work of creation; therefore it is an undeniable argument, that he, who created all things, must be God.
It may also be observed, that to create, is to exert infinite power, or to act above the power of a creature, which, at best, is but finite: now whatever is more than finite, must be infinite; and consequently he who created all things, must exert infinite power, and that is certainly such as is truly divine.
We might farther consider, that there are many scriptures which appropriate creation to God, and, indeed, it cannot be otherwise; for to suppose that a creature gave being to itself, is to suppose him to be both a cause and an effect, and consequently to be, and not to be, at the same time, to exist as a creator, and not to exist as brought into being, which is a plain contradiction; and it is evident, that, in scripture, the creature is opposed to the Creator: thus, in Rom. i. 25. it is said,they worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever. And there are several scriptures that speak of creation, as a distinguishing evidence of divine glory: thus, in Isa. xl. 28. we have a magnificent description of God, taken more especially from this work, when he is called,The everlasting God, the Lord, the Creator of the ends of the earth; and, in chap. xlii. 5.Thus saith God the Lord, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein; in which, and many other scriptures of the like nature, which might be referred to, it appears that creation is a work peculiar to God.
The next thing we are to prove is, that our Saviour created all things. There are many who think that this may be proved from the work of creation’s being ascribed to more persons than one; and therefore when we read of creators, in the plural number, as it is in the original, in Eccles. xii. 1.Remember thy Creator, or creators; and when God, in creating man, is represented as speaking after this manner,Let us make man after our own image, &c. this seems to imply that there were more divine Persons engaged in this work than the Father.
I do not indeed lay so much stress on this argument, as many do, yet it is not wholly to be neglected; for, I confess, I cannot see any reason why there should be such a mode of expression used, were it not to signify this divine mystery, of a plurality of Persons in the Godhead, to whom this work is ascribed.
Object.As for the objection, which some of the Anti-trinitarians, especially the Socinians, bring against it, that this mode of speaking, is such as is used in conformity to the custom of kings who, speak in the plural number;
Answ.To this it may be answered, that though kings do often speak in the plural number, yet this is only a modern way of speaking, implying, that whatever a king does, is by the advice of some of his subjects, who are his peculiar favourites, and who are also made use of to fulfil his will; but, nevertheless, this way of speaking is not so ancient as scripture-times, much less as Moses’s time, or the beginning of the world, which he refers to, when God is represented as thus speaking. It is thecustom of kings, in scripture, to speak in the singular number: and it is very absurd to pretend to explain any mode of speaking used in scripture, by customs of speech, not known till many ages after.
I am sensible, some think that mode of speaking used by Ahasuerus Esth. i. 15.What shall we do unto the queenVashti,according to law?is a proof that it was used in former ages. But the words may be rendered,What is to be done, according to law, &c. or what is expedient for me to do? and therefore it doth not prove that kings used, in ancient times, to speak of themselves in the plural number; and consequently it cannot be argued, that when God is represented as speaking so in scripture, it is in compliance with any such custom. Besides, whenever he is represented as speaking in scripture, in all other instances, excepting those that are supposed to be contained in our argument, he is always represented as speaking in the singular number; and therefore it seems still more probable, that this variation from his usual way of speaking, is not without some reason, and that hereby we are led into this doctrine, that there are more divine Persons than one, that created all things.
But not to insist on this, since we have more plain proofs hereof in scripture, it evidently appears that Christ made all things, not only from what is said in John i. 3. thatall things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made; but, from Col. i. 16.By him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether they are thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him; in which he is not only said to be the Creator, but the end of all things, which is the same with what is said in Prov. xvi. 4. thatthe Lord hath made all things for himself.
This farther appears from Psal. cii. 25.Of old hast thou laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of thy hands; which is expressly applied to Christ by the apostle, in Heb. i. 10.
By these, and such-like scriptures, it evidently appears that Christ made all things. The Socinians, indeed, who are sensible that creation was an evident proof of divine power, and therefore that the Creator of all things must be God, labour very hard to prove that all those scriptures that ascribe this work to our Saviour, are to be taken in a metaphorical sense, and so signify nothing else but his being the author of the gospel-state, which is a kind of new creation peculiar to him; and that he did this as a prophet, revealing those doctrines which relate thereunto; and accordingly they take the sense of that scripture, in John i. 2, 3. which speaks of his beingin the beginning, and that all things were made by him, as intending nothingelse, but that he was in the beginning of the gospel, and that whatever was made, or ordained, to be a standard and rule of faith, was by him; and that, in the discharge of this work, he was to restore decayed religion, and to correct several mistaken notions, which the Jews had entertained concerning the moral law, to add some new precepts to it, and give directions concerning that mode of worship which should be observed in the church for the future. This is all they suppose to be intended by that work, which is ascribed to Christ as a Creator; whereas, in this scripture, it is plainly said, that there was nothing in the whole frame of nature, nothing that was an effect of power, made without him. And there is another scripture, which cannot, with any colour of reason, be understood in that sense,viz.in Col. i. 16.By him were all things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible; where the apostle speaks of the creation of angels and men, as well as all other things: now, certainly, Christ did not come into the world to rectify any mistakes or restore decayed religion among the angels, therefore the apostle here plainly proves that our Saviour created all things.
But since this opinion of the Socinians is now almost universally exploded by the Anti-trinitarians, we have no occasion to add any thing farther in opposition to it; but shall proceed to consider what the Arians say concerning Christ’s creating all things. These allow that the work of creation is ascribed to him; but they deny that this argues him to be God in the same sense as the Father is. The account which they give thereof is, that God, to wit, the Father, created all things by the Son, as an instrument, created by him, immediately for that purpose; so that the Son was an inferior, or second cause of the production of all things; and therefore that it cannot, from thence, be concluded that he is God equal with the Father.
What I would humbly offer, in opposition hereunto is,
1. That, in this account of creation, there is not a just difference put between the natural and supernatural production of things, of which the latter can only be called creation; therefore, if these two be confounded, the distinguishing character of a Creator is set aside, and consequently the glory arising from hence cannot be appropriated to God; nor is that infinite perfection, that is displayed therein, duly considered, but according to this scheme or method of reasoning a creature may be a Creator, and a Creator a creature; nor can theeternal power and Godheadof the divine Being be demonstrated by the things that are made or created, as the apostle says they are in Rom. i. 20.
2. From that first mistake arises another, namely, that because, in natural productions, that which was created by God,may be rendered subservient to the production of other things; in which respect it may be termed an instrument made use of by a superior cause, and may have an energy or method of acting, peculiar to itself, whereby it produces effects according to the course and laws of nature, fixed by God, the first cause of all things; therefore they suppose, though without sufficient ground that God might create all things by an instrument, or second cause thereof, as they conclude he did by the Son.
3. Notwithstanding we must assert, that creation being a supernatural production of things, what has been said concerning natural production, is not applicable to it; therefore,
4. Though things may be produced in a natural way, by second causes, whose powers are limited, and subjected as aforesaid, to the laws of nature; yet supernatural effects cannot be produced by any thing short of infinite power; therefore, since creation is a supernatural work, it must be concluded to be a work of infinite power.
5. It follows, from hence, that it is not agreeable to the idea of creation, or the producing all things out of nothing, for God to make use of an instrument. That this may appear, let it be considered, that whatever instrument is made use of, it must be either finite or infinite. An infinite instrument cannot be made use of, for then there would be two infinites, one superior, the other inferior. Nor can a finite one be made use of, for that, according to our last proposition, cannot produce any supernatural effect, as creation is supposed to be, which requires infinite power, and that cannot be exerted by a finite medium, therefore no such instrument can be used. Moreover, if it requires infinite power to create all things, this power, in its method of acting, would be limited, by the instrument it makes use of; for whatever power a superior cause has in himself, the effect produced, by an instrument will be in proportion to the weakness thereof. This some illustrate by the similitude of a giant’s making use of a straw, or a reed, in striking a blow in which the weakness of the instrument renders the power of the person that uses it insignificant. Thus if God the Father should make use of the Son, in the creation of all things, the power that is exerted by him therein, can be no other than finite; but that is not sufficient for the production of things supernatural, which require infinite power. To this we may add,
6. That the creation of all things is ascribed to the sovereignty of the divine will; accordingly the Psalmist describing it, in Psal. xxxiii. 9. says,He spake and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast; so when God, in Gen. i. 3. said,Let there he light, and there was light; and when we read of the other parts of the creation, as produced by his almighty word, it implies that they were produced by an act of his will. Nowit seems impossible, from the nature of the thing, that an instrument should be made use of in an act of willing any more than in an act of understanding.
7. No cause can reasonably be assigned why God should make use of an instrument in the production of all things; for certainly he that, by his immediate power, produced the instrument, might without any difficulty, or absurdity, attending the supposition, have created all things immediately without one. And we must farther suppose, that if there were nothing in the nature of things, which required him to make use of an instrument, he would not, by making use of one, to wit, the Son, administer occasion to him, to assume so great a branch of his own glory, namely, that of being the Creator of the ends of the earth; or for his being, as the result thereof, worshipped as a divine Person supposing him to have a right to divine worship, for no other reason.
Object.1. Though no one supposes that God stood in need of an instrument, or could not have created all things without it, yet we must conclude that he did not, because the scripture speaks of the Father’s creating all things by the Son; and when one person is said to do any thing by another, it implies that he makes use of him as an instrument therein.
Answ.This seems to be the only foundation on which this doctrine is built. But there is no necessity of understanding the words in this sense, especially if we consider that all effects are produced by the power of God; and this power, supposing the Son to be a divine Person, (which we have endeavoured, by other arguments, to prove) must belong to him; and the Father, and the Son being united, in the same Godhead, one cannot act without the other; therefore whatever is said to be done by the Father, may, in this sense, be said to be done by the Son; for though the Persons are distinct, the power exerted is the same.
Thus a learned writer[150]accounts for this matter, when he says, that “The Son is of the same nature and substance with the Father, so nearly allied, so closely united, that nothing could be the work of one, without being, at the same time, the work of both: Hence it was, that the Son was Joint-creator with the Father, that all things were made by him, and nothing without him; it was not possible for them either to act, or to exist separately; and therefore it is that the work of creation is, in scripture, attributed to both.” This is a very safe as well as a just way of reasoning, consistent with, and founded on the doctrine of the Father and the Son’s being united in the same Godhead, though distinct Persons; and therefore it is agreeable to the sense of those scriptures, which attribute thiswork to the Son, in the same sense, as when it is attributed to the Father.
But I am sensible that the Arians will reply to it; that this does not sufficiently account for that subordination in acting, that seems to be implied in the sense of those scriptures, in which the Father is said to have created all things by the Son; therefore I shall take leave to speak more particularly to those texts that treat of this matter, where the same mode of speaking is used. And though there are several scriptures that represent the Son as a Creator, or consider all things, as being made by him, as well as the Father, or as a Joint-creator with him; yet there are but two places in the New Testament, in which the Father is said to have created all things by the Son, namely, Eph. iii. 9. in which it is said,that God, that is, the Father,created all things by Jesus Christ; and the other is in Heb. i. 2. where it is said,by whom also he made the worlds.
We have already considered the absurdity of the Socinian way of expounding those other scriptures, that speak of Christ as a Creator, in which he is not said to act in subserviency to, but co-ordinately with the Father. But inasmuch as God the Father is, in these scriptures, said to create all things by Jesus Christ, I shall humbly offer it, as my opinion, that though the other scriptures, in which Christ is set forth as a Creator, have no reference to him as Mediator, nor to the new creation, yet this seems to be the more probable sense of both these scriptures.[151]
As for the former of them, though some suppose that it is needless to give the sense of it, since the words,by Jesus Christ,[152]are wanting in some ancient copies of scripture, as well as in the vulgar Latin and Syriac versions; yet, since there are many copies that have it, we will suppose it to be genuine; and that we may account for the sense of it, we may observe that the apostle makes use of the wordcreatethree times in this epistle; we find it, in chap. ii. 10. and iv. 24. in both which places it is taken for the new creation, which is brought about by Christ, as Mediator; and, I humbly conceive, that it may be taken so, in this verse, which we are now considering; and therefore this is a part of that mystery, of which the apostlespeaks in the foregoing words,that was hid in God; and this sense seems not to be excluded, by those who suppose, that in other respects, it has some reference to the first creation of all things.[153]
As for the other scripture,by whom also he made the worlds, δι ου και τους αιωνας εποιησεν, that is, by whom he made, instituted, or ordained, the various dispensations, which the church was under, either before or since his incarnation; this was certainly done by him as Mediator; and herein he acted in subserviency to the Father, as well as in all other works performed by him, as having this character. I would not be too peremptory in determining this to be the sense of the text, inasmuch as the apostle speaksof his upholding all things, in the following verse, which is well put after this account of his having created them: I am also sensible that the word which we translateworlds, is used in Heb. xi. 3. to signify the world that was at first created, in the most proper sense of the wordcreation, when the apostle says, thatthrough faith we understand that the worlds, τους αιωναςwere framed by the word of God, &c. But yet when I find that in many other places of the New Testament, where the word is used, it is taken in the sense but now given,[154]I cannot but conclude it the more probable sense of the text; but that which most of all determines me to acquiesce in it, is, because the subserviency of the Son to the Father in this work is most agreeable to it.
If it be objected, that this sense of the text coincides with that which is given of it by Socinus, and his followers, which we before-mentioned and opposed;
To this I answer, that the sense I have given of it, is very foreign to theirs, who endeavour thereby to evade the force of the argument brought from it, to prove our Saviour’s Deity; whereas we only exchange one argument, for the proof thereof, for another; for it seems to me to be as great an evidence, that he is a divine Person, when considered as the Author and Founder of the church, in all the ages thereof, or the rock on which it is built, as when he is called, Creator of the world: if he be the supreme Head, Lord, and Lawgiver to his church, in all the ages thereof; if the faith and hope of all that shall be saved, is founded upon him, as the great Mediator, Redeemer, and Sovereign thereof, then certainly he is God, equal with the Father.
Object.2. To what has been before suggested, upon which the chief stress of our reasoning depends,viz.that a finite creature cannot be an instrument in supernatural productions, it is objected, that miracles are supernatural productions; but these have been wrought by men, as instruments in the hand of God; therefore the creation of all things may as well be supposed to have been performed by the Son, as an instrument made use of to this end by the Father.
Answ.That miracles are supernatural productions, no one denies; and it follows from hence, that they are either a species of creation, or equivalent to it; therefore if it be allowed that a creature can have power communicated to him to work them, and therein may be said to be an instrument made use of by God, then we cannot reasonably deny that God the Father might use the Son as an instrument in creating all things. But we must take leave to deny that any, who are said to have wrought miracles, have had infinite power communicated to them for that purpose; therefore they are not properly instruments in the hand of God, to produce supernatural effects; but all that they have done therein, was only by addressing themselves to God, that he would put forth his immediate power in working the miracle; and in giving the people, for whose sake it was to be wrought, occasion to expect it; and afterwards improving it for their farther conviction. It is true, miracles are oftentimes said to have been wrought by men; but, I humbly conceive, nothing more than this is intended thereby; which, that it may appear, we may observe, that sometimes they who have wrought them, have not made use of any action herein, but only given the people ground to expect the divine interposure: thus, immediately before the earth swallowed up Korah and his company, Moses gave the people to expect this miraculous event, Numb. xvi. 28-30.And Moses said, Hereby shall ye know that the Lord hath sent me. If these men die the common death of all men, then the Lord has not sent me. But if the Lord make a new thing, and the earth open her mouth, and swallow them up, then shall ye know that these men have provoked the Lord; and as soon as he had spoken the words, the ground clave asunder, and swallowed them up. This might be reckoned among the miracles wrought by Moses; though all that he did was only what tended to raise the people’s expectation, that such an extraordinary event should immediately happen. Again, at other times, when a miracle has been wrought, we read of nothing done but only a word spoken to signify that God would work it: thus, when the captain, with his fifty men, was sent by the king of Israel, to the prophet Elijah, to command him to come to him, the prophet uses this mode of speaking, 2 Kings i. 12.If I be a man of God, let firecome down from heaven, and consume thee and thy fifty; which immediately happened accordingly.
At other times, when miracles have been wrought, the Person, who, in the sense but now mentioned, is said to work them, has made use of some external and visible sign, which was either an ordinance for his own faith, if no one was present but himself; as when the prophet Elisha smote the waters of Jordan with Elijah’s mantle, and said, 2 Kings ii. 14.Where is the Lord God of Elijah?or else the sign, being given by divine direction, was an ordinance for the faith of the people present, whose conviction was intended thereby; not that they should suppose that the action used had any tendency to produce the miracle: but it was only designed to raise their expectation, that God would work it by his immediate power; as when Moses was commanded, in Exod. xiv. 16.to lift up his rod, and stretch out his hand over the sea, and divide it, that Israel might pass through; or, in chap. xvii. 6.to smite the rock, whereupon God caused water to come out of it; and in several other actions, which he used, by divine direction, when other miracles were wrought; in which respect, though he was said, in a less proper way of speaking, to have wrought them, yet he was no more than a moral instrument herein, and therefore the divine power was not communicated to, or exerted by him; and if creatures have been instruments in working miracles in no other sense than this, it cannot be inferred from hence that Christ might be made use of by the Father, as an instrument in creating the world: a moral instrument he could not be; for there was no doctrine contested, no truth to be confirmed thereby, no subjects present to expect a divine interposure; and, indeed, none ever supposed that the Son of God was an instrument in this sense; therefore if no one ever was an instrument in any other, nor could be from the nature of the thing, as has been already proved, then the force of the argument, which we have laid down to prove it, is not in the least weakened by this objection.
Thus we have endeavoured to prove the divinity of Christ from the work of creation.
2. We shall proceed to consider how our Saviour’s Deity appears, from those works of providence, which are daily performed by him. Providence is as much a divine work, and contains as glorious a display of the divine perfections, as creation; and this is twofold,viz.preserving and governing. With respect to the former of these, some divines have asserted, that it is, as it were, a continued creation, not formally so; but as the one produces a creature, the other prevents its sinking into nothing; and because it is, in all respects, dependent on the power of God, and as much so, for the continuance of itsbeing, as it was for its being brought into being; therefore conserving providence is an evidence of the divine power of him who sustains all things.
Now that this glory belongs to our Saviour, is plain from scripture, which speaks of him, in Heb. i. 3.as upholding all things by the word of his power; and in Coloss. i. 17. it is said,by him all things consist; both these scriptures respect this branch of divine providence, namely, his preserving all things in being; and this is certainly more than can be said of any creature. And it is not pretended that herein he acts as the Father’s instrument, even by those who suppose that he was so, in the creation of all things, inasmuch as scripture does not speak of God’s upholding all things by him, but of Christ’s upholding them by his own, that is, the divine power; so that we have as plain a proof of his Deity, from his upholding providence, as there is of the being of a God, which is evidently inferred from it.
As to the other branch of providence, respecting the government of the world in general, or of the church in particular, this is also ascribed to Christ, and thereby his Godhead is farther proved. Whatever degree of limited dominion may be said to belong to creatures; yet universal dominion belongs only to God; and this is assigned, as one ground and reason of his right to divine honour; therefore it is said, in Job xxv. 2.Dominion and power are with him, that is, there is a holy reverence due to him, as the supreme Lord and Governor of the world; and, in Psal. lxvii. 4. when it is said concerning the great God, thathe shall judge the people righteously, and govern the nations upon earth, this is considered as the foundation of universal joy,O let the nations be glad, and sing for joy; and of praise, ver. 5.Let the people praise thee, O God; let all the people praise thee; and, in Psal. xxii. 28. when it is said,the kingdom is the Lord’s; and he is the Governor among the nations; this is assigned, as the reason of their worshipping him, ver. 27.All the ends of the earth shall remember and turn unto the Lord; and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee.This therefore is, undoubtedly, a branch of the divine glory; so that if we can prove that universal dominion belongs to Christ, or that he is the Governor of the world, and of the church therein, this will plainly evince his Deity.
1. Let us consider him as the Governor of the world. This seems to be the meaning of several expressions of scripture, in which royal dignity is ascribed to him; and he is represented as sitting upon a throne, andhis throne to be for ever and ever, Psal. xlv. 6. and he infinitely greater than all the kings of the earth; upon which account, he is called, in Rev. i. 5.The Prince of the kings of the earth; and they are commanded totestify their subjection to him, and all are represented as blessed thatput their trust in him, Psal. ii. 12. And as his kingdom is considered, in John xviii. 36. asnot being of this world, and the honours due to him, such as are divine, this farther proves his Deity.
Moreover, his universal dominion, and consequently his Godhead, is evinced by that glorious character, which we have before considered[155], as belonging to him, namely, the Lord of hosts, as the prophet Isaiah says, speaking of the vision which he had of his glory, in chap. vi. 5.Mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts, as denoting his sovereignty over all the hosts of heaven, and all creatures in this lower world, as he governs them, and makes one thing subservient to another, and all this is done to set forth his own glory.
2. This will farther appear, if we consider him as the Governor of his church; in this he has access to the souls of men, working in them those graces, which are the effects of almighty power, which he does, when they are effectually called; and the work of sanctification, which is consequent hereupon, is carried on till it is perfected. We shall have occasion, under some following answers[156], to prove that these are divine and supernatural works; the more full and particular proof whereof, we shall reserve to its proper place, and only observe, at present, that they are spoken of as such in scripture, and ascribed to the exceeding greatness of the power of God, no less than thatwhich he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, Eph. i. 18,——20. and elsewhere they are called anew creation, chap. ii. 1.a quickeningorresurrection,a breaking the rock in pieces,taking away the heart of stone,giving an heart of flesh, ora new heart; Jer. xxiii. 29. Ezek. xxxvi. 26. which expressions would never have been used, had not the work been divine and supernatural; therefore it follows from hence, that since Christ is the Author of this internal work, he is a divine Person. Now that he is so, is obvious, from many places in the New Testament; as when he is styled, in Heb. xii. 2.The Author and Finisher of our faith; and when the apostle, in 1 Tim. i. 14. speaks offaith and love abounding, which is in Christ Jesus, he speaks, at the same time, of thegrace of our Lord abounding, as the spring and fountain thereof; and when the apostles, in Luke xvii. 5. desire him toincrease their faith, not in an objective way, as affording some greater foundation for it, but subjectively, by an internal work, exciting and promoting the principle thereof, which was before implanted in them; and so causing all those graces, that accompany it, to abound, as the effects of his divine power.
We might farther consider Christ’s spiritual government, asextended to his church, collectively considered, which is exposed to many dangers and difficulties, and meets with much opposition from its enemies, who attempt its ruin, but in vain, because it is the object of the divine care, kept by the power of God, through faith, unto salvation: for which reason, the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Now this is, in a peculiar manner, the work of Christ; he is the rock on which it is built; and his presence, in the midst of his people, is not only their glory, but their safety; which it would not be, if he were no more than a creature. We might also consider the subserviency of the various dispensations of providence in the world to their good, as he isHead over all things to the church, Eph. i. 22. which could not answer that valuable end, had he not been a divine Person.
We might farther consider how the divine glory of Christ will be demonstrated, in his second coming to compleat the work of salvation, begun in this world. To prepare a way for this, there will be an universal resurrection of the dead, which will be no less an effect of almighty power, than the creation of all things was at first. I need not therefore say any thing farther to prove this to be a divine work; we need only prove that this general resurrection shall be performed by Christ: this might be proved from several scriptures; in one whereof he expressly asserts it himself, in words very plain and particular,viz.John vi. 38.The hour is coming, in which all that are in their graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth, &c.
Moreover, when, at the same time, he is represented as coming in the clouds, with power and great glory, in hisown glory, as well asthat of the Father, and of the holy angels, in Luke ix. 26. the most natural sense of that text seems to be this, that his divine glory, which is calledhis own, which was comparatively hid from his people, while he was here on earth, shall eminently be demonstrated in his second coming, and also that Mediatorial glory, which he has received from the Father, as what he had a right to, on his having accomplished the work of redemption, which he came into the world about; and then there is the glory of his retinue, as appearing with all his holy angels; which bears some resemblance to that expression whereby the majesty of God is set forth upon another occasion, namely, as appearing on mount Sinai, to give the law, when it is said, in Deut. xxxiii. 2.The Lord came with ten thousands of saints.And to this we may add, that the work, which he shall, immediately after this, be engaged in, to wit, that of judging the world in righteousness, plainly proves his Deity, since none but a divine Person can judge the secrets of all men, and bring to light every thing that has been done, from the beginning to the end of time; and this is to be done, in that day;for it is said, in Eccles. xii. 14.That God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.This is a farther improvement of that argument, before laid down to prove his divinity from his omniscience; if his judgment must be, as the apostle says, in Rom. ii. 2.according to truth, and consequently performed with the greatest impartiality, as well as an exquisite knowledge or discerning of the cause, without which it could not be said, thatthe Judge of all the earth does right, (as he certainly will) in Gen. xviii. 25. and if rewards shall be proportioned to every work done, so that every one shall receive as the apostle says, in 2 Cor. v. 10.according to what he has done, whether it be good or bad; and if persons are to be rewarded, or punished, for all the secret springs of action, which must be reckoned either good or bad, according to what they produce, as well as the actions themselves; and if this respects not particular persons only, but all men, who have lived, or shall live, from the beginning to the end of the world, it evidently proves, that he, to whom this glorious work is ascribed, must be a divine Person.
And to this we may add, that the manner of his appearing, with the terror, as well as the majesty of a judge, being such as shall strike his enemies with the utmost horror and confusion, is a farther proof of this matter. This is represented in a lively manner, in Rev. vi. 15-17. in which it is said,the kings of the earth, and the great men, those who once rendered themselves formidable to their subjects shall desire tohide themselves in the dens and rocks of the mountains, and shall say to the rocks and to the mountains, fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth upon the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?And,
Lastly, He will not only pronounce the sentence but execute it, and that with respect to his saints and subjects; and his enemies: as to the former of these he will not only command them to come, and possess the kingdom prepared for them, but the blessedness which he will confer upon them, pursuant thereunto, is called the beatific vision, in 1 John iii. 2.We shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is; and the happiness of heaven is described in such a way as plainly proves our Saviour to be the fountain thereof, and consequently a divine Person; for it is represented as a state, in which they willbehold his glory, John xvii. 24. whereas certainly the beholding the glory of the most exalted creature, falls infinitely short of this ingredient in the heavenly blessedness.
And on the other hand, the immediate impressions of the wrath of God on the consciences of his enemies, or the powerof his anger, which shall render them eternally miserable, when banished from his presence, proves him to be a divine Person, inasmuch as the highest degree of misery consists in a separation, or departure from him, which it could not do, if he were not the fountain of blessedness; nor could the punishment of sinners be proportioned to their crimes, if it were not to be inflicted by theglory of his power; the apostle joins both these together, in 2 Thess. i. 9. though some understand the words, as implying, that their punishment proceeds from his immediate presence, in the display of the greatness of his power, as a sin-avenging Judge; in either of which senses, it argues him to be a divine Person. And that it is our Saviour who is spoken of, is evident, from the foregoing and following verses; it is he who shall appearin flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and obey not the gospel; and it is he that shallcome to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe; so that we have a very plain proof of his Deity, from the exercise of his government, either in this or the other world.
Having endeavoured to prove the divinity of Christ, from his works of creation and providence and under the former of these, offered some things in answer to the methods taken by the Socinians, and especially the Arians, in accounting for the sense of those scriptures that speak of the Father’s creating all things by the Son; it is necessary for us now to consider the most material objections, brought by the Anti-trinitarians in general, against what has been said in defence of this doctrine, taken from the works of common and special providence, as ascribed to him, and, in particular, from the administration of his kingdom of grace; it is therefore objected.
Object.1. That his kingdom, and power of acting, in the administration of the affairs relating thereunto, is wholly derived from the Father: thus he says in Luke xxii. 29.I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; and, in Mat. xi. 27.All things are delivered unto me of my Father; and in Psal. ii. 6.Yet have I set my King upon my holy hill of Zion.And whatever he does in managing the affairs thereof, is by the Father’s commission and appointment: thus in John v. 36. he speaks of the works which he was to perform, as those whichthe Father had given him to finish. And as for his power of executing judgment, which is one of the greatest glories of his kingly government, this is derived from the Father, in John v. 22.For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son; and, in Acts xvii. 31. it is said, thathe hath appointed a day, in which he will judge the world in righteousness, by that man whom he hath ordained, meaning our Saviour; and when he speaks, in Rev.ii. 27. of his ruling his enemieswith a rod of iron, and breaking them to shivers, as the vessels of a potter, he adds, that thishe received of his Father; from whence they argue, that since he received his dominion, or right to govern the world and the church, from the Father, therefore he cannot be God equal with the Father. As we say, in opposition to their scheme of doctrine, that a derived Deity, such as they suppose his to be, cannot be the same with that which the Father has; so they allege this, by way of reprisal, against the argument we have but now insisted on, that a derived dominion cannot be made use of as a medium to prove him that has it to be a divine Person, in the same sense in which we maintain him to be.