world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him." Rev. v. 12. "worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power," &c. Hence Acts vii. 59. "calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." ix. 14. all that call upon thy name." 1 Cor. i. 2. "with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord." 2 Tim. ii. 22. "with them that call upon the Lord out of a pure heart," that is, as it is explained Col. iii. 17. "whatsoever ye do.... do it in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him." 2 Tim. ii. 19. "every one that nameth the name of Christ." It appears therefore that when we call upon the Son of God, it is only in his capacity of advocate with the Father. So Rev. xxii. 20. "even so, come, Lord Jesus" —namely, to execute judgment, "which the Father hath committed unto him, that all men might honour the Son," &c. John v. 22, 23. Eleventhly, baptism in his name. Matt. xxviii. 18, 19. "all power is given unto me in heaven and in earth; go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." More will be said on this subject in the next chapter. Twelfthly, belief in him; if indeed this ought to be considered as an honour peculiar to divinity; for the Israelites are said, Exod. xiv. 31. "to believe Jehovah and his servant Moses.' Again, "to believe the prophets occurs 2 Chron. xx. 20. and "faith toward all saints," Philem. 5. and "Moses in whom ye trust," John v. 45. Whence it would seem, that to believe in any one is nothing more than an Hebraism, which the Greeks or Latins express by the phrase to believe any one; so that whatever trifling distinction may be made between the two, originates in the schools, and not in Scripture. For in some cases to believe in any one implies no faith at all. John ii. 23, 24. "many believed in his name.... but Jesus did not commit himself unto them," xii. 42. “ many believed on him, but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him." the other hand, to believe any one often signifies the highest degree of faith. John v. 24. " he that believeth on him (qui credit ei) that sent me, hath everlasting life." Rom. iv. 3. "Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for Оп 6 On the signification of the word TOTEUε with and without a preposition. see Vorstii Philolog. Sacr. and the commentators on the Creed, especially Pearson. righteousness." 1 John v. 10. “he that believeth not, God." See also Tit. iii. 8. This honour, however, like the others, is 1 derived from the Father. John iii. 35, 36. "the Father hath given all things into his hand: he that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life." vi. 40. "this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life.” xii. 44. “Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me." Hence xiv. 1. ❝ ye believe in God, believe also in me." 1 John iii. 23. "this is his commandment, that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ." It may therefore be laid down as certain, that believing in Christ implies nothing more than that we believe Christ to be the Son of God, sent from the Father for our salvation. John xi. 25-27. "Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection and the life; he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: and whosoever liveth and believeth in me shallnever die. Believest thou this? She saith unto him, Yea, Lord; I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world.” 66 Thirteenthly, divine glory. John i. 1. "the Word was with God, and the Word was God." v. 14. "we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only-begotten of the Father," Tapà Пατpòs v. 18. no man hath seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." vi. 46. "not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God," v Tapà rou sou. xvii. 5. "glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." No one doubts that the Father restored the Son, on his ascent into heaven, to that original place of glory of which he here speaks. That place will be universally acknowledged to be the right hand of God; the same therefore was his place of glory in the beginning, and from which he had descended. But the right hand of God primarily signifies a glory, not in the highest sense divine, but only next in dignity to God. So v. 24. "that they may behold my glory which thou hast given me; for thou lovedst ne before the foundation of the world." In these, as in other passages, we are taught that the nature of the Son is indeed divine, but distinct from and clearly inferior to the nature of the Father, for to be with God, πρòs Oɛòv, and to be from God, τupà ε,-to be God, and to be in the bosom of God the Father, to be God, and to be from God, -to be the one invisible God, and to be the only-begotten and visible,' are things so different that they cannot be predicated of one and the same essence. Besides, considering that his glory even in his divine nature before the foundation of the world, was not self-derived, but given by the love of the Father, it is plainly demonstrated to be inferior to the Father. So Matt. xvi. 27. " in the glory of his Father." Acts iii. 13. "the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus." Col. i. 19. "it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell." ii. 9. "in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." Eph. iii. 19. "that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God." These passages most clearly evince that Christ has received his fulness from God, in the sense in which we shall receive our fulness from Christ. For the term bodily, which is subjoined, either means substantially, in opposition to the vain deceit mentioned in the preceding verse, or is of no weight in proving that Christ is of the same essence with God. 1 Pet. i. 21. "who gave him glory, that your faith and hope might be in God." ii. 4. "chosen of God and precious." 2 Pet. i. 16, 17. "we were eye-witnesses of his majesty; for he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him-." 1 Pet. iv. 11. compared with 2 Pet. iii. 18. "that God in all things See Paradise Lost, VI. 681. 8 Son, in whose face invisible is beheld On which passage Mr. Upton (Critical Observations on Shakspeare, In whose conspicuous countenance, without cloud Made visible, the Almighty Father shines. Mr. Todd approves this correction, and quotes from Drummond's Flowers of Sion O blest abode! O happy dwelling place! Where visibly the invisible doth reign. The distinction so pointedly made in the passage above between 'the one invisible Gol,' and the only begotten and visible,' seems to confirm the propriety of Mr. Upton's conjecture. 8 Milton seems to have had the same idea in his mind in the following passage: 'Beyond compare the Son of God was seen Paradise Lost, III. 138. may be glorified, through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever: but grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ; to whom be glory both now and for ever." On a collation of the two passages, it would seem that the phrase our Lord, in the latter, must be understood of the Father, as is frequently the case. If however it be applied to the Son, the inference is the same, for it does not alter the doctrine of the former passage. John xii. 41. citing Isai. lxiii. 5. "these things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him,"—that is, the glory of the only-begotten, given to the Son by the Father. Nor is any difficulty created by Isai. xlii. 8. "I am Jehovah, that is my name; and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images." For though the Son be another than the Father, God only means that he will not give his glory to graven images and strange gods,-not that he will not give it to the Son, who is the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upon whom he had promised that he would put his Spirit, v. 1. For the Father does not alienate his glory from himself in imparting it to the Son, inasmuch as the Son uniformly glorifies the Father. John xiii. 31. "now is the Son of man glorified, On his right 1 9 The radiant image of his glory sat, Son, thou in whom my glory I behold Paradise Lost, III. 62. In full resplendence, heir of all my might. V. 719. Effulgence of my glory, Son belov'd, Son in whose face invisible is beheld 1 Father, O supreme of heavenly thrones, X. 65. VI. 723. As is most just; This I my glory account and God is glorified in him." viii. 50. "I seek not mine own glory; there is one that seeketh and judgeth." Hence it becomes evident on what principle the attributes of the Father are said to pertain to the Son. John xvi. 15. "all things that the Father hath are mine." xvii. 6, 7. "thine they were, and thou gavest them me; .... now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee." It is therefore said, v. 10. "all mine are thine, and thine are mine"-namely, in the same sense in which he had called the kingdom his, Luke xxii. 30, for he had said in the preceding verse, "I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me.” Lastly, his coming to judgment. 1 Tim. vi. 14. "until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, which in his time he shall show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords; who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see.' Christ therefore, having received all these things from the' Father, and "being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God," Philipp. ii. 5. namely, because he had obtained them by gift, not by robbery. For if this passage imply his co-equality with the Father, it rather refutes than proves his unity of essence ; since equality cannot exist but between two or more, essences. Further, the phrases he did not think it, he made himself of no reputation, (literally, he emptied himself,) appear inapplicable to the supreme God. For to think is nothing else than to entertain an opinion, which cannot be properly said of God.2 Nor can the infinite God be said to empty himself, any more than to contradict himself; for infinity and emptiness are opposite terms. But since he emptied himself of that form of God in which he had previously existed, if the form of God is to be taken for the essence of the Deity itself, it would prove him to have emptied himself of that essence, which is impossible. 2 Opinio autem in Deum non cadit.' Milton uses the same words in his treatise on Logic, where he assigns the reason. 'Opinio tamen in Deum non cadit, quia per causas æque omnia cognoscit.' Prose Works, Symmons' ed. VI. 293. For, as he says in his Speech for the Liberty of Unlicensed Printing, 'opinion is but knowledge in the making.' Prose Works, II. 92. VOL. IV. L |