CHAPTER IV: What kind of Son he is to God, or in what sense he is the Son of God.
proceeding from him as a Son, and as such existent afore. He therefore distinguisheth and severeth these two things (as appears in several speeches of his); 'I came from the Father,' so first; and then,
'And I came into the world;' or thus, 'And he hath sent me.' This is not only oft repeated, but this very order observed as oft as repeated:
John 7:29, 'I know him: for I am from him, and he hath sent me.'
CHAPTER IV
What kind of Son he is to God, or in what sense he is the Son of God.
He is the proper Son of God in a special peculiar manner, such as no other person can be said to be.—He is styled the only begotten Son of God, which can be affirmed of no creature.—This imports that his eternal generation is the foundation of his sonship.—He is called the Son of the living God; that he is begotten of him in his own likeness; and is of the same nature and substance with him.—That he is God by an identity; of one and the same essence of the Godhead, and not by union only, or office.
To demonstrate in what sense Christ has this title of Son of God, I shall herein also proceed by degrees.
1. It is given him by way of singularity, in comparison of all others that have the title of sons; this all acknowledge.
As God the first person, by way of singularity, ordinarily is called the Father, 'one God, the Father;' so frequently in the same way of singularity is Christ termed the Son, in relation unto this God as the Father. And it hath been observed by some, that whereas ὕιος Θεοῦ, that is to say, A son of God, is common to others, that is, to us with him; yet ὁ ὕιος τοῦ Θεοῦ, The Son of God, is never given to any but to him.
2. God the Father himself, by way of a special appropriation, sets him forth and exhibits him as his Son, with difference from all others. He said it himself from heaven, 'This is my beloved Son,' Luke 9:35. This person, this is the very He, he of all others individually, and alone he and none other; and then he adds, let all else 'hear him.' Thus when he presents him to the world, 'hear him,' acknowledge and receive him, as he who hath power to make you sons to me; John 1:12, 'But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.'
But this general is far short of what the Scriptures speak concerning what, or wherein his sonship consists. Even the Jews seem to conceive and apprehend that he who should be the Christ, should have the title of the Son of God given him by way of eminency above all others, yet all that while conceiving of him, as to the substance of his person, that it was but only a man that should transcendently have God's presence with him, and that God should appear in him in a more glorious manner than in all men else. And not the Jews only, but the Gentiles, were struck with a sense of some one special person's being the Son of God, as in this sense understood.
Thus far, and in such respect, Pilate had apprehensions that Christ possibly might be the Son of God. For when the Jews had told him that one Jesus made himself (or took upon him to be) the Son of God, John 19:7, 'When Pilate heard that saying,' saith the text, 'he was the more afraid.' It cannot be imagined that Pilate's divinity reached to convince him to be the substantial Son of God, but he thought he might (for all that he knew) be some eminently divine man from God, such as their poets spake of, and attributed to Augustus Cæsar, magnum Jovis incrementum, which struck fear into him.
I am doubtful, I confess, whether to refer to Nebuchadnezzar's speech, in Dan. 3:25, who when he saw one appear in a differing manner with those three children in the fiery furnace, he cries out,
'The form of the fourth is like the Son of God;' and surely it was an
appearance in such a glory, as was far beyond what creatures, even angels, appear in, that made him speak thus. But that which makes me doubtful is, that he had not any notion of this Son of God to come, unless, as I afore challenged it, for Christ's existence as God's
Son under the Old Testament, he perceiving his glory such, and so superlatively different, acknowledgeth him to be the Son of that God whose kingdom was to be an everlasting kingdom, Dan. 4:3.
But it is yet more observable to prove the present assertion, that whenever Christ spake of the Father afore his disciples, or others, he never said 'Our Father,' which yet he taught us to say, even when we pray in private, to the end that we should come to God as such a Father to us, as he is also to all others of his elect. And so the Jews were taught and instructed to say, 'We have one Father, even God,'
John 8:41. But his own usual style was 'my Father,' and therefore so a Father to him as to no other, nor to all or any of the sons of God.
And this appropriation was so much his wont that the Jews observed it, and took him at it, and were offended, John 5:17. Whereas he had said, 'My Father worketh hitherto, and I work,' the Jews 'sought the more to kill him, because he had said God was his Father,' which is but slenderly so translated: for in the original it is, because he had called God his own Father, that is, so and in such a manner his as not others'; and so the Jews themselves understood him, whilst the words were yet fresh in his mouth. Yea, and he speaks not this amongst a wicked company of Jews, who were the children of the devil, ver. 44, as any other ordinary son or child of God alone among a company of wicked ones might by way of separation so use it; but further, Christ doth the very same when he had an occasion to speak to and of his disciples, and of himself (who were the chiefest saints then alive of the sons of men, and representing the rest for ever to come), how God was Father both to him and them, yet he carefully makes this separation, 'My Father and your Father,' John 20:27. You see he mentions their relation apart, yea, as separate and aloof off from his own. He putteth the sonship or relation of all them into one common relation, 'your Father,' and sets against it, and severs from
it, as at a distance, his own, 'my Father.' And that, to shew their relation of sons to God, is not of the same rank or descent that his is.
There is moreover, an us all, Rom. 8:32, 'He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not also with him freely give us all things?' namely, us, the saints. 'God gave him up for us all,' says he, and these all, we find, had been afore termed the sons of God, in the 16th verse of that chapter, 'The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God;' and so declared 'heirs of all things,' because joint heirs with Christ, ver. 17.
And again, ver. 29, ha had called them the brethren of Christ, and him the 'firstborn among many brethren.'
And yet, after all this, by way of difference from these, he entitles Christ, 'God's own Son;' 'If God spared not his own Son,' ver. 32. To have said his Son, by way of singularity, when mention is made of many other brethren, had been enough to have signified his eminency unto them, especially to say the first-born, as ver. 29, he hath done. But he adds hereto over and above all, his own Son; as thereby signifying the different kind or sort of sonship and fatherhood that was betwixt God and him. This is therefore an eminent distinction of two sorts of sons which God had: his own Son, proper, genuine, true Son, and others that were not his own, but either by marriage or adoption. As strangers and aliens, in their original descent, use to be to a father that afterwards takes them for his adopted sons; and it is evident that this is his meaning. For ver.
15, the apostle had given this other part of distinction of sonship of this his us all. 'We have received,' says he, 'the Spirit of adoption, by which we,' that are Jews, 'cry, Abba,' and we, that are Gentiles,
'Father;' 'And if children, then heirs,' ver. 17. Now God in this speaks as plainly to men in their own language as is possible to express it.
Come to a man that hath both sons by marriage, and also a son out of his own loins, and you hear him call them all sons. But particularly ask him what son is this? 'My own son,' says he. And are these so?
No; they are my daughter's husbands, and so my sons-in-law, or my wife's sons, or whom I have taken to be my sons by will. Well, and
what doth a man mean when he says, This is my own son, especially when with a distinction from others that are adopted? All men understand a son that is of his substance, naturally begotten of him, of his flesh and blood. Then in its infinite proportion it ought so to be understood here.
A second expression, to be added to this, is, that of his being styled 'The only begotten Son of God' so often, John 1:14, 18; 3:16; 1 John
4:9, and therefore so begotten as not others. Quasi præter eum nullus; as if besides him no other were begotten. And if any would quarrel, that others are said to be begotten of God, 1 John 5:18, yet to be sure, when God says this of him, 'Thou art my begotten Son,' he means it of such a begetting as hath not been communicated to any creature of the old creation, which that place is express for, 'To which of all the angels hath he said, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee?' Heb. 1:5. So instancing in his highest sons, of the sort of mere creatures, that are nearest to him; in excluding them he excludes all the rest.
In which speech we may observe two things.
1. That a generation, or begetting him, is the foundation of his sonship, as it is of all true and natural sons else among men. For so he joins them, 'Thou art my Son; I have begotten thee,' as the ground of that his sonship. If it were but a metaphorical or similitudinary generation, as when he says of the ice and the snow, Job 38:28, 29,
'Hath the rain a father? or who hath begotten the drops of the dew?
Out of whose womb came the ice? and the hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it?' then his sonship were no other. But doth God speak poetically here (as there he doth), when of the generation of his Son? Then indeed he were but metaphorically a Son, and God a metaphorical Father to him. Whereas he is the 'true Son of God,' as John calls him, 1 John 5:20, and therefore as truly begotten.
2. Then that his generation is such a begetting, and he such a Son in that respect as is denied of the angels, or of men, is evident. Thou,
and thou alone, art my Son; I have begotten thee, and thee alone. So that otherwise, let the Scripture speak what it will of men's being born of God, begotten of God, it is with an infinite distance of sense from this. Theirs is but by his operation, not generation, by renascentia, a new birth of God's image on them, which are but divine qualities in the soul, not by a generation that is proper to a substantial person.
Then, thirdly, add to these two expressions of 'one Son,' and of 'only begotten,' that other, Mat. 16:16; as also John 6:69; where, both by Peter's and all the apostles their confession, he is professed to be the 'Son of the living God.' And in both those confessions, the conglomeration, or gathering together so many articles in the Greek set afore every word, are as so many stars that call us to behold this eminency of his sonship and generation. For they putting an emphasis on every word in that small sentence, 'Thou art that Christ; that Son of that God, that living God;' the like indigitation is never used but for some special intent, according to the nature of the matter spoken of. And that which makes it the more observable is, that John (who wrote long after the other evangelists, and avoideth to mention what other evangelists had recorded, and so mentions this confession of theirs as uttered at another time, and upon a differing occasion from that which Matthew relates) should yet, in his rehearsal of this confession, not only punctually keep to the same words, but hath as carefully added the same articles afore every word as Matthew had done.
Yea, further, whereas it is observed by some (as was said), that the article ὁ ὕιος, the Son, is given to none but to this Son; lo, here it is also put to every word besides, when his sonship is solemnly proclaimed. And so the meaning will be this, 'That Son of the only true God, that living God.' Which emphasis, the God, and which attribute, the living God, are purposely annexed to set out the greatness of this so great a Son. And to shew that if we do suppose the great and true God to have a Son, and but one Son, and him begotten by him, as he is the living God (as put this and those former
things mentioned of him together, and it appears), then what manner of a Son must this be? and what manner of generation, but such as living fathers have proportionably of their sons? A generation such as is proper to things living when they beget their kind.
Generation, properly taken, says Aquinas,* and experience shews it, is of things that are living, out of a living principle, and is improperly applied to production. And further, it is then said to be generation properly in them, when they beget in their own likeness, and that likeness consisting in their own kind, nature, and substance.
And thus living things properly are said to beget; as in nature you all see, a lion begets a lion, a man a man. Proprium est viventium generare simile in substantia. And those two attributes are given to Christ, holding forth his generation, viz., 'the Word,' and 'the Son,'
'The Word' shews he is begotten by God, who is an intellectual being; 'the Son' shews that he is begotten as a living essence or being.
Now then, putting all these three together: 1. God's own Son; 2. Only begotten; 3. That one only begotten Son of the true and living God; these twisted and interwoven mutually, are a threefold cord that cannot be broken. Let us therefore see what arguments and evidences these will afford to convince us what manner of a Son this is.
By a further adding all these succeeding considerations together to them, and setting these by them.
Assertion 3. That this only begotten and natural Son of God is God; and not God only by union, after he was put forth by God out of himself, but by an identity, or oneness of one and the same essence of the Godhead.
This third is naturally connected with the foregoing assertion, viz., that he is the natural Son of the living God. Thus,
1. The Scriptures connect and join these two together; in that often, when and where they mention his sonship to God, they annex withal
(because the one necessarily importeth the other), his being God also, as may be observed both out of the Old Testament and the New.
(1.) The Old Testament, Isa. 9:6, 'Unto us a child is born,' which speaks him to be man; 'and unto us a Son is given,' that speaks him to have been God, and as such, extant afore he as man was born; for what is given hath a being when he is given, and afore he is given; who took man's nature to himself as Son; and here, by Son, he means this Son of God, our Christ. Luke 1:31, 35: The angel there hath manifestly an eye upon this prophecy of Isaiah here; ver. 32, 'Thou shalt conceive a Son, and he shall be called the Son of the Most High: and God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end;' thus the angel there. And how speaks Isaiah? 'To us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulders. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, from henceforth, even for ever.' The angel citeth not the place, but evidently reciteth the very words of that prophecy, the very same, thus. So then, Christ being meant by the Son, that which I allege Isaiah for is this, that his being Son and his being God are joined; and so it follows in Isa. 9:6,
'To us a son is given; and his name shall be called the mighty God.'
(2.) In Heb. 1:8, you have the same by Paul's interpretation out of the Psalms: 'To the Son he says, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.'
Compare we now the words of Isaiah with that of the angel, and this of Paul out of the Psalms together; they are one and the same, to shew he is God's Son. Thus for the Old Testament and New both.
Again, in the New, Heb. 3:3, 'This man,' says the translation (you may as well say, 'This person;' man is not in the original), 'was counted worthy of more honour than Moses: inasmuch as he that built the house hath more honour than the house.' And ver. 4 it follows, 'Every house is builded by some man, but he that built all these things' (that is, the church in all ages, and things about it, under both Old and New Testament) 'is God.' He that had instructed
Moses and the church under the Old Testament, and now that of the New, 'is God,' speaking it of Christ as God. So then Christ is God, who is the builder of this house. Now, read on and you will find his being Son not far off; for in ver. 6, 'Christ as a Son over his own house.' Now, compare Mat. 16:16, 'Thou art the Son of the living
God,' says Peter. And what says Christ upon it? Ver. 18, 'Upon this rock I will build my church,' as being the Son of the living God. And he that was able to build it was God, says our apostle in that Heb.
3:4. Therefore he is such a Son as is also God, and both are joined together.
Again, those two parallel places in the epistle to the Romans, the one chap. 1 ver. 3, 4, 'Concerning his Son Jesus Christ, which was made of the seed of David, according to the flesh; and declared to be the Son of God with power.' Compare this with chap. 9:5, 'Of whom concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.' Son of God in the one, is God blessed for ever in the other.
Further, these two run as terms equivalent in other places of Scripture, where in like manner they be compared; 1 Tim. 3:16, it is said of Christ, 'God was manifest in the flesh;' and in 1 John 3:18, you have it this, 'The Son of God was manifested.'
Likewise, Acts 20:28, it is said, God purchased the church with his own blood. Now, compare Rev. 1:5, speaking of our Christ, 'He hath washed us with his own blood, and made us priests unto God his
Father.' So then it was the Son, whose blood was personally his own, who was distinct from his Father, and yet God, that purchased this church.
Again, 1 John 5:20, 'And we know that the Son of God is come; and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life;' the true Son of God: and the true God.
The very devil himself doth in effect acknowledge it, Mat. 4:3, 'If thou be that Son of God, command these stones to be made bread,'
which was in effect as to have said, If thou be that great Son of God that is to come into the world, then thou art God, and hast sovereign power to create or change the being of the creatures. Let us therefore see it by the effects, 'command these stones to be made bread.'
Last of all, that known place, John 10:30, alleged to prove Christ's Godhead, joins these two together, Son of God and God, and the one is inferred from the other. When at the 30th verse Christ had said, 'I and my Father are one;' that is, I who profess myself to be that one and only Son of God, who is my Father; as in such a special relation,
I am such a Son to him as am withal one with him.
So then, 1. Christ intended that his being God's Son was all one, and to be one with God.
Again, 2. So the Jews understood him to intend thereby that he was God. Their quarrel with him is that, ver. 33, 'Thou makest thyself
God;' and yet, lo, he had only affirmed, 'I, the Son, and my Father are one.' So then to be his Son in the sense the Jews understood him to take on him that title, was all one as to be God.
And, 3. In that very sense he so defended himself to be the Son of God, that is, such a Son as was God; for having, ver. 34–36, made his defence, alleging this proof, that if the eminent men and magistrates of the Old Testament were termed gods by office, and sons of God by adoption, who were but shadows of him in both those titles, then he, who was promised to be sent into the world as the substance, must be God by nature, and not office; and the Son of God, not by adoption only, but naturally, and therefore equal and one with God. I say, he having defended himself by this argument, his conclusion is, ver. 36, 'Say ye then of him whom the Father hath sealed, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?' Now, what was it that they had said? or, what blasphemy was it which they had laid to his charge? It was this, ver. 33, 'for thy blasphemy; because thou, being a man,' as to our apparent sight and view, 'makest thyself God.' And Christ, you see, in his making his
conclusion point-blank to their accusation, instead of saying, 'Why say you I blaspheme in saying I am God?' which yet was the thing which they had said of him, he speaks thus, 'Because I said, I was the Son of God,' 'believe not me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in him;' that is, that he and I are one in nature as he had affirmed, ver. 30. For indeed, in his having affirmed he was such a Son to God as was one with his Father, which was his saying, ver. 30, he had affirmed he was such a Son to God as was God, one that did the same works the Father did, ver. 35; which, I do, says he, then believe it, for it is the natural inference from it.
Thus, you see, the Scriptures join his being both Son and God together.
II. The same is in reason, that if he be the natural Son of God, and only begotten of the living God, the true and perfect Son of God, as the Scriptures, when they speak of his being Son, do declare him (as hath been clearly testified), that then necessarily, in point of rational inference, he must be God essentially. If God hath a true Son, that Son can be no other than true God; it holds no proportion else to the phrase it pretends to. It holds true in all things else. It is not to be thought, says Bernard,* that God should have a Son of another kind from himself; but it is necessary to acknowledge him to be of equal height and dignity, since even the sons of princes are themselves princes too, Deus non nisi Deum gignit. If God begets a Son he must be God, the living, true God. God cannot beget less than himself, which is clearly the concession of those last words in John, speaking of Christ, 'God hath given us an understanding to know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life,' 1 John 5:20. The scope of which is this, that he being the true Son of the true God, the living God, himself is, in himself, the true God also, and eternal life, having the fountain of all life in himself.
I shall but open and pursue one vein, or current, or course of Scriptures, which carry on this great point, that our Christ is God; not as appearing only in the form of God, as some of late, or by office only, but God by nature; the right God, the true God, the great God, the only God, the living God. Which attributes of God, when found to be given to him, argue him so to be God by essence, the same God the Father is, as put us past distinguishing upon it.
1. He is God by nature. It is the distinction which Paul useth, and whereby he sets out the true God in distinction from all other that are called gods, truly or falsely. 'When you knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.' Why doth he not in plain terms say, 'When ye worshipped idols?' The apostle supposeth the best of it; for some of those whom they worshipped had been gods by office, that is, kings and rulers, as Jupiter and others were; or of use (as gods), benefactors to mankind, for which they worshipped them. He needed not else have put in that distinction, that they were not gods by nature. From which is gathered to our purpose in hand, (1.) That none are to be worshipped but he that is God by nature, for he shews their sin to have been that they worshipped such as God that were not gods by nature. So then, if Christ were not God by nature, he were no more to be worshipped by us, though never so great a benefactor to us, which yet is his due. And to strengthen this argument, the command of worshipping so falls out that those who are gods by office of the highest rank, the angels, are commanded to give worship to him. That saying, Heb. 1, 'Let all the angels of God worship him,' in the psalmist's words (whom the apostle quotes) it is,
'Worship him, all ye gods,' Ps. 97:7. So then he is manifestly God by nature, and thereby distinguished from all of them; and worship is exacted from all of them as his due upon that account.
And this is the true and genuine drift and result of that passage of Christ's, John 10:30–39. 'I and my Father are one. Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, Many good
works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken; say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God? If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe me not, believe the works; that ye may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in him. Therefore they sought again to take him: but he escaped out of their hands., That scripture, of all others, hath seemed to have the greatest objection in it, but one (which I shall anon also again more touch), that Christ is called God only by office and union with God, as the great and eminent men in the Old
Testament were called. And the objection lies thus, that the Jews having challenged him to have made himself God, he defends his speech by this saying out of the Old Testament, 'I have said, Ye are gods:' as if himself were but such a God as they, only more eminent.
But Christ's scope is manifestly the clean contrary. For, 1. The Jews did plainly understand him to intend that he was God, and truly God, ver. 33. So the Jews, saith Augustine,* understood his speech thus to be meant; but the Arians will not. And the blasphemy which the Jews challenged him of was not that he made himself as one of those gods, but that he made himself God, one with the Father, and so by nature to be God as well as he. And his answer, if it had been intended in that other speech, had noway come home to their objection; for that was not the thing they quarrelled him for, that he said he was a god by office and deputation, as those whom the psalmist did speak of only were.
2. Christ here quoteth that saying, 'I have said, Ye are gods,' as a prophecy (so I term it, for types were prophecies of Christ, and what he should be, as much as any other), of himself: which those words,
ver. 35, 'And the Scripture cannot be broken,' manifestly import.
Now, how was this prophecy, but in this respect, that God his terming magistrates, and those eminent men in the Old Testament, in Jewry, or elsewhere, gods, was to fore-signify thereby his own Son, who was the substance of those shadows, what his person was, that he had promised to send into the world; for in saying, 'The Scripture cannot be broken,' his intent is to say, the Scripture is, and must be found true, and fulfilled or made good.
Now then, in this lies the force and edge of Christ's argument to prove himself God in that sense they had understood him. The Jews looked at and acknowledged all those great and eminent men whom the Scriptures termed gods, to be but forerunning shadows and types of him that is the Messiah. So that, look what titles and excellencies are given and attributed unto them, must in an eminent, and distinct, and substantial way be found true in his person, or the Scripture will be broken, and not be found consistent. If therefore they were called gods by commission and deputation, as having the word of God come to them, which put that title and office upon them; and it was said of them 'Ye are gods,' as Ps. 82:6; your Messiah must be God of another sort and rank than they were of, and not only merely by commission, or as to whom the word of God came, to make him God; but he must be truly and by nature and essence such.
Were he to be God no otherwise than they were, the Scripture had not been fulfilled.
And this argument is so strong, as nothing can be supposed stronger to us Christians, who know that all types of Christ were indeed but shadows, in all their excellencies attributed to them, of Christ as the substance. What is said of ceremonies is true of persons that were types of him, Col. 2:18, 'which are a shadow of things to come; but the body,' or substance signified by that shadow, 'is Christ.' Now, then, if they were termed gods, and sons of the Most High, it must be understood that therein they were but shadows, and he must have in his person that which holds true of the substance, the essence or real being thereof. And so, according to Christ's way of arguing, if they
are gods by office and union, he must be God by essence and nature, as that distinction of the apostle, Gal. 4:8, holds forth. And otherwise, he had himself been but a dark shadow, an officiary god, as they; no otherwise Son of the Most High than as they also were,
Heb. 10:1. The apostle speaks thus of all types and shadows under the Old Testament. The law had but a shadow of good things to come, and not so much as the image of the things themselves. From all which I gather that as in nature, so here, the shadow is lower than an image, and both alterius generis from the substance or reality, as in the case of Melchisedec is apparent, who in a mere shadow is said to have had no beginning nor end of days; not that really he had not, but because in a shadowy intent it is not mentioned in the book of Scripture, he being as a shadow conformed to the Son of God. Now, in comparison of Christ, all other eminences in any person, though more real, are yet esteemed to be but shadows in as true a manner as he (Melchisedec) was. And so this greatest excellency of all creatures to be styled gods, must, in comparison of him, be content with a shadowy title, whereof he bore the substance. He, in the conclusion of this argument, instead of saying he was God, which yet his argument and their accusation did drive to, concludes he was the Son of God: ver. 36, 'Say ye of him, thou blasphemest, because I said I am the Son of God?' The blasphemy in their sense was, ver. 33, that he
'made himself God,' as an inference out of that saying, 'I and my Father are one.' He defends it, and takes it on him by this, that he had said indeed that he was the Son of God (of whom all those gods and sons of the Most High the psalmist speaks of, were but shadows), and therefore truly God, as they intended it. It is not comparatio similium, ut volunt adversarii, that is, that I am God in the same and like manner that they are; but it is comparatio minoris et majoris, if they that are but shadows are called gods, then, if that Scripture be not broken, I must be God substantially. So then, by Christ's manner of concluding, it was all one for him to say he was
God, and the Son of God, both in his sense, in theirs, and in the psalmist's foresignifying of him. He again paraphraseth and explains all these by this phrase, 'The Father is in me, and I in him.' So then, the conclusion, the sum I draw out of all is, that for Christ to be the
Son of God, it is all one as for him to be God substantially, and in that respect one with God. And that being thus God, and one with God the Father, is (in its difference from God) best thus expressed, that his Father is in him, and he in his Father. Neither could Christ himself that experimented it, express his being God, and Son of God, more clearly unto us, than to say, I am in my Father, who is God, and he as God is in me, and so both are one: that is, one God substantially, or by nature, in distinction from gods by office, though we are two in person that subsist in this nature. Nor did John know better how to express it in chap. 1 ver. 1, both his oneness with God, and his distinction from God, than in saying, that he 'was God, and was with God.' God, not as those in the psalmist, to whom the word of the Lord came, and were gods merely by God's saying so of them; but he, 'the Word,' ὁ λόγος, itself (as John calls him) of whom they that declared the word were the types and shadows; and the only begotten of the Father, ver. 18, who was not made a god and a son, because sent into the world, and sanctified, but was therefore sent and sanctified to that office of Messiah, because he was by nature and substantially the Son of God, and God equal with the Father both in power and nature, ver. 29, 30; and in works, ver. 37, 38, 'If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not: but if I do, though you believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in him.'
2. He is styled 'the living God.' Those words, 'Take heed there be not an evil heart in departing from the living God,' Heb. 3:12, are manifestly meant of Christ; for his begun exhortation, ver. 7, was to hear his voice, and he it was that was tempted in the wilderness, 1
Cor. 16:7. And how that whole 95th Psalm was meant of Christ, I have elsewhere shewn; yea, it was he that gave the law, and pronounced those words, 'I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt; thou shalt have no other gods before my face;' for, Heb. 12:26, it is expressly said of him, 'whose voice then shook the earth,' namely, when the law was given, and those words uttered by him.
3. He is styled 'the true God.' So 1 John 5:20, 'And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his
Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.' And to testify this, he is styled by that incommunicable name of God, Jehovah, Jer.
23:6, Jehovah justitia nostra, 'the Lord our righteousness.' 'In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely; and this is his name wherewith he shall be called, The Lord our Righteousness.'
So also Isa. 40 vers. 3, 10, 12, 'Prepare the way for Jehovah.' These all the evangelists apply to John and Christ, Mat. 3:3, Mark 1:4, John
1:23. And if John be the vox clamantis, Christ must be acknowledged the Jehovah, whose way was prepared afore him. And when he comes in the flesh, Isa. 40 ver. 9, he says unto the cities of Judah,
'Behold your God;' and, ver. 10, 'Behold, the Lord God will come with strong hand, and his arm shall rule for him: behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him;' which is expressly applied to Christ, Rev. 22:12, speaking of his second coming. Ver. 11, 'He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he that is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still. And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give to every man according as his work shall be.' Which is expressly true of Christ. Read Mat. 16:27. It is God of whom it is said, Isa. 40:13, as the Septuagint hath it, Τὶς ἔγνω νοῦν κυρίου; 'Who hath known the mind of the Lord?' which, 1 Cor. 2:16, the apostle applies to Christ, by adding, 'But we have the mind of Christ.' So then Christ is that Jehovah, Jer. 23:6.
Now, men may vainly dispute it that this name of Jehovah is given unto mere creatures; but God himself hath decided it, and expressly declared, that it is given unto none but the true God: 'That men may know that thou, whose name alone is Jehovah, art the most high over all the earth' Ps. 83:18. And Isa. 42:8, 'I am the Lord, that is my name; and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.' Now, this honour is given to Christ, and therefore he must be God, and the true God.
4. He is also 'the great God.' Not only, Isa. 9:6, 'the mighty God,' but, Tit. 2:12, 13, τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ καὶ σωτήρς ἡυῶν, 'that great God and Saviour of us,' speaking both of one and the same person, Christ.
And it is here the putting the article before great God, and none before Saviour, imports; and so distinguisheth him from God by the like phrase generally, Eph. 1:3, ὁ Θεὸς καὶ πατήρ, God, and the Father of Christ; but more similar yet. This here, Gal. 1:4, τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ἡυῶν, 'according to the will of God and our Father.' So Christ, 'God and our Saviour,' in Peter, is 'Christ the great God and Saviour' in Titus. And this is at once proclaimed as the general faith of all believers and apostles, 'like faith with us,' 2 Pet. 1:1. And what is the object of it? ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ, 'on the righteousness.' I have wondered they should translate it 'through the righteousness,' when
Christ's righteousness is everywhere made the object of faith, as justifying, on which we believe. Yea, as that which, out of necessity to salvation, faith relies on; and that righteousness, as of a Saviour that is God, which were of no value to us sinners else; let them else take a Saviour and righteousness that will, for he nor it would do no man any good. This was the general expectation, as Paul to Titus, the general fundamental faith of all Christians then, as in Peter; and so the prophet's style and the apostle's style agrees. Isaiah, in his 40th,
43d, and 45th chapters, styles him 'The God and Saviour, and there is none besides him;' and the apostles in like manner, 'The great God and Saviour.'
5. If you yet doubt, lo! to put all out of question, he is styled 'the only true God.' The other, and the greatest objection that ever was or can be made against this Godhead of Christ is, that it is said there is but one God only. Yea, and the Father is so styled and called, 'And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus
Christ whom thou hast sent,' John 17:3. And I find in some men's late writings here at home them distinguishing thus: that take the Godhead simply in its unity, and so considered, it is only the Father, quoting all those places, there is none besides. And the Son they make to be either God, as united to man, and so in that respect becoming the Son, or the manifestation of God in flesh; or, at best,
but that in God which contained the mass and spirit of the whole creation as it was in God from everlasting, and so distinct from the nature of God, as purely in himself. But the objection hath been the occasion to me of the greatest satisfaction in this point, that the same style is given as completely unto Jesus Christ as to the Father in those other places. And so the words are not to be understood exclusively to Christ in this sense, to know thee as Father to be the only true God; the Father, that only is the true God; the words are not so, but inclusively rather thus, 'And him whom thou hast sent to be the only true God also.' Only Christ having an office, in respect of which he is called Christ, he is therefore named apart from the Father, yet so as both are that only true God, in distinction from all gods so called, that are not gods by nature. And the ground of my satisfaction is this, that in a multitude of places where God is called the only God, and none besides him, yet those places are expressly meant of and applied to our Christ: 'Thus saith the Lord the King of Israel, an his Redeemer the Lord of hosts, I am the first, and I am the last, and besides me there is no God,' Isa. 44:6. Here, yon see, is the attribute we seek for, the only God, &c. And this is as evidently spoken of Christ. For, First, Here are two titles given him, which are proper to Christ.
1. 'King of Israel;' see John 1:49, 'Thou art the Son of God, thou art the King of Israel.' And for that of 'his Redeemer,' I need not trouble you with any quotations that it is proper to him. And yet he to whom this title is given is God, and the only God, 'Yea, beside me there is no God.' And if you yet doubt, and ask me, But are you sure that it is spoken of him? Lo, Rev. 1 twice: ver. 8, 'I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end?' and again, ver. 17, 'I am the First and the Last.' And then you have them all three, 'I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last,' Rev. 22:13. The next in Isaiah is chap. 45:5, 'I am the Lord, and there is none else; there is no God besides me;' and ver. 21, 22, he bids us look on him. And sure, without any more ado, we that live under the New Testament, should know him upon first sight. For to whom is it to whom all the ends of
the earth do look, but he who was proclaimed the desire of all nations, who were not converted to God until Christ came? But he it is of whom Isaiah says, 'There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust,'
Rom. 15:12. 'Look, and trust on him, and be saved, who is a Saviour, and there is none besides,' says the Old Testament. 'Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved,' is the general style of the apostles' preaching: a Saviour, and 'besides him there is no other.'
And thus they set him forth also, Acts 4:11. There is no God, no Saviour besides him, and justification in him discovers him none other: 'By him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses,' Acts 13:39. 'And in this Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified,' says Isaiah;
'Surely, shall one say, in the Lord I have righteousness and strength,'
Isa. 45:24, 25. And if you were all put to speak, in whom would you say you had righteousness and strength? Hear Paul for all the rest, in one epistle: 'To be found in him, not having my own righteousness,'
Philip. 3:9. And for the other, hear him again in the same epistle, 'I can do all things through Christ, that strengtheneth me,' Philip. 4:13.
Do not all the jury of saints, with one mouth, say the same? And what is he in whom we have this righteousness? Doth not Isaiah's fellowprophet tell us, Jer. 23:6, 'And his name,' for essence, 'is Jehovah;' for office, 'our righteousness.' Thus, I say, Saviour and God still are joined. The righteousness of this Saviour as God is that by which, through looking on him by faith, all, both Jew and Gentiles, are saved. And bring all this to that of Peter, even now quoted, describing true believers, 'All that have obtained like faith with us,' apostles, 'on the righteousness of God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ.'
And yet he of whom all this is said, takes this style upon himself to be the only God, and none besides him. And if any have the heart or face to deny these characters loosely scattered up and down, enough to convert a Jew to own him for the Messiah prophesied of, much more a Christian to acknowledge him the only true God, whom Isaiah spoke of, if any, I say, can deny it as meant personally of Christ, let them consult Paul, who expressly applies this very scripture unto our
Jesus: 'Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people. Praise the Lord, all ye
Gentiles; and laud him, all ye people,' Rom. 15:10, 11. Where is that written but in this place of Isaiah, ver. 23, 'I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear.'
And again it is quoted, Philip. 2, 'that to him every knee shall bow.'
And let me yet bring the current and stream of other arguments usually alleged, to prove that Christ is God, into the channel of the last-cited scriptures. You have heard it argued that Christ is therefore
God, because he creates and is worshipped, and forgives sins; and the Scriptures are express, that God alone creates, is worshipped, and forgives sins.
1. For creation, these places are express: Isa. 44:24, 'Thus saith the Lord thy Redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself.' And Jer. 10:10–12,
'But the Lord is the true God, he is the living God, and an everlasting King: at his wrath the earth shall tremble, and the nations shall not be able to abide his indignation. Thus shall ye say unto them, The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth, even they shall perish from the earth, and from under these heavens. He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched out the heavens by his discretion.' Now it is not only elsewhere said, that Christ created all, John 1:1, 2; Heb. 1, and therefore is God; but further, in these very places where he is called that only God, even in these places quoted, he is said to be that God who alone created; thus Isa. 43:7, 11, 23; 44:6, 24; 45:6, 22–24.
2. Again, so of God alone it is made the prerogative to be worshipped, Rev. 22:9; Mat 4:10; out of Deut 6:5, 6, where also he is called one
God. And of Christ it is also elsewhere said, he is to be worshipped.
But further, you have both these in these very places also, wherein, as he is styled that God that is one, and none besides him, he is brought in swearing by himself, that every knee shall bow to him, which is applied to him.
3. So to forgive sins is proper to God alone, Mark 2:7. And we find Christ to forgive sins; and therefore he is argued to be God. But further, you have both in these very places quoted; as he is called that only true God, so he is said to be that God that blots out transgressions for and by himself; thus Isa. 43:25, 'I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins.' So then the argument is every way strong, and indeed all arguments centre in one; and we find all in this one and the same compass of Scripture.
1. That God is but one God.
2. That God alone creates, is to be worshipped, and forgives sins.
3. That his glory he will not give unto another.
4. That Christ is that one God, who is God alone. And, 5. These places are interpreted of him, and applied to him by the apostles.
So as indeed this one argument, from these places of Isaiah thus framed, hath all in it, which are scatteredly used by others out of several places. To conclude, to hear God speak, and saying, as Deut.
32:39, he doth, 'See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no God with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal; neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand.' And to hear John from God to say, 'The Word was God, and the Word was with God;' and to hear the prophets say, that Christ is that God who is God alone, and none else besides him; and to hear throughout the Scriptures one that is
God, talking to, of, and with another that is God, and yet all but one God; to hear the Father to be called the only true God, the Son likewise, and so the Spirit: let all the wits of men and angels reconcile it otherwise than thus if they can, that God's nature or essence is one, but affords three persons, who are each that one God: three that are one.