CHAPTER VIII: That the title of Lord, though it imports him that is God
but Christ only, so both Peter and Jude do name the very heresies the heretics of those apostles' times run into, naming the very things themselves wherein their heresy consisted; namely, in their denying him to be God, the only true God, which together with that additional character of 'the Lord that bought them,' was the very point they denied.
Add to this, It is well known that those first heretics of the primitive times (who pretended to Christianity, and against such they only wrote), did not deny 'one God the Father,' or his being 'the only true
God,' but that Jesus Christ was the only true God, this they denied; and therefore it is that Jude speaks this of Christ alone.
And last of all, an angel from heaven, in the close of the whole New Testament, speaks the very same, thereby confirming and sealing what all the apostles and scriptures had spoken of Christ; thus in Revelations, the very last chapter, ver. 6, 'And the Lord God of the holy prophets,' who inspired them, 'sent his angel to shew unto his servants,' &c. Now who is it to whom the sending of this angel is attributed? Read ver. 16, 'I Jesus have sent my angel to testify unto you these things in the churches;' even the same person (Christ); the same he it is, that is the 'Lord God of the holy prophets,' ver. 6. And this is for certain our Jesus. For ver. 16, 'I Jesus have sent my angel.'
And who in like manner concludes his speech, ver. 20, 'He which testifies these things saith, Surely I come quickly: Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus,' says the church. And this is our Lord and our
God, as Jude and Peter said in their epistles.
And by all this, the Socinian objection is sufficiently obviated and gone beyond.
CHAPTER VIII
That the title of Lord, though it imports him that is God, and connotates with it his being God; yet in this Corinthian text (and
elsewhere), doth primarily note a relation to an office or a dignity put on him by the Father, as considered to be God-man, and not simply his being second person, God with God only.—The apostle's intent here is, to set him forth in the dependence that all things, &c., have of him as such, and not upon him as second person, simply considered.
—It is a title of office which he bears afore God, considered as Godman.—The fitness, fulness, and sufficiency of this person, Christ,
God-man, to discharge this office of one Lord.—For what reasons it was necessary that he should be God-man in one person, to qualify him for the employment.
We do, or may know, that there is a twofold Lordship of the second person: one natural, absolute, and underived, belonging to him, as he is considered singly, second person, God with God, and Lord with the Lord, to whom therefore all the royalties of the divine nature do equally and alike in common belong, even as to the Father and Holy
Ghost; which Lordship is in them all founded on this, which is common to all three persons, namely, that they had a joint concurrence in the making of all things, and also in governing of them. But then there is another lordship, that is, a derived, economical, dispensatory, which is set up by commission from God, for effecting all his works of wonder for him, and under him; and this is a lordship proper and peculiar unto Christ, considered as Godmen, to whom as such the Father hath committed all judgment as the Son of man: John 5:22, 27, 'For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son.' 'And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.'
And of this lordship it is that Peter speaks, Acts 2:36, 'Let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made him both Lord and Christ.' So then, there is a made lordship of his, who yet, by virtue thereof, makes all things. And this is the very same in other equivalent terms, that are elsewhere spoken of him by the other apostles; as by Paul himself, Heb. 1:2, 'Whom he hath appointed heir of all things.' Heir there is equivalent to Lord in that Acts 2:36; and appointed there unto made in Peter's speech, Acts 2:36; and of all things there, unto one Lord, of whom are all things, here in the text.
Hence therefore, his being Lord evidently imports an office or economy committed to him, and undertaken by him, even as his being Christ also doth. And indeed, we find both those titles of Lord and Christ joined often together, and attributed to him as being, in this respect, of like kind or constitution, that is, as being both made titles of office. And to this sense, as we meet them joined, Acts 2:36, so also we find him to have been publicly proclaimed with and under these titles by the angels, as the militia sent from heaven at his birth,
Luke 2:11, to proclaim their own new Lord, as well as of men: 'To you is born a saviour, which is Christ the Lord;' where they add a third,
Saviour; all which three titles are also here in the text, 'Our Lord Jesus Christ;' all and each of these three do alike import matter of office given to him, and undertaken by him. And in respect to this investment with an official lordship, it is, he is styled Lord in distinction from God, elsewhere as well as here. In those words, Ps.
110:1, 'The Lord said to my Lord, Sit,' &c., though our translation took no notice of a distinction in the titles given setly to each; yet in the original it is, 'Jehovah said, L'adonai,* unto the Lord,' that is,
God the Father said to the Lord or Christ, as Christ himself interprets it, Mat. 22:42, 43. And that his being Lord then importeth this his office of made lordship, and not that as second person, Peter evidently shews, in the place fore-cited, Acts 2, where he quotes these very words of the psalmist, ver. 34, to prove that God had 'made him
Lord and Christ;' for that is his inference from David's words, 'The Lord said unto my Lord.' And Christ himself, in Mat. 22:43, 44, 45,
'He saith unto them, How doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, &c. If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?' In like manner, Dan. 9:17,
'Hear, O God' (Jehovah), 'for the Lord's sake;' where Christ, in distinction from God the Father, is called Adonai and Lord. Yea, and this distinguishing title is made appropriate to him, the Lord, by the angels at his birth, 'who is Christ the Lord.' And before his death, by the evangelists, in their mention of him, Luke 12:42, 'And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season?' Chap. 24:34, 'Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath
appeared to Simon.' And John 4:1, 'When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John.' And chap. 6:23, 'Howbeit there came other boats from Tiberias, nigh unto the place where they did eat bread, after that the Lord had given thanks.' By Mary Magdalene, John
20:18, Mary Magdalene 'came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her.' By the angels, Mat. 28:6, 'He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.' And in the Acts ordinarily. In the same sense is this my Corinthian text to be understood.
2. This title of Lord, thus distinguished, doth fitly serve as an introductory proof from parallel scriptures, that the Lordship of office is also intended in this title in the text, and not as second person simply considered. For these reasons.
Reason 1. Christ is thereby here distinguished from God; not only as he is the Father, but as he is one God. Now, if Christ were styled the Lord only as second person, then he is not so to be distinguished from the Father, as the Father is one God; but as such he is included therein with the Father, for he is one God with him, and not to be excluded from that title. God forbid! But it is evident that this title, one Lord, is to shew a distinction from the one God; and therefore it must import, as something more in his person, so his office of lordship; by which, as in relation to the dependence of all things upon him, he is termed Lord. And otherwise, if his meaning were to express that he is God, as he is second person, singly considered, he should say but one and the same thing by two several words, viz., that God the Father is God, and that Christ the second person is one
God also, whilst he thus saith of him that he is the one Lord. And indeed then there were no difference at all; for God the Father is one
Lord, in that sense of being Lord. And it is common to the persons, and so it belongs to the Father as well as to the Son; and the Son is one God as well as the Father. Neither could the Socinian objection be answered, unless we interpret this one Lord to be spoken of Christ respectu officii, in respect of his office, and not of what he is as
second person simply. For there is no distinction between one God and one Lord, if his being God were simply meant in both; but there is a manifest distinction between God the Father and Christ, in these two titles intended to them.
Reason 2. He is here set out such an one Lord, though holding an opposition unto, yet withal as beareth some semblance, in an opposite way, with what the heathens did conceive of their 'lords many' in their subserviency unto their many gods; and we most suppose some analogy or semblance here to hold. Only they affirmed that there were many gods, and that there were many lords; 'but to us there is but one God and one Lord.' And yet the parallel between both thus far holds, that as these heathens supposed that these lords they fancied were such as were appointed by their gods to govern the world under their supposed deities, so we must think of Christ, this one Lord, as under the great God, in an instrumentality and subserviency unto this one God. And as a midst betwixt God and us, and in a perfect opposition to their many false gods and lords, he makes this the glory of the Christian religion, that they held but one great and sovereign true God, high above all gods, as the psalmist often expresses it, whereas they made many, falsely so called. And that that Jesus Christ whom we worship is but one Lord, in defiance of their many lords, whom they fancied to be mediators and agents between God and them, and as placed in the middle betwixt God and men; that was their religion. And the apostle outvies them. We profess such an 'one Lord,' who is an universal Lord 'over all,' and a mediator betwixt men and God also.
And for the verifying of this notion, as thus stated, I refer the reader onto what a more learned hand hath writ, alleging this very scripture to the same purpose I now do, for the confirmation of my assertion.
'This distinction (says he) also, of sovereign gods and demons, I suppose our apostle alludes to in 1 Cor. 8:5, where he saith, Though there be many that be called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, as there be θεοὶ πολλοὶ, gods many; that is, dii cœlestes, sovereign
deities, καὶ κύριοι πολλοὶ, lords many, that is, δαίμονες ἐπιχθόνιοι, demons, presidents of earthly things; yet to us Christians, there is but one sovereign God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we to him; that is, to whom, as supreme, we direct all our services; and but εἷς κύριος, one Lord Jesus Christ, instead of their many mediators and demons, διʼ οὗ τὰ πάντα, καὶ ἡμεὶς διʼ ἀυτοῦ, by whom are all things which come from the Father to us, and through whom alone we find access to him. The allusion, methinks, is passing elegant, and such as I think cannot be well understood, without this distinction of superior and inferior deities in the theology of the Gentiles, they having a plurality in both sorts, and we Christians but one in each, as our apostle affirmeth. There wants but only the name of demons, instead of which the apostle puts lords, and that for the honour of Christ, of whom he was to infer, ἑ͂ις κύριος, the name of Christ not to be polluted with the appellation of an idol; for his apodosis must have been otherwise εἷς δάιμων. Or maybe, he alludes unto the Hebrew name Baalim, which signifies lords. And those lords, I told you, were nothing else but demons: for thus would Paul speak in the Hebrew tongue; There are רבים בעלים and אלהים דבים, many gods and many lords.'—(Mr Mede's Apostasy of the Latter Times, p. 13, and part of 14.) They had heard of one God, of whom are all things, from the wisest of their own philosophers, but never of one mediator between that God and them: they had stumbled at this in the Christian religion, that they worshipped a man Jesus raised from the dead, as Acts
17:18, 31, when yet themselves held that the souls of men dead (though not risen) were mediators for them to their gods, and thus imprecated them to interpose for them. The apostle therefore, most wisely and aptly, and most elegantly, sets both these religions together in a parallel comparison, and yet in opposition of the one to the other; and so maketh the false notion of their lords thus far serviceable as to let in to these heathens' minds, by a similitudinary glimpse, that whereby these heathens, at least confusedly, might understand and apprehend (if they would but reflect) what manner a Lord or Christ it was we Christians believed and adored, and for what
use or end. Their fancies indeed ran upon many lords, and mediators many, and those dead men's souls: but the apostle presents them, instead of theirs, with one great mediator, according to the Christian profession; and him, though a man raised from the dead, yet such a Lord as, being more than a man, was not a mediator only betwixt that one God and them, 'and we by him'—but was a Lord over, yea, a founder of all things else, together with God, 'one Lord, by whom are all things.' And thus he outshoots them infinitely in the mainest principles of their religion they doated on, and accounted their glory and highest wisdom.
In the next place, I come to manifest the fitness, fulness, and sufficiency of this person, Christ, God-man, or of the Son of God united into one person with a man, to bear and sustain this office of one Lord, both in relation unto all things to be by him, and especially to us the elect.
Let it be remembered that this discourse of Christ's fitness in this place is wholly confined unto that notion in general of his lordship, as in the universal extent thereof over all things; but what is proper to set forth his fitness to be the head of angels, and more particularly as an head and redeemer for men, the discovery of that fitness is to succeed in its proper place,* when redemption comes to be handled, as that fitness of his person is suited to that work of redemption.
If we, the chosen of God, and all things, were able to speak, as they are brought in speaking at last, Rev. 5:11, and were permitted to give their voices to design forth and choose one (and but one person, as the text speaks) to be the universal Lord, they nor we could desire no other, none but this person of God-man, thus constituted and made up as he is, and is now to be set forth.
The all-sufficiency that is in this person for this office, the narrative thereof proceeds on thus.
1. Though in respect of the office itself, he that is to have it, is said to be 'made,' that is, 'appointed,' as coming under God's will appointing; yet in his person, as the foundation of it, it was absolutely necessary he be one that is 'not made,' that is, not a mere creature. One that had been but a mere subject of God's, according to that tenure of the law of creation only, had not had an intrinsecal worth and dignity in his person to fill up and carry forth this his office of lordship with port and comely honour enough, nor suitably to that place. For he must be so over the creature, as that himself might challenge worship and honour from the creature as their Lord, as truly and justly as God the Father, in that he was to be one whom all things should depend upon, as well as upon the Father; in whose person also a demonstration might be given, how great a God God the Father was in his distance from the creature, in that he that was his appointed Lord should yet naturally hold so great a sovereignty over all his creatures. Whoever had been but a made person, and a made lord too, and wholly both, he were too mean stuff to make
God's Lord of, that is, such a 'one Lord' as this text sets out, and which became God to set up. His person most be able to bear and to fill up his Lordship and dominion, for else he would but fall into the same rank with those 'many lords' the former verse speaks of; yea, if you would suppose one so sublimated as to be the spirit of the whole creation, and in whom the several species of the whole were, by way of eminency, contained and comprehended, and out of whom, as an elixir, they all might be extracted (as some philosophise concerning our Christ), yet still, in that he were but only made, his distance from mere nothing were but the very same that his inferior fellowcreatures have, he could never have been a midst between God and them, because in his person he held not a proportionable distance between God and them, and thereby he had been as subject, by his original make and constitution, to the same mutability and weakness that any other of the creatures were, and so would have proved but a mere quick-sand to the upholding* and bearing up the weight of all things that were to be founded on him, and depend upon him. Look, then, as in the case of man's redemption, like as men that had infirmity, were laid aside for the office of the eternal priesthood; and
God sought out one that was 'perfect for evermore;' so, of all mere creatures, it must be said, as to this his office of Lordship, they all had infirmity.
If it be said yet, if God would, could he not have made one great enough for this? The answer is, even for this very reason, that still all would have been but merely a made greatness; even therefore, suppose what you can or will, it proves too little, and falls short. For, alas! it were all but wholly borrowed; yea, and of which greatness these very stones were as immediately capable without him, by God's sole raising them to such an estate, as himself once was thereof. God could have made as good such Christs, and Lords of them, as the Baptist says, Mat. 3:9, sons of Abraham out of stones. He that is capable of so high an office, must be one that is God, which we have even now proved.
This for the first, that this one Lord, here in the text, is and must be God.
And yet again, 2dly, if he be to be 'made a Lord, and Christ' (as the Scripture speaks also of him), he must, together herewith, be something that is made, as well as God, who cannot be made. He is to be (in respect of this office) under God, lower than God, between God and all things made by God; otherwise, this great end, which was to greaten God as God, by shewing visibly and demonstratively that infinite distance between God and all his creatures, had not been attained. For such a person as was God only, as well as himself, had been equal unto him. But God, to shew his greatness, designed such a one as should be also under him, and yet God; and withal, a sovereign Lord of all his creatures. And we find Christ accordingly speaks of himself, 'my Father is greater than I.' So, then, some one of the creatures must be taken in, to make up this Lord, to be made one person with him that is God, and so this Lord will take his place in the midst, between God and all things.
For, 3dly, this creature (whomever this honour is to fall upon), in God's eternal purposes (for we are still in the same sphere of mere possibility), must be made into one person with a person that is God; for else, still he is not one Lord. God, you see, would have but one
Lord, as God himself is but one. The text speaks it both negatively, 'not many lords;' and also affirmatively, 'one Lord.' Two complete persons of them can never make one, and these two must be made one person. A king and queen, though one in marriage (the nearest conjunction), never did, nor never can, make one king, or one prince
(as Philip and Mary with us did not). And, again, if we would suppose that many creatures, and not one only, had been taken up into union with some person that was God, yet still there would have been 'lords many.' But God will have such a Lord as is perfectly one, who therein shall be the perfect image of his sovereignty and monarchy over all things, and therefore will have but one, to whom all things else, without exception, are to be subject.
4thly, Which of the three persons in the Godhead, and what sort of the creatures, was fittest to make up, in a way of personal union, this one Lord?
(1.) As to the person of the Trinity, it must not be the Father; it was no way proper for him, that was the fountain of the persons, and of the whole creation, to undertake any office whatever, and so not to become this Lord, which is an office under God, as the text expressly affirmeth. Who then? God the Son is next, who in that he is the Son, is, by a proper natural right, Lord of all things, for he is the heir unto this his Father, in that he is the Son; and it is the common law, even from God to creatures downwards, that 'the heir is lord of all,' Gal.
4:1. It is fittest then that he, the Son, should have this office and title of Lord transferred on him, and none so fit to be the appointed heir of all things, Heb. 1:2, who, in his person, is naturally next God the Father, 'the begotten heir of all things.' who is not made, but begotten, and the only begotten, namely, of this one God the Father.
John 1:3, 14, 18, compared, 'All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.' 'And the Word
was made flesh, and dwelt among us; and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.'
'No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.' And so truly, a person to whom of special right this honour, as conferred, doth belong. This title of Lord was not to be severed from the natural heir: not so, as that one person should be the natural Lord by inheritance, and another made Lord and Christ by decree and appointment, upon this account also, that still there must be but one Lord. And, therefore, he who had a natural right to be Lord, as heir of all things, and he who was made so by decree and appointment, must meet in one and the same person.
And as for the pretension of the third person, the Holy Ghost; so it was in God's design, that he that was to be this Lord, was to have such a multitude of elect to be united to him, as he must be a person who was able to give and send the Spirit himself to make that union, and to effect all for him, and complete all from him; John 16:15, 'All things the Father hath are mine; therefore I said, that he (the Spirit) shall take of mine, and shew it to you.'
And again, the intendment of erecting this office of lordship being, that God might have an outward representative of himself, or a visible administration of all things, and to whom the whole creation should owe their subsistence and their all; and accordingly he was to be owned and honoured by them, and at the same rate that God is; hence therefore, for this honour, God comelily singled forth and constituted this Son to be that person that was next himself, as fathers use to do their sons. God the Father 'so loveth the Son, that he sheweth and revealeth all of himself to him,' John 5:20, 'and hath committed all judgment to him,' visibly to be administered by him; and that with this professed purpose and intent, 'that all men' (yea, and angels, and the whole creation) 'might honour the Son, as they honour the Father,' John 5:20, 23. So then, the Son is he that is made this Lord, under our one God the Father.
We have seen which of the three persons was fitted for this Lordship.
Now, (2.) As to what sort of the creatures (we are still, as was prefaced, in the supposition of all things as yet to be decreed, and so considered by God in the foresight of his simple intelligence) should be meetest to be taken up in this high privilege of one Lordship.
It so pleased our great and wise God as to single forth the nature of man; not in order only to the work of redemption of us men (that is but one branch of this work and office), but in order to his being
'Lord of all things,' he took that nature of man to choose. Yea, it is said, that so 'it became him' (namely, God), 'for whom are all things, and by whom are all things,' so to do; in Heb. 2:10, 14–18 verses, 'For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the Captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.' 'Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.' And although
God did thus design and determine in a more eminent respect to man's salvation (which was the occasion of what he there speaks of this, that he took on him, not the nature of angels, but the seed of Abraham); yet it is withal said, that that great God, 'of whom, and for whom are all things' (which is the preface to that more eminent part for which Christ was ordained, namely, man's redemption), had together in his eye at once all things, and all ends and designs of his whatever, as that phrase, 'for whom are all things,' imports; whiles he speaks of his ordaining him to be a redeemer for man; and
accordingly it became him to extend to, or rather grasp in, a respect unto all things in his great design; which this my text, collated and brought unto that, confirms and discovers in saying, 'one God, of whom are all things; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things.' And over and above, that we (those elected and redeemed men) should be by him also.
And how fit it was, that the person of the Redeemer of us men should himself be man; this you all acknowledge. But I further add, if a lord be to set up over all things, that is, the whole creation, what sort or species amongst the whole creation so fit as the nature of man? True indeed, that nature, for its rank, is a little lower than the angels; but that mattered not in this business. For this dignity of Lordship depended not on the dignity of the creature that was to be assumed.
But the dignity or the substantial worthiness and grandeur of the person was to arise from the dignity of the Son of God who should assume it. The nature assumed contributed nothing of worth, but had that wholly communicated to it; only it brought a fitness and a meetness with it into this union, for this office, above all other natures whatsoever. And that was it which God had a regard unto herein (besides his good pleasure) to choose that nature above all other, as is plain by that in Heb. 2. And certainly this comely capacity doth every way fall fuller upon the nature of man than upon any other; for who of creatures so fit to be made 'Lord of all things,' by that God 'for whom are all things,' but he that is the sum and contract of all sorts of creatures that ever God should make. Yea, and perhaps of all sorts of creatures possibly to be made, even from the angelical nature upwards, than which (they being merely spirits) nothing could be higher of kind upwards, between God and them; and then downwards to the meanest atom, or dust of the earth; or if you will, to the chaos, out of which all was made,—you cannot thrust in a new species or kind between any two of the whole order and descent of them. No new middle link between any two links of that chain of creatures from top to bottom; and what we see are made, man is the abstract and epitome, and contains all in him. If therefore we could suppose that all the creatures had had a tongue, and so a
voice in the election of their one Lord, they certainly would have pitched upon that nature to be their Lord, in which they all had such an interest, and have cast it, that all things epitomized should be this constituted Lord. And God, who is wise in working and excellent in counsel, considered this, and fitted them all with such a Lord as themselves, if to choose, would, for this respect, have chosen.
This was so happy a match, and so well thought of, as being that which perfectly suited this general administration, as it was no sooner thought of, but instantly it was concluded and agreed on by the three in heaven, and particularly consented to by the Son himself; who, as Peter's phrase is, 'was pre-ordained before the foundation of the world was laid;' all things else depending on this,
God's first resolve about him. No sooner was it agreed, but instantly God the Father, and the Godhead in the other two, embraced and 'possessed him' (as the expression is, Prov. 8:22, 'The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old'), possessed him as a rich and complete treasury and magazine of all his counsels laid up with him; and also a most able minister and agent for the execution of all his works. Christ, who is both 'the wisdom of God, and the power of God,' executively; his universal instrument, 'by whom,' a complete subject, 'in whom' to manifest all his glory; and ver. 30 of the same chapter, 'I was as one brought up with him,' as it is translated; it is a word so full of significancies to our purpose as nothing could be more comprehensive. The word אמון in the Hebrew signifies,* any one that was nutritius, the nurse or nourisher; as unto whom God had committed all his works, as men do their children unto a nurse, to cherish, bring up, and govern to all his ends he had designed them for; yea, as the word also signifies, to be his artist, architect, or master builder of them in their first creation; who took the fabric of the whole universe upon him, to contrive and frame the rearing of it with the most exquisite skill, to the most beautiful fashion that might be. For these things and many more doth that word signify. So as God presently said with himself, I have found a servant that shall perform all my pleasure, a chosen shaft, a meetful universal engine, adequate to all my purposes and thoughts, a