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 singula
rity is Christ termed the Son, in relation unto this God as the Father. And
it hath been observed by some, that whereas viog (dsov, that is to say, A
son of God, is common to others, that is, to us with him ; yet 6 viog roD
&ioi>, 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 ix. 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 pre sents him to the world, hear him, acknowledge and receive him, as he who hath power to make you sons to me ; John i. 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 under
stood.
Thus far, and in such respect, Pilate had apprehensions that Christ pos
sibly 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 xix. 7,
* he was the more afraid.
When Pilate heard that saying, saith the text,
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 Caesar, magnum Jovis incrementum, which struck fear
into him.
I am doubtful, I confess, whether to refer to Nebuchadnezzar s speech, in Dan. iii. 25, who when h. saw one appear in a differing manner with those
* The form of the fourth
three children in the fiery furnace, he cries out,
426 THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD THE FATHER, [BOOK II.
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, acknowledged him to be the Son of that God whose kingdom was to be an everlasting kingdom, Dan. iv. 3. But it is yet more observable to prove the present assertion, that when ever 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
* We have one Father, even God, John viii. 41. But his own usual
say,
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 v. 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 xx. 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, Horn. viii. 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
* heirs of all
spirit, that we are the children of God ; and so declared
things, because joint heirs with Christ, ver. 17. And again, ver. 29, he 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
CHAP. IV.J AND HIS SON JESUS CHRIST. 427
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
l 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
all.
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 be
gotten 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 i. 14, 18 ; iii. 16 ; 1 John iv. 9, and therefore so begotten as not others. Quasi prater 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 v. 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. i. 5. So instanc
ing 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 son-
ship, 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 genera
tion, as when he says of the ice and the snow, Job xxxviii. 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, I John v. 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 gene ration that is proper to a substantial person.
* only
Then, thirdly, add to these two expressions of one Son, and of
begotten, that other, Mat. xvi. 16 ; as also John vi. 69 ; whe^e, both by Peter s and all the apostles their confession, he is professed to be the Son
of the living God. And :i both those confessions, the conglomeration, or
gathering together so many articles in the Greek set afore every word, are as so
428 THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD THE FATHER, [BOOK II.
many stars that call us to behold this eminency of his sonship and genera tion. 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 observ able is, that John (who wrote long after the other evangelists, and avoideth to mention what other evangelists had recorded, and so mentions this confes sion 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
6 viog, 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, pro perly 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 con vince 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 God head.
* Pars, 1 Quest. 27, Art 2. Generatio sumitur. 1. Communiter ad omnia generabilia et corruptibilia. Et sic generatio nihil aliud est quam mutatio a non esse ad esse. 2. Proprie in viventibus ; sic generatio est origo alicujus viventis a prin-
cipio viventfe conjuncto. Nee tamen omne hujusmodi dicitur generatio, sed quod habet rationem similitudinis. Unde capillus non habet rationem geniti. Nee suf-
ficit qusecunque similitude. Vermes qui generantur in animalibus non haberit ra tionem geniti. Sed requiritur ut procedat, secundum rationem similitudinis, in natura ejusdem speciei, sicut homo procedit ab homine.
CHAP. IV.] AND HIS SON JESUS CHRIST. 429
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 (be cause 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. ix. 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 i. 81, 35 : The angel there hath manifestly an eye upon this
* Thou shalt conceive a Son, and he shall be called the Son of the Most High
prophecy of Isaiah here; ver. 32,
: 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.
ix. 6, To us a son is given; and his name shall be called the mighty God.
(2.) In Heb. i. 8, you have the same by Paul s interpretation out of the Psalms : To the Son he says, Thy throne, 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.
* This man, says the translation (you may as well say, This person ; man is not in the original), was counted
Again, in the New, Heb. iii. 3,
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 Testa
ment) 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. xvi. 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. iii. 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. i. 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. ix. 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 ->g terms equivalent in other places of Scripture, where in like manner they be compared ; 1 Tim. iii. 18, it is said of Christ,
430 THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD THE FATHER, [BOOK II.
God was manifest in the flesh ; and in 1 John iii. 18, you have it thus, The Son of God was manifested.
Likewise, Acts xx. 28, it is said, God purchased the church with his own
* He hath washed us with his own blood, and made us priests unto God his Father. So then
blood. Now, compare Rev. i. 5, speaking of our Christ,
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 v. 28, 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. iv. 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 x. 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. 83, 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,
1 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
* 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,
conclusion point-blank to their accusation, instead of saying,
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, if I do, says he, then be
lieve it, for it is the natural inference from it.
CHAP. IV.] AND HIS SON JESUS CHRIST. 431
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 Scrip
tures, 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 Ber
nard,* 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 v. 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), bene
factors 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 com mand 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
* Let all the angels of God worship him, in the psalmist s words (whom the apostle quotes) it is,
saying, Heb. i.,
* Worship him, all ye gods, Ps.
xcvii. 7. So then he is manifestly God by nature, and thereby distin
guished 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 x. 30-39. * I and my Father are one. Then the Jews
* Non est fas Dei Filium degenerem suspicari ; sed sequalem fateri necesse est
: nan. et filii principum principes, &c. Bern, de Ador., Ser. I.
altitudine, et dignitate
432 THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD THE FATHER, [BOOK II.
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 blasphemes! ; 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. There
fore 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 pro phecy (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 Scrip ture 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 attri buted 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 deputa
tion, 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. Ixxxii. 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,
* Ecce Judsei intellexerant quod non intelligunt Ariani. Augustin, Tract. 48, in Joan.
CHAP. IV.] AND HIS SON JESUS CHRIST. 433
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. ii. 18, which are a shadow of things to come ; but the body, or sub stance 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. iv. 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. x. 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 great est 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 there fore 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 fore signifying of him. He again paraphraseth and
* 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
explains all these by this phrase,
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 dis-
E e
434 THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD THE FATHER, [BOOK II.
tinction 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. i. 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, o Xoyog, 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 sanc
tified 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. iii. 12, are mani
festly 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. xviii. 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. xii. 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 v. 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.
xxiii. 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. xl. vers. 3, 10, 12, Prepare the way for Jehovah. These all
the evangelists apply to John and Christ, Mat. iii. 3, Mark i. 4, John
i. 23. And if John be the vox damantis, Christ must be acknowledged the Jehovah, whose way was prepared afore him. And when he comes in
the flesh, Isa. xl. 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. xxii. 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. xvi. 27. It is God of whom it is said, Isa. xl. 13, as
the Septuagint hath it, Tig fyvu vovv xvgiov ; Who hath known the mind of
the Lord ? which, 1 Cor. ii. 16, the apostle applies to Christ, by adding, But we have the mind of Christ. So then Christ is that Jehovah, Jer.
xxiii. 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,
CHAP. IV.] AND HIS SON JESUS CHRIST. 435
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. Ixxxiii. 18. And Isa. xlii. 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. ix. 6, the mighty God,
* 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
but, Tit. ii. 12, 13, rov ftvyakov sot; xcJ
<rw.njgo qpuv,
Saviour, imports ; and so distinguished him from God by the like phrase
generally, Eph. i. 3, 6 Qebg xxl Karqg, God, and the Father of Christ ; but more similar yet. This here, Gal. i. 4, rov sou %al vctTgbg qfjt,5>v, accord
ing 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. i. 1. And what is the object of it ? sv dixaioff-jv?}, on tha
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 I 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 xvii. 3. And I find in some men s late writ
ings 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 manifes
tation 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 under
stood 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
436 THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD THE FATHER, [BOOK II.
him, yet those places are expressly meant of and applied to our Christ :
* Thus saith the Lord the King of Israel, and his Redeemer the Lord of
hosts, I am the first, and I am the last, and besides me there is no God, Isa. xliv. 6. Here, you 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 i. 49, Thou art the Son of God, thou
* his Redeemer, I need not
art the King of Israel. And for that of
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. i. 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. xxii. 13. The next in Isaiah is chap. xlv. 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. xv. 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
: a Saviour, and
saved, is the general style of the apostles preaching
* besides him there is no other. And thus they set him forth also, Acts
iv. 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
xiii. 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. xlv. 24, 25. And if you were all put to speak, in whom would you say you had righteousness and strength ? Hear Paul for all
: To be found in him, not having my own right eousness, Philip, iii. 9. And for the other, hear him again in the same
the rest, in one epistle
epistle, I can do all .things through Christ, that strengthened me,
Philip, iv. 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 fellow-prophet tell us, Jer. xxiii. 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
CHAP. IV.] AND HIS SON JESUS CHRIST. 437
Lord, all ye Gentiles ; and laud him, all ye people, Eom. xv. 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, ii., 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 scrip tures. 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. xliv. 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. x. 10-12, But the Lord
: at his wrath
is the true God, he is the living God, and an everlasting King
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 i. 1, 2; Heb. i., 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. xliii. 7, 11, 23 ; xliv. 6, 24 ; xlv. 5, 22-24.
2. Again, so of God alone it is made the prerogative to be worshipped, Rev. xxii. 9 ; Mat iv. 10 ; out of Deut. vi. 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 swear
ing 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 ii. 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. xliii. 25, I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy trans
gressions 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. xxxii. 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
* The Word was
out of my hand. And to hear John from God to say,
God, and the Word was with God ; and to hear the prophets say, that
Christ is that God who i" God alone, and none else besides him ; and to
hear throughout the Scriptures one that is God, talking to, of, and with
438 THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD THE FATHER, [BOOK II.
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.