Sermons Preached on Romans 8
Christ's superlative fitness for it appears from, and was grounded upon,
1. His two Natures, the Hypostatical union of Both in his Person. He was God; Joh. 1.1. Phil. 2.6. 1 Joh. 5.20. Rom. 9.5. Isa. 9.6. Tit. 2.13. He was also Man; 1 Tim. 2.5. then too he • as God-man in one Person; Col. 2.19. Now who could be so fit to bring God and Man together, as he who was himself both God and Man? who so fit to negotiate with both, as he who was a middle Person betwixt both? who so fit to treat with an offended God, as he who was God? who so fit to suffer as he who was Man, and to merit by suffering as he who was God-man? Had he been only God he could not have suffered, had he been only Man he could not have merited: but being both he was eminently fit for both, (viz.) for suffering and meriting, for obeying and satisfying. Thus his not to be parallel'd Fitness was grounded upon his Personal consideration.
2. 'Twas grounded upon his glorious Attributes; his Power, Wisdom, Mercy, Goodness, Faithfulness, Holiness &c. He that will undertake to redeem Sinners must have all these, for they all were indispensably requisite to such an undertaking: the Lord Jesus had them all, and that too in an eminent and extraordinary measure (as I might easily show at large); never did any mere Creature arrive at that pitch of Wisdom, Power, Holiness &c. which he did: therefore none so fit to be sent as he.
3. 'Twas grounded upon his Sonship and near relation to God. Who so fit to make others the adopted sons of God, as he who was himself the Natural Son of God?
4. Upon the glory and dignity of his Person. He was the image of the invisible God Col. 1.15. the express image of his Fathers Person Heb. 1.3. Now who so fit to restore Man to God's image, as that Man who was the essential image of God?
5. Christ's admirable and transcendent fitness was grounded upon his threefold Office, as he was King, Priest, and Prophet. For hereupon he was (and is) fit to deal both with God and Man; he's a Friest to deal with God, a King and Prophet to deal with Man. Doth God stand upon Satisfaction? Christ is a Priest to die, and to offer up himself an expiatory Sacrifice: or will God keep his distance from the Creature and be known in his greatness? Christ is a Priest to mediate and intercede. Then is the Sinner under ignorance and darkness? Christ is a Prophet to enlighten and teach or is he under the tyranny of sin and a rebel against God? Christ is King to rescue, subdue and conquer him to himself, to bring and keep him under his own dominion and government. To sum up all! there are but two things to be done for the Sinner in order to his happiness (viz.) impetration and application; now both of these are done by Christ's threefold Office. By the first part of his Priestly Office (his Oblation ), there w • s the impetration, for by that he procured, purchased, merited all good; by the second part of his Priestly Office (his intercession, ), there's the application. And because both God and the Creature are to be dealt withal in order to this application, therefore Christ doth accordingly deal with both of them: with God he deals in the way of prayer or intercession (for God because of his Majesty and Sovereignty will be treated in this manner ); with the Creature, he deals in the way of power; partly by dispelling the darkness of the mind (which he doth as Prophet ), and partly by taking off the rebellion of the Will and bringing the stubborn Sinner under a ready subjection to God (which he doth as King ). Which things being done, all that Christ hath purchased is now made over and actually applied to the Creature. Upon the Whole then it follows, that Christ being invested with these Offices (which are every way so full, of so great virtue, so suited to the Nature and demands of God, and the condition of the Sinner ), he must needs be by many degrees the fittest-Person to be sent by God.
Before I go off from this Head I desire One thing may be taken notice of; It must be granted, that the sending of Christ was previous and antecedent to several of the Things which have been mentioned, (as the demonstrations of his superlative fitness to be sent, and the grounds of his being sent ): Yet nevertheless they may be alleged and made use of in that notion, because though in our apprehension (if not also in the Nature of the Thing ) they were after the sending, yet in the eye and estimation of God they were before it. For instance, Christ just at his sending had not then assumed the Human Nature, (we suppose that to antecede his incarnation ); yet God judged him a person fit to be sent because of that Nature. And so he might very well; for though the incarnation as considered in itself was future, yet as to the knowledge, consideration, estimation of God, it was present and done already. (I thought it necessary to put in this, for the preventing of an Objection which might arise in the thoughts of Some upon the reading of what hath been laid down).
4. Fourthly, God therefore sent Christ, not only because he was the fittest Person to be sent, but because indeed he was the only Person that could be sent; for none but he could effect or accomplish Man's Redemption. If God will be so gracious as to send, 'twas not only convenient but necessary that he should send this very person his own Son; for there was none Other in heaven or earth that could go through an undertaking of this nature. There were Evils to be endured, which were above the strength of any mere Creature to endure; there were Evils to be removed (the Wrath of God, the Guilt of Sin, the Curse of the Law ), which no mere Creature was able to remove; there were also Blessings to be procured (as Reconciliation with God, Justification, Adoption, eternal Salvation ), which no such Creature possibly could procure: O no! therefore Christ himself must come or nothing can be done. Why did not God send an Angel rather than his Son? why? because he knew Redemption-work was no work for an Angel; no, not for the whole body of Angels. If the whole Order of them had come from heaven and combined all their strength together, they could not have redeemed so much as One Soul. I dispute not how far God by his mighty power might have enabled an Angel to have bore up under the greatest sufferings: Suppose he might have had such a strength as to have been able to undergo all that Christ did, yet under the highest communications of the grace of God to him, he (being still a mere Creature ) could never satisfy for what was past, not merit for what was to come; he could neither expiate sin nor procure eternal Life. No, these are things which could only be accomplished by Him who was more than a mere finite or created being, even by the Lord Jesus who was Man but God too; wherefore he's the Person whom the Father will send. And he very well understood himself in what he did; if the work had been possible to have been effected by any Creature, God would have employd that Creature and spared his own Son; nothing but absolute necessity made him to fix upon this course.
So much for the Reasons why God sent his Son; which we poor dim-sighted creatures do but (in a manner) guess at, but he himself understands them fully. As all his works are known to him, so also the special reasons of all his works are known to him; and eminently those which he went upon in this his highest and greatest work. When we come to heaven we shall more fully know why Christ was sent; but here our knowledge is very dark and imperfect about it.
I have done with the three Things which I propounded to open, and so have dispatched the Doctrinal part; I am now to make some practical improvement of it.
Was Christ sent? and did God thus send him? what doth this great act of God call for from us? I will tell you in a few things:
1. It calls upon us greatly to admire God. O how should all our souls be drawn forth and elevated in the adoring of God, for his sending of Christ! What rich Mines of Grace have we in these few words, God sent his own Son! Here's the greatest thing that ever God did, or ever will do: 'twas much that he should make a World, but what's the making of a World to the sending of a Son? The Apostle (in the Text ) seems to ascend step by step, and to crowd together variety of great and glorious things, that he might the more heighten God's Love and draw up the hearts of Believers to the admiration of it. For
- 1. here is Sending:
- 2. God sending:
- 3. God sending a Son:
- 4. His own Son:
- 5. The sending of this Son in our flesh: Yea
- 6. in the likeness of sinful flesh: Yea
- 7. in that Flesh to offer up himself as a Sacrifice for sin:
- 8. Doing this for this End that sin might be condemned, and that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us:
- 9. Doing this too when the Sinners Case was desperate as to the Law; is not here maguum in parvo? and doth not the Apostle thrust
2. More particularly, this calls upon you to admire the Love of God the Father, and always to entertain good thoughts of him; (they are distinct Heads, however let me put them together). I would not too curiously divide or distinguish betwixt the Sacred Persons in their several Acts; much less would I set them in competition or prefer one before another, (as if we were more beholden to the One than to the Other ): As they center in the same common Essence, 'tis the same Love and the same gracious actings in all; but yet they being personally distinct, and they having those acts which are proper to them as so distinguished, so they have their special and peculiar Love. And 'tis very good for us to understand what is immediately done by the Father, what by the Son, what by the Spirit; which we must the rather endeavor after, because the Scripture usually (I do not say always ) apply's this effect to the First, that to the Second, and another to the Third Person. I am at present only to speak to the acts of the Father, wherein he hath displayed that Love which is proper to him; which if you please to look into (as the Scripture sets them forth), you will find yourselves under a strong obligation to admire him (as personally so considered). For 'pray observe, who did from all eternity predestinate, elect, choose you? was it not God the Father? Predestinating Love is the Father's Love: Eph. 1.3, 4, 5. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world &c. Having predestinated us unto the adoption of Children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will. After this came Redeeming Love, and had the Father no hand in that Love? nay, had not He the first and the chief hand therein? For did not he find out the ransom? Job 33.24. I have found a ransom: did not he contrive and lay the whole model and platform of Redemption in his eternal purpose and ordination? (therefore 'tis said Isa. 53.10. The pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand; that great Work resolves itself into the Will and pleasure of the Father, as the first and principal Cause of it; Christ (as Mediator ) is brought in but as subordinate to him, as being but the ministerial and executive agent in redemption, for 'tis but in his hands that the pleasure of the Lord should prosper ). Who chose, sent, called Christ to that Work and fitted him for it, but the Father (as you have heard)? So also who assisted and strengthened him in it, but the Father? Isa. 42.1. Behold my servant whom I uphold; of which upholding and strengthening Grace by the Father Christ assured himself beforehand (as you read Isa. 50. 7, 9.) and it was accordingly made good to him (as you read Matth. 4.11. Luke 22.43.) Then again, who rewarded Christ when he had finished his Work, but the Father? therefore to him Christ prayed for this, Joh. 17.4, 5. I have glorified thee on the earth, I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do: And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self, with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. And now Christ hath made the purchase, who doth authoritatively collate upon persons the blessings purchased, but the Father? Rom. 8.33. It is God that justifieth: 2 Cor. 5.18. All things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ &c. Luke 12.32. Fear not little flock, it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the Kingdom. Who is it that works in Sinners their meetness for heaven, but the Father? Col. 1.12. Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the Saints in light. Who is it that reveals the great mysteries of the Gospel, but the Father? Matth. 11.25. I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. Who bestows and gives the Spirit, but the Father? Joh. 14.16. I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter that he may abide with you forever, even the Spirit of Truth. And (to shut up this) who secures and keeps in a state of grace, but the Father? Joh. 10.29. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's band. Now (Christians) may you not be fully convinced by all this, that the Father's Love to you is very great? and if so, will you not admire him for it? You must honor the Son even as you honor the Father, and you must adore, bless, love the Father even as you do the Son. God forbid that I should go about to lessen your most thankful sense of what the Son and Spirit have done for you! but yet know, that these the Father (as the first Cause ) doth work by, 'tis He who by them doth do so great things for you: 'pray, think high of their love, but then think high of his love too.
Further, I would persuade you to entertain good thoughts of the Father. 'It is a temptation (though not so usual) which some gracious Persons lie under, they can with more comfort think of the Son than of the Father, they do not so much question the Love of the Son as of the Father: they cannot deny but that the Son is indeed a very gracious Person, for he came from heaven to seek and to save what was lost, to save Sinners, yea the chiefest of them &c. hereupon they can (in some comfortable manner) encourage themselves to hope in him. But as to the Father they are not so confident, they are more jealous and suspicious and have a greater dread of him, than they have either of the Son or of the Spirit. Doth Satan assault any of you in this manner? or do such thoughts as these prevail over you? O be convinced of your mistake! You have as great encouragement for faith and hope from the Father, as you have from the Son; for you hear 'twas He who sent Christ, and whatever Christ was or did, all was but in pursuance of his good pleasure; therefore have you any reason to think otherwise than well of him? Surely. God is Love: this very thing (his sending of his Son) represents him as full of Mercy, Goodness, and Grace; the Sinner hath not the least cause to be jealous or afraid of him. O when unbelief and hard thoughts of God the Father begin to rise, beat them down by arguing thus, was not He the first spring from which redeeming Grace did flow? the great contriver and willer of man's recovery? who set Christ on work but he? who sent him into the world to be a Savior but he? who employ'd his own Son for the good of Sinners but he? O that you would labor to get your Faith encouraged and strengthened as to the first Person! and that it might rise up to the first Cause of all, and there fix and terminate, that your faith and hope may be in God (as the Apostle expresses it 1 Pet. 1.21.) Christ says Joh. 14.1. Let not your heart be troubled, ye believe in God, believe in me also: and let me say, he believe in Christ, believe in God also, (as the fountain and original of all your happiness).
3. It calls upon us to love Christ greatly: O how should the consideration of this endear Christ to every gracious heart! God sent him, but not against his will; how willing was he to be sent upon the errand of your Salvation! he freely consented to whatever the Father was pleased to put him upon for your good. He very well knew before hand what would follow upon this sending, what he was to undergo, how he was to be abased (if he do engage to redeem and save you); yet notwithstanding this, no sooner did the Father call him to it, but he most readily and cheerfully obeyed, O the infinite Love of Christ! He came down from heaven that he might carry you up to heaven; he that was a Son for your sake stooped to be a Servant, that you of slaves might be made sons: What had become of you if Christ had refused to come when the Father sent him? O love the Lord Jesus! let his Person be very dear and precious to you, admit him into your hearts who was willing to take the whole business of your Salvation into his hands: what Love can be enough for a Father sending, and a Son coming! 'It is true God sent him, but his obedience to his Father was no diminution of his Love to you; and 'tis true, in this Embassy he acted in a way of inferiority to his Father, but 'twas his pity to you which made him willing to put himself into such a state of subjection and inferiority: for that did not proceed from his Nature (before he had assumed yours ), but merely from his dignation and gracious condescension; and now after all this will you not love him? how can you do otherwise than love him? Suppose you had heard him (as soon as ever God had signified his pleasure to him, and said, Son! the fullness of time is come, I must send thee down to earth to redeem man ), saying, Father I am ready, here I am, send me whithersoever and about whatsoever thou pleasest; to promote thy Glory and the good of Souls I am willing to go where-ever thou wilt have me; yea, Ple stick at nothing which thou shalt judge necessary for the preventing of the Sinners everlasting ruin: Send me to be made Flesh, I submit; to lie in a Manger, I submit; to die upon a Cross, I submit; lay what Commands upon me thou pleasest, to further the Salvation of Souls, they shall all be obeyed: Suppose (I say) you had heard Christ uttering such Words to his Father, doubtless it would have wrought very much upon you, your Hearts would have been all in flames of Love to him. O wretched Creatures! we know all this was spoken and done too by our Lord Jesus, and yet how cold, how weak is our Love to him!
4. It calls upon you to imitate Christ in his carriage with respect o his being sent. Thus, never go till you be sent, then go readily: both of these were admirably done by our Lord Jesus. He went not till he was sent, before he would move one step he would have his Father's Mission and Commission; a great Mind he had to be at Redeeming Work, his Heart was exceedingly set upon it, yet he would stay till he was sent, called, authorized thereunto by his Father. But as soon as he was so called, how readily and cheerfully did he engage! Lo T come to do thy Will, O God. Now in this his deportment he hath set us an excellent copy to write after; teaching us, always humbly to wait for a Call from God, and when it comes (let it be what it will) faithfully to comply with it. Whatever rank or station God hath set you in, see that you therein abide; and that you meddle with no Work, Employment, Office, Undertaking, further than as you are called thereunto. This is a Duty in special incumbent upon Public Officers, Magistrates and Ministers; as also, upon Christians in a private capacity with respect to public Offices: none must presume to invade an Office or to intrude themselves into it where they are not sent by God; O that's an act of high presumption, and usually attended with sad and fatal Consequences (as several Instances show). Concerning the Office and Work of the Ministry the Apostle is very smart, How shall they preach except they be sent? the Interrogation carries a vehement negation it it, (viz.) without a Call and Mission from God none ought, none can (that is, lawfully, warrantably, you may put in too successfully ) preach the Gospel. But now though in things of this Nature a Divine Call be eminently requisite, yet 'tis not to be limited to them; whoever you be, whatever work or service you engage in, you must look to your Call and Commission from God. For you can no further expect assistance, acceptance, success in anything you do then as you are thereunto called: when 'tis so, you may rely upon it God will assist, accept, succeed, prosper; but when 'tis otherwise, nothing can be hoped for. Our Lord being sent 'twas prophesied that the work should prosper in his hands; and we find that from the consideration of his sending all along he fetched encouragement, that his Father would be with him and would not leave him alone, (as you see Joh. 8.29. & passim ). Hence therefore I would give you this advice, in every undertaking (especially when 'tis very weighty and momentous ) make sure of a Call and Commission from above; to run upon anything without this, you will find to be not only uncomfortable but very dangerous. And in order to the finding out of this Call pro hic & nunc, there must first be the serious studying of the Word, and then the prudent weighing and considering of Providences (so far as they comply with the Word); for Providences. (so bounded) may sometimes in such and such particular Cases give much light concerning the Will and Call of God: (but I must not engage in this Point ).
But then I add (which is the Second Branch of this Exhortation), When once you are clear in your Call, stick at nothing; if God bids you go, be sure you go (let the errand be what it will). Suppose the Work be difficult, dangerous, contrary to the interest of the Flesh, &c. 'tis no matter for that, if God commands you must obey, if God sends you must run: no dangers, difficulties, discouragements, sufferings, fleshly concerns are then to be regarded. Paul 's example herein was excellent and most worthy of our imitation; Gal. 1.15, 16. When it pleased God, who separated me from my mothers womb, and called me by his grace, to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the Heathen; immediately I conferred not with Flesh and Blood: No question but Flesh and Blood were very apt to suggest many things, to make this blessed Man to balk the Call and Work of God; I but (says he) I would not confer with them, so as to hearken to their suggestions, so as to fetch my guidance and direction from them; no, these he laid aside that he might wholly steer his course by God's Will: O let the Service be what it will, be it the preaching of the Gospel amongst Heathens, there must be no consulting with Carnal Reason or Carnal Interest against a Divine Call and Command. But I am upon a far higher Example, the example of Christ himself: never was any sent upon such Work as His was, that was hard work indeed, abasing work indeed, painful work indeed, never was any to be compared with it; and yet upon his Father's Call with what readiness did he set upon it! And this is that very thing wherein the Apostle would have us to conform to Christ, Phil, 2.5. Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus; what mind doth he mean? why this, upon all occasions in ready compliance with the Will and Call of God, to be willing to be emptied and abased, to be, to do, to suffer anything. 'It is a great Evil for any (upon carnal and selfish Grounds ) to shift-off and withstand a Call from God; therefore the Lord took it very ill from Moses, that he was so backward to go upon his sending and would so fain have put it off: Exod. 4.13. Send I pray thee by the hand of him whom thou wilt send: but it follows ( verse. 14.) The anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses. Jonah 's disobedience in this cost him dear; God sent him to Niviveh but thither he would not go, wherefore God sent him to the bottom of the Sea and thither he shall go; O let all dread the like disobedience! Pray be always willing to observe and obey God's Call, balk not any service which he puts you upon: stir not a step till he sends, be sure you run when he sends; 'tis the wisdom of a Christian not to stir a foot till he be sent, 'tis the zeal of a Christian to run when he is sent. 'It is a blessed thing when we can so carry it, as neither to be over forward in running before we are sent (for which, though possibly in a Sense somewhat different from that which I am upon, God so much complained of the false Prophets, Jerem. 14.14. Chap. 23.21.) nor over backward in demurring and hanging off after we are sent. When God asked the Prophet, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? see how presently he answered, Here am I, send me: O that there was such a readiness in all of us to comply with God's Call! believe it, no errand is (or can be) bad which he sends about.
5. A word of Cautionary advice will here be very necessary, 'tis this, Take heed that you do not rest or take up with the external sending of Christ. When the everlasting concerns of your Souls are upon your thoughts, and you are casting with yourselves what may be necessary to bring you to Heaven, take heed of looking no farther than merely a Christ sent. True, this is the great thing which Faith builds upon, the proper and sole foundation of all its reliance and confidence; for that which it doth ultimately eye in the hope of pardon, justification, eternal life, is merely a Christ sent by God; but yet as to the qualification and actual intitling of the Person to the things believed and hoped for, so there must be something more than the bare external sending of Christ. Everyone knows there is a twofold sending of him, the one External and Visible, the other Internal and Invisible: the First was Christ's sending to be Man, (that's past and over, and was to be but once ); the Second is Christ's sending into Man, (that yet continues and is reiterated from time to time). Now these two though they are of a different nature must not be parted; he that would regularly hope for Salvation by Christ must have the latter as well as the former sending; for 'tis most certain that a Christ without if it be not also a Christ within, will never save. A Christ in our Flesh must be accompanied with a Christ in our Hearts, there must be not only a Christ sent to us but also a Christ sent into us, or else he will not profit us. The whole business of Merit lies upon the Christ without (as he took our Nature and therein fulfilled the Law ); but the fitting or qualifying of persons to have a share in the blessings merited, that lies in the Christ within as he is received into the heart: In a word, the impetration is by Christ without, but the application is by Christ within. Now therefore (I say) you must nor rest in the One unless you find the Other too: there are very dangerous mistakes abroad in the world about this. Some are all for a Christ within making nothing of a Christ without, (a most pernicious Opinion and destructive of all Christianity ): Others again are all for a Christ without, contenting themselves with this that he was sent into the world to save Sinners, and this to them is enough for future happiness, they look no farther. But now whoever would be wise to Salvation must take in both; so as to adore, believe in, rest upon a Christ as externally sent, and yet so as to make sure of a Christ in himself (through the gracious operations of the Spirit ). Paul here in this Verse speaks of the External Sending, in the 10 Verse he speaks of the Internal Sending [ And if Christ be in you &c]; all that live under the Gospel know the former, but few know the latter. O how is it with you? Christ was sent to you but is he in you? he was formed in the Virgins womh but is he formed in your hearts (as the expression is Gal. 4.19.)? he came from heaven in a corporeal manner for you, but did he ever in a spiritual manner come into you? you have the external mission but have you also the mystical Union? hath the Father who sent his own Son in your Flesh, sent also his own Spirit into your hearts? (which is the great Promise of the New Testament as the former was the great Promise of the Old; see Joh. 14.26. Joh. 15.26. Joh. 16.7.). 'Pray search diligently into these things, for be assured that a Christ as only sent in the likeness of sinful flesh, if He and his Spirit be not also received within, I say a Christ (so stated) will never make you happy.
6. Did God thus send Christ? it calls aloud to you all to believe in him. Hath the Father chosen him, set him apart, every way fitted him to be a Redeemer, sent him into the world for that end? and after all this, will you not receive, embrace, fly to, and venture yourselves, your All upon him? O what an Argument is this to draw Sinners to an hearty closure with Christ! what will engage Souls to believe on him if this will not! Christ (as sent) is the Object, the Ground, and also the great Encouragement of Faith: Sinners! you may very safely believe on him, for he's no Impostor or Deceiver but that very person whom God sent to be the Savior of the world. And 'tis not only so (that you may safely believe on him), but 'tis your great duty to believe on him; for he (who sent him) lays this as his grand Command upon you so to do: 1 Joh. 3.23. And this is [his Commandment] that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ. Joh. 6.29. This is the work of God (that great Work which he enjoins) that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. 'It is observable how high Christ speaks of the knowledge of himself under this notion (as he was sent of God ); Joh. 17.3. This is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ [whom thou hast sent]: As also how desirous he was that the World might know and believe that he was thus sent of God; Joh. 17.21, 23. That they all may be one, as thou Father art in me, and I in thee, that they all may be one in us, [that the world may believe that thou hast sent me]: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one, and [that the world may know that thou hast sent me]. Now what was it that Christ propounded to himself in all this? certainly he had more in his eye than the bare notional knowledge of, or naked assent to this great Truth, that he was the Person sent of God. Yes, his desire reached to a practical and fiducial knowledge of it, to such a knowledge as might be attended with true and saving Faith. So that 'tis not enough for you to know and believe (in a common and general way) that Christ was indeed sent of God, (which will only make you differ from Jews and Heathens ); but you must so know and so believe it as to receive, accept, close with, rest upon him in a saving manner, (which will make you differ from all outside and formal Christians).
Further let it be considered, what was God's great design in the sending of Christ? 'twas this, that Sinners believing in him might live: So the Gospel tells you over and over; God so loved the world, that he gave (or sent) his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life: For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved: is not here a strong engagement as well as an high encouragement to believe? And it being God's act to send his Son, he looks upon Himself as highly concerned according as men carry it towards him; therefore saith Christ He that receiveth me, receiveth him that sent me: He that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me. And especially this holds true in the matter of believing or not believing: O do you close with Christ and receive him upon the Gospel-offer? not only He himself, but his Father also is highly pleased herewith and takes it very kindly at your hands: I (says God) here are Souls that do not throw away or tread upon that costly remedy which I provided for them, who give me the glory of my Wisdom and Mercy, who would not have my great designs (in the sending of my Son ) to be frustrated, who duly entertain the Messenger whom I sent to transact the great affairs of my Glory and their Good, who answer my expectations in my highest Love &c. I say, this pleases God exceedingly. But (on the other hand) do you reject Christ, make little of him, stand it out against him, refuse to believe? how heinously doth God resent such carriage! this he looks upon as an high despising and undervaluing of his Mercy, a desperate striking at his Glory (which is very dear to him), a very unworthy requital of his Love, a dangerous attempt to make all his Grace to be to no purpose; and must not all this highly provoke him? Suppose some Great Person, hearing of the sad condition of some poor Captives, should out of mere compassion to them send from a far Country his own and only Son to redeem them; and this Son should in Person come to them, and treat with them about their redemption, he offering to pay down their ransom, to free them from all their misery; provided, they will but trust on him and be subject to him: If now these Captives should slight all this and choose still to continue in their chains, rather than upon these terms to accept of deliverance; would not this folly and obstinacy greatly incense both Father and Son? Or suppose again, some offended Prince (against whom the Treason had been committed) should send his Son to the Traitor with a Pardon in his hand; and he should take no notice of this Son or Pardon (brought by him), but reject and slight both; what could be expected to follow upon this but the greatest indignation? Now is not this the very case of Unbelievers? nay, is not theirs much worse in respect of the Person sending, the Person sent, the Benefits offered, the Conditions required? and therefore must not they incur an higher displeasure and make themselves obnoxious to a worser severity? Sinners! shall not these things be thought of? will nothing prevail upon you to believe? Was Christ sent and did he come to you and will not you come to him? will you not yet understand that it is He only who must save you? (to allude to that Act. 7.25. He supposed his brethren would have understood, how that God by his hand would deliver them, but they understood not ); do you look for another Son or another Savior to be sent? indeed hath God such another Son to send? or was not the once sending of this Son enough? hath not God in Christ given you his last Way and Method for Salvation, so that there is no Other to be expected after that? And was he only sent? did he not do all for which he was sent, and so returned back again to his Father? is there anything further to be done but only that you will repent and believe? Methinks these Considerations should work upon you, & yet I am sure they will not, unless the Lord persuade your hearts to believe and he himself be pleased to work Faith in you. We may speak much to convince you of your Duty, but when we have said all 'tis God who must both incline and enable you to believe, who must over-pour against unwillingness and strengthen against weakness. Faith is his Gift (Eph. 2.8.), he who gives the Christ to be believed on, must give the Grace to believe with; he who sent Christ to you must draw you to Christ; No man can (or will) come to me, except the Father which hath sent me, draw him. So much for the Duties proper to be urged upon God's sending of Christ, (in which you have the First Use ).
Secondly, It affords abundant matter of Comfort to all sincere Christians. The Truth which I have been upon (Christ sent by God), may be useful not only as a powerful incentive to Duty but also as a firm foundation of inward Comfort. O believers! set your Faith, Hope, Joy as high as ever you can, this Sending of Christ will bear you out in it: you cannot (God having done this) overbelieve or over-rejoice. I will show you what there is wrapped up in a Christ sent; and for the better raising of your Comfort. I will instance in Particulars, (for 'tis with Gospel-Truths as 'tis with your perfumed things, which so long as they are wrapped up do but weakly affect the Sense; but when they are taken out, opened and parted, then they do more strongly send forth their fragrant odors).
1. Did God send Christ? surely then great was his good Will towards you. For had it not been so, would he ever have done such a great thing for you as this? therefore that heavenly Choir of Angels singing in consort upon the Birth of Christ made this a part of their Spiritual Song, Glory to God in the Highest, and on Earth peace, [good will] towards men; (I follow our reading of the latter Clause, though I know it might be (and is) otherwise rendered): why did they say good will towards men? O because now in the Sending and Incarnation of Christ God had given out the highest demonstration that was possible of his good Will towards them. Had there been anything but that in his Heart, and had there not been an abundance of that in his Heart, he would never have sent and so sent his own Son.
2. Did God send Christ? surely then he is in good earnest, real, hearty in the matters of Salvation. After such a thing as this Saints have not the least reason to be jealous of God, or to question the reality of his Call, offers, invitations, intentions, promises, declarations concerning their happiness. What higher assurance could God give of his heartiness and reality in these, than this? if he once send his Son there's no room left for suspicion or doubting. This assures us that God is real in his Promises and will be faithful to his Promises, for by it they are all at once ratified and confirmed. If God make good the grand Promise of Sending his Son, what other promise will he not make good? a Christ sent is the Seal of all the Promises; (See Isa. 7.14.)
3. Did God send Christ? then you need not fear but that the work of Redemption is completed. When such a Person sends, and such a Person is sent, the Thing shall be done effectually and thoroughly; be it never so high, so hard, if Christ undertake it he'l accomplish it. Had a Creature indeed been sent, there might have been some ground of fear that he would not have been able to have gone throught such a work; but when Christ is pitched upon, all ground of fear is removed; to be sure he can and will finish what he engages in. And 'tis evident that he perfected what he came about, from the Father's re-admitting him into Heaven; had there been anything left undone by him would the Father have given him such a reception as he did? Believers! do not fear, all is finished, Christ gave not over till he brought it to that. You do your work by halfs, very weakly and imperfectly, but Christ did his completely; yea, though the Law itself (through your flesh ) was weak, yet Christ (in your flesh) was strong; he did that thoroughly which the Law was altogether unable to do.
4. Did God send Christ? know to your Comfort he hath not yet done. As to his own Satisfaction he hath no more to do, but as to Your Glory and Happiness he will yet do more. He sent Christ once into the Flesh and he will send him again in the Flesh, (not to suffer and die again, no, Christ being dead dies no more, there's now no further need of any suffering and dying; but) to appear like Himself in Glory and then to take you up into Glory. Once already he came down from Heaven to Earth, from thence he'l come again, for what end? why, to carry you up from Earth to Heaven. Heb. 9.28. Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many (that's past ), and unto them that look for him, shall he appear the second time without sin unto Salvation, (this is yet to come; O long for it, and rejoice in it!) His First-Sending was to make the Purchase, his Second shall be to put you into Possession; which shall be done as certainly as the former is done, and then there will be nothing further to be done.
5. Wherefore did God send Christ? for most gracious ends and purposes: 1 Tim. 1.15.— Christ Jesus came into the World to save Sinners &c. 1 Joh. 4.9, 10. In this was manifested the love of God towards us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him: herein is Love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins: Joh. 3.17. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through him might be saved. Now were these God's Ends and shall they not be accomplished? may not Faith fetch strong encouragement from these? for in order to the strengthening of Faith we are to look to God's Works and their great Ends, as well as to his Word and Promise.
6. Did God send Christ? set this against All. Against the weakness of the Law: that which the Law could not do, Christ did; that which was too hard for it, was not too hard for him; the Text tells you he was sent on purpose to make up what was defective in the Law. Set it also against the guilt of Sin: upon Christ's Sending presently you read of the condemning of sin; God sent his own Son &c. and for sin condemned sin in the flesh. Sin was to be destroyed and the Wise God took a fit course, employ'd a fit messenger for that end, (as the Scape-Goat with the Sin of the people was to be sent away by the hand of a fit man into the Wilderness, Lev. 16.21.) Several Other things might be instanced in; whatever it is which troubles the dejected Christian let him therein study a God sending, a Son sent, and there he may find very proper and considerable satisfaction in every Case.
7. God sent Christ, for whom? for you who see your lost and undone condition. Matth. 15.24. I am not sent but unto the lost Sheep of the house of Israel, (so his Commission was straitened at first, but afterwards it was enlarged to the lost sheep of the Gentiles also): Luke 19.10. The Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost: Matt. 9.13. I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. Tim. 1.15. This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save Sinners, of whom I am chief.
8. He that sent Christ was also pleased to lay a special Trust and Charge upon him, to secure all the Elect and to look to it that not One of those should perish. Here's a Truth which is like the full Honeycomb, you cannot touch it but Honey and sweetness drops from it: And I the rather here take notice of it, because I find our Savior himself when he is speaking of his Sending to make mention of it, or when he mentions it to take in also his sending: as Joh. 6.39, 40. This is [the Father's Will [which hath sent me], that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing; but should raise it up again at the last day: And this is [the Will of him [that sent me], that everyone which seeth the Son and believeth on him, may have everlasting life, and I will raise him up at the last day. O when the Father sent Christ he made this known to him as his Will and Pleasure, that he should take special care of all his Elect, and see that not one of them should be lost: And this Christ submitted to (as a part of his Surety-ship ), and ever since he hath with all faithfulness observed this his Father's Will, and made good his Trust in the securing of every sincere Christian. And (for your Comfort) know, that this Trust doth as much lie upon Christ's hands now as ever it did; that even as to your individual Persons (if you be true Believers) it is the Father's Will to Christ, that he should not lose one of you or let one of you perish. A child of God perish? O by no means! that neither Father nor Son will permit: Rather than that should befall any of the Elect, God would send his Son again to do and suffer all over again (if such a thing was to be imagined). Here then (Believers) is matter of strong Consolation for you, (viz.) as to your Spiritual and Eternal State you are safe; Christ is under a special obligation to secure you: For the Father did not only send him in order to the bringing of you into a good estate, but he did also then entrust him with the keeping of you in that estate when he should have brought you into it; and what can be spoken higher for your support and comfort? But I must leave these things with you! O that you would often think of them (especially in Soul-distresses ), and be ever drawing from them till your Hearts be even brim-full of Heavenly Consolation.
A Third Use offers itself, which might be as useful in order to Information as the two Former were in order to Exhortation and Consolation. Something hath been spoke for the opening of the Nature and Grounds of Christ's being sent, but as to the determination or close application of that to his Person (wherein we have to do with Jews and Infidels ), little hath been spoken (I mean in that way and method which is proper to those Opposers of Christ and Christianity ). Here therefore I should lay down and make good these two Propositions:
- 1. That that Jesus in whom we Christians believe, even He who was born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried, and rose again, &c. I say, this Jesus was the very Person whom God sent; and consequently that he was the Shiloh or Messias prophesied of.
- 2. That this Jesus was so sent by God (to be the true and only Messiah ), as that besides and after him no other Person is to be expected in that nature or quality to be sent by God.
Now though these be two as weighty and as Fundamental Truths to us Christians (as Christians) as any whatsoever; and though I could not hope to reach the great Enemies of the Gospel so as to fasten any conviction upon them, yet probably I might (in the pursuing of this Argument ) reach some weak Christians, so as to confirm & stablish them in the belief of these great Truths; yet I shall not at present engage in the discussing of these two Propositions. First because in so great Points 'tis better to say nothing then not to speak fully and thoroughly to them; which if I could (other Discouragements being removed) hope to do, yet here in this place, without making the Work in hand too vast and big, to be sure I could not. Secondly because (however pertinent this Undertaking might be to some other Texts ) to that which I am upon it would not be so pertinent: where the Apostles drift and design is not so much (in opposition to Jews and Infidels ) to assert that Christ was the very Person sent of God, as to assign (for the Comfort of Believers ) the Way and Course which God took to bring about their Salvation, when upon the terms of the Law it was impossible, (namely he sent his own Son &c). The Text therefore not tying me to it, I may wave it; I shall have work enough to go over what the proper and immediate Sense of the Contents of this Chapter will lead me to, and therefore I may well cut off what is of a more remote and foreign Consideration. So that this shall suffice for the First Observation, Christ was sent, and sent by God the Father.
ROM. 8.3.
God sending [his own Son] in the likeness of sinful flesh, &c.
CHAP. XI. Of Christ's being the Natural and Eternal Son of God.
The Second Observation spoken to. Of Christ's being God's Son. How his Sonship is attested in Scripture. Of his being God's own Son. That opened as he is considered both relatively and absolutely. That He is the Natural Son of God, coaequal, coessential, coaeternal with the Father, is asserted and proved by sundry Scriptures. The true Notion and Ground of Christ's Sonship vindicated against the Socinians. Where 'tis made good against them, that He is not the Son of God
- 1. in respect of his miraculous Conception: Nor
- 2. of his extraordinary Sanctification: Nor
- 3. of his Resurrection: Nor
- 4. of the Dignity and Advancement of his Person: Nor
- 5. of the Father's Special Love to him: Nor
- 6. of Adoption: Nor
- 7. of his Likeness to God.
- 1. That Christ is God.
- 2. That he is a very great and glorious Person.
- 3. That the work of Redemption was an high and costly Work.
- 1. To study Christ in this Relation, as God's own Son. Some Directions given about that.
- 2. To believe him and on him as Such.
- 3. To honor and adore Christ.
- 4. To admire the greatness of God's Love.
I Proceed to the Third General observed in the Words, the Description of the Person sent: he is described by his near and special Relation to God as being God's own Son. From whence the Second Observation will be this, That the Lord Jesus the Person sent by God (as you have heard) was his Son, yea his own Son. 1 Joh. 4.14. We have seen and do testify, that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.
Here Two things are to be spoken to;
- 1. Christ was God's Son:
- 2. He was God's own Son.
1. First Christ was God's Son. He was truly the Son of man but not only the Son of man, for he was also the Son of God; and he was as truly the latter as the former. In reference to his Human Nature he is styled the Seed of the Woman, the Seed of Abraham, the Son of David, the branch of the root of Jesse, the Son of man: in reference to his Divine Nature he is styled the Son of God. This Relative Appellation or Title is so frequently applied to Christ, that if I should cite the several Texts where it occurs, I must transcribe a great part of the New Testament.
Yet it will not be amiss to take notice of the several attestations there upon record to this great Truth. As that of John the Baptist, Joh. 1.34. I saw, and bare record, that this is the Son of God: That of Nathanael, Joh. 1.49. Rabbi, thou art the Son of God: That of Peter, Matth. 16.16. Thou art Christ the Son of the living God: That of the Centurion, Matth. 27.54. Truly this was the Son of God: That of the Eunuch, Acts 8.37. I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God: That of Martha, Joh. 11.27. Yea Lord, I believe, that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world: The Devils themselves witnessed to it, Matth. 8.29.— they cried out saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus thou Son of God? Mark 3.11. Unclean Spirits when they saw him fell down before him, and cried, saying Thou art the Son of God. Christ himself (even when he was speaking to God the Father) often asserted and pleaded his Sonship: And the Father himself in a most solemn and open manner attested it; First at Christ's Baptism, Matt. 3.17. Lo, a voice from heaven saying, This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased; and then at his Transfiguration, Matth. 17.5. Behold a voice out of the cloud which said, This is my beloved Son. The Apostle 1 Joh. 5.7, 8. speaks of the Witness of Heaven and of Earth; There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one: And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the Water, and the Blood, and these three agree in one: Now what is the thing which they bear witness to? 'tis Christ's Sonship; for that is instanced in as to the First and Supreme Witness (Vers. 9.), If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: For this is the witness of God, which he hath testified af his Son. You see how fully this Truth is attested, and how abundantly God was pleased to clear it up in the first promulgation of the Gospel, (it being the great thing necessary to be known and believed). Indeed the Jews (as to the Body of them) had a veil before their eyes, so that they could not) discern this near relation of Christ to God; they saw the Son of man but they did not see the Son of God: they went no higher than Is not this the Carpenters Son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? and his sisters, are they not all with us? Is not this Jesus the Son of Joseph, whose Father and Mother we know? how is it then, that he saith, I came down from heaven? Nay, when Christ plainly and boldly told them that he was the Son of God, they could not bear it: Joh. 10.33. For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy, and because that thou being a man makest thyself God: (you may know what they meant by this by Christ's reply (Vers. 36.) 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? ) Nay, they were so offended at it that for this very thing they took away his life: Joh. 19.7. The Jews answered him, we have a Law and by our Law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God. You have a full account of it, Mark 14.61, to 65. Again, the High Priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? And Jesus said I am: &c. Then the High Priest rent his clothes, and said, What need we any further witnesses? Ye have heard the blasphemy, what think ye? and they all condemned him to be guilty of death. Thus the eyes of that people were then (and O that they were not so still!) so blinded, that they could not perceive Christ to be the Son of God; but the Lord hath given sufficient evidence thereof to all who do not willfully shut their eyes upon the light. 'It is a Truth out of all question to us who are called Christians; (yet about the Nature and Manner of Christ's Sonship there are some unhappy Controversies raised amongst us).
2. Secondly Christ was God's own Son: so 'tis here signanter, God sending hîs own Son. I have told you in the Original 'tis the Son of himself, or his proper Son (as 'tis Vers. 32.); God is Christ's proper Father [ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ] Joh. 5.18, and Christ here is God's proper Son [ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ]. He is not barely a Son but a Son in a special and peculiar manner, God's own Son. This being a Truth of very high import, a most Fundamental Point, I will endeavor first to explain and prove it, and then to vindicate and make good its true and genuine Notion against Opposers.
Our Lord Jesus Christ is God's own Son, whether you consider him comparatively and relatively (I mean, in reference to other Sons ), or absolutely as he is in Himself, abstractly considered from all Other Sons:
1. Consider him Comparatively: And so he is thus styled to difference or distinguish him from all Other Sons. For God hath three sorts of Sons,
- (1.) Some are so by Creation (or in respect of their immediate Creation by God), so the Angels are the Sons of God; of whom Divines commonly interpret those passages in Job, Chap. 1.6. There was a day when the Sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord: Chap. 38.7. When the morning Stars sang together, and all the Sons of God shouted for joy. So Adam upon this account, he being immediately made by God, is called the Son of God Luke 3.38.
- (2.) Some are the Sons of God by Grace, (viz.) the Grace of Regeneration and Adoption: thus Believers are the Sons of God, as they are spiritually begotten of him and adopted by him. Joh. 1.12, 13. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the Sons of God &c. which were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God: Jam. 1.18. Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth &c. Gal. 4.3. To redeem them that were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption of Sons: Eph. 1.5. Having predestinated us unto the adoption of Chrildren by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will: Rom. 8.14. As many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the Sons of God: Gal. 3.26. Ye are all the Children of God by Faith in Christ Jesus: 1 Joh. 5.1. Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God; and everyone that loveth him that begat, loveth him also that is begotten of him. Then
- (3.) in contradistinction to these there is God's own Son or his Son by Nature; one that is a Son of another rank and Order than the former: in this respect God hath but One Son namely Christ: True Believers are his Sons (which speaks the exuberancy of Divine Love towards them, Behold what manner of Love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the Sons of God! ) therefore Christ owns them for his Brethren; Heb. 2.11. Both he that sanctifieth, and they who are sanctified, are all of one, for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren: and ( Vers. 17.) In all things it behooved him to be made like unto his brethren.
2. Consider him absolutely, and abstractly from all Other Sons, so he is God's own proper Son. It will be asked, how or wherein?
That I may a little insist upon the explication of this sublime Mystery, I answer, Christ is God's own Son not only as God hath a special interest or propriety in him, (as Believers are said to be [ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ] Christ's own Joh. 13.1.); nor only as Christ is the Son of no other Father but of God (as the Socinians would turn off the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ); for so the Saints themselves may be called God's own Sons, they being Sons as to their spiritual Sonship by and from God the Father only: there must be therefore something higher than this intended in this glorious Title of God's own Son. What may that be? Answ. that Christ was (and is) God's Natural and Essential Son, that he was in a peculiar manner begotten of him and from him in his eternal Generation, that he did participate of the Fathers own Nature and Essence, that he was a Son coequal, co-essential, co-eternal with God the Father.
To draw all into as narrow a compass as may be! Our Lord Jesus is God's own Son, as God the Father did from all eternity, in an ineffable manner, beget him in his own Divine Essence: So that it points to two things, to his being eternally begotten, to his being begotten in the Divine Essence. As to the latter, I choose to express it so because 'tis more safe (if not more true ) to say that the Son was begotten in that Essence, rather than out of it. And Some (who endeavor to open these profound Mysteries ) tell us, that here we are not to consider Christ essentially as he is God, but Personally as the Divine Essence subsists in him as the Second Person: In the First consideration as he was God he had the Divine Essence in and of himself, and so he could not be begotten to it; for he was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 God from himself, (though Some who yet were no Arians, do not agree to this): In the Second notion as he was God personally considered or as he was the Second Person and the Son, so he was of the Father and not of himself; for though he was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 God of himself yet he was not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Son of himself. The usual language of the Ancients was God of God, very God of very God &c. and this was very true; but then you must take it as spoken of God Personally considered, with respect both to the Person begotting and the Person begotten; for in the Sacred Persons Essence doth not beget Essence, but Person begets Person (as 'tis usually expressed). I fear these things may be too high for our weak capacities, that they do but darken rather than illustrate the Sonship of Christ: yet Divines know not how to speak more plainly concerning these Mysteries. Well! I (for my part) will not venture too far into these great depths: that Christ is the Son of God, yea thus the Son of God (as hath been laid down), is evident enough; but he that will engage in a curious inquisition into all Particulars resulting from or referring to Christ's Natural and Eternal Sonship, will find at last he attempted that which was infinitely too high for him.
Contenting ourselves therefore with this more General Explication of it and not launching out too far into Particulars, that we may be the more firmly rooted in the belief of this great Article of the Christian Faith, (viz.) that Christ is the natural and eternally begotten Son of God (and therefore called his own Son ), it will be necessary for us to look into the Word of Truth to see what Foundation we have there for this our belief: For it would be equally dangerous for us to believe it if the Word doth not affirm it, as not to believe it if the Word doth affirm it because we cannot fathom several things in it by the plummet of Reason. I shall desire you therefore to weigh the following Scriptures.
Joh. 7.29. I know him, for I am [from him], and he hath sent me. They are the words of Christ uttered with reference to God the Father, concerning whom he saith that he was [ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ] from him. How was Christ from the Father? I answer, not only in respect of his Mission by and from the Father, (that indeed follows immediately upon it [and hath sent me], but not as the sole or main thing in respect of which Christ is said to be from his Father; I conceive, his being sent is brought in as a quite Other thing and distinct from that ): But Christ saith he was from the Father in respect of his eternal Generation by the Father; that was the Thing principally intended by him in this Expression. As the Holy Ghost is said to be [from the Father] because of his procession from him, (that's the reason I go upon); Joh. 15.26. [ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ] he proceedeth from the Father: so the Son the Second Person is said to be from the Father because of his Generation by him; (and I find the Ancients thus opening the place).
Another Text for the proof of this eternal Sonship of Christ, is Psal. 2.7. The Lord hath said unto me, thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. To me, this is a very considerable Scripture for the confirming the Truth in hand, (though our Adversaries (I know) make a contrary use of it, and Some Others who are Friends speaks somewhat diminutively about it). 'It is beyond all dispute that Christ was the Person here spoken of; 'twas not said to David (further than as he was a type ) but to Christ himself, Thou art my Son &c. thus Some of the Jewish Writers themselves do carry it; and the matter of the Psalm with the several expressions in it, are only applicable to Christ; (See Vers. 8, 9, &c. to the end ): and as to that Verse which I have to do with, you have it thrice cited in the New Testament and 'tis always applied to Christ; (so Acts 13.33. Heb. 1.5. Heb. 5.5.) Well then! what doth God here say concerning Christ? why, Thou art my Son: but how did Christ come to be his Son? why, as he had begotten him (for that comes in as the fundamentum relationis ), Thou art my Son, I have begotten thee: but when did God thus beget him? why, from all eternity, [today] have I begotten thee. Various are the apprehensions of men about the import and reference of this word [today], and what that matter or period of Time is to which it refers: Some make it to point to the time of the rage and opposition of Enemies against Christ (spoken of Verse 1. &c.); Some to the time of the New-Testament-administration: Some to the time of Christ's resurrection and advancement (as we shall see hereafter). But I concur with Those who do not understand it of this or that particular, determinate day or time, but make it to point to and to be expressive of eternity. This Eternity is but one day or but one continued Now, in which there being no succession whatever God doth from eternity he may be said to do it now or today: So here, this day have I begotten thee, that is from everlasting. True indeed, the Word itself (in its first and strictect sense ) doth not signify or import eternity; yet because in this place it must be interpreted according to the matter spoken of, therefore here it must have that signification the Nature of the Thing so determining it. For God's begetting of his Son being an immanent act, it must (as all acts of that nature are) be from everlasting: and it being spoken after the manner of men, it must be so understood as may best suit with the Nature of God and with the Nature of the Thing which it speaks of. When therefore you read [thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee], 'tis as if God had said, O my Son I own thee to be so before the world, and I here attest that from all Eternity I have begotten thee, and that thou art my Son by eternal Generation. And thus the great Lights of the Ancient Church in their Contests with the Arians did make use of and expound it.
That Text in Prov. 8. is exceeding full and clear: Vers. 22, 23, 24, &c. The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was: When there were no depths, I was brought forth: when there were no fountains abounding with water. Before the Mountains were settled, before the Hills, was I brought forth. (this is further with great elegancy set forth Vers. 26, 27, 28.) He concludes ( Vers. 29, 30.), When he gave to the Sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his Commandment, when he appointed the foundations of the earth: Then I was by him, as one brought up with him, and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him. Of whom can all this be understood but of Christ? to whom is it applicable but to him who is the Personal Wisdom of God the Father? and if so, doth it not then plainly hold forth his eternal Existence and also his eternal Generation? So Micah 5.2. Thou Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be Ruler in Israel, whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting; (in the Hebr. 'tis from the days of eternity ).
If we look into the New Testament this will yet be more clear. There Christ is styled the only begotten of the Father, which Title the Evangelist John often repeats; the Other Evangelists speak much of Christ's Manhood and of his Birth as Man, but John is altogether taken up with the Godhead of Christ and with his eternal Generation as the Son of God; (whence Nyssene saith of him that he did indeed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ; and Some think he was from hence called John the Divine ). In reference to which he calls him over and over God's only begotten Son, (as you see Joh. 1.14.18. Joh. 3.16.18. 1 Joh. 4.9.) Now how is Christ the only begotten Son of God? surely it must be in respect of some extraordinary way and manner of his Sonship peculiar to himself; and what can that be but that which I am upon? Never was any person so begotten of the Father as he was; God hath other Sons begotten of him (as some prealledged Scriptures testify), but yet Christ is styled his only begotten Son because of his special and incommunicable Generation, because he is the Son of God by Nature and hath that very Nature and Essence which God the Father hath. Take away this speciality of his Sonship and how shall we interpret this exclusive title of Christ, the only begotten of God? He is not only called God's own Son but also his only Son; and nothing can make him to be so (as will appear by and by), but his being the Natural Son of God and by eternal Generation. 'It is observable, after the Evangelist had been speaking of the Sonship of Christ (Vers. 14.); and he speaks of this as being of a different kind and order from the former, upon which he calls him the only begotten of the Father. The old Arian Heretics had a pretty evasion for this; Christ says Eunomius (whom Basil and his Brother Nyssen have so profoundly confuted,) was the only begotten of the Father in as much as he was begotten only of the Father; (which evasion exactly falls in with that modern Gloss which some Socinians give upon the Text, Christ was God's own Son (i.e.) he was the Son of no other but of God ): But to this 'tis answered, there's a great difference betwixt being begotten only. of the Father and being the only begotten of the Father; the first makes God to be the only begetter but not Christ to be the only begotten: without which this Title of his would signify nothing. For 'tis true as to the Saints they are begotten only of the Father, but yet 'tis not true that they are the only begotten of the Father, (indeed this belongs not to them at all, but only to Christ); their Sonship by regeneration and Christ's Sonship by eternal Generation are things of a quite different Nature and Species, and it must be so or else he could not truly be styled the only begotten of the Father.
The Apostle in this Chapter ( Vers. 32.) calls Christ God's own Son, He that spared not his own Son &c. now the word [ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ] imports as much as God's proper or natural Son. That's the fignification of it in other references; Luke 6.44. Every tree is known by his own fruit: 'tis 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that fruit which is proper and natural to it; so that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is to be taken 1 Cor. 15.38. God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body: And so Christ is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 God's own Son (that is) his Son who hath the same Nature and Essence with himself.
There are three Properties (if the two First be not one and the same, ) belonging to Christ in his Sonship which are incommunicable to any other: As
1. He is a Son Co-equal with his Father: Joh. 5.18. The Jews sought the more to kill him, not only because he had broken the Sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God: The Jews were in the right as to the thing only they erred as to the Person, because they would not see that Christ was this Son of God and therefore equal to the Father; their Argument was good and their Inference proper and genuine, if Christ do claim to be the proper Son of God then he must be equal with God; nothing could be more true. And he had and must have such a Sonship as will rise up to this, therefore his whole discourse (in which he is very large Joh. 5. & 10 Chapt. ) tends to the proving of nothing lower than his Natural Sonship, and consequently his equality with his Father. And if he had been only the Son of God in a lower way why did he not so explain himself? why did he suffer the charge of blasphemy upon it? nay, why did he lose his life upon it? Had he been the Son of God only as others are, the very telling of that had quieted the people, acquitted him from blasphemy, and saved his life; but he lets them alone to go on in their malice against him, because that was the very truth which they pitched upon and which he would have to be known, namely, that he was so the Son of God as to be equal with God. For a further proof of this take that of the Apostle where he speaks it out expressly, Phil. 2.6. Who being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: surely there is more in this [being equal with God] than what Some (particularly Grotius ) are pleased to make it to be; it notes equality of Nature and Essence, not only some external show or appearance, or estimation by others. The latter Clause must be expounded as 'tis join'd with the former, and then its sense and emphasis will be clear enough; Christ being in the form of God (existing in the Divine Nature and really participating of that Nature) thought it no robbery (no bold encroachment upon the honor of God) to be equal with God, (to assume and apply that Nature to himself which he had in truth). And (which will much strengthen this exposition of the words,) as that which follows Vers. 7, 8. speaks Christ's Natural equality with us (as he was Man ) and must be so interpreted, so this here speaks Christ's Natural equality with the Father (as he was God ) and must be so interpreted also.
2. Christ is a Son Co-essential with the Father. He is not only like him but of the same Nature and Essence with him, not only under some resemblance of God ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ), but under a perfect identity and oneness of Essence with God ( 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ): Joh. 10.30. I and my Father are one. Hence he is stilled the image (the essential and substantial image) of God, Col. 1.15. Heb. 1.3. This was that great Truth which the Nicene Fathers asserted and maintained with such renowned courage and zeal. (But I will but touch upon this Head because 'tis the same with the former; that is more comprehensive but in its main import it perfectly agrees with this).
3. Christ is the Co-eternal Son of God the Father. They were both of the same standing (if I may with reverence so express it), both from everlasting. Christ was eternally a Son, there never was any time when he was otherwise or when he began so to be, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (as the Ancients used to express it). If the Father was eternal and always a Father then the Son was eternal and always a Son, for Relatives must be simultaneous. This was that which greatly troubled and vexed Arius so often to hear the Orthodox speaking of, semper Pater semper Filius, simul Pater simul Filius, (I say) this offended him very much, (as appears by what he himself wrote in his Letter to Eusebius ): but the thing is never the less true because he was offended at it. The Scriptures are very plain concerning Christ's eternity and eternal generation, (some of which have been already cited, take a few more) Rev. 1.8. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty. Rev. 2.8. These things saith the First and the Last, which was dead and is alive. As soon as the Apostle had spoken of Christ's Sonship Heb. 1.5. presently he falls upon his eternity Vers. 8. Unto the Son he saith, Thy Throne, O God, is forever and ever. Thus I have shown in what respects Christ is styled God's own Son, and how far those are grounded upon the Word of truth.
But all this being vehemently denied and opposed by Some, and it highly concerning us truly to apprehend and firmly to believe a Thing of so high a Nature, upon these considerations I judge that it will not be enough barely to assert the Truth, but it will be necessary also to hear what Opposers say against it and how they endeavor to undermine it; give me leave therefore to spend some time about that.
I think I may confidently and warrantably affirm that amongst all the Articles of Faith which make up the Christian Religion, not any One of them ever met with so much Opposition and was the ground of so many and so fierce Disputes, as this great Article which refers to the Godhead of Christ and to his being the Natural and Essential Son of God. They who know anything of what hath passed in former Times in the matters of Religion, know what Contests there were about it in the first Ages of the Church: In the very infancy of the Gospel Satan stirred up Some (as Ebion, Cerinthus &c.) to oppose it, for it being the great fort and bulwark of Christianity he would be sure first to make his batteries against it. But things never came to their full height till about 300 years after Christ, when Arius and his Party with great zeal (such as it was) set themselves against it, boldly denying Christ to be God or the eternal Son of God. After a long flux of time, these Controversies were pretty well composed, yea the Church had (in a great measure) after its sharp Conflicts gained the belief of this fundamental Truth and was in the quiet possession of it: till in these latter Ages that unhappy SOCINUS came upon the stage, and he muddy'd the waters again, revived the old Arian Heresies which seemed to be dead and rotten, and did (with no less boldness and more subtlety) veterem serram reciprocare. With Him and his Followers (all of which do unanimously agree in their denial of Christ's Sonship in that sense wherein it hath been opened) we now have to do: & the difference 'twixt them and us stands thus; they agree with us that Christ is the Son of God, but as to the nature, quality, manner, foundation of his Sonship, there they differ from us. We say he is the proper, natural Son of God, they make him (in effect) no better than an improper, allusive, Metaphorical Son of God; we say he is the eternal Son of God, they say he is only so in time; We say he is the Son of God by eternal Generation and thereupon called God's own Son, they say he's God's own Son upon other Grounds and Causes; which what they are we are now to inquire after and whether they be true and consonant to the Word. This is a work which hath been done over and over by many, (by Some in our own language), yet the Subject in hand necessarily leads me also to speak something to it.
1. First they affirm that Christ is God's own Son in respect of his miraculous Conception and production in the womb of the Virgin by the holy Ghost. For the proof of which they allege Luke 1.35. The Angel answered and said unto her, The holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: [Therefore also that Holy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God].
Here the Defenders of the Truth take notice of the Adversaries fallacious and fraudulent dealing, which indeed is very gross; for the greatest of them sometimes seem to grant that Christ is the Natural and Essential Son of God, ('tis the very Title which they prefix before some of their Treatises ); in which One would think that they did concur with us, holding the same thing which we do and giving the same honor and respect to Christ which we do: when in truth there's no such thing, they do but speak fraudulently (according to the custom of their old Predecessors ): for here's the Fallacy, they me an by all this nothing more than that Christ was the Son of God in regard of his wonderful Conception and Nativity by the Virgin Mary. (But to pass by their frauds let us come to the thing!) We say Christ's filliation or Sonship was grounded upon something of a far higher nature than this, that he was the Son of God antecedently to it, even from all eternity; they ground his Sonship upon it only, making it but then to commence when he was begotten by the holy Ghost, conceived and born by the Virgin.
Against which dangerous Opinion we argue thus;
1. If Christ's Sonship did result from this as the true and proper ground of it, then the Holy Ghost (the third Person ) should rather be entitled the Father of Christ than the First Person; because that effect which was the foundation of Christ's Sonship was more immediately produced by him than by the First Person. But this is notoriously false, for all along in the whole current of the Word Christ is brought in as the Son of the Father and as standing in this relation to the Father, and not to the Spirit.
2. Christ himself never resolves his Sonship into his miraculous Conception or Birth. You find him sometimes professedly treating upon it and giving the world' an account about it, & what doth he then ground it upon? why, he carry's it up to his doing what the Father did Joh. 5.19. to his quickening whom he will, even as the Father doth Joh. 5.21. to his having life in himself, as the Father hath life in himself Joh. 5.26. to his being one with the Father Joh. 10.30. to his being in the Father and his Father in him Joh. 10.38. He doth not at all mention his miraculous Conception (which in all probability he would have done if that had been the proper Ground of his Sonship ), but he insists altogether upon things tending to the proof of his participating of his Fathers Nature and Essence, and by them he designs to make out his Sonship, yea, and that it was such a Sonship as did render him equal with his Father; but this he could not have done either with truth or evidence had he been only the Son of God upon what is here pretended.
3. Though Christ's Conception and temporal Generation was very wonderful, yet that did but reach to his Flesh or Human Nature and there terminate. Now the Scripture doth not place his great Sonship in his Human but in his Divine Nature; therefore as to that it speaks him to be the Son and Seed of David or the Son of Man, in contradistinction to his being the Son of God. And his Sonship to God cannot be grounded upon that which was the ground of his Sonship to Man, for where the Sonships are so different they must needs have different Grounds and foundations. Pray let these two Texts be well weighed and they will sufficiently prove what I say; Rom. 1.3.4. Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, and declared to be the Son of God with Power, according to the Spirit of Holiness, by the resurrection from the Dead. Rom. 9.5. Whose are the Fathers and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all God blessed forever. The sum of all, Christ hath two Natures, according to which two Natures he hath two distinct Sonships (he is the Son of God and he is the Son of Man ), these different Sonships must have different causes & grounds; therefore his Conception upon which he was the Son of Man cannot make him also to be the Son of God.
4. As to the Text alleged by our Adversaries to prove their Opinion, there's a double Answer commonly given to it.
1. The particle [therefore] in it is not causal but illative. 'It is not brought in as signifying the Ground of Christ's Sonship, but as a note of inference wherein something is infer'd from what went before. The Angel had told Mary that the Holy Ghost should come upon her, and the power of the Highest should overshadow her; (and then adds) therefore also the Holy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God: therefore? what may be the force of this word in this place? 'tis a mere deduction drawn from the premises, to this effect, Since such a thing shall be done by the Holy Ghost, therefore (according to what was prophesied ) Christ shall be called the Son of God. The words plainly refer to the prophesy Isa. 7 14. Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign, Behold a Virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and shall call his name Immanuel: The Evangelist brings them in expressly in that reference, Matth. 1.21, 22, 23. And she shall bring forth a Son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins. (Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled, which was spoken of the Lord by the Prophet, saying, Behold a Virgin shall be with Child, and shall bring forth a Son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is God with us). And their sense and tendency is the same here, Therefore also that Holy thing &c. as if the Angel had said, this being the thing which was foretold (which must be accomplished and is now near to be accomplished) therefore it shall so be, that which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. So that this [Therefore] is only a note of Consequence as to the Event or the fulfilling of the Prophesy, not a note of causality as to the thing itself (viz.) Christ's Sonship to God.
2. 'It is therefore he shall be [called] the Son of the most High: 'tis not therefore he shall be the Son &c. but therefore he shall be called. &c. And so it points not to that which was constitutive of Christ's Filiation, but only to that which was manifestative and declarative of it. Christ was God before he assumed Flesh, but he was God manifested in the Flesh (1 Tim. 3.16.) so Christ was the Son of God before he was thus conceived but this was a great manifestation or declaration that he was the Son of God. 'It is true, as to us our being called the Sons of God notes our being made the Sons of God; but here as to Christ it only notes that he should be declared, evidenced; acknowledged to be the Son of God: he was not now made the Son of God (that was done by his eternal Generation ), only it was now made to appear that he was the Son of God. In short, the Lord Jesus who was thus miraculously conceived was the very Son of God, but as he was thus conceived or because he was thus conceived, so he was not the Son of God; for of this there was an antecedent foundation, that which was of a far more ancient date, namely his being begotten of the Father from everlasting.
2. Secondly 'tis said, that Christ was the Son of God in respect of his Sanctification and Mission. Joh. 10.36. 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? Christ being sanctified by the Father (that is) the Spirit of Grace and Holiness being in so eminent a degree poured out upon him, and he being designed and set apart and fitted by God to and for a most high and eminent Office, as also he being sent upon a great work for an extraordinary end to redeem and save lost Sinners; therefore upon these Grounds (and not upon his being eternally begotten of the Father) he was God's Son.
Answ. More is infer'd from this Text than what it will bear; we may thus far very well argue from it He who was sanctified and sent was undoubtedly the Son of God; but if we go further and infer, He who was sanctified and sent was therefore the Son of God (as if the sanctification and mission were the ground of his being so ), we stretch the words too far and endeavor to fetch that out of them which is not at all in them. There's a great difference betwixt the applying of such a relation to such a Person, and the assigning of the proper cause and foundation of that relation: Christ being sanctified and sent is the Son of God, upon these that relation may truly be attributed to him; but yet they do not amount to the being the Cause of that relation. Christus qui fuit sanctificatus & missus est Filius Dei is a Proposition very true, but Christus quà fuit sanctificatus & missus est Filius Dei (as pointing to the fundamentum Filiationis ), is a Proposition very false; (and there lies the Controversy betwixt us and our Opponents ). The words cited have reference to the preceding Verses, where Christ is vindicating himself from that blasphemy which the Jews charged him with because he made himself God, ( Vers. 33.): now this he doth first in a lower way, by an Argument drawn from the Title usually given to Men in places of Office and Authority; they are called God's, and if so then (saith Christ) do I blaspheme because I call myself God & the Son of God whom God hath sanctified and sent and invested with such high Offices? Do not mistake here, Christ is not God only in a titular way because of his Office, he is so truly, properly, in respect of his Nature and Essence, (this he speaks to Vers. 30, 37, 38.) but he instances only in his Office in this place and from thence fetches that Argument which was very proper to his present design, (viz.) the vindicating of himself as to the charge of blasphemy. Verses 34, 35, 36. Jesus answered them, is it not written in your Law, I said ye are God's? If he called them God's, 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? Now what is there in this to undermine Christ's eternal Sonship? or to make his sanctification and mission the ground of his filial relation to God? One word further (as to the latter of these), if Christ was the Son of God before he was sent then his sending did not make him to become the Son of God; but so he was, for 'tis said here in the Text God sent his Son implying he was a Son before he was sent; had it not been so, it must have been said God sent him to be his Son and not God sent his Son (which supposes him before the sending to be actually a Son ).
3. Another Cause assigned of Christ's Sonship and of the apellation here given him, God's own Son, is his Resurrection. That begetting which the Psalmist speaks of Psal. 2.7. is not (say they) to be interpreted of Christ's being eternally begotten of the Father, but only of what the Father did when he raised him up from the dead: for so the Apostle brings it in Acts 13.32, 33. We declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the Fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto us▪ their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again: as it is also written in the Second Psalm, Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee.
For answer to this, 1. How many Causes and Grounds shall we have of Christ's Sonship? we have had two already here's a third, we shall have by and by a fourth and a fifth and I know not how many more, where shall we stop? Christ's Sonship is but one (I mean as he is the Son of God ), and therefore admits not of the multiplication of Causes. In all relations there is some single act which is the foundation of them, upon which in their relative notion they are complete: and why should it not be so here in the relation betwixt God and Christ? Our Opponents tell us that Christ upon his miraculous Coneeption was the Son of God? I then ask, was he so, truly, fully, perfectly, completely? if so (which they by their Principles cannot deny) then what need is there of anything further? or how doth the nature of the thing admit of anything further? for he that is a Son already perfect and complete cannot by any addition or new emergency be made more a Son; because the Essence of things (whether absolute or relative ) cannot be intended or remitted. We are enquiring what is it which makes Christ the Son of God? we ground it (as we should and must) upon one thing, namely upon the Father's begetting of Christ from all eternity and communicating his own Nature and Essence to him; they (who oppose) lay it upon several things (as you have already heard in part and will yet further hear in what follows): now we say this cannot be, for there can be but one foundation of one and the same relation, therefore they must pitch upon some such one foundation and wave all the rest. I know what they say, Christ upon his Conception &c. was the Son of God in a way of inchoation, but upon his Resurrection and Exaltation he was the Son of God in a way of consummation: I reply, (1.) Then the Texts urged before are out of doors and signify little or nothing; for they only prove that Christ (upon his Conception and Sanctification and Mission) began to be a Son of God, but he was not so indeed, fully, and properly; for there must be yet something more which must follow after to complete and consummate his Sonship. (2.) This is a very strange and most ungrounded distinction, it arguing a growth and progress in Christ's Sonship (for which there is not the least warrant from the Word of God): we read of Christ's increasing in wisdom and stature and in favor with God and Man, but we never read of his increasing in his Sonship; that admitted of several manifestative evidences (as to us ) but not of several perfective degrees (as to itself ). Even the Sonship of Believers at the first moment of their Conversion is entire and full; they may grow and be more perfect in their Gifts, Graces, Comforts, but as to their Covenant-state and Relation to God that's complete at the first and admits of no further addition. And shall the Sonship of the blessed Son of God be a partial, imperfect, progressive thing? neither the glory of the Person nor the nature of the Relation itself will bear such a thing.
2. Secondly, nothing more evident than that Christ was the Son of God before his Resurrection: Matth. 3.17. Lo, a voice from heaven saying, This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased: was not this witness given of Christ before his Resurrection? Rom. 8.32. He that spared not his own Son but gave him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Christ here is called God's own Son, which must be understood of him before his Resurrection for the Father's not sparing of him was antecedent to that, and yet then he was his own Son otherwise how could it be said that God spared not his own Son? Matth. 16.16. Thou art Christ the Son of the living God: was not this Confession made by Peter before Christ's Resurrection? I might go much higher in the dating of Christ's Sonship than merely before his Resurrection; but that is high enough to show the falsity of what is asserted by the Adversary.
3. We say Christ was declared and manifested but not made or constituted the Son of God by his Resurrection. So the Apostle himself states it Rom. 1.4. Declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of Holiness, by the resurrection from the dead: (that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is truly rendered by [declared], is sufficiently proved by many). 'It is one thing to be made God's Son, another thing to be declared God's Son, the First Christ had from his eternal Generation 'twas only the Second that he had from his Resurrection. You read Vers. 19. of this Chapter of the manifestation of the Sons of God, Believers are not made the Sons of God when they enter upon the glorified estate, but they are then manifested both to be the Sons of God as also what their glory is upon their being so. 1 Joh. 3.2. Now are we the Sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be; but we know, that when he shall appear, we shall be like him: mark it, the relation itself is present [now we are the Sons of God], but the dignity and glory which is to follow upon this relation, that doth not yet appear but hereafter it shall: So here, Christ was the Son of God long before his resurrection, but the manifestation thereof was when God raised him from the dead; till then his Sonship and Glory had been very much veiled and hid, but then it broke forth like the Sun after it hath been shut up under a dark and thick cloud: then God owned him as his own Son before all the world, and made it to appear who and what he was. And this is that which the Apostle aimed at in the place cited: his only design there being to prove that God had given the World sufficient Evidence that Christ was his very Son; and amongst other Evidences of it he instances in the miraculous raising of him out of the Grave. So that the begetting in Psal. 2. and in Acts 13. are of a quite different nature, the one being proper as relating to the thing itself, the other improper as relating only to the declaration or manifestation of the thing: We argue from the proper and primary sense of the words [ Thou art my Son &c.] the Adverse Party from their improper and secondary sense (as the Apostle makes use of them in that place ). In the Scripture dialect several things are said to be done when they are declared and manifested to be done: so Paul brings in Christ as begotten at the day of his Resurrection, because it was then declared that he was the eternally begotten Son of God.
4. 'It is said, Christ is God's Son (and so called) because of the preeminence and dignity of his Person, or because of his great advancement and exaltation to the Offices of King and Priest. Heb. 1.4, 5. Being made so much better than the Angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they: For unto which of the Angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son. Heb. 5.5. Christ glorified not himself to be made an high Priest: but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, today have I begotten thee: Here you see Christ's Sonship comes in upon his exaltation with respect to his Person and Office.
I answer, this proves as little as that which went before; for here also
1. 'It is clear that Christ was the Son of God before he was thus exalted.
2. His Exaltation was not the ground but the result and consequent of his Sonship: he was not a Son because he was exalted, but he was exalted because he was a Son. First the Apostle describes him in what relates to the formality and Essence of his Sonship, Heb. 1.3. Who being the brightness of his Glory, and the express image of his Person: and then he sets down the Honor which the Father put upon him, not to be a Son (for that he was already) but because he was a Son, (for that's the ground of the more excellent name given to him, and so the words in Vers. 4, 5. come in).
3. 'It is strange that this day of Christ's begetting should be so multiplied: there's the day of his Nativity, and then it was [ today have I begotten thee; there's the day of his Resurrection, and then too it was [ To day have &c.] there's the day of his Exaltation, and then again it was [To day have] &c. Had this Text been cited forty times in forty several Cases, we must have had so many several grounds and Causes of Christ's Sonship.
But why then (Some may say) is this place so often repeated in the New Testament?
I answer, not only because 'tis applied to the several declarations of Christ's Sonship, but also to show that all which the Father did to and for Christ was all to be resolved into his eternal Sonship as the ground thereof: he was raised again because he was the Son of God, exalted to great Honor and Dignity because he was the Son all was grounded upon this his Relation. And therefore when ever such great things are brought in concerning Christ, this Text is mentioned as pointing to that Sonship which was the ground of them, but not to assert that they were the ground of it.
4. Though the glory which the Father hath confer'd upon Christ, (as King, Prophet, and Priest) be very great, yet it will not reach that which is wrapped up in his being the proper and only begotten Son of God. Sonship and Office are different things, and the highest Office can never come up to what is in Sonship by eternal Generation.
5. Fifthly 'tis said that Christ is the Son of God in respect of that special love and affection which the Father bears to him. Matth. 3. 17. Lo, a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased: And whereas Christ is called the only begotten Son of God, they (with whom I have to do) say there's no more in it than only this that Christ is the most beloved of God: As Isaac is stilled Abraham's only Son Gen. 22.2. his only begotten Son Heb. 11.17. now how is this to be taken? had not Abraham an Ishmael as well as an Isaac? how is Isaac then called his only begotten Son? why, only as he had a greater share in his Fathers love than Ishmael had. For the same reason Solomon calls himself an only Son Prov. 4.3. therefore the Septuagint render the word there used [ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ] by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the beloved; and so our Translators fill it up [and only beloved in the sight of my Mother]. So (say they) 'tis here as to Christ's being the only begotten Son of God, God hath a special love for him and that's all.
Answ. But we must not suffer this great Title of our Lord Jesus to be thus wrested out of our hands: Without all question God hath transcendent, superlative love for Christ, (his dear Son he is called Col. 1.13.) but yet we say,
1. (As before) this Love is not the Cause of his Sonship but his Sonship the cause of it: He is not a Son because beloved, but he is beloved because a Son; therefore it cannot be the Cause which is but the Effect.
2. If this was the proper foundation of Christ's Sonship, then there would be only a gradual difference betwixt his Sonship and the Sonship of Believers. For they being beloved of the Father as well as he and even as he is, (for the nature