A Vindication, Part 3
Arg. 3. That Doctrine which deſtroys the true Faith of Chriſtians, and brings in another Faith, a ſtrange and falſe Faith; that Doctrine deſtroys the true Goſpel and Scripture, and brings in another Goſpel and Scripture, in a main Point.
But this Doctrine of his, which makes Chriſt a creature, doth ſo:
Therefore, this Doctrine of his deſtroys the true Goſpel and Scripture, and brings in another and a falſe Goſpel and Scripture.
The Major is indubitable; the Minor may be thus proved:
That Doctrine which takes away the principal object of a Chriſtians Faith, doth deſtroy the true Faith of a Chriſtian.
But this Doctrine of his, which makes Chriſt a meer creature, doth take away the principal object of the Faith of a Chriſtian:
Therefore, this Doctrine of his doth deſtroy the Faith of a Chriſtian.
The Major cannot reaſonably be denied, becauſe Faith is true and ſaving from the object that it is converſant about; as ſuppoſe it ſhould be Baal in ſtead of the true God; ſuppoſe it ſhould be Mahomet in ſtead of Chriſt; or ſuppoſe it ſhould be a falſe or counterfeit Chriſt, in ſtead of the true Chriſt: that faith that is carried out to ſuch an object, could neither be true nor ſaving.
The Minor may be thus confirmed:
That Doctrine that denies Chriſt to be the Son of God takes away the principal object of the faith of Chriſtians.
But this Doctrine of his, which makes whole Chriſt a creature doth deny Chriſt to be the Son of God:
Therefore, this Doctrine takes away the principal object of the faith of Chriſtians.
The Major hath an infallible truth in it: for the Scripture makes Chriſt to be principally the object of a Chriſtians faith, as he is the Son of God. 1. It hath its denomination from this object; it is called the faith of the Son of God Gal. 2. 20. 2. Chriſt propoſeth himſelf, as he is the Son of God, to be believed on: ſo to the blinde man (whoſe eyes he had opened) Doſt thou believe the Son of God, ſaid Chriſt? Joh. 9. 35. Under that conſideration, as ſuch a perſon he preſented himſelf as an adequate object of his faith for ſalvation. 3. The primitive Saints mentioned in Scripture, in their Confeſſions of Faith, do point their Faith, and terminate it upon Chriſt, the Son of God. In Joh. 11. 27, Martha ſaid, Lord, I believe that thou art Chriſt the Son of God. The Eunuch alſo being put upon the declaration of his faith, did pitch it upon, and carried it out to this object, Acts 8. 37. I believe that Jeſus Chriſt is the Son of God. It ſhould ſeem that Philip had held him forth in the excellency and glory of his perſon as the Son of God, and had preached him under that relation as the object of ſaving faith, and that thereupon the Eunuch received him as ſuch, and believed. But before theſe, the Apoſtles themſelves, that were bred up under Chriſt, and were inſtructed by Chriſt, they grounded their faith upon Chriſt as he was the Son of the living God, in Joh. 6. 69. We believe and are ſure that thou art Chriſt the Son of the living God. 4. Chriſt makes himſelf, as he is the Son of God, the foundation of Chriſtians, upon which their faith muſt bottom; and this Article of Faith, Thou art Chriſt the Son of the living God, he makes the Rock upon which he will build his Church; and the gates of hell ſhall never prevail againſt it, Matth. 16. 16. And he placeth true bleſſedneſs in it. I could wiſh that all perſons that are right in their opinion of Chriſts Godhead, and yet plead againſt the fundamentalneſs of the errour of denying the Godhead, would but ponder what is here preſented, and take it up in its full weight and ſtrength. They that hold Chriſt to be God, muſt needs do it upon this account, becauſe God in the perſon of the Son, or the Son of God, which is the ſecond perſon in the Trinity, took fleſh upon him, and became man; and that hence it is that this man, and this ſecond perſon in the Godhead, or this Son of God, make up one Chriſt, and that Chriſt is hereupon juſtly ſtiled the Son of God, or the ſecond perſon in the Godhead. And if it be alſo clear from Scripture, that faith in Chriſt is onelyonly ſound and ſaving, as it hath Chriſt conſidered as he is the Son of God, or the ſecond perſon in the Godhead, for the object of it; then what can that Doctrine be leſs then deſtructively dangerous, and ſubverting the very foundation of Chriſtianity, that denies that there is any ſuch God in the perſon of the Son, or any ſuch ſecond perſon in the Godhead called the Son, or that there is any ſuch Son of God, who is God; ſuch perſons conſequently cannot have their Faith carried out after any ſuch Son of God, who is God, but after a Creature-ſon of God, which is totally another thing from that Son of God which Scripture preſents to us: And what can be thought of thoſe that hold ſuch Doctrine, but that they have left the Rock, the Foundation upon which Believers are built unto the ſalvation of their ſouls; and that they build upon the ſand, and that their ſtate threatens certain ruine?
But the Minor will be that Propoſition which he will deny; viz. That this Doctrine of his which makes whole Chriſt a creature, doth deny Chriſt to be the Son of God.
I have proved this Propoſition in my proſecution of the former Argument; to which I might refer the Reader: but for further ſatisfaction I ſhall make choice of another medium, and by it prove that this his Doctrine denies Chriſt to be the Son of God.
That Doctrine that makes Chriſt a creature-ſon of God, denies Chriſt to be the true Son of God.
But this Doctrine of his makes Chriſt to be onelyonly a creature-ſon of God:
Therefore this Doctrine of his denies Chriſt to be the true Son of God.
The Major Propoſition is that which will onelyonly be denied by him; therefore I ſhall prove out of Scripture, that Chriſt cannot be a creature-ſon of God.
1. The eternal Son of God cannot be a creature-ſon of God, becauſe no creature is eternal. Or thus:
That Son of God that hath neither beginning of days, nor end of life, cannot be a creature-ſon of God, becauſe it is the moſt high God's property to be without beginning or ending.
But Chriſt is ſuch a Son of God, which is without beginning of days, and hath no end of life; which is evident from Heb. 7. 3. Melchizedek is deſcribed to have neither beginning of days, nor end of life; and therein (as a type onelyonly) to be like the Son of God, or like Ghriſt as he is the Son of God: by which it appears, that Chriſt is ſuch a Son of God as is truely eternal, without beginning or ending. For it behoves that which is the Antitype, or the thing typified, to be that in truth, which the Type is in ſhadow. Melchizedek was in figure and in myſterie without beginning of days and end of life; Chriſt muſt therefore really and truely be without beginning and end, becauſe he, as the Son of God▪ was the perſon whom Melchizek typified herein.
Therefore, he is no creature-ſon of God.
2. The Almighty Son of God cannot be a creature-ſon of God, becauſe Almightineſs is one of the moſt high God's incommunicable attributes.
But Chriſt is ſuch a Son of God as is Almighty:
Therefore, no creature-ſon of God.
That Chriſt is ſuch a Son of God as is God Almighty, will be proved from Scripture. In Mat. 14. 32. 33, conſidered with the context, the windes were boiſterous and tempeſtous: by the vertue and power of Chriſt, (which was inherent in him, and which he was the ſubject of) they ceaſed. Hereupon, the diſciples all of them worſhipped him, and confeſſed that he was the Son of God, that is, one Almighty, whom the windes and the ſea obeyed; and this they made to be the Son of God: for they apprehended the Son of God to be ſuch an one who was cloathed with ſuch power. So in Joh. 1. 33, 34, John knew not Chriſt who he was; but the Father told him that he on whom the holy Ghoſt ſhould deſcend, ſhould baptize with the holy Ghoſt. Hence John collected, that he was the Son of God; and the text ſaith, he bare record of it. God had not told him ſo, but onelyonly that he ſhould baptize with the holy Ghoſt; but he thence collected ſo much. But how could that be, ſeeing the diſciples baptized with the holy Ghoſt; and yet it could not be collected that they were each of them the Son of God in the ſence that John bare record of Chriſt, that he was the Son-of God? It muſt be conceived then, that John looked upon Chriſt as one in whom the power was inheto baptize with the holy Ghoſt, and that he argued after this manner. He in whom the vertue, is to baptize with the holy Ghoſt; that is, he who hath the power of enabling men to ſpeak with ſtrange tongues, and to propheſie, and to work miraculouſly, he muſt needs be the Son of God. But Chriſt is ſuch an one: Therefore, he is the Son of God. The Son of God which John ſpeaks of, is therefore an Almighty Son of God, and no creature, becauſe he can do ſuch a thing, that requireth an Almighty power. In like manner we may read in Joh. 5. 25. Chriſt ſaith, that the dead ſhall hear the voice of the Son of God, and that they that hear it ſhall live. This Son of God then can be no creature, becauſe the dead in any ſence cannot hear the voice of a creature. It is not to be denied, but that men have raiſed the dead, in what ſence ſoever it may be taken, who are but creatures: but it was not the outward voice which raiſed them, and which they heard, which external voice is the creatures voice; but it was the power that they felt, which was God's, which is called the voice behinde them, or within them, and is nothing but the power of God in working upon them, Iſa. 30. 21. But the voice by the force of which theſe dead which Chriſt ſpeaks of were to be raiſed, was the voice of the Son of God; it was Chriſt's own voice, Chriſt's own power, by which they were to be raiſed; elſe Chriſt declared neither any new thing, nor ſtrange thing, to cauſe them to believe on him, becauſe many others as inſtruments might utter ſuch a voice. And the following verſe clears it, that by the voice of the Son of God, the power of the Son of God is meant: As the Father (ſaith Chriſt) hath life in himſelf, ſo hath he given to the Son to have life in himſelf. The meaning is, that as the Father is the living God, and hath life in himſelf eſſentially, and is the root of life, to quicken the dead that are without life: ſo the Son hath life in himſelf eſſentially, and is the principle of life to others that are dead, and want it. And if this were not ſo, there could not be the ſtrength of a Reaſon to confirm the foregoing verſe. Chriſt had ſaid, They that hear the voice of the Son of God, ſhall live. How doth he prove it? Thus: As the Father hath life in himſelf; that is, As the Father is all life, eſſentially life, and the principle of life, to quicken whom he will by his mighty power: ſo the Son hath life in himſelf, (though it be communicated with his eſſence by eternal generation, which is ſutable to a Son) and is eſſentially life, all life, and nothing elſe; and is the principle of life, quickning, by that life in himſelf, whom he will. I ſhall preſent one Scripture more, in 1 Joh. 3. 8. For this purpoſe the Son of God was manifeſted, that he might deſtroy the works of the devil. This phraſe, the Son of God was manifeſted, is a parallel-phraſe with that in 1 Tim. 3. 16. God manifeſted in the fleſh. This God was God in the perſon of the Son, who was manifeſted in the fleſh, that is, took the fleſh of a Virgin upon him, and became man. For what end? The Apoſtle ſhews, that he might deſtroy (that is, in man's nature might do it) the works of the devil. The Son of God deſtroyed; but by whoſe power deſtroyed he the works of the devil? By his own power: he is called one that is ſtronger then the devil, Luke 11. 12. And if it had not been done by his own power, there was no neceſſity that the Son of God ſhould have been manifeſted in the fleſh for that purpoſe: for the Son of man might have done it as an Inſtrument, as the Diſciples caſt out devils; (which was one of the works of Satan that was deſtroyed; his work was to poſſeſs bodies, as well as ſouls; and he was caſt out; which was the deſtruction of that work:) but the vertue by which they caſt out, was none of theirs, but Chriſts; but Chriſt's vertue was his own: for, as one ſtronger, he ſpoiled Satan of all he had, and deſtroyed all his works; wherein the Almightineſs of Chriſt is manifeſt. And ſo it appears that Chriſt is ſuch a Son of God that is Almighty, and ſo conſequently no creature-ſon.
3. That Son of God that is omniſcient, or all-knowing, cannot be a creature-ſon of God.
But Chriſt is ſuch a Son of God that is omniſcient and all knowing:
Therefore, he is not a creature-ſon of God.
The Major is clear, becauſe Omniſciencie is like Omnipotencie; it is incommunicable to the creature, being one of Gods attributes.
The Minor may be proved from Revel. 2. 18, 23. The words are: Thus ſaith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like a flame of fire, that is, to give light to him in all the world, by which he may ſee all things. Therefore it is added. And all the Churches ſhall know that I am he that ſearcheth the heart, and trieth the reins, and giveth to every one according to his works. Chriſt ſpeaketh of himſelf, as the Son of God, and ſhews what a Son he is; ſuch a Son that is equal to his Father, who can ſearch as deep, and inward, and hidden things as the Father can: he hath his Fathers eyes, his Fathers knowledge, wiſdom, and underſtanding. It is the one onelyonly God's priviledge and prerogative, to ſearch the heart, as I have proved from Jer. 17. 9, 10. already; and yet Chriſt as the Son of God, doth it: Therefore he is no creature-ſon, but ſuch a Son as is the one onelyonly God alſo.
The fourth Argument, that carries on the ſame deſigne, viz. tends to prove this Doctrine of his againſt the Godhead of Chriſt to be deſtructive to the Goſpel in ſome main point of it, is this: