A Vindication, Instance 4
Inſtance 4. If Chriſt be but a meer creature, then a meer creature is the Saviour of men, ſaving them with a mighty and eternal ſalvation, as the Scripture ſpeaks: but this is againſt the whole current of the Goſpel, which ſpeaks of God our Saviour, Tit. 2. 10, 13. And in many other places.
In anſwer to this, he ſaith,
Againſt this your inſtance, I ſhall level this aſſertion, which will be ſufficient to diſcover its weakneſs, and confute it; That to affirm Jeſus Chriſt to be the Saviour of men, without God, or equal with God, is contrary to the current of the whole Scripture, which doth diſtinguiſh God from Chriſt in the work of Salvation, calling him a Saviour as diſtinct from Chriſt, 1 Tim. 1. 1. where God is ſaid to be our Saviour, and the Lord Jeſus Chriſt to be our hope, and in the Text you alledge, and elſewhere frequently.
Rep. To level one aſſertion againſt another, is to level Arguments by way of oppoſition, not to anſwer Arguments by way of ſatisfaction: Yea, it is to evade anſwering by objecting. And it is a ſlie and crafty way of anſwering, when there is a knot which is difficult, and perhaps impoſſible to be untyed, in any Scripture or Argument, to paſs it over with ſilence, and onelyonly propoſe ſomewhat which may trouble and perplex the truth in it, or the mind rather of him that reads it. Thus he did in his Anſwer to the two laſt Inſtances, and now again he runs to theſe fig-leaves to cover the nakedneſs of his Tenent from that ſhame which this Argument or Inſtance, enforced with ſo uncontroulable a Scripture, would caſt upon it. But I ſhall inforce the Scripture alleadged by me, conceiving it will carry conviction along with it to the hearts of ſuch who ſhall duely perpend and conſider it; and afterwards ſhew the weakneſs of his aſſertion.
In this Scripture of Tit. 2. 10, 11, 13. the Apoſtle ſpeaks of Chriſt all along: in v. 10. he calls the doctrine of the Goſpel, the Doctrine of our Saviour God. So it is in the Original, foreign. That they may adorn the Goſpel of our Saviour God: in v. 11. he ſpeaks of the ſame God Chriſt: for by the grace of God, he means the Goſpel of grace, or the Doctrine of Grace, which he had in the former verſe called the Doctrine of our Saviour God. This Doctrine or Goſpel hath appeared unto all men: in ver. 13, he ſtiles Chriſt the bleſſed hope, which is elſewhere made the title of God, Rom. 15. 13. 1 Pet. 1. 21. And he puts the denomination of the great God and our Saviour upon Chriſt. It is not a great God, without an article, as he alleadged to evade the ſtrength of Joh. 1. 1. But it is the great God, with an Article. This Text I preſented among the Scriptures which I produced, and it was the third in order; but he paſſed over it then, promiſing to ſpeak to it when he ſhould give in his anſwer to another Paper; and here he takes no notice of it neither: What may be the reaſon? but becauſe he is not able to preſent any thing which can clould and darken the bright evidence of it; for it witneſſeth two things with great clearneſs, 1. That Chriſt is God, great God, the great God, or that one great God. 2. That Chriſt, though he be man as well as God, yet he is Saviour chiefly and eſpecially as he is God, and not as he is man; For, conſidered as God, he is able to ſave to the utmoſt. As he is man, there are actions done by him, and ſufferings born, by which men are ſaved; but the vertue, force, efficacie, and valour of both the one and other, are as he is God.
And he ſaveth with the Father as the principal efficient, Iſa. 45. 21. I am a juſt God and a Saviour, and there is none beſide me. This is the perſon that took fleſh, that thus ſpeaks. It is cleer from Rev. 14. 10, 11, that it is Chriſt; but the Father is not excluded; and the meaning is, there is none other God that ſaves, but what Chriſt is: Becauſe the Father, and Chriſt, and the Spirit, are one principal efficient that ſaves.
It is further confirmed, Hoſ. 1. 7. I will ſave them by Jehovah their God: it is the ſpeech of Jehovah the Father, concerning Jehovah the Son, whom he calls their God; and promiſeth them to ſave by him. And it muſt not be underſtood that this ſalvation is inſtrumentally effected, becauſe it is ſaid, I will ſave them by, &c. For, the titles given to the perſon by whom the Father will ſave, do ſhew that he is not an inſtrument. Is Jehovah their God but an inſtrument in ſaving? Is one Jehovah inſtrumental to another? or is it onelyonly the order of working betwixt the Father and the Son? Are there two Jehovahs, and both of them our God? Moſes tells Iſrael, Jehovah our God is our Jehovah; for Eſſence one, though two in perſons, Deut. 60. 4. The order then betwixt the perſons is onelyonly to be obſerved and acknowledged, not any ſuperiority or inferiority in working.
But let me conſider his aſſertion.
To affirm Jeſus Chriſt to be the Saviour of men without God, or equal with God, is contrary to the current of Scripture. Thus he.
But againſt what expreſſions of mine is this aſſertion levelled? I have affirmed that whoever ſaves, muſt be God; therefore Chriſt, becauſe he ſaves, muſt be God. But where have I ſaid that Chriſt ſaves without God? To ſave as God, and to ſave without God, are theſe two one thing? Or are they not rather repugnant and contrary to one another? But ſuppoſe (as it muſt needs be) that by God he means the Father, I have not aſſerted that Chriſt ſaves without the Father, by way of efficiency, but the Father ſaves by the Son, Chriſt Jeſus, and the Son ſaves from the Father: But I aſſert them to be equals in ſaving, notwithſtanding this order betwixt them: for it is but one God that ſaves, though in diverſity of perſons; and this one God cannot be ſuperiour and inferiour to himſelf. And all the confirmation that he himſelf gives of his own Poſition, is this, That God in Scripture is diſtinguiſhed from Chriſt, in the work of Salvation; and he quotes, 1 Tim. 1. 1. where God is ſaid to be our Saviour, and the Lord Jeſus is onelyonly ſaid to be our hope: But this hath no ſtrength in it; for in Tit. 1. 4. God hath not the title of Saviour given unto him, when he is mentioned with Chriſt, but hath the relative title of Father onelyonly given him; but Chriſt is called Saviour, and is diſtinguiſhed from God by that name. Is therefore God, viz. the Father, leſs a Saviour, or an unequal Saviour to Chriſt, becauſe Chriſt, and not he▪ is called a Saviour? And is not Chriſt called both the bleſſed hope, and the great God our Saviour? Are not both titles put upon him, as due to him? And though they are uſed by the Apoſtle to diſtinguiſh the perſons of Father and Son from each other when they are ſpoken of together, yet both theſe are applyed to both perſons, and are proper to him alone, that is the moſt high God.
But he ſaith,
Scripture doth prefer God in the work of ſalvation before our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, making him to be the principal Agent therein, when it declares that the work of Chriſt in ſaving, was from the purpoſe of God, who appointed him for it; from the precept of God, who injoyned him to it; and from the preſence of God, who aſſiſted him in it.
Reply. But where doth Scripture witneſs this of God the Father, in reference to the whole of Chriſt? He ſaith, Scripture doth abundantly ſet forth all theſe; but he doth not quote any one place for proof of them, but would have us receive it upon his word. That God purpoſed to ſave by Chriſt, conſidered as David's and Mary's ſon, conſidered according to his Manhood; that God enjoyned him as ſuch, that God aſſiſted him as ſuch (God being taken eſſentially and properly, for Father, Son, and holy Ghoſt; and not improperly and perſonally, for the Father) will be granted; and it will be plentifully made out by Scripture: but that the Father purpoſed without the Son and holy Ghoſt, and commanded and enjoyned without the Son and holy Ghoſt, and aſſiſted without the Son and holy Ghoſt; this is denied. For as the Father without the Son and holy Ghoſt made not man, but the Trinity ſate in Councel; Let us make man: ſo it was in the work of Salvation; it was an act of Councel: The Father gave the Son, and the Son gave himſelf, emptied himſelf: every Perſon concurred and wrought in the work, ſo far as concerns efficiencie: All decreed it, all acted in it, as one principal Agent; and onelyonly the Humanity of Chriſt was Inſtrumental.
And if we conſider the Material and Meritorious cauſe of mens ſalvation, God the Father, or God in the perſon of the Father, is far from being the Principal cauſe thereof; for he is no cauſe at all: for the Father took not fleſh upon him, nor was Mediator either of Satisfaction or Interceſſion; he made not the Atonement; but this was the Son's ſole work, he did all in it; he was the perſon that was made of a Virgin, and was made under the Law; he was the perſon that was made fleſh, and manifeſted in fleſh; and hath a peculiar right, in this reſpect, to the denomination of Saviour. And though all was acted and endured in and by the fleſh that he aſſumed: for he bare our ſins on his body on the tree; yea, and in his ſoul alſo, when he cried out, My God, my God, &c. in ſuch manner; yet if that fleſh had not been ſupported by the Godhead of the Son, which aſſumed it, it would have been crumbled to duſt and powder by that weight of wrath that lay upon it: So that it was by the vertue and power of the Godhead, that ſuch actings and ſuch ſufferings were; and all was accounted as done and ſuffered by the Son, though the Son, as the Son, was not capable of it, but by aſſuming fleſh into the unity of his perſon; and ſo it came to be reckoned as his work; and it was in account as if the Lord of glory had been crucified, and as if the blood of God had been ſpilt, and the merit was from the excellencie of the perſon of the Son, that did and ſuffered all.
But he further ſaith,
That the Scripture revealeth the Lord Chriſt to be in the work of ſalvation but an inſtrumental Saviour. For this, (ſaith he) ſee Tit. 3. 4, 5, 6. which puts it paſt all queſtion. But after that the kindneſs and love of God and our Saviour towards man appeared, not by works of righteouſneſs which we have done, but according to his mercy, he ſaved us by the waſhing of regeneration, and renewing of the holy Ghoſt, which he ſhed on us abundantly, through Jeſus Chriſt our Lord.
Reply.
Here is in theſe words of his,
Firſt, A bold aſſertion, viz. That Scripture revealeth Chriſt to be but an inſtrumental Saviour.
Secondly, A peremptory Concluſion, that Tit. 3. 4, 5, 6. puts it out of queſtion.
Thirdly, A defective and inſufficient probation, or confirmation; he alledgeth the words of the Text as if they did carry with them conviction of what he aſſerts in the very letter of them, when as there is no ſuch matter.
1. Scripture is ſo far from revealing ſuch a thing of Chriſts inſtrumentalneſs, that it reveals the contrary to it: in Heb. 1. 3. it is ſaid, That Chriſt by himſelf purged away our ſins; but of any inſtruments can it be ſaid that by himſelf he doth any thing? Doth an inſtrument act by himſelf, that is, by his own vertue and ſufficiency? and by himſelf, that is, without the power of the principal efficient? Is an Inſtrument any thing out of the hand of the chief Agent? Alſo in Heb. 7. 25. it is ſaid, That Chriſt is able to ſave to the utmoſt; But is any Inſtrument able to ſave to the utmoſt? Hath he the ability within himſelf? So that it may be ſaid of him, that he is able? What greater thing can be predicated of the principal efficient, or chief Agent, then that he is able to ſave to the utmoſt? This is too high an expreſſion for an Inſtrument. And in Pſal. 89. 19, it is ſaid of Chriſt (whom David typified) that God had laid help upon one that was mighty. If Chriſt be onelyonly but an Inſtrument, what needs he to be mighty in himſelf? for every Inſtrument if it be mighty through the might of another (as the Rams horns were) it is ſufficient. What needed the choice of a mighty one, if the Saviour be onelyonly inſtrumental? The weaker the Inſtrument, the more honour will the Principal Efficient have. The excellencie of Power is known to be of God, when the inſtrumental means is Weakneſs and Fooliſhneſs. Why alſo could not the blood of Goats have cleanſed the Conſcience, but the Blood of JESUS CHRIST, God's Son, was neceſſary, if an Inſtrument may be a Saviour? Doubtleſs, a word of Inſtitution would have made the one as effectual as the other.
But indeed, there is no might that any creature-Inſtrument is capable to be recipient or the ſubject of, that can ſave to the utmoſt, becauſe it requires an infinite power to conquer Sin and Satan, Death and Hell; to aboliſh theſe, and to bring Life and Immortality to light; to effect a firſt and ſecond Reſurrection for men who were to be ſaved.
Secondly, The Scripture that he alleadgeth out of Titus 3. 3, 4, …, hath no ſuch thing engraven upon it, as he produceth it for; ſuch that he that runs may read it written there, or he that reads may underſtand without queſtioning, that whole Chriſt is but an Inſtrument.
For all that is aſſerted by the Apoſtle, is, that God the Father our Saviour, ſaved through Chriſt our Saviour, by the holy Ghoſt. And what doth this hold out, but the Order among the Perſons in their working? And when JEHOVAH ſaves by JEHOVAH their God, doth this particle [by] import inſtrumentalneſs? I have ſhewed the contrary.
Indeed, the Manhood of Chriſt is made inſtrumental to the Godhead of Chriſt, and to the whole Trinity, in this great deſigne of the Father, Son, and holy Ghoſt, to ſave men; but it cannot in this place be applied to the Manhood, becauſe the Spirit is ſhed or given from the Father, through Chriſt, not as Man, but as God, as I have ſhewed in the other Treatiſe.