holy Scripture; so as that the Son be acknowledged as one and the same God, together with the Father': but the manner being not revealed, and inconceivable to us, the Church hath not determined it. To conclude this account of Christ's being styled the Son of God, and the Word, in the holy Gospel; we find that to him, as to the Father, are ascribed the same titles of Lord and God, the same high powers, attributes, and perfections, and also the same adoration, honour, and worship; and yet in the Scripture it is also constantly asserted, that there is but one God, or that God is one; and therefore, by the Scripture, the Father and the Son, with the Holy Ghost, are in essence or being that one God. But we are not to expect, that, searching into the deep things of God, our finite reason and understanding should ever be able to comprehend (at least on earth) his infinite nature, not only in respect to the Trinity, but in many other regards besides; as how God is eternal, without any beginning; how he foreknows future contingencies, (that is, things to come, which depend on uncertain causes, and the actings of free agents, &c.) or in respect to other Articles of our Creed. We find in Scripture the doctrine of the resurrection of the body; by which we understand that our bodies, however decayed in the earth, shall be raised again, and united to our souls; but after what manner we understand not: all which yet we profess to believe. So that in respect to these matters, which are and will be mysteries, without further revelation, "We believe as we conceive, not distinctly and particularly, but generally, as our ideas or conceptions are; and we must be content with P Socrates, Hist. Eccles. 1. i. c. 5, 6, 7, 8. and 1. iii. c. 25. Theodor. 1. iv. c. 2. Bishop Pearson on the Creed, Artic. II. His only Son, p. 135, 137. edit. 4. ad marginem. Bp. Bull, Defensio fid. Nic. c. 1. such imperfect knowledge, and assent as far as our conceptions go; believing in part, what is revealed in part, or what we now only see as through a glass darkly, and can only know in part. But it is unreasonable to deny our assent to the truth of any thing, or the reality of its existence, only because the manner of its existing is unknown to us." Lastly, Seeing the church of Christ in the next ages to the inspired writers, as well as for so many ages since, to this time, hath understood the Scriptures in the sense above mentioned, it is certainly our duty, and safest for us, to acquiesce therein; though we cannot account for the manner, in a point confessedly above our comprehension; adoring God for his unspeakable goodness, who so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. Sixth remark. The reason why our Lord calls himself the Son of man, seems to be chiefly in reference to that famous prophecy, which the Jews themselves understood concerning the Messiah and his kingdom': I saw in the night visions, and behold one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days; and there was given him dominion, glory, and a kingdom. Hence our Lord takes on him the same title, as being the true Messiah, The Son of man shall come in the glory of the Father; and, Then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. And", As the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; and hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man*. Hereby Christ declared, that how lowly soever 4 Mede, book iv. epistle xv. * Cartwright. Mellific. Hebraic. Dan. vii. 13, 14. • Matt. xvi. 27. t Luke xxi. 27. " John v. 26, 27. X he now appeared, and had not where to lay his head, yet he was the same which Daniel prophesied should one day appear so gloriously. The reason why in this prophecy Christ is called the Son of man, may be, because he was therein foretold to receive the kingdom, not barely as God, co-eternal with the Father, but as being the Messiah, who was to take upon him the nature of man. The calling Ezekiel so often Son of man, was upon some other account, probably to keep him humble, and prevent his being too much exalted with the many heavenly visions which he saw. Seventh remark. There was great reason why the Messiah or Saviour should be the Son of God, and also should take upon him the nature of man, viz. that the Divine justice might be satisfied, and honour vindicated; for though God designed man's redemption out of his love and goodness, yet it was requisite that consideration should be had to his honour and justice, which was done by the sufferings of Christ, being God as well as man; the excellency and dignity of his person raising the value and merit of his sufferings. Thus much plainly appears from Rom, iii. 24, 25, 26. Being justified freely by his grace, (as to the motive of it,) through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ, (as to the meritorious cause,) whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, that he might be just, (to do nothing inconsistent with his own divine justice,) in remitting sins past; inasmuch as Christ has made satisfaction for them, by his most precious blood. It is not for us to say, by what other method God might have. been reconciled to us; we are to adore, and walk worthy of his abundant love, in sending his Son to be our Redeemer. Again, the honour of God was vindicated by the obedience of Christ, who fulfilled all righteousness; especially since he suffered and performed the obedience in the same nature of man, which had by sin offended God's justice, and broken his laws. Eighth remark. Christ, or the Messiah, as he was man, was to proceed out of the house of David: for God promised David, Thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever". Accordingly Isaiah foretold, Hear ye now, O house of David, &c. Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, &c. God indeed bade Ahaz ask a sign; but Ahaz said, I will not ask; and then follows the promise, not to Ahaz alone, but to the whole house of Davida. Here, by the way, we learn a proper answer to the objection of the Jews against this prophecy of the Messiah, which being uttered so many ages before Christ's birth, they think could not be a sign to Ahaz at that time: forasmuch as the promise of the Messiah was a security to the house of David, under that their present danger of an invasion by the kings of Syria and Samaria, that they should not be extinguished, but that the Messiah, of the seed of David, was one day to appear, and establish his throne. Furthermore, Jeremiah prophesied, Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch". It is said, indeed, that some of the Herodians (a spawn of the Sadducees, who adhered to Herod the Great) pretended that Herod, (who was no Jew, much less of David's posterity,) whom the Romans had made king of the Jews, was the Messiah; and afterwards, This matter is thus explained by Irenæus, 1. iii. c. 20. Hæ◄ rere itaque fecit, et adunivit, quemadmodum prædiximus, hominem Deo. Si enim homo vicisset inimicum hominis, non juste victus esset inimicus: rursus autem, nisi Deus donasset salutem, non firmiter haberemus eam, &c. vid. (in not. Grabii ad loc.) textum Græc. z 2 Sam. vii. 16. a Isa. vii. 10, &c. b Jer. xxiii. 5. c Ham. et Lightf. Hor. in Matt. xxii. 16, d Grot. et Ham. ibid. Josephus would have Vespasian, the Roman emperore, to be the expected Prince, or Messiah. But as the Herodians pretended in flattery to Herod, so Josephus sought the favour of the Romans, and was kindly used by them, and he believed God had forsaken his own countrymen the Jews; so that it is not strange he should interpret oracles in favour of Vespasian, then emperor of so great a part of the world, and conqueror of the Jewish nation. But the generality of the Jews always expected the Messiah to proceed from King David; and there was none so usual and proper a name, which their rabbies were wont to call him by, as Ben David, or the Son of David. Hence the blind men besought Christ, Thou Son of David, have mercy on us: And when the people saw the miracles that he wrought, they said, Is not this the Son of David? that is, the Messiah whom we expecth. And therefore we are to suppose, that the Virgin Mary was of the family of David, as well as Joseph; that Christ might be raised from the loins of David. And thus much appears from the angel's words to her, Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a Son-He shall be great, and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David. She therefore, who conceived this Son, must be of the house of David, since Joseph was only his supposed father. And otherwise she could not have gone to Bethlehem, the city of David, to be taxed or enrolled', but must have gone to another place; for it is said, that all went to be taxed, every one to his own city, that is, where their ancestors were born, that their names, family, dignity, and condition, might be recorded or registered, Lightf. Hor. in Matt. xii. 23. i Acts ! Luke ii. 5. - m Verse 3. Joseph. Wars, book vii. chap. 12. ́ Matt. i. 1. |