VEa.x,6,7,8,9 Rpfiletothe HxaR. Ews. Wordscannot fo in any meafure be verified or made good. By man, fame under, hand Adam' inhis integrity ; who how he can be called theSon of man, I knownot; befides how was his Honour, not to be thought of or mentioned without the re- membrance of his fin and thameful fall, filch a cautè of rejoycing andExaltation un- to the Pfalmiff I Some, man in his corrupted condition; which howfar he is from the thingshere mentioned need not be declared. Can we fuppofe the Apostle would prove the fubjeflion of the world to come unto Chriff, by a Testimony principally re- fpeóting themwho have no intereft in it ; Some, believers as rejf000d in Chriff, which isune confguentially, and in refpced ofParticipation, Rev. 2. 26, 27. but not antece- dently unto the inveftiture of the Honour that they are made partakers of in the Perfon of Christ. Befides which is thegreat abfurdity of this Interpretation, they all affirm, that the fame words are ufed tóexprefs and confirm things direçtly contrary and adverse unto one another. For thofe words in the Pßómili, Thouhall made him littk lets than the Angels, they would have to sign¡fie the Exaltation Of man in his Creation, being made nigh unto, and little leg than Angels, and in the Application of them by the Apoftle untoChrili, theyacknowledge, that they denote depreJron, mino- ration, humiliation, or exinanition. How the fame words in the fame place canexprefs contrary things,prove the exaltationof one, and the depreffon ofanother, is very hard, ifnot impoffible tobeunderstood. Betides, they are compelled to interpret the fame phrafein divers fenfes, as well as the fame sentence in contrary ; for thofe words in the Pfalmiff ßt4X6 ?4 as applyed untoman,theymake to denotequantity or quality,as unto Chrift,timeor duration ; whichthat in the fame place,they cannot doboth, is needlefs to prove. But as we faid, our Expofition is wholly free from thefe entangtements,anfwering the wordsof the Pfalmiff,& fuitedto the words and Context ofthe Apollothroughout. Schiklingius or Crelliur in his Comment on thefe words, would faign lay hold of an objection againftthe Deity of Chrifl ; p. t t2. Him videmus, faith he, cumD, Au- thor adeà f llicitè laborer, â Scripture dilfis pugnet cum qui Angelis fuerit ration nature minor, nempeCbríffum, debuii fuprema gloría ém ',more coronari, angelosque dignitate longb fuperare nec ipfi Authori me cuipiamChriffianorum ad quos feribit, divine pre- ter humanam inChriffonature in mentent veniffi, nam fi bane in Chriffa agnoviffint, nut - lo negotio etiam ChriffumAngelis longe preffare, naturamq; humanam ei minimb obffare vi- dint : quid quefo tanto molimine, tantoque argomentorum apparatu ad rem omnibus apertiffimam perfuadendam opusfnit t aid argumentis aliunde conquifsu laborat au- thor, cum uno ilia, unica nature iJltns divine mentione rem totem canficere patuiit? The whole ground of this fallacy lyes in a fuppofition that the Apoltle treateth of the Perfon ofChritt abiólutely and in himfclf confidered; which isevid,nty falü : he fpeaks of him in rcfpeEd of the Office he underwent as the Mediator of the New Covenant; in which refpecit he was both made lei! than the Angels not only on the account of his nature, but of the Condition whereinhe difcharged his Duty, and alto made,orexalted above them, by grant from hisFather; whereas in his Divine Nature he wasabfolutely and infinitely fo, from the inttant ofthe creation. And whereas thofe to whomhe wrete,did hear that he was in the difcharge of his Office, for a little whilemade much lower than the Angels, it was not in vainfor him to prove byArguments and Teffimonies, that in the Execution of thefame Office , he was allo exalted above them, that part of his work being flubbed for whichhe was made lower than they for a feafon. And molt needful it was for him fo todo inrefpeét of the Hebrews, who boatlingin the Miniffry ofAngels in the givingof the Law, were to be convinced of theExcellency of the Author of the Gospel, as such, in the dischargeof his work, above them. And the exprefsmention of his Divine Nature was in this place altoge- ther needkfl and improper; nor would it have proved the thing that he intended ; for how eafle had it beenfor the Jews to have rep'.yed ; that notwithflanding that, they Caw in how low, an outward condition he miniftred upon the earth, and therefore that would not prove his Exaltation above Angels in the discharge of his Office; feeingnotwithllanding that he was evidently made lower than they in that Office. Itwould alto have been improper for him in thisplace to have madeany mention thereof; feeing the proofof the Excellency of his Perfon abfolutely confidered, was nothing unto the buinefs he had now in hand.. And it was likewife every way needkfd, he having fo abundantly proved and vindicated his Divine Nature in the Chapter foregoing. Now to take an Argument againft a thing from the Apottles fi- knee of it in one place, where the mention of it was improper, ufclefs and needlefs, he having fully exprelfed the fame matter elsewhere, yea, but newly before, is an Aa a a evidence Z 19
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=