QUESTION I. 413 his object of worship, which is the proper sense of my God in all other scriptures. Nor is there any sufficient reason then why . we should construe the words my Father, as relating to the deity of Christ, since the words my God cannot be so construed, and since both these titles seemsso intimately connected and referring to one and the same subject. Mark xiii. 32. Of that day and hour knoweth not the Son, but the Father. I confess it may be said in that paragraphhe is called the Son of man, ver. 26. yet it must be granted that the more natural sense of the word is " Of that hour knoweth not the Son of God, but only God the Father." This text does so plainly shewChrist's ignorance of the day of judgment as he is the Son, that though it be granted the divine nature of Christ knows the day of judgment, yet as a Son he does not : therefore as a Son he hath not a divine nature, or true godhead. John iii. 35. The Father loveth the Son, and hath givenall things into his hands. Ver. 34. God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him. All this implies an inferiority and depen- dency. As a Son he receives all from another, which godhead cannot do. Luke xxiii. 47. When the centurion or captain saw the mi. racles at the death of Christ, he cried out, Verily this man was the Son of God. He cannot be supposed to mean that this man was the true and eternal God, but only that he was a great and glorious person, like God, or some way related to God : or he was the person whom the Jews expected for their Messiah. This Roman captain could not imagine Christ to be God himself. 1 Cor. xv. 28. Then shall the Son also himself be subject to him that has put all things under him, that God may be all in all. This is a character of too much inferiority for true god- head. The argument stands thus : If the Son of God be true God considered as a Son, then he is originally and necessarily Lord of all, and then it must be said it is by his own voluntary condescension that he is so far depressed and humbled by the economy, as to become the Father's deputy and vicegerent ; and when that economy ceases, he is of course exalted to his equality with the Father, and tohis essential and natural lordship over all. But the representation of St. Paul is just the contrary : In many parts of his writings, particularly Phil. ii. he shews us, that the Son of God is not depressed but exalted by the economy to the kingdom. And he tells us in this text, that when the Son gives up this economical kingdom, he comes again into subjec- tion ; then shall the Son himself be subject to the Father ; which plainly skews, that considered as a Son, he is naturally subject to the Father, and that at the end of this economical exaltation he shall return to his natural subjection, and shall be so for ever when God appears all in all. This is most evidently the meaning of the great apostle.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=