424 elvEsT1ONs CONe1. RNING JESUS. not abuse oúrselvee by false and mistaken notions, and imagine that we derive them all from the word of God. III. I was afraid to ,build"my belief of the Deity of Christ upon feeble and insufficient foundations, and therefore I thought it necessary to examine this argument which is drawn from his son- ship. The great doctrine of the godhead of our Lord' Jesus Christ, and faith in him as the true God, has been by many per- sons built chiefly on this name which isgiven him, viz. the Son of God ; and that upon this bare presumption, that as a son amongst men has the same specific nature with his father, so the Son of /God must have the same individual nature with his Father ; but how weak this argument is tó support such a doctrine, appears in the foregoing discourse. Now I would- not have the faith of christians in any important doctrine, that is divinely true, built upon a supposition that is feeble or false, lest the adversa- ries take occasion to insult the faith of christians, and to decry the doctrine itself, as though it had -no better arguments or founda- tions to support it. Besides, when christians have built their own faith and hopes upon a foundation so feeble and uncertain, they are more liable to have their creed shaken, and to part with the glorious doctrine itself ; and therefore I would persuade them rather to build their faith on such arguments as will stand the test against all opposers.: And I think most of those which I have made use of in the eighth and ninthpropositions of the treatise of the Christian Doctrine of the Trinity, may lay a claim to this character, and will better support this faith than any argument derived from his mere generation or sonship. III. It is necessary as far as possible to remove all cavils from every important doctrine of christianity, and such is that of the deity of Christ. Now if the doctrine of his deity bebuilt on his sonship, then he must be true G,od considered as he is a Son ; but the notion of a SON in all languages of mankind importing some sort of derivation and dependence, and the notion of god- head importing independence and self-existence, seem to carry a sort of contradiction in them. And thisbecomes a mighty preju- dice to the minds of men against their belief of the deity of Christ, when they are told, that he is God as be is a-Son, or that his deity depends on his sonship, that is, his deity is included in bis derived and dependent character. Though I will not here as- sert that absolute self-existence and independence belong to every . thing in and of God, for I know not what powers or properties ofgodheaddepenel on each other, yet I would not willingly prove the godhead of Christ from the very name which seems to ex- clude self-existence and independence, since there are many other and better proofs of it. And though I dare not utterly renounce all those schemes
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=