1 Tim. iii. 16. World, received up into Glory*. And GOD, who is the Subject of these Propofitions, can be only Chrift; because of him each is true, and are all true of none but Him. We grant the divine Perfections and Attributes to be the fame with the divine Effence; yet we fay they are never in the Scriptures called GOD, or, if they were in other places, none of them could here be the Subject, or furnish out a tolerable Interpretation. And therefore when the Socinians tell us, that by the Name of GOD is here meant the Will of GOD; by manifefted in the Flesh, revealed by frail and mortal Man; by received up into Glory, received gloriously on Earth; they teach us a Language which the Scriptures know not, which the Holy Ghost never used, and which even Sense and Grammar will not bear. As no Attribute, then, fo likewife no Perfon but the Son can be here defcrib'd. Not the Holy Ghoft; for by Him the Person spoken of, is affirm'd to have been juftified: Not the Father; who was neither manifested in the Flesh, nor received up into Glory. (The great Objection against the force of this Text is rais'd by Grotius, who pretends that the Term Oss (GOD) was put in by the Neftorians; it being before savepáln (which was manifefted, &c.) as it is in the old Latin Verfion, and in the Syriac. But this Charge, if well examined, falls to nothing. For First, the Neftorians would never falfify a Text to the ruin of their own Opinion, which in this respect, was, that GOD was not Incarnate, nor did afcend into Heaven. Secondly, our Reading is St. Chryfoftom's, after whom three other Patriarchs fucceeded to the See of Conftantinople, before Neftorius: As it is likewife St Cyril's, whom we find making great ufe of it, in oppofing the Neftorian Hereticks at their first appearance. Thirdly, as for Liberatus and Hincmarus, who are brought to vouch the Story of Macedonius's being the Author of this Corruption, and being turned out of the See of Conftantinople for a Neftorian; as the latter of thofe Authors probably tranfcribes from the former, so neither is the former of any Credit in this Point; becaufe 'tis certain that Macedonius was not a Neftorian, and because the Relation is confirmed by no Authorities of Hiftory. Befides; both affirm the first Greek to have had and not; and that refers to the Perfon, not to the Mystery. Hincmarus fays, it was one Letter only was altered; altered; and then it could not make sds: Liberatus fays, it was changed to ; and this weighs nothing in the Controversy. Laftly, if Macedonius had been ejected and depriv'd, for fuch a Falfification, Care would have been taken to restore the os in the Greek, which we no where meet with; but on the contrary, with Oss in all the Copies, before and fince Macedonius's time.) Again, St. Paul thus admonishes the Elders of the Church of Ephefus; Take heed unto your felves, and to all the Flock, over which the Holy Ghoft hath made you Overfeers, to feed the Church of GOD, which He purchafed with bis own Blood +. In the Propofition here imply'd, GOD † A&ts xx. 28. purchafed the Church with his own Blood, as GOD is the Subject, fo Chrift is GOD. Many general Acts are indeed without diftinction apply'd to the Father and to the Son; and fo here, the Father might have been said to purchase us, because He gave his Son a Ransom for us; but not to have purchased us with his own Blood, because He cannot die. (Befides idov aia, his own Blood, is in Scripture opposid το αίμα αλλότριον, the Blood of others. And in this regard Chrift is diftinguished from the Aaronical High-Prieft: Not by the Blood of Goats and Calves, but by his own Blood, He entred once into the Holy Place. And whereas the High-Prieft entred every Year, with the Blood of others, Chrift appeared once to put away Sin, by the Sacrifice of Himself +. And therefore 'tis ve- + Heb. ix. 12, ry obfervable, that the Socinians in their Gloffes upon this Paffage in the Acts, make not the leaft mention of idor, but concealing that Word in which the chief ftrength of our Argument lies, are content to plead, that the Blood of Chrift may in fome Sense be called the Blood of GOD the Father.) 25, 26. 2. That the Name of GOD invested, by way of Excellence, with an Article, is attributed in the Scriptures unto Chrift. Thus in St. Matthew's Interpretation of Emanuel, the Greek Article is prefix'd: (μsť ¿μãv ¿Osòs *.) * Mat. i. 23. Were the Name Emanuel, as fome would perfuade us, to be expounded in the way of a Propofition, GOD is with us, (as the Lord our Righteousness †, and the Lord is † Jer. xxxiii.16. there*, must be understood, when applied to Jerufalem,) Ezek. xlviii.35. it would not have been the Title of Chrift, but of his Church. Whereas we find it moft directly and folemnly E 2 given ↑ John xx. 28. given to Him, and bearing no kind of Similitude to thofe Os be the Supreme GOD, Osos us must be my Supreme GOD; as when David often cries out, Osos, Os, the latter is of the fame Importance with the former.) Nor is our Saviour only ftiled the GOD, but for a further certainty, the true GOD, with the fame Eminency of an Article: We know that the Son of GOD is come, and hath given us an Understanding, that we may know Him that is true; and we are in Him that is true, even in his Son Fefus Chrift. This is the true GOD, and Eternal * John v. 20. Life *. It is poffible, fay our Adverfaries, that these last Words fhould refer to the Father, the remote Antecedent, not to the Son, the immediate, according to Grammatical Conftruction. But a bare poffibility in Syntax, is no Objection, when all the Reafons lie on the other fide; and we may conftrue falfe, without making a Solecifm in Grammar. As the conftant Title of our Saviour, in St. John's Language, is Eternal Life, fo is He no lefs less the true GOD, and by being in Him, we are prov'd to be in Him that is true. * Mark xiv.61. * Rom. i, 25, 3. That, were there no place of Scripture in which the Article was thus exprefs'd, yet we find fuch Adjuncts affixed to the Name of GOD, when attributed to Chrift, as will prove equivalent to an Article, or to any thing that might denote the Supreme Majefty. As in that noble Paffage in the Epiftle to the Romans, St. Paul magnifies the Fews, out of whom, as concerning the Flesh, Chrift came, who is over all, GOD blessed for evert. Here, Firft, our † Rom. ix. 5. Saviour is called GOD, and his Flesh, or Human Nature, oppos'd to his Divinity. Secondly, He is fo called GOD, as not to be of the Many Gods, but the One Supreme (á) GOD over all; anfwering to the common Title of GOD in Scripture, The Moft High. Thirdly, He is alfo ftyled the Blessed; which Name alone elsewhere is used for the Supreme GOD: As, Art thou the Chrift the Son of the Blefjed*? Or, is added as the fitteft Epithet to the Name of GOD: As, GOD, who is bleffed for ever, knoweth, &c. †: Or, comes in as a great † 2 Cor. xi. 31. Addition to any of his other Titles: As, --They ferv'd the Creature more than the Creator, who is bleffed for ever and all this conformably to the Language of the Jewish Church; with which the Blessed One is known to have fignified as much as the Holy One, and both, or either of them, the GOD of Ifrael. Besides, the Apostle's Argument would lofe much of its Force, fhould He, to raife the Glory of the Jewish Nation, only affirm, that a Man born of that Race, was afterwards made a GOD, in an inferiour Senfe, not by his Birth, but by his Death, Whereas the truly great Honour and Glory is, that the moft High GOD, bleffed for ever, fhould take on Him the Seed of Abraham. The Pretence of Erafmus for leaving out the Word GOD ('s) in this Text is vain and groundless: The Paffage of St. Cyprian, alledg'd by him, wanted it only thro' the negligence of the Tranfcribers; fince the Text is there us'd (as before by Tertullian, whose Disciple St. Cyprian profefs'd himself,) to prove the Divinity of our Saviour. And the Word was indeed found in the MSS. made ufe of by Manutius, Morellius, and Pamelius. St. Hilary's omiffion of it, in one of his Works, must have happen'd thro' the like neglect; fince He ex E 3 preffly *John v. 26. preffly urgeth it in another, to evince our prefent Affertion. Laftly, the Objection of Grotius from the Syriac Version is a manifeft Falfity: The Word being exprefs in that Tranflation, as in all others, and in all Copies of the Original. III. The Divine Effence which Chrift had before He was conceived of the Virgin, He had by communication from GOD the Father. As there can be but one Effence properly Divine, fo there can be but one Perfon originally, of Himself, fubfifting in that Effence. The Father of our Lord Jesus Chrift is originally GOD, as not receiving his Eternal Being from any other. Jefus Chrift, therefore, who is not the Father, and yet has been already prov'd to be the true, proper, and Eternal GOD, must be understood to have the Godhead communicated to Him by the Father. As the Father bath Life in Himself, fo bath He given to the Son to have Life in Himfelf *. Our Saviour, who thought it not robbery to be equal with GOD, yet even in that Equality confeffeth a Priority, when He fays, My Father is John xiv. 28. greater than I +. There is no Difference. or Inequality, in the Nature, or Effence: Yet the Father has that Effence of Himfelf, from none; the Son, not of Himself, but from the Father. (As the Orthodox amongst the Antients exprefs'd their Belief of our Saviour's Divine Ef fence, by the Term of pools, fo the Manichees us'd the fame Term in an Heretical Senfe, as if the Son were a Part of the Divine Effence of the Father; which Abuse of theirs fupplied the Arrians with an Excufe for rejecting the Word.) The Divine Nature and Substance being abfolutely immaterial, and confequently indivifible, cannot be given by Participation, but only by Communication. When our Lord fays, I and the Father are one*, the Plu rality of the Verb, and Neutrality of the Noun, with the diftinction of their Perfons, fpeak a perfect Identity of their Effence. And as He declares, the Father is in me, and I in Him+; fo He acknowledges, I came forth John xvi. 28. from the Father: By the former fhewing the Divinity of his Effence, by the latter the Origination of Himself. John x: 30. John x. 38. IV. This Communication of the Divine Effence is a proper Generation. The moft proper Generation that |