fimilar to that which we find in thefe; "ONE GOD, "the Father."

• If the term God, be understood in this place, as ⚫ peculiar to the Father; either it includes a particular excellency, and is taken for that Perfon who is the fource of the other; or for the Father, without denoting any particular excellency. If the former, we have already fhewed, that they who speak thus, either contradict themselves, and acknowledge that the Father only is the Supreme God; or else they say nothing to the purpofe. If the latter, the apoftle muit have spoken impertinently. For the queftion was not, whether the Father is but one; but, whether God is but one; as appears from the preceding words.'-Here we retort upon Crellius. If the term Lord be taken in this place as peculiar to the Son; either it includes a particular excellency, and is taken for the Perfon who has an original authority; or for one poffeffed of dominion, without denoting any particular excellency. If the former, they who speak thus, either contradict themfelves, and acknowledge that the Son is the Supreme Lord; or else they say nothing to the purpofe. If the latter, the apostle must have spoken impertinently. F.. the question was not, whether the Son is but one; bu whether the Lord is but one; as appears from the preceding words.

Our adverfaries, if they can, may anfwer this objection as for us, we are not concerned in it. For what is this argument but a mere fophifm? The term Gov, by being appropriated to the Father, does not lofe its natural fignification. It ftill denotes that infinite excellence which diftinguishes his effence, to whom it is applied, from all that are called gods, or lords, whether on earth, or in heaven. The FATHER, who is here opposed, not to the Son, nor to the Holy Ghoft, for that was not the question; but, to falfe gods, to magiftrates, and to angels, is reprefented as infinitely fuperior to "all that is called god. But what infurmountable

difficulty is there in all this? Is not Jesus alfo oppofed, in this place, not to the Father, for that was not the queflion; but to all those that are called lords, whether on earth or in heaven?

CHAPTER V.

An Objection from Luke i. 35. answered.

ANOTHER objection, against the doctrine

From

maintained, is formed by our adverfaries on the following words: "The Holy Ghoft fhall come upon thee, and "the power of the Higheft shall overshadow thee; "therefore alfo that Holy Thing which shall be born "of thee, fhall be called, THE SON OF GOD." hence they infer, that the fublime title, SON OF GOD, is founded on the miraculous conception of Jefus, by the Holy Spirit. Here they demand, how Chrift could be fo called, on account of his wonderful conception, by the power of the Highest, if he was the Son of God from eternity?

In anfwer to which I obferve; That God, in this revelation of his will, accomodates his language to the capacities of the perfon to whom he makes known his gracious defigns. Thus he had frequently done to the Jewish prophets. When he revealed to thofe holy men the calling of the Gentiles, it was often under fuch images as were borrowed from the ancient fanctuary, with which they were well acquainted. He informed them, that " an altar fhould be erected in the midst of

Egypt;" and that, from the rifing to the fetting fun incenfe fhould be offered with a pure offering." Such ideas were familiar to them; and, therefore Spiritual things and future events were revealed to th

prophets, and the church of old, under thefe images.. So the angel, who appears to Mary, fpeaks in a fimilar way. He might, if he had pleased, have defcribed Jefus Chrift as the Mediator, who fhould reconcile heaven and earth. He might have represented him to the virgin mother, as an univerfal Monarch, according to the oracle of Daniel; as a spiritual King, who should reign over the hearts and confciences of men; and as Lord of the universe, having all authority in heaven and in earth. These things, however, he does not mention; because it was expedient that the should be gradually led into the mysteries of the kingdom of God. He, therefore, fpeaks of the re-establishment of David's kingdom, which was at that time the object of the nation's hope, and most familiar to the mind of a Jew. "The Lord

"God," fays Gabriel," shall give unto him the throne " of his father David; and he shall reign over the house "of Jacob for ever."-Now, as the eternal Sonship of Jefus is one of the most fublime and mysterious doctrines in the whole Book of God, we have no reason to be furprised if the heavenly meffenger, in his converfe with Mary, did not intend, by any thing he said of the Lord Meffiah as the Son of God, to declare the proper ground of his Divine filiation; but only to inform her, in general, of his infinite dignity, and that his filial relation to the Father should be attested in his miraculous conception by the Holy Spirit.

Again: The Scripture frequently makes ufe of fuch words to exprefs an event, as feem to denote the cause. So the evangelift fays, "Therefore they could not believe, because that Efaias faid again." Thus the expreffions on which the objection is raised, feem to denote the caufe for which Jefus Chrift fhould be called, the Son of God; but they fignify only the event. For the fenfe of the paffage is this; The Holy Ghoft fhall come upon thee; the power of the Higheft fhall overfhadow thee; and it fhall come to pafs, that the Holy Thing which fhall be born of thee, fhall be called the

Son of God. The particle therefore, is not to be confidered as pointing out the reafon why Jefus fhould bear the exalted title; but why he fhould be received and acknowledged under it, by his people who would infer, from his miraculous conception by the Holy Ghost, and his wonderful birth of a virgin, that he was the "Child born, the Son given," and the glorious IMMANUEL fpoken of in ancient prophecy *.

But were we to understand the words in their literal fenfe, they would not express any thing really inconfiftent with what we maintain. For the power of the Holy Spirit, by which the body of Jefus was conceived in the womb, conferred upon him, as man, the unspeakable honour of being called, THE SON OF GOD. This cannot be denied, in whatever fenfe you understand the phrase, "he fhall be called," whether for, he shall be, or he fhall be denominated. Certain it is, that the conception of Chrift by the Holy Ghoft, was the reafon why that which was born of Mary is called the Son of God. For as the human nature of Jefus is hypoftatically united to the Divine; it partakes of this and other glorious titles which are given to the Meffiah, in confequence of his miraculous conception. The reafon why the humanity of Chrift is fometimes, though in a figurative fenfe, invefted with fuch titles and qualities as belong only to the eternal Son of God, or the uncreated Word; is, ita perfonal union with the Word.

Admitting, however, that there were a real difficulty in the text, a difficulty intended, by the wisdom of God, to exercise our humility and faith; yet our opponents would gain but little advantage by it: becaufe it is easily proved that the title, SON OF GOD, is eftablished on different foundations from that of his miraculous conception He is frequently called, God's beloved Son; his own Son; his only Son; and his only begotten Son. We ought, confequently, to inquire, not only into his

Ifaiah vii. 14. and ix. 6.
B b

general character Son; but alfo into thofe ideas of diflinguifbing excellence which are annexed to it, by various remarkable epithets.

Our adverfaries being determined not to acknowledge Jefus Chrift as the Son of God, by eternal generation, endeavour to eftablish the title on the following foundations. His conception by the Holy Ghoff-His investiture in the offices of prophet, prieft, and king— His unction by the Holy Spirit-His refurrection from the dead--And his exaltation, after his fufferings. Of all which in their order.

In regard to the first supposed ground of the august character, I would afk; Whether the mere advantage of having been conceived by the Holy Spirit, be greater than that of being formed immediately by the power of God, in a ftate of holinefs; as were the angels, and the fouls of our firft parents? For, to be formed by the Spirit of God, and by the power of God, is, on the principles of our opponents, the fame thing. This, therefore, they muft allow. Confequently, though Jefus might be called THE SON OF GOD, because he was formed by the Divine, Spirit; yet the title would be common to him with angels, whom God created by his own immediate power. He would then be the Son, but not the ONLY Son of God.

It may, perhaps, be faid; Jefus might be called the Son of God, in diftinction from angels, because they have not a father, being created and unbegotten ⚫ intelligences; which was the case of our first parents, and is true of the fouls of men in general. But it was · proper that Chrift, being like other men, and having Yet, not having a mother, fhould also have a father.

⚫ had one as other men, the want of ordinary generation being fupplied by the Holy Spirit; we need not wonder, either that he is called the Son of God, or that he is • thus denominated in diftinction from pure intelligences.' -This reply is weak. For the character Son, OWN SON, and ONLY BEGOTTEN SON, though fuch a sublime