The knowledg of Christ Jesus. Or The seventh book of commentaries vpon the Apostles Creed: containing the first and general principles of Christian theologie: with the more immediate principles concerning the true knowledge of Christ. Divided into foure sections. Continued by Thomas Jackson Dr. in Divinitie, chaplaine to his Majestie in ordinarie, and president of Corpus Christi Colledge in Oxford

CHAP 26.

That by the Sonne of God and the Word, wee are to understand one and the same partie or person: that the Word by whom S. John saith the World was made, is coeternall to God the Father, who made all things by him.

BUt to wave this point (for the present) concerning the maner how the eternall God should beget an eternall sonne: the thread which we are to unwind (as far as possibly we can with∣out knot or ravell) is this: that Christ Jesus is ••eri, bodiè, yesterday, to day, the same (only true sonne of God) for ever, truely coeternall to his Father. And this being a point of so great consequence, I will not allot one place onely for the clearing of it, but insist upon it (more or lesse) in all the articles which concerne Christ. For in all of them, wee shall be enfor∣ced to incounter the Jew, as well as the Arrian, or Socinian.

2 Whether of these two be the greater sin∣ner, or more dangerous enemy to the crosse of Christ, that I leave to God the Father, and Christ Jesus the judge of quick and dead, and to the holy Spirit to determine. But seeing it is no sinne to refute or censure both their errours; the errour of the moderne Jew, who utterly denieth Christ

to be the sonne of God in any sense seemes to me more excusable,* 1.1 at least lesse inexcusable then the errour of the Arrian or Socinian; who granting Christ to be the sonne of God, deny him to be coeternall to his Father. And my reason is, because it is not more plaine or pregnant out of the writings of Moses or the Prophets (which the Jews only acknowledge) that God was to be in∣carnate or to become man (though that be most pregnant;) then it is from the Evangelist and o∣ther sacred writers of the new Testament, (whose authoritie the Socinian denies not) that Christ is the only sonne of God from all eternitie. Two or three testimonies shall suffice for the present. Were there no other place besides that of the A∣postle Heb. 7. 3. and that of S. Iohn chap. 1. these would captivate my understanding to the obe∣dience of beleife in this point. The Apostle spea∣king of Melchisedech saith, he was without beginning without end of life, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, albeit he had both Father and Mother, begin∣ning and end of dayes, yet he is represented unto us, without beginning or end of dayes, that so he might be a type or shadow of the sonne of God. But how farre a type of the sonne of God? only in this, as he was without beginning of dayes, or end of life. That the Apostle by the sonne of God did meane Christ Jesus and none else, none deny. The very scope and end of this parallel betwixt Melchisedech and Christ was, to shew that Christ the sonne of God was truely and really such as Melchisedech was only by shadow or represen∣tation;

that is really and absolutely without be∣ginning or end of dayes, he who is, who was, & is to come: perfect characters of eternitie. Againe, it is evident, that the sonne of God who died for us, was the same person and party with that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, with that word which was made flesh. This consequence is ungainesayable [that if 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Word were without beginning or end of dayes; God blest for ever, and coeternall with him, who said, Let there be light, Let there be a firmament, &c. then Christ Iesus the sonne of God, who not on∣ly we but the Socinians grant did die for us, was and is without beginning or end of dayes, truely coeternall to God the Father]

3 That 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 [the word of God] was abso∣lutely eternall not made so in time, is a truth which the wit of man cannot more punctually presse against all that in future times should deny or question it, then S. Iohn doth in the beginning of his Gospell. And the manner of his reiterate emphaticall expressions of himselfe, (every later adding strength unto the former) confirmes the opinion or tradition of the Ancient: that he pur∣posely wrote that maiestick proeme to his Gos∣pell (which is but a paraphrase, though most di∣vine, upon the writings of Moses, and the Pro∣phets touching this great mysterie) for preven∣ting of the spreading of the Arian or like here∣sie whose seeds were by the envious man sowne in S. Iohns time, after Christs other Apostles were fallen asleepe. In the beginning (saith S. Iohn) the Word was; What beginning doth he meane? The

same which Moses meant, when hee said, In the beginning God made the Heaven and the Earth. The originall phrase, whether used by Moses in the Hebrew, or by S. Iohn in the Greeke, exactly answers to the Latine in principio. Now though every cause be Principium, the begin∣ning or that which gives beginning to its proper effect: Yet Omne principium every beginning is not a proper cause of that which usually followes up∣on it. For the first dawning or scaring of the mor∣ning is the beginning, yet no true positive cause, of the day following; it is first in order of time, but not of causality. And this ambiguity of the Phrase in the beginning is the same both in the He∣brew, and in the Chaldee as the learned in these tongues (no parties in this businesse) have obser∣ved. Now in that first of Genesis, we must take the word beginning, not for the cause of all which followed, but for the first in order or preceden∣cy of duration. For the heavens and the earth (if we take them as now they are) were not made in that beginning or point of time wherein God is said to have made the heaven and earth: Nor did any of these, or any other parts of the world spring or result by way of causality from the first masse which was without order of parts; or true forme; otherwise the distinction of light from darknesse, or separation of the waters which are above the firmament, could not have beene works of crea∣tion properly so called, but rather of generation; whereas the Scripture tells us, that these were the works of the first and second day: much lesse

could the production of plants or vegetables, or substances endued with sense have been any pro∣per works of creation, after the heavens and earth were made. When then Moses saith,* 1.2 In the beginning God made the Heaven and the Earth, this is all one, as if he had said, the heavens and the earth had a beginning, & that this unformed masse was the beginning or first draught of them, and all things else whereof this masse was the be∣ginning, did beginne to be before they had any permanent or determinate kinde of being. And when S. Iohn saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In the begin∣ning the word was: the Phrase in grammaticall construction necessarily implies that the word had a perfect actuall being when all things else did but beginne to be, and having then an actu∣all proper being, it could not at that time, or any time since, not at the beginning of time it selfe, beginne to be, but was and is and so continues, without ending.

4. Or lest wits unarmed with arts, or unable to untwist arguments subtilly contrived by so∣phistry, should be made to stagger in this article of the eternity of the word, he addes the word was with God, and the word was God, not by extrinsecall or borrowed appellation (as Princes and Angells sometimes are called Gods) but by nature God, the Almighty God. Hence he addes, the same was in the beginning with God, that is, had as perfect be∣ing

as God himselfe had, when all things else be∣gunne to be [there is his eternity] or if this were not enough, he further saith, ver. 3. All things were made by him, to wit, by the Word [This is the character of his Almighty power or coequality with God who made all things by him.] But here perhaps the Arian, or other involved in his error, will object, at least in favour of this opinion it may be objected, that this universall of S. Iohn, all things were made by the Word, is subject to the same limitation or exception which those two u∣niversall before* 1.3 mentioned were, the one out of S. Paul, 1 Cor. 15. [When he saith he hath put all things under his feet, he is excepted who hath put all things under him:] the other out of the Author of the 146, Psal. [that we may not put trust or confi∣dence in any sonne of man] which admits of this limitation [unlesse it bee in that sonne of man, who is also the sonne of the Lord God of Israel:] why then may not this universall of S. Iohn [All things were made by the Word,] admit of this or the like restraint; All other things besides the word were made by God, and by the word as his coagent, but the word himselfe made by God a∣lone? Indeed if our Evangelist had said only thus [All things were made by the Word] this limitation would be more tolerable; but to prevent this ca∣vill or captious limitation, he expressely addeth [Without him was not any thing made that was made] This clause reacheth home, and caries it cleare, that this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Word, was not any of those things which were made or created, other∣wise

it should have been made or created by it selfe, which is impossible. The addition of this clause is but an exegeticall, or fuller expression of that which S. Iohn said before [that the Word was with God in the beginning,] that is, when all things which have beginning, did beginne to hee, this word was Gods coagent, truely eternall and Al∣mighty.

5. The same conclusion is contained (though more closely couched, especially in our English version) in that of S. Paul, Heb. 1. 2. God in these last dayes hath spoken unto us by his sonne, whom hee hath appointed heire of all things, by whom also hee made the Worlds. Though he be appointed heire of all things, as he is man, yet this right of inhe∣ritance was derived unto him as man, from the work of Creation, as he was the sonne of God. For as the Apostle there addes, God by him made the Worlds. Were there then more worlds then one? If there were, all were created by the sonne, and without him neither any world, nor any part of the world was created. Howbeit the world in the original, doth no signifie this visible or quan∣titative world, non mundos sed saecula, non 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sed 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, not the heavens, the earth, the elements, or any other part which we see, but all things whatsoever, which have any duration or successi∣on, were made by the sonne of God; and he had a perfect being before any thing could hee made by him, and is therefore truly eternall. The worlds in the originall comprehends all things which heretofore have beene, and now are not;

all things which now are and sometimes were not; all which hereafter shall be, though after their beginning of being they shall have no end. So that S Pauls speech expressely extends it selfe somewhat further then that of S. Iohn, All things were made by him, and without him was nothing made that was made. S. Iohns speech (expressely) refers only to things which were then made, S. Pauls speech extends it selfe as well to things future as past, not only for their making or beginning, but for their preservation or supportance. For so he saith Heb. 1. ver. 3. He upholdeth all things by the word of his power. As the father then created all things, so were all things created likewise by the sonne. The Father preserveth all things, and yet the sonne (who is the expresse image of his glory,) preserveth and upholdeth all things. And how∣ever we render the originall 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the bright∣nesse, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, he is the Almighty splendor, and the Almighty expression or character of the father Almighties glory and person. Finally, as hee is heire of all things else, so is he heire of the Al∣mighty Essentiall Attributes; these he enjoyes, not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, not by adoption or participation; but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 by right of inheritance, as being his only begot∣ten sonne: yet not his successor but his coequall from eternitie. And here (by the way) I cannot sufficiently admire the care and wisedome of the ancient Church, in appointing the gospell for that great festivall, (wherein we celebrate the memo∣ry of Christs nativitie) out of the forementioned Chapter of S. Iohn: and the Epistle for the same

festivall, out of the first of the Hebrews; to the end that all Christians might bee sufficiently in∣structed as well in the truth of his eternall gene∣ration, or eternity of his person, as he is the sonne of God, as of his nativity in time, as he was the sonne of David borne of the Virgine, or of his be∣getting from the dead. And as for the errour of the Arians or others, who acknowledging the di∣vine truth of the new Testament, deny the eter∣nity or eternall generation of the sonne of God; The most compendious way to refell them is not (as I conceive) fiercely to dispute against them, but rather to let them be caried with the blast of their owne doctrine, or draw them unto these fundamentall Rocks, and let them split them∣selves.

6. But to follow S. Iohns expressions a little further, which come neerer to the point now in handling, ver. 4. In him (that is, in the word) was life, this is more then if he had said, he is the word of life. For so is the Gospell by way of efficacy or efficiency; but men only, who live by it, are the seat and subject of that life which it imparts; which is wrought by the preaching of it. But when the Apostle saith, in the Word was life, this implies, hee was that seat and fountaine of life, from whom both the efficacy of the Gospell, and that life which is subjectively in men or Angells, is derived or participated. And the life was the light of men, and the light shineth in darknesse, and the darknes comprehended it not. All these are Attributs or expressions of a nature truly divine, characters

of a living essence, or of life it selfe, before men or the world were made, and this is confirmed to us ver. 8. The Word was the true light, which light∣neth every man that commeth into the world, And if every man that commeth into the world, then the first man Adam was enlightned by this word: For he was both the light and life of the world, ever since the first beginning of either; albeit the world and worldly men did not apprehend him to be such, as it is expressed ver. 10. He was in the world, and the world was made by him, but the world knew him not, So them, he was in the world ever since it was made, and the world was in him (as in its eminent, or ideall efficient cause) before it was made. He came unto his owne, and his owne re∣ceived him not. Who were these his owne? If all generations of men, or all succession of time, or things temporall were made by him, all these were his owne. Yet before the comming into the world, of which the Apostle here speakes, all these were not his owne by the same peculiar right. He alwayes was Lord of lords, and King of kings, and supreame ruler of such as ruled the nations; yet were not all nations his peculiar inheritance: this was the prerogative of Abrahams seed or Ia∣cobs posterity. And albeit he had beene in them and with them after a more speciall kinde of pre∣sence for many generations: yet at this time, whereto the Apostles words referre, he first came by a peculiar maner, both into the world and un∣to them, by becomming an inhabitant or sojour∣ner in the territories bequeathed to Abraham and

to his seed. But these who were thus his owne by peculiar redemption from the land of Aegypt, for the most part received him not. Yet his comming (though) after this peculiar manner, to his owne was not lost, nor was Gods promise to Abraham any way impeached by their refusing, or not re∣ceiving of him. For to as many as received him (whe∣ther they were of Abrahams seed after the flesh, or of the Gentiles, to all of both sorts) he gave a right or priviledge to become the sonnes of God. ver. 12. All were made the true and lively sonnes of Abraham by receiving him, who was before Abra∣ham, but was now made man of the seed of Abra∣ham. Now in that he made all the sonnes of God which received him: this presupposeth he was the sonne of God, not by making, not by taking the seed of Abraham; but the sonne of God by nature or eternall generation, the true God of Is∣rael. For so the Evangelist concludes that hea∣venly discourse ver. 14. And the word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

7. Why S. Iohn in the proaeme to his Gospell doth iustyle Christ Jesus the word of God, rather then the sonne of God, why it is rather said, the Word became flesh, then the sonne became flesh: in what prophecy the words becomming flesh was foretold or foreshadowed, with the manner how it was made flesh, or the meaning of this phrase; must be the subject of some Chapters following. This, for the present, is evident out of places be∣fore

alleaged, that S. Iohn did meane no other party or person by the word, then him whom af∣terwards, throughout his whole Gospell, he stiles the sonne of God: and out of the same places it is as evident, that the word, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, was that very God of Israel, who had promised to erect a Taberna∣cle and dwell in his people or amongst them, and to manifest his glory to them after a more pecu∣liar manner, then he had done, either during the time of the first tabernacle, or of both the Tem∣ples. For that text of S. Iohn Iohn, 1. 14. He dwelt a∣mongst us, and wee saw his glory, the glory as of the only begotten sonne of God, imports the exact fulfil∣ling of all those prophecies, wherein the mani∣festation of Gods glory in succeeding ages is pro∣mised. That the glory of God was to be revealed in the flesh, S. Iohn did learne from Scriptures, which were extant before our Saviours incarna∣tion; though this he learned not by study or art, but from Divine revelation. But that the man Christ Iesus, with whom he conversed here on earth, was the word, which the Scripture foretold should be made flesh, or that the glory, which shined in him, was the very brightnesse of Gods glory; this S. Iohn knew by experiment; as having seene his transfiguration upon Mount Tabor, and conversed with him after his resurrection. This both he and S. Paul beleeved from sensible evi∣dence of experiments exactly answerable to the predictions of Moses and other Prophets, con∣cerning the glory of God, which was in later times morefully to be revealed, then in former.

8 To omit those two places before cited Exod. 29. 44, 45. and Leviticus 26. 11, 12. (unto both which places that of S. Iohn chap. 1. 14. doth in speciall referre) wee will insist a while upon that text Exodus 33. 14. to the 23. The Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh with his friend. The summe of this dialogue is expressed ver. 14, 15. My presence (saith God) shall go with thee, and I will give thee rest. And Moses said, if thy presence go not with us, carry us not up hence, for wherein shall it be knowne here, that I and thy people have found grace in thy sight? But Moses not satisfied with the promise of Gods presence, and separation of them from other people, requests a sight of his glory, and this in part is granted ver. 21, 22, 23. And the Lord said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shall stand upon a Rock. And it shall come to passe while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the Rock, & will cover thee with my hand, while I passe by. And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seene. For so God had said ver. 20. Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see my face, and live. Yet this sight of Gods glory, or so much of it as Moses saw, left such an impression in his face or Coun∣tenance, as you may read chap. 34. ver. 33. that he was constrayned to put a vaile upon his face, whilest he talked with the people, who were not able to behold the glory. But this vaile as our Apostle tels us, 2 Cor. 3. 14.) is put away in Christ. It is true. Yet this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or the word, was not the Christ to doe away this vaile, till he put on the vaile of flesh. The

flesh then was a vaile to him, but as a glasse or mirrour to us. Wee may in Christ with open face behold that glory of God, whose reflexe on Moses face the Israelites could not behold, but through a vaile. Christ then is that glasse or mirrour, wher∣in the brightnesse of Gods glory, which the Israe∣lites could not then behold, may now be seene. But did the Iews or Israelites in the time of the old Testament (or in that time, wherein the Au∣thor of the booke of Wisdome wrote) conceive any such matter, as our Apostle here inferres, that the glory of God should be more fully revealed; or that men should be more capable of the parti∣cipation of his presence in later ages, then they had beene in former? Some of them did, others did not; all of them ought, even by their owne prenotions or interpretations of Scriptures, so to have conceived and beleeved. For thus some mo∣derne Iews conceive of Moses his request. What was that (saith a great Rabbin amongst them) which Moses our Master sought to attaine unto, when he said, I pray thee shew me thy glory?

9 He requeged to know the truth of the be∣ing (or essence) of the holy blessed God, untill that he were knowne in his heart, like as a man is knowne, whose face is seen, and whose forme is ingravē in ones heart: so that man is distingui∣shed or separated in his knowledge from other men. So Moses requested that the Essence of God might be distinctly knowne in his heart from the essence of other things, so that he might know the truth of his Essence as it is.

But God answered him, that the knowledge of living man, who is compounded of body and soule, hath no ability to apprehend the truth of this thing concerning his Creator.

* 1.4 That know∣ledge of God or sight of his glory whereof Moses was uncapable, was truely ingraven in the heart of the man Christ Iesus, and in his light wee see light. He that saw him with the eyes of faith, did see the father; he did see the glory of the God∣head. The brightnesse of the divine glory is alike inaccessible, alike incommunicable in the Sonne as in the Father, if we consider them in their di∣vine nature alone; but in the man Christ Iesus, and in him alone, wee may behold the brightnesse of the Divine glory, which neither eye nor heart of man could behold in it selfe, or in any divine per∣son alone, but only in the divine person which was incarnate.

10 And it is not here to be omitted that the forecited 29. of Exodus ver. 45, I will dwell among the Children of Israel is thus translated by Onkelus in his paraphrase & ponam praesentiam divinitatis meae in medio filiorum Israel. So Fagius (with some others) render it; and why he so renders it, gives the reason.* 1.5

And the later Rabbines (asb 1.6 one well conversant in their writings, saith) gene∣rally observe that whensoever it is said in the person of God, that I will dwell amongst them;

this

may not be understood but of the Majestie of the holy and blessed God. To this purpose they al∣leage the 9. verse of the 8▪ Psalme, His salvation is neere them that feare him, that glory may dwell in our Land. And Simeon, in his dying song, doth te∣stifie, that Jesus the sonne of Mary, whom he im∣braced, when he was presented in the Temple, was the salvation of God. Lord now lattest thou thy Servant depart in peace, according to thy Word. For mine eyes have seene thy Salvation. And al∣though our Saviour, whilest hee lived here on earth, had no constant dwelling, no place of inhe∣ritance; yet at this time the Godhead, or that glory of the Godhead, of which the Psalmist speaketh, was incorporated in him. These and the like Scriptures S. Iohn did see fulfilled in Christ, when he said, the Word was made flesh, and dwelt a∣mongst us, and wee saw his glory the glory as of the only begotten of the Father; that is, such glory as could not bee communicated to any but to him, who was by nature the sonne of God: such glory as no flesh could behold, otherwise then as it was in Christ, or in the word made flesh; such a decla∣ration of the divine Majestie as none besides the sonne of God could declare. So the Apostle saith, ver. 18. No man hath seene God at any time, but the only begotten sonne who is in the bosome of the Father, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, he hath declared, or expounded him. But wherein doth this declaration consist, or how was it made by the sonne? Not by word only, or by declaration of his will, but by matter of fact, or reall representation. But of this point more

fully in the exposition of the name Iesus. Seeing Moses had said, that no flesh could see God and live, it may seeme strange to men, which have not their senses exercised in the search of Scrip∣tures; that the Prophet Isaiah should avouch the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together. Isay 40. 5. Moses speech, and that conceipt which the ancient had, [that man could not see God and live] was universally true, untill the word or brightnesse of Gods glory was made flesh. But this was the very mysterie which Isaiah in that chapter foretold, as elsewhere hath beene declared in part, and shall be (as it comes in or∣der to be handled) more fully a little after this Chapter.

11 That the moderne Iews can expect the God of their Fathers should dwell with them, should walk with them, should manifest his glory unto them, after such a manner as their owne Doctors interpret his promise made to Moses to al these purposes, after any other way or manner, then the Evangelist witnessed, he did walk with, and manifest his glory unto, his Disciples: This (to us Christians) is an evident demonstration, that the vale, which their Forefathers put before their faces, when they could not behold the brightnesse of Gods glory, which shone on Moses face after he had seene God and talked with him, is to this day put before their hearts, when they read Moses and the Prophets. For this glorious Majestie of God, the very expresse or graven Image of his substāce, which (they say) Moses desired to see

but could not, did so personally dwell in the man Christ Jesus, that whilest he walked with his peo∣ple, God did walke with thē; whilest he remayned within the territories of Iudah or Galilee, salva∣tion & glory did dwell in their Land. And to this day in whomsoever he dwelleth by faith in him God dwelleth by faith. As he is the expresse image of the person of his Father: so every one in whom he thus dwelleth, in him is the expresse image of him as he is man; he is the Tabernacle or Temple of the living God. The inference is our Apostles 2 Cor. 6. 16. Yee are the Tēples of the living God, at God hath said, I will dwel in thē, and walk in thē, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Our Evan∣gelist S. Iohn Revel. 21. 3. exegetically dilates the former testimonies of Moses, and the Prophets a great deale further, thē S. Paul here doth, I heard a great voice out of Heaven, saying, Behold the Ta∣bernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himselfe shall be with them, and be their God, and God shall wipe away all teares from their eyes. And there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shal there be any more paine, for the former things are passed away. But this mortalitie must put on im∣mortality, and our corruptible flesh become in∣corruptible, before this last clause of S. Iohns pro∣phecy can be literally fulfilled in us; or begin to beare date in esse. And before this happy change of our mortall bodies, none of those other pro∣phecies Exod. 29. Levit. 26. Ezek. 37. shall be final∣ly accomplished; albeit all of them have beene al∣ready

fulfilled in differēt measure & manner, both according to the literall, and mysticall sense: For God hath dwelt and doth dwel more properly in the man Christ Iesus then at any time he did in the Tabernacle or Temple. These were in their times the seats of Gods peculiar presence, of the manifest appearances of his divine Maiestie, from which all the blessings upon Israell or Abrahams posteritie by bodily descent were derived, after such a manner as the visible light in this inferiour world is derived from the body or sphaere of the sunne. Yet such as were partakers of these bles∣sings, all the particular Synagogues through the land of Iury, did not by this participation of his presence in the Temple or Tabernacle, become Temples or Tabernacles of the God of Israel: these were never conceived to be or instyled the seat of his rest, or of his peculiar presence. But since the Word was made flesh, since the seed of Abraham was made the Temple of the living God; every particular Church, truely Christian, becomes a more proper seat of Gods peculiar presence, then the materiall Temple in its glory and splendour was; and farre more communica∣tive of all blessings spirituall to every true parti∣cular member of them. Every individuall or par∣ticular man, who is incorporated into this Church, and made a living member of it, doth by the par∣ticipation of that Spirit which dwelleth in it, be∣come a true Temple or Tabernacle of the living God. Whosoever truely beleeves in Christ, who∣soever eateth his flesh, and drinketh his blood,

Christ (who is the prototypon and true temple of God) doth dwell in him, and he in Christ: he is in God, and God in him after a more peculiar manner, then either the patriarks or Prophets were in God, or God in them. But this peculiar manner of Gods dwelling in us by faith, and wee in him, hath his peculiar place in other principall Articles of the Creed, or in the Treatise of the Sacrament, concerning the mysticall union be∣twixt Christ and his members. The next Quaere, which in this Section offers it selfe to be discussed and must be the Title of the next Chapter, is briefly this:

Notes

• * 1.1

  Cap. 26
• * 1.2

  Inprincipio erat verbū hoc est erat ante omnia: Significat e∣nim diffe∣rentam fi∣lii Dei, & rerum crea∣tarum, quippe hae in principio fiunt: at ae∣ternus filius nequaquam fit in princi∣pio, verum erat ante omnia sacu∣la. Et quē∣admodum caelum, & terra in principio, id est ante om¦nia fuerunt facta: ita Dei verbum erat ante omnia crea∣ta. Nam praeteritum antiquita∣tem, & prae∣existentiam nobis desig∣nat. Adhaec 〈◊〉〈◊〉 principio fiunt, sed ••on est 〈◊〉〈◊〉, ut s••••t: at verbum Dei in prin∣cipio erat, quod est, non factum est, sed erat & est. Simon Portius in initio Scholii in haec verba loannis.
• * 1.3

  Chap. 21 parag. 6.
• * 1.4

  Ainsworth upon this place, out of Maimo∣ny &c.
• * 1.5

  Paraphrasi quaedam v∣sus sum ad explicandū vim et ener∣giam vocis Chaldaicae Shechinah, quam, ad verbum quietem vertere, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 enim verbum, quaescere sig∣nificat. Hinc Hebraei presentiam Dei quae sese in tabernaculo circa arcā exerebat, à quies∣cendo, (quod ibi videretur quasi quietem et sedem suam babere Deus). Shechinah ap∣pellant. Nos jam quietem, jam praesentiam Divinitatis, jam majestatem illius reddidimus. Fagius in Exod. 29. 45.
• b 1.6

  Ainsworth upon this place.