Emmanuel, or, God-man a treatise wherein the doctrine of the first Nicene and Chalcedon councels, concerning the two natures in Christ, is asserted against the lately vented Socinian doctrine / by John Tombes ...

SECT. 24. (Book 24)

The Text is explained in order to the re∣felling of the Exception.

TO clear this Text, and Argument, and so to refel the exception, it will be ne∣cessary to enquire what is meant: 1. By the form of God. 2. By being in the form of God. 3. By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 4. By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 5. By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 6. By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 7. By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 8. By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 9. By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 10. By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 11. By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 12. By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 13. By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 14. By 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 15. By found. 16. By humbled himself. 17. By becoming obedient. 18. When he was in the form of

God. 19. When he emptied himself▪ 20. When he took the form of a Servant.

1. It is true that form 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is most com∣monly applied to signific something outward which is the object of sight, and therefore Grotius conceives, that by the form of God is meant the glory of his Miracles. But as Dr. Casa••bon in the place before cited, right∣ly observed, where it is used for something which appears to the sight, it is never used for Excellent Power, or Divine Power in working Miracles, but for the outward vi∣sage, when it hath splendour, beauty and excellent lustre, attractive of the eyes, and moving desire or lust, or giving occasion to conceive in the person Majesty, or an heroical Spirit within, and so awing others, or pro∣curing dread or reverence of him. Now it is certain Christ had not in the daies of his flesh such a form, but as the Prophet fore∣told, Isa. 53. 2. He grew up before God as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: He had no form nor comeliness: and when he was seen there was no beauty that they should desire him, but in outward appear∣ance he was poor and despicable; Neverthe∣less the verbs simple and compound do sig∣nifie something inward and not conspicuous

to the eyes. Thus it is meant when St. Paul saith Gal. 4. 19. My little Children of whom I travail in birth until Christ be formed in you, Rom. 12. 2. Be ye transformed in the renewing of your mind, 2 Cor. 3. 18. we are transformed after the same image. And if in the Holy Scripture the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 form signifie not that which is inward and hidden, yet in Aristotle and other Authours, the word signi∣fies * 1.1 the essence or that con∣stitutive essential part of a substance, which differen∣ceth one substance from another, which is defined by Aristotle 2d. Physick. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the reason of its being such a thing: And indeed many understand by the form of God, the essence or nature of God. But to the contrary is. 1. That form hath the same notion, Phil. 2. 6. in the term form of God, as it hath verse 7. in the term form of a Servant; But in that notion of the essence or nature of a Servant, it cannot be said Christ took the form of a Servant, for that is a m••er relation, and if he had taken the essence of a Servant by being incarnate it had been the same with being made in like∣ness of men, and so he could not have put off

the essence of a Servant, no more than the essence of a man, if his taking the form of a Servant had been by being made a man: Besides the nature of man is not the essence of a Servant; man may be Lord as Christ man is Lord of all, Acts 10. 36. and yet hath the essence of man, and Angels are Servants and yet have not the essence of man. 2. It is said, Christ emptied himself, to wit, of the form of God in which he was, which notes some lessening or laying aside of the form of God, in wh••ch he was; But that could not be the Divine essence, therefore it is not here meant.

Nor is it to be conceived, that by the form of God is meant the power of doing Miracles: For neither is the power of Miracles any where termed the form of God, and if that were all that is meant, it might be said of Moses and Elias that they were in the form of God: Besides he did not empty himself of the power or exercise of it whereby he did Mira∣cles at any time, no not when he was appre∣hended, for even then the Souldiers at his word went backward and fell to the Earth, John 18. 6. and he restored Malch••s his ear cut off by Peter, Luke 22. 5••. although he did not use his power to rescue himself.

Therefore it is more likely that by form of God is meant the state or Majesty of God, that glory which he had with his Father be∣fore the world was, John 17. 5. the Exer∣cise of his Empire, which he had opposite to the state of a Servant which he took, and to the obedience which he yielded to his Fa∣ther, ver. 7, 8. For the estate of God is an estate of Empire and Command exercising Power and Dominion, giving of gifts to friends, helping Subjects, subduing Enemies, which Christ did with the Father before he took flesh, but emptied himself of it in his humiliation: which is the more confirmed in that his superexaltation, verse 9. restored that which he emptied himself of: Now that was his Glory and Majesty, all things being made subject to him. And this seems best to agree with the use of the term form, as here it seems to be used: For as the form of a Servant notes that which made him appear to others to be under the command of ano∣ther, to wit, of his Father, which was that he should lay down his life and take it again, John 10. 18. which was undoubtedly conspi∣cuous to the Angels, and also to those who knew him to be the Son of God; So the form of God notes that Majesty, Glory, exercise of

Empire which he had with his Father, which was apparent to the Holy Angels, and to Abraham who saw his day, and to Jacob and other holy persons afore his Incarnation, and is the same with his being as God, or equal to God.

2. From hence then we may understand what is meant by his being in the form of God, to wit his possession and enjoyment of that glory he had with his Father before the world was, John 17. 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 notes the subsistence or being of his person, and the form of God notes his estate of Glory and Majesty, which I conceive expressed by that of the A∣postle, 2 Cor. 8, 9. Ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he were rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich.

3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may be expounded either as an adjective as our translatours render it, equal with God, or as an adverb, and so it is used twelve times in the Greek ve••sion of the Book of Job, Wisdome 7. 3. in Homer, and else-where, and answers to 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the He∣brew, and notes likeness, and may be trans∣lated, as God: Now whether of these two waies it is to be read, is in my apprehension difficult: I incline to the latter. 1. Because

nothing is expressed that may be as a substan∣tive to it, whereas if it were an adjective, either 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 himself, used ver. 7▪ or as Came••arius in his note observes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 his things, should be added: As for that which is by Pasor in his Lexicon voce 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from Zanch. de incarnatione Filii Dei, lib. 1. c. 2. imagined, as if there were an ellipsis of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and the sense were, that he was equal∣ly God, as God, that is the Father; it is a bold supplement, that hath not any thing to countenance it in the Text, and gives much advantage to them that say, he is not the same God. In that which he mentions out of Posselius his Syntaxis, p. 134. [that it is an Hellen••sm, and it is put for the noun sub∣stantive equality, as if by the Article 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the Infinitive Mood were turned into a Noun, and the sense were as in the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 he gives it, he did not snatch, or catch by ra∣pine equality with God] the interpretation doth suppose, that he counted it not rapine, is all one with, he did not take by rapine, and the verb substantive of the Infinitive Mood, to be turned into a Noun, whereas it is drown∣ed in his sense, and if it were made a Noun, it should be thus read, he did not take by rapine being equality with God, whi••h hath

no good sense, and the Adjective or Adverb is made a Noun Substantive, not the Infini∣tive Mood, and the Noun of equality is made to govern a D••tive case without any Example, when according to that sense by rule God should be in the Genitive: I confess where 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is used adverbially it doth most commonly note simili••ude of action, yet simi∣litude of being is some∣times expressed by it, as * 1.2 Job 11. 12. in the Greek, and elsewhere, and though it note equality, yet also it notes likeness; and in the same chapter, v. 20. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is trans∣lated like minded, and this doth best answer to the use of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ver. 6, 7, 8. which note likeness of estate or condition, yet com∣prehending withall reality of Nature. 2. If it were to be read to be equal with God, it would intimate, that he emptied himself of it as the adversative; But verse 7. shews, and the phrase, he counted it not a prey, do evince; but equality with God he could not empty himself of, but must hold it as a prey not to be let go, the contrary whereof the Text doth propound for our imitation.

4. Whence it seems most likely, that the thing he means by his being as God, was his commanding as God, his like doing with his Father mentioned, John 5. 17, 19. which he did in his presence, and such glory as he had then, and now had not as before, but prayes for its restitution, John 17. 5. Of which see what is said before, Sect. 16. Zanchius parte secunda de tribus Elo••im, l. 3. c. 2. §. 4. quasi filius hominis cum nubibus C••li venit, hoc est Christus per∣venit ad gloriam De••tatis post resurrectionem, sicut ego cum m••gnis viris intelligo.

5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is a rare word, yet seems to have the same sense with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. and notes either rapinam or raptum, the act of taking or carrying away, or the thing taken, or ca〈…〉〈…〉d away, both which are expressed by the Greek word, and by the word [robbery] which our t••anslators use to answer it, yet I rather render it prey, or spoil, as expressing only the thing gotten, not the act of getting. 1. Because 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 cannot be meant of the acquisition, but the thing possessed. 2. It is more agre∣able to the phrase of emptying himself, which presupposeth a thing had or possessed, which was the form of God, and being as God, and

the thing possessed as Robbers or Beasts of prey get what they have. 3. the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is so used by the Greek Interpreters, Job 29. 17. Isa. 42. 22. Isa. 61. 18, &c. for the thing gotten, although in the latter place it be translated robbery, and the term robbed is as well meant of the person from whom, as the thing gotten by robbery: So also it is used Levit. 6. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that which he took violently away, Ezek. 19. 6. Ezek. 18. 7, 13, 16, 18. Ezek. 23. 25, 27. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

6. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 translated by the vulgar La∣tine arbitratus est, by Beza duxit, by ours thought, may either note an act of judgement, or affection, or purpose, or use: In the first sense to think it not a prey is as much as he did not judge, that the being as God was a thing stoln or gotten by any force or fraud, usurped, or plundered from another, but his own whether by inheritance or free donation: But this is not likely, partly because the in∣ward act of judgement or cogitation is not here propounded to be imitated, but some act of will or affection manifested by outward action or patent fact, which is apparent by the Exhortation, verse 5. where the A∣postle

saith, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Let the same mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, that is have the same will, purpose, resolution, action as he had, who was so far from doing any thing through st••••fe and vain-glory, that he preferred others before himself, not looking at his own things, but the things of others, which he shewed by his not holding fast his Excellency, but emp∣tying himself; partly also because the act of thinking here denied must be opposite to his emptying himself: For the particle [but] being adversative shews the thinking it robbery to be equal with God, or to be as God to be contrary to the emptying; Now if the not thinking were as much as not judging, then the emptying must be an alteration of his thoughts, or a privation of it, which hath no congruous sense: For the emptying was of himself, or that which he was in be∣ing, not of his thoughts of himself, or hav∣ing other thoughts of himself: Besides the not thinking it robbery or a prey is not an act of sentence determining what was his own or right he had to a thing, but an act of pur∣pose, that notwithstanding his right or pos∣session, yet his resolution was not to retain it, but (as the emptying, verse 7. shews)

tending to a dereliction of it for a time in o∣bedience to his Father whom he would glorifie on earth, by finishing the work he gave him to do, though by abasing himself, as he saith in his prayer to his Father, John 17. 4. where he relates the event of his errand and business for which he came into the world, and for which he took on him the form of a Servant: which ••eason evacuates that sense which is given by Grotius, Heinsius, and if there be any other, that imagine the sense to be according to a speech of John Baptist in the Syriak Liturgy, that he would not assu∣mere rapinam, that is, do such an injurious thing as to pretend to have greater authority than Christ, that Christ did not think it a wrong to his Father that he was equal to him, or had power of Miracles, and was beheld as God, as Grotius his phrase is: For his act did suppose his ••ight, but expresseth his intent notwithstanding his right, and this an∣tecedent to his emptying himself, taking the form of a Servant, being made in the like∣ness of men, and ••ending thereto removendo prohibens by removing that which might hinder his emptying himself, not disclaim∣ing his right, but relinquishing his possessi∣on of what he had, not doing as Robbers

or others, who hold what they have gotten by violence as long as they have any power to keep it, but freely and voluntarily in duti∣ful subjection to his Father, yielding it up to his hands from whom he received it, in order to the accomplishment of his Will, as it is expressed, Heb. 10. 9. And this al∣so helps to shew that Piscator and those who follow him do mistake in the notion of this phrase, as if it were, as if the Apostle had said, he did not as men that have gotten a spoil by victory, triumphantly make shew of it, but did rather conceal, or hide it at least, for the greatest part of his life forbidding the di∣vulging his Miracles, and that confession which Peter made, Mat. 16. 20. and the Vision in the Mount at his transfiguration, Mat. 17. 9. For then his not thinking it a spoil should be after his emptying, which was when he took the form of a Servant, be∣ing made in the likeness of men, whereas it was before, and in his not thinking should be no act of obedience, whereby he took the form of a Servant, nor can be rightly made as tending to the act of emptying himself, which was not in the opinion of others, but in his own diminution, nor did he conceal or hide himself, but both by Miracles and

expresse speeches shew himself to be the Son of God, John 1. 14. and 2. 11. and 10. 30, 32, 36, &c. although for some time he in∣hibited his Disciples to divulge some pecu∣liar Revelations, that no impediment might be to the great design of his suffering and ris∣ing from the dead, which he should accom∣plish at Jerusalem, according to Moses and Elias their conference with him, Luke 9. 31. nor could these inhibitions to some persons be indeed his emptying himself, or making himself of no reputation, or not thinking it robbery or spoil gotten by conquest that he was as God, by not triumphantly boasting of it, but concealing it: For in the event not∣withstanding those prohibitions his glory was so known, that immediately his fame spread abroad throughout all the Region round about Galilee, Mark 1. 28. and he who was for∣bidden to speak of his curing him, yet went out and began to publish it much, and to blaze abroad the matter, insomuch that Jesus could no more openly enter into the City, but was without in desart places, and they came to him from every quarter, Mark 1. 45. Wherefore I conceive, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 notes a denial of an act elicite of the mind and affections, in esteeming, valuing, affect∣ing,

or making account of his being as God, as men do of a prey gotten by violence, which they do so affect or rejoyce in it that they cannot part with it. 2. Of an act impe∣rate of the members in retaining it by claim∣ing or asserting of it, and contending to keep it as a thing which they will not yield up but by force; and the sense is, Christ being in the form of God, that is the glory of his Fa∣ther as associate with him in his Empire, did not esteem or hold that his being as God, as if it had been a prey gotten by violence, which he would not relinquish without force; But &c. Which importance of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is agreable to the use of it in this Epistle, Philip. 2. 3. and 3. 7. 8. where his account∣ing all things as loss and dung notes his esteem and * 1.3 dereliction of them as such, and the like use is else∣where, 1 Thes. 5. 13. 2 Thes. 3. 15. 1 Tim. 1. 12. and 6. 1. Heb. 10. 29. and 11. 26. James 2. 1. besides what occurs in other Authours. And hereunto I may accommo∣date some of the words which Dr. Merick Casaubon cites in his Diatriba de usu ver∣borum p. 52. out of Cornelius a lapide the

Jesuite, As Chrysostom and Vatablus ob∣serve, rapere to catch or take by violence sig∣nifies by a Metalepsis studiously and contenti∣ously to retain something as if it were snatcht or caught by violence 〈◊〉〈◊〉 rapine, as if he said, Christ did not catch, nor ambiti∣ously sought, as Lucifer, Isa. 14. 13. the equality of God, not as Robbers are wont (while they being guilty of their evil doing, fear least they should lose it) studiously ke••p and ambitiously defend the thing caught by them; but rather of his own accord as a law∣ful Lord deposed it, or let it go and emptied himself: For the adversative particle [but] which follows, when he saith, but he emp∣tied himself requires this: Otherwise it will not be so much an adversative as an explica∣tive, and will be taken improperly, sed, pro, veruntamen, but, for, nevertheless: which leads us to the consideration of verse 7.

7. Where I take 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as an adversative rightly rendered [but] not [yet] or [nevertheless] to which answers 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Greek, and it notes something contrary to what it is said he did not, verse 6. which being the holding of his being as God, that which he did is to be conceived contrary to it, expressed by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which our

Translators render made himself of no repu∣tation, and that is by many conceived to have been by concealing or hiding from men his being as God; But this, as I shewed before, is not right, sith Christ did manifest his glory so as that they beheld his glory as of the only begotten Son of God full of grace and truth, John 1. 14. and by his words and works did indeed what did, and might make him of great reputation, so that he was a Prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people, Luke 24. 19. and is contrary to what is said, 1 John 3. 5, 8. 1 Tim. 3. 16. God was manifested in the flesh; and also must restrain this act to the time of his converse with men, whereas the Text makes it to have been either antecedent or coincident with his taking the form of a Servant, being made in the likeness of men: Nor is it said, he diminished his esteem, or begat in others a low opinion of him, but he emptied or evacuated himself, that is, be∣came less full than he was; which is not rightly referred by Grotius, to his living a poor life, but notes some act antecedent to his conversing with men: Heinsius likes it better to render it humbled, than emptied himself, alledging Chrysostom Exercit.

Saer. l. 11. c. 2. But sith the Apostle useth that word, verse 8. as a further act of Christs submission of himself beyond that of empty∣ing, verse 7. they are not rightly confound∣ed, but the emptying is to be taken as an act of privation in some sort of somewhat he had, and the humbling to subjection to what was appointed him to suffer. Rightly saith Dr Hammond in his An∣notation on Philip. 2. 7. * 1.4 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies to lessen, diminish; so Pharorinus 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to suffer or undergo diminution, so the He∣brew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which Jerem. 4. 4. (it should be 2.) and 15. 9. is ••rendered 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to empty, is Joel 1. 10, 12. Nehem. 1. 4. (mis-printed for Nahum 1. 4.) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to diminish, and Hos. 4 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, to make little: A di∣minution then or lessening, or priva〈…〉〈…〉 is ex∣pressed by it, which is to be conceived to be the form of God, his being as God, the glo∣ry he had in possession with his Father, when he commanded with him, but now in respect of use and enjoyment laid it aside, lessened himself from the condition of being Lord of

all, to that of a subject and ordinary man, as Dr. Hammond speaks in his Paraphrase, which is confirmed in that it is expressed in the words following, Taking the form of a Servant, being made in the likeness of men, wherein this emptying of himself did consist.

8. The form of a Servant cannot be inter∣preted merely of Christs v••sage or outward aspectable form: For 1. There is no such outward form which doth distinguish a free∣man from a Servant or Slave, but that the one is often as comely and beautiful as the o∣ther. 2. Though it be true that by reason of his suffering, his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the Sons of men, as the Prophet fore-told, Isa. 52. 14. yet he took not this form, but it was put on him by his enemies: His whipping, binding and leading away was not the form of a Servant, but of a Prisoner, and he took not these, but under-went them when they were inflicted on him: His Crucifying it is true, was Servile supplicium, the punish∣ment of Slaves, but it was inflicted on o∣thers also; even then when he was Crucified others were Crucified with him, not as Ser∣vants, but as Thieves and Robbers, and

upon him it was inflicted as on a Malefactor, so that it was written in the title of his con∣demnation, The King of the Jews, and he was numbered with the Transgressors, Mark 15. 26, 28. and he was made a curse for us, as it is written, Cursed is every one that ••angeth on a Tree, Gal. 3. 13. Nor is tak∣ing of the form of a Servant referred only to his outward poverty, as Grotius conceives, that he took on him the form of a Servant, in that he had nothing of his own, as he said of himself, Mat. 8. 20. For that is not the form of a Servant, it may be the estate of a Son in minority, Gal. 4. 1. And though it were true, that he had no certain dwelling place, yet he had a Bag kept by Judas, out of which distribution might be made to the poor, John 13. 29. Nor is it his Humane Nature, for then it had been the same with being made in the likeness of men: Nor are all mens Servants, and he by his super-exal∣tation, verse 9. left the form of a Servant, not his Humane Nature: Besides the form of a Servant which he took was not to men, but to God, as appears, from verse 8. where it is said, he became obedient unto death: His obedience was to God his Father, as appears from verse 9. therefore God, that

is God the Father, verse 11. highly exalted him, for his obedience to him, Heb. 5. 8. Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedi∣ence by the things which he suffered, Now Rom. 6. 16. his Servant any one is to whom he obeys: And therefore Christ obeying his Father is often stiled his Servant, Isa. 52. 13. and 42. 1. Mat. 12. 18.

9. His taking then the form of a Servant was his submission of himself to his Fathers command, according to that which he saith, John 6. 38. I came down from Heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me, and this was his emptying himself: For it is rightly observed by Dr. Pearson Explic. of the Creed, art. 2. p. 135. of the second Edition, that the Apostle ex∣plains the emptying of himself, by adding the taking the form of a Servant, not by way of conjunction, but by way of apposition, though I do not conceive, that signifies a clear iden∣tity, as he speaks: But that which follows is right, that it is necessary to observe, that our translation of that verse is not only not exact, but very dis-advantagious to that truth which is contained in it: For we read it thus: He made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a Servant, and

was made in the likeness of men: Where we have two copulative conjunctions, neither of which is in the original Text, and three propositions without dependance of one upon the other; whereas all the words together, are but an expression of Christs exinanition, with an explication shewing in what it consist∣eth: And this also sheweth what was the form of God, and his being as God, like, or equal to God, to wit his Dominion and Em∣pire with his Father, that fulness which he emptyed himself of by taking the form of a Servant, which was restored to him when he was highly exalted, made universal head over all, Ephes. 1. 20, 21, 22, 23. 1 Pet. 3. 22. Heb. 1. 13, 14. and by his being made universal Judge, Philip. 2. 9, 10, 11. compared with Rom. 14. 9, 10, 11.

10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by us translated of men, is without ground conceived to note, not the Nature of man simply considered, but the state of men in an abject condition: For, 1. There is no example in the Apostles writings of the use of it in that notion. 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the likeness of men, is the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the likeness of flesh, Rom. 8. 3. and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, fashion or shape as a man, which notes

humane nature or feature simply considered: Nor do the two Texts alledged for the in∣terpreting of men as noting an abject condi∣tion, serve for that purpose: Psal. 82. 7. where it is said, ye shall dye 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as men, is so far from noting an abject condition that it plainly notes the condition of mortality common to all; and the Emphasis is, that though God said, verse 6. they were Gods, and all the Sons of the most High, in respect of their office and dignity, yet they should dye as common men, and fast as one of the Princes; Ainsworth's note is [as earthly men] as Adam; * 1.5 that is as any other mortal man: So after, as one of the Princes, that is, of the other Princes of the world: See the like, Judges 16. 7, 11, 17. which also shews us how to understand the expression, Judges 16. 7, 11. that Sampson said of himself, that he should be weak and be as one of men, where men notes not the state of abject serv••le men, debassd below other men, or peculiar to some men in such a rank or estate, but a state common to other men, not elevated a∣bove ordinary men by an heroical Spirit, and excellent strength, which is apparent from

the expressions, verse 13. I shall be weak as one of men, and verse 17. I shall be weak and be as all men, or as Tremellius reads it, sicut unus aliquis homo, as some one man, and so notes this, that then he should have but the strength of one man: Nor is that con∣ceit of Grot••us in his note on Philip. 2. 7. any better, made in the likeness of men] when he was like to men, to wit, those first men, that is without sin, 2 Cor. 5. 21. which hath no example of using [men] for [the first men] and the Apostles expression like to that here, Rom. 8. 3. rather ins••nuates the contrary, that he was like to sinful men, when he said, God sending his own Son, is the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin condem∣ned sin in the flesh: Therefore in the likeness of men is to be expounded of them as men ac∣cording to their humane nature.

11. Likeness of men notes not a bare image or representation, or resemblance as in a vision or picture, but as a Child is said to be begotten in his Fathers likeness, Gen. 5. 3. And so the Authour to the Hebrews, ch. 2. 17. saith, in all things it behoved Christ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to be made li••e unto his brethren, that is, to have the same humane nature in all parts that they have: Thus it is said,

Rom. 9. 29. And as Esaias said before, ex∣cept the Lord of Sabboth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodom, and been made like as Gomorrah, from Isa. 1. 9. where to be, and to be like are the same: More to the same purpose may be seen in Heinsius Aristar. sac. in nonnum c. 19.

12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is well rendered made in the likeness of men, but it is without Exam∣ple or reason referred to an act of men, as if they by their injurious usage had thus made him to be as ordinary and vulgar men, who are endued with no Divine Power, or he had by an act of will made himself in his suffer∣ings as such, but it was by the act of Gods Power, that he was made in the likeness of men, and it was when he assumed a humane Nature, or to use the same Apostles words, Gal. 4 4. But when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son, made or born of a Woman made (the same word which is used, Philip. 2. 7.) under the Law, or as it is Luke 1. 35. The Holy Ghost shall come upon the••, and the Power of the most High shall over-shadow thee: And therefore it is expounded as expressing the time of his taking the form of a Servant, and to be read, when he was made in the likeness of

men, or as Dr. Pearson's Exposition hath it, he took the form of a Servant by being made in the likeness of men, that is as he after expresseth it, when Christs body first was framed, even then did he assume the form of a Servant: In which expression he doth rightly make this place parallel to that of Heb. 10. 5. A body hast thou prepared me, which answers to Psal. 40. 7. concerning which I shall use the words of Mr. Gataker in his Cinnus l. 2. c. 11. Junius, and after him Pis••ator would have the Kingly Pro∣phet to have had respect to that right of boar∣ing the Servants ear, and fastning it to his Masters post, who was willing to be still a Servant, mentioned Exod. 21. 6. when un∣der the person of the Lord Christ, he said, Psal. 40. 7. Thou hast boared mine ears, as if he had said, thou hast addicted me to service and perpetual Ministry: Whence Isa. c. 42. verse 1. Behold my Servant, &c. For which the Greeks, and the Apo∣stle following them, Heb. 10. 5. but a body hast thou made up for me, because to wit, then he put on the form of a Servant, when he assumed humane flesh, and even the like∣ness of sinful flesh, Rom. 8. 3. Philip. 2. 7. So that the Apostle shews not the identity▪

but the coincidency of these, the taking the form of a Servant, being made in the like∣ness of men: Nor can the taking the form of a Servant be referred either to the servile or mean condition he had, when he convers∣ed among men; or his being made in the likeness of men to any subjection of himself consequent on his Apprehension, Binding and Scourging.

13. The word we translate in fashion, signifies the outward habit of the body, in Aristotles Categories the shape or figure of it, in Geom〈…〉〈…〉 the various sc〈…〉〈…〉uations of lines and angles, in Rhetorick the various modes or manners of expressions in speech, the ge∣stures of the body, the affections of the mind, the accidents, occurrences, order of things subl••nary, 1 Cor 7 31. Here it notes the shape or fea••ure of a man, and that with re∣ality of humane nature, as form and likeness were also used.

14. A man notes not either a man in his dejected 〈◊〉〈◊〉, so as that the sense should be, being found in fashion (or habite) as a man (that is in outward quality, con∣dition, and acting, no whi•• differing from a common man) it being the same with the likeness of men, verse 7. nor as Grotius

in his Note, Schema is here axioma, con∣spicuous dignity, as often with the Greeks, which word also the Syriak Interpreter here used: And 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was seen, As a man, as Adam, that is with dominion o∣ver all the creatures, the Sea, Winds, Bread, Water: For which cause that which was said of Adam in Psal. 8. is applied mystically to Christ: For neither is [man] put any where in the New Testament that I find, for [Adam] but still either Adam, or the first man, nor is it here put with the article 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as if it noted a special or sin∣gular man by excellency, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 a man, that is a man simply considered accor∣ding to humane nature: Nor is the particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as here used as noting only likeness with∣out reality of Nature, but as Sect. 22. is shewed it to be used, John 1. 14. and else∣where, as a confirming and assuring particle noting certainty: And surely where that in Psal. 8. is applied to Christ mystically, Heb. 2. 6. it notes not man in conspicuous dig∣nity, but rather as contemptible, as the words, what is man that thou art mindful of him? and thou hast lessened him for a lit∣tle time below Angels shew, nor is it pecu∣liarly meant of Adam, but of men, as men,

as the word Son of man shews, although it be mystically fulfilled in Christ alone, and he be by excellency stiled man, or the Son of man.

15. Found notes not apprehension of him, when he was betrayed by Judas, and laid hold on by the Souldiers; for it was afore his humbling himself and obedience to death, and if the form of a Servant did note his whipping, and servile usage which was af∣ter his apprehension, and yet is set down by the Apostle as antecedent to being found in fashion as a man; his finding cannot be re∣ferred to his apprehension: Nor is his being found appropriated to the time of his con∣spicuity in the exercise of his Dominion over the creatures, but the fashion as a man be∣ing the same with the like∣ness of men, it notes only * 1.6 his appearing or being as a man, simply considered a∣mong men, the word found frequently noting only be∣ing or appearing to be, Phil. 3. 9. Gal. 2. 17. 2 Cor. 5. 3. and 11. 12. 1 Pet. 1. 7. Rom. 7. 10. Luke 17. 18, &c.

16. That of Grotius, he humbled him∣self]

he did not behave himself according to that dignity, but very humbly, so as to wash his Disciples feet, John 13. 12, 13. As he emptied, so he humbled, are of the form Hiphil, but signifie to exhibit or shew himself such: So also the Latins say, to make himself courteous] is not right, the humbling noting not an exercise of the vertue of humility, but patient subjection to affli∣ction, and that not by shewing humility only but by patient undergoing of it: And thus is it used, Phil. 4. 8. I know how 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to be abased or humbled, as appears by the oposite term to abound, and by other places, where he useth the same of himself, 2 Cor. 11. 7. and 12. 21. and is apparent in that the humbling himself is in the Text opposite to his superexaltation, verse 9. Now that doth not oppose the vertue of hu∣mility and the exercise of it, which consists with his exaltation but the state of a person debased, which is removed by his super∣exaltation: Besides this very place is parallel with that, Acts 8. 32. out of Isa. 53. 7. where of Christ, Philip expounds the words of that Prophet, He was led as a Sheep to the slaughter, and like a Lamb dumb be∣fore the shearer, so he opened not his mouth▪

in his humiliation (the Noun in the Greek derived from the verb Phil. 2. 8. and so ex∣plains it) his judgment (or right) was taken away, and who shall declare his generation? For his life is taken away from the earth. Lastly, the Text shews wherein his humilia∣tion consists, which was in his being obedient unto death, even the death of the Crosse, which is not rightly translated by our Trans∣lators, and became obedient, putting a conjunction copulative without cause as they did, verse 7. and so obscure the meaning of the Apost••e, but it is to be read by appo∣sition, becoming obedient, and so shewing wherein the humbling of himself was.

17. Grotius his note here is not right: He was made obedient to wit to men, Jews as well as Romans: He opposed not that Divine Power to them that took him, condemned him, slew him: So great injuries he patiently un∣derwent for the good of men; For it was shewed before that the obedience was to his Father, otherwise there had not been such reason of his super-exaliation, as is expressed, vers. 9, 10, 11.

18. By this which hath been said, it may appear, that Christs being in the form of God; and not accounting it as a prey to bb

equal or as God was afore his being a man, and consequently, that he had a Divine Being as God afore he was incarnate, and therefore consubstantial to the Father as touching his God-head.

19. It may appear that then Christ emp∣tied himself, when he took the form of a Ser∣vant, who was antecedently in the form of God, when he came not to be ministred to but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many, Mat. 20. 28.

20. That then he did this when he was made in the likeness of men, had a body pre∣pared for him, which proves him to be con∣substantial to us according to his Man-hood, which thing was to be demonstrated.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Vide Danielis Heinsij Arist sac. in Non. c. 19.
• * 1.2

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Gr. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, ••ob 13. 12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. ••sa. 51. 23.
• * 1.3

  Job 13. 24. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Job 19. 11. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.4

  Psal. 137. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Ez••k. 5. a. 12. Hebrew 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Gr. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Ezek. 28. 7. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Isa. 51. 7.
• * 1.5

  Vide Gatakeri Cinnum l. 2. c. 10. p. 288, &c.
• * 1.6

  Vide Gataker ad Antonin. l. 9. Sect. 9. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Philip. ch. 2. ver. 7, 8. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 idem va∣lent.