Vindiciæ evangelicæ or The mystery of the Gospell vindicated, and Socinianisme examined, in the consideration, and confutation of a catechisme, called A Scripture catechisme, written by J. Biddle M.A. and the catechisme of Valentinus Smalcius, commonly called the Racovian catechisme. With the vindication of the testimonies of Scripture, concerning the deity and satisfaction of Jesus Christ, from the perverse expositions, and interpretations of them, by Hugo Grotius in his Annotations on the Bible. Also an appendix, in vindication of some things formerly written about the death of Christ, & the fruits thereof, from the animadversions of Mr R.B. / By John Owen D.D. a servant of Jesus Christ in the work of the Gospell.

CHAP. XIII.

Of the Incarnation of Christ, and his preexistence thereunto.

THe Testimonies of Scripture, which affirme Christ to * 1.1 have been Incarnate, or to have taken flesh, which inevitably proves his Preexistence, in another nature, to his so doing, they labour in their next attempt to corrupt, and so to evade the force, and efficacy, which from them appeareth so destructive to their cause; and herein they thus proceed.

From what Testimonies of Scripture do they endea∣vour * 1.2 to demonstrate, that Christ was (as they speake) * 1.3 incarnate.

From these, Joh. 1. 14. Phil. 2. 6, 7. 1 Tim. 3. * 1.4 16. Heb. 2. 16. 1 Joh. 4. 2, 3. Heb. 10. 11.

Of the first of these we have dealt already, in the handling of * 1.5 the beginning of that Chapter, and sufficiently vindicated it

from all their exceptions; so that we may proceed immediately to the second.

What doest thou answer to the second? * 1.6

Neither is that here contained, which the * 1.7 adverse party would prove; for it is one thing which the Apostle saith, being in the forme of God he tooke the forme of a servant: another, that the Divine nature assumed the humane. For the forme of God cannot here denote the di∣vine Nature, seeing the Apostle writes, that Christ exinanivit, made that forme of no repu∣tation. But God can no way make his nature of no reputation. Neither doth the forme of a servant, denote Humane Nature, seeing to be a servant is referred to the fortune and conditi∣on of a man. Neither is that also to be for∣gotten, that the writings of the New Testa∣ment doe once only (it may be) use that word forme elsewhere, viz. Mark. 16. 12 and that in that sence, wherein it signifyes, not nature, but the outward appearance, saying, Jesus appea∣red in another forme, unto two of his Disci∣ples.

But from those words, which the Apostle afterwards adds, he was found in fashion as a man, doth it not ap∣peare, that He was as they say Incarnate?

By no meanes; For that expression con∣taines nothing of Christs Nature: for of Samp∣son we read that he should be as a man: Judge 16. 7, 11. and Psal. 82. Asaph denounceth to those whom he called Sonnes of the most High, that they should dye like men. Of whom it is certaine, that it cannot be said of them, that they were (as they speake) Incarnate.

How doest thou understand this place? * 1.8

On this manner, that Christ, who in the * 1.9 world, like God, did the workes of God, to whom all yeilded Obedience, as to God, and to whom divine adoration was given, God so willing, and the Salvation of men requiring it, was made as a servant, and a vassall, and as one of the vulgar, when he had of his own accord permitted himselfe to be taken, bound, beaten, and slaine.

Thus they.

Now because it is most certaine, and evident to every one, that ever considered this text, that according to their old trade and craft, they have mangled it, and taken it in pieces, at least cut off the head and leggs of this Witnesse, we must seeke out the other parts of it, and lay it together, before we may proceed to remove this heape out of our way. Our Argument from this place, is not solely from hence, that he is said to be in the forme of God; but also that he was so in the forme of God, as to be equall to him, as is here expressed; nor meerely that he took upon him the forme of a servant, but that he tooke it upon him, when He was made in the likenes of man, or in the likenes of sinfull flesh, as the Apostle expresses it Ro. 8. 3. Now these things our Ca∣techists thought good to take no notice of, in this place, nor of one of them any more in any other. But seeing the very head of our Argument lyes in this, that in the forme of God, he is said to be equall to God, and that expression is in another place taken notice of by them, I must needs gather it into its own contexture before I doe proceed. Thus then they

How doest thou Answer to those places, where Christ is * 1.10 said to be equall to God, Joh. 5. 18. Phil. 2. 6.

That Christ is equall to God, doth no way * 1.11 prove, that there is in him a divine Nature. Yea the contrary is gathered from hence. For if Christ be equall to God, who is God by nature, it followes, that He cannot be the same God. But the equality of Christ with God lyes here∣in

that by that virtue, that God bestowed on him he did, and doth all those things, which are Gods, as God himselfe.

This being the whole of what they tender, to extricate them∣selves * 1.12 from the Chaines, which this witnes casts upon them, now lying before us, I shall propose our Argument from the words, and proceed to the vindication of it in order.

The intendment and designe of the Apostle in this place, * 1.13 being evidently to exhort Believers to selfedenyall, mutuall love, and condescention one to another, he proposes to them the ex∣ample of Jesus Christ: and lets them know, that he being in the forme of God, and equall to God therein; (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, existing in that forme, having both the nature, and Glory of God,) did yet in his love to us, make himselfe of no reputation, or lay aside, and eclipse his Glory, in this, that he tooke upon him the forme of a servant, being made man, that in that forme, and nature, He might be obedient unto death, for us, and in our behalfe: Hence we thus plead.

He that was in the forme of God, and equall to God, existing * 1.14 therein, and tooke on him the nature, and forme of a servant, He is God by nature, and was Incarnate, or made flesh, in the sence before spoken of: Now all this is affirmed of Jesus Christ: Ergo.

1. To this they say, (that we may consider that first, which * 1.15 is first in the Text) that his being equall to God, doth not prove him to be God by nature: but the contrary, &c. as above. But 1. if none is, nor can, by the Testimony of God himselfe, be like God, or equal to him, who is not God by nature; then he that is equall to him, is so: but, to whom will ye liken me, or shall I be equall, saith the Holy one, lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, Isa. 40. 25. none, that hath not created all things of no thing, can be equall to him: And to whom will ye liken me, and make me equall, and compare me, that we may be like, Chap. 46. 5. (2.) Between that which is finite and that which is infi∣nite, that which is eternall, and that which is temporall, the Creature and the Creatour, God by nature, and him, who by nature is not God, It is utterly impossible there should be any Equality. 3. God having so often avouched his infinite distance from all Creatures, his refusall to give his glory to any of them, his ine∣quality

with them all, it must have been the highest Robbery, that ever any could be guilty of, for Christ to make himselfe equall to God, if he were not God. 4. The Apostles Argument arises from hence, that he was equall to God, before he tooke on him the forme of a Servant, which was before his working of those mighty workes, wherein these Gentlemen assert him to be equall to God.

2. Themselves cannot but know the ridiculousnesse of their * 1.16 begging the thing in question, when they would argue, that be∣cause He was equall to God, He was not God: He was the same God in nature, and Essence, and therein equall to him, to whom he was in subordination, as the Sonne; and in Office a Servant, as un∣dertaking the worke of Mediation.

3. The case being as by them stated, there was no equality * 1.17 between Christ and God, in the workes he wrought: For 1. God doth the workes in his own Name, and Authority, Christ in Gods. 2. God doth them by his own Power, Christ by Gods. 3. God doth them himselfe, Christ not, but God in him, as an∣other from him. 4. He doth not do them as God, howe∣ver that expression be taken; for according to these men, He wrought them, neither in his own name, nor by his own power, nor for his own glory, all which he must doe, who doth things, as God.

2. He is said to be equall to God, not as He did such, and such * 1.18 workes, but as, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, being in the forme of God; antecedently to the taking in hand of that forme, wherein He wrought the workes intimated.

3. To worke great workes, by the power of God, argues no * 1.19 Equality with him; or else all the Prophets, and Apostles, that wrought miracles, were also equall to God. The infinite inequa∣lity of nature between the Creatour and the most Glorious Creature, will not allow, that it be said on any account to be equall to him. Nor is it said, that Christ was equall to God, in respect of the workes He did, but Absolutely, He thought it no Robbery to be equall to God. And so is their last plea to the first part of our Argument accounted for: come we to what they begin withall.

1. We contend not (as hath been often said) about words * 1.20 and expressions. That the Divine nature assumed the Humane, we

thus farre abide by, That the Word, the Sonne of God, tooke to himselfe, into Personall subsistence with him, an humane nature, whence they are both one Person, one Christ: and this is here punctually affirmed, viz. He that was, and is God, tooke upon him the forme of a man. 2. The Apostle doth not say, that Christ made that forme of no Reputation, or Christ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 that forme, but Christ being in that forme 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, made himselfe * 1.21 of no reputation; not by any reall change of his Divine nature, but taking to himselfe the Humane, wherein he was of no reputation. It being he that was so, in the nature & by the dispensation, wherein he was so; and it being not possible, that the Divine nature of it selfe, in it selfe, should be humbled, yet He was humbled, who was in the forme of God, though the forme of God was not.

3. It is from his being equall with God, in the forme of God, * 1.22 whereby we prove, that his being in the forme of God doth denote his divine Nature: but of this our Catechists had no minde to take notice.

2. The forme of a servant, is that which he tooke, when he * 1.23 was made 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; as Adam begat a Sonne in his own likenesse. Now this was not only in condition a servant, but in reallity, a man. 2. The forme of a servant was that where∣in he underwent death, the death of the Crosse; but he dyed as a man, and not only in the appearance of a Servant. 3. The very phrase of expression manifests the humane nature of Christ to be denoted hereby: only as the Apostle had not before said directly that he was God, but in the forme of God, expressing both his nature, and his Glory, so here he doth not say He was a man, but in the forme of a Servant, expressing both his nature and his condition, wherein he was the servant of the Father. Of him it is said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: He was in the other, but this He tooke. 4. To be a servant denotes the state or condition of a man: but for one who was in the forme of God and equall to him, to be made in the forme of a servant, and to be found as a man, and to be in that forme put to death, denotes in the first place, a taking of that nature, wherein alone he could be a servant. And this Answers also to other expressions, of the Word being made flesh, and God sending forth his own Sonne made of a woman. 5. This is manifest from the expression, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; He was found in fashion as a man: that is, He

was truely so; which is exegeticall of what was spoken before He took on him the forme of a servant.

But they say this is of no importance; For the same is said of * 1.24 Sampson, Judg. 16. 7, 11. and of others Psal. 82. who yet we doe not say were incarnate.

These Gentlemen are still like themselves. Of Christ it is said, that he humbled himselfe, and tooke upon him the forme of a Servant, and was found in likenesse as a man: of Sampson, that being stronger then an hundred men, if he were dealt so and so withall, he would become as other men, for so the words expressly are: no stronger then another man; and these places are paralell: much good may these paralells doe your Catechumens. And so of those in the Psalme, that though in this world they are high in power for a season, yet they should dy as other men do. Hence, in a way of triumph and merriment, they aske, if these were incarnate, and answer themselves, that surely we will not say so. True, he who being as strong as many becomes by any meanes to be as one, and they who live in power, but dye in weakenesse, as other men doe, are not said to be incar∣nate: but He who being God, tooke on him the forme of a Servant, and was in this world a very man, may (by our new Masters leave,) be said to be so.

For the sence which they give us of this place, (for they are bold to venture at it) it hath been in part spoken to already. Christ * 1.25 was in the world, as to outward appearance, no way instar Dei, but rather as he sayes of himselfe, instar vermis. That he did the workes of God, and was worshiped as God, was because He was God; nor could any but God, either doe the one, as He did them, or admit of the other. 2. This is the exposition given us; Christ was in the forme of God, counting it no robbery to be equall to him, that is, whilst he was here' in the world in the forme of a servant, He did the workes of God and was worshiped. 3. Christ was in the forme of a Servant from his first coming into the world, & as one of the peo∣ple; Therefore He was not made so by any thing afterwards: his being bound, and beate, and killed, is not his being made a ser∣vant; for that by the Apostle is afterwards expressed, when he tells us why, or for what end, not how, or wherein He was made a Servant; viz. He became obedient to death, the death of the Crosse.

And this may suffice for the taking out of our way, all that * 1.26 is excepted against this testimony by our Catechists: but be∣cause the Text is of great importance, and of it selfe sufficient to evince the Sacred truth we plead for, some farther ob∣servations, for the illustration of it, may be added.

The sence they intend to give us of these words is plainely * 1.27 this: that Christ by doing miracles in the world, appeared to be as God, or as a God: but he laid aside this forme of God, and tooke upon him the forme of a servant, when He suffered himself to be taken, bound, & crucifyed: He began to be, they say, in the forme of God, when after his baptisme, He undertooke the worke of his publike Ministry, and wrought mighty workes in the world: which forme he ceased to be in, when he was taken in the Garden, and exposed as a servant to all manner of reproach.

That there is not any thing in this whole exposition, Answe∣ring * 1.28 the minde of the Holy Ghost, is evident as from what was said before; so also 1. Because it is said of Christ, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉∣〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, He was in the forme of God, before he tooke the forme of a servant, and yet the taking of the forme of a servant in this place, doth evidently answer his being made flesh, Joh. 1. 14. his being made in the likenesse of sinfull flesh, Rom 8. 3. his comeing or being sent into the world, Math. 10. 11. 20. 28. Joh. 3. 16, 17. &c. 2. Christ was still in the forme of God, as taken essen∣tially, even then, when he was a servant, though as to the dis∣pensation He had submitted to, He emptied himselfe of the Glo∣ry of it, and was not knowne to be the Lord of Glory, 2 Cor. 8. 3. Even all the while that they say He was in the forme of God, He was in the forme of a servant, that is, He was really the servant of the Father, and was dealt withall in the world as a servant, under all manner of reproach, revilings, and persecutions. He was no more in the forme of a servant when he was bound, then when he had not where to lay his head. 4. The state and condition of a Servant consists in this, that he is not sui juris: no more was Christ in the whole course of his Obedience; he did not any private will of his own, but the will of him that sent him. Those who desire to see the vindication of this place to the utmost, in all the particulars of it, may consult the confutation of the interpretation of Erasmus, by Beza, Annot. in Phil, 2. 6, 7. Of Ochinus, and Laelius Socinus, by Zinchius in locum; & de Tribus

Elohim, pag. 227. &c. Of Faustus Socinus, by Beckman: exercitat: pag. 168. & Johan. Jun. Examen Respon. Socin. pag. 201, 202. Of Enjedinus, by Gomarus, Anal. Epist. Paul. ad Philip. cap. 2. Of Ostorodus, by Jacobus a porta, Fidei Orthodox. Defens. pag. 89. 150. &c. That which I shall farther adde, is in reference to Grotius, whose Annotations may be one day considered by some of more Time and leasure for so necessary a worke.

Thus then he; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in nostris li∣bris * 1.29 non significat internum & occultum aliquid, sed id quod in oculos in∣currit, qualis erat eximia in Christo potestas sanandi morbos omnes, e∣jiciendi Daemones, excitandi mortuos, mutandi rerum naturas: quae verè Divina sunt, ita ut Moses, qui tam magna non fecit, dictus ob id fuit De∣us Pharaonis: vocem 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 quo dixi sensu habes Mar. 16. 12. Isa: 44. 13. ubi in Hebraeo 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; Dan. 4. 33. 6. 10. 6. 28. ubi in Chal∣deo 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: Job. 4. 16. ubi in Hebraeo 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in our Books doth not signify an internall, or hidden thing, but that which is visibly discerned: such as was that eminent power in Christ of healing all Diseases, casting out Divels, raising the Dead, changing the Natures of things: which are truly Divine; so that Moses, who did not so great things, was therefore called the God of Pharaoh: The word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in the sence spoken of, you have, Mar. 16. 12. Isa. 44. 13. where in the Hebrew it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Dan: 4. 33. &c. where in the Chal∣dee it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: Job. 14. 6. where in the Hebrew it is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.

An. A Forme is either substantiall, or accidentall: that which is indeed, or that which appears. That it is the substantiall forme of * 1.30 God, which is here intended, yet with respect to the glorious manifestation of it, (which may be also as the accidentall forme) hath been formerly declared, and proved. So farre it signifies that which is internall and hidden, or not visibly discer∣ned, in as much as the Essence of God is invisible. The proofes of this I shall not now repeat. 2. Christs power of working mira∣cles was not visible, though the miracles He wrought were vi∣sible; insomuch, that it was the great Question between him, and the Jewes, by what power He wrought his Miracles; for they still pleaded, that he cast out Divells by Beelzebub, the Prince of the Divels. So that if the power of doing the things mentio∣ned, were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that forme was not visible, and exposed to the sight of men, for it was aliquid internum & occultum, a thing

internall and hidden. 3. If to be in the forme of God, and thereup∣on to be equall to him, be to have power, or Authority, of healing disea∣ses, casting out Divels, raising the dead, and the like; then the Apostles were in the forme of God, and equall to God, having power and Authority given them for all these things, which they wought accordingly; casting out Divels, healing the diseased, raising the dead, &c. which whether it be not blasphemy to affirme, the reader may judge. 4. It is true, God sayes of Moses, Exod. 7. 1. I have made thee a God to Pharaoh; which is expounded c. 4. 16. where God tels him, that Aaron should be to him insteed of a mouth, & he should be to him insteed of God. That is, Aaron should speak & deliver to Pharaoh, & the people, what God revealed to Moses, Moses revealing it to Aaron; Aaron receiving his message from Moses, as other Prophets did from God, whence he is said to be to him in∣steed of God: And this is given as the reason of that expression, c. 7. 1. of his being a God to Pharaoh; even as our Saviour speakes, because the word of God came by him; because he should reveale the will of God to him. Thou shalt be a God to Praraoh, and Aaron thy Brother shall be thy Prophet; Thou shalt speake all that I command thee, and Aaron thy Brother shall speake to Pharaoh. He is not upon the account of his working miracles called God, or said to be in the forme of God, or to be made equall to God; but revealing the will of God to Aaron, who spake it to Pharaoh, he is said to be a God to Pharaoh, or in the stead of God, as to that businesse. 5. It is true, the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or forme, is used Mar. 16. 12. for the out∣ward appearance; and it is as true the verbe of the same signifi∣cation is used for the internall and invisible forme of a thing, Gal. 4. 19. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, untill Christ be formed in you. So that the very first observation of our Annotatour, that in our bookes, that is, the Scriptures, (for in other Authors it is acknowledged, that this word signifyes the internall forme of a thing) this word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies not any thing internall or hid∣den, is true only of that one place, Mar. 16. 12. in this it is other∣wise, & the verbe of the same signification is evidently other∣wise used. And which may be added, other words, that bare the same Ambiguity of signifycation, as to things substantiall or accidentall, being applyed to Christ, doe still signify the for∣mer, not the latter; yea where they expressly Answer what is here spoken; as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Col. 1. 15. & 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Heb. 1. 3. both of the same import with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here, save that the latter adds personality.

6. For the words mentioned out of the Old Testament, they are used in businesses quite of another nature, and are restrained in their significations by the matter they speake of. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 properly, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and is translated imago, by Arias Mon: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is rather 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Gen. 29. 17. 1 Sam: 28. 14. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is used ten times in the Bible, and hath various significations, and is variously rendred: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Deut. 4. 15. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, v. 16. so most commonly. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Daniel is splendor, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: and what all this is to our purpose in hand, I know not. The forme of God, wherein Christ was, is that, wherein He was equall to God: that, which as to the Divine Nature, is the same, as his be∣ing in the forme of a Servant, wherein He was obedient to death, was to the humane. And which is sufficiently destructive of this whole Exposition, Christ was then in the forme of a Servant, when this Learned man would have him to be in the forme of God, which two are opposed in this place; for he was the ser∣vant of the Father in the whole course of the work, which He wrought here below: Isa. 42. 1.

He proceeds on this foundation: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, * 1.31 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, est locutio Syriaca: in Liturgiâ Syriacâ, Johannes Baptista Christo Baptismum ab ipso expetenti, dieit, non assu∣mam rapinam. Solent qui aliquid bellicâ virtute peperere, id omnibus o∣stentare, ut Romani in Triumpho sane solebant. Non multum aliter Plu∣tarchus in Timoleon: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Sensus est, non vendita∣vit Christus, non jactavit istam potestatem: quia saepe etiam imperavit ne quod fecer at vulgaretur. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hic est adverbium; sic Odyss: O: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, dixit Scriptor, 2 Macc. 9. 12. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, est spectari tanquam Deum. The summe of all is; He thought it no Robbery, that is, He boasted not of his power, to be equall to God, so to be looked on as a God.

The words I confesse are not without their difficulty: many * 1.32 Interpretations are given of them; and I may say, that of the very many which I have considered, this of all others, as being wrested to countenance a false hypothesis, is the worst. To insist particularly on the opening of the words, is not my present task. That Grotius is besides the sence of them, may be easily mani∣fested; for 1. He brings nothing to enforce this interpretation; That the expression is Syriack, in the idiome of it, he abides not by: giving us an instance of the same phrase of expression out

of Plutarch; who knew the propriety of the Greeke tongue very well, and of the Syriack not at all. Others also give a paralell expression out of Thucidides, lib. 8. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 2. I grant 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 may be used adverbially; and be rendered aequali∣ter: but now the words are to be interpreted pro subjecta materia. He who was in the forme of God, counted it no Robbery; (that is, did not esteeme it to be any wrong, on that account of his being in the forme of God,) to be equall to his Father, did yet so sub∣mit himselfe, as is described. This being equall to God, is spoken of Christ accidentally to his taking on him the forme of a Servant, which He did in his Incarnation, and must relate to his being in the forme of God; and if thereunto it be added, that the intend∣ment reaches to the declaration he made of himselfe, when he declared himselfe to be equall to God the Father, and one with him, as to Nature and Essence, it may compleat the sence of this place.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: He renders, libenter duxit vitam inopem; * 1.33 referring it to the poverty of Christ, whilest he conversed here in the world. But what ever be intended by this expression, it is not the same with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which Grotius afterwards interprets to the same purpose with what he saies here of these words. 2. It must be something antecedent to his taking the forme of a servant, or rather something that he did, or became, ex∣ceptively to what he was before, in becoming a servant. He was in the forme of God, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but He humbled, or bowed down himselfe, in taking the forme of a servant: that is, He condescended thereunto, in his great love that He bare to us, The demonstration whereof the Apostle insists eepressly upon; and what greater demonstration of love, or condescention up∣on the account of love could possibly be given, then for him who was God, equall to his Father, in the same Deity, to lay aside the manifestation of his glory, & to take upon him our nature, therein to be a servant unto death.

He proceeds 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, similis factus servi••, qui nihil * 1.34 proprium possident: He was made like unto servants, who possesse nothing of their own. Our Catechists, with their great Master, referre this his being like servants, to the usage He submitted to at his death; this man to his poverty in his life. And to this sence of these words is that place of Math. 8. 20. better accommodated, then to the

clause foregoing, for whose Exposition it is produced by our Annotatour.

But 1. It is most certaine, that the exposition of Grotius will * 1.35 not, being laid together, be at any tollerable agreement with it selfe, if we allow any order of processe to be in these words of the Apostle: His aime is acknowledged to be an Exhorta∣tion to Brotherly love, and mutuall condescention in the same, from the Example of Jesus Christ; for he tells you, that He being in the forme of God, made himselfe of no reputation, and tooke upon him the forme of a servant. Now if this be not the graduation of the Apostle, that in being in the forme of God, free from any thing of that which followes, He then debased and humbled himself, & took up∣on him the forme of a servant, there is not any forme of plea left from this example, here proposed, to the end aimed at. But now saies Grotius, His being in the forme of God, was his working of miracles; his debasing himselfe; his being poore; his taking the forme of a servant; possessing nothing of his own: But it is evident, that there was a coincidence of time as to these things, and so no gradation in the words at all: For then whe•• Christ wrought miracles, He was so poore, and possessed nothing of his own; that there was no condescention nor relinquishment of one condition for an∣other discernable therein. 2. The forme of a servant that Christ tooke was that, wherein he was like man; as it is expounded in the words next following; he was made in the likenesse of man; and what that is the same Apostle informes us, Heb. 2. 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, wherefore heought inall things to be made like his brethren: that is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, He was made in the likenesse of man: or as it is expressed Rom. 8. 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in the likenesse of flesh; which also is expounded Gal. 4. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, made of a woman; which gives us the manner of the accomplishment of that, Joh. 1. 14. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the word was made flesh. 3. The employment of Christ in that likenes of man, is confestly expressed in these words, Not his condition, that he had nothing, but his employment, that he was the servant of the Father, according as it was foretold that he should be, Isa. 42. 1, 19. and which He every where professed himselfe to be. He goes on.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: cum similis esset hominibus, * 1.36

illis nempe primis; id est, pecca••i expers; 2 Cor. 5. 21. whereas He was like men, namely those first, that is, without sin.

That Christ was without sinne, that in his being made like to * 1.37 us, there is an exception as to sinne, is readily granted. He was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Heb. 7. 26. But 1. That Christ is ever said to be made like Adam, on that account, or is compared with him therein, cannot be proved. He was 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: but that he was made 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is not said. 2. This expression was sufficiently cleared by the particular places formerly urged. It is not of his sinlesnesse in that condition, of which the Apostle hath no occasion here to speak, but of his Love in taking on him that condition, in being sent in the likenesse of sinfull flesh, yet without sinne, that these words are used. It is a like∣nesse of nature to all men, and not a likenesse of innocency to the first, that the Apostle speakes of: a likenesse, wherein there is a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as to the kinde, a distinction in number: as Adam begat a Sonne in his own likenesse, Gen. 5. 1.

All that followes in the Learned Annotater, is only an endea∣vour * 1.38 to make the following words speak in some Harmony, and conformity to what he hath before delivered; which being dis∣cerned not to be suited to the mind of the Holy Ghost in the place, I have no such delight to contend about Words, Phrases, and Expressions, as to insist any farther upon them. Returne we to our Catechists.

The place they next propose to themselves to deale withall, is 1 Tim. 3. 16. And without controversy great is the mystery of Godli∣nesse, * 1.39 God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of Angells, and revealed unto the Gentiles, believed on in the World, received up into Glory.

If it be here evinced, that by God is meant Christ, it being spoken absolutely, and in the place of the subject in the proposi∣tion, this businesse is at a perfect close, and our Adversaries fol∣lowing attempt, to ward themselves from the following blows of the sword of the Word, which cut them in pieces, is to no purpose, seeing their deaths wound lyes evident in the efficacy of this place. Now here not only the common Apprehension of all Professors of the name of Christ in Generall, but also the common sence of mankind, to be tryed in all that will but

read the Books of the New Testament, might righteously be appealed unto; but because these are things of no importance with them, with whom we have to do, we must insist on other considerations.

1. Then, that by the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, God, some person is intended, * 1.40 is evident from hence, that the word is never used but to ex∣presse some person; nor can in any place of the Scriptures be wrested possibly to denote any thing, but some person, to whom that name doth belong, or is ascribed, truly, or falsly. And if this be not certaine, and to be granted, there is nothing so, nor do we know any thing in the World, or the intendment of any one word in the Book of God. Nor is there any Reason pre∣tended, why it should have any other Acceptation, but only an impotent begging of the thing in Question. It is not so here, though it be so every where else, because it agrees not with our hypothe∣sis; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉! 2. That Christ, who is the second Person, the Son of God, is here intended, and none else; is evident from hence, that what ever is here spoken of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, of this God here, was true, and fulfilled in him, as to the matter, and the same expressions for the most of the particulars, as to their substance, are used con∣cerning him, and no other. Neither are they possible to be ac∣commodated to any Person but him. Let us a little accom∣modate the words to him. 1. He who as God, was in the be∣ginning with God, in his own nature invisible, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, was manifested in the flesh, when 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, when he was made flesh, Joh. 1. 14. and made 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Rom: 8. 3. in the like∣nesse of flesh, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: Rom: 1. 3. so made visible and conspicuous, (or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, when 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) dwelling amongst men, who also saw his glory, as the glory of the on∣ly begotten Son of God, v. 14. Being thus manifest in the flesh, having taken our nature on him, He was reviled, persecuted, condemned, slaine by the Jewes as a Malefactor, a seditious Person, an Im∣postor; But 2. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, He was justified in the spi∣rit, from all their false accusations and imputations: He was ju∣stified by his Eternall spirit, when he was raised from the dead, and declared to be the Sonne of God with power, thereby, Rom: 1. 4. for though He was crucified through weaknesse, yet he liveth by the power of God, 2 Cor. 13. 4. so He also sent out his spirit to convince the World of sinne, because they believed not in him, and of Righte∣ousnesse,

because he went to his Father; Joh. 16. 9, 10. which he also did, justifying himselfe thereby, to the conviction and conversion of many thousands, who before condemned him, or consen∣ted to his condemnation, upon the account formerly mentio∣ned, Act. 2 37. And this is He, who 3. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, was seen of Angels, and so hath his witnesses in Heaven and Earth. For when he came first into the World, all the Angels receiving charg to worship him, by him who said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Heb. 1. 6. one came downe at his Nativity to declare it, to whom He was seene, and instantly a multitude of the Heaven∣ly Host saw him, Luk. 2. 9, 13. and afterwards went away into heaven; v. 15. In the beginning also of his Ministry, Angels were sent to him in the Wildernesse to minister to him, Math. 4. 11. and when he was going to his death in the garden, an Angell was sent to comfort him, Luk. 22. 43. And he then knew, that He could at a words speaking, have more then twelve Legions of An∣gels to his assistance, Mat. 26. 53. And when he rose againe, the Angels saw him againe, and served him therein, Math. 28. 2. And as He shall come againe with his holy Angels to judgement, Math. 25. 31. 2 Thess. 1. 7. so no doubt but in his Assention the Angels accom∣panied him: yea that they did so, is evident from Psal. 68. 17, 18. So that there was no eminent concernment of him, where∣in it is not expresly affirmed, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: at his Birth, Entrance on his Ministry, Death, Resurrection, Assention, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, He was Preached unto the Gentiles, or among the people, or Gentiles: which besides the following Accomplishment of it to the full, in the Preaching the Gospell concerning him throughout the World, so it had a signall en∣trance in that Declaration of him to devout men dwelling at Jerusalem, out of every Nation under Heaven, Act. 7. 5. And here∣upon; 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, He was believed on in the World; He that had been rejected as a vile person, condemned and slain, being thus justifyed in spirit, and Preached, was believed on, many thousands being daily converted to the Faith of him, to be∣lieve that he was the Messiah, the Son of God, whom before they received not, Ioh. 1. 10, 11. And for his own part, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, He was taken up into Glory; the story whereof we have, Act. 1. 9, 10, 11. when He had spoken to his Disciples, He was taken up, and a cloud received him. Of which Luke saies briefly, as Paul

here, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Act. 1. 2. as Mark also doth, Chap. 16. 19. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; that is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, He was taken up into Heaven, or to Glory; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is as much as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, He was taken up (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) into Glory.

This Harmony of the description of Christ here, both as to * 1.41 his person and Office, with what is elsewhere spoken of him, (this being evidently a summary collection of what is more largely in the Gospell spoken of) makes it evident, that he is God, here intended: which is all that is needfull to be evinced from this place.

Let us now heare our Catechists pleading for themselves. * 1.42 What doest thou Answer to 1 Tim. 3. 16? * 1.43

1. That in many antient Copies, and in the vulgar Latine it selfe, the word, God, is not read; * 1.44 wherefore from that place nothing certaine can be concluded. 2. Although that word should be read, yet there is no cause why it should not be referred to the Father, seeing these things may be affirmed of the Father: that he appea∣red in Christ, and the Apostles, who were flesh: & for what is afterwards read, according to the usuall translation, He was received into Glory, in the Greeke it is, He was received in Glory, that is, with Glory, or Gloriously.

What then is the sence of this Testimony?

That the Religion of Christ is full of Myste∣ries: for God, that is, his will, for the saving * 1.45 of men, was perfectly made known by infirme & mortall men; and yet because of the Miracles * 1.46 and various powerfull workes, which were performed by such weake mortall men, it [was acknowledged for true, and it was at length perceived by the Angells themselves, and was preached not only to the Jewes, but also to the Gentiles; all Believed thereon, and it was re∣ceived with great glory after an eminent man∣ner.

Thus they; meerly rather then say nothing, or yeild to the truth. Briefely to remove what they offer in way of Exception or Assertion.

1. Though the word God, be not in the vulgar latine, yet * 1.47 the unanimous constant consent of all the Originall Copies, confessed to be so, both by Beza, and Erasmus, is sufficient to evince, that the losse of that word in that translation, is not of any import to weaken the sence of the place. Of other antient copies whereof they boast, they cannot instance one; in the vulgar also, it is evident, that by the Mystery, Christ is under∣stood.

2. That what is here spoken MAY be referred to the Father, * 1.48 is a very sorry shift, against the evidence of all those considera∣tions, which shew, that it OƲGHT to be referred to the Son.

3. It may not, it canno•• with any tollerable sence, be refer∣red to the Father. It is not said, that in Christ and the Apostles he appeared, and was seen of Angells, &c. that is spoken of; but * 1.49 that God was manifested in the flesh, &c. nor is any thing, that is here spoken of God, any where ascribed, no not once in the Scripture, to the Father. How was he manifested in the flesh, how was he justifyed in the Spirit, how was He taken up into glory?

4. Though 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, may be rendred gloriously, or with glory, yet 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, may not, receptus est, but rather assumptus est; and is * 1.50 applyed to the Assension of Christ in other places, as hath been shewed.

2. For the sence they tender of these words; Let them 1. Give any one instance, where God, is put for the will of God, * 1.51 and that exclusively to any person of the Deity, or to speake to their own Hypothesis, exclusively to the Person of God. This is intollerable boldnesse, and argues something of searednesse. 2. The will of God for the salvation of men, is the Gospell: how are these things applyable to that? How was the Gospell justifyed in the spirit; how was it received into Gory, how was it seen of the Angels, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉? In what place is any thing of all this spoken of the Gospell? Of Christ all this is spoken, as hath been said. In summe, the Will of God is no where said to be manifest in the flesh, Christ was so. That the will of God should be preached by weake mortall men, was no great Mystery; that God should assume humane nature, is so. The will of God can∣not

be said to appeare to the Angells, Christ did so. Of the last ex∣pression there can be no doubt raised.

Grotius insists upon the same interpretation with our Catechists * 1.52 in the whole, and in every part of it: nor doth he adde any thing to what they plead, but only some quotations of Scripture, not at all to the purpose; or at best suited to his own Apprehensions of the sence of the place, not opening it in the least, or evincing what he embraces, to be the mind of the Holy Ghost, to any one that is otherwise minded. What he sayes, because he sayes it, deserves to be considered.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: suspectam nobishanc lectionem faciunt in∣terpretes * 1.53 veteres, Latinus, Syrus, Arabs, & Ambrosius, qui omnes legunt 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Addi•• Hinemaerus Opusculo 55. illud. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hic positum a Nestorianis. But this suspicion might well have been removed from this learned man, by the universall consent of all originall Copies, wherein as it seemes his own manuscript, that sometimes helps him at a need, doth not differ 2: One corruption in one translation makes many. 3. The Syriack reads the word God, and so Tremelius hath rendred it. Ambrose and Hin••marus followed the latine translation. And there is a thousand times more probability, that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 wa•• filch'd out by the Arians, then that it was foysted in by the Nestorians. But if the Agreement of all Originall Copies may be thus contemned, we shall have nothing certaine left us. But saith he; sensum bo∣num facit illud 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Evangelium illud caeleste innotuit primum non per Angelos, sed per homines moritales, & quantum extorna species fere∣bat infirmos, Christum, & Apostolos ejus. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 bene convenit myste∣rio, id est, rei latenti: Col. 1. 26, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 hominem significat mortalem: 2 Cor: 2. 16. 1 John 4. 2.

1. Our Annotatour having only a suspicion that the word * 1.54 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was not in the text, ought on all accounts to have interpreted the words according to the reading, whereof he had the better perswasion, and not according unto that, where∣of he had only a suspicion. But then it was by no meanes easy to accommodate them according to his intention, nor to ex∣clude the Person of Christ frō being mentioned in them, which by joyning in with his suspicion he thought himself able to do. 2. He s•• not able to give us any one instance in the Scripture, of the like expression to this, of manifest in the flesh, being referred to

the Gospell; when referred to Christ, nothing is more frequent; John 1. 14. John 6. 53. Acts, 2. 31. Rom. 1. 3. Rom: 8. 3. Rom: 9. 5, Ephes. 2. 14, 15. Col: 1. 22. Heb: 5. 7. Heb. 10. 19, 20. 1 Pet: 3. 18. 1 Pet: 4. 1. 1 John 4. 2. &c. Of the flesh of the Gospell, not one word. 3. There is not the least opposition intimated, between men and Angels, as to the meanes of preaching the Gospell; nor is this any mystery, that the Gospell was preached by men; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is well applyed to a mystery or hidden thing; but the question is, what the mystery or hidden thing is; we say it was the great matter of the words being made flesh, as it is elswhere ex∣pressed. In the place urged out of the Corinthians, whether it be the 2. or 11. Chapter that is intended, there is nothing to prove, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifyes a mortall man. And this is the en∣trance of this exposition; Let us proceed.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; per plurima miracula approbata est ••a veritas. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sunt miracula divina, per 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 quae est 1 Cor. * 1.55 11. 4. & alibi. Justifyed in the Spirit; that is, approved by many mi∣racles; for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is miracles by a metonymy. Then let every thing be as the Learned man will have it. It is in vaine to contend. For surely never was expression so wrested. That 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, simply, is miracles, is false; that to have a thing done 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, signifies miracles, is more evidently so; 1 Cor. 2. 4. The Apostle speakes not at all of miracles, but of the efficacy of the Spirit with him in his preaching the word, to convince the world of sinne, Righteous∣nesse, and Judgment, according to the promise of Christ. The ap∣plication of this expression to Jesus Christ see above. He addes; 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (is here) approbare, ut Math. 11. 19. It is here to ap∣prove, and that because it was necessary that the Learned Anno∣tatour should 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. In what sence the word is taken, and how applyed to Christ, with the genuine meaning of the place, see above. See also, Joh. 1. 33, 34. nor is the Gospell any where said to be Justifyed in Spirit, nor is this a tollerable exposition, justifyed in spirit, that is, it was approved by miracles.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 nempe cum admiratione, Angeli hoc arcanum per ho∣mines morrales didicere; Ephes. 3. 10. 1 Pet. 1. 12. How eminently * 1.56 this suits what is spoken of Jesus Christ, was shewed before. It is true, the Angells as with admiration looke into the things of the Gospell; but that it is said, the Gospell 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, is not proved.

It is true, the Gospel was Preached to the Gentiles; but yet this * 1.57 word is most frequently applyed to Christ, Act. 3. 20. Act. 8. 25. Chap. 9. 20. Chap. 19. 13. 1 Cor. 1. 23. 1 Cor. 15. 12. 2 Cor. 1. 19. 2 Cor. 4. 5. 2 Cor. 11. 4. Phil. 1. 15. are Testimonies here∣of.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, id est, in magna mundi parte, Rom. 1. 8. Col. 1. * 1.58 6. But then I pray, what difference between 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉∣〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉? The first is, it was approved by mi∣raeles, the other, it was believed; now to approve the truth of the Gospell, taken actively, is to believe it. How much more naturally this is accommodated to Christ, see Ioh. 3. 17, 18. & v. 35, 36. Ioh. 6. 40. Act. 10. 43. and Chap. 16. 31. Rom. 3. 22. Rom. 10. 8, 9. Gal. 2. 16. 1 Ioh. 5. 5. &c.

The last clause is, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; Gloriose admodum exalta∣tumest, * 1.59 nempe quia majorem attulit sanctitatem, quàm ulla ante haec dog∣mata. And this must be the sence of the place, without any co∣lour, much lesse evidence of proofe. For the sence of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in this businesse, see Luk. 9. 51. Mar. 16. 19. Act. 1. 2. v. 11. & v. 22. And in this sence we are indifferent, whether 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, unto glory, which seems to be most properly intended, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, with Glory, as our Adversaries would have it, or gloriously, as Grotius; for it was gloriously, with great Glory, and into that Glory, which He had with his Father before the World was. That the Gospell is Glorious in its Doctrine of Holinesse is true, but not at all spoken of in this place.

Heb: 2. 16. is another Testimony insisted on, to prove the in∣carnation * 1.60 of Christ, and so consequently his subsistence in a divine nature antecedently thereunto. The words are: For ve∣rily, he took not on him the nature of Angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham. To this they Answer; that

Herein not so much as any likenesse of the * 1.61 incarnation, as they call it, doth appeare. For this writer doth not say, that Christ took (as some read it, and commonly they take it in that sence) but He takes. Nor doth he say, hu∣mane nature, but the seed of Abraham: which in the Holy Scriptures denotes them, who be∣lieve in Christ, as Gal. 3. 29.

What then is the sence of this place? * 1.62

This is that which this Writer intends, that Christ is not the Saviour of Angells, but of men believing, who because they are subject to afflictions and death, (which He before expres∣sed by the participation of flesh and blood) therefore did Christ willingly submit himselfe unto them, that he might deliver his faithfull ones from the feare of death, and might helpe them in all their afflictions.

The sence of this place is evident; the Objections against it * 1.63 weake. That the word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, assumit, not assumpsit, is an Enallage of Tense so usuall, as that it can have no force of an Objection. And v. 14. it is twice used in a con∣trary sence; the time past, being put for the present, as here the present, for that which is past: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: see Joh: 3. 31. Joh: 21. 13. 2. That by the seed of Abraham, is here intended the humane nature of the seed of A∣braham, appears. 1. From the expression going before of the same import with this; He took part of Flesh and Blood, v: 14. 2. From the opposition here made to Angels, or the Angelicall nature; the Holy Ghost shewing, that the businesse of Christ being to save his Church by dying for them, was not therefore to take up∣on him an Angelicall, spirituall substance, or nature, but the nature of man. 3. The same thing is elsewhere in like manner expres∣sed: as where He is said to be made of the seed of David according to the flesh, Rom: 1. 3. and to come of the Fathers as concerning the flesh, Rom: 9. 5. 4. Believers are called Abrahams seed sometimes spi∣ritually, in relation to the Faith of Abraham, as Gal: 3. 29. where he is expresly spoken of, as Father of the Faithfull, by inheriting the Promises: but take it absolutely, to be of the seed of Abraham, is no more, but to be a man of his posterity, Joh. 8. 37. I know that ye are Abrahams seed, Rom. 9. 7. Neither because they are the seed of Abra∣ham are they all Children, v. 8. that is, they are the Children of the flesh: so Rom. 11. 1. Are they the seed of Abraham? so am I, 2 Cor. 11. 22. 2. For the sence assgined; it is evident, that in these words the Apostle treats not of the help given, but of the way whereby Christ came to help his Church, and the means thereof; his a∣ctuall

helping and relieving of them is mentioned in the next verse. 2. Here is no mention in this verse of Believers being ob∣noxious to Afflictions and Death, so that these words of theirs may serve for an Exposition of some other place of Scripture, (as they say of Gregories Comment on Job) but not of this. 3. By partaking of Flesh and Blood, is not meant primarily, being obnoxious to death and afflictions; nor doth that expression in any place sig∣nify any such thing; though such a nature, as is so obnoxious, be intended. The Argument then from hence stands still in its force; that Christ subsisting in his divine nature, did assume an humane nature of the seed of Abraham, into Personall union with him∣selfe.

Grotius is still at a perfect agreement with our Catechists. Saith * 1.64 he, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 apud Platonem, & alios, est solenniter vindicare, his autem & superioribus intelligendum est, vindicare, seu asserere in liberta∣tem manu injectâ.

This word in Plato and others, is to vindi∣cate into liberty; here, as is to be understood from what went before, it is to assert into Liberty by laying hold with the hand.

Of the First, because he gives no instances, we shall need take no farther notice. The Second is denyed; both the helpe afforded, and the meanes of it by Christ, is mentioned be∣fore. The help is Liberty: the meanes, partaking of Flesh and Blood to dye. These words are not expressive of, nor do answer the latter, or the help afforded, but the means for the obtaining of it, as hath been declared. But he adds, the word signifies to lay hold of with the hand, as Mark. 8. 23. &c. Be it granted that it doth ••o•• to lay hold with the hand, and to take to ones selfe. This is not to as∣sert into Liberty, but by the help of a Metaphor: and when the word is used Metaphorically, it is to be interpreted pro subjectâ ma∣teriâ, according to the subject matter: which here is Christs ta∣king a nature upon him, that was of Abraham, that was not Angeli∣call. The other expression he is singular in the interpretation of.

He took the seed of Abraham. id est, id agit, ut vos Hebraeos liberet a * 1.65 peccatis & metu mortis; eventus enim nomen saepe datur operae, in id im∣pensae. That is,

He doth that, that he may deliver you He∣brews from sinne, and feare of death: the name of the e∣vent, is often given to the work imployed to that purpose.

But 1. Here I confesse, he takes another way from our Cate∣chists;

the seed of Abraham is with them, Believers; with him, only Jews; but the tails of their discourse are tyed together with a firebrand between them, to devoure the harvest of the Church. 2. This taking the seed of Abraham, is opposed to his not taking the seed of Angells; now the Jews are not universally opposed to An∣gels in this thing, but humane kind. 3. He took the seed of Abraham, is it seems, He endeavoured to help the Jewes. The whole discourse of the help afforded both before and after this verse, is extended to the whole Church, how comes it here to be restrained to the Jewes only. 4. The discourse of the Apostle is about the under∣taking of Christ by death, and his being fitted thereunto by par∣taking of flesh and blood; which is so farre from being in any place restrained or accommodated only to the Jewes, as that the contrary is every where asserted, as is known to all.

1 John 4. 3. Every Spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come * 1.66 in the flesh, is of God; He who comes into the world, or comes into flesh, or in the flesh, had a susibstence before he so came. It is very probable, that the intendment of the Apostle was to dis∣cover the Abomination of them, who denyed Christ to be a true man, but assigned him a phantasticall body, which yet he so doth, as to expresse his coming in the flesh in such a manner, as eviden∣ces him to have another nature (as was said) besides that which is here Synecdothically called flesh. Our Catechists to this say, * 1.67

That this is not to the purpose in hand; for that which some read, He came into the flesh, is * 1.68 not in the Greeke, but he came in the flesh. Moreover, John doth not write, that Spirit which confesseth Jesus Christ, which came in the flesh, is of God; but that that Spirit which confesseth Jesus Christ, who is come in the flesh is of God. The sence of which words, is that the Spirit is of God, which confesseth that Jesus Christ, who performed his office in the earth, without any pompe or worldly ostentation, with great hu∣mility, as to outward appearance, and great contempt, & lastly, underwent a contumelious death, is Christ, & King of the people of God.

I shall not contend with them about the translation of the * 1.69 words: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, seemes to be put for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; but the intend∣ment is the same; for the word came is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, that came, or did come. 2. It is not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, who did come, that thence any colour should be taken for the exposition given by them, of confessing that Christ, or him who is the Christ, the King of the people of God, or confessing him to be the Christ, the King of the people of God; but it is, that confesseth him who cam•• in the flesh, that is, as to his whole Person and office, his com∣ing, and what he came for. 3. They cannot give us any exam∣ple, nor any one Reason, to evince, that that should be the mea∣ning of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which here they pretend. The meaning of it hath above been abundantly declared. So that there is no need that we should insist longer on this place. Nor why we should trouble our selves with Grotius his long discourse on this place. The whole foundation of it is, that to come in the flesh, signifies to come in a low, abject condition; a pretence without proofe, without evidence. Flesh may sometimes be taken so; but that to come in the flesh, is to come in such a condition, we have not the least plea pretended.

The last place they mention to this purpose is, Heb. 10. 5. Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, sacrifice and Offering * 1.70 thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me. He who had a body prepared for him, when he came into the world, he subsisted in another nature, before that coming of his into the world. To this they say. * 1.71

Neither is there here any mention made of * 1.72 the incarnation, (as they call it) seeing that world, into which the Author sayes Christ en∣tred is the world to come, as was above demon∣strated. Whence to come into the world, doth not signify to be borne into the world, but to enter into Heaven. Lastly, in these words, a body hast thou prepared me, that word a body (as appeared from what was said, where his entring this world was treated of) may be ta∣ken for an immortall body.

What is the sence of this place?* 1.73

That God fitted for Jesus such a body, after* 1.74 He entred Heaven, as is fit and accommodate for the discharging of the duty of an High Priest.

But doubtlesse, then this whole dreame nothing can be more* 1.75 fond or absurd. How many times is it said, that Christ came into this world, where no other world but this can be understood? For this cause saith he, came I into the world, that I might beare witnesse to the truth? Joh▪ 18. Was it into Heaven that Christ came to beare witnesse to the truth? Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners, 1 Tim. 1. 15. was it into Heaven? 2. These words, a body hast thou prepared me, are a full expression of what is Synecdochically spoken of in the Psalmes, in these words, mine eares hast thou opened, expressing the end also why Christ had a body prepared him, namely, that he might yeild obedience to God therein, which he did signally in this world, when he was obe∣dient to death, the death, of the crosse. 3. as I have before▪ manifested the groundlessenesse of interpreting the word world, put abso∣lutely, of the world to come, and so taken off all, that here they relate unto, so in that Demonstration, which God assisting I shall give, of Christs being a Priest, and offering sacrifice in this world, before he entred into Heaven▪ I shall remove what farther here they pretend unto. In the mean time, such expressions as this, that have no light, nor colour given them from the Text they pretend to unfold, had need of good strength of Analogie given them from elsewhere, which here is not pretended. When he comes into the world, that is, when He enters Heaven; he sayes, a body hast thou prepared me, that is, an immortall body thou hast given me, and that by this immortall body they intend indeed no body, I shall afterward declare.

Grotius turnes these words quite another way, not agreeing* 1.76 with our Catechists; yet doing still the same worke▪ with them: which because he gives no proofe of his exposition, it shall suf∣fice so to have intimated: In summe, v. 4. he tels us, how the blood of Christ takes away sinne, viz. because it begets faith in us, and gives right to Christ for the obtaining of all necessary helps for us, in

pursuit of his former interpretation of chap. 9. where he wholy excludes the satisfaction of Christ. His coming into the world, is (he sayes) his shewing himselfe to the world, after he had lead a private life therein for a while; contrary to the perpetuall use of that expression in the New Testament; and so the whole designe of the place is eluded; the exposition whereof I shall deferre to the place of the satisfaction of Christ.

And these are the Texts of Scripture our Catechists thought* 1.77 good to endeavour a delivery of themselves from, as to that Head or Argument of our plea, for his subsistence in a divine nature, antecedently to his being borne of the Virgin, namely, because he is said to be incarnate, or made flesh.

Notes

• * 1.1

  §. 1.
• * 1.2

  §. 2.
• * 1.3

  E quibus Testimoniis Scrip∣turae demonstrare conantur, Christum (ut lequuntur) in∣carnatum esse?
• * 1.4

  Ex iis, ubi secundum eo∣rum versionem legitur, ver∣bum caro factum est, Joan. 1. 14. Et qui (Christus) cum esset in forma Dei &c. Phil. 2. 6, 7. 1 Tim. 3. 16. Heb. 2. 16. Joan. 4. 2, 3. Heb. 10. 11.
• * 1.5

  §. 3.
• * 1.6

  §. 4.
• * 1.7

  Ad secundum quid respon∣des? Ne{que} hic eoetare, quod ad∣versa pars confectum velit. Aliud enim est, quod hic Apo∣stolus ait, cum in forma Dei esset, formam servi assumpsit; aliud vero, natura divina assumpsit humanam. Etenim hic: forma Dei designare non potest Dei naturam, cum A∣postolus scribat, eam formam Christum exin anivisse. Deus vero naturam suam nullo modo exinanire potest. Nec vero forma servi denotat naturam humanam, cum servum esse ad fortunam & conditionem hominis referatur. At ne id quo{que} dissimulandum est, scrip∣ta Novi Testamenuti hanc vo∣cem, forma, semel fortassis tan∣tū alibi usurpare, Mar. 16. 12. id{que} eo sensu, quo non natu∣ram, sed exteriorem speciem significat, cum ait, Jesum du∣obis discipulis suis apparuisse in alia forma. Ex iis vero verbis, quae Apostolus paulo post subjecit, babitu inventus est ut homo, nonne apparet eum (ut loquun∣tur) incarnatum esse? Nullo modo, etenim ea ora∣to nihil in se habet ejusmodi. De Sampsone enim in literis sacris legimus, quod idem fu∣turus erat, ut homo; Judic. 16. 7, 11. & Psal. 82. Asaph iis, hominibus, quos Deos & Filios altissimi vocaverat, denunciat, quod essent morituri ut hominos; de quibus certum est, non posse dici, eos (ut adversarii dicunt) incarnatos fuisse.
• * 1.8

  §. 5.
• * 1.9

  Qua ratione locum hunc totum intelligis? Ad eum modum, quod Chri∣stus, qui in mundo instar dei, opera dei efficiebut, & cui sicut deo omnia parebāt & cui divina adoratio exhibebatur, ita volente deo, & hominum salute exigente, factus est tan∣quam servus, & mancipium, & tanquam unus ex aliis vul∣garibus hominibus cum ultro se capi, vin••i••i, caedi, & occidi permiserat.
• * 1.10

  §. 7.
• * 1.11

  Qui porro ad ea loca re∣spondes? Quod Christus sit aequalis deo, id divinam in co naturam nullo modo probat, imo hinc res adversa colligitur. Nam si Christus deo, qui natura deus est, aequalis est, efficitur, quod is idem deus esse non possit. Aequalitas vero christi cum Deo in eo est, quod ea virtute, quam in eum contulit deus, ea omnia efficeret, & efficiat, quae ipsius der sunt, tanquam deus ipse.
• * 1.12

  §. 8.
• * 1.13

  §. 9.
• * 1.14

  §. 10.
• * 1.15

  §. 11.
• * 1.16

  §. 12.
• * 1.17

  §. 13.
• * 1.18

  §. 14.
• * 1.19

  §. 15.
• * 1.20

  §. 16.
• * 1.21

  〈1 line〉〈1 line〉
• * 1.22

  §. 17.
• * 1.23

  §. 18.
• * 1.24

  §. 19.
• * 1.25

  §. 20.
• * 1.26

  §. 21.
• * 1.27

  §. 22.
• * 1.28

  §. 23.
• * 1.29

  §. 24.
• * 1.30

  §. 25.
• * 1.31

  §. 26.
• * 1.32

  §. 27.
• * 1.33

  §. 28.
• * 1.34

  §. 29.
• * 1.35

  §. 30.
• * 1.36

  §. 31.
• * 1.37

  §. 32.
• * 1.38

  §. 33.
• * 1.39

  §. 34.
• * 1.40

  §. 35.
• * 1.41

  §. 36.
• * 1.42

  §. 37.
• * 1.43

  Adtertium vero quid re∣spondes?
• * 1.44

  Primum quidem, quod in multis exemplaribus vetustis & in ipsa vulgata, non legatur vox Deus. Quare ex eo loco certum nihil concludi potest. Deinde, etiamsi ea vox lege∣retur, nullam esse causam cur ad Patrem referri non possit, cùm haee de Patre affirmari possint, eum apparuisse in Chri∣sto, & Apostolis qui caro fue∣runt. Quod autem inferiùs le∣gitur, secundum usitatam ver∣sionem, receptus est in glori∣am, id in Graeco habetur, re∣ceptus est in gloria, id est, cum gloria, aut gloriosè.
• * 1.45

  Quae verò futura est hujus testimonii sententia?
• * 1.46

  Religionem Christi plenane esse mysteriis. Nam Deus, id est, voluntas ipsius de servan∣dis hominibus, per komines infirmos & mortales perfectè patefacta est: & nihilominus tamen propter miracula, & virtutes varias, quae per homi∣nes illes infirmes & mortales edita fuerant, pro vera est ag∣nita: eadem ab ipsis Angelis fuit demum perspecta; non so∣lum Judaeis, verum etiam gentibus fuit praedicata: omnes ei crediderunt, & insignem in modum, & summa cum gloria recepta fuit.
• * 1.47

  §. 39.
• * 1.48

  §. 40.
• * 1.49

  §. 41.
• * 1.50

  §. 42.
• * 1.51

  §. 43.
• * 1.52

  §. 44.
• * 1.53

  §. 45.
• * 1.54

  §. 46.
• * 1.55

  §. 47.
• * 1.56

  §. 48.
• * 1.57

  §. 49.
• * 1.58

  §. 50.
• * 1.59

  §. 51.
• * 1.60

  §. 52.
• * 1.61

  In co, ne similitudinem qui∣dem incarnation is (ut vocant) apparere, cùm is Scriptor non dicat, Christum assumpsisse (ut quidam reddunt, & vul∣go eo sensu accipiunt) sed as∣sumere: nec dicit, naturā hu∣manā, sed semen Abrahae quod in literis sacris not at eos, qui in Christum crediderunt, ut Gal 3. 29. videre est.
• * 1.62

  Quid vero sensus hujus erit loci? Id sibi vult is Scriptor, Christum non esse Servatorem Angelorum, sed hominum cre∣dentium, q••i quoniam & af∣flictionibus & morti subjecti sunt (quam rem superius ex∣pressit per participationem car∣nis & sanguinis) propterea Christus ultro illis se submi∣sit, ut fideles suos a mortis me∣tu liberaret, & in omni affli∣ctione iisdem opem afferret.
• * 1.63

  §. 54.
• * 1.64

  §. 55.
• * 1.65

  §. 56.
• * 1.66

  §. 57.
• * 1.67

  §. 58.
• * 1.68

  Etiam in eo nihil prorsus de incarnatione (quam vo∣cant) haberi. Etenim quod apud quosdam legitur, venit in carnem, in Graeco habetur, in carne venit. Propterea non scribit Joannes, quòd spiritus, qui confitetur Jesum Christum, qui in carne venit, ex Deo est. Sed quod ille Spiritus qui confitetur Jesum Christum in carne venisse ex Deo est. Quorum verborum sensus est, eum spiritum ex Deo esse, qui confitetur Jesum illum, qui munus suum in terris fine ulla pompa & often tatione munde∣na, summa cum humilitate, quoad exteriorem specient sumino••; cum contemptu obiverit, martem deni{que} ignominiosam opperierit, esse Christum, & populi Dei regem.
• * 1.69

  §. 59.
• * 1.70

  §. 60.
• * 1.71

  §. 61.
• * 1.72

  Ne hic quidem de incarna∣tione (ut vocant) ullam men∣tionem factam, cum is mun∣dus, in quem ingressum Jesum is autor ait, sit ille mundus fu∣turus, ut superius demonstra∣tum est. Ʋnde etiam ingredi in illum mundum, non nasci in mundum, sed in coelum in∣gredi significat. Deinde, illis verbis, Corpus aptasti mihi, corporis ••ox (••t ex eo appa∣ruit, ubi de ingressu hoc in mundum actum est) pro cor∣pore immortali accipi potest.
• * 1.73

  §. 62.
• * 1.74

  Quae sententia ejus lo••i est? Deum Jesu tale corpus ap∣tasse, postquam in caelum est ingressus, quod ad obeundum munus Pontificis summi ap∣tum & accommodatum foret.
• * 1.75

  §. 63.
• * 1.76

  §. 64.
• * 1.77

  §. 65.