And indeed, whoever peruses the whole Pfalm, will naturally understand the main Body of it to relate to the Glory and Triumph of the Man Chrift Jesus. For, tho' some Passages which are directed to God, were (as we are now assur'd by a Divine Interpreter) address'd to Christ's Divine Nature (from whence I shall afterwards infer his being the Very God) yet the main Body of the Pfalm relates to that Exaltation, which the Very God vouchsaf'd to his Human Nature. And the Pfalmist, who well knew the great Mystery of the Union of two Natures in one Person, which was in God's due Time to be verify'd and declar'd in Fact, expresses himself in such a manner, as implies his actual Adoration of the Divinity, and his inspired Knowledge of the Humanity, of which he gives a Prophetic Description, setting forth the Dominion and Spiritual Kingdom, which the Meffiah should enjoy, after that his Sufferings upon Earth were recompens'd with his Exercise of fupreme Authority over the whole Creation, and especially over all Mankind, which should gradually become Members of his Church. You will forgive my adding one thing. St. Paul says, God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, Seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. I Tim. 3. 16. If any Person therefore should be weak enough to pretend, that the Divine Nature of Christ was exalted, because God was received up into glory; I answer, that the plain Meaning is, that Christ, who is here fimply called God upon the account of his Divine Nature, as he is elsewhere called Man upon the account of his Human Nature, tho' he is in reality both God and Man; was received up, and confequently exalted, in his Human Nature, the Exaltation of which D2 1 which is so frequently and fully declared, and expreffed by this very Phrase ἀνελήφθη. The Context it felf, not only allows, but leads to this Exposition. For the God who was received up, was mani fest in the flesh; and as such, viz. as a God incarnat, he was received up. Whenfoever therefore the Exaltation of Christ is mention'd, it constantly means the Exaltation of his Human Nature only; of which alone 'tis exprefly affirmed, or plainly suppos'd, in Holy Scripture. For as it can't be atfirm'd of his Human Nature, thơ' united with the WORD in one Person, that it made all Things; because, tho''tis exprefly affirm'd of his Divine Nature, that it made all Things, yet the fame is never once affirm'd or imply'd of the Human Nature: even so it can't be affirm'd of the Divine Nature, tho' united with the Human in one Person, that it was exalted; be cause, tho''tis exprefly affirm'd of the Human, yet 'tis never once either affirm'd or imply'd of the Divine Nature. 'Tis certain therefore, that Chrift was exalted with respect to his Human Nature only; and that his Divine Nature never was exalted at all. What has been already said, is abundantly sufficient to establish the true Doctrin of our Savior's Exaltation. We ought not to expect a positive Declaration in Scripture, that the WORD or Divine Nature is not exalted. For we ought to restrain Christ's Exaltation to his Human Nature, unless we have good Grounds to extend it farther; that is, unless we have fome clear Proof, that the Divine Nature is exalted also. However, I shall now evince what I have been contending for, by fuch a Confideration, as I think is equivalent to an express Restriction of our Savior's Exaltation to his human Nature, and an express Exclusion of the Divine Nature from the Participation of that Exaltation. 'Tis this. to The Evangelist tels us, that all Things whatsoever were made by the WORD or Divine Nature, John 1.3. So that the whole Creation, even the most glorious created Beings whatsoever, derive their Exiftence from him. Hence 'tis evident, that he is by Nature their Superior. Now the utmost pitch of our Lord's Exaltation is his exercising supreme Dominion over all Creatures. For the fullest and most pompous Description of it amounts to no more. And confequently that Exaltation which our Lord enjoys, could be no Exaltation the WORD, or his Divine Nature, because he is necessarily as great in himself, as that Exaltation could make him. How then could Christ be exalted with refpect to his Divine Nature? How could that which Christ is said to be advanc'd unto, be reprefented as an ύψωσις, an exceeding Exaltation, if understood of his Divine Nature? 'Tis indeed an ύψωσις, an exceeding Exaltation, of his human Nature; but 'tis no Exaltation at all to his Divine Nature. Because his Divine Nature (whether it be the very God, or an inferior Being) always was, even upon your own Principles, and before the Creation, every whit as Great and Glorious, as the most magnificent Scripture Description of Chrift's present Exaltation supposes him to be. I can't frame more than one Objection against this Way of reasoning; and 'tis indeed such, as I would scarce mention, were I not unwilling to neglect any thing, that even a weak Mind may stumble at. Perhaps it may be pretended, that how great foever the WORD effentially is (for D3 you you fee, I don't as yet determin whether he be the very God, or no) by reason of his having made all created Beings whatsoever; yet the Exercise of supreme Authority over what he himself had made, may be esteem'd an Exaltation of him. To this I answer, 1. That fince he is essentially above it, and can gain nothing by it, his immediat Goverment of the Universe must be esteem'd a Condescention rather than an Exaltation. Because it tends only to the Advantage of his Subjects, and not in the least to his own Advancement. 2. That the very God himself exercis'd this Authority immediatly, and without the Interposition of a Mediator, before Christ's Exaltation. But was the very God exalted thereby? Is it not Blafphemy to suppose it? And why could not the very God be thereby exalted? Even because he is by Nature fuperior to the whole Creation. And is not this the selfsame Argument which I used before with respect to the WORD? If the WORD were not the very God; yet fince he is (at the least, and upon your own Principles) vastly superior to the whole Creation, his Administration of the Goverment of it can be no Exaltation, till a Way shall be found, whereby he may be suppos'd the better by it. If it be faid, that the WORD is rendred the more glorious in the Eyes of his Creatures by having the Government of them in his own Hands; I ask, whether the very God can be exalted, by the most glorious Conceptions which Creatures can have of him? Was not the very God as high before the Creation, as he has been or can be fince? Were Creatures produc'd to exalt the very God? Or can he be in any respect exalted by them; I mean, as to his Condition of Happiness, and his effential Greatness? No furely. Accordingly A dingly therefore, the WORD can't be exalted by the utmost Honor the Creatures can pay him, or by the nobleft Idea they can frame of him. There is no real Exaltation, unless the Being be rendred the more happy, than the Condition of its Nature supposes. And yet the whole Account of our Lord's Exaltation implies his being really the better for it, and a Gainer by it; his having, not only more Honor from inferior Beings, but more fubstantial Happiness also, by his Exaltation, than the Condition of his Nature could invest him with. 'Tis plain therefore, that Christ is exalted only with respect to his human Nature. For the WORD, or his Divine Nature, is essentially superior to, and consequently not capable of, nor does participate, that change of Condition, which his Exaltation has made with respect to his human Na Phil. 2. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. explain'd. |