demanding this divine honour of him that performed it, in Josh. v. 14,
15. where he appeared as the _Captain of the host of the Lord_; upon
which, _Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and said
unto him, What saith my Lord unto his servant? And the Captain of the
Lord’s host said unto Joshua, Loose thy shoe from off thy foot, for the
place whereon thou standest is holy; and Joshua did so_. It cannot be
supposed that it was any other than a divine Person that appeared; not
only because Joshua fell on his face and worshipped him, and expressed
his willingness to fulfil his command, but because he bid him loose his
shoe from his foot, since the place on which he stood was holy; which
expression is no where used in any other text of scripture, except in
Exod. iii. 5. in which our Saviour, as we before considered, appeared to
Moses, with the majesty and glory of a divine Person, whose immediate
presence made the place relatively holy, which the presence of a
creature never did. Moreover, the character which he here gives of
himself to Joshua, as the Captain of the Lord’s host, not only implies,
that all his success was owing to his conduct and blessing, on his
warlike enterprizes; but this is also agreeable to the description which
is elsewhere given of our Saviour, in Isa. lv. 4. in which he is said to
be _a Leader and Commander to the people_; and he is called in Heb. ii.
10. _The Captain of our salvation_; and elsewhere, _The Prince of life_;
and, _The Prince of the kings of the earth_.
Moreover, there are various instances in the New Testament of worship
given to Christ; in which, by several circumstances contained in it, it
is evident, that it was divine or religious. Thus he had divine honour
given him by the wise men from the East, in Matth. ii. 11. who _fell
down and worshipped him_, &c. and, in Luke xxiv. 52. when he ascended up
into heaven, his disciples _worshipped him_; where there is nothing in
the mode of expression that distinguishes this from that worship that is
due to God. Moreover, there is a very illustrious instance of his being
thus worshipped by a numerous assembly, represented in that vision, in
Rev. v. 11-13. _I beheld, and heard the voice of many angels round about
the throne, saying, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, to receive power,
and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and
blessing: And every creature that is in heaven, and on the earth, and
under the earth, saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be
unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and to the Lamb for ever and
ever_; in which words there are such glories ascribed, that higher
expressions cannot be used by any, who adore the divine Majesty; and it
is plain, that our Saviour is intended hereby, because he is described
as the _Lamb that was slain_; and he is also considered co-ordinately
with the Father, when it is said, that this glory is given to him that
_sitteth upon the throne, and to the Lamb_. Now if our Saviour be thus
worshipped, he must have a right to it, or else his worshippers would
have been reproved, as guilty of idolatry; thus Peter reproves
Cornelius, or rather prevents his paying divine adoration to himself,
who was no more than a man, in Acts x. 26. _Stand up, I myself also am a
man_; and the angel, in Rev. xix. 10. when John at first, through
mistake, thinking him to be a divine person, fell at his feet to worship
him, expressly forbad him, saying, _See thou do it not; I am thy
fellow-servant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus;
worship God._ But our Saviour never forbids any to worship him;
therefore we must conclude that he is the object thereof, and
consequently a divine Person.
We shall now proceed to consider the various branches of divine worship
that are given to him, _viz._
1. Swearing by his name, whereby an appeal is made to him, as the Judge
of truth, and the Avenger of falsehood. Some think that the apostle, in
Rom. ix. 1. intends as much as this, when he says, _I speak the truth in
Christ, I lie not_, that is, I appeal to Christ, as the heart-searching
God, concerning the truth of what I say. But there is also another sense
of swearing, namely, when in a solemn manner, we profess subjection to
him, as our God and King; which agrees with, or is taken from the custom
of subjects, who swear fealty or allegiance to their king: thus it is
said, in Isa. xlv. 23. _Unto me every knee shall bow, and every tongue
shall swear_; and, in doing this, they acknowledge him to be the object
of faith, and to have a right to universal obedience, as well as the
Fountain of blessedness. This religious worship, as the prophet
foretels, was to be given to the Person here spoken of, who is
particularly said to be our Saviour by the apostle, referring to it in
Rom. xiv. 11.
2. This leads us to consider another act of religious worship, which has
some affinity with the former, contained in the baptismal vow; in which
there is a consecration, or dedication, of the person baptized, to the
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, according to the command given, in Matt.
xxviii. 19. or a public profession, that it is our indispensable duty to
exercise an entire subjection to them, in a religious manner. This is
one of the most solemn acts of worship that can be performed, wherein
there is an explicit mention of the name of the Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost. And here we may consider, in general, that the Son is put
co-ordinately with the Father, which no creature ever is: and it will be
also necessary for us to enquire what is meant by being baptized in the
name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, that so it may farther appear
to be an act of religious worship.
Some hereby understand nothing else but our being baptized by the
authority of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or by a warrant received
from them to do it: but though this be sometimes the meaning of our
acting in the name of God, yet more is intended by this expression, used
in the administration of this ordinance, otherwise it is not
sufficiently distinguished from all other acts of religious worship;
which cannot be rightly performed without a divine warrant. According to
this sense of the word, ministers may as well be said to preach the
gospel, and the church to attend on their ministration, in the name of
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; for this cannot he done without a
divine warrant, upon which account it may be deemed an ordinance.
Moreover, to suppose that this instituted form of administering baptism,
conveys no other idea, but that of a divine warrant to do it, is to
conclude that there is no determinate meaning of the action performed,
contained in it; but the administrator is to intend nothing else by it,
but only that he has a warrant from God to baptize; whereas its being
performed in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, seems plainly
to intimate the principal thing signified thereby, as a direction for
our faith, when engaging in it: which is, that they who are baptized are
consecrated, or devoted to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, devoted to
God professedly, and called by his name, in the sense in which the
phrase is elsewhere used in scripture; his right to them is hereby
signified, and their indispensable obligation to be entirely his; and
that with a peculiar acknowledgment of the distinct personal glory of
the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and the concern that each of them have
in our salvation. The apostle speaking of our being baptized in the name
of Christ, calls it, in Gal. iii. 27. _a putting on Christ_; which seems
to imply a consecration, or dedication, to him. Persons as well as
things, before this ordinance was instituted, were consecrated to God by
divers washings, as well as other rites, used under the ceremonial law;
and this seems to be the sense in which the apostle himself explains
this _putting on Christ_, in ver. 29. when he infers, from this action,
that they who had so done _were Christ’s_, not only by that right, which
he has to them as their Creator and Redeemer, but by another, which is
the immediate result of their professed dedication to him; therefore
this is such a comprehensive act of worship, that it includes in it the
whole of that subjection, which is due to the Father, Son, and Spirit;
and since, in particular, the Son is considered as the object thereof,
together with the Father, it follows that he is God, equal with the
Father.
I might here consider, that it would be not only an unwarrantable
action, but an instance of the greatest profaneness, for us to be
baptized in the name of any one who is not a divine Person, which
farther argues that it is an act of divine worship; upon which occasion,
the apostle Paul, speaking concerning some of the church of Corinth, as
being disposed to pay too great a veneration to those ministers who had
been instrumental in their conversion, as though, for this reason, they
were to be accounted the lords of their faith; and, in particular, that
some said they were of Paul, and, being apprehensive that they thought
the minister, who baptized them, had a right to be thus esteemed, he not
only reproves this ungrounded and pernicious mistake; but takes occasion
_to thank God, that he baptized none of them, but Crispus and Gaius,
together with the household of Stephanas, lest any should say he
baptized in his own name_; so that while he testifies his abhorrence of
his giving any just occasion to any, to conclude that he was the object
of this branch of divine worship, he takes a great deal of pleasure in
this reflection, that the providence of God had not led them through the
ignorance and superstition that prevailed among them, to draw this false
conclusion from his exercising this branch of the ministerial work,
which properly they would not have inferred from any other’s having
baptized them, who had not so great an interest in their affections as
he had. This I apprehend to be the meaning of what the apostle says, in
1 Cor. i. 12-16. which I take occasion to refer to, as a farther proof
of baptism’s being an act of religious worship, unalienable from the
Father, Son, and Spirit, in whose name alone we are to be baptized; and
I cannot but conclude, that if the Son were not a divine Person, we
might as well be baptized in the name of Paul, or any other of the
apostles, as in his name, which is a just consequence from its being an
act of religious worship; and therefore he would never have joined his
own name with the Father’s when he gave forth his commission to baptize,
if he had not had a right to it, as well as the Father.
Again, divine worship is due to Christ, as he is the object of faith;
and that not only as we are to depend upon whatever he has revealed, as
a matter of infallible verity, otherwise the faith of the church
especially under the New Testament dispensation, would be built on an
uncertain foundation; but, since I am sensible it would be objected to
this, that whatever is transmitted to us by divine inspiration, is
infallibly true, though the instruments made use of herein were not
divine persons; and when we assert that what Christ delivered was
infallible, in a higher sense than this, we rather suppose than prove
his Deity; the Anti-trinitarians will not deny, that what he imparted
was infallibly true, and therefore the object of faith; but they suppose
at the same time, that whatever was imparted to the world by the
apostles and prophets, was equally true and infallible; therefore they
were the objects of faith, in the same sense that our Saviour himself
was.
In answer to this I would not compare what was delivered immediately by
our Saviour with what was transmitted by those who spake and wrote by
divine inspiration, or suppose that one was more infallibly true than
the other; and therefore that which I would principally insist on, when
I speak of Christ, as the object of faith, whereby he appears to be a
divine Person, is not only that we are obliged to yield an assent to
what he has imparted to us, but this is to be attended with a firm
reliance on him, or trusting him with all we have, or for all we expect,
to make us completely happy: in this sense we are to understand the
apostle’s words, when he says, in 2 Tim. i. 12. _I know whom I have
believed_, or trusted, _and I am persuaded that he is able to keep that
which I have committed unto him against that day_; this is such a faith,
as no creature is the object of. Trust in man is prohibited, and called
a departure from God, in Jer. xvii. 5. _Cursed be the man that trusteth
in man_, or, by a parity of reason in any other creature, _and maketh
flesh his arm, and whose heart herein departeth from the Lord_. Trust is
such an act of faith, as is appropriated to a divine Person; and I
cannot but observe, that there is something peculiar in the mode of
speaking, when Christ is represented as the object thereof, that is
never applied to any creature; as his worshippers are said to believe
_in him_; thus, in John xiv. 1. _Ye believe in God, believe also in
me_,[159] where he commands his people to believe in him, in such a way;
as that this act of faith is accompanied with other graces, which argue
him a divine Person.
This leads us to consider him as the object of supreme love and
universal obedience, which are also acts of religious worship; the
former respects him, as our chief good and happiness; the latter as our
undoubted sovereign and proprietor: we do not say, that a person’s
having a right to be obeyed, or loved, or trusted, in a limited degree,
argues him to be a divine Person; but when these graces are to be
exercised in the highest degree, without any possibility of our
exceeding therein; and when the exercise thereof is inseparably
connected with salvation, as it often is in scripture, and our not
exercising them, is said to exclude from it, I cannot but from hence
conclude, that, being thus circumstanced, is an act of religious
worship; and it is certain, that our saviour is often represented, in
scripture, as the object thereof.
The last thing that we shall consider, under this head, is, that he is
the object of prayer and praise; and that these are parts of religious
worship, needs no proof. Some think, and the conjecture is not
altogether improbable, that this is intended by the Psalmist, Psal.
lxxii. 15. _Prayer also shall be made for him continually_; since it
might as well be rendered, continually made _to him_, which agrees with
what follows, _And daily shall he be praised_; and that this Psalm
respects the Messiah, who had a right to more glory than Solomon,
appears from several things, which are said concerning him therein; but
I will not insist on this, since we have more evident proofs thereof in
other scriptures. It is also foretold concerning him in Isa. xi. 10.
that _to him_, for so the words ought to be rendered, _shall the
Gentiles seek_; which mode of speaking is frequently used, to signify
our addressing ourselves to a divine Person with prayer and
supplication, for the supplying of our wants. But we have yet more
evident proofs hereof in the New Testament; the Syrophenician woman’s
prayer, which was directed to him, was indeed short, but very
comprehensive, Matt. xv. 22. _Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou Son of
David_; and, in ver. 25. _She came and worshipped him, saying, Lord help
me_; and this act of religious worship was commended by our Saviour, and
her prayer answered. And can we suppose any other than an act of
religious worship, contained in that petition of the man who came to him
to cast the devil out of his son, in Mark ix. 24? _Who said, with tears,
Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief_; by which we are not to
understand that he desired that his unbelief should be removed in an
objective way, by our Saviour’s giving him more convincing arguments to
confirm his faith, but by a powerful access to his heart, as the Author
and Finisher of faith, which is the peculiar gift of God; and
accordingly he is considered as a divine Person, by those who thus
address themselves to him.
We shall conclude this head, with giving a few instances of short
prayers directed to Christ, together with doxologies, or ascriptions of
praise, in which he is sometimes joined with the Father and Holy Ghost;
and he is also argued, from the subject matter thereof, to be a divine
Person: thus the apostle Paul concludes his epistles with, _The grace of
our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all, Amen_; 1 Cor. xvi. 23. Phil. iv.
23. 1 Thess. v. 28. 2 Thess. iii. 18. and, _The grace of our Lord Jesus
Christ be with your spirit_; Philem. ver. 25. and, _The Lord Jesus
Christ be with thy Spirit_; 2 Tim. iv. 22. which is a short and
comprehensive prayer directed to Christ, that he would bestow on them
all those graces that are necessary to their salvation; and that this
grace may so govern and influence their spirits, as to fit them for his
service, which supposes him to be the God and Giver of all grace. And,
in 2 Cor. x. iii. 14. he puts up a prayer to the three Persons in the
Godhead expressly; _The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of
God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all, Amen_;
desiring, that they would communicate those blessings, which accompany
salvation, by which the divine perfections, and in particular the
Personal glory of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, are demonstrated; and
herein the Son is as much considered as the object of prayer as the
Father, and consequently hereby proved to be a divine Person.
To this we may add those doxologies whereby praise is given to Christ;
and so he is farther considered as the object of divine worship; thus,
in 2 Pet. iii, 18. speaking of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, he
says, _To him be glory, both now and for ever, Amen_; and, in Jude, ver.
24, 25. _Unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present
you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, to
the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power,
both now, and for ever, Amen_; where it is plain that he ascribes this
divine glory to Jesus Christ; for he is spoken of in ver. 21. _Looking
for the mercy of our Lord Jesus unto eternal life_, that is, for that
mercy which shall preserve us unto eternal life, and then confer it upon
us; which is the sense of those words, _Keeping us from falling, and
presenting us faultless before the presence of his glory_, with a small
variation of the phrase; and the very same thing he is expressly said to
do elsewhere, in Eph. v. 27. to _present it to himself a glorious
church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing, but that it
should be holy, and without blemish_, that is, that he may present it to
his own view, as taking a survey of his workmanship, when brought to
perfection; as God is said _to have taken a view of all things that he
had made at first_, when he pronounced _them good_ Gen. i. 31. and, when
he has thus taken a survey of his church, or presented it to himself,
then he presents it to the view of the whole world of angels and men,
which, as it is said, is attended with exceeding joy; which plainly
makes it appear that our Saviour is the Person here spoken of; which is
agreeable to what follows, where he is called, as he is elsewhere, _God
our Saviour_, Tit. ii. 10, 13. which character agrees with the name by
which he was most known, to wit, _Jesus_.
Another doxology we have in Rev. i. 4, 5, 6. _Grace be unto you, and
peace from Jesus Christ_, &c. _Unto him that loved us, and washed us
from our sins in his own blood; and hath made us kings and priests unto
God and his Father, to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever,
Amen._
There are also two places more, in which, to me, it seems more than
probable, that doxologies are directed to Christ, namely, in 1 Tim. vi.
15, 16. _Who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and
Lord of lords; who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light, which
no man can approach unto: whom no man hath seen, or can see; to whom be
honour and power everlasting, Amen_: All allow that nothing greater can
be said of God than is here spoken; therefore the only thing denied by
the Arians is, that this is applied to any but the Father; but to me, it
seems very obvious that it is spoken of Christ, because he is mentioned
immediately before: thus, in ver. 13. it is said, _I give thee charge in
the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ
Jesus[160]; who, before Pontius Pilate, witnessed a good confession;
That thou keep this commandment without spot, until the appearing of our
Lord Jesus Christ, which in his times he shall shew; Who is the blessed
and only Potentate, &c._ where by _his times_ is meant that season in
which his glory shall shine most brightly, when, what he witnessed
before Pontius Pilate, to wit, that he was the Son of God, he will
demonstrate in the highest degree, and then will eminently appear to
have a right to that glory, which the apostle ascribes to him.
Again, there is another scripture, in which a glorious doxology is
ascribed to Christ, in 1 Tim. i. 17. _Now unto the King eternal,
immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory, for ever
and ever, Amen._ A late learned writer[161] puts this among those
scriptures which he applies to the Father, without assigning any reason
for it; which he ought to have done, inasmuch as the context seems to
direct us to apply it to the Son, spoken of in the foregoing verses;
thus, in ver. 12. _I thank Jesus Christ our Lord, who counted me
faithful, putting me into the ministry_; and, ver. 14. _The Grace of our
Lord was exceeding abundant_, &c. and ver. 15. _Christ Jesus came into
the world to save sinners_; and ver. 16. _Howbeit, for this cause I
obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all
long-suffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on
him to life everlasting._ Thus having mentioned the great things which
Christ did for him, it is natural to suppose that he would take
occasion, from hence, to ascribe glory to him, which he does in the
words immediately following, _Now, unto the King, eternal, immortal_,
&c.
Having considered the force of this argument, taken from divine worship
being ascribed to Christ, to prove his deity, we shall now proceed to
observe the methods used by the Anti-trinitarians to evade it. Some of
the Socinians, as though there had been no scriptures that speak of him
as the object of religious worship, have peremptorily denied that it is
due to him, and thought very hardly of their brethren, as though they
were involved in the common guilt of idolatry, which they suppose his
worshippers to have been chargeable with. This occasioned warm debates
in Transylvania and Poland, where Socinianism most prevailed towards the
close of the 16 century[162]; and, indeed, the method of reasoning, made
use of by those who denied that he was the object of worship, though it
tended more to his dishonour, yet it carried in it a greater consistency
with that scheme of doctrines, which both sides maintained, who denied
his divinity.
As for the Arians, they do not expressly deny him to be the object of
worship, but rather deviate from the true sense of the word, when they
maintain his right to it: they speak of great honours that are to be
ascribed to him, by which one would almost be ready to conclude that
they reckoned him a divine Person; but when these honours are compared
with those that are due to the Father, they very plainly discover that
they mean nothing more hereby, but what in consistency with their own
scheme may be applied to a creature. Thus a late writer[163], in his
explication of that text, in John v. 23. _That all men should honour the
Son, even as they honour the Father_, plainly discovers his sense of
divine worship, as due to our Saviour, to be very remote from that which
is defended by those who maintain his proper deity. His explication of
this text is, “That the meaning is not that the Son’s authority should,
like that of the Father, be looked upon as underived, absolute, supreme,
and independent; but that as the Jews already believed in God, so they
should also believe in Christ: as they already honoured God the Father,
so they should also for the future, honour the Son of God; honour him,
as having all judgment committed unto him; honour him, to the honour of
the Father, which sent him; acknowledge him to be God, to the glory of
the Father.” Which is a very low idea of divine honour; for it is as
much as to say, that as the Father is to be honoured as God, so there is
a degree of honour, which he has conferred upon the Son, infinitely
below that which is due to himself, but yet called divine, because it is
given him by a divine warrant. Whether, in this sense, an angel might
not have had a warrant to receive divine honour, I leave any one to
judge; and, indeed, nothing is contained in this sense, but what rather
tends to depreciate, than advance the glory of Christ. But that we may
better understand how far they allow that religious worship may be given
to our Saviour, as well as that we may take occasion to defend that
right to divine worship, which we have proved to be due to him, we shall
briefly consider, and endeavour to make some reply to the following
objections.