Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

angels or men, or any other creature, and the likeness of them; which to do is to worship the creature, besides, or along with the Creator. But this hinders not but that the Son and Spirit may have acts of worship performed to them, equally as to the Father; and for this reason, because they are, with him, the one God; hence baptism is administered equally in the name of all three; and prayer is jointly made unto them; both solemn acts of religious worship; see Matt. xxviii. 19. Rev. i. 4, 5. And this doctrine of the unity of the divine Being, as it fixes and settles the object of worship, so being closely attended to, it guides the mind right in the consideration of it, while worshipping, without any confusion and division in it; for let the direction, or address, be to which person it may, as each may be distinctly addressed; be it to the Father, he is considered in the act of worship, as the one God, with the Son and Spirit; if the address is to the Son, he is considered as the one God, with the Father and the Spirit; or if the address is to the Spirit, he is considered as the one God, with the Father and Son. And this doctrine also serves to fix and settle the object of our faith, hope, and love, without division and distraction of mind; which are not to be exercised on different objects, and to be divided between them; but are to center in one object, the one only true God, Father, Son, and Spirit; whom alone we are to make our confidence, our hope, and the center of our affections, Jer. xvii. 7. Psal. lxxiii. 25. As well as this doctrine carries a strong and powerful argument to promote unity, harmony and concord among the saints; for which it is used in Eph, iv. 3-6.

OF A PLURALITY IN THE GODHEAD.

HAVING proved the unity of the divine Being, and explained the sense in which it is to be understood; my next work will be to prove that there is a plurality in the Godhead; or, that there are more persons than one, and that these are neither more, nor fewer, than three; o1, that there is a Trinity of Persons in the unity of the divine essence. Some except to these terms, because not literally and syllabically expressed in scripture; as Essence, Unity, Trinity, and Person; of which see the introduction, p. io. I shall,

I. Prove that there is a plurality of persons in the one God; or, that there are more than one. The Hebrew word which answers to the Greek word poowa, is used of the divine persons, My persons shall go with thee, Exod. xxxiii. 14, and if TD thy persons go not with me, 15. and he brought thee out by his persons, Deut. iv. 37. The word is used three times in Psal. xxvii. 8, 9. and in each clause the Septuagint has the word pororov, and which, as Suidas observes, is expressive of the sacred Trinity. That there is such a plurality of persons, will appear more clearly,

1. From the plural names and epithets of God. His great and incommunicable name Jehovah, is always in the singular number, and is never used plu

[ocr errors]

rally; the reason of which is, because it is expressive of his essence, which is but one; it is the same with I AM that I AM; but the first name of God we meet with in scripture, and that in the first verse of it, is plural; In the begin ning God (Elohim) created the heaven and the earth, Gen. i. 1. and therefore must design more than one, at least two, and yet not precisely two, or two only; then it would have been dual; but it is plural: and, as the Jews themselves say, cannot design fewer than three". Now Moses might have made use of other naines of God, in his account of the creation; as his name Jehovah, by which he made himself known to him, and to the people of Israel; or Eloah, the singular of Elohim, which is used by him, Deut. xxxii. 15, 16. and in the book Job frequently; so that it was not want of singular names of God, nor the barrenness of the Hebrew language, which obliged him to use a plural word; it was no doubt of choice, and with design; and which will be more evident when it is observed, that one end of the writings of Moses, is to extirpate the polytheism of the heathens, and to prevent the people of Israel from going into it; and therefore it may seem strange, that he should begin his history with a plural name of God; he must have some design in it, which could not be to inculcate a plurality of gods, for that would be directly contrary to what he had in view in writing, and to what he asserts, Deut. vi. 4. Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord: nor a plurality of mere names and characters, to which creative powers cannot be ascribed; but a plurality of persons, for so the words may be rendered, distributively, according to the Idiom of the Hebrew language; "In the beginning every one, or each of the divine persons, created the heaven and the earth."

And then the historian goes on to make mention of them; who, besides the Father, included in this name, are the Spirit of God, that moved upon the Face of the waters, and the Word of God, verse 2. which said, Let there be light, and there was light; and which spoke that, and all things, out of nothing; see John i. 1-3. And it may be further observed, that this plural word Elohim, is, in this passage, in construction with a verb singular Bara, rendered created; which some have thought is designed to point out, a plurality of persons, in the unity of the divine essence; but if this is not judged sufficient to build it upon, let it be further observed, that the word Elohim is sometimes in construction with a verb plural, as in Gen. xx. 13. and xxxv. 7. 2 Sam. vii. 23. where Elohim, the gods, or divine persons, are said to cause Abraham to wander from his father's house; to appear to Jacob; and to go forth to redeemn Israel: all which are personal actions: and likewise it is in construction with adjectives and participles plural, Deut. iv. 7. and v. 26. Josh. xxiv. 19. 1 Sam. vii. 26, 36. Psal. lviii. 11. Prov. xxx. 3. Jer. x. 10. in which places Elohim, gods, or the divine persons, are said to be nigh to the people of Israel; to be living, holy, and to judge the earth; characters which belong to persons; and now, as a learned man" well observes, "that however the construction of a

Vid. Alting. Dissert. Philolog. 4. s. 6; 7; 8, ▾ Allix's Judgment of the Jewish Church, P. 184.

noun plural with a verb singular, may render it doubtful to some whether these words express a plurality or no, yet certainly there can be no doubt in those places, where a verb or adjective plural are joined with the word Elohim." No such stress is laid on this word, as if it was the clearest and strongest proof of a plurality in the Deity; it is only mentioned, and mentioned first, because it is the most usual name of God, being used of him many hundreds of times in scripture, and what stress is laid upon it, is not merely because it is plurai, but because it appears often in an unusual form of construction; it is used of others, but not in such a form; as has been observed. It is used of angels, Psal. viii. 6. they being not only many, but are often messengers of God, of the divine Persons in the Godhead, represent them, and speak in their name. And it is used of civil magistrates, Psal. Ixxxii. 6. and so of Moses, as a god to Pharaoh, Exod. vii. 1. as they well may be called, since they are the vicegerents and representatives of the Elohim, the divine Persons, the Trine-une God: nor need it be wondered at, that it should be sometimes used of a single Person in the Deity, it being common to them all; and since each of them possess the whole divine nature and essence undivided, Psal. xlv. 6, 7. The ancient Jews not only concluded a purality, but even a Trinity, from the word Elohim. With respect to the passage in Numb. xv. 16. they say, "There is no judgment less than three;" and that three persons sitting in judgment, the divine Majesty is with them, they conclude from Psal. lxxxii. 1. he judgeth among the gods, . Hence they further observe, that "no sanhedrim, or court of judicature, is called

unless it consists of three." From whence it is manifest, that the ancient Jews believed that this name not only inferred a plurality of persons, but such a plurality which consisted of three at least.

Another plural name of God is Adonim; If I am (Adonim) Lords, where is my fear? Mal. i. 6. now, though this may be said of one in the second and third Persons plural, yet never of one in the first Person, as it is here said of God by himself; am Lords; and we are sure there are two, The Lord said to my Lord, &c. Psal. cx. 1.

In Dan. iv. 17. the most high God is called the watchers and the holy ones; This matter is by the decree of the watches, and the demand by the word of the holy Ones; which respects the revolution and destruction of the Babylonian monarchy; an affair of such moment and importance as not to be ascribed to angels, which some understand by watchers and holy ones; but however applicable these epithets may be to them, and they may be allowed to be the executioners of the decrees of God, yet not the makers of them; nor can any thing in this world, and much less an affair of such consequence as this, be said to be done in virtue of any decree of theirs; besides, this decree is expressly called, the decree of the most High, 24. so that the watchers and holy Ones, are no other than the divine Persons in the Godhead; who are holy in their nature, and watch Gloss, in T. Bab. Yebamot, fel. 46. 2.

* Sec my doctrine of the Trinity, p. 30. Betaco, fol. 61. & Gloss. in ibid.

* T. Bab.

over the saints to do them good; and over the wicked, to bring evil upon them: and as they are so called in the plural number, to express the plurality of thein in the Deity; so to preserve the unity of the divine essence, this same decree is called, the decree of the most High, 24. and they the watcher and holy One, in the singular number in 13.

II. A plurality in the Deity, may be proved from plural expressions used by God when speaking of himself, respecting the works of creation, providence, and grace. At the creation of man he said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness, Gen. i. 25. the pronouns us and our, manifestly express a plurality of persons; these being personal plural characters; as image and likeness being in the singular number, secure the unity of the divine essence; and that there were more than one concerned in the creation of man, is clear from the plural expressions used of the divine Being, when he is spoken of as the Creator of men, Job xxxv. 10. Psal. cxlix. 2. Eccles. xii. 1. Isai. liv. 5. in all which places, in the original text, it is, my Makers, his Makers, thy Creators, thy Makers; for which no other reason can be given, than that more persons than one had an hand herein; for as for the angels, they are creatures themselves, and not possessed of creative powers; nor were they concerned in the creation of man, nor was he made after their image and likeness; nor can it be reasonably thought that God spoke to them, and held a consultation with them about it; for with whom took he counsel? Isai. xl. 14. Not with any of his creatures; no, not with the highest angel in heaven; they are not of his privy council. Nor is it to be thought that God, in the above passage, speaks regio more, after the manner of kings; who, in their edicts and proclamations, use the plural number, to express their honour and majesty; and even they are not to be considered alone, but as connotating their ministers and privy council, by whose advice they act; and, besides, this courtly way of speaking, was not so ancient as the times of Moses; none of the kings of Israel use it; nor even any of those proud and haughty monarchs, Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar; the first appearance of it is in the letters of Artaxerxes, king of Persia, Ezra iv. 18. and vii. 23. which might take its rise from the conjunction of Darius and Cyrus, in the Persian empire, in both whose names edicts might be made, and letters wrote; which might give rise to such a way of speaking, and be continued by their successors, to express their power and glory: but, as a learned man observes, “It is a very extravagant fancy, to suppose that Moses alludes to a custom that was not (for what appears) in being at that time, nor a great while after." The Jews themselves are sensible that this passage furnishes with an argument for a plurality in the Deity".

a

A like way of speaking is used concerning men, in Gen. iii. 22. And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us; not as one of the angels, for they are not of the Deity, nor the companions of God, and equal to him; Kidder's Demonstration of the Messiah, part 3. p. 9o. edit. fol. See my doctrine of th: Trinity, p. 35, 36.

VOL. I.

& C

for whatever private secret meaning Satan might have in saying, Ye shall be as gods; he would have it understood by Eve, and so she understood it, that they should be not like the angels merely, but like God himself; this was the bait he laid, and which took, and proved man's ruin; upon which the Lord' God said these words, either sarcastically, "behold the man whom Satan promised, and he expected to be as one of us, as one of the persons in the Deity; see how much he looks like one of us! who but just now ran away from us in fear and trembling, and covered himself with fig-leaves, and now stands before us cloathed with skins of slain beasts!" or else as comparing his former and present state together; for the words may be rendered, he was as one of us; made after their image and likeness: but what is he now? he has sinned, and come short of that glorious image; has lost his honour, and is become like the beasts that perish, whose skins he now wears. Philo, the Jew, owns that these words are to be understood not of one, but of more; the ev xai mona, the one and many, so much spoken of by the Pythagoreans and Platonists; and which Plato speaks of as infinite and eternal, and of the knowledge of them as the gift of the gods; and which, he says, was delivered to us by the ancients; who were better than we, and lived nearer the gods; by whom he seems to intend the ancient Jews; this, I say, though understood by their followers of the unity of God, and the many ideas in him, the same with what we call decrees; I take to be no other than the one God, and a plurality of persons in the Deity; which was the faith of the ancient Jews; so that the roxxa, of Plato, and others, is the same with the Andor of Philo, who was a great Platonizer; and both intend a plurality of persons.

God sometimes uses the plural number when speaking of himself, with respect to some particular affairs of providence, as the confusion of languages; Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language; which also cannot be said to angels; had it, it would rather have been, go ye, and do ye confound their language: but, alas, this work was above the power of angels to do; none but God, that gave to man the faculty of speech, and the use of language, could confound it; which was as great an instance of divine power, as to bestow the gift of tongues on the apostles, at Pentecost; and the same God that did the one, did the other; and so the us here, are after explained of Jehovah, in the following verse, to whom the confounding the language of men, and scattering them abroad on the face of the earth, are ascribed, verse 8, 9. In another affair of providence, smiting the Jewish nation with judicial blindness; this plural way of speaking is used by the divine Being; says the prophet Isaiah, I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for us? Isai. vi. 8. not the seraphim say this, but Jehovah; for to them neither the name Jehovah, nor the work agree; and though there is but one Jehovah that here speaks, yet more persons than one are intended by him; of Christ, the Son of God no question can be made, since the Evangelist applies them to him; and observes, that

ε το ποιήσωμεν πλήθος εμφαίνοντος, De Confus. Ling. 344 345• Ficin. Vid. Parmenidem, p. 1111, 1112, 1117, 1120, 1122.

In Philebo, p. 372, 373·

Ed.

« AnteriorContinuar »