' Ps xlviii. 14, ix. 6, 7, etc.
TESTIMONIES TO THE DEITY OF CHRIST VINDICATED, 321
It appears, then, that we have here a description of Jesus Christ, and of him only, and that the names here ascribed to him are pro- per to him, and declare who he was and is, even " The mighty God, The Prince of Peace," etc. Let us proceed with our catechists.
In the next place they heap up sundry places, which they return slight answers unto ; and yet to provide them in such manner as that they might be the easier dealt withal, they cut off parcels and expres- sions in the middle of sentences, and from the context, from whence the greatest evidence, as to the testimony they give in this matter, doth arise. I shall consider them apai-t as they are proposed : —
Christ is called the Word of God, John i. 1, Rev. xix. 13. They say,—
From hence, that Christ is called " The Word of God," a divine nature in Christ cannot be proved, yea, the contrary may be gathered; for seeing he is the Word of the one God, it is apparent that he is not that one God, But Jesus is therefore called the Word of God, because he expounds to us the whole will of God, as John there declares a little after, John i. 18 : as he is also in the same sense said to be life and truth.*
1. Christ is the Word of God. The Word, or 6 Aoyog, is either -rrpo- (popixog, or the word which outwardly is spoken of God ; or hdidhrog, his eternal, essential Word or Wisdom, Let our catechists prove another acceptation of the word in any place. That Christ is not the word spoken by God they will grant ; for he was a f)erson, that revealed to us the Avord of God, He is, then, God's eternal Word or Wisdom ; and so, consequently, God, 2. Christ is so called the Word of God, John i. 1, as that he is in the same place said to be God. And our adversaries are indeed too impudent, whereas they say, " If he be the Word of the one God, he cannot be th9,t one God," the Holy Ghost affirming the flat contrary, namely, that he was " The Word, and was with God, and was God ;" that is, doubtless, the one true God, verses 1-3. He was " with God " in his person as the Son; and he "was God" as to his nature. 3. Christ is not called the Word, John i. 1, upon the account of his actual revealing the word of God to us in his own person on the earth (which he did, verse 18), because he is called so in his everlasting residence with the Father before the world was, verse 1 ; nor is he so called on that account, Pev. xix. 13, it being applied to him in reference to the work of executing judgment on his enemies as a king, and not to his revealing the word of God as a prophet. So that notwithstanding this exception, this name of the " Word of God," applied to Christ,
> " Ex eo quod Verbum Dei sit Christus doceri divina in Christo natura non potest, imo adversum potius colligitur, cum enim ipsius unius Dei Verbum sit, apparet eum non esse ipsum uuum Deum. Quod etiam ad singula hocc testimonia simul responderi potest. Verbum vcro, vel Scrmo Dei Jesus idee nuncupatur, quod omncm Dei volunta- tem nobis exposuerit, ut ibidem Johannes infcrius exposuit, Jolian. i. 18. Qucmadmo- dum ctiam eodcm sensu et vita et Veritas dicitur. '
VOL. XII. 21
822 VINDICIiE EVANGELIC J3.
as in the places mentioned, proves him to have a divine nature, and to be God, blessed for ever.
The next place is Col. i. 15, " Christ is the image of the invisible God." To which they say only, —
The same may be said of this as of that foregoing. '
But an image is either an essential image or accidental, — a re- presentation of a thing in the same substance with it, as a son is the image of his father, or a representation in some resemblance, like that of a picture. That Christ cannot be the latter is evident. Our catechists refer it to his office, not his person. But, — 1. It is the person of Christ that is described in that and the following verses, and not his office. 2. The title given to God, whose image he is, " The invisible God," will allow there be no image of him but what is invisible ; nor is there any reason of adding that epithet of God but to declare also the invisible spiritual nature of Christ, wherein he is like his Father. And the same is here intended with what is mentioned in the third place : —
Heb. i. 3, " He is the express image of his person."
This is to be understood that whatever God hath promised, he hath now really exhibited in Christ. ^
Well expounded ! Christ is the character of his Father's person; that is, what God promised he exhibited in Christ! Would not any man admire these men's acumen and readiness to interpret the Scrip- tures? The words are part of the description of the person of the Son of God, " He is the brightness of his Father's glory, and the ex- press image of his person, upholding all things by the word of his power;" that is, he reveals the will of God! This the apostle had expressly affii-med, verse 2, in plain and familiar terms ; that he should now repeat over the same thing again, in words so exceed- ingly insignificant of any such matter, is very strange. 2. The apostle speaks of the hypostasis of the Father, not of his will ; of his subsistence, not his mind to be revealed. We do not deny that Christ doth represent his Father to us, and is to us the " express image of his person;" but, antecedently hereunto, we say he is so in himself Grotius' corruption of this whole chapter was before dis- covered, and in part removed.