Page images

which I had with thee before the world was." What then can be supposed wanting to complete the form of a covenants which we have not here?

XI. In fine, all these things may be confirmed from this, that Christ likewise made use of the Sacraments; not only as to the matter of these institutions, as they were divine commands, the observance of which was to him meritorious; but as to the form, as they were signs and seals of the covenant ; God the Father, by the use of them, sealed the federal promise concerning justification from sins, not his own personal sins, either of commission or omission, (for such he had none, & Cor. v. 21. 1 Pet. ii. 18.) but from those, which, by a voluntary engagement, he took upon himself as his own, and from which, as surety, he was justified in the Spirit, 1 Tim. i. 16; and also concerning life eternal, to be bestowed on him and his; God the Son, in the use of them, acknowledged himself a debtor to fulfil all righteousness: as these things have been already observed and explained by the celebrated Voetius, disput. de fide Christi, ejusque sacramentorum usu.

Disput. T. ii. p. 160. and Essenius, de subjectione Christi ad legem divinam, c. 10. § 11. But let us illustrate this by an example. In the baptism of Christ, there was an evident sealing of the covenant of both sides. Christ declared, that it was his province to fulfill all righteousness. To that he bound himself by baptism; telling John, upon his refusing to baptize bim, “ suffer it to be so now, for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness,” Matt. ii. 16. The Father declared, that he accepted the suretiship: “in thee I am well pleased," Luke f. 22. and put him in mind of the inheritance; “ thou art my

Son." And all these things he sealed by the symbol of the Holy Ghost descending upon him.

XII. As these things are evident, and contain a demonstration of the truth to the conscience, I would not have Psal. xvi. 2. strained to this purpose:

" thou hast said unto the Lord, thou art my Lord: you yo ya inayo my goodness (is not upon thee) extendeth not to thee.” As if in these words there was an address of God the Father to the Son, to this purpose : I require nothing more of thee as a satisfaction to me, in order to display my grace. For thus a learned author paraphrases these words. Thou hast said to the Lord, &c. Thou Son of man hast acknowledged, that Jehovah is the Lord, and hast engaged thy obedience to him. Thou by loving and obeying as a servant, even unto death (to which thou offerest thyself) hast declared me to be Lord, and honoured me with a perfect obedience. As to any advantage to be obtained, my


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

goodness, that is, my grace, and the benefits depending there-
on, extendeth not to thee, (is not upon thee) that is, thou art
Tdlenkimuévos, an absolute and perfect Saviour. What was laid
upon thee, or what thou wast bound by suretisbip to perform,
that my goodness might extend to mankind, that thou hast
performed, and I accept of the whole. Thus by generally de-
notes something new, both among the Hebrews, and in the
sacred writings.

XIII. But I think these things are strained, and do not
run with that smoothness one could wish. For, Ist. There
is nothing which obliges us to imagine, unless we incline šo
to do, that there is in these words, an address of God the
Father to the Son ; since the whole of this Psalm has not
the least appearance of a dialogue, but only represents a sin,
gle person speaking in one continued discourse, whom Pise
cator, by weighty arguments, proves to be the Lord Jesus.
The learned person himself speaks thus: “ It is certain this
discourse may be ascribed to the Son, as addressing himself."
And therefore I say it is certainly possible, that this discourse
cannot contain the approbation of the Father, acquiescing in
the obedience of the Son. For if the Son addresses his own
soul, which said to Jehovab, “ thou art my Lord, and my
goodness extendeth not to thee;" doubtless the Son said this
to the Father, and not the Father to the Son. 2dly, I own
that these words which the Son says to the Father, or the
Father to the Son, are so emphatical, that they cannot, in
their full signification, be supposed to be spoken by either of
them to the other, on account of the peculiar excellence which
is in the Son, Heb. i. 4. But I question whether any can be
easily persuaded that the approbation of the most perfect
obedience of the Son, and the acquiescence of the Father there-
in are expressed in such slender terms. Thou hast said, thors
art my Lord. I appeal to any who teaches the good know-
ledge of the Lord, as it is said of the Levites, % Chron.
XXX. 22. whether those words of scripture
nothing can be devised more proper to illustrate that sense
which the very learned person elsewhere requires, before he
acquiesces in the meaning assigned, Sum. Theol. c. S. § 30.
Sdly. It is very true, that yo sometimes, among the Hebrews,
signifies, something due. The very learned De Dieu, on Gen.
xvi. 5. has long ago observed this, from the writings of the
Hebrews and also of the Arabs. But that signification does
not seem proper to this place. For Christ was neither in

debted to God for his goodness or grace, and the blessings
depending upon it: Nor did he properly owe the grace of

such as that

[ocr errors][merged small]

God to believers. But it was by virtue of a compact that he owed obedience to God; on performing which, God owed to Christ, and to them who are Christ's, the reward promised by the compact, which is given to Christ as a due debt. The signification of being due might be insisted upon, had it been said my law, or satisfaction to my justice, or something to that purpose, is no more upon thee, no longer' extendeih to thee. But we must fetch a strange compass to make these words, my goodness extendeth not to thee (is not upon thee) to signify, Thou art no longer indebted to my goodness, and again, that the meaning of them should be, Thou hast done every thing to which thou wast bound, that my goodness might be extended to men. And I verily doubt whether it could ever come into any one's mind, that,“ such an explication is the fullest, the most simple, and most suited to the connexion : In fine, that it is such, that none who compares it with the words of scripture can devise a more happy manner of expressing the thing; and that therein an inexpressible degree of light, truth, and wisdom, may be discovered." For these are laws of interpretation which the very learned person

hin. self has laid down. Sum. Theol. c. 6. § 38.

XIV. 4thly. Another sense may be fairly brought from the words of the Psalm, which has nothing either harsh or strained, and contains what is becoming the wisdom of God, as thus: the Lord Jesus being deeply engaged in holy meditations, addresses bis soul, or himself: and declares, that while in bis meditation he said to Jehovah the Father, thou art the Lord, all-sufficient to and by thyself for all happiness ; and therefore by this whole work of my Mediation, and consequently by all my obedience, no accession of new or greater happiness is made to thee, nor canst thou be enriched by my satisfaction ; my goodness extendeth not to thee : Thou receivest no benefit thereby : all the fruit of my satisfaction redounds to thy pious and chosen people. · See Job xxii. 2. and xxv. 7. The comment of Ben Nachman on the former place is elegant, agreeing very much with the phraseology in our text; he declares, “ That no addition of good is made to God, when any good is done." All which words contain a salutary truth, instructing us correrning the all-sufficiency of God, whom no new good can accrue from any quarter, and concerning the fruit of Christ's satisfaction, as redounding to the godly: and are most adapted to the words and analogy of the whole Psalm. For sy many times in scripture signities the same as 5x, to. I shall produce a place or two which occurred to me when meditating on these things in reading the scriptures : what Micah says, chap. iv. 1. DO 155 1973, and people shall flow unto it: Tois Isaiah expresses as follows, chap. ii. 2. dyan sa 199x170), and all nation's shall flow unto it.

Where by and 5are taken in the same signification. In like manner, 2 Chron. xxx. 1. Wrote leto ters, ond by, that is, to the Ephraimites ; it is still more to the purpose, what we have, 1 Sam. chap. i. 10. prayed unto the Lord, and Psal. xvii. 41. They cried unto the Lord, but he answered them not. Sometimes it signifies the same thing as ty up to, or quite to, as 2 Chron. xxxü. 5. and raised (the wall) up to the towers: not that it is credi. ble the wall exceeded the towers in height. Jer. iv. 18. it reacheth unto thine heart. You may add other instances from Glassius Phil. Sacr. p. 773. As therefore the use of this particle is very extensive, we have no reason to restrain its signification to owing or being due, which seems less adapted to this place.

XV. I speak not these things with a view to detract any thing from the due praises of the very learued interpreter, to whom I profess myself greatly indebted, but because nothing is dearer to me than to search out the true meaning of the Spirit speaking in the scriptures. And while I am wholly intent upon this, I cannot avoid sometimes examining the opinions of others; even of those for whom I have otherwise the greatest veneration. Faith is none of those things which may be imposed by any human authority: neither is any injury done even to the greatest of men, when we darlare our dissent in a modest manner: whether we have done so here or not, must be left to the determination of the impartial reader, who may also judge whether by these observations, I have deserved that severe language which the very famous person Dr. John van der Waeyen, was pleased to throw out against me in Sum. Theol. Christ. lib. i. c. 4, 5. 267. Seq. He very much complains that I called that explication of the celebrated Cocceius harsh and forced, and that the words of the Psalm were wrested to that meaning. I own indeed, I had formerly wrote in this manner out of my simplicity, inor did I imagine there was either reproach or injury contained. in these words: But there is no force of argument in the tartness of language : and that the least appearance of that may not remain, I now alter it, and instead of wrested,

say harsh, not running so smoothly. The rest I cancel. I freely forgive the ill language of my Reprover, as becomes a Chris tian. It does not belong to him, but to our common Lord, to pass a judgment on my intention. As to the subject itself,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

I beseech the reader to compare my reasonings with his; and if he thinks that mine are solidly confuted, I am not against his differing in every respect from me as I differ from him ; and the simple explication of the words which I maintain, with the generality of expositors, began the more to please me, the more I saw my reprover stand in need for the defence of his opinion of such a compass of words, and so farfetched and intricate subtleties : I have no inclination minutely to consider the rest. Each one has his own temper, his own way of writing: which is I cannot commend, I endeavour to bear with. But I return from this unwilling digression.

XVI. As the doctrine of the covenant between the Father and the Son is so expressly delivered in scripture, it is upjustly traduced as a new and a late invention. Though I find few among the more ancient who have professedly bandled this subject, yet some of the greatest divines have sometimes made mention of this covenant. I say nothing now of Armi. nius, who does not carelessly discourse on this covenant, in his oration for the degree of doctor; from wbich the very accurate Amesius produces and commends some things in Rescriptione ad Grevinchovium, c. i. Amesius himself, in Anti-Synodalibus, de morte Christi, c. 1. $ 5. charges a certain distinction of the Remonstrants with this absurdity, that “ it denies that the covenant entered into with Christ (lie shall see his seed, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand,) had been ratified." Gomarus, treating of the baptism of Christ, on Matt. Üz 13. says, that it was the “sign and seal of the covenant between God and Christ; namely, that God would be bis God, and the bestower of salvation; but he himself was bound to perform obedience from a principle of perpetual gratitude.". In like manner, on Luke ü. 21. of the circumcision of Christ, he says, that it

a sign and seal of the covenant with God : which covenant consisted in this; partly that God was the God of Christ, according to the general promise, made also to him, Gen. xvi. 7. as to the seed of Abraham, Gal. i. 16. and according to the singular character given of him, Psal. xlv. 7. Heb. i. 9. partly, that Christ was bound to obey the will of God," Johd vi. 38. Matt. v. 17. See his disput. de merito Cbristi, § 1. The very learned Cloppenburgius, disput. 8. de fædere Dei, not only slightly mentions this subject, but fully and accurately handles it. The very famous Voetius, Dis

“ He (Christ) was subject for us to a special law of paying our debt by a condign punishment, as



[ocr errors]

P. 266.


put. T. Ü.

« PreviousContinue »