Q. How dost thou understand this place?

'A. On this manner; that Christ, who in the world did the works of God, to whom all yielded cbedience, as to God, and to whom divine adoration was given, God so willing, and the salvation of men requiring it, was made as a servant, and a vassal, and as one of the vulgar, when he had of his own accord permitted himself to be taken, bound, beaten, and slain.' Thus they.

Now because it is most certain, and evident to every one that ever considered this text, and according to their old trade and craft, they have mangled it, and taken it in pieces, at least cut off the head and legs of this witness, we must seek out the other parts of it, and lay it together, before we may proceed to remove this heap out of our way. Our argument from this place, is not solely from hence, that he is said to be in the form of God;' but also that he was so in the form of God, as to be equal to him, as is here expressed; nor merely that he took upon him the form of a servant, but that he took it upon him, when he was made in the likeness of man, or 'in the likeness of sinful flesh,' as the apostle expresses it; Rom. viii. 3. Now these things our catechists thought good to take no notice of, in this place, nor of one of them any more in any other. But seeing the very head of our argument lies in this, that in the form of God, he is said to be 'equal to God,' and that expression is in another place taken notice of by them, I must needs gather it into its own contexture before I do proceed. Thus then they,

'Q. How dost thou answer to those places, where Christ is said to be equal to God? John v. 18. Phil. ii. 6.

A. That Christ is equal to God, doth no way prove that there is in him a divine nature. Yea, the contrary is gathered from hence. For if Christ be equal to God, who is God by nature, it follows, that he cannot be the same God. But the

e Qua ratione locum hunc totum intelligis ?-Ad eum modum, quod Christus, qui in mundo instar Dei, opera Dei efficiebat, et cui, sicut Deo, omnia parebat, et cui divina adoratio exhibebatur, ita volente Deo, et hominum salute exigente, factus est tanquam servus, et mancipium, et tanquam unus ex aliis vulgaribus hominibus cum ultro se capi, vinciri, cædi, et occidi permiserat.

d Qui porro ad ea loca respondes ?- Quod Christus sit æqualis Deo, id divinam in eo naturam nullo modo probat, imo hinc res advera colligitur. Nam si Christus Deo, qui natura deus est, æqualis est, efficitur, quod is idem Deus esse non possit. Aqualitas vero Christi cum Deo in eo est, quod ea virtute, quam in eum contulit Deus, ea omnia efficeret, et efficiat, quæ ipsius Dei sunt, tanquam Deus ipse.

equality of Christ with God lies herein, that by that virtue that God bestowed on him, he did, and doth all these things, which are God's, as God himself."

This being the whole of what they tender, to extricate themselves from the chains which this witness casts upon them, now lying before us, I shall propose our argument from the words, and proceed to the vindication of it in order.

The intendment and design of the apostle in this place being evidently to exhort believers to self-denial, mutual love, and condescension one to another, he proposes to them the example of Jesus Christ, and lets them know, that he being in the form of God,' and 'equal to God' therein (váρxwv, existing in that form, having both the nature and glory of God), did yet in his love to us, 'make himself of no reputation,' or lay aside, and eclipse his glory, in this, that he took upon him the form of a servant,' being made man, that in that form and nature, he might be obedient unto death, for us, and in our behalf: hence we thus plead.

1. He that was in the form of God,' and ' equal to God," existing therein, and took on him the nature and form of a servant, he is God by nature, and was incarnate, or made flesh, in the sense before spoken of. Now all this is affirmed of Jesus Christ: ergo.

1. To this they say, that we may consider that first, which is first in the text, that his being equal to God, doth not prove him to be God by nature: but the contrary, &c. as above. But 1. If none is, nor can, by the testimony of God himself, be like God, or equal to him, who is not God by nature; then he that is equal to him, is so: but, 'to whom will ye liken me, or shall I be equal? saith the Holy One. Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things;' Isa. xl. 25,26. None that hath not created all things of nothing, can be equal to him. And to whom will ye liken me, and make me equal, and compare me, that we may be like;' chap. xlvi. 5. 2. Between that which is finite and that which is infinite, that which is eternal, and that which is temporal, the creature and the Creator, God by nature, and him, who by nature is not God, it is utterly impossible there should be any equality. 3. God having so often ayouched his infinite

distance from all creatures, his refusal to give his glory to any of them, his inequality with them all, it must have been the highest robbery, that ever any could be guilty of, for Christ to make himself equal to God, if he were not God. 4. The apostle's argument arises from hence, that he was equal to God, before he took on him the form of a servant, which was before his working of those mighty works, wherein these gentlemen assert him to be equal to God.

2. Themselves cannot but know the ridiculousness of their begging the thing in question, when they would argue, that because he was equal to God, he was not God: he was the same God in nature and essence, and therein equal to him, to whom he was in subordination, as the Son; and in office a servant, as undertaking the work of mediation.

3. The case being as by them stated, there was no equality between Christ and God, in the works he wrought. For, 1. God doth the works in his own name and authority, Christ in God's. 2. God doth them by his own power, Christ by God's. 3. God doth them himself, Christ not, but God in him, as another from him. 4. He doth not do them as God, however that expression be taken; for according to these men, he wrought them neither in his own name, nor by his own power, nor for his own glory, all which he must do, who doth things as God.

2. He is said to be equal to God,' not as he did such and such works, but as έv μoppé dɛov vπáρxwv, being in the form of God antecedently to the taking in hand of that form, wherein he wrought the works intimated..

3. To work great works, by the power of God, argues no equality with him; or else all the prophets and apostles that wrought miracles, were also equal to God. The infinite inequality of nature, between the Creator and the most glorious creature, will not allow that it be said on any account to be equal to him. Nor is it said, that Christ was equal to God in respect of the works he did, but absolutely, he thought it no robbery to be equal to God.' And so is their last plea to the first part of our argument accounted for: come we to what they begin withal.

1. We contend not (as hath been often said) about words. and expressions. That the divine nature assumed the human, we thus far abide by, that the Word, the Son of God,

took to himself, into personal subsistence with him, a human nature, whence they are both one person, one Christ: and this is here punctually affirmed, viz. he that was, and is God, took upon him the form of a man. 2. The apostle doth not say, that Christ made that form of no reputation, or Christ Kévwoɛ that form, but Christ being in that form ¿KÉνWσE ÉανTÒv, 'made himself of no reputation;' nor by any real change of his divine nature, but taking to himself the human, wherein he was of no reputation. It being he that was so, in the nature and by the dispensation wherein he was so; and it being not possible, that the divine nature of itself, in itself, should be humbled, yet he was humbled, who was in the form of God, though the form of God was not.

3. It is from his being equal with God,' in the 'form of God,' whereby we prove, that his being in the form of God doth denote his divine nature: but of this our catechists had no mind to take notice.

2. The form of a servant,' is that which he took, when he was made ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων; as Adam begat a son in his own likeness. Now this was not only in condition a servant, but in reality a man. 2. The form of a servant was that wherein he underwent death, the death of the cross; but, he died as a man, and not only in the appearance of a servant. 3. The very phrase of expression manifests the human nature of Christ to be denoted hereby: only as the apostle had not before said directly that he was God, but in the form of God,' expressing both his nature, and his glory, so here he doth not say he was a man, but in the form of a servant, expressing both his nature and his condition, wherein he was the servant of the Father. Of him it is said ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπαρχῶν, but μορφὴν δούλου λαβὼν: he was in the other, but this he took. 4. To be a servant denotes the state or condition of a man: but for one who was in the form of God' and 'equal to him,' to be made in the 'form of a servant,' and to be found as a man,' and to be in that form put to death, denotes in the first place, a taking of that nature, wherein alone he could be a servant. And this answers also to other expressions, of the Word being made flesh,' and 'God sending forth his own Son made of a woman.' 5. This is manifest from the expression, ἐν σχήματι εὐρηθεὶς ὡς ἂνθρωπος ‘He was found in fashion as a man that is, he was truly so; which is exegetical of

what was spoken before he took on him the form of a servant.'

But they say this is of no importance; for the same is said of Sampson, Judg. xvi. 7. 11. and of others; Psal. lxxxii. who yet we do not say were incarnate.'

These gentlemen are still like themselves. Of Christ it is said, that he humbled himself, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was found in likeness as a man of Sampson, that being stronger than a hundred men, if he were dealt so and so withal, he would become as other men; for so the words expressly are: no stronger than another man; and these places are parallel: much good may these parallels do your catechumens. And so of those in the Psalm, that though in this world they are high in power for a season, yet they should die as other men do. Hence, in a way of triumph and merriment, they ask, if these were incarnate, and answer themselves, that surely we will not say so. True, he who being as strong as many becomes by any means to be as one, and they who live in power, but die in weakness, as other men do, are not said to be incarnate: but he who being God, took on him the form of a servant, and was in this world a very man,' may (by our new masters' leave), be said to be so.

For the sense which they give us of this place (for they are bold to venture at it), it hath been in part spoken to already. Christ was in the world, as to outward appearance, no way instar Dei, but rather as he says of himself, instar vermis. That he did the works of God, and was worshipped as God, was because he was God; nor could any but God, either do the one, as he did them, or admit of the other. 2. This is the exposition given us; 'Christ was in the form of God, counting it no robbery to be equal to him, that is, whilst he was here in the world in the form of a servant, he did the works of God and was worshipped.' 3. Christ was in the form of a servant from his first coming into the world, and as one of the people. Therefore he was not made so by any thing afterward: his being bound, and beat, and killed, is not his being made a servant; for that by the apostle is afterward expressed, when he tells us why, or for what end, not how, or wherein he was made a servant; viz. He became obedient to death, the death of the cross.'