GOD in unity with the Father. He can do nothing of himself, but what he feeth the Father do. The Greek here is more expreffive than our English tranflation : Ου δύναται ὁ ὑιος ποιειν αφ' ἑαυτου ουδέν εαν μη τι βλέπει τον πατερα ποιοιντα & γαρ αν εκείνος ποιει ταυτα και ὁ ὑιος ὁμοίως ποιεί, "The Son can do no

66

thing of himself, but what he feeth the Father "DOING." So that the Son is a concurrent action with the Father, and at the fame inftant; for, whatfoever the Father doeth, the fame alfo doeth the Son, μows, in the very fame degree, in the fame inftant, and with the fame divine power. Therefore JESUS did not fet himself up to be a feparate GoD, or of a diftinct fubftance or power from the Father, but, in unity, and co-operating, with him; and,. of course, when he said, My Father worketh hi"therto, and I work," he faid nothing which impugned the doctrine of the Unity of GoD. Our LORD, then, proceeds to fhew them, that, as the Son can do nothing without the Father, fo the Father doth nothing without the Son: "For, the Fa"ther loveth the Son, and fheweth (or communi"cateth to) him all things whatsoever he himself

66

doth, and he will communicate to him greater "works than those, (which ye have already feen,) "that ye may wonder;" which communication of action is most evidently an affertion of the unity of the Son with the Father. And, as there is a communication of action, fo is there a communication For, as the Father raifeth up the dead

of power:

" and

and quickeneth them, fo alfo the Son, ous Shel ZwOTO, quickeneth whom he will." There is alfo a communion of agreement and accord between the Father and the Son: hence, because the Son of GOD' is the Son of Man: (ver: 27.) therefore, "the Fa"ther judgeth no one; but hath given, dedans, all "judgement to the Son." There is an equal participation alfo of Divine honours'; for, it is added, "that all men may honour the Son even as they ho-" "nour the Father," &c. "He that honoureth not"the Son honoureth not the Father who fent him :" fo that the honour, reverence, eftimation, of the one all terminates equally in the other; and, if the Son is difhonoured, the Father is difhonoured like-. wife. It is farther added by our LORD, for the purpose of convincing the Jews, that he did not affumeto himself any feparate Divinity, and that he did not, in any refpect, oppofe himfelf to the unity of GOD.

"As the Father hath life in himfelf, fo hath "he given to the Son to have life in himself:" fo that the self-existence of the Son is by the communication of the felf-exiftence of the Father; is not the self-existence of a God feparate from the felf-existence of the Father; but, is an infeparable participation of it. And, ftill more to convince them that he did not arrogate to himself an exclufive Divinity, or any thing that was oppofite to the unity of GOD, he again fays to them, Cu dirapai syw at εμα του τσοιειν ουδεν, wherein the perfonal pronoun eye has a force which will not eafily be expreffed in

εγω

our language, plainly implying, that in his perfonal existence he could do nothing, but in the union of the Deity. "As I hear (he fays) I judge, and my judgement is juft; because, I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father that fent me:" so that hereby he fully obviates the objection of the Jews, and difclaims, in the ftrongest terms, all afsumption to himself of any power distinct from the unity of GOD. Therefore, when JESUS afferted his own Divinity, he afferted nothing that was inconfiftent with the Divine unity.

It may be proper here juft to mention the objection to our LORD's Divinity which is derived from the words fending and being fent; but this objection feems to be merely a quibble upon words: for, according to the circumftances, fending, or being fent, imply no degree either of fuperiority or inferiority. It is the Arians' acknowledgement, when they deny the unity of the substance, still that there is an unity of confent between the Father and the Son. This unity, therefore, of confent plainly juftifies us in our conclufion, that the being sent implies in it none of that inferiority or inequality which they have contended for, and, confequently, that the objection itself is of no validity. But let us proceed.

"All that the Father giveth me fhall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wife "caft out." John vi. 37. These are very remarka

ble

ble words, and must have been spoken with the greatest impropriety imaginable, if he that fpake them had not an inherent power, as GOD, to caft out whom he would; but he would not caft out any whom the Father fhould give him, because, as he adds, "I came down from heaven, not to do mine "own will, but the will of him that fent me." Language here almoft seems to fail us, when we would convey in words what the mind conceives upon this occafion. There feems to have been, with reverence be it spoken, as it were, a voluntary suspension of the Divine will of the Aoyos when he came down from heaven; for, his coming down from heaven is evidently represented as a voluntary action of his own, καταβέβηκα εκ του ουρανου; and the purpofe of his coming down as evidently feems to have proceeded from his voluntary confenting not to do his own will, but the will of him under whofe commiffion he confented to act; and, if it may be permitted to the frail minds of human creatures to fearch

into the deep things of GoD, perhaps the reafon of this quiefcence of his own Divine will, may be perceived in that union of himself with man's nature, in which he was to act, and in which he could not act but in fubmiffion to the will of him that fent him; and, therefore, it might be necessary that his own divine will should be quiefcent. These thoughts probably will lead us to a right apprehenfion of the fublime and almoft unfathomable language of St. Paul in his Epiftle to the Corinthians, (1 Cor. xv.)

He had been fpeaking of the Son, CHRIST, the Osaros, who was to reign till all was made fubject to him; and then fays he, (ver. 28,) "When "all things fhall be fubdued unto him, then fhall "the Son alfo himfelf be fubject unto him that put "all things under him, that God may be all in all." That is, the difpenfation of the Otav9pwTos fhall be all complete and finifhed, ἵνα ἡ ὁ Θεος τα παντα εν was, that the Godhead may be the whole in every respect.

C

Here, then, for a moment I must pause.-The great and aweful fubject we are upon requires the utmost exertion and attention, left any thing fhould be faid derogatory from its magnitude, left any thing - merely conjectural, or not fufficiently founded, fhould be fuggefted as truth. But the declaration of St. Paul, added to what St. John fays concerning the Aoyos, feems to open to us a new view of things, in which I think many difficulties will be removed, if what occurs to me may be admitted.

St. Paul's declaration is, that when all things fhall be fubdued unto him, then alfo fhall the Son himfelf be fubject unto him that put all things under him. Then fhall the difpenfation of the save gwπos be terminated, and the union of the Aoyos with man's nature cease; then shall the Son bimfelf be subject.

The