Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

difficulty presents itself; to what of Christ this description belongs; and what is the particular meaning of the expressions.

1. To what nature, or what of Christ this description belongs. I shall not examine in particular the reasons that are alleged for several interpretations; but only propose and confirm that sense of the place which on full and due consideration appears agreeable to the analogy of faith, as expressly answering the apostle's design. To this end the following positions are to be observed:

(1.) It is not the direct and immediate design of the apostle to treat absolutely of either nature of Christ, his Divine or human; but only of his person. Hence though some of the things mentioned may belong to or be the properties of his Divine nature and some of his human, yet neither of them is spoken of as such, but are all considered as belonging to his person, of which he treats professedly.

(2.) That which the apostle principally intends with respect to the person of Christ, is to set forth his dignity, pre-eminence, and exaltation above all; and that not only consequentially to his discharge of the office of mediator, but also antecedently, in his worth, ability, and suitableness to undertake and discharge it, which in a great measure depended on his Divine nature.

(3.) As none of these expressions, especially in their present connexion, are used concerning any other but Christ alone; so they plainly express things that are more sublime and glorious, than can by scripture rules or the analogy of faith, be ascribed to any mere creature however exalted. Unto God asking that question, "Whom will ye compare to me, and whom will you fiken unto me?" We cannot answer of any who is

not God by nature, that he is "the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person."

(4.) Though the design of the apostle in general be to shew how the Father declared himself to us in the Son; yet this could not be done without manifesting what the Son is in himself, and in reference to the Father. The words express him such an one, as in whom the infinite perfections and excellencies of God are revealed to us.

(5.) There is nothing in these words that is not applicable to the Divine nature of Christ. He is in his person distinct from the Father, another, not the Father; but yet the same in nature and all glorious properties and excellencies. This oneness in nature, and distinction in person, may be well shadowed out by these expressions, he is "the brightness of his glory and the express image of his person." The bold curiosity of the schoolmen and some others, in expressing the manner of the generation of the Son by similitudes, is intolerable. Nor are the rigid impositions of those words and terms, which they or others have invented to express this profound mystery, of any better nature. Yet I confess, that supposing with some, the apostle intends by "the brightness of glory," to set forth to us the relation of the Son to the Father, by an allusion to the sun and its beams, some relief may thence be derived to our weak understandings, in the contemplation of this mystery; provided we observe that one known rule whose use Chrysostom urgeth in this place, namely, "That in the use of such allusions, every thing of imperfection is to be removed in their application to God." To say that there is only an allusion in the words, and that the Son is not properly, but by a metaphor, "the brightness of glory," is to teach the apostle to express himself in the things of God. For

my part, I understand as much of the nature, glory, and properties of the Son by this expression, "He is the brightness of glory," as I do by any of the most accurate expressions which have been arbitrarily invented to signify the same thing. This, and this alone, is clearly intended by them: that he is one distinct from God the Father, related unto him, and partaker of his glory.

(6.) These things being promised, we may discern the general import of the expressions. The words themselves being no where else used in scripture, we may receive some light from those in other places which are nearest allied to them. Such are these and the like: "We have seen his glory, the glory of the only Son of God," John i, 14; "He is the image of the invisible God," Col. i, 15; "The glory of God shines forth in him," 2 Cor. iv, 6. Now in these and the like places, the glory of the Divine nature is so intimated, as that we are directed to look to the glory of the absolutely invisible and incomprehensible God, in him incarnate. And this is the apostle's general meaning; the Son, in whom God speaks to us in the revelation of the gospel, doth in his own person so every way answer the excellencies and perfections of God the Father, that he is in him expressly represented to our faith and contemplation.

§3. 2. It remains then, that we consider the expressions severally, with the reasons why the apostle thus expresses the Divine glory of Jesus Christ.

(Ος ων απαυγασμα της δόξης) "Who being the brightness," light, lustre, majesty "of glory." The apostle, in my judgment, (which is humbly submitted to consideration) alludes to something that the people were instructed by, typically, under the Old Testament, with respect to this great mystery, the manifestation of the glory of God to them by the Son, the

VOL. IL

6

second person in the Trinity. The ark, which was the most signal representation of the presence of God amongst them, was called "his glory." So the wife of Phineas, upon the taking of the ark, affirmed, that the glory was departed, 1 Sam. iv, 22, "The glory is departed from Israel, for the ark of God is taken." And the psalmist, mentioning the same thing, calls it "his glory" absolutely; Psalm lxxviii, 61, "He gave his glory into the hand of his enemies," that is, the ark. Now, on the filling of the tabernacle with the signs of God's presence in cloud and fire, the Jews affirm, that there was a constant (exаvyeoμe, a Ken) or majestic, shining glory resting on the ark; which was the απαύγασμα της δόξης) the splendor of the glory of God in that typical representation of his presence; and this was to instruct them in the way and manner whereby God would dwell amongst them. The apostle, therefore, calling them from the types, by which they had been obscurely instructed in these mysteries, to the things themselves represented, acquaints them with what that typical glory and splendor signified; namely, the eternal glory of God, with the essential beaming and brightness of it in the Son, in and by whom the glory of the Father shineth forth to us.

§4. The apostle adds, that he is (xapanîup iτocîzOEWS avis) "the express figure or image of his person;" that is, of the person of God the Father. Hence observe, that,

The hypostasis of the Father, is the Father himself. Of him is the Son said to be the express image. As is the Father, so is the Son. And this agreement and likeness between the Father and the Son is essential; not accidental, as those things are between relations finite and corporeal. What the Father is, doth, hath; that the Son is, doth, hath; or else the Father, as the

Father, could not be fully satisfied in him, nor repre sented by him.

By character two things seem to be intended, First, that the Son in himself is (ev popOn Oes) "in the likeness of God," Phil. ii, 6. Secondly, that unto us he is (EX Oɛ8) "the image of God," representing him to us, Col. i, 6. For these words (poppy, εxwv, xapaninp) are used of the Lord Christ with respect to God the Father; and they seem to be thus distinguished by their use: (εν μορφή Θες υπαρχων) being or subsisting in the form of God, implies that he is essentially so; for there is no (pop) or form in the Deity, but what is essential. This he was absolutely, antecedently to his incarnation; the whole nature of God being in him, and consequently was in the form of God. In the manifestation of God to us, he is said to be (ɛináv tõ Oε пopalov, Col. i, 6) "the image of the invisible God," because in him, as partaker of the nature of the Father, do the power, goodness, holiness, grace, and all other glorious properties of God shine forth, 2 Cor. iv, 6; and both these seem to be comprised in this word (xapanlup) express image, both that the whole nature of God is in him, as also that by him God is declared and expressed to us. The ordinary engraving of rings, or seals, or stones, is generally thought to be alluded to. It may be also that the apostle had respect to some representation of the glory of God by engraving amongst the institutions of Moses. Now there was scarcely any thing of old that more gloriously represented God, than that of engraving his name on a plate of gold, to be worn on the front of the mitre of the high-priest, Exod. xxviii, 36, "Thou shalt make a plate of pure gold, and grave upon it, like the engraving of a signet, (p) "Holiness to Jehovah." Here was that

« AnteriorContinuar »