AN INQUIRY

INTO THE DOCTRINE OF THE ETERNAL

SONSHIP OF JESUS CHRIST.

CHAPTER I.

INTRODUCTION.

SECTION I.

STATEMENT OF THE QUESTION, WITH SUGGESTIONS ON ITS IMPORTANCE.

In the present inquiry, our Lord Jesus Christ will be contemplated as "perfect God, and perfect man: of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting; who, although he be God and man, is not two, but one Christ.”

In this mixed nature he is distinguished by various names and appellations; such as, "God,-Lord,-the Word, the Son of God,-the Son of man,-Christ,and Jesus." These may be ranged under two general heads. The one includes such as belong to his preexistent state; the other, such as apply to his complex person alone.

The divine titles of our Lord are independent of the economy of redemption, and, apart from all official relations and prerogatives, pertain to his eternal nature.

B

He is thus made known, either in his personal divinity, or in the relations which he sustains to the everblessed and adorable Trinity. Thus, in the one respect he is styled "Jehovah,-the great God;" in the other, "the Word of God;" and had he never condescended to our nature, these names and titles would have been perfectly appropriate.

For

His

The second class of appellations by which our Lord is distinguished originated in his incarnation, and describe him as Mediator, in his person, offices, or work. It is a common inaccuracy, and one which has led to much false reasoning, to confine them to his humanity. such a restriction we have no scriptural warrant. Deity may be contemplated apart from his human nature, because it existed from eternity in its pure and uncreated spirituality; but the humanity, except ex hypothesi, is not separable from the Deity. Hence the titles which originated in the economy of redemption, embrace both God and man in the one complex person.

The principal question for examination in the following pages is, To which of these two classes does the title of SON OF GOD belong? By some, it is supposed to have originated in the incarnation, and, in one respect or another, to be dependent upon the hypostatical union. By others, it is alleged to belong to the preexistent state of our Lord, and to be properly descriptive of pure Deity. In the one case, it is explained in a loose metaphorical sense; in the other, its assigned signification is strict and literal.

Upon the admission of the latter interpretation, the term suggests a natural and eternal relation. Where there is a Son truly divine, there must be an eternal Sonship. The subject is supposed to be more fully brought before us in the begetting of the first Person of the Trinity, and the being begotten of the second. But as these expressions are somewhat uncouth, the word

generation has been employed to indicate the act of begetting on the part of the one, and the state of being begotten in the subsistence of the other. The propriety of the phrases "eternal sonship" and "eternal generation," must depend upon the scriptural sense of the title "Son," and its equivalents; and this it is our object, if possible, to ascertain.

There exists almost as much difference of judgment upon the importance, as upon the truth, of this doctrine. Those theologians who take the affirmative view, generally regard it as of high moment. Of the advocates of the contrary opinion, some have gone so far on the other hand as to represent it as a subject of mere strife of words; a question rather belonging to the philologist than to the theologian. Its real value will hereafter be considered at large; yet, before we proceed further, it seems desirable to offer a few suggestions, which may tend to a due appreciation of the inquiry.*

We may venture at least to affirm, that the discussion in which we are about to engage is not one of mere

* In that religious community of which the writer has the privilege to be a member, a profession of faith in the eternal Sonship of Christ has of late years been demanded from candidates for the ministry. This requisition, though perfectly in harmony with the formulas which, from the beginning, have been maintained among us, has been the subject of considerable censure; ostensibly at least, on account of the trivial character of the doctrine. Upon no other ground, indeed, is this demand assailable; for it will not be questioned, that on all important subjects, the Ministers of any section of the Christian church are bound to secure unanimity in the public instructions of those whom they admit to a share of their labours. These suggestions therefore are not without practical interest; and to the writer of these pages, it would be a source of no common satisfaction, should any remarks, either here or at a more advanced stage of his undertaking, tend to confirm the confidence and affection of their flocks towards the venerable Pastors with whom this requisition originated, and by whom it is enforced.

philology. The terms by which our Lord Jesus Christ is distinguished are certainly designed to convey some distinct ideas. The several aspects under which he is presented to our contemplation account for the variety and number of his titles; and though they may vary in the degree of their importance, none can justly be accounted trivial. The loss of any one would leave us without an appellation by which to describe our Redeemer under some particular phasis of his character; and so far, the evangelical nomenclature would be incomplete. Whatever may be the meaning of the principal title involved in the present inquiry, that it has some meaning, that it is not a mere empty sound, is too apparent to be reasonably questioned.

Let the phrase "SON OF GOD" be seriously considered in its naked import, and it can hardly fail to impress us with a sense of grandeur and distinction. Man, in his highest state of glory, whether contemplated as coming directly from the hand of his Maker, or as redeemed, and renewed, and presented faultless before the throne of his Saviour with exceeding joy, can attain to no eminence beyond that which such an appellation involves. Angels, the most exalted of created intelligences, have no designation more honourable. And if, when applied to the creature, it transcends every other distinction, it is obvious that its application in a sense far higher, and one altogether unapproachable, must be worthy of our most profound and most reverent investigation. The mysteriousness of the person of Christ gives value and interest to the smallest measure of information respecting it which the word of God affords; and it can hardly be questioned, that the title under consideration is too eminent not to suggest some views which no other can supply. If we can succeed in bringing these into prominence, and in realizing a corresponding impression upon our minds and hearts,

such a result will amply reward a deliberate and thoughtful examination. An inquiry which has such a design, and such a tendency, will not, by any devout spirit, be deemed insignificant.

It is equally plain, that the title describes a RELATION, and that between persons no less august than Jesus the Messiah, and God the Father. If it have pleased God thus to reveal an eternal relation subsisting in the Deity, it is undoubtedly our duty to receive his communication with reverence and docility. To deny the existence of such a relation, or to affix to the term in which it is conveyed a meaning totally distinct from, and vastly inferior to, that which divine wisdom intended, is indisputably a serious error. If, on the other hand, the appellation in question belong to Christ's complex person only, and, by a figure of speech, describe merely an economical relation, or the mode of his human production, it is an error not less serious to assign to him in his pure Deity a character which he could not sustain without derogation from his dignity, or to interpret an exclusive title of the evangelical economy as descriptive of his eternal and inscrutable nature.

And as the appellation "Son" is not of unfrequent occurrence in the New Testament, the correct exposition of many passages must of course depend upon the accurate apprehension of its signification. Even a cursory reader will discern that such passages frequently possess peculiar interest, and are designed to convey vivid ideas of the infinite love of God, the exalted glory of our Redeemer, the special reasons for trust in the evangelical covenant, the aggravated guilt of those who reject the salvation of Christ, and topics of a like order. In many of these examples it will be perceived, that the colour of the argument is determined mainly by the sense assigned to the title in question; and though they can never be wholly divested of their interest, yet the