DISCOURSE I.

PART II.

T

HE three diftinct States belonging to Chrift Jefus, and mentioned in the Words of the Text, being fuppofed: The

firft, his State of Dignity, which he was in Poffeffion of before the Worlds began: The fecond, his State of Humiliation, when he took upon himself the Form of a Servant, being made in the Likeness of Men, which ended in his Death upon the Crofs: The third, his State of Exaltation, to which he was raifed by the Father, as the Reward of his Humility and Sufferings, and which shall continue till the Confummation of all Things: Let us now proceed,

Thirdly, To compare the feveral Parts of St. Paul's Argument together, and to examine, what the Apostle teaches us concerning each of these States.

As to the two laft of thefe States, that of Humiliation, and that of Exaltation, the Difficulties are not great. It will be readily allowed, that, in the firft of the two, he was very Man, fubject to the Infirmities of human Nature, and did really undergo the fhameful and bitter Death of the Cross: that, in the laft, he is Lord and Head over the Church, under God; that he now governs and directs it, and fhall, at the last Day, appear in the Majefty of his Father, to judge the whole World. Thus far the Generality of Chriftians are agreed, how widely foever they differ in their Opinions concerning his firft State, and the proper Glories and Dignities belonging to him before his coming into the World.

This State is defcribed in the first Verse of the Text; Who being in the Form of God. In order to fet forth the great Humility of Chrift in becoming Man, the Apostle first tells us from how great and glorious a State he defcended: He was in the Form of God. The following Words, as they ftand in our Tranflation,

Tranflation, go on to defcribe the Excellency of his Glory, which was fo real and tranfcendent a Glory, that he thought it no Robbery to be, i. e. he thought himself entitled to be, equal with God. But I shall not infift upon this Tranflation; for it is more: agreeable to the Apoftle's Argument, and to the Language made ufe of, to fuppofe him to intend, in thefe Words, to exprefs the first Degree or Inftance of his Humility; and that the Verse should be rendered by Words to this Effect; Who, being in the Form of God, was not fond, or tenacious of appearing as God; but made himself of no Reputation. I fhall not trouble you with the particular Reasons of this Rendering, which would lead us too far into critical Inquiries: But which Way foever of these two the Text be understood, the To εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ will be found to belong to Jefus Christ. If he thought it no Robbery to affume this Equality with God, (whatever is meant by it) undoubtedly he was equal: Or, if it was the Effect of his Humility, that he did not hold or infift upon his Equality with God, then certainly he had such an Equality; for where is the Humility of not infifting

C 4

fifting on, or not retaining an Equality, which never did, or could belong to him?

I find fome, in tranflating these Words, make use of Expreffions purposely chofen to exclude Chrift from the Dignity here mentioned; for thus they make the Apostle fpeak: Who, being in the Form of God, did not arrogate, affume, or lay claim to any Equality or Likenefs with God: But I think this Language bears no Analogy to the Words in the Original, nor can be made to agree with the Aim and Defign of the Apostle. The Expreffion in the Original: is metaphorical, and alludes to the Eagernefs and Tenacioufnefs with which Men catch, and retain the Prey, which they are afraid fhould flip out of their Hands: But I believe no Language knows what it is to arrogate, affume, or lay claim to a Prey: A Prey is to be caught, to be held faft; but not to be affumed, or arrogated, or laid. claim to. Befides, it is evidently St. Paul's Defign to fet forth the great Humility of Chrift Jefus: In order to this, he fays, he did not greedily retain his Equality with God; which, fuppofing the Equality to belong to him, is a very great, the greatest Inftance

I