more directly defigned to convey to those who heard them, and in what Sense the People generally could and did understand this Name.

'Tis evident from feveral Expreffions of Chrift, that he well knew that his own Words fometimes carried in them a much nobler and fublimer Signification, than barely that which he defigned to convey to the Jews, or even to his own Disciples at that Time: As when he fays to the Jews, Before Abraham was I am, John 8. 58. And fo when he fays to his Difciples, John 14. 10. I am in the Father, and the Father in me, they could not know that glorious and fublime Relation of Chrift to the Father, and his intimate Oneness with the Father, which he himself was perfectly acquainted with.

My chief Bufinefs in this Difcourfe therefore is only to fhow what is the true Idea or Meaning of the Word Son of God, which our Saviour or the facred Writers defigned to convey to their Difciples thro' all Ages and Nations by this Name, and in which 'tis poffible their Hearers could understand them, or we who read the fame Words.

And in order to find this Sense of it, let us confider thofe Texts of Scripture wherein the Belief of Chrift to be the Son of God is made the great Requifite in order to Salvation, and a neceffary Ingredient of Christianity. For in thefe places of Scripture, thefe two Confiderations will offer themfelves, (1.) That

the Sense of these Words must be plain, familiar, and easy to be understood; otherwife it could not be made a neceffary Article, or a Fundamental of the Chriftian Faith. It must have alfo (2dly) fome apparent Connexion with and Influence into our Salvation, otherwise the Belief of it would not have been made fo grand a Requifite in order to be faved; for it is fcarce to be imagined that the bleffed God would appoint any mere arbitrary and unoperative Speculations to be the Terms of our enjoying his favour. Now, both these Confiderations will give us fome Affiftance toward our finding out the true Senfe of this Title.

The Texts of Scripture, wherein a Belief of Jefus to be the Son of God seems to be made the great neceffary Term of our Salvation, are fuch as these. John 3. 18. He that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the Name of the only begotten Son of God. John 20. 31. Thefe things are written, that ye might believe that Jefus is the Chrift, the Son of God, and that believing ye might have Life through his Name. 1 John 5. 13. Thefe things have I written to you that believe on the Name of the Son of God, that ye may know that ye have eternal Life, and that ye may believe on the Name of the Son of God. 1 John 4. 15. Whosoever shall confess that Jefus is the Son of God, God dwel

B 2

dwelleth in him. 1 John 2. 23. Whosoever denieth the Son, the fame hath not the Father. Acts 8. 37. And Philip faid to the Eunuch, if thou believeft with all thy Heart, thou mayft be baptized; and he anfwered and fatd, I believe that Jefus Chrift is the Son of God: and he baptized him.

Now if believing or not believing Chrift to be the Son of God has Salvation and Damnation annexed to it by the facred Writers, then furely 'tis of confiderable Importance to know what this Name means, that we may not include too little in it, and by leaving out fome important Part, expose ourselves to that Anathema; nor include too much in it, and so be tempted to lay our weaker Neighbours under the like Condemnation for want of fufficient Knowledge.

But bleffed be God, fince it is a Name of fuch Importance, he has not confined this Name precisely to one fingle, narrow, abftrufe and difficult Idea, but has affixed it to feveral Ideas in Scripture, that so if we receive it in the most important Senfes, we may be secured from the fcriptural Condemnation, tho' we should not happen to understand and receive it in all the fublime Senfes which may be applied to it.

Let it be noted alfo, that perhaps the various Imaginations and Reasonings of Men may have affixed more Senfes to this Phrafe than Scripture

Scripture has ever done: Yet, in order to give this Enquiry a fuller Confideration, we will furvey the feveral Senfes which have been ufually put upon it; and this fhall be the first Argument which I fhall use toward the Proof of the true Signification of this Name in the New Teftament, i. e. by way of a disjunctive Syllogifm, propofing feveral and excluding fome of them.

SECT. I. The first Argument toward the Proof of the Senfe of this Name, Son

of God.

THIS Name, Son of God, hath been fuppofed to be given to our Lord Jefus Chrift upon fome or all of thefe five accounts. (1.) Because of an eternal and unconceivable Generation by the Perfon of the Father in the Sameness of the Divine Effence. (2.) Becaufe of the glorious Derivation of his human Soul from God before the Creation of this World. (3.) Because of his Incarnation or coming into this World by an extraordinary Conception, and Birth of a Virgin without an earthly Father, by the immediate Operation of God. (4.) Because of his Refurrection from the Dead, and high Exaltation. (5.) In order to point out that glorious Perfon who had in general fome fublime and fingular Relation to God, and who alfo was to fuftain the ChaB 3 racter

racter and Office of the Meffiah, the Saviour of the World.

1. The first of these Senfes is patronized by many Writers, viz. That an eternal unconceiveable Generation of the Perfon of the Son by the Perfon of the Father in the Sameness of the Divine Effence, confubftantial, coequal and coeternal with the Father, is included in the Name SON OF GOD.

But I am perfuaded this can never be the Senfe of this Name in thofe feveral Texts before cited: They can never fignify, that it is neceffary to Salvation to believe Chrift to be the eternal Son of God as a diftinct Perfon in the fame Divine Effence, proceeding from the Father by fuch an eternal and incomprehenfible Generation. For,

1. If this be never so true, yet it is confeft to be unconceiveable. Now, if it be so very unconceivcable, fo myfterious and sublime a Doctrine, then I do not think the gracious God would put fuch a difficult Teft upon the Faith of young Difciples, poor illiterate Men and Women, in the very Beginning of the Gospel, and exclude them from Heaven for not believing it,

2. Nor indeed is this eternal Generation and confubftantial Sonship clearly enough revealed in Scripture for us to make it a fundamental Article in any Age, and to damn all who don't receive it. I cannot fee Evidence enough in the Word of God to make

the