Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Sundry August Titles, Descriptive of Deity, Applied to the Son, Not, as Praxeas Would Have It, Only to the Father.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Chapter XVII.—Sundry
August Titles, Descriptive of Deity, Applied to the Son, Not, as
Praxeas Would Have It, Only to the Father.
They more readily supposed that the Father acted
in the Son’s name, than that the Son acted in the Father’s;
although the Lord says Himself, “I am come in my Father’s
name;”7979
and even to the
Father He declares, “I have manifested Thy name unto these
men;”7980
whilst the Scripture likewise says,
“Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the
Lord,”7981
that is to say, the
Son in the Father’s name. And as for the Father’s
names, God Almighty, the Most High, the Lord of hosts, the King of
Israel, the “One that is,” we say (for so much do the
Scriptures teach us) that they belonged suitably to the Son also, and
that the Son came under these designations, and has always acted in
them, and has thus manifested them in Himself to men. “All
things,” says He, “which the Father hath are
mine.”7982
Then why not His
names also? When, therefore, you read of Almighty God, and the Most
High, and the God of hosts, and the King of Israel, the “One that
is,” consider whether the Son also be not indicated by these
designations, who in His own right is God Almighty, in that He is the
Word of Almighty God, and has received power over all; is the Most
High, in that He is “exalted at the right hand of God,” as
Peter declares in the Acts;7983
is the Lord of
hosts, because all things are by the Father made subject to Him; is the
King of Israel because to Him has especially been committed the destiny
of that nation; and is likewise “the One that is,” because
there are many who are called Sons, but are not. As to the point
maintained by them, that the name of Christ belongs also to the Father,
they shall hear (what I have to say) in the proper place. Meanwhile,
let this be my immediate answer to the argument which they adduce from
the Revelation of John: “I am the Lord which is, and which was,
and which is to come, the Almighty;”7984
and from all other passages which in their opinion make the designation
of Almighty God unsuitable to the Son. As if, indeed, He which is to
come were not almighty; whereas even the Son of the Almighty is as
much almighty as the Son of God is God.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
