Thursday, September 16, 2021

Thomas Emlyn (1663-1741) on 1 Corinthians 15:22-28, Hebrews 1:8-9 and Christ (after the resurrection) having a Superior God Above Him

  

For as in Adam all die, so also in 1Christ all shall be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ's at His coming, then comes the end, when He delivers up the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished call rule and all authority and power. For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be abolished is death. For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, "All things are put in subjection," it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. And when all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, that God may be all in all. (1 Cor 15:22-28 NASB)

 

But of the Son He says, "Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever, And the righteous scepter is the scepter of His kingdom. "Thou hast loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Thy God, hath anointed Thee With the oil of gladness above Thy companions." (Heb 1:8-9 NASB)

 

After quoting 1 Cor 15:22-28 (cf. Psa 110:1) Thomas Emlyn noted the following about the Christological implications of this pericope and Heb 1:8-9 (i.e., the ascended, exalted Jesus has a God above/superior to Him):

 

Thus it appears that Christ is “God” insofar as he is under a superior god, who has set him over all. This fits with the scriptural explication of the deity of the blessed Jesus—that he is invested with a God-like authority and power from the supreme God his Father. Thus, when he was accused by the fault-finding Jews of assuming the title “the Son of God” (which they would perversely stretch, as though it implied an equality with God) he explains in what sense he justified it, namely “as one whom the Father has sanctified,” i.e. called to a great office, and honored with a higher commission than those magistrates, on whom the Scripture so freely bestows the title of “gods” (John 10:35-36), it is explained in what sense or what sort of “God” he is (Hebrews 1:8-9). It is to be understood that by saying his god (implying that he had a god over him) had “anointed him with oil,” etc., that is, had invested him with royal power and dignity (as kings were installed in their office among the Jews by anointing with oil) which is an explication of his deity or dominion. And he is said to be “above his fellows,” not, to be sure, above the Father and Holy Spirit (which are supposed by those who understand Jesus’ deity to be the supreme deity to be his fellows as God) but above all other subordinate powers. This is one single scriptural explanation of his being called “God,” for these things are spoken to him and of him under the title of “God”—“O God, your throne,” etc (Hebrews 1:8). I think people should be well assured on what grounds they go before they assign other reasons for this title being given to him which are so different from the scriptural explanation. Let it be enough to us that God has “made him both Lord and Christ,” that he has “exalted him to be a Prince and a Saviour” (Acts 2:36; 5:31). (Thomas Emlyn, An Humble Inquiry into the Scripture-Account of Jesus Christ: A Short Argument Concerning His Deity and Glory, according to the Gospel, eds., Dale Tuggy and Kegan A. Chandler [White House, Tenn.: Theophilus Press, 2021], 47-48)