The real Christian, or, A treatise of effectual calling wherein the work of God…

Fourthly, I utterly deny it, that ever it was the pleasure of God, that religious worship should be given to any mere Creature. Take Christs word for that, Matth. 4.10. It is written (there is an old Law for this, God hath manifested his pleasure as to this point) Deut. 6.13. and 10.20. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou ⟨image 15⟩serve. Crellius makes great use of this exclusive Particle only, in John 17.3. which he puts in the front of all his Texts against the Divinity of Christ, because he said in his Prayer, This is life eternal, to know thee the only true God: Crellius putting the stress upon the word only, proves that Christ excludes himself from being the true God. By the same word, and as good reason, say I, doth Christ exclude himself from being the Object of religious worship: Let the Socinians say what they can, I know what distinctions Socinus useth to help himself here; but whence had he them? Out of the Turkish Alcoran, not out of the holy Scriptures I am sure, they are wholly silent as to any such Notions; so that thence he must have them, or they are the putrid Figments of his corrupt brain: But let Francken alone with him, I will not multiply more Texts being now I am in an Epistle to the Reader. Only one Text more which Francken urgeth against Socinus, Isai. 42.8. My glory I will not give to another. So Isai. 48.11. here God declares it plainly, that it is not his pleasure to give away the glory due to him unto any other, he is peremptory against it. Francken urgeth the Text tus, Religious worship is the glory of God, and God saith he will not give his glory to another: Therefore he hath not given it to Christ if he be not God. Socinus may scratch his head, but shall never be able to answer it. But one word more concerning this Text, I think it will afford some thing against Socinus and Francken too, denying the Divinity of Christ; ¹