Of Worship Addressed to Christ by Charles Morgridge 1837
To worship is to adore, to reverence, to honor, to submit to; and this homage differs as much in nature and degree, as the beings to whom it is rendered differ in nature, character, or dignity. Therefore to infer that all objects of worship are equal, is, in the highest degree, absurd. It is maintained by Trinitarians, that worship being ascribed to Christ, in the Scriptures, proves him to be God. That Christ is to be worshiped according to a scriptural use of the term, is admitted by all. But the only question is, in what sense is he to be worshiped! Inattention to the true import of words has been the source of many errors, and of much animosity among Christians. The word worship is now generally used to express the religious homage due to God. But this is not the only sense in which the word is used in the Bible. Illustration: “And all the congregation bowed down their heads, and
worshiped the LORD and the king.” I Chron. 29:20. That is, they worshiped the LORD as God, and David as their King. “Then the King Nebuchadnezzar fell upon his face and
worshiped Daniel.” Dan. 2:46. Had the king worshiped Daniel as God, he would have been guilty of idolatry; and Daniel would, unquestionably, have reproved him. But no reproof was intimated. Cornelius, when Peter first came into his house, “fell down at his feet, and
worshiped him.”—Acts 10:25. Yet Cornelius knew that Peter was not God. Nor did Peter reprove him; which he would have done, had Cornelius been guilty of an act of idolatry. Peter only declined the homage, saying, “I myself also am a man.” As if he had said, “I pretend to no superiority or dominion over others, which can entitle me to such homage.” Thus it is evident that the word worship is used in the Scriptures to denote that reverence and submission which an inferior owes to a superior; as well as to denote that supreme adoration which is due to God only. That Christ used the term in this sense, is obvious from the following passages. “But when thou art bidden, go and sit down in the lowest room; that when he that bade thee cometh, he may say unto thee, ‘Friend, go up higher:' Then thou shalt have worship, in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee.” —Luke, 14:10. Speaking of the conduct of a servant towards an earthly benefactor, Christ says, “The servant fell down and
worshiped him.” These passages show that we are not to build our faith upon the mere sound of words; but on the broad basis of unequivocal Scripture testimony.
That this kind of worship should never have been offered to Jesus, by any of the hundreds and thousands on whom he bestowed special favors, is incredible. That they should have worshiped him as God, is also incredible — for we have already seen, that those who saw and enjoyed the miraculous displays of his grace and mercy, never inferred that he was God. The worship offered by those who were the happy subjects of these blessings, must have been such as to comport with the character they conceived him to bear. Did they believe him to be “a Teacher come
from God,” they worshiped him as such. Did they believe “God was
with him,” they worshiped him as such. Did they regard him as “a man
approved of God, by miracles, and wonders, and signs, which God did by him,” they worshiped him as such. Did they believe him to be the “Son of God,” whom God had sanctified and sent into the world, they worshiped as such. When he stilled the winds and the waves, his disciples worshiped him, not as God, but as the Son of God: for they said in just so many words, “Of a truth thou art the Son of God.”—Matt. 14:33. The man born blind, whose eyes Jesus opened, worshiped him, not as God, but as the Son of God. For Jesus “said unto him, ‘Dost thou believe of the Son of God?' He answered and said, ‘Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him? And Jesus said unto him, ‘Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee.' And he said, ‘Lord, I believe.’ And he worshiped him.”—John, 9:35–38. This, I think, is the only instance recorded by John in which “worship” is ascribed to Christ. How is this to be reconciled with the belief that John wrote particularly to prove that Christ is God? Besides the two just quoted, I think there are but nine passages recorded by all the four Evangelists, in which persons who came to Christ as suppliants for favors, or who had been witnesses of his miraculous works, are said to have worshiped him. [Matt, 8:2, the leper: 9:18, the ruler: 15:25, the woman of Camaan: 20:20, the wife of Zebedee: 28:9, the woman who had been at the sepulchre: verse 17, the eleven disciples. Mark, 5:6; 15:19. Luke, 24:52, where we find the eleven, on the ascension of Christ, worshiped him, and, returning to Jerusalem, ‘were continually in the Temple praising and blessing God.’ In all these instances, let the reader substitute, for “worshiped him,” did him homage or obeisance, and then judge whether Jesus was worshiped as God, or as the Christ, the Son of God, whom the Father had sanctified and sent into the world.]
Had there been a hundred times as many, it would not have been surprising. If the reader will carefully examine those passages, he will perceive that there is no circumstance connected with them which intimates that Christ was worshiped as God. Seven out of the eleven are recorded by Matthew, who informs us that Jesus instructed his disciples, “After this manner pray ye, “Our FATHER,” &c., and who assures us that he restricted supreme worship to JEHOVAH. There is nothing but the mere sound of the English word worship, that favors the idea that Jesus was worshiped as God. Had the translators rendered it did him obeisance, as Archbishop Newcome has done, in Matt. 8:2, there would be nothing to favor the belief that supreme adoration was intended. It was the constant practice of our blessed Saviour, whenever his discourses or miracles had excited the astonishment of the people, to lead their minds away from himself, to the invisible Father, as the original source of all his wisdom and power, and consequently the only proper object of supreme adoration and praise. And we know that, sometimes at least, the people entertained these just sentiments. There is no evidence that worship was ever offered to, or accepted by, Jesus Christ, without a higher reference to the glory of God the FATHER.
“For the Father judgeth no man; but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoreth not the Son, honoreth not the Father which hath sent him.”— John, 5:22,23. It has been often insisted upon, by Trinitarians, that the word
honor here means worship, and that the passage requires that Jesus should be worshiped as God. This, I think, is not correct. If honor here means worship, we may substitute the latter for the former, without altering the sense. Verse 23 would then read thus—“He that worshipeth not the Son, worshipeth not the Father which hath sent him.” But this would not be true. Many worship the Father who do not worship the Son. Jesus, himself, always worshiped the Father, but he never worshiped the Son. He taught his disciples to worship the Father, but he forbade them to worship the Son. “In that day, (that is, after the resurrection) ye shall ask ME nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall ask the FATHER, in my name, he will give it you.”—John 16:23. How very careful was Jesus to remove all possibility of mistake in this matter. Again, Jesus here claims honor for the Son, not on account of any supposed equality with the Father, but simply on the ground of his having received a commission from him, and having been
sent by him. It will not be pretended that the Father hath committed all judgment unto God, or that the Father hath sent God. Whatever may be the meaning of the word honor in this passage, it must be admitted, I think, that, as it is claimed by the Son only on the ground of such relations as demonstrate his dependence on the Father, it cannot mean supreme worship. If honor is due to the Son because the Father hath commissioned and sent him, it must be received by the Son with higher reference to the glory of God the Father. Hence all men are to honor the Son as the authorized ambassador of God, to reveal his will to men. Finally, why are we required either to worship God, or to honor the Son? We are required to worship God primarily and chiefly on the ground of his moral attributes, and his relations to us. Though these depend on his natural attributes, and cannot exist without them, yet those are not the principal grounds on which God claims from men the homage of adoration and praise. ‘We love God because he first loved us, and gave his Son to die for us.” 'Who shall not fear thee, O Lord, and magnify thy name? For thou art Holy.' 'Praise the Lord, for he is good, for his Mercy endureth forever.’ ‘A son honoreth his father, and a servant his master: if then, I be a Father, where is my honor and if I be a Master, where is my fear? If it were possible to conceive of an eternal, independent being of a malignant character, no honor would be due him from men. If Satan, were almighty, he would have no claims upon our love or homage. If then, we are to honor the Father on account of his moral attributes and relations, it follows that we are to honor the Son on similar grounds. But the relations of the Father and the Son are, in some respects, different. The Father
gave and
sent his Son, but the Son did not give and send the Father. The Son sustains the relations of Lord and Christ; of Prince and Saviour; of Prophet, Priest, and King. But all these relations demonstrate his dependence on God the Father. For God
made him both Lord and Christ;
exalted him to be a Prince and Saviour; and ordained him Prophet, Priest, and King. Therefore all men honor the Son, even as they honor the Father, when they render to him that homage only which comports with his moral character and relations. Consequently it cannot be supreme worship; that being due to the FATHER, the fountain of all that love, and mercy, and grace in the Son, for which we are required to honor him. Yet we are required to worship the Son, as the Son, and to honor him in all his character. With the angels of God, we are to worship him as the
first begotten. We are to worship him as the brightness of the FATHER's glory, and the express image of his person—as the Christ of God, in whom dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead—as the Lamb that was slain for us—as the resurrection and the life—as the author and finisher of our faith—and our intercessor at the right hand of God.
But he that honoreth the Son, honoreth the Father also. If we honor the Son on the ground of derived dignity, as “God's own Son,” then we honor the Father. If we honor the Son because the Father dwells in him, then we honor the Father. If we honor the Son on account of his official character, and the divine authority the Father gave him, as the
appointed Saviour, and
constituted judge of the world, then we honor the Father.
I know of no passage of Scripture that ascribes worship to the Son, where the connection and circumstances furnish the least intimation that he was worshiped as God. Even in the most splendid description of the glory of Christ found in the Bible, the distinction between God and him is sufficiently clear. Rev. 4:2, we read, “Behold, a throne was set in heaven, and ONE (not three) sat on the throne.” Verses 10 and 11, this ONE is worshiped, as the Being who liveth forever and ever, and who had created all things. Ch. 5:6, 7, 9, we read, “And in the midst of the elders stood a Lamb, as it had been slain.....And he came and took the book out of the right hand of HIM that sat upon the throne;.....and they sung a new song, saying, ‘Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation.’” There is not in the Bible a clearer distinction between the only true God, and his only Son our Saviour, than is here expressed. GoD sat on the throne; the Son stood amidst the elders. God had in his right hand a book; the Son came and took the book out of his hand. GOD was worshiped as the Being who created all things; and who liveth forever and ever. The Son was honored as the Lamb that was slain, and redeemed us unto God by his blood. And as the whole congregation of Israel bowed down their heads, and worshiped the LORD and the king, who was but a type of this Lamb; so, in verse 13, the whole universe is represented as ascribing Blessing, and honor, and glory, and power, unto HIM that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb, forever and ever.
It is maintained by Trinitarians, that, ‘since God and Jesus Christ in this instance receive the same tribute of praise, they must be equal in eternity, power, and glory.’ Indeed those who believe that Christ is God, commonly represent it as a circumstance of great importance, whenever he is mentioned in connection with God, and in the same or similar terms. The following passages will show what inferences ought to follow from the application of the same language in the same connection to God and to some other being. Ex. 14:31—“And the people feared the LORD, and believed the LORD,
and his servant Moses.” 1 Sam. 12:18—"And all the people greatly feared the LORD
and Samuel.” 1 Chron. 29:20–"And all the congregation blessed the Lord God of their fathers, and bowed down their heads, and worshiped the Lord and the king.” 2 Chron. 31:8—“And when Hezekiah and the princes came and saw the heaps, they blest the Lord and his people Israel.” Acts, 15:28—“It seemed good to the Holy Spirit (that is, to God) and to us.” 1 Thess. 2:10—“Ye are witnesses and God also.” In these passages the only True God is associated with his creatures, as the object of faith, fear, worship, and blessing: and as giving counsel and bearing witness. As we are here taught to apply the terms to God and to men in a different sense, with different modifications of meaning, so we ought to do when God in the same sentence is conjoined with Jesus Christ his Son. 1 Tim. 5:21—“I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things.” Let us suppose that, instead of the “elect angels,” the Apostle had written “the Holy Spirit,” and that the verse read thus—“I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit, that thou observe these things.” Would it not have been regarded as an unanswerable argument for the doctrine of the Trinity? Would it not have been insisted upon that the three persons in the Godhead are appealed to in exactly the same terms, and called upon by a solemn adjuration to bear testimony to the injunction delivered by the Apostle to Timothy 1 Sam. 25:32, 33—“And David said unto Abigail, ‘Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, who sent thee this day to meet me; and blessed be thy advice; and blessed be thou.” Now suppose the terms “Son,” and “Holy Spirit,” to be in verse 33, instead of “thy advice,” and “thou,” and the passage to read thus—“Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; and blessed be the Son; and blessed be the Holy Spirit.”—Would not this passage thus written have been better evidence for the doctrine of the Trinity, than any of those which are now cited? It would, no doubt, have been peremptorily asserted that the ascription of blessing and praise, in precisely the same words, and in the same connection, is as strong proof as language can furnish of the equality of the persons in God.
Dr. Dwight, speaking of the formula of baptism, says— “Nothing but impiety can, so far as I can see, be contained in a direction to baptize in the name of God and a Creature. What creature would dare associate himself with God in such an act of authority; and thus presume to ascend the throne of his Maker?' Men in the heat of controversy are not apt to weigh their words. Does the Dr. make nothing at all of “the man Christ Jesus?” Does he believe “the Lamb that was slain” to be the Divine nature of Christ, that is, God? The Scriptures clearly teach that “the man Christ Jesus” does “associate himself with God in such an act of authority;” and in much higher acts of authority. He also does “presume to ascend the throne of his Maker,” and
sit on his right hand. “These things saith the Amen, the faithful and True Witness, the beginning of the creation of God.....and the first begotten of the dead, ‘To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame,
and am set down with my Father in his throne.”—Rev. 1:5; 3:14, 21.
Phil. 2:9–11: “God hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven, and in earth, and under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the FATHER.” This passage, I think, proves beyond all debate, that the highest homage given to Christ “in heaven,” as well as “in earth, and under the earth,” is ascribed to him with higher reference to the glory of God the FATHER. If Jesus were to be worshiped as God, his own glory would be the supreme object with every
true worshiper.
