Chapter XIV: Part 14

(1.) Christ is described as having a true body. This is maintained against those who, in an early age of the church,[122] denied that he had a real human nature. These, it is true, do not deny his deity; but they suppose, that it was impossible for God to be united to human flesh, and therefore that he appeared only in the likeness thereof; as some heathen writers represent their gods, as appearing in human forms, that they might converse with men. Thus they suppose, that the Godhead of Christ appeared in an human form, without a real human nature, in which sense they understand that scripture, _He took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men_, Phil. ii. 7. as though, in that place, the similitude of a man were opposed to real humanity; or, at least, they suppose, that he had no other human nature when he dwelt on earth, than what he had, when he appeared to the church, under the Old Testament-dispensation, _viz._ to Abraham, Moses, Joshua, and several others, in which they conclude, that there was only the likeness of a human body, or an aerial one, which, according to some common modes of speaking, is called a spirit. To give countenance to this, they bring some other scriptures, as when it is said, after his resurrection, that _he appeared in another form to two disciples, as they walked into the country_, Mark xvi. 12. so when he appeared to Mary, it was in such a form, as that _she knew not that it was Jesus, but supposed him to be the gardener_, John xx. 14, 15. and especially when it is said, in another scripture, Luke xxiv. 21. when his two disciples at Emmaus _knew him, he vanished out of their sight_;[123] which they understand of his vanishing, in the same sense, as, according to the popular way of speaking, a spectrum is said to do.

But this opinion is so absurd, as well as contrary to scripture, that it only shews how far the wild and extravagant fancies of men may run, who are so hardy, as to set aside plain scriptures, and take up with some few passages thereof, without considering their scope and design, or their harmony with other scriptures. And, indeed, there is scarce any thing said concerning him in the New Testament, but what confutes it; where we have an account of him, as being born, passing through all the ages of life, conversing familiarly with his people, eating and drinking with them, and, at last, dying on the cross, which put this matter out of all manner of dispute; as also when he distinguishes himself from a spirit, when the disciples were terrified upon his standing unexpectedly in the midst of them, supposing that he had been a spirit, he satisfies them that they were mistaken, by saying, _Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have_, Luke xxiv. 29.

As for those scriptures in the Old Testament, which speak of his appearing in a human form, assumed for that purpose; whether there was, in every one of those instances, a real human body that appeared, though, in some of them, it is beyond dispute that there was, I will not pretend to determine; yet it must be considered, that this is never styled his incarnation, or becoming man, but it was only an emblem, or prelibation thereof; and when it is said, in the scripture before mentioned, that he was made in the _likeness of men_, it does not from hence follow, that he was not, after his incarnation, a real man, for the _likeness of man_ is oftentimes so understood in scripture; as when it is said, on occasion of the birth of Seth, that _Adam begat a son in his own likeness_, Gen. v. 3. And as to that other scripture, in which Christ is said to appear in different forms, it is not to be supposed that there was a change in his human nature, but only a change in his countenance, or external mein; or he appeared with other kind of garments, which rendered him not immediately known by them. And when, in the other scripture, it is said, he _vanished out of their sight_, nothing is intended thereby, but an instantaneous withdrawing of himself from them, which, it may be might contain something miraculous.

(2.) Christ is farther described, as having taken to himself a reasonable soul, to which his body was united. This is maintained against the Arians, who deny that he had an human soul, concluding that the divine nature, such an one as they will allow him to have, was, as it were, a soul to his body; which is founded partly on their misunderstanding the sense of those scriptures, in which it is said, _The Word was made flesh_, John i. 14. and _God was manifest in the flesh_, 1 Tim. iii. 16. and, _Forasmuch as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same_, Heb. ii. 14. and, _Of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came_, &c. Rom. ix. 5. But the principal argument, by which this opinion is supported, is, because they suppose, that, if he had an human soul, distinct from his divine nature, he must have had two understandings and wills, to wit, a divine and an human, and then it would have been possible for him to have had contrary ideas in his mind, and determinations in his will, as man, to what he had as God, which would infer a sort of confusion of thought, and irregularity of actions: but to this it may be answered,

_1st_, As to the former, relating to his assuming flesh, it is a very common thing, in scripture, by a _synecdoche_, of the part for the whole, for _flesh_ to signify the whole man, consisting of soul and body, of which we have many instances in scripture; as when it is said, _All flesh had corrupted his way_, Gen. vi. 12. that is, all men had corrupted their way; and the prophet speaking concerning the vanity of man, as mortal, says, _All flesh is grass_, Isa. xl. 6.

_2dly_, As to the other branch of their argument; we allow that Christ, as Man, had a distinct understanding and will, from what he had as God, and that his human understanding was not equally perfect with his divine, neither had his human will the sovereignty and glory of his divine will. And, if it should be also allowed, that if his human understanding and will had not always been under the influence and direction of his divine, he might have had contrary ideas, and determinations, as man, to what he had as God; yet we cannot allow that the divine nature would so far suspend its direction and influence, as that his human understanding should have contradictory ideas to his divine, so that this inconvenience should ensue, which would occasion a confusion and disorder in his actions, or methods of human conduct. It was no disparagement to him, nor hindrance to his work, to suppose that his human soul was subject to some natural imperfections, which were inconsistent with the infinite perfection of his deity; however, it is sufficient to assert, that, as Man, he knew every thing, which he was obliged to perform, in a way of obedience, and consented to, and delighted in every thing that was agreeable to his divine will, which would render his obedience compleat; though we suppose, that the nature, in which he performed it, was less perfect than that to which it was united; therefore this method of reasoning is not conclusive, and we must suppose, that he had a human soul, distinct from his divine nature. This is evident, because he could not perform obedience in the divine nature, his human soul being the only subject thereof, and it is proper to the deity to be dispassionate; therefore those sinless passions which he was subject to, were seated in his soul, as united to the body; and that he had such passions, is very plain from scripture; for he says, _My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death_, Matt. xxvi. 38. And there are various other passions besides sorrow, which he was subject to, which, though free from sin, were altogether inconsistent with the infinite perfection of the divine nature.

9. This human nature is said to have been conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the Virgin Mary, and born of her, yet without sin. Here we may observe,

(1.) That there was something in the formation of Christ’s human nature, in which he resembled the rest of mankind, in that he was not produced, and brought into a state of manhood in an instant, or created out of the dust of the ground, as Adam was, but was born, or as the apostle expresses it, _made of a woman_, Gal. iv. 4. to denote his being formed out of her substance; and accordingly he began his state of humiliation in infancy, that he might, in all respects, be made like unto those whom he came to redeem. Herein the promise made to our first parents, relating to his being _the seed of the woman_, Gen. iii. 15. was not only fulfilled; but another express prediction, by the prophet Isaiah, who says, _Unto us a Child is born_, Isa. ix. 6.

(2.) There was something peculiar and extraordinary in his formation, as he was an extraordinary Person, and to be engaged in a work peculiar to himself; so he is said to have been born of a Virgin, not because, as some suppose, that that is a state of greater sanctity, than any other condition of life, but, as was before observed[124], that he might be exempted from the guilt of Adam’s first sin, which he would have been liable to, though sanctified from the womb, had his human nature been formed in an ordinary way. It was certainly necessary that his human nature, which was, in its first formation, united to his divine Person, should be perfectly sinless; since it would have been a reproach cast on the Son of God, to have it said concerning him, that he was, in the nature which he assumed, estranged to, and separate from God, as all mankind are, who are born in an ordinary way. And this was also necessary for his accomplishing the work of our redemption, since as the apostle says, _Such an High Priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners_, Heb. vii. 26. And, in order to his being born of a Virgin, there was an extraordinary instance of the power of God; and therefore it is said, _The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee_, Luke i. 35.

His being born of a Virgin, was an accomplishment of that prediction which we read of in Isa. vii. 14. _The Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a Virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and shall call his name Immanuel_. This text being so convincing a proof of Christianity, and, as such, referred to in the New Testament, Matt. i. 22, 23. the Jews, and many of the modern Deists, have endeavoured to weaken the force thereof, which renders it necessary for us to illustrate and explain it, agreeably to the scope and design of the prophecy, contained in the context; which we shall endeavour to do, in the following Paraphrase. Says God to the prophet, “Go to Ahaz, and bid him not be faint-hearted, by reason of the threatened invasion by the confederate kings of Israel and Syria; but let him ask a sign for the confirmation of his faith, that I may hereby assure him, that they shall not be able to do him any hurt: but I know, before-hand, his unbelief, and the sullenness of his temper, that he will refuse to ask a sign; therefore, when thou goest to meet him, take thy young son Shear-jashub in thine hand, or in thine arms, from whom thou mayest take occasion to deliver part of the message which I send thee with to him; tell him, that though he refuse to ask a sign, _nevertheless_[125], _the Lord shall give thee a sign_, to his people, whom thou shalt command to hear this message, as well as Ahaz, they being equally concerned herein; therefore let them know, that, though their obstinate and wicked king calls a compliance with my command a _tempting_ me, and therefore will not ask a sign, I will not give him any other sign, than what the whole house of Israel shall behold, in future ages, which, though it cannot be properly called a prognostic sign, yet it will be, when it comes to pass, a _rememorative sign_[126], and that shall be a glorious one; for, _Behold a Virgin_[127] _shall conceive, and bear a Son, and thou shalt call his name Immanuel_. When this wonderful thing happens, a thing new and unheard of, which shall be _created in the earth, that a woman should compass a man_, as it is said elsewhere, Jer. xxxi. 22. then the house of David shall understand the reason why I have not suffered these two kings to destroy Judah, so that it should be _broken, that it be not a people_, as _Ephraim shall, within threescore and five years_, [ver. 8.] for then the Messiah could not come of the house of David; and what he shall do for them, when he comes, is the ground and reason of all the temporal deliverances that I work for them, and particularly of this from the intended invasion of these two confederate kings. Tell them, moreover, that as this shall be a _rememorative sign_, so I will give them to understand, at present, that they shall be delivered in a little time; for before this Child, which thou hast here brought with thee, _shall know to refuse the evil, and chuse the good_, or shall know the difference between moral good and evil, that is, in two or three years time, _The land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings_; or those two kings, which thou dreadest, shall be driven, by the king of Assyria, out of their own land. And inasmuch as my people may be afraid, that, before these two years are expired, they shall be brought into such straights, through famine, or scarcity of provisions, which generally attend sieges, that they shall want the necessaries of life; let them know that this child, meaning Shear-jashub, shall not want _butter and honey_, that is, the best and most proper food for it, _that he may know_, or rather, _until_[128] _he know to refuse the evil, and chuse the good_, that is, till these two kings, Rezin and Pekah, be utterly destroyed.”

Thus having considered our Saviour’s being born of a Virgin, there is one thing more that is to be observed under this head, namely, that he was of her substance, which is particularly mentioned in this answer, with a design to fence against an ancient heresy, maintained by the Gnostics in the second century, and hath been defended by others, in later ages, who supposed, that our Saviour did not derive his human nature from the Virgin Mary, but that it was formed in heaven, and sent down from thence; and that the Virgin’s womb is only to be considered as the first seat of its residence in this lower world, which they found on those scriptures which speak of _his coming down from heaven_, John iii. 13, 14. which they understand concerning his human nature; whereas, nothing is intended thereby but the manifestative presence of his divine nature, in which respect God is, in other scriptures, said to _come down_ into this lower world, Gen. xi. 5, 7. And another scripture, which they bring to the same purpose, is that, in which, they suppose, he denies his relation to his mother, when he says, _Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? Whosoever shall do the will of my Father, which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother_, Mat. xi. 48, 50. in which he does not deny his natural relation to them, but designs to shew, that his regard to persons in the exercise of his public ministry, was principally founded on their doing the will of his Father. And whereas they farther suppose, that if his human nature had, in any respect, been derived from the substance of the Virgin, either she must be concluded immaculate, as the Papists do, or else he must have been born a sinner; this hath been already proved to be no just consequence, inasmuch as the formation of his human nature, though it were of the substance of the Virgin, was in an extraordinary and miraculous way, whereby he was exempted from the guilt of original sin.

There is another opinion maintained by some of the school-men, which, though it be not generally received, seems, to me, not altogether improbable, namely, that Christ’s human body, though formed in the womb of the virgin, and a part of her substance, yet, as to the manner of its formation, it differed from that of all other human bodies, inasmuch as the matter, of which they consist, receives its form in a gradual way, and they cannot properly speaking be styled human bodies, till organized and fitted to have their souls united to them; whereas these suppose that the body of Christ, in its first formation, was rendered fit to receive the soul, which was, in an instant united to it; and both soul and body, at the same time, without having any separate subsistence, were united to the divine nature. This account of the formation of Christ’s human body, though I think it most adapted to the union of his soul and body with the divine nature, in the very instant of its formation, and therefore cannot but conclude it a more probable conjecture than what is generally received, yet I do not lay it down as a necessary article of faith; nor would I, from hence, be supposed to deny that the body of Christ grew in the womb like other human bodies, after the soul is united to them; nor would I set aside the account the scripture gives of the virgin’s _accomplishing_ the full number of _days, in which she should be delivered_, Luke ii. 6. Gal. iv. 4. Thus we have considered our Saviour, as having a true body and a reasonable soul, and both united to the divine nature, whereby he is denominated God incarnate, in this answer.

6. Our Mediator is farther said to have been incarnate, in the fulness of time; and it is added, he shall continue to be both God and man for ever.

(1.) Let us consider what is meant by Christ’s becoming man in the fulness of time. The human nature could not be united to the divine from all eternity; since it is inconsistent with its being a created nature, that it should exist from eternity; notwithstanding he might, had it been so determined, have, assumed this nature in the beginning of time, or immediately after the fall of man, who then stood in need of a Mediator; but God, in his sovereign and wise providence, ordered it otherwise, namely, that there should be a considerable distance of time between the fall of man and Christ’s incarnation, in order to his recovery, which is called, in scripture, the _fulness of time_, Gal. iv. 4. that is, the time foretold by the prophets, and particularly Daniel, Dan. ix. 24, 25. whose prediction had an additional circumstance of time annexed to it, which gave occasion to the Jews to expect his coming at the same time that he was incarnate.

That there was an universal expectation of the Messiah at this time, appears from the disposition of many among them to adhere to any one, especially if he pretended himself to be a prophet, or that he would make some change in their civil affairs; and the Jewish historian[129] tells us of many tumults and seditions that were in that age. Some of their ring-leaders he styles magicians; and persons pretending to be prophets, though, indeed, he does not expressly say that they assume the character of Messiah, yet he observes, that the time in which this was done, gave occasion hereunto[130]; by which he means that it being at that time that the Jews expected that the Messiah, their king, should come, they thought it a fit opportunity to make these efforts, to shake off the Roman yoke; and they were so far from concealing the expectation they had thereof, that it was well known by the heathen, who were not without jealousies concerning them, with respect to this matter; so that some celebrated writers among them observe, that it was generally received throughout the east, according to some ancient predictions, that, at that time, the Jews should obtain the empire;[131] and there are several expressions, in scripture, which intimate as much: thus Gamaliel speaks of one Theudas, who _boasted himself to be somebody_, by which, it is probable, he means the Messiah, _to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves, and were slain_, Acts v. 36, 37. which some think to be the same person that Josephus mentions, the name being the same; though others are rather inclined to think that it was another pretender to this character, from some critical remarks they make on the circumstance of time referred to by Gamaliel, being different from that which is mentioned by Josephus.[132] However, this does not affect our argument; for it is plain, from hence, that, about that time, the Jews were disposed to join themselves to any one who endeavoured to persuade them that he was the Messiah.

And this farther appears, from what our Saviour says, _All that ever came before me, are thieves and robbers_, John x. 8. by which, doubtless, he means, several that pretended to be the Messiah, in that age, before he came; and it is said elsewhere, Luke xix. 11. a little before our Saviour’s crucifixion, that _they_, that is, the Jews, generally _thought that the kingdom of God_, and consequently the Messiah, whom they expected, _should immediately appear_; and he also foretels, that between this and the destruction of Jerusalem, that is, before that age was at an end, _many false Christs, should arise_, and warns his followers not to adhere to them, Mat. xxiv. 24-26.

Moreover, had not the Jews expected that the Messiah would appear at that time, they would never have sent in so formal a manner, as they are said to have done, to enquire, _Whether John the Baptist_, when he exercised his public ministry amongst them, _was he_? John i. 19-21. And, when he had convinced them that he was not the Messiah, but that our Saviour would soon appear publicly amongst them, who had the only right to this character, he found it no difficult matter to persuade them to believe it; and accordingly Jerusalem and all Judea, that is, the people almost universally attended on his ministry, and were baptized, making a profession of this faith, and of their expectation of, and willingness to adhere to him; and it was the report, that the wise men, who came from the east, had received from the Jews, who were conversant with them, that this was the time that the Messiah should appear, that brought them to Jerusalem, from their respective countries, otherwise that preternatural meteor, or star, which they saw, could not have given them a sufficient intimation concerning this matter, so as to induce them to come and pay their homage to him; and when they came, and enquired of Herod, _Where is he that is born king of the Jews_? how surprizing soever it might be to that proud tyrant, to think that there was one born, who, as he supposed, would stand in competition with him for the crown, yet it was no unexpected thing to the Sanhedrim, whose opinion in this matter he demanded, in an hypocritical manner; therefore they say, he was _to be born in Bethlehem_, according to the prediction of the prophet Micah; whereas, if they had not known that this was the time in which he was to be born, they would have replied, that it was an unseasonable question, and a vain thing, to ask where a person was to be born, whose birth was not expected in that age; and they might easily have satisfied Herod, and removed the foundation of his jealousy and trouble, and thereby have prevented that inhuman barbarity committed on the infants of Bethlehem, if they had told him that the time spoken of by the prophet Daniel, in which the Messiah was to be born, was not yet come: but they knew otherwise; and in this respect, Christ might be said to be born _in the fulness of time_. That which we shall farther observe, concerning it, is,

_1st_, That it was at that time when God had sufficiently tried the faith of the Old Testament-church, in waiting for his coming, and thereby glorified his sovereignty, who hath the times and seasons of his bestowing all blessings in his own power.

_2dly_, It was at that time when the measure of the iniquity of the world was abundantly filled, whereby his people might observe the deplorable state into which sin had brought mankind, and the utter impossibility of our recovery without a Mediator, and that the light of nature could not discover any method by which the redemption and salvation of man might be brought about.

_3dly_, It was at that time that the Jewish church was at the lowest ebb, and therefore the most seasonable time, and they were laid under the highest obligations to adore and magnify him: their political state was broken, the sceptre departed from Judah, and they were brought under the Roman yoke, which sat very uneasy upon them; neither could they ever expect to make that figure in the world as they once had done, therefore now was the time for the Messiah to come, and erect his kingdom. And, besides this, they were given up to a very great degree of judicial blindness and hardness, and were disposed to make void the law of God by their traditions; so that religion, among them, was at a very low ebb; therefore it was the fittest time for God to display his grace, in reviving his work, and preventing his cause and interest from wholly sinking in the world. This was the time in which the Son of God became Man.

(2.) Christ shall continue to be God and Man for ever, or the union of these two natures is indissoluble: as to his divine nature, he is necessarily eternal and unchangeable; and the human nature shall continue for ever united to it, as the result of the divine purpose, in which God intends that some ends, glorious to himself, honourable to the Mediator, and advantageous to his people, should be attained thereby. For,

_1st_, If he had had a design to lay aside his human nature, he would have done it when he finished his work of obedience and sufferings therein, and thereby had so far answered the end of his incarnation, that nothing more was necessary for the purchase of redemption: but when he rose from the dead, as a Conqueror over death and hell, and was declared to have accomplished the work he came into the world about, it is certain he did not lay it aside, but ascended visibly into heaven, and shall come again, in a visible manner, in that same nature, to judge the world at the last day.

_2dly_, The eternity of Christ’s human nature appears from the eternity of his mediatorial kingdom, of which more under a following answer, when we come to speak concerning the glory of Christ’s kingly office. It appears, also, from the eternity of his intercession, which, as the apostle expresses it, _He ever liveth to make_, Heb. vii. 25. for his people: thus he does, by appearing in the human nature in the presence of God, in their behalf; therefore he must for ever have an human nature.

_3dly_, His saints shall abide for ever in heaven, and, as the apostle says, _Shall ever be with the Lord_, 1 Thess. iv. 17. and their happiness shall continue both as to soul and body; and, with respect to their bodies, it is said, they shall be _fashioned like unto Christ’s glorious body_, Phil. iii. 21. therefore his glorious body, or his human nature, shall continue for ever united to his divine Person.

_4thly_, His retaining his human nature for ever, seems necessary, as it redounds to the glory of God: it is an eternal monument of his love to mankind, and an external means to draw forth their love to him, who procured those mansions of glory, which they shall for ever be possessed of, by what he did and suffered for them therein.

Footnote 113:

_See Page 379._ Vol. I.

Footnote 114:

_See Quest._ xliv.

Footnote 115:

_See Vol. I. Page 243._

Footnote 116:

_See Quest._ ix, x, xi.

Footnote 117:

_Vide the note, Vol. I. Page 279._

Footnote 118:

_For this reason, the Sabellians are often called, by ancient writers,
Patripassians._

Footnote 119:

_See the same scriptures, and others to the like purpose, before
cited, for the proof of Christ’s proper deity, under Quest._ ix. x.
xi. _Vol. I. Page 302, to 319, and also what has been said concerning
his Sonship, as implying him to be God-man Mediator. Vol. I. Page 274,
279, &c._

Footnote 120:

_Nestorius was Bishop of Constantinople, in the reign of Theodosius,
the younger, A. D. 428. who very warmly maintained, that the Virgin
Mary was not the mother of that Person that was God, but of a distinct
human Person, called Christ, which was censured and condemned by the
council at Ephesus, A. D. 431._

Footnote 121:

_These are called Eutychians, from Eutyches, an abbot of
Constantinople, who, when he had gained a great deal of reputation, in
disputing against Nestorius, in the council at Ephesus, a few years
after, viz. A. D. 448. propagated his opinion, which was condemned, as
heretical, in the council at Chalcedon, A. D. 451._

Footnote 122:

_This absurd opinion, subversive of Christianity, was propagated by
several among the Gnosticks, in the second century, who, for this
reason, were called Docetæ._

Footnote 123:

αφαντος εγενετο.

Footnote 124:

_See Page 112 ante._

Footnote 125:

_So the Hebrew word ought to be rendered, rather than_ therefore; _for
so it is understood in other scriptures, particularly in Jer._ xxx.
_16._

Footnote 126:

_This is a just distinction relating to signs mentioned in scripture;
in which, sometimes a sign did not take place till the thing
signified, or brought to remembrance thereby, had been accomplished.
See Exod._ iii. _12. 1 Sam._ ii. _34. Isa._ xxxvii. _30. Jer._ xliv.
_29, 30. as Bishop Kidder well observes. See Demonstrat. of the
Messias, Part II. page 105, in Fol._

Footnote 127:

_The Hebrew word_ עלמה _is truly rendered_ a Virgin, _as it is
translated by the LXX._ [η παρθενος] _who well understand the sense of
it, in this and other places, where we meet with it; as also doth the
Chaldee Paraphrast thus understand it, and the Syriac, Arabic, and
vulgar Latin versions: and this sense agrees with the grammatical
construction of the word, which is derived from_ עלם abscondit, _and
it alludes to the custom used among the Jews of keeping their virgins
concealed till they were married; therefore as a learned writer well
observes_, עלמה Notat statum solitarium domi delitescentium ideoq;
cælebum & virginum; _and in those two places, in which it is objected
by the Jews, that the word does not signify_ a virgin, _but a_ young
woman, _namely, Prov._ xxx. _19 and Cant._ vi. _8. In the former, as
one observes_, Promptissimum est intelligere vincula amoris quibus
virgo incipit adstringi futuro sponso suo; _and therefore it may be
understood of a virgin, in the literal sense of the word. Vid. Cocc.
Lexic. in Voc. The LXX. indeed, render it_, ανδρος εν νεοτητι, _and
the vulgar Latin version_, Viri in adolescentia; _but the Chaldee
Paraphrast renders it_, Viri in virgine. _And as for the later
scripture, in which it is said, there are_ threescore queens, and
fourscore concubines, and virgins without number, _it is plain, the
word_ virgins _is not opposed to_ young women, _for such were many of
them that are called_ queens and concubines, _but to persons
defloured; therefore we may conclude, that the word always signifies a
virgin, and therefore is rightly translated in the text, under our
present consideration_.

Footnote 128:

_So the word is properly rendered by the Chaldee Paraphrast._

Footnote 129:

_See Joseph. Antiq. Lib. XVIII. cap. 1. & Lib. XX. cap. 2. & de Bell.
Jud. Lib. II. cap. 6._

Footnote 130:

Βασιλειαν ο καιρος, ανεπεισθε.

Footnote 131:

_Vid. Sueton in Vespas. Percrebuerat oriente toto, ventus & constans
opinio, esse in fatis; ut eo tempore Judea, profecti, rerum
potirentur; & Tacit. Histor. Lib. V. Pluribus persuasio inerat,
antiquis sacerdotum literis contineri, eo ipso tempore fore ut
valesceret, Oriens, profectiq; Judea rerum potirentur._

Footnote 132:

_See Lightfoot’s works, Vol. I. Pag. 765, 766._

Quest. XXXVIII., XXXIX., XL.

QUEST. XXXVIII. _Why was it requisite that the Mediator should be
God?_

ANSW. It was requisite that the Mediator should be God, that he
might sustain and keep the human nature from sinking under the
infinite wrath of God, and the power of death, give worth and
efficacy to his sufferings, obedience, and intercession; and so
satisfy God’s justice, procure his favour, purchase a peculiar
people, give his Spirit to them, conquer all their enemies, and
bring them to everlasting salvation.

QUEST. XXXIX. _Why was it requisite that the Mediator should be
Man?_

ANSW. It was requisite that the Mediator should be Man, that he
might advance our nature, perform obedience to the law, suffer, and
make intercession for us in our nature, have a fellow-feeling of our
infirmities, that we might receive the adoption of sons, and have
comfort and access with boldness unto the throne of grace.

QUEST. XL. _Why was it requisite that the Mediator should be God and
Man in one Person?_

ANSW. It was requisite that the Mediator, who was to reconcile God
and Man, should himself be both God and Man, and this in one Person,
that the proper works of each nature might be accepted of God for
us, and relied on by us, as the works of the whole Person.

Our Mediator having been considered as God and Man, in one person, we have a farther account of the necessity of being so. And,

I. It was necessary that he should be a divine Person, for several reasons here assigned, with others that may be added. As,

1. If he had not been God, he could not have come into the world, or been incarnate, and have had the guilt of our sins laid on him, with his own consent; for he could not have been a party in the everlasting covenant, in which this matter was stipulated between the Father and him; and, had he not consented to be charged with the guilt of our sin, he could not have been punished for it, inasmuch as God cannot punish an innocent person; and, if such an one be charged with this guilt, and consequently rendered the object of vindictive justice, as our Saviour is said to have been, in scripture, it must be with his own consent. Now the human nature could not consent to its own formation, and therefore it could not consent to bear our iniquities; since to consent supposes the person to be existent, which Christ, had he been only Man, would not have been before his incarnation, and therefore he could not have come into the world as a Surety for us, and so would not have been fit, in this respect, to have discharged the principal part of the work, which he engaged in as Mediator.

2. There is another thing, mentioned in this answer, which rendered it requisite that the Mediator should be God, namely, that he might sustain and keep the human nature from sinking under the infinite wrath of God, and the power of death. It must be allowed, that the weight of the wrath of God, due to our sin, was so great, that no mere creature could, by his own strength, have subsisted under it. We will not deny, that a mere creature, supposing him only innocent, but not united to a divine Person, might have been borne up, under the greatest burthen laid on him, by the extraordinary assistance of God, with whom all things are possible; nor that God’s giving a promise that he should not fail, or be discouraged, is such a security, as would effectually keep it from sinking; yet when we consider the human nature, as united to the divine, this is an additional security, that he should not sink under the infinite weight of the wrath of God, that lay upon him; for then it would have been said, that he, who is a divine Person, miscarried in an important work, which he undertook to perform in his human nature, which would have been a dishonour to him: so far this argument hath its proper force. But,

3. There is another reason, which more fully proves the necessity of the Mediator’s being a Divine Person, _viz._ that this might give worth and efficacy to his sufferings, obedience, and intercession, that so what he did might have a tendency to answer the valuable ends designed thereby, namely, the satisfying the justice of God, procuring his favour, and purchasing a peculiar people to himself. Had he been only man, what he did and suffered, might indeed have been sinless, and perfect in its kind; nevertheless, it could not be of infinite value, for a finite creature, as such, cannot pay an infinite price, and thereby answer the demands of justice. Had nothing been demanded of him but a debt of obedience, which he was obliged to perform for himself, as a creature, it would not, indeed, have been necessary that it should be of infinite worth and value, any more than that obedience, that was due from our first parents, while in a state of innocency: But when this is considered as a price of redemption paid for us, and as designed to procure a right to the favour of God, and eternal life, this must be of such a value, that the glory of the justice of God might be secured, which nothing less than an infinite price could do; and the law of God must not only be fulfilled, but magnified, and made honourable; and therefore the obedience, which was required, must not only be sinless, but have in it an infinite worth and value, that hereby, when in a way of intercession, it is pleaded before God, it might be effectual to answer the ends designed thereby; but this it could not have been, had he not been an infinite Person, namely, God as well as Man.

4. Another reason assigned for this, is, that he might give his Spirit to his people. It is necessary that redemption should be applied, as well as purchased; and that the same Person, as a peculiar branch of glory due to him, should perform the one as well as the other; and, in the application of redemption, it was necessary that the Spirit should be glorified, that hereby he might appear to be a divine Person; and, as he acts herein in subserviency to the Mediator’s glory, as has been before observed[133], he is said to be sent by him, which he could not have been, had not Christ had a divine nature, in which respect he was equal with him; nor could he be said to give that which the Spirit works, as he promised to do, when he told his disciples, _If I depart, I will send him unto you_, John xvi. 7.

5. It was necessary that Christ should be God, that he might conquer all our enemies, and so remove every thing out of the way that tends to oppose his name, interest, and glory; these are sin, Satan, the world, and death. Sin, which is opposite to the holiness of God, is that which spirits, excites, and gives being to all opposition there is against him, either in earth or hell, and endeavours to eclipse his glory, controul his sovereignty, and reflect dishonour on all his perfections. This must be subdued by Christ, so _that it may no longer have dominion_ over his people, Rom. vi. 14. and, in order hereunto, its condemning power must be taken away, by his making satisfaction for it, as our great High Priest; and also its enslaving power subdued by the efficacy of his grace, in the internal work of sanctification.

And, upon his having obtained this victory over sin, Satan is also conquered when his prisoners are brought from under his power; and he finds himself for ever disappointed, and not able to detain those, who were, at first, led captive by him, nor to defeat the purpose of God relating to the salvation of his elect, or to boast as though he had wrested the sceptre out of his hand, or robbed him of one branch of his glory.

Moreover, the world, which is reckoned among the number of God’s enemies, must be conquered inasmuch as it opposes his name and interest in an objective way, from whence corrupt nature takes occasion either to abuse the various gifts and dispensations of providence, or by contracting an intimacy with those who are enemies to God and religion, to become more like them, as the apostle says, _The friendship of the world is enmity with God_, James iv. 4. Now Christ must be God, that he may discover its snares, and enable his people to improve the good things of providence to his glory, and over-rule the evil things thereof for their good.

And as for death, which is reckoned among Christ’s and his people’s enemies, which the apostle calls, _The last enemy that is to be destroyed_, 1 Cor. xv. 26. this is suffered to detain the bodies of believers, as its prisoners, till Christ’s second coming; but it must be destroyed, that so they may be made partakers of complete redemption; and this is also a part of the Mediator’s work, as he raises up his people at the last day. And all these victories over sin, Satan, the world, and death, as they require infinite power, so it is necessary that he, who obtains them, should be a divine Person.

6. It is necessary that the Mediator should be God, that he might bring his people to everlasting salvation, that is, first fit them for, lead them in the way to Heaven, and then receive them to it at last; for this reason, he is styled, _The author and Finisher of our Faith_, Heb. xii. 2. and it is said, that as _he began the good work, so he performs it_, Phil. i. 6. or carries it on to perfection. Grace is Christ’s gift and work; as he purchased it by his blood, while on earth; it is necessary that he should apply it by his power; even as Zerubbabel, who was a type of him, after he had laid the foundation-stone of the temple, at last, _brought forth the head-stone thereof, with shoutings, crying, Grace, grace, unto it_, Zech. iv. 7. so Christ works all our works for us, and in us, till he brings them to perfection, and _presents his people unto himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, but that it should be holy, and without blemish_, Eph. v. 27. and this is certainly a divine work, and consequently he, who performs it, must be a divine Person. And to this we may add,

7. It was necessary that our Mediator should be God, inasmuch as the everlasting happiness of his people consists in the enjoyment of him. He is not only the Author of their complete blessedness, but, as we may express it, the matter of it; they are made happy, not only by him, but in him; accordingly heaven is described as a state, in which they _behold his glory_, John xvii. 24. and _see him as he is_, 1 John iii. 2. therefore, since he is the Fountain of blessedness, it is requisite that he should be God, as well as Man.

II. It was requisite that the Mediator should be Man. When we speak of the necessity of Christ’s incarnation, we are not to understand hereby, that this was absolutely necessary, without supposing the divine will, or purpose, to redeem man; for since our redemption was not in itself necessary, but was only so, as the result of God’s purpose relating thereunto; so Christ’s incarnation was necessary, as a means to accomplish it. This is what divines generally call a conditional necessity[134]; so that since Christ was ordained to be a Mediator between God and man, it was requisite that he should become Man: The reason assigned for it is, that he might perform obedience to the law. That obedience to the law was required, in order to his making satisfaction for sin, we shall have occasion to consider, when we speak of his Priestly office; therefore all that need be observed under this head, is, that this obedience could not be performed by him in the divine nature, in which respect he cannot be under any obligation to perform that which belongs only to those who are creatures, and as such subjects; therefore, if he be made under the law, he must have a nature fitted and disposed to yield obedience.

Some have enquired, whether it was possible for Christ to have answered this end, by taking any other nature into union with his divine Person; or, whether this might have been brought about by his taking on him the nature of angels? I shall not enter so far into this subject, as to determine whether God might, had he pleased, have accepted of obedience in any other nature, fitted for that purpose; but we have ground, from scripture, to conclude, that this was the only way that God had ordained for the redemption of man; and therefore, though Christ might have performed obedience in some other finite nature, or might have taken the nature of angels, this would not, in all respects, have answered those many great ends, which were designed by his incarnation. And therefore, since this was the way in which God ordained that man should be redeemed, it was necessary that he should take the human nature into union with his divine; and inasmuch as he was to yield obedience to the same law, that we had violated, it was necessary that he should be _made of a woman_, as the apostle expresses it, Gal. iv. 4. God had ordained, as an expedient most conducive for his own glory, that he, who was to be our Redeemer, should run the same race with us; and also, that he should suffer what was due to us, as the consequence of our rebellion against him, that so, as _the Captain of our salvation, he should be made perfect through sufferings_, Heb. ii. 10. And inasmuch as sufferings were due to us in our bodies, it was necessary, God having so ordained it, that he should suffer in his body, as well as in his soul; and as death entered into the world by sin, so God ordained it, that we should be redeemed from the power of the grave, by one, who died for us; in which respects, it was necessary that he should be man.

There are also other ends mentioned in this answer, which render this necessary, namely, that he might advance our nature. It was a very great honour which that particular nature, which he assumed, was advanced unto, in its being taken into union with his divine Person. Though it had no intrinsic dignity, or glory, above what other intelligent, finite, sinless beings are capable of; yet it had a greater relative glory than any other creature had, or can have, which may be illustrated by a similitude taken from the body of man, how mean soever it is in itself, yet, when considered in its relation to the soul, that adds a degree of excellency to it, in a relative sense, greater than what belongs to any creature, destitute of understanding; so the human nature of Christ, though it had not in itself a glory greater than what another finite creature might have been advanced to; yet, when considered as united to the divine nature, its glory, in a relative sense may be said to be infinite.

It follows from hence, that since Christ’s being truly and properly man, was a particular instance, in him, of the advancement of our nature, to a greater degree of honour, than what has been conferred on any other creature, this lays the highest obligation on us to admire and adore him; and should be an inducement to us, not to debase that nature which God has, in this respect, delighted to honour, by the commission of those sins, which are the greatest reproach unto it.

Another consequence of Christ’s incarnation, whereby it farther appears that it was requisite that he should be man, is that, in our nature, he might make intercession for us. For the understanding of which, let it be considered, that the divine nature cannot properly speaking, be said to make intercession, since this includes in it an act of worship, and argues the Person, who intercedes, to be dependent, and indigent, which is inconsistent with the self-sufficiency and independency of the Godhead; therefore, had he been only God, he could not have made intercession for us, and consequently this is the necessary result of his incarnation.

_Object. 1._ It may be objected hereunto, that _the Spirit_ is said to _make intercession for the Saints, according to the will of God_, Rom. viii. 27. whereas he has no human nature to make intercession in; therefore Christ might have made intercession for us, though he had not been incarnate.

_Answ._ When the Spirit is said to make intercession for us, this is not to be understood of his appearing in the presence of God, and so offering prayers, or supplications to him in our behalf; but it only intends his enabling us to pray for ourselves, which is an effect of his power, working this grace in us; therefore the apostle, speaking concerning the same thing, says, elsewhere, _God hath sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father_, Gal. iv. 6. that is, enabling us to cry, _Abba, Father_: Such an intercession as this, is not unbecoming a divine Person; and this is what is plainly the sense of those scriptures, in which the Spirit is said to intercede for us. As for Christ’s intercession, it consists, indeed, in his praying for us,[135] rather than enabling us to pray; therefore it was requisite that he should be Man, in order thereunto.

_Object. 2._ It is generally supposed, that Christ made intercession for his people before his incarnation: Thus we cannot but conclude, that he is intended by _the angel of the Lord_, who is represented as pleading for Israel; _O Lord of hosts, how long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusalem, and upon the cities of Judah, against which thou hast had indignation these three-score and ten years?_ Zech. i. 12. and also as pleading in their behalf against the accusations of Satan, _The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan; even the Lord, which hath chosen Jerusalem, rebuke thee: Is not this a brand which is plucked out of the fire?_ chap. iii. 2. If therefore he made intercession at that time, when he had no human nature, his incarnation was not necessary thereunto.

_Answ._ Though we allow that Christ is often represented, in the Old Testament, as interceding for his people; yet these expressions are either proleptical, and do not denote, so much, what Christ then did, as what he would do, after he had assumed our nature; or they imply, that the salvation of the church, under that dispensation, was owing to the intercession that Christ would make after his incarnation, as well as to that satisfaction which he would give to the justice of God in our nature; so that Christ, in those scriptures, is represented as procuring those blessings for his people, by what he would, in reality, do after his incarnation, the virtue whereof is supposed to be extended to them at that time: He did not therefore _formally_, but _virtually_, intercede for them; and consequently it does not prove that his incarnation was not necessary for his making that intercession, which he ever lives to do in the behalf of his church.