Chapter XXIV: Part 24

Moreover, what valuable end is answered by this their change of condition, which might in some measure tend to justify the assertion? Must they live here, that they might perform an extraordinary ministry, to promote the edification of their mortal brethren, whom they found living upon earth? This was not absolutely necessary, for God has appointed other ways for the edification of his church; and, if he did not think fit, before, to send down ministers, to preach the gospel, from heaven, to them, but ordained the common method of preaching it by others, less qualified for this work, who are subject to like infirmities with those to whom they preach, why should we suppose such an alteration in the method of divine providence on this particular occasion?

And if we suppose that they shall continue on earth till Christ’s appearing to judgment, then it must be argued, that they were sent here not only to be helpers of the faith of others, who live therein, but to be exposed, in common with them, to a second warfare upon earth; not, indeed, with flesh and blood, but with those who are represented in the same chapter, in which the first resurrection, and thousand years’ reign, are mentioned, as _compassing the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city_; and therefore they are called back from a triumphant to a militant state.

If it be said, that they shall be admitted into heaven before this battle begins, that can hardly be supposed; for if God send them to be companions with his mortal saints, in their prosperous state, will he call them away when the time of their greatest danger approaches, in which their presence might be of the greatest service to their brethren, who are left to struggle with these difficulties? Therefore, upon the whole, we cannot suppose that any shall, in a literal sense, be raised from the dead, till this glorious, though spiritual reign of Christ shall be at an end, and the day of judgment draws nigh, which is agreeable to the general scope of all those scriptures, which speak of the resurrection and final judgment.

_Object._ But to this it will be objected, that the scripture elsewhere intimates, that there shall be two resurrections; for the apostle says, in 1 Thes. iv. 16. that _the dead in Christ shall rise first_; therefore why may not this resurrection be understood in the same sense with that mentioned in Rev. xx. which has been before considered?

_Answ._ We do not deny but that this resurrection, which the apostle speaks of, must be taken in a literal sense; but let it be observed, that he does not here mention any thing of the thousand years’ reign, but of the day of judgment, when _Christ shall descend from heaven with a shout, and with the voice of the arch-angel_, with which the glory of that day shall begin, and then the dead shall be raised, in which the saints and faithful shall have the pre-eminence; they shall rise first, that is, before others, mentioned in the following verse, _that are alive, who shall be caught up with them in the clouds_. And this shall also be done, before the wicked shall be raised, to the end that, when Christ appears, _they_, as it is said elsewhere, _may appear with him in glory_; and that they may bear a part in the solemnity of that day, and be happy in his presence; when others are raised to shame and everlasting contempt, and filled with the utmost confusion and distress.

Moreover, this first resurrection of those that died in Christ, is not particularly applied to them that suffered martyrdom for him, much less is there any account of its being a thousand years before the general resurrection; therefore it may very well be understood of a resurrection a very short time before it, and consequently gives no countenance to the opinion, which has been before considered, concerning this resurrection, as going before the reign of Christ on earth.

2. There is another scripture brought in defence of another part of their scheme, taken from the apostle’s words, in Rom. viii. 21-23. where he speaks of the _creatures’_ present _bondage_, and future deliverance, and their _waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of their bodies_, which, they suppose, will have its accomplishment, when this reign of Christ begins: but I cannot think that the apostle, in that scripture, intends any thing else, but that the whole creation is liable at present, to the curse, consequent upon man’s fall; and that the deliverance he speaks of, shall be at the general resurrection, when the saints shall be raised immortal and incorruptible, which is what they now wait and hope for.

Thus we have considered the sense that is given of some scriptures, by those who understand the reign of Christ on earth, as attended with various circumstances, which we cannot readily allow of; and shewed, that some of those texts, which are usually brought to support that particular scheme, have reference to the return of the Jews from captivity,[203] and others, that predict their building of Jerusalem, and the temple there, Jer. xxix. 5. Isa. xliv. 28. and the setting up their civil and religious policy, had their accomplishment after their return from the Babylonish captivity; and that those, which seem to look farther, and respect some privileges which they shall enjoy in the last days, will be fulfilled, when they are converted to Christianity, and partakers of many spiritual privileges, in common with the gospel-church; therefore I need only mention two scriptures more, which we understand in a sense very different from what some do, who treat of Christ’s reign on earth. As,

_1st_, That in which we have an account of the general conflagration, which, as was before observed, some few, who give too great scope to their wit and fancy, beyond all the bounds of modesty, and without considering those absurdities that will follow from it, have maintained that it shall be immediately before Christ’s reign on earth begins: the scripture they bring for that purpose, is that in 2 Pet. iii. 10, 13. in which the apostle says, that _the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat; the earth also, and the works that are therein, shall be burnt up. Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens, and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness_. This scripture, it must be confessed, is hard to be understood. We are far from thinking, as some do, that it is only a metaphorical description of some remarkable providences, tending to the ruin of Christ’s enemies, and the advantage of his people; certainly the words are to be taken in a literal sense; for the apostle had been speaking, in the foregoing verses, of the _old world_, which, _being overflown with water, perished_; which is, without doubt, to be taken in a literal sense. And now he speaks, as some call it, of a second deluge, which shall be not by water, but by fire,[204] _in which the heavens and the earth shall pass away_, or be _dissolved_, that is, changed, as to the form thereof, though not annihilated. By _the heavens and the earth_, the learned Mede well understands that part of the frame of nature, that was subjected to the curse, or that is inhabited by Christ’s enemies, and includes in it the earth, water, and air, but not the heavenly bodies, which are not only at a vast distance from it, but it is little more than a point, if compared to them for magnitude. And he also (notwithstanding some peculiarities held by him, as before mentioned, relating to the Millennium) justly observes, that this conflagration shall not be till the end of the world, and consequently it shall be immediately before the day of judgment; and, indeed, the apostle intimates as much, when he speaks of this awful providence, as _reserved to the day of judgment, and perdition of ungodly men_, in ver. 7. The main difficulty to be accounted for, is, what is meant by these _new heavens, and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness_, which are appointed as an habitation for the righteous. Concerning which, if I may be allowed to give my sense thereof, with that humility and modesty that the difficulty of the subject calls for, I cannot think that there is any absurdity, if we suppose, that, by these _new heavens and new earth_, the apostle means, that the form of them shall be so changed, as that they shall be an apartment of heaven, in which, together with those other parts of the frame of nature, which are designed to be the seat of the blessed, the saints shall dwell and reign with Christ for ever.

_2dly_, We shall now consider the sense that may be given of that scripture, in Rev. xx. and more especially what we read therein, concerning the _first resurrection_, in which the martyrs are said _to live_, when this thousand years’ reign begins, and the _rest of the dead not to live, till these thousand years be finished_, in ver. 4, 5. on which the stress of the whole controversy principally depends. I cannot but adhere to their opinion, who think that these words are to be taken in a metaphorical sense; and then they, who were _beheaded for the witness of Jesus_, viz. the martyrs, shall live when Christ’s spiritual reign begins, that is, the cause, for which they suffered martyrdom, shall be revived: this is supposed to have been in a languishing and dying condition, during the reign of Anti-christ, and towards the close thereof, to be at the lowest ebb, and, as it were, dead; I say, this shall be revived, these martyrs shall, as it were, live again, not in their own persons, but in their successors, who espouse the same cause. Before this, the enemies of Christ, and his gospel, persecuted and trampled on his cause, insulted the memory of those that had suffered for it; but afterwards, when it is said, _Babylon is fallen, is fallen_, then Christ’s cause revives, and that which was victorious over it dies, and shall not rise again, or be in any capacity to give disturbance to the church, till the thousand years are finished, and Satan is loosed again out of prison, to give life and spirit to it; and then we read of a new war begun, a fresh battle fought, _the nations deceived, the camp of the saints compassed about_; and this will continue till Christ shall come, and put an end to it at the day of judgment, when the devil shall be _cast into the lake of fire and brimstone_. In this sense some, not without ground, understand the account which is given of the _slaying_ and _rising_ of the _witnesses_, Rev. xi. 7, 11. as signifying that the gospel, which before had been persecuted, and the preaching thereof prohibited, shall then prevail without restraint. The _witnesses’ death_, denotes their being silenced; their _rising_ and _standing upon their feet_, their having liberty again to preach. And therefore why may we not understand the resurrection, in the chapter we are now considering, as taken in the same sense? And this agrees very well with the sense of ver. 6. in which it is said, concerning them, who _have a part in the first resurrection_, that is, the saints, who live and reign with Christ, _on such this second death hath no power_, that is, whatever the enemies of the church may attempt against them, after this thousand years reign, shall be to no purpose; for they shall not prevail, their cause shall never die again. Or, if it be applied to their persons, the meaning is, that they shall not die eternally. Eternal death is a punishment to be inflicted on their enemies, who shall _be cast into the lake of fire_, which is expressly called the _second death_, in ver. 14. But these, as it is said, in Rev. ii. 11. shall not be _hurt of it_, i. e. not exposed to it; but, as they have lived with Christ, in a spiritual sense, on earth, so they shall live with him for ever in heaven.

We are, in giving this sense of the text, under a kind of necessity to recede from the literal sense thereof, because we cannot altogether reconcile that to the analogy of faith. And it will not seem strange to any, who consider the mystical or allegorical style in which this book of the Revelation is written, that this text should be understood in the same sense: However, that this sense may be farther justified, let it be considered, that it is not disagreeable to what we find in many other scriptures, that speak of the church’s deliverance from its troubles, under the metaphor of a _resurrection_; and of the destruction of its enemies, under the metaphor of _death_. Thus the Babylonish captivity, and Israel’s deliverance from it, is described, in Ezek. xxxvii. 1-12. The former by a metaphor taken from a _valley full of dry bones_; the latter by another taken from their being _raised out of their graves, living and standing on their feet an exceeding great army_. And, in Ezra ix. 9. we read of God’s extending mercy to them, who were before bond-men, and not forsaking them in their bondage, giving them an opportunity to set up the temple and worship of God; this is called, _giving them a reviving_; and the prophet, speaking concerning the captivity, in Lam. iii. 6. says, _He has set me in dark places, as they that be dead of old_; and the prophet Isaiah speaks concerning their return from captivity, as a resurrection from the dead, _Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise; awake, and sing ye that dwell in the dust_, Isa. xxvi. 19.

Many other scriptures might be cited, out of the writings of the prophets, to justify this metaphorical sense of the words, _death_, and _resurrection_ and also some out of the New Testament, of which I need only refer to one, which has a particular respect to the subject under our present consideration, when the apostle says, that the _receiving of them_, to wit, of the church of the Jews, when converted, shall be as _life from the dead_, Rom. xi. 15. therefore the scripture gives countenance to its being called a _resurrection_.

On the other hand, we might refer to some scriptures that speak of the ruin of the church’s enemies, under the metaphor of a state of death: thus, in Isa. xxvi. 14. _They are dead, they shall not live; they are deceased, they shall not rise; therefore hast thou visited and destroyed them, and made all their memory to perish_; and, in chap. xiv. he describes the utter destruction of the Chaldeans, the church’s enemies, by whom they had been carried captive, in a very beautiful manner, and carries on the metaphor, taken from persons departed out of this world, in. ver. 9, 10, 11. and says, in particular, concerning the king of Babylon, _Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, the noise of thy viols; the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee_; which signifies the political death of that empire, and the utter inability which followed upon this, of their giving disturbance to the church of God, as they had formerly done. These, and many other scriptures of the like nature, may, in some measure, justify the sense we have given of the scripture before mentioned, relating to the death and resurrection of Christ’s cause, for which his martyrs suffered, and the death of the Anti-christian cause, which ensued thereupon.

Thus concerning Christ’s reign on earth, and what may be probably supposed to be the sense of those scriptures that are brought in defence thereof. We have not entered into the particular consideration of what is said concerning the time, or the number of years, which this glorious dispensation shall continue. We read, indeed, of Christ’s _reigning a thousand years_, by which we are not to understand the eternal exercise of his government; for it is said not only to be _on earth_, but this period is also considered, as what shall have an end: which that excellent Father, whom I before mentioned, did not duly consider, when he reckoned this as a probable sense of this thousand years, and produces that scripture to justify his sense of the words, in which it is said, that _God has remembered his covenant for ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations_, Psal. cv. 8. by which we are to understand, that God will establish his covenant with his people, and make good the promises thereof throughout all the ages of eternity. This, indeed, sufficiently proves that a thousand years might be taken for eternity, agreeably to the sense of scripture; but it is plain, from the context, that it is not to be so taken here, in Rev. xx.

As for the other sense he gives of this _thousand years_,[205] namely, that they might be understood as containing a great but indeterminate number of years, in the latter part of the last thousand which the world shall continue, so that, by a figurative way of speaking, a part of a thousand years may be called a thousand years;[206] this I will not pretend to argue against, nor to say that those divines are in the wrong, who suppose that a thousand years is put for a great number of years, and that it does not belong to us to say how many; I say, whether we are to acquiesce in this, or in the literal sense of the words, I will not determine; only we must conclude, as we have scripture ground for it, that they shall end a little before Christ’s coming to judgment; during which short interval it is said, Satan _will be loosed a little season_, and make some fresh efforts against the church, till he, and those that are spirited and excited by him, to give disturbance to it, perish in the attempt, and are cast into the lake of fire and brimstone. This is all that I shall say concerning the time appointed for this glorious reign, our principal design being to speak concerning the advantages that the church shall enjoy under it.

We have endeavoured to avoid two extremes, namely, that of those who do not put a just difference between it and the heavenly state; as also another extreme, which we have not yet mentioned, which several modern writers have given into, who suppose, that this thousand years’ reign is long since past, and that the binding of Satan therein consisted only in some degrees of restraint laid on him, and that the reign itself contained in it only some advantages, comparatively small, that the church enjoyed at that time, and that the thousand years’ reign began in Constantine’s time, when the empire became Christian, about the year of our Lord 300, and that they ended about the year 1300, when the church met with some new difficulties from the eastern parts of the world, which they suppose to be intended by Gog and Magog.[207] But we cannot see sufficient reason to adhere to this opinion, because the state of the church, when Satan is said to be bound a thousand years, is represented as attended with a greater degree of spiritual glory, holiness, purity of doctrine, and many other blessings attending the preaching the gospel, than we are given to understand by any history that it has yet enjoyed.

As to what concerns the general method, in which we have insisted on this subject, I hope we have not maintained any thing that is derogatory to the glory of Christ’s kingdom, nor what has a tendency to detract from the real advantage of the saints. Do they, on the other side of the question, speak of his reigning? so do we. They, indeed, consider him as reigning in his human nature, and conversing therein with his saints; which opinion we cannot give into, for reasons before mentioned: but it is not inconsistent with the glory of Christ to assert, as we have done, that he shall reign spiritually; and the consequence hereof shall be, not the external pomp and grandeur of his subjects, but their being adorned with purity and universal holiness, and enjoying as much peace, as they have reason to expect in any condition short of heaven. Moreover, we have not advanced any thing that has a tendency to detract from the spiritual blessings and advantages of Christ’s kingdom, which the saints shall enjoy in this happy period of time. If, notwithstanding all this, it be said, that there are some advantages which the contrary scheme of doctrine supposes that the saints shall enjoy on earth, beyond what we think they have ground to expect from scripture; nevertheless, their not enjoying them here will be fully compensated with a greater degree of glory, which they shall have when they reign with Christ in heaven; which leads us to consider,

The eternity of Christ’s mediatorial kingdom; concerning which it is said, _He shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever, and of his kingdom there shall be no end_, Luke i. 33. As he is described, by the apostle, as a _Priest for ever_, Heb. v. 6. and as _ever living to make intercession for those that come unto God by him_, chap. vii. 25. so he shall exercise his kingly office for ever; not according to the present method of the administration thereof, but in a way adapted to that glorified state, in which his subjects shall be, in another world.

There is, indeed, a scripture that seems to assert the contrary, which the Socinians give a very perverse sense of, as though it were inconsistent with his proper deity; and accordingly they suppose, that, as he was constituted a divine Person, or had the honour of a God, or king, conferred on him, when he ascended into heaven, as the reward of the faithful discharge of his ministry on earth; so this was designed to continue no longer than to the end of the world, when he is to be set on a level with other inhabitants of heaven, and _be subject to the Father_, when _God shall be all in all_. This they suppose to be the meaning of the Apostle’s words, in 1 Cor. xv. 24, 25, 28. _Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule, and all authority and power, for he must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet; and when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him, that put all things under him, that God may be all in all_. It must be acknowledged, that this is one of those things, in Paul’s epistles, that are hard to be understood; but I humbly conceive that we may give a sense of it, very remote from that but now mentioned, which is subversive of his Godhead, and of the eternity of his kingdom. Therefore, for the understanding thereof, let it be considered,

(1.) That when the apostle speaks of the _end coming when he shall deliver up the kingdom to the Father_; by the kingdom we may, without the least strain on the sense of the text, understand his material kingdom, or the subjects of his kingdom, which is very agreeable to that sense of the word, both in scripture and in common modes of speaking; as when we call the inhabitants of a city, the city; so we call the subjects of a kingdom, the kingdom: taking the words in this sense, we must suppose, that the subjects of Christ’s kingdom are his trust and charge, and that he is to deliver them up to the Father at last, as persons whom he has governed in such a way, as that the great ends of his exercising his kingly office, have been fully answered, as to what concerns his government in this lower world. This is no improbable sense of Christ’s delivering up the kingdom to the Father.

But it may also be taken in another sense, to wit, for the form of Christ’s kingdom, or the present mode of government, exercised towards those who are in an imperfect state: this shall _be delivered up_, that is, he shall cease to govern his people in such a way as he now does; but it doth not follow, from hence, that he shall not continue to govern them, in a way adapted to the heavenly state.

And when it is said, that _he shall put down all rule and all authority and power_, the meaning is, that all civil and ecclesiastical government, as it is now exercised in the world, or the church, shall be put down, as useless, or disagreeable to the heavenly state, but it does not follow, from hence, that he shall lay aside his own authority and power.

(2.) When it is said, in ver. 25. that _he must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet_, it does not imply that he shall not reign afterwards, but that he shall not cease to reign till then, which is the sense of that parallel scripture, in which it is said, _Sit thou at my right-hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool_, Psal. cx. 1. which does not denote that he shall, after his enemies are made his footstool, sit no longer at God’s right hand, as advanced there to the highest honour. It is very evident, from several scriptures, as well as our common mode of speaking, that the word _Until_ does not always signify the cessation of what is said to be done before, but only the continuance thereof till that time, as well as afterwards: thus it is said, _Our eyes wait upon the Lord our God, until that he have mercy upon us_, Psal. cxxiii. 2. by which we are not to understand, that, when God extends mercy, the eyes of his people cease to wait upon him, but we will not leave off waiting upon him, until we have received the mercies we hope for; and, after that, we will continue to wait for those mercies that we shall farther stand in need of; and elsewhere Job says, _Until I die, I will not remove mine integrity from me; mine heart shall not reproach me, as long as I live_, Job xxvii. 5-7. This does not imply that he would retain his integrity no longer than he lived. If the word _Until_ be frequently used in this sense, then there is no ground to suppose, that when it is said _Christ shall reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet_, that it denotes that he shall not reign to eternity, nor any longer than till all things be subdued unto him: but, indeed, it rather argues, that he shall reign for ever, than that he shall cease to reign; for when all enemies are removed out of the way, and his right to govern is no longer contested by them, shall he then cease to exercise that sovereign dominion which he has over all things?

(3.) Since the main difficulty, and the greatest stress of the argument brought against the eternity of Christ’s kingdom, is what the apostle farther adds, in ver. 28. of this chapter, that _when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him, that God may be all in all_. It is said, indeed, that the Son shall be subject to the Father, _viz._ as man; but can any one suppose that the Son is not now subject to the Father? And when it is farther added, God shall be all in all, is it to be supposed that he is not now so? If this be far from being the true meaning of these words, then the sense they give thereof is not just, but we are to understand them thus, that in the end, when all the ends of Christ’s administering his mediatorial government in this lower world are answered, and the present form or method of administration shall cease, then it shall appear, that the whole plan thereof had the most direct tendency to promote the Father’s glory, or to answer those most valuable ends for which this mediatorial kingdom was erected; and, by this means, it will more eminently appear, than ever it has done before, that this work is from God, and worthy of him. If the Son’s kingdom had not been subjected, or subservient to the Father’s glory, the subjects thereof would not have been delivered up, or presented to the Father, as the Mediator’s trust and charge committed to him; and, if God had not been all in all, or the administration of Christ’s kingdom had not been the effect of divine power, in all the branches thereof, it would not have had so glorious and successful an issue, as it will appear to have in the great day. This I take to be the plain sense of this scripture, which cannot reasonably be denied, if we consider that it is very agreeable to our common mode of speaking, to say, that a thing is, when it appears to be what it is, which may be thus illustrated: Suppose a king has gained a victory over his enemies, or quelled some civil broils, or tumults, in his kingdom, he may say, upon that occasion, Now I am king; that is, I appear to be so, or my establishment in the kingdom seems less precarious. We have an instance of the like mode of speaking in scripture, when David says upon the occasion of bringing the affairs of his kingdom to a settled state, after Absalom’s rebellion, _Do I not know that I am this day king over Israel?_ 2 Sam. xix. 22. that is, I appear to be so, since that, which tended to unhinge, or give disturbance to my government, is removed out of the way.

Moreover, that things are said to be, when they appear to be, is agreeable to that mode of speaking used by the Israelites, when, upon their receiving the fullest conviction that the Lord was God, pursuant to Elijah’s prayer, by an extraordinary display of his glory, in working a miracle to confute their idolatry, they fell on their faces, and said, _The Lord he is God_; that is, he now appears to be so, by those extraordinary effects of his power, which we have beheld. If therefore this be no uncommon mode of speaking, why may we not apply it to that text which we are now endeavouring to explain? and so conclude, that the sense but now given of the Son’s being subject to the Father, and God’s being all in all, contains in it nothing absurd, or contrary to the scripture way of speaking, and consequently the eternity of Christ’s kingdom is not overthrown thereby; and therefore we must conclude, that as his kingly government is now exercised in a way agreeable to the present condition of his church, so it shall be exercised in a glorious manner, suited to the heavenly state, when all his saints and subjects shall be brought there.

Thus we have considered Christ, as executing his offices of Prophet, Priest, and King; we now proceed to speak concerning the twofold state in which they have been, are, or shall be executed by him; and first concerning his state of humiliation.

Footnote 191:

_See Quest. LXII, LXIII._

Footnote 192:

_See Quest. LXXVIII._

Footnote 193:

_See Page 257._

Footnote 194:

_Vid. Burnet. Tellur. Theor. Lib._ iv.

Footnote 195:

_Justin Martyr seems to speak of it not only as his own opinion, but
as that which was generally held by the orthodox in his day, joins the
belief hereof with that of the resurrection of the dead, and supposes
it to be founded on the writings of some of the prophets. Vid. Justin
Martyr Dialog. cum. Tryph. Jud. page 307._ Εγω δε, και ει τινες εισιν
ορθογνουμονες κατα παντα Χρισιανοι, και σαρκος ανας ασιν γενησεθαι
επισαμεθα, και χιλια ελη εν Ιερουσαλημ οικοδομηθειση και κοσμηθειση
και πλατυνθειση, οι προθηται Ιεζεχιηλ, και Ησαιας, και οι αλλοι
ομολογουσιν. _And Irenæus_ [_Vid. advers. Hær. Lib. V. cap. 33._] _not
only gives into this opinion, but intimates, that it was brought into
the church before his time, by one Papias, cotemporary with Polycarp,
and that he recieved it from those who had it imparted to them by the
apostle John: But Eusebius, [Vid. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. Lib. III. cap.
33._] _though he speaks concerning this Papias, as one who was
intimate with Polycarp, notwithstanding represents him as a very weak
man; and therefore there is little credit to be given to his account
of this matter, as agreeable to the apostle’s sentiments or writings;
and Irenæus himself, in the place before mentioned, cites a passage
out of the same author, which, he pretends, he received from those
that had it from the apostle John, concerning a certain time, in which
there shall be vines, which shall produce ten thousand branches, and
each of these as many smaller branches; and each of these smaller
branches have ten thousand twigs, and every twig shall bear ten
thousand clusters of grapes, and every cluster ten thousand grapes;
which shews that the man was ready to swallow any fable he heard; and,
if it was told him so, to father it upon the apostle, which discovers
how little credit was to be given to what he says concerning this
opinion, especially as he explains it, as transmitted to the church by
the apostle John. And Tertullian is also mentioned, as giving some
occasional hints, which shew that he was of this opinion. And
Lactantius, who, in his Ciceronian style, describes the happy
condition that the church shall be in, (without having much regard to
those spiritual privileges that it shall enjoy, in which sense the
predictions of the prophets, concerning it, are principally to be
understood) takes his plan more especially from some things that are
said concerning it, in the Sybilline oracles. Vid. Lanctant. de vita
beat. Lib. VII. cap. 24. & Epitom. cap. 11._

Footnote 196:

_Vid. Aug. de Civ. Dei. Lib. XX. cap. 7._

Footnote 197:

_Vid. Mede Commet. min. in Apocal. cap. xix. and Dr. More, and others,
who are of the same opinion as to this matter._

Footnote 198:

_See Mede’s Works, Book IV. Epist. 17. Page 938-940._

Footnote 199:

_As for the story that Mede relates, to give countenance to this
opinion, concerning Christ’s appearing, in a glorious manner, upon the
Jews demanding such an extraordinary event, (after a public
disputation, held three days, between Gregentius, an Arabian Bishop,
and Herbanus, a Jew, a multitude of spectators being present, both
Jews and Christians) and signifying that he was the same Person that
their fathers had crucified; and their being first struck blind, as
Paul was, and then, like him, converted and baptized, there are
several things, in this account, that seem fabulous and incredible;
though it is not improbable that there was a disputation held between
Gregentius and the Jews, about the truth of the Christian religion,
about the year of our Lord 470; or, as others suppose, 570: yet it is
much to be questioned, whether the account we have of it be not
spurious, written, by one who calls himself by that name, in Greek,
about three or four hundred years since; and especially, because so
extraordinary a miracle, wrought in an age when miracles had, for so
considerable a time, ceased, is not taken notice of by other writers,
of more reputation in the age in which it is said to be wrought,
especially since it would have been one of the most extraordinary
proofs of the Christian religion that have been given since our
Saviour’s time. And it is very strange, that, as the result hereof,
five millions and a half of the Jews should be converted at once, by
this miracle, and yet this thing be passed over in silence by other
writers; and it is very much to be questioned, whether there were such
a multitude of Jews gathered together in one kingdom, and, indeed,
whether that kingdom consisted of such a number of people; and, if
there were so many Jews, we must suppose that there was an equal
number of Christians present; but that so many should be present at
one disputation, seems incredible to a very great degree. Vid. Gregen.
disputat. cum Herban. fol. 192, & 200. & Cave. Hist. lit. Tom. I. page
363._

Footnote 200:

_Moriar ut videam._

Footnote 201:

_Vid. Mede de Resurrec. prim. Lib. III. Page 710, 749, 750._

Footnote 202:

_Vid. Aug. de civ. Dei, Lib._ xx. _cap. 7._

Footnote 203:

_See_ Ezek. xxxvii. 21. _and_ Jer. xxxvii. 7-13. _& alibi passim_.

Footnote 204:

_So Irenæus styles it, Adv. Hær. Lib. V. cap. 29._ Diluvium
superveniet Ignis.

Footnote 205:

_Vid. Aug. de Civ. Dei. Lib. XX. cap. 7._

Footnote 206:

_This is very agreeable to the scripture-mode of speaking; nothing is
more common than for the cardinal number to be put for the ordinal;
and so the meaning is, that this reign shall continue to the
thousandth year, or till the last 1000 years of the world shall have
an end, what part soever of his 1000 years it began in. Thus God tells
Abraham, in Gen._ xv. _13. that_ his seed shall be a stranger in a
land that is not theirs, _to wit, Egypt, and shall_ serve them, and
they shall afflict them 400 years; _whereas it is certain that his
seed were not above 215 years in Egypt, and they were not slaves, or
afflicted there 100 years; therefore the meaning is,_ q. d. _that they
shall afflict them till 400 years are expired, from this time._

Footnote 207:

_See Napier on the Revelation, prop. 33, 34. page 61, 62._

Quest. XLVI., XLVII., XLVIII.

QUEST. XLVI. _What was the estate of Christ’s humiliation?_

ANSW. The estate of Christ’s humiliation was that low condition,
wherein he, for our sakes, emptying himself of his glory, took upon
him the form of a servant, in his conception and birth, life, death,
and, after his death, until his resurrection.

QUEST. XLVII. _How did Christ humble himself in his conception and
birth?_

ANSW. Christ humbleth himself in his conception, in that, being from
all eternity, the Son of God, in the bosom of the Father, he was
pleased, in the fulness of time, to become the Son of man, made of a
woman of low estate, and to be born of her; with divers
circumstances of more than ordinary abasement.

QUEST. XLVIII. _How did Christ humble himself in his life?_

ANSW. Christ humbled himself in his life by subjecting himself to
the law, which he perfectly fulfilled, and by conflicting with the
indignities of the world, temptations of Satan, and infirmities in
his flesh; whether common to the nature of man, or particularly
accompanying that his low condition.

In considering Christ’s low and humble state, while he was in this world, we may observe, that this is styled his _emptying himself of his glory_, when _he took on him the form of a servant_: thus the apostle expresses it, in Phil. ii. 7. for the words,[208] which we render, _he made himself of no reputation_, are to be so understood. Now, since his incarnation is so expressed, we must, before we proceed any farther on this subject, enquire, how this was inconsistent with his Godhead? and, whether he might be said, in taking our nature, to empty or humble himself? and also, whether his incarnation may, properly speaking, be called a part of his humiliation?

There is a sense in which he may be said to humble himself in his divine nature; as, when we read of _God’s humbling himself, to behold the things that are in heaven and in the earth_, Psal. cxiii. 6. This is so far from being a dishonour to him, that it is expressive of his glory, as it argues, that there is an infinite distance between him and the creature. In this sense, the second Person of the Godhead might be said to humble himself, in assuming the human nature, and thereby, as it were, casting a veil over his glory. This is such a sense of Christ’s humiliation, as denotes infinite condescension, but no diminution, or loss of divine glory; neither can this be styled his emptying himself of glory, or humbling himself, in that sense in which the apostle expresses it, as above mentioned. It cannot be denied, but that Christ’s incarnation was the highest instance of condescension; and, if nothing more be intended than this, when persons speak of Christ’s humbling himself in his incarnation, or taking our nature into union with his divine, we are far from denying it.

But we are not now speaking of Christ’s humbling himself in a relative sense, as God, but his being in a state of humiliation, as God-man Mediator; in which sense, the act of incarnation, or taking the human nature into union with his divine Person, cannot, properly speaking, be styled a branch of his mediatorial humiliation; for that which tends to constitute the Person of the Mediator, cannot be said to belong antecedently to him as Mediator. For the understanding of which, we may observe,

1. That the Person of Christ is to be considered in two different respects, _viz._ as God, or as Mediator; in the former sense, he was, from eternity, a divine Person, and would have been so, if he had not been Mediator: but when we speak of his Person, as Mediator, we always consider him as God-man.[209]

2. Every mediatorial act,[210] according to the most proper and literal sense thereof, supposes the constitution of his Person, as God-man Mediator, and consequently it supposes him to be incarnate. This is evident, because what he did here on earth was performed by him, in obedience to, and as having received a commission from, the Father; which could not be performed any otherwise than in his human nature.

3. Christ could not be said to assume the human nature into union with his divine Person, as God-man, for that implies a contradiction in terms; nor could it be said, that, before this, he performed any act of obedience to the law, for that supposes the human nature to be assumed, and therefore is consequent to his incarnation.

4. For our farther understanding this matter, we may distinguish between the act of incarnation, or taking the human nature into union with his divine Person; and the state in which he was, after this. The former was an instance of divine condescension; the latter, in the most proper sense, was a branch of his mediatorial humiliation. And this leads us to consider the various instances in which Christ is said to have humbled himself, in some following answers, namely, in his birth, life, death, and after his death.

I. Christ humbled himself in his birth; and that,

1. In that he submitted to be in a state of infancy, in common with all, who come into the world. This is the most unactive state of life, in which we are under a natural incapacity of enjoying, or conversing with God, or being of any other use, than objectively, to men, inasmuch as the new-born infant is destitute, at least, of the regular exercise of thought; and is also exposed to various evils, that attend its infantile state; sensible of a great deal of pain and uneasiness, which renders it the object of compassion; and knows not what is the secret cause thereof, nor how to seek redress. This stage of life our Saviour passed through, and thereby discovered a great degree of humiliation.

We have no reason to think, with the Papists[211], that, during his infancy, he had the perfect exercise of his reasoning powers, as though he had been in a state of manhood, as supposing that the contrary would have been a dishonour to him. For, if it were in no wise unbecoming the divine nature to continue its union with his body, when separate from his soul, and therefore in a state of the greatest inactivity, it could be no dishonour for it to be united to his human nature, though we suppose it to have been, during his infancy, in that state, in which other infants are, as having the powers and faculties of the soul not deduced into act, as they afterwards are; therefore we can reckon this no other than a groundless and unnecessary conjecture, and cannot but admire this instance of his humiliation, while he was an infant. And, indeed, since he came to redeem infants, as well as others, it was becoming the wisdom and goodness of God, that he should be like them, in most other respects, except in their being born guilty of Adam’s sin. If his passing through the other ages of life was designed for our advantage, as he was therein like unto us, and as the apostle says, able to sympathize with us, in the various miseries that attend them; so this affords the like argument for that peculiar compassion, which he has for infants, under those evils that they are liable to.

What we have here asserted, against those who think it a dishonour to him, to suppose, that he was liable to any imperfection, as to knowledge, during his infancy, is not to be reckoned a groundless conjecture, without sufficient reason to support it; since it is expressly said, in scripture, in Luke ii. 52. that he _increased in wisdom_ as well as _stature_; therefore we suppose, that Christ’s humiliation began in those natural infirmities, which he was liable to, that are inseparable from a state of infancy.

2. Another branch of Christ’s humiliation, respecting his birth, was, that he should be born of a woman of very low degree in the world, rather than of one, whose circumstances and character therein were superior to those of all others, and called for an equal degree of respect from them. The blessed virgin was, indeed in a spiritual sense, honoured and respected above all women, as the salutation given her, by the angel, imports, _Hail thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee; Blessed art thou among women_, Luke i. 28. notwithstanding, it is plain she was far from being honourable in the opinion of the world. It is true, she was, of the seed of David, which was a princely line: But the sceptre was now departed from it; therefore, when our Saviour is said to have _the throne of his father David_, chap. i. 32. given him by God, it is certain he had it not from his parents, in a political sense. It is called, indeed, the throne of David, as referring to that promise made to David, 2 Sam. vii. 12-16. that one should descend from him whom God would _set on his throne, whose kingdom he would establish for ever_. What relates to the establishment of David’s kingdom, and the eternity of it, certainly looks farther than the reign of Solomon, or the succession of kings, who were of that line; so that David’s kingdom continuing for ever, denotes the perpetuity thereof, in Christ’s being set, in a spiritual sense, on his throne, which seems to be the meaning of the angel’s words, _He shall sit on the throne of his father David_. He had not, indeed, a right to David’s crown by natural descent from him, for that seems contrary to what was foretold of him; for though it is said, that _a rod shall come of the stem of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots_; Isa. xi. 1. which plainly refers to our Saviour, as being of the seed of David; yet it is as plainly intimated, that he was not to inherit the crown of David, in a political sense, by right of natural descent from him, inasmuch as it is said, _He shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground_, chap. liii. 2.

To this we may add; that his mother’s condition in the world appears to have been very low, in that she was treated with an uncommon degree of neglect, as it is particularly remarked, Luke ii. 7. designing to set forth our Saviour’s humiliation in his birth, that _she brought forth her first-born Son, and wrapt him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn_. No room, because his mother was poor, and therefore was treated in such a manner; better accommodations were reserved for others, who, at that time, in which there was great resort to Bethlehem, were better able to satisfy the mercenary demands of those, at whose house they lodged.

As for Joseph his reputed father, he was not one of the great men of this world, but lived by his industry, his occupation being that of _a carpenter_, Mat. xiii. 55. This was sometimes objected against our Saviour by his enemies, who did not consider, that the mean condition of his parents was a part of that state of humiliation, which he was to pass through, in discharging the work for which he came into the world, and plainly discovered, that he cast the utmost contempt on all the external pomp and grandeur thereof, and thought no honours worthy of his receiving, but such as were of a spiritual nature.

3. There is another circumstance of humiliation, taken from the places of our Saviour’s birth and residence. He was born in Bethlehem, a city, which though once esteemed honourable when David dwelt there: yet, at this time, it was reckoned, by the Jews, not as one of the principal cities of Judah. The prophet Micah styles it, _Little among the thousands of Judah_, Micah v. 2. But as for the place of his abode, Nazareth, that was despised, even to a proverb; so that the Jews reckoned, that nothing good or great could come from thence. Thus Nathaniel speaks their common sense, when he says, _Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?_ John i. 46. And this was afterwards improved against him, as an argument that he was no prophet; when the Jews say, not concerning this place alone, but the whole country, in which it was, to wit, Galilee, _Out of it ariseth no prophet_, chap. vii. 51. And this, is expressly intimated, as a design of providence, that it should be a part of his humiliation, as it is said, _He dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that it might be fulfilled, which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene_, Matt. ii. 23. by which we are not to understand, that any of the prophets foretold this in express words, as having particular reference to the place where he lived: But the meaning is, that as the prophets, with one consent, spake of him, as being in a most low and humble state, so this was a particular instance hereof; and, in that respect, what was spoken by them, concerning his state of humiliation, in various instances, as fulfilled in this[212].

II. Christ’s state of humiliation appeared throughout his whole life, and that in several instances.

1. In his subjecting himself to the law; and accordingly he was under an obligation to yield obedience to God in every thing that was required of him, during the whole course of his life. This, indeed, was the necessary result of his incarnation; so that he no sooner became man, but he was under a law, which no creature is, or can be, exempted from. Nevertheless, it was so far founded on his own consent, as he consented to be incarnate, which was certainly an instance of infinite condescension; and his being, in pursuance thereof, actually made under the law, was a branch of his mediatorial humiliation.

_1st_, He was made under the law, that is, he was obliged to obey the precepts thereof; and that not only of the moral law, which, as to some of its precepts, the best of creatures are under a natural obligation to yield obedience to; but, besides this, there were several positive laws, which he submitted to yield obedience to, in common with these he came to redeem, which obligation he perfectly fulfilled, as it is observed in what he says to John the Baptist, _Thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness_, Mat. iii. 15. _q. d._ it becometh me, in common with all mankind, to yield perfect obedience to the law; and elsewhere he speaks of himself, as coming into the world _to fulfil the law_, chap. v. 17. And we may observe, that it was not one single act, but a course of obedience, that he performed, during his whole life, as it is said, in this answer, he perfectly fulfilled the law, which is agreeable to that sinless perfection, which is ascribed to him in scripture.