Truths Victory Over Error, Chapter 8
CHAP. VIII. Of CHRIT the Mediator.
Question I.
DID the Son of GOD, when the fulness of time was come, take upon him Mans Nature, with all the essential Properties, and common Infirmities thereof, yet without sin; being conceived by the power of the holy Ghost, in the Womb of the Virgin Mary, of her substance?
Yes. Iohn 1. 1, 14. 1 Iohn 5. 20. Heb. 2. 14, 16, 17. Luke 1. 27, 31, 35.
Well then, do not those Hereticks called Marcionits, and the Anabaptists err, who maintain, That Christ is not a true Man, but onelyonly the Appearance, Shape, or Form of a Man?
Yes.
Do not likewise the Manicheans err, who maintain, That the Body of Christ, is not of the substance of the Virgin Mary, but a heavenly Body, brought from Heaven to the Womb of the Virgin?
Yes.
By what reasons are they confuted?
(1) Because, Christ is said to be made of a Woman; Gal. 4. 4. (2) Because, the Word was made Flesh; Iohn 1. 4. (3) By an induction of the essential parts of a Man, and sinless infirmities, which were found in him. First, He was endued with a rational Soul; Iohn 12. 27. Secondly, He had a real and substantial Body, and denyed he was a Spirit only; Luke 24. 39. Thirdly, Christ did hunger; Mat. 4. 2. Fourthly, He was wearied, and thirsty; Iohn 4. 6. Lastly, He was sad▪ he groaned in Spirit, and was troubled; Iohn 11. 33. and verse 15. He wept. None of which sinless perturbations, can agree to an Appearance, Shape, or Form of a Man. (4) Because, He was made of the seed of David, according to the Flesh; Rom. 1. 3. and descended of the Iews; Rom. 9. 5. (5) Because, the promises were made in the seed of Abraham; Gen. 12. 3. and Gen. 18. 18. (6) Because, He took not on him the nature of Angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham, wherefore in all things, it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren; Heb. 2. 16, 17. (7) Because, otherwise, he could not have satisfied in our place, the Justice of GOD: seing it had been unjust, for another Nature to have suffered punishment, than that Nature which had offended and sinned.
Quest. II.
ARE there two whole, perfect, and distinct Natures in Christ, the God-head, and the Man-hood, inseparably joyned together, in one person?
Yes: 1 Cor. 8. 6. Eph. 4. 5.
Well then, do not the Nestorians err, who maintain, the Union between the Divine and Humane Nature, not to be Hypostatical, but only by way of Assistence: and that, as there are two Natures in Christ, so there are two Persons, one proper to the Divine Nature, another proper to the Humane Nature?
Yes.
By what reasons are they confuted?
(1) Because, unless Christ-God-Man were but one Person, the Merit of his Death, would not be of so great value, as to redeem the Elect from infinite, and eternal punishment: seeing hence cometh, all the value, and worth of his death, that the same Person, who was God, did suffer, and die for us. (2) Because, otherwise, Christ had been swallowed up, and devoured by the wrath of God, against the sins of the Elect, which he himself undertook. (3) Because, Christ, if he had not been both God and Man, in one Person, he could not have been a Mediator: for a Mediator must be One; 1 Tim. 2. 5.
Quest. III.
IS the Godhead, and Man-hood in Christ, united without Conversion, Composition, or Confusion?
Yes. Luke 1. 35. Col. 2. 9. Rom. 9. 5. 1 Peter 3. 18. 1 Tim. 3. 16.
Well then, do not those old Hereticks, the Eutichians err, who maintain, that as the Person of Christ is One, so his Nature is made One, by a composition, or Confusion of the two Natures together?
Yes.
By what reasons are they confuted?
(1) Because, such a Composition, is impossible, seing the Divine Nature, is most perfect, and cannot lose any, of its own perfection, unless we would affirm, the Divine Nature, to be mutable, and changeable. (2) Because, that same Christ, who according to the Flesh descended of the Iews, is over all, God blessed for ever; Rom. 9. 5. (3) Because, this doctrine takes away all means of Mediation: for, by taking away the distinction between the Natures, they take away the Natures themselves: and so neither could Christ have suffered in our place, because not Man: neither could he have given any vertue, value, or worth, to his sufferings, because not God.
Quest. IV.
DID Christ endure most grievous▪ torments immediately in his soul?
Yes. Mat. 26. 37, 38. Luke 22. 44. Matth. 27. 46.
Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that the soul of Christ, even from its first creation, was never affected with any sadness, or sinless perturbation of mind?
Yes.
By what reasons are they confuted?
(1) Because, the Scripture testifies, that his soul was sad unto death; Matth. 26. 37. (2) Because, the Apostle Iohn testifies, that when Christ saw Mary weeping for her brother Lazarus, he groaned in Spirit, and was troubled; Iohn 11. 33. Iohn 12. 27. (3) Because, his soul, was exceeding sorrowful, even unto death, as was cited before, Matth. 26. 37. (4) The same thing is proven from Christs desertion, whereby the actual fruition, and enjoying of Gods favour, as to his sense, was interrupted, and broken in the midst for a time, but in no wise, altogether taken away, which made him cry upon the Cross: My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken Me. Matth. 27. 46. Eph. 5. 2.
Quest. V.
HAD the Lord Iesus, by his perfect obedience, and sacrifice of himself, which he through the eternal Spirit, once offered up unto God, fully satisfied, the Iustice of his Father?
Yes: Rom. 5. 9. Rom. 3. 25, 26. Heb. 9. 14, 16. Heb. 10. 14.
Well then, do not some, otherwise Orthodox err, who deny, Christs Active Obedience, to be a part of his satisfaction, performed in our place?
Yes.
By what reasons are they confuted?
(1) Because, the Active disobedience of the first Adam made us all sinners: therefore we must be made Righteous, by the Active Obedience of the second Adam; Rom. 5. 19. (2) Because, Christ not only offered himself to the death for us, but for their sakes (that is, for the Elects sake) he sanctified himself (that is, he gave up himself, as a holy sacrifice) Iohn 17. 19. (3) Because, it behoved Christ to fulfil all righteousness; Mat. 3. 15. (4) Because, we stood in need; not only of the expiation of sin, for saving us from eternal death, but of the gift of righteousness, for obtaining eternal life, according to that precept and demand of the Law, Do this, and thou shalt live. And therefore Christ is not only called our Ransom, but the end and perfection of the Law, to every one, that believeth Rom. 10. 4. That is, the aim of giving the Law by Moses, is that, thereby men being brought to the knowledge of their sin, should flie for refuge unto Christ, and his righteousness, as he that hath perfectly fulfilled the Law for us. (5) Because, the passive obedience of Christ, was not in it self meerly and purely passive, but his active obedience did challenge the chief, and principal part in it. Psal. 40. 7. Then said I, lo, I come,: in the volume of the book, it is written of Me. With these words, our Saviour Christ declareth his willing Obedience, to accept of, undergo, and execute the Mediatorship, by GOD imposed upon him. And (Isaiah 53. 7.) he offered up himself a sacrifice for sin, and by one Oblation, he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified; Heb. 10. 14. (6) Because, whole Christ was given to us, with all his benefits: otherwise, if onelyonly his passive Obedience were imputed to us, it would follow, that half Christ onelyonly were given; to wit, Christ suffering, but not Christ doing those things which pleased the Father; taking away our sin, and saving from death onelyonly, but not bringing Righteousness. But Christ was not given, and born for himself, but for us, that he might bestow himself wholly upon us, by doing for us, what we could not do, and by suffering for us, what we could not suffer.
Do not likewise the Socinians err, who maintain, That this Orthodox Doctrine, (namely, That Christ did merit Eternal Salvation, to the Elect, and hath satisfied Divine Iustice for them;) is erroneous, false, and absurd?
Yes.
By what reasons are they confuted?
(1) Because, the Messiah doth finish the transgression, and maketh an end of sins, and maketh Reconciliation for iniquity, and shal be cut off, but not for himself, as the Prophet Daniel hath foretold; chap. 9. 24, 26. (2) Because, his own self bare our sins in his own Body, upon the tree; 1 Peter 2. 24. (3) Because, he hath reconciled those to GOD, that were sometimes alienated, and enemies in their mind, by wicked works, in the body of his Flesh through death; Col. 1. 21, 22. (4) Because, now once in the end of the world, hath he appeared, to put away sin, by the sacrifice of himself; Heb. 9. 26. (5) Because, he hath given his life, an foreign, a pretium redemptionis, a price of Redemption for many. (6) Because, the Prophet Isaiah sayes, that it pleased the Lord to bruise him, and put him to grief; and that he was wounded for our transgressions, and that he bare our iniquities; chapter 53. 5, 10, 11.
Quest. VI.
DID Christ, in the work of Mediation, act according to both Natures, by each Nature, doing that, which is proper to it self?
Yes: Heb. 9. 4. 1 Peter 3. 18.
Well then, do not the Papists err, who maintain, that Christ is a Mediator only according to his humane Nature?
Yes.
By what reasons are they confuted?
(1) Because, it was needful, for perfecting the work of the Mediator, that Christ should overcome death; which could not otherwise be done, than by his Divine Nature; 1 Pet. 3. 18. Where it is said, he was put to death in the Flesh, but quickned by the Spirit. (2) Because, there are very many properties of the Mediator, which cannot in any wise agree to the humane Nature of Christ, as undertaking, and promising, that he will raise up all at the last day, whom the Father has given him; Iohn 6. 39. Again, he could not lay down his life, and take it up again, by the alone strength of his humane Nature: but all these are works proper to the Mediator; as is clear from the tenth chapter of Iohn v. 18. And (3) the application of those good things, which he hath merited, is the proper work of the Mediator, which can only be done, by the Divine Nature. (4) Because, Christ is a Prophet, a Priest, and a King, according to both his Natures. A Prophet; Matt. 11. 27. No man knoweth the Father, save the Son. A Priest; Rom. 5. 10. Heb. 9. 14. He is a King; Luke 1. 32. All which Offices, he executes according to both his Natures.