us onely as a Man ? The [Man] Cbrift Jesus.] " : Ans. True, fo he is, Man, True Man, Chrift true but not meer Man, Verus, fed non merus. The Man, but not word is not to be taken exclusively, as denying meer Man. the Divine Nature. No, Elfewhere in this Epistle, the fame pen stileth him God, (as D have shewn you) [God manifested in the Flesh.] So as here is no ground for the Atian, or Socia nian, to cast anchor upon. By the like reason 1, the. Marcionites, or Manichees, might conclude against the truth of Chrift's Humanity, because elfe-where he is called God. [God bles Sed for ever, Rom.9.5.] Thus is the fame Person, being Θεάνθρωπος, both God, and Man, some times denominated from one nature, fomee times from the other; Sometimes called God, and fometimes man: Yet so, as he is truely both And in that respect fitly faid to be a Mediatour betwixt God and men; having an Interest in, and participating of both Natures wel LOZ SOV e A Reaf. And it was very requisite that he Reason. hould be fo; And that for the due qualify- Why Chrift ing of him for the Office and work of his Me mult partake of diatorship, That he might be a meet and fit- both Natures. ting Person to deale betwixt God and men. That was his Office, that was his Work; to deal with God for man; and to deal for God with man. Now that he might be fit for both these transactions, for both parts of this Office, he muft partake of both Natures: That he x might effectually deal with God for man, he muft C2 : must be God, [If a man fin against the Lord, who shall intreat for him?) (faith Eli to his fons) 1 Sam.2.25. And that he might deale A from God, and for God with man, he must be man. When God spake unto Ifrael at Mount Sinui, at the giving of the Law, (though I Lex non data conceive it was not the immediate voice of God eft per Filium, himselfe, but of some principall Angel, whose Jed per unum è Ministry he there made use of in that promulpracipuis An- gation, as may not obfcurely be collected gelis Dei nomi- from those known Texts, Heb. 2.2. Acts 7.38. ne loquentem. Grotius An-yet the people were not able to abide that not. in Hebr. Voice or Prefence: And therefore they defire an Internuncius, a man like themselves, who might be as a Mediatour, to go betwixt God and them, Exod.20. 18,19. For this Reafon, (amongst others) it was requifite that the Meffiab, Jesus Christ, should be both God and man, that he might be a meet Mediatour to deal betwixt God and man. Li 2.2. 2 diator in re Thus have I passed over this first Branch of the Point in hand, shewing you how Christ isda Mediatour in respect of his Person; A middle Person betwixt God and man, participating of both Natures. And here is that Mediatio substantialis, his substantiall Me diation. • Paffe we now to the second Branch, to the Chrift a Me- Energeticall, Operative Mediation; where we spect of his shall fee how Christ is faid to be a MediaOffice, deal tour in respect of his Office; performing the ing betwixt work of a Mediatour: being in himselfesa God & Man. Middle Person, he dealeth betwixt God and Quest. man ra his Quest. Dealeth betwixt them? How? in The great at what way? what is that Transaction? what Transaction k is the businesse wherein, and whereabout the of Christ. Lord Christ dealeth betwixt God and man? Reconciliation. Anm. To this take the Answer in one word. of It is the businesse of Reconciliation. This was the great Negotiation about which the Son of God, deaving the bosome of the Father, came into the world, took the nature of man $upon him, and undertook the office of a Mediatour, All for the reconciling of God and Et man. So the Scripture holdeth it forth: [God was in Christ reconciling the world to bimselfe, 2 Cor.5.19.] [It pleased the Father by him to reconcile all things to himselfe, Col. he 1.19. This was the great designe of God in gi nd ving his Son, and of his Son in giving himself, to that he might be a Mediatour of Reconciliation betwixt God and man, or bozziwa ch Reconciliation, Take we hold of the skirts of that word. We may learn that from it which Reconciliation importing three A may conduce not a little to our present pur-things. τι pose. Καταλλαγή, faith the Originall, fitly at rendred Reconciliation, Which is, the restoring of former love, amity, agreement, betwixt two, or more, disagreeing parties. This is proe perly Reconciliation, importing (as you may ve cake notice) these three particulars. 1. A Fore going Amity, and friendship: 2. A Subsehe quent Breach, and disagreement: 3. A making up of that Breach, and a restoring of that former Amity again: All fitly appliable to the point we have now in hand. Christ's reconciG+3 bauf ling 912 ling of God and man imports all these three T particulars. 1. A precedent Amity, and friendship. Such 1. Precedent there was betwixt God and man at first. God Amitie, having made man after his own Image, like unto himselfe, there was a blessed unity, and agreement betwixt them; they were at One. Man was God's Favourite, greatly beloved of him, highly in grace and favour with him. And God was again highly honoured, and greatly beloved of man. Thus was there a near Union, a sweet and blessed Communion betwixt them. Such was the state of man in his Creation. 2. A fubfe 2. A Subsequent Breach: whereby that quent breach. Union and Communion were diffolved, and a naturall Enmity introduced. So came it to passe by Satan's mediation, his interposing be twixt God and man; his foliciting and enticing man to fin against the Law of his Creatour, and fo to break the Covenant betwixt God and him. Hereupon followed a mutuall alienation. God was estranged from man, and man was estranged from God. Nay, a mutual Enmity. You that were sometimes alienated and enemies, (faith Paul to his Coloffians, speaking of their eftate before converfion,) Col. 1.21. When we were enemies we were reconciled to God, (faith the same Apostle to his Romans) Rom.5.10. Such a mutuall Enmity there is betwixt God and man; God for fin hating man, and man through fin hating God. Such is the estate of man by Degeneration and Corrupti on. A state of Enmity. 3. And ! تار 3. And hereupon it was (which is the third 3. A reftoring particular) that Jesus Christ took upon him of Amity. the Office of a Mediatour, that he might diffolve and destroy this ground-work of the Di vell, (as Saint John speaketh 1 John 3.8.) That he might slay this Enmity, make up this Breach, compose this difference, restore that former love and amity; That he might make reconciliation betwixt God and man. A Mutuall Reconciliation. Such was the Reconciliar ■ Enmity which Satan had made. A mutualt on by Chrift Enmity. And such was the Reconciliation which mutuall. Christ undertaketh, A Mutuall Reconciliation. To reconcile God unto man, & man unto God. Which let it be taken notice of by the way; Socinian erAnd that against the Socinians, and some other rour refuted. of the times, who would have this Reconciliati 1 on to be onely on one part, viz.on Man's part to God, not of God's to man. To this end (faith one of them) Christ came into the world not to Paul Hobson's Serm. Chrift reconcile God to man, but man to God. As for the effect, not God, he was reconciled to his Elect from Eter the cause of the nity, So as he not onely bare them no ill will, love of God, but he bare them good will; loving them, and pag.47. intending good unto them: What then needeth any Reconciliation of his part? The Reconciliaetion spoken of in Scripture (say they)is onely on Man's part: [When we were enemies we were reconciled to God] Rom.5.10. not God to us! [God was in Christ reconciling the world to bimselfe,] 2 Cor. 5. 19. not himselfe to the world t But this opinion of theirs is justly cenfured .....and |