Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	assume_v	humane_a	union_n	3,291	5	9.5119	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A96532	The doctrine of the covenant of redemption Wherein is laid the foundation of all our hopes and happiness. Briefly opened and improved. By Samuel Willard, teacher of a church in Boston. [Three lines from Psalms]	Willard, Samuel, 1640-1707.; Mather, Increase, 1639-1723.	1693 (1693)	Wing W2274A; ESTC W38208	68,045	178

only God 2. As he hath assumed our Nature into Union with his Person and so is God-Man 3. As he hath a Mystical Union with all the Members of his Church or with all Believers in which sense he is also called Christ 1 Cor. 12. 12. and under which of these considerations he is a party in this Covenant is variously apprehended Here then we may conclude 1. That Christ Mystical is not the party in this Covenant my meaning i● that the Members of Christ or his Spiritual Seed were not joyntly Covenanters with him here The People of God are considered as a party in the Covenant of Grace with whom God Indents through a Mediator but they have no such consideration here It is true they are taken notice of in this Covenant yea it is for them that Happiness was contrived and secured in it but that is as they stand related to the Terms of it The Elect are not Agents but Patients here There is nothing in it required of them to be done by them but all is to be done for them They are not Undertakers but are Undertaken for Isa 53. 10. and this is one difference between these two Covenants 2. Hence it is the Person of Christ alone that is the Party It must be either Christ personal or Christ Mystical not the latter as is already declared He was alone in this Undertaking He only was to perform the work of Redemption and had no Coadjutor Isa 63. 3. Redemption-work is appropriated to him As he was to have the whole honour of our deliverance paid unto him so that none might share with him in the Glory of it he took none into Partnership with him in the work but took it wholly upon himself nay there was none in Heaven or Earth to be found to Undertake in this Business besides him and therefore he stood alone in it 3. Christ meerly considered as the Eternal Son of God and the Second Person in the Blessed Trinity and not as God and Man by the Assumption of our Nature is the other party in this Covenant I know there are weighty Divines of another Perswasion who labour by many arguments to prove that the Son of God was looked upon as in our nature or with respect to the Futurition of his assuming it in the Indenting of this Covenant But I suppose that conception will overthrow the very notion of a Covenant in this matter The present conclusion that hath now been laid down will be apparent by these things 1. This is as hath already been observed called a Covenant only by way of Analogy as it is accommodated to our understanding it being nothing else but that Article in the Decree which concerns the Redemption of Man by Christ There must therefore be such an Analogy observed in our conceptions of it and it must be Interpreted by notions proper to a Covenant Now though the Father and the Son be one in Essence and so have not two Wills but one undivided yet they are Two Persons and as such are conceived by us as consulting deliberateing and concluding about things hence the Divine Persons are so represented Gen. 1. 26. and the reason of it is because the things done are to our manner of conception the Fruits of Counsel That there was not only a Divine Will in the Father sending but also in the Son consenting to be sent by him we must needs entertain else we can have no rational and regular notion of a person sending and of a Person sent Although these are but one Will yet it comes under a distinct consideration by us though the manner of it be above our conception 2. Christ not only as he is Man but also as he is Son is in the Oeconomical Dispensation of things Subordinate to his Father Though in the Divine Essence he is Equal as he is God for where there is a compleat sameness there must needs be a perfect equality yet in the Oeconomy of the Administration of the Affairs of his Kingdom he is Subordinate The meer Assumption of our Humanity did not make him so for his Person was not degraded by his Incarnation he was still in regard of that In the Form of God and counted it no Robbery to be Equal with him Phil. 2. 6. but he voluntarily complied with his order This is the common consent of Orthodox Divines and that according to Scripture Gal. 14. 29. My Father is greater than I. Not as ●he is God for so he asserts Joh. 20. 30. My Father and I am one but as he is the Father considering Christ not as man but as Son For this reason he is said to be Sent by the Father which must needs have reference to the Eternal Covenant and that this relates to his Person therein appears because how else can we Terminate the Incarnation upon the Son as the Person assuming 3. Though it be true that without the Humane Nature Assumed by the Son of God the work of Redemption could not have been performed by him which is the main stress of the reasonings for the other assertion yet the Son of God both could and did undertake for the doing of this work without the Humane Nature Assumed The Incarnation therefore of the Son of God is rather a Condition of Redemption or a thing requisite in him who was to be a Redeemer in order to his fitness to go through with that great Undertaking than a quality needed to render him a party Though the Son of God could not actually Redeem us but in our Nature yet without our Nature he could Covenant to Redeem us Though he could not perform Obedience active or passive to the Law but in our Nature which was only concerned in this Obedience as to the actual performance of it yet he could Undertake without it to obey the Law in it and that is sufficient with respect to his Covenanting about it 4. The Son of God became man according to Covenant and therefore is not tobe considered as man in the act of Covenanting The Incarnation of the Son of God was one Article in this Covenant as will be afterwards observed it was one of the things undertaken by him and for which he engaged The futurition therefore of his being man depended upon this proposal and undertaking and for that reason must needs presuppose it Nor was it necessary that the person Covenanting must so be looked upon as man for the Saving of the Elect before his actual coming in the Flesh it was sufficient that the person was designed to this before time by promise or Covenant 5. The Covenant of Redemption was an Eternal Covenant and therefore the party as such must come under an Eternal consideration and that could only be in regard of his being the Eternal Son of God or with respect to his Divine Personality Though in the Decree Christ is no sooner appointed to be a Redeemer than he is designed to be man and therefore this also had an

arising from it the Glory of One God in Three Persons is the design which was laid in it or if we consider the mutual obligation they stand equally bound each of them to the terms which he Undertakes Now for a more distinct and particular view of these Articles it may be Enquired 1. What were the common Terms between both the Parties 2. What were the Obligations lying upon each Party by himself 1. What were the common Terms between both Parties A. They were such as these that follow viz. 1. That a certain number of Mankind should be made the Monuments of Rich Grace or That the Glorious Attribute of Grace should be exalted in the Eternal Salvation of a Definite Company of men and to this Article belongs the consideration of mans being Created in his Integrity put under a 〈◊〉 and permitted to fall from it and make himself miserable in order to the making way for the Illustration of this Grace That such a thing should be was voluntary on Gods part and therefore there past a Decree for it and this being Essential it belongs to all the Three persons Hence the Scripture speaks of mens being Ordained or appointed to Glory and of their being Elected or Chosen to the Kingdom which expressions denote this eternal designation which was agreed upon and so past between God Father Son and Spirit see ' 1. Thes 5 9. Mark 13. 20. 1 Thes 1. 4. 2 Thes 2. 13. and all this was with an eye to the glorifying of the Grace of God Eph 1. 6. 2 That in order to the Illustration of this Grace in mans Salvation the first Covenant should be Satisfied in all the demands of it That whatsoever that required should be fully responded The consideration of mans being under a Law-Covenant and forfeiting himself to the Curse of it being supposed in the former Article there is a Proviso that the Covenant shall not be baulked and that therefore the Salvation intended should make no breach upon nor offer any violence to the Rule of Justice but that it should in all points be complied withal and mans Salvation be so effected as that no jot or tittle of the Law should pass for so it is brought about Math. 5. 18. and that Justice and Peace should agree in one Psal 85. 10. that God should be Just in Justifying of the sinner Rom. 3. 26. 3 That in order to the accomplishment of this great affair there should be a sutable and sufficient Redeemer provided who should undertake this work and accomplish it in all things that were requisite for the compleating of it The agreement about a Redeemer still belongs to the common consent among the three Divine Persons according to our distinct conception of it for it is an act of absolute Divine Soveraignty to accept of Satisfaction at the hands of any besides the proper Offender the case being Criminal it must therefore proceed from that Soveraign Will of his to determine that it should be so from whence alone it could be a thing acceptable to God when therefore Christ appeared in the Execution of his Work God declared his acceptableness to him by a voice from Heaven Mat. 3. 17. 2. What were the Articles peculiar or the Engagements lying upon each party by himself A. Such there were and here in general we are to observe That though the Parties were equal in their Covenanting yet in the Covena●t one Party Indented to be Inferiour to the other The Son of God was to take to himself a Nature in which he was to be his Fathers Servant hence he is so called Isa 42. 1. and because there was something to be done by him first in order to his meriting of that which he was to receive of his Father for it this may first come under our consideration Here then 1. We may consider the Engagement which the Son took upon himself The work of Redemption was laid upon his Shoulders he was the party agreed upon and consenting to take that Province upon him in his own person and it may suffice to speak generally of this and so his Undertaking may be comprized in two things 1. He accepted of and took upon him to perform the work of Redemption and thereby he received the Relative Title of Redeemer from Eternity To this the Scripture bears witness when it tells us that he was the Lamb slain from the Foundations of the World Rev. 13. 8. and when it saith that we are Chosen in him to obtain Redemption by him Eph 1. 4 7. which Scriptures clearly express his designation to this Office 〈◊〉 Work and this being personal hence there was not only the Father Propounding but the Son also consenting and accepting so that this amounts properly to one Article of the Covenant for we cannot rationally suppose a person free sovereign and under no natural obligation to it to be designed constituted and set apart to an Office without his own free and voluntary consent Hereupon it follows that on this very score or account all the old Testament believers dying before his appearing in the flesh went to heaven upon the credit of his undertaking having their sins discounted and their happiness conferred upon them in the merit of that satisfaction and obedience which he had engaged for 2 He undertook and engaged to do all that which was requisite for the performance and accomplishment of this Redemption and this is necessarily inferred upon the former He who takes upon him to do any work engageth himself to do all that without which the work cannot be done What this was will appear both by taking a view of that which was needful for mans recovery from misery and being restored to favour and happiness and by observing what it was that the son of God did actually perform Whatever Christ did go thorough here was according to the foreknowledg and determinate Counsel of God i. e. the Covenant between God the Father and the Son and this was summarily in two things 1 That he would assume to his person the nature of man and thereby put himself into a capacity of performing Redemption work That the Covenant was made with the Son of God not considered as God man but only as Son hath been already made to appear This undertaking then is to be considered as an Article belonging to it and it must needs be so for the Son of God could not be appointed to be a Man but by a Covenant because his consent was absolutely requisite in such an appointment it being a Covenant between equals as is granted on all hands hence we must either unnecessarily multiply Covenants or else assign it unto this The Scripture mentions no more but three covenants in which God is concerned about man viz that of works that of Grace and this of Redemption and it must belong to this if to any of these for in the other two men themselves are parties Besides the Humane Nature to be assumed needs not to be respected as Covenanting but only ● Covenanted for inasmuch as the Divine Nature assuming