were unnecessary to prove sith his composition of Body Birth Growth Properties Actions Sufferings and what ever else prove a Person to be a man as we are as plainly are related and were as fully manifested to have been in Christ Jesus as in any other man but that as of old Valentinus Marcion and some others denied his body to have been of humane seed as the matter holding it to have been imaginary not real or Coelestial and to have passed through the Virgins womb So others of late have denied the truth of Christs Incarnation and the reason of his being termed the Son of man contrary to the holy Scriptures as shall be shewed by these Texts following which ascribe both a Divine and Humane Nature to one and the same Person the Lord Jesus Christ both while he was on Earth and as he is now in Heaven and shall appear at his future coming to Judgement To this purpose are the words alledged before out of John 1. 14. which shew that the same Person who is the Word was Flesh which because I have before vindicated Sect. 6. I shall not insist on here nor on such proofs as may be made from Col. 1. 18. or Heb. 1. 3. in which that is ascribed to the Son whom I before proved Sect. 9 10 11 12. from those chapters to be God which proves him a man to wit his being head of the body the Church the first-born from the dead who by himself purged our sins and is sate down on the right hand of the Majesty in the heights But consider other places where both natures in one Person are declared Among which I shall chuse to insist on first those places which speak of Christ as descending from the Fathers according to the Flesh as Acts 2. 30. Therefore David being a Prophet and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his loins according to the flesh he would raise up Christ to sit on his Throne Rom. 1. 3 4. Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh who was declared or determined the Son of God in or with Power according to the Spirit of Holiness by the Resurrection of or from the dead Rom. 9. 5. Whose are the Fathers and of whom Christ according to the flesh who is over all God blessed for ever Which Texts do expresly teach that Jesus Christ had a humane nature which is termed the flesh as it is frequent by Flesh to understand a man or Humane Nature Rom. 3. 20. and 11. 14. Isa. 58. 7. Gal. 2. 16. For he was of the fruit of Davids loins according to the Flesh which being a restriction cannot limit raising up but Christ and so notes another part according to which Christ was not raised up out of the loins of David which must be understood of his Divine Nature according to which he was Davids Lord Mat. 22. 44 45. He was of the seed of David and of the Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as to that which was according to the Flesh restrictively after it implying another Nature according to which he is of an higher original even the Son of God Rom. 1. 3 4. God over all blessed for ever Rom. 9. 5. Whence it is inferred He who is so Davids Son according to the flesh raised up out of the fruit of his loins according to the flesh made of the seed of David according to the flesh of the Fathers according to the Flesh as that he is also Davids Lord the Son of God God over all blessed for ever is consubstantial with the Father as touching the God-head and consubstantial with us as touching his Man-hood But such is Jesus Christ. Therefore c. SECT 16. The Exception against the Argument from Acts 2. 30. Rom. 1. 3 4. Rom. 9. 5. is set down AGainst this it is thus excepted When the Apostle saith that Christ came of the Fathers according to the flesh who is over all a God blessed for ever the opposition is not entire and exact as wanting the other Member What that Member is another passage of the Apostle wherein you have the same opposition in describing Christ will inform you It is Rom. 1. 3 4. concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord who was made or rather born of the seed of David according to the flesh and declared to be the Son of God with Power Gr. determined or ordained Son of God in Power according to the Spirit of Holiness by the Resurrection from the dead Here you see that to those words according to the flesh are opposed these according to the Spirit of Holiness Again What this Spirit of Holiness is will be no hard matter to find out if we consider that as the flesh signifyeth a constituting part of Christ namely his fleshly body so also must the Spirit of holiness opposed thereunto signifie a constituting part If so then it is not the holy Spirit as every one will confesse nor the reasonable soul of Christ because he is intimated to have had this Spirit by means of the resurrection from the dead whereas he had a reasonable Soul before his death Nor the Divine Nature for that is no where in Scripture designed by the name of Spirit or Spirit of holiness Besides the adversaries hold that Christ had the Divine Nature whilst he was yet cloathed with flesh It remains therefore that by the Spirit of holiness which Christ had by means of the resurrection of the dead and is a constituting part of him is to be understood his Holy Spiritual Body whereby he is excepted from other men being the first-born from the dead or the first that so rose from the dead as that he never dyed again but was cloathed with a Spiritual body and made like to God who is a Spirit And now the sense of that passage beginneth to appear Heb. 9. 14. How much more shall the blood of Christ who through the eternal Spirit Gr. through an eternal Spirit for no Article is prefixed offered himself without spot to God Purge your consciences from dead works to serve the living God By eternal Spirit is here meant the spiritual body of Christ which lasteth to all eternity and this expression is opposed to what the same Divine Authour speaketh of Christ Heb. 5. 7. who in the daies of his flesh c. For eternal is contrary to dayes and spirit to flesh Neither will that which we have here spoken seem strange to him who having penetrated into that profound Epistle to the Hebrews knoweth what is there frequently intimated that Christ then made his offering for our sins when after his Resurrection he entered into Heaven and being endued with a spiritual and immortal Body presented himself before God For so the Type of the Levitical High-Priest making the yearly Atonement for the siâ—s of the People Levit. 16. did require For as the Atonement was not then made when he
4. By the Spirit of Holiness Rom. 1. 4. whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 note a constituting part or an efficient cause cannot be meant Christs holy Spiritual Body in the Exceptors sense For 1. It would imply that his Spiritual Body were another constituting part than his fleshly body which is already refuted 2. It would imply that his fleshly body were not his holy body whereas that which was born of Mary was that holy thing which should be called the Son of God Luke 1. 35. 3. No where is the body of Christ termed a Spirit or the Spirit of Holiness in any estate For though it be true that 1 Cor. 15. 44. mentions a Spiritual body yet 1. That is there contradistinguished not to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fleshly but to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 natural or â—oulary 2. No where termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Spirit 3. Nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Spirit of Holiness 4. After his Resurrection Christ denies his body to be a Spirit as having flesh and bones Luke 24. 39. and he is said to enter into the holy place by his own blood Heb. 9. 12. and to have consecrated for us a new and living way to enter into the holiest by his blood through the Veil that is to say his Flesh Heb. 10. 19 20. It is an errour that by the eternal Spirit Heb. 9. 14. is meant Christs Eternal Spiritual Body For the Eternal Spirit there must be of something distinct from himself Else the meaning should be he offered himself by himself which is tautological and absurd but by himself must be meant his body as Heb. 1. 3. Having purged our sins by himself is by his own body For the thing offered was his own Body or his Life or Soul Isa. 53. 10. In the Type the thing offered is some body gift or sacrifice Heb. 5. 1. and 8. 3. and 9. 7. 9. and 10. 1. and 11. 4 17. whence the body offered is termed the oblation Heb. 10. 5 8. In the antitype Christ is said to offer himself that is his body called his oblation Heb. 10. 10. and this offering is termed Heb. 9. 25 26. the Sacrifice of himself for the putting away of sin and this to be not often but once in the end of the world ver 26. he was once offered to bear the sins of many verse 28. He needed not daily as those High-Priests to offer up sacrifice first for his own sins and then for the peoples For this he did once when he offered up himself Heb. 7. 27. By the which will we are sanctified by the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all Heb. 10. 10. But this man after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever sate down on the right hand of God verse 12. which must be afore he sate down on the right hand of God and therefore on earth and this was by his suffering or dying Heb. 9. 26 27 28. and therefore cannot be referred to his appearing in Heaven but to his blood-shedding Heb. 9. 22. in the daies of his flesh whereby it appears to be false that Christ did not offer his Sacrifice for our sins on the Cross there being no other time meant by that once when he offered up himself for the sins of the people Heb. 7. 27. and whereas it is saâ—d Heb. 9 28. Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many St. Peter tells us 1 Epistle 2. 24. Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree that we being dead to sin should live unto righteousness by whose stripes ye were healed Which doth evidently refer to Isa. 53. 4 5 6. whence the last clause is taken and shews the bearing of our sins by the offering of himself to have been on the Cross or at the time of his suffering on Earth And hereby it appears to be false that Christ made not atonement till he came to Heaven For Col. 1. 20. It is said And having made peace through the blood of his Cross he reconciled all things to his Father ver 21 22. Now hath he reconciled in the body of his flesh through death Rom. 8. 3. God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin or by a sacrifice for sin as Heb. 10. 8. condemned sin in the flesh which is all one with making atonement That which is alledged that the atonement was not then made when the High-Priest slew the Beasts but when having put on his linnen Robes he brought their blood into the Sanctuary before the Mercy-Seat is partly false there being atonement made for himself and his house Levit. 16. 5 6. before he entered into the holy place and partly impertinent sith the point in question is not where the atonement was made but where Christ offered himself Heb. 9. 14. though both the offering and the atonement are resolved to have been afore his sitting at the right hand of God Heb. 1. 3. and 10. 12. Nor doth it appear that Eternal Spirit Heb. 9. 14. is put in opposition to the daies of his flesh Heb. 5. 7. For it is not said Heb. 5. 7. flesh that hath daies as if it noted a distinction of his body mortal from his Spiritual Immortal Body but daies of his flesh only to note the time of his offering prayers not the quality or adjunct of his body Nor is it said he offered by the daies of his flesh as here by the Eternal Spirit but in the daies of his flâ—sh to note the time which is not intimated Heb. 9. 14. by that term by the Eternal Spirit for then it should rather have been said by or in the Eternity of the Spirit The offering being an act of Christ on Earth is no other than the act of his Deed and Will whereby he did present himself as a Sacrifice to God as the phrase is Rom. 12. 1. or as it is Eph. 5. 2. Gave himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savour by reason of such acts Abraham is said to offer up Isaac Heb. 11. 17. and we are said to offer the Sacrifice of Praise Heb. 13. 15. Spiritual Sacrifices 1 Pet. 2. 5. which is plainly expressed Heb. 10. 10. By which Will we are sanctâ—fied by the offering of the Body of Jesus Christ once or for once which was no other than that which he expressed in that prayer which Armiâ—â—â—â— termed rightly the Canon or rule of Christs Sacrifice John 17. 19. And for them I sanctifie my self that they also may be sanctified in truth Which being considered I see not what good sense can be made of it as many Divines expound it of the Divinity of Christ making the Sacrifice of Christ of value to satisfie for sins For the words through the Eternal Spirit have not respect to himself who was offered as enhauncing the price of the thing offered by reason of the union of it to himself neither the place of
it before himself nor the Preposition used being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through or by not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with or in conjunction do sute with such a sense but it is in construction annexed and referred to the offering and notes the cause and means of offering Besides the reason of Piscator is good in his Scholie on the Text that it belongs not to the Deity to offer Sacrifice but that is it to which it is offered by a man as a man And indeed it is not good sense to say Christ offered himself by his God-head to God it being not easily conceivable what notion the God-head should have in such a speech which is not absurd or inept Nor do I think Piscators opinion good that by the Eternal Spirit is meant Christs Immortal Soul partly because no where is Christs Humane Soul called the Eternal Spirit partly because I think it should rather be said in than through the Eternal Spirit if Christs Immortal Soul were meant by it the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 noting the efficient cause not the subject in which the act of offering was And therefore I rather pitch upon it to understand by the Eternal Spirit the holy Spirit answering to the fire which kindled the Sacrifice and moving or inflaming the heart of Christ with love to us and obedience to God to give himself an Offering and a Sacrifice to God for us Ephes. 5. 2. The holy Spirit is fitly resembled by fire Mat. 3. 11. and he well termed the Eternal Spiâ—it in opposition to the temporary fire kindling the legal Sacrifices But if the allusion be not thereto yet the sense is good and right For as it is said that Christ had not the Spirit by measure John 3. 34. and that he was full of the Holy Ghost Luke 4. 1. that the Spirit of the Lord was upon him that it anointed him verse 18. So it is said that he was moved by the Spirit to be Tempted to Preach in the same places and to cast out Devils by the Spirit of God God putting his Spirit on him he shewed Judgment to the Gentiles sent forth Judgement to victory Maâ— 12. 18 20 28. gave Commandements through the Holy Ghost Acts 1. 2. And accordingly here is said to offer himself to God by the Holy Eternal Spirit Nor is the want of the Article any more against the expounding the Eternal Spirit of the Holy Ghost than against the expounding it of Christs Spiritual Immortal Body it being as requisite in respect of use to design the one as the other But the truth is it is not requisite that it should be prefixed to shew it to be meant of the holy Spirit sith it is omitted Rom. 9. 1. and 14. 17. c. and even in this Eâ—â—stlâ— Hâ—b 2. 4. and 6. 4. So that the sense may be notwithstanding any thing I find to the contrary that Christ willingly obediently offered or yielded through the holy Spirits incitation or operation in him himself a Sacrifice without spot or blemish to God And as executing the function of Priest-hood to which he was anointed above others Heb. 1. 9. And this sense is most agreable to the Apostles intent which is to set forth the efficacy and validity of Christs Sacrifice above the Legal which he doth here from the obedience and readiness of will to offer himself as he doth Heb. 10. 10. and the holiness of his person or his being without spot or blemish as he doth Heb. 7. 26 27. 1 Pet. 1. 19. no where that I find from the Hypostatical Union or the spirituality immortality and glory of his humane body or the immortality of his Soul 5. The term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 1. 4. is not rightly rendered determined or ordained Son of God in Power For though it be true that the verb signifies appointment ordination or predestination and that this last is used by the Latin vulgar translation and by sundry of the Antients and the verb is used so in the New Testament Lukâ— 22. 22. Acts 2. 23. and 10. 42. and 17. 26 31. in which places the appointment or determination is by God of a thing future yet that cannot be the meaning Rom. 1. 4. For then the sense should be that Christ should be appointed or ordained or determined by God either that by power according to his Spiritual body by the resurrection of the dead he should be the Son of God Or else that his appointment ordination or determination that he should be the Son of God was by power according to the Spirit of holiness that is his holy spirituall body by the Resurrection from the dead This latter sense is most absurd it would intimate as if Gods determination were in power according to Christs Spiritual body by the Resurrection of the dead whereas the determination of Gods purpose or his ordaining of things future hath no cause but his will his ordaining is not an act of power though the execution of it be Nor is the former sense true For then the meaning should be that Christs being the Son of God was consequent on the power the spirit of holiness and resurrection of the dead sith ordaining or fore-appointing his Sonship to be thereby supposeth them to be before as the cause is before the effect and his Sonship to be future to them or after them But this is contrary to what is confessed by the adversaries that he was the Son of God before his resurrection and is proved from Luke 1. 35. Mat. 16. 16. John 6. 69. and Heb. 5. 8. Although he were a Son yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered which shews he was a Son afore he learned obedience by the things which he suffered For which reasons I like not to say as Dr. Pearson doth in his Exposition on the second Article of the Creed that he was defined or constituted and appointed the Son of God in Power by the Resurrection from the dead Nor that of Grotius that he was made a celestial King after his Resurrection and also before destinated to that Kingdom by so many Miracles done by Divine Power proper to him and dwelling in him where the term Son of God standing in contradistinction to being of the seed of David according to the flesh is as much as a Celestial King and the Participle determined is expounded by two other made and before destinated the one noting a thing past the other a thing future so as that the same word in the same place shall signifie being made a Celestial King after Christs resurrection and being aestinated before to that Kingdom and in Power according to the Spirit of holiness shall be Divine Power proper to him and inhabiting in him by that Spirit of holiness that is force of Divinity by which from the beginning of his conception he was sanctified and by which he did Miracles and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall be after the Resurrect on from