« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
bis Merits and Mediation, by one Spirit, renewing and fan&tifying us, we have access with Confidence unto the Father, Ephef. ii. 18.
So that we have, without this Doctrine of a DiItinction of Persons in the Godhead, a most plain Revelation both of the Love of God to us, and the great Evil of Sin, for which such an Atonement was made, and of the absolute Neceflity of Holiness to our Happiness, and of the Arfistance of the Holy Spirit to make us holy. And confequently we have the greatest and most powerful Motives and Engagements to the Love of God and Hatred of Sin, and to the Study of HoJiness and Goodness, and never to resist and grieve the holy Spirit, but ever to obey its holy Motions; and then we may most surely and safely rely on the Merits and Mediation of Jesus Christ for our Salvation, though we never subscribe to Articles of Faith invented by Men in other Terms than the Spirit of God inspired the Penmen of the holy Scriptures to express;
without which we may fufficiently apprehend the Death and Sufferings of our Lord in the Flesh, and the exceeding Value and Merit thereof, and all the necessary Doctrines of the Gospel.
We shall close this Section with an excellent Passage of Dr. Taylor,
(P)'He that goes about to speak of the myste
rious Trinity, and does it by Words and Names • of Man's Invention, and by the Diftinctions of • the Schools, if he only talk of Elences and Existencies, Hypoftafes and Personalities, Diftin&tions
(P) Sermon on Feby vii. 17.
without Difference, Priority in Coequalities, and '< Unity in Pluralities, he may amuse himself, and « build Tabernacles in his Head, and talk some
thing, but he knows not what : But the good “ Man that feels the Power of the Father, and
he to whom the Son is become Wisdom, Righ• teousness, Snnctification and Redemption: He • in whose Heart the Love of the Spirit of God • is spread; this Man, though he understands • nothing of what is unintelligible, yet he alone * understands the Mysteriousness of the Holy
Of the Body of Chrift,
Our Opponent's first Query in this Section is,
• Is not he only properly Christ, that was ma• nifest in the Body of Flesh, and was before • the Body was, and was never seen with any « carnal Eye ; for we can never call the bodily • Garment Christ, but that which appeared and • dwelt in that Body?
The Author's he cites for this are W. Penn and Ifaac Penington, who thus answer for themfelves.
The former, in his Preface to Dr. Philips's Vindiciæ Veritatis, first reciting what he had said, viz. · That the Body or outward Person that di• ed could not properly be said to be the Son of • God, but rather the Body or outward Person of
* the Son of God; taking and making the Terms
Body and outward Person to be Synonymons or • the same Thing,' adds, which Distinction I was ļ only led to make, because T. Jenner against
whom I writ had laid down his Proposition too • near the Doctrine of L. Muggleton, who asserts • God himself to have died as well as his Body, < which the Scripture tells us God had prepared 6 of the Seed of Abraham for his beloved Son to • to do his Will in ; as the Scope of the Place • and Context, and particularly the Confession
made to me by Jesus Christ as the Son of God, Page 149. of the Apology, doth express, as well as import.
The Latter, in one of the Places cited, (viz. Questions to Professors, p. 33.) says, . Now the Scriptures do expresly distinguish between
Christ and the Garment which he wore, be«tween him that came and the Body in which he
came, between the Substanee which was vailed, « and the Vail which vailed it; Lo I come a Body,
haft thou prepared me. There is plainly he, and the Body in which he came.
There was the < outward Veffel and the inward Life. This we
certainly know, and can never call the Bodily « Garment Christ, but that which appeared and • dwelt in the Body. Now if ye indeed know the
Christof God, tell us plainly what that is which appeared in the Body? Whether that was not the Christ before it took up the Body, after it took up the Body and for ever ?
And then their confining Christ to that Bo<dy, plainly manifefteth that they want the • Knowledge of him in Spirit. For Christ is the
Son of the Father, he is the infinite eternal Being, one with the Father, and with the Spirit, < and cannot be divided from either, cannot «
be any where where they are not, nor can be « excluded where they are. He may take up <a Body, and appear in it, but carnot be con
fined to be no where else but there, no not • at the very time while he is there. Chrift « while he was here on Earth, yet was not ex• cluded from being in Heaven, with the Fa• ther, at the very same time as he himself said
concerning himself, The Son of Man which is * in Heaven, John iii. 13. Nor was the Father • excluded from being with him in the Body, but * the Father was in him, and he in the Father, - whereupon he said to Philip, He that baib seen
me, hath seen the Father. What, did every one • that saw the Body see the Father also ? nay,
not so, but he that saw Christ the Son of the
Living God, whom Flesh and Blood revealed 'not, but the Father only (Mat, xvi. 16, 17.) he < saw the Father also.
Ifaac Penington's foregoing Query, viz. Whether that which appeared in the Body, was not the Christ before it took up the Body, after it took up the Body, and for ever seems to be answered in the Affirmative, fee Prov. viii. 22. 31. Also Heb. i. 10, 12. And, thou Lord, in the Beginning baft laid the Foundation of the Earth, and the Heavens are the work of thine Hands. They shall perish, but Thou remainest; and they all Mall wax old as doth a Garment ; and as a Vejture shalt thou fold them up, and they mall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy Years fhall not fail. This is spoken to Christ, the Son, the anointed Saviour, who, our Adverfary says, yet was not properly the entire Christ until he took our Flesh; and, that it was not with Refpe&t to his Godhead but his Manhood only, that be was anointed with the Holy Ghost, and is therefore said to be anointed above bis Fellows, or all other Men, Heb. i. 9. Though the Verse immediately foregoing might have inform’d him better, which is, But unto the Son, he faith, Thy Throne, O God, is for ever and ever, a Scepter of Righteousness is the Scepter of thy Kingdom: “And then Ver. 9. Thou bast loved Righteousness and hated Iniquity, therefore God, even thy God, bath anointed ihee with the Oyl of Gladness above thy Fellows. This Text therefore, wherein Christ is exprefly spoken 10, under the Appellation of God, is not pertinent to prove that it related to his Manhood only. Nor doth that other Text of Aets iv, 27. speak of the holy Child Jesus exclusive of his Godhead. He adds, and therefore Christ as he was manifest in the Body of Flesh, was truly seen by carnal or bodily Eyes ; though 'tis plain from Scripture, that many with their carnal or bodily Eyes did see Christ's Outward Body of Flesh, who yet did not truly fee Christ as he was manifested in that Body, but thro' Ignorance persecuted and put him to Death.
The Vicar's next Question is,
· Had not Christ, as God alway, and ftill has, • an heavenly Manhood, of an heavenly uncreated · Soul and Body, Flesh, Blood and Bones, dit« ferent from the outward Manhood he took of • the Virgin Mary, which was only as a cloath
ing to his heavenly Manhood, and but a Type and Figure of it, which is the Mystery and
Substance, whereby the Work of our Redemp* tion is wrought now in our Hearts within us ?
To form this Query, he has culld Words from three several Writers, and with the Addicion of several Terms of his owa, wrested them