CHAPTER V: That our Mediator should be both God and man in one person
devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.' And God, to the devil's confusion, would have him led captive by one who is man. So Heb. 2:14, 'He took the nature of man, that he might by death destroy him that had the power of death.' It is a reason given of his assuming it. If this great act had been done by an angel, the devil might have said he had met with his match, and so was foiled; but to have it done by a weak man, one that was once a babe, a suckling, this was a mighty confusion of him. And thus it is noticed in the 8th psalm, which is applied to Christ, 'Out of the mouths of sucklings thou hast ordained strength, that thou mightest still the enemy and avenger,' Ps. 8:2. And this very confusion and revenge upon Satan, who was the cause of man's fall, was aimed at by God at first; therefore is the first promise and preaching of the gospel to Adam brought in rather in sentencing him than in speaking to Adam, that the seed of the woman should break the serpent's head, it being in God's aim as much to confound him as to save poor man.
CHAPTER V
That it was fit that our mediator should be both God and man in one person, that so he might partake of the nature of both parties, and be a middle person between them, and fill up the distance, and bring them near to one another.—That he might be in a better capacity to communicate unto us his benefits, and that he might be capable of performing what our redemption required.
We see then how much it behoved Christ to be man as well as God, and indeed both, for a mediator is a mediator between two, Gal.
3:20; and those two between whom a mediator must go, were God and man; and therefore it is said that there is but one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus, 1 Tim. 2:5. And this was most fit; for,
First, Hereby he participates of both natures, and so his person doth bear a resemblance of the work in general. Mediation was the business, and who so fit as a middle person? Therefore, first, he became medius, a middle person, and then a mediator; first medius, then medians—a middle person in regard of participation of both natures, and then a mediator in regard of reconciliation and reconciling both natures. And a middle person, not in order only, as men are between angels and beasts, and as a middle rank of men are between those above them and under them, but of participation, as having the natures of both. A middle person not in place only, as Moses when he stood between God and the people, Exod. 5:5, but in person. A medium, not only between God and us, but one with God and us, and symbolising with both. Therefore our divines say, that mediatio operativa is founded, and hath influence from his mediatio substantialis, that his works of mediation, whereby he mediates for us, ariseth from his person, that they arise from both natures, so as both natures have an influence into all his works, and they are the works of both, so that he might be lotus mediator, a whole, entire mediator, in his person and in his works.
And, secondly; Hereby he is of equal distance and difference from both; as he is God he differs from us, as he is man he differs from God. Yea, and as he is mediator he takes on him a differing person as it were from himself, and what he is essentially, as being only the Son of God; for he became lesser than himself in his office, and emptied himself, and so is a fit mediator between us and himself also as he is the Son of God, Differt Filius incarnatus, ὀικονομικῶς, à seipso φυσικῶς. The Son incarnate differs ministerially from what himself is naturally. As we say in philosophy, Una et eadem res à seipsa diversa est, modo et ratione. One and the same thing is differenced from itself by a different modus, or manner of existing.
Thirdly; Hereby he is indifferent also between both, so as not to take part with the one more than with the other, ready to distribute to both with unequal hands their due, and be faithful to both: Heb. 2:17,
'That he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things
pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the people.' Lo here are the matters both of God and man referred to him, for the cause of both was to be committed to him, Τὰ πρὸς Θεὸν, and τὰ πρὸς ἡμᾶς, therefore he partakes of both, and is distant from both, as a middle thing participates of both extremes, and toucheth both.
Fourthly; He was to make peace between both, and take away hostility, therefore he takes pledges both out of earth and out of heaven. He takes the chief nature on earth and the chief in heaven, thereby to still the enmity, and to part us who were fighting each against other, we against God, and God against us. Now having our nature and God's, he had two hands able enough to part us, he could take hold of God's strength, and hold his hands, as it is Isa. 27:5, and so make peace; and having our nature, he had a hand to take hold of our hands also.
Fifthly; He is hereby able to draw near to both, and bring both together, and so make us one; for is not he fit to do this, that is both
God and man? He joins our nature first with God in his own person, and makes both one there, that so God and man becoming one in person, he might the easilier make God and man one in covenant.
God and man were at division, and when he would make utrumque unum, he becomes et unum ex utroque. He by this means is in a friendly way able to treat with both, and hath a hand to shake with both. He is become 'the man God's fellow,' Zech. 13:7. If he had been
God's fellow, and not the man God's fellow, he might have drawn near to God, and yet we have been never the nearer; and yet if not more than man, and so God's fellow (which no mere man could be) he could not have approached to God; as Jer. 30:21, 'And their nobles shall be of themselves, and their governor shall proceed from the midst of them; and I will cause him to draw near, and he shall approach unto me: for who is this that engaged his heart to approach unto me? saith the Lord.' Who but he could have engaged his heart, or assumed the boldness to have drawn near unto God? And yet withal he being the man God's fellow, we may draw nigh to him, and come to God by him, as the phrase is in the epistle to the Hebrews;
for why, he comes out of the midst of us, as in the same Jer. 30:21.
Thus Heb. 4:15, 16, 'For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldy unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.' And Heb. 10:21, 22, 'And having an high priest over the house of God; let us draw, near with a true heart, in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.'
Sixthly; He could hereby communicate the benefit of all he did for us unto us, which without it had not been done, Participavit de nostro, ut communicaret suum: He partakes of ours, that he may communicate to us his. We are to participate the divine nature, 2 Pet.
1:4, and therefore he takes part of ours. If we were to have righteousness from him, it was fit our own nature should be the fountain: John 17:19, 'For their sakes I sanctify myself that they may be sanctified;' I, that is, my deity, sanctifies myself, that is, my human nature, which he calls himself, because it was one in person with himself. It was fit that that nature that sinned should be sanctified to 'condemn sin in the flesh,' Rom. 8:3. And hence it is the benefit of his righteousness is not extended to angels, because he that sanctifies and them that are sanctified are of one, Heb. 2:11, which he and angels are not; and therefore his merits reach not in a proper and direct way unto them. The intense worth indeed of his benefits ariseth from his abilities and sufficiency personal, but the extension from his so proper fitness that he was a man, and therefore reacheth only to men.
Seventhly; That which he was to do for us required he should be both God and man. For consider but the principal parts of the work that he was to do, and it was fit that he should be both, that what did not become the one nature the other might do.
1. He was to keep and fulfil the law, and be subject to it, and to merit by keeping it. Now if he had not been man he could not have been
subject to the law; therefore he was made of a woman, and made under the law; first, therefore, made of a woman, that so he might be under the law: Gal. 4:4, 'But when the fulness of the time was come,
God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law.' And if he had not been God, he could not have merited for us by that his keeping the law, for he had done but what was required and what was a due, and so it could have reached but to himself; for all creatures, when they have done all they can, are but unprofitable servants; and he that merits must do it by his own strength, for otherwise 'what hast thou that thou hast not received?'
2. He that is our mediator must die and overcome death, for he was to rescue us from death, and destroy him that had the power of it.
Now if he had not been man, he could not have died; therefore he took such a body as we have that he might die; he could not have tasted of death else: Heb. 2:9, 'But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.' Ver. 14, 'Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil.' And if he had not been God he could not have raised himself: Rom. 1:4, 'And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:' therefore, John 10:18, 'I lay down my life,' saith he, 'and take it up again.'
(1.) He had not had a life to lay down if he had not been man, for the Godhead could not die.
(2.) If he had not been God he could not have merited by laying it down. It must be his own, not in the dominion of another; now the lives of creatures are not their own, and therefore their laying of them down cannot merit.