« IndietroContinua »
there is no SAVIOUR beside Me” (Hosea xiii. 4). « Look unto
be seen, that the Divine of the Lord, which is called the Father, and, here, Jehovah and God, and the Divine-Human, which is called the Son, and, here, the Redeemer and Saviour, as also the Former, that is, the Reformer and Regenerator; are not two, but one; for not only is mention made of Jehovah, God, and the Holy One of Israel, and of a Redeemer and Saviour, but it is said, that Jehovah is the Redeemer and Saviour; nay farther, that Jehovah is the Saviour, and there is none beside. Hence, it manifestly appears, that the Divine and Human in the Lord are One Person, and that the Human also is Divine; for the Redeemer and Saviour of the World is no other than the Lord as to the DivineHuman, which is what is called the Son. Redemption and salvation also constitute the attribute proper to his Human, which is called merit and righteousness ; for it was his Human that endured temptations and the passion of the cross; thus by his Human he saved and redeemed mankind. Now whereas, after the union [unitio] of the Human with the Divine within it, which was like that of the soul and body in man, they were no longer two, but one person,-agreeably to the doctrine of the Christian world, -it follows that the Lord is Jehovah and God in respect to both; wherefore we sometimes read of Jehovah and the Holy One of Israel, the Redeemer and Saviour, and, at others, of Jehovah the Redeemer and Saviour; as may be
seen in the passages cited. Thus Christ is called the Saviour (Luke ii. 11; John iv. 42). God, and the God of Israel, are called the Saviour and Redeemer (Luke i. 47; Isaiah xlv. 15; liv. 5; Psalm lxxviii. 35). Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, is called the Saviour and Redeemer (Isaiah xli. 14 ; xliii. 3, 11, 14, 15; xlviii. 17; xlix. 7; liv. 5). Jehovah is called the Saviour, Redeemer, and Former (Isaiah xliv. 6; xlvii. 4 ; xlix. 26; liv. 5; lxiii. 16; Jerem. l. 34; Psalm lxxviii. 35; Psalm cxxx. 7, 8; 2 Sam. xxii. 2, 3). Jehovah God is called the Redeemer and Saviour, and it is said that beside him there is no other (Isaiah xliii. 11; xliv. 6; xlv. 14, 15, 21, 22; Hosea xiii. 4).
35. VI. THAT THE LORD PUT OFF, BY SUCCESSIVE STEPS, THE HUMAN FROM THE MOTHER, AND PUT ON A HUMAN FROM THE DIVINE IN HIMSELF, WHICH IS THE DIVINE-HUMAN AND THE SON OF GOD. That the Lord was Divine and Human, Divine from Jehovah the Father, and Human from the virgin Mary, is well known. Hence he was both God and man, having a Divine Essence and a human nature, a Divine Essence from the Father, and a human nature from the mother; and hence was equal to
the Father, as to the Divine, and inferior to the Father, as to the Human: and further, that this human nature from the mother was not transmuted into the Divine Essence, neither commingled with it, is taught by the doctrine of faith, called the Athanasian Creed. Indeed, the human nature cannot be transmuted into the Divine Essence, nor commingled therewith. And moreover from the same creed is our doctrine, that the Divine took, that is, united, to itself the Human as the soul is united to its body, so that they were not two, but one person. From this, it follows, that the Lord put off the Human from the mother, which, in itself, was like the human of another man, and thus material, and put on a Human from the Father, which, in itself, was like his Divine, and thus substantial: so that the Human also was made Divine. Hence it is, that in the prophets, the Lord is called, even with respect to the Human, Jehovah and God; and in the Evangelists, the Lord, God, the Messiah or Christ, and the Son of God, in whom we must believe, and by whom we are to be saved.
Now as the Lord had from the first a Human from the mother, which he put off by successive steps, therefore, he was, during his abode in the world, in two states; the one a state of humiliation, or exinanition, and the other a state of glorification, or union with the Divine, which is called the Father. in the state of humiliation at the time, and in the degree, that he was in the human from the mother; and he was in the state of glorification, at the time, and in the degree, that he was in the Human from the Father. In the state of Humiliation he prayed to the Father, as to a being distinct from himself; but in the state of glorification he spoke with the Father as with himself. In this latter state he said, that the Father was in him, and he in the Father, and that the Father and he were One; but in the other state he underwent temptations, and suffered the cross, and prayed to the Father not to forsake him; for the Divine could not be tempted, much less could it suffer the cross.
Hence it further appears, that, by temptations followed by continual victories, and by the passion of the cross, which was the last of those temptations, he fully conquered the hells, and fully glorified the Human, as was shewn above.
That the Lord put off the human from the mother, and put on a Human from the Divine in himself, which is called the Father, may also be concluded from this circumstance, that whenever he spoke to or of her, he did not give her the title of mother. There are but three occasions recorded in the Evangelists, on which the Lord addressed her or mentioned her; and on two of these he called her woman, and the third time he declined to acknowledge her as his mother. That he twice called her woman, we read in John: “ The mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine: Jesus saith unto her,
Woman, what have I to do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come (ii
. 3, 4). And again : “When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by whom he loved, he said unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son; then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy Mother” (xix. 26, 27).
(xix. 26, 27). That he once declined to acknowledge her, we read in Luke: "It was told Jesus by certain who said, Thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to see thee: And he answered and said unto them, My mother and my brethren are they who hear the word of God, and do it” (viii. 20, 21; Matt. xii. 46–49; Mark iii. 31–35). In other places Mary is called his mother, but not from his own mouth. The same truth is also confirmed by this circumstance, that he would not acknowledge himself to be the the son of David : for we read in the Evangelists, Jesus asked the Pharisees, “saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, the Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand till I make thine enemies thy footstool ? If David then call him Lord, how is he his son ? And no man was able to answer him a word” (Matt. xxii. 41—45; Mark xii. 35-37; Luke xx. 41 -44; Psalm cx. l). Thus it is evident, that the Lord, in respect to his glorified Human, was neither the son of Mary nor of David. What was the nature of his Glorified Human, he shewed to "Peter, James, and John,” when he “was transfigured before them; and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was as white as the light;—and a voice came out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased : hear ye him” (Matt. xvii. 1–8; Mark ix. 2-8; Luke ix. 28 -36). The Lord was also seen by John, “as the sun shining in his strength” (Rev. i. 16).
That the Human of the Lord was glorified, is evident from what is said of his glorification in the Evangelists. Thus in John : « The hour is come that the Son of Man should be glorified.” “Father glorify thy name : Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again” (xii. 23, 28). It is said, "I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again,” because the Lord's glorification was accomplished by successive steps. Again : “Therefore, when he [Judas] was gone out, Jesus said, Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in him,-God shall also glorify him in himself, and shall straightway glorify him” (xiii. 31, 32). Again: Jesus said, “Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee” (xvii. 1, 5). And in Luke: “Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?" (xxiv. 26). These words are spoken in reference to his Human. The reason why the Lord said, “God is glorified in him ;” and also, "God shall glorify him in himself,” and further, “Glorify thy Son, that thy Son may also glorify thee ;” was, because the union was reciprocal, being a union of the Divine with the Human, and of the Human with the Divine; which also occasioned him to say, “I am in the Father and the Father in me” (John xiv. 10, 11): and, “All mine are thine, and thine are mine” (John xvii. 10). Thus the union was absolutely full or perfect. It is indeed true of all union, that it is not full and perfect unless it be reciprocal : such, therefore, must be the union of the Lord with man, and of man with the Lord, as he teaches in John: "At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you” (xiv. 20): And in another place: “Abide in me, and I in you ;-he that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit” (xv. 4, 5).
Since the Human of the Lord was glorified, that is, was made Divine, therefore he arose after death on the third day with his whole body; which never happens to any man, for he only rises as to his spirit, and not as to his body. That mankind might be assured, and that no doubt might be entertained, that the Lord arose with his whole body, he not only declared it by the angels who were in the sepulchre, but he also shewed himself in his human body to his disciples : and when they imagined that they saw a spirit, he said to them," Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet” (Luke xxiv. 39, 40; John xx. 20). And further, he said to Thomas, “ Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side; and be not faithless but believing. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God” (John xx. 27, 28). And still further, to evince that he was not a spirit but a man, he said to the disciples, "Have ye here any meat ? And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of a honey-comb: and he took it and did eat before them” (Luke xxiv. 41-43). As, however, his body was now no longer a material, but a divine substantial body, he came in amongst the disciples whilst the doors were shut” (John xx. 19, 26). And after he had been seen “he vanished out of their sight” (Luke xxiv. 31). Being thus wholly Divine, he was taken up, and sat on the right hand of God: for we read in Luke: “And it came to pass while he blessed them (the disciples] he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven” (xxiv. 51). And in Mark : “After he had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God” (xvi. 19). To sit on the right hand of God, means, to possess Divine Omnipotence.
Now since the Lord ascended into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God, or entered on the exercise of Divine Omnipotence, with his Divine and Human united in one, it follows, that his Human Substance or Essence, is as his Divine. To suppose otherwise, is to imagine that his Divine ascended up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God, but that his Human did not; a supposition which is contrary to Scripture, and also to the received Christian doctrine, which teaches, That God and man in Christ are as soul and body; and to separate these is repugnant to sound reason. This union of the Father with the Son, or of the Divine with the Human, is also meant in the following passages: “I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world : again, I leave the world, and go to the Father” (John xvi. 28). “I go away unto him that sent me” (John vii. 33 ; xvi. 5, 16; xvii. 11, 13; xx. 17). “What and if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where he was before ?” (John vi. 62). “No man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven” (John iii. 13). Every man that is saved, does indeed ascend into heaven, yet not of himself, but from the Lord; only the Lord ascended of himself.
36. VII. That Thus GOD BECAME MAN, AS IN FIRST PrinCIPLES SO ALSO IN ULTIMATES. That God is a man, and that every angel and spirit is a man from God, is shewn in the treatise on Heaven and Hell ; and more fully in the two treatises entitled Angelic Wisdom. God, however, was from the beginning a man in first principles, but not in ultimates; but after he assumed the human in the world, he also became a man in ultimates. This follows from what has just been proved, namely, that the Lord united his Human to his Divine, and thus made his Human Divine also. Hence it is, that the Lord is said to be the Beginning and the Ending, the First and the Last, and the Alpha and the Omega; as in the Revelation : “I am Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the Ending, saith the Lord, who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty” (i. 8, 11). So when John saw the Son of Man in the midst of the seven candlesticks, he fell at his feet as dead; but he laid his right hand upon him, saying, “I am the First and the Last” (i. 17; ii. 8; xxi. 6). Again : “Behold, I come quickly,—to give to every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last” (xxii. 12, 13). And in Isaiah: “Thus saith Jehovah, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer, Jehovah of Hosts: I am the First and I am the Last” (xliv. 6; xlviii. 12).
THE LORD IS THE VERY GOD, FROM WHOM THE WORD IS, AND
OF WHOM IT TREATS.
37. In the first section of this work we undertook to shew that the whole Sacred Scripture treats of the Lord, and that