Page images
PDF
EPUB

thew, that the Body which they saw was truly and vitally informed with an * Ideo claufis Humane Soul. And that they might be yer farther * assured that it was the ad difcipulos ostiis introi- tam

fame Soul by which that Body lived before, he gave a full Testimony of his bat, & flatu Divinity by the Miracle which he wrought in the Multitude of Fishes caught, suo dabat Spi- by breathing on the Apostles the Holy Ghost, and by ascending into Hearitum Sanftum, & dato ven in the Sight of his Disciples. For being no man afcended into Heaven intelligentiæ but he which came from heaven, the Son of man which was in heaven, be imune amining the Divinity was never fo united to any Humane Soul but only in that turarumn oc- Person, it appeared to be the same Soul with which he lived and wrought all culta pande- the Miracles before. To conclude, being Christ appeared after his Death bat; & rursus

us with the same Body in which he died, and with the same Soul united to it, it lateris, fixuras followeth that he rose from the dead by a true and proper Resurrection. clavorum, & Moreover, that the Verity and Propriety of Christ's Resurrection may faromnia recentilfimæ paffio-ther appear, it will be necessary to confider the Cause thereof, by what Power nis figna and by whom it was effected. And if we look upon the meritorious Cause, monftrabat, ut agnofcere. we shall find it to be Christ himself. For he by his voluntary Sufferings in his tur in eo pro- Life, and exact Obedience at his Death, did truly † deserve to be raised unto prietas divi- Life again. Because he drank of the Brook in the way, because he humbled næ humanæque naturæ himself unto Death, even to the Death of the Cross, therefore was it necessary

that he should be exalted, and the first Degree of his Exaltation was his Re. permanere. Leo, Serm. I. un

; furrection. Now being Christ humbled himself to the Sufferings both of Soul de Resurrecti- and Body ; being whatsoever fuffered, the same by the Virtue and Merit of one. his Passion was to be exalted; being all other Degrees of Exaltation suppoUt mediator Dei & homi- fed that of the Resurrection; it followeth from the meritorious Cause that num homo Christ did truly rise from the Dead with the same Soul and the fame Body, Chriftus Jesus with which he lived is with which he lived united, and di

rated. refurrectione clarificaretur, priùs humiliatus est passione: non enim à mortuis resurrexisset fi mortuus non fuisset. Humilitas claritatis eft meritum, claritas humilitatis eft præmium. S. Aug. Tract. 104. in Joh.

The Efficient Cause of the Resurrection of Christ is to be considered either as Principal or Instrumental. The Principal Cause was God himself; for no other Power but that which is omnipotent can raise the Dead. It is an Act

beyond the Activity of any Creature, and unproportionate to the Power of Afts 2. 32. any finite Agent. This Jefus hath God raised up, faith the Apostle, wbere

of we are all witnesses. And generally in the Scriptures as our, so Christ's Resurrection is attributed unto God; and as we cannot hope after Death to rise to Life again without the Activity of an infinite and irresistible Power no more did Christ himself, who was no otherwise raised than by an eminent Act of God's Omnipotency; which is excellently set forth by the Apostle, in so high an Exaggeration of Expressions, as I think is scarce to be pa-

ralleld in any Author, #That we may know what is the exceeding greatness $ Eph. 1.19. Καλά π

the of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of the might

έρ- . Berrov pile of his power which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him up from the

© li dewage dead. Being then Omnipotency is a Divine Attribute, and Infinite Power beai mire, un pri Temers longs to God alone : being no less Power than Infinite could raise our Saviour xeg6T86 pp from the Dead ; it followeth, That whatsoever Instrumental Action might ocią' wig, v cvhefugev cu cur, tog mult be acknowle TIXerra. whico Words our Translation comes far mort of, and I doubt our Language can scarce reach it. For firft, here are douce his and ige's, two Words to express the Power of God, and the validity and force of it, but not sufficient; wherefore there is an Addition to each of them, ublogu o dwdéusws, and regte op igúc, two Words more to express the eminent Greatness of this power and Force, but not sufficient yet; and therefore there is another Addition to each Addition; to aapbanrov miling, and j cieles rõ rogéros, to set forth the Eminence and Activity of that Greatnejs; and all yet as it were but flat and dall, till it be quickned with an attive Verb, my cruelnoev CV TW Xensa igcseges out to ex ixção. All which he fet en work, all which he netuated in Christ, when he raised him from the Dead.

xent.

[merged small][ocr errors]

And therefore in the Scriptures the Raising of Christ is attributed to God the Father (according to those Words of the Apostle, Paul an Apostle not of men Gal. 1. i. neither by men, but, by Jesus Christ, and God the Father who raised him from the dead, but it is not attributed to the Father alone. For to whomsoever that infinite Power doth belong, by which Cbrift was raised, that Person must be acknowledged to have raised him. And because we have already proved that the eternal Son of God is of the fame Effence, and confequently of the fame Power with the Father, and shall hereafter thew the fame true also of the Holy Ghost, therefore we must likewise acknowledge that the * Father, Son and Holy Ghost raised Christ from the dead. Nor is this only * Quis nisi sotrue by virtue of this Ratiocination, but is also delivered expresly of the Son, furrexit, quia and that by himself. It is a weak Fallacy used by the Socinians, who main- folus mori potain, That God the Father only raised Christ, and then i

os tuit qui carist, and then fay, they teach as me

cach as nem habuit ? much as the Apostles did, who attribute it always either generally unto God, & tamen ab or particularly to the Father. For if the Apostles taught it only To, yet if he hoc opere

quo folus Fiwhich taught the Apostles, taught us something more, we must make that llus refurrexit also part of our Belief. They believe the Father raised Christ, because St. Paul non erat Pater hath caught them so, and we believe the same; they will not believe that much cridem

alienus, de Christ did raise himself, but we must also believe that, because he hath said eft, qui susciso. These were his Words unto the Jews, a Destroy this temple, and in tavit à morthree days I will raise it up; and this is the Explication of the Apostle, But An fortë se ipbe spake of the temple of his body, which he might very properly call a se non suscitaTemple, because b the fulness of the Godhead dwelt in him bodily. And of

à vit? Et ubi

19, eft quòd ait, when he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembred that he had said Solvite temthis unto them, and they believed the Scripture and the word that Jefus had plum hoc, co

triduè fufcia faid. Now if upon the Resurrection of Christ the Apostles believed those tabo illud ; & Words of Christ, Destroy this temple, and I willraise it up, then did they qudd porestabelieve that Christ raised himself; for in those words there is a Person men- tim

tem habere se

dicit ponendi tioned which raised nd no other person mentioned but himself. e iterum fua

mendi animam füam? Quis autem ita defipiat, ut Spiritum San&um refurrectionem hominis Christi dicat non co-operatum, cùm ipfum hominem Chriftum fuerit operatus. S. Auguf. contra Serm. Arian. cap. 15. John 2. 19,21. Coloff. 2.9.

A strange Opposition they make to the Evidence of this Argument, † fay- † Aliter Deus

Christum sufing, That God the Father raised Christ to life, and Christ being raised to life, citavit, "aliter did lift and raise his Body out of the Grave, as the Man fick of the Pallie Christus corraised himself from the Bed, or as we shall raise our felves out of the Graves pus

us Chrifto vie when the Trump fhall found: And this was all which Christ could do. But tam restituenif this were true, and nothing else were to be understood in those Words of do, Christus

h vitâ recuperaour Saviour, he might as well have said, " Destroy this temple, aud in three mata days any one of you may raise it up. For when Life was restored unto it by um levando, God, any one of them might have lifted it up, and raised it out of the Gravé, &è fepulchro

· prodeundo, and have shewn it alive.

seque poft

mortem vivum fiftendo præbendoque. Sic & Paralyticus ille erexerat corpus fuum, acceptâ à Chrifto fanitate: fic & omnes mortui surgent, & ex monumentis prodibunt, receptâ ab eodem Christo vitâ. Confessionis Sociniana Vindices. ¢ John 2. 19.

This Answer therefore is a mere shift: For to raise a Body which is dead, is in the Language of the Scriptures to give Life unto it, or to quicken a mortal · Body. d | For as the Father raiseth up the dead and quickneth them, even pogohn 5. 25. the Son quickneth whom he will. He then which quickneth the dead Bodies of Yixers and ca's

070év is the Same thing; and therefore one in the Apodosis answereth to both in the Protasis, and sheweth that Christ raiseth and quickneth whom he will, which demonstrateth his infinite, and absolute Power Kai roi so outsáp écu 78 Torby, TW, s Séad caulioy ésiv. Ei 78 as Siau, dubaé ciung Woney to gS genes izsrics: 6 jó dwódy cp cw , šxéto š's sind. To ý 78 Carie o to clinę byees, a duwéénews deixoves to T aega isegi my po j šs Jade'isolas i isotila. S. Chryf. Hom. 38. in Joh. Where it is very observable that though épocev To's verega's and (wozoley be the same in the language of the Scriptures, gét évtigey and (oolover are not the same. By which observation the late learned Bishop of Ely, bath most evidently detected that Socinian Cavil. Si quis obstinatè vocem Excitabo [ilaçã] urgere vult, is animad

LI

vertet

[ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]

vertet quid D. Jesus alibi dicat, Eum qui perdiderit animam, vivificaturum eam. Ubi fi quis infiftere vellet ipsis verbis, eum colligere oporteret, Credentes etiam ipsos sese vivificaturos, & à mortuis excitaturos. Cat. Rac. pag. 278. For iregão hath manifest relation to the dead, but I wolovã unto the living. And therefore our Translation hath very well rendered those words. Luc. 17. 33. ös éa'r donéon outlu, (wolovéad outli, Whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it : So that (woloveãy fuxl is to preserve life, which Interpretation is most evident out of the Antithesis of the same place. ος εαν ζητήση γ' ψυχω ωτό (ώσαι, πλίση αυτώ. For Cώσαι and λιλέσg in the former part are the fame with dinnéon and (wolovýcs in the latter. And beside, this is the language of S. Luke, who, Acts 7. 19. says that the Egyptians ill intreated the Israelites, rõ ZORGV é xBela te Beéon atãy, is to us (wolovciat. So that they cast out their young children, to the end they might not live, that is, remain alive, Syr. ping 77, nè servarentur, ne viverent, as the Arabick. In which words there is a manifeft reference to that place in Exodus, where thrice this word is used in that sense by the LXX. as 1. 17. Drabuo ng pingi, w i swoyoyoy tá agreva, V.T. sed conservabant mares, Chald. Nu Á so verse 18. iS wolovete ta ägreva, and 22. ssj wão Jijau (wolovente autó. And indeed 7'71 in Piel, is often used for keeping or preserving alive, and is so several times translated, swolovã as well as (więã, as Jud. 8. 19. Enno 15, 6 if we govýxelo auto's, óx ár án éxleya öpãs, V.T. Si servassetis eos, non vos occiderem. If ye had saved them alive, I would not say you. I Sam. 27. 9. Tini Nabo se ox woróvd budeg, gwaira. V.T. Nec relinquebat viventem virum aut mulierem. And left neither man nor woman alive. And which is yet nearer to our purpose. 1 Kings 20. 21. Two na 717 518 LXX. Śws Ewolovýad rais yuxas huôr. V.T. forfitan falvabit animas noftras. Peradventure he will save thy life. So that wolove in the language of the LXX. is to save alive, and (wocovery fuxlw, is to preserve ones life. So that s. Luke in the Text cited by the Socinians, could intend no more than that he which was ready to lose his life for Christ should thereby preserve it, and consequently he speaks nothing of the raising of the dead.

forfitan mo ne

in the LXX

18.

others when he raiseth them, he also quickned his own Body when he raised that. The temple is supposed here to be disolved, and being so to be raised again ; therefore the suscitation must answer to the dissolution. But the temple of Christ's Body was dissolved when his Soul was separated, nor was it any other way dissolved than by that separation. God suffered not his Holy One to see corruption, and therefore the parts of his Body, in respect of each to other, suffered no dissolution. Thus as the Apostle desired to be disolved and to be with Christ, so the temple of Christ's Body was dissolved here, by the separation of his Soul; for the temple standing was the body living, and therefore the raising of the dissolved temple was the quickning of the body. If the Body of Christ had been laid down in the sepulchre alive, the temple had not been dissolved; therefore to lift it up out of the fepulchre when it was before quickned, was not to raise a dissolved temple, which our Saviour promised he would do, and the Apostles believed he did.

Again, It is most certainly false that our Saviour had power only to lift up his Body when it was revived, but had no power of himself to re-unite his

Soul unto his Body, and thereby to revive it. “For Christ speaketh exprefly of John 10. 17, himself, I lay down my life (or foul) that I might take it again. No man

taketh it from me, but I lay it down of my felf. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. The laying down of Chril Life was to die, and the taking of it again was to revive, and by his taking of his Life again he shewed himself to be the resurrection and the life. For he which was made of the feed of David according to the flesh, was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead. But if Christ had done no more in the Refurrection, than lifted up his Body when it was revived, he had done that which any other Person might have done, and so had not declared himself to be the Son of God with power. It remaineth therefore, that Christ by that power which he had within himself, did take his Life again which he had laid down, did re-unite his Soul unto his Body, from which he leparated it when

he gave up the Ghost, and so did quicken and revive himself: And so it is a

w certain truth, * not only that God the Father raised the Son, but also that u6ev, as well änztes csísma God the Son raised himself. Cev çow Tóv. Ign. ad Smyrn. Si peccati confeffor revixit à morte, quis euin suscitavit ? Nullus mortuus eft fui ipfius suscitator. Ille se potuit suscitare qui mortuâ carne non mortuus eft. Etenim hoc suscitavit quod inortuum fuerat. Ille se suscitavit qui vivebat in le, in carne autem suscitandâ mortuus erat. Non enim Pater folus Filium suscitavit, de quo dictum eft ab Apostolo, Propter quod eum Deus exalta vit, sed etiam Dominus seipsum, id est, corpus suum: unde dicit, sola vite templum hoc, or in triduo fufcitabo illud. S. Aug. de Verb. Domin. Serm. 8.

From this Consideration of the efficient cause of Christ's Resurrection, we are yet farther assured, That Christ did truly and properly rise from the dead

in

himself, arturance thavas never letly proved furrection ,

in the fame Soul, and the fame Body. For if we look upon the Father, it is beyond all Controversie that he raised his own Son: And as while he was here alive, God spake from Heaven, faying, This is my well-beloved Son ; so after his Death it was the same Person, of whom he spake by the Prophet Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. If we look upon Christ himself, and consider him with Power to raise himself, there can be no greater Assurance that ho did totally and truly arise in Soul and Body by that Divinity which was never separated either from the Body or from the Soul. And thus we have sufficiently proved our second particular, the Verity, Reality, and Propriety of Christ's Resurrection, contained in those Words, He rose from the dead.

The Third Particular concerns the Time of Christ's Resurrection, whichi is expressed by the third day; and those words afford a double Consideration; one in respect of the Distance of Time, as it was after three Days ; the other in respect of the Day, which was the third Day from his Passion, and the precise Day upon which he tose. For the first of these, we fhall fhew that the Mefias, who was foretold both to die and to rise again, was not to rise before, and was to rise upon the third Day after his Death; and that in correspondence to these Predictions, our Jesus, whom we believe to be the true Meffias, did not rise from the Dead until, and did rise from the Dead upon, the third Day.

The Typical Predictions of this Truth weré two, answering to our two Considerations, one in reference to the Distance, the other in respect of the Day it self. The first is that of the Prophet Jonas, who was in the belly of Jon. 1. 17. the great fish three days and three nights, and then by the special Com- and 2. 10.1 mand of God he was rendered safe upon the dry Land, and fent. a Preacher of Repentance to the great City of Niniveh. This was an express Type of the Mesias then to come, who was to preach Repentance and Remission of Sins to all Nations; that as Jonas was three days and three nights in the Mat. 12. 38. whale's belly, so should the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth: And as he was restored alive unto the dry Land again, so should the Mesias, after three Days, be taken out of the jaws of Death, and restored into the Land of the Living.

The Type in respect of the Day was the waved Sheaf in the Feast of the First-fruits, concerning which, this was the Law of God by Mofes, When ye be come into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest Lev. 23. 10, thereof, then Wall ye bring a leaf of the first-fruits of your barvest un. "I's to the Priest: And he shali wave the meaf before the Lord to be accepted for you: On the morrow after the fabbath the Priest Mall wave it. And he fall offer that day when ge wave the peaf an He-Lamb without blemish of the first year for a burnt-offering unto the Lord. For under the Levitical Law, all the Fruits of the Earth in the Land of Canaan were prophane; none might eat of them till they were consecrated, and that they were in the Feast of the First-fruits. One Sheaf was taken out of the Field and brought to the Priest, who lifted it up as it were in the Name of all the rest, waving it before the Lord, and it was accepted for them, so that all the Sheafs in the Field were holy by the Acceptation of that: For if the firf- Rom. 11. 16. fruits be holy, the lump also is holy. And this was always done the Day after the Sabbath, that is, the Paschal Solemnity, after which the Fulness of the Harvest followed: By which thus much was foretold and represented, that as the Sheaf was lifted up and wayed, and the Lamb was offered on thác Day by the Priest to God, so the promised Messias, that immaculate Lamb which was to die, that Priest which dying was to offer up himself to God, was upon this Day to be lifted up and raised from the Dead, or rather to shake and lift up and present himself to God, and so to be accepted

LI 2

12.

for

for us all, that so our Dust might be sanctified, our Corruption hallowed. our Mortality consecrated to Eternity. Thus was the Resurrection of the Mefias after Death typically represented both in the Distance and the Day.

and now in reference to both Resemblances, we shall clearly shew that our Fefus, whom we believe, and have already proved to be the true Mefias, was so long and no longer dead, as to rise the third day; and did fo order the

Time of his Death, that the Third Day on which he rose might be that very Day on which the Sheaf was waved, the Day after that Sabbath mentioned in the Law.

As for the Distance between the Resurrection and the Death of Christ, it is to be considered, first, generally in it felf, as it is fome Space of Time : Secondly, as it is that certain and determinate Space of Three Days. Christ did not, would not, suddenly arise, lest any should doubt that he ever died. It was as necessary for us that he should die, as that he should live; and we, which are to believe them both, were to be assured as well of the one as of

the other. That therefore we may be ascertained of his Death, he did some *De cruce de

- rime continue it. * He might have descended from the Cross before he died. terat, sed dif- but he would uot, because he had undertaken to die for us. t He might have ferebat ut de revived himself upon the Cross after he had given up the Ghost, and before sepulchro refurgeret." Jofeph came to take him down, but he would not, left as Pilate questioned S.Aug. in Joh. whether he were already dead, so he might doubt whether he ever died. The Trafl. 22;. Reward of his Resurrection was immediately due upon his Passion, but he + 'Hdwóclo Keward o os mais atã deferred the receiving of it, left either of them being questioned, they both Javáry to might lose their Efficacy and intended Operation. It was therefore necessary Cãrece deyee como máãi, that some Space should intercede between them. dagar xãv sada rj Tãto xadãos megid ay i Ew7rie Weronxe. Eine g8 Šv tis pendo o rws autó te@ynx évou, unde tárcov aută Soluce or if auxiva, o war' w a Téyésarw ll érideixas. Táxçe ö ry on loco os diasupana 70 te JardT8ITE X dvasárias äondov iyivelo od mene ciplagoids xaro. "Obex live dhe nje vexegy to Cöra, og Micr wwé Mesve uécku dále, si tentation TĞto wãow değev plag?ov. S. Athanas. de Incarnat. Verbi. Kas teens ä ruéegs dice što Cwe zaiencev, vee wis bon öro dvilaver, og8 Fu savęão autode móvor Bebauš ), sej rãi wávla ofer, esta seg med ägóvæ ai muigão. S. Chryfoft. Homil. 43. in Matt.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Again. Because Christ's Exaltation was due unto his Humiliation, and the first Step of that was his Resurrection; because the Apostles after his Death were to preach Repentance and Remission of Sins through his Blood, who were no way qualified to preach any fuch Doctrine till he rose again ; because the Spirit could not be sent till he ascended, and he could not afcend into Heaven till he rose from the Grave; therefore the Space between his Relurrection and Passion could not be long; nor can there be any Reason assigned why it should any longer be deferred, when the Verity of his Death was once fufficiently proved. Left therefore his Disciples fhould be long held in fufpense, or any Person after many Days should doubt whether he rose with the fame Body with which he died, or no ; that he might shew himself aliye while the Soldiers were watching at his Grave,

his Grave, and while his Crucifixion was 7 "Everes med et go yet in the Mouths of the People, he would not stay † many Days before To dos xoliw as he rose. Some Distance then of Time there was, but not great, between his

Ž Dávalov a tas Carpeta Crucifixion and his Refurrection. Teslašov ovesure tõto live ö min iri word docučiver sey placed reason őseegu avashoes arisnon, ang óx autó ára irrego Cãrece pegar (opedde 75 Šv tis xij di cutiv xeģvov ÚTISEN TUS Panopeffeéicos rj éria zvolve as sfvopoléo) dice tõto ó show Terão vigolo

δε επί πολύ τους ακέσανίας αυτά οι τ ανασάσεως παράλκυσεν· αλλ' έτι ή ακοών αυτών ένωλον εχόνων ή λόfoν, και έτι και οφθαλμών αυτών εκδεχομένων, και η διανοίας ωτών ήρ7ημέρης, και ζώντων επί γής έτι και επί τόπον όντων και θαναλωσάντων και μαρτυρένων οι τ8 θανάτε το Κυριακό Cώμα/G», αυτός ο τύ Θεά ήoς ώ τριλαίων διασήμα]αι το βιόρθρον νεαρον Cώμα i dežev sétávceloy xjö plag?or. Ibid.

The particular Length of this Space is determined in the third day : But that Expression being capable of fome Diversity of Interpretation, is not so easily

conclu

« PreviousContinue »