his presence, and therefore could never for a moment leave heaven, that is, really and properly, but only in an analogical sense.

I add also, that the following words confirm this sense. Verse 49. As we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly; that is, our souls are made now on earth and joined to bodies, to frail and feeble bodies, capable of disease and corruption, as was the soul of Adam, which was made on earth after his body was formed: But as the soul of Christ came down from heaven, and assumed a body upon earth, so the souls of the saints at the resurrection shall come down from heaven, and assume their immortal bodies upon earth: And in this sense Christ the second Adam, the Lord from heaven, is the pattern of the saints' resurrection much rather than the first; and the parallel which the apostle represents of our bearing the image of the earthy and the heavenly Adam, is much more just, perfect and natural, if we take in this part of the resemblance as well as others.

Some would construe these words, The Lord from heaven, to signify the divine nature of Christ. But let it be observed, that the apostle's design here is only to shew how the man Christ Jesus shall be the pattern of saints raised in glory; and it is no part of his purpose here to represent saints as bearing the image of God, or his divine nature, but only the image of his glorified human nature, and therefore these glorious expressions rather refer to his human soul. Now put all these things together, and we can hardly suppose our blessed Lord or his apostles should express his real and proper human descent from heaven in plainer words than those which have been cited, or in words more fitted to lead every common reader into this plain and easy sense.

To conclude this section, if the most natural and obvious sense of scripture leads us to believe, that there was a glorious Being who is sometimes called an angel, and sometimes a man under the Old Testament, who was clothed with peculiar rays of glory, and assumed divine prerogatives, and yet in other parts of his character and conduct appears much inferior to the majesty of pure godhead, and that this illustrious Being emptied and divested himself of his peculiar riches and glory when he came to dwell in flesh, that he was capable of having a will different from the will of his Father, as appears in those words of his, Father, not my will, but thy will be done; Luke xxii. 42. and that he did really leave his dwelling with the Father, and come down into our world, I know not to what subject all this can be so well applied as to the human soul of Christ, and its existence before his incarnation.

SECT. IV.-Miscellaneous Arguments to prove the same Doctrine.

Though the considerations already offered carry with them a good force of argument, yet all the reasons which support the doctrine of Christ's pre-existent soul cannot be reduced to one general head. There are several others which are not so easily ranged under any head, that can give their assistance to this work; and therefore I call them miscellaneous, and propose them thus:

Argument I. "It seems needful that the soul of Christ should be pre-existent, that it might have opportunity to give its previous actual consent to the great and painful undertaking of atonement for our sins."

It was the human soul of Christ that endured all the weakness, poverty and pain of his infant state, that sustained all the labours and fatigues of life, that felt the bitter reproaches of men, and the sufferings of a shameful and bloody death, as well as the buffetings of devils, and the painful inflictions of the justice of God. This is evident, for neither the divine nature, nor the mere flesh or body abstractly considered, are capable of pain nor shame without the human soul. Surely then it seems to be requisite that the soul of Christ should give its actual free consent to this undertaking before his labours, pains or sorrows began, which was as soon as ever he was born.

One cannot but think it very congruous and highly reasonable, that he who was to undergo so much for our sakes should not be taken from his childhood in a mere passive manner into this difficult and tremendous work. And afterwards only give his consent to it when he was grown up a man, upon a secret divine intimation that he was born for this purpose. It looks most likely and condecent in respect of the nature of things, and the justice of God, that Christ's human soul which endured all the pains, should well know before hand what the glorious work of mediation would cost him, and that he should voluntarily accept the proposal from the Father: Otherwise it rather seems a a task imposed upon him, than an original and voluntary engagement of his own; whereas such an imposition would seem to diminish the merit and glory of this noble undertaking, and is also contrary to scripture in itself.

But if we suppose the human soul, united to the divine nature at its first creation, and being thereby fully capacitated for this amazing work, receiving the proposal with chearfulness from God his Father from the foundation of the world, and then from an inward delight to glorify his Father, and from a compassionate principle to the children of men, undertaking this difficult and bloody service, and coming down into a human body to fulfil it : this highly exalts the merit of his love, and the condescending

glory of his labours and his sufferings. And indeed this voluntary consent of his to become incarnate and to suffer, is plainly represented in several places in scripture; Psal. xl. 6, 7. Heb. x. 6. Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire, these were not sufficient to expiate the sin of man; thou hast prepared a body for me; then said 1, lo I come, that is, to dwell in this body, to undertake this work; 1 delight to do thy will, O my God." And these two expressions; Psal. xl. 6, 8. My ears hast thou bored, and thy law is in my heart, are more proper, saith Dr. Goodwin, vol. III. book iv. pages 142, 143. to apply to the soul of this human nature, and to be understood to be the voice of his human nature, rather than of the divine: He was willing and obedient to do God's will, as a servant to do his master's." And this great author thought this consent so necessary, that he rather ventures to introduce a most miraculous scene, than to have this early consent of Christ as man omitted; and therefore he supposes that in a miraculous way the human soul of Christ did give itself up to this work from his very birth.

His own free consent appears plainly in these words, He humbled himself; Phil. ii. 7. He emptied himself of glory when he became man, and died for sinners. And he himself took part of flesh and blood with this design, that he might die, "that he might through his death destroy the works of the devil;" Heb. ii. 14. He declares further his own free consent; John vi. 38. 1 came down from heaven to do my Father's will. And John x. 17, 18. Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life that I may take it again. No man taketh my life from me, that is, against my free consent; but I lay it down of myself, that is, of my own choice and voluntary engagement. "This thought I propose, says the defender of Bishop Fowler's Discourse, to be well considered by all free and ingenuous minds, and by all those who would not in the least derogate from the honour of their blessed Mediator Christ Jesus," and the amazing love that appears in his mighty undertaking.

II." The covenant betwixt God the Father and his Son Jesus Christ for the redemption of mankind, is represented in scripture as being made and agreed upon from or before the foundation of the world. Is it not then most proper that both real parties should be actually present, and that this should not be transacted merely within the divine essence by such sort of distinct personalities as have no distinct mind and will? The essence of God is generally agreed by our protestant divines to be the same single numerical essence in all three personalities, and therefore it can be but one conscious mind or spirit. Now can one single understanding and will make such a covenant as scripture represents

I grant the divine nature which is in Christ from eternity

contrived and agreed all the parts of this covenant. But does it not add a lustre and glory, and more conspicuous equity, to this covenant, to suppose the man Christ Jesus, who is most properly the Mediator according to 1 Tim. ii. 5. to be also present before the world was made, to be chosen and appointed as the Redeemer or Reconciler of mankind, to be then ordained the head of his future people, to receive promises, grace and blessings in their name, and to accept the solemn and weighty trust from the hand of his Father, that is, to take care of millions of souls ?— Read the following scriptures, and see whether they do not imply thus much; 1 Tim. ii. 5. There is one Mediator between God and man, even the man Christ Jesus. Eph. i.3, 4. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ; according as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world. 2 Tim. i. 8, 9, 10. God hath saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began. Tit. i. 2. Eternal life, which God that cannot lie, promised before the world began. Now to whom could this promise be made but to Jesus Christ, and to us in him, as the great patron and representative of believers; Rev. xiii. 6. All that dwell on earth shall worship the beast, rohose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Whether these words, "froin the foundation of the world," refer to the slaying of the Lamb by way of anticipation, or rather to writing of the book of life, yet they certainly refer to the transaction of this important affair with the Lamb, and therefore this expression is used several times in the book of the Revelation.

It was by virtue of this covenant, and the sacrifice of his own blood which Christ was to offer in due time, that all the benefits of this covenant were derived upon mankind in the various ages of it ever since the fall of man; therefore Christ was a Saviour from the beginning of the world; and those who apply all these things merely to the divine nature of Christ, as consenting to this covenant upon the proposal of the Father, yet they suppose the human nature of Christ to be included in it, in the view of God the Father, by way of "prolepsis," or anticipation. But surely it seems much more proper to explain these things concerning the human soul of Christ as actually united to the divine nature, and actually consenting to this covenant, since the human nature was to endure the sufferings; and then we need not be constrained to recur to such proleptical figures of speech to interpret the language of scripture, since the literal aense is just and true.

Thus it appears, if we consider this covenant as made be

twixt God the Father and his Son, and as it is usually called the covenant of redemption, it seems to require the pre-existence of the soul of Christ. Or if we consider the covenant of grace as it has been proposed to men in all ages since the fall, the existence of Christ as God-man seem requisite also to constitute him a proper Mediator. It does not appear to be so agreeable a supposition to make this covenant for the salvation of men from the vengeance of God to run on for the space of four thousand years together, that is, from the creation and fall of man to the incarnation of Christ, without any proper or suitable mediator or undertaker on the part of man. This covenant of the gospel, or of God in Christ, includes in the very nature and theory of it two real distinct parties, God and man; so that the title of mediator seems to require that man should be represented by the mediator as well as God, and that the complete person of the mediator should have some affinity to both parties, and actually agree to this covenant in that whole person before the communication of the benefits of it to the earliest ages of mankind.

Observe also, what was intimated before, that this one Mediator is particularly called the man Christ Jesus; 1 Tim. ii. 5. that the human nature may appear to be signally concerned in the mediation; and for the same reason, the book of life is said to belong to the Lamb, which name is applied to the human nature of Christ, in union with the divine, with much more propriety than it can be applied merely to the divine nature without such an union.

III. Another argument for this doctrine of the existence of the soul of Christ before his incarnation may be derived from the "scriptural descriptions of Christ's coming into the world. This is always expressed in some corporeal language, such as denotes his taking on him animal nature, or body, or flesh, without the least mention of taking a soul." Read the following scriptures; John i. 14. The word was made flesh and dwelt among us. Rom. i. 3. He was made of the seed of David, according to the flesh. Rom. viii. 3. God sending his Son in the likeness of sinful flesh. Gal. iv. 3. God sent forth his Son made of a woman. This word cannot necessarily imply the soul, for his soul could not be made of the soul or body of the Virgin Mary, but his flesh or blood was made out of hers. Phil. ii. 7, 8. He was made in the likeness of men, and was found in fashion as a man. Now shape or fashion peculiarly refer to the body rather than the soul.

And in the second chapter to the Hebrews, where the apos tle treats professedly of the incarnation of Christ, he seems to suppose that his soul existed before, and that he was like the children of God already in that respect; but verse 14. For as