3. Setting aside the consideration of the grace and love of Christ, and the compact between the Father and the Son as unto his under- taking for us, which undeniably proves all that he did in the pursuit
THE I3IPUTATI0N OF CHRTST'S OBEDIENCE. 259
of tliem to be done for us, and not for himself; I say, setting aside the consideration of these things, and the human nature of Christ, by- virtue of its union with the person of the Son of God, had a right unto, and might have immediately been admitted into, the highest glory whereof it was capable, without any antecedent obedience unto the law. And this is apparent from hence, in that, from the first / instant of that union, the whole person of Christ, with our nature existing therein, was the object of all divine worship from angels and men ; wherein consists the highest exaltation of that nature.
It is true, there was a 'peculiar glory that he was actually to be made partaker of, with respect unto his antecedent obedience and suffering, Phil. ii. 8, 9. The actual possession of this glory was, in the ordination of God, to be consequential unto his obeying and suffering, not for himself, but for us. But as unto the right and capacity of the human nature in itself, all the glory whereof it was capable was due unto it from the instant of its union; for it was therein exalted above the condition that any creature is capable of by mere creation. And it is but a Socinian fiction, that the first foundation of the divine glory of Christ was laid in his obedience, which was only the way of his actual possession of that part of his glory which consists in his mediatory power and authority over all. The real foundation of the whole was laid in the union of his person; whence he prays that the Father would glorify him (as unto mani- festation) with that glory which he had with him before the world was.
I %vill grant that the Lord Christ was " viator" whilst he was in this world, and not absolutely " possessor;" yet I say withal, he was so, not that any such condition was necessary unto him for himself, but he took it upon him by especial dispensation for us. And, there- foi'e, the obedience he j^erformed • in that condition was for us, and not for himself.
4. It is granted, therefore, that the human nature of Christ was made i/co vd/iov, as the apostle affirms, " That which was made of a woman, was made under the law." Hereby obedience became neces- sary unto him, as he was and whilst he was " viator." But this being by especial dispensation, — intimated in the expression of it, he Avas " made under the law," namely, as he was " made of a woman," by especial dispensation and condescension, expressed, Phil. ii. 6-8, — ■ the obedience he yielded thereon was for us, and not for himself. And this is evident from hence, for he was so made under the law as that not only he owed obedience unto the precepts of it, but he was made obnoxious unto its curse. But I suppose it will not be said that he was so for himself, and therefore not for us. We owed obe- dience unto the law, and were obnoxious unto the curse of it, or
260 ON JUSTIFICATION.
y-TTohxoi tCj QiM. Obedience was required of us, and was as necessary unto us if we would enter into life, as the answering of the curse for us was if we would escape death eternal. Christ, as our surety, is " made under the law" for us, whereby he becomes liable and obliged unto the obedience which the law required, and unto the penalty that it threatened. Who shall now dare to say that he underwent the penalty of the law for us indeed, but he yielded obedience unto it for himself only ? The whole harmony of the work of his media- tion would be disordered by such a supposition.
Judah, the son of Jacob, undertook to be a bondman instead of Benjamin his brother, that he might go free. Gen. xliv. 83. There is no doubt but Joseph might have accepted of the stipulation. Had he done so, the service and bondage he undertook had been neces- saiy unto Judah, and righteous for him to bear: howbeit he had undergone it, and performed his duty in it, not for himself, but for his brother Benjamin ; and unto Benjamin it would have been im- puted in his liberty. So when the apostle Paul wrote these words unto Philemon concerning Onesimus, E/ d's n ridl-Ariss as, rj o(pu\u, touto lfj.ol sXXoyn, lyu u'TTorlsai, verse 18, — " ' If he hath wronged thee,' dealt unrighteously or injuriously with thee, ' or oweth thee ought/ wherein thou hast suffered loss by him, ' put that on mine account,' or impute it all unto me, ' I will repay it,' or answer for it all," — he supposeth that Philemon might have a double action against Onesimus, the one " injuriarum," and the other " damni" or " debiti," of wrong and in- jury, and of loss or debt, which are distinct actions in the law: " If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought." Hereon he proposeth himself, and obligeth himself by his express obligation: 'Eyw UavXog iypa-^a -rfj s/ijJj' %£/p/, — " I Paul have written it with mine own hand," .that he would answer for both, and pay back a valuable consideration if required. Hereby was he obliged in his own person to make satis- faction unto Philemon; but yet he was to do it for Onesimus, and not for himself. Whatever obedience, therefore, was due from the Lord Christ, as to his human nature, whilst in the form of a servant, either as a man or as an Israelite, seeing he was so not necessarily, by the necessity of nature for himself, but by voluntary condescen- sion and stipulation for us; for us it was, and not for himself