Q. Did Christ die to reconcile and bring God to us, or, on the contrary, to bring us to God?
A. Rom. V. 10; Eph. ii. 14, 16; 2 Cor. v. 19; 1 Pet. iii. 18.
That I may by the way speak a little to this question, reserving the full discussion of the matter intended to the ensuing discourse, the terms of it are first to be explained : —
1. By " reconciling God," we intend the making of such an atone- ment as whereby his wrath or anger, in all the effects of it, is turned away. Though we use not the expression of " reconciling God to us," but of " reconciling us to God," by the taking away or removal of his wrath and anger, or the making reconciliation with God for sin, yet, as to reconcile God intends the aj^peasing of the justice and anger of God, so that whereas before we were obnoxious to his displeasure, enmity, hatred, and wrath, thereby and on that account, we come to be accepted with him, we say Christ died to reconcile God to us;
414 VINDICIiE EVANGELia^.
which in the progress of this discourse, with plentiful demonstrations from the Scripture, shall be evinced.
2. Of " l)ringing God to us" we speak not ; unless by " bringing God to us" he intends the procurement of the grace and favour of God toward us, and his loving presence to be with us, and then we say in that sense Christ by his death brought God to us.
3. " Our reconciliation to God," or the reconciliation as it stands on our part, is our conversion unto God, our deliverance from all that enmity and opposition unto God which are in us by nature; and this also we say is the effect and fruit of the death of Christ.
4. "Our bringing unto God," mentioned 1 Pet. iii. 18, is of a larger and more comprehensive signification than that of our recon- ciliation, containing the whole effect of the death of Christ, in the removal of every hinderance and the collation of every thing neces- sarily required to the perfect and complete accomplishment of the work of our salvation ; and so contains no less the reconciliation of God to us than ours to him, and is not proper to make up one member of the division there instituted, being a general expression of them both.
Now, concerning these things Mr B. inquires whether Christ by his death reconciled God to us, or, on the contrary, us to God ; so insinuating that one of these effects of the death of Christ is in- consistent with the other. This seems to be the man's aim : —
1. To intimate that this is the state of the difference between him and us, that we say Christ died "to reconcile God to us;" and he, that he died " to reconcile us to God."
2. That these things are contrary, so that they who say the one must deny the other; — that we, who say that Christ died to reconcile God to us, must of necessity deny that he died to reconcile us to God ; and that he also, who saith he died to reconcile us to God, may and must deny, on that account, the other effect by us ascribed to his death. But this sophistry is so gross that it is not worth the while to insist upon its discovery. We say that Christ died to recon- cile God to us, in the sense before explained, and us unto God ; and these things are so far from being of any repugnancy one to another, as to the making up of one entire end and effect of the death of Christ, that without them both the work of reconciliation is by no means complete.
Not to prevent the full proof and evidence hereof, which is intended, it may at present suffice that we evince it by the light of this one consideration: If in the Scripture it is expressly and frequently affirmed, that, antecedently to the consideration of the death of Christ and the effects thereof, there is not only a real enmity on our part against God, but also a law enmity on the part of God against us, and that both of these are removed by virtue of the death of
OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST, ETC. 41 5
Christ, then the reconciliation of God to us and our reconciliation to God are both of them one entire effect of the death of Christ. That there is in us by nature a real enmity against God, before it be taken away by virtue of the death of Christ, and so we reconciled to him, is not denied; and if it were, it might be easily evinced from Rom. viii. 7, 8, Tit. iii. 3, Eph. ii. 12, and innumerable other places. And certainly the evidence on the other side, that there was a law-enmity on the part of God against us, antecedent to the consi- deration of the death of Christ, is no less clear. The great sanction of the law, Gen. iii., Deut. xxvii. 26, considered in conjunction with the justice of God, Rom. i. 32, Hab. i. 13, Ps. v. 4-6, 2 Thess. i. 5, 6, and the testimonies given concerning the state and condition of man in reference to the law and justice of God, John iii. 36, Rom. v. 18, Eph. ii. 3, 12, etc., with the express assignation of the reconciliation pleaded for to be made by the death of Christ, Dan. ix. 24, Heb. ii. 14, do abundantly eviuce it. There being, then, a mutual enmity between God and us, though not of the same kind (it being physical on our part, and legal or moral on the part of God), Christ, our media- tor, making up peace and friendship between us doth not only re- concile us to God by his S]3irit, but God also to us by his blood. But of this more afterward, under the consideration of the death of Christ as it was a sacrifice.