the Redeemer is the fame fort of Man as the Perfons Redeem'd by him. Thus the fame Apoftle faies, there is one Mediator between God and men, the man Chrift Jefus, 1 Tim. 2. 5. And again, he has appointed a day in the which he will judge the world in righteoufnefs, by that man whom he has ordained: whereof be bas given affurance unto all men, in that he has raifed him from the dead, Acts 17. 31. So that our Mediator and Judge is as much a Man, as thofe for whom he intercedes, and who fhall be judged by him. To these I might add diverfe other Texts. And what is the plain Senfe of them? What did our Savior and his Apoftles understand by the Word Man? What fort of Creature did they take Adam, and all other Men, to be? Even fuch as was our Lord himself. The human Soul is by much the principal Part of Man, and his chief constituent Part; and therefore to fuppofe a Man (a true, perfect, and proper Man, and fuch as our Lord is notorioufly defcrib'd and affirm'd to be) without an human Soul, is the height of Abfurdity.

2

4

...I will not enter into a Metaphyfical Inquiry, what conftitutes the Effence or Subftance of an human Soul or human Body. The Effences or Subftances of Things are little understood by us. We can't precifely determin, what makes an Identity of Nature or Kind.. But tho' we can't precifely determin, what makes an Identity: yet a small share of common Senfe can difcern a manifeft Diversity ; for inftance, that the WORD which created all things, is not an human Soul. And confequently for any one to affirm, that the WORD joined to an human Body makes a Man, is much more ridiculous, than to affirm, that an human Soul joined to the Body of a Lion, is a Man. For there is a

2

wider

wider Difference between the WORD and an human Soul, than between the Body of a Man and the Body of a Lion.

Whofoever therefore affirms, that our Savior wanted an human Soul, muft not think to prove his Doctrin true, by faying, that 'tis poffible in the Nature of the Thing, for the WORD to fupply the want of an human Soul in Chrift (for tho' I do by no means yield, that fuch a Supposition is confiftent with the Scriptural Account of the Bleffed Jefus; yet if it were granted, 'tis no Proof) but he must give fome convincing Demonftration, that tho' the Holy Scriptures do not exprefly fay, that Chrift wanted an human Soul; yet, when they call him Man, they certainly mean fomething dif ferent from what that Word does ordinarily import, as it occurs in the infpired Books. 'Till this is don (which is evidently impoffible) the Word Man, when spoken of the Bleffed Jefus, must be understood in the obvious, ufual and common Senfe. And confequently it appears by the plain Declarations of himself, and of the Infpired Wri ters, that our Savior had an human Soul.

Again, let us obferve, how the Author to the Hebrews argues. Having fhewn in his firft Chapter, that our Lord Jefus Chrift is a Perfon of greater Dignity than the Angels, he infers from thence, in the former Part of the fecond Chapter, the Neceffity of our Obedience to the Laws of the Gofpel. Then he proceeds to evince our Savior's Exaltation from the Old Teftament, by quoting fome Words of the Eighth Pfalm, thus, But one in a certain place teftified, faying, What is man that thou art mindful of him or the Son of man, that thou vifiteft him? Thou madeft him a little lower than the Angels thou crown

2

edft

edft him with glory and honour, and didft fet him over the works of thy hands: Thou haft put all things in fubjection under his feet, Heb. 2. 6, 7, 8. He then obferves the Univerfality of this Subjection, faying, For in that he put all in fubjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him, v. 8. He then concludes, that this must be understood, not of Man in General, but of one Particular Man, viz. our Lord Jefus Christ, faying, But now we fee not yet all things put under him. But we fee Jefus, who was made a little lower than the Angels, for the fuffering of death, crowned with glory and honour, that be by the grace of God should taft death for every man, v. 8, 9. 'Tis notorious therefore, that Chrift Jefus was a Man in the fame Senfe with other Men in General,that is,he had the fame human Nature with our felves. Otherwise the Apoftle's Argument is impertinent, and a mere Cheat put upon his Readers. Now if Chrift Jefus was as much a Man as others, he certainly had an human Soul, as well as an human Body.

... But, what is ftill more remarkable, now follows. He informs us, that Chrift ought to be of the fame Nature with our felves, in order to his being the Redeemer of Mankind. For thefe are his Words, Wherefore in all things it behoved him (dual) to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest, in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the fins of the people. For in that he himself bath fuffered, being tempted, he is able to fuccour them that are tempted, ver. 17, 18. I confefs, this Paffage is the Conclufion of his Argument for the Neceffity of Chrift's having Flesh and Bloud, as we have: but then, the Expreffions are fuch, as manifeftly fuppofe and imply, that he had alfo an human Soul, For he fays, it behoved Chrift to be made like unto his Brethren, mivu, in all things. Now this does

indeed demonftrat, that he ought to be cloath'd with Flesh and Bloud, as we are (for if he had not had Flesh and Bloud, he would in that one thing have been unlike his Brethren) but furely his being cloath'd with Flesh and Bloud did not make him like us, or of the fame Nature with us, in all things. For the principal Part of our Nature would be ftill wanting in him, if he had not an human Soul. And fince his having Flesh and Bloud is but one Inftance of Similitude, I would fain know, what other he could have, upon Suppofition that he had not an human Soul and confequently with what Propriety of Speech he could be faid to be like us in all things, which muft imply two things at least. Befides,if 'twas neceffary that he fhould have Flefh and Bloud for this very Reason, that he might be like his Brethren, or of the fame Nature with them; 'twas much more, or at leaft 'twas equally neceffary, that he should have an human Soul alfo, the Enjoyment of which wou'd give him the principal Likeness to Mankind. So that, tho' the Apoftle did indeed attempt to prove no more, than that our. Savior ought to have a Body like ours (for he did not fufpect, that any wou'd doubt of his having an Human Soul; and therefore did not defignedly guard against that Error) yet the whole Tenor of his Difcourfe, and the whole Force of his Argument, do neceffarily infer, that in the Apostle's Opinion, Chrift had an human Soul, as well as an human Body.

Nay,the very End of his being cloath'd with Flesh and Bloud demonftrats, that he had an human Soul. For the Apostle fays, in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest, in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the fins of the people. For in that he him

felf

felf bath fuffered, being tempted, he is able to fuccour them. that are tempted, v. 17, 18. Now thofe that deny our Lord an human Soul, affirm that the WORD fupply'd the want of it. But this Conceit makes the Apoftle's Argument ridiculous. For then, how could Chrift be a merciful and faithful High Prieft, and able to fuccor them that are tempted, for this Reason, because he himself bath fuffered being tempted? Do not the Apoftle's Words imply, that because he was tempted like us, he is therefore fenfible of human Infirmities, and will pity us in the fame Circumftances? Is not this what the fame Author elsewhere urges in this very Epiftle? Does he not fay, We have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without fin ? Chap. 4. v. 15. Does he not alfo fay, that Every high priest taken from among men, is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and Sacrifices for fins: Who can have compaffion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way; for that be bimfelf alfo is compoffed with infirmity? Chap. 5. v. 1, 2. And does he not manifeftly apply this to Chrift ? But how can this be, if Chrift had no human Soul, but the WORD fupply'd the want of it? Could the WORD, who is effentially fuperior to all created Beings whatfoever, the Maker and Former of all things, be tempted like us?

I confefs, thofe that allow Chrift an human Soul, muft own, that there is fome Difference! between Chrift's Temptations and ours, upon the account of our laboring under Original Sin, from which Chrift was wholly free: but they are notwithstanding perfectly confiftent with the Apoftle, because they allow Chrift's Soul to be of. the fame Kind with our own; and therefore he

was