|
|
CHAPTER
6
OF THE NATURE OF RECONCILIATION, AND THE ARGUMENT TAKEN FROM THENCE.
Arg.
12. Another thing ascribed to the death of Christ, and, by
the consent of all, extending itself unto all for whom he died,
is RECONCILIATION. This in the Scripture is clearly proposed
under a double notion; first, of God to us; secondly, of us to
God; — both usually ascribed to the death and blood-shedding
of Jesus Christ: for those who were “enemies he reconciled
in the body of his flesh through death,” Colossians 1:21,
22. And, doubtless these things do exactly answer one another.
All those to whom he hath reconciled God, he doth also reconcile
unto God: for unless both be effected, it cannot be said to be a
perfect reconciliation; for how can it be, if peace be made only
on the one side? Yea, it is utterly impossible that a division of
these two can be rationally apprehended: for if God be
reconciled, not man, why doth not he reconcile him, seeing it is
confessedly in his power; and if man should be reconciled, not
God, how can he be ready to receive all that come unto him? Now,
that God and all and every one in the world are actually
reconciled, and made at peace in Jesus Christ, I hope will not be
affirmed. But to clear this, we must a little consider the nature
of reconciliation as it is proposed to us in the gospel; unto
which, also, some light may be given from the nature of the thing
itself, and the use of the word in civil things.
Reconciliation
is the renewing of friendship between parties before at variance,
both parties being properly said to be reconciled, even both he
that offendeth and he that was offended. God and man were set at
distance, at enmity and variance, by sin. Man was the party
offending, God offended, and the alienation was mutual, on either
side; — but yet with this difference, that man was alienated
in respect of affections, the ground and cause of anger and
enmity; God in respect of the effects and issue of anger and
enmity. The word in the New Testament is katallagh>, and the
verb katalla>ssw, reconciliation, to reconcile; both from ajlla>ttw,
to change, or to turn from one thing, one mind, to another:
whence the first native signification of those words is
permutatio and katalla>ttontai, ) because most commonly those
that are reconciled are changed in respect of their affections,
always in respect of the distance and variance, and in respect of
the effects; thence it signifieth reconciliation, and to
reconcile. And the word may not be affirmed of any business, or
of any men, until both parties are actually reconciled, and all
differences removed in respect of any former grudge and ill-will.
If one be well pleased With the other, and that other continue ajkata>llaktov,
unappeased and implacable, there is no reconciliation. When our
Savior gives that command, that he that brought his gift to the
altar, and there remembered that his brother had aught against
him, — was offended with him for any cause, — he should
go and be reconciled to him, [he] fully intendeth a mutual
returning of minds one to another, especially respecting, the
appeasing and atoning of him that was offended. Neither are these
words used among men in any other sense, but always denote, even
in common speech, a full redintegration of friendship between
dissenting parties, with reference most times to some
compensation made to the offended party. The reconciling of the
one party and the other may be distinguished, but both are
required to make up an entire reconciliation.
As,
then, the folly of Socinus and his sectaries is remarkable, who
would have the reconciliation mentioned in the Scripture to be
nothing but our conversion to God, without the appeasing of his
anger and turning away his wrath from us, — which is a
reconciliation hopping on one leg, — so that distinction of
some between the reconciliation of God to man, making that to be
universal towards all, and the reconciliation of man to God,
making that to be only of a small number of those to whom God is
reconciled, is a no less monstrous figment. Mutual alienation
must have mutual reconciliation, seeing they are correlata. The
state between God and man, before the reconciliation made by
Christ, was a state of enmity. Man was at enmity with God; we
were his “enemies,” Colossians 1:21; Romans 5:10;
hating him and opposing ourselves to him, in the highest
rebellion, to the utmost of our power. God also was thus far an
enemy to us, that his “wrath” was on us, Ephesians 2:3;
which remaineth on us until we do believe, John 3:36. To make
perfect reconciliation (which Christ is aid in many places to
do), it is required, first, That the wrath of God be turned away,
his anger removed, and all the effects of enmity on his part
towards us; secondly, That we be turned away from our opposition
to him, and brought into voluntary obedience. Until both these be
effected, reconciliation is not perfected. Now, both these are in
the Scripture assigned to our Savior, as the effects of his death
and sacrifice.
1.
He turned away the wrath of God from us, and so appeased him
towards us; that was the reconciling of God by his death: for
“when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the
death of his Son,” Romans 5:10. That here is meant the
reconciling of God, as that part of reconciliation which
consisteth in turning away his wrath from us, is most apparent,
it being that whereby God chiefly commendeth his love to us,
which certainly is in the forgiveness of sin, by the aversion of
his anger due to it; as also being opposed to our being saved
from the wrath to come, in the latter end of the verse, which
compriseth our conversion and whole reconciliation to God.
Besides, Romans 5:11, we are said to what means, we have
translated “atonement”); which cannot be meant of our
reconciliation to God, or conversion, which we cannot properly be
said to accept or receive, but of him to us, which we receive
when it is apprehended by faith.
2.
He turneth us away from our enmity towards God, redeeming and
reconciling us to God by “the blood of his cross,”
Colossians 1:20; — to wit, then meritoriously,
satisfactorily, by the way of acquisition and purchase;
accomplishing it in due time actually and efficiently by his
Spirit. Both these ye have jointly mentioned, 2 Corinthians
5:18-20; where we may see, first, God being reconciled to us in
Christ., which consisteth in a non-imputation of iniquities, and
is the subject-matter of the ministry, 2 Corinthians 5:18, 19;
secondly, the reconciling of us to God, by accepting the pardon
of our sins, which is the end of the ministry, 2 Corinthians
5:20; — as the same is also at large declared, Ephesians
2:13-15. The actual, then, and effectual accomplishment of both
these, “simul et semel,” in respect of procurement, by
continuance, and in process of time, in the ordinances of the
gospel, in respect of final accomplishment on the part of men, do
make up that reconciliation which is the effect of the death of
Christ; for so it is in many places assigned to be: “We are
reconciled to God by the death of his Son,” Romans 5:10;
“And you, that were sometime alienated, hath he reconciled
in the body of his flesh through death,” Colossians 1:21,
22: which is in sundry places so evident in the Scripture, that
none can possibly deny reconciliation to be the immediate effect
and product of the death of Christ.
Now,
how this reconciliation can possibly be reconciled with universal
redemption, I am no way able to discern; for if reconciliation be
the proper effect of the death of Christ, as is confessed by all,
then if he died for all, I ask how cometh it to pass, —
First, That God is not reconciled to all? as he is not, for his
wrath abideth on some, John 3:36, and reconciliation is the
aversion of wrath. Secondly, That all are not reconciled to God?
as they are not, for “by nature all are the children of
wrath,” Ephesians 2:3; and some all their lives do nothing
but “treasure up wrath against the day of wrath,”
Romans 2:5. Thirdly, How, then, can it be that reconciliation
should be wrought between God and all men, and yet neither God
reconciled to all nor all reconciled to God? Fourthly, If God be
reconciled to all, when doth be begin to be unreconciled towards
them that perish? by what alteration is it? in his will or
nature? Fifthly, If all be reconciled by the death of Christ,
when do they begin to be unreconciled who perish, being born
children of wrath? Sixthly, Seeing that reconciliation on the
part of God consists in the turning, away of his wrath and not
imputing of iniquity, 2 Corinthians 5:18, 19, which is
justification, rendering us blessed, Romans 4:6-8, why, if God be
reconciled to all, are not all justified and made blessed through
a non-imputation of their sin? They who have found out a
redemption where none are redeemed, and a reconciliation where
none are reconciled, can easily answer these and such other
questions; which to do I leave them to their leisure, and in the
meantime conclude this part of our argument. That reconciliation
which is the renewing of lost friendship, the slaying of enmity,
the making up of peace, the appeasing of God, and turning away of
his wrath, attended with a non-imputation of iniquities; and, on
our part, conversion to God by faith and repentance; — this,
I say, being that reconciliation which is the effect of the death
and blood of Christ, it cannot be asserted in reference to any,
nor Christ said to die for any other, but only those concerning
whom all the properties of it, and acts wherein it doth consist,
may be truly affirmed; which, whether they may be of all men or
not, let all men judge.