same place Now declare unto me who are those five Enemies from which Christ hath delivered us A. Death the Devil the Curse and Condemnation of the Law Sin and Hell B. As touching Death you said it was destroyed by the Obedience of Christ So also after what manner he delivered us from the slavery of the Devil Now declare how he redeemed us from the Curse of the Law being made a Curse for us And after he had said a few words A. God in his just Judgment required of us all things that are written in the Law which because we were not able to pay therefore Christ our Lord paid those things for us and willingly took and received unto himself the Curse and Condemnation to which we were liable And And he himself suffered those things that we ought to have suffered being scourged besmeared with spittle beaten smitten on the cheek crucified and dyed for us Theophylact in the first Chapter to the Hebrews on these words procuring the Expiation of our sins by him When he had spoken concerning the Majesty of the Divinity of the Word afterwards he discourseth of his care that he takes for men by his flesh which is much more than that he beareth all things And here he asserts two things both that he cleansed us from our sins and also that he did this by himself For by the Cross and Death which he sustained he purged us not only because he dyed for our sin whereas himself was free of all sin and suffered punishment which yet he did not owe to us and delivered that Nature that was simply condemned for the sin and transgression of Adam On Cap. 9. For that cause Christ died that he might cleanse us and in his Testament bequeathed unto us the pardon of sin the use of his Father's Goods being made the Mediator of our Father For the Father would not let go the Inheritance to us but was angry at us as Sons rejecting him and estranged from him Therefore Christ becoming Mediator reconciled him unto us How what we should have suffered for we should have dyed that he suffered for us and made us worthy of his Testament Anselm concerning the Conception of the Virgin and Original Sin cap. 22. If every one hath not the sin of Adam saith some body how sayest thou that none is saved without Satisfaction for the sin of Adam For how doth the just God require of them Satisfaction for the sin they have not To which I say God exacteth of no sinner more than he oweth But because none can restore as much as he owes Christ only rendered more than is due for all that are saved Bernard Epist 190. to Innocentius It was a man that owed and it was a man that paid For saith he if one died for all them are all dead to wit that the Satisfaction of one may be imputed to all as he only did bear the sins of all and so there was not found one that purchased and another that satisfied because one Christ is Head and Body therefore the Head satisfied for the Members Christ for his own Bowels Arnoldus Carnotensis in his Work concerning the seven last words that were spoken by Christ upon the Cross He is forsaken with them that are forsaken and paid a Tribute for the Nature that he took and being to carry with him his own kindred beyond the Sea of this World paid the fare of his flesh to the plundering Pirates and deceived their greedy Teeth being glewed together and drew away and carried up both himself and his prey He offered himself to be a Debtor for Debtors and what he owed not of himself he refused not to owe of his own accord Therefore the Exacter required the sum of the whole Debt of him who gave himself for all Nicetas Choniates in the Annals in John Commenus Christ falling raised up the Carcase of our Nature stretching forth his hands upon the Cross and with a few Sprinklings bringing the whole World into Unity Nicalaus de Cusa Cardinalis excitationum lib. 10. Thus Christ acted for our Justification for we sinners in him suffered the infernal punishments that we justly deserve FINIS
is a sign of the immutableness of the thing to which it is added Psal 95.11 110.4 Hebr. 3.11 6.17 7.21 And a Promise gives power to a Party which cannot without injury be taken from it Therefore though to promise is free yet there is not a freedom to break Promises therefore that ought to be referred to those things that have immutable pravity in themselves Therefore God cannot do this who is therefore called faithful because he keeps his Promises 1 Thess 5.24 Therefore let us see whether there is in the said Penal Law any thing that utterly disallows Relaxation And first it may be objected That it is just naturally that the Guilty themselves be punished with such a punishment as is answerable to their Crime and therefore that it is not subject to Free-will nor is relaxable That this Objection may be answered it must be known that unjust doth not follow of any denial of just no not at that very time when the same Circumstances are put for as it doth not follow if a King should be called Liberal who gave to some Man a thousand Talents that he should therefore not be Liberal if he gave them not so it is not perpetual that that which is performed justly cannot be omitted but unjustly Now a thing is called natural as in Physicks so in Morals either properly or less properly Natural in Physicks properly is that which necessarily coheres to the Essence of every thing as for a living Creature to have sense but less properly that which is convenient and as it were fitted for any Nature as for a man to use his right hand So then in Morals there are some things properly natural which follow necessarily from the relation of the things unto rational Natures as that Perjury is unlawful but some improperly as that a Son succeeds the Father Therefore that he that hath offended deserves Punishment and therefore is punishable this follows necessarily from the relation of the sin and sinner to the Superior and it is properly natural But that any sinner should be punished with such a Punishment as is answerable to the Fault is not neceslary simply and universally Neither is it properly natural but agreeable enough unto Nature whence it follows that nothing hinders why the Law commanding this same thing should not be relaxable The sign of a definite Decree or Irrevocability appears not in that Law of which we Discourse neither is it a promising Law therefore none of those things hinder a Relaxation for it should not be admitted that a threatning should be equallized to a Promise for by a Promise some right is acquired to him to whom the Promise was made But by threatning only the merit of Punishment in the sinner and the right of punishing in the Threatner are more openly declared Neither is it to be feared least something be detracted from the Veracity of God if he doth not fulfil all his Threatnings for it must be understood that all threatnings that have not with them a sign of Irrevocability by their own nature do diminish nothing of the right of the Threatner to relax as before was declared and it appears manifestly by the Example of the Divine Clemency towards the Ninevites It must not be here omitted that the ancient Philosophers by Natural Light judged that no matter was more relaxable than Penal Law Therefore Aristotle says that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Sopater in an Epistle to Demetrius saith so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That which is called moderate Justice comfortably interpreting the austere voice of the Laws seems unto me an innocent pretence of the true and free Graces but correcting Justice in mutual Exchanges wholly shuns the nature of the Graces But that which consists in Accusations doth not abhor the meek and courteous face of the Graces It appears by these things which hitherto have been said that that Positive and Penal Law of God was dispensable But this hinders not but that there were certain Reasons which might disswade that I may stammer after humane manner this Relaxation And these may be taken either from the nature of all Laws or from the proper matter of the Law It is common to all Laws that by relaxing something seems to be taken away from the Anthority of a Law It is a property of this Law that though that Law as we said hath not an inflexible Rectitude yet it is very agreeable to the Nature and Order of things from which things it follows That the Law was not to be wholly unrelaxable but not easily nor for a light Cause And the only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 infinitely wise Lawgiver did according to that For he had a very weighty Cause when Mankind fell into sin to relax the Law because if all sinners had been to be given up to Eternal Death two very beautiful things had utterly perished out of the World on Mens part Religion towards God on God's part the Testimony of his special Bounty towards Men. Neither did God in relaxing the Law observe Causes only and that very weighty ones but also did set a singular Bounds to the Relaxation concerning which there will be a fitter place to Discourse afterwards CHAP. IV. Whether it is unjust that Christ should be punished for our sins And it is shewed that it is not unjust THE Arguments whereby Socinus goes about to disprove this Doctrine having not been placed by him in a right enough Order seems to us that they ought to be digested in this manner That the first rank be of those Reasonings which gather that That which we defend to have been performed is unjust The second of those that deny there was cause for so doing The third of those which deny that God did that which we assert For if the thing it self hath Unrighteousness in it in vain is the Cause thereof sought for because there can be no reasonable Cause of that which is unjust In vain also is it disputed Whether it hath been because no unjust thing can be done by God Also the Examination of the Cause because by nature it goes before the Question of the Fact should also first be handled therefore that we may come to the Question of Just and Unjust first these things are to be separated Whether it was just that Chirst should be punished for our sins And if that could any thing Conduce to obtain a pardon for us For this latter must be referred to the second rank that disputes of the Cause of the Fact but it belongs not properly to this first For though such a Cause of Punishment had not been it would not thence follow that some Injury is contained in the Punishment But it seems that an Injury may be sought either in the Matter it self that is in the very heavy Afflictions and Death compared with the Innocency of him who suffered those things or in the Form that is in the Punishment compared with other mens Sins
A DEFENCE OF THE Catholick Faith Concerning the Satisfaction of Christ Written originally By the Learned HVGO GROTIVS And now Translated by W. H. A Work very necessary in these Times for the preventing of the Growth of Socinianism LONDON Printed for Thomas Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns at the lower end of Cheapside near Mercers Chappel and Jonathan Robinson at the Golden Lyon in St. Paul's Church-yard 1692. TO THE RIGHT WORSHIPFUL Sir CHARLES WOOSELEY Knight and Baronet Much Honoured Sir THE Translation of this worthy Labour of the great and famous Grotius may boldly Claim the Honour of being Dedicated to your Patronage for many Causes The Excellency of this Subject being a Defence of one of the most Fundamental Articles of the Christian Faith requires a Patron of Worth and Excellency and such a one I may speak it without flattery is your self who are eminent for Learning and exemplary for Piety Your Works that are published in the World which are both greatly approved for their Piety and justly admired for their Profundity are an invincible Argument how Greatness and Goodness are joyned together in you by a a lovely Union But there is also a peculiar Encouragement to Dedicate this Book to you because you were the first that encouraged the Translation and Publication of this Work And verily if the seasonableness of a thing adds to its beauty as Solomon hath testified this Work hath found a fit time for its Impression For at this time that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 damnable Heresie or Heresie of Destruction as the word in the Original signifies that Root of Bitterness the hellish Error of wretched and blasphemous Socinus who trampled under his Feet the Blood of Jesus the Mediatour of the New Covenant is now beginning to spread it self in England and to infect whole Houses with a worse and more dangerous than any Egyptian Plague If the Son of Croesus who had been dumb all his days before was so wonderfully affected with the danger his Father's Life was in that the bands of his Tongue through the vehemency of Natural Affection were dissolved so that he that never spake before suddainly cried out Kill not my Father King Croesus how much more zealously may I that have been a great while lurking in Darkness as those that have been long dead now appear in the Light against those Enemies of my Redeemer who by their horrid Blasphemies are not ashamed to spit in the Face of my Lord Jesus with greater Impudence than ever did the Jews at his Crucifixion I am very glad that my blessed Redeemer hath honoured me to be Instrumental for the Confutation of that filthy Error of Socinianism which is as ready a way to Hell as ever the Devil of Hell found out since he was a Devil Methinks the very mention of the name of Socinus may make the heart of a gracious Christian to rise with holy Indignation and his hair to stand with amazement that such a blasphemous Wretch could be found upon the Earth How did this Blasphemer strive to vilifie the Blood of Christ Jesus as if thereby our Sins had not been expiated as if thereby no Satisfaction had been made to the Justice of the holy God as if the Death and Sufferings of this Lamb of God had not taken away the sins of the World and had been no Propitiation for our sins Those wicked Blasphemies are throughly Confuted both by invincible Arguments of sound Reason and evident Testimonies of Scripture in this Learned Work of Grotius God hath exhorted all Christians by the holy Apostle Jude 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to contend vehemently or to contend as men that are striving for the mastery as the Original Word signifies for the Faith that was once delivered to the Saints therefore I may justly hope that this Work will be acceptable to all good Christians into whose hands it shall come And that your self as you were the first Encourager of its Publication will now also willingly Patronize its being published Worthy Sir I recommend you to the Grace of the Lord Jesus and I beg of God that he may prolong your Life to the glory of his Name and after you have passed the time of your Mortality that an Entrance may be ministred to you abundantly into the Everlasting Kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ I am Your much obliged Servant W. H. A DEFENCE OF THE Catholick Faith Concerning the Satisfaction of Christ AGAINST FAVSTVS SOCINVS Written by Hugo Grotius CHAP. I. The State of the Controversy is shewed and the true Opinion is Explained in the Words of Scripture BEfore we come to this Dispute we will first set down that Opinion which being taken out of Sacred Writings the Church of Christ hath hitherto defended with an unwavering Faith that afterwards it may evidently appear what is the difference between this and the Opinion of Socinus Therefore we shall explain the same Opinion bringing some Testimonies of Scripture which because Socinus wrested to another Sense by the way the true Interpretation of them shall be vindicated Therefore the Catholick Opinion is thus God being moved by his own Goodness to be signally beneficial unto us but our sins standing in the way which deserved Punishment he appointed that Christ being willing of his own free Love towards men should suffer punishment for our sins by enduring very grievous Torments and a bloody and ignomious Death that without prejudice to the demonstration of the Divine Righteousness we should by Faith Interposing be delivered from the punishment of Eternal Death The first Efficient Cause of the Thing whereof we treat is God God gave his only begotten Son that he that believeth in him should not perish John 3.16 God spared not his own Son but delivered him up for us all Rom. 8.32 God laid upon Christ the sins of us all Isai 53.6 God made Christ sin 2 Cor. 5.21 The former Cause that moved God is Mercy or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Love to Mankind So God loved the World that he gave his Son John 3.16 God commends his Love to us that when we were yet sinners Christ died for us Rom. 5.10 The other Cause which moved God is our Sins deserving Punishment Christ was delivered for our sins Rom. 4.25 Where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is with an Accusative which amongst the Authors of the Greek Tongue Sacred and Profane is a very usual sign of an impulsive Cause As when it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For these things the wrath of God comes upon the Children of Disobedience Eph. 5.6 And as oft as that Phrase propter peccata for Sins is joined to Sufferings it admits no sense different from an impulsive Cause I will punish you seven times for your sins Levit. 26.28 For those Abominations the Lord God casts them out from your sight Deut. 18.12 and in several other places of Scripture neither is it any where other ways And that other Phrase pro peccatis for
sins hath the same force as oft as it is join'd with Sufferings Hitherto belong those Christ died 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for our sins 1 Cor. 15.3 Christ suffered once 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for sins 1 Pet. 3.18 Christ gave himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for our sins Gal. 1.4 Christ offered a Sacrifice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for sins Hebr. 10.12 And yet in these places Socinus would have the final Cause and not the impulsive to be denoted Yea which is more he adds That by the word pro for and the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for there was never an impulsive Cause declared but always a final Many places do evince that this latter on which Socinus relies is not true For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 use to signifie no less the impulsive Cause than the final Cause The Gentiles are said to praise God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Mercy Rom. 15.9 that thanks may be given on our behalf 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 faith Paul 2 Cor. 1.11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for you Eph. 1.16 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eph. 5.20 We pray 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Christ's sake 2 Cor. 5.21 Great is my glorying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on your behalf 2. Cor. 7.4 and 9.2 and 12.5 straits 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Christ 2 Cor. 12.10 I give thanks to God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for you 1 Cor. 1.4 God will rebuke the wicked 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for all their ungodly Deeds Jude 15. So also the Latines say Pro beneficiis gratias agere aut reddere to give or render thanks for benefits as Cicero doth very often The same said Vlcisei pro injuriis To revenge for Injuries Pro magnitudine sceleris poenas persolvere To suffer punishment for the greatness of the Crime Supplicia pro maleficiis metuere To fear punishments for evil Deeds As Plautus Castigare pro commerita noxia To chastise for a deserving Crime And Terentius Pro dictis factis ulcisci To take vengeance for Words and Deeds In all these places pro for signifies not the final Cause but the impulsive So also when Christ is said pro peccatis passus aut mortuus to have suffered or died for sins the Matter it self suffers not the final Cause to be understood as Socinus would have it for because there is a twofold End 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The End to whom and the End for whom As the End to whom the Medicine is made is the diseas'd Man the End for the sake whereof is Health and neither of them agree to sin For whether you say with Socinus that it is the end of Christ's Death that we should be drawn back or removed from our sins or whether also that we may obtain the remission of sins that we may omit that this End according to his opinion could not be attributed unto Death but very remotely neither of them can be expressed by these words propter peccata for sins or pro peccatis for sins for the End to whom will be Man but the End for what is not for sins but for that which is most contrary to sins the destruction or remission of sins Who ever said a Drug or Medicine was taken for Death that is to prevent Death But it is therefore said to be taken for the Disease because the Disease drives us thitherto It follows therefore that the impulsive Cause should be understood here Wherefore when also the Particle Min amongst the Hebrews denoted the Antecedent or impulsive Cause as Psal 38.9 and elsewhere often that place of Isai 53.5 cannot be translated better and more agreeably to other Scriptures than Dolore afficitur ob defectiones nostras atteritur ob iniquitates nostras he is afflicted for our faults he is bruised for our iniquities And that Romans 6.10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 died unto sin what other thing can it signifie but Mortuus est ob peccatum he died for sin But the impulsive Cause though it may be manifold yet in this place it must be taken for meritorious for the Discourse is of Punishment as we shall presently shew Now sins are the cause of punishment no otherways than by way of merit Neither can it be shewed that these words ob peccata for sins or propter peccata for sins are any otherways taken in the holy Scriptures than in this signification of Merit especially when they are joined with Sufferings That place doth not prove the contrary 1 Kings 14.16 God will deliver Israel for the sins of Jeroboam for the sins of Jeroboam in that place signifie the kind it self of the sin to wit Idolatry unto which Jeroboam stirred up the People for the following words make that evident quibus peccavit quibus peccare fecit Israelem which he sinned and which he made Israel to sin For this is the truer Interpretation than that brought by Socinus Qui peccavit qui peccare fecit Israelem Who sinned and who made Israel to sin Therefore those sins whereof Jeroboam was the Author and the People the Followers deserved that Punishment of being delivered up Though I may also mention that Sacred Writings do testify that the followers of other mens sins are justly punished not only for their own but also for other mens sins which is so evident that Socinus himself is compelled to confess that a man may be punished for other mens sins if he is partaker of the Crime But that place of Psalm 39.12 which Socinus citeth makes evidently against him In increpationibus propter iniquitatem corripuisti aliquem liquefieri fecisti ut tineam desiderium ejus With rebukes thou hast corrected man for iniquity and hast made his beauty to consume like a Moth that is If thou would'st punish a man as much as his sin deserves verily that man's life would not be worth the enjoying of it for by this Argument he endeavours to move God to pity As elsewhere If thou mark iniquities that is if thou strictly requirest punishment for them who shall stand or endure Psal 130.3 Therefore that remains unshaken that the Phrase ob peccata for sins doth denote the Impulsive Cause and indeed the Meritorious for that Socinus somewhere seeks this way of escape that he says It is sufficient for the truth of this Phrase that any kind of occasion be signified First That is contrary to his Position in which he had said that the word pro for was never referred to an Impulsive Cause but always to a Final Cause because an Occasion is no way a Final Cause but if it deserves to be called a Cause it ought to be referred to an Impulsive Moreover both the Custom of Scripture and Usual Speech doth clearly confute such an Exposition of the words pro peccatis for sins and ob peccata for sins Hence it may be understood how erroneously Socinus denies That there may be found an Antecedent Cause of the
Death of Christ besides the Will of God and Christ Which is manifestly contrary to the saying of Paul If there is righteousness by the Law then Christ died 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in vain Gal. 2.21 where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in vain by the acknowledgment of Socinus signifies without Cause but there should have been added without an Antecedent Cause which is the original and most frequent signification of this word The original of it is from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies a Gift that is such a Gift as hath not an Antecedent Cause of Right whence it began to be translated also to other things in which the Antecedent Cause is not found So David Psalm 25.19 speaking of his Enemies says They hated me hinam in vain that is when I had given them no Causes of hatred Which Christ applying to himself John 15.25 says They hated me 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without a cause just in the same signification The place of Paul it self of which we are treating suffers not another Cause than an Antecedent to be understood For the Cause which Socinus deviseth to wit That they who mend their lives should be assured of the pardon of their sins this Final Cause appertains unto the Preaching and the Resurrection but not to Death which when Socinus saw here he would have Christ understood by the name of Death and also that Preaching and the Resurrection are included both wrestingly and contrary to the mind of Paul for Paul denying that Christ died for all signifies that there is some peculiar Cause which should belong to the Death of Christ for otherways he could have preached for a certain Cause and for a certain Cause have received a Reward for according to Socinus the Resurrection is only referred hither and not have died Moreover that Paul had a peculiar respect to the Death of Christ that which goes before makes it sufficiently evident who gave himself for me for that Giving every where in the Scripture signifies Death And Paul calling this same thing the Grace of God denies that that is despised or rejected by him and immediately gives a Reason For if righteousness came by the Law Christ then died in vain signifying by the contrary that this is the peculiar Cause why Christ gave himself and died because we by the Law were not just but guilty of punishment therefore our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iniquity is the Antecedent Cause of the Death of Christ The other Efficient Cause is Christ himself and that a willing Cause I lay down my life saith Christ no man taketh it from me but I lay it down of my self John 10.18 Christ gave himself for us for the Church Gal. 2.20 Eph. 5.2 and 5.25 The Cause that moved Christ was his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Love to Mankind This is saith he my Command that ye love one another as I loved you Greater love than this hath no man that a man should lay down his life for his Friends Ye are my Friends John 15.13 In the Faith of the Son of God that loved me and gave himself for me Gal. 2.20 Who loved us and washed us from our sins in his blood Apoc. 1.5 Christ loved us and gave himself for us an Oblation Eph. 5.2 Christ loved the Church and gave himself for her Eph. 5.25 The Matter is both the Torment going before Death and chiefly Death it self Isaiah calleth Torments by a pathetical name haburah a Wound Isai 53.5 And 1 Pet. 2.24 calls them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stripes Therefore we also see mention made of the Cross where this Argument is handled He reconciled both to God by the Cross Ephes 2.16 Having made peace by the blood of the Cross 1 Col. 12. Neither should only those Corporal pains be understood by the name of Torments but chiefly those very grievous Sufferings of Mind which the Evangelists signifie by the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be sorrowful to be astonished to be heavy in respect of which chiefly Christ cried out that he was forsaken of God The other part of the Matter Death it self is urged in many places I lay down my life John 10.18 He reconciled us by Death Coloss 1.22 Death coming between for the Redemption of Transgressions Hebr. 9.15 This Death in the holy Scriptures is considered chiefly with two qualities as Bloody and as Ignominious That quality of bloody Death is denoted by the word Blood This is the Blood of the New Covenant which is poured forth for many for the remission of sins Matth. 26.28 Luke 22.20 God purchased the Church with his own blood Acts 20.28 God hath appointed Christ for a Propitiation by Faith in his Blood Rom. 3.25 Justified in his Blood Rom. 5.9 We have redemption by his Blood the remission of sins Eph. 1.7 Ye that sometimes were afar off are made near by the Blood of Christ for he is our peace Eph. 2.13 We have redemption by his Blood Col. 1.14 Having made peace by the Blood of the Cross Col. 1.14 Not by the Blood of Bulls or Goats but by his own Blood he entred into the holy place having obtained eternal redemption Hebr. 10.12 Without shedding of Blood there is no remission Hebr. 10.22 Ye are come to the Blood of sprinkling that speaketh better things than that of Abel Hebr. 12.24 According to the purification of the Blood of Jesus Christ 1 Pet. 1.2 The Blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin 1 John 1.7 Christ washed us from our sins in his Blood Apocal. 1.5 But the other quality of an Ignominious Death is signified by the very Name of the Cross for in that very punishment there is great ignominy whence it is said He suffered the Cross having despised the shame Hebr. 1.2 And by the name of Contempt which Isaiah used Isai 53.3 Here by the by it may be observed That not only in the places now alledged and others like them that either only or chiefly treat of the remission of sins there is mention made of Death Cross Blood but that in very many places the Apostles did profess they knew nothing they taught nothing but Christ and him crucified 1 Cor. 1.23 and 2.2 and that therefore the Gospel it self is by them called the Word of the Cross 1 Cor. 1.12 Moreover Christ appointed the Sacred Sacrament of his Supper not peculiarly for a Commemoration of his Life or Resurrection but of his Death and the shedding of his Blood 1 Cor. 11.26 Which things having been so often repeated do manifestly shew that some proper and peculiar Effect should be attributed unto this Death and Blood which Socinus cannot do For the whole Life of Christ gave an Example of Holiness more than his Death it self which was compleated in a short time But the Confirmation of that Promise of Celestial Life consists properly in the Resurrection of Christ unto which Death is only as a way
So that the Scripture looking towards this should have made mention of the Resurrection not of Death verily not so often and with Marks of Emphasis adjoined Socinus himself lib. 1. cap. 3. endeavouring to shew that the way of Salvation was confirmed by the Effusion of Blood when he had taken away the true Cause which we defend could not substitute any other probable Cause of that Confirmation neither could he bring any other true Difference why that ought to be attributed to the Death of Christ only and not to the Death of other Martyrs also Neither can Socinus ever explain how Christ obliged God to us which he himself grants to be true in some sense if God hath promised nothing for the shedding of Blood The Form is the suffering of Punishment for our Sins which Socinus lib. 3. cap. 9. and lib. 2. cap. 4. stifly denies Wherefore we will briefly prove this very thing The Hebrews that they may signify that which the Latins call poenas pendere to suffer punishment they have no phrase more usual than this ferre peccatum to bear sin Like unto which is an expression of the Latins lucre delicta to suffer sins that is the punishment of sins If any do not discover the Blasphemer he feret peccatum shall bear his sin Lev. 5.1 Qui nuditatem Sororis sue retexit peccatum suum ferto He that hath uncovered his Sisters nakedness let him bear his sin Lev. 20.17 So Expiatory Sacrifices are said to bear the Iniquities of them that offer them Lev. 10.17 because their Blood is for the soul of man Lev. 17.11 Neither only conjunctly but also separately these words are found in the same sense So 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to bear Judgment is said Gal. 5.10 Ferre ob peccata to bear for sins Ezech. 18.20 And sin is said to overtake a man that is the punishment of sin And by the same phrase Peter said Christ carried up our sins in his Body unto the Gross 1 Pet. 2.24 He could have said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he carried but because he would also signify his ascent up to the Cross therefore he said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he carried up that is he carried up in going which doth diminish nothing from the said phrase but adds something to it therefore the Syrian translated it portavit ascendere fecit he carried and made to ascend Socinus that he may weaken the strength of this place first says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies he took away but contrary to the nature and use of the word for neither doth the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 suffer that interpretation neither hath any Greek Author so used that word Also in the New Testament it no where occurs in that signification but it signifies either to carry up Luke 24.51 or to lead up Matth. 17. Mark 9.2 And because the Sacrifices were carried into an upper place that is into an Altar therefore they also are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be carried up Hebr. 2.27 James 2.21 Whence also Christ himself is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to have carried up himself Hebr. 7.27 and we are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to carry up Praises or spiritual Sacrifices Hebr. 13.15 And 1 Pet. 2.24 Socinus cites one place only Hebr. 9.28 where he would have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to carry up sins to be nothing else but to take away but without Cause and without Example and the sense of the place not requiring it For the two Comings of Christ are opposed the one against the other the former in which he did bear our sins the other in which he is to come 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without sin that is not loaded not burdened with any sins but set at liberty and freed from them But these are not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opposite to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without sin and peccata auferre to take away sins but to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without sin and peccatis oneratum esse to be burdened with sins Whence it appears that in that place to the Hebrews also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is either to carry up to wit unto the Cross as in the place of Peter and that appositely for here also is an allusion to Sacrifices but the Cross was as an Altar or simply to suffer as in Thucydides 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to suffer dangers Therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies ferre to bear not auferre to take away which the Text of Peter it self proves For the Discourse is not concerning any Benefit of Christ but concerning his great Patience which is shewed not by taking away but by suffering That Socinus adds That with this sense whereby Christ is said to bear our sins that which follows doth not rightly enough cohere it is said without cause for Peter doth manifestly declare That Christ did so bear our sins that he might deliver us also from punishment whence he presently adds By his wounds ye are made whole But these cohere very well together If Christ underwent such hard things that he might obtain the pardon of sins verily ye that have obtained it ought to beware of sins in time to come God hath given to us that being freed from the hand of our Enemies we should serve him in all holiness and righteousness Luke 1.74 Behold thou art made whole sin no more John 5.14 Ye are bought with a price glorify therefore God in your Body 1 Cor. 7.20 Neither doth Paul any other thing in the Seventh and following Chapters to the Romans but shew that we ought to be stirred up by the great Benefits of God and Christ to live holily like unto that place of Peter yea whither Peter certainly had an eye as it also appears by the words following Ye were healed by his stripes is that of Isai 53.11 My righteous Servant shall justify many and shall bear their sins In Hebrew it is Ve avonotam hou jisbal Now the word avon signifies Iniquity and also the punishment of Iniquity as 2 Kings 7.9 but the word sabal signifies to bear or sustain and as oft as to bear is put with the name of sin or iniquity that in every Tongue and especially in Hebraism signifies to bear punishment For indeed nasha sometimes signifies to take away but sabal signifies not so therefore here apparently Christ is said that he will bear the punishment of them that are justified This Phrase admits of no other Interpretation neither doth it hinder that this bearing of iniquity seems to be put by the Prophet after death for it is verily after death not in time but in order as the Effect the Cause existing together with it But Socinus says that this word sabal being joined to sin doth not always include some imputation but that it is enough if it signify a man's being afflicted upon any occasion of another man's deed He proves that by no Example neither doth the Holy Scriptures speak so at any time
Yea also Greek and Latin Authors when they use that Phrase do always include imputation Socinus for the confirming of this Exception cites a place of Jeremiah which is thus Our Fathers sinned and are not and we bear their punishment neither doth he suffer here any imputation to be understood But by what Argument doth he prove that that Phrase signifies another thing here than in all other places where it is put Socinus himself is compelled to confess that as oft as the Sons follow their Fathers footsteps not only their own but their Fathers sins are imputed unto them for the Word of God is evident Exod. 20.5 But that those concerning whom Jeremiah speaks were like their Fathers that makes it evident which follows in the Prophet Wo to us that we have sinned verse 16. Neither is this different from the intent of Jeremiah for that he may aggravate the Misery of those that then lived he saith That the punishment both of their own and their Ancestors sins redounds upon them and that therefore the lot of their Fathers was much better than their lot who being alike guilty were yet taken out of life before that those very bitter punishments heaped up as if it were in the Treasure of Divine Wrath were at length poured forth together But though the signification of these words ferre peccata to bear sins were ambiguous in Sacred Writings yet both in this place of Isaiah and in that of Peter the joint mention of the Sufferings of Christ and our Deliverance would make the Interpretation certain For to bear sins by suffering and so that others may be delivered from them cannot signify another thing but the undertaking of anothers punishment And in the same Isaiah vers 6. and 7. it is God cast or laid on him the punishment of us all he is punished and he is afflicted Here Socinus moves every stone that he may wrest the genuine sense from the words and deviseth a new Interpretation God did by him or with him go against the iniquity of us all But the Hebrew word doth manifestly contradict Hiphgiah being of that Conjunction which signifies not a single but twofold Action wherefore seeing Phaga properly signifies to go against it follows that Hiphgiah signifies he made to go against and by Metaphor he deprecated because a person that deprecates doth as it were interpose his Prayers To deprecate here hath not place for then God should be said to have deprecated for Christ for that is the signification of this word the Particle Beth following Jer. 15.11 Neither doth fecit deprecari he made to deprecate agree here both because bo on him follows when otherways it ought to have been said He made him deprecate and also because all things that next go before and follow pertain to Affliction not to Deprecation Therefore these words do not bear another sense but this God did make the sins of us all occurrere illi to go against him that is impegit incussit he inflicted or he did cast upon him Sin is required exigitur peccatum that is according to Scripture phrase the punishment of sin Et ipse affligitur and he is afflicted Here Socinus objects unto us that place of Lev. 16.21 and 22. where sins are said to be put upon the Goat of Atonement and the Goat himself is said to carry the sins of the people into a waste Wilderness For he thought that nothing is more manifest than that it could in no ways be said that this Goat suffered punishment for the sins of the People which by what right he takes upon him I see not For verily Punishment taken in the general befals Beasts also The blood of all your Souls will I require Of every Beast will I require it Gen. 9.5 When an Ox shall push a Man or a Woman that he die let that Ox be stoned Exod. 21.28 If any man lie with a Beast let him be put to death also slay the Beast it self Lev. 20.15 The Earth was cursed with a Deluge for man's sake Gen. 8.21 The Creature was subject to vanity Rom. 8.20 Neither is there Cause why Socinus should object that this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Scape-Goat did not use to be killed but that the shedding of blood or death was required for the remission of sins For though the Scripture doth not expresly declare that that very Goat was thrown headlong from a high place in the Wilderness and so slain the Hebrew Interpreters agree about it which though it were not so yet what other thing did that driving into a waste Wilderness threaten but a death not at all natural either of hunger or the tearings of wild Beasts Also the word Nagash is to be marked in Isaiah for it is very certain that Nagash Schin having a point in the left-horn doth properly signify exigere to require as appears 2 Kings 23.35 Zach. 9.8 but metaphorically is taken for opprimere to oppress therefore the Passive Nagash is either opprimitur he is oppressed or exigitur he is required Opprimitur he is oppressed hath no place here because it follows in the same vehou Sentence ipse affligitur and he is afflicted whence it appears that this Verb is referred to another Noun than that unto which the word affligitur he is afflicted is applied Therefore it remaineth that that word should be taken properly that it may signify exigitur is required and may be referred to the Noun immediately going before Now to require sin is or can be nothing else but to require the punishment of sin therefore the requiring of Punishment and Christ's Affliction are joined together There went before in the same Prophet these words The Chastisement of our peace was laid upon him and by his stripes we are healed In the Hebrew Chastisement is called Musar which word signifieth not every Affliction but that which hath a relation to Punishment whether it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exemplary or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 admonitory only by which words of old Taurus the Philosopher did aptly distinguish the kinds of Punishment And thence it came to pass that any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 admonition per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the figure Catachresis was signified by the word Musar But because the signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rebuke hath no place in Christ especially seeing the discourse is concerning Afflictions including Death it remains that we should understand Affliction that hath joined together with it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exemplary punishment for the use of that Hebrew word is not found separated from all respect unto a fault But here if by the subject matter we understand the good of Impunity it will appear that Christ's Punishment and our Impunity are very well opposed the one against the other Though nothing hinders Reconciliation to be understood by the name of Peace though there was no mention made of Enmity which the matter it self and the following words of the Prophet do abundantly
fact came death and by man came the resurrection of the dead As in Adam all die as many as die so in Christ all shall be made alive as many as shall be made alive 1 Cor. 15.21,22 Who reading these very words sees not that this saying to the Corinthians is exactly answerable to that to the Romans Therefore the Discourse is concerning Death that is common to the Posterity of Adam and from which they do rise again which rise again Wherefore also this place being compared with that to the Romans we say the Discourse is here concerning Adam a sinner for what he said here by man there he said by sin The Animal Condition of Adam is discoursed upon in Twenty Verses and more by the Apostle on a very different occasion for here Death is opposed to the Resurrection but there the Qualities of the Body at the first created and afterwards raised again are compared with one another of which that had joined with a natural possibility of dying by the bounty of God a possibility also of living but this shall so have life in it self that it shall be without any natural possibility of dying Here I cannot omit the adding of an excellent place of the very excellent Writer of the Book of Wisdom which though it is not in the Hebrew Canon yet it hath a venerable Antiquity and was always had in estimation among Christians So then saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1.13 And next 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2.23 God made not Death neither doth he delight in the destruction of living Creatures for he created all things to have Existence and their Generations are healthful and the Poison of destruction is not in them neither is the dominion of Hell upon Earth But Righteousness is immortal But the ungodly with their hands and words called it to them and thinking it to be their Friend were consumed and made a Covenant with it because they are worthy to have a portion with it God created Man for uncorruption and made him the Image of his own Deity but by the Envy of the Devil Death came into the World and they have Experience of it that are on its side Here he shews that any kind of Death is understood which Death God is said not to have created nor to desire to wit with a will going before sin in opposition to uncorruption for the hope whereof Man is said to be created and that hope is not obscurely declared to have been a part of the Divine Image or at least a Consequent thereof But Uncorruption excludes all Death whether it is violent or not violent And what the Apostle said That by Man and by Sin Death entred this Author said no less truly That Death entred by the Envy of the Devil For all these Expressions signify the same Fact to wit That the first Sin of Man was committed by the Suggestion of the Devil Neither doth it hinder that this Author observes a certain special Effect of Death upon the Wicked for Death having entred by the first sin and gained power over all Men gets a certain peculiar strength by the great and continual sins of every Man in which sense sin is called the sting of death 1 Cor. 15.56 Therefore those from whom after their death all passage to life is shut up are deservedly called the Confederates of Death or its Bondslaves and peculiar Possession It might very easily be demonstrated if this were the thing that is treated upon that this was the constant Opinion both of Jews and Christians that any kind of death of a Man is a punishment of sin so that the Christian Emperours not without cause disallowed that Opinion besides others in Pelagius and Celestius that they said That Death did not flow from the snare of sin but that the Law of an unchangeable Appointment required it But that we may gather the things that hitherto have been said into one because the Scripture saith That Christ was chastised by God that is was punished That Christ did bear our sins that is the punishment of our sins That he was made sin that is subjected to the punishment of sin That he was made a Curse unto God or liable to the Curse that is the punishment of the Law But the Passion of Christ it self having been full of Torments bloody and ignominious is a very fit matter of punishment Moreover because the Scripture saith That these things were inflicted on him by God for our sins that is our sins so deserving because Death it self is called the wages that is the punishment of sin verily it cannot be justly doubted that in respect of God the Passion and Death of Christ was a punishment Neither are the Interpretations of Socinus worthy to be regarded which deviates from the constant use of words without Example especially because no just reason hindereth to retain the signification of the words which shall appear more evident afterwards Therefore in God the punishment is actively in Christ passively yet to whose Passion a certain voluntary Action is joyned to wit the undertaking of the Penal Passion The end of the thing that is discoursed upon according to the Intention of God and Christ which being placed in act may also be called an Effect is twofold to wit a Demonstration of the Divine Righteousness and the Remission of Sins in respect of us that is our Impunity For if you take the exacting of punishment impersonally it 's end is the Demonstration of Divine Righteousness but if you take it personally that is wherefore Christ was punished the end is that we might obtain freedom from punishment The former end is expressed by Paul when he saith concerning Christ Whom God hath appointed for a Propitiation in his Blood for the demonstration of his Righteousness for the pardoning the foregoing sins in the forbearance of God Afterwards he adds repeating almost the same words To declare his Righteousness at this time that he may be the justifier of him that is of the Faith of Jesus Rom. 3.25,26 Here next unto his Blood that is his bloody Death is joyned the end 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to declare his Righteousness By this Name of the Righteousness of God that Righteousness should not be understood that God works in us or which he imputeth unto us but that which is in God for it follows That he may be just that is that he may appear to be just This Justice of God that is Righteousness according to its divers Objects hath divers Effects About the good or evil Deeds of a Creature the Effect thereof amongst others is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reward unto which Paul having respect said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is it is just with God to reward Affliction to them that afflict you And elsewhere Every Transgression and Disobedience received 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a just Recompence of Reward And that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 3.8 the Syrian translated it Whose Condemnation
which ascribe the remission of sins to the Blood of Christ that place should be joyned which we just now cited Being justified in his Blood Rom. 5.9 Also those that attribute the washing away of sins to Blood or Death Te Blood of Christ cleanseth us from all sin 1 John 1.7 For the purging of the Blood of Jesus Christ 1 Pet. 1.2 Christ washed us from our sins in his Blood Apoc. 1.5 For though to wash away to cleanse and the like words may signifie either to cause that sins may not be committed in time to come or that being committed they may not appear yet the other Interpretation is more agreeable to the Phrase of Scripture So to abolish sins is expounded not to remember sins Isaiah 43.24 and to cleanse from Iniquity is shewed to be the same thing with forgiveing Jer. 33.8 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that sins may be blotted out hath evidently the same sense Acts 3.19 And these are taken wholly for the same thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to forgive sins and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to cleanse from all inquity 1 John 1.9 and elsewhere these are put as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 synonimous 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to be cleansed and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that pardon may be Hebr. 9.22 Wherfore also Socinus is forced to confess that in John's Apocal. cap. 1. vers 5. where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to cleanse is attributed to Blood deliverance from punishment is more rightly understood than the cleansing of the Soul To these may be joyned that of Isaiah just now cited The chastisement of our peace was upon him that is his punishment procures us peace with God concerning which peace the Angels speak Luke 2.14 And that of the same Isaiah By his stripes we are cured that is by his punishment we have freedom from punishment By these Testimonies therefore it is manifest that the impunity of our sins is the End of the Death of Christ and also an Effect of the same Death Socinus who is not willing to acknowledge this Connexion of Death with the Remission of sins performed unto us brings others wonderfully different from the words and scope of the Scripture But all these that he hath here and there scattered in his Book seem to be reducible to these four Heads The first is That Christ when he preached that the remission of sins lyes open to the Penitent did not refuse Death to give testimony to that Preaching But this sense makes the Death of Christ an Effect of remission more than remission of Death For the Existence of a thing is the cause of a Testimony not contrariways But the Scrripture says that we obtain remission by Blood Ephes 1.7 Coloss 1.14 And that Blood blots out our sins 1 John 1.7 Also that the shedding of Blood is a thing Antecedent without which there is no Remission Hebr. 9.22 Moreover if this Interpretation were true the Martyrs also might be said to have shed their Blood for the remission of sins and that we obtain remission by that Blood when yet the Scripture gives this priviledge to Christ only Moreover the Cause of the Killing of Christ in respect of men was not properly the preaching of Repentance and Remission of Sins but that he called God his Father making himself equal to God John 5.18 and consequently that he did profess himself to be God For which cause his Death gave properly a Testimony to this Profession not to the preaching of Pardon And also a Testimony concerning the Doctrine was given no less but more by the Miracles than by the Death of Christ But no where is this Effect attributed unto Miracles that by them we obtain Remission of sins The second thing that Socinus brings is That Christ by his Death obtained the power of giving Remission But Socinus himself overturns this Position who sheweth that Christ living on Earth had and exercised this Power But that which is cannot be any more made mine And lest any man should so mistake which Socinus doth more hint at than affirm as if this Power of Christ had only respect to Punishments Temporal and of this Life it must be observed That when Christ is said to have had power upon earth to forgive sins the Effect is not restrained by that Addition on Earth but the place of the Action is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 emphatically expressed For it is also said to the Apostles Whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth where though to loose is to declare to be loosed yet that Expression on the Earth signifies only the place of the Action for it follows they shall be loosed in Heaven For that is it which Christ signified that that Power though so eminent and Celestial belonged to him living on the Earth Neither do the People wonder at any other thing but that so great power was given to men that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by enallagy to one of the number of men Christ himself also first forgives the sins of the man that had the Palsy before he takes away the Palsy which was a Temporal Punishment and manifestly distinguishing both Powers he proves the one by the other to wit the invisible by the visible Then Christ did not at length obtain the power to forgive sins by his Death and consequently those sayings which ascribe the Effect of the remission of sins to his Death cannot be drawn to this sense Moreover the Scripture explains the way of the Connexion between Death and Remission by the word Propitiation and other such like words which cannot be applied to the power of giving Pardon The third thing is That in the Death of Christ an Example of Patience and Obedience is proposed to us But this Example in some respect pertains to Sanctification and that which follows it Eternal Glory but not any ways to the remission of sins for Christ by his Patience and Obedience obtained no pardon to himself as having no sin Wherefore when Christ is proposed for Imitation that we keeping that way which he went may come to the same Mark nothing would be more unseasonable than to make any mention of remission of sins And the Phrases of Scripture Blood cleanseth us By his Blood we have Remission do utterly reject this sense The fourth thing remains which most pleased Socinus So that in very many places he inculcates this as the support of his Cause and it is this That the Death of Christ perswades us to that very thing that is required for the obtaining remission of sins to wit Faith or as Socinus explains himself the hope of obtaining Eternal Life But verily what is more disagreeable unto truth than that so bloody a death of a most innocent man doth of it self conduce unto this that it may perswade us that great Joys are prepared by God for us living holily Wherefore Socinus seeing the absurdity of this Invention saith That the Death of Christ doth not this but his Resurrection
and those things that followed his Resurrection But that it was requisite Death should go before But if the Scripture had signified so it would have mentioned perpetually the Resurrection or rather the Exaltation unto Heaven and sitting at the right hand of God where forgiveness of sins is discoursed of not Death and Blood at least not so often and in words so significant For that so frequent and usual joyning of Blood with Remission signifies some Effect not common but proper not far remote but near hand For what By-ways are these The Remission of sins is granted unto none but them that live holily for so speaks Socinus Faith and a certain hope of reward makes for holiness of Life This Faith is begotten by the Example of Christ raised from the Dead and glorified for holiness of Life as Socinus would have it Death went before that raising up therefore rightly and fitly is Remission said to be obtained by the Death of Christ Is not this it really which he finds fault with in others Alas That the Pine-tree was cut in the Pelian Wood for that is brought for a cause which is not some near thing or at least not far distant but that which is most remote from the Effect What if this had been in one place of Scripture it would perhaps have been less wonderful But what man that is in his right wits can believe that the Scripture speaks so often so obscurely and so coldly That Saying of Paul is very unlike Christ was raised from the dead for our justification Rom. 4.25 Which that it may be explained there is no need to fetch so long a compass of Socinus For the Resurrection of Christ begets in us Faith and Reliance on God and Christ to which Faith is promised Remission of sins And this Series is manifestly shewed Acts 13.33,38 Rom. 1.4 and 10.9 for Death is so far from being fit to beget Faith that on the contrary it most affrighteth men from that Faith And therefore in preaching the Gospel the Apostles do always oppose the Resurrection to the Ignominy of the Cross and the Misery of Death But that by Death and the shedding of Blood which the Scripture frequently expresseth in this Argument which is not properly a Cause of the Resurrection but only an Antecedent he would have the Resurrection it self to be expressed What is it else but to name Night that thereby Day may be understood Moreover if Death did not belong to the Remission of sins except because of the Resurrection that followed how could it have happened that Remission of sins was very seldom referred to the Resurrection but to Death in innumerable places Now add this also that Paul doth attribute to Death it self apart that is as it is abstracted from the Resurrection and Glory of Christ the Effect of Redemption purchased For he says If when we were Enemies we were reconciled to God by the Death of his Son much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his Life Rom. 5.10 Death is opposed unto a glorious Life and as Reconciliation is ascribed distinctly unto that so is Preservation unto this Reconciliation is obtained for Enemies by Death as a Sacerdotal Act being reconciled they are kept by his Kingly Power unto which Resurrection made access So also elsewhere the same Apostle puts Reconciliation before Preaching which begets Faith God was in Christ reconciling the World to himself not imputing their sins unto them and did put in us the Word of Reconciliation therefore we are Ambassadours for Christ and as if God were requesting by us we beseech you in Christ's stead be ye reconciled unto God 2 Cor. 5.19,20 Here a twofold Reconciliation is put the former which is declared by the Word the other that is made by the Word that is the Reconciliation of Impetration this of Application that is before the Word this is after the Word We treat of that former and do justly deny that it can be referred to the Ingeneration of Faith which comes by the Word That also may be added John 3.16 where Christ is said to be given to wit unto death that they who believe may not perish Therefore it is profitable for another thing than that they may believe And verily if you please to attend the same thing is not obscurely shewed in that very place of Paul which is by Socinus cited for to confirm his own Opinions to wit that of which we discoursed who was delivered to wit unto death for our sins and rose again for our justification Because Sins are an evil thing and Justification a good thing it appears that the word propter for is not taken alike in both Members and it is convenient that the final Cause should be expressed in the latter Member if I am not mistaken we sufficiently shewed above that in the former the Impulsive Cause is signified Just as if I say that a Medicine is taken for a Disease and for Health Therefore Justification is the end proposed unto the Resurrection to wit by the Ingeneration of Faith by the Confession of Socinus Though verily I know not whether the Resurrection in this place is looked upon as an Argument to perswade Faith or whether it rather signifies the whole glorious state of Christ who hath this end proposed to himself amongst others that the Preachers of the Gospel may be sent and that their Endeavour may be promoted with a very plentiful Influence of the Spirit and Faith being made after that manner men may obtain the Remission of sins for so said Christ himself All Power is given to me in Heaven and in Earth Therefore go ye and teach all Nations Behold I am with you always to the end of the World Matth. 28.18,19,20 Before as John saith the Spirit was not to wit poured forth with that efficacy and abundance the cause is added because Jesus was not yet exalted to Glory John 7.39 Paul also said of Christ When he had ascended on high he led Captivity captive and gave gifts to men He gave some Apostles others Prophets and others Evangelists and others Pastors and Teachers to the perfecting of the Saints Ephes 4.8,12 But whether of these two ways you take it it appears that some peculiar and is ascribed to the Resurrection inasmuch as it is distinguished from Death On the other side it is ascribed unto Death apart or deliverance unto Death that it happened for sins but that very thing is no where ascribed unto the Resurrection and in this place it is not obscurely taken from the same But the Death of Christ in this Affair is both to be separated from the Resurrection and from the Ingeneration of Faith and in these places which deduce the Remission of sins from the Resurrection of Christ a certain distinct Effect is to be understood which the very simplicity of the Words import agreeing with other words of Scripture which say That Christ for our sins died a bloody death and that the
what Common-wealth or under what Governor any man suffers the punishment of a Crime for he shall be equally delivered amongst all men which would not be so if there were a certain Creditor as of other things so also of punishment For payment made to him only not to others also except by his Command would free the Debtor The contrary for the most part appears in Reward for it is rightly said a Reward is owing to him but the certain person that owes it if you lay aside the Positive Law doth not appear For if any man say There is a certain Common-wealth that owes a Reward because it received a Benefit that man will not distinguish Favour from Reward Experience it self teacheth that those men also are honoured with Rewards by Governours who have profitted not their own Common-wealth in particular but Mankind as Inventers of things profitable for the common good yea also we see Rewards given to Counsels nobly undertaken though success hath been wanting and thereby no profit redounded unto any man Therefore neither is there here any relation between definite persons such as in that kind of owing which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of mutual Exchanges But if any man desires something in punishment to be given him that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 analogical to a Creditor perhaps it will not be said amiss that the order of things and the publick good is in the place of a Creditor the dispensation of which Order and Good is permitted to the Government for this seems to be signified by that Proverbial Speech It is for the Publick Good that Crimes should be punished And hence it comes to pass that when in other Causes the Judge exerciseth Judgment between two Parties oftentimes in the Cases of Crimes the accused Person appears the Accuser appears not because Order it self or the Publick Good is as it were in the place of an Accuser which the Scripture also seems to intimate when it saith That sin crieth against the sinner And where a man acts for punishment he acts either as any man as in those places where Accusations lye open to all men promiscuously or as appointed for this thing by the Law which happens in those places which have Accusers publickly constituted Both of which is a certain token that by nature and really there is not here any definite Adversary and as it were a Requirer of Punishment Another Question follows What is the force of that word when any Governor is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to forgive or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to pardon sins or which is the same the punishment For many being deceived by this word have thought that here some Property or Debt goes before in which they are much deceived For the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifies to remove from a man's self and so it is taken Matth. 4.20 and elsewhere often whence the Metaphor being taken it signifies both to forsake and let go and permit but most frequently to have no regard of a thing which the Latines signifie by a like Expression Missum aliquid facere therefore the Greek Scholiasts expound 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to neglect So it appears this word is taken Matth. 15.14 18.12 23.23 Mark 1.8 So also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is peccata missa facere to let sins pass because elsewhere the Scripture further following this Translation calls it peccata in mare projicere to cast sins into the Sea Mich. 7.19 So also the Latin Poets say that those things which they signifie are put out of care Ventis tradi in mare raptanda are delivered to the Winds to be violently carried into the Sea Wherefore as these things are opposed missum aliquid facere to let a thing pass and retinere to retain it so are opposed to one another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore missa facere peccata to let sins pass as also delere peccata to abolish sins and tegere to cover them is the same thing that elsewhere is more plainly expressed not to remember Jer. 31.34 But not to remember as the Latin ignoscere is not to be willing to punish Wherefore as in these words not to remember to cover to abolish not to be willing to retain there is not the signification of Lordly Right or Debt so neither in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But because that word that signifies to let pass is general therefore it is also applied to those things that we have in our Property and to Names and other things by the like right So also the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 belongs to all kinds of gratifying Christ unto the blind 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gave sight Luke 7.21 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It was given to you to suffer for Christ Phil. 1.29 So also the Judge that for the sake of another Condemns or Absolves a man is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to give him to another man Acts 3.14 25.11 and 16. All which signifie that no Property or Debt is necessarily signified by that word Concerning the Latin words donandi condonandi remittendi of giving forgiving pardoning it is less necessary that we should be solicitous because they are not extant in Holy Scripture and yet it is easie to give an account of them for that hath happened unto those words that hath happened unto many other yea almost all that they are brought from like things to like things Donare to give properly is to make that freely another mans which was his own by Property Punishment therefore is not properly given for what is given exists before and afterwards remains Punishment was neither before it was given and by giving it is made not to be But herein is the similitude that as the Giver hath right in the thing so hath the Governor in punishment but not the same right or equally free For the right of Property as we said before is for the sake of the Owner but the right of Punishment for the sake of the Common Good the dispensation whereof as of other common things belongs to the Governour The second Agreement is in this that both in Donation the right of the Giver and in granting freedom from Punishment the right that was the Governor's to punish is taken away The third is That both Donation and Granting of freedom from Punishment proceeds from the same Fountain of Bounty and profits another Neither only here but also elsewhere often the word giving is translated to those things in which Lordly Power hath no place So a man is said donari to be gifted by a Magistrate Civitate with the Priviledges of the City vacatione with vacation honore with honour proemio with Reward So Seneca said moram donare to give delay for auferre moram to take away delay for the sake of a man So we are said to give our time to others But remittere signifies originally as
ascribes the Death of Christ as appears to any man which are not joyned with that Effect by any necessity What if it sufficeth to him to alledge Causes not cogent that I may so say but inviting and perswading Equity suffers not that he should give a harder Law to them that dispute with him But it will not be difficult to us to give a sufficient Cause and that very weighty out of the Scriptures whether we ask this Why God would forgive Eternal Punishment to us or Why he was not willing otherways to forgive the same but by punishing Christ The former hath Cause in his Goodness which of all the Properties of God is most proper to God for every where God describes himself chiefly by this Attribute that he is bountiful and gracious Exod. 34.7 Josh 4.2 2 Chron. 30.9 Psal 86.4 and 14. 103.8 111.4,5 Isai 55.7 Jer. 31.20 Joel 2.12 Luke 6.36 Rom. 2.4 Therefore God is forward to help man and make him happy But this he cannot do while that horrible and eternal Punishment remains Moreover if Eternal Death should have been inflicted upon all men all Religion had perished through Despair of Happiness therefore there were great Causes of sparing On the other side those Testimonies of Scripture already brought by us which say that Christ was for our sins delivered up suffered died do prove that God had cause Why he laid punishment on Christ For these kinds of speaking as we there shewed signifie an Impulsive Cause But by these things that we have said of the end it may be understood that there was not only a Cause but also what the Cause was to wit that God would not pass by so many and so great sins without a remarkable Example But this is therefore because every sin doth greatly displease God and so much the more how much greater it is Prov. 11.20 Psal 5.5 Isai 66.4 Rom. 1.18 Zech. 8.17 Psal 45.8 Hebr. 11.2 But because God is active and created Creatures using reason for that purpose that he should make his Properties more manifest it is convenient for him to testifie by some act how much sins displease him but the act most agreeable to that thing is punishment Hence is that in God which Sacred Writings call Anger because there is no other word more significant Exod. 32.10,11 Numb 11.1 16.22 25.3 Psal 2.5,6 1 John 3.36 Rom. 1.18 2.8 Eph. 5.6 Coloss 3.6 Apoc. 5.16 By this Anger God testifies that he is hindered from doing Good to men Gen. 6.7 Jer. 5.25 Isai 59.2 Deut. 32.29,30 Moreover all impunity of sin of it self hath this that sins are thereby esteemed to be of less value as on the contrary the most expeditious way of driving from sin is fear of punishment Hence that by bearing a former Injury thou invitest a new one therefore Prudence upon this account stirs up a Governour to punishment Moreover the Cause of punishment is augmented when any Law is published which threatneth punishment for then the omission of punishment for the most detracts from the Authority of the Law amongst Subjects Hence that Precept of the Politicians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to keep strongly the appointed Laws Therefore God hath very weighty Causes of punishing especially if you please to consider both the magnitude and multitude of sins But because amongst all Gods Properties the love of Mankind hath the pre-eminence therefore God when he could justly and was moved to punish the sins of all men with a deserved and legal punishment that is with Eternal Death he would spare them that believe in Christ But when he was to spare by making some or no Example against so many and so great sins most wisely he chose that way by which many of his Properties should be manifested to wit both Clemency and Severity or the hatred of Sin and care of keeping the Law So Aelianus praising the Fact of Zaleucus mentions two Causes thereof that the young man may not be wholly blinded and that that which once was authorized might not be destroyed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which Causes the one looks thitherward that something of the Law may be changed through Clemency and the other that it should not be changed too much They that have written concerning the Relaxation of Laws observe that those are the best Relaxations unto which Commutation or Compensation is annexed to wit because that way very little of the Authority of the Law is destroyed and in some respect that Reason which is the Cause of the Law is obeyed as if he that is obliged to restore a thing be freed by paying the price for the same and so much are very near a-kin Such Commutation is sometimes admitted not only among things but also sometimes among Persons providing that may be without hurt to the other party So Fathers are permitted to succeed into the Prison of the Son as Cimon succeeded Miltiades and that we may not go out of Penal Judgments and those Divine there are extant express Footsteps of the like Fact in Sacred Scriptures Nathan at the command of God pronounced to David being a Murtherer and Adulterer Thy sin that is the punishment of sin is translated from thee for thou shalt not dye which otherways the Law required but because thou hast given the Enemies of God occasion to blaspheme God that Son which is born to thee to wit very near unto thee and Vicar of thy punishment shall surely die 2 Sam. 12.13,14 Achab defileth himself both with Murder and Robbery God denounceth to him by Elias That it should come to pass that the Dogs should lick his Blood Nevertheless the same God seeing his Fear and a certain Reverence to the Deity said I will not bring the Evil to wit which himself had deserved and I had threatned in his days In the days of his Son who besides his own shall also bear his Father's punishment I will bring the Evil upon his House In both God relaxeth the Law or Threatning of Punishment but not without some Compensation by translating the Punishment upon another And so he evidenceth both his Clemency and Severity or Hatred of Sin So then God willing to spare those that were to believe in Christ had sufficient just and great Causes why he exacted the punishment of our sins of Christ being willing to wit that I may use the words of Aelianus That that which was once ratified may not be disanulled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and least sins should be less regarded if so many and so great should be passed over without an Example Moreover by this very thing God did not only testifie his hatred against sins and so by this Fact terrified us from sins for it is easily gathered if God would not forgive sins no not to them that repent unless Christ succeeded into the pâ—…shment much less will he suffer the Impenitent to be unpunished but also in a signal manner declared his great Love and Good-will
towards us to wit that he spared us to whom it was not a thing indifferent to punish sins but who thought it a thing of so great Concernment that rather than he would suffer them to be wholly unpunished he delivered up his only begotten Son to punishment for those sins So that as it was said by the Ancients 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither according to the Law nor against the Law but above the Law and instead of the Law That is very true of Divine Grace It is above the Law because we are not punished for the Law because Punishment is not omitted And therefore is Remission given that we may in time to come live to the Divine Law These things being rightly understood all those things fall which Socinus objects concerning the Defect of a Cause So that it is not necessary to go through all particulars in which nevertheless not a few Errours may be observed As when in the first Chapter of the first Book also in the first Chapter of the third Book â—…e says That punishing Justice doth not reside in God but is an Effect of his Will Verily to punish is an Effect of the Will but that Justice or Rectitude out of which proceeds both other things and also Retribution of Punishment is a Property residing in God for the Scripture concludes God to be just because he renders Punishment to Faults gathering the Cause from the Effect But Socinus seems to have been led into this Errour because he believed that any Effects of the Properties of God are altogether necessary whereas many of them are free to wit a free Act of the Will interveening between the Property and the Effect So it is an Effect of the Goodness of God to communicate his own Goodness but this he did not before the Creation It belongs to the same Goodness to spare the Guilty but scarcely will any man say that God spares those whom he punisheth with Eternal Punishment Therefore there are some Properties of God the Exercise whereof both as to the Act and also as to the Time and Manner of the Act yea also as to the Determination of the Object depends upon his free Will over which nevertheless Wisdom presides Neither can God therefore be said because he hath the free use of these Properties to do what he doth without a Cause when he useth them For God did not therefore make the World in vain because he had liberty not to make it neither because it pleased God to punish some which Socinus confesseth to be true chiefly in those whose Repentance God waits for doth he therefore punish without cause where he punisheth for many things are performed freely and yet for a weighty cause The other Errour is also above mentioned that he would make God forgiving sins to do just the same thing that men do who give up their own right It hath been shewed that punishment is not in Property or Debt or that it can be equallized to them in all things To give a man 's own to forgive Debt is always honourable of it self When we say of it self we exclude those things which are present 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by accident such as is the Poverty of the Giver himself which also cannot have place in God But to forgive Punishment sometimes would not be honourable no not to God himself as Socinus acknowledgeth Therefore there is a wide difference here but the rise of the difference is thence that the next Foundation of Lordly Power and Debt is a certain Relation of a thing to a Person but the next foundation of Punishment is the Relation of a thing to a thing to wit the Equality of a Fault with some Hurt agreeing to Order and common Good wherefore that is not true which Socinus asserted as most certain That the Common-wealth will commit no unjustice if it absolve a Guilty Person except it also be injurious to the proper right of some private Person or break God's Law For by the name of Common-wealth he either understands the Multitude that governs or is governed The Multitude that is governed as it hath not the power of making Laws so neither hath it the power of moderating them But a Multitude that Governs as a Senate in the State of Peers or the greater part of a Parliament in a Popular State cannot do more than other chiefest Governours as for example free Kings in a Kingdom and Fathers in respect of a Family But it is part of the Justice of a Governour to keep Laws yea those also that are positive and given by himself which Lawyers prove to be true as well in a free University as in the highest King The Reason of both is because the Act of Making or Relaxing a Law is not an Act of Absolute Lordship but an Act of Empire which ought to tend to the Preservation of Good Order That also which Socinus says deserves Reprehension That besides the Will of God and Christ himself there can be no lawful Cause given of the Death of Christ unless we say Christ deserved that he should dye For Merit is in the Antecedent Cause as we said above but Impersonally for our sins deserved that Punishment should be required But that Punishment was conferred upon Christ this we so refer to the Will of God and Christ that that Will hath also its own Causes not in the Merit of Christ who when he knew no sin was made sin by God but in the great fitness of Christ to shew a signal Example which consists both in his great Conjunction with us and in the unmatched dignity of his Person But that Collection of Socinus is confuted by manifest Testimonies of Scripture The Antecedent Cause Why the Infant of David died is made manifest because David by sinning heinously gave occasion to the wicked to insult over the Name of God blasphemously Here there is Merit but not in the Infant And in punishing the Posterity of Achab beyond their own Merit God had respect to the Merit of the sins of Achab. Whence it appears that the Antecedent Cause of Punishment is Merit but not always the Merit of the Person that is punished CHAP. VI. Whether God willed that Christ should be punished And it is shewed that he willed it And also the Nature of Satisfaction is Explained THese two Questions having been handled Whether God could justly punish Christ being willing for our sins And Whether there was some sufficient Cause why God should do it The third remains Whether really God did this or which signifies the same willed to do it For Socinus denies it both in many places elsewhere and also in a set Discourse upon it Lib. 3. cap. 2. We together with Scripture maintain that God willed this and did it For Christ is said to have been delivered up to have suffered and died for our sins Rom. 4.25 1 Pet. 3.18 Isai 53.5 The Chastisement of our Peace was laid upon
powerful into favour And those words of Paul express the Ministry of Reconciliation which Reconciliation he had just now described by the Non-imputation of sins So Christ himself said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He was sent to proclaim liberty to Captives Luke 4.18 and commanded the Apostles to preach in his name the remission of sins Luke 24.47 So Paul himself said he declared the remission of sins Acts 13.38 Eph. 2.16 It is written concerning Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he may reconcile both Jews and Gentiles in one Body unto God This Dative 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot be governed but by the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the Interpretation of Socinus that Deo here may stand by it self or that reconciliare Deo should be to reconcile them amongst themselves that they may serve God is wrested hard and without example Neither is the Argument drawn thence of any force that in that place Paul treats of the Peace made between the Jews and the Gentiles for it doth not follow that mention of Peace is unsutable to this Argument which is purchased unto them both with God for the two divers things that are joyned are so joyned with one another that they are first and more eminently joyned to the Bond it self for they are not joyned with one another but by and for the Bond. Therefore the Gentiles and Jews are made Friends with one another through their Friendship with God And it is wonderful that Socinus doth not acknowledge this when he says himself Col. 1.20,21,22 That the Apostle having raised a Discourse concerning the Agreement procured between Creatures presently and immediately subjoyns mention of that Reconciliation by which men are made friends to God and that by the interposition of the word and which useth not to joyn things that have no manner of coherence Whence it is manifest that these things are joyned with one another so that Paul in that place to the Ephesians whereof we treat did rightly refer the Reconciliation of men with men unto the Reconciliation of men with God as an effect to its Cause That must be added that in that same place the blood of Christ is named as by which reconciliation was made But the Scripture in many places subjoyns remission of sins to the blood of Christ as its most proper effect Matth. 26.28 Ephes 1.7 Coloss 1.14 Hebr. 9.22 Rom. 3.25 and 5.9 1 John 1.7 1 Pet. 1.2 Apoc. 1.5 to wit by a Propitiatory Virtue 1 John 2.2 and 4.10 Like unto that place to the Ephesiâ—…s seems that of which already mention hath been made to the Coloss 1.20 so that for the explication of that I think that this rather should be brought then that Eph. 1.9,10 for very many things agree what there is said separately by Blood and by Cross is here said joyntly by the Blood of the Cross There is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 making peace here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having made peace there that he might reconcile both to God here to reconcile all unto himself that is God This is the difference that there only mention is made of men reconciled with one another because they were reconciled unto God but here of men reconciled both with one another and with Angels therefore because they were reconciled unto God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is verily unto himself as also the Syrian interprets for if this were the sense of these words into one as Socinus would have it it should have been written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or at least 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but should not have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is necessarily referred to a certain person Neither is it a new thing that the Preposition in with an Accusative is put for a Dative because amongst the Hebrews there is a very frequent change of the Particles b and l for by the confession of Socinus himself it is an usual Phrase amongst the Grecians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that a man is reconciled to another But no man can deny that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Apostolick Speech is put in the place of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who hath looked into a few places diligently such as Matth. 15.24 Acts 16.40 Eph. 3.19 and the exchange of the same words may be also frequently observed in profane Writers Wherefore that is not likely that Socinus would have that in this Sentence only the Reconciliation of Creatures with one another is mentioned but in the following Sentence the Reconciliation of men with God for contrariways what is said in the general vers 20. that is specially applied to the Colossians v. 21. which the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and you signifies that is yea you also or you your selves But in this Sentence that is not said which Socinus says That Reconciliation was made by making us unblameable but that we were reconciled that we might be made unblameable Socinus made the way of the end verily very licentiously The Scripture in many places declares that sins are forgiven to us that in time to come we may live holily being obliged by so great a benefit Luke 1.17 And it is to be observed that in this Sentence also there is made mention of the body of Christ which was broken for us for the remission of sins 1 Cor. 11.24 Matth. 26.28 and of death to which likewise already before we shewed that remission as an effect is attributed But that which the Apostle adds That we were reconciled when we were estranged and enemies in our mind is like that which he said elsewhere that Christ died for us when we were sinners and wicked Rom. 5.6,8 and that it is God that justifies the ungodly Rom. 4.5 Wherefore it is so much the more justly believed that here also the same benefit is treated of for this was the beginning whereby the Apostle came in to this speech that we have in Christ redemption to wit the remission of sins and verily it cannot be better understood how much God and Christ loved us and how much we are Debtors to God and Christ than if we consider that the remission of sins was first obtained and afterwards applied to us being under the wrath of God and guilty of sins which two things the Scripture for the most part joyns together But that which Socinus saith in another place That it behoved God to be throughly appeased towards us and not angry at all before Christ was sent to make a Covenant How disagreeable unto truth this is he seems himself elsewhere to have acknowledged when he said That at that very moment when God offered Conditions to renew Friendship with us he was of a mind not reconciled but reconcilable And verily Reason it self teacheth this very thing for in all conditional things the conditional are before the absolute Neither should the Condition only be offered but also fulfilled before an absolute Act followeth Wherefore the Scripture saith We have peace with God
after we are justified by Faith Rom. 5.1 Before we are sons o wrath Eph. 2.3 for our sins are the cause of separtion that is they make God averse from us Isai 59.2 This Anger excludes Peace or Friendship but not any kind of Love generally so called as appears John 3.16 and 1 John 4.10 And verily Socinus himself supposeth That sins are not forgiven to men before repentance But he cannot be said to be reconciled or as Socinus expresseth it throughly reconciled who yet imputes sins Which thing that it may be more clearly understood there are verily three moments that I may so say of Divine Will to be distinguished The first is before the coming to pass of the Death of Christ either really or in the decree and foreknowledge of God In this moment God is angry at a sinner but so as he doth not abhor all ways and reasons of laying down his wrath The second moment is when Christ's Death is now come to pass In which God doth not only appoint but also promise that he will lay down his wrath The third is when a man believes with a true faith in Christ and Christ according to the form of the Covenant commends the Believer to God Here now God lays down his anger and receives a man into favour But because Verbs Active and Passive answering to the same use to have a twofold signification either that they are confined within Vertue and Efficacy or that they include Effect also it follows that in the first moment neither of these have place and therefore in respect thereof God may be called only reconcileable In the second and third he is rightly said to be reconciled the two Senses that I mentioned being distinguished In the former sense God is said to have reconciled the world to himself and we reconciled to God when we were Enemies In the latter is that Be ye reconciled to God and we received Reconciliation and the same is the signification of the words Redemption and Expiation and that expression whereby Christ is said sometimes to have died for all sometimes for some Moreover that must be observed that the word Reconciliation doth not exclude Satisfaction or all Performance and Expence For in Livius there is That by that gift he might reconcile unto himself the minds of his Country men and elsewhere in many places the like may be seen so that upon that account Christ should no less be called our Reconciler which very thing the Scripture also shews when it adds to Reconciliation the mention of Blood CHAP. VIII Concerning our Redemption purchased by the Death of Christ THat we may come to the second Class of Testimonies which is of Redemption before all things it must be put beyond Controversie that Redemption and the like words in holy Scripture are applied to our deliverance from deserved Punishment which appears to be so Gal. 3.13 Rom. 3.24 and especially Eph. 1.7 and Coloss 1.14 neither doth Socinus deny it Yea also those places which say that we were redeemed from iniquity and vain conversation as Tit. 2.14 and 1 Pet. 1.18 belong to the same for it is a very frequent thing for sin to be put for the punishment of sin And in that place to Titus the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being added that is to expiate which we shall afterwards explain and after that in the place of Peter the mention of a Lamb that is a Sacrifice make this evident because the Scripture in many places bears witness that this Redemption is ascribed to the Death of Christ as the cause as Eph. 1.7 Rom. 3.24 Hebr. 10.12 Socinus could not deny it But how the Death of Christ is the cause of Redemption this is it that is in Controversie For we say That the Death of Christ is therefore the cause of Redemption because thereby he moved God to deliver us from punishment but Socinus denies this thing But though there were something ambiguous in these Testimonies in which mention of Redemption is made it would be sufficient to bring other places of the same Argument for interpreting them of which sort we have cited many which signifie not obscurely that Christ died for our sins suffered punishment for us and so obtained us the remission of sins to wit God being reconciled by his Death yet we hope that the same Opinion may be proved clearly enough by these places which use the word Redemption and other like it Now there is a twofold phrase in Scripture one which names the Redemption of sins another which names our Redemption by a divers kind of speaking but with the same signification That former phrase Hebr. 9.15 where the Death of Christ is said to have been caused 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the redemption of transgressions but that by this kind of speaking 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in Latine culpas delicta crimina redimere to redeem faults offences crimes there is not only signified the Cause moving to deliver but such also as includes Compensation or Satisfaction it is so manifest that Socinus ought to have confessed that also Therefore sith this is the most usual signification of that word it is not allowed us to recede from it except two things be proved that sometimes though less frequently another thing is signified by that expression and that there is here just cause why the less usual signification should be preferred before the more usual Neither of these is proved by Socinus For he brings no place of Sacred or Profane Writer where to redeem transgression sins faults offences signifies any other thing but that which we said In the Sentence of Solomon Prov. 16.6 there is a Hebrew word Chaphar which doth not properly answer the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which very thing Socinus also acknowledgeth when he saith Expiation rather than Redemption is signified by that word It may be added that the most native signification of that word is to cover and thence it is drawn to other things by a certain resemblance Neither doth it follow because the word Chaphar which among the Hebrews as many others because of the penury of primitive words in that tongue is of many significations so that it may signifie both other things and also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to redeem that therefore likewise the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should have all the significations that Chaphar hath because the use of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is simple among the Greeks answering its own Original but other words of the Greeks express other significations of the word Chaphar In Dan. 4.24 there is a Hebrew word Pharak which is not of equal force with the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but both properly and frequently it signifies to tear to break to pluck up and for this also to deliver Howbeit though we should interpret redimere in this place with the Ancients nothing compels to take this word out of the signification that we defend
received the pleasure of Wickedness But if the price of Redemption belongs to no other but the Possessour I ask to whom was this offered and for what cause If you say that it was offered to that wicked one fie upon that Blasphemy whereas this thing proceeds from God only Yea if it were so a Robber would receive God for a price of Redemption and thereby a Reward over and above of his Tyranny for which it was just to spare us But if it was offered to the Father first how for we were not kept in Bondage by him But what a saying is that that the Blood of the only begotten delights the Father who did not accept of Isaac offered by his Father but he exchanged the Sacrifice delivering a Beast instead of the reasonable Sacrifice Or it is evident that the Father receiveth not having asked nor having been requested but for the dispensation and because of the necessity that man should be sanctified by the Humane Nature of God that he might deliver us having laid hold on the Tyrant by force and might bring us to himself by his Son being Mediator and dispensing this for the honour of the Father Gregory Nyssene to Olympius the Monk concerning the Form of a perfect Name But we learn that Christ is the price of Redemption having given himself a price for us This we are taught by such a saying that we should learn how he having paid a certain price for every man's soul made immortality the peculiar possession of them that were by him redeemed from Death unto Life Ambrosius lib. de Tobia cap. 10. Behold the Prince of this world cometh and findeth nothing of his own in me he owed nothing but he payed for all as he himself bears witness saying Then I restored that which I took not away The same in his Book concerning Joseph the Patriarch Joseph was sold in Egypt because Christ was to come to them to whom it was said Ye were sold for your sins And therefore he redeemed them whom their own sins had sold But Christ was sold by undertaking the Condition not the Fault And he owes no price for sin because he himself did no sin Therefore he drew on debt by our price not his own he took away the Hand-writing removed the Usurer freed the Debtor he alone paid that which was due from all Ambrose concerning Esau cap. 7. God therefore took flesh upon him that he might abolish the Curse of sinful flesh and was made a Curse for us that the Blessing might swallow up the Curse the Integrity the Sin the Indulgence the Condemnation and Life Death For he undertook Death that the Sentence might be fulfilled and that the Judgment due to sinful Flesh by the Curse might be satisfied unto the Death Therefore nothing was done against the Sentence of God because the Condition of the Divine Sentence was fulfilled for the Curse was unto Death and after Death came Grace The same Lib. 9. Epist 7. The Lord Jesus when he came forgave all men the sin which no man could avoid and blotted out our Hand-writing by the shedding of his own Blood that is as he saith Sin abounded by the Law but Grace superabounded by Jesus because after all the World was subdued the took away the sin of all the world Lib. 1. Epist. 11. See whether that is the saving Sacrifice which God the Word offered in himself and sacrificed in his own Body And a little after But that he pours out the Blood at the Altar thereby may be understood the cleansing of the World the remission of all sins For he pours out that Blood at the Altar as a Sacrifice to take away the sins of many For the Lamb is a Sacrifice but not a Lamb of an unreasonable Nature but of a Divine Power Concerning whom it was said Behold the Lamb of God behold him that taketh away the sins of the world for he hath not only with his Blood cleansed the sins of all but also endued them with a Divine Power The same upon Luke lib. 7. cap. 12. The Adversary esteemed us at a base rate as Captive-slaves but the Lord hath redeemed us by a great price as being beautiful Bond-slaves which he made after his own Image and Likeness who is a fit Judge of his own handy-work as the Apostle said For ye are bought with a price and well it may be called great which is not prized by Money but by Blood because Chrst died for us who delivered us by his precious Blood c. And well it may be called precious because it is the Blood of an unspotted Body because it is the Blood of the Son of God who hath not only redeemed us from the Curse of the Law but also from the perpetual death of Impiety The same Lib. 10. upon Luke Chap. 22. I have sinned because I have betrayed innocent Blood the price of Blood is the price of the Lord's Passion Therefore the World is bought by Christ with the price of Blood Lib. 3. concerning Virginity near the end We were put in pledge to an evil Creditor by sins we drew on the Hand-writing of the Fault we owed the price of Blood The Lord Jesus came he offered his own Blood for us And presently Therefore do thou also behave thy self worthy of such a price lest Christ come who hath cleansed thee who hath redeemed thee and if he find thee in sin he say unto thee What profit hadst thou by my blood What hath it profitted thee that I went down into Corruption Lib. 1. of the Apology of David cap. 13. The Apostle says excellently Because the Lord Jesus hath forgiven our sins blotting out the Hand-writing of the Decree which was against us and he hath taken it away saith he having fixed it to the Cross He blotted out the Ink of Eve with his own Blood he blotted out the Obligation of the hurtful Inheritance On the Epistle to the Hebrews cap. 9. But all the bodily cleansing of the Old Testament belonged to him but now there is a Spiritual cleansing of the Blood of Christ Therefore he saith This is the blood of the New Testament for the remission of sins In those there was an outside sprinkling and again the sprinkled person was rinsed for the People did not always walk besprinkled with blood But it is not so in the Soul but the Blood is mingled with its Essence making that clean Fountain and bringing forth unspeakable beauty For this cause was the killing of the Lamb and its blood was sprinkled on the Door-posts of them that were to be delivered For this cause also we read of all the Sacrifices of the Old Testament which were appointed to typifie this Sacrifice by which comes the true remission of sins and the cleansing of the Soul for ever The same or rather the Writer of the Commentary on the Epistles of Paul attributed to Ambrose on 1 Cor. cap. 6. Because we are bought with a dear price we
should serve the Lord more diligently lest being offended he should deliver us back to that death from which he redeemed us For he bought us with a very dear price that he might give his blood for us The same on the same Ep. c. 11. We take the mystical Cup of the blood for the preservation of our body and soul because the blood of the Lord redeemed our blood that is made the whole man safe For the flesh of the Saviour was for the salvation of our body and the blood was shed for our souls The same on the second Epistle to the Corinthians cap. 5. Because he was offered for sins he is not without cause said to be made sin because the Sacrifice in the Law which was offered for sins was called sin that we might be the righteousness of God in him who knew no sin as Isaiah says Who did no sin neither was guile sound in his mouth He was slain as if he had been a sinner that sinners might be justified before God in Christ Epiphanius Hoeres 55. First he offered himself that he might abolish the Sacrifice of the Old Testament having offered a more perfect living Sacrifice for all the world himself being the Temple himself the Sacrifice himself the Priest himself the Altar himself God himself Man himself a King himself an High-Priest himself a Sheep himself a Lamb becoming all in all for our sake that he might become life to us in all respects and might procure the unchangeable establishment of his Priesthood Andraeas Caesariensis on Apoc. cap. 1. Honour saith he Glory and Dominion becometh him who being inflamed with burning love by his own Death deliverec us from the bonds of Death and by the pouring forth of his Life-giving blood and water washed us from the filth of sin and chose us for a Royal Priesthood Prudentius on Roman Mart. This is the Cross the Salvation of us all saith Romanus this is man's redemption Chrysostomus in his Preface on the Comment on Isaiah How great is the Clemency of God towards us He spared not a Son that he might spare a Servant He delivered up his only Begotten that he might redeem Servants that were altogether unthankful he payed the blood of his own Son for their price Hieronymus lib. 1. against the Pelagians And saith he when he would enter in let him offer a Calf for sin and a Ram for a Burnt-Sacrifice and let him take two Goats for the People let him offer one of them for his own sin and one for the sin of the People and a Ram for a Burnt-Sacrifice One of the two Goats takes all the sins of the People upon him for a Type of the Lord our Saviour and carries them away into the Wilderness and so God is reconciled to all the Multitude The same on Isaiah He was despised and not regarded when he was hanged on the Cross and being made a Curse for us bore our sins and spake to the Father My God why hast thou forsaken me Augustine concerning the Trinity lib. 13. cap. 14. What is the righteousness where-by the Devil was overcome What other but the righteousness of Jesus Christ and how was he overcome because when he found nothing in him worthy of Death yet he killed him And verily it is just that the Debtors whom he held should be sent away free believing in him whom he slew without any Debt For so was that innocent blood shed for the remission of our sins And presently He goes on afterwards to his Passion that he might pay that which he owed not for us the Debtors And in the next Chapter Then that blood because it was the blood of him that had no sin at all was shed for the remission of our sins that because the Devil kept those deservedly in bondage whom being guilty of sin he bound over to a condition of Death he might justly set these free by him whom being guilty of no sin he punished with Death without his deserving The strong man was overcome by this righteousness and tied with this bond that his Goods might be taken away that whilst they were in his possession were together with him and his Angels Vessels of Wrath and that they might be turned into Vessels of Mercy The same on John Tract 41. We are not reconciled but by the taking away of sin which is the Medium of Separation but the Mediator is the Reconciler Therefore that the Wall of Separation may be taken away the Mediator comes and the Priest himself is made a Sacrifice Lib. 7. de Civ Dei cap. 31. God sent his Word unto us who is his only Son by whose Birth and Sufferings for us in the Flesh that he took we might know how much God prized man and might be cleansed by that one Sacrifice from all our sins and Love being spread abroad in our hearts by his Spirit having overcome all Difficulties we might come to everlasting rest In his Declaration on Psalm 95. Men were held captive under the Devil and served Devils but they were redeemed from Captivity For they could sell themselves but they could not redeem themselves The Redeemer came and gave the price shed his blood and bought the world Ask ye what he bought See what he gave and find what he bought The blood is the price What is of so great worth What but the whole world What but all Nations They are very unthankful to their own price or they are very proud who say that either it was so small a price that it purchased only Africans or that they themselves were so great that it was given for them only Therefore they should not insult nor be puft up with pride he gave for the whole as much as he gave He knows what he bought because he knows for how much he bought it and how much he gave for it On Psalm 129. Our Priest received from us what he might offer for us for he received flesh from us In the flesh he was made an Expiation he was made a whole Burnt-Offering he was made a Sacrifice Lib. 4. against the two Epistles of the Pelagians But how say the Pelagians that Death only passed unto us by Adam For if we therefore dye because he died and he died because he sinned they say the punishment passeth unto us without the Fault and that the innocent Infants are punished by an unjust Judgment in being liable to Death without the merits of Death Which the Catholick Faith acknowledgeth of one only Mediator between God and Men the man Christ Jesus who condescended to undergo Death for us that is the punishment of sin without sin For as he only was made the Son of Man that through him we might be made the Sons of God So he undertook punishment for us without evil merits that we throught him might obtain grace without good merits Because as there was not any good due to us so neither was any evil due to him Lib. 14. against Faustus
the Manich cap. 4. Christ undertook our punishment without guilt that thereby he might take away our guilt and also put an end to our punishment The same in the eight Sermon concerning Time There is a twofold cause chiefly why the Son of God became the Son of Man One is that as Man through suffering all things for us he might set us free from the bonds of Sins for so the Prophet Isaiah had foretold he bore our sins c. But the other cause of the Lord's Passion is that he might stir us up whom he redeemed from sins and wickedness by his own blood unto the study of Piety not only by the help of Doctrine and Grace but also by his own Example De Temp. Serm. 51. Death could not be overcome but by Death therefore Christ suffered Death that an unjust Death might overcome just Death and might deliver them that were jusâ—ly condemned whilst he was unjustly slain for them And Serm. 141. Our Lord Jesus Christ by partaking with us of the punishment without the sin hath taken away both the sin and the punishment De Serm. Dom. on Luke 37. It is thy fault that thou art unjust but it is thy punishment that thou art mortal He that he might be thy Neighbour he undertook thy punishment but he took not upon him thy sin or if he took it upon him he took it upon him to abolish it not to do it And presently after by taking upon him the punishment and not taking upon him the sin he abolished both the sin and the punishment Cyrillus on Leviticus lib. 10. Then all the People cried that he should let Barrabbas go free but delier up Jesus to Death Behold thou hast the Goat that was sent away alive into the Wilderness carrying with him the sins of the People crying and saying Crucifie Crucifie He then is the Goat was sent alive into the Wilderness and he is the Goat that was offered to the Lord for a Sacrifice to make Atonement for sins and he made a true Propitiation for the People that believe in him The same against Julian lib. 9. See therefore the Sacrament and how it is well delineated by the two Goats For the Goat was slain for the sins of the Priest and People according to that which was commanded in the Law And because Christ was sacrificed for our sins he is compared to a Goat For so saith the Prophet Isaiah We all went astray like sheep every man wandred in his own way and God delivered him up for our sins For two Goats are taken not that there are two Christs that is two Sons as some supposed But rather because it was requisite that he should be seen who was also to be slain for us dying indeed according to the flesh but living according to the spirit The same on John lib. 2. cap. 1. One Lamb is slain for all that he may offer all kind of men to God One for all that he may gain all and that all may no longer live to themselves but to Christ that died for all and that rose again for all For because we were in sin and were therefore a due debt to Death and Destruction the Father gave his Son for our Reddemption He gave one for all both because all are in him and he is better then all The same in the Homil. that was said at Ephesus against Nestorius Verily these wicked Hereticks are the Sons of Perdition and the wicked Seed which deny the Lord that bought them for we are bought with a price not corruptible as Gold and Silver but with the precious blood of Christ as of a Lamb without blemish and spot But how could the blood of a common man like us have been the Redemption of the World In the Exegesis to Valerianus concerning the Incarnation of the Word which is extant Concil Eph. 6. c. 17. He who was without a Body as God confesseth that he hath a Body prepared for him that being made an oblation for us he might heal us all by his stripes according to the saying of the Prophet But how could one dying for all pay a sufficient price for all if we say that was the suffering of any meer man But if the Word having suffered according to the Flesh translated unto himself the Sufferings of his own Flesh as if they were his own Sufferings and claimed them to himself then indeed we do very well affirm that the Death of one according to the Flesh was of greater value than the life of all men Theodoretus quaest 9. on Numb For the Lord Christ only as Man is unblameable and the Prophet Isaiah fore-seeing this cries out Who did no sin neither was guile found in his mouth For this cause also he took upon him the sins of others having none of his own for he saith he doth bear our sins and is in anguish for our sakes And the great John Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the World For this cause he is free among the dead as having suffered Death unjustly The same Serm. 10. concerning Providence he brings in the Lord speaking thus For I have paid the Debt for that Generation for not owing Death I suffered Death and being made subject to Death I undertook Death and though being unblameable I was reckoned among them that were worthy of blame and being free from Debts was reckoned amongst the Debtors I therefore paid the Debt of nature and having suffered an unjust Death I abolish the just Death and I having been unjustly detained do free them that were justly detained from their bondage Behold the Nature's Bill of Indictment taken away O bitter Death behold it nailed to the Cross Behold it being a Bill of wickedness not received for the eyes of this very body have paid for the eyes that beheld wickedly the ears of this body for the ears that received pollution this tongue likeways these hands and the other parts for those Members that committed any manner of sin But the Debt being paid it is requisite that they who were kept in bondage upon this account should be freed from their bondage and receive their former liberty and return to the Country of their Father Proclus the Constantinopolitan Homil concerning the Nativity of Christ. The nature of man was deeply indebted through sins and was in distress about the Debt for through Adam all were made guilty of sin the Devil kept us in slavery The first Inventer of our Miseries stood up arguing the Debt upon us and demanded of us Justice Therefore it was necessary that one of these two things should be that either Death should be brought upon all according to the Condemnation because all have sinned or that such a price should be given in recompense that contained all Righteousness that was required Now then Man could not save us for he was liable to the Debt of Sin An Angel could not redeem the Human Nature for the was not capable to