certainly known So our High Priest Jesus Christ is without beginning of dayes or end of life Repl. This answer is too light and frothy in a subject so serious It was not mine intent or designe and he knows it very well to make Melchisedech God nor any of the persons of the Godhead nor yet to make a quaternity of persons but to make Christ God to whom that in truth belongs which in type only and in a figure mystically is attributed to Melchisedech Moses and David speak of Melchisedech as if he had been one who had glided down out of heaven and come from above and had again soon after conveyed himself thither for there is not any mention at all made of his birth or death of his father or mother or kindred or when he became Priest nor when he laid down his Priesthood And the Apostle saw the mysterie in it and that it behoved him so to be described and set out that he might be a Type of Christ both of his Person and Priesthood And therefore when he makes use of him as a Type to set out Christ by he describes him to be without father and so was Christ as he was man and without mother and so was Christ as he was God having no beginning of dayes nor end of life nor had Christ according to his divine Nature considered either beginning or end of dayes but acording to his humane he had both and both of them described and well known by all that are versed in Scripture-story and the Apostle knowing these things in expresse words makes Melchisedech the Type of him discerning that the Holy Ghost in concealing these things of him had made him so and intended him to be so as these words import Made like unto the Son of God for he is described saith Beza as if he had neither been mortall man nor had been born of a mortall woman which because it could by no means agree with any meer man born of men therefore the Apostle saith that he is peculiarly the figure of that one only begotten Son of God and that it was so intended by the Holy Ghost Now then the strength of the Argument fetch'd from this Scripture lies here First Melchisedech is a Type of Christ that is without controversie Secondly He is a Type in these things mentioned of him Without father without mother without beginning of dayes and end of time Otherwise in vain doth the Apostle mention these things of Melchisedech but as a type for in truth it was not so of Melchisedech And it appears by the scope of the Apostle which was to interpret the words of David A Priest after the order of Melchisedech therefore it was necessary for him to set forth what Melchisedech was in his person and in his office and in his person he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Without father without mother not in truth but they are not mentioned and so it is as if it had been so and that in type he might be so and therein resemble the Son of God that in truth was so Thirdly Melchisedech being only a type in these things of Christ it was not necessary that he should be such in truth but only in a figure mystically as indeed he was not but it was necessary that Christ should be so in truth being the Anti-type that is being the substance of that which Melchisedech was but a shadow of therefore in John 1. 17. it is said that the law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ That is there were many shadows in the law of Moses but Christ came and fulfilled them and was the truth of them We read of David that he said of himselfe They pierced my hands and my feet they gave me vineger and gall to drink which really were not done to David but mystically and in a figure as David was the type of Christ but these things were really done to Christ and in truth were fulfilled in Christ So the bloud of buls and calves and of such beasts which were sacrificed and offered they took away sin cleansed away the guilt and brought pardon and purged the conscience and brought peace but none of these did so in truth but mystically in type only as they shadowed out and pointed at the sacrifice of Christ and at his bloud but the bloud of Christ really and in truth did take away sin did clense the conscience did bring remission peace Heb. 9. 9 12 13 14. More instances might be given but indeed there is evidence enough in the very nature of a type and antitype There is a mystery in the type and there is the impletion or fulfilling of the mystery in the Antitype or the thing of the mystery is to be seen in the Antitype But enough of this unless he had said more to impugne it I now come to consider of his answer to Pro. 8. 22. The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way before his works of old I was set up from everlasting from the beginning or ever the earth was To this he thus answers And gives this sense The Lord who is Possessour of heaven and earth obtained or created me when he began to worke before his antient workes And I was set up or annoynted to have the dominion of all things and that from everlasting that is from the beginning before the earth was Repl. The word indeed signifies to obtain or to possess which is sometimes done by creation and so when heaven and earth were created they were possessed by God or as he saith God was Possessour of them But in this place it is an obtaining or possessing as is done by generation I gave an instance in Eve in reference to Cain I have gotten a man it was by a begetting or generating there and in this place it is so also Christ is called the onely begotten of the Father and here in ver 24. Christ the wisdome of God declares how he was possessed viz. as a Son that is brought forth by a woman travelling in which Christ is said to be born and is called the first-born to exclude creation and that it might be by generation and the act of the Father in communicating the divine essence to the Son is called after the manner of men that it may be better conceived of a begetting or generating suteable to which is the Hebrew word Amun v. 30. which signifies a child nursed nourished brought up with a father and such was Christ which is thus expressed to hold forth his generation and not creation for when God created Adam he created him a man but Christ is represented as a child to shew how he was begotten and it is added that Christ was his Fathers delight and a sport before him for so it is in the Hebrew and this is humanitùs dictum is is spoken after the manner of Fathers who take dear delight in the childe that comes out of their
of God they are but as Wormes and Grashoppers What then if the fault be against God who is the Prince of all Princes and before whom the highest is but as the dust of the ballance who is infinite in his nature and in all his attributes the guilt of such a fault will be according to the person infinite as the person is and hence it is that it cannot be expiated by persons that commit a fault against God no not by sufferings therefore the wicked and ungodly suffer for ever because they can never suffer enough in any time to give satisfaction to God for their transgression therefore they must always suffer and there must be infinity in their suffering so far as they are capable of infinity we say that that which hath no end is infinite but the sufferings of the Reprobate have no end This comes from the Justice of the infinite God which in punishing the creature that sins against him considers the infinite distance that is betwixt him and it and makes the punishment proportionable which made Eli say to his sons If a man sinne against a man the Judge shall judge him but if man sinne against the Lord who shall intreat for him the distance is such that there is no mediatour that the creature can find out for him but he is punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord. 4. That sacrifice is something that was ordained of God to satisfie the justice of God which must needs be confessed if it can be proved that God was attoned appeased pacified by sacrifice and that transgressions against God which carry infinite guilt in them are remitted by them but this is manifest from many places of Scripture Lev. 1. 4. and chap. 4. 26 31 34. and divers others 5. The sacrifice that Christ offered to God when he offered himself to God was sufficient to satisfie Gods justice though infinitely wronged and offended by the Elects transgressions Rom 8. 33 34. Who can lay any thing to the charge of Gods Elect it is God that justifieth but how can that be when so just and so holy a law hath been transgressed and the justice of God calling upon God for satisfaction The Apostle answers it in the next words Who can condemne it is Christ that died or rather that is risen again This imports that Christ by dying hath given such satisfaction that nothing can condemne the Law that was transgressed cannot Gods justice cannot Heb. 9. 26. Christ hath once in the end of the world appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself and ver 12. Christ by his own blood entred once into the holy place having obtained eternal redemption for us The minor Proposition or the Assumption is undeniable and needs no proof which is this A sacrifice finite in value cannot satisfie an infinite justice offended for there must be some proportion betwixt the offence by which infinite justice is ingaged against persons that commit it and the satisfaction that is tendred and given to justice so ingaged in reference to transgression but what proportion betwixt a finite sacrifice of a finite value and vertue and infinite justice moved stirred offended and ingaged against men Now unto this Argument there is no answer returned but some little arguing there is against an infinite sacrifice which is rather a denying of the conclusion then an answering to any premise of the Argument Notwithstanding it is necessary that I consider what he objecteth against the thing which I drive at though he comes not near the Argument which I propounded to arrive at it Repl. How doth that appear in my expressions when I onely ask a question how a Sacrifice finite in value can satisfie an infinite Justice offended And in steed of answering it there is deep silence he passeth it over as if he had not observed it Yet he saith The Scripture tels us that Christ was made sin or a sin-offering for us by taking our sins and bearing the Curse but how this Sacrifice was infinite to me is unconceivable Repl. And doth not the Scripture tell us that the person that was made this sin-offering was God therefore his bloud is called the bloud of God Acts 20. 28. was the Lord of glory therefore it is said had they known him they would never have crucified the Lord of glory now this is the Title of the most high God Psal 24. 7. Psal 29. 3. Was the great Shepherd of the sheep yea the chief Shepherd which is equivalent to the most high God for the most high is familiarly in Scripture called a Shepherd Psal 23. 1 and Psal 80. 1. And if so then he is chief Shepherd and if chief Shepherd then Christ is he because there are not two chief Shepherds but one chief Shepherd and so the Father and Christ are one and the same chief Shepherd Heb. 13. 20. 1 Pet. 5. 4. The great or chief Shepherd is said to be brought again from the dead by the Father so that the person that was this sin-offering was as great as high as excellent as can be imagined as high as the highest infinitely high and great as these Scriptures do declare for such a person according to the flesh that he assumed was crucified did shed his bloud was raised again by the Father in some places of Scripture by himself in other for the Father and he work the same works the Father raiseth the dead yea the dead body of Christ and the Son raiseth the dead and his own dead body also as hath been shewed before Yea further Doth not the Scripture tell us that Christ through the eternal Spirit offered up himself without spot to God and that his blood in this regard is made more effectual for the purging away of sin than the bloud of Bulls and Goats Heb. 9. 14. How much more saith the Apostle shall the bloud of Christ who through the eternal Spirit offered up himself to God purge your Consciences from dead works to serve the living God In this Scripture here is both the Sacrifice and the Priest that offered it Christ according to his Humanity is the sacrifice it was himself according to the Flesh that was offered up and Christ according to his Divinity or Deity was the Priest that offered up him according to the Flesh It is said that Christ did it through the Eternal Spirit What is this Eternal Spirit It was not the soul of Christ for first The soul of Christ is not properly eternal no more then he will grant the sufferings of the creature in hell to be infinite and yet they never shall have end that is properly eternal which neither hath beginning nor ending and so cannot be measured and therefore nothing can be said to be past and nothing future and to come in that which is eternal and eternity is one of the Attributes of the most high God and incommunicable to the creature though somtimes that which hath no end
perfect Tabernacle by which being sacrificed and offered up to God he entred heaven and opened it for beleevers It is called a greater Tabernacle because it was not of this building not framed of the seed of male and female as other bodies are but of another building as the Apostle observes Heb. 9. 11. conceived in the wombe of a Virgin by the over shadowing of the Holy Ghost and it was greater also because not the glory of the Lord filled it only as it did the Tabernacle made in the wildernesse but because the fulnes of the Godhead dwelt in him bodily and by this greater Tabernacle he obtained eternal redemption for us and entred into heaven to take possession of glory for us Why did not God delight in burnt-offering but Christ must come the reason is rendred it was to do the Will of God The Will of God was to have his truth satisfied his law satisfied his righteousnesse satisfied that upon just and holy and honourable termes he might be reconciled this was the Will of God This Will burnt-offerings and sin-offerings could not accomplish Christ must therefore come to satisfie it and to fulfil it Therefore it is said Not by the blood of Goats and Calves but by his own blood he entred once into the holy place Heb. 9. 12. and in ver 13 14. it is said If the blood of Buls and Goats do cleanse the flesh being types of the blood of Christ how much rather shal the blood of Christ clense the conscience If all had depended upon institution and that there had been no respect had by God of a full satisfaction the blood of buls and goats might have been as effectual to have clensed not the outside but the conscience equally as the blood of Christ if the vertue of clensing had not depended upon the excellency of the person whose blood it was that did clense there would have been no difference betwixt the bloods that did clense therefore the value of the blood in reference to the person whose it was fals under the consideration of God in the busines of remission But he saith The foundation that I build upon is not a little questionable and that not a few errors do lie under my non scriptural language You tell us saith he of an infinite sacrifice but what you mean by it and where Scripture tels us so much I am yet for to learne The Scripture tels us that Christ was made sin or a sin offering for us by taking our sins and bearing the curse but how this sacrifice was infinite remains to me unconceivable If the suffering of Christ had been infinite there had been no end of it if the curse had been infinite man could not have born it being uncapable of any thing infinite in the infinity of it It is enough for me to beleeve that my Lord Jesus suffered for me what I deserved to suffer and that was the curse of the Law be that what it will Rep. The foundation which I build upon wil admit of his utmost questioning without being shaken therby As for the errors that may lie under my words he might have done well to have presented them unto view yea I beleeve he hath done it so far as his fancy hath suggested any to him which whether they will prove to be errors when I shall have represented what I am able to say will be judged of by the Reader and whether my language be unscriptural in the sense of it or his answer be not impertinent and no answer to any thing wherin the strength of my Argument lies or whether it be not rather a shuffling and a shifting then an answering let any intelligent impartial person judge He hath been wont to draw up my Arguments into form when he hath apprehended an advantage by it but at other times pretermits it I shall therfore do it for him at this time he cals it a Querie and it runs in that form but the strength of this Argument is in it If Christ be a meer creature then a sacrifice finite in value wil be able to satisfie an infinite justice offended but a sacrifice finite in value cannot satisfie an infinite justice offended ergo Christ is not a meer creature He answers not to either of these propositions nor indeed can do without running into absurdities for first the consequence is firme and good which will be manifest if these five things be made out 1. That the sacrifice of a meer creature neither is nor can be any other then finite in value which none wil doubt of if they consider that a meer creature is only finite and can be nothing more and if so then the actings of it are according to the nature of it finite also both in their nature and in their value worth for nothing can act beyond it self and this I beleeve he will not deny 2. That the justice of god is infinite which because it is an attribute of God and is God for what ever is in God is God must needs be granted because God himself is infinite and indeed God cannot be compounded of things that are finite for an infinite being is never made up of finite things so that all in God is infinite And that which is finite is limited and that which is limited is limited by another which is greater then it and can limit it but both these are incompetent to God who is greater then all limits all but is limited of none 3. That this infinite justice was offended which is manifest because 1. a just and holy law was broken 2. a righteous and just penalty proposed to warn man lest he should transgress was sleighted and despised 3. man was immediately upon the transgression judged and sentenced with death and expulsed Paradise 4 because this law was Gods which was transgressed and the penalty that was threatned and was despised was Gods also therefore the offence in transgressing and despising was infinite though not in the nature of it yet in relation to such a God who is infinite which will farther appear if this be granted which in reason cannot be denied that faults cōmitted receive their aggravation as from the matter and manner of committing and from the end and design so from the object or person against whom committed the greater more excellent the person is against whom the transgression is the greater is the transgression therfore if against a Prince it is an high aggravation and it counted treason and a more grievous death is inflicted and if it be an high crime against him it is endeavoured that his death may be perpetuated therefore his torments are prolonged and this is judged righteousnesse in the persons that inflict such punishment in reference to such transgression and yet the highest of men are persons that must die and their breath is in their nostrils and they are not only finite but their life is like bubbles upon the water and in comparison
Saviour or an unequal Saviour to Christ because Christ and not he is called a Saviour And is not Christ called both the blessed hope and the great God our Saviour Are not both titles put upon him as due to him And though they are used by the Apostle to distinguish the persons of Father and Son from each other when they are spoken of together yet both these are applyed to both persons and are proper to him alone that is the most high God But he saith Scripture doth prefer God in the work of salvation before our Lord Jesus Christ making him to be the principal Agent therein when it declares that the work of Christ in saving was from the purpose of God who appointed him for it from the precept of God who injoyned him to it and from the presence of God who assisted him in it Reply But where doth Scripture witness this of God the Father in reference to the whole of Christ He saith Scripture doth abundantly set forth all these but he doth not quote any one place for proof of them but would have us receive it upon his word That God purposed to save by Christ considered as David's and Mary's son considered according to his Manhood that God enjoyned him as such that God assisted him as such God being taken essentially and properly for Father Son and holy Ghost and not improperly and personally for the Father will be granted and it will be plentifully made out by Scripture but that the Father purposed without the Son and holy Ghost and commanded and enjoyned without the Son and holy Ghost and assisted without the Son and holy Ghost this is denied For as the Father without the Son and holy Ghost made not man but the Trinity sate in Councel Let us make man so it was in the work of Salvation it was an act of Councel The Father gave the Son and the Son gave himself emptied himself every Person concurred and wrought in the work so far as concerns efficiencie All decreed it all acted in it as one principal Agent and onely the Humanity of Christ was Instrumental And if we consider the Material and Meritorious cause of mens salvation God the Father or God in the person of the Father is far from being the Principal cause thereof for he is no cause at all for the Father took not flesh upon him nor was Mediator either of Satisfaction or Intercession he made not the Atonement but this was the Son's sole work he did all in it he was the person that was made of a Virgin and was made under the Law he was the person that was made flesh and manifested in flesh and hath a peculiar right in this respect to the denomination of Saviour And though all was acted and endured in and by the flesh that he assumed for he bare our sins on his body on the tree yea and in his soul also when he cried out My God my God c. in such manner yet if that flesh had not been supported by the Godhead of the Son which assumed it it would have been crumbled to dust and powder by that weight of wrath that lay upon it So that it was by the vertue and power of the Godhead that such actings and such sufferings were and all was accounted as done and suffered by the Son though the Son as the Son was not capable of it but by assuming flesh into the unity of his person and so it came to be reckoned as his work and it was in account as if the Lord of glory had been crucified and as if the blood of God had been spilt and the merit was from the excellencie of the person of the Son that did and suffered all But he further saith That the Scripture revealeth the Lord Christ to be in the work of salvation but an instrumental Saviour For this saith he see Tit. 3. 4 5 6. which puts it past all question But after that the kindness and love of God and our Saviour towards man appeared not by works of righteousness which we have done but according to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the holy Ghost which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Lord. Reply Here is in these words of his First A bold assertion viz. That Scripture revealeth Christ to be but an instrumental Saviour Secondly A peremptory Conclusion that Tit. 3. 4 5 6. puts it out of question Thirdly A defective and insufficient probation or confirmation he alledgeth the words of the Text as if they did carry with them conviction of what he asserts in the very letter of them when as there is no such matter 1. Scripture is so far from revealing such a thing of Christs instrumentalness that it reveals the contrary to it in Heb. 1. 3. it is said That Christ by himself purged away our sins but of any instruments can it be said that by himself he doth any thing Doth an instrument act by himself that is by his own vertue and sufficiency and by himself that is without the power of the principal efficient Is an Instrument any thing out of the hand of the chief Agent Also in Heb. 7. 25. it is said That Christ is able to save to the utmost But is any Instrument able to save to the utmost Hath he the ability within himself So that it may be said of him that he is able What greater thing can be predicated of the principal efficient or chief Agent then that he is able to save to the utmost This is too high an expression for an Instrument And in Psal 89. 19 it is said of Christ whom David typified that God had laid help upon one that was mighty If Christ be onely but an Instrument what needs he to be mighty in himself for every Instrument if it be mighty through the might of another as the Rams horns were it is sufficient What needed the choice of a mighty one if the Saviour be onely instrumental The weaker the Instrument the more honour will the Principal Efficient have The excellencie of Power is known to be of God when the instrumental means is Weakness and Foolishness Why also could not the blood of Goats have cleansed the Conscience but the Blood of JESUS CHRIST God's Son was necessary if an Instrument may be a Saviour Doubtless a word of Institution would have made the one as effectual as the other But indeed there is no might that any creature-Instrument is capable to be recipient or the subject of that can save to the utmost because it requires an infinite power to conquer Sin and Satan Death and Hell to abolish these and to bring Life and Immortality to light to effect a first and second Resurrection for men who were to be saved Secondly The Scripture that he alleadgeth out of Titus 3. 3 4 â— hath no such thing engraven upon it as he produceth it for such that he that runs may read it
man dying for sin and many men sinning and deserving death each of them for the sins they have committed But he makes no answer at all unto it but sends me to Rom. 5. 15. to answer my self which sleight proceedings will satisfie none but such who are willing to be deluded by him The question only will be what satisfaction is necessary that grace may abound to many Because there be many that conceive that any satisfaction will serve to make man capable of grace which God will accept and they do not look at proportion And there are others that hold that no satisfaction at all is necessary in respect of God because God having loved the Elect loves them for ever and there is no change at all in Gods love nor is God capable of changing but is immutable in his nature and therefore though man sinned yet his love was not broken off thereby nor was there any breach on his part at all nor did Christ dye to satisfie him at all for he was satisfied always in his own love which continued the same after man had sinned as before for in his love he gave Christ after man had transgressed therefore the breach was on mans part he had wronged God and merited nothing but hatred and wrath and all evill and no love at all and having an evil and guilty conscience he was suspicious of God and expected no good from him but feared all evil and could not conceive how God could love such a creature or shew any grace or favour to him that had sinned in such sort against him and knew not how God could do it without satisfaction Thus unsatisfied was mans conscience having sinned concerning the finding of any mercy from Gods hands therefore God gave Christ and delivered him up to death and layed him under the curse of the Law not to satisfie himself thereby but to satisfie mans conscience and to give rest and quiet to it and that God cared not for a few drops of bloud but there was a wound in the conscience of those that had sinned that would not be healed but by such a manifestation of the Fathers love as in giving Christ and delivering him up for such appeared And some say Christ came to reveal the Fathers councells and dyed for the confirmation of them This opinion takes hold of many and spreads and prevailes much my designe is not to make a large discourse in way of answer because it is beside my present undertaking only because I am necessitated in reply to him to insist a little on the point of satisfaction and because the point is of great concernment I shall not oversleightly passe over it but stay a while in answer to both the forementioned Tenents and shall first shew that some satisfaction to God is necessary and then declare what it is Sol. And first I shall premise some things and afterward lay down some positions That which is to be premised is 1. That there are no passions and affections in God after the manner of men there is neither love nor hatred nor wrath nor anger nor joy nor grief nor any such by which the mindes and spirits of men are moved and disturbed for God had all things before him at first that should come to passe afterward and if it were good it was of his own operation and if it were evill it was of his own permission and ordering also and that which he could easily have prevented So that it is irrationall to conceive that God should be stirred or moved with any thing that comes to passe or that he should be in divers tempers or mindes or that he should be one thing to day and an other thing to morrow this is inconsistent to that absolute blessedlesse of God therefore though these things are spoken of God in Scripture yet they be humanitus dicta they be attributed to God after the manner of men And those things that are passions and affections in men are attributes and decrees and counsels and actions and operations in God and imply not the least mutation or change in God As for example Gods loving of Jacob before he had done good to deserve such a thing what was it but Gods goodnesse and graciousnesse which is an attribute in God noted in decreeing Iacob to glory which is called Election and Gods hatred to Esau before he had done evill what was it but his soveraignty and absolute dominion which God hath over the creatures without being capable to give any account exercised iâ— appâ—inting him to perdition and destruction 〈◊〉 they are not passions and affections in God but they are acts of the unchangeable will of God in which the above mentioned properties in God are expressed And Gods wrath and anger is not a passion in God but it is an act of Gods righteousnesse and justice by which he repells that which is evill in the creature and contrary to his own holinesse in testification of the unsuitablenesse of it to him and of that which he justly expects from the creature 2. There is difference to be put betwixt the decree and purpose of God concerning life and glory in reference to such persons whom he will glorifie goodnesse towards and the way and means by which God will effect it and accomplish it which is in advancing holinesse and righteousnesse in order to which he made the first Adam after his image gave him an holy and righteous nature writte his will in his heart and then entred into a Covenant of life and peace and glory with him upon the observation of his will and threatened death and all evil and misery upon the violation thereof and this Covenant was in reference to himself and his posterity that were in his loyns This latter is called in Scripture the way of peace and life Rom. 3. 16 17. The former is hid in God for who hath been of his counsell or who knoweth further then he reveals and it hath its being in God and no where else The latter is declared to the creature and it is the creatures capacity of life or the visible state of life into which God did put him and it hath its being in the creature 3. There is difference to be put betwixt the love of God to the creature and the amity of God with the creature or betwixt the decree of grace in electing the creature to life and glory the prosecution of the decree in suteable and proportionable actings of God toward the creature If there be a right distinguishing betwixt these things that thus differ these following propositions and conclusions will be better understood and more easily granted 1. When sin was committed against God the love of God was not broken off nor the councell purpose and thoughts of God concerning glorifying of such persons whom he had chosen to life and glory were not altered nor changed for this foundation stands sure the Lord knoweth who are his nor is God in this
blood of Christ 1 Pet. 1. 18 19. Now that this life of Christ was laid down and this blood of Christ was shed as a price to ransome the Elect who were Captives appears clearly from Mat. 20. 28. and 1 Tim. 2. 6. where it is said that Christ laid down his down his life a ransome for many ye◠for all the Elect and the Apostle Peter make◠a comparison betwixt this price of Christs blood and a price that is wont to be given for the ransome of Captives in gold and silver and such corruptible things and he makes this price of Christs blood farre more precious then the other 1 Pet. 1. 18. 19. And that this price was given to God is manifest also from the same place of Peter where Christs blood is compared to the blood of an immaculate Lambe that hath no blemish nor spot now such Lambs were trespasse-offerings brought to God who was the person against whom the trespasse was committed and it was for satisfaction in reference to sin committed and it pointed at Christ who was indeed the Lambe of God that taken away the sins of all Elect ones in the world by that satisfaction or price which he gave in his own blood Also David in his speech to Saul in 1 Sam. 26. 19. gives witnesse to this truth that offerings were brought to God and that blood was the price of redemption for sin given to God If God have stirred thee up against me being offended at me for that is the meaning of it let him accept an offering that is for satisfaction and pacification let him accept it But more directly and positively the Author to the Hebrews speaks to this Heb. 9. 14. How much more saith he shall the blood of Christ who through the eternal spirit offered himself without spot to God purge your consciences c. If then the price of redemption was given to God God is the person that firstly and principally detains the Elect as Captives in bondage for he that receives the price is he that holds us in such evil condition and the redemption is from him that is from that in him that holds us 10. The reconciliation which Christ effected through his death and blood was of God to us as well as of us to God which appears from Rom. 3 25. where it is said that God hath set Christ forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood The sense of the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Placamentum that by which God is appeased and pacified who was angry before and gives answers of peace to his people when he meets with them as in Exod. 25. 17 21 22. God caused a Mercy-seat to be made it is rendred propitiatorium and is the same word with this of the Apostle and he caused it to be put upon the Ark and there he met with the people and communed with them in a peaceable way and manner This was this type of Christ this appeased God sacramentally typically figuratively Christ properly really truly by his blood which speaks better things in Gods ears then the blood of Abel that cryed for vengeance this cries for pardon for peace for reconciliation therefore the Apostle John saith If any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father who is a Propitiation for our sins who expiates our sins by his blood and so appeaseth God and pacifies him And by Christ it is said that we receive the attonement that is with God or we have God attoned to us Rom. 5. 11. for all the offerings of the Old Testament were for attonement and the people offered them to attone him God did not offer them to attone them or reconcile them nor did they offer them to show that they were reconciled to God for they were offered immediately after they had sinned and had the sense of their sinne upon their consciences and knew they had angred God that by offering them in a beleeving way looking at Christ the sinne-offering which they signified they might appease him and pacifie him and so might have peace in their owne hearts But there are many objections that are framed against this great and weighty truth of Christs making satisfaction for the offences of men to God Object 1. It is asserted that there is no such thing read of as satisfaction unto God Sol. Though the word it self be not to be found in Scripture yet the sence of the word is found in many places that which is equivalent is found in Matth. 20. 28. and 1 Tim. 2. 6. Christ is said to give his life 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a ransome for many which words do signifie the price of redemption by way of satisfaction paid for transgression and the guilt of it And the righteousnesse of Christ is called in Rom. 5. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which may signifie just satisfaction in this place most properly though in some other places it is taken in other sences for there is an opposition betwixt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the one is set against the other the righteousnesse or rather righteous satisfaction of Christ against the offence of Adam and the offence being but one there is one satisfaction or satisfaction at once set against it for the words ought to run as by one offence judgment came upon all men so by one just satisfaction the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life Obj. 2. It is asserted that there is no such thing that we read of in Scripture as the reconciling of God to men and that it is repugnant to Gods love in giving Christ that he should give him for that end to reconcile himselfe to men for he shewed himself reconciled to them in that he gave Christ to them Sol. We read of God offended because of sin of God threatning man having sinned of God expulsing man from the place where himself had a little before placed him in his tender love and care over him and if his setting of Cherubims and a flaming sword turning every way to guard the way to the tree of life which argued a great breach betwixt God and man and that not only on mans part but on Gods part for these were all of them passages of displeasure and anger on Gods part and we read of the whole posterity of man abiding under wrath having no other portion but wrath having the marks of Gods wrath upon them from the womb Ephes 2. 3. and we read of Gods wrath taken away in Christ by the shedding of his blood and of the pacification of God towards men through blood and of his being attoned to men through Christ and what is all this but the reconciling of God to men And though love and anger would have beene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inconsistent together in God towards the same subject person or object about which they would be conversant if sinne had not come betwixt yet because of sins intervening there is no more incongruity to
impartiall therein when his son whom he loved had offended by adultery caused one of his sons eyes and another of his own to be put out save only the praise of his justice and truth in his lawes and this is that which God grieves at And if the Judge loving the prisoner that is before him and knowing he hath nothing to pay and yet the law recovers payment will give his own son to be his surety and will lay the debt upon him and is content that his son shall fetch the price out of his own treasure yet the law is satisfied and the judges righteousnesse in reference unto it and his love to the Prisoner are glorified Nor is the satisfaction the lesse because God the offended person procures it and not man that offended him for the truth of God stands firme by that means and the law takes place and is not made of none effect as it would have been had no satisfaction been given which would have redounded to Gods dishonour Yea the righteousnesse of God and his love to undeserving creatures shines forth because the satisfaction is of Gods own procuring And though it proceed from God yet it cannot be said that God satisfies himself or that he was satisfied before for he that provides it doth not act it but it is acted in and by an other person The Father sends the Son and the Father in the Son receives satisfaction and though the Father and Son be the same God yet they are not the same person nor is the satisfaction that the Son gives materially considered given in the divine nature or God-head but the Sonne took flesh and in that flesh by dying and sheding his blood gave satisfaction so that it is from God but not in God if we speak of the next and immediate subject which is the man-hood if the matter of the satisfaction be respected And though it may be said that God was satisfied before in reference to his own love to such persons he did not repent of it in such sort as to cast them off nor was his purpose of glorifying them one whit shaken yet he was not satisfied after they had sinned and after he had sentenced them to death in point of righteousnesse and truth to passe by their transgression without satisfaction his Law was not satisfied in a free forgivenesse without satisfaction and so God was unsatisfied because the Law was Object 6. It is likewise asserted that there is an unsatisfied conscience in men men having sinned cannot discerne how Gods heart can be towards them without satisfaction therefore the Scripture speaks of propitiation through Christs bloud and of atonement by his death condescending therein to mans infirmity which could not otherwise apprehend how God could communicate life and glory to men after they had sinned without being first appeased and pacified by Christs blood But if things be rightly considered in themselves as in truth they are Christ dyed not to reconcile us to God but to heal us of an evill conscience and that we might know that God loved us after we had sinned as well as he did before by the gift of Christ who is the manifestation of the Fathers love after the fall which the Elect could not be perswaded of but by a pledge of it Therefore it is said that Christ shed his bloud to purge our conscience from dead works to serve the living God Heb. 9. 14. and not to satisfie God Sol. It will readily be confessed that it was an end of Christs dying to reconcile men to God and that they might have the answer of a good conscience before God 1 Pet. 3. 21. But that this was the solitary end or the principall end or that satisfaction to God is no end but is wholly excluded is denyed and hath been disproved all along in the discourse upon this subject 1. What need would there have been that Christ should have dyed at all if only satisfaction to mens consciences concerning Gods goodnesse and love to fallen creatures had been intended therein For God could best have done that by his spirit and must yet do it by his spirit if it be ever done in the hearts of men Indeed God having given Christ and delivered him up to death the spirit represents it as a great manifestation of the Fathers love but the spirit might have abundantly assured the heart of a sinner of the Fathers love without it so that there was no necessity of Christs dying in that regard 2. The love of God represented unto men in giving Christ is much lessened to them in the representation if Christ were only given to satisfie their hearts in reference to their fears of God not to satisfie Gods justice if there were no need of Christ in reference to any danger they were in in regard of God if God could or would have pardoned sin without him and his justice and truth could have remitted it 3. It is derogatorie to Gods wisdome and love to assert that Christ was delivered up to be crucified upon the crosse and there to shed his blood principally for this end to cure mans panique fears and his groundlesse causeles suspicions of God and not from any necessity that there was in mans evill condition in regard of sin committed by him and of Gods righteousnesse and truth prosecuting it against him For God might have done this in an easier way and have spared his dear Son God is represented prodigall of his dear Sons bloud if he must die and bleed out his spirits to cure some false conceits that men have entertained of God 4. What need was there that the Son should come in flesh and should empty himself of his glory and that he that is the Lord of glory should be crucified if no satisfaction to divine justice was looked at but only the satisfaction of the conscience the bloud of God as it is called would not have been necessary but the bloud of a meer creature Christ would have served the turne for such a purpose had that been all 5. How came those fears in the heart of man after the fall after sinne committed What bred them was there no ground for them were they meer conceipts and jealousies that wanted a right bottom did not the threatning before sinne was committed cause the horrours and terrours that were in the soul after sinne was committed and if they had Gods threatning as the ground of them viz. in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye the death were they not well grounded and was it possible that these fears should be cured by the bloud of Christ and the cause not removed by the bloud of Christ the threatning not taken away the truth of God and his righteousnes not fulfilled and satisfied which were in the threatning and which bred the feares 6. These fears and terrors of the Elect before Christs bloud be brought to their hearts to remove them are they not of the same nature with the