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
declare to have went before For neither did the Angels make mention of Enmity when they proclaimed that Peace was to come upon the Earth Luke 2.14 nor the Apostle when he said We have peace with God Rom. 5.1 And as the Hebrews put Sin for Punishment as it appears besides other places now alledged Zachar. 14.19 and Gen. 4.13 so also the same call him sin who suffers the punishment as also the Latines take piaculum both for the Crime and also for him that suffers the punishment of the Crime Whence it is that instead of peccatum sin the Scripture calls the Piacular Host or Propitiatory Sacrifice Sin Lev. 4.29 and 5.6 Therefore Isaiah following this form of Speech said concerning Christ Tashim asham naphsho he made his Soul sin that is he made his Soul obnoxious to the punishment of sin Neither did Paul speak otherways For God made him that knew no sin to become sin that we might be the righteousness of God in him 2 Cor. 5.2 It appears in the words of Paul that in both Members the Adjunct is taken for the Subject Socinus that he may invalidate the authority of that place of Paul by the word sin would have to be understood a man supposed by men to be a sinner First without Example for no where is the Hebrew or Greek word so taken Moreover Paul attributes this Action to God that he made Christ sin But yet that the Jews and others did judge of Christ as if he had been a wicked and flagitious man God is in no ways the Author of that thing yea on the contrary by a Voice from Heaven and by working Miracles he did that which made the Innocency of Christ manifest unto all men Moreover that new Interpretation of Socinus can in no ways agree to the words of Isaiah which contain the like Phrase for that which Paul said God did Isaiah attributes the same to Christ to wit that he made his soul sin or that he made himself sin Moreover Paul opposeth sin and righteousness We are made the righteousness of God that is we are justified or delivered from Divine punishment but Christ that that might come to pass was made sin that is he suffered Divine punishment There is also another Antithesis to be observed in these same words of Paul for God made him that knew no sin that is who deserved no punishment to become sin that is he would have him suffer punishment Christ was innocent not only towards the Humane but also the Divine Law Therefore the force of the opposition requires that he should also have suffered the punishment of the Divine Law Moreover it is a thing that daily comes to pass that the Innocent are evil entreated by the Wicked but here the Apostle observes some excellent thing And what other thing can this be but that God laid punishment on him that deserved it not Not unlike those former places is that of Paul to the Galatians 3.13 Christ redeemed us from the Curse of the Law being made a Curse for us for it is written Cursed is he that hangeth on a Tree that the Blessing of Abraham in Christ Jesus might come unto the Gentiles Here we have the less difficulty in understanding the sense of Paul's words when he says Christ was made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a Curse or Execration because he himself interprets himself and alledges Moses the Author of his saying he shews that by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Curse he understands 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Accursed And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Paul himself being Interpreter is he that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 under the Curse Execration saith Socinus in this place is the very punishment of Execration which is true For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Curse in many places signifies the punishment proceeding from the sanction of the Law 2 Pet. 2.14 Matth. 25.41 And here the mention of the Law being added forbids the Curse to be otherways taken And the same Socinus confesseth That this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Curse was in Christ the Cross it self Therefore the Cross of Christ signifies punishment and that is it which we say Perhaps Socinus will grant that the Cross was a punishment because it was laid upon Christ by Pilate the Judge in way of a punishment But this doth not contain all that Paul said For that he may prove that Christ was made liable to punishment he cites Moses openly saying That those who are hanged to wit according to the Law of God are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Accursed of God Wherefore the same word also is to be supplied in Paul citing Moses and referring these words to Christ as if he had said That Christ was made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Accursed of God that is liable to the punishment inflicted by God and that very ignominious For the Apostles when they refer the Passion of Christ to our uses they do not therein look at the deeds of men but at the fact of God himself as is manifest by many places before mentioned To all these things this also may be added That Death it self that is the destruction of that person which is made up of a Body and Soul inasmuch as it is inflicted by God hath always some signification of punishment Not that God hath no power otherways to inflict it upon man for he is Lord of the Creature but because it seemed good otherways to his Goodness That the state of this peculiar Controversy may be rightly understood we deny not that Man when he was created was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 earthly who had a certain vital strength but not a life-giving strength as Paul teacheth us 1 Cor. 15.45,46 and therefore that was the Condition of the Body that it would have perished unless God sustained it yet we contend that by the decree of God he was not to die if he had continued in Innocency The nobleness and eminency of that Creature proveth this as being the only Creature that is said to be made after the Image of God that is endued with a Mind and Free-will which is the Foundation of his Dominion over other Creatures for he cannot be Lord of other things who is not Lord of his own Actions Therefore this Excellency above other Creatures is an Argument that something more than a Temporal use was regarded in the Creation of Man And now what is more clear than that Divine Word If thou eatest thou shalt die Here the Discourse is concerning the Act of Death whether it was to be violent or without violence Therefore Death it self would not have happened unto Man unless the Condition of Sin had been No less clear and general is that of Paul The wages that is the punishment of sin is death Rom. 6.23 Before he had said By sin came death and so death passed upon all men All men saith he therefore he treats of the common event of all Mankind Therefore by man that is by human
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
in the eyes of all men Also there is nothing stronger than those Examples of Justice Zaleucus when he had guarded the City of the Locrenses with very wholsom and profitable Laws when his Son being Condemned for the Crime of Adultery according to the Law appointed by him should have wanted both his Eyes and the whole City in respect to the Father forgave the young man the necessity of the Punishment for sometime he consented not At length being overcome by the Prayers of the People first having plucked out his own Eye and then his Sons he reserved the use of seeing to both So he rendered unto the Law the due measure of Punishment by a wonderful moderation of Justice having divided himself between a merciful Father and a just Law-giver And verily if a man had a free power as of Living in Banishment so in plucking out his own Eye nothing could be found more praise-worthy than that Fact of Zaleucus especially when the precise Obligation of the Law ceased either for his Principality or for the Peoples Consent Therefore Zaleucus erred as almost all Pagans that he claimed a greater power over his own Body than was due But that Fact so much celebrated gives Testimony against that Knowledge that Socinus thinks is imprinted in the minds of men that no man can take upon himself the punishment of another man's Fault That we may conclude this Question this is not enquired Whether it is lawful for any Judge to inflict upon any man any punishment of another man's Crime For the Law of Superiour Judges takes away this power from the Inferiour Neither is this enquired Whether this be lawful to the highest Power among men in any punishment and over any man for sometimes either the Law of God or natural Reason hindereth But this properly is enquired into Whether the Act that is in the power of the Superiour may without consideration of another man's Crime be ordained by that Superiour for the punishment of another man's Crime The Scripture denies this to be unjust which shews that God did this Nature denies because it is not proved to forbid the Consent of Nations openly denies And that the thing may be presented more naked before the Eyes who judges Decimation that was usual in the Roman Legions to be unjust when he that offended and could have been pardoned no less than another is punished not for his own Fault only but for the Fault of all the other Who judgeth it unjust if the highest Power relaxing the Law some man useful to the Common-wealth but deserving Banishment for a Fault is retained in the Common wealth yet another of his own accord obliging himself to Banishment to satisfie the Example Who would judge it unjust if a chief Governour of a Common-wealth denies Preferments to Children of Rebels otherways not unworthy if there are others found as fit for them Verily there is no injustice here for in the first kind of Fact the proper fault of the Person punished in the second the valid Consent of the Party concerned in the third the Liberty of the Governour permitted that to be performed which the Governour useth for punishment In our Fact God hath power to punish Christ being Innocent unto a Temporal Death as Socinus confesseth to wit a Lordly Power Christ also had by Divine Concession yea as being God himself a Power which we have not over his own Life and Body I saith Christ have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Power and Authority to lay down my Life John 10.18 Therefore there is no Injustice in this That God who hath the highest Power for all things that are not of themselves unjust he himself being subject to no Law would use the Torments and Death of Christ to shew a weighty Example against the great Crimes of us all to whom Christ was very nearly joyned by Nature Kingdom Suretiship which how not only justly but also wisely was appointed by the most Wise and most Just God it will appear more in the following Chapter where we shall search into the Cause of this Divine Counsel CHAP. V. Whether there was sufficient Cause that moved God to punish Christ for us and it is shewed that there was Socinus often endeavours to prove that God was not willing that Christ should suffer punishment for us by this Argument because there appears no Cause that God would do so We need not here use the Lawyers Defence who deny that account can be given of all things that were appointed by Ancestors though this Refuge may much more justly be laid open to us than to them because it is not so difficult to men to search into the Causes of Human Will because of the Community of Nature but the Causes of the Divine Will many times through their very sublimeness are hid from us Who knoweth the mind of the Lord who hath been his Counseller Rom. 11.32 Therefore often 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 11.33 his ways are unsearchable It could be added that often the Will of God is sufficient to it self for a Cause for these things being excepted that contain in themselves a certain rectitude and determined to one which God willeth because they are just that is because they agree to his Nature in all other things that he willeth he maketh them just by willing so on whom he will he hath mercy and whom he will he hardneth Rom. 9.18 But it is not necessary that we should fly to those things because God himself hath manifestly enough declared unto us Causes of his own Counsel But it is convenient that we should say this only by way of Preface that Socinus doth not rightly require that such a Cause should be rendered which may prove that God could not do otherways for such a Cause in these things that God doth freely is not requisite But he that will say this Action is free will have Augustine for a Consenter that professeth God wanted not another possible way of delivering us but there was not another more convenient way for curing our Misery But also before Augustine Athanasius said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God could have said a word and so abolished the Curse if he had not come at all but it behoveth to consider that which is profitable to men and not the power of God in all things Therefore that demand of Socinus is so much the more unjust because he himself gives no Causes of the Torments and Death of Christ which draw any necessity with them for Oracles and Miracles could suffice to shew us the way of Holiness and Christ could without Death and Death without Christ for the Afflictions and Death of the Prophets also and Apostles the Life also of Christ could be abundantly sufficient unto us for this use Christ also could after a Life passed innocently here as Enoch or Elias have been translated into Heaven without Death and thence shew his Majesty to the Earth For these are the Causes to which Socinus
before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But I go to washings and the brinks of the shore that having cleansed my faults I may escape the heavy wrath of the Goddess We see here manifestly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be reconciled to the Gods is the same with escaping their anger And verily he that diligently hath lookt into those places just now cited cannot deny that they speak of this Reconciliation that is the turning away of the wrath of God or verily of this also For Rom. 5. Paul after his own manner expressing twice the same thing that which he had said before that Christ died for the wicked and sinners vers 6. and 8. presently he expresseth the same in these words that when we were Enemies we were reconciled unto God by the death of his Son vers 10. And it appears by the opposite Member that this benefit is before Conversion it self If these things saith he are so much more now being justified by him we shall be saved from wrath verse 9. also much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his life The Apostolick Argumentation proceeds à majori If God was so good towards us before we were converted what will he be to us being converted Here the word Reconciliation in the formed Member cannot signifie Conversion for the Apostle observes some singular thing in Christ but to convert sinners is not such a thing for they are not converted at any time but being sinners But it is a rare and altogether singular thing to dye for sinners and to reconcile sinners by death seeing that there have been always very few who would dye for their Friends being good men vers 7. Then Conversion is more aptly ascribed unto the glorious Life of Christ than his Death but this Reconciliation is attributed to Death distinguished and discriminated from a glorious Life as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opposite signification of the word shews Moreover by the latter benefit it is given to be understood what the former is The latter that comes to the converted is to have peace with God verse 1. to be saved from wrath vers 9. and 10. The Apostle calls this same to receive reconciliation verse 11. What other thing is it here to receive reconciliation but to receive remission of sins as the Scripture speaks Acts 10.43 and 26.18 but to receive Conversion is an unknown kind of speaking If therefore in the latter Member to receive reconciliation is to receive the reconciliation of sinners and in effect to be delivered from wrath or from punishment in the former Member also to be reconciled should have an analogical signification that the former Member may be a right to the thing the latter an exhibition of the same thing Add unto all these that the love of God cannot be said but very unsutably and unaptly to be gathered from this that we have departed from the hatred of God For though Paul would have discoursed of the benefit of our Redemption it should have been expressed with anotherguess word that might signifie not our action but Gods But nothing is more plain than our Interpretation nothing more agreeable to the Apostle's purpose But that Socinus objects that the mention of satisfaction here is not sutable yea that the praise of love is thereby diminished it is a vain thing for mention is not made of satisfaction in respect of its being a punishment but as it is a way of delivering us Neither as we proved before can the love of God towards men be more manifestly shewed any way than that being angry that is requiring punishment yet found a way for our freedom from punishment having bestowed Christ for that purpose In that place 2 Cor. 5. about the end as in that to the Romans there is found mention of a twofold Reconciliation The former Reconciliation is that whereby God reconciled all things or the World to himself by Christ or in Christ vers 18 and 19. The latter is that unto which the Apostles as Ministers of Reconciliation in whom the word of Reconciliation is put exhort men in the name of God and Christ vers 18 19 20. Therefore that former cannot be Conversion it self for it is the Antecedent and chief Matter of that word by which conversion is made Moreover Paul himself sheweth that it consists in the not imputing of sins that is in the decree of not imputing them But now to impute sins and to forgive them signifie the same thing Rom. 4.6,7,8 But how is this Decree of not imputing sins founded on Christ Paul will tell for God made him that knew no sin to become sin for us That which Socinus objects That the not imputing of sins is contrary to that way of reconciling by satisfaction is without reason for as was explained before satisfaction goes before afterwards emission and non-imputation of sins follow It may also be said that it is not absolutely said that God imputes not sins but that he imputes them not to them that is to the sinners And that sin may be forgiven to one man or not be imputed to him and that it may be imputed to another man for example or that another man may upon that account be afflicted and punished it appears sufficiently both by many things that we alledged before and also chiefly by that which happened to David And though these are not joyned immediately in words not imputing sins and he made him that knew no sin to become sin that doth not make them not to belong to the same thing For these are joyned to one another by conjunctive words and and for neither doth any new speech and differing from this argument come between but this is said that God hath made the Apostles Ambassadors and Ministers of the benefit by him bestowed to wit that they were sent for this purpose through the World that they might plant the Faith of that benefit in men by their preaching But the strongest argument for making that Faith is from the delivering up of Christ unto Death for it is not credible that God would have had his Son that was most dear to him and most innocent so heavily afflicted except he had proposed some excellent end unto himself But this end to wit the proper end and most nearly adhering to that fact Scripture every where and reason it self in some respect by induction testifying can scarcely be any other but the obtaining the right of pardon by antecedent satisfaction But that we request you in Christ's stead be ye reconciled to God though according to the nature of the word it may signifie either cast ye away your hatred towards God or receive ye the remission of sins to wit by repentance as is shewed Mark 1.4 Luke 3.3 Acts 3.19 and 5.31 yet according to the nature of the thing discoursed of it more rightly admits the latter sense for a weaker person useth not to be requested to receive more
peculiar which cannot be communicated to the Apostles But it could if the benefit of Christ's death were distinguished only by degree from the death of the Apostles and not also in its proper end So also in the Epistle to the Hebrews 2.10 there is an example in it that Christ came to glory by Sufferings the special manner is in that that Christ suffered for every man vers 9. And as in those places patience so in other places love is commended to us by the same example of Christ but the special manner doth more openly express the deed of Christ Though if you will look more exactly into those places we shall see that not so much the act of death as the danger of death is there regarded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which only John useth 10 11 15. and 1 John 3.16 as also John 13.37 and 38. also John 15.13 is not properly there to lose life but as it were to put it in pledge that is to undergo the danger of death Therefore in those places that very thing that is prescribed to us contains not only the benefit of another but also a certain exchange to wit in that sense which Horace expressed in these Verses Paratus omne Caesaris periculum Subire Moecenas tuo Being prepared to undergo all dangers of Caesar Mecenas with thine But in the saying of Caiaphas not only as a Prophesy dropt from him at unawares but also according to his Opinion a certain true substitution was expressed For he feigned the inevitable destruction of the Jews if Christ should be permitted to live and on the contrary if Christ should be slain that certain safety should be obtained for this very thing Therefore he desired to substitute really the death of Christ to a destruction otherways hanging over And so he would have the same in kind to befall Christ with that which was otherways to happen to the people and he believed that the death of Christ was a near cause of the deliverance of the People and fit of it self Which is the same thing as if you should say he would have Christ perish in the room of the People that was otherways that is under a contrary condition to perish Here it must be marked by the by that Caiaphas did put the first effect of the death of Christ not about the Jews whose deliverance he sought but about the Roman Governours whose Anger he desired to escape So that if it be true which Socinus urgeth that such an interpretation of the words of Caiphas should be taken which may answer both the mind of the Holy Spirit and his mind this dying for the people must needs signifie that safety was to be obtained from another but that other according to the mind of the Holy Ghost can be none but God whence it follows it is exercised about God before it is exercised about men which Socinus stubbornly denies But those things that have been hitherto said by us concerning the signification of exchange in the Particle pro for are much illustrated by the the nature of the Expiatory Sacrifice For in those the Scripture and common Opinion of Nations do witness that blood is given for life which shall now be made manifest CHAP. X. Concerning the Expiation made by the Death of Christ THere remains the last rank of Testimonies which signifie that Christ's Death is an Expiatory Sacrifice which because by the Artifice of Socinus they are involved in many Mists we reserved them for the last place that they might receive some light from these things that have been said before We and Socinus are agreed concerning the word that Christ's Death was an Expiatory Sacrifice or a Sacrifice for Sin the Divine Epistle to the Hebrews testifying the same especially cap. 9. But of the proper force of that word Socinus thinks one way and the Church of Christ another way The disagreement shall be briefly and perspicuously so explained if we say that according to Socinus the effect of expiation first and properly is exercised about sins to come because the Death of Christ by ingenerating Faith draws us from sins but in respect of by-past sins only secondarily and in that respect also all this action is exercised about us not about God that is that God is not moved to pardon but we are prepared to receive remission to wit by the Amendment of Life but according to the Opinion of the Church which agrees to Scripture the effect of expiation is properly exercised about by past sins and the first action is about God who is moved to forgive That the first action is exercised about God not about Men it is proved from the nature of Priesthood For a Priest is appointed for Men in the things of God Hebr. 5.1 but not for God in the things of Men which is the Office of a Prophet And because Sacrifice especially Expiatory Sacrifice is an act of the Priest as such for a High-Priest is appointed for this purpose that he may offer Sacrifices for sins Hebr. 5.1 8.3 it follows that Sacrifice belongs to those things which are performed for Man with God But the whole matter will be made more manifest by comparing the Sacrifices of the Old Law with this Sacrifice of which comparison the Writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews is an Author unto us and elsewhere the Prophets and Apostles The ancient Law is considered two manner of ways either carnally or spiritually Carnally as it was an Instrument of the Commonwealth of the Jews Spiritually as it had a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shadow of things to come Hebr. 10.1 As touching the former consideration the Expiatory Sacrifices of the Law sanctified unto the purifying of the flesh Hebr. 9.13 which of what sort it is we shall explain The Law of God had this sanction he is accursed that abides not in all the words of the Law Deut. 27.26 Gal. 3.10 therefore he shall be guilty of punishment whosoever in the least shall deviate from the Law as James shews James 2.10 This Punishment according to a carnal sense was violent death which is evident from the contrary because life is promised to him that fulfils the Law Lev. 18.5 Gal. 3.12 But as in every Commonwealth rightly governed the King requires punishment by his Judges and if they fail by himself So in the Hebrew Commonwealth which Josephus rightly called Theocratia because God was its King Judg. 8.23 1 Sam. 8.7 God ordinarily required the punishments of the Law by Judges yet so that he himself required the same punishment if the Judges failed in their duty Let the people saith he stone him or I setting my angry face against that man will cut him off Lev. 20.3 Neither did he only threaten this but also often performed it as it appears by many Examples of the Old Testament But because a Lawyer may somewhat relax his own Law especially Penal God the King of the Hebrews in some Crimes admitted Expiatory Sacrifices in the room
pay such a price of Redemption Therefore it remained that the sinless God ought to dye for them that had sinned for this only way remained of deliverance from that Evil. What then he that brought every Nature out of nothing into being who was not in distress to find out a way of Deliverance he found out for them that were Condemned a most sure Life and a very honourable way of abolishing Death and he is born a Man of the Virgin after such a manner as he himself knows for speech cannot declare the wonderfulness thereof and he died in what he became and purchased Redemption by what he was according to the saying of Paul In whom we have Redemption by his Blood the remission of sins O glorious works he purchased Immortality for others for he himself was Immortal Leo concerning the Passion Serm. 12. What hope can they have in the safeguard of this Sacrament who deny the truth of Human Substance in the Body of our Saviour Let them tell by what Sacrifice they are reconciled by what Blood they are redeemed who is he that gave himself for us an Oblation and Sacrifice for a savour of sweet smell Or what Sacrifice was ever more holy than that which the true High-Priest laid upon the Altar of the Cross For though the Death of many Saints was precious in the sight of God yet the killing of no other Innocent person was the Propitiation of the World The Just receive Crowns but did not give them and from the Courage of the Faithful have arisen Examples of Patience but not Gifts of Righteousness for there were singular Debts in each one of them neither did any of them pay another man's Debt by his Death whereas it was only our Lord Jesus Christ that was found among the Sons of Men in whom all were crucified all died all were buried and also all were raised again Claudianus Mamertus concerning the State of the Soul lib. 2. Pictavus Hilarius in many of his high Disputations being somewhat different in his Opinion asserted these two things contrary to truth one of of which was this That he said nothing was created Incorporeal the other was this That he said Christ suffered no pain in his Passion whose Passion if it had not been true our Redemption also could not have been true Anastasius Sinaita Bishop of Antiochia concerning the Right Rules of the Catholick Faith lib. 4. concerning the Passion and impassible Deity of Christ His Blood was shed which was sufficient to redeem many Perhaps it would be better to say it was sufficient to redeem all for all are also many Procopius of Gaza on the 24th of Exod. Seeing Christ was by nature joyned to the Father if we are made partakers of him by the Spirit we will also by him be united to the Father coming into the Society of the Divine Nature Neither did they go up into the Mountain before they were crucified with the Blood of Christ who gave himself a price of Redemption for us offering his own Flesh as an unblameable Sacrifice to God and the Father Gregor M. lib. 3. Moral cap. 13. Another that was created for Paradise would proudly take upon him the similitude of Divine Power Nevertheless the Mediator paid for the fault of this Pride being himself without fault Hence it is that a certain wise man said to the Father because thou art just thou desposest all things justly also thou condemnest him that ought not to be punished But it must be considered how he can be just and dispose all things justly if he condemns him that ought not to be punished For our Mediator ought not to have been punished for himself because he had no contagion of sin But if he had not undertaken an undue Death he had never delivered us from a due Death Therefore the Father because he is just in punishing the just one he disposeth all things justly For hereby he justifies all in that he condemns him that is without sin for sinners Isychius on Levicic cap. 16. The Law made the Children of Israel liable to the Curse and to Death so that they had therefore a necessity of Expiation and the Sacrifice of the only begotten is slain for them principally but he is Sacrificed for all men so that Caiphas said It behoveth that one man should dye for the People and not the whole Nation perish And the Evangelist John confirming and also correcting what was said added But this he said not of himself but being High-Priest that year he prophesied that Christ was to dye for that Nation and not for that Nation only but that he should gather together into one the Sons of God that are scattered to wit the Gentiles Jesus was slain for Israel and he offered him for all Mankind to be an Expiation of our Uncleanness Antiochus in Exomologess Thy Word was discoloured with no sprinkling of sin at all whom thou sentest through the bowels of thy Mercy that he might call back his own handy-work into the way being made flesh he suffered himself for our sake to be crucified and abolished the Hand-writing that was against us being made a Propitiation for our sins Sophronius of Jerusalem Epist to Sergius Patriarch of Constantinople Christ condescended to dye for men and for their redemption shed his Divine Blood and laid down his Soul which was a Gift more Divine than all Dignity Elias Cretenses Christ was called Redemption because he set us at liberty that were sold under sin and gave himself as a price of Redemption for the Expiation of the whole World Nicephorus of Constantinople Epist to Leo 3. which is extant in Baronius Tom. 9. Annal. p. 587. Edit Mor. 2. I believe he was crucified not in that Substance wherein he shines with the Father though it is said the Lord of Glory was crucified but in our Earthly Nature in which he took upon him our Earthly Mass and was made a Curse for us that he might make us partakers of the Blessing that comes from him and he was content to suffer the Death of Malefactors according to the flesh that by suffering Death he might condemn the sting of Death in his flesh and might destroy him that had the Power of Death that is the Devil Mark the Hermite in his Book concerning them that think they are justified by Works Christ is Lord according to his Essence and Lord also according to Dispensation Because he made them that were not and hath redeemed them that died to sin by his own Blood and gave Grace to them that thus believed Theodorus Abucara Bishop of the Carians Disp 15. cap. 5. God in his just Judgment required all things of us that are written in the Law which because we were not able to pay therefore our Lord paid those things for us and freely took and received upon himself the Curse and Condemnation to which we were liable he himself suffered those things that we ought to have suffered The same in the
this matter and unusual to Scripture but Bounty and that much greater than that lately started up Opinion of Socinus The former Bounty is that God seeing he was stirred up with great hatred against sin and could have as well been utterly unwilling to spare us as he was utterly unwilling to spare the Angels that finned yet that he might spare us he did not only admit such a payment as he was not obliged to admit but he also himself of his own accord found it out Verily this benefit is much greater and much more glorious than if God judging it a matter of no value whether some Example were made or not had suffered our sins to go unpunished as Socinus would have Therefore the Glemency of God is not overthrown by the payment of punishment because to admit such payment and much more to invent it proceeded from meer Clemency The other Bounty is that he delivered up to death his own Son being most dear unto him the Image of himself and if it is lawful so to speak his other self not only that he might give a Testimony to the Truth of the Doctrine and so might attain unto the Resurrection within which Socinus contained himself but chiefly that he might perform that payment or satisfaction by suffering the punishment of our sins in which part Socinus ought to confess that he would owe much less to Christ than we owe yea this evidenceth that a greater love of God is declared by us because it is just that Benefits should be esteemed not only for the Expence but chiefly for the Advantage that by the Expence redounds unto the person on whom the Benefit is bestowed But we besides the Advantages which together with us Socinus confesseth acknowledge a chief one which he denies Neither say we That God bestowed his Son that God himself might receive his own and so make God sordid with which Socinus upbraids us but we say God therefore did it that he might openly declare the merit of sin and his own hatred against our sins and also that he might consult the order of things and his own Law as much as be could in sparing us Neither is that less unjust and that I may use his own word cruel that he sats we make God cruel For that end of the Satisfaction being added makes the Sufferings of Christ no heavier which Socinus is compelled to confess that they were laid upon him by God without any cruelty yea how many more ends there are so much farther is the appearance of Cruelty removed for he is a cruel person that without cause or for a light cause tormenteth any one Moreover this end of Satisfaction or bearing Punishment coheres with the Death of Christ much more evidently and with a much surer connexion than those ends that Socinus acknowledgeth for Miracles could give Testimony to the Doctrine enougn and abundantly Also Celestial Glory could have been conferred upon Christ without the intervening of Death but Death such a Death especially is fitted properly for suffering Punishments and punishment for procuring deliverance But though we hitherto shewed that satisfaction was made to God by the punishment of Christ yet we desire not to deny that the force of satisfaction is in the very action of Christ For oftimes an acceptable action useth to be admitted instead of a punishment A benefit coming after saith Seneca suffereth not an injury to appear Lib. 6. cap. 5. In which place he sheweth that to render is to give a thing for a thing and that by payment the same thing is not paid but so much But though God that needeth nothing cannot receive a Benefit yet his great Goodness taketh any Dutifulness for a Benefit So Achab prevented a Temporal punishment by calling humbly upon God Neither doth only a mans own action profit him for freedom from punishment but also another man's with whom he is joyned So punishment was forgiven to the Posterity of David for the sake of David himself 2. Kings 8.19 not only for the Promises made to David but also because the actions of David pleased God judging graciously of them 1 Kings 11.13 and 20.6 So Aelianus tells That Aeschylus was delivered from punishment because his Brother Amyntas had acted valiantly for bis Country So amongst the Romans when Titus Quintius was accused the Memory of his Father profitted him Livius concerning Appius He commemorated the Merits of his Forefather towards the Common-wealth that he might deprecate punishment Death was forgiven to Plautius Lateranus for the eminent Merit of his Uncle And in the general Sallustius said If they offended their ancient Nobility the valiant Acts of their Ancestors are present for a Safeguard unto them Cicero It will behove him who shall require that he may be pardoned to produce good Deeds of his Predecessors if any are known Quintilian The Merits of Progenitors plead for a person in danger And as Works temporally good avail for a temporal impunity so the Work of Christ being perfectly and spiritually good availed for deliverance from eternal punishment Unto which that hath reference By the obedience of one man many are made righteous that is they are justified they are esteemed as innocent Rom. 5.19 and that other for his Name to wit the Name of Christ and there was no mention of God before as Socinus confesseth And moreover the like Sentence proveth this same thing Acts 10.43 Our sins are forgiven to us 1 John 2.13 For it is certain that by this phrase for the name of a man the impulsive cause is signified Neither can Socinus prove the contrary by any place of Scripture But what we said of Satisfaction that it is first given to the punishment and afterward to the obedient action if self the same should be understood concerning the appeasing God concerning our Redemption and concerning Expiation for the explaining whereof we are now preparing CHAP. VII Concerning Propitiation and Reconciliation made by the Death of Christ SOcinus himself took care that no man might mistake this present Disputation as if it were concerning a word only for he professeth in many places That be opposeth not the naked word of Satisfaction but the thing it self signified by the word Therefore Christ reconciled God unto us by his blood Christ delivered us out of the hands of Divine Justice by giving thereunto his own blood the price of our Redemption Christ made amends for our wicked works by his own obedience Christ worthily deserved that God should bestow upon us the remission of sins Christ pacified the Anger of God by the loss of his life Socinus no less disallows all these than the word Satisfaction it self and yet if this Disputation were concerning the word the Church cannot be justly defrauded of the liberty of interpreting Scriptures In which this also is comprehended to translate very aptly into other Languages those things that either the Prophets spake in Hebrew words or the Apostles in Greek words which savoured many times
of a Hebraism or Syrianism or to epitomize in a perspicuous compend of words those things which belonged to the same Matter the Scripture hath delivered in several places So that which the Scripture said That Christ was delivered to death for sins and to have suffered sins that is the punishment of sins and that his blood was shed for the remission of sins is expressed in elegant Latine and significantly by the word satisfaciendi of satisfying for that word in Law or common use signifies the exhibition of a Fact or Thing from which Deliverance followeth not ipso facto but an Act of the Will being joyned And it useth to be taken in this sense not only in pecuniary Debts but also in Crimes which Languages that are derived of the Roman Language with depravation call contentare to content But that it may appear that Expressions of the same value yea those very Expressions that Socinus rejects are found in Sacred Scripture we shall add some other Testimonâ—…s unto those that were drawn out of the Sacred Book above in the first Explication of this Sentence and we shall refer them to four Classes The first Class shall be of those Expressions that signifie the turning away of Anger The other of those that declare Deliverance made by Redemption or the paying of a price The third of those that signifie Subrogation The fourth of those that ascribe unto the Death of Christ the vertue of an Expiatory Sacrifice That we may enter upon the first Class it is very well known that to turn away the wrath of a man is called in the Greek Language 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the Latine placare pacare conciliare reconciliare also propitiare to appease to pacify to reconcile to propitiate Both the act it self and also that by which the act is properly performed is called by the Grecians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and by the Latines placamen In God Anger as we said above is called by anthropopathy as it were the affection of punishing which the Apostle saith is revealed from heaven upon all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men that detain the Truth in unrighteousness that is that go against the known Commands of Christ But no man is excepted because we are all by nature the sons of wrath that is liable to the anger of God This anger abides upon some Joh. 3.26 and it is turned from them upon whom it abides not Christ by his Death attains this Aversion and therefore it is very rightly called Propitiation So John the Apostle calls him twice when he says If any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the Righteous and he is a Propitiation for our sins and not for ours only but for the sins of all the world Epist 1. cap. 2. vers 2. Also in this is love not that we loved God but that he loved us and sent his son to be a Propitiation for our sins cap. 4. vers 10. with which place that of Paul must be compared God commendeth his love that when we were yet sinners Christ died for us Rom. 5.8 for both Paul and John prove by the same Argument that we did not first love but were beloved of God and that which Paul calls he died John calls he was made a Propitiation Moreover that place of Paul must be added We are justified freely by the Redemption in Christ Jesus whom God hath set forth to be a Propitiation by Faith in his Blood Therefore Christ was made a Propitiation in his own blood which what is it else but that very thing that Socinus denies That God was reconciled in Christ for that he interprets in John 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Expiation and by the word Expiation understands the destruction of sin he doth that for no cause and guarded by no example 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in all Greek Writers Poets Historians and others is to propitiate and useth to be construed with an Accusative signifying the person whose anger is turned away neither is it otherways taken in the Septuagint and Luke 18.13 In one place only which is Hebr. 2.17 Christ is said to be appointed a Chief Priest to propitiate the sins of the people where there is an Enallagy coming from the Hebraism to propitiate the sins when it should have been said according to custom to propitiate God for the sins of the people Therefore he there signifies Expiation but that which is made by Reconciliation Otherways this use of the word should have nothing common with the nature of the word and the perpetual signification of the same Wherefore that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to propitiate and the word thence derived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 propitiation cannot signifie such an Expiation as Socinus deviseth that is the destruction of sin which is performed without atonement But Socinus interpreteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mentioned by Paul that in which God sheweth himself appeased We deny not that this signification may agree to the word and for some such reason the covering of the Ark is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Writer to the Hebrews But because words of that Termination signifie properly a certain effective Vertue and improperly a declarative no reason suffereth us here to depart from property for it is evident that Christ is so called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by Paul as he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by John But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verily signifies atonement not the testimony of atonement wherefore Scripture interpreting Scripture the word also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be expounded of Christ actively not declaratively Moreover the word blood being joyned with it shews the same to which the virtue of reconciling is attributed because without shedding blood there is no remission These are well known Sanguine placastis ve'ntos virgine coesa Ye pacifi'd the Winds with blood and a Virgin slain and the like in Poets concerning which there will afterwards be place to discourse more accurately The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is like the word appeasing to procure favour and reconcile which Paul useth in this very Argument Rom. 5.10 and 11.292 Cor. 5.18 and Eph. 2.16 and Col. 1.10 Socinus opposeth That it is written that God was not reconciled to us but we to God and that upon that account because God was not angry at us but we were turned away from God For the word reconciling as also the word appeasing promiscuously assigns sometimes the Dative sometimes the Accusative to either party both the party that is angry and also the party that is not angry at all or less angry Therefore it hath the same signification that we are reconciled to God and God to us Sophacles in Ajax 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But he goes being turned to the best Opinion That he may be reconciled to the Gods from his anger Where the Quire expresseth that which Ajax had said
thing whether you strike a private Person or a King also whether you strike an unknown Person or a Father because strokes are directed to the Body not to the Dignity of the Person which gross Errour long since Aristotle hath confuted Also the common-Judgment dissents from Socinus For those People whose Laws are most praised esteemed punishments by the dignity of the Persons and other Attributes Wherefore according to the Laws of the Romans which are known evidently to be very full of equity Punishments are varied according to the Condition of the Persons and it hath been abundantly demonstrated by them that did write of Commonwealths that other Nations famous for Wisdom did not otherways appoint And the Interpreters of the Roman Law prove it CHAP. IX What doth it import that Christ died for us IN the third Class we did put those Testimonies which intimate Subrogation as when Christ is said to have tasted death for all men Hebr. 2.9 died for the people John 11.50 suffered for us 1 Pet. 2.21 died for us wicked and sinners Rom. 5.7,8 one died for all 2 Cor. 5.14 It is received in every Tongue that when a Person did or suffered a thing in the room and place of another it is said that he suffered or did that for him So it is in Terentius I will lead thee pro instead of him I will grind pro for thee Neither is this phrase only applied to persons but also to things for that is said to be given put or had for him which in his stead or room is given put or had Socinus declines this Interpretation by the ambiguity of the word pro for which often signifies only the profit of another which is true of the Latin word as also of the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is â—ound in Matthew 20.28 and Mark 10.45 wholly rejects this signification and requires commutation So evil is said to be rendered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for evil 1 Pet. 3.9 Rom. 12.17 an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth Matth. 5.38 so a Serpent given for a Fish Luke 11.15 the birthright for one morsal Hebr. 12.16 hair for a covering 1 Cor. 11.15 But as oft as that Particle is applied to Persons it signifies that one succeeded into the place of another So Archelaus is said to have reigned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the room of Herod his Father that is that he succeeded him in the Kingdom Matth. 2.22 so Peter is commanded to give a piece of money for himself and Christ Matth. 17.27 because he alone in that action supplied the room of two Neither is it otherways in prophane Writers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one in the room of many and the like Here Socinus being in a strait dares not deny that a certain change is signified by that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for many But he miserably seeks an escape When the Redemption is discoursed of saith he there is place for that Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though a Captive owes nothing for Redemption This is true but not to the purpose For we do not from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 directly infer payment but we gather from thence that Christ died in our stead that is unless Christ had died we should have died and because Christ died we shall not die an eternal Death For verily the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being joyned to a Person and the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 requires that a Person expressed in the Genitive was to give the same in Gender or Species which now another gave Neither is it any difference whether it be lawfully as in a Bond for Debt or unlawfully as in him that is taken by High-way-men but this being granted that it would come to pass that we should have been put to death unless Christ had died the payment is afterwards rightly gathered from the very nature of the thing For either we were to have been unjustly put to death or justly not unjustly for we had deserved death therefore justly If justly then we were debtors of death Christ procured us deliverance from this debt by giving something But to give something that another by that same may be delivered from a Debt is to pay or satisfie Therefore that expression 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to give for many signifies a true exchange as always not a metaphorical which Socinus invents without example But touching the other Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it must be observed that it also not always but often signifies the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Paul wisheth to be accursed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in room of the Jews whom otherways persevering in their unbelief he knew would be accursed Rom. 9.3 The Apostles are Ambassadors 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for Christ that is they are Ambassadours in the room of Christ himself 2 Cor. 5.20 Wherefore seeing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 necessarily signifies exchange and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 useth sometimes to be put for the same nothing forbids to interpret a word of a doubtful notation from a certain chiefly when the same Argument is treated of But especially that place 2 Cor. 5.14 seems to require that interpretation If one died for all then are all dead Moreover though the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of it self ambiguous had not been used in these places but it had been openly said that Christ died for our good by this very thing that exchange should not have been excluded but rather inclued other places being compared For he also who dies for this purpose that thereby he may deliver another from death dies for his good Neither can this sense be rejected because the fact of Christ is proposed to us for example For unto an example it is sufficient that there be a certain general similitude though the difference be in a special respect of which nevertheless mention sometimes is made for denoting the thing more certainly Which is manifestly evident from the Exhortation of Peter 1 Pet. 2.19 he would have us be patient in bearing afflictions which we suffer innocently He brings the example of Christ who said he himself also suffered This was sufficient for a comparison but he added 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for us which belongs not the comparison but clearly expresseth the thing it self that is the suffering of Christ Therefore Patience is a common thing but that manner is different Otherways Paul should in vain ask if Paul was crucified for believers 1 Cor. 1.13 for he also could have been crucified for the Church that is for the use of the Church as he said he suffered for the Church Col. 1.24 and afterward he himself was for the great good of the Church beheaded Peter and other Apostles crucified But neither Paul nor any other man could be crucified in that manner that Christ was by suffering punishment in our stead Therefore that word pro expresseth here something