Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	body_n	soul_n	torment_n	4,875	5	9.1881	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A79465	Anti-Socinianism, or, A brief explication of some places of holy Scripture, for the confutation of certain gross errours, and Socinian heresies, lately published by William Pynchion, Gent. in a dialogue of his, called, The meritorious price of our redemption, concerning 1. Christ's suffering the wrath of God due to the elect. 2. God's imputation of sin to Christ. 3. The nature of the true mediatorial obedience of Christ. 4. The justification of a sinner. Also a brief description of the lives, and a true relation of the death, of the authors, promoters, propagators, and chief disseminators of this Socinian heresie, how it sprung up, by what means it spread, and when and by whom it was first brought into England, that so we be not deceived by it. / By N. Chewney, M.A. and minister of God's Word.	Chewney, Nicholas, 1609 or 10-1685.	1656 (1656)	Wing C3804; Thomason E888_1; ESTC R207357	149,812	257

undergone those most grievous punishments due unto and for the same But Christ hath so born or carryed our iniquities sustaining and suffering death for the same that we might be freed there from Therefore he hath truly and indeed sustained the most grievous punishments of our iniquities Here the Dialogue doth endeavour Tenebras inducore rebus to cast a mist before our eyes by telling us that this very place being cited by St. Matthew c Mat. 8.17 is by him applyed to bodily sicknesses and diseases inferring from hence that Christ did not bear infirmities or sicknesses from the sick and diseased as a Porter bears a burthen by laying them on his own body but bearing them away by the power of his Word * See how they reason Ferre seu portare in Scripturali quando ergo Semper after which manner also he bare our sins and our iniquities One egg cannot be more like another then these Words and this glosse are to those and that of Socinus d De Christo Servatore and his Disciple Crellius e Corporales morbos Christus non sustinuit aut perculit sed ab hominibus abstulit ac verbo Sanavat Cont. Grot. pag. 56. if they may not be said and that truly to be the same To which we in the name of the Orthodox do answer that that place of St. Matthew is to be read by way of application not explication sicknesses and diseases are the effects and fruits of sin therefore he declareth Christ to be a Physician not for the soul only but for the body also and in token of spiritual health and recovery from sin he did afford and apply corporal from maladyes and distempers So Pareus upon this place in Matthew It was the end of Christs coming to bear our sins which are the sicknesses of the soul and therefore he begins by practising upon the sicknesses of the body that so having cured the one he might proceed to the Sanation of the other Thus honest Ferus the fryer f Christi propositum erat ut peccata nostra portaret quae verè infirmitates sunt animarum c. in Mat. 8. Also St. Chrisost saith g Homil. 25. that the corporal health which Christ afforded to the sick was a type of that spiritual health which was to be expected from him Nor is there so much difference if any at all between that in Isaiah which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that in St. Matthew which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as they would bear us in hand in regard he may be truly said to bear both the one by passion the other by compassion Now seeing the figg-leaf will not serve to cover their nakedness but that it must be discovered for that he bare wounds and bruises for us cannot be denyed He that is our Dialogue tells us that Satan and his instruments did thus bruise and wound him True but not for us The sufferings wounds and bruises of which the Prophet Isaiah doth so liberally discourse and so literally describe are not only such wherein Satan and wicked men were instruments as these Socinians the Dialogue and the rest h We put them together as birds of a seather do fondly fain but some of them were immediately inflicted by God himself without any second means as instruments of the same so Vers 6. the Lord hath laid on him the iniquities of us all also Vers 10. It pleased the Lord to bruise him Now these sufferings were principally in his soul which neither men nor Divels could afflict or terrify but God could and did as was forespoken of him in the same verse Thou shalt make his soul a sacrifice for sin Add to these the complaint of Christ himself i Matt. 26.33 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 my soul is exceeding heavy even unto the death And then the sum of all will be this that Christ our Saviour did undergo most exquisite torments both in body and soul joyned with and lying under the sense of Divine wrath by reason of the guilt of sin which lay upon him and was imputed to him For the further confirmation hereof I might urge and that with better authority then any can refuse it that place in the book of the Lamentations k Lam. 1.12 Is it nothing to you all ye that passe by Behold and see if there be any sorrow like unto my sorrow which is done unto me wherewith the Lord hath afflicted me in the day of his fierce wrath I know and according to the letter it cannot be denyed but that these words are set down by the Prophet Jeremiah in the person of his own people being then in great misery and of the holy City then laid wast by the Chaldees their professed Enemies what then says one l Bishop Andrews his serm as learned as the best of those that dare oppose it I find saith he there is not any of the Ancient writers but do apply yea and in a manner appropriate this speech to our Saviour Christ and wheresoever they treat of the passion ever this cometh in to expresse the bitterness and the horrour thereof And to say the truth taking the words strictly and as they lye before us they cannot agree with or be verified of any but of him and him only For though some other and not altogether unfitly may say the same words yet it must be in a qualified sense For in full and perfect propriety of speech he and none but he can say si fuerit dolor sicut dolor meus no day of wrath like to his day no grief no sorrow no torment to be compared to his yea his exceeded them all Besides what if it were spoken literally of this people then So was that in the Prophesie of Hosea m Hos 11.1 Ex Aegypto vocavi filium out of Aegypt have I called my Son yet it is by the Evangelist n Matt. 2.15 understood of and applyed to our Saviour Christ My God my God why hast thou forsaken me was at first uttered by David o Psal 22.1 yet Christ himself maketh use of the same words and that more truly and properly then ever David did or could and of those of Davids and of these of Jeremies there is the same reason Well though the Ancients all along have ascribed them unto Christ and in fitness of terms and more fulness of truth they may be taken to be spoken of him more and rather then of any other whatsoever yet because we will give n●ne occasion to cavil we will freely and fairly passe them by A man that would commend a Spring water need not drink up the whole Fountain one or two draughts is sufficient We have already had a tast of the truth of Christs suffering the wrath of God for us Yet we will take a sip or two more and so will conclude this first part And to this purpose mark how fully the Apostle Paul p Gal.

very drift and purpose of the Holy Ghost in this place of the Apostle Further more there are some and those of no small account in the Church of God who take that Article in the Creed of Christs descension into Hell to signify those Spiritual and internal passions which he suffered in his Soul out of the sense of Divine wrath hanging over him and inflicted upon him by reason of the guilt of our sins for which he was to satisfie Thus U●sinus k Catechism pag 236. and Spanhemius l Summos cruciatus angustias dolores quas Christus perpossus c. de exinatione Christi pag. 274. also our own Perkins m Perkins on the Creed upon the Creed expounding that part of Hannah's song 1 Sam. 2.6 The Lord killeth and the Lord maketh alive He bringeth down to Hell and raiseth up again saith thus The Lord maketh men feel wo and misery in their Souls yea even the pangs of Hell and afterwards restoreth comfort and refreshment to them But we passe this What ever uncertainty in this point the Dialogue would fasten on us and make the World believe there is among us shall so he may gain the more credit to himself and his Socinian opinion I leave to the judgment of the indifferent Reader in the mean season let all men know that in this we all agree and this constantly and un●nimously affirm that Christ Jesus suffered that death and those very Soul n Ipsam poenam infornalem re ipsa tulit c. Poliander 1. concertatione torments to which the Elect were subject by reason of the curse of the Law which lay upon them For the further confirmation whereof we here propound a three-fold question First in what manner Secondly in what measure Thirdly for what time Christ suffered this death and these torments Which being resolved will not be much unlike Solomons three-fold cord not easily broken First how and in what manner Christ suffered this death and these torments Answ Our sins and we by reason of our sins being accursed hatefull and abhominable in the sight of the most pure God not beholding us in our filthinesse but with indignation towards us It pleased Jesus Christ being himself most holy by the unspeakable mercy of the Father and his own free grace and goodness taking upon him our miserable and forlorne condition and undergoing both in body and soul those torments which we should everlastingly have suffered * Christus fit pro nobis maledictio in cruce luens poenam iis debitam qui voluerunt dificri Bez. in Luc. 23. to free us from the same This I say he did freely and of his own accord for though according to the Evangelist o Mat. 26.39 there may seem some reluctancy in him yet against the Monotholites we consider in Christ a double will the one Divine the other humane in respect of his humane will he may be said under condition to eschue death and desire to be delivered from it but his Divine will was that the will of his Father and not his humane will might be accomplished which being considered he did freely and voluntarily engage himself to suffer what ever his Father in Justice would even to his wrath and indignation to satisfy the same and free the Elect from it Secondly how much and in what measure Christ suffered Answ As much in full weight and measure if we may use the terms as did counter-vail all the sins of the Elect past present and to come and what was wanting in his bodily torments to make full satisfaction to Divine Justice was supplyed and made up in his soul sufferings * Christus cum Satana cum p●ccatis cum morte denique horren●a illa maledictione De●armatis potenter luctans c. Beza in Mar. cap. 13. the sense of which both before and in the time of suffering did so much molest and trouble him Thirdly what time and how long did he suffer Answ From the very time that he began to work out the Redemption of the Elect date it when they will untill upon the crosse he cryed out consummatum est it is finished To the Jews this may be a stumbling block to the Greeks foolishness to the Dialogue and the rest of the Socinian brood absurd and ridiculous but both to Jews and Greeks with all that believe it is the mighty power wisdome and goodness Object 1 of God to Salvation But here the Dialogue c. do scoffingly object what would God deal so hardly with his own Son as not to abate him any thing of the full price of that which sinfull man should have payed Answ To which the Apostle himself hath given an answer hear we him for we cannot mend it p Rom. 8.32 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non pepercit he spared not his own Son but gave him up to death and what death even the cursed death of the crosse for our redemption Object 2 It is further objected that this punishment and these sufferings and that death which our Savivour Christ endured cannot he said to be eternal because they lasted but a time which being expired they were likewise finished Answ For answer whereunto we affirm that a thing may be said to be eternal two wayes q Vel ratione quid dicatis vel ratione durationis L. V. de satisfactione either in respect of the substance or in respect of the circumstance the being or continual being of a thing in the former sense Christ suffered eternal death not in the latter he suffered the essential part of those torments r Ipsissimam maledictionem in lege minacum subierit Idem which all the Elect should have suffered unto all eternity though not the circumstantial in respect of duration Besides eternal death in the phrase and dialect of the Scriptures doth not signify the perpetual dissolution of body and soul as the Socinians do understand it for so the damned themselves do not suffer eternal death ſ Aliud est ceterum in morte manere aliud est aeternam mortem sustinere Illud durationem hoc virtutem mortis utrumque vel de animae corporis solutione vel de cruciatibus gehennae intelligitur Cal. de Satisf pag. 466. but either in the immeasurable greatness of infernal torments or the everlasting continuance thereof The first of which is essential the other but accidental That Christ suffered This he could not ought not to undergo Could not because he is eternal life it self God blessed for ever Amen Ought not because it was his office to free us from death by conquering the power and taking away the sting thereof Lastly Christ may be said to suffer eternal death potentially if we may borrow that expression to declare our intention though not actually that is a death alwayes enduring though not by him alwayes to be endured There is this proportion between that death which we should have suffered and that which Christ did

vain for they cannot shake us from our assured confidence herein being so strongly confirmed and maintained by the Scriptures as we find it is and that first partly by that which hath bin said already if Christ were not lyable to the Law in respect of himself which notwithstanding he truly fulfilled it is then most certain that he fulfilled the Law for others See what he spoke to Iohn the Baptist b Matt. 3.15 it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness So c Matt. 5.17 I am not come saith he to destroy the Law but to fulfill it Secondly also partly by the opinion of the Apostle d Rom. 8.3 for what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinfull flesh and for sin condemned sin in the flesh where the fulfilling of the Law is ascribed to the Son of God which was impossible to be performed by us that the righteousness of the Law should be fulfilled in us by faith that is in Christ Jesus Moreover we may peruse that of the Apostle e Rom. 5.18 and that to the Philipians cap. 3. vers 9. Thirdly from that Axiome of St. Paul to the Romanes Christ saith he is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth for what else is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the end of the Law but the complement and perfect fulfilling of the same But for whom hath he fulfilled the Law Not for himself but for us that believing in him who hath done this for us we might be justified Fourthly from the imputation of righteousness g Phil. 3 5. that I may be found in him saith the Apostle not having mine own righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the faith of Christ * Quam quia non habemus in nobis Deus nobis gratuitò donat Calvin in Gal. 3.6 the righteousness which is of God by faith Hence we argue If the righteousness of Christ be truly imputed to us it is necessary also that it should be employed and improved yea performed for us that is in our steed But it is truly imputed to us h Rom. 5.18 Therefore it is necessary it should be imployed improved and performed for us Lastly from the very end of Christs being subject to the Law from whence also we conclude If Christ of his own accord subjected himself to the Law that he might redeem us from the Law and that we might obtain the adoption of Sons it were requisite that Christ should compleat and fulfill the Law for us But the former is true Therefore the latter Thus then we see not for himself did Christ fulfill the Law of God as Socinus and our Dialogue considering him only as a godly Jew would have it but for us * Christus pro nobis est in carnatus pro nobis obedivit patri pro nobis baptizatus passus mortuus resuscitatus glorificatus Symphonia Cathol and in our steed did he compleat the same though they never so much oppose it And so we come to our question again Christ was either doing or suffering suffering or doing i Christus in vita habuit actionem passivam aut passionem activam even during the whole course of his life his triumph was upon the crosse a little before his death when he had procured deliverance from Hell and right and interest to Heaven then was the perfect consummation of his obedience For saith the Apostle k Heb. 9.15 by the death of the Mediator not his bodily death only as the Dialogue falsly and fainedly would have it but his whole sufferings both in soul and body the close and conclusion whereof was death do we receive the promise of an everlasting inheritance and notwithstanding he was about it and all things in the way of obedience which he either did or suffered conduced to it yet with one l Heb. 10.14 oblation upon the crosse did he perfect them that are sanctified Nor can they possibly be perfected but by the perfect obedience of Christ imputed to them And so we passe unto the other two Questions which are yet to be handled Secondly how Christ could obey being God and Quest 2 satisfy for us being man Answ Answ Christ must not be considered in the transaction of this great and weighty business either meerly as God or meerly as man but as God-man or man-God junctae juvant both together will do well but either alone will not serve the turn It is a grosse absurdity to say no more of which the Dialogue is guilty in this particular conceiving him no other no better for thirty years together then any other common though Godly Jew notwithstanding he had then the work and office of a Mediator imposed on him The two distinct natures of Christ Hypostatically united must not cannot be separated or divided without wrong or in ury to the person of the Mediator and his high and holy undertaking herein That the truth of this sacred mistery which seems folly unto some may the more cleerly be manifested unto all who desire to be instructed in it we will lay down these few ensuing arguments The first of which is taken from the Names and Apellations which are usually ascribed and given unto Christ being not only God or Man or the Son of God or the Son of man but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God-man as m 2 Sam. 7.19 Homo qui Deus Dominus est So according to the Original The Man which is the Lord God also n Isa 9.6 the Prophet telleth us of a Child puer natus a Child is born and yet in the same verse he is called the mighty God the everlasting Father Likewise the Prophet Jeremiah o Jer. 23.5 6. calls him the Branch of David and yet the Lord our Righteousness The second from the Prophesies of the old Testament concerning the Messiah in which as true God he is set before us and proposed to us as also his coming in the flesh as true man is described to us for the working out of our redemption The Psalmist notes him as true God in these words p Psal 45.6 Thy Throne O God is for ever and ever and vers 7. as true man in these words Thou art annointed with the Oyle of gladness above thy fellows Also q Psal 68.18 where is described his Ascension according to his humanity who is said as God vers 7. to go forth in his divinity before the people In like manner the Prophet Isaiah bringeth him in r Isa 49.16 as Jehova in respect of his Divine and yet sent by the Holy Ghost in respect of his humane nature The third from the most plain and evident Testimonies of the new Testament in which also as God and Man he is delivered and descyphered out unto us So the Evangelist St. John ſ Joh. 1. vers 1. 2 3 4.

our Surety and in our steed The whole work whereof may be called if you will Mediatorial from the office of the Perso● obeying Legal from the Rule which was obeyed This obedience as we have said is but one which y●● is constituted of these two parts First the perfect fulfilling of the Law Secondly the suffering of that punishment which the breaking thereof deserved The fulfilling of the Law is the first part of Christ● obedience by which he performed throughout t●● whole course of his life perfect obedience to the Law of God for us The enduring the punishment for our sins is the other part of his obedience taking upon him in our room that which we had justly merited by reaso● of our transgressions that so satisfying the severity of Gods Justice for us we might be freed from that obligation and penalty which was upon us so that Ursinus joyning both together saith * Quicquid fecit aut passus est Christus ad quod ipse tanquam justus Dei filius non fuit obligatus est satisfactio ejus quam nobis praestitit justitia quae nobis credentibus adeo gratis imputatur ea enim satisfactio aequiposset vel impletioni Legis per obedientiam velaeternae paenae propter peccatum ad quorum alterutrum Legi obligamur pag. 394. Here the Dialogue takes an occasion to what purpose I know not to quarrel with the Lutherans for an errour of theirs on the one hand unlesse it be that he may the better and sooner prevail with his over-confident Reader and so carry him into an errour on the other cunningly casting out one Devil by another and yet the latter more dangerous if not more desperate then the former For neither one drop of bloud as he chargeth them nor all the bodily sufferings of Christ as we charge him to say but the perfect fulfilling of the Law for us and the satisfying Divine Justice incensed against us even the whole obedience of Christ is that by which we are redeemed from and discharged of that debt and penalty to which we were lyable and for which we stood accountable The Dialogue auribum lupum tenet finding it too hard a matter to prove what he had undertaken that is That Christs natural or bodily death only is the meritorious price of our redemption falls strangly off and betakes himself unto an other matter For not being able to confirm by argument he will perplex with amazement his lesse attentive Reader telling him that the Jews and Romanes did not put Christ to death but that he himself seperated his soul from his body shed his own bloud and did as he expresses it actuate his own death contrary to the very letter of the Scriptures y Act. 2.23 where Peter in his Sermon chargeth them home with the cruel killing of Christ the Lord saying him have yea taken and by wicked hands have crucifyed and slain Again z Act. 3.15 and have killed the Prince of life What our blessed Saviour speaks in Iohn a Joh. 10.17 18. that he laid down his life no man taking it away from him sheweth his willingness to yeeld himself up into their hands who by the determinate councel and foreknowledge of God were to be instruments of his death We know that in respect of humane power no man could take away his life till he was willing to lay it down which he did by submitting to them when his hour was come for that very purpose We say Christ dyed willingly we cannot dare not say wilfully which he must needs do if the Language of the Dialogue may passe for currant that he shed his own bloud and did actuate his own death Christ offered himself to God his Father yet did he not kill himself The Jews killed him yet did they not offer him for indeed they could not The Priest is more worthy then the sacrifice yet here is one who was Priest Sacrifice and Altar too He was a Priest but not in respect of his Divine nature alone as the Dialogue labours to perswade For whatsoever Christ did or suffered in a Mediatorial way was done and suffered by the two natures b In exequendo Mediatoris officio utraque natura operatur rum communione alterius Leo ad Flavianum cap. 4. in him Hypostatically united and not by either alone Whole Christ is our Mediator Redeemer Priest and Prophet in both natures according to his Deity and humanity What the Dialogue would force upon our belief from that place of Iohn c Joh. 6.63 namely that the humanity of Christ which he understands by the word flesh doth not profit us is in the first place a meer contradiction to himself having altogether pleaded for the bodily sufferings of Christ hitherto then we averre that it is not to be found in or gathered from the words for the best Expositors tell us that by flesh there is meant any natural food and not the flesh of Christ giving this reason for it wheresoever say they Christ speaketh of his own flesh there is the Pronoune My added to it or else he expresseth it thus the flesh of the Son of man but there is neither the one nor the other and therefore cannot be meant of the flesh of Christ They are exceedingly mistaken says Scharpius d Errant qui hoc loco percarnis vocem humanitatem Christi distinctè consideratam Spiritum Deitatè significari volunt Syphonia in the sense and meaning of our Saviours Words who by flesh would have his humanity by Spirit his Deity to be signified or understood But should we let this passe for granted which must not be that the humanity of Christ doth not profit us must it therefore follow that his obedience to the Law doth not profit us nor his fulfilling of the same for us Did ever any that pretended the least knowledge in the Rudiments of Art fetch a conclusion so far wide of the premisses But what shall we say to these Socinians whom no rules of Art are able to keep within compasse of sound Reason nor texts of Scripture within the bounds of true Religion but that they break through and run over all to beguile us in the one and betray us in the other Plutarch makes report of a certain Woman named Phea who rob'd all passengers that came by her Pallace These these Socinians the Dialogue and his fellows are like unto her For none can escape their hands They rob God of his Justice mercy and wisdome Christ of his merit and satisfaction man of all sound and solid means of Salvation leaving him in a worse condition then the thieves left that poor man that went down from Hierusalem to Iericho not half but stark dead without any help or hope of recovery I shall bestow upon the Dialogue and his high admirers with the rest of the Socinian Brethren but this one argument and so I will conclude this part also with a friendly advice to all Christian

the Dialogue professe he knows not what kind of imputation it is and yet doth he thus reproach it We may easily know then what Spirit he is of Iude 10. Speaking evill of those ●hings which he knoweth not And 't is a sign he knows it not indeed otherwise he would not so severely censure it yea condemne and blaspheme it as he doth which most darkens the necessary Doctrine of a sinners justification let the indifferent Reader judge If he desire to know what it is let him search the Scriptures for they do abundantly testify of it To the Law and to the Testimony * Legimus passim apud Paulum nos justos fieri justificari p●r Christum per Christi mortem sanguinem redemptionem obedientiam justitiam illam justitiam imputari nobis à Deo absque operibus Noster Amesius Bell. enerva 10.4 pag. 137. and they which speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them The very term Impute taken for judicial laying of that to the charge of a person which is not properly his but yet justly laid to him and put truly upon his account is ten times used by the Apostle Paul in the 4th to the Romanes In which sense we affirm that sin is imputed to Christ or else he could not have suffered This we take to be and shall stick by as an infallible truth No man dyes as death is a privation of the life of the body unlesse it be for his own sin or the sin of some others imputed to him The Scriptures that confirm this are divers Gen. 2.17 In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye the death Rom. 6.23 The wages of sin is death 1 Cor. 15.56 The sting of death is sin Rom. 5.12 As by one man sin entred into the World and death by sin and so death passed over all men for that all have sinned from whence we collect that every man that dyes dyes for sin that is either for his own or the sin of some other made his by imputation Death is not natural to man as man For that which is natural to him as he is man was engraffed into him and appointed unto him of God but death is not planted or engraffed into him by God neither was he by him made lyable to it e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Man before his fall was free from death as after the last judgment he shall be likewise Besides death is an enemy to humane nature threatning the ruine and destruction thereof will any man then say that that is natural to him which doth destroy him Is that agreeable to the nature of man which above all other he abborreth being accompanied with that which brings nothing but trouble anguish and vexation to him whence we see that death is not natural to man as man but to man only as a sinner Now that Christ dyed the Devils themselves have not impudence enough to deny being themselves instrumentally engaged for the effecting of his death But let the Dialogue or any man else for him answer me in good sadness was it for his own sin or for the sin of others None can none dare openly though these black mouth'd Socinians do secretly mutter so much affirm for his own therefore it must necessarily be for the sin of others Sin may be said to be anothers properly or improperly either truly or after a certain manner those sins are truly anothers of which in no sort thou hast bin partaker and for which by no Law thou art bound to suffer but for those whereof thou hast bin partaker no reason can be produced to the contrary but thou shouldst suffer Christ doth in a manner partake of our sins f Isa 53.6 the Lord hath laid on him or hath made to meet on him the iniquities of us all yea Peter in the 2. Chapter of his first Epistle and the 24. vers saith plainly that his own self bare our sins in his own body on the Tree c. and so cannot especially offering himself and becoming our surety undertaking for us the penalty due to us but be every way lyable to the same Christ was not subject to any necessity of dying being as God immortal as man holy and immaculate without the least tincture of sin therefore no necessity in him no necessity for him but in respect of us and as our pledge and surety This is a proposition of an undoubted truth that where there is no Original corruption there is no actual transgression Christ being free from the one must needs be acquit of any suspition of the other therefore not for his own sins but for ours the guilt whereof being laid upon him and imputed to him did he suffer that misery those torments and that death that accursed death of which we have already so fully spoken Here the Dialogue that he may the more closely and covertly beguile the over-credulous Reader which I perceive is his great endeavour doth ignorantly if not wilfully corrupt some texts of Scripture wresting and wringing them about to make them speak in his sense and to his purpose namely that Christ did not bear as we say by imputation but did bear away our sins and our iniquities from us Having therefore already freed those places quoted out of the Prophesie of Isaiah g Isa 53.7 c. expounded as he saith by that of Matt. 8.16 and from which he draweth this false consequence that Christ bore our sins as he bore our sicknesses whereas indeed there is great difference in the manner of bearing h Hos enim abstulit non pertulit illa non pertulit illa pertulit abstulit simul Sibran Lub lib. 2. cap. 4. these he did not bear but bear away those he bore and bore away together We shall now do the best we can by Gods assistance to clear this of St. Peter also and free it from the like corrupt handling In this 1 Pet. 2.24 the place before cited the Apostle saith expresly that Christ did peccata nostra sursum tulisse carry our sins up with him upon the crosse If the Spirit of God by the Apostle had intended herein a bearing away he might have used as learned Grotius well observes i De Satisfactione Christi cap. 1. and more apt for that purpose the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which barely signifies to take away But for the greater Emphasis and more cleer expressing of his meaning he useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is he took up which is so far from diminishing that it adds something to the signification thereof Now Socinus and his Ape the Dialogue that they may weaken if possible the strength of this place do tell us that this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie abstulit he bare away but quite contrary to the nature and use of the word For neither the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will admit of

silly shift is to no purpose Would the Dialogue bu undresse his brames take off and lay a side these and such like phanatick toyes that gingle about his understanding God might receive more glory the Church more peace himself more comfort others more benefit by or from the study and practise of those Truths which lend directly and necessarily to edification and salvation For fear this will not be we will leave wishing and woulding and return to the prosecution of the matter we have in hand We are justified by the perfect and compleat righteousness of Christ by which the Law is fulfilled the justice of God satisfied and we delivered from that wrath which we had deserved * Communis omnium nostrorum sententia neque quòd ad rem attinet quisquam è nostris aliter scripsit aut sensit all which we will wind up upon this one bottome and comprehend in this one argument By that righteousness we are justified by which the Law is fully satisfied By the righteousness of Christ the Law is fully satisfied Therefore by the righteousness of Christ are we justified For the proof of the Proposition three things are to be granted First that whosoever is justified is made just by some righteousness For to think that a man should be justified without any Justice is as absurd as to imagine a man to be clothed without rayment Secondly that all true righteousness is a conformity to the Law of God which is the perfect Rule of righteousness insomuch that what is not conformable to that Law is called and that justly to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sin Thirdly that there can be no justification without the Law be fulfilled * Christus induens nostram carnem nostro nomine perfectè praestitit legem either by our selves or some other for us For our Saviour Christ protested when he came to justifie and redeem us that he came not to break but to fulfill the Law * Tum demum redderetur inanis si illi non satisficeret vel per nos vel nostro nominae per alium atqui id per Christum est satisfactum qui non venit solvere sed implere Tossa pag. 26. and that not one jot or title of the Law should passe away without its due and true accomplishment These things thus premised being taken for granted the proposition is firm and undeniable The assumption is that by the righteousness of Christ the Law is fully satisfied For the cleering whereof we are to understand that to the full satisfying of the Law since the fall of Adam two things are necessarily required the one hath respect to the penalty to the suffering vvhereof sin hath made us lyable the other to the precept it self to the performing and compleating whereof the Law it self doth oblige us The former to free us from Hell and damnation the other to intitle us to Heaven and eternall salvation according to the Sanction of the Law if thou doest not that which is commanded thou art thereby accursed but if thou do then thou shall be saved In respect of the former the Law cannot be satisfied in the behalf of him who hath once transgressed it but by eternal punishment or that at least which is equivalent thereunto in respect of the latter it is not satisfied but by a total perfect and perpetual obedience Now our Saviour Christ hath fully satisfied the Law for all them that truly believe in him in both respects For he hath super-abundantly satisfied the penalty of the Law for us by his sufferings and death he hath likewise perfectly fulfilled the Law for us by performing all r ghteousness ●hat it even to the uttermost either did or could require So that by them both we are freely and fully justified being freed from Hell that place of torment by the one and entitled to Heaven that place of happiness by the other God in Christ esteeming and accounting a sinner as just d Deus in Christo peccatorem estimat acsi ipse omnia singula peregisset perpessus esset quae Christus utraque illâ obedientiâ suâ peregit perpessus est Bradshaw de Justific as if he had performed and endured all and every thing which Christ himself both by his active and passive obedience performed and endured The form of a sinners justification is the imputation of the righteousness of Christ because by imputing it the Lord doth justifie which was also expressed in the definition And this doth necessarily follow upon that which hath bin already said of the matter For it cannot be imagined that we should be justified by that righteousness of Christ which is out of us and in him otherwise then by imputation For as we were made sinners by Adams personal disobedience e Rom. 5.19 So are we made righteous by the obedience of Christ But how could we either be made sinners by Adams disobedience or justified by the obedience of Christ either active or passive unlesse they were communicated to us And how could that be but by imputation Downame f De Justific lib. 1. cap. 3. makes it cleer by another action not unlike unto it As when Rebeccah clothed her Son Jacob in the raiment of Esau her elder Son the matter of this action was that which did cloth him that is Esau's garment the form of that action was the applying of it unto him and the putting of it upon him So the Lord justifieth us by putting upon us the precious raiment of our elder brother Christ his righteousness in which we obtain the blessing Thus doth St. Ambrose g De Jacob vita beata also use this action for illustration of the form of our justification with divers others It is not unknown how stifly Socinus and his followers oppose this namely that imputation is the formal cause of a sinners justification and how directly they conclude against it that no imputation whatsoever Object 1 can be the form of justification and they give this for a reason because it is no righteousness whereas a form of justification must of necessity be a righteousness Righteousness imputed say they and our Dialogue is not much behind them is a righteousness but the imputation of righteousness cannot be righteousness To which we answer 1. It is true Answ righteousness must be to make one righteous but that is the matter imputation of it or it imputed is the form the introduction of this which is imputation hath the place of a form And 2. this introduction giveth denomination it is the constitution of a man righteous by applying to him that which he hath not in or of himself that is the righteousness of another Again say they if the righteousness of Christ be Object 2 the matter as we have declared and imputation thereof the form as we do affirm then one righteousness must be the form of another because the form must needs be a righteousness if the matter and