sence like man that he should repent Those whom he thus loveth he loveth to the end that is he cannot cast off whom he hath chosen For these councells of grace concerning these persons being without respect either to good or evill in the persons themselves Rom. 9. 11. The good or evill that followed them in such persons could neither confirme them nor overturne them because they stand upon this basis the immutable and unchangable Will of God not upon the uncertain and wavering creature and hence it came to passe that when one means of effecting them viz mans own righteousnesse proved ineffectual God to shew his firmenesse in his Councels found out other means to accomplish them by viz. the righteousnesse of another and therefore gave Christ John 3. 16. 2. Though sinne did not could not overturn the Decree of life yet it broke the Covenant of life and so overthrew that visible state of life in which the elect were whom God had chosen and so brought them into a dreadfull visible state of death though not into a final miserable state because of Gods election Sin altered the state of elect persons though it altered not Gods thoughts concerning them so that it might be said he that was before in the state of salvatiō is now through sin in the state of condemnation though it cannot be said that God will because of sin now damn that person whom his thought and purpose was to have saved Rom. 3. 11. Destruction and misery is in their paths and ver 23. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God and Rom. 5. 12. As by one man sin entred into the world and death by sin so death passed over all men because all had sinned 3. Sin having overthrown the Covenant of life and glory and brought men into the state of death all hope and expectation of life was together with it taken away and nothing but a fearfull expectation of death and condemnation It is said of Adam when he had sinned that he hid himself from God when God came into the Garden as one that expected no good from Cod. We read of the condition of the elect before deliverance that through fear of death they were all their life subject to bondage This is to be interpretend in reference to their consciences which tormented them with the representations of death but this will be granted that Christ came to satisfie the conscience and quiet it but not to satisfie God 4. Though the election of God stand sure and the sove of God could not be broken off yet the amity and friendship of God was brought to an end and wrath was manifested instead of love and God instead of prosecuting his Decree of life prosecutes the breach of the Covenant of life which was violated by sin and ratifies the threatning which was this thou sbalt surely die and doth unfold the curse in it and open it in some part of its latitude which was shut up under these generall words thou shalt die Gen. 3. 16. to 20. And Ephes 2. 3. Elect person are called Children of wrath as well as the reprobate they are in one state till deliverance come And 1 Thes 1. 10. Jesus is said to deliver us from wrath to come Now wrath is not a passion in God as I have shewed but it is Gods righteousnesse conflicting with and prosecuting sinne viz. the first sin in the violation of the Covenant of of life and all after sins also And such which sinne are accursed Gal. 3. 10. that being the sentence of the Law is the sentence of God whose the Law is so that God as a Judge prosecuting sinne on the Lawes behalf is represented unto us 5. If God must be a righteous and just God and faithfull and true God he must be even he himself the prosecutor of the Elect notwithstanding his Decree of life and glory in which he had comprehended them wherein his goodnes freely wrought from all eternity towards them because God had threatned and must not reverse it least he suffer in his truth least his word be falsified which was that Adam transgressing his Commandement should surely die and the law saith That that soule that sins shall die His truth therefore binds him to it God must be true and every man a liar that contradicts him in that which he speaks And the Apostle Paul speaks of some persons That knew the judgement of God that they that commit such things are worthy of death He had mentioned many sins which men committed and brings in the knowledge that they had of the demerit of such sins against them that such sins were worthy of death and that it might not be thought that they judged these sins worthy of death through the working of their consciences only the Apostle shews that they had the knowledge of the judgement of God and that thence it was that they judged these sins worthy of death Now the judgement of God is according to righteousnesse therefore Justice presseth God on to a prosecuting where ever sin is 6. Though God because he hath chosen some to life will not suffer them to perish but will bring them to life everlasting and though he love them so well that to save them he will give Christ to them and for them as from John 3. 16. is manifest he doth yet in the giving of Christ he will have such respect to his justice and to his truth that neither of them may be violated or wronged Hereto the Apostle gives witnesse Rom. 3. 25 26. God hath saith he set forth Christ to declare his righteousnesse that he might be just and the justifier of them that beleeve in Jesus God had regard to both these in sending and setting forth Christ that he might justifie those that he had chosen and had brought to faith and that he might be just in so doing because the sinne that such had commited or participated in was worthy of death by Gods owne dome therefore God minds both that goodness and righteousnesse might be exalted together in the same Christ So in Gal. 3. 10. 13. God had an eye to his truth when he gave Christ it was written in the Law that he that continued not in all things contained there was accursed and because no man did continue in all things written there that God in the Law might be true Christ whom Gods electing love gave to the elect became accursed for them Christ therefore died not for any such end as to ratifie the doctrine which he had brought from the Father for by his miracles he gave sufficient witnesse thereto nor is this made the end of Christs dying any where in Scripture but it was to appease God and to fulfill righteousnesse 7. Gods laying the sinnes of the Elect upon Christ Isa 53. 6. was in order to satisfaction to God It was not only done to assure us that in mercy they are taken away from us that we might not fear
divine faith and so Moses and the Prophets may be the object of faith which is gross 2. Though God viz. the Father and Jesus Christ be two objects of divine Faith yet it is not true in the sence that he represents it in viz. that they are two objects really distinct from one another for the Father that sent the Son Jesus Christ and the Son Jesus Christ that was sent are not two distinct Gods but one God they are not two distinct Essences though they be two distinct subststences or persons so the object essentially and really is but one To this agrees the place which he quotes Joh. 12. 44. He that beleeveth on me beleeveth not on me but on him that sent me An Expositor of note puts this sence upon it Not on me that is such whom you take me to be a man and no more but on me the Eternal God and then same in Essence with him that sent me He puts another sence upon it saying He that beleeves one beleeves both because God appears merciful in the face of Christ and Christ appears instrumental in the hand of God Rom. 4. 24. and 10. 9. And so he makes Christ an instrument who could not as he saith raise himself from the dead the object of faith concerning our Resurrection and Salvation which is gross for Christ is the object of our faith as he is able to save not himself onely but us to the utmost And though Christ be the Son considered as sent and as having taken flesh and as Mediator and so is the object of faith yet he is the same person as before he took Flesh and was Mediator though under another consideration yet the taking of Flesh hath not made him another person much less another being and still he remains the same God with his Father And though as he is considered in Flesh and as Mediator he be an intermediate object of faith yet he is also the principal and ultimate object of faith as he is the Eternal Son and second person in the Trinity for the same person may be both the intermediate and the ultimate object of Faith under a divers consideration this was one part of his emptying of himself the Son became Mediator in Flesh and so the intermediate object of faith who yet was with the Father the ultimate Object of it And Christ though he had been Mediator yet if he had not been God he could not have been the intermediate Object of Faith no more then Moses was who was Mediator he was not the Object of Faith nor could be because he was but a creature Moses was one by whom they beleeved on God and so were the Prophets and also the Apostles Paul saith of himself and of Apollo that they were Ministers by whom the Corinthians beleeved 1 Cor. 3. 5. Mediums or means by whom they were brought to faith in Christ and God but Objects they were not no not intermediate objects of their Faith so Christ could have been but a means of faith in God if he had been no more but a man and had not been God The brazen Serpent which was a Type of Christ to which the promise was made That whoever looked up to it should be healed and it was really so they were healed as God in the promise said Numb 21. 8 9. was onely a means by which they beleeved in God being but a creature and not an intermediate Object of Faith they did not beleeve on it at all but through it on God and so it must have been said of Christ had he been but a meer creature had he been but onely the man Jesus Christ And though it cannot be denyed but that whole Christ as consisting of two natures being God and man is Mediator and materially considered is the intermediate Object of Faith yet not the whole of Christ is the formal cause of faith in Christ but the Divinity or Godhead of Christ alone is the formal cause and reason and ground of the faith of Christians in Christ for that is the Rock upon which the souls of Saints are built and a firm unshaken unmoveable Rock it is and the gates of hell shall never prevail against Beleevers whose faith doth bottom them upon this Rock But he saith It is from Gods commandment that faith in Christ is needful Joh. 3. 23. And it is from Gods appointment that faith in Christ is saving Joh. 6. 40. Rep. All faith that justifies and saves as well that which hath God viz. the Father for its Object as that which hath Christ for its Object is by Gods commandment and appointment justifying and saving for the first Covenant was of Works which men brake and were under death by breaking it and then came both the commandment of faith and the promise of life that was made to faith Gal. 3. 8. The Scripture foreseeing that God would justifie the heathen through faith c. God freely made choyce of faith to save men by it as well of that which respects himself as that which respects Christ I hope he will confess that it was by institution that faith in him that sent Christ viz. the Father is needful and is saving But if his meaning be that no faith was due to Christ naturally save what is due by vertue of appointment and commandment It is utterly untrue if extendeded to whole Christ for Christ is the natural Essential Son of God and look what faith was due to the Father the same faith is due to Christ as the Eternall Co-effential Son of God Or if this sense be given to the words that there was nothing but a Commandment that could move or draw to faith in Christ that is false also for Nathanael was drawn to beleeve without any commandment that came to him to that purpose from those beams of his Deity which sparkled upon him in those words of his Before Philip called thee when thou wast under the Fig-tree I saw thee And many others believed on him when they saw his Miracles So that not the commandment onely but his own Almightiness and Infinite Excellency brought credit and gained faith to him The conclusion is this Though it should be granted that Faith in the Father and faith in Christ do act in a divers manner as indeed it must Christ being considered as Mediator yet it will not follow that either in one manner or another Faith doth act upon a creature but that still the person is God that it acteth upon And it is to be observed that he hath not invalidated that Scripture in Joh. 14. 1. but it stands in full force still for though he would have iâ— to be man Christ that is there spoken of yet it cannot be for Christs Argument would not be good in that sence Ye beleeve in God therefore beleeve in me a man there is no good consequence in it But the Argument is good Ye beleeve in God the Father beleeve in me the Son also for the
Saviour or an unequal Saviour to Christ because Christ and not he is called a Saviour And is not Christ called both the blessed hope and the great God our Saviour Are not both titles put upon him as due to him And though they are used by the Apostle to distinguish the persons of Father and Son from each other when they are spoken of together yet both these are applyed to both persons and are proper to him alone that is the most high God But he saith Scripture doth prefer God in the work of salvation before our Lord Jesus Christ making him to be the principal Agent therein when it declares that the work of Christ in saving was from the purpose of God who appointed him for it from the precept of God who injoyned him to it and from the presence of God who assisted him in it Reply But where doth Scripture witness this of God the Father in reference to the whole of Christ He saith Scripture doth abundantly set forth all these but he doth not quote any one place for proof of them but would have us receive it upon his word That God purposed to save by Christ considered as David's and Mary's son considered according to his Manhood that God enjoyned him as such that God assisted him as such God being taken essentially and properly for Father Son and holy Ghost and not improperly and personally for the Father will be granted and it will be plentifully made out by Scripture but that the Father purposed without the Son and holy Ghost and commanded and enjoyned without the Son and holy Ghost and assisted without the Son and holy Ghost this is denied For as the Father without the Son and holy Ghost made not man but the Trinity sate in Councel Let us make man so it was in the work of Salvation it was an act of Councel The Father gave the Son and the Son gave himself emptied himself every Person concurred and wrought in the work so far as concerns efficiencie All decreed it all acted in it as one principal Agent and onely the Humanity of Christ was Instrumental And if we consider the Material and Meritorious cause of mens salvation God the Father or God in the person of the Father is far from being the Principal cause thereof for he is no cause at all for the Father took not flesh upon him nor was Mediator either of Satisfaction or Intercession he made not the Atonement but this was the Son's sole work he did all in it he was the person that was made of a Virgin and was made under the Law he was the person that was made flesh and manifested in flesh and hath a peculiar right in this respect to the denomination of Saviour And though all was acted and endured in and by the flesh that he assumed for he bare our sins on his body on the tree yea and in his soul also when he cried out My God my God c. in such manner yet if that flesh had not been supported by the Godhead of the Son which assumed it it would have been crumbled to dust and powder by that weight of wrath that lay upon it So that it was by the vertue and power of the Godhead that such actings and such sufferings were and all was accounted as done and suffered by the Son though the Son as the Son was not capable of it but by assuming flesh into the unity of his person and so it came to be reckoned as his work and it was in account as if the Lord of glory had been crucified and as if the blood of God had been spilt and the merit was from the excellencie of the person of the Son that did and suffered all But he further saith That the Scripture revealeth the Lord Christ to be in the work of salvation but an instrumental Saviour For this saith he see Tit. 3. 4 5 6. which puts it past all question But after that the kindness and love of God and our Saviour towards man appeared not by works of righteousness which we have done but according to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the holy Ghost which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Lord. Reply Here is in these words of his First A bold assertion viz. That Scripture revealeth Christ to be but an instrumental Saviour Secondly A peremptory Conclusion that Tit. 3. 4 5 6. puts it out of question Thirdly A defective and insufficient probation or confirmation he alledgeth the words of the Text as if they did carry with them conviction of what he asserts in the very letter of them when as there is no such matter 1. Scripture is so far from revealing such a thing of Christs instrumentalness that it reveals the contrary to it in Heb. 1. 3. it is said That Christ by himself purged away our sins but of any instruments can it be said that by himself he doth any thing Doth an instrument act by himself that is by his own vertue and sufficiency and by himself that is without the power of the principal efficient Is an Instrument any thing out of the hand of the chief Agent Also in Heb. 7. 25. it is said That Christ is able to save to the utmost But is any Instrument able to save to the utmost Hath he the ability within himself So that it may be said of him that he is able What greater thing can be predicated of the principal efficient or chief Agent then that he is able to save to the utmost This is too high an expression for an Instrument And in Psal 89. 19 it is said of Christ whom David typified that God had laid help upon one that was mighty If Christ be onely but an Instrument what needs he to be mighty in himself for every Instrument if it be mighty through the might of another as the Rams horns were it is sufficient What needed the choice of a mighty one if the Saviour be onely instrumental The weaker the Instrument the more honour will the Principal Efficient have The excellencie of Power is known to be of God when the instrumental means is Weakness and Foolishness Why also could not the blood of Goats have cleansed the Conscience but the Blood of JESUS CHRIST God's Son was necessary if an Instrument may be a Saviour Doubtless a word of Institution would have made the one as effectual as the other But indeed there is no might that any creature-Instrument is capable to be recipient or the subject of that can save to the utmost because it requires an infinite power to conquer Sin and Satan Death and Hell to abolish these and to bring Life and Immortality to light to effect a first and second Resurrection for men who were to be saved Secondly The Scripture that he alleadgeth out of Titus 3. 3 4 â— hath no such thing engraven upon it as he produceth it for such that he that runs may read it
man dying for sin and many men sinning and deserving death each of them for the sins they have committed But he makes no answer at all unto it but sends me to Rom. 5. 15. to answer my self which sleight proceedings will satisfie none but such who are willing to be deluded by him The question only will be what satisfaction is necessary that grace may abound to many Because there be many that conceive that any satisfaction will serve to make man capable of grace which God will accept and they do not look at proportion And there are others that hold that no satisfaction at all is necessary in respect of God because God having loved the Elect loves them for ever and there is no change at all in Gods love nor is God capable of changing but is immutable in his nature and therefore though man sinned yet his love was not broken off thereby nor was there any breach on his part at all nor did Christ dye to satisfie him at all for he was satisfied always in his own love which continued the same after man had sinned as before for in his love he gave Christ after man had transgressed therefore the breach was on mans part he had wronged God and merited nothing but hatred and wrath and all evill and no love at all and having an evil and guilty conscience he was suspicious of God and expected no good from him but feared all evil and could not conceive how God could love such a creature or shew any grace or favour to him that had sinned in such sort against him and knew not how God could do it without satisfaction Thus unsatisfied was mans conscience having sinned concerning the finding of any mercy from Gods hands therefore God gave Christ and delivered him up to death and layed him under the curse of the Law not to satisfie himself thereby but to satisfie mans conscience and to give rest and quiet to it and that God cared not for a few drops of bloud but there was a wound in the conscience of those that had sinned that would not be healed but by such a manifestation of the Fathers love as in giving Christ and delivering him up for such appeared And some say Christ came to reveal the Fathers councells and dyed for the confirmation of them This opinion takes hold of many and spreads and prevailes much my designe is not to make a large discourse in way of answer because it is beside my present undertaking only because I am necessitated in reply to him to insist a little on the point of satisfaction and because the point is of great concernment I shall not oversleightly passe over it but stay a while in answer to both the forementioned Tenents and shall first shew that some satisfaction to God is necessary and then declare what it is Sol. And first I shall premise some things and afterward lay down some positions That which is to be premised is 1. That there are no passions and affections in God after the manner of men there is neither love nor hatred nor wrath nor anger nor joy nor grief nor any such by which the mindes and spirits of men are moved and disturbed for God had all things before him at first that should come to passe afterward and if it were good it was of his own operation and if it were evill it was of his own permission and ordering also and that which he could easily have prevented So that it is irrationall to conceive that God should be stirred or moved with any thing that comes to passe or that he should be in divers tempers or mindes or that he should be one thing to day and an other thing to morrow this is inconsistent to that absolute blessedlesse of God therefore though these things are spoken of God in Scripture yet they be humanitus dicta they be attributed to God after the manner of men And those things that are passions and affections in men are attributes and decrees and counsels and actions and operations in God and imply not the least mutation or change in God As for example Gods loving of Jacob before he had done good to deserve such a thing what was it but Gods goodnesse and graciousnesse which is an attribute in God noted in decreeing Iacob to glory which is called Election and Gods hatred to Esau before he had done evill what was it but his soveraignty and absolute dominion which God hath over the creatures without being capable to give any account exercised iâ— appâ—inting him to perdition and destruction 〈◊〉 they are not passions and affections in God but they are acts of the unchangeable will of God in which the above mentioned properties in God are expressed And Gods wrath and anger is not a passion in God but it is an act of Gods righteousnesse and justice by which he repells that which is evill in the creature and contrary to his own holinesse in testification of the unsuitablenesse of it to him and of that which he justly expects from the creature 2. There is difference to be put betwixt the decree and purpose of God concerning life and glory in reference to such persons whom he will glorifie goodnesse towards and the way and means by which God will effect it and accomplish it which is in advancing holinesse and righteousnesse in order to which he made the first Adam after his image gave him an holy and righteous nature writte his will in his heart and then entred into a Covenant of life and peace and glory with him upon the observation of his will and threatened death and all evil and misery upon the violation thereof and this Covenant was in reference to himself and his posterity that were in his loyns This latter is called in Scripture the way of peace and life Rom. 3. 16 17. The former is hid in God for who hath been of his counsell or who knoweth further then he reveals and it hath its being in God and no where else The latter is declared to the creature and it is the creatures capacity of life or the visible state of life into which God did put him and it hath its being in the creature 3. There is difference to be put betwixt the love of God to the creature and the amity of God with the creature or betwixt the decree of grace in electing the creature to life and glory the prosecution of the decree in suteable and proportionable actings of God toward the creature If there be a right distinguishing betwixt these things that thus differ these following propositions and conclusions will be better understood and more easily granted 1. When sin was committed against God the love of God was not broken off nor the councell purpose and thoughts of God concerning glorifying of such persons whom he had chosen to life and glory were not altered nor changed for this foundation stands sure the Lord knoweth who are his nor is God in this
blood of Christ 1 Pet. 1. 18 19. Now that this life of Christ was laid down and this blood of Christ was shed as a price to ransome the Elect who were Captives appears clearly from Mat. 20. 28. and 1 Tim. 2. 6. where it is said that Christ laid down his down his life a ransome for many ye◠for all the Elect and the Apostle Peter make◠a comparison betwixt this price of Christs blood and a price that is wont to be given for the ransome of Captives in gold and silver and such corruptible things and he makes this price of Christs blood farre more precious then the other 1 Pet. 1. 18. 19. And that this price was given to God is manifest also from the same place of Peter where Christs blood is compared to the blood of an immaculate Lambe that hath no blemish nor spot now such Lambs were trespasse-offerings brought to God who was the person against whom the trespasse was committed and it was for satisfaction in reference to sin committed and it pointed at Christ who was indeed the Lambe of God that taken away the sins of all Elect ones in the world by that satisfaction or price which he gave in his own blood Also David in his speech to Saul in 1 Sam. 26. 19. gives witnesse to this truth that offerings were brought to God and that blood was the price of redemption for sin given to God If God have stirred thee up against me being offended at me for that is the meaning of it let him accept an offering that is for satisfaction and pacification let him accept it But more directly and positively the Author to the Hebrews speaks to this Heb. 9. 14. How much more saith he shall the blood of Christ who through the eternal spirit offered himself without spot to God purge your consciences c. If then the price of redemption was given to God God is the person that firstly and principally detains the Elect as Captives in bondage for he that receives the price is he that holds us in such evil condition and the redemption is from him that is from that in him that holds us 10. The reconciliation which Christ effected through his death and blood was of God to us as well as of us to God which appears from Rom. 3 25. where it is said that God hath set Christ forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood The sense of the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Placamentum that by which God is appeased and pacified who was angry before and gives answers of peace to his people when he meets with them as in Exod. 25. 17 21 22. God caused a Mercy-seat to be made it is rendred propitiatorium and is the same word with this of the Apostle and he caused it to be put upon the Ark and there he met with the people and communed with them in a peaceable way and manner This was this type of Christ this appeased God sacramentally typically figuratively Christ properly really truly by his blood which speaks better things in Gods ears then the blood of Abel that cryed for vengeance this cries for pardon for peace for reconciliation therefore the Apostle John saith If any man sin we have an Advocate with the Father who is a Propitiation for our sins who expiates our sins by his blood and so appeaseth God and pacifies him And by Christ it is said that we receive the attonement that is with God or we have God attoned to us Rom. 5. 11. for all the offerings of the Old Testament were for attonement and the people offered them to attone him God did not offer them to attone them or reconcile them nor did they offer them to show that they were reconciled to God for they were offered immediately after they had sinned and had the sense of their sinne upon their consciences and knew they had angred God that by offering them in a beleeving way looking at Christ the sinne-offering which they signified they might appease him and pacifie him and so might have peace in their owne hearts But there are many objections that are framed against this great and weighty truth of Christs making satisfaction for the offences of men to God Object 1. It is asserted that there is no such thing read of as satisfaction unto God Sol. Though the word it self be not to be found in Scripture yet the sence of the word is found in many places that which is equivalent is found in Matth. 20. 28. and 1 Tim. 2. 6. Christ is said to give his life 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a ransome for many which words do signifie the price of redemption by way of satisfaction paid for transgression and the guilt of it And the righteousnesse of Christ is called in Rom. 5. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which may signifie just satisfaction in this place most properly though in some other places it is taken in other sences for there is an opposition betwixt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the one is set against the other the righteousnesse or rather righteous satisfaction of Christ against the offence of Adam and the offence being but one there is one satisfaction or satisfaction at once set against it for the words ought to run as by one offence judgment came upon all men so by one just satisfaction the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life Obj. 2. It is asserted that there is no such thing that we read of in Scripture as the reconciling of God to men and that it is repugnant to Gods love in giving Christ that he should give him for that end to reconcile himselfe to men for he shewed himself reconciled to them in that he gave Christ to them Sol. We read of God offended because of sin of God threatning man having sinned of God expulsing man from the place where himself had a little before placed him in his tender love and care over him and if his setting of Cherubims and a flaming sword turning every way to guard the way to the tree of life which argued a great breach betwixt God and man and that not only on mans part but on Gods part for these were all of them passages of displeasure and anger on Gods part and we read of the whole posterity of man abiding under wrath having no other portion but wrath having the marks of Gods wrath upon them from the womb Ephes 2. 3. and we read of Gods wrath taken away in Christ by the shedding of his blood and of the pacification of God towards men through blood and of his being attoned to men through Christ and what is all this but the reconciling of God to men And though love and anger would have beene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inconsistent together in God towards the same subject person or object about which they would be conversant if sinne had not come betwixt yet because of sins intervening there is no more incongruity to
impartiall therein when his son whom he loved had offended by adultery caused one of his sons eyes and another of his own to be put out save only the praise of his justice and truth in his lawes and this is that which God grieves at And if the Judge loving the prisoner that is before him and knowing he hath nothing to pay and yet the law recovers payment will give his own son to be his surety and will lay the debt upon him and is content that his son shall fetch the price out of his own treasure yet the law is satisfied and the judges righteousnesse in reference unto it and his love to the Prisoner are glorified Nor is the satisfaction the lesse because God the offended person procures it and not man that offended him for the truth of God stands firme by that means and the law takes place and is not made of none effect as it would have been had no satisfaction been given which would have redounded to Gods dishonour Yea the righteousnesse of God and his love to undeserving creatures shines forth because the satisfaction is of Gods own procuring And though it proceed from God yet it cannot be said that God satisfies himself or that he was satisfied before for he that provides it doth not act it but it is acted in and by an other person The Father sends the Son and the Father in the Son receives satisfaction and though the Father and Son be the same God yet they are not the same person nor is the satisfaction that the Son gives materially considered given in the divine nature or God-head but the Sonne took flesh and in that flesh by dying and sheding his blood gave satisfaction so that it is from God but not in God if we speak of the next and immediate subject which is the man-hood if the matter of the satisfaction be respected And though it may be said that God was satisfied before in reference to his own love to such persons he did not repent of it in such sort as to cast them off nor was his purpose of glorifying them one whit shaken yet he was not satisfied after they had sinned and after he had sentenced them to death in point of righteousnesse and truth to passe by their transgression without satisfaction his Law was not satisfied in a free forgivenesse without satisfaction and so God was unsatisfied because the Law was Object 6. It is likewise asserted that there is an unsatisfied conscience in men men having sinned cannot discerne how Gods heart can be towards them without satisfaction therefore the Scripture speaks of propitiation through Christs bloud and of atonement by his death condescending therein to mans infirmity which could not otherwise apprehend how God could communicate life and glory to men after they had sinned without being first appeased and pacified by Christs blood But if things be rightly considered in themselves as in truth they are Christ dyed not to reconcile us to God but to heal us of an evill conscience and that we might know that God loved us after we had sinned as well as he did before by the gift of Christ who is the manifestation of the Fathers love after the fall which the Elect could not be perswaded of but by a pledge of it Therefore it is said that Christ shed his bloud to purge our conscience from dead works to serve the living God Heb. 9. 14. and not to satisfie God Sol. It will readily be confessed that it was an end of Christs dying to reconcile men to God and that they might have the answer of a good conscience before God 1 Pet. 3. 21. But that this was the solitary end or the principall end or that satisfaction to God is no end but is wholly excluded is denyed and hath been disproved all along in the discourse upon this subject 1. What need would there have been that Christ should have dyed at all if only satisfaction to mens consciences concerning Gods goodnesse and love to fallen creatures had been intended therein For God could best have done that by his spirit and must yet do it by his spirit if it be ever done in the hearts of men Indeed God having given Christ and delivered him up to death the spirit represents it as a great manifestation of the Fathers love but the spirit might have abundantly assured the heart of a sinner of the Fathers love without it so that there was no necessity of Christs dying in that regard 2. The love of God represented unto men in giving Christ is much lessened to them in the representation if Christ were only given to satisfie their hearts in reference to their fears of God not to satisfie Gods justice if there were no need of Christ in reference to any danger they were in in regard of God if God could or would have pardoned sin without him and his justice and truth could have remitted it 3. It is derogatorie to Gods wisdome and love to assert that Christ was delivered up to be crucified upon the crosse and there to shed his blood principally for this end to cure mans panique fears and his groundlesse causeles suspicions of God and not from any necessity that there was in mans evill condition in regard of sin committed by him and of Gods righteousnesse and truth prosecuting it against him For God might have done this in an easier way and have spared his dear Son God is represented prodigall of his dear Sons bloud if he must die and bleed out his spirits to cure some false conceits that men have entertained of God 4. What need was there that the Son should come in flesh and should empty himself of his glory and that he that is the Lord of glory should be crucified if no satisfaction to divine justice was looked at but only the satisfaction of the conscience the bloud of God as it is called would not have been necessary but the bloud of a meer creature Christ would have served the turne for such a purpose had that been all 5. How came those fears in the heart of man after the fall after sinne committed What bred them was there no ground for them were they meer conceipts and jealousies that wanted a right bottom did not the threatning before sinne was committed cause the horrours and terrours that were in the soul after sinne was committed and if they had Gods threatning as the ground of them viz. in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye the death were they not well grounded and was it possible that these fears should be cured by the bloud of Christ and the cause not removed by the bloud of Christ the threatning not taken away the truth of God and his righteousnes not fulfilled and satisfied which were in the threatning and which bred the feares 6. These fears and terrors of the Elect before Christs bloud be brought to their hearts to remove them are they not of the same nature with the
could not save by Christ without transmitting that curse and wrath which was due to all and every of the Elect to Christ and if Christ had been but a meer man then there would have been need of so many Christs to have suffered and endured as there are Elect persons and every one of these Christs must have suffered hel viz. the torments of hell as well as death and then they must have suffered ever also without any end and yet could not have justified the Elect because while they should be suffering till that be ended God could not be satisfied and if God could not be satisfied the Elect could not be justified and discharged and so to all eternity the Elect could not be acquitted and this appears in Christ if he had suffered and had never got through his suffering we had never been saved if he had dyed and had never risen we had never risen to life and glory And this is that which I presented in that Argument or Instance as he calls it of mine viz. that the satisfaction which Christ gave to Gods justice is destroyed if Christ be but a meer man and not God for how could the blood of aman satisfie for the sins of many transgressours whereas there is no proportion betwixt one meer man dying for sin and many men sinning and deserving death each of them for the sins they have committed The righteousnesse is in Scripture called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 5 18. which signifies a just satisfaction or satisfaction according to the exactnesse of justice and Gods scope is thereby to declare himself just that is to magnifie his justice thereby Rom. 3. 26. By all this that hath been presented it appeares how sleight and weak he is in his answer to an Argument of the highest weight and moment For what thing is there of greater consequence for the satisfying of the conscience then to know that the satisfaction is full and sufficient which Christ hath given which was shewed by the Argument that I brought to be disproportionable upon his Tenent of Christs meer creatureship to which he returnes no other answer but this As the sin of one meere man was imputed unto and brought death upon all men even so the gift of grace by one man Jesus Christ whom he makes but a meer man abounded unto many unto justification and life In the next place he comes to discusse and give answer to my 2d Querie How it may be conceivable that an infinite justice offended should be satisfied by a sacrifice finite in value And thus he expresseth himself What matters it if it be unconceivable must it therefore be uncredible doubtlesse in all controversall doctrines you will not hold this for an orthodox all Tenent In the doctrine of the Trinity credit must be given to things unconceiveable but the like liberty will not be allowed in Christs Mediatorship Reply 1. If no more words had been added by me to these expressions It is unconceivable yet if there be a truth therein that it is unconceivable these bare expressions without any addition might have passed with him for an unanswerable Argument because he professeth himself to be a man so given up to reason that he will prostrate himself to use his own expressions to the shadow of it and his faith will not carry him beyond reason how shallow soever his apprehension is he will not beleeve further then he can see which hath caused him to be so unsetled and unstable in the doctrine of the Trinity and to question it so long till at last he hath rejected it 2. That which is unconceivable and wants the authority of Scripture so to countenance it is not receivable So did not the doctrine of the Trinity for though it be an incomprehensible mystery yet it is not an unscriptural doctrine but it is compassed about with a cloud of witnesses both of the old and new Testament which do declare it with the greatest clearnes but that such a thing should be in Christs Mediatorship that that which is finite in nature value should yet satisfie for that which is infinite in provocation and offence hath neither the light of reason nor the truth of Scripture to draw out consent unto it therfore is worthy to be expunged out of the Saints beliefs 3. That which is unconceivable against the tenor of the Scripture which words I added but he would take no notice therof deservs no credit with Christians but must be razed from among the articles of their faith but that a sacrifice that is finite in value should satisfie an infinite Justice offended is both incomprehensible by reason and contradictory to Scripture as appears from Heb. 9. 9. Gifts and Sacrifices while the first Tabernacle was standing were offered which could not make him that did the service perfect it could not purge away his sin nor justifie him what was the reason of it could not God have taken these gifts and sacrifices for satisfaction no he could not the Apostle faith it could not be there was no proportion an offence against God must be purged away with better sacrifices then these Tâ—â— Apostle that was of Gods counsel and knew the truth tels us so Heb. 9. 23. It was necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices then these why necessary because the justice of God could not be satisfied by these nor the truth of God fulfilled therefore it was necessary there should be better then these but if these better be not proportionable to the offence to purge the guilt away in a satisfactory way to justice wherin is the betternes betwixt them there is no difference in this respect they are alike without preheminence one to the other He repeats it again Heb. 10. 1. as that which is of weighty consideration and which he would have the Christian Hebrews to be throughly instructed in The Law saith he having a shadow of good things to come can never with those sacrifices which they offered make the comers thereto perfect and v. 4. It is not possible that the blood of buls and goats should take away sin It was possible at first but after God had said In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt die the death it was not possible aâ—ter the law had cursed every one that continues not in all things written therein it was not possible and the Apostle fetcheth his confirmation from Christs own words in Ps 40. which he mentions and applies to this purpose v. 5. Wherefore he saith when he cometh into the world sacrifice and offering thou wouldst not but a body hast thou prepared in burnt offering and sacrifice thou delightest not then said I loe I come to do thy will O God Why would not God have sacrifice but prepared a body for his Son the reason is because this flesh of Christ is called a greater and more
perfect Tabernacle by which being sacrificed and offered up to God he entred heaven and opened it for beleevers It is called a greater Tabernacle because it was not of this building not framed of the seed of male and female as other bodies are but of another building as the Apostle observes Heb. 9. 11. conceived in the wombe of a Virgin by the over shadowing of the Holy Ghost and it was greater also because not the glory of the Lord filled it only as it did the Tabernacle made in the wildernesse but because the fulnes of the Godhead dwelt in him bodily and by this greater Tabernacle he obtained eternal redemption for us and entred into heaven to take possession of glory for us Why did not God delight in burnt-offering but Christ must come the reason is rendred it was to do the Will of God The Will of God was to have his truth satisfied his law satisfied his righteousnesse satisfied that upon just and holy and honourable termes he might be reconciled this was the Will of God This Will burnt-offerings and sin-offerings could not accomplish Christ must therefore come to satisfie it and to fulfil it Therefore it is said Not by the blood of Goats and Calves but by his own blood he entred once into the holy place Heb. 9. 12. and in ver 13 14. it is said If the blood of Buls and Goats do cleanse the flesh being types of the blood of Christ how much rather shal the blood of Christ clense the conscience If all had depended upon institution and that there had been no respect had by God of a full satisfaction the blood of buls and goats might have been as effectual to have clensed not the outside but the conscience equally as the blood of Christ if the vertue of clensing had not depended upon the excellency of the person whose blood it was that did clense there would have been no difference betwixt the bloods that did clense therefore the value of the blood in reference to the person whose it was fals under the consideration of God in the busines of remission But he saith The foundation that I build upon is not a little questionable and that not a few errors do lie under my non scriptural language You tell us saith he of an infinite sacrifice but what you mean by it and where Scripture tels us so much I am yet for to learne The Scripture tels us that Christ was made sin or a sin offering for us by taking our sins and bearing the curse but how this sacrifice was infinite remains to me unconceivable If the suffering of Christ had been infinite there had been no end of it if the curse had been infinite man could not have born it being uncapable of any thing infinite in the infinity of it It is enough for me to beleeve that my Lord Jesus suffered for me what I deserved to suffer and that was the curse of the Law be that what it will Rep. The foundation which I build upon wil admit of his utmost questioning without being shaken therby As for the errors that may lie under my words he might have done well to have presented them unto view yea I beleeve he hath done it so far as his fancy hath suggested any to him which whether they will prove to be errors when I shall have represented what I am able to say will be judged of by the Reader and whether my language be unscriptural in the sense of it or his answer be not impertinent and no answer to any thing wherin the strength of my Argument lies or whether it be not rather a shuffling and a shifting then an answering let any intelligent impartial person judge He hath been wont to draw up my Arguments into form when he hath apprehended an advantage by it but at other times pretermits it I shall therfore do it for him at this time he cals it a Querie and it runs in that form but the strength of this Argument is in it If Christ be a meer creature then a sacrifice finite in value wil be able to satisfie an infinite justice offended but a sacrifice finite in value cannot satisfie an infinite justice offended ergo Christ is not a meer creature He answers not to either of these propositions nor indeed can do without running into absurdities for first the consequence is firme and good which will be manifest if these five things be made out 1. That the sacrifice of a meer creature neither is nor can be any other then finite in value which none wil doubt of if they consider that a meer creature is only finite and can be nothing more and if so then the actings of it are according to the nature of it finite also both in their nature and in their value worth for nothing can act beyond it self and this I beleeve he will not deny 2. That the justice of god is infinite which because it is an attribute of God and is God for what ever is in God is God must needs be granted because God himself is infinite and indeed God cannot be compounded of things that are finite for an infinite being is never made up of finite things so that all in God is infinite And that which is finite is limited and that which is limited is limited by another which is greater then it and can limit it but both these are incompetent to God who is greater then all limits all but is limited of none 3. That this infinite justice was offended which is manifest because 1. a just and holy law was broken 2. a righteous and just penalty proposed to warn man lest he should transgress was sleighted and despised 3. man was immediately upon the transgression judged and sentenced with death and expulsed Paradise 4 because this law was Gods which was transgressed and the penalty that was threatned and was despised was Gods also therefore the offence in transgressing and despising was infinite though not in the nature of it yet in relation to such a God who is infinite which will farther appear if this be granted which in reason cannot be denied that faults cōmitted receive their aggravation as from the matter and manner of committing and from the end and design so from the object or person against whom committed the greater more excellent the person is against whom the transgression is the greater is the transgression therfore if against a Prince it is an high aggravation and it counted treason and a more grievous death is inflicted and if it be an high crime against him it is endeavoured that his death may be perpetuated therefore his torments are prolonged and this is judged righteousnesse in the persons that inflict such punishment in reference to such transgression and yet the highest of men are persons that must die and their breath is in their nostrils and they are not only finite but their life is like bubbles upon the water and in comparison
declared it and there may be yet more glorious effects of it if he shall please then any that have been wrought But this concession hurts not my assertion viz that an infinite power is required in creation and he hath not denyed the truth and clearness of the manifestation of it therein though he say there may by a fuller manifestation of it which by the multiplication of mighty works which God can effect must needs be because every work will bear witness thereof in reference to it self But if he should mean by more power a greater power or more in measure and degree then yet he hath used and manifested in the creation and in the works which he hath wrought it must not be yeilded to him for though there might be a greater work yet not a greater power for the same power is manifested in the one as in the other viz. an infinite power and there are no degrees in that which is infinite though one worke may more fully speak to us that infinity of power which is put forth therein then an other doth The work of creation is that work that God glories in in the Scripture and he doth appropriate it to himself and doth give witness therein to the world that he is the most high God Jer. 10. 10 11 12. And the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are cleerly seen being understood by the the things that are made even his eternall power and Godhead so that the very heathen are left without excuse Rom. 1. 20. And a greater work then creation is from which an ampler testimony of the infinity of Gods power may be fetched for the conviction of the creature in some sense there can be none for there is an infinite distance betwixt something and nothing and onely an infinite power can get over it for that which cannot be measured is infinite but the distance betwixt something and nothing is such as cannot be measured and creation is a bringing of something out of nothing therefore the power that effects it must be infinite therefore infinite power or infinity of power is manifested in great fulnesse and clearenesse in creation His 2d. answer that he gives is this 2. Your assertion plainly denyes the man Christ Jesus to be God Almighty or infinite in power for you say that God could not give or derive an infinite power to any creature and that a creature cannot be God Almighty c. The man Christ Jesus was a creature How then can that person be God Repl. This reasoning is unworthy a man of parts a very child that hath learned the first principles might answer him The man Christ Jesus is a creature that is the son of Mary the seed of Abraham is a creature and I do deny this seed of Abraham as the seed of Abraham to be God or Almighty or capable of an infinite power and therfore God could not derive it nor was Christ Almighty as man as the son of man But this man Christ Jesus was God as well as man that is this person Christ Jesus was both God and man not that the manhood was turned into the Godhead and so became God but that the eternall Son of God who is by nature God with the Father and the Holy Ghost assumed manhood tooke the nature of man the seed of Abraham and became one person with it and this person was Almighty as he was the Son of God not as man and this almightinesse was not by derivation from the Father but was an essentiall attribute in him His third Argument is this The Ground saith he of your Argument is straw and stubble for infinite power may be manifested by them to whom 't is not communicated And he gives instances many Repl. Because I soresaw he might give such an answer therefore on that day of the conference which he spoke of I mentioned such an instrument which he now speaks of which is not the subject of the power but a meanes without which God will not exercise the power which he himselfe is the subject of and I granted God might have made use of such an instrument but Christ in creation as also in preservation is the subject of the power and I spoke of such an instrument which is the subject of power and shewed it was impossible that there should be such an instrument and therefore Christ having such power in himselfe could not be an instrumentall but the principall Agent He comes in the last place to consider of the Minor of the Argument which he had cast the Scriptures I produced into fetched from Christs creating which is this All things were made by Christ Jesus His answer is It is true Christ being excepted of whose creaturall being I have already spoken But against this answer he frames an obction Obj. You will say saith he that in Joh. 1. 3. it is said that without him was nothing made that was made And he answers it Sol. The words are to be restrained to all those things which by the use of an instrument were made in the first verse the creation of Jesus Christ is included and in this 3 verse he is spoken of as the instrument of God in creating all things therefore he is there to be excepted And he gives some instances which I omit the mention of because I shall have no need to return answer to them Repl. If indeed the creation of Jesus Christ be included in ver 1. then I shall grant that Jesus Christ is excepted in ver 3. but if not then ver 3. is strong against him The words in ver 1. In the beginning was the word and that is granted by both sides that then he was but that then he began is not asserted by the Apostle and is denyed by us if he will have it to be so let him shew in his next how he will fetch out creation from these words In the beginning was the word God the Father was in the beginning was God the Father therefore created in the beginning The next Scripture produced by me to prove Christ's Deity by was Heb. 7. 3. Without father without mother without descent having neither beginning of dayes nor end of life made like unto the Son of God abideth a Priest continually Christ is here resembled to Melchisedech in reference to eternity But what answer makes he to this text Truly it is an impotent lame and poor answer Was Melchisedech saith he eternall if so then he was God but he was neither the Father nor the Son nor the Holy Ghost I hope you will not allow a quaternity of persons in unity of essence and therefore will allow the words to be taken in a figurative sense Melchisedech was without beginning of dayes and end of life in that there is no mention made either of his birth or death in the History of Moses or especially in reference to his Priesthood the time of it's beginning or ending being not
certainly known So our High Priest Jesus Christ is without beginning of dayes or end of life Repl. This answer is too light and frothy in a subject so serious It was not mine intent or designe and he knows it very well to make Melchisedech God nor any of the persons of the Godhead nor yet to make a quaternity of persons but to make Christ God to whom that in truth belongs which in type only and in a figure mystically is attributed to Melchisedech Moses and David speak of Melchisedech as if he had been one who had glided down out of heaven and come from above and had again soon after conveyed himself thither for there is not any mention at all made of his birth or death of his father or mother or kindred or when he became Priest nor when he laid down his Priesthood And the Apostle saw the mysterie in it and that it behoved him so to be described and set out that he might be a Type of Christ both of his Person and Priesthood And therefore when he makes use of him as a Type to set out Christ by he describes him to be without father and so was Christ as he was man and without mother and so was Christ as he was God having no beginning of dayes nor end of life nor had Christ according to his divine Nature considered either beginning or end of dayes but acording to his humane he had both and both of them described and well known by all that are versed in Scripture-story and the Apostle knowing these things in expresse words makes Melchisedech the Type of him discerning that the Holy Ghost in concealing these things of him had made him so and intended him to be so as these words import Made like unto the Son of God for he is described saith Beza as if he had neither been mortall man nor had been born of a mortall woman which because it could by no means agree with any meer man born of men therefore the Apostle saith that he is peculiarly the figure of that one only begotten Son of God and that it was so intended by the Holy Ghost Now then the strength of the Argument fetch'd from this Scripture lies here First Melchisedech is a Type of Christ that is without controversie Secondly He is a Type in these things mentioned of him Without father without mother without beginning of dayes and end of time Otherwise in vain doth the Apostle mention these things of Melchisedech but as a type for in truth it was not so of Melchisedech And it appears by the scope of the Apostle which was to interpret the words of David A Priest after the order of Melchisedech therefore it was necessary for him to set forth what Melchisedech was in his person and in his office and in his person he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Without father without mother not in truth but they are not mentioned and so it is as if it had been so and that in type he might be so and therein resemble the Son of God that in truth was so Thirdly Melchisedech being only a type in these things of Christ it was not necessary that he should be such in truth but only in a figure mystically as indeed he was not but it was necessary that Christ should be so in truth being the Anti-type that is being the substance of that which Melchisedech was but a shadow of therefore in John 1. 17. it is said that the law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ That is there were many shadows in the law of Moses but Christ came and fulfilled them and was the truth of them We read of David that he said of himselfe They pierced my hands and my feet they gave me vineger and gall to drink which really were not done to David but mystically and in a figure as David was the type of Christ but these things were really done to Christ and in truth were fulfilled in Christ So the bloud of buls and calves and of such beasts which were sacrificed and offered they took away sin cleansed away the guilt and brought pardon and purged the conscience and brought peace but none of these did so in truth but mystically in type only as they shadowed out and pointed at the sacrifice of Christ and at his bloud but the bloud of Christ really and in truth did take away sin did clense the conscience did bring remission peace Heb. 9. 9 12 13 14. More instances might be given but indeed there is evidence enough in the very nature of a type and antitype There is a mystery in the type and there is the impletion or fulfilling of the mystery in the Antitype or the thing of the mystery is to be seen in the Antitype But enough of this unless he had said more to impugne it I now come to consider of his answer to Pro. 8. 22. The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way before his works of old I was set up from everlasting from the beginning or ever the earth was To this he thus answers And gives this sense The Lord who is Possessour of heaven and earth obtained or created me when he began to worke before his antient workes And I was set up or annoynted to have the dominion of all things and that from everlasting that is from the beginning before the earth was Repl. The word indeed signifies to obtain or to possess which is sometimes done by creation and so when heaven and earth were created they were possessed by God or as he saith God was Possessour of them But in this place it is an obtaining or possessing as is done by generation I gave an instance in Eve in reference to Cain I have gotten a man it was by a begetting or generating there and in this place it is so also Christ is called the onely begotten of the Father and here in ver 24. Christ the wisdome of God declares how he was possessed viz. as a Son that is brought forth by a woman travelling in which Christ is said to be born and is called the first-born to exclude creation and that it might be by generation and the act of the Father in communicating the divine essence to the Son is called after the manner of men that it may be better conceived of a begetting or generating suteable to which is the Hebrew word Amun v. 30. which signifies a child nursed nourished brought up with a father and such was Christ which is thus expressed to hold forth his generation and not creation for when God created Adam he created him a man but Christ is represented as a child to shew how he was begotten and it is added that Christ was his Fathers delight and a sport before him for so it is in the Hebrew and this is humanitùs dictum is is spoken after the manner of Fathers who take dear delight in the childe that comes out of their