it clearly follows that the obligation of thâ— believer to them as they have respect to such an end dissolves anâ— ceaseth That which is God's intent by them being obtained without them the execution of them without the least derogation to thâ— This is that which Auâ—hors call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cum paena adhibetur aniâ—o ulcisâ— endi Hoc interest inter castigationem â—oeâ—am poena vindictae rationem habei castigatio veâ—ò habei rationem â—mendationis Gamet truth of God or impeachment of hâ— other properties may be suspenâ—ed But legal threatnings being â— another nature and having anothâ— end namely the vindication â— God 's holiness and justice upon prâ—soners and rebels they are no wiâ— dissolvable but must necessariâ— be inflicted that the perfectioâ— and government of God may vindicated and sin may be â— venged All sin is a contempâ— God's authority and governmeâ— and casts dirt upon his glory aâ— punishment is the vindicating God's honour in the revenging â— evil which is committed Onâ— let this be noted that in case of Though I use these words in stead of better yet I would not be understood as if there were any mutatio abrogatio dispensatiâ— â—ut relâ—xatio legis ni hil tale hic locum hâ—bere cre do tantum per additionem legis fidei ad legâ—m operum divini juris latâ— legis exhibetur interpretaâ—io such a proportionable satisfaction by which the honour and equity of his law is vindicated his justice holiness and hatred of sin demonstrated the ends of government attained he may relax and dispense with his threatnings as to the party offending which is the case here for by executing the threatning upon Christ and receiving a valuable consideration and satisfaction from him he hath given as eminent demonstration of his righteousness purity and hatred of sin and as fully vindicated his law from contempt as â—f the offenders themselves had suffered and therefore by an admirable mixture of grace with â—is justice hath released us I do â—ot say he hath released his law â—or I think that is only interpreted â—ow interpretation doth not take off the obligation of the law only declares that in such a case it was not intended to oblige Having now premised these things I reassume the argument namely that the truth of God's threatning would not allow him to pardon sin and save sinners but upon the consideration of a satisfaction 1. God having denounced death and the curse against sin Gen. 2. 17. Deut. 27. 26. The veracity and faithfulness of his nature obliged him to see it inflicted Never any intertained a notion of God but they included in it that he spake truth could ever any threatning of God be of awe upon the conscience of a sinner should the first and great threatning be made so easily void should it be granted that notwithstanding God's solemn denunciation of wrath in case of sin that yet he hath taken the offendor into favour and pardoned the offence without any satisfaction or consideration at all what would creatures imagine but that God either intended his threatnings for meaâ— scarcrows or that he were subject to mutability which apprehensions being once recieved what boldness would men assume in sin believing that the comminations of the Gospel would be no more executed than those of the law But let God be true and every man a liar Rom. 3. 4. 2. To suppose that God hath abrogated his threatning is at once to overthrow the whole Scripture for that expresly tells us That not one jot of the Law was to perish Mat. 5. 18. That every disobedience received a just recomâ—ence of reward Heb. 2. 2. see Heb. 8. 28. Heb. 9. 22 23. That withâ—ut blood there was to be no remission 3. If the threatning annexed to the law be released it is either by virtue of the law it self or by virtue of the Gospel It is not by virrue of the law for that was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 significat inutilem otiosum inanem reddere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e â—â—are facimus firmam efficâ—câ—m reddâ—muâ— hâ—no â—m ei suum defendimus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 significat abelâ—râ— aebrogare factis vel dictis legem oppugnare qâ—d coelum terroe miscebitur potius quam ut id fiat wholly inexorable requiring either perfect and constant obedience or denouncing unmixed and unallay'd wrath Gal. 3. 10. Not is it released by the Gospel this the Holy Ghost clearly informs us Rom. 3. 31. Do we then make void the law through faith God forbid yea we establish the law Beza his Paraphrase here is very good Christi satisfactio quid aliud quam legis minas ostendit minimè irritas esse quam illas luere Christum opportuerit Christi justitia quid aliud est quam legis praestatio See also Mat. 5. 17 18. Think not saith Christ that I come to destroy the Law or the Prophets I am not come to destroy but to fullfil For verily I say unto you till heaven and earth pass away one jot or one title shall in no wise pass from the Law till all be fulfilled As all the predictions of the Prophets were fulfilled by him and in him so was the whole law in his keeping the precepts of it and teaching others to do the like and in his bearing the penalty of it and his fulfilling and answering the types of it The Gospel is so far from repealing the penalty of the law that the very Gospel is founded in Christ's undertaking to bear the penalty of it Heb. 9. 15 16. There could have been no Testament but in and through the death of the Testator There could have been no such thing as a Gospel or tender of glad tydings and mercy to us but through Christ's undertaking as our surety to bear the curse of the law Gal. 3. 13. And so much for the first argument from the truth of God's threatning 2. It was not possible for God upon the Plea of meer mercy without any consideration or satisfaction to forgive sin and release the sinner because the justice holiness and righteousness of his nature would not allow it The necessity of a satisfaction is Mirum quantum peâ—ileâ—tissime Socino gratificentur qui aliter sentiuns Amyr Thes Salm de neces satisf See this Text vindicated in the Appendix not only founded in the wisdome and soveraignty of God God thought it convenient and would have it so but it is founded in tâ—e holiness justice and righteousness of God His nature would not otherwise admit him to forgive sin and save sinners Heb. 2. 10. It became God this refers to God's nature not his meer will This will the better appear 1. If we consider the nature of sin which in it self abstracting from any constitution of God about it deserves to be punished I do not speak universally of all sins for there are somethings indifferent and become evil only by virtue of the Divine
them alone foâ— expiation of guilt and right to life But that no satisfaction can bâ— made by sacrifices appears 1. In that Scripture expreslâ— Sacrificia considerantur vel quaâ—enus typi crant futurae satis facticnis Messia vel quatenus illis vis expiandi per se adscribebatur priori modo Deuâ— illa voluit posteriori carejecit Walth rejects all sacrifices when trusteâ— to for that end and purpose Psalâ— 40. 6. Sacrifice and offering thâ— didst not desire mine ears hast thâ— opened burnt-offering and sin-offering hast thou not required i. e. hâ— did not desire them as means bâ— which sin could be expiated Sâ— Psal 50. 8. to 12. Micah 6. 6 7 Heb. 9. 9. and 10. 1 2 3 4. Goâ— in Scripture expresseth his disliâ— of sacrifices upon three occasionâ— 1. Because of the prophaness â— the Offerers Isa 1. 11 12. c. â— 18. Isa 66. 5. Jer. 6. 20. 2â— When they were preferred to moral obedience 1 Sam. 15. 22. Hos 6. 6. Jer. 7. 21 22. 3. When trusted to for justification and life as we have just before expressed 2. There is no worth in the blood of a Bull or Goat to make reparation for the dishonour done by sin to God he must have very mean thoughts both of sin and God that thinks his justice can be satisfied or the guilt of sin expiated by the bloud of a Calf or Lamb. The wrong done by sin being infinite justice requireth that the satisfaction should be proportionable 3. Nor was there any proporâ—ion nor relation either betwixt the sinner and the sacrificed beast that the blood and death of the one should pass for a satisfaction â—or the sin and offense of the other There should be a conjunction in Nature betwixt him that commits â—he offence and him that makes the satisfaction in what nature the sin is committed in that nature the reparation should be made there being therefore no communion in nature betwixt a beast and a man the blood of the one cannot pass for a satisfaction for the crime of the other 4. Because it is necessary that whoever makes satisfaction for another should consent and willingly submit to such an undertaking now a beast is altogether uncapable of stipulation or agreeing to such an exchange Psal 118. 27. and therefore can no wise make satisfaction The Heathen could say Quum sis ipse nocens moritur cuâ— victima prote Stultitia est morte alterius sperarâ— salutem So that upon the whole it is clear we cannot plead a satisfaction bâ— sacrifice 2. Others possibly may be ready to insist on moral obedience as if by that we could make God a valuable compensation for the wrong we have done him This was the the great refuge of the Jews of old Rom. 2. 17. They rested in the law Rom. 9. 31. They followed after the law i. e. they expected life and righteousness in and through the observance of the law not that they thought themselves able so universally to keep it as not at all to sin but they apprehended that they sufficiently kept the law to justification if they performed the outward acts of duety and forbore the outward acts of sin or if their good works were more than their evil Mat. 19. 18 19 20. Phil. 3. 6. but that there is no coming off on this Plea 1. The Scripture every where informs us in its disclaiming all possibility of being justified by works Rom. 3. 20. By the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight Gal. 3. 21 22. If there had been a law given which could have given life verily righteousness should have been by the law but the Scripture hath concluded all under sin c. Rom. 8 3. what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh c. The law had we kept it by continuing in the sâ—ate wherein we were created was both appointed and able to have given life but man by sin becoming flesh the law stood by as altogether insufficient to help such an one and is therefore called the ministration of death 2 Cor. 3. 7. and of condemnation 2 Cor. 3. 9. and though it was afterward continued for other ends yet it was never intended that they should have life and righteousness by it 2. The obedience of the law is such as never any sinner did or can perform Psal 143. 2. In thy sight shall no man living be justified i. e. upon a personal righteousness of his own Psal 130. 3. If thou Lord shouldst mark iniquities O Lord who shall stand The law required not only a personal but an universal perfect and perpetual obedience and as to all the last three we are sadly defective and accordingly those Saints who had as much to plead this way as any yet constantly disclaim'd being justified on this score Psal 19. 12. Psal 40. 12. My sins are more than the hairs of my head As if he had sâ—id I may sooner tell my hairs than reckon my sins Job 9. 2 3 15 20 21 30. read it at leisure See also 2 Cor. 4 4. Though I know nothing by my self yet am I not hereby justified Phil. 3 8 9. 3 Were it possible that we coulâ— give God a perfect and universal obedience which we never can yet it were no more than a debt which we owe him as we are his Creatures and therefore could be no satisfaction from us as we are his delinquents Whatever we are or have it being from God we owe him the farthest improvement of all without rendring him beholding yea in the state wherein he created us he might have obliged us to the utmost obedience and after all that instead of any reward have reduced us into the state of nothing out of which he raised us being fallen more than we can yield is a debt we owe him as our Maker and therefore can be no satisfaction to him as an offended Judge One debt useth not to go in payment for another if a man commit one treasonable act and for a time make an escape but be afterwards apprehended it will be no Plea in Law to say he is Loyal now because he was bound to have been so before and therefore must satisfie for his former disloyalty 4. All the obedience we are â—er able to yield to God it is â—rough the alone strength and inâ—uence of his grace Joh. 15. 5. Cor. 3. 5. And therefore instead â— being a satisfaction to his juâ—ce we are made fresh debtors to â—s mercy 5. One sin dishonours God â—ore than an eternity of obedience â—n recompence all our service â—ings no accession to God to meâ— any thing at his hand Job 22. 3. Can a man be profitable to â—d is it pleasure to the Almighty â—at thou art righteous or is it â—in to him that thou makest thy â—ys perfect Job 35. 7. If thou â— righteous what givest thou unto â—m or what receiveth he at thine â—nd see also Psal 16. 2 3. Luc.
Isa 29. 13. with Mat. 15. 7 8. Jer. 7. 11. with Mat. 21. 13. Isa 1. 9. with Rom. 9. 29. 4. A Scripture may be said to be fulfilled either when that which is chiefly designed is brought forth or when that which only typisieâ— and represents the other comes tâ— pass Many things in Scripture arâ— spoken of the type which principally belong to the Antitype sâ— 2 Sam. 7. 14. compared with Heâ— 1. 5. and Hos 1. 11. with Mat. 2. 15 and Jer. 31. 15. with Mat. 2. 16 17 18. Now Christ his healinâ— of bodily diseases being a type oâ— his curing the diseases of the souâ— therefore the Holy Ghost appliâ— â—hat which firstly and chiefly beâ—ongs to the one to the other that â— they might not look on Christ â—s a meer bodily Physitian but raâ—er as one whose work and end â— was to heal their souls whereâ—f the curing the infirmities of â—eir bodies was only a type and â—mbol see Mat. 8. 2. 5. A Scripture may be said â— be fulfilled when the accomâ—ishment of it is demonstrated â— the effects Multa fieri dicunâ—r quando facta esse intelliguntur â—e Psal 2. 7. with Acts 13. 32 33. â—hrist in the day of his resurrectiâ— is said to be begotten of the â—ather because he was then most â—idently shown to be the Son of â—od So Jam. 2. 21. Abraham â— the offering of his Son Isaac is â—id to be justified by works beâ—use that great work gave demonâ—ation of his being justified Now â—hrist his taking away bodily diâ—mpers being an evidence of his taking away sins which is done bâ— bearing of them therefore thaâ— which the Prophet spake in refâ—rence to the cause the Evangeliâ— applies in reference to the effectâ— So that having dispatched this objection we presume to concludâ— from the whole of what hath beeâ— offered that as Christ suffered thâ— same penalty which was due to us so he suffered it in our room anâ— stead and as a satisfaction anâ— compensation to God's justice foâ— our sins CHAP. VII The satisfaction of Christ further established from his having redeemed â— The import of the word A ransomâ— paid for us Accepted of God anâ— thereupon we set free THat Jesus Christ hath maâ— satisfaction for our sins wiâ— â—rther appear if in the next place â—e consider that he hath effected â—d accomplished what in other cases â—eth to be the effects and results of a â—tisfaction namely he hath reâ—emed us from the wrath and curse â— which we were obnoxious To â—â—eem in the general import of â—e word is either to deliver from â—ndage and misery through the â—tervention of a price or to reâ—ue out of a state of slavery â—rough force and power In this â—uer sence the deliverance of â—ael out of Egypt is often called â—demption Exod. 15. 13. Deut. â—8 and 9. 26. and 13. 5. and 21. 8. â—al 77. 15. and in many places â—sides And Moses having been â—nally employed in that affair is â—lled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deliverer Acts 7. â— and let this be observed by the â—ay that as the redemption of â—e people from the bondage of â—gypt was typical of the Redemâ—ion from the wrath of God so it is called redemption not so much from the general nature of deliverance as from the respect iâ— had to the redemption to be wrought by Christ whereof iâ— was a type And besides as thaâ— temporal deliverance from thâ— Egyptian bondage was typical oâ— the spiritual redemption from thâ— curse so there was a typical pricâ— exacted and paid suitable to thaâ— typical redemption to point to uâ— the real and proper price whicâ— Christ was to pay for our propâ— and spiritual redemption Anâ— in reference to this it is that Chriâ— is called our Passover 1 Cor. 5. â— and as they were redeemed froâ— temporal wrath and typically râ—conciled to God by the blood â— the Paschal Lamb so we are râ—deemed from eternal wrath aâ— really reconciled to God by tâ— blood of Christ who is therefoâ— called the Lamb of God Joh. 1 2â— and a Lamb without spot and blemiâ— 1 Pet. 1. 18 19. But to redeem in its first and most proper intendment signifies by the payment and solution of a price and ransome to set free Quid agas nisi ut redimas te captum quam queas minimâ— si nequeas paululo ac quanti queas Terent. Si fratrem Pollux alterna morte redemit Virg. Now one may be in bondage eiâ—her as a Debtor to a Creditor or â—s a Criminal to a Governour and Ruler he that is in Prison on the first foot of account must conâ—nue so unless satisfaction be made by the payment of the summ of which he stands charged and â—e that is detained on the second â—ccount is not to expect deliveâ—ance unless the penalty be underâ—one to which his offence hath â—endred him obnoxious And â—hose who upon other terms come â—o be free cannot proberly be said to be redeemed but only to be released Having stated the significatioâ— of the word before I come tâ— prove that Christ through the payment of a price hath in a proper sense redeemed us I desire to premise these three things 1. That we stood obnoxious tâ— God's fiery indignation and wrath His law we had broken and by his sentence we stood condemned â— is his judgment that they who commit sin are worthy of death 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God's constitution and appointment The precept of the law being broken we lay liable to the curse as the penalty of it Gal. 3. 10. Divine Justice had made us prisoners Isa 61. 1. and we were subject to Satan as God's jaylor and without payment there was to be no deliverance 2. That as we had for feited the favour of God and were become subject to his wrath so we had lost his image and were fettered in our own lusts Therefore as we werâ— to be redeemed from the justice and wrath of God so we were to be set free from the dominion and power of corruption as a Captive delivered from the penalty of the law is also released from his prison and irons and as the delivery of a Traitor from the wrath of the Governour and sentence of the law is the primary and principal thing intended in redemption and the loosing of him from his fetters and jayl follows as consequential and secondary upon that So Christ having as the chief end of his suffering satisfied the justice of God and redeemed us from his wrath he hath through a redundancy of merit which was in his blood consequentially purchased grace for us and set us free from the power of our corruption Hence as he is said to have redeemed us from the curse of the law Gal. 3. 13. so he like wise is said to have redeemed uâ— from iniquity and from our vaiâ— conversation Tit. 2. 14. 1 Pet. 1. 18 3. We must distinguish betwixâ— pecuniary debts and penal betwixâ— a meer Creditor and a Governour In pecuniary
surplusage he that was our creditor is become our debtor there is more honor ariseth to God from Christ's sufferings than he suffered dishonor by our sins 3ly For his wisdom how wonderfully is that display'd in the whole transaction the debt pay'd and yet the debtor forgiven sin punished and yet the sinner acquitted God at once infinitely righteous and withal gracious Death submitted to yet conquered c. See Eph. 1. 8. Eph. 3. 10. and as the Father is honoured through this transaction so is the Son hereby he gives demonstration of his love to mankind Rev. 1. 5. is rewarded for his sufferings with a numerous seed Isa 53. 10 11. And in recompence for his depression and humiliation he hath a name given him above every name Phil. 2. 7 8 9. Eph. 1. 21 22. and to overweigh his cross and shame he is crowned with dignity honour and glory Heb. 2. 9. Having thus far cleared our way by demonstrating that it is not against justice for one to be made suffer for anothers sin and having opened what conditions are necessary to render such a transaction righteous and that they all meet in the affair before us Before we come to the proof of Christ his having suffered what we should have suffered we desire further to premise these three things 1. We are to distinguish what is essential in the punishment from what only is accidental in it what it includes in its own nature from what ensueth through the weakness of the subject If we consider only what is absolutely included in the threatning we shall find no more but this namely that the sinner ought to undergo both as to sense and loss as much as it is possible for a creature to bear The law principally eyes the quality and the weight of the punishment not so much the duration and continuance The living and dying in Prison is no part of a man's debt neither is that the primary intention of the law towards any yet this comes justly to be his lot that will not or cannot pay his debt That which lyes then formally in the threatning is death Rom. 6. 23. wrath Rom. 2. 5. and the curse Gal. 3. 10. but that this is eternal ariseth meerly from the finiteness and weakness of the creature If a sinner could at once bear that which is proportionable and equal in justice to his crime and by so doing make satisfaction there might in time be an end of his punishment but this he cannot do â—nd therefore must suffer forever according to what he is capable of bearing Now Christ was to undergo only what was formally in the threatning to bear the weight of it and having by bearing of it made satlsfaction he was no ways concerned in the eternity and duration of the punishment justice it self discharging him the debt being pay'd 2. We must distinguish betwixt those effects which flow naturally from suffering and those which through the corruption of the party punished flow only accidentally from it If the Socinians would be pleased to take notice of this they would ease us the trouble of that thread-bare objection viz. that in case Christ underwent the punishment of the law he behoved to dispair and blaspheme forasmuch as these do not flow naturally from suffering but proceed meerly from the corruption and imbecillity of those that suffer A person may undergo punishment without either murmuring at the Judge who sentenceth him or reproaching the law by which he is condemned The blasphemy of a damned sinner ariseth in way of causation meerly from his own corruption his pains are at most but occasional of it and while he had mercies they issued in the like effects For the dispair of a damned person it proceeds hence that he knows he shall never make satisfaction nor extricate himself from under what he feels Now it was not possible that either of these should fall upon Christ not the first seeing he was perfectly holy in his nature without any principle of or inclination to sin Not the second in that he knew himself able to make God a satisfaction and foresaw and believed a glorious issue from all his pains 3. We must make a difference betwixt those sufferings which were directly in the threatning and those that were only consequentially â—in it Those that the humane nature may be made obnoxious to though it be holy and innocent and those that follow the humane nature as existing only in our sinful persons Christ assumed only the common nature of man and not the person of any man and therefore was neither subject to passionate disorders of mind nor painful sicknesses of body seeing these do not appertain to the essence of the humane nature but only attend it as it exists in our sinful persons These things being premised I come now to prove that Christ hath suffered what we should have suffered and that the same penalty which was due to us was inflicted on him the death and curse which the law denounced against the sinner Christ as the Surety bore The punishment which was due to us consisted of two parts death and the curse to be inflicted upon us and the favour of God to be suspended and withdrawn from us 1. That which was expresly denounced as the penalty of sin was death and the curse Gen. 2. 17. Deut. 27. 26. Rom 6. 23. Rom. 5. 12. Gal. 3. 10. And this and no less this very punishment and not an other did Christ undergo the same sentente of the law which should have been executed upon us was executed upon him There was a change of persons the Surety suffering for the Debtor the just for the unjust but no change of punishment at all Christ tasted death Heb. 2 9. was put to death Joh. 18. 31 32. became obedient unto death even the death of the Cross Phil. 2. 8. bore the curse Gal. 3. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law being made a curse for us The Apostle having asserted in the 10. verse that every person who continues â—ot in all things which are writâ—en in the Book of the Law to do â—hem is cursed He here opens â—ow believers notwithstanding â—hat commination come to be â—eed from the curse namely beâ—ause Christ hath born it and for â—he proof of this he refers them â—o Deut. 21. 23. where they were â—aught so much 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Execraâ—o a Curse the abstract for the â—oncrete as is usual in Scripture 2 Câ—r 3. 9. and 5. 21 Eph. 5. 8. John 17 17. Rom. 3. 30. â—e the Texts in the Margin that is â—e underwent all the wrath which â—e law denounced particularly â—at death to which it only affixed â— curse By curse we may either â—nderstand the sentence of the law â—ecrating and condemning the sinâ—r which is called the curse â—tively or we may understand the execution of punishment according to that sentence which is the curse passively for in both respects Christ was made
a curse I would have well observed here that though hanging was reckoned always an ignominious kind of death yeâ— that it alone was an accursed death arose meerly from the constitution of the Law-maker and the declaration of the Law Whatever malefactors were hanged before the enacting and proclaiming of this Law we have no ground to believe that they were accursed and originally the curse was ceremonial being intended by God as a type of the moral curse which Christ was to bear Suspensus secundum legem ceremonialem est execrationi Deo nam alicqui neque secundum naturae legem nec secundum jura civilia neque per seipsum denique qui suspensus est Deo execrabilis Jun. Paralâ—ll l. 2. And here the providence of God is very observable that whereas suspension was not any oâ— the capital punishments prescribed by Moses neither was it the custome of the Jews to punish their malefactors with that kind of death Christ should dye by a Romane and not a Judaical law It is true that some after they were stoned to death were sometimes for the enormity of their fact put to the ignominy of Deut 21. 22. And he be to be put â—o death and thou hang him on a Tree oughâ— to be read and he be put to deâ—th and thou hang him on a Tree See Grot. and Fag on the place the Gibbet but otherwise it was no Judaick punishment and had Christ been executed according to a Mosaick law he could not have been Crucified But among the Romans it was a death to which they often used to put Traitors Thieves Murderers and Seditious persons Authores Seditionis aut tumultus pro qualitatis dâ—gnitate aut in crucem tolluntur aut besâ—tis objâ—câ—untur Paulus l. 5. tit 22. Now Christ being condemned by Pilate upon accusation of affecting the Soveraignty disturbing the Nation and being an enemy to Caesar Luc. 23. 2. Joh. 19. 12. underwent the death of the Cross which was the Roman punishment for these crimes Crucem autem irrogatam Christo tanquam seditionis auctori verissimè à multis notatum est eam enim pâ—nam ei crimini statuunt Romanae leges Grot. in Mat. 27. And as of all deaths it was the most painful and shameful summum supplicium Paul in Seâ—tent Extrema poena Apul. Servile supplicium Tacit. Pone crucem servo Juven So over all these there was in the death of Christ the curse of the law and the wrath of God And this together with the apprehension and sense of the withdrawment of his Fathers love of which more anone was the rise of that grief and horrour in the soul of Christ which the Holy Ghost by the several Evangelists so largely expresseth His soul was exceeding sorrowful Mat. 26. 38. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 undequaque tristis Bez. It signifies the soul surrounded and encompassed with an excess of sorrow beset with grief round about The soul depressed and bowed under dejection of mind the Holy Ghost seems to â—ave respect to Psal 116. 3. The â—orrows of death compassed me and â—he pains of hell got hold upon me â— found trouble and sorrow See â—lso Psal 22. 14. Mark expresseth â—t He began to be sore amazed and â—ery heavy Mar. 14. 33. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â— signifies an high degree of horâ—our and amazement Medici voâ—ant horripilationem when the hair â—ands up through fear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—ravissimè angebatur Bez. It imâ—lies much fear attended with restâ—â—eness and anxiety of mind Prae â—oerore pene concidere animo John â—presseth it Now is my soul trouâ—ed Joh. 12. 27. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it sigâ—fieth great trouble through fear or grief Hence tartarus hell 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quia terret omnia Luke satth he was in an agony Luke 22. 44 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it signifieth fear and commotion of mind upon the feeling and foresight of evil and danger yet not so as to be dispirited or disheartned From hence also proceeded his bloody sweat ibid. his sweat was as it were great drops of blood Tears were not sufficient evidences of his inward sufferings nor could the sorrows of his heart be vented enough at his eyes but the innumerâ—ble pores of his body must represent and speak the bitter anguish of his soul There is no instance can parallel it That a person under no distemper of body who before hand had agreed to lay down his life and was now willing to do it A person perfectly innocent both in nature and life under no accusation of conscience as to personal â—uilt free from all solicitude in â—eference to the cares of the world and câ—â—tain of a Crown of Glory should be under such â—nguish and constâ—rnation which â—leaâ—ly argues that it did not proâ—eed from the consideration of meer natural death but from the â—ense of Divine wrath and the â—eeling of the curse I here are â—wo instances in Thuanus which â—hough very strange yet do infiâ—itely differ from this Dux quidam indigna mortis metu adeo conâ—ussus animo fuit ut sanguineum â—udorem toto corpore fudit Hist â— 11. Juvenis obâ—leâ—em causam à Sâ—xto 5. ad mortem damnatus prae doloris vehementia lachrymas crucnâ—as fudisse sanguinem pro suâ—dore toto corpore mittere visus est l. 80 I might also add That his strong crys and tears arose from the same spring Heb. 5. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It denoteth a most ardent kind of praying Aâ—dentior orandi â—oâ—ma cum lachrymis gemitu aliisque gestibus conjuncta Luke expresseth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he prayeâ— more earnestly To say that all this was only from a preapprehension of his bodily sufferings is a most irrational as well as a false suggestion for what were this but to abase the valour and courage of Christ below that of thousands of men who have undauntedly at least with less consternation encountred death in its most terrible shapes The ground then of all this anguish and agony which Christ was in was his conflicting with Divine wrath and the curse of the law in death There was not the least change of the punishment in reference to the Surety from what was denounced against the sinner The consideration of this overthrows First the Popish phansie of Christ his suffering formally only in his body and in his soul only by way of simpathy he suffered the very same that we should have suffered i. e. he suffered both in soul and body In neither did God spare him but both gave him up to death and made his soul an offering for sin Rom. 8. 32. Isa 53. 8 10. Secondly It overthrows the phansie of others that if God had so pleased one drop of the blood of Christ might have been a compensation for our sins whereas seeing it was death wrath and the curse which was in the threatning nothing less could have made a satisfaction for sin It is a note of Camero's
debts something material is paid and received by which the Creditor is made richer In penal it is enough that thâ— Law be satisfied though the Governour be not formally made thâ— richer A person that is wronged may account himself satisfied iâ— the party who hath offended him hazard his life for him though hâ— formally pay him nothing Sâ— here it was not needful that Goâ— should properly receive any thingâ— it was enough that he should accept what was done To makâ— good God's acceptance of thâ— price it is sufficient that his law is satisfied and that his justice suffered not by the delivery of thâ— sinner though he be not formally made the richer and this is not only true that the justice of God suffers nothing by our release Rom. 3. 25. but besides it is more glorified than it could have been in the destruction of the sinner These things being premised we come now to prove that Christ by the interposition of his blood as a price hath properly in way of solution and payment redeemed and delivered us And this will appear if we consider these three things 1. If we observe that there was a price paid and this the Scripture fully informs us 1 Cor. 6. 20. for ye are bought with a price and what this price was we are expresly told 1 Pet 1. 18 19. Ye are not redeemed with silver and gold but with the precious blood of Christ as of a Lamb without blemish and without spot Of what use silver and gold are in other cases to redeeme captives of that use is the blood of Christ to redeem sinners Hence Christ's death is called a ransome Mat. 20. 28. He gave his life a ransome for many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is all one whether it come from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to loose or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to pay As we wâ—re held prisoners by the law and justice of God we are by this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 redeemed and set free The Antient Câ—ot in Mat. 28. 20. Jews used to stile the Messiah 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is not improbable that the Romans derived their lustrum from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when many were delivered from destruction by one or more suffering to purifie and â—xpiate the sin of the rest Hinc Decâ—i dicuntur lustrasse Romanum exercitum Now Christ was such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of many Hence he is stiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. 2. 6. Quum alius solvit quod reus non poteraâ— Arâ—t Est tale pretium in quo liberator simile quid subâ—t et â—alo quod ei imminebat qui liberatur Scult It signifieth a counter price that which one undergoeth in the room of another When one giveth his own life for the saving of anothers Such were those whom the Greeks called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who gave life for life and body for body who used to devote themselves to death to deliver others as Alceste did for Admetus Philumene for Aristides Anâ—inous for Adrian the Decii for their Country So Christ laid down his life to redeem ours he bore the curse that we might escape it he shed his blood in our lieu and offered up himself a valuable compensation for our release 2. That it was paid and accepted in our lieu and stead There is no other ground with any consistency to Scripture or reason can be assigned of the payment of it for not being paid for himself it must meeds have been for us It is chiefly and principally in reference to this that he is our Mediator it was God's law and justice which was against us and the only way for a Mediator to deal with them was in bearing the penalty to give justice the satisfaction which it did claime So that should it be granted that the word is sometimes used to signifie only an interpreter and intermessenger yet the nature of the case betwixt God and us doth necessarily require that whoever interposeth in way of mediation must do it by price and ransome And the Apostle puts it out of doubt by asserting this as the cause ground and end of his mediatorship in those places where he so stiles and mentions him 1 Tim. 2. 5 6. There is one Mediator betwixt God and Man the man Christ Jesus who gave himself a ransome Heb. 9. 15 He is the Mediator of the New Testament that by means of death for the redemption of transgressions that were under the first Testament they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance Heb. 12. 24. And to Jesus the Mediator of the New Covenant and to the blood of sprinkling In all which places the Apostle clearly assigns this as the cause and reason of Christ's being Mediator namely that he gave himself a ransome and by his blood made reparation for transgression 3. This will further appear by observing that by vertue of the solution and payment which Christ hath made we are said to be redeemed Ephes 1. 7. repeated Col. 1. 14. In whom we have redemption through his blood the forgiveness of sins c. Though there be forgiveness yet it is only through the redemption wrought and accomplished by the blood of Christ c. see Rev. 5. 9. Heb. 9. 12. 1 Pet. 1. 18. 19. Rom. 3. 25. In all these places both our redemption is asserted and the blood of Christ hâ—ld forth as the meritorious and procuring cause of it The words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 never so far as I remember made use of in the whole New Testament but to denote a proper redemption save that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is once metaphorically employed Heb. 11. 35. to signifie a temporal deliverance From what hath been offered we may now confidently infer the truth and certainty of a satisfaction Object 1 Object 1. But it is Objected That Moses as a type of Christ in reference to his bringing the people of Israel out of Egypt is called a redeemer who yet paid no price for them and consequently that the intendment of the Scripture when it speaks of Christ's having redeemed us is not that he payd any ransome for us but only that he hath set us free which he may have done by other ways and means than the solution of a price Answ To this I offer these Answers 1. It is a strange way of arguing that because redemption is taken sometimes Metaphorically that therefore it must always be so taken because we so interpret it in such places where it is expresly said to be done in a way of power must we likewise interpret it so in such places where there is express mention of a price and ransome 2. We have shown before how that temporal deliverance out of Egypt was not wrought without a typical reconciliation and price to intimate that the spiritual deliverance was not to be effected but by a proportionable price and ransome 3. Though I do not deny but
that Moses was a type of Christ and that the redemption out of Egypt was a type of that which the Messiah was to work yet it no ways follows that because the redemption out of Egypt was without any ransome of price therefore the redemption from sin must likewise be so for it is not needful that the type and the thing typified be in all things alike it is enough if they agree in that wherein the one was designed of God to be the type of the other Jonas his being in the belly of the Whale was a type of Christ's being in the bowels of the Earth must we therefore infer that because Jonas was alive in the belly of the Whale that Christ was so in the grave So here it was sufficient to render Moses a type of Christ that they were both deliverers and that they both wrought deliverances but it was no wise needful either that their deliverances should be of one kind or accompâ—ished after one manner The deliverance which Moses wrought was a temâ—oral deliverance who will therefore say that that of Christ was but a temporal deliverance â—o more ought we to alledge that because the one was accomplished without a price that therefore the â—ther must be effected so also 4. Moses was not a type of Christ in all his Offices Now â—hat wherein Moses was a type of Christ was Christ's Kingship and therefore we are not to expect an agreeableness betwixt what Christ wrought as he was Priest and what Moses did but we must seek â—he resemblance in that wherein â—he one was the type of the other Now there is a resemblance beâ—wixt Moses's redeeming Israel â—rom the tyranny of Pharaoh and Christ's redeeming us from the power of Satan Object 2 Object 2. But is is further obâ—ected that redemption in this whole affair must be understood in a Metaphorical sense because we are saiâ— to be redeemed from iniquitieâ— Tit. 2. 14. and from a vain conversation 1 Pet. 1. 18. but it cannot be said that there was a pricâ— paid to sin or that there was a satisfaction made to our vain conversation and consequently that to redeem is no more in this affair but tâ— deliver Answ For Answer 1. The objectoâ— at once proclaim themselves ignorant both of Law and Religion iâ— there any thing more usual thaâ— when a person pays to the Creditor the debt of one that is in Prison or the ransome of one that iâ— in bondage to him that detainâ— him to say that that person hath redeemed such a one out of Prison and from the Gally though the satisfaction was not made to the Prison or Gally but to him or them by whom they were held and detained in these conditions In alâ— cases satisfaction is to be made to him who detains the captive by way of law power and authority and not to them who detain him only in subserviency to the principal Creditor and Judge Now it was God that we were debtors to and criminals against it was his Law we had broken and it was by his Sentence that we stood condemned Our sins were the debts satisfaction was to be made for not to be made to Satan was only an instrument of our vexation and bondage in subserviency to God's leave and commission neither they nor he were properly our detainers but only as the Jaylor and Irons detain a Malefactor at the Action of the Creditor Sentence of the Judge and Authority of the Law 2. We have before distinguished the principal end of Christ's death from the subordinate betwixt that which was the primary end of his dying and that which was only secondary Now the principal and primary end of the death of Christ was the satisfying the justice of God the making him a compensation for the dishonour which had been done to his Name and for the contempt which had been shown to his Law the secondary and that which was only consequential on the former was the purchasing the spirit and grace for us that thereby we might be enabled to resist and conquer Satan kill and subdue inbred corruption have a conformity wrought in us to God's holiness and be brought again to a willing obedience CHAP. VIII The satisfaction of Christ further justified from his having made reconciliation The words used in this affair opened Signifie God's being reconciled to us Foretold that Christ should make reconciliation This the intendment of the Levitical Priesthood Christ properly a Priest Hath offered a true sacrifice Through him we have attonement TO reconcile is to restore and recover lost friendship it is the renuing of peace betwixt persons once at an agreement but now at variance so that it supposeth these two things 1. That there was once a peace and friendship betwixt God and Man God approved Man and Man loved God In the state of innocency there was a twofold union betwixt Man and God an union of nature he was like God and an union of state he was Gods friend 2. By the fall there arose a breach of that peace and friendship We at once lost the image of God and forfeited his fâ—vour we became alienated from God through sin and God became alienated from us for sin The enmity is mutual not only on our part to God Col. 1. 21. but on God's part to us There is no peace in him to the wicked Isa 48. 22. They are the children of his wrath Ephes 2. 3. And under his curse Gal. 3. 10. Their persons are an abomination to him Psal 5. 5. And their services an abhorrency Prov. 15. 8 and 21. 4. Now Christ by a satisfactory sacrifice hath appeased the anger of God purchased his grace to renue us and so hath brought God and Man into a state of friendship and favour again The words the Holy Ghost expresseth this by are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 5. 10. 2 Cor. 5. 18 19 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ephes 2. 16. Col. 1. 20 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Col 1. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 5. 11. 2 Cor. 5. 18 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 2 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Joh. 2. 2. 1 Joh. 4. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 3. 25. Now all these words signifie to appease to render propitious to turn away anger to attone to reconcile and import as well God's being ' reconciled to us as our being reconciled to God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Sâ—phocles is to attone the Anger of the Gods and to render them propitious and favourable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Homeâ— is by sacrifice to appease God It is that which the Latines call Propitiare placare And in this sense do the Septuagint most frequently make use of them Exod. 30. 15 16. and 32. 30. Levit. 4. 20. and 10. 17. Numb 28. 22 30. In all which places and innumâ—rable more the words signifie by appeasing anger to reconcile God to us It is not denied but
import is that it is Christ who reconciles God to us if you take it in the second then the meaning is that he doth it by himself as by a placamen an anger appeasing sacrifice Most take it in the Neuter and so it is either by way of allusion to the propitiatory sacrifices by which God was said to be attoned and reconciled Levit. 6. 30. and 8. 15. Hence the Ram was called the Ram of attonement Num. 5. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Septuagint So Christ hath put away sin by the sacrifice of himself Heb 9. 26. Or else by way of allusion to the Mercy Seat which the Apostle calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 9. 5. either because the Mercy Seat covered the Ark the law which chargeth and condemneth us for sin lay in the Ark Exod 25. 16. Now the Mercy Seat covered the Ark to signifie that through Christ the law should not condemn us Exod 25. 20 21. Exod. 36. 34. So Christ hath blotted out removed and cancelled the handwriting which was against us Col. 2. 14. Or else because through sprinkling of thâ— blood of the sacrifice upon thâ— Mercy Seat God signified himselâ— pleased and attoned Levit. 16. 15 16 1â— and it is very remarkablâ— â—hat the High Priest durst not go â—ear the Mercy Seat but with the â—lood of the sacrifice which was â—ppointed to make attonement â—o in and through the blood of Christ we are accepted Ephes 1. â—6 but without coming in the verâ—ue and under the sprinkling of â—he blood of Christ there is no â—cceptance Or else because it was â—om the mercy seat that God as â—econciled communed with his â—eople Exod 25. 22. Num. 7. 89. â—o in and through Jesus Christ we â—ave access with boldness and conâ—dence Ephes 2. 18. and 3. 12. We hope now that from this which hath been tendred in the â—resent chapter especially togeâ—er with what hath been deliverâ—d in the preceding chapters we â—ay boldly infer and assert the â—ruth of Christ's satisfaction Object 1. But it is objected that â—od before hand loved us forasâ—uch as in demonstration of his love he sent his Son to dye for us and consequently that he cannot be saiâ— to have been angry with us or that bâ— needed to be reconciled For Answer 1. It is true God'â— love was carried towards us as hiâ— creatures but at the same time hâ— hated us as sinners Deus mirâ— modo quando nos oderat diligebatâ— odit in unoquoque nostrum quod sâ— ceramus amavit quod fecerat Beâ— He did not love us and hate us â— the same time and in the same respect He loved us as his creâ—tures whom he intended to recover he hated us as rebels who haâ— transgressed his law and contemned his government Answer 2. There is a twofolâ— love in God a love of benevoâ— lence and a love of friendship â— love of good will and a love â— delight The first we ascribâ— to God antecedently to the consiâ—deration of the death of Christ as that which was the spring anâ— â—untain of his giving Christ and â—his we own to have been superlaâ—ve in its kind Joh. 3. 16. 1 Joh. â— 10. Neither was there in God â—ny hatred or anger opposite to â—is love but then this love was â—othing else but a purpose of conâ—iving and by such means of â—inging about our reconciliation â—hile in the mean time we were â—e objects of his wrath Joh. 3. â—6 Ephes 2. 3. God's eternal â—urpose of reconciling himself to â—s did not in the mean time exâ—mpt us from being the objects of â—is wrath but supposeth both that â—e were and behoved to continue â— till by such ways and mediums â—ur peace was purchased It imâ—lyes not the least contrariety to â—firm that God hated us but yet â— as to purpose by such means his â—turning into friendship with us â— the 42. chap. of Job ver 7 8. â—e read of God's being angry â—ith Jobs three friends yet so as to signifie by what means he would again accept them Object 2. It is objected 2ly That upon supposition that God would not pardon us without a satisfaction and that Christ undertook anâ— hath made satisfaction we should bâ— more obliged to the Son than to thâ— Father Answ We are infinitely anâ— alike obliged to both to the Father in giving his Son to make thâ— satisfaction and in taking us intâ— favour upon it being made tâ— the Son in condescending and undertaking to make it And accordingly the Scripture mentionâ— equally the love of both the loâ— of the Father as the rise and sprinâ— of our reconciliation Joh. 3. 16 1 Joh. 4. 10. Rom. 5. 8. and in râ—ference to this he is called our Saviour 1 Tim. 1. 1. Tit. 1. 3. Thâ— love of the Son as the means â— carrying it on and accomplishiâ— it Eph. 5. 2. 25. Rev. 1. 5. Gal. â— 20. Eph. 3. 19. So that to make the comparison betwixt the one and the other argues not only bold presumption but also ignorance of this whole mystery of God Object 3. But it is alledged thirdly that by asserting the satisfaction of Christ we must be exposed to one of these two absurdities either that Christ hath satisfied himself or else that he is more merciful than the Father and pardons sin without any satisfaction Answer 1. To this I return these two things 1. It is no ways absurd to say he hath satisfied himself The Court of Aldermen having a Citizen before them who â—s obnoxious to a mulct and which they in consistency with the preservation of Government cannot remit and the offendor not having wherewithal to pay may not one of themselves make soluâ—ion in the offenders behalf to the Court and so by making satisfaction to the Bench he makes also satisfaction to himself forasmuch as he is a member of it So God being in this whole affair considerable a Governour and not as a meer Creditor it is no pageantry to affirm that he might satisfiâ— himself Answer 2. Upon supposition that Christ hath made satisfaction yet it doth not follow that adequatè he hath made it to himself seeing he made it as God man and it was made to him only as God Now as there is nothing more usual in Scripture than to affirm contrary things of Christ under different respects for example that the Father is greater than he Joh. 14. 28. and yet that the Father and he are one Joh. 10. 30. that he is Gods equal Phil. 2 6. and yet Gods sâ—rvant ibid. ver 7. So under different respects he both made the satisfaction and had it made to him Having at great length demonstrated the satisfaction of Christ which is the alone plea upon which we can be justified the next enquiry is how upon this plea we come to be justified CHAP. IX How upon the Plea of a satisfaction made by Christ we are justified The satiffaction of Christ effectual before made as well as after None actually justified till they believe