you once denie it For where you affirme that certaine Sacrifices of the Iewes set foorth those sufferings of Christs soule which you meane and I vtterly denied that any sacrifices of the Iewes did shew the suffering of hell paines in Christs soule or any other kind of death besides the death of the body only you take not the paines to make any proofe of that you aâ—…rme but stand in your state and say you deny my assumption As if the negatiue being mine and the affirmatiue yours you were not by all rules of Râ—…ason to prooue your aâ—…atiue and it sufficed me to stand on the negatiue till you made iust proofe of the contrary Here you will say you doe bring proofe for your assertion Here indeed you spend three leaues in talking of it as your manner is howbeit your word is here as throughout your writings the best warrant you offer vs for this cause But let vs heare your examples and proofes First that sacrifice consisting of two goats a slaine and a scape-goat You obiect heere against first that I abuse the Text. That were a great fault but let vs view the Text. Against your instance of the Scape-goat figuring as you would haue it the suffeâ—…ings of Christs soule I made three exceptions First that the Scripture did not call the Scape-goat a Sacrifice for sinne Secondly that no proofe was or could be made that the Scapegoat signified the soule of Christ Thirdly that if both those were granted which were no way proued the Scape-goat suffering nothing but being let loose into the wildernesse did rather inferre that Christes soule was freed from all such sufferings as you would force vpon it To the last which is the chiefest you take the paines to say little and so giue the Reader to vnderstand that your bolde assertion is the best foundation of your proofe for if you can not shew as you neither doe nor can that the Scape-goat by the Scriptures suffered any thing how will you bring it about that the Scape-goat figured the sufferings of Christes soule shall no suffering be a figure of suffering such may your figures be but the wisdome of God maketh figures for similitude and resemblance to the trueth and not for contrarietie to it as you do The chiefest point then you cleane slide from and take holde on some words in Moses text about which you thinke you may wrangle with some more likelihood The verie expresse wâ—…rds of the text you say are these Aaron shall take of the people two goats for a sinne offering And verie good reason must I bring to frustrate so plâ—… a speech I am farre from bringing any thing to frustrate the Scriptures but if the Scripture expresse it selfe I preferre that before your misapplying the words to your will Aaron shal take of the congregation of the children of Israel two goats for sinne So stand the words if you will needs appeale precisely to the text Here is a taking of two goats and an intent for sinne declared in generall but the particular maner of vsing and ordering either of them according to Gods appointment followeth in distinct and direct wâ—…ds Aaron shall take the two goats and make them stand before the Lord at the doore of the Tabernacle And Aaron shall giue lots vpon both goats one lot for the Lord and another for the Scape-goat And Aaron shall make the goat on which the lâ—… fell for the Lord to draw neere and shall make him reddie or sacrifice him for sinne For here is AASA'HV added which in the Scriptures vsually signifieth to make readie a Sacrifice And he shall kill the goat that is for sinne for the people and bring his bloud within the vaiâ—…e In as plaine words as the former be or any can be that goat on which the lot fell for the Lord must be made readie that is sacrificed for sinne of which he spake at first and that which was the peoples sinne-offering must be slaine and his blood brought within the vaile But neither of these agree to the Scape-goat therefore the Scape-goat was not the sinne offering for the people which the Scripture in that place mentioneth These words you say proue not that the Scape-goat was no sinne-offering at all These particular circumstances doe plainly proue which of the two goats was made the peoples sinne-offering and so conuince that you inlargc the words of Moses without any iust ground to serue your owne conceit Two sinne-offerings were not taken from the people but two goats were taken for sinne and one of them sacrificed for the people as was after prescribed and performed and Aaron commanded for him and his house to offer a bullocke for his sinne-offering So that where the Scripture mentioneth no moe sinne-offerings for the people but one neither vseth the word AASA but to one of them that one was prepared and slaine by Gods commandement as a sinne-offering for the people where the Scape-goat was preserued aliue and sent away into the wildernesse to shew the force of the former sacrifice by carying with it the sinnes of the people I take a sacrifice and offering in the largest sense as signifying any consecrated thing giuen to God to appease him for sinne And such vnbloudie sinne-offerings very manie we shall finde in Moses Law Wherefore the Scape-goat may be a sinne-offering though it were not slaine or bloudie That the word Sacrifice may be diuersly taken and applied to things vnbloudie and ghostly I haue no doubt but that one and the same word in one and the same place should import both a bloudie and vnbloudie sacrifice for sinne is a shift of yours without all sense it hath no shew in the sacred Scriptures Againe the sacrifices for sinne were they bloudie or vnbloudie which are mentioned in Moses law and namely in all those places which you quote in your margin they were all without exception OFFERED to God by FIRE the things liuing suffered first death by effusion of bloud the things without life as flowre oyle wine and such like were cast into the fire where the bloudie sacrifices were burned and so without bloud or fire no sacrifice for sinne is appointed in Moses law Since then the Scape-goat was neither slaine nor touched with fire but sent forth aliue into the wildernesse what do those examples of things vnbloudie yet offered by fire helpe you to proue that the Scape-goat liuing was such a sinne offering as many are found in Moses law Can there be any thing in the world more full and strong to prooue that the Scape-goat also was a true sinne-offering or rather a true part of this whole and entire sinne-offering consisting and being compleat in both these goats the slaine and the Scape-goat For as the slaine so the Scape-goat we see was CONSECRATED to the Lord and here OFFERED to make reconciliation by him and separated from men and barâ—… vpon him all the sinnes of the
of the liuing sacrifices what needed the burning of the same after it was dead and senselesse obscurely to intimate if not falsely that the fire of affliction as you would haue it should consume the Messias God had therefore another meaning as I take it in commanding ech sacrifice after it was slaine to be offered to him by fire Forwhere of all creatures subiect to mans sight and sense fire was the fittest for the light heate force and motion thereof to designe vnto the people the brightnesse of Gods glorie the zeale of his holinesse the grace of his Spirit and seate of his habitation in the heauens God gaue the Iewes fire from heauen to burne perpetually on his Altar which did teach them with what cleannesse of hands and feruentnesse of heart the things which hee required should bee offered vnto him and did separate the sacrifices dedicated vnto God from all prophane abuse and humane vse and made them ascend towardes the place of his glorious presence that he might accept them with fauour and be pleased with them All which significations of heauenly fire were most perfectly accomplished in the sacrifice of Christ Iesus For neuer man nor Angel offered vnto God any seruice with like puritie and charitie as the Lord Iesus offered himselfe to his Fathers will and that his oblation did not onely clense his body from all corruption of mortalitie and infirmitie as appeared by his resurrection but pearced the heauens with admirable celeritie and efficacie and preuailed in the presence of God to bee a sweete smelling sauour for all the sonnes of God Some of these things you seeme to acknowledge As fire to signifie the Acceptation of Christs death in that it was a sacrifice of a sweete sauour ascending vp to God What reason then haue you that fire should note the wrath of God powred out on Christes soule and body before he died Shall one and the same fire in one and the same sacrifice import both gracious acceptance with God and terrible vengeance from God These be contraries in mine eyes whatsoeuer they be in yours That fire in sacrifices did shew Gods fauour and not his anger the sacrifices of Gedeon Salomon and Elias doe plainly prooue which God with fire from heauen consumed not in token of any displeasure against them or dislike of their offerings but in signe of very fauorable acceptations both of their persons and sacrifices Euen so at the first offerings of Aaron the glory of the Lord appeared to all the people and there came a fire from the Lord and consumed the burnt offering vpon the Altar which when all the people saw they gaue a shout for ioy and fell on their faces This fire descending from God and consuming that sacrifice God commaunded to keepe burning for euer on his Altar and none might approch to him with any other fire in incense or offering in so much that when Nadab and Abihu the sonnes of Aaron tooke strange â—…ire to offer before the Lord and not of that which alwaies burned on the Altar God destroyed them with fire The fire then which consumed the sacrifices of the Iewes was miraculously deliuered them by God and ioyfully receaued of all the people and therefore did not argue to them any wrath or vengeance on their sacrifices but rather the fauour and good liking of God which the Scripture noteth by the sweete odour of the sacrifice As when Noah made his burnt offerings to ascend by fire the Scripture saith the Lord smelled a sauour of rest that is he shewed himselfe to be appeased and his anger to rest So when Aaron and his sonnes were to be consecrated Priests God said to Moses Thou shalt make to smell by fier that is thou shalt burne the whole Ram as a burnt offering it shall be to the Lord a sauour of rest that is a pleasing sacrifice And for that cause God willed the Iewes in their peace offerings whereby they gaue thanks for their safetie and prosperitie to vse fire and saith of it ISSHE this burning by fire or this sacrifice made by fire is a sauour of rest vnto the Lord. And so in incense which Saint Iohn resembleth to the prayers of the Saints fire was likewise required to teach them that their prayers went vp before God as the smoke of sweete odours and were accepted of him Then not affliction or indignation on the Sacrifice was declared by the fire which God commaunded to be vsed in all kinds of sacrifices but rather an ascending vp to the presence of God and an accepting thereof in the sight of God which is farre from your suffering of hell paines in the soule of Christ for which you bable so much in both your bookes But the Apostle sayth as the bodies of beasts were burnt without the campe so Christ suffered without the gate Were it granted that fire in Sacrifices did signifie probation or affliction which is no way proued you are no whit the neerer to your suffering of hell paines in the soule of Christ. For the bodies of beasts sayth the Apostle were burnt which can by no pretense of these wordes be stretched farder than the afflictions of Christes bodie when he was carried to be crucified without the gate And the chopping of the holocaust in pieces that it might the more conueniently be layed on the wood to burne maketh as slender proofe that Christes soule suffered the paines of hell notwithstanding your graue deuice that Christes soule was chopt in pieces and not his bodie which conceits of yours declare your follie but helpe not your cause Those Sacrifices whereof part was burnt by fire and the rest reserued for the Priest and sometimes for the owner that brought them to feast before the Lord had their bloud shed at the doore of the Tabernacle as well as the other and so resembled the death of Christ no lesse than the other though God would haue no part of the one to be eaten by the Priests or people as the other were but to be wholly consumed by fire because they were wholly reserued or dedicated vnto him And this the Apostle respecteth in that comparison which he maketh of the bodies of beasts burnt without the campe whereof the Priests that serued in the Tabernacle could not be partakers They were consumed by fire because the Priests should not eat thereof to foreshew as the Apostle noteth that such as were addicted to the seruice and ceremonies of the Law and the outward Temple could not be partakers of the trueth which is in Christ except they did leaue those elements of the Law which seemed so glorious in their eyes and followed Christ out of the gate bearing his reproch whose bloud was most holy and most sufficient to sanctifie the people though hee were cast out of the citie to suffer as a malefactour and wicked person Neither were the dead bodies of those beasts consumed by fire out
the hole that you would faine hide your selfe in To that intent which I set downe my reasons drawen from the Iewish sacrifices and Christians sacraments did and doe still stand effectuall For the olde sacrifices must figure and the new Sacraments must seale whatsoeuer death in Christ was the full and perfect ransome of our sinnes But they foreshew and confirme the bodily death of Christ onely they neither shew not signifie the death of the soule nor the death of the damned Therefore the bodily death of Christ onely is the full and perfect ransome of our sinnes the death of the soule and the death of the damned as they serued nothing to our Redemption so were they not suffered in the soule of Christ. Two cauils you offer against the first part of this reason touching the sacrifices of the fathers before and vnder the law One that they figured not the whole sacrifice as neither Christes Deitie his soule nor his resurrection the next that all the sacrifices of the Iewes did not signifie his bodily death because the Scape goate which was a sinne offering was not slaine Of trifling you talke much this is more then trifling it is plaine shifting Christes deitie could be no part of that sacrifice which suffered for sinne the diuine Maiestie can not suffer either paine or sorrow To what ende then come you in with Christes Godhead when you talke of his suffering for sinne His soule you say was not figured by those sacrifices The suffering death in his soule was indeed no way figured by them but that the mediatour should haue an humane soule to bee separated from his body by death before hee could make purgation of our sinnes that was more then figured by those sacrifices For since not the blood of beasts but of man and euen of the Sonne of God made man was by Gods promise to be shed for our sinnes It is euident that from life to death he could not come but by seuering his soule from his body And consequently he must haue a soule being a man which must be powred out vnto death before he could die euen as the powers of life in bloody sacrifices were parted from their flesh before they could be offered as sacrifices vnto God But I charge you vntruely when I say you expound your whole and absolute Redemption to be of all the fruites and causes of our Redemption you haue no such word nor meaning as fruites Your words are our whole and absolute Redemption and those I say containe the whole course of our saluation euen vnto the last step which is our glorification as I haue formerly prooued by Christes owne speech Againe if the resurrection of Christ which is your owne instance bee a part of that propitiatorie sacrifice because it was a necessarie consequent then all the benefites that Christ obtained for vs or bestowed on vs must be comprised in that his oblation for sinne For they are all necessarie consequents and effects of our Redemption and depend on these two branches his death to free vs from sinne and his resurrection to raise vs into a new and heauenly life now for euer He was deliuered to death for our sinnes and rose againe for our iustification From these two heads the Scriptures deriue not onely forgiuenes of sinnes but newnesse of life on earth and happinesse of life in heauen Yet you did not call them fruits Effects you called them and what is a ioyfull effect such as was Christs resurrection but a fruit and that as well in Christ as in vs When the Prophet saith of Christ he shall see the trauaile of his soule and be satisfied what meaneth he but the fruits and effects of Christs labour when for his obedience to death God highly exalted him and gaue him a name aboue euery name that euery knee should bow vnto him what is this but a fruite and reward of his humiliation first in his owne person then proportionably in all that be his Many of the Iewes sacrifices yea most of them did represent and signifie Christs bodily sufferings onely yet not all Therefore you may well deny mine assumption as you did before and affirme that certaine Iewish Sacrifices set forth the sufferings euen of the soule of Christ and not of his body only Did I any where say that all the Iewish sacrifices were bloudy or that all of them did represent Christs death and blood shedding Could I be ignorant that the Iewes had oblations made onely by fier as of flower wine and incense and also offerings of the first fruits and other things dedicated or presented to the Lord for the vse of his tabernacle and Temple Doth not the Apostle say Euery high Priest is ordayned for men to offer GIFTES and SACRIFICES for sinne Where gifts shew that things without life were offered as well as liuing beasts and birds which were slaine As then there was no cause nor neede I should so I neuer vsed the word ALL in that case vnlesse I added liuing or BLOODY Sacrifices For they by their life lost and blood shed figured the death of Christ Iesus But this ALL is your adding to my wordes that you may take occasion to pike some quarrell at them But you may well deny my assumption that no sacrifices of the Iewes did figure the sufferings of Christs soule I assumed no such thing neither did I meddle with the sufferings of Christs soule vnlesse they were the death of the soule or the paines of hell which the Scripture calleth the second death and I the death of the damned because none besides the damned die that second death but you plainly giue me the slip and conuey your selfe from speaking of the death of the soule or of the death of the damned which are the things in Question to the sufferings of the soule in generall of which I make no Question And though your meaning be vnder the sufferings of the soule to comprise the tormenting of Christs soule by the immediate hand of God with the selfe same paines which the damned do feele in hell Yet such is your cariage that euery where you suppresse your maine intent and make a faire shew with the sufferings of Christs soule as if you ment no more but that Christs soule must needs haue some sufferings proper to it selfe which you confesse I sundry times teach and yet you make your Reader beleeue I euer impugne You shall doe well to awake out of this slumber and call to minde that there are no sufferings of Christs soule now in question but the DEATH of the SOVLE or of the DAMNED which you dare not openly auouch and therefore you plaster them ouer with smoother termes of the sufferings of the soule to hide your secret mysteries till you meete with itching eares that will listen more to fansies then to faith Another peece of skill you shew in this place to ease your selfe of all proofe and thinke it enough if
they be neuer freed from that horrible confusion in which they lie And therefore they scare the place prouided for them and besought Christ neither k Luc. 8. to send them into the deepe and bottomlesse pit nor to l Matth. 8. torment them besore their time Neither was there onely transgression reprobation and confusion in the place of heauen where the Angels sinned and whence they were cast but of the blessed Angels S. Iohn saith that one of them m Reuel 20. came downe from heauen hauing the key of the bottomlesse pit and a great chaine in his hand who tooke the Dragon which is the diuell and bound him and cast him into the bottomlesse pit and shut him vp and sealed vpon him And were it doubtfull of Angels how they could retaine the measure of their brightnesse and blessednesse in the place of hell yet heare we Dauid confesse of God himselfe and of his spirit If I ascend to heauen thou art there if I get downe to hell thou art there So that the very fountaine of all holinesse and happinesse is in heauen earth and hell and yet the states of these three places are not confounded because the perfection of all goodnesse is present in euery of them The goodnesse and glory of God is not so fastned vnto places that either Paradise or heauen did priuilege men or Angels from sinne as heauen did not the diuels nor hell it selfe can hinder the happinesse of the blessed Angels when they are sent with power from God to execute his pleasure And yet this doth not confound the distinction of places or states in heauen or hell but that heauen is now the place where the brightnesse of Gods glory is reuealed to his Saints besides their internall and continuall vision of God which maketh them most happie and neuer leaueth them whethersoeuer they goe And therefore the Angels that sinned were cast thence that they should not defile the place of Gods presence with their wickednesse and hell is likewise the prepared mansion for the diuels where vengeance from God is powred on them and greater shall be when after iudgement they shall be closed in perpetuall prison though till that day some of them be suffered to beare rule in the aire and to worke in the children of disobedience for the triall of the saints and farder setting forth os Gods most glorious wisedome power and rightcousnesse n Defenc. pag. 119. li. â—…7 Lastly the true ioyes of heauen may be out of the locall heauen as when the glorious Angels haue bene and tarried some while here on earth with men Yet did they neuer for a moment want the toyes and glory of heauen From Angels endued with inward and heauenly light power holinesse and happinesse and by grace euerlastingly confirmed therein no argument can be drawen to our weake sinfull and variable condition neither doe we dispute of Gods power what he can doe but of his will and ordinance whereby he hath appointed heauen to be his seat that is the place where his glory is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and eternall and perfect blessednesse bestowed on all the inhabitants thereof be they men or Angels And though the Angels whethersoeuer they goe or whatsoeuer they doe retaine the cleere sight of God and the perfection of their 〈◊〉 all happinesse yet that is no proofe that we liuing here in mortall and miserable flesh can haue that on earth which they haue For example take some parts or consequents of that heauenly ioy and blisse which the Angels being heere on earth keep immutable and you shall soone see how grossely you erre in communicating their glory to men yet dwelling in houses of clay The Angels of God 〈◊〉 here on earth can neither erre sinne nor die they can feele no necessity infirmity nor miserie they need not eat sleepe nor rest they are indued with light that cannot be obscured with holinesse that cannot be defiled with ioy that cannot be diminished with power that cannot be resisted by men or Diuels Can these things be attributed to mortall men here on earth without open and palpable heresie Wherefore it is an erroneous and presumptuous inference that o Defenc pa. 120. 〈◊〉 2. If Angels may enioy heauen really being in the world that men heere liuing may doe the like p Defenc. pag. 120. 3. It is possible for Gods goodnesse to communicate some reall foretasie thereof vnto some blessed men also A taste of glory which neither continueth nor satisfieth can not be called heauen which is the perfect and perpetuall fulnesse of all kinde of blisse and want of all kinde of miserie S. Peter teacheth vs that God q 1. Pet. 1. begetieth vs into a liuely hope to an inheritance incorruptible vndefiled and vnchangeable reserued in the heauens for vs who are by the power of God kept by faith vnto saluation readie to le shewed in the last time If the taste of glory which you talke of be not immortall immutable vndefiled with any defect or miserie it may not be called heauen nor be sayd to be the inheritance reserued for vs in heauen And therefore though some blessed men haue had a sight of some glory which you call a taste thereof as Moses Esay Steuen and others yet that doth not proue them to haue beene really in the ioyes of heauen How osten is it written of the Israelites that they saw the glory of the Lord and yet they were ouerthrowen in the wildernesse r Exodus 24. ver 16. 〈◊〉 17. The glory of the Lord saith Moses abode vpon mount Sinai and the sight of the glory of the Lord was like a consuming fire on the top of the mountaine in the eies of the children of Israel So when Aaron offered his first offering for his Priesthood and blessed the people t Leu t. 9. v. 23 The glorie of the Lord appeared to all the people of whom God saith u Numb 14. vers 22. All these men which haue seene my glory my miracles which I did in Egypt and in the wildernesse and haue tempted me these ten times certainly they shall not see the land whereof I sware to their Fathers When Salomon had builded and consecrated the temple with praier and sacrifice x 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The glory of the Lord 〈◊〉 house so that the Priests could not enter into the house of the Lord because the glory 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord had filled the Lords house And when all the children of Israel saw the fire and the glory of the Lord come downe vpon the house they bowed themselues with their faces to the earth vpon the pauement and worshipped and praised the Lord. I trust the King the Priests and the People were not all in the ioies of heauen and yet they all with their eies saw the glory of God there presented before them and such as were religious and obedient saw it to their exceeding ioy y Defenc. pag. 120. li. 5. That God doth