Page images


the following manner: the law declares, there is no admission for any to eternal life, but on the account of a most perfect and compleat righteousness; also, that every sinner shall undergo the penalty of death, and be under its dominion for ever. However, it is a doubtful matter, not explained by the law, whether that perfect righteousness must necessarily be performed by the very person to be saved, or, whether a surety may be admitted, who shall perform it in his room. Again, it is doubtful, whether it was necessary the sinner should, in his own person, undergo the deserved punishment, or whether he could truly undergo it in the person of a sponIn fine, it is a matter of doubt, whether he who was to undergo the penalty, ought to do so to an infinite degree, with respect to duration, or whether, that dominion of death could be abolished by the sufficient dignity and worth of the person who should undergo it, and so death be swallowed up in victory strict justice would, as the words seem to import, at first view, demand the former; but the favourable construction, which, according to Aristotle, Ethic. lib. v. c, 10. is an amendment of the law, where it is deficient, on account of its universality, admits of the latter, where it can be obtained; as really was, and is the case with Christ and Christians. Thus therefore, that in which the law seemed to be defective from its universality, comes to be corrected; not as to the intention of God the lawgiver, which is altogether invariable, and always most perfect; but as to the express form of the words: almost in the same manner, as if a father should be admitted to pay an equivalent fine for his son, and instead of silver, make payment in gold. This would be a favourable interpretation of the law.

VII. Nor was it unjust for Christ to be punished for us: seeing Socinus himself and Crellius own, that the most grie vous torments, nay, death itself, might be inflicted on Christ, though most innocent; which also appears from the event, For God, in right of his dominion, could lay all those afflictions on Christ; especially with the effectual consent of the Lord Jesus himself, who had power over his own life. The whole difficulty lies in the formality of the punishment. But as Christ, most willingly took upon himself our transgressions, and the trespasses we had committed against the divine majesty, and offered himself as a surety for them; God, as the supreme governor could justly exact punishment of Christ in our room, and actually did so. And thus the chastisement of our peace, that exemplary punishment inflicted on Christ, in which God by the brightest example, shewed his impla cable hatred to sin, " was upon him.” Isa. liii. 5. who


brought pardon and peace unto us. For om was upon him, here is that exemplary punishment, in which God's wrath against sin is discovered, whith is well adapted to deter others from it. Thus Jer. xxx. 14. the punishment of a cruel one; and Prov. vii. 22. the exemplary punishment of a fool, and Ez. . 15. so shall it be a reproach and a taunt, an instruction (example) and an astonishment.

[ocr errors]

VIII. But we certainly take too much upon us, when we presume to examine the equity of the divine government, by the standard of our reason when the fact is plain, we are always to vindicate God against the sophistry of our foolish reasonings. That man is certainly the author of a monstrous, horrible, and detestable heresy, and discovers a profane arrogance, who like Socinus, is not ashamed to write as follows: As for my part, indeed, though such a thing should be found not once, but frequently, in the sacred records, I would not on that account believe it to be so. But modesty should teach us rather to say; That truly for my part, though my reason, which I know is blind and foolish, and apt to be clam'orous against God, should a thousand times gain-say it, P would not therefore presume to call in question, what I 'find but once in the sacred records; or, by seeking some other interpretation, would I force on the words of scripture, any ' meaning more consonant to my reason.' When therefore we shall have proved from holy writ, that the Lord Christ has made satisfaction to the justice of God, and consequently, that there is no injustice in it: according to the maxim, which na ture itself dictates, that all the ways of God are righteousness and truth.


IX. No Christian questions that Christ fulfilled all righThe multitude of the Jews, Mark vii. 37. testified concerning him, he hath done all things well. And he declared this truly, as he did every thing else, concerning himself" for, I do those things that please him," John viii. 29. And hence he boldly appealed to his enemies, v. 46.“ which of you convinceth me of sin?" Nay, even to his father himself, Psal. xcix. 5. "O God, thou knowest my foolishness, and my sins are not hid from thee:" For I suppose this Psalm contains a prayer of the Lord Christ, as appears from several parts of it, being often quoted in the New Testament. And these words, I think, contain a protestation of the Lord Jesus to his father of his own innocence; of which Theodorus in Catena, has given no impropet paraphrase : "Whether I have been guilty of any fault against them, thou thyself knowest and art my witness, I have done nothing." But I think the meaning

meaning may be more fully expressed thus: It is true my God, I have taken guilt upon me, and am made a curse; but thou knowest all my sins, even to the slightest offence, for which I suffer; that in all there is not the least fault of mine, by which I have violated thy law, so as to restore what I have taken. The truth of this protestation the father attests, when Isa. liii. 11. he calls Christ his righteous servant, and justi fied him in the Spirit, 1 Tim. iii. 16. declaring that as man he was innocent of every crime falsely laid to his charge; on the contrary, he honoured his father by his perfect obedience, and as mediator so diligently executed his office, that he was deficient in nothing.

X. It is also allowed that the most holy obedience of Christ was for our good: because therein we have, 1st, A confirmation of his heavenly doctrine; the works of his most perfect holiness, no less than his miracles, being a demonstration that he was a preacher of divine truth sent down from heaven. 2dly, A living law and most perfect pattern of holiness, worthy both of God and of the children of God, of which we had an exact delineation in the written law; but its shining forth in its lively intage and native light in Christ and his actions, is fitted to stir up every man to love it, who beholds it with a spiritual eye. Mankind wanted this even to discern the unspotted image of the divine holiness in one of their brethren; which at length they obtained in Christ, who "left us an example that we should follow his steps." I Pet. ii. 21. 3dly, A pointing out of the way to heaven: Christ teaching us not only by his words, but his actions, that "without holiness no one shall see the Lord," Heb. xii. 14.

XI. But we must proceed a step further, and affirm, that the obedience of Christ was accomplished by him in our room, in order thereby to obtain for us a right to eternal life. The law, which God will have secured inviolable, admits none to glory, but on condition of perfect obedience, which none was ever possessed of but Christ, who bestows it freely on his own people. This is what the Apostle declares, Rom. v. 16. "but the free gift of Jesus Christ is of many offences unto justification:" though we want those works, for which the reward may be due: nay, though for so many sins, we may have deserved an eternal curse; nevertheless there is something sufficient, not only for abolishing many offences, but likewise to be the meritorious cause of righteousness; namely, the obedichce of one; and it becomes ours by gratuitous gift. More clearly still, ver. 19. " for as by one man's obedience many were made [constituted] sinners, so by the obedience of one


shall many be made [consituted] righteous." The former one man was Adam, the root and federal head of mankind. By his disobedience, all mankind, as belonging to him, was involved in the guilt of the curse: and as he sustained the person of all, what he did amiss, is accounted as done by all. The other is the one man Christ, who neither sinned in, and with Adam, nor had the dominion of sin and death passed upon him, and who is worthy to be both lord and head, a second Adam, and the origin and source of the inheritance to be devolved on his brethren. He is possessed of an obedience, even to the whole law of God, which enjoined him to have a perfect love for the glory of his father, and for the salvation of his Brethren. By that obedience the collective body of those who belong to him are constituted righteous; that is, are judged to have a right to eternal life, no less than if every one had performed that obedience in his own person.

XII. Nor should it be thought strange, that the obedience of Christ is sufficient to acquire to all a right to eternal life, even though it became him as man to yield obedience for himself. For we are here to consider the dignity of the person obeying; who being man in such a manner, as at the same time to be the eternal and infinite God, he is much more excellent than all the elect, taken together: and therefore his obedience is deservedly esteemed of such value as may be imputed to all, for obtaining a right to a blessed immortality. And although the divinity, in the abstract, did not obey, yet he who did is God; and thus the divinity of the person contributes very much to the dignity of the obedience. It is certain, that as man, he owed obedience for himself, but since he became man on our account, he also performed that obedience in our room. Moreover, as man he was not necessarily under the law, as prescribing the condition of happiness; because if we set aside the consideration of the suretiship undertaken for us, he would have enjoyed all manner of happiness, from the first moment of his incarnation, on account of the union of the humanity with the Godhead, as we have more fully shewn, chap. iii. sect. 13, 14.

XIII. It would likewise be false to infer from this, that if Christ performed obedience for us, we ourselves are un'der no necessity of obeying; because no demand can be 'made on the principal debtor, for what the surety has performed in his room.' Our obedience may be considered, either as it is the Duty of the rational creature, with respect to his sovereign Lord; or as it is a condition of acquiring a right to eternal life: in the latter respect Christ accomplished it VOL. I. for

D d

for us, and therefore under that relation, it neither is, nor can be required of us, as if for want of perfect obedience, we could be excluded from eternal life. But in the former respect, we by all means owe obedience, and the obligation to it rather increased than diminished by this instance of Christ's love. For what more proper than by this to shew our gratitude, and declare, not so much by words as actions, that we acknowledge him for our lord, who has purchased us for himself? And in fine, that as adopted sons we decline no obedience to our heavenly Father, whom his natural son, and of the same substance with himself, so chearfully obeyed.

XIV. But besides, Christ satisfied the vindictive justice of God, not only for our good, but also, in our room, by enduring those most dreadful sufferings, both in soul and body, which we had deserved, and from which he by undergoing them, did so deliver us, that they could not with the wrath and curse of God, as the proper punishment of our sin, be inflicted on us. If there is any point in our divinity accurately proved, and solidly defended against the exceptions of the Socinians, by illustrious persons in the church, it is certainly this; which I choose not to repeat, desiring the reader to fetch the arguments from a Grotius, a Junius, a Turretine, a Hoornbeck, an Essenius, and the like renowed heroes; which will baffle all the efforts of the adversaries, properly to answer.


What sufferings of Christ are satisfactory.

I. BUT it is really to be lamented, that in these our days, a new question should be started among the orthodox: namely, which of the sufferings of Christ ought to be deemed satisfactory in our room. There is one in particular, who seems to acknowledge none of the sufferings of Christ to be sactisfactory for us, but those which Christ underwent during the three hours of the solar darkness, while he was upon the cross, and before he expired; excluding from the number of satisfactory sufferings, that agony and horror which he endured in the garden of Olivet the night in which he was apprehended, and that blood which he shed before, and when he was crucified, and after he expired on the cross. He had


This was the garden of Gethsemane, which lay at the foot of the mount of Olives.

« PreviousContinue »