TO juſtifie, is eitherI will not inſiſt on the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , jus, ju • i •• ia, juſtific • re. taken in a moral ſenſe, or in a judicial▪ for the working a change in a mans perſon, or • he making a change in his eſtate. By the firſt, he is made a new crea • ure: By the ſecond, he is abſolv • d at the Bar of Juſtice. The Pa • iſts contend wholly for the firſt • nſe; namely, that juſtification • ught to be taken for the infu • on of holineſs, and the Reformed • r the ſecond, viz. the diſcharg •• g and abſolving one in Law▪ Now that this, and not the former muſt be the meaning and ſenſe of the Holy Ghoſt in this affair, appears,

1. Becauſe otherwiſe we ſhould Voces quibus utitur Sp. S. null • bi in to • a Scripturâ, in • uſâ iuſtitiâ juſtū face • e, notant. nec apud proba • os latinitatis Authores, hoc ſenſu uſurpan • ur. confound juſtification, and ſanctification, which the Scripture every where diſtinguiſheth, 1 Cor. 6. 11. But ye are ſanctified, but ye are juſtified, Rom. 8. 29, 39. whom he called, (namely, to a conformity to the image of his Son) them he alſo juſtified. 1. In ſanctification, the change is abſolute and inherent; in juſtification, relative and juridical, 2. Sanctification is gradual and ſucceſſive, juſtification is inſtantaneous, and compleat at once. 3. By the firſt we are made like God, by the ſecond we are taken into the favour of God. 4. Sanctification is the ſubduing the dominion and power of ſin in us. Juſtification is the removing the obnoxiouſneſs to the curſe which was againſt us. Though theſe two • n the caſe we ſpeak of beever un •• ed, yet they are not to be confounded. They differ as to the praedicate, though they be not ſeparate as to the ſubject; though where the one is, there the other be alſo, yet the one is not formally the other. In many other caſes they are ſeparable, one may be morally juſt, and yet not juridically juſtified; as Chriſt, who though he was every way Innocent, Pilate himſelf being Judge, Joh. 18. 38. Joh. 19. 4. 6. yet he was condemned; and on the other hand one may be morally unjuſt, and yet judicially acquitted, daily experience bearing witneſs: however in all caſes they are diſtinct. But to ſay the truth, the Papiſts acknowledge no pardon of ſin diſtinct from ſanctification, for though they ſpeak of remiſſion, yet they always underſtand it by renovation, which is a ſtumbling at the very threſhold, and an argument of their little inſight into this myſtery of God.

2. Becauſe the Apoſtle, who ſo often uſeth the word, never uſeth it for the Infuſion of holineſs, but for a judicial abſolution and therefore oppoſeth it not to pollution and defilement, but to accuſation and condemnation, Rom. 5. 18. As by the offence of one judgment came upon all to condemnation, even ſo by the righteouſneſs of one, the freegift came upon all men unto juſtification of life, Rom. 8. 33, 34. It is God that juſtifieth, who is he that condemneth. And accordingly he deſcribeth it by remeſsion of ſin, not by renovation of nature, Rom. 4. 7. and by Imputation of righteouſneſs without us, to us, not by an Infuſion of holineſs, or working of grace in us, Rom. 4. 6.

3. Becauſe the queſtion betwixt the Jews and the Apoſtle, was not whether we were renewed in our ſouls by the works of the Law, or by Faith, but by which of them we were acquitted at the Ba • of God. This is clear throughout the whole diſpute.

The word then is to be taken in a judicial legal ſenſe, and ſo is oppoſed to condemn; now in this ſenſe it is uſed two ways in Scripture.

1. For the declaring of oneJu • um judicare. vid. Mat. 11. 19. Mat. 12. 37. Luc 7. 29 & 16. 15. juſt, 1 Tim. 3. 16. juſtified in the ſpirit the Son of God, having aſſumed our nature, being made of a woman, Gal. 4. 4. taking fleſh and bloud, Heb. 2. 14. and manifeſting himſelf in the fleſh, he was judged by the world, not onely to be a meer man, but condemned as an Impoſtor and Malefactor; now he was juſtified in the ſpirit, that is, in and by the ſpirit; He was not only vindicated, and proclaimed innocent from all the accuſations of his enemies, but withal approved and declared to be the true and the great God; partly by the atteſtation of the Holy Ghoſt, in viſible deſcent on him at baptiſm, Mat. 3. laſt, partly by audible voice both then, and at other times, Mat. 17. 5. Joh. 12 28, 29. partly by the teſtimony of miracles, which he wrought by the ſpirit, Heb. 2. 4. Act. 2. 22. partly by that great teſtimony of raiſing himſelf from the dead, through the eternal ſpirit, Rom. 1. 4. Act. 13. 33. 1 Pet. 3. 18. partly by the teſtimony of the Prophets and Apoſtles, who as they ſpake by the inſpiration of the ſpirit, 2 Pet. 1. 21. Joh. 16. 13. So they bare witneſs to the divinity and Godhead of Chriſt. This alſo is the import of the word, Jam. 2. 21. was not abraham our father juſtified by works, i. e. declared to be juſt; by the offering of Iſaac, Abraham teſtified his faith to be true and right, Gen 22. 12. by this I know that thou feareſt me, upon which God reneweth unto him the promiſe, as a teſtimony and declaration that he was juſtified.

2. But moſt properly, and alſoJuſtum judicare, vid Deut. 25. 1. ps. 143. 2 Rom. 8. 33, 34. moſt frequently, it is made uſe of to ſignifie to abſolve and acquit in judgment; Act. 13. 29. by him all that believe are juſtified from all things, from which he could not be juſtified by the law of Moſes, Rom. 2. 13. not the hearers of the law are juſt before God, but the doers of the law ſhall be juſtified, Rom. 3. 20. by the deeds of the law ſhall no fleſh be juſtified in his ſight, ſee Rom. 5. 16, 17. 1 Cor. 4. 4. Gal. 12. 16, 17. Now this is the ſenſe we are to underſtand the words in, in this affair, to diſcharge by accounting righteous in law.

HAving eſtabliſhed the ſenſe of the words, that in the affair before us we are alone to take them in a judicial ſenſe; ſome things are to be offered in the next place for the rendring more eaſie and clear the common notion of our juſtification.

1. Juſtification is an act of juſtice, and not of mercy, Rom. 3. 26. To declare his righteouſneſs, that he might be juſt, and the juſtifier of them which believe in Jeſus. This is the difference betwixt for • iveneſs and juſtification, that the •• rſt is an act of mercy, the latter • n act of juſtice. The word juſti • e is a judicial word, and in all Courts of Judicature, proceedings • ught to be according to right, • nd not according to favour; and • entence ſhould not be according • o mercy, but law; grace, but equi • y, Exod. 23. 2, 3, 6.

2. None but juſt men can be • uſtly juſtified; a man muſt be juſt, or made juſt before he can be juſtly juſtified, Deut. 25. 1. If there be a controverſie between men, and they come unto judgment, that the Judges may udge them, then they ſhall juſtifie the righteous and condemn the wicked. There is a wo denounced againſt him that ſhall juſtifie the wicked, Iſa. 5. 23. Solomon tells us, that he who juſtifies the wicked, is as much an abomination to the Lord as he that condemns the juſt, Prov. 17. 15. Not but that it is lawful ſometimes for a Prince or others to pardon an offendor, but without calling good evil, which God denounceth a wo againſt, Iſa. 5. 20. An offendor cannot be juſtified. Joſeph pardoned his Brethren, but he could no ways juſtifie them: according to all lines and meaſures of juſtice, it is as criminal to juſtifie the Nocent, as to condemn the Innocent, Prov. 24. 24. He that ſaith to the wicked, thou art righteous, him ſhall the People curſe; and this not onely holds with reference to Men, but God, Exod. 34. 7. He will by no means clear the guilty, Mica. 6. 11. Shall I count them pure with the wicked ballances? There is a ſtrong negation in ihe queſtion, I cannot: To ſtrengthen this a little further, and render it more plain; we muſt diſtinguiſh between pronouncing the ſentence of guilt and death, and the execu • ion of the ſentence: A priſoner may be found guilty and condemned, and yet • ot execute; foraſmuch as he may produce a pardon, or obtain a reprieve, but he can no ways be juſtified, and acquitted as not guilty. Thus God by Nathan pronounced againſt David the ſentence of guilt, yet pardoned him as to the execution of it, 2 Sam. 12. 7. 13. God neither did nor could pronounce him guiltleſs of the murder, &c. though he could and did remit the ſentence of death. That none but thoſe who are juſt or made juſt, can be juſtly juſtified, appears further here. (1.) Becauſe all Gods judgments are according to truth, Rom. 2. 2. but it were contrary to truth, to ſay to a man he is guiltleſs, when he is guilty. (2.) All God's judgments are according to juſtice, Pſal. 119. 75. But it were contrary to juſtice, to acquit and declare a man innocent, when he were nocent.

Object. 2 2. But it is again Objected, that ſin every where ſaid to be forgiven, • ardone, remitted, and the for • veneſs of it attributed to mercy • d grace, and conſequently that • ere can be no ſatisfaction made • r it, there being nothing more • ntrary to forgiveneſs, than com • nſation, nor more oppoſite to grace • an what is paid for. Thus the • amphleter, p. 6, 7, 8, 9. out of his • aſters, Socinus, Crellius, &c. • o which I offer theſe things by • ay of return.

Anſw 1 (1.) It is a moſt ignorant miſ • ke, that ſatisfaction made by • hriſt, and forgiveneſs made to • s, are oppoſite and inconſiſtent; • hereas Scripture every where • olds forth the agreement be • wixt theſe two, Rom. 3. 24, 25. • eing juſtified freely by his grace, • rough the redemption that is in • eſus Chriſt, &c. Where though • rgiveneſs be held forth as free • d of grace, yet it is alſo declared to be through Chriſt, as a pro • pitiation, and by virtue of th • redemption, which by his bloo • he had purchaſed and wrough • See alſo Eph. 1. 7. Col. 1. 14. • is ſaid to be free and of grace i • reference to us, to exclude the m • rit of our works; not in reſpect • Chriſt, to exclude his ſatisfact • on. Herein God hath diſplay • the depths of his wiſdome, th • pardon is both of grace and • merit, that it is at once an act • mercy, and an act of righteou • neſs.

Anſw. 2 (2.) It hath been already ſho • wherein the grace and freeneſs remiſſion conſiſts, and that it • wiſe ſtands, either in the want • a ſatisfaction or in any deficien • in the ſatisfaction that was mad • Let the adverſary, if he plea • attempt to overthrow what ha • been ſpoken to that purpoſe, • ſhall find us ready upon all oc • • 〈…〉 vindicate it.

Anſw. 3 (3.) The clearing of this ſhall be further eſſayed in the Appendix.

2. The ſecond and only plea then of a charged ſinner is to plead for juſtification, upon the account of a ſatisfaction made to the party offended for the offence, and this ſatisfaction muſt be pleaded, either as made by our ſelves, or made by another in our ſtead.

1. It cannot be pleaded, that we have made any ſatisfaction our ſelves: There are but three ways can with any ſeemingneſs be inſiſted on to this purpoſe, and it is altogether impoſſible it ſhould be made any of theſe ways.

1. Some may be ready to imagine, that ſatisfaction might be made by ſacrifices and coſtly offerings, and that by them God's wrath might be appeaſed, and the guilt of ſin expiated. Sacrifices were of God's own appointment, and after the fall the firſt piece of inſtituted worſhip, Gen. 4. 3, 4. Rom. 14. 23. Heb. 11. 4. By faith Abel offered; which implies the warrant of a command: and if this were not neceſſary, there would be no ſuch thing as will▪ worſhip in the world, and faith would differ nothing from a blind venturous boldneſs. Now ſacrifices may be conſidered tw • ways.

Firſt, As an Appendix of th • Covenant of works, and as they were intended to teſtifie guilt • and in that ſenſe the Apoſtle is t • be underſtood, Col. 2. 14. Th • hand writing of Ordinances whic • was againſt us, which was contrar • to us. Epheſ. 2. 15. Having aboliſhed in his fleſh the enmity, eve • the law of commandments contained in Ordinances.

Secondly, They are conſiderable as ſubſervient to the Covenan • of grace. As they were our School-maſter to lead to Chriſt, Gal. 3. 24. As they were ſhaddows and he the body, Col. 2. 17. And as they were types of the great ſacrifice which he was to offer, Heb. 9. 9. God having made man a promiſe of recovery • nd redemption, through the • eed of the woman, Gen. 3. 15. • nd it being neceſſary that this • hould be accompliſhed in the way of death and blood, Heb. 9. • 5, 22. God therefore appoint • d ſacrifices, to typifie and prefi • ure the great ſacrifice of the • eſſiah; and in this ſenſe among • thers may Rev. 13. 8. be under • ood, (if that be the right read • g of the place) The Lomb ſlain • om the foundation of the world; • ot only in the virtue and the effi • cy of his death, but alſo with • ſpect to the ſacrifices, which • efigured his death. Now the • nerality of mankind ſoon ſunk into an ignorance of the right end of ſacrifices, and inſtead of conſidering them • s Divine appointments, to repreſent the ſacrifice of the Son of God, and to ſtrengthen their faith in that: they begin to rely upon them alone, fo • expiation of guilt and right to life But that no ſatisfaction can b • made by ſacrifices, appears.

(1.) In that Scripture expreſl • Sacrificia conſiderantur, vel qua • enus typi crant futurae ſatis facticnis Meſſia, vel quatenus illis vis expiandi per ſe adſcribebatur; priori modo Deu • illa voluit, poſteriori carejecit, Walth. rejects all ſacrifices, when truſte • to for that end and purpoſe, Pſal • 40. 6. Sacrifice and offering th • didſt not deſire, mine ears haſt th • opened; burnt-offering and ſin-offering haſt thou not required, i. e. h • did not deſire them as means b • which ſin could be expiated. S • Pſal. 50. 8. to 12. Micah 6. 6, 7 Heb. 9. 9. and 10. 1, 2, 3, 4. Go • in Scripture expreſſeth his diſli • of ſacrifices upon three occaſion • (1.) Becauſe of the prophaneſs • the Offerers, Iſa. 1. 11 12. &c. • 18. Iſa. 66. 5. Jer. 6. 20. (2 • 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 propor • ion nor relation either, betwixt the ſinner and the ſacrificed beaſt, that the blood and death of the one, ſhould paſs for a ſatisfaction • or the ſin and offenſe of the other. There ſhould be a conjunction in Nature, betwixt him that commits • 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,

So that upon the whole it is clear we cannot plead a ſatisfaction b • 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 ſ • 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 ſ • 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 coul • 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 • er able to yield to God, it is • rough the alone ſtrength and in • uence of his grace, Joh. 15. 5. Cor. 3. 5. And therefore inſtead • being a ſatisfaction to his ju • ce, we are made freſh debtors to • s mercy.

(5.) One ſin diſhonours God • ore than an eternity of obedience • n recompence; all our ſervice • ings no acceſſion to God to me • any thing at his hand. Job 22. 3. Can a man be profitable to • d? is it pleaſure to the Almighty • at thou art righteous? or is it • in to him, that thou makeſt thy • ys perfect? Job 35. 7. If thou • righteous what giveſt thou unto • m? or what receiveth he at thine • nd? ſee alſo Pſal. 16. 2, 3. Luc. • . 10. Rom. 11. 35. Acts 17. 25. • t the leaſt ſin is a derogation • m his honour, and lays us under • obnoxiouſneſs to eternal wrath.

(6.) Juſtification upon the ple • of obedience is that which the Apoſtle through the Epiſtles to th • Romans and Galatians ſo largel • diſputes againſt, and therefore w • muſt either make nonſenſe of a • his arguments, or we muſt elſ • confeſs that there is no being juſtified upon this plea.

3. It remains, that if we ma • ſatisfaction by our ſelves, it mu • be alone done by ſufferings. Th • Papiſts, though they agree with • about the truth of Chriſts ſatisfaction, yet they greatly deroga • from it in the eſtabliſhing the n • ceſſity of humane ſatisfaction • It is true, their doctrine is a litt • intricate in this affair, they are n • accorded among themſelves, eith • as to the extent or the condignit • of ſuch ſatisfactions, yet they a • meet in this, that Chriſt hath n • ſo ſatisfied as to remove the who • puniſhment, but that there is ſo • of the legal penalty ſtill to be u • dergo • by our ſelves, which is • artly born in puniſhments in this • fe, and partly in purgatory tor • ents in the future. This they • alliate by diſtinguiſhing betwixt • moving of the fault, and re • oving of the puniſhment: The • ult is the offence committed • gainſt God, which is done away • remiſſion; the puniſhment is • e penalty, which after the fault • removed, remains, ſay they, • ll to be ſuffered; and by the • aring of which, either in our own • rſons, or one for another, we • ake God formal ſatisfaction.

But (1.) we have already prov • , that the bearing of the penal • , doth conſtitute no man who is • ce unjuſt, juſt again. The firſt • ention of the law is obedience, • d nothing doth ſatisfie the pri • ary deſign of the law but that. • grant that in humane laws in • me caſes it may be otherwiſe, • mely where the law is purely penal, the intention of the la • giver being neither preciſely • command nor forbid any thing • but on a penalty to allow th • which otherwiſe he prohibite • As for example, that if a perſo • be choſen Sheriff of Lon • on, • ſhall either hold, or pay ſuch fine: The paying the fine do • here ſatisfie the law, foraſmuch • the law did not preciſely enjoy • the party to hold, but only boun • him to the payment of ſuch • ſumm in caſe he would not. Bu • in Divine Laws the caſe is different, the end of all God's Law • being obedience, and the penalt • being annexed only for other ends

(2.) The diſtinction upon whic • the Papiſts here proceed, implie • one of the abſurdeſt things imaginable; namely, that the fault ſhould be remitted, and not the puniſhment; that the debt ſhould be forgiven▪ and yet payment exacted; ſeeing the forgiving the • ebt, is nothing elſe but the diſ • olving the offenders obligation to • uniſhment. See Mat. 18. 17.

(3.) Sin being of an infinite de • erit, requires an infinite penal • y, • ow a penalty can be infinite only • ne of three ways.

(1.) Through the infinite worth of the perſon ſuſtaining the puniſhment, and in this ſenſe I ſuppoſe none will ſay that man is of • uch value and dignity, as that any ſuffering he undegoes ſhould be accounted infinite.

(2.) A penalty may be infinite from the infinite weight of what is inflicted and ſuſtained, and in this ſenſe no man can undergo an infinite puniſhment▪ foraſmuch as no finite creature can bear any weight but what is finite.

(3.) A puniſhment may be infinite as to length and duration, but for to think that a perſon can ſatisfie by bearing a puniſhment which is infinite as to continuance, involves,

(1.) A plain contradiction, being for ever to ſuffer, and nev • to ſatisfie; for ever to be damne • and never acquitted.

(2.) Such kind of ſuffering do • not ſatisfie the primary intentio • of the law, ſeeing law and juſti • in their firſt intention, require th • the puniſhment be commenſura • to the crime in the weight of i • rather than in the length. S • that upon the whole we cannot b • juſtified upon the plea of havin • made a ſatisfaction our ſelves.

If we plead juſtification then▪ upon the account of a ſatisfaction▪ it muſt be alone, becauſe of a ſatisfaction made by another: an • this leads me to the next point, th • ground and matter of our juſtification, viz. the ſatisfaction o • Chriſt.

2. THE ſecond and only Plea of a guilty ſinner is, that Chriſt hath made ſatisfaction. To this end he was incarnate, and for this end he died. That there were other ſubordinate ends of his Incarnation, Obedience, and Paſſion is not denied; but that any thing elſe was either the ſupream, or the only end, muſt not be granted. That which is firſt pleaded by th • Socinians, is that all which Chriſt underwent was to ratifie and confirm his Doctrine; having preached the freeneſs of remiſsion to ſuch as ſhould repent. And men finding a witneſs in themſelves of their liableneſs to wrath and death, being ready to ſuſpect every propoſal o • grace and favour; t • erefore Chriſ • by his death (ſay they) made fait • of, and gave aſſurance of what h • had taught. Now that what w • have to offer in oppoſition to this, may be the better ſecured againſ • all exceptions, we premiſe theſ • three things to be firſt taken notice of.

1. That Chriſt anſwerable t • the threefold neceſſity that w • were in, ſtood in a threefold office▪ As we were ignorant of God, h • was our Prophet, Joh. 6. 14. Act▪ 3. 22, 23. As we were under th • guilt of ſin, he was our Prieſt, Heb▪ 2. 17. Heb. 7. 26, 27. As we • were in bondage to ſin and Satan▪ he was conſtituted our Captai • and King, Iſa. 55. 4. Heb. 2. 10. Dan. 9. 25. Now as he is ou • Prophet, he not only reveals and makes known the Father to us, Joh. 1. 18. but hath alſo by his death ſealed and confirmed his doctrin • Joh. 18. 37. As he is our • rieſt he hath by his death ex • iated ſin, Heb. 9. 15. 1 Joh. 2. • . purchaſed remiſſion to us, Mat. 26. 28. Eph. 1. 7. and • ought grace for us, Phil. 1. 29. • Pet. 2. 1. And as he is our • ing, he hath by his death conque • ed our enemies, Col. 2. 15. Heb. • . 14. and left us an example of • ffering and patience. 1 Pet. 2. 21. • ow one or more of theſe ends • e not excluſive of the other, be • auſe ſome of theſe were the ends • his death, we muſt not ſay that • hers are not. But the Socinians • they confound the Prieſthood of • hriſt, either with his Kingſhip • with his Prophetical Office; ſo • ey confine the ends of his death, • what meerly was done as he • od in theſe relations: but as • e ſhall (God willing) hereafter • monſtrate him to be properly Prieſt, as well as a King, or • ophet: So for the preſent we diſtinguiſh what were the ends of his death as Prieſt, from thoſe which were the ends of it, as he was King and Prophet.

2. We would have it obſerved, that there were ſome more primary and principal ends of Chriſt's death, and others that were leſs princip • and only ſecondary. The more primary and principal end of his death, was that he might give himſelf a ranſome for ſinners, 1 Tim. 2. 6. be a propitiation for our offences, 1 Joh. 2. 2. and become a ſacrifice for ſin, Heb. 9. 26. and 10. 12. The ſecondary and leſs principal were, that he might ratifie the truth of his doctrine, and leave us an example of patience in ſuffering: Now the adverſaries inſiſt only upon the ſubordinate and ſecondary ends of his death, and altogether ſhut out the more principal and chief.

3. We would diſtinguiſh betwixt the proper end of his death, and thoſe things which are the fruits and conſequences of it, through his having obtained that end. The proper end of the death of Chriſt, was the ſatisfying of God's juſtice, and the vindicating his Law and Government, Rom. 3. 25. and 4. 25. but the fruits and conſequences of it through his having compaſſed that end, are our deliverance from the curſe and condemnation of the law, Gal. 3. 13. Rom. 8. 34. The remiſſion of our ſins, Col. 1. 14. juſtification at the Bar of God, Rom. 5. 9. and a right and title to life, 1 Pet. 3. 18. Rom. 5. 18. Having now premiſed theſe things, we come to prove that the confirmation of the doctrine of the Goſpel, could not be the only not yet the principal end of the death of Chriſt.

1. Becauſe the truth of his doctrine was otherwiſe ſufficiently eſtabliſhed; for being demonſtrated to be from God, there needed no▪ further evidence of the truth of it; and that it was from God was abundantly proved,

(1.) By thoſe motives of credibility, and inbred evidence which it carried in it; if we conſider the Purity, Majeſty, Plainneſs, Fullneſs, Method and Manner in which delivered, it is not poſſible, but that without further means of conviction, we may be aſcertained that God is the Author of it.

(2.) God himſelf by the Teſtimony and Atteſtation of Miracles gave irrefragable evidence that it was true, and from himſelf, Heb. 2. 4.—God bearing witneſs, with ſigns, and wonders, and divers miracles, &c. Act. 2. 22. Jeſus a man approved of God amongſt you, by miracles, wonders, and ſigns, which God did by him in the midst of you, &c. and it was to theſe that Chriſt ſo often appealed for the truth of his doctrine, Joh. 5. 36. I have a greater witneſs than that of John; for the works which the Father hath given me to finiſh, the ſame works that I do, bear witneſs of me, that the Father hath ſent me; Joh. 10. 25. The works that I do in my Fathers Name, they bear witneſs of me. So Joh 15. 24. and alibi. And it was upon the conviction and evidence of theſe, that the world received his doctrine, Joh. 2. 23. Many believed in his Name, when they ſaw the miracles which he did. Joh. 3. 2. We know that • hou art a Teacher come from God: for no man can do theſe miracles • hat thou doſt, except God be with • im, Joh. 7. 31. And many of the • eople believed on him, and ſaid, • hen Chriſt cometh, will he do more • iracles, then theſe which this man • ath done. So that there was no • eceſſity for Chriſt to have dyed in • eference to this end, his doctrine • eing by other mediums ſuffici • ntly confirmed, had there never been any ſuch thing as the death of Chriſt, yet there wanted not ſufficient grounds by which a Divine Revelation might be known. Thoſe that lived before the incarnation of Chriſt, were not without ſufficient evidence of the truth and divinity of the doctrine of Moſes and the Prophets, yet they had not this argument to eſtabliſh and confirm them in the belief of it.

(3.) The needleſſeneſs of Chriſts dying in relation to the aſcertaining the truth of his doctrine appears hence, in that the higheſt argument and motive the Holy Ghoſt inſtanceth in, in reference to the confirming any declaration o • God is God's Oath, Heb. 6. 17, 18. So that if this had been the ſupream end of the death of Chriſt I do not ſee how it was any wiſe neceſſary that Chriſt ſhould hav • dyed, there having been other way • and me • ns every way ſufficient fo • the attaining of that end; yea, • annot underſtand how it is con • iſtent with the wiſdome, good • eſs, and righteouſneſs of God, • o have put an innocent perſon, • nd one ſo dear to him as his own Son to death, when he might • ave ſpared him, and yet arrived • t all he propounded by his ſuf • erings.

2. If the confirming the truth of the Scripture, had been the • upream end of all the ſufferings of Chriſt, and if it be upon that • ccount that he is ſo often ſaid to • ave dyed for us; this is no more • han what men are capable of do • ng, yea, than what the Martyrs • ave actually done, for they by ſufferings, blood, and death have • ealed and confirmed the truth of the Goſpel, and yet they are never ſaid to have dyed for us, or to have reconciled us to God by their blood; yea inſtead of this it is expreſly denied, that they ever did, or could dye for us in that ſenſe, and to that purpoſe tha • Chriſt did, 1 Cor. 1. 13. Act. 4. 12. and by conſequence there behoved to be other and greate • cauſes of the death and ſuffering • of Chriſt, then the ſealing o • confirming the truth of his doctrine.

3. It may from hence be further demonſtrated, that it was no • the ſupreame end of Chriſt's dying, only to encourage us to believe the certainty of God's promiſe, in reference to the free remiſſion of ſin, becauſe the Scripture every where aſſigns other ends, namely, that he might bea • our ſins, Rom. 4. 25. deſtroy th • e mity betwixt God and us, Eph. 2. 16. ſave us from periſhing, an • give us a right to life, Joh. 3. 16. So that the firſt Plea of the Sociniars remains confuted and overthrown.

2. The ſecond end inſtanced in, and pleaded for as the impulſive cauſe of the ſufferings and death of Chriſt is, that he might give us an example of ſuffering with patience. It is not denied, but that the death of Chriſt is of ſingular import to theſe purpoſes, 1 Pet. 2. 21. and 4. 1. Heb. 12. 2, 3. but yet theſe were not the principal ends of his ſufferings and death, neither were they indiſpenſably needful upon that ſcore.

(1.) Becauſe the Old Teſtament Saints were patiently carried through ſuffering, who (though they lived in the faith of the death of Chriſt) yet had not the lively example of the quality of his ſufferings, nor of his patience under them.

(2.) Becauſe upon theſe terms Chriſt ſhould not be properly our Saviour, but the act of ſaving us ſhould be our own: Chriſt ſhould only chalk us the way to ſalvation, whereas we ſhould go in it, and conſequently the act of ſaving us ſhould be altogethe • ours.

(3.) Becauſe God by the ſtrength and influence of hi • grace could have carried us through ſuffering with patience, without ſetting us the pattern an • example of his Son; and this he actually doth in that which is every way as difficult; for example, the mortifying of indwelling corruption; wherein the adverſary dare not ſay, that Chriſt was capable of being our pattern. Theſe being diſclaimed then from being the ſupream ends of Chriſt his ſuffering, it follows that we demonſtrate the true and principal end of his dying to have been that he might make ſatisfaction to God for us.

WE being in debt to God, Chriſt undertook to be our Surety, Heb. 7. 22. I do not deny but that he is alſo God's Surety to us, for the making good of all the promiſes, which are therefore ſaid to be in him, yea and Amen, 2 Cor. 1. 20 and he is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Sponſor propriè eſt qui pro alio ſpondet, vel ut debitum ſolvat, Prov. 22. 26. vel ut paenam l • at, Gen▪ 44 32, 33. Turret. in reference to this called God's Witneſs, Iſa. 55. 3, 4. But withall he is our Surety to God for the diſcharging of our debt: And that that is the intendment of the Apoſtle in the forequoted place appears from the context, in that he is there treating of the Prieſthood of Chriſt; and particularly treating of it in reference t • thoſe things which were to b • done with God for m • n. It i • true there were two parts of th • Prieſts office; one was to declar • God's ſtatutes and ordinances t • the people, and to overſee hi • worſhip, according to his ow • inſtitution and appointment: an • in this ſenſe Chriſt is called, Th • High Prieſt of our profeſsion, an • ſaid to be faithful in God's houſe, Heb. 3. 1, 2. which is alſo the import of Zech. 6. 13. He ſhall buil • the Temple of the Lord, and he ſhall bear the glory, and ſhall ſit and rule upon his Throne, and he ſhall be a Prieſt upon his Throne. The other part was to offer ſacrifice for men to God, and to reconcile God to the people, and this was the principal part of the Prieſt's office, Heb. 5. 1. the other being only ſecondary, and conſequent to this. And in this ſenſe the Apoſtle in the foregoing place underſtands Chriſt's Prieſthood, • nd in reference to this notion of • , ſtiles him ſurety, foraſmuch as • t had our debt charged upon • im, and ſuffered the penalty • hich we ſhould have born, Ere • e attempt the proof of this, we • eſire firſt to eſtabliſh theſe two • hings.

1. It is not againſt juſtice in • od to caſt pains upon an innocent • erſon. This the adverſary dare • ot deny, foraſmuch as it was • one in reference to Chriſt. I do • ot now diſpute, whether thoſe • ains were ſatisfactory; all a • • reſent I intend is, that God • ithout injuſtice may inflict pains • pon an innocent, as it is mani • eſt he did upon Chriſt. Though • mongſt men it be againſt all • rinciples of juſtice, to take away • he life of a guiltleſs perſon, ſee • ng we have no natural and abſo • ue dominion over one another, • either is there any ſuch power allowed us by the ſupream Sov • raign; yet God having an abſ • lute dominion over the lives, b • dies, and fortunes of men; he ha • a right to act, what none elſ • without the groſſeſt injuſtice ca •

2. It is not in every caſe unj • for one to be made undergo the p • niſhment of anothers ſin. The I • fants of Sodome, were involve • in the puniſhment of thoſe crim • of which themſelves were n • guilty, Gen. 19. Cham commi • ted the ſin, and the ſlavery w • entailed upon Canaan, Gen. 9. 2 • 25. The lye was ſingly Gehezi • but yet the Leproſie clave not t • him alone, but alſo to his poſt • rity, 2 Kings 5. 27. Scriptu • furniſheth us with an infini • number of inſtances, where Go • makes uſe of the Sons miſery, t • puniſh the Fathers offence. S • 2 Sam 21. 8, 14. and 24. 15, 1 • Joſh. 7. 24. 1 Kings 14. 10. Ja • 22. 30. God threatens to viſit t • • niquity of the fathers upon the Children, unto the third and • ourth generation, Exod. 20. 5. Neither is this any more, then what in one inſtance or other hath • een, and is ſtill practiced among • en in all Nations. If a perſon • e convicted of Treaſon, his in • eritance eſcheats to the Crown, • nd all right of claim ceaſeth from his poſterity. In pecuniary • atters it cannot be denied, but • hat puniſhment may redound to • he Surety: And in criminal caſes, • autionaries have been often pu • iſhed for others whom they have • e preſented.

Now to render ſuch a tranſ • ction juſt, that one be made to • uffer for anothers fault, there are • ut theſe things neceſſary.

1. That the innocent perſon • ave a dominion over that which • e parts with; hence a perſon • aving a dominion over his eſtate may alienate it to pay anothers debt, and had we as abſolute pow • over our lives as over our money▪ we might likewiſe diſpoſe • them for the preſervation of th • lives of others. And among th • Heathens, who apprehended tha • they had the ſame right over th • one as over the other, there wan • not inſtances of that nature; neither were thoſe commutations among them ever blamed of injuſtice. The example of Dam • and Pithias is obvious. That which alone renders ſuch tranſactions unjuſt is, that we have not a domini • on over our lives, and ſo cannot alienate and part with them: But now Chriſt had a plenary domini • on over his own life, and ſo coul • freely diſpoſe of it for the lives o • others, John 10. 18. I lay down my life of my ſelf, I have power to lay it down.

2. That there be a willingneſ • in the parties concerned, in the Judg and Ruler, to allow and accept ſuch a commutation in the • bſes and Surety to condeſcend to, • nd engage in ſuch an undertak • ng: There is no wrong done, •• en all parties are willing. Now • oth parties are here agreed; the Father in calling and inviting Chriſt to it, John 10. 18.—I lay • own my life—this commandement have I received of my Father. The Son in readily, ſubmitting to • nd engaging in the work, Heb. 10. • , 6, 7, 8, 9.—loe I am • ome, &c.

3. That the party ſtipuluting be • ble to overcome all he expoſeth • imſelf to, and that thoſe in • hoſe ſtead he doth it, do there • y eſcape what they themſelves • ood obnoxious to. If either • e be ſure to periſh in the engage • ent, or they for whom he under • akes be likely to receive no ad • antage by it, then the whole un • ertaking is altogether inconſiſtent • ith wiſdome, whatever it be with righteouſneſs. But now Jeſus Chriſt know himſelf able t • diſcharge all he became bound for, Joh. 10. 18. I lay down my life, and I take it up again. And certai • deliverance was to attend thoſe i • whoſe room he became ſubſtitute • Gal. 3. 13. Chriſt hath redeemed u • from the curſe of the law, being made a curſe for us.

4. That there be ſome near conjunction in him that ſuffers, with thoſe that ſhould have ſuffered. Juſtice doth not allow that a perſon altogether inconcerned in the offence, ſhould be ſubjected to the puniſhments due to thoſe with whom he hath no relation. But now there is the neareſt union betwixt Chriſt and thoſe in whoſe behalf he became engaged.

(1.) There is an union of nature, the ſatisfaction is made in the ſame nature in which the offence was committed, Heb. 2. 14, 16. There could have been no poſſibility of • aving ſinners, without a ſatisfa • tion in the nature that ſinned; • nd there was no need at all of Chriſt's having aſſumed our na • ure, but only in order that he • ight ſuffer and dye in it: And • he Apoſtle in forecited place, • aketh his aſſuming our nature, • he very foundation of his fitneſs • o undertake in our behalf, and the ground why the benefits of his ſuf • ering do in juſtice redound to us.

(2.) Being one with us in na • ure, he became alſo one with us in • aw: Though Phyſically the Sure • y and Debter be two different • en, yet Juridically and in conſpe • tu fori, in the account of the • aw, they are one and the ſame • erſon. Thus Chriſt being our • urety, was one with us legally, and in a law ſenſe became chargeable wi • h, and pu • ſuable for all • ur ſins, Iſa. 53. 6.—The Lord • aid on him the iniquity of us a •• , • Cor. 5. 21. He made him to be ſin for us, who knew no ſin.

(3.) He became alſo one with, u • in a myſtical and ſpiriturl ſenſe, on • with us as head to members, Eph. 1. 22, 23. One with us a • husband to wife, Eph. 5. 31, 32. And one with us as King to Subjects. Now as a husband may b • juſtly ſued for his wives debt; and if the hand offend the head may be ſmitten. So is Chriſt withou • any unrighteouſneſs impleadable for our ſins.

5. That the inducements moving to ſuch a tranſaction be weighty and conſiderable: It is not f • that the criminal himſelf ſhoul • be releaſed, nor that an innocen • perſon ſhould be ſubſtituted i • his room, but upon a cauſe that i • momentous and great. Therefore do Hiſtorians juſtifie the Decii in devoting themſelves to death in that it was for the preſervatio • of the Commonwealth. No • there was moſt important reaſon • ns for the transfering our guilt • pon Chriſt, and exacting ſatis • ction at his hand.

(1.) Becauſe otherwiſe the • hole race of mankind had been • terly loſt. In the fall of Angels • ere was only a certain number • at ſinned, millions being preſer • d in their obedience to God, and • condition of bleſſed enjoying of • m. But in the fall of man the • hole race was involved. not ſo • uch as one of the whole kind • uld have ever come to the frui • on of God; and beſides God • ould have miſt that, which was • art of his end in the creating of • em, viz. active glory in a way of • ankſgiving and praiſe. Now • ough their was no neceſſity aroſe • om hence upon God, but that • might have left them in their • and miſery; yet there was a • eat agreeableneſs in it to the Di • ne wiſdom, that a whole ſpecies • rational creatures ſhould not be loſt; but that as there we • ſome of the Angels who ſtood • give God the active glory of h • perfections and works; ſo ſom • of fallen mankind ſhould be recovered to joyn forever with th • in that employment.

(2.) Becauſe otherwiſe God ha • loſt the opportunity of glorifyin • his mercy and grace. God in th • creation of the world had glorified his power, wiſdom, and bounty; and in the preterition of falle • Anctels, he had glorified his holineſs and vindictive juſtice: No • without the recovering of falle • man, his mercy and grace had no • been equally honored and manifeſted with his other properties▪ And it is obſervable, that there i • no one attribute of God's nature▪ by which he loveth and chuſeth to m • ke himſelf more known, ther • goodneſs, clemency, and mercy▪ Exod. 34. 6, 7. 2 Chron▪ 30. 9. Pſ • l. 86. 5, 15. and 3. 4. and alibi.

(3.) Becauſe otherwiſe all reli • ion had been neceſſarily extin • uiſh'd in diſpair. It is not poſ • ble to ſerve God without hope • f reward, Heb. 11. 6. Had man • een unavoidably left obnoxious • o wrath he would through deſ • air have reſigned himſelf to all • in and villany; being left equally • opeleſs with the devils, he would • ave been as oppoſite to the love and obedience of God as they. Now it was very becoming the Divine wiſdome, that obedience and ſervice ſhould not utterly periſh from the earth.

6. The laſt thing needful to render ſuch a tranſaction juſt i • , that the honor of the tranſactors be heightned, at leſt ſecured by the tranſaction. It were no ways conſonant either to wiſdom or righteouſneſs, to allow the interpoſure of a fidejuſſor or ſubſtitute, if more could be had by retaining the offendor. But now by the exacting ſatisfaction from Chriſt as our Surety, the glory of the perfections of God's nature, the honour of his law and government are much more enhanced, than if God ſhould have inflicted puniſhment perſonally upon us. Firſt, for his Law, that is honored both in the precept, and threatning of it; Chriſt having both fulfilled the command and born the curſe: whereas had God confined himſelf to the ſinner, he had forever loſt the honour of the obediente of his law, and could have only honoured his threatning. 2ly. For the properties of his nature. (1.) Had he detained the offendor, he had compaſſed only the honour of his juſtice, but he had miſt the glory of his grace: His juſtice indeed had been conſpicuous, but his mercy had never come in view. He had rendred himſelf dreadful and terrible to his creatures, but not endeared, whereas now he hath given evidence and demonſtration of it to the utmoſt, 1 John 4. 10. Eph. 2. 4, 5, 6, 7. (2.) For his juſtice, though it had been enough that it did not ſuffer through the the releaſing the offendor, yet it is moreover exalted above whatever it could have been, had God reſolved on the deſtruction of the ſinner. (1.) Had he executed the puniſhment upon us, his juſtice had been glorified only paſſively, but by inflicting it upon Chriſt, it is glorified not only paſſively, but alſo actively. Chriſt loved the Majeſty of God at the ſame tim • he ſatisfied his Juſtice, but the damned while under the effects of God▪s juſtice, they hate both it and his holineſs: The voluntary ſufferings of Chriſt do infinitely more honour the juſtice of God, than the forced torments of the ungodly can. (2.) In that had he confined himſelf to the ſinner, his juſtice ſhould never have been ſatisfied. The damned are alwiſe paying their debt, but yet never pay it. Now Chriſt hath ſatisfied to the full. (3.) In that juſtice hath not only all its demands, but is obliged with a 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, • 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 • 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 • ot in all things, which are writ • en in the Book of the Law to do • hem, is curſed: He here opens • ow believers, notwithſtanding • hat commination, come to be • eed from the curſe; namely, be • auſe Chriſt hath born it; and for • he proof of this, he refers them • o Deut. 21. 23. where they were • aught ſo much. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Execra • o, a Curſe, the abſtract for the • oncrete (as is uſual in Scripture,2 C • r. 3. 9. and 5. 21 Eph. 5. 8. John 17 17. Rom. 3. 30. • e the Texts in the Margin) that is, • e underwent all the wrath which • e law denounced; particularly, • at death to which it only affixed • curſe. By curſe we may either • nderſtand the ſentence of the law • ecrating and condemning the ſin • r, which is called the curſe • 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, ye • 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. Paral • ll. l. 2. And here the providence of God is very obſervable, that whereas ſuſpenſion was not any o • 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 • o death, and thou hang him on a Tree; ough • to be read, and he be put to de • 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 d • gnitate, aut in crucem tolluntur, aut beſ • tis obj • c • 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 p • 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 Se • 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. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , 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 • ave reſpect to Pſal. 116. 3. The • orrows of death compaſſed me, and • he pains of hell got hold upon me: • found trouble and ſorrow. See • lſo Pſal. 22. 14. Mark expreſſeth • t, He began to be ſore amazed and • ery heavy, Mar. 14. 33. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , • ſignifies an high degree of hor • our and amazement, Medici vo • ant horripilationem, when the hair • ands up through fear, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . • raviſsimè angebatur, Bez. It im • lies much fear attended with reſt •• eneſs and anxiety of mind: Prae • oerore pene concidere animo. John • preſſeth it, Now is my ſoul trou • ed, Joh. 12. 27. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , it ſig • fieth great trouble through fear or grief: Hence tartarus, hell, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , quia terret omnia. Luke ſatth he was in an agony, Luke 22. 44 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , 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 innumer • 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 • uilt, free from all ſolicitude in • eference to the cares of the world, and c •• tain of a Crown of Glory, ſhould be under ſuch • nguiſh and conſt • rnation; which • lea • ly argues that it did not pro • eed from the conſideration of meer natural death, but from the • enſe of Divine wrath, and the • eeling of the curſe. I here are • wo inſtances in Thuanus, which • hough very ſtrange yet do infi • itely differ from this. Dux quidam indigna mortis metu adeo con • uſſus animo fuit, ut ſanguineum • udorem toto corpore fudit, Hiſt. • . 11. Juvenis ob • le • em cauſam à S • xto 5. ad mortem damnatus, prae doloris vehementia lachrymas crucn • as fudiſſe, & ſanguinem pro ſu • 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. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . It denoteth a moſt ardent kind of praying: A • dentior orandi • o • ma, cum lachrymis, gemitu, aliiſque geſtibus conjuncta. Luke expreſseth it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , he praye • 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, Dignitas perſonae 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 ſatisfactionis detrahere nil poteſt, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 poteſt; ratio est, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 eſt ſatisfaction • eſſentialis, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 non eſt.

2. The ſecond part of the curſe was ſeparation from God, and the ſenſe of the loſs of his favour, and this alſo Chriſt underwent, being for a time under the with drawment and loſs of the feeling of God's love So much was before hand propheſied concerning him, Pſal. 22. 1. and himſelf declareth that he bore it, Mat. 27. 46. My God, my God, why haſt thou forſaken m • ? It is true, he was not left as to the diſſolution of the perſonal union with the Divine Eſſence • on. 14. 11. and 10. 30. Heb. 9. 14. n • r as to the vertue and ſupport of God's power and providence, Pſal. 16. 8, 9 Joh. 16. 32. nor as to grace and ſanctification, Col. 1. 19. It was needful that he ſhould be always holy, otherwiſe he had failed in the work which he came about, but • t was not needful that he ſhould be always joyful; yea, conſidering his undertaking, it was impoſſible that he ſhould be ſo: and therefore he was left only as to the communication of the effects of Divine love and favour, which is that which the damned • ye under in hell. And this, with what I delivered under the former head, was the ground of his fear, agony, and bloody ſweat, &c. Having proved that Chriſt ſuffered the very ſame which we ſhould have ſuffered; it naturally follows, that he did it in way of a ſatisfaction, for there is no other reaſon imaginable, why God ſhould thus puniſh a perſon who in himſelf was altogether innocent, and one ſo dear to him as his own Son, but that he ſtood charged as a Surety with our ſins, to make ſatisfaction to Divine Juſtice for them.

THE next thing which comes under conſideration for the more full clearing, that Chriſt hath ſatisfied for us is this; that as he ſuffered the ſame which we ſhould have ſuffered, ſo he ſuffered it all in our room and ſtead. It was before hand told, that the Meſsiah ſhould be cut off, but not for himſelf, Dan. 9. 26. He was to be penally cut off, not upon his own account, or for himſelf, but for us. This particular will be fully made out by conſidering theſe five things.

1. In that he underwent death, which God had conſtituted the puniſhment of ſin, and there being no • uſe in himſelf why he ſhould ſuf • r that penalty, It unavoidably • llows, that it was becauſe he ſtood • arged with our offences. I do not • ow diſpute, whether God might • ave made man obnoxious to • ath in caſe he had never ſinned, • e only queſtion is what he hath • one: I will not deny, but that • od having given us our beings • nd lives, might without inju • ice have taken back, what he • ad given, he might in way of do • inion and ſoveraignty have ſent • into the world to act our parts • or a time, and then remanded us • to our ſtate of not being again; • e only queſtion is what he hath one, and that in condecency to is wiſdom, goodneſs, and righte • uſneſs as governour of his crea • res; and here we affirm that • eath was appointed by God to be • e wages of ſin, and that if man • ad not ſinned, he ſhould not have • yed, notwithſtanding the poſſibility of dying, which was in ma • nature, he ſhould by the power • God have been preſerved fro • actual dying. Whatever he was ob • noxious to in the conſtitution • his nature, he ſhould for ever na • been free from death in the even • And it was very conſonant to Di • vine wiſdom and goodneſs, th • perfect righteouſneſs and puri • ſhould have been attended wit • life and immortality, and th • God ſhould not take away th • being which he had beſtowed but upon a faileur in reference t • the end for which it was given God appointed death to be th • puniſhment of ſin, Gen. 2. 17. I • the day that thou eateſt thereof, th • ſhalt ſurely dye. This being denounced only in caſe of ſin, w • are thence fully informed, that i • man had not ſinned he ſhould no • have dyed. To this it were • aſi • to ſubjoyn many other places o • Scripture, Rom. 6. 23. The wag •• of ſin is death. Rom. 5. 12. Death entred into the world by ſin. It came not in as a conſequent of the frailty of humane nature, but as the deme • it of the fall. Hence death is called an enemy, 1 Cor. 15. 26. God made not death, ſaith • he Apocryphal writer. Now Jeſus Chriſt having ſuffered death, which was the puniſhment of ſin, and having had no ſin of his own for which he could be puniſhed, it reſults by a neceſſary conſequence, that he ſuffered death as the penalty of our ſins, • nd as he ſtood in our room.

Object. Object. But poſsibly it may be • bjected, that this interferes with our own doctrine. For if death be the • enalty of ſin, then for aſmuch as Chriſt by bearing the penalty hath de • ivered us from every thing that is • enal, he ſhould have delivered us from death too, but not having delivered us from death, we contradict • ur ſelves in calling death the pu • iſhment of ſin.

But to redeem in its firſt and moſt proper intendment, ſignifies by the payment and ſolution of a price and ranſome to ſet free.

Now one may be in bondage, ei • her as a Debtor to a Creditor, or • s a Criminal to a Governour and Ruler; he that is in Priſon on the firſt foot of account, muſt con • nue ſo, unleſs ſatisfaction be made by the payment of the ſumm of which he ſtands charged; and • e that is detained on the ſecond • ccount, is not to expect delive • ance, unleſs the penalty be under • one, to which his offence hath • endred him obnoxious. And • hoſe who upon other terms come • o be free, cannot proberly be ſaid to be redeemed, but only to be releaſed.

Having ſtated the ſignificatio • of the word before I come t • 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 t • God's fiery indignation and wrath. His law we had broken, and by his ſentence we ſtood condemned▪ • is his judgment, that they who commit ſin are worthy of death. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , 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 wer • 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 u • from iniquity, and from our vai • converſation, Tit. 2. 14. 1 Pet. 1. 18▪

3. We muſt diſtinguiſh betwix • pecuniary debts and penal, betwix • a meer Creditor and a Governour▪ In pecuniary debts ſomething material is paid and received, by which the Creditor is made richer: In penal, it is enough that th • Law be ſatisfied, though the Governour be not formally made th • richer. A perſon that is wronged may account himſelf ſatisfied, i • the party who hath offended him hazard his life for him, though h • formally pay him nothing. S • here it was not needful that Go • ſhould properly receive any thing • it was enough that he ſhould accept what was done. To mak • good God's acceptance of th • price, it is ſufficient that his law is ſatisfied, and that his juſtice ſuffered not by the delivery of th • 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, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , it is all one whether it come from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to looſe, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to pay. As we w • re held priſoners by the law and juſtice of God, we are by this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 redeemed and ſet free. The Antient C • ot. in Mat. 28. 20. Jews uſed to ſtile the Meſſiah 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 . It is not improbable that the Romans derived their luſtrum from 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , when many were delivered from deſtruction by one or more ſuffering, to purifie and • xpiate the ſin of the reſt. Hinc Dec • i dicuntur luſtraſſe Romanum exercitum. Now Chriſt was ſuch a 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , inſtead of many. Hence he is ſtiled 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , 1 Tim. 2. 6. Quum alius ſolvit, quod reus non potera • , Ar • t. Eſt tale pretium in quo liberator ſimile quid ſub • t et • 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , 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, An • 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 h • ld forth as the meritorious and procuring cauſe of it. The words are 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , never ſo far as I remember, made uſe of in the whole New Teſtament, but to denote a proper redemption; ſave that▪ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 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 accomp • iſhed after one manner. The deliverance which Moſes wrought, was a tem • oral deliverance; who will therefore ſay that that of Chriſt was but a temporal deliverance? • o more ought we to alledge, that becauſe the one was accompliſhed without a price, that therefore the • ther muſt be effected ſo alſo.

(4.) Moſes was not a type of Chriſt in all his Offices. Now • 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 • he reſemblance in that wherein • he one was the type of the other. Now there is a reſemblance be • wixt Moſes's redeeming Iſrael • rom the tyranny of Pharaoh, and Chriſt's redeeming us from the power of Satan.

Object. 2 Object. 2. But is is further ob • ected, that redemption in this whole affair muſt be underſtood in a Metaphorical ſenſe, becauſe we are ſai • to be redeemed from iniquitie • Tit. 2. 14. and from a vain converſation, 1 Pet. 1. 18. but it cannot be ſaid that there was a pric • 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 t • deliver.

Anſw. For Anſwer, (1.) The objecto • at once proclaim themſelves ignorant both of Law and Religion; i • there any thing more uſual, tha • when a perſon pays to the Creditor the debt of one that is in Priſon; or the ranſome of one that i • in bondage, to him that detain • 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 al • 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.

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 f • 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 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Rom. 5. 10. 2 Cor. 5. 18, 19, 20. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Epheſ. 2. 16. Col. 1. 20, 21. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Col, 1. 20. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Rom. 5. 11. 2 Cor. 5. 18, 19. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Heb. 2 17. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 1 Joh. 2. 2. 1 Joh. 4. 10. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , 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 non-Latin alphabet 〉 , in S • phocles is to attone the Anger of the Gods, and to render them propitious and favourable. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Home • , 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 innum • rable more, the words ſignifie by appeaſing anger, to reconcile God to us.