(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
See other formats

Full text of "The works of John Owen"


1'I{INCET0jS\ N. J. 

No. Ca,v, ~^m^ ^- - 

No. Shelf. Se^cS^ .. 

No. Book, y ,. \v 



















And sold by J. Parker, Oxford ; Deighton and Sons, Cambridge ; D. Brown, 
Wangli and Innes, and FI. S. Baynes and Co. Edinburgh ; Clialmers and 
Collins, and M. Ogle, Glasgow; M. Ktene, and R. M. Tiras, Dublin. 







Of the priestly office of Christ ; how he was a priest ; when he entered on this 
office ; and how he dischargeth it 1 


Of the death of Christ, the causes, ends and fruits thereof, with an entrance into 
the doctrine of his satisfaction thereby - 19 


The several considerations of the death of Christ, as to the expiation of our sins 
thereby, and the satisfaction made therein: First, of it as a price. Secondly, 
as a sacrifice -• 28 


Of the death of Christ, as it was a punishment, and the satisfaction made 
thereby « • • • 46 


Some particular testimonies evincing the death of Christ to be a punishment, 
properly so called 58 


A digression concerning the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah : and the vindication 
of it from the perverse interpretation of Hugo Grotius 74 

Of the matter of the punishment that Christ underwent, or what he suffered • • • 110 


Of the covenant between the Father and the Son, the ground and founda- 
tion of this dispensation of Christ's being punished for us, and in our 
stead ■ ^''^^ 


Of redemption b^ the death of Christ, as it was a price or ransom 139 


Of reconciliation by the death of Christ, as it is a sacrifice 168 


The satisfaction of Christ, on the consideration of his death being a punish- 
ment, farther evinced ; and vindicated from the exceptions of Smalcius • • • • 182 


Of election and universal grace. Of the resurrection of Christ from the dead • • 194 

Of justification and faith • 206 


Of keeping the commandments of God : and of perfection of obedience, how 
attainable in this life • 210 


Of prayer : and whether Christ prescribed a form of prayer to be used by be- 
lievers : and of praying unto him, and in his name, under the Old Testament 226 


Of the resurrection of the dead, and the state of the wicked at the last day • • • 232 

Of the death of Christ, and of justification 244 



Recommendatory Preface 321 

The Preface to the Reader 323 


The introduction. The design of the work. AUieists. The prolepsis of divine 
justice general. The divisions of justice, according to Aristotle. The senti- 
ments of the schoolmen respecting tliese. Another division. Justice consi- 
dered absolutely. Then in various respects 343 


The universal justice of God. The idle fancies of the schoolmen. The argu- 
ments of Durandus against commutative justice. Suarez's censure of the 
scholastic reasonings. His opinion of divine justice. The examination of 
it. A description of universal justice from the Sacred Writings. A division 
of it in respect of its egress. Rectitude of government in God, what, and 


of wliat kind. Definitions of the philosophers and lawyers. Divisions of 
the justice of government. A caution respecting these. Vindicatory justice. 
The opinions of the partisans. An explication of the true opinion. Who 
the adversaries are. The state of the controversy farther considered 249 


A series of arguments in support of vindicatory justice. First, from the Scrip- 
tures. Three divisions of the passages of Scripture. The first contains those 
which respect the purity and holiness of God. The second, those which re- 
spect God as the judge. What it is to judge with justice. The third, those 
which respect the divine supreme right. A second argument is taken from 
the general consent of mankind. A threefold testimony of that consent. 
The first from the Scriptures. Some testimonies of the heathens. The se- 
cond, from the power of conscience. Testimonies concerning that power. 
The mark set upon Cain. The expression of the emperor Adrian, when at 
the point of death. The consternation of mankind at prodigies. The horror 
of tlie wicked, whom even fictions terrify. Two conclusions. The third tes- 
timony, from the confession of all nations. A vindication of the argument 
against Rutherford. TLc regard paid to sacrifices among the nations. Dif- 
ferent kinds of the same. Propitiatory sacrifices. Some instances of them 364 


The origin of human sacrifices. Their use among the Jews, Assyrians, Ger- 
mans, Goths, the inhabitants of Marseilles, the Normans, the Francs, the 
Tyrians, the Egyptians, and the ancient Gauls. Testimonies of Cicero and 
Cffisar, that they were used among the Britons and Romans by the Dmids. 
A fiction of Appio, concerning the worship in the temple of Jerusalem. The 
names of some persons sacrificed. The use of human sacrifices among the 
Gentiles, proved from Clemens of Alexandria, Dionysius of Halicarnassia, 
Porphyry, Philo, Eusebius, Tertullian, Euripides. Instances of human sa- 
crifices in the Sacred Scriptures. The remarkable obedience of Abraham. 
What the neighbouring nations might have gathered from that event. Why 
human sacrifices were not instituted by God. The story oflphigenia. The 
history of Jephtha. Whether he put his daughter to death. The cause of 
the difficulty. The impious sacrifice of King Moab. The abominable su- 
perstition of (be Rugiani. The craftiness of the devil. Vindications of the 
argument. The same concluded • 379 


The third argument. This divine attribute demonstrated in the works of Pro- 
vidence. That passage of the apostle to the Romans, chap. i. 18. considered. 
Anger, what it is. The definitions of the philosophers. The opinion of 
Lactantius concerning the anger of God. Anger often ascribed to God in 
the Holy Scriptures. In what sense this is done. The divine anger denotes, 
1. The effects of anger. 2. The will of punishing. What that will is in 
God. Why the justice of God is expressed by anger. The manifestation cf 
the divine anger, what it is. How it is revealed from heaven. The sum of 
the argument. The fourth argument. Vindicatory justice revealed in the 
cross of Christ. The attributes of God. How displayed in Christ. Heads 
of other arguments. The conclusion ,• 399 




Another head of the first part of the dissertation. Arguments for the necessary 
egress of vindicatory justice from the supposition of sin. The first argument. 
God's hatred of sin, what. Whether God by nature hates sin, or because 
he wills so to do. Testimonies from Holy Scripture. Dr. Twiss's answer. 
The sum of it. The same obviated. The relation between obedience as to 
reward, and sin as to punishment, not the same. Justice and mercy, in re- 
spect of their exercise, different. The second argument. The description 
of God in the Scriptures, in respect of sin. In what sense he is called a con- 
suming fire. Twiss's answer refuted. The fallacies of the answer 409 


The tliird argument. The non-punishment of sin is contrary to the glory of 
God's justice. Likewise of his holiness and dominion. A fourth argument. 
The necessity of a satisfaction being made by the death of Christ. No ne- 
cessary cause, or cogent reason for the death of Christ, according to the ad- 
versaries. The objection refuted. The use of sacrifices. The end of the 
first part of the dissertation ■ 415 

PART 11. 


Objections of the adversaries answered. The Racovian catechism particularly 
considered. The force of the argument for the satisfaction of Christ, from 
punitory justice. The catechists deny that justice to be inherent in God. 
And also sparing mercy. Their first argument weighed and refuted. Jus- 
tice and mercy are not opposite. Two kinds of the divine attributes. Their 
second and third arguments, with the answers annexed 4^3 


Crellius taken to task. His first mistake. God doth not punish sins as being 
endowed with supreme dominion. The first argument of Crellius. Tlie an- 
swer. The translation of punishment upon Christ, in what view made by 
God. Whether the remission of sins, without, a satisfaction made, could take 
place, without injury to him to whom punishment belongs. Whetlier every 
one can resign his right. Right twofold. The right of debt, what : and what 
that of government. A natural and positive right. Positive right, what : a 
description also of natural right. Concessions of Crellius 427 


The opinions of Socinus considered. What he thought of our present question, 
viz. that it is the hinge on which the whole controversy, concerning the sa- 
tisfaction of Christ turns. His vain boasting, as if having disproved this vin- 
dicatory justice, he had snatched the prize from his adversaries. Other clear 
proofs of the satisfaction of Christ. That it is our duty to acquiesce in the re- 
vealed will of God. The truth not to be forsaken. Mercy and justice not 
opposite. Vain distinctions of Socinus concerning divine justice. The con- 
sideration of these distinctions. His first argument against vindicatory jus- 


tice. The solution of it. The anger and severity of God, what. Universal 
and particular justice, in what they agree. 'J'he false reasoning and vain 
boasting of the adversary 433 


The arguments of Socinus against punitory justice weighed. A false hypothesis 
of his. Sins, in what sense they are debts. The first argument of Socinus, 
in which he takes for granted what ought to have been proved. A trifling 
supposition substituted for a proof. Whether that excellence, by virtue of 
which God punishes sins, be called justice in the Scriptures. The severity 
of God, what. Our opponent's second argument. It labours under the same 
deficiency as the first. It is not opposite to mercy to punish the guilty. 
There is a distinction between acts and habits. Our opponent confounds tliem. 
The mercy of God infinite, so also is his justice. A distinction of the divine 
attributes. In pardoning sins through Jesus Christ, God hath exercised infinite 
justice and infinite mercy. The conclusion of the contest with Socinus • • • • 439 


The progress of the dispute to the theologians of our own country. The supreme 
authority of divine truth. Who they are, and what kind of men, who have 
gone into factions about this matter. The Coryphojus of the adversaries, Che 
very illustrious Twiss. The occasion of his publishing his opinion. The opi- 
nion of the Arminians. The effects of the death of Christ, what. Twiss ac- 
knowledges punitory justice to be natural to God. The division of the dispute 
with Twiss. Maccovius's answers to the arguments of Twiss. The plan of 
our disputation 451 


Twiss's first argument. Its answer. A trifling view of the divine attributes. 
Whether God could, by his absolute power forgive sins without a satisfaction : 
to let sins pass unpunished, implies a contradiction; and that twofold. What 
these contradictions are. Whether God may do, what man may do. Whe- 
ther every man may renounce his right. Whether God cannot forgive sins 
because of his justice. The second argument. Its answer. Distinctions of 
necessity. God doth no work, without himself, from absolute necessity. Con- 
ditional necessity. Natural necessity twofold. God doth not punish to the 
extent of his power, but to the extent of his justice. God always acts with a 
concomitant liberty. An argument of the illustrious Vossius considered. God 
a consuming fire, but an intellectual one. An exception of Twiss's. Whe- 
ther independent of the divine appointment, sin would merit punishment. In 
punishment, what things are to be considered. The relation between obe- 
dience as to reward, and disobedience as to punishment not the same. The 
comparison between mercy and justice, by Vossius improperly instituted • • 454 


Twiss's third argument. A dispensation with regard to the punishment of sin, 
what, and of what kind. The nature of punishment, and its circumstances. 
The instance of this learned opponent refuted. The considerations of renew- 
ing and punishing, different. How long, and in what sense God can dispense 
with the punishment due to sin. God the supreme governor of the Jewish 
polity : also, the Lord of all. The fourth argument of Twiss. The answer. 


Whether God can inflict punishment on an innocent person. In what sense 
God is more willing to do acts of ivindness than to punish. Wliat kind of 
willingness that assertion respects. The conclusion of the answer to Twiss's 
principal arguments 461 


The defence of Sibrandus Lubbertus against Twiss. The agreement of these 
very learned men in a point of the utmost importance. A vindication of his 
argument from God's hatred against sin. Liberality and justice different. A 
sentiment of Lubbertus undeservedly charged with atheism. What kind of 
necessity of operation we suppose in God : this pointed out. The sophisti- 
cal reasoning of this learned writer. How God is bound to manifest any pro- 
perty of his nature. The reasons of Lubbertus and Twiss's objections to the 
same considered. That passage of the apostle, Rom. i. 32. considered and 
vindicated. His mode of disputing rejected. The force of the argument 
from Rom. i. 32. The righteous judgment of God, what. Our federal re- 
presentative, and those represented by him, are one mystical body. An an- 
swer to Twiss's arguments ; Exod. xxxiv. 7. The learned writer's answer 
respecting that passage. A defence of the passage. Punitory justice a name 
of God. Whether those for whom Christ hath made satisfaction, ought to be 
called guilty. Psal. v. 5 — 7. the sense of that passage considered. From 
these three passages the argument is one and the same. Lubbertus's argu- 
ment from the definition of justice, weighed. How vindicatory justice is dis- 
tinguished from universal. The natures of liberality and justice evidently 
different. Punishment belongs to God. In inflicting punishment, God 
vindicates his right. Will and necessity, whether they be opposite. The 
end of the defence of Lubbertus 46.'> 


Piscator's opinion of this controversy. How far we assent to it. Twiss's argu- 
ments militate against it. How God punishes from a natural necessity. How 
God is a consuming fire. God's right, of what kind. Its exercise necessary, 
from some thing supposed. Whence the obligation of God to exercise it 
arises. Other objections of Twiss discussed 475 


Rutherford reviewed. An oversight of that learned man. His opinion of pu- 
nitory justice. He contends that divine justice exists in God freely. The 
consideration of that assertion. This learned writer and Twiss disagree. His 
first argument. Its answer. The appointment of Christ to death twofold. 
The appointment of Cbrist to the mediatorial office, an act of supreme do- 
minion. The punishment of Christ an act of punitory justice. An argument 
of that learned man, easy to answer. The examination of the same. The 
learned writer proves things not denied ; passes over things to be denied. ' 
What kind of necessity we ascribe to God in punishing sins. A necessity 
upon a condition supposed. What the suppositions are upon which that 
necessity is founded. A difference between those things which are necessary 
by a decree, and those which are so from the divine nature. The second ar- 
gument of that learned man. His obscure manner of writing pointed out. 
Justice and mercy different in respect of their exercise. What it is to owe the 
good of punitory justice to the universe. This learned man's third argument. 


The answer. Whether God could forbid sin, and not under the penalty of 
eternal death. Concerning the management of punishment in human courts 
from the divine appointment. The manner of U, What this learned author 
understands by the interna! courts of God. This learned author's fourth ar- 
gunient. All acts of grace have a respect to Christ. His fifth argument. 
The answer. A dissertation on the various degrees of punishment. For 
what reason God may act unequally with equals. Concerning the delay of 
punishment, and its various dispensations 481 


The conclusion of this dissertation. The use of the doctrine herein vindi- 
cated. God's hatred against sin revealed in various ways. The dreadful 
effects of sin all over the creation. Enmity between God and every sin. 
Threalenings and the punishment of sin appointed. The description of sin 
in the Sacred Scriptures. To what great miseries we are liable through sin. 
The excellency of grace, in pardoning sin through Clirist. Gratitude and 
obedience due from the pardoned. An historical fact concerning Tigranes, 
king of Armenia. Christ to be loved for his cross above all things. The 
glory of God's justice revealed by this doctrine ; and also of his wisdom and 
holiness ■ 494 



Of the priestly office of Christ ; hotv he was a priest ; when he entered on 
this office ; and hotv he dischargeth it. 

His eleventh cliapter is concerning the priestly office of Jesus 
Christ. In the first and second question he grants him to 
be a priest, from Heb. iv. 14. and to be appointed to that 
office by the Father, from Heb. v. 5. The remainder of the 
chapter is spent in sundry attempts to prove that Christ 
was not a priest, whilst he was on the earth ; as also to take 
off from the end of his priesthood, with the benefit redound- 
ing to the church thereby. 

For the first, a man wt)uld suppose Mr. Biddle were fair 
and ingenuous in his concessions, concerning the priesthood 
of Jesus Christ. May we but be allowed to propose a few 
questions to him, and to have answers suggested according 
to the analogy of his faith, I suppose his acknowledgment 
of this truth will be found to come exceedingly short of 
what may be expected. Let him therefore shew, whether 
Christ be a high-priest properly so called, or only in a 
metaphorical sense, with respect to what he doth in heaven 
for us, as the high priest of old did deal for the people in 
their things, when he received mercy from God ? Again, 
whether Christ did or doth offer a proper sacrifice to God? 
and if so, of what kind ? or only that his offering of himself 
in heaven is metaphorically so called ? If any shall say that 
Mr. B. differs from his masters in these things, I must 
needs profess myself to be otherwise minded, because of his 
following attempt to exclude him from the investiture with, 
and execution of, his priestly office in this life, and at his 
death ; whence it inevitably follows, that he can in no wise 
be a proper priest, nor have a proper sacrifice to offer, 
but that both the one and the other are metaphorical ; and 
so termed in allusion to what the high-priest among the Jews 



did for the people. That which I have to speak to, in this 
ensuing discourse, will hinder me from insisting much on the 
demonstration of this, that Christ was a priest so called, and 
offered to God a sacrifice of atonement or propitiation, pro- 
perly so called, whereof all other priests and sacrifices appoint- 
ed of God, were Luttypes. Briefly, therefore, I shall do it. 

The Scripture is so positive that Jesus Christ in the exe- 
cution of his office of his mediation, was, and is a priest, 
a high-priest, that it is amongst all that acknowledge him 
utterly out of question. That he is not properly so called, 
but metaphorically, and in allusion to the high-priest of the 
Jews, as was said, the Socinians contend. I shall then, as I 
said, in the first place prove, that Christ was a high-priest, 
properly so called; and then evince when he was so, or 
when he entered on that office. This first is evident from 
that description or definition of a high-priest, which the 
apostle gives, Heb. v. 1. 'Every high-priest taken from 
among men, is ordained for men, that he may offer both 
gifts and sacrifices for sin,' That this is the description 
of a high-priest properly so called, is manifest from the 
apostle's accommodation of this office spoken of to Aaron, 
or his exemplifying of the way of entrance thereinto, from 
that of Aaron, v. 4. ' And no man taketh this honour to him- 
self, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.' That is, 
to be such a high-priest as Aaron was, which here he de- 
scribes. One that had that honour, which Aaron had. Now 
certainly Aaron -was a high-priest properly and truly, if 
ever any one was so in the world. That Jesus Christ was 
such a high-priest, as is here described, yea, that he is the 
very high-priest so described by the Holy Ghost, appears 
upon this twofold consideration. 1. In general, the apostle 
accommodates this definition or description of a high- 
priest, to Jesus Christ, ver. 5. ' So also Christ glorified not 
himself to be made a high-priest.' Were it not that very 
priesthood of which he treats, that Christ was so called to, 
it were easy so to reply : true ; to a proper priesthood a 
man must be called, but that which is improper and meta- 
phorical only, he may assume to himself, or obtain it upon 
a more general account, as all believers do. But this the 
apostle excludes, by comparing Christ in his admission to 
this office, with Aaron, who was properly so. 2. In parti- 


cular, all the parts of this description have in the Scripture 
a full and complete accommodation unto Jesus Christ, so 
that he must needs be properly a high-priest, if this be the 
description of such a one. 

1. He was taken from amongst men. That great pro- 
phecy of him so describes him, Deut. xviii. 18. 'I will raise 
you up a prophet from among your brethren.' He was taken 
from among men, or raised up from among men, or raised 
up from among his brethren. And in particular, it is men- 
tioned out of what tribe amongst them he was taken, Heb. 
vii. 13, 14. ' For he, of whom these things are spoken, per- 
taineth to another tribe : For it is evident, that our Lord 
sprang out of Juda.' And the family he was of in that tribe, 
namely, that of David, is everywhere mentioned. 'God 
raised up the horn of salvation in the house of his servant 
David ;' Luke i. 69. 

2. He was ordained for men, ra ir^og tov ^eov, as to 
things appointed by God : Ka^hraTui, is appointed to rule 
and preside, and govern, as to the things of God. This or- 
dination or appointment, is that after-mentioned, which he 
had of God : his ordination to this office, ver. 5, 6. * So also 
Christ glorified not himself, to be made a high-priest, but 
he that said unto him. Thou art my Son, this day have I 
begotten thee,' &c. He had his ordination from God. 
He who made him both Lord and Christ, made him also a 
high-priest ; and he was made in a more solemn manner 
than ever any priest was, even by an oath ; chap. vii. 20, 21. 
' For as much as not without an oath,' &:c. and he was so 
appointed for men, to preside and govern them in things ap- 
pertaining to God, as it was with the high priest of old ; 
the whole charge of the house of God, as to holy things, his 
worship, and his service, was committed to him. So is it 
with Jesus Christ, Heb. iii. 6. ' Christ is as a Son over his 
own house, whose house are we.' He is for us, and over us, 
in the things of the worship, and house of God. And that 
he was ordained for men, the Holy Ghost assures us farther, 
chap. vii. 26. ' Such a high-priest became us ;' he was so, 
for us : which is the first part of the description of a high 
priest, properly so called. 

3. The prime and peculiar end of this office, is to offer 
gifts and sacrifices for sin. And as we shall abundantly ma- 


nifest afterward, that Christ did thus offer gifts and sacri- 
fices for sin : so the apostle professedly affirms, that it was 
necessary he should do so, because he was a high-priest, 
chap .viii. 3. ' For every high-priest is ordained to offer gifts 
and sacrifices ; wherefore it is of necessity, that this man 
have somewhat also to offer.' The force of the apostle's ar- 
gument, concerning the necessity of the offering of Christ, 
lies thus. Every high-priest is to offer gifts and sacrifices ; 
but Christ is a high-priest, therefore he must have some- 
what to offer. Now if Christ was not a priest properly so 
called, it is evident his argument would be inconclusive; for 
from that which is properly so, to that which is only so me- 
taphorically, and as to some likeness and proportion, no ar- 
gument will lie. For instance ; Every true man is a rational 
creature ; but he that shall thence conclude, that a painted 
man is so, will find his conclusion very feeble. What it is 
that Christ had to offer, and what sacrifice he offered, shall 
afterward be declared. The definition then of a high-priest, 
properly so called, in all the parts of it, belonging unto Christ, 
it is necessary that the thing defined belong also unto him. 

2. He who is a priest, according to the order of a true 
and real priesthood, he is a true and real priest. Believers 
are called priests. Rev. i. 5. and are said to offer up sacri- 
fices to God f spiritual sacrifices, such as God is pleased 
with. Whence is it, that they are not real and proper 
priests ? Because they are not priests of any real order of 
priesthood, but are so called, because of some allusion to, 
and resemblance of, the ''priests of old, in their access unto 
God. This will also by the way discover the vanity of them 
among us, who would have the ministers of the gospel, in 
contradistinction to other believers, be called priests. Of 
what order were they who did appropriate that appellation? 
The absurdity of this figment, the learned Hooker could no 
otherwise defend, than by affirming that priest was an ab- 
breviation of presbyter. When both in truth, and in the 
intendment of them that used that term, its sense was other- 
wise. But to return. The sons of Aaron were properly 
priests. Why- so? Because they were so appointed in the line 
of the priesthood of Levi, according to the order of Aaron. 
Hence I assume, Christ being called a priest, according to 

a Heb. xiii. 16. ^ 1 Pet. ii. 9- Eplies. ii. 18. Hcb.x. 22. 


the order of a true and proper priesthood, was truly, and 
properly so. * He was a priest after the order of Melchi- 
sedec;' Psal. ex. 4. which the apostle often insists on in the 
Epistle to the Hebrews. If you say that Christ is called a 
high-priest, after the order of Melchisedec, not properly, but 
by reason of some proportion and analogy, or by way of al- 
lusion to him : you may as well say, that he was a priest ac- 
cording to the order of Aaron ; there being a great simili- 
tude between them, against which the apostle expressly dis- 
putes in the whole of the 7th chapter to the Hebrews. He 
therefore was a real priest, according to a real and proper 

3. Again, He that was appointed of God to offer sacri- 
fices for the sins of men, was a priest properly so called ; but 
that Christ did so, and was so appointed, will appear in our 
farther consideration of the time, when he was a priest, as also 
in that following, of the sacrifice he offered ; so that at pre 
sent I shall not need to insist upon it. 

4. Let it be considered, that the great medium of the 
apostolical persuasion against apostacy in that Epistle to the 
Hebrews, consists in the exalting of the priesthood of Christ, 
above that of Aaron : now that which is metaphorically only 
so in any kind, is clearly and evidently less so, than that 
which is properly and directly so. If Christ be metaphori- 
cally only a priest, he is less than Aaron on that considera- 
tion. He may be far more excellent than Aaron in other 
respects, yet in respect of the priesthood he is less excellent, 
which is so directly opposite to the design of the apostle in 
that epistle, as nothing can be more. It is then evident on 
all these considerations, and might be made farther conspi- 
cuous, by such as are in readiness to be added, that Christ 
was, and is, truly and properly a high-priest, which was the 
first thing designed for confirmation. 

The Racovian catechism doth not directly ask or answer 
this question. Whether Christ be a high-priest properly so 
called? but yet insinuates its author's judgment expressly to 
the contrary. *^'The sacerdotal office of Christ is placed 
herein, that as by his kingly office he can help and relieve 

« Munus icitur sacerdotale in eo situm est, quod quemadmodum pro regio mu- 
nere potest nobis in omnibus nostris necessitatibus subveniie: ita pro niunere sacer- 
dotali subvenire vult, ac porro subvenit : atque lisc illius subveniendi, seu opis atfe- 
rendae ratio, sacrificiuni ejus appellatur. Catec. Rac. de Mun. Clir. Sacer. Q. 1. 

6 Christ's puiEbTLY office. 

our necessities ; so by his sacerdotal office he will help, and 
actually doth so : and this way of his helping or relieving 
us, is called his sacrifice.' 

Thus they begin. But, 1 . That any office of Christ should 
bespeak power to relieve us, without a will, as is here affirmed 
of his kingly, is a proud, foolish, and ignorant fancy. Is this 
enouoh for a king among men, that he be able to relieve his 
subjects, though he be not willing ? or is not this a proper 
description of a wicked tyrant ? Christ as a king, is as well 
willing, as able to save ; Isa. xxxii. 1, 2. 2. Christ as a high- 
priest is no less able than willing also, and as a king, he is 
no less willing than able ; Heb. vii. 27. That is, as a king 
he is both able and willing to save us, as to the application 
of salvation, and the means thereof. As a priest, he is both 
willing and able to save us, as to the procuring of salvation, 
and all the means thereof. 3. It is a senseless folly to ima- 
gine, that the sacrifice of Christ consists in the manner of 
affording us that help and relief, which as a king he is able 
to give us : such weak engines do these men apply, for 
the subversion of the cross of Christ; but of this more af- 

But they proceed to give us their whole sense, in the next 
question and answer, which are as followeth. 

*Q. "^Why is this way of his affording help, called a sa- 
crifice ? 

* A. It is called so by a figurative manner of speaking ; for 
as in the old covenant, the high-priest entering into the ho- 
liest of holies, did do those things, which pertained to the 
expiation of the sins of the people ; so Christ hath now en- 
tered the heavens, that there he might appear before God 
for us, and perform all things that belong to the expiation of 
our sins.' 

The sum of what is here insinuated, is, 1. That the sacri- 
fice of Christ is but a figurative sacrifice, and so consequently, 
that he himself is a figurative priest : for as the priest is, 
such is his sacrifice : proper, if proper; metaphorical, if rae- 

<i Quare lisec ejus opis afferenda; ratio sacrificiura vocatiir? — Vocatur ita figurato 
loquendi modo, quod qucmadmodum in prisco foedere sunimus Pontifex ingressusin 
sanctum sanctorum, ea quce ad expianda peccata populi spectarent, perficiebat: ita 
Cliristus nunc penetravit coelos, ut illic Deo appareat pro nobis, et omnia ad cxpia- 
tionem peccatorum nostrorum spcctantia peragat. Heb. ii. 17. iv. 14. v. 1. ix. 24. 
De Mun. Chr. Sacerdot. Q. 2. 


taphorical. What say our catechists for the proof hereof? 
They have said it; not one word of reason, or any one testi- 
mony of Scripture is produced to give countenance to this 
figment. 2. That the high priest made atonement and ex- 
piation of sins, only by his entering into the most holy place, 
and vi'hat he did there : which is notoriously false, and con- 
trary to very many express testimonies of Scripture ; Lev. 
iv. 3. 13. 21.27. V. 16. vi. 5—7. xvi. &c. 3. That Christ 
was not a high-priest, until he entered the holy place ; of 
which afterward. 4. That he made not expiation of our 
sins, until he entered heaven, and appeared in the presence 
of God. Of the truth whereof, let the reader consult Heb. 
i. 3. If Christ be a figurative priest, I see no reason why he 
is not a figurative king also ; and such indeed those men 
seem to make him. 

The second thing proposed is, that Christ was a high- 
priest, whilst he was on the earth ; and offered a sacrifice to 
God. I shall here first answer what was objected by Mr. 
Biddle to the contrary, and then confirm the truth itself. 

I say then, first, that Christ was a priest, while he was on 
earth, and he continueth to be so for ever ; that is, until the 
whole work of mediation be accomplished. 

Socinus first published his opinion in this business in his 
book * De Jesu Christo Servatore' against Covet. For some 
time the venom of that error was not taken notice of. Six years 
after, as himself telleth us, (''Epistola ad Niemojev. 1.) he 
wrote his answer to Volanus, wherein he confirmed it again 
at large. Whereupon Niemojevius, a man of his own anti- 
trinitarian infidelity, writes to him, and ""asks him sharply (in 
substance), if he was not mad to affirm, a thing so contrary 
to express texts of Scripture. (Epist. Joh. Niemojev. 1. ad 
Faust. Socin.) Before him, that atheistical monk, Ochinus, 
had dropped some few things in his dialogues hereabout. 
Before him also, Abailardus had made an entrance into the 
same abomination, of whom, says ^Bernard, (Epistohi 190.) 
'Habemus in Francia novum de doctoremagistro theologum: 

« Nam annos abljiuc sex atqiie eo amplius idem paiadoxum in raea de Jesu Cliristo 
Servatore disputatione sine dubio legisti. Faust. Socin. Res. ad Joh. Niemojev. Ep. 1. 

f Veruni non sine mxrore (ne quid gravius addani),incidi inter legenduni in quod- 
dam parado.xon, dum Christum in morte, sive incrucesacrificium obtulisse peniegas, 
Joh. Niemojev. Epist, 1. ad Faust. Socin. 

« Vide Bernard. Epist. 109. 


qui ab ineunte setate sua in arte dialectica lusit, et nunc in 
Scripturis sacris insani.' 

How the whole nation of the Socinians have since con- 
sented into this notion of their master, I need not manifest. 
It is grown one of the articles of their creed ; as this man 
here lays it down among the substantial grounds of Christian 
religion. Confessedly on their part, the whole doctrine of the 
satisfaction of Christ, and justification, turns on this hinge. 
For though we have other innumerable demonstrations of the 
truth we assert, yet as to them, if this be proved, no more is 
needful. For if Christ was a priest, and offered himself a 
sacrifice, it cannot but be a sacrifice of atonement, seeing it 
was by blood and death. Crellius tells us, that Christ died 
for us on a double account; partly as the ''mediator, and 
surety of the new covenant; partly as a priest, that was to 
offer himself to God. A man might think he granted Christ 
to have been a priest on the earth, and as such to have of- 
fered himself a sacrifice. So also doth 'Volkelius allow the 
killing of the sacrifice, to represent the death of Christ. 
Now the killing of the sacrifice, was the sacrificing of it. 
So Stuckius proves from that of the poet, ' Et nigram mac- 
tabis ovem, lucumque revises.' But Crellius afterward ex- 
pounds himself, and tells us, ^that this twofold office of 
Christ (than which nothing can be spoken more ridicu- 
lously) of a mediator and a priest did as it were meet in the 
death of Christ : the one ending (that is, his being a medi- 
ator), and the other beginning. And 'Volkelius doth the 
like ; with a sufficient contradiction to his assertion, calling 
the death of Christ the beginning and entrance of his priest- 
hood. For his mediatorship, Crellius telleth us that it is 
most evident, that Christ therein was subordinate to God : 

•" Etenim mortem, Chrlstus subiit, duplici ratione; partim quidem, ut foederis me- 
diator, seu sponsor, et veluti testator quidem partim utSacerdos Deo ipsum obiaturus. 
Crell. de caus. m.ort. Christi, p. 6. 

" Partes Iiujus muneris liaec sunt potissimum; mactatio victiraaj, in tabernaculum 
ad oblationem peragendam ingressio, et ex eodem egressio. Ac mactatio quidem 
mortem Christi violentam, sanguinisque profusionem continet. Volkel. de vera Re- 
lig. lib. 3. cap. 37. p. 145. 

•' In morte utrumque munus (mediatoris, et sacerdotis) veluti coit : et prius qui- 
dem in ea desinit, eaque confirmatur postremumautem incipit, et ad id Christusfuit 
quodammodo praeparatus, p. 8. 

• Hinc colligitur solani Christi mortem, nequaquam illam perfectam absolutaraque 
ipsius oblationem de qua in Epist. ad Hebraeos agitur, fuisse — sed piincipium et prae- 
parationem quandam istius sacerdotii in coelo demum administrandi, extitisse. Idem. 


SO he phrases it ; that is, he was a mediator with us from 
God, and not at all '"with God for iis. And this he proves, 
because he "put not himself into this office, nor was put 
into it by us, so to confirm the covenant between God and 
us ; but was a minister and messenger of God, who sent him 
for this purpose. But the folly of this shall be afterward 
manifested. Christ was given of God, by his own consent, 
to be a mediator for us, and to lay down his life a ransom for 
us ; 1 Tim. ii. 4 — 6. which certainly he did to God for us, 
and not for God to us, as shall afterward be evinced. But 
coming to speak of his priesthood he is ataloss. "'When,' 
saith he, 'he is considered as a priest (for that he was pro- 
perly a priest he denies, calling it ' Sacerdotii, et oblationis 
metaphora') although he seemeth to be like one who doth 
something with God in the name of men, if we consider di- 
ligently, we shall find that he is such a priest, as performs 
something with us, in the name of God.' 

This proof is, TTOjoa rrjv avv^eaiv koi dia'ipeaiv. But this 
is no new thing with these men. Because Christ as a high- 
priest, doth something with us for God, therefore he did no- 
thing with God for us. As though because the high-priest 
of old, was over the house of God, and ruled therein, there- 
fore he did not offer sacrifices to God for the sins of the 
people. All that Crellius, in his ensuing discourse hath to 
prove this by, is, because as he saith, ' Christ offered not his 
sacrifice until he came to heaven.' Which because he proves 
not, nor endeavours to do it, we may see what are the texts 
of Scripture urged for the confirmation of that conceit by 
Mr. B. and others. 

Seeing all the proofs collected for this purpose are out of 
the Epistle to the Hebrews, I shall consider them in order as 
they lie in the epistle, and not as transposed by his questions 
with whom 1 have to do. 

The first is, in his eleventh question, thus insinuated ; 
' Why would God have Christ come to his priestly office by 

n> Jam vero satis apparet, Christum priori modo spectatum, penitus Deo subordi- 

natum esse, p. 6. , . • . j r j • . r» 

n Neque enim vel ipsum ingessit, vel a nobis missus est ad toedus inter Deum, et 
nos peragendiiiii : sed Dei, qui ipsum in huiic fmem niiserat, minister, ac iiiternuntius 
liac in parte fuit, p. 7. ....... t . ■ • ix i- 

° Cum vero considcratur ut Sacerdos, etsi simiiitudiiiem tefert ejus, qui Deo all- 
quid hoininum nomine prastet. Si tanien rem ipsaui penitus spectes, deprehendes, 
talem eura esse saccrdotem, qui Dei nomine nobis aliquod prxstef, p. 7. 

10" Christ's priestly office. 

suffering V According to the tenor of the doctrine before 
delivered, the inference is, that until after his sufferings he 
obtained not his priestly office, for by them he entered upon 
it. The answer is,' Heio. ii. 10. 17, 18.' 

Arts. 1. The apostle doth not say absolutely, that it be- 
came Christ to be made like us, that he mioht be a hiffh- 
priest, but that he might be a merciful high-priest. That is, 
his suffering and death were not required antecedently, that 
he might be a priest, but they were required to the execution 
of that end of his priesthood, which consists in sympathy 
and sufferance together with them, in whose stead he was a 
priest. He sustained all his afflictions, and death itself, not 
that he might be a priest, but that being merciful, and hav- 
ing experience, he might on that account be ready to succour 
them that are tempted ; and this the words of the last verse 
do evidently evince to be the meaning of the Holy Ghost ; 
* in that he suffered, being tempted.' His sufferings were to 
this end of his priesthood, that he should be merciful, able 
to succour them that are tempted ; besides, it is plainly said, 
that he was a high-priest, slg t6 iXa(7Ki.<y9ai rag anapriag tov 
Xaoii, or iXaaKecrdai rbv ^eov rrepl twv f!,uopriwv, to make re- 
conciliation for the sins of the people. Now that reconcilia- 
tion was made by his death and blood the Scripture informs 
us, Rom. V. 10. 'Whilst we were enemies, we were recon- 
ciled by the death of his Son ;' Dan. ix. 24. So that even 
from this place of Scripture, produced to the contrary, it is 
evident, that Christ 'was a high-priest on earth,' because he 
was so when he made reconciliation, which he did in his 
death on the cross. 

But yet Mr. Biddle's candid procedure in this business 
may be remarked ; with his huckstering the word of God. 
He reads the words in this order : ' It became him to make 
the captain of their salvation perfect through suffering; that 
he might be a merciful and faithful high-priest.' Who would 
not conclude, that this is the series and tenor of the apostle's 
discourse ; and that Christ is said to be made perfect 
through sufferings, that he might be a merciful high-priest? 
These words of ' making perfect through suffering,' are part 
of the 10th verse; 'that he might be a merciful high-priest,' 
part of the 17th. Between which two there intercedes a dis- 
course of a business quite of another nature; namely, his 


being 'made like his brethren' in taking on 'him the seed of 
Abraham,' whereof these words, * that he might be a merci- 
ful and faithful high-priest,' are the immediate issue ; that 
is, he had a body prepared him, that he might be a priest, 
and have a sacrifice. Our High Priest was exercised with 
sufferings and temptations, says the apostle : Jesus was ex- 
ercised with sufferings and temptations, that he might be 
our high-priest, says Mr. Biddle. 

Heb. viii. 1, 2. is insisted on to the same purpose in his 
third question, which is, 'What manner of high-priest is 

* A. Heb. viii. 1, 2. We have such a high-priest, who 
is set on the right hand of the throne of the majesty in the 
heavens. A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true taber- 
nacle,' &c. I name this in the next place, because it is co- 
incident with that of chap. iv. 14. insisted on by Socinus, 
though omitted by our author. 

Hence it is inferred, that Christ entered the heavens 
before he was a high-priest; and is a high-priest only 
when he is set 'down at the right hand of the Majesty on 

Ans. That Christ is a high-priest there also, we grant ; that 
he is so there only, there is not one word in the place cited 
to prove. Heb. iv. 14. saith indeed, that ' our High Priest is 
entered into the heavens ;' but it says not, that he was not 
our high-priest before he did so ; as the high-priest of the 
Jews entered into the holy place ; but yet he was a high- 
priest before, or he could not have entered into it. He is 
such a high-priest, * who is set on the right hand of the 
throne of majesty;' that is, not like the typical high-priest 
who died, and was no more; but he abides in his office of 
priesthood ; not to offer sacrifice, for that he did once for all, 
but to intercede for us for ever. 

Heb. viii. 4. is nextly produced in answer to this ques- 

' Was not Christ a priest whilst he was upon earth ; 
namely, when he died on the cross ? 

' A. Heb. viii. 4. vii. 15, 16. 

The same question and answer is given by the Racovian 
catechism, and this is the main place insisted on by all the 
Socinians : ' For if he were on earth, he should not be a 

c 2 

12 Christ's priestly office. 

priest, seeing that there are priests, that offer gifts according 
to the law.' 

Ans. 1. 'Etti yriQ may be interpreted of the state and 
condition of him spoken of, and not of the place wherein he 
was. If he were etti jrig of a mere earthly condition, as the 
high-priest of the Jews, he should not be a priest. So is the 
expression used elsewhere. Col. iii. 2. we are commanded 
not to mind to. Iiri rrig jrig ; that is ' terrene' things, earthly 
things. And, ver. 5. 'mortify your members,' ra tTrt rfjc yrw, 
that is, your earthly members. 

2. If the word signify the place, and not the condition of 
the things, whereof they are, they may be referred to the ta- 
bernacle, of which he speaks, and not to the high-priest : ver. 
2. the apostle tells us, that he is the minister, or priest of 
the true tabernacle, which God made, and not man: and 
then, ver. 3. that in the other tabernacle there were * priests 
that offered daily sacrifices;' so that, saith he, if this taber- 
nacle 7fv tTTi yng, he should not be a priest of it. For in the 
the earthly tabernacle there were other administrators ; but 
to pass these interpretations, 

3. The apostle does not say, that he that is upon the 
earth can be no priest, which must be our adversaries' argu- 
ment, if any, from this place, and thus formed. He that is 
upon the earth is no priest ; Christ before his ascension was 
upon the earth, therefore he was no priest. This is not the 
intendment of the apostle, for in the same verse he affirms,, 
that there were priests on the earth. This, then, is the ut- 
most of his intendment; that if Christ had been only to con- 
tinue on the earth, and to have done what priests did, or 
were to do upon the earth, there was neither need of him, 
nor room for him : but now is he a priest, seeing he was not 
to take upon him their work ; but had an eternal priesthood 
of his own to administer. There is no more in this place, 
than there is, chap.vii. 19. 23,24. which is a clear assertion, 
that Christ had a priesthood of his own, which was to per- 
fect and complete all things; being not to share with the 
priests, that had all their work to do upon the earth. And in 
ver. 13 — 15. of chap. 7. you have a full exposition of the 
whole matter. The sum is, Christ was none of the priests of 
the Old Testament ; no priest of the law : all their earthly 
things vanished, when he undertook the administration of 

Christ's priestly office. 13 

heavenly. So that neither doth this at all evince, that Christ 
was not a priest of the order of Melchisedec, even before 
his ascension. 

To this, Heb. vii. 15, 16. is urged, and those words, 'After 
the power of an endless life,' are insisted on : as though Christ 
was not a priest, until after he had ended his life, and risen 

But is this the intendment of the apostle? Doth he aim 
at any such thing ? The apostle is insisting on one of his ar- 
guments to prove from the institution of the priesthood of 
Melchisedec, or a priesthood after his order, the excellency 
of the priesthood of Christ above that of Aaron; from the 
manner of the institution of the one and of the other, this ar- 
gument lies : says he, 'The priests of the Jews were made Kara 
vo/xov IvToXrig aapKiKrig, according to the law of a carnal com- 
mandment :' that is, by carnal rights and ceremonies; by 
carnal oil and ordinances; 'but this man is made a priest 
after the order of Melchisedec, icara dvvafxiv Korig dKUTaXvTov, 
by virtue of an endless life; by the appointment of God, 
having such a life, as should never by death interrupt him in 
the administration of his office ; for though the life of Christ 
was intercepted three days, yet his person was never dis- 
solved, as to the administration of his office of priesthood : 
which is the thing spoken of, and in respect of that he had 
an endless life. 

Quest. 9. is to the same purpose. ' How did Christ enter 
into the holy place to offer himself? 

'A. By his own blood ;' Heb. ix. 12. 

Ans. Would not any one imagine, that it was said in the 
Scripture, that Christ entered into the holy place to offer 
himself; that that is taken for granted, and the modus, or 
manner how he did it, is alone inquired after? This is but 
one part of the sophistry Mr. B. makes use of in this Scrip- 
ture catechism. But it is so far from being a true report of 
the testimony of the Scripture, that the plain contrary is as- 
serted; namely,.that Christ offered himself before his entrance 
into the holy place, not made with hands, and then entered 
thereinto, to appear in the presence of God for us. Christ 
entered by his own blood into the holy place, inasmuch as 
bavins' shed and offered his blood a sacrifice to God, with 
the efficacy of it he entered into his presence, to carry on 

14 Christ's priestly offtce. 

the work of his priesthood in his intercession for us. As the 
high-priest, having offered without a sacrifice to God, entered 
with the blood of it into the most holy place, there to perfect 
and complete the duties of his office, in offering and inter- 
ceding for the people. 

The remaining questions of this chapter may be speedily 
despatched. His sixth is, 

'What benefit happeneth by Christ's priesthood? 
'A. Heb. V. 9, 10/ 

Though the place be very improperly urged, as to an an- 
swer to the question proposed ; there being very many more 
testimonies clearly and distinctly expressing the immediate 
fruits and benefits of the priestly office of Christ; yet be- 
cause we grant, that by his priesthood principally and emi- 
nently, Christ is become the author of salvation, we shall 
not dissent, as to this question and answer. Only we add 
as to the manner, that the way whereby Christ by his priest- 
hood became the author of salvation, consists principally in 
the offering up of himself to death, in, and by the shedding 
of his blood, whereby he obtained for us eternal redemption; 
Heb. ix. 14. 26. 

But this Mr. B. makes inquiry after. 'Q. 8. How can 
Christ save them by his priesthood ? 
'A. Heb. vii. 25. ix. 28.' 

Ans. 1. We acknowledge the use of the intercession of 
Christ, for the carrying on, and the completing of the work 
of our salvation : as that also it is the apostle's design there 
to manifest his ability to save, beyond what the Aaronical 
priests could pretend unto, which is mentioned chap. vii. 25. 
but, that ' he saves us thereby,' exclusively to the oblation 
he made of himself at his death; or any otherwise, but as 
carrying on that work, whose foundation was laid therein 
(redemption being meritoriously procured thereby), I suppose 
Mr. B. doth not think, that this place is any way useful to 
prove. And that place which he subjoins is not added at all 
to the advantage of his intendment : for it is most evident, 
that it is of the offering of Christ by death, and the shedding 
of his blood, or the sacrifice of himself, as ver. 26. that the 
apostle there speaks. 

There is not any thing else that is needful for me to in- 
sist upon in this chapter ; for though the Scripture instructs 


«s in many other uses, that we are to make of the doctrine 
of the priesthood of Christ, than what he expresses in his 
last question, yet that being one eminent one amongst them 
(especially the foundation of coming with boldness to the 
throne of grace, being rightl)^ understood), 1 shall not need 
to insist farther on it. 

Not to put myself, or reader to any needless trouble, Mr. 
B. acknowledging that Christ is a high-priest, and having 
opposed only his investiture with the office, whilst he was 
upon the earth, and that to destroy the atonement made by 
the sacrifice of himself ; having proved that he was a priest 
properly so called ; I shall now prove that he was a high- 
priest whilst he was upon earth, and shew afterward what 
he had to offer, with the efficacy of his sacrifice, and the in- 
tent thereof. First, the Scripture will speedily determine 
the difference; Eph. v. 2. 'Christ hath loved us, and hath 
given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God, for a 
sweet-smelling savour.' He that offereth sacrifices and of- 
ferings unto God, is a priest : so the apostle defines a priest, 
Heb. V. 1. He is one 'taken from amongst men,' and or- 
dained to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. Now thus did 
Christ do, in his giving himself for us : TrapfSwKfv, he de- 
livered himself for us. To deliver himself, or to be delivered 
for us, notes his death, always in contradistinction to any 
other act of his : so Eph. v. 25. Gal. ii. 22. Rom. viii. 32. 
iv. 25. 6c TTopeSoS'ij ^la to. TrapairTiofxaTa i]fxCov, koi rijip^r^ dia 
TTjv diKaiMCTiv nf^ojv. In that delivery of himself he sacrificed ; 
therefore he was then a priest. 

To this Socinus invented an answer, in his book *de Ser- 
vatore,' which he insists on again, Epist. 2. ad Niemojev. and 
whereunto ''his followers have added nothing, it being fixed 
on by them all; in particular by Smalcius in Catech. Racov. 
And yet it is in itself ludicrous, and almost jocular. The 
words they tell us are thus to be read, TraptStuKtv iavrov virlp 
njuiov. And there they place a point in the verse, irpocrrpopdv 
KoX ^vaiav rto ^i(^- without any dependance upon the former 
words, making this to be the sense of the whole. Christ 
gave himself to death for us; and (3 what an offering was 
that to God, and O what a sacrifice ! that is, in a metaphori- 
cal sense : not that Christ offered himself to God for us ; 

r Volkfl. dc ver. Rclig. lib. 3. cap. 37. p. 146. 

16 Christ's priestly office. 

but that Paul called his giving himself to die, an ofFering^, 
or a thing grateful to God, as good works are called an of- 
fering ; Phil. iv. 18. that is, the dying of Christ was * prae- 
clarnm facinus/as Volkelius speaks. But, 

1. It is easy to answer or avoid any thing by such ways 
as this ; divide, cut off sentences in the dependance of the 
words, and you may make what sense of them you please; 
or none at all. 

2. These words, irpoaipopav icai ^vaiav, have no other word- 
to be regulated by, but irapidiOKav : and therefore must relate 
thereunto ; and Christ is affirmed in them to have given him- 
self an offering and a sacrifice. 

3. These words, an * offering and a sacrifice,' are not a com- 
mendation of Christ's giving himself, but an illustration, and 
a description of what he gave ; that is, himself a sacrifice of 
sweet savour to God. So that notwithstanding this excep- 
tion (becoming only them that make it), it is evident from 
hence, that Christ offered himself a sacrifice in his death, 
and was therefore then a priest fitted for that work. 

2. Heb. v. 6, 7. * As he saith also in another place. Thou 
art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec : who in 
the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and 
supplications, with strong cries and tears, unto him that was 
able to save him from death ;' ver. 6. The apostle tells us, 
that he was a priest ; and, ver. 7. what he did by virtue of 
that priesthood, vpocriviyKS StT/crE'C Km tKiTr^piag. It is a tem- 
ple expression of the office of a priest, that is used. So ver. 1. 
a high-priest is appointed 'Iva Trpoa^ipy^, that he may offer. 
Now when did Christ do this ? It was in the days of his flesh, 
' with strong cries and tears,' both which evidence this his of- 
fering to have been before his death, and at his death ; and 
his mentioning of prayers and tears, is not so much to shew 
the matter of his offering, which was himself, as the manner, 
or at least the concomitants of the sacrifice of himself, 
prayers, and tears ; and these were not for himself, but for 
his church, and the business that for their sakes he had un- 

3. Heb. i. 3. 'When he had by hifnself purged our sins, 
sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.' The 
purging of our sins was by sacrifice ; there was never any 
other way Ka^apirrfiov ; but now Christ did this before his as- 

Christ's puiestly office. 17 

cension : Ka^apiafiov rrotr](jafxtvog, when he had himself, or 
after he had purged our sins ; and that St mvTov, hy himself, 
or the sacrifice of himself. That our sins are purged by the 
oblation of Christ, the Scripture is clear ; hence his blood 
is said to 'wash us from all our sins.' And Heb. x. 10. 'sanc- 
tified,' is the same with 'purged :' and this through the offer- 
ing of the body of Christ; £^a7ro| Christ then offering this 
sacrifice whilst he was on the earth, was a priest in so doing. 

Unto this may be added sundry others of the same im- 
port ; chap. vii. 27. ' Who needed not daily, as those high- 
priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then 
for the people's ; for this he did once, when he offered up him- 
self.' The one sacrifice of Christ is here compared to the 
daily sacrifices of the priests. Now those daily sacrifices 
were not performed in the most holy place, whither the high 
priest entered but once in a year, which alone was a represen- 
tation of heaven ; so that what Christ did in heaven cannot 
answer to them, but what he did on earth, before he entered 
the holy place, not made with hands. 

And chap. ix. 12. ' He entered by his own blood into 
the holy place, auoviav Xvrpwaiv ivpafievog, after he had ob- 
tained eternal redemption.' Redemption is every where in 
the Scripture ascribed to the blood of Christ. And him- 
self abundantly manifesteth on what account it is to be had, 
when he says, that he gave his life a ransom, or a price of 
redemption. Where, and when Christ laid down his life, 
we know : and yet that our redemption or freedom is by the 
offering of Christ for us, is as evident; chap. ix. 26. 'He puts 
away sin (which is our redemption) by the sacrifice of him- 
self ;' so that this sacrifice of himself, was before he entered 
the holy place ; and consequently he was a priest before his 
entrance into heaven. It is, I say, apparent from these places, 
that Christ offered himself before he went into the holy 
place, or sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 
which was to be proved from them. 

4. Christ is often said to offer himself once for all : de- 
signing by that expression some individual action of Christ, 
and not such a continued course of procedure, as is his pre- 
sentation of himself in heaven ; or the continuation of his 
oblation, as to its efficacy by his intercession ; so Heb. vii. 
27. TovTO £7rojr/(T£v £(^a7ra^. ix. 28. otto? TTpoaivt\^iig- &c. 


X. 10. 12. 14. In all these places the offering of Christ 
is not only said to be one, but to be once offered ; now no 
offering of Christ, besides that which he offered on the earth, 
can be said to be once offered. For that which is done in 
heaven is done always, and for ever; but that which is done 
always, cannot be said to be done once for all. To be al- 
ways done, or in doing, as is Christ's offering himself in hea- 
ven, and to be done once for all, as was the oblation spoken 
of in those places, whereby our sins are done away, are plain- 
ly contradictory. It is said to be so offered aira^,, as to be 
opposed unto TroWaKig, vv'hereby the apostle expresses that 
of the Aaronical sacrifice, which in two other words he had 
before delivered ; they were offered dir^veKeg, and kut r^fjiepav ; 
that is, TToXXaKig, in which sense his offering himself in hea- 
ven cannot be said to be done aira^, but only that on the 
cross. Besides, he was ottos Trpu)(jeve-)(^iig dg to ttoWojv 
aviv^yKeiv afxapriag, ver. 28. and how he did that we are in- 
formed, 1 Pet. ii. 24. "Og rag afxapriag i)inov avTog avi^vejKev 
iv T(^ (TMfxaTi avTov £771 TO ^v\ov' lic did it in his body on the 

Besides, the apostle, Heb. ix. 26. tells us, that he speaks 
of such an offering, as was accompanied with suffering : he 
must have often suffered since the foundation of the world. 
It was such an offering, as could neither be repeated nor 
continued without suffering that he treats of. We do not 
deny, that Christ offers himself in heaven ; that is, that he 
presents himself, as one that was so offered, to his Father : 
but the offering of himself, that was on earth, and therefore 
there was he a priest. 

5. Once more ; that sacrifice which answered those sa- 
crifices, whose blood was never carried into the holy place; 
that must be performed on earth, and not in heaven. That 
many proper sacrifices were offered as types of Christ, whose 
blood was not carried into the holy place, the apostle assures 
us, Heb. X. 11. The daily sacrifices had none of their blood 
carried into the holy place ; for the high-priest went in thi- 
ther only once in the year. But now these were all true sa- 
crifices and types of the sacrifice of Christ; afid therefore, 
the sacrifices of Christ also, to answer the types, must be 
offered before his entrance into heaven, as was in part de- 
clared before. Yea, there was no other sacrifice of these. 


but what was performed in their killing and slaying; and 
therefore, there must be a sacrifice prefigured by them, con- 
sisting in killing and shedding of blood. All this is asserted 
by the apostle, Heb. vii. 27, ' Who needeth not daily as those 
high-priests, to ofiler up sacrifices, for this lie did once, when 
he offered up himself. Those sacrifices which were offered 
KaO* rifxtpav, ' daily,' were types of the sacrifice of Christ ; and 
that of his, which was offered t^aTro^, did answer thereunto; 
which was his death, and nothing else. 


Of the death of Christ, the causes, ends, and fruits thereof, with an entrance 
into the doctrine of his satisfaction thereby. 

Mr. Biddle's 12th chapter is concerning the death of 
Christ, the causes, and fruits, and ends thereof : the error 
and mistake whereabout, iis the second great head of the 
Socinian religion ; next to his person there is not any thing 
they set themselves so industriously to oppose as his death, 
in the sense wherein it hath constantly hitherto been em- 
braced by all Christians, as the great foundation of their 
faith and confidence. 

That the Lord Jesus our Mediator, did not by his death 
and sufferings undergo the penalty of the law as the punish- 
ment due to our sins, that he did not make satisfaction to 
God, or make reconciliation for transgressors, that he did 
not thereby properly redeem us by the payment of a ran- 
som, nor so suffer for us, as that our sins should in the jus- 
tice of God be a meritorious cause of his suffering, is the se- 
cond great article of the creed, which they^ labour to assert 
and maintain. 

There is not anything about which they have laid out so 
much of their strength as about this; namely, that Jesus 
Christ is called our Saviour in respect of the way of salva- 
tion, which he hath revealed to us, and the power committed 
to him to deliver us, and save us, in and by obedience re- 
quired at our hands, nor on the account of any satisfaction 

a Vid. Faust. Sociii. de Jes. Christ. Servator. Prrelect. Theol. Lect. Sac. Pseraen. 
ad Volan. Epistola ad Nieniojev.Tlies. de Jiislif. Smal. Ref. Thcs. Fran. adv. Smigl. 
Nov. Monst. Catec Rac. &c. Crelli. dc Cans. Mor. Clirist. Vindic. ad Grot. Volkcl. 
Ver. Rrlig. Christ. Ostorod. Institut. cap. 11. Suhliuhting. Epist. ad Hcbr.T. &c. 


he hath made for us, or atonement by the sacrifice of him- 

How Faustus Socinus first broached this opinion, with 
what difficulty he got it to be entertained with the men of 
his own profession, as to the doctrine of the Trinity, has 
been before declared. What weight he laid upon this opi- 
nion about the death of Christ, and the opposition he had 
engaged in against his satisfaction, with the diligence he 
used, and the pains he took about the one and the other, is 
evident from his writings to this purpose which are yet ex- 
tant. His book, *De Jesu Christo Servatore' is wholly taken 
up with this argument; so is the greatest part of his 'Prae- 
lections ;' his ' Lectiones Sacrse' are some of them of the same 
subject; and his ' Parsenesis' against Volanus ; many of his 
Epistles, especially those to Smalcius, and Volkelius, and 
Niemojevius, as also his treatises about justification, have 
the same design. Smalcius is no less industrious in the 
same cause, both in his Racovian catechism, and his answers 
and replies with Franzius and Smiglecius. It is the main 
design of Schlichtingius's comment on the Hebrews ; Crel- 
Kus, * de Causis mortis Christi,' and his defence of Socinus 
against Grotius dwells on this doctrine. Volkelius hath his 
share in the same work, &c. 

What those at large contend for, Mr. Biddle endea- 
vours slily to insinuate into his catechumens in this chap- 
ter : having thereby briefly spoken of salvation by Christ, 
and of his mediation in general, in consideration of his sixth 
and seventh chapters, I shall now, God assisting, take up the 
whole matter, and after a brief discovery of his intendment 
in his queries concerning the death of Christ, give an ac- 
count of our whole doctrine of his satisfaction, confirming it 
from the Scriptures, and vindicating it from the exceptions 
of his masters. 

For the order of procedure, I shall first consider Mr. Bid- 
die's questions ; then state the point in diflference, by ex- 
pressing what is the judgment of our adversaries concerning 
the death of Christ, and what we ascribe thereto ; and then 
demonstrate from the Scripture the truth contended for. 

Mr. Riddle's first question is, 

' Was it the will and purpose of God that Christ should 
suft'er the death of the cross ? What saith the apostle Peter 


to the Jews concernino- this ? A. Acts ii. 22, 23.' To which 
he subjoins, 'What say the disciples in general concerning 
the same ? A. Acts iv. 24. 27, 28.' 

It is not unknown what difference we have, both with 
the Socinians and Arminians, about the purposes and effica- 
cious decrees, and the infallibility of the prescience of God : 
something already hath been spoken to this purpose, in our 
discourse concerning the prescience of God, as formerly in 
that of perseverance. How unable Mr. Biddle's companions 
are to disentangle themselves from the evidence of that tes- 
timony, which is given to the truth we contend for, by these 
texts which here he with so much confidence recites, hath 
been abundantly by others demonstrated. I shall not here 
enter into the merits of that cause, nor shall I impose on 
Mr. Biddle the opinion of any other men, which he doth not 
expressly own ; only I shall desire him to reconcile what he 
here speaks in his query, with what he before delivered con- 
cerning God's ' not foreseeing our free actions, that are for 
to come.' What God purposes shall be and come to pass, 
he certainly foresees that that will come to pass. That 
Christ should die the death of the cross was to be brought 
about by the free actions of men, if any thing in the world was 
ever so, and accomplished in the same manner; yet that this 
should be done, yea, so done, God purposed ; and therefore 
without doubt foresaw that it should be accomplished, and 
so foresaw all the free actions whereby it was accomplished. 
And if he foresaw any one free action, why not all? there 
being the same reason of one and all. But at the present 
let this pass. His second question is, 

* Did Christ die to reconcile and bring God to us, or on 
the contrary, to bring us to God ? 

'A. Rom.v. lO.Eph.ii. 14. 16. 2 Cor. v. 19. 1 Pet. iii. 18.' 

That I may, by the way, speak a little to this question, 
reservino' the full discussion of the matter intended to the 
ensuing discourse; the terms of it are first to be explained, 

1. By' reconciling God,' we intend the making of such an 
atonement, whereby his wrath or anger, in all the effects of 
it, are turned away. Though we use not the expression of 
reconciling God to us, but of reconciling us to God, by the 
taking away, or removal of his wrath and anger, or the 
making reconciliation with God for sin ; yet as to reconcile 


God, intends the appeasing of the justice and anger of God, 
so that, whereas before we were obnoxious to his displea- 
sure, enmity, hatred, and wrath thereby, and on that account 
we come to be accepted with him, we say Christ died to re- 
concile God to us, which in the progress of this discourse 
with plentiful demonstrations from the Scripture shall be 

2. Of 'bringing God to us,' we speak not; imless by 
bringing God to us, he intends the procurement of the grace 
and favour of God toward us, and his loving presence to be 
with us, and then we say, in that sense, Christ by his death 
brought God to us. 

3. Our ' reconciliation to God,' or the reconciliation as it 
stands on our part, is our conversion unto God, our deliver- 
ance from all that enmity and opposition unto God, which 
is in us by nature ; and this also we say is the effect and fruit 
of the death of Christ. 

4. Our' bringing unto God,' mentioned, 1 Pet. iii. 18. is 
of a larger and more comprehensive signification, than that 
of our reconciliation ; containing the whole effect of the 
death of Christ, in the removal of every hinderance, and the 
collation of every thing necessarily required to the perfect 
and complete accomplishment of the work of our salvation, 
and so contains no less the reconciliation of God to us, than 
ours to him ; and is not proper to make up one member of 
the division there instituted, being a general expression of 
them both. 

Now concerning these things Mr. Biddle inquires, ' Whe- 
ther Christ by his death reconciled God to us, or on the 
contrary, us to God V So insinuating that one of these effects 
of the death of Christ is inconsistent with the other; this 
seems to be the man's aim. 

1. To intimate that this is the state of the difference be- 
tween him and us ; that we say, Christ died to ' reconcile 
God to us ;' and he, that he died to ' reconcile us to God.' 

2. That these things are contrary, so that they who say 
the one, must deny the other; that we who say, that Christ 
died to reconcile God to us, must of necessity deny that he 
died to reconcile us to God; and that he also, who saith, 
he died to reconcile us to God, may, and must deny, on that 
account, the other effect by us ascribed to his death. But 


this sophistry is so gross, as it is not worth the while to in- 
sist upon its discovery ; we say, that Christ died to reconcile 
God to us in the sense before explained, and us unto God ; 
and these things are so far from being of any repugnancy 
one to another, as to the making up of one entire end and 
effect of the death of Christ, that without them both, the 
work of reconciliation is by no means complete. 

Not to prevent the full proof and evidence hereof, which 
is intended, it may at present suffice, that we evince it by the 
light of this one consideration: If in the Scripture it is ex- 
pressly and frequently affirmed, that antecedently to the 
consideration of the death of Christ, and the effects thereof, 
there is not only a real enmity on our parts against God, but 
also a law enmity on the part of God against us, and that 
both of these are removed by virtue of the death of Christ; 
then the reconciliation of God to us, and our reconciliation 
to God, are both of them one entire effect of the death of 
Christ. That there is in us by nature a real enmity against 
God, before it be taken away by the virtue of the death of 
Christ, and so we reconciled to him, is not denied ; and if 
it were, it might be easily evinced from Rom. viii. 7, 8. Tit. 
iii. 3. Eph. ii. 12. and innumerable other places; and cer- 
tainly the evidence on the other side, that there was a law 
enmity on the part of God against us, antecedent to the con- 
sideration of the death of Christ, is no less clear. The great 
sanction of the law. Gen. iii. Deut. xxvii. 29. considered in 
conjunction with the justice of God, Rom. i. 32. Hab. i. 13. 
Psal. v. 4 — 6. 2Thess. x. 5, 6. and the testimonies given 
concerning the state and condition of man in reference to 
the law and justice of God, John iii. 36. Rom. v. 18. Eph. 
ii. 3. 12, &c. with the express assignation of the reconcilia- 
tion pleaded for, to be made by the death of Christ, Dan. 
ix. 24. Heb. ii. 18. do abundantly evince it; there being- 
then a mutual enmity between God and us, though not of 
the same kind (it being physical on our part, and legal or 
moral on the part of God), Christ our Mediator making up 
peace and friendship between us, doth not only reconcile us 
to God by his Spirit, but God also to us, by his blood ; but 
of this more afterward under the consideration of the death 
of Christ, as it was a sacrifice. 

For the texts cited by Mr. Biddle, as making to his pur- 


pose, the most, if not all of them look another way than he 
intends to use them. They will in the following chapter 
come under full consideration. Rom. v. 10. 'When we were 
enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son;' 
is the first mentioned. That our being reconciled to God, 
in this place doth not intend our conversion to him, and our 
deposition of the real enmity, that is in us against him, but 
our acceptance with him, upon the account of the atonement 
made in the blood of Christ, whereby he is reconciled to us, 
is evident from sundry circumstances of the place. For, 

1. That which is called ' being reconciled by his death,' 
in ver. 10. is ' being justified by his blood;' ver. 9. The ob- 
servation of the same antithesis in both verses makes this 
evident. Now to be j ustified by the blood of Christ, is not to 
have our enmity with God slain and destroyed (which is our 
sanctification), but our acceptation with God upon the ac- 
count of the shedding of the blood of Christ for us ; which 
is his reconciliation to us. 

2. We are thus reconciled, when we are enemies, as in the 
verse insisted on ; ' when we were enemies we were recon- 
ciled.' Now we are not reconciled in the sense of deposing 
our enmity to God (that deposition being our sanctification) 
whilst we are enemies, and therefore it is the reconciliation 
of God to us, that is intended. 

3. Ver. 11. we are said to receive this reconciliation; or 
as the word is rendered, the '" atonement ;' the word is the 
same with that used ver. 10. Now we cannot be said to 
receive our own conversion, but the reconciliation of God 
by the blood of Christ, his favour upon the atonement made, 
that by faith we do receive. Thus Mr. Biddle's first witness 
speaks expressly against him, and the design for the carry- 
ing on whei^eof he was called forth ; as afterward will more 
fully appear. 

His second also, of Eph. ii. 14. 16. speaks the same 
language ; * He is pur peace, who hath made both one, that 
he might reconcile both unto God in one body, by his 
cross, having slain the enmity thereby;' setting aside the 
joint design of the apostle to manifest the reconciliation 
made of Jews and Gentiles by the cross of Christ, it is evi- 
dent the reconciliation here meant, consists in slaying the 

^ Karal\'Kayhv. 


enmity mentioned, so making peace. Now what is the 
enmity intended ? Not the enmity that is in our hearts to 
God, but the legal enmity that lay against us, on the part of 
God; as is evident from ver. 15. and the whole desion of the 
place, as afterward will appear more fully. 

There is indeed, 2 Cor. v. 18 — 20. mention made of re- 
conciliation in both the senses insisted on; of us to God; 
ver. 20. where the apostle saith, the end of the ministry is 
to reconcile us to God; to prevail with us to lay down our 
enmity against him, and opposition to him ; of God to us, 
ver. 19. ' God was in Christ reconciling the world to him- 
self;' which to be the import of the words is evinced from 
the exegetical expression immediately following; 'not im- 
puting to them their sins and transgressions ;' God was so 
reconciling the world unto himself in Christ, as that upon 
the account of what was done in Christ, he will not impute 
their sins ; the legal enmity he had against them, on the ac- 
count whereof alone men's sins are imputed to them, being 
taken away. And this is farther cleared by the sum of his 
former discourse, which the apostle gives us, ver. 21. declar- 
ing how ' God was in Christ, reconciling the world to him- 
self;' 'For,' saith he, 'he made him sin for us who knew no 
sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in 
him.' Thus he was in Christ reconciling the world to himself; 
in that he made him to be sin, or a sacrifice for sin, so to 
make an atonement for us, that we might be accepted before 
God, as righteous on the account of Christ. 

Much less doth that of the 1 Pet. iii. 18. in the last 
place mentioned, speak at all to Mr. B.'s purpose : ' Christ 
hath once suffered for sin, the just for the unjust, that he 
might bring us to God.' ' Bringing to God,' is a general ex- 
pression of the accomplishment of the whole work of our 
salvation, both in the removal of all hinderances, and the 
collation of all things necessary to the fulfilling of the work : 
of this the apostle mentions the great fundamental and pro- 
curing cause, which is the suffering of Christ in our stead, 
the just for the unjust; Christ in our stead suffered for our 
sins, that he might bring us to God. Now this suffering of 
Christ in our stead, for our sins, is most eminently the cause 
of the reconciliation of God to us ; and by the intimation 

VOL. IX. 1) 


thereof, of our reconciliation to God, and so of our manuduc- 
tion to him. 

Thus, though it be most true, that Christ died to recon- 
cile us to God, by our conversion to him, yet all the places 
cited by Mr. Biddle to prove it (so unhappy is he in his quo- 
tations), speak to the defence of that truth, which he doth 
oppose, and not of that which he would assert; and which 
by asserting in opposition to the truth, with which it hath 
an eminent consistency, he doth corrupt. 

The next question 1 shall not insist upon ; it is concern- 
ing the object of the death of Christ, and the universality 
thereof; the words of it are, ' For whom did Christ die?' 
The answer is from 2 Cor. v. 14, 15. 1 Tim. v. 6. Heb. ii. 9. 
John vi. 8. where mention is made of 'all/ and the 'world' in 
reference to the death of Christ. The question concerning 
the object of the death of Christ, or whom he died for, hath 
of late by very many been fully discussed ; and I have my- 
self spoken ^elsewhere somewhat to that purpose ; it shall 
not then here be insisted on ; in a word, we confess that 
Christ died for all, and for the world; but whereas it is very 
seldom that these words are comprehensive of all and every 
man in the world, but most frequently are used for some of 
all sorts, they for whom Christ died, being in some places 
expounded to be the 'church, believers, the children, those 
given unto him out of the world ;' and nowhere described by 
any term expressive constantly of an absolute universality : 
we say the words insisted on are to be taken in the latter 
sense, and not the former ; being ready, God assisting, to 
put it to the issue and trial with our adversaries, when we 
are called thereunto. 

He proceeds : * What was the procuring cause of Christ's 
death ? 

' A. Rom. iv. 25. Isa. liii. 5. 1 Cor. xv. 3.' The expres- 
sions are ; that ' Christ was delivered for our offences/ that 
' Christ died for our sins, and was bruised for our iniquities.' 

That in these and the like places, that clause for our 
sins, offences, and transgressions, is expressive of the pro- 
curing cause of the death of Christ, Mr. B. grants j sin can 
be no otherwise the procuring cause of the death of Christ, 

" Saliis Elecforiim sanguis Jesu. 


but as it is morally meritorious thereof. To say * our sins 
were the procuring cause of the death of Christ,' is to say, 
that our sins merited the death of Christ; and whereas this 
can no otherwise be, but as our sins were imputed to him, 
and he was put to death for them, Mr. B. hath' in this one 
question granted the whole of what in this subject he con- 
tends against. If our sins were the procuring cause of the 
death of Christ, then the death of Christ was that punish- 
ment which was due to them : or in the justice, or according 
to the tenor of the law of God, was procured by them ; and 
so consequently, he in his death underwent the penalty of 
our sins, suffering in our stead, and making thereby satis- 
faction for what we had done amiss. Mr. Biddle's masters 
say generally that the expression of, ' dying for our sins,' de- 
notes the final cause of the deatli of Christ; that is, Christ 
intended by his death to confirm the truth, in obedience 
whereunto we shall receive forgiveness of sin ; this grant of 
Mr. B.'s, that the procuring cause of the death of Christ is 
hereby expressed, will perhaps appear more prejudicial to his 
whole cause, than he is yet aware of; especially being pro- 
posed in distinction from the final cause, or end of the death 
of Christ, which in the next place he mentions, as afterward 
will more fully appear ; although I confess he is not alone, 
Crellius'^ making tlie same concession. 

The last question of this chapter is, ' What are the ends 
of Christ's suffering and death intimated by the Scripture?' 
Whereunto by way of answer, sundry texts of Scripture are 
subjoined ; every one of them expressing some one end or 
other, some effect or fruit, something of the aim and intend- 
ment of Christ in his suffering and death ; whereunto ex- 
ceeding many others might be annexed. But this business 
of the death of Christ, its causes, ends, and influence into 
the work of our salvation, the manifestation that therein he 
underwent the punishment due to our sins, making atone- 
ment, and giving satisfaction for them, redeeming us pro- 
perly by the price of his blood, &c. being of so great weight 
and importance as it is, lying at the very bottom and 
foundation of all our hope and confidence, I shall, leaving 
Mr. Biddle, handle the whole matter at large in the ensuing 

<• Crellius dc Causis Mortis Chiisli. p. 13. 
D 2 


For our more clear and distinct procedure in this impor- 
tant head of the religion of Jesus Christ, I shall first lay- 
down the most eminent considerations of the death of Christ, 
as proposed in the Scripture ; and then give an account of 
the most special effects of it in particular, answering to 
those considerations of it ; in all manifesting wherein the 
expiation of our sins by his blood doth consist. 

The principal considerations of the death of Christ, are 
of it, 1. as a price ; 2. as a sacrifice; 3. as a penalty. Of 
which in the order wherein they are mentioned. 


The several considerations of the death of Christ, as to the expiation of our 
sins thereby, and the satisfaction made therein : First, of it as a price. 
Secondly, as a sacrifice. 

1. The death of Christ in this business is a price : and that 
properly so called ; 1 Cor. vi. 20. riyopda^r^Te Tifir\g, * you 
were bought with a price ;' and if we will know what that 
price was, with which we are bought, the Holy Ghost in- 
forms us, 1 Pet. i. 17, 18. ' Ye were not redeemed with cor- 
ruptible things, as silver and gold, but with the precious 
blood of Christ.' It is the blood of Christ, which in this 
business hath that use which silver and gold have in the re- 
deeming of captives; and paid it is into the hand of him, 
by whose power and authority the captive is detained, as 
shall be proved ; and himself tells us what a kind of price 
it is, that is so paid ; it is \vtqov. Matt. xx. 28. ' He came 
to lay down his life,' Avrpov avTi ttoXAwv; which for its more 
evidence and clearness, is called, avTiXvTQov, 1 Tim. ii. 6. ' a 
price of redemption,' for the delivery of another. 

The first mention of a ransom in the Scripture is in Exod. 
xxi. 30. ' If there be laid on him a sum of money, then he shall 
give for the ransom of his life, whatever is laid on him.' The 
word in the original is ]inD, which the Septuagint there render 
\vTpa' ^wGH XvTpa Trig ipv)(ric avTov' and it is used again in 
the same sense, Psal. xlix. 9. and in both places intends a 
valuable price, to be paid for the deliverance of that, which 
upon guilt became obnoxious to death. It is true, the word 
is from mD ' redimere, vindicare, asserere in libertatem,' by 


any ways and means, by power, strength, or otherwise. But 
wherever it is applied to such a kind of redemption, as had 
a price going along with it, the Septuagint constantly render 
it by aTToXvTpovv, and sometimes XvTpwaacjBai, otherwise by 
pvofxai, and the like. 

It is then confessed, that mD in the Old Testament, is 
sometimes taken for redemit in a metaphorical sense, not 
strictly and literally, by the intervention of a price ; but that 
\vTpiJ)<jaa^ai, the word whereby it is rendered, when a price 
intervened, is ever so taken in the New Testament, is denied 
Indeed Moses is called Aurpwrrjc, Acts i. 35. in reference to 
the metaphorical redemption of Israel out of Egypt : a deli- 
verance by power and strong arm ; but shall we say because 
that word is used improperly in one place, where no price 
could be paid, where God plainly snys, it was not done by a 
price, but by power, therefore it must be so used in those 
places, where there is express mention of a price, both the 
matter of it, and its formality as a price, and speaketh not a 
word of doing it any other way, but by the payment of a 
price. But of this afterward. 

There is mention of a ransom in ten places of the Old 
Testament; to ransom, and ransomed, in two or three more. 
In two of these places, Exod. xxi, 30. and Psal. xlix. 9. the 
word is pHD from niD as before, and rendered by the Sep- 
tuagint Xvrpov, in all other places it is in the Hebrew "iDD, 
which properly signifies a propitiation, as Psal. xlix. 8. which 
the LXX have variously rendered. Twice it is mentioned in 
Job, chap, xxxiii. 24. and xxxvi. 18. In the first place, they 
have left it quite out, and in the latter so corrupted the 
sense, that they have rendered it altogether unintelligible. 
Prov. vi. 35. and xiii. 8. they have properly rendered it Xv- 
rpov, or a price of redemption, it being in both places used 
in such business, as a ransom useth to be accepted in. Chap, 
xxi. 18. they have properly rendered it to the subject mat- 
ter, rrepiKa^apfxa' TrepiKa^apfiara, are things publicly devoted 
to destruction, as it were to turn away anger from others, 
coming upon them for their sakes. 

So is Ku^appa, ' Homo piacularis pro lustratione et ex- 
piatione patrise devotus ;' whence the word is often used as 
scelus in Latin, for a wicked man, a man fit to be destroyed 
and taken away. Vpv^uv Se kcu roXpciTov to Ka^appun, says 


he in the ^poet, KaOap/nog is used in the same sense by Hero- 
dotus, Kaoapfibv rrig ^(JpTj^ Troiovjaivuyv 'A\aiojv, A^a/JLavra tov 
'AioAov, * Athamas was made a piaculum, or a propitiation for 
the country.' Whence BudiBus renders that of the apostle, 
bXTTTip TTfpt Ka^apfiaTa rov koctjuou eyevij^nfitv : ' nos tanquam 
piacula mundi facti sumus, et succidanese pro populo vic- 
timse :' * we are as the accursed things of the world, and sa- 
crifices for the people :' reading the words,'' loairtp Ka^apfiara : 
not u)g TrepLKa^apfMOTa. The Greek Scholiast, who reads it as 
we commonly do, rendering it by aTroaaptafia-a ; as the Vulgar 
Latin * purgamenta,' to the same purpose ; such as have all 
manner of filth cast upon them. 

And Isa. xliii. 3. * they have rendered the same word aX- 
Xayfxa, * a commutation by price;' so Matt. xvi. 26. ti Sw(7£« 
av^puiirog avToXXayfia rf)c i/'i'X^'^ ' * ^ P"ce in exchange.' Now 
in all these places and others, the Hebrews use the word idj 
' a propitiation,' by way of allusion ; as is most especially evi- 
dent from that of Isaiah, ' I will give Egypt a propitiation for 
thee ;* that is, as God is atoned by a propitiatory sacrifice, 
wherein something is offered him in the room of the offender, 
so will he do with them ; put them into trouble, in room of 
the church, as the sacrificed beast was, in the room of him 
for whom it was sacrificed ; and hence does that word sig- 
nify a ransom, because what God appointed in his worship 
to redeem any thing, that by the law was devoted, which 
was a compensation by his institution (as a clean beast in 
the room of a firstborn was to be offered a sacrifice to God), 
was so called. And the word ' satisfaction,' which is but once 
used in the Scripture, or twice together; Numb. xxxv. 31, 
is "IDD in the original. IDD indeed is originally pitch or bi- 
tumen : hence what God says to Noah about making the ark, 
mDDI Gen. vi. 14. the Septuagint have readered a<T(j>aXTOj(T£ig 
Ty o(T^aXr(i» ' bituminabis bitumine.' ")DD in Pihel, is ' placavit, 
expiavit, expiationem fecit ;' because by sacrifice sins are 
covered, as if they had not been; to cover or hide, being the 
first use of the word. 

And this is the rise and use of the word * ransom' in the 
Scripture, both ]V"rD mD and "IDD which are rendered by Xv- 
rpov, TTtpiKaS'apjua, avTiXvrpov, aXXajfia ' it denotes properly 
a price of redemption, a valuable compensation made by 

«■ Aristoph. in Plut. ^ 1 Cor. iv. 13. 


one thing for another, either in the native signification, as 
in the case of the first word ; or by the first translation or 
it from the sacrifice of atonement, a^s in the latter. Of this 
farther afterward in the business of redemption. For the 
present is sufficeth, that the death of Christ was a price of 
ransom, and these are the words whereby it is expressed. 

2. It was a sacrifice ; and what sacrifice it was shall be 

1. That Christ offered a sacrifice, is abundantly evident 
from what was said before, in the consideration of the time 
and place, when and wherein Christ was a high-priest. The 
necessity of this the apostle confirms, Heb. viii. 3. 'For 
every high-priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices : 
wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat 
also to offer.' If he be a priest, he must have a sacrifice; 
the very nature of his employment requires it. The whole 
and entire office and employment of a high-priest, as a priest, 
consists in offering sacrifice, with the performance of those 
things, which did necessarily precede and follow that action. 
It is of necessity, then, that he should also have somewhat to 
offer as a sacrifice to God. 

For the other part of our inquiry, viz. What it was that 
he sacrificed ? I shall manifest in this order of process (taking 
leave to enlarge a little in this, intending not so much the 
thing, proved before, as the manner of it). 

1. He was not to offer any sacrifice, that any priest had 
offered before, by God's appointment. 

2. He did not actually offer any such sacrifice. 

3. I shall shew positively what he did offer. 

1. He was not to offer any sacrifice that the priests of old 
had appointed for them to offer. He came to do another 
manner of work, than could be brought about with the blood 
of bulls and goats. It cost more to redeem our souls. That 
which was of more worth in itself, of nearer concernment to 
him that offered it, of a more manifold alliance to them for 
whom it was offered, and of better acceptation with God to 
whom it was offered, was to be his sacrifice. This is the 
aim of the Holy Ghost; Heb. x. 1—7. 'For the law,' &c. 

This is the sum of the apostle's discourse ; the sacrifices 
instituted by the law, could not effect, nor work that which 


Christ our High Priest was to accomplish by his sacrifice ; 
and therefore he was not to offer them ; but they were to be 
abolished, and something else to be brought in that might 
supply their room and defect. 

What was wanting in these sacrifices, the apostle ascribes 
to the law, whereby they were instituted. The law could 
not do it, that is, the ceremonial law could not do it. The 
law which instituted and appointed these sacrifices, could 
not accomplish that end of the institution, by them. And 
with this expression of it he subjoins a reason of this weak- 
ness of the law. ' It had a'shadow of good things to come, 
and not the very image of the things themselves.' An ob- 
scure representation of those good things, which, when they 
were instituted and in force, were julAXovra to come, though 
now actually exhibited, and existent : that is, Jesus Christ 
himself, and the good things of the gospel accompanying of 
him. It had but a shadow of these things, not the image ; 
that is, the substance of them ; for so I had rather under- 
stand image here substantially ; as that may be called the 
image of a picture, by which it is drawn ; than to make o-jcta 
and aiKwv here to differ but gradually, as the first rude shape 
and proportion, and the perfect limning of any thing do. 
The reason then why all the solemn, operous, burdensome 
service of old, could not (of itself) take away sin, is be- 
cause it did not contain Christ in it, but only had a shadow 
of him. 

2. The apostle instances in particular, by what means the 
law could not do this great work, of ' making the comers 
thereunto perfect.' Touc tt poaepxo iJ.lv ovg, that is, those who 
come to God by it, the worshippers ; which is spoke in op- 
position to what is said of Christ ; chap. vii. 25. ' He is able 
to save to the uttermost roue Trporrepxoiuiivovt;, those that come 
to God by him.' The word expresseth any man under the 
consideration of one coming to God for acceptation. As 
Heb. xi. 6. ' He that cometh unto God' Set tov Trpoaepxofxevov 
these it could not make perfect ; that is, it could not per- 
fectly atone God, and take away their sins, so that the con- 
science should no more be troubled, nor tormented with the 
guilt of sin, as ver. 2. 4. By what could not the law do this ? 
By those sacrifices which it offered year by year continually. 


Not to speak of sacrifices in general. The sacrifices of 
the Jews may be referred to four heads. 

1. The daily sacrifice of morning and evening, which is 
instituted Exod. xxix. 38, 39. which being omitted, was re- 
newed by Nehem. x. 33. And wholly taken away for a 
long season by Antiochus, according to the prophecy of Da- 
niel, Dan. xi. 31. this is the juge sacrijicimn typifying Christ's 
constant presence with his church, in the benefit of his death 

2. Voluntary and occasional, which had no prefixed time, 
nor matter ; so that they were of such creatures as God had 
allowed to be sacrificed, they were left to the will of the of- 
ferer, according as occasion and necessity was by providence 
administered. Now of these sacrifices there was a peculiar 
reason, that did not (as far as I can find) belong unto any 
of the rest. The judicial government of that nation being as 
their own historian Josephus calls it, QeoKparia, and imme- 
diately in the hand of God. He appointed these voluntary 
sacrifices, which were a part of his religious worship, to have 
a place al-o in the judicial government of the people. For 
whereas he had appointed death to be the punishment due to 
every sin ; he allowed that for many sins sacrifice should 
be offered, for the expiating of the guilt contracted in that 
commonwealth, of which himself was the governor. Thus 
for many sins of ignorance and weakness, and other perver- 
sities, sacrifice was offered, and the guilty person died not, 
according to the general tenor of the law, ' Cursed is every 
one that continueth not in all these things.' Hence'^ David 
in'his great sin of murder and adultery flies to mere mercy ; 
acknowledging that God had appointed no sacrifice for the 
expiation of those sins, as to the guilt political, contracted 
in that commonwealth, though otherwise, no sins nor sinners 
were excluded from the benefit of sacrifices. This was their 
political regard, which they had, or could have only on this 
account ; that God was the supreme political governor of 
that people, their Lord, and King. 

3 Sacrifices extraordinary on solemn occasions : which 
seem some of them to be mixed of the two former kinds ; 
stated and voluntary. Such was Solomon's great sacrifice 
at the dedication of the temple. These partly answered 

«^ Psal. li. 16. 


the sacrifice instituted at the dedication of the altar and ta- 
bernacle, partly the free-will offerings, which God allowed 
the people, according to their occasions ; and appointed 
them for them. 

4. Appointed sacrifices on solemn days: as on the sab- 
bath, new moons, passover, feast of weeks, lesser and greater 
jubilee, but especially the solemn anniversary sacrifice of ex- 
piation, when the high-priest entered into the holy place, 
with the blood of the beast sacrificed, on the tenth day of 
the month Tizri. The institution of this sacrifice you have 
Lev. xvi. throughout. The matter of it was one bullock, 
and two goats, or kids of goats, ver. 2. 5. The manner was 
this, 1. In the entrance 'Aaron offered one bullock peculiarly 
for himself and his house ;' ver. 6. 2. Lots were cast on the 
two goats, one to be a sin-offering, the other to be Azazel, 
ver. 8, 9. 3. The bullock and goat being slain, the blood 
was carried into the holy place. 4. Azazel having all the 
sins of the people confessed over him, was sent into the wil- 
derness to perish; ver. 21. 5. The end of this sacrifice 
was atonement and cleansing, ver. 30. Of the whole nature, 
ends, significancy, and use, of this sacrifice (as of others), 
elsewhere ; at present, I attend only the thesis proposed. 

Now if perfect atonement and expiation might be ex- 
pected from any of the sacrifices so instituted by God, cer- 
tainly it might be from this ; therefore this doth the apostle 
choose to instance in. This was the sacrifice offered kot' 
tviavTov, and tic to Strjvticsc ' but these, saith he, could not do 
it; the law by them could not do it, and this he proves with 
two arguments. 

L From the event, ver. 2, 3. * For then would they not 
have ceased to be offered ; because that the worshipper once 
purged, should have had no more conscience of sin? But in 
these sacrifices, there was a remembrance made again of sins 
every year.' The words of the second verse are to be read 
with an interrogation, conclusive in the negative : would 
they not have ceased to have been offered ? That is cer- 
tainly they would ; and because they did not do so, it is 
evident from the event, that they could not take away sin. 
In most copies the words are, IttI av eTravrravTo ^po(T(f>£p6iu£vat. 
Those that add the negative particle ovk, put it for ovx', as 
it is frequently used. 


2. From the nature of the thing itself, ver. 4. * For it was 
not possible, that the blood of bulls and goats should take 
away sin.' The reason in these words is evident and plain, 
especially that of ver. 4. There is a twofold impossibility in 
the thing. 

1. In regard of impetration ; it was impossible they 
should really atone God, who was provoked. First, The con- 
junction between the sinner and the sacrificed beast, was 
not such, or so near (being only that of possessor and pos- 
sessed), that really and beyond representation and type, the 
blood of the one could satisfy for the sin of the other. Much 
less, secondly, was there an innate worth of the blood of any 
beast, though never so innocent, to atone the justice of God, 
that was offended at sin; Mich. vi. 6, 7. Nor thirdly, was 
there any will in them for such an undertaking, or commu- 
tation. The sacrifice was bound with cords to the horns of 
the altar ; Christ went willingly to the sacrifice of himself. 

2. In regard of application. The blood of common sa- 
crifices being once shed, was a dead thing, and had no more 
worth nor efficacy : it could not possibly be a living way 
for us to come to God by ; nor could it be preserved, to be 
sprinkled upon the conscience of the sinner. 

Hence doth the apostle make it evident, in the first place, 
that Christ was not to offer any of the sacrifices which for- 
mer priests had offered, because it was utterly impossible, 
that by such sacrifices, the end of the sacrifice which he was 
to offer, should be accomplished. This also he proves, 

2. Because God had expressly disallowed of those sacri- 
fices, as to that end ; not only it was impossible in the nature 
of the thing itself, but also God had absolutely rejected the 
tender of them, as to the taking away sin, and bringing sin- 
ners to God. But it may be said, did not God appoint them 
for that end and purpose, as was spoken before ; the end of 
the sacrifice in the day of expiation was (Lev, xvi. 30.) to 
atone, and cleanse ; * on that day shall the priest make an 
atonement for you to cleanse you' (for the priest made an 
atonement actively, by offering the sacrifice : the sacrifice 
itself passively, by undergoing the penalty of death ; Christ, 
who was both priest and sacrifice, did both). I answer ; they 
were never appointed of God for to accomplish that end, by 
any real worth and efficacy of their own, but merely to ty- 


pify, prefigure, and point out him, and that; which did the 
work, which they represented ; and so served as the apostle 
speaks, until the time of reformation; Heb. ix. 10. they 
served the use of that people, in the under-age condition, 
wherein God was pleased to keep them. 

But now that God rejected them as to this end and pur- 
pose, the apostle proves by the testimony of David, speak- 
ing of the acceptance of Christ, Psal. xl. 6, 7. ' Sacrifice 
and offering thou didst not desire ; mine ears hast thou open- 
ed ; burnt-offering-, and sin-offering hast thou not required. 
Then said I, Lo I come/ &c. which the apostle insists on, 
ver. 6 — 9. There are several accounts, upon which God in 
Scripture is said to disregard, and not to approve or accept 
of sacrifices, which yet were of his own institution. 1. In 
respect of the hypocrisy of the offerers : that people being 
grown formal and corrupt, trusted in sacrifices, and the work 
wrought in them, and said by them, they should be justified; 
God expressing his indignation against such sacrifices, or 
the sacrifices of such persons, rejects the things themselves 
wherein they trusted, that is, in reference to them that used 
them. This is the intention of the Holy Ghost, Isa. i. 12, 
13. but this is not the cause of their rejection in this place 
of the psalmist ; for he speaketh of them who walketh with 
God in uprightness, and waited for his salvation ; even of 
himself and other saints, as appears in the context, ver. 5. 
&c. 2. Comparatively; they are rejected as to the outward 
work of them, in comparison of his more spiritual worship; 
as Psal. 1. 12 — 14. but neither are they here rejected on that 
account ; nor is there mention of any opposition between 
the outward worship of sacrifice, and any other more spi- 
ritual and internal part thereof : but between sacrifice, and the 
boring of the ear, or preparing of the body of Christ, as ex- 
pressly, ver. 6. 

Their rejection then here mentioned, is, in reference to 
that which is asserted, in opposition to them, and in refer- 
ence to the end, for which that is asserted : look to what 
end Christ had a body fitted and prepared for, and to that 
end, and the compassing of it, are all sacrifices rejected of 
God : now this was to take away sin, so that as to thate nd 
are they rejected. 

And here in our passage may we remove what the Raco- 


vian catechism gives us, as the difference between the expi- 
ation under the Old Testament, and that under the New, 
concerning which. Chap, de Mun. Ch. Sacerdot. q. 5. they 
thus inquire. 

' Q. Whaf* is the difference between the expiation of sin 
in the Old and New Testament? 

*A. The expiation of sins under the New Testament, is not 
only much different from that under the Old, but also is far 
better, and more excellent: and that chiefly for two causes: 
the first is, that under the Old Testament, expiation by those 
legal sacrifices was appointed only for those sins, which 
happened upon imprudence and infirmity ; from whence 
they were also called infirmities and ignorances. But for 
greater sins, such as were manifest transgressions of the com- 
mand of God, there were no sacrifices instituted, but the pu- 
nishment of death was proposed to them : and if God did 
forgive such to any, he did not do it by virtue of the cove- 
nant, but of singular mercy, which God besides the covenant 
did afford, when, and to whom he would : but under the new 
covenant, not only those sins are expiated, which happen by 
imprudence and infirmity, but those also, which are trans- 
gressions of most evident commands of God, whilst he who 
happened so to fall, doth not continue therein, but is changed 
by true repentance, and falleth not into that sin again. The 
latter cause is, because under the Old Testament, expi- 
ation of sins was so performed, that only temporal punish- 
ment was taken away from them, whose sins were expiated. 
But under the New, the expiation is such, as not only takes 

^ Quodnara est discrimen inter veteris, et novi fcEdciis peccatoruni expiationera ? 
— Expiatio peccatoruni sub novo foedere.non solum distat ab expiatione peccatorum 
sub vetereplurimuni, veruin etiam longe praestantior, et excelleiitior est: id vero du- 
abus potissirauni de causis : prior est, quod sub vetere foedere, iis tantum peccatis 
expiatio, per ilia legalia sacrificia, constituta fuit, quse per imprudentiani, vel per 
infirniitatem admissa fuere, uiide etiam infirmitates, et ignorantia; nuncupabantur : 
verum pro peccatis gravioribus, qua; transgressiones erant mandati Uei nianifestae, 
nulla sacrificia institutafuerant, sed mortis prena fuit proposita. Quod si talia Deus 
alicui condonabat, id non vi foederis fiebat, sed misericordia Dei singulari, quam 
Deuscitrafoedus,etquando,etcuilibuitexhibebat: sub novo vero focdcre pcccataex- 
piantur, non solum per imprudentiani et infirniitatem admissa, verum etiam ea, qua3 
apertissiniorum Dei mandatorura sunt transgressiones, dummodo is cui labi ad eum 
moduracontigerit,in eo non perseverct; verum per veram panitentiam resipiscat, nee 
ad illud peccatum amplius relabatur. Posterior vero causa est, quod sub prisco foe- 
dere ad eum niodum peccatorum expiatio peragebatur, ut poena temporaria tantum, 
ab iis, quorum peccata expiabantur, toUeretur : sub novo vero ea est expiatio, ut 
non solum pcenas temporarias, verum etiam aeternas amoveat, et loco poenarum, aeter- 
nam vitam in foedere promissam, iis (luorum peccata fuerint expiata offerat. De 
Mun. Ch. Sacerdot. Q. 5, 


away temporal, but eternal punishment, and in their stead, 
offers eternal life promised in the covenant, to them whose 
sins are expiated.' Thus they. 

Some brief animadversions will give the reader a clear 
account of this discourse. 1. Sundry things are here splen- 
didly supposed by our catechists, than which nothing could 
be imagined or invented more false : as 1. That the covenant 
was not the same for substance under the Old and New Tes- 
tament, before and after the coming of Christ in the flesh. 
2. That those under the Old Testament were not pardoned 
or saved by Christ. 3. That death temporal was all that 
was threatened by the law. 4. That God forgave sin, and 
not in, or by the covenant. 5. That there were no promises 
of eternal life under the Old Testament, &c. on these and 
the like goodly principles, is this whole discourse erected ; 
let us now consider their assertions. The first is, 

1 . That expiation by legal sacrifices was only for some 
sins and not of all ; as sins of infirmity and ignorance, not 
great crimes : wherein, l.They suppose, that the legal sacri- 
fices did by themselves, and their own efficacy, expiate sin, 
which is directly contrary to the discourse of the apostle 
now insisted on. 2. Their affirmation hereon is most false : 
Aaron making an atonement for sin, confessed over the 
goat all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their 
transgressions, in all their sins; Lev. xvi. 21. and besides, 
all manner of sins are comprised under those expressions of 
ignorances and infirmities. 

2. They say, * for greater sins there was then no expiation, 
but death was threatened to them.' But then, 1, None that 
ever committed such sins were saved ; for without expiation 
there is no salvation. 2. Death was threatened, and inflicted 
without mercy for some sins, as the law with its judicial ad- 
ditaments was the rule of the judaical polity ; and for those 
sins, there was no sacrifice for a deliverance from death tem- 
poral ; but death was threatened to every sin, small and 
great, as the law was a rule of moral obedience unto God ; 
and so in respect of sacrifices there was no distinction. This 
difference of sacrifices for some sins, and not for others in 
particular, did depend merely on their use by God's appoint- 
ment in the commonwealth of that people, and had no re- 
gard to the spiritual expiation of sin, which they typified. 


3. That God forgave the sins of his people of old, by sin- 
gular mercy, and not by virtue of his covenant, is a bold fig- 
ment. God exercises no singular mercy, but in the covenant 
thereof; Eph. ii. 12. 

4. Their condition of expiation (by the way) under the 
New Testament, that the sinner fall not again into the same 
sin, is a matter that these men understand not ; but this is 
no place to discuss it. 

5. That the expiation under the Old Testament reached 
only to the removal of temporal punishment, is another ima- 
gination of our catechists. It was death eternal that was 
threatened, as the punishment due. to the transgression of 
the law, as it was the rule of obedience to God, as hath been 
proved ; even the death that Christ delivered us from ; Rom. 
V. 12, &c. Heb. ii. 14, 15. God was atoned by those sacri- 
fices, according to their way of making atonement. Lev. 
xvi. 30. so that the punishment avoided was eternal punish- 
ment. 2. Neither is this indeed spoken by our catechists, 
as though they believed any punishment should be eternal; 
but they only hide themselves in ambiguity of the expression, 
it being annihilation they intend thereby. 3. The irpwrov 
xpevBog of this discourse is, that expiation by sacrifices was no 
other, than what was done really by the sacrifices themselves, 
so everting their typical nature and institution, and divesting 
them of the efficacy of the blood of Christ, which they did 

6. It is confessed, that there is a diflference between the 
expiation under the Old Testament, and that under the New; 
but this of application and manifestation, not of impetration 
and procurement. This is Jesus Christ, * the same yesterday, 
to day, and for ever.' 

But they plead proof of Scripture for what they say in 
the ensuing question. 

* Q. How* dost thou demonstrate both these ? 

'A. That the sins, which could not be expiated under the 
Old Testament, are all expiated under the New, Paul wit- 
nesseth. Acts xiii. 38, 39. and the same is also affirmed ; 

" Qua ralione vcro utrunique deraonstras? — Peccata, quee sub x'etere foedere ex- 
plari lion potuere omnia sub novo expiari tcstatur Apostolus Paulus, in Actis, cap. 
xiii. 38, 39. idem habetur; Rom. iii. "25. Heb. ix. 15. Quod vcro ea rationc expi- 
ciitur peccata sub novo fodere, ut etiam asterna f cena amoveatur, et vita aetcrna do- 
uetur, habetur Heb. ix. 12. ubi sup. Q. 6. 


Rom. iii. 25. Heb. ix. 15. But that sins are so expiated 
under the New Testament, as that also eternal punishment 
is removed, and life eternal given, we have Heb. ix. 12.' 

This work will speedily be at an issue. 1. It is denied, 
that Paul, Acts xiii. 38, 39. makes a distinction of sins, 
whereof some might be expiated by Moses' law, and others 
not. He says no ttiore there, than in this place to the He- 
brews, namely, that the legal sacrifices, wherein they rested 
and trusted, could,not of themselves free them, or their con- 
sciences from sin, or give them peace with God; being but 
types and shadows of good things to come ; the body being 
Christ, by whom alone all justification from sin is to be ob- 
tained. Absolutely, the sacrifices of the law expiated no sin, 
and so were they rested in by the Jews. Typically, they ex- 
piated all, and so Paul calls them from them to the antitype 
(or rather thing typified) now actually exhibited. 

2. The two next places of Rom. iii. 25. Heb. ix. 15. do 
expressly condemn the figment they strive to establish by 
them ; both of them assigning the pardon of sins that were 
past, and their expiation, imto the blood and sacrifice of 
Christ; though there were then purifications, purgations, 
sacrifices, yet the meritorious, and efficient cause of all ex- 
piation, was the blood of Christ, which manifests the expia- 
tion under the Old and New Testament for substance to have 
been the same. 

3. That the expiation under the New Testament is ac- 
companied with deliverance from eternal punishment, and a 
grant of life eternal, is confessed ; and so also was that 
under the Old, or it was no expiation at all, that had respect 
either to God, or the souls of men : but to proceed with the 
sacrifice of Christ. 

This is the first thing I proposed, Christ being to offer 
sacrifice, was not to offer the sacrifice of the priests of old ; 
because they could never bring about what he aimed at in 
his sacrifice ; it was impossible in the nature of the thing it- 
self, and they were expressly, as to that end, rejected of God 

2. Christ as a priest did never offer these sacrifices ; it 
is true, as one made under the law, and whom it became to 
fulfil all righteousness, he was present at them : but as a 
priest he never offered them ; for the apostle expressly af- 


firms, that he could not be a priest, that had right to offer 
those sacrifices, as before ; and he positively refuses the 
owning himself for such a priest, when having cured the 
leprous man, he bade him go shew himself to the priest ac- 
cording to the law. 

3. What Christ did offer indeed, as his sacrifice, is nextly 
mentioned. This the apostle expresseth in that which is 
asserted, in opposition to the sacrifices rejected ; Heb. x. 5. 
* But a body hast thou prepared me.' 

The words in the psalm are in the sound of them other- 
wise, Psal. xl. 6. >b nnj CD'im ' mine ears hast thou digged:' 
which the Septuagint render, and the apostle from them, 
atjfxa KaraprtCTw fxol ; * a body hast thou prepared me.' Of the 
accomodation of the interpretation to the original, there is 
much contention; some think here is an allusion to the cus- 
tom among the Jews, of boring the ear of him, who was upon 
his own consent to be a servant for ever. Now because Christ 
took a body to be obedient, and a servant to his Father, this 
is expressed by the boring of the ear, which therefore the 
Septuagint renders by preparing a body, wherein he might 
be so obedient ; but this to me seems too curious on the 
part of the allusion, and too much strained on the part of 
the application, and therefore I shall not insist on it. 

Plainly, mD signifies not only in its first sense to 'dig,' 
but also to ' prepare,' and is so rendered by the Septuagint ; 
now, whereas the original expresseth only the ears, which 
are the organ by which we hear, and become obedient 
(whence to hear is sometimes as much as to be obedient), it 
mentions the ear synecdochically, for the whole body, 
which God so prepared for obedience to himself: and that 
which the original expressed synecdochically, the Sep- 
tuagint, and after them the apostle rendered more plainly 
and fully, naming the whole body wherein he obeyed, when 
the ears were only expressed, whereby he learned obedi- 

The interpretation of this place by the Socinians, is as 
ridiculous as any they make use of; take it in the words of 
Volkelius. *■' Add hereto that the mortal body of Christ, 

f Ailde quod corpus uiortale, quo Christus ante mortem, imo ante suum in coe- 
him asccnsuni prfeditus erat, ad hoc baccrdotiuni obeundum, ct sacrificiura penitus 
absolvendum, apluni non fuit ; idcoque tunc dcmum corpus, liuic rci accoumioda 



which he had before his death, yea, before his ascension inta. 
heaven, was not fit for his undergoing this office of priest- 
hood, or wholly to accomplish the sacrifice : wherefore the 
divine writer to the Hebrews, chap.x. 5. declareth, that then 
he had a perfect body, accommodated unto this work, when 
he went into the world ; that is, to come, which is heaven.' 
A heap of foolish abominations. 1. The truth is, no body 
but a mortal body was fit to be this sacrifice, which was to 
be accomplislied, according to all the types of it, by shed- 
ding of blood, without which there is no remission. 2. It 
is false, that Christ had a mortal body after his resurrection ; 
or that he hath any other body now in heaven, than what 
he rose withal. 3. It is false that the world, spoken of 
simply, doth any where signify the world to come, or that 
the world here signifies heaven. 4. It is false that the 
coming into the world, signifies going out of the world : as 
it is here interpreted. 5. Christ's bringing into the world, 
was by his incarnation and birth, Heb. i. 6. according to 
the constant use of that expression in the Scripture, as his 
ascension is his leaving the world, and going to his Father, 
John xiii. 1. xiv. 19. xvi. 28. 

But I must not insist on this; it is the body that God 
prepared Christ for his obedience, that is, his whole human 
nature that is asserted for the matter of Christ's offering. 
For the clearing whereof the reader may observe, that the 
matter of the offering and sacrifice of Christ is expressed 
three ways. 

1. It is said to be of the body and blood of Christ ; Heb. 
X. 10. The offering of the body of Jesus, and the blood of 
Christ, is said to spurge us from our sins, that is, by the 
sacrifice of it ; and in his blood have we redemption, and by 
his own * blood did he enter into the holy place,' Heb. ix. 
12. and most expressly, xiii. 12. 

2. His soul; Isa. liii. 10. 'When thou shalt make his 
soul an offering for sin.' 

3. It is most frequently said to be himself that was of- 
fered. Eph. V. 2. Heb. i. 3. ix. 14. 25, 26. vii. 27. Hence 
it appears what was the matter of the sacrifice of this High 

tuni, iierfectum eifuisse, divinus Aullior indicat, Heb. x. 5. ciim in munduii), nen)|)e 
fiitunim illam, qui cceIuid est, iiigrcderetur. A''olkel. de vera Relig. lib. 3. cap. 37. 

dc Sac. Cbristi. p. 146. 

1 Joliii i. 7, Ephes. i. 13. 


Priest, even himself; he sacrificed himself; his whole human 
nature ; he offered up his body and soul, as a propitiatory- 
sacrifice to God ; a sacrifice for atonement and expiation. 

Farther, to clear this, I must desire the reader to take 
notice of the import of this expression ; ' He sacrificed him- 
self/ or Christ sacrificed himself. * He' in the first place, as 
it is spoken of the sacrificer, denotes the person of Christ, 
and both natures herein ; ' himself,' as the sacrificed, is only 
the human nature of Christ, wherein and whereof that sacri- 
fice was made. He makes the atonement actively, as the 
priest; himself passively, as the sacrifice. 

1 . * He' is the person of Christ, God and man jointly and 
distinctly acting in the work. 

1. As God ; Heb. ix. 14. ' through the eternal Spirit he 
offered himself to God.' His eternal Spirit, or Deity, was 
the principal agent, offering; and wherever there is men- 
tioning of Christ's offering himself, it relates principally to 
the person, God-man, who offered. 

2. The free will of his human nature was in it also ; so 
Heb. X. 7. ' Lo, I come to do thy will ;' when God had pre- 
pared him a body, opened his hears, he says/Lo, I come to 
do thy will ;' as it was written of him in the volume of God's 
book ; and that this expression, * Lo, 1 come to do thy will,' 
sets out the readiness of the human will of Christ, is evident 
from that exposition which is given of it, Psal. xl. 8. ' yea 
thy law is within my heart,' or in the 'midst of my bowels;' 
thy law, the law of the Mediator, that I am to undertake, it 
is in the midst of my heart ; which is an expression of the 
greatest readiness and willingness possible. He then that 
offers is our Mediator, God and man in one person ; and the 
offering is the act of the person. 

2. ' Himself offered, as the matter of the sacrifice, is only 
the human nature of Christ, soul and body, as was said ; 
which is evident from the description of a sacrifice, what 
it is. 

A sacrifice is a religious oblation, wherein something by 
the ministry of a priest, appointed of God thereunto, is de- 
dicated to God and destroyed, as to what it was, for the 
ends and purposes of spiritual worship whereunto it is in- 
stituted. I shall only take notice of that one part of this 
definition, which asserts that the thing sacrificed was to be 



destroyed as to what it was. This is clear from all the sacri- 
fices that ever were ; either they were slain or burnt, or sent to 
destruction. Now the person of Christ was not dissolved, 
but the union of his natures continued ; even then when 
the human nature was in itself destroyed, by the separation 
of soul and body. It was the soul and body of Christ that 
was sacrificed ; his body being killed, and his soul separated ; 
so that at that season it was destroyed as to what it was; 
though it was impossible he should be detained by death. 

And this sacrifice of Christ, was typified by the two 
goats; his body, whose blood was shed, by the goat that was 
slain visibly ; and his soul by Azazel, on whose head the 
sins of the people were confessed, and he is sent away into 
the. wilderness to suffer there by a fall or famishment. 

This also will farther appear in our following considera- 
tion of the death of Christ, as a punishment; when I shall 
shew, that he suffered both in soul and body. 

But it may be said, if only the human nature of Christ 
was offered, how could it be a sacrifice of such infinite value, 
as to the justice of God, for all the sins of all the elect, 
whereunto it was appointed. 

Am. Though the thing sacrificed was but finite, yet the 
person sacrificing was infinite; and the a-KOTik^aiia of the 
action follows the agent ; that is, our Mediator S'cavS'jowTroe; 
whence the sacrifice was of infinite value. 

And this is the second consideration of the death of 
Christ, it was a sacrifice ; what is the peculiar influence of 
his death as a sacrifice, into the satisfaction he hath made, 
shall be declared afterward. 

From what hath been spoken, a brief description of the 
sacrifice of Christ, as to all the concernments of it may be 

1. The person designing, appointing, and instituting this 
sacrifice, is God the Father; as in grace contriving the great 
work of the salvation of the elect ; a * body did he prepare 
him;' and therein he came to do his will, Heb. x. 9. in that 
which he did, which the sacrifices of old could not do. He 
came to fulfil the will of God, his appointment and ordi- 
nance, being his servant therein ; made jSpo^^u n less than 
the Father, that he might be obedient to death : God the 
Father sent him when he made his soul an offering. 


2. He to whom it was offered, was God; God essentially 
considered, with his glorious property of justice, which was 
to be atoned ; * he gave himself a sacrifice to God, for a 
sweet smelling savour;' Eph. v. 2. that is, to atone him being 
provoked, as we shall see afterward, 

3. The person offering was Christ the Mediator, God 
and man; * he offered himself to God;' Heb. ix. 14. And 
because he did it, who was God and man, and as God and 
man, God is said to ' redeem his church with his own blood ;' 
Acts XX. 28. 

4. The matter of the sacrifice was his whole human na- 
ture, body and soul, called himself, as I have shewed, in 
sundry particulars. 

5. The immediate efficient cause of his offering, and the 
destruction of that which he offered unto God, as before de- 
scribed, was his own will : ' Lo, I come,' saith he, * to do 
thy will ;' and ' no man,' saith he, ' taketh my life from me ; 
I lay down my life, and I have power to take it up again ;* 
John X. 17, 18. What men or devils did to him, as what he 
suffered from the curse of the law, comes under another con- 
sideration, as his death was a penalty; as it was a sacrifice, 
his own will was all the cause immediately effecting it. 

6. The fire that was to set this holocaust on a flame, was 
the Holy Spirit; Heb. ix. 14. Through the eternal Spirit; 
that the fire which came down from heaven, and was always 
kept alive upon the altar, was a type of the Holy Ghost, 
might easily be demonstrated. I have done it elsewhere. 
Now the Holy Spirit did this in Christ; he was offered 
through the eternal Spirit ; as others were by fire. 

7. The Scripture speaks nothing of the altar, on which 
Christ was offered. Some assign the cross. That of our 
Saviour is abundantly sufficient to evince the folly thereof; 
Matt, xxiii. 18, 19. If the cross was the altar, it was greater 
than Christ, and sanctified him, which is blasphemy. Be- 
sides, Christ himself is said to be an altar; Heb. xiii. 10. and 
he is said to sanctify himself to be an offering or a sacrifice; 
John xviii. 19. So that indeed the Deity of Christ, that sup- 
ported, bore up, and sanctified the human nature as offered, 
was the altar ; and the cross was but an instrument of the 
cruelty of man, that taketh place in the deatli of Christ as 
it was a penalty, but hath no place in it as a sacrifice. 


That this sacrifice of Christ was a sacrifice of propitia- 
tion, as made by blood, as answering the typical sacrifices 
of old ; that the end and effect of it was atonement or recon- 
ciliation, shall elsewhere be more fully manifested : the dis- 
covery of it also will in part be made, by what in the en- 
suing discourse shall be spoken about reconciliation itself. 


Of the death of Christ, as it was a punishment, and the 
satisfaction made thereby. 

So is the death of Christ revealed as a price, and a sacri- 
fice : what are the proper effects of it, under these consi- 
derations, shall be afterward declared. 

The third consideration of it, is, being a penalty, or a 
punishment; to clear this, I shall demonstrate four things. 

1. What punishment, properly so called, is. 

2. That Christ's death was a punishment, or that in his 
death he did undergo punishment. 

3. What that was that Christ underwent, or the material 
cause of that punishment. 

4. Wherein the formality of its being a punishment did 
consist; or whence that dispensation had its equity. 

For the first I shall give the definition of it, or the de- 
scription of its general nature, 

2. The ends of it are to be considered. 

For the first, that usual general description seemeth to 
be comprehensive of the whole nature of punishment; it is, 
* malum passionis, quod infligitur ob malum actionis,' an 
evil of suffering inflicted for doing evil. Or more largely to 
describe it; it is an effect of justice in him, who hath sove- 
reign power and right, to order and dispose of offenders, 
whereby he that doth contrary to the rule of his actions, is 
recompensed with that which is evil to himself, according to 
the* demerit of his fault. 

1. It is an" effect of justice; hence God's punishing is 

* Si non reddit faciendo quod debet reddet patiendo quod debet. August, lib. 3, 
de lib. Arbit. 

^ Vid. Diat. de Just. Viiidic. StKtj ■rif/.cjo^laq d'/sa'iTnait waji tZv Tr^ovi^mwoTOiv. Hier. 


"often called an inflicting of anger, as Rora. ill. 5. * Is God un- 
righteous, 6 lirKp^phiv Ti)v opjriv, who inflicteth anger?' Anger 
is put for the justice of God, Rom. i. 18. ' the anger or wrath 
of God is revealed from heaven,' 8cc. That is, his vindictive 
justice against sin, is manifested by its effects; and again, 
the cause for the effect. Anger for the effect of it in pu- 
nishment. And therefore we have translated the word ' ven- 
geance,' Rom. iii. 5. which denotes the punishment itself. 

2. It is of him, who hath sovereign power, and judiciary 
right to dispose of the offenders ; and this is either imme- 
diate in God himself, as in the case whereof we speak ; he 
is the only * lawgiver, who is able to save, and destroy;' 
Jam. iv. 12. or it is by him delegated to men, for the use of 
human society ; so Christ tells Pilate, he could have no 
power over hira (wliomhe considered as a malefactor) unless 
it was given him from above; John xix. 11. though that is 
spoken in reference to that peculiar dispensation. 

3. The nature of it consists in this, that it be evil to him, 
.on whom it is inflicted, either by the immission of that 

which is corrupting, vexing, and destroying, or the sub- 
traction of that which is cheering, useful, good, and desir- 
able, in what kind soever. And, therefore, did the ancients 
call the punishment ' fraus,' because, when it came upon men, 
they had deceived, and cut short themselves of some good, 
that otherwise they might have enjoyed. So the historian,*^ 
' Cseterse multitudini diem statuit, antequam liceret sine 
fraude ab armis discedere :' that is, that they might go away 
freely, without punishment. And so is that expression ex- 
plained by Ulpian ; Dig. lib. 20. ' Capitalem fraudem ad- 
raittere, est tale aliquid delinquere, propter quod, capitepu- 
niendus sit.' ^ 

The schoolmen have two rules that pass amongst them 
without control. 1. That * Omne peccatum est adeo vo- 
luntarium, ut si non sit voluntarium non est peccatum.' It 
is so of the nature of sin, that it be voluntary, that if any 
thing be not voluntary, it is not sin. The other is, * est ex 
natura pcente ut sit involuntaria :' it is so of the nature of 
punishment, that it be against the will of him that is punished, 
that if it be not so, it is not punishment. 

Neither of which rules is true, yea, the latter is undoubt- 

•^ Salust.bcil. Catil. 


edly false. For the first, every sin is thus far indeed volun- 
tary, that what is done contrary to the express will of him 
that doth it, is not his sin ; but that the actual will, or will- 
ing of the sinner is required, to make any thing his sin, is 
false. In the case of original sin manifestly ; wherefore 
John gives us another definition of sin than theirs is, that it 
is, ' dictum, factum, concupitum, contra legem ;' namely, that 
it is avofiia, ' a transgression of the law ;' have it the actual 
consent of the will or no, if it be a transgression of the law, 
an inconformity to the law, it is sin. 

For the latter it is true indeed, that for the most part it 
falls out, that every one that is to be punished, is unwilling 
to undergo it ; and there is an improper nolleity (if I may so 
speak) in nature, unto the subtracting of any good from it, 
or the immission of any evil upon it ; yet, as to the perfec- 
tion of the nature of punishment, there is no more required, 
than what was laid down in general before, that there be 
' malum passionis, ob malum actionis,' a suffering of evil for 
doing of evil, whether men will or no. Yea, men may be 
willing to it, as the soldiers of Caesar after their defeat at^ 
Dyrrachium, came to him, and desired that they might be 
punished, ' more antiquo :' being ashamed of their flight. But 
whatever really or personally is evil to a man, for his evil is 
punishment ; though chiefly among the Latins, punishment 
relates to things real : capital revenges had another name. 
Punishments were chiefly pecuniary, as Servius on that of 
Virgil : * Post mihi non simili poena commissaluetis: luetis: 
persolvetis : et hie sermo a pecunia descendit, antiquorum 
enim pceneeomnes pecuniarice fuerunt.' And ' supplicium' is 
of the same importance. Punishments were called "supplicia,' 
because with the mulcts of men, they sacrificed, and made 
their supplications to God : whence the word is sometimes 
used for that worship ; as in Salustius, describing the old 
Romans, he says they were in ' suppliciis Deorum magnifici/ 

4. There is the procuring cause of it, which is, doing 
evil, contrary to the law and rule whereby the offender ought 
to walk, and regulate his actings and proceedings : ' omnis 
poena, si justa est, peccati poena est,' says Aug. indeed, not 

d Quanta fortitndine dimicaverint, festiinonioest, quod adverso seniel apud Djira- 
cliiuni prnelio, pcenaiii in se ultro depoposcuiit. Sueton. in Jul.Cees. cap. 68. More 
patrio dcciijiari voiueruiit. Appianus, 


only, * si justa est/ but ' si poena est ;' taking it properly, 
offence must precede punishment. 

And whatever evil befalls any, that is not procured by 
offence, is not properly punishment, but hath some other 
name and nature. The name' poena,' is used for any thing that 
is vexatious or troublesome, any toil or labour, as in the tra- 
gedian, speaking of one who tired himself with travel in 
hunting. ** Quid te ipse pcenis gravibus infestus gravas ;' but 
improperly is it thus used. This Abraham evinceth in his 
plea with God ; Gen. xviii. 25. * That be far from thee to do 
after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked; and 
that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from 
thee : shall not the judge of all the earth do right V It is of 
God as the judge of all the earth of whom he speaks ; that 
is, of him that hath the supreme power of disposing of of- 
fenders ; and of his justice inflicting; which, as I said, was 
the cause of punishment. It is that, whereby God doth right: 
and he gives the procuring cause of all punishment, the 
•wickedness of men ; * That be far from thee, to destroy the 
righteous with the wicked.' And therefore, that place of 
Job, chap. ix. 22. ' This is one thing, therefore I said it, he 
destroys the perfect and the wicked ;' is not to be under- 
stood absolutely, but according to the subject of the dispute 
in hand, between him and Bildad. Bildad says, chap, viii.20. 
That ' God will not cast away a perfect man,' that is, he 
will not afflict a godly man to death. He grants that a godly 
man may be afflicted, which Eliphas's companion seemed 
to deny : yet, says he, he will not cast him avv^ay; that is, 
leave him without relief from that affliction, even in this life. 
To this Job's answer is, ' this is one thing;' that is, one thing I 
am resolved on, 'and therefore I said it,'and will abide by it, 
* he destroyeth the perfect and the wicked ;' not only wicked 
men are destroyed and cutoff in this life, but perfect men 
also; but yet in this very destruction, as there is a difference 
in the persons, one being perfect, the other wicked ; so there 
is in God's dealing with them; one being afflicted to the 
door of heaven, the other cursed into hell. But for punish- 
ment properly so called, the cause is sin, or the offence of 
the person punished. And therefore in the Hebrew, the 
same words (many of them) signify both sin ^nd punishment; 

•^ Scncc. llippol. Act. 3. 


SO near and indissoluble is their relation. npoariKU dijnov^eif 
WC XP^'" icXripovofxiag ^ia^i)(^E(T^at Trig irovrfpptag ttjv KoXami^. 
Plut. de Sera Numin. vindicta. 

5. The measure of any penalty, is the demerit of the of- 
fence ; it is a rendering to men, as for their works, so ac- 
cording to them J 

Nee vincet ratio hoc, taritiindeni ut peccet, idemque 
• Qui teneros caules alieni fregcrit horti 
Et qui noclurnus Divuni sacra legerit. Adsit 
Regula, peccatis quaj pcenas irroget aquas : 
Nc scutica diguum horribili seclere flagcllo. 

I shall not trouble the reader with the heathens appre- 
hension of Rhadaraanthean righteousness, and the exact 
rendering to every one according to his desert even in an- 
other world. 

There is a twofold rule of this proportion of sin and pu- 
nishment ; the one constitutive, the other declarative. The 
rule constitutive of the proportion of penalty for sin, is the 
infinitely wise, holy, and righteous will of God. The rule 
declarative of it is the law. 

For the first, it is his judgment that they which commit 
sin are worthy of death, Rom. i.32. This the apostle fully 
declares ; chap. ii. 5 — 10. The day of punishing, he calls 
the day of the revelation of the righteous judgment of God. 
That is, what his judgment is concerning the demerit of sin. 
The world shall then know, what in justice he requires for 
the due vengeance of it. And this according to his will ; 
ver. 6. he will in his righteous judgment render to every one 
according to his deeds. 

And here it is to be observed, that though there be an 
exceeding great variation in sin, in respect of degrees, so 
that some seem as mountains, others in comparison of them 
but as molehills, yet it is the general nature of sin (which is 
the creatures subducting itself from under the dominion of 
God, and dependance upon him), that punishment original 
is suited unto ; whence death is appointed to every sin, and 
that eternal ; wherein the degrees of punishment vary not 
the kind. 

2. Fors the several kinds of punishment (I call them so, 

f Hor. Sat. lit»| 1. 3. — Vid. Catonis orat. apud Salust. Bel. Catalin, 
S Piinieudis ])t'ccatis (re scsse debere causas existiiiiatuin est. Una est quae vov^ea-la 
•vel xoXacri; vel wapaiVes-ic dicitur : cum poena adliibetur tastigaridi atque emendandi 


in a general acceptation of both words) they are distin- 
guished according to their ends and causes ; the ends of 
punishments, or all such things as have in them the nature 
of punishments, may be referred to the ensuing heads. 

1. The first end of punishment, is, the good of him that 
is punished, and this is twofold. 1. For amendment, and 
recovery from the evil and sin that he hath committed. Thi.tv 
kind of punishing is frequently mentioned in Scripture ; so 
eminently. Lev. xxvi. doth the Lord describe itat large, and 
insists upon it, reckoning up in a long series, a catalogue 
of several judgments ; he interposing, * But if ye shall not be 
reformed by these things, but will walk contrary to me,' as 
ver. 25. then will I do so and so, or add this or that pu- 
nishment to them foregoing : and this in reference to the 
former end of their reformation, and the success of this 
procedure, we find variously expressed ; sometimes the 
end of it in some measure was fulfilled, Psal. xviii. 32 — 35. 
sometimes otherwise, Isa. i. 5. 'Why should you be smit- 
ten any more? you will revolt more and more ;' intimating, 
that the end of the former smiting was to cure their revolt- 
ings. And this kind of pumshment is called'' vov^earia cor- 
rection for instruction ; and is not punishment in its strict 
and proper sense. 

2. For the taking off of sinners, to prevent such other 
wickednesses as they would commit, should patience be ex- 
ercised towards them. The very heathen saw, that he that 
was wicked and not to be reclaimed, it was even good for 
him, and to him, that he should be destroyed. Such a one 
as Plutarch says, was iripoig ye Travrwc jSAa/Sepov avriij re 
/BXajSepwTarov, * hurtful to others, but most of all to himself.' 
HoW much more is this evident to us, who know that future 
judgments shall be proportionably increased to the wicked- 
ness of men in this world; and if every drop of judgment 
in the world to come, be incomparably greater than the 
greatest and heaviest a man can possibly sufier in this life, 
or lose his life by, it is most evident, that a man may be 

gratia, ut is qui fortuito deliquit, attentior fiat, corrcctiorque. Altera est, quani ii, 
qui vocabula ista ciiriosiiis diviserunt, nfjiw^iav appellant, ea causa aniinatlverteiuli 
est, quura dignitas authoritasque ejus, in queui est pcccatum tuenda est, iie pra:- 
termissa animadversio contemptuni ejus pariat, et hoiiorem elevet, &c. vid. A. Gell. 
lib. 6. cap. 24. 

•• YiM yaj h vov^iria xat o ^oyo; IfA.Tton'i joceravoiav aal aiVj^uvtjv. Plut. de virlut. 


punished with death for his own good; 'mitius punientur.' 
This is KoXaaia. And this hath no place in human adminis- 
trations of punishments, when they arise to death itself; men 
cannot kill a man, to prevent their dealing worse with him, 
for that is their worst; they can do no more says our Saviour; 
but accidentally it maybe for his good. Generally KoXaarig, 
or KoXacria, is, as 'Aristotle speaks, iraaKOvTog tveKa ; and is 
thereby differenced from rt/iwpio (of which afterward), which 
as he says, is tou iroLovv-og evBKa 'Iva aTTOTrXrjjowS'^. Hence 
iiKoXdaTog, is one not corrected, not restrained, ' incastiga- 
tus.' And therefore, the punishment of death cannot at all 
properly be KoXaaig : but cutting off by God to prevent far- 
ther sin, hath in it t\ avaXoyov thereunto. 

2. The second end of punishment, which gives a second 
kind of them in the general sense before-mentioned, is for 
the good of others, and this also is various. 

1. For the good of them that may be like minded with 
him that is punished; that they may be deterred, affrighted, 
and persuaded from the like evils. This was the end of 
the punishing of the presumptuous sinner; Deut. xvii. 
12, 13. ' That man shall die, and all the people shall hear, 
and fear, and do no more presumptuously.' 'The people ;' 
that is, any among them that was like minded unto him that 
was stoned and destroyed. So in some places they have 
taken lions that have destroyed me«, and hung them on 
crosses, to fright others that should attempt the like. Hence 
'exemplum,' is sometimes put absolutely for punishment, 
because punishment is for that end. So in the Comedian,'' 
* Quae futura exempla dicunt in eum indigna ;' on which 
place Donatus, ' graves pceuEE, quae possunt cseteris docu- 
mento esse, exempla dicuntur.' And this is a tacit end in 
human punishment. I do not know that God hath cora- 
niitted any pure revenge unto men ; that is, punishing with 
a mere respect to what is past. Nor should one man de- 
stroy another, but for the good of others. Now the good 
of no man lies in revenge. The content that men take 
therein, is their sin, and cannot be absolutely good to them. 
So the philosopher,' 'nemo prudens punit quia peccatura 
est, sed ne peccetur ; revocari enim preeterita non possunt, 
futura prohibeantur :' and Rom. xiii. 4. ' If ye do that which 

* Arist, Khct. 1. ^ Tereiit. Eunuch, act. .5. see. 4. ' Sen. 


is evil, be afraid,' &c. See what he hath done to others, and 
be afraid. 

2. It is for the good of others, that they may not be 
hurt in the like kind, as some were by the sin of hira who 
is punished for it. This"" seems to be the main end of that 
great fundamental law of human society, * Let him that hath 
killed by violence be killed, that the rest of men may live 
in peace.' And these kinds of punishments in reference to 
this end are called ira paddy fiara,"^ * examples ;' that others by 
impunity be not enticed to evil, and that the residue of men 
may be freed from the barm that is brought upon them, by 
reason of such evils. 

Hence the historian says, that commonwealths should 
rather be mindful of things done evilly, than of good turns ; 
the forgetfulness of the latter, is a discouragement to some 
good, but of the former an encouragement to all licentious- 
ness. Thus Joseph" suspecting his espoused consort, yet 
refused TrapadnyfiaTiaai, to make an open example of her by 
punishment. And these'' punishments are thus called from 
their use, and not from their own nature ; and therefore, 
differ not from KoXaaiai and Tifxh^piai, but only as to the end 
and use from whence they have their denomination. 

3. The good of him that punisheth is aimed at, and this 
is proper to God. Man punisheth not, nor can, nor ought, 
for his own good, or the satisfaction of his own justice ; but 
*God made all things for himself, and the wicked for the day 
of evil;* Prov. xvi. 4. Rom. ix. 22. and in God's dealing 
with men, whatever he doth unless it be for this end, it is 
not properly punishment. 

This is Tt^wof'a, * vindictanoxse;' purely the recompensing 
of the evil that is committed, that it may be revenged. This, 
I say, in God's dealing is properly punishment, the revenge 
of the evil done, that himself, or his justice may be satisfied, 
as was seen before, from Rom. ii. 7 — 9. Whatever of evil 
God doth to any, which is therefore called punishment, be- 
cause it partaketh of the general nature of punishment, and 
is evil to him that is punished; yet if the intendment of 

"' Nalurale jus lalionis liic iiidicatur. Grot, in Gen. i.K. 6. 
" Iiule 'Bia^aliiyiJi.a.Tix.l^ a-vWoyia-j/.'-t;, c\. 7ia^ahiy(ji.a.T{)dt EV&u^Ejua. " MaU. i. 19. 

P KoXttS"aTE Se d^tiii; toi'tsl? t£ xal roX^ oXXiij avy.y.i.'^oi^ 7ta^n.hiy(A,a <ra<^i<; xara- 
a^fiactrt, Tliucid. lib. .S. 


God be not to revenge the evil past upon him, in a propor- 
tion of law, it is not punishment properly so called. And 
therefore it will not suffice to prove that believers are, or 
may be punished for sin, to heap up texts of Scripture, 
where they are said to be punished, and that in reference to 
their sin ; unless it can be also proved, that God doth it ' ani- 
mo ulciscendi,' and that their punishment is' vindicta noxae,' 
and that it is done rov ttovovvtoq tvsKa Iva aTroTrXrjjOoS'jj : but 
of this I am not now to treat. The reader may hence see 
what punishment is in general ; what are the ends of it, and 
its kinds from thence ; and what is punishment from God, 
properly so called. It is 'vindicta noxae, animo ulciscendi, 
ut ipsi satisfiat :' and this kind of punishment was the death 
of Christ : which is to be proved. 

3. That the death of Christ was a punishment properly 
so called, which is the third consideration of it, as I said, is 
next to be proved. Of all the places of Scripture and testi- 
monies whereby this may be demonstrated, I shall fix only 
on one portion of Scripture : and that is, Isa. liii. What in 
particular shall be produced from thence, will appear when I 
have given some general considerations of the chapter, which 
I shall do at large, as looking on that portion of Scripture 
as the sum of what is spoken in the Old Testament, con- 
cerning the satisfactory death of Jesus Christ. 

1. This whole prophecy from ver. 13. of chap. lii. which 
is the head of the present discourse, is evinced to belong to 
the Messias, against the Jews. 

1. Because the Chaldee paraphrast, one of their most 
ancient masters, expressly names the Messias, and interprets 
that whole chapter of him ; < Behold,' saith he, ' my servant 
the Messias shall declare prudently.' And the ancient rab- 
bins, as is abundantly proved by others, were of the same 
mind. Which miserably entangles their present obdurate 
masters, who would fix the prophecy upon any, rather than 
on the Messias. Seeing evidently, that if it be proved to 
belong to the Messias in thesi, it can be applied to none 
other in hi/pothesi, but Jesus of Nazareth. 

2. Because they are not able to find out, or fix on any 
one whatever, to whom the things here spoken of, may be 
accommodated. They speak indeed of Jeremiah, Josias, a 
rio-hteous man in general, the whole people of Israel, of 


Messiah Ben Joseph, a man of straw of theii' own setting 
up ; but it is easy to manifest, were that our present work, 
that scarce any one expression in this prophecy, much less 
all, do or can agree to any one, or all of them named, so that 
it must be brought home to its proper subject: of this at 
large in the ensuing digression against Grotius. 

2. That to us it is evident above all contradiction, that 
the whole belongs to Jesus Christ ; because not only parti- 
cular testimonies are taken from hence in the New Testament 
and applied to him, as Matt. viii. 17. Mark. xv. 28. Luke 
xxii. 37. Rom. x. 16. but it is also expounded of him in ge- 
neral for the conversion of souls; Acts viii. 28. The story is 
known of Philip and the eunuch, 

3. This is such a prophecy of Christ, as belongs to him 
not only properly, but immediately: that is, it doth not in 
the first place point out any type of Christ, and by him sha- 
dow out Christ, as it is in sundry psalms, where David and 
Solomon are firstly spoken of, though the Messias be prin- 
cipally intended: but here is no such thing. Christ himself 
is immediately spoken of. Socinus says indeed, that he 
doubted not but that these things did primarily belong to 
another, could he be discovered who he was, and that from 
him was the allusion taken, and the accommodation made 
to Christ : ' and if,' saith he, ' it could be found out who he 
was, much light might be given into many expressions in the 
chapter.' But this is a bold figment, for which there is not 
the least countenance given either from Scripture or reason; 
which is evidently decried from the former arguments, 
whereby the impudency of the Jews is confounded ; and 
shall be farther in the ensuing digression, where it shall be 
proved, that it is impossible to fix on any one but Jesus Christ, 
to whom the several expressions, and matters expressed in 
this prophecy may be accommodated. 

2. Now there are three general parts of this prophecy, to 
consider it with reference to the business in hand. As the 
seat of this truth in the Old Testament, 

1. A description given of Christ, in a mean, low, misera- 
ble condition, from ver. 14. of chap. lii. to ver. 5. of chap, 
liii. His 'visage was marred, and his form, more than the 
sons of men, he hath no form, nor comeliness,' ver. 2. 'No 
beauty, a man of grief and sorrows, despised, neglected, ac- 


quainted with grief;* ver. 3. looked on 'as stricken and af- 
flicted of God,' ver. 4. 

2. The reason is given of this representation of the Mes- 
sias, of whom it is said in the entrance of the prophecy, that 
he should deal prudently, and be exalted, and extolled, and 
be very high. To which this description of him seems most 
adverse and contrary. The reason, I say, hereof is given 
from ver. 5. to the 10. it was on the account of his being 
punished, and broken for us, and our sins. 

3. The issue of all this from ver. 10. to the end, in the 
justification and salvation of believers. 

It is the second that I shall insist upon, to prove the death 
of Christ, to have in it the nature of punishment, properly and 
strictly so called. 

Not to insist upon all the particular passages, that might 
be done to great advantage, and ought to be done, did I pur- 
pose the thorough and full handling of the business before 
me (but I am 'in transitu,' and pressing to somewhat farther), 
I shall only urge two things. 

1. The expressions throughout, that describe the state 
and condition of Christ as here proposed. 

2. One or two singular assertions, comprehensive of much 
of the rest. 

For the first, let the reader consider what is contained in 
the several words, liere setting forth the condition of Christ ; 
we have, 'despising and rejecting, sorrow and grief;' ver. 4. 
He was 'stricken, smitten, afflicted;' or there was striking, 
smiting, affliction on him, 'Wounded, bruised, chastised 
with stripes ;' ver. 5. wounding, bruising, chastising unto 
soreness, oppressed, stricken, cut off, killed, brought to 
slaughter; ver. 7—9. 'Bruised, sacrificed, and his soul 
made an offering for sin ;' ver. 10. 

Now certainly for the material part, or the matter of pu- 
nishment, here it is abundantly : here is 'malum passionis' in 
every kind. Immission of evil, subtraction of good in soul 
and body: here is plentiful measure heaped up, shaken to- 
gether, and running over. 

But it maybe said, though iiere be the matter of punish- 
ment, yet it may be all this was for some other end ; and so 
it may be it was vov^taia, or ^oKi[.iaGic, or iruLdvaia, not ti- 
Idio^na, or punishment properly so called. 


Consider then the ends of punishment before insisted on, 
and see what of them is applicable to the transaction be- 
tween God and Christ here mentioned. 

1. Was it for his own correction? No, says the prophet, 
ver. 9. ' He had done no violence, neither was any deceit ia 
his mouth.' He was perfectly innocent. So that he had no 
need of any chastisement for his amendment ; and so sig- 
nally in sundry places, where mention is made of the death 
of Christ, his own spotless innocency is often pleaded. Nei- 
ther was it for his instruction that he might be wise, and in- 
structed in the will of God ; for at the very entrance of the 
prophecy, chap. lii. 13. he says, he shall deal prudently and 
be exalted. He was faithful before in all things. And though 
he experimentally learned obedience, by his sufferings, yet 
habitually to the utmost his ears were bored, and himself 
prepared to the will of God, befoi'e the afflictions here prin- 
cipally intended. Neither, 

3. Was he TrapaSeiyima ; punished for example ; to be 
made an example to others, that they might not offend : for 
what can offenders learn from the punishment of one who 
never offended. He was 'cutoff, but not for himself:' and 
the end assigned, ver. 11, 12. which is not the instruction 
only, but the justification and salvation of others, will not 
allow this end. ' He shall justify many, for he shall bear their 
iniquities ;' he set us an example in his obedience ; but he 
was not punished for an example. Neither, 

4. Was it inaprvpia, a suffering to bear witness and tes- 
timony to the truth. There is no mention of any such end 
in this place. Yea, to make that the main intendment here, 
is a monstrous figment. The expressions all along as we 
shall see in the next place, are, that all this was for our trans- 
gressions, for our sins, for our iniquities, for our peace. God 
wounded, bruised, killed him, for our iniquities ; that is, he 
died to bear^witness to his doctrine. 'Credat Apella.' 

2. Then, the matter of punishment being expressed, see 
the cause of the infliction of it. It was for transgressions, for 
iniquities,'^ver. 5. for wandering and iniquity, ver. 6. for 
transgressions, ver. 8, for sin, ver. 12. Let us now remem- 
ber the general description of punishment that was given 
at the beginning; it is 'malum passionis quod infligitur ob 
malum actionis,' and see how directly it suits with this pu- 

VOL. IX, 1 


nishment of Jesus Christ. 1. Here is * malum passionis' in- 
flicted, wounding, bruising, killing. And 2. there is 'malum 
actionis' deserving, sin, iniquity, and transgression. How 
these met on an innocent person, shall be afterward declared. 
2. Go along to the peculiar description of punishment pro- 
perly so called, as managed by God. It is 'vindicta noxae;' 
now if all other ends and causes whatever, as of chastisement 
or example, &c. be removed, and this only be asserted, then 
this affliction of Christ was ' vindicta noxae/ punishment in 
the most proper sense ; but that these ends are so removed 
hath been declared upon the particular consideration of 

And this is the first argument from this place to prove 
that the death of Christ and his suffering, hath the nature 
of punishment. 

2. The second is, from the more particular expressions 
of it to this purpose, both on the part of the person punish- 
ing, and on the part of the person punished : a single expres- 
sion on each part may be insisted on. 

1. On the part of God punishing, take that of ver. 6. 
' The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all :' of which 
sort also is that of ver. 10. 'Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise 
him, he put him to grief, when thou shalt make his soul an 
offering for sin.' 

2. On the part of him punished, ver. 11. ' He shall bear 
their iniquities.' Fi'om the consideration of those expres- 
sions we shall evidently evince what we haye proposed. Of 
these in the next chapter. 


Some particular testimonies evincing the death of Christ to he 
a punishment, properly so called. 

The two expressions that I chose in particular to consider, 
are nextly to be insisted on. 

The first relates to him, who did inflict the punishment. 
The other to him that was punished. 

The first in ver. 6. 'The Lord laid on him the iniquities 
of us all.' The person punishing, is Jehovah, the person pu- 


nished called * him :1 that is, he who is spoken of throughout 
the whole prophecy ; the Messiah Jesus Christ, as above 

For the opening of the words, that the efficacy of them to 
our purpose in hand may appear. Two of them are especi- 
ally to be considered. 1. What is meant by that which is 
rendered 'laid on him,' 2. What is meant by 'iniquity.' 

The first by our translation is rendered in the margin, 
' made to meet ;' he ' made to meet ;' ' on him the iniquities of 
us all ;' the Vulgar Latin, 'posuit Dominus in eo.' The 'Lord 
put upon him,' according to our translation in the text. 
' Montanus, Dominus fecit occurrere in eum.' ' God hath 
caused to meet on him,' according to our translation in the 
margin. Junius to the same purpose. ' Jehovah fecit ut 
incurrat,' ' the Lord made them meet, and fall on him.' The 
Septuagint render it, kol Kvpiog napi^ioKtv avTOv raig a/xapnaig 
rifiiov. ' The Lord delivered him to our sins,' that is, to be pu- 
nished for them. By others the word is rendered ' impegit, 
traduxit, conjecit,' all to the same purpose, importing an act 
of God in conveying our sins to Christ. 

The word here used is y>JDn ; its root is ytl^JD to which 
all the significations mentioned, are assigned ; 'occurrere, 
obviam ire, incurrere, aggredi, rogare, precari.' The first 
general signification of it is to meet, as the bounds of a 
field, or country, or house, meet with one another. Joshua 
xix. 34. ]Vl3p j^Jisn So all along in that chapter, where the 
bounds of one country are said to reach to another ; that 
is, to meet with them ; it is the word here used. So in vo- 
luntary agents, it is ' obviam ire,' or to meet, and that either 
for good or evil ; for good it is spoken of God, Psal. Ixiv. 5. 
thou meetest him, &c. and so for evil, Amos v. 19. 'as if a 
man fled from a lion, and a bear meet him :' lyjDl that is, to 
tear him in pieces. Hence because men that met others, 
went to them, to desire some help of them, the word also 
signifies to ask, to pray, entreat, or intercede ; so the word 
is used Isa. lix. 16. there was no entreater, y>JDD none to 
meet, to come and ask. And in this very chapter, ver. 12. 
he made intercession for the transgressors ; the word is the 
same with that here used; to meet the Lord, and intercede 
for transgressors, to stay his hand against them, is its 

F 2 


2. To meet, or to make to meet properly, which is the 
first, and most clear sense of the word. It is often used for 
to meet ' anirao hostili,' to meet, to fall upon for hurt, 1 Sam. 
xxii. 17. the servants of the king would not put forth the 
hand yjD*? to meet, that is, as we have translated it, to fall 
upon the priests and kill them; so 2 Sam. i. 15. David bid 
his young man arise, yjD fall upon the Amalekite, that is, to 
kill him. Judg. xv. 12. Samson made the men of Judah 
swear that they would not ppDD meet with him, or fall on 
him themselves. 

Nextly, it may be inquired in what sense the word is here 
used, whether in the first spoken of, to ask, entreat, inter- 
cede ; or in the latter, to meet ; or to meet with. 

Grotius interpreteth it (to remove, so much of his inter- 
pretation by the way), 'permisit Deus, ut ille nostro gravi 
crimine indignissima pateretur;' that so he might suit what 
is spoken to Jeremiah, without pretence or colour of proof. 
For the word, it is forty-six times used in the Old Testament, 
and if in any one of them it may be truly rendered 'permisit,' 
as it is done by him, or to that sense, let it be here so ap- 
plied also. And for that sense, which is, that God suffered 
the Jews by their wickedness to entreat him evilly, it is most 
remote from the intendment of the words, and the Holy 
Ghost in them. 

1. First then, that the words cannot be interpreted to 
pray, or intercede, is evident from the contexture ; wherein 
it is said (in this sense) 'he prayed him for the iniquity of us 
all;' that is, the Lord prayed Christ for the iniquities of us 
all. This sense of the word y>JDn in this place, Socinus 
himself grants not to be proper, nor consistent. * Porro 
significatio ilia, precari, in loco nostro locum habere non po- 
test ; alioqui sequeretur Isaiam voluisse dicere, Deum fe- 
cisse, ut omnium nostrum iniquitas per Christum, vel pro 
Christo precata fuerit, quod longe absurdissimumesse nemo 
non videt.' cap. 21. p. 132, Praelec. Socin. 

2. It is then ' to meet :' now the word here used being in 
hiphil, which makes a double action of that expressed by 
adding the cause, by whose power, virtue, and impress, the 
thing is done ; thence it is here rendered ' occurrere fecit,' 
* he made to meet,' and so the sense of it is, God made our 
sins, as it were, to set upon, or to fall upon Jesus Christ, 


which is the most common use of the word, as hath been 

It is objected, that the word signifies to meet, yet no 
more but this may be the meaning of them ; God in Christ 
met with all our iniquities ; that is, for their pardoning, and 
removal, and taking away. 

Of the many things that may be given in for the ever- 
sion of this Gloss, 1 shall name only two, whereof the first 
is to the word, the latter to the matter. For the word ; the 
conjugation according to the common rule, enforces the 
sense formerly mentioned : be made to meet, and not be met. 

2, The prophet in these words renders a reason of the 
contemptible sad condition of the Messiah, at which so 
many were scandalized, and whereupon so few believed the 
report of the gospel concerning him ; and this is, that ' God 
laid on him our iniquities ;' now there is no reason why he 
should be represented in so deplorable a state and condition, 
if God only met with, and prevented our sin, in and by him, 
which he did (as they say) in his resurrection, wherein he 
was exceeding glorious ; so that the meaning of the word is, 
that God made our sins to meet on him, by laying them on 
him; and this sense Socinus himself consents unto, Praelec. 
cap. 21. p. 133. But this also will farther appear in the ex- 
plication of the next word : and that is 'our iniquities.' 

* He hath laid on him the iniquities of us all.' py How 
the iniquitiy of us, that is, the punishment of our iniquity? 
I shall offer three things, to make good this interpretation. 

1. That the word is often found in that sense ; so that it 
is no new, or uncouth thing, that here it should be so. Gen. 
iv. 13. >31j; ' mine iniquity' is greater than I can bear, it is the 
same word here used ; they are the words of Cain, upon the 
denunciation of God's judgment on him ; and what iniquity 
it is, he gives you an account in the next words, ' behold 
■thou hast cast me out,' ver. 14. that was only the punishment 
laid on him. It is used in like manner several times ; Lev. 
XX. 17. 19. 1 Sam. xxviii. 10. Saul swear to the witch, that 
no iniquity should befall her; that is, no punishment for 
that which she did at his command, in raising up a spirit to 
consult withal, contrary to the law. And also in sundry 
other places : so that this is no new signification of the 
word, and is here most proper. 


2. It appears from the explication that is given of this 
thing in many other expressions in the chapter. ' God laid 
on him the iniquity of us all.' How ? in that it pleased him 
to 'bruise him, and put him to grief;' ver. 10. In that he 
' was wounded for our transgressions, and he was bruised for 
our iniquities/ ver. 5. as will be made more evident when 1 
come to the next phrase : ' He bare our iniquities/ which an- 
swers to this, ' He laid them on him.' 

3. Because he did so lay our sin on Christ, that he made 
his soul an offering for sin : when our iniquities were on him, 
his soul, that is, he by a usual synecdoche (the soul for 
the person), v^^as made CZitt'K an offering for sin; the word 
here used, is like ' piaculum' in Latin, which signifies the fault, 
and him who is punished for it in a way of a public sacri- 
fice. So is this word taken both for a sin, a trespass, and a 
sacrifice for the expiation of it. As another word, viz. NDn 
is used also ; Lev. iv. 3. He shall offer it riKDn^ for a sin ; 
that is, an offering for sin; so also Exod. xxix. 14. Lev. iv. 
29. And this very word is so used Lev. vii. 2. They shall 
kill Dl£^X that is, the sin, or sin-offering, or trespass-offering, 
as there it is rendered : and other instances might be given. 
Now God did so cause our iniquities to meet on Christ, that 
he then under them made himself UU}'A or an offering for sin. 
Now in the offering for sin, the penalty of the offence was, 

* suo more,' laid on the beast, that was sacrificed or made an 
offering; Paul interpreteth these words by other expressions, 
2 Cor. v. 21. he made him to be a sin for us, that is an of- 
fering for sin, Dti'K. He made him sin, when he made him a 
curse, the curse of the law. Gal. iii. 13, that is, gave him up 
to the punishment, by the law due to sin : Rom. viii. 3. 

* God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, 
and for sin,' kui ttejoi afxaQTiaq, for sin, a sacrifice for sin, con- 
demned sin in the flesh, Heb. x. 6. 'OXoKawrw/xara koi Trtpi 
ajuapriac ouk twSoKrjcrac, ' in burnt-offerings, and for sin thou 
hadst no pleasure ;' and again, on ^vaiav koL iTgoa(^o^av koI 
oXoKauTWjuara koi Trepi afxapriag. It appears then from all that 
hath been said, that our iniquities that were laid on Christ, 
were the punishment due to our iniquity. 

Farther to clear this, I shall a little consider what act of 
God this was, whereby he laid our iniquities on Christ; and 
these two things are considerable therein. 


1. How it was typically prefigured. 

2. How it was done, or in what act of God the doing of 
it doth consist. 

1. This was eminently represented in the great anniver- 
sary sacrifice, of which I have spoken formerly ; especially 
in that part which concerns the goat,* on which the lot fell 
to be sent away. That that goat was a sacrifice, is evident 
from ver. 5. where both the kids of the goats (afterward 
said to be two goats), are said to be a sin-offering ; how this 
was dealt withal, see ver. 21. * Aaron shall lay both his hands 
upon the live goat, and confess our sin, all the iniquities of 
all the people, all their transgressions in all their sins, and 
put them upon the head of the goat.' Now in what sense 
could the sins of the people, be put upon the head of the goat. 

1. This was not merely a representation: as it were a 
show or pageant, to set forth the taking away of ini^quity : 
but sins were really, as to that typical institution, laid on the 
head of the goat: whence he became a* piaculum,' an avd^rifia, 
and he that touched him was defiled, so ver. 26. The man 
that carried out the goat was unclean until he was legally 
purified, and that because the sin of the people was on the 
head of the goat, which he so carried away. 

2. The proper pravity, malice, and filth of sin, could not 
be laid on the goat. Neither the nature of the thing, nor 
the subject will bear it ; for neither is sin, which is a priva- 
tion, an irregularity, an obliquity, such a thing, as that it can 
be translated from one to another, although it hath an infec- 
tious, and a contagious quality to diffuse itself, that is, to 
beget something of the like nature in others : nor was the 
goat a subject wherein any such pernicious or depraved habit 
might reside, which belongs only to intelligent creatures, 
which have a moral rule to walk by. 

3. It must be the punishment of sin, that is here intended, 
which was in the type laid on the head of the goat. And 
therefore it was sent away into a land not inhabited, 
a land of separation, a wilderness, there to perish, as all the 
Jewish doctors agree : that is, to undergo the punishment 
that was inflicted on him. That in such sacrifices for sin, 
there was a real imputation of sin unto punishment, shall af- 
terward be farther cleared. 


Unto this transaction doth the prophet allude in this ex- 
pression, he laid on, or put on him. As the high-priest con- 
fessed all the sins, iniquities, and transgressions of the peo- 
ple and laid them on the head of the scape-goat, which he 
bare, undergoing the utmost punishment he was capable of, 
and that punishment, which in the general kind and nature 
is the punishment, due to sin, an evil and violent death. So 
did God lay all the sins, all the punishment due to them, 
really upon one that was fit, able, and appointed to bear it, 
which he suffered under to the utmost, that the justice of 
God required on that account. He then took a view of all 
our sins and iniquities. He knew what was past and what 
was to come, knowing aH our thoughts afar off. Not the 
least error of our minds, darkness of our understandings, 
perverseness of our wills, carnality of our affections, sin of 
our nature, or lives, escaped him. All were yvjuva koI rerpa 
■)(a\iajjiiva before him. This is Set out by the variety of ex- 
pressions used in this matter in the type ; all the iniquities, 
all the transgressions, and all the sins. And so by every 
word whereby we express sin, in this 53rd of Isaiah : going 
astray, turning aside, iniquity, transgression, sin, and the 
like. God, I say, made them all to meet on Christ in the pu- 
nishment due to them. 

2. What is the act of God, whereby he casts our sins on 

I have** elsewhere considered, how God in this business 
is to be looked on : I said now in the entrance of this dis- 
course, that punishment is an effect of justice in him, who 
had power to dispose of the offender as such. To this two 
things are required. 

1. That he have in his hand power to dispose of all the 
concernments of the offence and sinner, as the governor of 
him and them all. This is in God. He is by nature the 
King and Governor of all the world. Our Lawgiver ; James 
\\. 12. Having made rational creatures, and required obedi- 
ence at their hands, it is essentially belonging to him to be 
their*^ Governor, and not only to have the sovereign disposal 
of them, as he hath the supreme dominion over them, with 

*■ Vide of the death of Christ, the price he paid, and the purchase he made. 
« Vid. Diatrib. de Justit. Divin. 


the legal dispose of them, in answer to the moral subjection 
to him, and the obedience he requires of them. 

2. That as he be a King, and have supreme government, 
so he be a judge to put in execution his justice. Thus God is 
judge himself, Psal. 1. 6. ' He is the judge of the world.' Gen. 
xviii. 25. Psal. xciv. 2. Psal. Ixxv. 7. Isa. xxxiii. 22. as in 
innumerable other places. Now as God is thus the great 
Governor and Judge, he pursues the constitutive principle of 
punishment, his own righteous and holy will, proportioning 
penalties to the demerit of sin. 

Thus in the laying our sin on Christ, there was a twofold 
act of God : one as a governor, the other as a judge properly, 

1. The first is, 'innovatio obligationis,' the 'innovation of 
the obligation,' wherein we were detained, and bound over to 
punishment. Whereas in the tenor of the law as to its ob- 
ligation unto punishment, there was none originally but the 
name of the offender, ' In the day that thou eatest thereof 
thou shaltdie :' and ' Cursed is every one that continues not:' 
and ' the soul that sinneth it shall die ;' God now puts in the 
name of the surety of Jesus Christ ; that he might become 
responsible for our sins, and undergo the punishment that 
we were obliged to. Christ was viro v6/.iov yevofievov, he 
was made under the law ; that is, he was put into subjection, 
to the obligation of it unto punishment : God put his name 
into the obligation, and so the law came to have its advan- 
tage against him, who otherwise was most free from the 
charge of it. Then was Christ made sin, when by being put 
into the obligation of the law, he became liable to the pu- 
nishment of it. He was the Mediator of the new covenant, 
the ' Mediator between God and man ;' 1 Tim. ii. 5. So a 
Mediator, as to ' lay down his life a ransom' for them, for 
whom he was a Mediator, ver. 6. and the surety of the cove- 
nant is he also ; Heb. vii. 22. Such a surety, as paid that 
which he never took, made satisfaction for those sins which 
he never did. 

2. The second act of God as a judge, is ' inflictio pcense.' 
Christ being now made obnoxious, and that by his own 
consent, the justice of God finding him in the law, layeth 
the weight of all on him. * He had done no violence, nei- 
ther was any deceit found in his mouth ;' well then, it will 
be well with him ; surely it shall be well with the innocent. 


no evil shall befall him; nay but said he, ver. 10. 'Yet it 
pleased the Lord to bruise him, he hath put him to grief;' 
yea, but what was the reason of this? Why was this the 
will of God ? why did this seem good to the just Judge of 
all the world? The reason is in the very next words, 'His 
soul was made an offering for sin,' which before is expressed 
' he bare our grief, he was wounded for our transgressions ;' 
being made liable to them he was punished for them. 

By that which is said it is evident from this first ex- 
pression, or the assignation of an action to God in reference 
to him, that this death of Christ was a punishment, he who 
had power to do it, bringing in him (on his own voluntary 
offer) into the obligation to punishment, and inflicting pu- 
nishment on him accordingly. 

The second expression Avhereby the same thing is far- 
ther convinced is on the part of him that was punished, and 
this in ver. 4. ' Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried 
our sorrows,' or which is more evident, ver. 11. 'He shall 
bear their iniquities.' 

For the right understanding of the words, I shall give a 
few brief previous observations, that may give light to the 
matter we treat of. And the first is, 

1. That as this whole thing was done in the justice of 
God, as hath been declared, so it was done by the counsel 
and appointment of God. The apostles confess the death of 
Christ to have proceeded thence ; Acts iv.28. ii. 23. Now as 
laying of our sins on Christ, being designed our mediator, 
and undertaking the work, was an act of God, as the gover- 
nor of all, and the righteous judge, so this of the determi- 
nate counsel, and fore-appointment, or the eternal designa- 
tion of Christ to his ofiice, is an act of sovereign power and 
dominion in God, whereby he doth as he pleaseth, accord- 
ing to the counsel of his will. As he would make the world 
in his sovereign good pleasure, when he might have other- 
wise done. Rev. iv. 11. so he would determine, that Christ 
should bear our iniquities, when he might otherwise have 
disposed of it, Rom. xi. 34 — 37. 

2. In respect of us, this pre-appointment of God was an 
act of grace, that is, a sovereign act of his good pleasure, 
whence all good things, all fruits of love whatever to us do 
flow. Therefore, it is called love; John iii. 16. and so in 


the fruit of it is it expressed 5 Rom. viii. 32. And on this 
John often insists in his Gospel and Epistle ; 1 John iv. 9 
— 11. His aim on his own part was the declaration of his 
righteousness ; Rom. iii. 25. and to make way for the praise 
of his 'glorious grace,' Eph. i. 6. on our parts, that we might 
have all those good things, which are the fruits of the most 
intense love. 

3. That Christ himself was willing to undergo this bur- 
den and undertake this work ; and this as it is consistent 
with his death being a punishment, so it is of necessity to 
make good the other considerations of it, namely, that it 
should be a price and a sacrifice. For no man gives a price, 
and therein parts with that which is precious to him unwill- 
ingly ; nor is a sacrifice acceptable that comes not from a 
free and willing mind. That he was thus willing himself 
professeth, both in the undertaking and carrying of it on ; 
in the undertaking ; Heb. x. 9. ' Lo I come to do thy will 
O God.' It is the expression of one breaking out with a 
ready joy to do the thing proposed to him. So the church 
of old looked on him, as one that came freely and cheer- 
fully. Cant. ii. 8, 9. * It is the voice of my beloved, behold 
he cometh leaping on the mountains, skipping on the hills : 
my beloved is like a roe, or a young hart, he standeth be- 
hind the wall, he looketh forth at the window, shewing him- 
self through the lattice.' The church looked on Christ as 
yet at a distance from the actual performance of the work 
he had undertaken, and so herself kept off from that clear 
and close communion which she longed after, and thence 
she says of him, that he ' stood behind the wall,' that he 
'looked forth at the window, and shewed himself at the lat- 
tices.' There was a wall yet hindering the actual exhibition 
of Christ ; the ' fulness of time was not come.' The pur- 
pose of God was not yet to bring forth ; but yet in the mean- 
time, Christ looked on the church through the window of 
the promise, and the lattice of the Levitical ceremonies. 

And what discovery do they make of him, in the view 
they take in the broad light of the promises, and the many 
glimpses of the ceremonial types. They see him coming, 
* leaping on the mountains, and skipping on the hills,' 
coming speedily with a great deal of joy and willingness. 

So of himself he declares what his mind was from old. 


from everlasting; Prov. viii. 30, 31. 'Rejoicing always be- 
fore him/ that is, 'before God his Father ;' but in what did 
he rejoice ? ' in the habitable parts of the earth, and my de- 
light was with the sons of men.' When this joy of his was, 
he tells you ver. 22, 23. 26, 27. He rejoiced before God his 
Father in the sons of men, before they were created ; that 
is, in the work he had to do for them. 

His will was also in the carrying of it on unto accom- 
plishment, he must be doing his Father's business, his will 
who sent him, Luke xii. 50. ttmq truvEX^juat. He was pained 
as a woman in travail to be delivered, to come to be bap- 
tized in his own blood. And when he was giving himself 
np to the utmost of it, he professes his readiness to it, John 
xviii. 11. when Peter who once before would have advised 
him to spare himself, now being his counsel was not fol- 
lowed, would have rescued him with his sword ; as for his 
advice he was called Satan, so for his profFerred assistance 
he is now rebuked ; and the reason of it is given, 'shall I not 
drink of the cup ?' It is true, that it might appear, that his 
death v.as not a price, and a sacrifice only, but a punish- 
ment also, wherein there was an immission of every thing 
that was evil to the suffering nature, and a subtraction of 
that which was good, he discovered that averseness to the 
drinking of the cup, which the truth of the human nature 
absolutely required (and which the amazing bitterness of 
the cup overpowered him withal), yet still his will con- 
quered and prevailed in all ; Matt. xxvi. 53, 54. 

4. Christ's love was also in it, his delight was in the 
sons of men ; his love towards them carried him out to the 
work; and Paul proves it by the instance of himself ; Gal. 
ii. 20. 'Who loved me.' And John applies the same to all 
believers. Rev. i. 5, 6. 'To him that loved us/ Sec. And 
thus was this great work undertaken. 

These things being premised, let us look again to the 
words under consideration. 

1. For the word he bare our grief, ver. 4. it is j^ii^l ; a 
word of as large, and as many various acceptions as any, if 
not absolutely the most extensive in the whole Hebrew 
tongue. It hath usually assigned unto it by the lexicogra- 
pher eight or nine several significations ; and to make it 
evident, that it is of various acceptions, it is used (in the 


collections of Calasius) eight hundred and eighteen times 
in the Old Testament, whereof not a third part is answered 
in any language by one and the same word. With those 
senses of it that are metaphorical we have not any thing 
to do. That which is the first, or most proper sense of it 
and what is most frequently used, is to ' carry' or ' bear/ 
and by which it is here translated as in very many other 

Socinus would have it here be as much as ' abstulit,' he 
took away, so saith he, ' God took away our sin in Christ, 
when by him he declared, and confirmed the way whereby 
pardon and remission is to be obtained ; as he pardoned 
our sin in Christ, by discovering the new covenant, and 
mercy therein.' Now because the word is of such various 
significations, there is a necessity that it be interpreted by 
the circumstances of the place where it is used. And be- 
cause there is not any circumstance of the place, on the 
account whereof the word should be rendered ' abstulit,' he 
,took away, and not'tulit,' he * took,' 'bare,' or' suffered,' we 
must consider what arguments or reasons are scraped to- 
gether 'aliunde' by them, and then evince what is the proper 
signification of it, in this place. 

1. This very expression is used of God Exod.xxxiv. 7. 
py «iz;3 ' ferens iniquitatem,' as also it is again repeated ; 
Numb. xiv. 18. In both which places, we translate it 'for- 
giving,' ' forgiving iniquities, transgressions, and sins.' Nor 
can it be properly spoken of God, to bear ; for God cannot 
bear, as the word properly signifies. 

The sum of the objection is ; the word that is used so 
many times, and so often mptaphorically, is once or twice 
in another place used for to take away, or to pardon ; there- 
fore, this must be the sense of it in this place. God cannot 
be said to bear iniquities, but only metaphorically, and so 
he is often said to bear, to be pressed, to be weary, and made 
to serve with them ; he is said to bear our sins, in reference 
to the end of bearing any thing, which is to carry it away ; 
God in Christ taking away, pardoning our sins, is said to 
bear them, because that is the way which sins are taken 
away; they are taken up, carried, and laid aside. But he 
of whom these words are spoken here, did bear properly, 
and could do so, as shall be shewed. 


2. The interpretation of this place by Matthew, or the 
application of it is insisted on : which is of more importance; 
Matt. viii. 16, 17. Christ curing the diseases of many, and 
bodily sicknesses, is said to ' bear our griefs,' according as it 
is said in Isaiah, that he should do. Now he did not bear 
our diseases, by 'taking them upon himself,' and so be- 
coming diseased, but morally, in that by his power he took 
them away from them, in whom they were. 

Not to make many words, nor to multiply interpretations 
and accommodations of these places, which may be seen in 
them, who have to good purpose made it their business to 
consider the parallel places of the Old and New Testaments, 
and to reconcile them : I say only, it is no new thing to 
have the effect and evidence, and end of a thing, spoken of 
in the New Testament, in answer to the cause, and rise of 
it, mentioned in the Old, by the application of the same 
words unto it which they are mentioned in. For instance, 
Paul, Eph. iv. 8. citing that of the psalmist, Psal. Ixviii. 18. 
' Thou hast ascended up on high, and hast led captivity 
captive, and received gifts for men ;' renders it, ' when he 
ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts 
unto men ;' and that because his giving of them, was the 
end of his receiving of them ; and his receiving of them, 
the foundation of his giving of them : the effect and fruit 
being here expressed, the foundation and ground supposed. 

So also, ' Mine ears hast thou bored,' Psal. xl. is rendered 
' a body hast thou prepared me,' Heb. x. because the end 
of the boring the ears of Christ was, that he might offer his 
body a sacrifice to God ; so it is here in this place of Mat- 
thew ; Christ's taking away the bodily distempers, and sick- 
nesses of men, was an effect, and an evidence of his taking 
away their sin, which was done by bearing of them. And 
therefore Matthew mentioning the effect and evidence of 
the thing, doth it in the words that express the cause and 
foundation of it. Not that that was a complete accom- 
plishment of what was foretold, but that it was so demon- 
strated in the effect and evidence of it. Nor do the Soci- 
nians themselves think that this was a full accomplishment 
of what is spoken by the prophet, themselves insisting on 
another interpretation of the words : so that notwithstanding 
these exceptions, the word here may have its proper signi- 


fication of bearing or carrying ; which also that it hath, may 
be farther evidenced. 

1. Here is no cogent reason, why the metaphorical use 
of the word should be understood. When it is spoken of 
God, there is a necessity, that it should be interpreted by the 
effect ; because properly he cannot bear, nor undergo grief, 
sorrow, or punishment. But as to the Mediator, the case 
is otherwise, for he confessedly underwent these things 
properly, wherein we say that this word, bearing of punish- 
ment, doth consist; he was so bruised, so broken, so slain ; 
so that there is no reason to depart from the propriety of 
the word. 

2. Those who would have the sense of the word to be, 'to 
take away,' in this place, confess it is by way of the allusion 
before-mentioned ; that he that takes away a thing, takes it 
up, and bears it on his shoulders, or in his arms, until he 
lay it down; and by virtue of this allusion doth it signify 
to take away. But why? seeing that taking up, and bearing, 
in this place is proper, as hath been shewed, why must that 
be leaped over, and that which is improper, and spoken by 
way of allusion, be insisted on ? 

3. It appears that this is the sense of the word, from all 
the circumstances of the text, and context. Take three that 
are most considerable. 

1. The subject spoken of, who did thus bear our griefs ; 
and this is Christ ; of whom such things are affirmed, in 
answer to this question, how did he bear our griefs ? as will 
admit of no other sense : the Holy Ghost tells us how he 
did it, 1 Pet. ii. 24, 25. ' Who his ownself bare our sins in 
his body on the tree.' That Peter in that place expressed 
this part of the prophecy of Isaiah, which we insist upon, 
is evident ; the phrase at the close of ver, 24. and the be- 
ginning of ver. 25. of this chapter make it so : they are the 
very words of the end of the 5th and beginning of the 6th 
verses here ; how then did Christ bear our griefs ? Why in 
that ' he bear our sin in his own body on the tree.' 

I shall not insist on the precise signification of the word 
ava(^igh), here used, as though it expressed the outward 
manner of that suffering of Christ for sin, when he was hfted 
up on the cross or tree. It is enough, that our sins were on 
him, his body ; that is, his whole human nature (by a 
usual synecdoche), when he was on the tree; that he did it 


when he suffered in the'flesh, cap. iv. 1. He that did so 
bear our grief, sin, and iniquities, as to have them in his own 
body, when he suffered in the flesh, he is said properly therein 
'tulisse,' not 'abstulisse,' to 'have borne,' not 'taken away' 
our griefs. But that this is the case, in Christ's bearing 
our grief, the Holy Ghost doth thus manifest. 

£. The manner how Christ bare them evidently mani- 
festeth, in what sense this expression is to be understood. 
He so bare them, that in doing so, * he was wounded and 
bruised, grieved, chastised, slain/ as it is at large expressed 
in the context. Christ bare our grief, so as in doing of it, 
to be wounded, broken, grieved, killed, which is not to take 
them away, but really to bear them upon himself. 

3. The cause of this bearing our grief, is assigned to be 
sin ; ' he was wounded for our transgressions,' as was shewn 
before : now this cannot be the sense, for our sins, he took 
them away ; but for our sins, he bare the punishment due 
to them, 2 Cor. v. 21. 

4. To put all out of question, the Holy Ghost in this 
chapter useth another word in the same matter, with this, 
that will admit of no other sense, than that which is proper. 
And that is ^no v. 11. b2D> Nin dDDiiJ/l ' He shall bear their 
iniquities :' and it is used immediately after this we have 
insisted on, as explicative of it ; and * carried our sorrows :' 
now as HWi properly signifies to * lift,' to take up that which 
a man may carry, so ^2D signifies to bear, and undergo the 
burden, that is taken, or that a man hath laid on his 
shoulders. And Matthew hath rendered this word by 
(daardtlii), tclq voaovg f/Baoraaev, that is ' bajulo, porto ;' to 
bear a thing, as a man doth a burden on his shoulders ; nor 
is it once used in the Scriptures, but it is either properly to 
bear a burden, or metaphorically from thence, to undergo 
that which is heavy and burdensome ; thus did Christ bear 
our griefs, our iniquities, by putting his shoulder under them, 
taking them on himself. 

2. What did he thus bear? our griefs, our sins ; or our 
iniquities, our sins. Let us see by a second instance, what 
it is in the language of God, *To bear iniquities,' and this 
argument will be at an issue. Lament, v. 7. ' Our fathers 
have sinned, and are not, and we have borne their iniquities.' 
'We have borne their iniquities,' or the punishment that was 
due to them; 'They are not,' they are gone out of the 


world, before the day of recompense came, and we lie under 
the punishment threatened and inflicted for their sins, and 
our own. Distinctly, 

1. Men are said to bear their own sin, Levit. xix. 5. 

* every one that eateth it shall bear his iniquity ;' that is, he 
shall be esteemed guilty, and be punished : Levit. xx. 17. 

* He shall bear his iniquity,' is the same with ' he shall be 
killed,' ver. 16. 'and he shall be cut off from his people;' 
ver. 18. For a man to bear his iniquity, is constantly for him 
to answer the guilt, and undergo the punishment due to it. 

2. So also of the sins of others; Numb. xiv. 33. ' And 
your children shall wander in the wilderness forty years, and 
shall bear your whoredoms : bear you, whoredoms ;' that is, 
my anger for them, and the punisliment due to them ; 
Numb. XXX. 15. He that compels by his power and autho- 
rity another to break a vow, shall himself be liable to the 
punishment due to such a breach of vow. Ezek. xviii. 20. is 
an explanation of all these places ; ' The soul that sins it 
shall die,' it shall be punished ; 'The son shall not bear the 
iniquity of the father,' &,c. The son shall not be punished 
for the sin of the father : nor the father for the sin of the 
son. In brief, this expression, to bear iniquities, is never 
otherwise used in Scripture, but only for to undergo the 
punishment due thereunto. 

Thus much then we have clearly evinced. God did so 
lay our sins on Christ, as that he bare and underwent that 
which was due to them; God inflicting it on him, and he 
willingly undergoing it. Which is my second demonstration 
from this place, that the death of Christ is also a punishment. 
Which is all that I shall urge to that purpose. And this is 
that, and all that we intend, by the satisfaction of Christ. 

But now having laid so great stress as to our doctrine, 
under demonstration upon this place of the prophet, and 
finding some attempting to take away our foundation, before 
I proceed, I shall divert to the consideration of the anno- 
tations of Grotius on this whole chapter, and rescue it from 
his force and violence, used in contending to make what is 
here spoken to suit the prophet Jeremiah, and to intend 
him in the first place : to establish which vain conjecture, 
he hath perverted the sense of the whole, and of every parti- 
cular verse, from the beginning to the end of this prophecy. 




A digression concerning the fifty -third chapter of Isaiah: and the 
vindication of it from the perverse interpretation of 


This chapter is well by some termed Carnificina Tlabbiao- 
rum; a place of Scripture that sets them on the rack; and 
makes them turn themselves all ways possible to escape the 
torture, which he puts their unbelieving hearts unto. Not 
long since a worthy and very learned friend told me, that 
speaking with Manasseh Ben Israel at Amsterdam, and 
urging this prophecy unto him, he ingenuously told him, 
Profecto locus iste magnum scandalum dedit ;' to whom the 
other replied; 'Recte, quia Christus vobis lapis scandali 
est.' Hulsius, the Hebrew professor at Breda, professes that 
some Jews told him, that their Rabbins could easily have 
extricated themselves from all other places of the prophets, 
if Isaiah in this place had but held his peace. ' Huls.^The- 
olog. Judaic, lib. 1. part. 2. Diet. Sapp. de Tempor. Mes- 
siae.' Though I value not their boasting of their extricating 
themselves from the other prophesies, knowing that they are 
no less entangled with that of Daniel, chap. ix. (Of which 
there is an eminent story*" in Franzius, de Sacrificiis, concern- 
ing his dispute with a learned ,Jew on that subject): yet it 
appears, that by this, they are confessedly extricated beyond 
all hope of evading, until they divest themselves of their 
cursed hypothesis. 

Hence it is that with so much greediness they scraped 
together all the copies of Abrabaniel's comment on this 
chapter; so that it was very hard for a Christian, a long 
time to get a sight of it ; as Constantine 1' Empereur ac- 
quaints us in his'= preface to his refutation of it : because 

^ Aliqui Judffii mihi confessi sunt, Rabbinos suos ex Propheticis Scripturis facile 
se extricare potuisse, inodo Isaias tacuisset. 

•> Disput. decima, de saciificiorum duratione,Thes.82 — 84. &c. 

c Abrabiniel tani avidc a Judais passim coiiquiritur, ut vix tandem ejus compos 
fieri potiierim. Nam eum Christiani supcrioreiii putant: qui solideeorum argunienta 
&c. Constant. 1' Emper. Prolog, ad Lectorem: praefix. Com. Abrab. in cap. 33. Is. 


they thought themselves in some measure instructed by him, 
to avoid the arguments of the Christians from hence, by his 
application of the whole to Josiah : and I must needs say 
he hath put as good, yea, a far better colour of probability 
upon his interpretation, than he with whom I have to do, 
hath done on his. 

How ungrateful then, and how unacceptable to all profes- 
sors of the name of Jesus Christ, must the labours of Grotius 
needs be; who hath to the utmost of his power reached out 
his hand to rslieve the poor blind creatures from their rack 
and torture, by applying (though successlessly) this whole 
prophecy of Jeremiah, casting himself into the same entan- 
glements with them, not yielding them indeed the least re- 
lief, is easily to conjecture. And this is not a little aggra- 
vated, in that the Socinians who are no less racked and tor- 
tured with this Scripture than the Jews, durst never yet 
attempt to accommodate the things here spoken of to any 
other; though they have expressed a desire of so doing; 
and which if they could compass, they would free themselves 
from the sharpest sword that lies at the throat of their cause; 
seeing, if it is certain, that the things here mentioned may be 
applied to any other, the satisfaction of Christ cannot from 
them be confirmed. This digression then, is to cast into the 
fire that broken crutch, which this learned man hath lent 
unto the Jews and Socinians to lean upon, and keep them- 
selves from sinking under their unbelief. 

To discover the rise of that learned man's opinion, that 
Jeremiah is intended in this prophecy, the conceits of the 
Jewish Doctors may a little be considered, who are divided 
amongst themselves ; the ancient doctors generally conclude, 
that it is the Messiah, who is here intended, ' behold my ser- 
vant the Messiah shall prosper,' says the Chaldee Paraphrast 
upon the place. And Constant! us 1' Empereur tells from** 
R. Simeon, in his book Salkout, that the ancient Rabbins, 
in their ancient book Tancluma, and higher, were of the 
same judgment. Rabbi Moses Alscheth is urged to the 
same purpose at large by Hulsius. And in his comment on 

^ Porro libri istius, unde liEc sectio in Esaiaiii dcsiinipfa est, Author perliibetur 
D. Simeon, concionatoruni princcps.qui Francofiirti olim degcbat. Hie e Jiida-orurn 
vetustissin-.is Scriptis, secundum bibliorum serieui, dicta et explicationes plurinias : 
magna diligentia et iabore collegit: undo libre suo noincu is-bt ac si pcrain dicas: 
quia lit ill pera reconduntur plurima: 1' Eiiiper. 

G 2 


this place he says expressly, * Ecce doctores nostri laiidatas 
meraoriai uno ore statuunt, et a majoribus acceperunt,de rege 
Messia sermouem esse, et doctorum L, M. vestigiis insiste- 
mns.' And one passage iu him is very admirable, in the 
same place, saith he ; ' Dicunt Doctores nostri L. M. omni- 
um afflictionum qu33 mnndum ingressee sunt, tertia pars Da- 
vidi et patriarchis obtigit: tertia altera seculo excisionis, 
ultima tertia pars regi Messise incumbet.' Where he urgeth 
the common consent of their doctors for the sufferings of 
the Messiah. Of the same mind was R. Solomon, as he is 
cited by Pctrus Galatinus, lib. 8. cap. 14. As the same is 
affirmed by the Misdrach Resh. cap. 2. 14. And in Bere- 
sheth Rabba 'on Gen. xxiv. as is observed by Raimundus 
Martin. Pug. fidei 3. p. Dist. 1. cap. 10. So that before these 
men grew impudent and crafty in corrupting and perverting 
the testimonies of the Old Testament, concerning the Mes- 
siah, they generally granted him, and only him, to be here 
intended, it was not for want of company then, that Gro- 
tius took in with the modern Rabbins, who being mad with 
envy and malice care not what they say, so they may oppose 
Jesus Christ. 

2. Many of the following Jewish doctors interpret this 
place of the whole people of the Jews. And this way go the 
mi:n, who are of the greatest note amongst them in these 
latter days ; as R. D. Kimchi, Aben Ezra, Abarbiniel, Lip- 
man, with what weak and mean pretences, with what incon- 
sistency as to the words, of the text, hath been by others 

3. Abrabinel, or Abrabaniel,a man of great note and ho- 
nour amongst them, though he assents to the former expo- 
sition of applying the whole prophecy to the people of the 
Jews, and interprets the words at large accordingly, which 
exposition is confuted by Constantine I'Empereur, yet he 
inclines to a singular opinion of his own, that Josiah is the 
man pointed at, and described : but he is the first and last, 
that abides by that interpretation. 

4. Grotius interprets the words of Jeremiah in the first 
place; not denying them (as we shall see) to have an ac- 
commodation to Christ. In this he hath the company of 
one Rabbi; R. Saadias Gaon, mentioned by Aben Ezra upon 
the 52d chap, of this prophecy, ver. 13. But this fancy of 


Saadias is fully confuted by Abarblnel : which words be- 
cause they sufficiently evert the whole design of Grotius 
also, I shall transcribe as they lie in the translation of' Hul- 
sius. Revera ne unum quidera versiculum video, qui de Je- 
remiah exponi possit: qua ratione de eo dicetur, Extolletur 
et altus erit valde? Item illud, propter eum obdent reges os 
suum, nam astas ilia prophetas habere consueverat. Quo- 
modo etiam dici potest morbos nostros portasse, et dolores 
nostros bajulasse, et in tumice ejus curationeni nobis esse, 
Deum in ipsum incurrere fecisse peccata omnium nostrum: 
quasi ipsi posna incubuisset, et Israel fuisset immunis. Jam 
illud, propter peccatuni populi mei plaga ipsis, item, dedit 
cumimprobis sepulcrum ejus, ad ipsum referri nequit; multo 
minus illud, videbit semen, prolongabit dies, item, cum ro- 
bustis partietur spolium. In quibus omnibus nihil est quod 
de ipso commode affirmari possit. Unde vehementer miror, 
quomodo H. liagaon in banc sententiani perduci potuerit, 
et sapientes dari qui banc expositionem laudant : cum ta- 
men tota ista exponendi ratio plane aliena sit, et e Scriptura 
non facta.' 

Now certainly if this Jew thought he had sufficient cause 
to admire, that the blind Rabbi should thus wrest the sense 
of the Holy Ghost, and that anywise man should be so fool- 
ish as to commend it : we cannot but be excused, in admir- 
ing that any man professing himself a Christian, should in- 
sist in his steps, and that any should commend him for so 

Tliat, therefore, which here is affirmed, in the entrance of 
his discourse by Abarbinel, namely, that not one vevse can, 
or may, be expounded of Jeremiah, shall now particularly be 
made good against Grotius. 

1. He confesseth with us, that the head of this prophecy 
and discourse is in ver. 13. chap. 52. The words of that 
verse are, 

' Behold my servant shall deal prudently : he shall be 
exalted and extolled, and be very high.' 

Of the sense of which words, thus he : 

* Ecce intelliget servus mens] Haic omnia clarissime re- 
velata cognoscet Jeremiah. Exaltabitur et elevabitur et 
sublimis erit valde.] In magnohonore erit apud ipsos Chal- 
da^os, Jereni. 39. chap. v. 40. My servant Jeremiah shall 


have all these things clearly revealed to him, and he shall 
be in great honour with the Chaldeans.' So he, 

First, for the words themselves : b>y\l!> with the Vulgar 
Latin, he renders 'intelliget,' shall 'understand/ The word 
signifies rather ' prudence' for action with success, than any- 
speculative knowledge by revelation ; 1 Sam. xviii. 30. it is 
used of David behaving himself wisely in the business of his 
military and civil employment. Its opposite, saith Pflg^^fw, 
is ^3D (' quod incogitantiam significat in rebus agendis et 
ignavam levitatem') which signifies ' incogitancy in the ma- 
nagement of affairs, and idle lightness,' Whence the word 
is usually taken for to * prosper' in affairs, as it is used of 
our Saviour, Jerem. xxiii. 5. * a king shall reign' ^Dti^m and 
* prosper.' Nor can it be otherwise used here, considering 
the connexion of the words wherein it stands : it being the 
precedent to his being 'highly exalted' who is spoken of; 
which rather follows his 'dealing prudently,' than his 're- 
ceiving revelations.' So that in the very entrance there is 
a mistake in the sense of the word, and that mistake lies at 
the bottom of the whole interpretation. 

2. I deny that God speaks any where in the Scripture of 
any one besides Jesus Christ in this phrase, without any ad- 
dition, ' my servant ;' as here, ' Behold my servant.' So he 
speaks of Christ, chap. xlii. 1. 19. and other places; but 
not of any other person whatever. It is an expression kut 
l^oxnv, and not to be applied to any, but to him, who was 
the great servant of the Father, in the work of mediation. 

3. Even in respect of revelations, there is no ground why 
those made to Jeremiah, should be spoken of so emphati- 
cally, and by way of eminence above others ; seeing he 
came short of the prophet, by whom these words are written. 
Nor can any instance be given of such a prediction used 
concerning any prophet whatever, that was to be raised up 
in the church of the Jews ; but of Christ himself only. 

4. The exposition of the close of these words, 'he shall 
be ^exalted and extolled, and be very high' (the great ex- 
altation of the Lord Jesus Christ in his kingdom, when he 
was made a Prince and a Saviour, in a most eminent manner, 
being set forth in various expressions, no one reaching to the 

^ Etuinenliac n<)ti(jiicni (luavifsforimilaexprcssit.tniiailljus ciniiitiitia eiit subiiiuii ' 
excelkiilia eiit subliiuis cxcellentia. D. Kinichi. 


glory of it); is unworthy the learned annotator. *He shall 
be exalted and extolled, and be very high ;' that is, the 
Chaldeans shall give him 'victuals' and a 'reward ;' Jer. xl. 5. 
and after awhile, he shall be carried a prisoner into Egypt, 
and there knocked on the head : such was the exaltation 
of the poor prophet. What resemblance hath all this, to 
the exaltation of Jesus Christ, whom the learned man con- 
fesseth to be intended in these words. 

The sense then of these words is, 'Jesus Christ the Mes- 
siah, the servant of the Father,' Isa. xlii. 1.19. Phil. ii. 7, 8. 
* shall deal prudently/ and prosper in the business of doing 
his Father's will, and carrying on the affairs of his own king- 
dom ;' Isa. ix. 7. ' And be exalted far above all principalities 
and powers, having a name given him above every name, 
that at the name Jesus,' &c. Phil. ii. 7, 8. 

The next verse is, 

* As many were astonished at thee, his visage was so 
marred, more than any man, and his form more than the sons 
of men.' 

Of the accomplishment of this, in and upon the Lord 
Jesus Christ, there is no difficulty. The astonislunent men- 
tioned is that of men, at his low, and despicable condition 
as to outward appearance ; which was such, as that he said 
of himself, ' he was a worm and no man,' Ps. xxii. His con- 
dition was such, and his visage such, as all that knew any 
thing of him, were astonished to the purpose. The marring 
of his visage and form, as it may point out all the acts of 
violence, that were done upon his face, by spitting, buffetting, 
and the like; so they express his whole despised, contemned, 
persecuted estate and condition. But let us attend to our 
annotator. ^ 

' Modo secunda, modo tertia persona de Jeremia lo- 
quitur, quod frequens Hebrseis. Sicut mulli mirati erant 
hominem tam egregium tarn fsede tractari, in carcerem de- 
trudi, deinde in lacum lutosum, ibique ; et psedore et cibi 
inopia tabescere. Sic contra, rebus mutatis, admiration! 
erit honos ipsi habitus.' ' He speaks of Jeremiah, sometimes 
in the second, sometimes in the third person, which is fre- 
quent with the Hebrews. As many wondered that so ex- 
cellent a person should so vilely be dealt with, be thrust into 
prison, and then into a miry lake, and there to pine with 


stink, and want of food. So on the contrary, affairs being 
changed, the honour afforded him shall be matter of admira- 

1. To gi'ant the first observation, as to the change of 
personsinthe discourse, theword (T?3nti' 'shallbe astonished') 
here used, signifies not every slight admiration, by wonder- 
ing upon any occasion, or that may be a little more than or- 
dinary : but mostly, an astonishment arising from the con- 
templation of some ruthful spectacle. So Levit. xxvi. 32. 
' I will bring the land into desolation, and the enemies which 
dwell therein, shall be astonished at it;' and the word is 
near twenty times used to the same purpose. This by way 
of diminution is made, * mirati sunt, admirationi erit.' 

2. This astonishment of men, is by Grotius referred both 
to the dejection and exaltation of Jeremiah, whereof there is 
nothing in the words. It is the amazement of men, at the 
despicable condition of him, that is spoken of, only, that is 
intended ; but without intruding something of his exaltation, 
this discourse had wanted all colour or pretext. 

3. Was it so great a matter in Jerusalem, that a prophet 
should be put in prison there, where they imprisoned, stoned, 
tortured, and slew them almost all, one after another, in 
their several generations, that it should be thus prophesied 
of, as a thing that men would, and should be amazed at? 
Was it any wonder at all in that city, whose streets not 
long before, had run with the blood of innocent men, that a 
prophet should be cast into prison? Or was this peculiar 
to Jeremiah to be dealt so withal ? Is it any matter of as- 
tonishment to this very day ? Was his honour afterward, 
such an amazing thing, in that for a little season he was 
suffered to go at liberty, and had victuals given him? Was 
not this, as to the thing itself, common to him with many 
hundred others? Were his afflictions such, as to be beyond 
compare with those of any man, or any of the sons of men? 
Or his honours such as to dazzle the eyes of men with ad- 
miration and astonishment? Let a man dare to make bold 
with the word of God, and he may make as many such appli- 
cations as he pleaseth, and find out what person he will, to 
answer all the prophecies of the Messiah. This not suc- 
ceeding, let us try the next verse. 

^ So shall he sprinkle many nations ; the kings shall shut 


tlieir mouths at him ; for that which had not been told them, 
shall they see, and that which they had notheard, shall they 

* Ita asperget gentes multas,' in Hebro ' sic asperget ;' 
' ut respondeat illi sicut, quod prjscessit. Multos ex gen- 
tibus ab idolorum cultu avertet. Similitudo sumpta ab as- 
persionibus legalibus; unde et Chaldeeis nr3 est objurgari. 
At LXX habent ovtm ^avf-iaaovrai t^vt) iroXXa IttI civtm' noii 
male, nam mirari est aspergi fulgore alicujus.' ' In the He- 
brew it is. So he shall sprinkle, that it might answer to 
the ' As' that went before. He shall turn many of the na- 
tions from the worship of idols. A similitude taken from 
the legal washings : whence nfJ with the Chaldees is to ' re- 
buke.' The LXX render it, ' So shall many nations wonder 
at him :' not badly. For to wonder is as it were, to be 
sprinkled with any one's brightness.' 

For the exposition of the words ; 

1. We agree that it is, ' So he shall sprinkle :' an cnroEo)- 
dig, relating to the Trporaaig, ver. 14. 'As many were aston- 
ished,' &c. The great work of Christ, and his exaltation 
therein, being rendered in opposition to his humiliation and 
dejection before-mentioned. As he was in so mean a con- 
dition, that men were astonished at him, so he shall be ex- 
alted in his great work of converting the nations to their 

2. It is granted that the expression, ' he shall sprinkle,' 
is an allusion to the legal washings and purifications, which 
as they were typical of real sanctification and holiness ; so 
from them is the promise thereof so often expressed in the 
terms of 'washing' and 'cleansing,' Ezek. xxxvi. 26,27. 
the term being preserved and used in the New Testament 
frequently ; the blood of Christ, whereby this work is done, 
being therefore called the ' blood of sprinkling ;' Eph. v. 
25, 26. Heb. ix. 14. The pouring out of the Spirit by Jesus 
Christ, for the purifying and sanctifying of many nations, 
not the Jews only, but the children of God throughout 
the world, by faith in his blood, is that which is here in- 
tended. What the use of nfl in the Chaldee to this purpose 
is, I know not. 

3. The LXX have very badly rendered the words, ' many 


nations shall wonder at him ;' both as to words and sense. 
For 1. as the words will not bear it ; so 2, they make that 
the action of the nations towards Christ, which is his to- 
wards them. They lose the whole sense of the words, and 
what they say, falls in with what follows, and is clearly ex- 
pressed. 3. It is not helped by the explanation given to it by 
the annotator. The first expression is metaphorical, which 
the LXX render by a word proper, remote from the sense 
intended, which the annotator explains by another metaphor. 
By which kind of procedure, men may lead words and senses 
whither and which way they please. 

4. For the accommodation of the words to Jeremiah ; 
how did he sprinkle many nations ; so as to answer the 
type of legal cleansing? Did he pour out the Spirit upon 
them ? Did he sanctify, and make them holy ? Did he purge 
them from their iniquities? But he turned 'many amongst 
the nations, from the worship of idols.' But who told 
Grotius so ? Where is it written or recorded ? He pro- 
phesied indeed of the desolation of idols and idolaters. Of 
the conversion of many, of any among the heathen by his 
preaching, he being not purposely sent to them, what 
evidence have we? If a man may feign what he please, and 
affix it to whom he please, he may make whom he will to be 
foretold in any prophecy. 

'Kino's shall shut their mouth at him. Reo-es, ut Ne- 
buchodonosor ChaklEeorum, et Nechos yEgyptiorum, eorum- 
que satrapse admirabuntur cum silentio, ubi videbunt omnia, 
quae dixit Jeremias ad amussim et suis temporibus impleta.' 
'Kings, as Nebuchodonosor of the Chaldees, and Necho of 
the Egyptians, and their princes, shall admire with silence, 
when they shall see all things foretold by Jeremiah come to 
pass exactly, and to be fulfilled in their own time.' 

That by this expression, wonder and amazement is in- 
tended, is agreed : as men, all sorts of men before were as- 
tonished at his low condition ; so even the greatest of them 
shall be astonished at the prosperity of his work and exalta- 
tion. The reason of this their shutting their mouths in si- 
lence and admiration, is, from the work which he shall do ; 
that is, he shall sprinkle many nations ; as is evident from 
the following reason assigned : *fnr that which hath not been 


told them, shall they see ;' which expresseth the means 
whereby he should * sprinkle many nations,' even by the 
preaching of the gospel to their conversion. 

For the application hereof to Jeremiah. 1 . That the kings 
mentioned did so become silent with admiration at him and 
astonishment, is dypacpov : and all these magnificent thoughts 
of the Chaldeans dealing with Jeremiah, is built only on this ; 
that looking on him, as a man that had dissuaded the Jews 
from their rebellion against them, and rebuked all their 
wickedness, and foretold their ruin, they gave him his life 
and liberty. 2. The reason assigned by Grotius, why they 
should so admire him, is for his predictions : but the reason 
of the great amazement and astonishment at him, in the text, 
is his sprinkling of many nations : so that nothing, not a 
word or expression, doth here agree to him. Yea this gloss 
is directly contrary to the letter of the text. 

The close of these words is ; 'That which had not been 
told them shall they see, and that which they had not heard, 
shall they consider.' Of which he says, ' They shall see that 
come to pass, foreseen and foretold by him, which they had 
not heard of by their astrologers or magicians.' 

1, But what is it, that is here intended ? The desolation of 
Jerusalem. That was it which Jeremiah foretold ; upon the 
account whereof he had that respect with the Chaldees, 
which through the mercy of God he obtained. Is this that 
which is thus emphatically expressed ; 'That which they had 
not heard, that which they had not been told, this they should 
see, this they should consider.' That this is directly spoken 
of Jesus Christ, that he is the thing which they had not seen, 
or heard of, the apostle tells us, Rom. xv. 21. Strange that 
this should be the desolation of Jerusalem. 2. It is probable 
that the magicians and astrologers, whose life and trade it 
was to flatter their kings with hope of success in their wars 
and undertaking, had foretold the taking of Jerusalem, con- 
sidering that the king of the Chaldees,^ had used all manner 
of divinations, before he undertook the war against it. It 
is too much trouble to abide on such vain imaginations. 
Nor doth Grotius take any care to evidence, how that which 
he delivers as the sense of the words, may so much as be ty- 

sEzck. xxi. 21. 22, 


pically spoken of Jesus Christ, or be any way accommodated 
to hira. 

The prophet proceeds, chap. liii. with the same continued 
discourse. ' Who hath believed our report ; and to whom is 
the arm of the Lord revealed V which words are thus illus- 
trated by the annotator. 

' Vultis scire, inquit, quis ille sit futurus de quo csepi agere, 
qui et meis prophetiis plenam habebit fidem, et ipst; de max- 
imis rebus, quas potentia Dei peraget, revelationes accipiet 
exactissimas, omnibus circumstantiis additis : Dabo vobis 
geminas ejus notas, unde cognosci possit : Has notae in Je- 
remiam quidem congruunt prius, sed potius in Christum.' 
'Will you know, saith he, who he shall be, of whom I have 
begun to treat ? Who shall both fully believe my prophecies, 
and shall himself receive most exact revelations of the great 
things that the power of God shall bring to pass, all the cir- 
cumstances being added ; I will give you two notes of him, 
by which he may be known. These notes in the first place 
agree to Jeremiah ; but rather to Christ.' 

1. 1 suppose if we had not the advantage of receiving quite 
another interpretation of these words, from the Holy Ghost 
himself in the New Testament, yet it would not have been 
easy for any to have swallowed this gloss, that is as little 
allied to the text, as any thing that can possibly be imagined. 
The Holy Ghost tells us, that these words are the complaint 
of the prophet, and the church of believers unto God, con- 
cerning the paucity of them that would believe in Christ, or 
did so believe, when he was exhibited in the flesh : the power 
of the Lord with him for our salvation, being effectually re- 
vealed to very few of the Jews : so John xii. 37, 38. ' But 
though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they 
believed not on him, that the saying of Isaias the prophet 
might be fulfilled. Lord who hath believed our report, and 
tovvhom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? So Rom. 
X, 16. 'But they have not obeyed the gospel; for Isaias saith. 
Lord, who hath believed our report?' 

2. Let us now a little compare these several interpreta- 
tions : ' Who hath believed our report V Lord how few do be- 
lieve on Christ, working miracles himself, and preached by 
the apostles ? Jeremiah shall believe my prophecies, saith 


Grotius. To whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? To how 
few is the power of God unto salvation made known by the 
Holy Ghost? Jeremiah also shall have clear revelations, says 
Grotius. And this is counted learnedly to interpret the 
Scriptures ; and every day are such annotations on the Scrip- 
ture multiplied. 

3. It is not then the prophet's prediction of what he 
should do, of whom he treats, what he should believe, what 
he should receive, whereof there is notice given in this verse ; 
but what others shall do in reference to the preaching of him; 
they shall not believe, ' Who hath believed V 

4. The annotator tells us, these words do agree to Christ 
chiefly, and magis, Kara Xi^iv. This then must be the signi- 
fication of them, according to his interpretation, in relation 
unto Christ: 'He shall believe the prophecies of Isaiah, and 
receive revelations of his own.' For my part 1 am rather of 
the mind of John and Paul, concerning these words, than of 
the learned annotator's. 

5. There is no mention of describing the person spoken 
of by two notes : but in the first words the prophet enters 
upon the description of Christ, what he was, what he did, 
and suffered for us, which lis pursues to the end of the 

Ver. 2. * For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, 
and as a root out of a dry ground ; he hath no form nor 
comeliness, and when we shall see him, there is no beauty, 
that we should desire him.' An entrance is made in these 
words, into the account that the prophet intends to give, 
why so few believed in Christ the Messiah, when he came, 
after they had looked for him, and desired him so long, 
namely his great unsuitableness to their expectation; they 
looked for a person shining in honour and glory, raising a 
visible pompous terrene kingdom, whereof they should be 
made partakers. But Christ, when he comes indeed, grows 
up both in his human nature, and his kingdom, as a tender 
plant, obnoxious to the incursions of beasts, winds, and 
storms, and treading on of every one ; yet preserved by the 
providence of God, under whose eye, and before whom he 
grew up, he shall prosper; and he shall be as a root pre- 
served in the dry ground of the parched house of David, and 
poor family of Mary and Joseph, every way outwardly cou- 


temptible ; so that from thence none could look for the 
springing of such a branch of the Lord. And whereas they 
expected that he should appear with a great deal of outward 
form, loveliness, beauty, and every thing that should make 
a glorious person desirable, when they come to see him, in- 
deed, in his outward condition, they shall not be able to dis- 
cover any thing in the world, for which they should desire 
him, own him, or receive him. And therefore after they shall 
have gone forth upon the report that shall go of him, to see 
him, they shall be offended and return, and say, * Is not this 
the carpenter's son, and are not his brethren with us V This 
sword of the Lord, which lies at the heart of the Jews to 
this day, the learned annotator labours to ease them of, by 
accommodating these words to Jeremiah ; which through 
the favour of the reader, I shall no otherwise refute, than by 
its repetition : 'for he shall grow up before the Lord as a ten- 
der plant ; Jeremiah shall serve God in his prophetical office, 
whilst he is young. And as a root out of a dry ground : 
He shall be born at Anathoth, a poor village. He hath no 
form nor comeliness: he shall be heavy and sad. And when 
we see him, &,c. He shall not have an amiable countenance.' 
Who might not these things be spoken of him that was a 
prophet, if the name of Anathoth be left out, and some other 
supplied in the room thereof? 

The third verse pursues the description of the Messiah 
in respect of his abject outward condition, which being of 
the same import with the former, and it being not my aim 
to comment on the text, 1 shall pass by. 

Ver. 4. ' Surely he hath borne our griefs and carried our 
sorrows : yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, 
and aflflicted.' Having formerly given the sense of these 
words, and vindicated them from the exceptions of the So- 
cinians, I shall do no more but animadvert upon their ac- 
commodation to Jeremiah by Grotius. Thus then he, 

' Vere languores nostros ipse tulit.] Ille non talia 
meritus, mala subiit quae nos eramus meriti. Haec omnia 
ait Judseos dicturos postcaptam urbem.' 'He that deserved 
no buch thing underwent the evils that we had deserved. 
All these things he saith the Jews shall say after the taking 
of the city.' 

It is of the unworthy dealing of the Jews with the pro- 


phet in Jerusalem during the siege, that he supposes these 
words are spoken, and spoken by the Jews after the taking 
of the city. The sum is, when he was so hardly treated, we 
deserved it, even to be so dealt withal, not he, who delivered 
the word of God. 

But 1. The words are, * he bare our griefs, and carried 
our sorrows.' That by our griefs and sorrows, our sins and 
the punishment due to them are intended, hath been de- 
clared. That the force of the words ' bearing and carrying' 
do evince, that he took them upon himself, hath also been 
manifested. That he so took them, as that God made them 
meet upon him in his justice, hath likewise been proved. 
That by his bearing of them we come to have peace, and are 
freed, shall be farther cleared ; as it is expressly mentioned, 
ver. 5. 11. Let us now see how this may be accommodated 
to Jeremiah. Did he^nidergo the punishment due to the 
sins of the Jews ? Or did they bear their own sins ? Did God 
cause their sins to meet on him, then when he bare them, or 
is it not expressly against his law, that one should bear the 
sins of another? Were the Jews freed? Had they peace by 
Jeremiah's suiferings ? Or rather did they not hasten their 
utter ruin? If this be to interpret the Scripture, I know not 
what it is to corrupt it. 

2. There is not the least evidence, that the Jews had 
any such thoughts, or were at all greatly troubled after the 
taking of the city by the Chaldeans, concerning their deal- 
ings with Jeremiah ; whom they afterward accused to his 
face, of being a false prophet, and lying to them in the 
name of the Lord. Neither are these words supposed to be 
spoken by the Jews, but by the church of God. 

* Et nos existimavimus eum percussum (leprosum ver. 6.) 
vulneratum et a Deo humiliatum.] ^Nos credimus Jeremiani 
merito conjectum in carcerem et lacum, Deo ilium exosum 
habente, ut hostem urbis, templi, et pseudo prophetam.' 
* We believed that Jeremiah was deservedly cast into the 
prison and mire, God hating him as an enemy of the city and 
temple, and as a false prophet.' But, 

1. These words may be thus applied to any prophet 
whatever, that suffered persecution and martyrdom from the 
Jews, as who of them did not, the one or the other? For 

e Grot. 


they quickly saw their error and mistake as to one, though 
at the same time they fall upon another ; as our Saviour up- 
braideth the Pharisees. 


2. V/as this any such great matter, that the Jews should 
think a true prophet to be a false prophet, and therefore de- 
servedly punished, as in the law was appointed, that it should 
thus signally be foretold concerning Jeremiah. But that 
the Son of God, the Son and heir of the vineyard, should 
be so dealt withal, this is that the prophet might well bring 
in the church thus signally complaining of. Of him to this 
day are the thoughts of the Jews no other than as here re- 
corded, which they express by calling him *)br\. 

The reason of the low condition of the Messiah, which 
was so misapprehended of the Jews, is rendered in the next 
verse, and their mistake rectified. 

' But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was 
bruised for our iniquities, the chastisement of our peace was 
upon him, and with his stripes we are healed.' 

I suppose it will not be questioned, but that these words 
belong to our blessed Saviour, and that redemption which he 
wrought for us by his death and blood. Not only the full ac- 
complishment of the thing itself as delivered in the New Tes- 
tament, but the quotation of the words themselves, to that 
end and purpose ; 1 Pet. ii. 24. do undeniably evince it. In 
what sense the words are to be understood of him, we have 
formerly declared. That in that sense they are applicable 
to any other will not be pleaded. That they have any other 
sense is yet to be proved. To this, thus the annotator, 

* Ipse autem vulneratus est propter iniquitates nostras] 
in Hebrffio,'^ At vero ipse vulneratus est (id est, male trac- 
tatus est) crimine nostro : in nobis culpa fuit, non in ipso : 
Sic et quod sequitur, Attritus est per culpam nostrorum : Ini- 
quissima de eo sensimus et propterea crudelitur eum tracta- 
vimus : id nunc rebus ipsis apparet. Similia dixerant Judsei 
qui se converterunt die Pentecostes : et deinceps.' 

* But he was wounded for our transgressions] In the 
Hebrew, But he was wounded (that is, evilly entreated) by 
our fault. The fault was in us, not in him. And so that 
which foUov/s; ' He wasbruised by our fault :' we thought 

b Giot. 


ill of him, and therefore handled him cruelly. This now is 
evident from the things themselves. The like things said the 
Jews, who converted themselves on the day of Pentecost, and 

The reading of the words must first be considered, and 
then their sense and meaning. For against both these doth 
the learned annotator transgress, perverting the former, that 
he might the more easily wrest the latter. * He was wounded 
for our sins' ' crimine nostro' by our crime ; that is, it was 
our fault not his, that he was so evilly dealt with. And not 
to insist on the word, ' wounded' or ' tormented with pain,' 
which is slightly interpreted by evil-entreated, the question 
IS, whether the efficient, or procuring and meritorious cause 
of Christ's wounding be here expressed. 

2. The words used to express this cause of wounding are 
two, and both emphatical : the first is yti^D, he was wounded 
li'j/ti'DO for our prevarications, our proud transgressing of 
the law, yii>D, ' est rebellare, et exire a voluntate Domini, 
vel preecepto, ex superbia :' R. D. in Michi. It is properly 
to rebel against man or God. Against man ; 2 Kings iii. 7. 
' The king of Moab yii'D hath rebelled against me :' and 
chap. viii. 20. ' In his days Edom ytt'D rebelled :' as also 
against God ; Isa. i. 2. * I have brought up children, and 
they ll/li'D have rebelled against me.' Nor is it used in any 
other sense in the Scripture, but for prevarication and rebel- 
lion with an high hand, and through pride. The other word 
is my. He was bruised i3>niiiyD ' for our iniquities ;' the word 
signifies, a declining from the right way, with perversity and 
frowardness. my, * est inique vel perverse agere ; proprie 
curvum esse, vel incurvari ;' so that all sorts of sins, are here 
emphatically and distinctly expressed, even the greatest re- 
bellion, and most perverse, crooked turning aside from the 
ways of God. 

3. Their causality, in reference to the wounding of him 
here mentioned, is expressed in the preposition p which 
properly is ' de, ex, a, e,' ' from,' or ' for.' Now to put an 
issue to the sense of these words, and thence, in a good 
measure, to the sense of this place, let the reader consult the 
collections of the use of this preposition in Pagnine, Buxtorf, 
Calasius, or any other ; when he finds it with sin as here, 
and relating to punishment, if he find it once to signify any 



thing but the meritorious procuring cause of punishment, 
the learned annotator may yet enjoy his interpretation in 
quietness. But if this be so ? If this expression do con- 
stantly and perpetually denote the impulsive procuring cause 
of punishment ; it was not well done of him, to leave the 
preposition quite out in the first place, and in the next place 
so to express it, as to confine it to signify the efficient cause 
of what is affirmed. 

This being then the reading of the words, ' He was 
wounded or tormented for our sins.' The sense as re- 
lating to Jesus Christ, is manifest. When we thought he 
was justly for his own sake, as a seducer and malefactor, 
smitten of God, he was then under the punishment due to 
our iniquities ; was so tormented for what we had deserved. 
This is thus rendered by our annotator; 'Jeremiah was not 
in the fault, who prophesied to us, but we, that he was so 
evilly dealt with. He was bruised for our iniquities, that is, 
we thought hard of him, and dealt evilly with him ;' which 
may pass with the former. 

The LXX render these words : avrog Se hpavnaria^t} dia 
TUQ afxapTiag rifiCjv, kol /nfioXaKiarat dia rag avon'iag rifxu)v' 
Rightly ! to be wounded ha rag ajiagrlag, is to be wounded 
for, and not by sin, no otherwise than that also signifies the 
impulsive cause. And the Chaldee paraphrast, not able to 
avoid the clearness of the expression, denoting the merito- 
rious cause of punishment, and yet not understanding how the 
Messiah should be wounded, or punished, he thus rendered 
the words : ' Et ipse sedificabit domum sanctuarii nostri, 
quod violatum est propter peccata nostra, et traditum est 
propter iniquitates nostras.' ' He shall build the house of our 
sanctuary, which was violated for our sins (that is, as a pu- 
nishment of them) and delivered for our iniquities.' So he : 
not being able to offer sufficient violence to the phrase of 
expression, nor understanding an accommodation of the 
words to him spoken of, he leaves the words, with their own 
proper significancy, but turns their intendment, by an addi- 
tion to them of his own. 

Proceed we to the next words, which are exegetical of 
these : * He was wounded for our sins ; the chastisement of 
our peace was upon him, and with his stripes are we healed.' 
Of these thus the annotator. 


' Disciplina pacis nostras super eum] apud eum, id est, 
monitis, nobis attulit salutaria, si ea reciperemus.' * He 
gave us wholesome warnings, if we would have received 

But 1. There is in this sense of the words, nothing pecu- 
liar to Jeremiah. All the rest of the prophets did so, and 
were rejected no less than he. 

2. The words are not, ' He gave us good counsel, 
if we would have taken it.' But, * The chastisement of our 
peace was upon him.' And what affinity there is between 
these two expressions, that the one of them should be used 
for the explication of the other, I profess I know not; Peter 
expounds it by, ' He bare our sins in his own body on the 
tree ;' 1 Pet. ii. 24. 

3. The word rendered by us, ' chastisement ;' by the Vulgar 
Latin which Grotius follows, * disciplina,' is "IDIO, which 
as it hath its first signification to ' learn,' so it signifies 
also to* correct,'because learning is seldom carried on with- 
out correction ; and thence ' disciplina' signifies the same. 
Now what is the * correction of our peace V Was it the in- 
struction of Christ, not that he gave, but that he had, that 
we have our peace by ? The word vb)} he renders, * apud 
eum,' contrary to the known sense of the word ; n^j; is * to as- 
cend, to lift up, to make to ascend ;' a word of most frequent 
use ; thence is the word used, rendered * super ;' intimating 
that the chastisement of our peace was made to ascend on 
him : as Peter expresseth the sense of this place ; 6c tuq 
afiapTiag rifxiov avrdg avijvajKSv ev no awinaTi avrou IttXto ^wAov" 
* he carried up our sins on bis body on the tree;' they were made 
to ascend on him. The LXX render the words ett' avrbv ; 
the Vulgar Latin ' super eum.' And there is not the least 
colour for the annotator's, 'apud eum.' Now 'the chastise- 
ment of our peace,' that is, the punishment that was due, that 
we might have peace, or, whereby we have peace with God, 
'was upon him;' is, it seems, ' He gave us good counsel and 
admonition, if we wQuld have followed it.' 

4. Here is no word expressing any act of the person 
spoken of, but his suffering or undergoing punishment. But 
of this enough. 

' Etlivore ejus sanati sumus.] Livore ejus, id est, ipsius 
patientia, nos sanati fuissemus, id est, liberati ab impenden- 

H 2 


tibus malis, si verbis ipsius, tanta malorum tolerantia confir- 
matis, habuissemus fidem. Hebreei potentialem modum aliter 
quam per indicativum exprimere nequeunt ; ideo multa ad- 
hibenda attentio ad consequendos sensus.' * With his stripes 
we are healed ; with his wound, or sore, or stripe, that is, by 
his patience we might have been healed ; that is, freed from 
impendent evils, had we believed his words, confirmed with 
so great bearing of evils. The Hebrews cannot express the 
potential mood, but by the indicative : therefore much at- 
tention is to be used to find out the sense.' 

I cannot but profess, that setting aside some of the mon- 
strous figments of the Jewish Rabbins, 1 never in my whole 
life met with an interpretation of Scripture, offering more 
palpable violence to the words, than this of the annotator. 
Doubtless to repeat it, with all sober men, is sufficient to 
confute it. I shall briefly add ; 

1. The prophet says, * we are healed :* the annotator, ' we 
might have been healed, but are not.' 

2. The healing in the prophet, is by deliverance from 
sin, mentioned in the words foregoing : and so interpreted by 
Peter, 1 Ep. ii. 24. whereby we have peace with God, which 
we have. The healing in the annotator, is the deliverance 
from the destruction by the Chaldeans which they were not 
delivered from, but might have been. 

3. mnn in the prophet, is juwXtu;// in Peter; but 'patience' 
in the annotator. 

4. * By his stripes we are healed,.' is in the annotator, ' By 
hearkening to him we might have been healed ;' or delivered 
from the evils threatened, ' by his stripes ;' that is, ' by heark- 
ening to his counsel, when he endured evils patiently ;' 
' we are healed,' that is, we might have been delivered, but 
are not. 

5. As to the reason given of this interpretation, that the 
Hebrews have no potential mood, I shall desire to know who 
compelled the learned annotator to suppose himself wiser 
than the Holy Ghost, 1 Pet. ii. 24. to wrest these words into 
a potential signification, which he expresseth directly, actu- 
ally, indicatively. For a Jew to have done this out of 
hatred and enmity to the cross of Christ, had been tolerable : 
but for a man professing himself a Christian, it is somewhat 
a strange attempt. 


6. To close with this verse; we do not esteem ourselves 
at all beholding to the anuotator, for allowing an accommo- 
dation of these words to our blessed Saviour; affirming, that 
the Jews, who converted themselves (for so it must be ex- 
pressed, least any should mistake, and think their conver- 
sion to have been the work of the Spirit, and grace of God) 
on the day of Pentecost, used such words as those that the 
Jews are feigned to use in reference to Jeremiah. It is quite 
of another business that the prophet is speaking : not of the 
sin of the Jews in crucifying Christ, but of all our sins, for 
which he was crucified. 

• Munera quidem mi sit, sed raisit in haino. 

Ver. 6. 'All we like sheep are gone astray, we are turned 
every one to his own way, and the Lord hath laid on him 
the iniquity of us all. 

Grotius. * Erraveramus a Manassis temporibus, alii ad 
alia idola : et permisit Deus ut ille nostro gravi crimine in- 
digna pateretur.' ' We have all erred from the days of Ma- 
nasseh, some following some ido4s, others others : And God 
permitted that he by our grievous crime should suffer most 
unworthy things.' 

Though the words of this verse are most important, ye 
having at large before insisted on the latter words of it, I 
shall be brief in my animadversions on the signal deprava- 
tion of them by the learned annotator. Therefore, 

1. Why is this confession of sins restrained to the times 
of Manasseh ? and not afterward ? The expression is uni- 
versal. 13^3 ' all of us :' and a man to his own way. And if 
these words may be allowed to respect Jesus Christ at all, 
they will not bear any such restriction. But this is the 
TrpwTov xptv^og of this interpretation ; that these are the 
words of the Jews after the destruction of Jerusalem ; which 
are the words of the converted Jews and Gentiles, after the 
suffering of Jesus Christ. 

2. Why is the sin confessed, restrained to idolatry? 
Men's own ways which they walk in, when they turn from 
the ways of God, and know not the ways of peace, compre- 
hend all their evils of every kind that their hearts and lives 
are infected withal. 

3. The last words are unworthy a person of much less 
learning, and judgment than the annotator. For, 


1. The word yuDn (of which before) is interpreted with- 
out pretence, warrant, or colour, ' Permisit/ God permitted. 
But of that word sufficiently before. 

2. By ' his suflering unworthy things through our fault' 
he understands, not the meritorious cause of h-is suffering, 
but the means whereby he suffered : even the unbelief and 
cruelty of the Jews, which is most remote from the sense of 
the place. 

3. He mentions here distinctly, the fault of them that 
speak, and his suffering that is spoken of. ' Permisit Deus 
ut ille nostro gravi crimine indigna pateretur :' when in the 
text the fault of them that speak, is the suffering of him 
that is spoken of. ' Our iniquities were laid on him ;' that 
is, the punishment due to them. 

4. His suffering in the text is God's act : in the anno- 
tations, the Jews only. 

5. There is neither sense nor coherence in this interpre- 
tation of the words. * We have all sinned, and followed idols : 
and God hath suffered him to be evilly entreated by us :' 
when the whole context evidently gives an account of our 
deserving, and the ways whereby we are delivered : and 
therein a reason of the low and abject condition of the Mes- 
siah in this world. But of this at large elsewhere. 

Ver. 7. * He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he 
opened not his mouth : he is brought as a lamb to the 
slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he 
opened not his mouth.' 

' Oblatus est, quia ipse voluit, et non aperuit os suum.] in 
Heb. oppressus et afflictus fuit, et non aperuit os suum. 
Sensum bene expresserunt LXX koI avrbg dia to KEKUKioar^ai 
ouK dvoiys rb arofia avrov. Etiam tunc cum in carcerem 
ageretur, et in locum lutosum nihil fecit, dixitve iracunde. 

' Sicut ovis] mitissimum animal. 

' Et quasi agnus] cum quo ispe Jeremias se coraparat, 
cap 11. v. 18. 

* He was offered because he would, and he opened not 
his mouth ; in the Hebrew, he was oppressed and afflicted. 
The LXX have well expressed the sense. Because of 
affliction he opened not his mouth : even then when he was 
thrown into the prison and mire, he neither did, nor spake 
any thing angrily.' 


' As a sheep* a most mild creature. 

' And as a lamb/ wherewith Jeremiah compares himself, 
chap. xi. ver. 18.' 

The process of the words is to give an account of the 
same matter formerly insisted on, concerning one's suffering 
for the sin of others. That the words are spoken of the Lord 
Jesus, the Holy Ghost hath long since put it out of question ; 
Acts viii, 32. And though there be some difficulty and va- 
riety in the interpretation of the first words, yet his patient 
suffering as the lamb of God, typed out by all the sacrifices 
of the Jews, under the punishment due to our sins, shines 
through the whole. 

1. For the words themselves, they are Nini li'JJ which are 
variously rendered : koi avrog dtuTo KeKUKwa^ai, LXX. And 
he for, or because of affliction. * Oblatus est quia ipse vo- 
luit. Vulg. Lat. He was offered because he would. ' Op- 
pressus est et ipse afflictus est. Arias Mont. Exigitur et ipse 
affligitur,' Jun. ' it was exacted, and he was afflicted.' Others, 
* it was exacted, and he answered,' which seems most to agree 
with the letter ; W^i is sometimes written with the point on 
the right corner of W and then it signifies to approach, to 
draw nigh ; and in the matter of sacrifice it signifies to 
offer, because men drew nigh to the Lord in offering. So 
Amos V. 25. >b Onti'Jn. Have you made to .draw nigh your 
offerings and sacrifices ? Or have you offered ? Thus the 
Vulg:. Lat. read the word, and rendered it ' Oblatus est,' he 
was offered. With the point in the left corner, it is to exact, 
to require, to afflict, to oppress. To exact and require at 
the hands of any, is the most common sense of the word. 
So 2 Kings xxiii. 35, Jehoiachim exacted silver and gold 
of the people of the land. Thence is ti^Jl3 an exactor, one 
that requires what is imposed on men : Zee. ix. 8. x. 4. Being- 
used here in a passive sense, it is, it was exacted, and re- 
quired of him ; that is, the punishment due to our sins was 
required of Jesus Christ, having undertaken to be a sponsor : 
and so Junius hath supplied the words : ' Exigitur pana,' 
' punishment was exacted.' And this is more proper, than 
what we read ; ' He was oppressed ;' though that also be 
significant of the same thing. How the punishment of our 
sin was exacted or required of Jeremiah, the annotator de- 
clares not. 


The other word is nw the Vulgate Latin seems to 
look to the active use of the word, ' to answer ;' and therefore 
renders it 'voluit;' he would, he willingly submitted to it, 
or he undertook to do that which was exacted. And much 
may be said for this interpretation from the use of the word 
in Scripture. And then the sense will be, it was exacted of 
him, or our punishment was required of him, and he imder- 
took it with willingness, and patience : so it denotes the will 
of Christ in undergoing the penalty due to our sins, which 
he expresseth ; Psal. xl. 8. Heb. x. 6, 7. Take it in the 
sense wherein it is most commonly used, and it denotes the 
event of the exacting the penalty of our sins of him : ' He 
was afflicted.' In what sense this may possibly be applied 
to Jeremiah, I leave to the annotator's friend to find out. 

The next words, ' He opened not his mouth,' he applies 
unto the patience of Jeremiah, who did neither speak, nor do 
any thing angrily when he was cast into prison. Of that 
honour which we owe to all the saints departed, and in an 
especial manner to the great builders of the church of God, 
the prophets and apostles, this is no small part, that we 
deliver them from under the burden of having that ascribed 
to them, who are members, which is peculiar to their head. 
I say then, the perfect submission and patience expressed 
in these words, was not found in holy Jeremiah, who in his 
affliction and trial opened his mouth, and cursed the day 
wherein he was born : and when he says that himself was 
as a lamb, and as an ox appointed to the slaughter, in the 
same place, and at the same time he prays for vengeance on 
his adversaries, Jerem. xi. 19; in those words, not denoting 
his patience, but his being exposed to their cruelty. 

Ver. 8. ' He was taken from prison and from judgment, 
and who shall declare his generation? For he was cut off 
out of the land of the living ; for the transgression of my 
people was he smitten.' 

The person speaking is here changed, as is manifest from 
the close of the verse, ' for the transgression of my people ;' 
who were the speakers before. These, then, are the words 
of God by the prophet : and they are not without their diffi- 
culties, concerning which the reader may consult commen- 
tators at large. Grotius thus, 

' De carcere et judicio ablatus est] id est, liberatus tan- 


dem: Judicium vocat hoc, quia specie judicii ipsi hsec mala 
imposita fuerunt, Jerem. 32. 3. liberatur autem per Baby- 
lonios. Generationem ejus quis enarrabit?] Quis numerare 
poterit dies vitse ejus? id est, erit valde longsevus. Quia 
abscissus est de terra viventium nempe] cum actus fuit pri- 
mum in carcerem, deinde in lacum ilium caenosum, et rursum 
in carcerem.' 

' He was taken from prison and judgment/ that is, he was 
at length dehvered. He calls it judgment, because these 
evils were imposed on him with a pretence of judgment. 
But he was freed by the Babylonians ; who shall declare 
his generation? ' Who shall be able to number the days of 
his life V that is, he shall live very long. ' For he was cut off 
out of the land of the living,' namely, when he was thrown 
into the prison, and then into the miry pit, and then into 
prison again. He adds, ' Propter scelus populi mei percussi 
sum,'] in Heb. ' est plaga ipsi (supple supervenit) populi 
summo errore, ac crimine, ut ante dictum est.' * For the 
wickedness of my people I have stricken him,' in the He- 
brew it is, ' Stroke it on him,' that is, befel him, through 
the great error and fault of the people, as is before said.' So 
far he. 

The sense of these words being a little tried out, their 
application will be manifest. The first words are not without 
their difficulty, ny^D ' from prison' say we. The word is 
from "i2fy, ' prohibere,' ' coercere ;' to 'forbid' and 'restrain :' 
and is no where used for a prison directly. The LXX have 
rendered it, Iv ry rairnvMcrei r\ Kpicrig avrov vp^rj, in his humility 
or humiliation, his judgment or sentence was taken away; 
refering one of the words to one thing, and another to ano- 
ther. The Vulgar Latin, ' Angustia, Arias Mountanus, clau- 
sura : Junius, per coarctationem :' rendering the preposition 
by, not from. The word is rendered by us, ' oppression;' 
Psal. cvii. 39. it is at the utmost in reference to a prison, 
* claustrum,' a place where any may be shut up ; but may as 
well be rendered ' angustia,' with the Vulgar Latin ; better 
' coarctation,' with Junius, being taken for any kind of strait 
and restraint. And, indeed, properly our Saviour was not 
cast into a prison, though he was all night under restraint. 
If the intendment of the words be about what he was de- 
livered from, under which he was ; and not what he was 


delivered from, that he should not undergo it, DD12/0D1 and 
'from judgment,' there is no difficulty in the word. Only 
whose judgment it is, that he was taken from, is worth in- 
quiry ; whether that of God or man : npb he was taken, 'ub- 
latus est.' The Vulgar Latin, ' he was taken up.' np^ is * ca- 
pere, accipere, ferre, toUere,' a word of very large use, both 
in a good, and in a bad sense ; * to be taken up/ it will 
scarcely be found to signify ; ' to be taken away,' very 

Now the sense of these words is, that either Christ was 
taken away, that is, killed and slain by his pressures, and 
the pretended judgment that was passed on him, or else 
that he was delivered from the straits and judgment, that 
might have come upon him. Although he was so afflicted, 
yet he was taken away from distress and judgment. Junius 
would have the former sense ; and the exegesis of the word, 
taken away, by the following words, * he was cut off from 
the land of the living,' seem to require it. In that sense the 
words are, by durance, restraint, affliction and judgment, 
either the righteous judgment of God, as Junius, or the pre- 
tended juridical process of men, he was taken away or slain. 
If I go off from this sense of the words, of all other appre- 
hensions, I should cleave to that of eternal restraint or con- 
demnation, from which Christ was delivered in his greatest 
distress; Isa. 1. 7, 8. Heb. v. 7. Though his afflictions were 
great, and his pressures sore, yet he was delivered from 
eternal restraint and condemnation ; it being not possible 
that he should be detained of death. 

Applying all this to Jeremiah, says Grotius, he was * de- 
livered from prison and judgment by the Babylonians.' That 
tlpb is delivered, and that he was delivered by the Babylo- 
nians from judgment, after that judgment had passed on 
him, and sentence been executed for many months, is 
strange. But let us proceed to what follows. 

' Who shall declare his generation?' Who shall speak it, 
or be able to speak it? nn 'his generation.' *in is 'aatas, 
generatio, seeculum :' Gr. yevta. ttiv ytveav avrov dg ^fny'>](ye- 
rai; who shall * expound his generation,' or declare it; that 
is, though he be so taken away by oppression and judgment, 
yet his continuance, his generation, his abiding shall be 
such, as 'Quis eloquetur?' Who shall speak it? It shall be 


for ever and ever ; for he was to be * satisfied with long, or 
eternal life, and therein to see the salvation of God.' 

This is, says Grotius, * Who can declare the generation 
of Jeremiah? he shall live so great a space of time.' He 
began his prophecy when he was * very young ;' chap. i. 5. 
even in the thirteenth year of Josiah ; and he continued pro- 
phesying in Jerusalem until the eleventh year of Zedekiah, 
about forty years; and how long he lived after this is un- 
certain. Probably he might live in all sixty years; whereas 
it is evident that Hosea prophesied eighty years or very 
near. Now that this should be so marvellous a thing, that 
a man should live sixty or seventy years, that God should 
foretel it, as a strange thing, above twice so many years be- 
fore, and express it by way of admiration, that none should 
be able to declare it, is such an interpretation of Scripture, 
as becomes not the learned annotator. Let the learned 
reader consult Abarbinel's accommodation of these words 
to Josiah, and he will see what shifts the poor man is put to 
to give them any tolerable sense. 

' For he was cut off out of the land of the living.' on 
aigtrai otto Tr\Q -yTJc i? ^WJ? avrov. ' His life was taken from 
the earth:' to the sense, not the letter: 1?J3 'cut off,' as a 
branch is cut off a tree ; "in is 'abscindere, succidere, exti- 
dere,' to cut off. The 'land of the living,' is the state and con- 
dition of them that live in this world ; so that to be cut off 
from the land of the living, is a proper expression for to be 
slain, as in reference to Christ it is expressed by another 
word, Dan. ix. 26. The meaning of this is, says Orotius, 'Je- 
remiah was cast into the prison, and into the miry lake. He 
was cut off out of the land of the living ;' that is, he was put 
into prison twice, and taken out again. If this be not to 
offer violence to the word of God, I know not what is. The 
learned man confesses, that this whole prophecy belongs to 
Christ also ; but he leaves no sense to the words, whereby 
they possibly maybe applied to him. How was Christ cast 
into prison, and a miry pit, and taken out from thence by 
the way of deliverance? 

' For the transgression of my people was he sUicken.' 
Of the sense of this expression, that Christ was smitten, or 
that the stroke of punishment was upon him for our sins, or 
the sins of God's people, I have spoken before. Grotius 


would have it, by the sins, that is, the ' people sinned in 
doing of it ;' that is, in putting Jeremiah into prison. The 
whole context evidently manifests, and the preposition in 
the relation wherein it stands to sin and punishment, neces- 
sarily requires, that the impulsive and meritorious, not the 
efficient cause, be denoted thereby. 

Ver. 9. 'And he made his grave with the wicked, and 
with the rich in his death, because he had done no violence, 
nor was any deceit in his month.' 

• Et dabit impios pro sepultura et divitem pro morte sua.] 
Illi ipsi interficere eum etiam voluerant, ut legimus Je- 
rera. xxvi. At Deus istius vice viros potentes quidem, sed 
improbos, sacerdotes nempe, mortem Jeremise machinatos, 
morti dedit per Chaldseos;' 2 Reg. xxv. 18 — 21. Nihil illis 
divitiae suae profuerunt, quibus redimi se posse speraverant. 
Eo quod iniquitatem non fecerit, neque dolus fuerit in ore 
ejus.] quanquam nihil aliud dixerat, quam quod Deus ei man- 

' And he shall give the wicked for his grave or burial, 
and the rich for his death. They would have slain him, as 
we read ; Jerem. xxvi. But God gave them, that were 
very powerful indeed, but wicked, even the priests that de- 
signed his death, up to death by the Chaldeans, 2 Kings 
xxv. 18. their riches, whereby they hoped to redeem them- 
selves, profited them nothing, — although he had not said any 
thing, but what God commanded him.' 

It is confessed, that the first words are full of difficulty, 
and various are the interpretations of them : which the 
reader may consult in expositors- It is not my work at pre- 
sent to comment on the text, but to consider its accommo- 
dation by Grotius. The most single sense of the words to 
me seems to be, that Christ being cut off from the land of 
the living, had his sepulchre among wicked men, being taken 
down from the cross as a malefactor, and yet was buried in 
the ' grave of a rich man,' by Joseph of Arimathea in his 
own grave; the consent of which interpretation with the 
text, is discovered by Forsterus and Mercerus, names of 
sufficient authority in all Hebrew literature. The sens.? that 
Grotius fixes on, is, that * God delivered Jeremiah from 
death, and gave others to be slain in his stead, who had con- 
trived his death.' But, 


1. Of deliverance from death here is no mention ; yea he 
who is spoken of, was vnon ' in mortibus ejus,' in his deaths, 
or under death and its power. So that it is not, others shall 
die for him, but, he being dead, under the power of death, 
his grave, or burial, or sepulchre, shall be so disposed of. 

2. There is not any word spoken of putting others to 
death; but of giving, or placing his grave with the wicked. 
Nor were those mentioned in 2 Kings xxv. 18, 19. that were 
slain by the king of Babel, as it doth any way appear, of 
the peculiar enemies of Jeremiah ; the chief of them Seraiah, 
being probably he, to whom Jeremiah gave his prophecy 
against Babylon, who is said to be a ' quiet prince ;' Jer. 
li. 59. 61. 

3. It is well that it is granted, that pro is as much as 
vice ; ' for one,' in one's stead ; which the learned annotator's 
friends will scarce allow. 

4. The application of those words, ' He did no violence, 
nor was there any deceit found in his mouth' (which are 
used to express the absolutely perfect innocency of the Son 
of God), to any man, who as a man is, or was a liar, is little 
less than blasphemy, -and to restrain them to the prophet's 
message from God, is devoid of all pretence of plea. 

Ver. 10. 'Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him ; he shall 
put him to grief; when thou shalt make his soul an offering 
for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and 
the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.' 

'Tamen Deo visum est eum conterere and infirmare.] 
id est, attenuare fame, illuvie, squalore ; verba activa apud 
Hebraebs saepe permittendi habent significationem ; causa 
sequitur, cur id Deus permiserit. Si posuerit pro delicto 
animam suam, videbit semen longaevum.] verteris recte : ut 
cum semetipsum subjecerit panis, videat semen, diuque 
vivat. Hebrseis paena etiam injuste irrogata CD'i^^k dicitur, 
quia infligitur si non sonti, certe quasi sonti ; sic xion sumi 
apparet,' Gen. xxxi. 39. Zech. xiv. 19. • Vixit diu Jeremias 
in Egypto.' 

' Yet it seemed good to God to bruise and weaken him. 
that is, to weaken him, and bring him down by hunger, filth 
&c. Active verbs among the Hebrews, have often the sig- 
nification of permitting; the reason follows, why God suf- 
fered this. If he make his soul, &c. You sliall rightly 


read it, that when he hath submitted himself to punish- 
ments, that then he may see his seed and live long. 
Amongst the Hebrews punishment unjustly inflicted, is 
called asham, because it is inflicted on him that is guilty or 
supposed so. So it is evident, that chata is taken Gen. 
xxxi. 39. Zech. xiv. 19. Jeremiah lived long in Egypt.' 

The words and sense are both briefly to be considered. 
\*Dn ' voluit,' the Lord would bruise him, * delectatus est ;* 
Jun. It pleased the Lord, say we. The Greek renders this 
word IdovXerai, properly ; although in the following words 
it utterly departs from the original. The word is not only 
* veste,' but * voluntatem seu complacentiam habere,' to take 
delight to do the thing, and in the doing of it, which we will 
to be done ; Numb. xiv. 8. Judges xiii. 23. Our translation 
refers it to the purpose, and good pleasure of God ; so is 
the word used Jonah i. 14. and in sundry other places.' The 
noun of the same signification is used again in this verse, 
^Dn and translated, ' the pleasure j the pleasure of the Lord 
shall prosper;' that is, the thing which pleases him, and 
which he hath purposed to do. The purpose and pleasure 
of the Lord in giving Christ up to death ; Acts ii. 23. and 
iv. 26, 27. is doubtless that which the prophet here intends; 
which also as to the execution of it, is farther expressed ; 
Zech. xiii. 7. 

2. It pleased the Lord, Mi'Dl ' eum contundere; conterere, 
frangere ;' to bruise, or break him ; in answer to what was 
said before, ver. 5. * he was wounded, he was bruised,' &c. 

That which is said to accommodate all this to Jeremiah, 
is that by all this is intended, that God permitted it to be 
done to him. But, 

1. The word T^sn is nowhere used in that sense, 
nor will any where bear that interpretation. And though 
some active verbs in the Hebrew may be interpreted in a 
sense of permitting, or suffering the thing to be done, which 
is said to be done; yet that all may so be interpreted when 
we please, without a cogent reason of such an interpretation ; 
that this verb signifying not only to will, but with delight 
and purpose, should be so interpreted, and that in this place, 
not admitting of such a gloss in any other place, is that 
which was needful to be said by the learned annotator ; but 
with what pretence of reason or truth, I know not. 


2. As to Christ, to whom he confesseth these words pro- 
perly to belong, the proper sense of the word is to be re- 
tained, as hath been shewed ; and it is very marvellous, the 
improper sense of the word should be used in reference to 
him, to whom it nextly belongs ; and the proper, in refe- 
rence to him, who is more remotely, and secondarily sig- 

For the second passage ; ' when,' or * if, thou or he shall 
make his soul an oflPering for sin;' or as it may be read, * when 
his soul shall make an offering for sin ;' it may relate either 
to God, giving him up for a sacrifice, his soul for his whole 
human nature ; or to Christ, whose soul was, or who of- 
fered himself as a sacrifice to God ; Eph. v. 2. Which way 
soever it be taken, it is peculiar to Christ ; for neither did 
God ever make any one else an offering for sin, nor did 
ever any person but Christ, make himself an offering, or 
had power so to do, or would have been accepted in so do- 
ing. To suit these words to Jeremiah, it is said, that CDli'K 
in the Hebrew, signifies any punishment, though unjustly 

I will not say that the learned annotator affirms this, 
with a mind to deceive ; but yet I cannot but think, that as 
he hath not given, so he could not give one instance out of 
the Scripture, of that use of the word which he pretends. 
This I am sure, that his assertion hath put me to the labour, 
of considering all the places of Scripture, where the w^ord 
is used, in the full collections of Calasius ; and I dare con- 
fidently assure the reader, that there is no colour for this 
assertion, nor instance to make it good. The Greeks have 
rendered it irepi ojuapriac, ' an offering for sin;' as is expressed, 
Rom. viii. 3. Heb. x. 5. 8. so the word is used Lev. v. 16. 
vii. 1. But, 

If CDii>N be not used in that sense, yet Nion is, in Gen. 
xxxi. 39. Zech. xiv. 19. But, 

1. This doth not satisfy, if this word may not be so in- 
terpreted, which is here used ; yet another, which is not 
here used, may be so interpreted ; and therefore, that which 
is here used, must have the same sense. Nor, 

2. Can he prove that NIDn hath any other signification, 
but either of sin, or punishment, or satisfaction ; in the first 
place instanced in, Gen. xxxi. 39. Jacob says, that, for that 


which was taken away out of the flock of Laban, he ex- 
piated it, he made satisfaction for it, as the law afterward 
required in such cases should be done; Exod.xxii. 12. And 
in that place of Zech. xiv. 19. it is precisely punishment for 
sin. But this word is not in our text. 

Take then the word in any sense that it will admit of, to 
apply this expression to Jeremiah, is no less than blas- 
phemy. To say that either God, or himself made him a 
sacrifice for sin, is to blaspheme the one sacrifice of the Son 
of God. 

For the next words, * he shall see his seed,' Grotius knows 
not how to make any application of them to Jeremiah, and 
therefore he speaks nothing of them. How they belong to 
Christ is evident, Psal. xxii. 30. Heb. ii. 8, 9. that, 'he 
shall prolong his days,' is not applicable to Jeremiah, of 
whom the annotator knew not how long he lived in Egypt, 
hath been formerly declared. Christ prolonged his days, 
in that notwithstanding that he was dead, he is alive, and 
lives for ever. 

The last clause concerning the prospering of the good 
pleasure, the will, and pleasure of the Lord, in the hand of 
Jesus Christ, for the gathering of his church, through his 
blood, and making peace between God and man, hath little 
relation to any thing, that is spoken of Jeremiah, whose 
ministry for the conversion of souls, doth not seem to have 
had any thing eminent in it above other prophets ; yea fall- 
ing in a time, when the wickedness of the people, to whom 
he was sent, was come up to the height, his message seemed 
to be almost totally rejected. 

Ver. 11. ' He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall 
be satisfied; by his knowledge shall my righteous servant 
justify many, for he shall bear their iniquities.' 

The event, and glorious issue of the suffering of Christ, 
in respect of himself and others, with the reason thereof, is 
briefly comprised and expressed in this verse. 

* Videbit et saturabitur.] videbit diu ad satietatem : simile 
loquendi genus in Hebrseo, Gen. xxv. 8. xxxv. 19. 1 Paral. 
xxiii. 1. xxix. 28. 2 Paral. xxiv. 14. 

'In scienlia sua.] per eam quamhabet Dei cognitionem. 

' Justificabit ipse Justus servus meus multos.] Exemplo 
et institutione corriget multos etiam ex gentibus. Hsec est 


maxime propria verbi, pnjfTi significatio, et GrsBci StKotoc, 
ut apparet Dan. xii. 3. Apocal. xxii. 11. et alibi ssepe. 

*Et iniquitates eorum ipse portabit.] id est, auferet, per 
fjiiTiovvijlav, quia qui sordes aliquas auferunt, solent eos collo 
supposito portare. Abstulit Jeremias multorum peccata, ita 
ut diximus, corrigendo.' 

'He shall see and be satisfied :' He shall see long, unto 
satiety ; the like phrase of speech you have in the Hebrew ; 
Gen. XXV. 8, 8lc. ' By his knowledge.' By that knowledge 
which he hath of God. ' He shall justify many.' By his ex- 
ample and institution he shall convert many, even from 
among the heathen : this is the most proper sense of the word 
pHKn and ofdiKaioc in the Greek; as appeareth Dan. xii. 3. 
Rev. xxii. 11 ; Sec. 'For he shall bear their iniquities,' that 
is, take them away by a metonymy ; because those that take 
away filth, used to take it on their necks, and bear it. Je- 
remiah took away the sins of many, as was said, by correct- 
ing or amending them.' 

The intelligent reader will easily perceive the whole So- 
cinian poison, about the death of Christ, to be infolded in 
this interpretation. His knowledge is the ' knowledge' that 
he had of God, and his will, which he declares : to 'justify,' 
is to 'amend men's lives,' and to 'bear sin,' is to take it 
away. According to the analogy of this faith, you may 
apply the text to whom you please, as well as to Jeremiah. 
But the words are of another import, as we shall briefly 

1 . Those words iii^Di ^DJ/D which the Vulgar Latin renders 
' pro eo quod laboravit :' ad verbum, ' propter laborem animae 
suffi,' which express the object of the seeing mentioned, and 
that wherewith he was satisfied, are not taken notice of. 
The ' travail of the soul' of Christ, is the fruit of his ' labour, 
travail,' and suffering : this, says the prophet, he ' shall see,' 
that is, 'receive, perceive, enjoy;' as the verb nXT in 
many places signifies ; verbs of sense, with the Hebrews, 
having very large significations: yili'> 'saturabitur,'he shall 
be ' full and ' well-contented,' and pleased with the fruit 
that he shall have of all his labour and travail. This (saith 
Grotius) is, ' he shall see to satiety,' whereby he intends he 
should ' live very long,' as is evident from the places whither 
he sends us for an exposition of these words ; Gen. xxv, 8, 



&c. in all which mention is made of men that were old, and 
' full of days.' 

1. But to ' live to satiety,' is to live till a man be weary 
of living, which may not be ascribed to the prophet. 

2. This of his ' long life,' was spoken of immediately 
before, according to the interpretation of our annotator^ 
and is not, probably, instantly again repeated. 

3. The long life of Jeremiah, by way of eminency above 
others, is but pretended, as Hath been evinced. But, 

4. How came this word * to see,' to be taken neutrally, 
and to signify ' to live V What instance of this sense, or use 
of the word, can be given ? I dare boldly say, not one. He 
shall * see unto satiety,' that is, ' he shall live long.' 

5. The words 'videbit, saturabitur,' do not stand in any 
such relation to one another or construction, as to endure to 
be cast into this form : it is not ' videbit diu ad satietatem j' 
much less ' vivetad satietatem,' but * videbit, saturabitur.' 

6. The word ' shall see,' evidently relates to the words 
going before, * the travail of his soul.' If it had been 'he 
shall see many years, or many days, and be satisfied,' it had 
been something. But it is, * he shall see of the travail of 
his soul, and be satisfied.' 

2. By his knowledge ^nv^^ ' in,' or ' by his knowledge,' 
'in scientia sua,' Vulg. Lat. 'Cognitione sui,' Jun. The LXX 
wholly pervert all the words of this verse, except the last, 
as they do also of the former. That by the 'knowledge' 
here mentioned, is meant the knowledge of Christ taken ob- 
jectively, and not the knowledge of God taken actively, as 
our annotator supposes, is evident from the fruit that is as- 
cribed hereunto, which is the justification of them that have 
that knowledge. By his knowledge, that is, the ' knowledge 
of him,' they shall be justified, Phil. iii. 8. So, 'teach me 
thy fear,' that is, 'the fear of thee;' 'my worship,' that is, 
' the worship of me.' No 'knowledge of God' in the land. 
But the use of this is in the next words. 

' My righteous servant shall justify many :' that this term, 
used thus absolutely, * My righteous servant,' is not applied 
to any in the Scripture besides Jesus Christ, hath been de- 
clared, especially where that is ascribed to him, which here 
is spoken of, can it be no otherwise understood : p»*72^> ' shall 
justify,' that is, shall absolve from their sins, and pronounce 


them righteous. Grotius would have the word here to sig- 
nify, ' to make holy and righteous by instruction' and insti- 
tution, as Dan. xii.3. and ^LKaiog, Rev. xxii. 11. That both 
these words are to be taken in a forensical signification, that 
commonly, mostly they are so taken in the Scriptures, that 
scarce one and another instance can be given to the con- 
trary; that in the matter of our acceptation with God through 
Christ they can no otherwise be interpreted, hath been 
abundantly manifested by those who have written of the 
doctrine of justification at large; that is not now my pre- 
sent business. This I have from the text, to lay in the way 
of the interpretation of the learned annotator : the reason 
and foundation of this justification here mentionefi, is in the 
following words, which indeed steer the sense of the whole 
text. * For he shall bear their iniquities.' Now what justi- 
fication of men is a proper effect of another's bearing their 
iniquities ? Doubtless the acquitting of them from the guilt 
of their sins, on the account of their sins being so borne, 
and no other. But, 

Says our annotator, * To bear their sins, is to take them 
away,' by a figurative expression. If this may not be under- 
stood, I suppose every one will confess that the annotator 
hath laboured in vain, as to his whole endeavour of applying 
this prophecy unto Jeremiah. If by ' bearing our iniquities,' 
be intended the undergoing of the punishment of those ini- 
quities, and not the delivering men from their iniquities, the 
whole matter here treated of can relate to none but Jesus 
Christ ; and to him it doth relate in the sense contended 
for. Now to evince this sense we have all the arguments 
that any place is capable to receive the confirmation of its 
proper sense by. 

For, 1. The word, as is confessed, signifies properly to 
*bear,' or 'carry,' and not to 'take away.' Nor is it ever 
otherwise used in the Scripture, as hath been declared; and 
the proper use of a word is not to be departed from, and a 
figurative admitted without great necessity. 

2. The whole phrase of speech of * bearing iniquity' is 
constantly in the Scripture used for bearing or undergoing 
the punishment due to sin, as hath been proved by instances 
in abundance ; nor can any instance to the contrary be pro- 

I 2 


3. The manner whereby Christ ' bore the iniquities of men/ 
as described in this chapter, namely, by being ' wounded/ 
' bruised/ * put to grief/ will admit of no interpretation, but 
that by us insisted on. From all which it is evident, how 
violently the Scripture is here perverted by rendering, ' My 
righteous servant shall justify many, for he shall bear their 
iniquities,' by, ' Jei-emiah shall instruct many in godliness, 
and so turn them from their sins.' 

Ver. the last. 'Therefore will I divide him a portion 
with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong, 
because he hath poured out his soul unto death, and he was 
numbered with transgressors, and he bare the sins of many, 
and made intercession for the transgressors/ 

A farther fruit of the travail of the Lord Christ in his 
conquest over all oppositions, in the victory he obtained, 
the spoils that he made, expressed after the manner of the 
things of men, with the causes and antecedents of his exalta- 
tion, is summarily comprised in these last words. Hereof 
thus Grotius. 

'Dispartiam ei plurimos.'] 'Dabo ei partem in multis : id 
est, multos servabunt Chaldsei in ejus gratiam,' vide Jer. 
xxxix. 17. Et fortium dividet spolia;] id est, Nabuzardan 
Magister militum, capta urbe, de pra?da ipsi dona mittet. 
Jer. xl. 5. Oblatus etiam ipsi a Chaldseis locus quantum 
vellet. Pro eo quod tradidit in mortem animam suam] in 
Hebrseo, Quia effudit in mortem animam suam, id est, pe- 
riculis mortis semet objecit, colendo, veritatem quse odium 
parit. Vide historiam ad banc rem oppositam, Jer. xxvi. 
13. Sic Ti^ivai -ipvxnv dici pro periculo mortis semet obji- 
cere diximus ad, John x. 11. Et cum sceleratis reputatus 
est.'] Ita est tractatus quo modo scelerati solent in carcere, 
catenis et barathro. Et peccata multorum tulit] pessime 
tractatus fuitpermultorum improbitatera uti sup. ver. 5. Et 
pro transgressoribus rogavit.] j;>JD' est deprecari : Sensus 
est, eo ipso tempore cum tam dura poteretur a populis, non 
cessavit ad Deum pieces pro eis fundere, vide Jer. xiv. 
7.' &c. 

' I will divide him a portion with the great,' or many, 
that is, the Chaldeans shall preserve many for his sake ; Jer. 
xxxix. 17. * He shall divide the spoil with the strong/ that 
is, Nabuzardan the chief captain, the city being taken, shall 


send him gifts of the prey, Jer. xl. 5. As much land also as 
he would was offered him by the Chaldeans. ' Because he 
poured out his soul unto death;' that is, he exposed himself 
to the dangers of death, by following truth, which begets 
hatred. See Jer. xxvi. 13. n^ivm \pv)(fjv is spoken for ex- 
posing a man's life to danger of death. * He bare the sin of 
many,' or was evilly treated by the wickedness of the many. 
' And made intercession for the transgressors ;' he prayed 
for the people,' &c. 

To run briefly over this exposition, ' 

1. ' I will divide him a portion with the great ;' that is, 
the Chaldees shall save many for his sake. How is this 
proved? Jer. xxxix. 17, 18. Where God says, * he will save 
Ebedmelech, because he put his trust in him.' Such is the 
issue commonly, when men will wrest the Scripture to their 
own imaginations. Such are their proofs of what they af- 

2. • He shall divide the spoil with the strong ;* that is, 
the city being taken, the captains of the guard gave him vic- 
tuals, and a reward, and set him at liberty, as we read, Jer. 
xl. 5. 

3. ' Because he poured out his soul to death ;' that is, he 
ventured his life by preaching the truth, although he did 
not die. For, 

4. ' He bare the sin of many :' that is, by the ' wicked- 
ness of many he was wronged ;' though this expression in 
the verse foregoing be interpreted, * he shall take away their 
sins ;' and that when a word of a more restrained significa- 
tion is used to express bearing, than that here used. At this 
rate a man may make application of what he will, to whom 
he will. 

Upon the sense of the words, and their accomplishment 
in and upon the Lord Jesus Christ, I shall not insist. That 
they do not respect Jeremiah at all, is easily evinced from 
the consideration of the intolerable wresting of the words, 
and their sense by the learned annotator, to make the 
least allusion appear betwixt what befel him, and what is 

To close these animadversions, I shall desire the reader 
to observe. 

1. That there is not any application of these words made 


to the prophet Jeremiah, that suits him in any measure, but 
what may also be made to any prophet, or preacher of the 
word of God, that met with affliction and persecution in the 
discharge of his duty, and was delivered by the presence of 
God with him. So that there is no reason to persuade us, 
that Jeremiah was peculiarly intended in this prophecy. 

2. That the learned annotator, though he profess that 
Jesus Christ was intended in the letter of this Scripture, yet 
hath interpreted the whole, not only without the least men- 
tion of Jesus Christ, or application of it unto him, but also 
hath so opened the several words and expressions of it, as to 
leave no place nor room for the main doctrine of his satisfac- 
tion here principally intended. And how much the church 
of God is beholding to him for his pain and travail herein, 
the reader may judge. 


Of the matter of the punishment that Christ underwent, 
or what he suffered. 

Having dispatched this digression, 1 return again to the 
consideration of the death of Christ, as it was a punishment 
which shall now be pursued unto its issue. 

The third thing proposed to the consideration on this ac- 
count, was the matter of this punishment that Christ under- 
went which is commonly expressed by the name of his death. 

Death is a name comprehensive of all evil, of what na- 
ture, or of what kind soever. All that was threatened, all 
that was ever inflicted on man : though much of it fall with- 
in the compass of this life, and short of death, yet it is evil 
purely on the account of its relation to death, and its ten- 
dency thereunto ; which, when it is taken away, it is no 
more generally, and absolutely evil, but in some regard 

The death of Christ as comprehending his punishment, 
may be considered two ways. 

1. In itself. 

2. In reference to the law. 

On the first head, I shall only consider the general evi- 


dent concomitants of it, as they lie in the story, which are 
all set down as aggravations of the punishment he under- 

In the latter, give an account of the whole, in reference 
to the law. 

1. Of death natural, which in its whole nature is penal 
(as hath been elsewhere evinced) there are four aggravations 
whereunto all others may be referred. As, 1. That it be vio- 
lent or bloody. 2. That it be ignominious or shameful. 3. 
That it be lingering and painful. 4. That it be legal and 
accursed. And all these to the height, met in the death of 

1. It was violent and bloody ; hence he is said to be 

1. Slain, Acts ii. 23 ; avdXsTE, ' ye have slaiil.' 

2. Killed, Acts iii. 15; ainKTdvaTe, *ye have killed.' 

3. Put to death ; John xviii. 31, 32. 

4. Cut off; Dan. ix. 26. 

The death of Christ, and the blood of Christ, are, on this 
account, in the Scripture the same. His death was by the 
effusion of his blood ; and what is done by his death, is still 
said to be done by his blood. And though he willingly gave 
up himself to God therein, as he was a sacrifice, yet he was 
taken by violence and nailed to the cross, as it was a punish- 
ment J and the dissolution of his body and soul was by a 
means no less violent, than if he had been most unwilling 

2. It was ignominious and shameful. Such was the 
death of the cross.* The death of slaves, malefactors, rob- 
bers, pests of the earth, and burdens of human society ; like 
those crucified with him. Hence he is said to be * obedient 
to death, the _death of the cross,' Phil. ii. 8. that shameful 
and ignominious death. And when he endured the cross, 
he despised the shame also; Heb. xii. 2. To be brought 

a ZxeXojwwia, seu crucifragium ut crux ipsa, servorum quasi peculiare suppliciuin 
fuit. Lipsias. Sublimes extra ordinera aliqiiae statuebanturcruces; si exenipla edenda 
forent in famosa persona, et ob atrox faciuus, aut si hoc suppiicio veniret afficiendus 
ille, cujus odium erat apud omnes flagrantissimum. Salmas. de Cruce : which seems 
to be the case in the cross of Christ : between these of the thieves. Bene addit 
crucem, nam servorum non civium crucis erat suppliciura. Nannius, in Tcrent. And. 
Act. 3. Noli minitari, Scio crucem futuram mihi sepuichrum : ibi raei niajores sunt 
siti, pater, avus, proavus, abaviis : servus apud Plaut. Mil. Glor. ii. 4. 19. Vid. 
Trach. Histor. lib. ii. 27. Vulcat in Avid. Cassio. cap. 4. Capitolin. iu Macrin. cap. 
12. Luc. floras lib. 3. cap. 19. 


forth scourged as a malefactor, amongst malefactors, in the 
eye of the world, made a scorn and a by-word, men wagging 
the head, and making mouths at him in derision, when he 
was full of torture, bleeding to death, is no small aggravation 
of it. Hence the most frequent expression of his death is by 
the cross, and crucifying. 

3. It was lingering. It was the voice of cruelty itself, 
concerning one who was condemned to die : * sentiat se mori ;' 
' let him so die that he may feel himself dying ;' and of one, 
who, to escape torture, killed himself, ' evasit,' * he escaped 
me :' sudden death, though violent, is an escape from torture. 
Such was this of Christ. From his agony in the garden, 
when he began to die (all the powers of hell being then let 
loose upon him), until the giving up of the Ghost, it was from 
the evening of one day to the evening of another ; from his 
scourging by Pilate, after which he was under continual 
pain, and suffering in his soul, in his body, to his death, 
it was six hours ; and all this while was he under exquisite 
tortures, as on very many considerations might easily be 

4. It was legal; and so an accursed death. There was 
process against him by witness and judgment. Though they 
were indeed all false and unjust, yet, to the eye of the world, 
his death was legal, and consequently accursed ; Gal. iii. 
13. * Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree ;' that is, 
because of the doom of the law, whose sentence is called a 
curse ; Deut. xxvii. 29. such was that of Christ; Isa. liii. 4. 

2. As all these aggravations attended his death, as it was 
death itself, so there was a universality in ail the concern- 
ments of it, as it was a legal punishment. Briefly to give 
some instances : 

1. There was a universality of efficient causes; whether 
principal or instrumental. The first great division of causes 
efficient, is into the Creator and the creatures, and both here 

1. The Creator, God himself, laid it upon him. He was 
not only ' delivered by his determinate counsel,' Acts ii. 22, 
23. iv. 27, 28. not spared by him, but given up to death ; 
Rom. viii. 32. but, it * pleased him to bruise him, and to put 
him to grief,' Isa. liii. 10. as also to forsake him ; Psal. xxii. 
1. so acting in his punishment, by the immission of that 


which is evil, and the subtraction of that which is good ; so 
putting the cup into his hand, which he was to drink, and 
mixing the wine thereof for him, as shall afterward be de- 

2. Of creatures one general division is, into intelligent, 
and brute or irrational, and both these also in their several 
ways concurred to his punishment ; as they were to do by 
the sentence and curse of the law. 

Intelligeut creatures are distinguished into spiritual and 
invisible, or visible and corporeal also. 

Of the first sort are angels and devils ; which agree in 
the same nature, differing only in qualities, and states or 
conditions. Of all things, the angels seem to have no hand 
in the death of Christ; for being not judge, as was God, 
nor opposite to God as is Satan, nor under the curse of the 
law, as is mankind, and the residue of the creatures, though 
they had inestimable benefit by the death of Christ, yet nei- 
ther by demerit nor efficacy, as is revealed, did they add to 
his punishment. Only whereas it was their duty to have 
preserved him being innocent, and in his way from violence 
and fury, their assistance was withheld. 

But from that sort of spiritual invisible creatures, he suf- 
fered in the attempts of the devil. 

Christ looked on him at a distance in his approach to set 
upon him : ' The prince of this world,' saith he, ' cometh ;' 
John xiv. 30. He saw him coming with all his malice, fury, 
and violence, to set upon him, to ruin him if it were possi- 
ble : and that he had a close combat with him on the cross, 
is evident from the conquest that Christ there made of him. 
Col. ii. 15. which was not done without wounds, and blood, 
when he break the serpent's head, the serpent bruised his 
heel; Gen. iii. 15. 

2. For men ; the second rank of intellectual creatures ; 
they had their influence into this punishment of Christ, in 
all their distributions, that on any account they were cast 

1. In respect of country or nation, and the privileges 
thereon attending. The whole world on this account is di- 
vided into Jews and Gentiles ; and both these had their ef- 
ficiency in this business; Psal. ii. 1. 'Why did the heathen 
rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?' Heathens and 


people. Gentiles and Jews, are all in it, as the place is inter- 
preted by the apostles. Acts iv. 25, 26. And to make this 
the more eminent, the great representative of the two people 
conspired in it ; the Sanhedrim of the Jews, and the body of 
the people in the raetropolitical city, on the one hand ; and 
the Romans, for the Gentiles, who then were ' reruni Domini,' 
and governed olnovfxtvriv, as Luke tells us, chap. ii. 1. The 
whole on both hands is expressed Matt. xx. 18, 19. 

2. As to order, men are distinguished into rulers, and 
those under authority, and both sorts herein concurred, 

1. Rulers are either civil or ecclesiastical ; both which 
(notwithstanding all their divisions) conspired in the death 
of Christ. 

1. For civil rulers, as it was foretold, Psal.ii. 2. xxii. 12. 
so it was accomplished. Acts iv. 25, 26. The story is known 
of the concurrence of Herod and Pilate in the thing : the 
one, ruler af the place where he lived, and conversed ; the 
other, of the place, where he was taken and crucified. 

2. For ecclesiastical rulers; what was done by the 
priests, and all the council of the elders, is known. The 
matter of fact need not be insisted on ; indeed, they were 
the great contrivers and malicious plotters of his death; us- 
ing all ways and means for the accomplishing of it. Acts iii. 
17. in particular Annas, the usurper of the priesthood, seems 
to have had a great hand in the business, and therefore to 
him was he first carried. 

2. For those under authority : besides what we have in 
the story, Peter tells the body of the people, Acts ii. 23. 
that * they took him, and with wicked hands crucified him, 
and slew him :' and, chap. iii. 15, ' That they killed the prince 
of life;' so Zech. xii. 10. not only the house of David, the 
rulers, but the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the people, are said 
to pierce him, and thence, 'they who pierced him,' is a pe- 
riphrasis of the Jews ; Rev, i. 7. after, every eye shall see 
him, there is a distribution into them that pierced him, that 
is, the Jews, and all the kindreds of the earth, that is, the 
Gentiles. The very rabble was stirred up to cry ' Crucify him, 
crucify him,' and did it accordingly ; Matt, xxvii. 20. And 
they all consented as one man in the cry, ver. 22. and that 
with violence and clamour ; ver. 23. * abjects made mouths 
at him,' Psal. xxxv. 15. xxii. 6. 


3. Distinguish man in relation to himself, either upon a 
natural or moral account, as his kindred and relations, or 
strangers, and they will appear to be all engaged ; but this 
is so comprised in the former distinction of Jews and Gen- 
tiles, that it need not be insisted on. 

2. On a moral account, as they were either his friends 
or his enemies, he suffered from both. 

1. His friends, all his disciples, forsook him, and fled; 
Matt. xxvi. 56. the worst of them betrayed him, ver. 14. and 
the best of them denied him, ver. 10. and so there was 'none 
to help,' Psal. xxii. 11. 

And if it were thus with him in the house of his friends, 
what may be expected from 

2. His enemies ; their malice and conspiracy, their im- 
placableness and cruelty, their plotting and accomplishment 
of their designs, take up so great a part of the history of 
his crucifying, that I shall not need insist on particular in- 

Yea, mankind was engaged, as distinguished into sexes. 
Of men of all sorts you have heard already ; and the tempt- 
ing, ensnaring, captious question of the maid to Peter mani- 
fests, that amongst his persecutors, there were of that sex 
also. Matt. xxvi. 69. 

Of men's distinction by their employments, of soldiers, 
lawyers, citizens, divines, all concurring to this work ; I shall 
not add any thing to what hath been spoken. 

Thus the first order of creatures, those that are intellec- 
tual, were universally, at least with a distributive univer- 
sality, engaged in the suffering of the Lord Jesus; and the 
reason of this general engagement was, because the curse, 
that was come upon them for sin, had filled them all with 
enmity one against another. 1. Fallen man and angels 
were engaged into an everlasting enmity, on the first en- 
trance of sin ; Gen. iii. 15, 16. 2. Men one towards another 
were filled with malice, and envy, and hatred ; Tit. iii. 3. 

3. The Jews and Gentiles were engaged by way of vi- 
sible representation of the enmity which was come on all 
mankind ; John iv. 9. Eph. ii. 15 — 17. and therefore he who 
was to undergo the whole curse of the law, was to have the 
rage and fury of them all executed on him. As I said be- 
fore, all their persecution of him concerned not his death. 


as it was a sacrifice, as he made his soul an offering for sin ; 
but as it was a punishment, the utmost of their enmity was 
to be executed towards him. 

2. The residue of the creatures concurred thus far to his 
sufferings, as to manifest themselves at that time, to be vi- 
sibly under the curse and indignation that was upon him, 
and so withdrew themselves, as it were, from yielding him 
the least assistance. To instance in general, heaven and 
earth lost their glory, and that in them which is useful and 
comfortable to the children of men, without which all the 
other conveniences and advantages are as a thing of nought: 
'the glory of heaven is its light;' Psal. xix.1,2. Andtheglory 
of the earth, is its stability : he hath fixed the earth, that it 
shall not be moved. 

Now both these were lost at once. The heavens were 
darkened, when it might be expected, in an ordinary course, 
that the sun should have shone in its full beauty. Matt, xxvii. 
45. Luke xxiii. 44, 45. And the earth lost its stability, and 
shook or trembled, ver. 51. and the rocks rent, and the 
graves opened ; all evidences of that displeasure against sin, 
which God was then putting in execution to the utmost ; 
Rom. i. 18. 

Thus first in his suffering there was universality of effici- 
ent causes. 

2. There was a universality in respect of the subject 
wherein he suffered. He suffered, 1. In his person, 
2. In his name ; 3. In his friends ; 4. In his goods ; as the 
curse of the law extended to all, and that universally in all 

1. In his person, or his human nature in his person; he 
suffered in the two essential constituent parts of it ; his 
body, and his soul. 

1. His body. In general as to its integral parts; his 
body was broken, 1 Cot. xi. 24. and crucified ; his blood 
was shed, or poured out. 

2. His soul. His soul was made an offering for sin; Isa. 
liii. 10. And his soul ' was heavy unto death ;' Matt. xxvi. 
37, 38. 

! 2. In particular : his body suffered in all its concern- 

\ ments, namely, all his senses, and all its parts or members. 

\ 1. In all its senses : as to instance, 



1. In his feeling ; he was full of pain, which made him, 
as he says, cry for disquietness ; and this is comprised in 
every one of those expressions which say he was broken, 
pierced, and lived so long on the cross, in the midst of most 
exquisite torture ; until being full of pain, he cried out, and 
gave up the Ghost; Matt, xxvii. 50. 

2. His tasting. When he fainted with loss of blood, and 
grew thirsty, they gave him 'gall and vinegar to drink,' 
Matt, xxvii. 34. John xix. 29. Matt, xxvii. 48. not to stu- 
pify his senses, but to increase his torment. 

3. His seeing. Though not so much in the natural organ 
of it, as in its use. He saw his mother and disciples stand- 
ing by, full of grief, sorrov/, and confusion, which exceed- 
ingly increased his anguish and perplexity ; John xix. 25, 
26. And he saw his enemies full of rage and horror, standing- 
round about him; Psal. xxii. He saw them passing by, and 
wagging the head in scorn. Matt. xxix. 39. Psal. xxii. 7, 8. 

4. His ears were filled with the reproach and blasphemy, 
of which he grievously complains ; Psal. xxii. 7, 8. which 
also is expressed in his accomplishment. Matt, xxvii. 39 — 44. 
Luke xxiii. 36 — 38. They reproached him with God, and his 
ministry, and his profession ; as did also one of the thieves 
that was crucified with him. And, 

5. They crucified him in a noisome place, a place of 
stink and loathsomeness ; a place where they cast the dead 
bodies of men, from whose bones it got the name of Gol- 
gotha, a place of dead men's sculls ; Matt. xxvi. 33. 

2. He suffered in all the parts of his body ; especially 
those, which are most tender and full of sense. 

1. For his head, they planted a crown of thorns, and put 
it on him ; and to increase his pain, smote it on (that the 
thorns might pierce him the deeper) with their staves ; Matt, 
xxvii. 28, 29. as the Jews had stricken him before, chap. xxvi. 
68. John xix. 2, 3. 

2. His face they spit upon, buffeted, stroke, and plucked 
oflf his hair ; Isa. 1. 6. Matt. xxvi. 67, 68. 

3. His back was torn with whips and scourges. Matt, 
xxvii. 27. John xix. 1. l/xaariyoxTs ; there they made long 
their furrows. 

4. His hands, and feet, and side, were pierced with nails 
and spears ; Psal. xxii. 16. 

5. To express the residue of his body, and the condition 


of it, when he hung on the cross so long by the soreness of 
his hands and his feet, says he, * All my bones are out of 
joint;' Psal. xxii. 17. and also ver. 14, 15. 

Thus was it with his body; the like also is expressed of 
his soul, for, 

1. On his mind was darkness ; not in it, but on it, as to 
his apprehension of the love and presence of God. Hence 
was his cry, Psal. xxii. 1, ' My God, my God, why hast 
thou forsaken me?' Matt, xxvii. 46. Though his faith was 
upon the whole of the matter prevalent and victorious ; Isa. 
1. 8, 9. yet he had many sore conflicts with the sense and 
appi'ehension of God's wrath for sin, and that desertion he 
was then under, as to any cheering influences of his love and 

For the rest of his faculties, he was not only under the 
pressure of the most perplexing, grievous, and burdensome 
passions, that human nature is obnoxious unto, as, 1. Hea- 
viness ; * His soul was heavy unto death ;' Matt. xxvi. 37. 

2. Grief; no ' sorrow like to his ;' Lamen. i. 12. 

3. Fear; Heb. v. 7. but also was pressed into a condi- 
tion, beyond what we have words to express, or names of 
passions or affections to set it forth by. Hence he is said 
to be in an agony ; Luke xxii. 44. to be amazed ; Mark xiv. 
33. with the like expressions, intimating a condition mise- 
rable and distressed beyond what we are able to comprehend 
or express. 

2. In his name, his repute, or credit, he suffered also. 
He was numbered amongst transgressors; Isa. liii. 11. Psal. 
xxii. counted a malefactor, and crucified amongst them ; a 
seducer, a blasphemer, a seditious person, a false prophet, 
and was cruelly mocked and derided on the cross as an 
impostor, that saved others, but could not save himself; that 
pretended to be the Messias, the King of Israel, but could 
not come down from the cross ; laid in the balance with 
Barrabas, a rogue and a murderer, and rejected for him. 

3. In his friends. The * shepherd was smitten, and the 
sheep scattered ;' Zech. xiii. 7. All his friends distressed, 
scattered, glad to fly for their lives, or to save themselves by 
doing the things that were worse than death. 

4. In his goods, even all that he had ; ' they parted his 
garments, and cast lots for his vesture ;' Psal. xxii. 18. Thus 
did he not in any thing go free ; that the curse of the law in 


all things might be executed on him ; the law curses a man 
in all his concernments ; with the immission and infliction 
of every thing that is evil, and the subtraction of every thing 
that is good ; that is, with' psena sensus, et psena damni,' as 
they are called. 

In reference to the law, I say, that Christ underwent that 
very punishment that was threatened in the law, and was 
due to sinners. The same that we should have undergone, 
had not our surety done it for us ; to clear this briefly ob- 

1. That the punishment of the law may be considered 
two ways. 

1. Absolutely in its own nature, as it lies in the law, and 
the threatening thereof. This in general is called death ; 
Gen. iii. 15. Ezek. xv. 4. Rom. v. 12. And by way of ag- 
gravation, because of its comprising the death of body and 
soul, * death unto death;' 2 Cor. ii. 16. and the second death; 
Rev. XX. 14. and the curse; Deut. xxvii. 29. and Matt. xxv. 41. 
and wrath, &c. Hence we are said to be delivered from wrath 
to come; 1 Thess. i. 10. Rom. ii. 5. wrath, or the day of 
wrath, and in innumerable other places ; all which are set 
out in many metaphorical expressions by those things which 
are to the nature of man most dreadful ; as of a lake with 
fire and brimstone ; of Tophet, whose pile is much wood, 
and the like. 

Of this punishment in general there are two parts. 

1. Loss, or separation from God, expressed in these 
words, ' Depart from me ;' Matt. vii. 23. 'Go ye cursed ;' 
Matt. xxv. 41. as also 2 Thess. i. 9. 

2. Sense or pain, whence it is called fire ; as 2 Thess. i. 
9. Torments, &c. All this we say Christ underwent, as shall 
be farther manifested. 

2. Punishment of the law may be considered relatively 
to its subject, or the person punished, and that in two re- 

1. In reference to its own attendencies, and necessary 
consequents, as it falls upon the persons to be punished ; 
and these are two. 

1. ' That it be a worm that dieth not ;' Matt. ix. 44. 
Isa. Ixvi. 24. 

2. That it be a fire, not to be quenched ; that it be ever- 


lasting, that its torments be eternal ; and both these, I say, 
attend and follow the punishment of the law, on the account 
of its relation to the persons punished ; for, 

1. The worm is from the inbeing, and everlasting abiding 
of a man's own sin ; that tormenting anguish of conscience, 
which shall perplex the damned to eternity, attends their 
punishment merely from their own sin inherent; this Christ 
could not undergo. The worm attends not sin imputed, but 
sin inherent ; especially not sin imputed to him who under- 
went it willingly. It being the cruciating vexation of men's 
own thoughts, kindled by the wrath of God against them- 
selves, about their own sin. 

2. That this worm never dies, that this fire can never be 
quenched, but abides for ever, is also from the relation of 
punishment to a finite creature that is no more. Eternity 
is not absolutely in the curse of the law, but as a finite crea- 
ture is cursed thereby. If a sinner could at once admit upon 
himself that which is equal in divine justice to his offence, 
and so make satisfaction, there might be an end of his pu- 
nishment in [time. ^ But a finite, and every way limited 
creature, having sinned his eternity in this world, against an 
eternal and infinite God, must abide by it for ever. This was 
Christ free from ; the dignity of his person was such, as that 
he could fully satisfy divine justice, in a limited season; 
after which, God in justice loosed the pains of death, for it 
was impossible he should be detained thereby. Acts ii. 24. 
and that because he was able to swallow up death into 

2. Punishment, as it relates to the persons punished, may 
be also considered in respect of the effects which it pro- 
duceth in them which are not in the punishment absolutely 
considered, and these are generally two. 

— 1. Repining against God, and blaspheming of him ; as 
iftthat type of hell ; Isa. viii. 20. This is evil, or sin in it- 
self, which punishment is not. It is from the righteous God, 
who will do no iniquity. This proceeds from men's hatred 
of God. They hate him in this world, when he doth them 
good, and blesses them with many mercies.; how much more 
will their hatred be increased, when they shall be cut off from 
all favour or mercy whatever, and never enjoy one drop of 
refreshment from him. They hate him, his justice, yea, his 


blessedness, and all his perfections. Hence they murmur, 
repine, and blaspheme him. Now this must needs be infi- 
nitely remote from him, who in love to his Father, and his 
Father's glory, underwent this punishment. He was loved 
of the Father, and loved him, and willingly drank of this cup, 
which poisons the souls of sinners with wrath and revenge. 

2. Despair in themselves ; their hopes being cut oft' to 
eternity, there remaining no more sacrifice for sin, they are 
their own tormentors with everlastingly perplexing despair. 
But this our Saviour was most remote from ; and that because 
he believed he should have a glorious issue of the trial he 
underwent; Heb. xii. 2. Isa. 1. 8. 

But as to the punishment that is threatened in the law, 
in itself considered, Christ underwent the same that the law 
threatened, and which we should have undergone. For, 

1. The law threatened death ; Gen. iii. 15. Ezek. xviii. 
4. and he tasted death for us ; Heb. ii. 9. Psal. xxii. 7, 8. 
The punishment of the law is the curse ; Deut. xxvii. 29. 
and he was made a curse ; Gal. iii. 13. The law threatened 
loss of the love and the favour of God, and he lost it; Psal. 
xxii. 1. 

To say that the death threatened by the law was one, and 
that Christ underwent another, that eternal, this temporal, 
and so also of the curse, and desertion threatened (besides 
what shall be said afterward) would render the whole busi- 
ness of our salvation unintelligible, as being revealed in 
terms equivocal, no where explained. 

2. There is not the least intimation in the whole book of 
God, of any change of the punishment, in reference to the 
surety from what it was, or should have been, in respect of 
the sinner. God made all ' our iniquities to meet on him ;' 
that is (as hath been declared), the punishment due to them. 
Was it the same punishment or another? Did we deserve 
one punishment, and Christ undergo another? Was it the 
sentence of the law, that was executed on him, or was it 
some other thing, that he was obnoxious to ? It is said, that 
he was 'made under the law ;' Gal. iv. 4. that sin was 'con- 
demned in his flesh ;' Rom. viii. 3. that ' God spared him not;' 
Rom. viii. 31. that he 'tasted death;' that he was *made a 
.curse ;' all relating to the law : that he suffered more or less 
there is no mention. 



It is strange to me, that we should deserve one punish- 
ment, and he who is punished for us, undergo another; yet 
both of them be constantly described by the same names 
and titles. If God laid the punishment of our sins on Christ, 
certainly it was the punishment that was due to them ; men- 
tion is every where made of a commutation of persons, the 
just suffering for the unjust, the sponsor for the offender, 
his name as a surety being taken into the obligation, and 
the whole debt required of him ; but of a change of punish- 
ment, there is no mention at all. And there is this despe- 
rate consequence that will be made readily, upon a supposal 
that any less than the curse of the law and death, in the na- 
ture of it eternal, was inflicted on Christ, namely, that God 
indeed is not such a sore revenger of sin, as in the Scrip- 
ture he is proposed to be ; but can pass it by in the way of 
compositions on much easier terms. 

3. The punishment due to us, that is in the 'curse of the 
law/ consists, as was said, of two parts. 

1. Loss, or separation from God. 

2. Sense, from the infliction of the evil threatened; and 
both these did our Saviour undergo. 

For the first, it is expressed of him, Psal. xxii, 1. and he 
actually complains of it himself, Matt, xxvii. 46. and of this 
cry for a while, he says, 'O my God, I cry in the day-time 
and thou hearest not;' Psal. xxii. 2. until he gives out that 
grievous complaint, ver. 15. 'My strength is dried up like a 
potsherd ;' which cry he pressed so long with strong cries 
and supplications, until he was 'heard and delivered from 
what he feared ;' Heb. v. 7. They who would invent eva- 
sions for this express complaint of our Saviour, that he was 
deserted and forsaken, as that he spake it in reference to his 
church, or of his own, being left to the power and malice of 
the Jews, do indeed little less than blaspheme him ; and say 
he was not forsaken of God, when himself complains that 
he was. Forsaken, I say, not by the disjunction of his per- 
sonal union; but as to the communication of effects of love 
and favour, which is the desertion that the damned lie under 
in hell. And for his being forsaken, or given up to the 
hands of men, was that it which he complained of? Was 
that it whereof he was afraid ? Which he was troubled at ? 
Which he sweat blood under the consideration of? and had 


need of an angel to comfort and support him ? Was he so 
much in courage and resolution Kelow those many thousands 
who joyfully suffered the same things for him? If he was 
only forsaken to the power of the Jews ; it must be so. Let 
men take heed how they give occasion of blaspheming the 
holy and blessed name of the Son of God. 

''Vaninus, that grand Atheist, who was burned for atheism 
at Tholouse in France, all the way as he went to the stake 
did nothing but insult over the friars that attended him ; 
telling them, that their Saviour when he was led to death 
did sweat and tremble, and was in an agony. But he upon 
the account of reason, whereunto he sacrificed his life, went 
with boldness and cheerfulness. God visibly confuted his 
blasphemy, and at the stake he not only trembled and 
quaked, but roared with horror. But let men take heed 
how they justify the atheistical thoughts of men, in asserting 
our blessed Redeemer to have been cast into that miserable 
and deplorable condition, merely with the consideration of a 
temporary death, which perhaps the thieves that were cruci- 
fied with him did not so much tremble at. 

2. For * paena sensus :' from what hath been spoken it is 
sufficiently manifest what he underwent on this account. 
To what hath been delivered before, of his being * bruised, 
afliicted, broken' of God from Isa. liii. although he was 
taken from ' prison, and judgment,' or everlasting condemna- 
tion ; ver. 8. add but this one consideration of what is af- 
firmed of him, that he * tasted death for us/ Heb. ii. 9. and 
this will be cleared. What death was it he tasted ? The 
death that had the curse attending it; Gal. iii. 13. ' He was 
made a curse ;' and what death that was himself declares, 

b Vidi ego dum plaustro per ora vulgi traducitur, illudentem Theologo e Francis- 
canis, cujus cura mollire ferocitatem animi obstinati. Lucilius ferocitate contumax, 
dum in patibulum traditus, monachi solatium aspernatus objectam crucera ayersatur, 
Christoque illudit in liaec eadera verba; illi in extremis prae timore inibellis sudor, 
e<T0 imperterritus morior. Falso sane imperterritum se dixit sceletus homo, quern 
vi°diraus dejectum animo, philosophia uti pessirae, cujus se mentiebatur professoreni. 
Erat illi in extremis aspectus ferox et horridus, inquieta mens, anxium quodcunque 
loquebatur : et quanquam philosophice mori se clamabat identidem, finiisse ut brutum 
nemo negaverit. Antequara rogo subderetur ignis: jussus sacrilegam linguamcultro 
submittere, negat, neque exerit, nisi forcipum vi apprehensam carnifex ferro abscin- 
dit: nou alias vociferatio horridior: diceres raugire ictura bovem, &c. Hie Lucilii 
Vauini finis, cui quanta constantia fuerit, probat belluinus in morte clamor. Vidi ego 
in custodia, vidi in patibulo, videram antcquam subiret vincula: flagitiosus in liber- 
tate, et voluptatura sectator avidus, in carcere Catholicus, in extremis omni pbiloso- 
phiae prsssidio destitutus, amens moritur. Gramon. Histor. Gal. lib. 3. ad An. 1619. 

K 2 


Matt. XXV. 41. where, calling men accursed, he cries 'go into 
everlasting fire :' you that are obnoxious to the law, go to 
the punishment of hell ; yea, and that curse which he un- 
derwent, Gal.iii. 13. is opposed to the blessing of Abraham, 
ver. 14, or the blessing promised him, which was doubtless 
life eternal. 

And to make it yet more clear, it was by death, that he 
delivered us from death ; Heb. ii. 14, 15. and if he died only 
a temporal death, he delivered us only from temporal death, 
as a punishment. But he shews us what death he delivered 
us from, and consequently what death he underwent for us, 
John viii. 51. *He shall never see death; that is, eternal 
death, for every believer shall see death temporal. 

On these considerations it is evident, that the sufferings 
of Christ in relation to the law, were the very same that were 
threatened to sinners, and which we should have undergone, 
had not our surety undertaken the work for us. Neither was 
there any difference in reference to God the judge, and the 
sentence of the law, but only this, that the same person who 
offended, did not suffer: and that thqse consequences of the 
punishment inflicted, which attend the offenders' own suf- 
fering, could have no place in him ; but this being not the 
main of my present design, I shall no farther insist on it. 

Only I marvel, that any should think to implead this 
truth of Christ's suffering the same that we did, by saying 
that Christ's obligation to punishment was 'sponsionis pro- 
prise,' ours 'violatae legis.' As though it were the manner 
how Christ came to be obnoxious to punishment, and not 
what punishment he underwent, that is asserted when we say, 
that he underwent the same that we should have done. But 
as to say, that Christ became obnoxious to punishment the 
same way that we do, or did, that is, by sin of his own, is 
blasphemy : so to say he did not upon his own voluntary 
undertaking undergo the same, is little less. It is true, 
Christ was made sin for us, had our sin imputed to him, not 
his own ; was obliged to answer for our fault, not his own ; 
but he was obliged to answer what we should have done : 
but hereof elsewhere. 



Of the covenant between the Father and the Son, the (jround and foundation 
of this dispensation of Christ's heing punished for us, and in our stead. 

The fourth thing considerable, is the ground of this dis- 
pensation of Christ's being punished for us, which also hath 
influence into his whole mediation on our behalf. This is 
that compact, covenant, convention, and agreement, that was 
between the Father and the Son, for the accomplishment of 
the work of our redemption by the mediation of Christ, to 
the praise of the glorious grace of God. 

The will of the Father, appointing and designing the 
Son to be the head, husband, deliverer, and redeemer of his 
elect, his church, his people, whom he did foreknow, with 
the will of the Son voluntarily, freely undertaking that 
work, and all that was required thereunto, is that compact 
(for in that form it is proposed in the Scripture), that we 
treat of. 

It being so proposed, so we call it ; though there be diffi- 
culty in its explication. Rabbi Ruben, in Galatinus, says of 
Isa. Ixvi. 15. that if the Scripture had not said it, it had not 
been lawful to have said it, but being written, it may be 
spoken, "in fire, or by fire is the Lord judged ;' for it is not 
Sophet, that is, 'judging,' but Misphet, that is, ' is judged :' 
which by some is applied to Christ, and the fire he under- 
went in his suffering. However the rule is safe, that which 
is written may be spoken ; for, for that end was it written : 
God in his word teaching us how we should speak of him ; 
so it is in this matter. 

It is true, the will of God the Father, Son, and Holy 
Ghost, is but one. It is a natural property, and where there 
is but one nature, there is but one will : but in respect of 
their distinct personal actings, this will is appropriated to 
them respectively ; so that the will of the Father, and the 
will of the Son, may be considered in this business. Which 
though essentially one and the same, yet in their distinct 
personality it is distinctly considered, as the will of the Fa- 
* isaif: nin" rrxa '3 


ther, and the will of the Son ; notwithstanding the unity of 
essence, that is between the Father and the Son, yet is the 
work distinctly carried on by them, so that the same God 
judges and becomes surety, satisfieth and is satisfied, in 
these distinct persons. 

Thus though this covenant be eternal, and the object of 
it be that which might not have been, and so it hath the na- 
ture of the residue of God's decrees in those regards ; yet, 
because of this distinct acting of the will of the Father, and 
the will of the Son, with regard to each other, it is more 
than a decree, and hath the proper nature of a covenant, or 
compact. Hence from the moment of it, I speak not of 
time, there is a new habitude of will in the Father and Son 
towards each other, that is not in them essentially ; I call it 
new, as being in God freely, not naturally. And hence was 
the salvation of men before the incarnation, by the under- 
taking, mediation, and death of Christ. That the saints 
under the Old Testament were saved by Christ, at present 
I take for granted. That they were saved by virtue of a 
mere decree, will not be said. From hence was Christ es- 
teemed to be incarnate, and to have suffered ; or the fruits 
of his incarnation and suffering could not have been im- 
puted to any : for the thing itself being denied, the effects of 
it are not. 

The revelation of this covenant is in the Scripture, not 
that it was then constituted, when it is first mentioned in 
the promises and prophecies of Christ, but then first declared 
or revealed. Christ was declared to be the Son of God, by 
the resurrection from the dead ; but he was so from eternity. 
As in other places as shall be evinced, so in Isa. liii. is this 
covenant mentioned ; in which chapter there is this pro- 
phetical scheme ; the covenant between Father and Son, 
which was past, is spoken of as to come ; and the sufferings 
of Christ, which were to come, are spoken of as past, as ap- 
pears to every one that but reads the chapter. It is also 
signally ascribed to Christ's coming into the world: not 
constitutively, but declaratively. It is the greatest folly 
about such things as these, to suppose them then done, 
when revealed, though revealed in expressions of doing 
them. These things being premised, i proceed to manifest 
how this covenant is in the Scripture declared. 


Now this convention or agreement, as elsewhere, so it is 
most clearly expressed, Heb. x. from Psal. xl. ' Lo, I come 
to do thy will O God.' And what will? ver. 10. 'The will 
by which we are sanctified, through the offering of the body 
of Jesus once for all.' The will of God was, that Jesus 
should be offered ; and to this end, that we might be sancti- 
fied and saved : it is called the * offering of the body of Je- 
sus,' in answer to what was said before, ' a body hast thou 
prepared me ;' or a human nature, by a synecdoche. My 
will, says God the Father, is, that thou have a body, and 
that that body be offered up, and that to this end, that the 
children, the elect might be sanctified : says the Son to 
this, ' Lo, I am come to do thy will.' I accept of the con- 
dition, and give up myself to the performance of thy will. 

To make this more distinctly evident, the nature of such 
a compact, agreement, or convention, as depends on personal 
service, such as this, may be a little considered. 

There are five things required to the complete establish- 
ing and accomplishing of such a compact and agreement : 
1. That there be sundry persons, two at least, namely, a pro- 
miser and undertaker, agreeing'' voluntarily together in coun- 
sel and design, for the accomplishment, and bringing about 
some common end, acceptable to them both, so agreeing to- 
gether ; being both to do somewhat, that they are not other- 
wise obliged to do, there must be some common end agreed 
on by them, wherein they are delighted; and if they do not 
both voluntarily agree to what is on each hand incumbent 
to do, it is no covenant or compact, but an imposition of one 
upon the other. 

2. That the person promising, who is the principal en- 
gager in the covenant, do require something at the hand of 
the other, to be done or undergone, wherein he is concerned. 
He is to prescribe something to him, which is the condition, 
whereon the accomplishment of the end aimed at, is to depend. 

3. That he make to him who doth undertake such pro- 
mises as are necessary for his supportment and encourage- 
ment, and which may fully balance in his judgment and 
esteem, all that is required of him, or prescribed to him. 

4. That upon the weighing, and consideration of the 

b Nee dari quicquam necesse est, ut substantiara capiat obligatio; scd sufficit eos 
qui negotia gerunt consentire. Institut. 1. 3, de oblig. ex consensu. 


condition and promise, the duty and reward prescribed and 
engaged for, as formerly mentioned, the undertaker do vo- 
luntarily address himself to the one, and expect the accom- 
plishment of the other. 

5. That the accomplishment of the condition, being^ 
pleaded by the undertaker, and approved by the promiser, 
the common end originally designed, be brought about and 

These five things are required, to the entering into, and 
complete accomplishment of such a covenant, convention, 
or agreement, as is built on personal performances ; and 
they are all eminently expressed in the Scripture, to be found 
in the compact between the Father and the Son, whereof we 
speak, as upon the consideration of the severalswill appear. 

On the account of these things, found at least virtually 
and effectually, in this agreement of the Father and Son, we 
call it a covenant ; not with respect to the Latin word * fas- 
dus,' and the precise use of it, but to the Hebrew nn3, and 
the Greek SmSr/jicr;, whose signification and use alone is to be 
attended to, in the business of any covenant of God ; and in 
what a large sense they are used, is known to all that under- 
stand them, and have made inquiry into their import. The 
rise of the word ' fcedus,'is properly paganish and supersti- 
tious ; and the legal use of it, strict to a mutual engagement, 
upon valuable considerations ; the form of its entrance, by 
the sacrifice and killing of a hog, is related in Polybius, 
Livius, Virgil, and others. The general words used in it 
were;** ' Ita fcede me percutiat magnus Jupiter, utfoede hunc 

<^ "OTTEp iTTfoa-p^Ea-fljjv (Toi, i'X}ti Wf oo-JiKTov ; iX'^' Formula Jur. institut. lib. 3. c. 
Tollitur. §. item per. Numerius Nigidius iiiterrogavit Aulum Augerium : Quicquid 
tibi liodierno die, per aquilianam stipulationem spopondi, id ne orane babes accep- 
tum. Respondit Aulus Aiigerius, habeo, acceptumque tuli. ibid. 

^ FaecialJs sumpto in manibus lapide, postquam de foedere inter partes convenerat, 
haec verba dixit. Si recte ac sine dolomalo, hoc foedus atque hoc jusjurandum facio, 
dii mibi cuncta felicia praestent; sin aliter aut ago, aut cogito, CEeteris omnibus salvis, 
in propriis legibus, in propriis laribus, in propriis templis, in propriis sepulchris, solus 
ego pereara, ut hie lapis de manibus raeis decidet. Polyb. lib. 3. Audi Jupiter, audi 
pater patrate, ut ilia palam prima postrema, ex illis tabulis recitata sunt sine dolo 
malo, utque ea his hodie rectissime intellecta sunt; illis legibus populus Romanus 
prior noil deficiel; si prior defecerit publico consilio, dolo malo, tu ille diespiter, po- 
pulum Romanum sic ferito, ut ego hunc porcum hodie feriara; tantoque magis ferito 
quanto magis potes, pollesque id ubi dixit, porcum saxo silice percussit. Livius. 
Armati, Jovis ante aras, paterasque tenentes 
Stabant : et cjesa jungebant fcedera porca. — Virg. JEn. viii. 640. 

Ad quern locum Servius : foedera dicta s\mt, a porca fosde ct crudeliter occisa : 
nam cum ante gladiis configeretnr, a fecialibus inventum,ut silice feriretur, ea causa 
quod antiquum Jovis signum, lapidis silicera putaveruiit esse. 


porcum macto, si pactum foederis non servavero,' whence is 
that phrase of one in danger ; * sto inter sacrum et saxum.' 
The hog being killed with a stone ; so 'fcedus' is ' a feriendo.' 
Though sometimes even that word be used in a very 
large sense, for any orderly disposed government ; as in the 
poet : 

Regemque dedit, qui foedere certo 

Et preniere, et laxas sciret dare jussus habenas, &c. — Virg. ^n. 1. 62. 

But unto the signification and laws hereof, in this business, 
we are not bound : it sufficeth for our present intendment, 
that the things mentioned be found virtually in this com- 
pact, which they are. 

1. There are the Father and the Son, as distinct persons 
agreeing together in counsel, for the accomplishment of 
the common end ; the glory of God, and the salvation of the 
elect. The end is expressed, Heb. ii. 9, 10. xii. 1. Now 
thus it was, Zech. vi. 13. and the ' counsel of peace shall be 
between them both,' ^' inter ambos ipsos.' That is the two 
persons spoken of, not the two offices there intimated, that 
shall meet in Christ ; and who are these ? The Lord Jehovah, 
who speaks, and the man whose name is nQlf the ' branch,' 
ver. 12. who is to ' do all the great things' there mentioned. 
*He shall grow up,' &c. But the counsel of peace, the de« 
sign of our peace, is between them both ; they have agreed 
and consented to the bringing about of our peace. Hence 
is that name of the Son of God, Isa. ix. 6. ' Wonderful Coun- 
sellor.' It is in reference to the business there spoken of, 
that he is so called. This is expressed at the beginning of 
the verse ; ' to us a child is born, to us a Son is given ;' to 
what end that was is known ; namely, that he might be a 
Saviour or a Redeemer ; whence he is afterward called the 
' everlasting Father, the Prince of peace ;' that is, a Father 
to his church and people, in everlasting mercy ; the grand 
Author of their peace, that procured it for them, and es 
tablished it unto them. Now as to this work, that he who 
is nnj ^K * the mighty God,' might be \r\i p * a Son given, a 
Child born ;' and carry on a work of mercy and peace to- 
wards his church, is he called the wonderful Counsellor, as 
concurring in the counsel and design of his Father, and with 
him, to this end and purpose. Therefore, when he comes to 


suffer in the carrying on of this work, God calls him his fel- 
low, Tl'Di^, my ' neighbour' in counsel and advise, as David 
describes*^ his fellow or companion ; Psal. Iv. 14. ' We took 
sweet counsel too^ether.' He was the fellow of the Lord of 
hosts, on this account that they took counsel together about 
the work of our salvation to the glory of God. Prov. viii. 
21 to 31. makes this evident : that it is the Lord Jesus Christ, 
the eternal word, and wisdom of the Father, who is here in- 
tended, was before evinced. What then is here said of him? 
* I was daily the delight of God, rejoicing before him, re- 
joicing in the habitable parts of the earth, and my delight 
was in the sons of men.' When was this, that the wisdom 
of God the ]7ather did so rejoice before him, on the account 
of the sons of men, ver. 24, 25. ' When there was no depth, 
when there were no fountains abounding with water, before 
the mountains were settled,' &c. * whilst as yet he had not 
made the earth,' 8ic. But how could this be ? Namely, by 
the counsel of peace, that was between them both, which is 
the delight of the soul of God, and wherein both Father 
and Son rejoice. 

The first thing then is manifest ; that there was a volun- 
tary concurrence, and distinct consent of the Father and 
Son, for the accomplishment of the work of our peace, and 
bringing us to God. 

2. For the accomplishment of this work, the Father who 
is principal in the covenant, the promiser, whose love * sets 
all on work,' as is frequently expressed in the Scripture, re- 
quires of the Lord Jesus Christ his Son, that he shall do that 
which upon consideration of his justice, glory, and honour, 
was necessary to be done, for the bringing about the end 
proposed ; prescribing to him a law for the performance 
thereof; which is called his will so often in Scripture. 

What it was that was required, is expressed both nega- 
tively and positively. 

1. Negatively, that he should not do, or bring about this 
work, by any of those sacrifices that had been appointed to 
make atonement ' suo more,' and to typify out what was by him 
really to be performed. This the Lord Jesus professeth at 
the entrance of his work when he addresses himself to the 
doing of that which was indeed required. ' Sacrifice and 

f Zech. xiii. 7, 


burnt-ofFerings, &c. thou wouldest not have.' He was not to 
offer any of the sacrifices that had been offered before, as at 
large hath been recounted : it was the will of GoO that by 
them, he, and what he was to do, should be shadowed out 
and represented; whereupon, at his coming to his work, 
they were all to be abrogated. Nor was he to bring silver 
or gold for our redemption, according to the contrivance of 
the poor convinced sinner, Mic. vii. 6. but he was to tender 
God another manner of price ; 1 Pet. i. 18. 

He was to do that which the old sacrifices could not do, 
as hath been declared. 'For it was not possible that the 
blood of bulls and goats should take away sins;' Heb. x.5. 
acpaipHv ainapriag, quod supra a^tTuv et ava(j)ip£iv est extin- 
guere peccata, sive facere ne ultra peccetur; id sanguis 
Christi facit, tumquiafidem in nobis parit, tum quiaChristo 
jus dat nobis auxilia necessaria impetrandi.' Grot, in Loo. 
Falsely and injuriously to the blood of Christ. ^A(j}aipHv 
afiapriag, is no where in the Scripture, to cause men to ' cease 
to sin ;' it never respects properly what is to come, but what 
is past. The apostle treats not of sanctification, but of jus- 
tification. The taking away of sins he insists on, is such, 
as that the sinner should no more be troubled in conscience 
for the guilt of them : ver. 2. The typical taking away of 
sins by sacrifices, was by making atonement with God prin- 
cipally, not by turning men from sin, which yet was a con- 
sequent of them. The blood of Christ takes away sin, as to 
their guilt, by justification, and not only as to their filthy 
sanctification. This purification also by blood, he expounds 
in his annotations, chap. ix. 14. 'Sanguini autem purgatio 
ista tribuitur, quia per sanguinem, id est, mortem Christi, 
secuto ejus excitatione, etevectione, gignitur in nobis fides,' 
Rom. iii. 25. * quae deinde fides corda purgat.' Acts xv. 19. 
The meaning of these words is evident to all that have their 
senses exercised in these things. The aversion of the ex- 
piation of our sins, by the way of satisfaction and atonement, 
is that which is aimed at. Now because the annotator saw, 
that the comparison insisted on with the sacrifices of old, 
would not admit of this gloss. He adds, ' Similitudo autem 
purgationis legalis, et evangelicse, non est in modo purgandi 
sed ineffectu.' Than which nothing is more false, nor more 
directly contrary to the apostle's discourse, chap. ix. x. 


2. Positively, and here, to lay aside the manner how he 
was to do it, which relates to his office of priest, and prophet, 
and king, the conditions imposed upon him may be referred 
to three heads. 

1. That he should take on him the nature of those, whom 
he was to bring to God. This is as it were prescribed to 
him ; Heb. x. 5. *a body hast thou prepared me ;' or ' ap- 
pointed,' that I should be made flesh, take a body therein to 
do thy will. And the apostle sets out the infinite love of 
the Son of God, in that he condescended to this inexpres- 
sible exinanition, and eclipsing of his glory ; Phil. ii. 6, 7. 
'being in the form of God, and equal to God, he made him- 
self of no reputation, but took upon him the form of a ser- 
vant, and was made in the likeness of man;' or made a man. 
He did it upon his Father's prescription, and in pursuit of 
what God required at his hands. Hence it is said, * God 
sent forth his Son, made of a woman ;' Gal. iv. 4. and ' God 
sent his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh ;' Rom, viii. 
3. and properly in answer to this of the Fatt^er's appointing 
him a body, is it that the Son answers, ' Lo I come to do 
thy will.' I will do it, I will undertake it ; that the great 
desirable end may be brought about, as we shall see after- 
ward. So Heb. xiv. 15. And though I see no sufficient 
reason of relinquishing the usual interpretation of (TTrtpjUaToc 
A(5paafx £7riXaju/3avtrat, Heb. ii. 16, yet if it be ' apprehendit,' 
and expressive of the effect ; not ' assumpsit,' relating to the 
way of his yielding us assistance and deliverance, the same 
thing is intimated. 

2. That in this 'body' or human nature, he should be a 
* servant,' or yield obedience ; hence God calls him his ser- 
vant ; Isa. xlii. 1. 'Behold my servant whom I uphold,' 
and that this was also the condition prescribed to him, our 
Saviour acknowledges ; Isa. xlix. 5. ' Now saith the Lord 
that formed me from the womb to be his servant ;' and in 
pursuit hereof, Christ takes upon him the ' form of a servant; 
Phil. ii. 6. and this is his perpetual profession, ' I come to do 
the will of him that sent me.' 

' And this commandment I have received of my Father.' 
So ' though he were a Son yet learned he obedience.' All 
along in the carrying on of his work he professes that 
this condition was by his Father prescribed him, that he 


should be his servant, and yield him obedience, in the work 
he had in hand. Hence be says, his Father is '^greater than 
he,' not only in respect of his humiliation, but also in respect 
of the dispensation whereunto he as the Son of God sub- 
mitted himself to perform his will, and yield him obedience. 
And this God declares to be the condition whereon he will 
deliver man;'' Job xxxiii. 23. If there be a messenger (a 
servant) one of a thousand to undertake for him, it shall be 
so, I will say, deliver man ; otherwise not. 

3. That he should suffer and undergo what in justice is 
due to him, that he was to deliver. A hard and great pre- 
scription ; yet such as must be undergone, that there may 
be a consistence of the justice and truth of God, with the 
salvation of man. This is plainly expressed Isa. liii. 10. 

* When thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin,' or rather 
•*if his soul shall make an offering for sin, then he shall see 
his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the 
Lord shall prosper in his hands.' As if he should say, if 
this work be brought about, and if the counsel of peace which 
we have consented in, be carried on, if my pleasure therein 
be to prosper, thou must make thy soul an offering for sin. 
And that this was required of our Saviour, himself fully ex- 
presses even in his agony, when praying for the removal of 
the cup, he submits to the drinking of it, in these words: 

* Thy will O Father be done ;' this is that, which thou wilt 
have me do ; which thou hast prescribed unto me, even that 
' I drink of this cup,' wherein he ' tasted of death,' and which 
comprised the whole of his sufferings; and this is the third 
thing in this convention and agreement. 

4. Promises are made upon the supposition of under- 
taking that which was required ; and these of all sorts, that 
might either concern the person that did undertake, or the 
accomplishment of the work that he did undertake. 

1. For the person himself that was to undertake, or the 
Lord Jesus Christ, seeing there was much difficulty, and 
great opposition to be passed through, in what he was to do 
and undergo ; promises of the assistance of his Father by his 
presence with him, and carrying him through all perplexities 
and trials, are given to him in abundance. Some of these 
you have Isa. xlii. 4. * He shall not faint, nor be discouraged, 
e John xiv. 28. '' Vid. Cocceiuin in locum. \ W33 Dirx a-irn DK 


until he hath set judgment in the earth.' And ver. 6. ' I the 
Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thy 
hand, and will keep thee, and give thee a covenant of the 
people.' Whatever opposition thou mayst meet withal, I 
will hold tljee, and keep thee, and preserve thee, * I will not 
leave thy soul in hell, nor suffer thine holy one to see cor- 
ruption ;' Psal. xvi. 3. So Psal. Ixxxix. 28. ' My mercy will 
I keep for him evermore, and my covenant shall stand fast 
with him.' And hence was our blessed Saviour's confidence 
in his greatest trial. Isa. 1. 5 — 9. ver, 5, 6. our Saviour ex- 
presses his undertakmg, and what he suffered herein, ver. 7 
— 9. The assistance that he was promised of his Father in 
this great trial, on the account whereof he despises all his 
enemies with full assurance of success ; even upon the Fa- 
ther's engaged promise of his presence with him. This is 
the first sort of promises made to Christ in this convention, 
which concern himself directly ; that he should not be for- 
saken in his work, but carried through, supported, and up- 
held, until he were come forth to full success, and had sent 
' forth judgment into victory.' Hence in his greatest trial, 
he makes his address to God himself, on the account of these 
promises, to be delivered from that ' which he feared ;' Heb. 
V, 7. Who in the days, &c. So Psal. Ixxxix. 27, 28. 

2. There were promises in this compact that concerned 
the work itself, that Christ undertook; namely, that if he 
did what was required of him, not only that he should be 
preserved in it, but also, that the work itself should thrive 
and prosper in his hand. So Isa. liii. 10, 11. 'When thou 
shalt make/ &:c. Whatever he aimed at is here promised to 
be accomplished ; the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper ; 
the design of Father and Son for the accomplishment of our 
salvation, shall prosper. He shall * see his seed,' a seed of 
believers shall be raised up, that shall * prolong their days ;' 
that is, the seed shall prolong, or continue whilst the sun 
and moon endure : all the elect shall be justified and saved. 
Satan shall be conquered, and the spoil delivered from him. 
And this our Saviour comforts himself withal in his ' great- 
est distress;' Psal. xxii, 30, 31. and for this glory that 'was 
set before him,' the glory of 'bringing many sons to glory/ 
that was promised to him, * He despised the shame and en- 
dured the cross; Heb. xii. 2. So also Isa. xlii. 1, 2. 


And this is the third thing in this compact, he who pre- 
scribes the hard conditions of incarnation, obedience, and 
death, doth also make the glorious promises of preservation, 
protection, and success. And to make these promises the 
more eminent, God confirms them solemnly by an oath ; he 
is consecrated an high-priest for evermore, by the 'word of 
the oath ;' Heb. vii. 28. ' The Lord sware and will not re- 
pent, thou art a priest for ever,' &c. 

4. The Lord Jesus Christ accepts of the condition and 
the promise, and voluntarily undertakes the work. Psal. iv. 
7, 8. ' Then said I, lo, I come to do thy will, yea, I delight 
to do thy will, O my God ; yea, thy law is within my heart.' 
He freely, willingly, cheerfully, undertakes to do and suffer 
whatever it was the will of his Father that he should do, or 
suffer, for the bringing about the common end aimed at. He 
undertakes to be the Father's servant in this work. And 
says to the Lord, 'thou art my Lord ;' Psal. xvi. 2. thou art 
he, to whom I am to yield obedience, to submit to thee in 
this work. ' Mine ear hast thou bored, and I am thy ser- 
vant.' I am not rebellious, I do not withdraw from it; Isa. 
L 8. Hence the apostle tells us that this mind was in him ; 
that whereas he was in the ' form of God, he humbled him- 
self to the death of the cross ;' Phil. ii. 8. and so by his own 
voluntary consent he came under the law of the Mediator, 
which afterward as he would not, so he could not decline. 
He made himself surety of the covenant, and so was to pay 
what he never took. He voluntarily engaged himself into 
this sponsion ; but when he had so done, he was legally sub- 
ject to all that attended it ; when he had put his name into 
the obligation, he became responsible for the whole debt, 
and all that he did or suffered, comes to be called obedience 
which relates to the law that he was subject to : having en- 
gaged himself to his Father, and said to the Lord, * Thou art 
my Lord, lo, I come to do thy will.' 

5. The fifth and last thing is, that on the one side, the 
promiser do approve and accept of the performance of the 
condition prescribed, and the undertaker demand, and lay 
claim to the promises made, and thereupon the common 
end designed be accomplished and fulfilled. All this also 
is fully manifest in this compact or convention. God the 
Father he accepts of the performance of what was to the 


Son prescribed. This God fully declares Isa. xlix. 5, 6. 
' And now saith the Lord that formed me from the womb to 
be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, though Israel 
be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the 
Lord, and my God shall be my strength. And he said, it is 
a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the 
tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel : I will 
also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest 
be my salvation to the ends of the earth.' And eminently ver. 
8, 9. ' Thus saith the Lord, in an acceptable time have I 
heard thee; and in a day of salvation have I helped thee and 
I will preserve thee and give thee for a covenant of the 
people, to establish the earth to cause to inherit the deso- 
late heritages. That thou mayest say to the prisoners go 
forth ; to them that are in darkness shew yourselves/ &.c. 
Now I have been with thee and helped thee in thy work and 
thou hast performed it, now thou shalt do all that thy heart, 
desires according to my promise. Hence that which was 
originally spoken of the eternal generation of the Son ; Psal. 
ii. 7. ' Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee, is 
applied by the apostle to his resurrection from the dead. 
Acts xiii. 33. ' God hath fulfilled his word unto us, in that 
he hath raised up Jesus from the dead,' as it is also written 
in Psal. ii. * Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.' 
That is, God by the resurrection from the dead, gloriously 
manifested him to be his Son, whom he loved, in whom he 
was well pleased, and who did all his pleasure. So Rom, i. 4. 
' He was declared to be the Son of God with power, by the 
resurrection from the dead.' Then was he declared to be 
the Son of God. God approving and accepting the work 
he had done, loosed the pains of death, and raised him 
again, manifesting to all the world his approbation and ac- 
ceptation of him and his work. Whence he immediately 
says to him, Psal. ii. 8. ' Ask of me, and I will give thee the 
heathen for thine inheritance ;' now ask what thou wilt, 
whatever I have promised, whatever thou didst, or couldest 
expect upon thy undertaking this' work, it shall be done, it 
shall be granted thee. And, ^ 

2. Christ accordingly makes his demand solemnly on 
earth, and in heaven; on earth John xvii. throughout the 
whole chapter is the demand of Christ, for the accomplish- 


ment of the whole compact, and all the promises that were 
made to him, when he undertook to be a Saviour, both 
which concerned himself and his church; see ver. 1.4 — 6. 
9. 12 — 16, &c. and in heaven also ; he is gone into the pre- 
sence of God, there to appear for us, Heb. ix. 24. and is able 
to ' save to the uttermost them that came to God by him, 
seeing he liveth for ever, to make intercession for them ;' 
Heb. vii. 25. not as in the days of his flesh, with strong 
cries and supplications, but by virtue of his oblation, lay- 
ing claim to the promised inheritance in our behalf. And, 

3. The whole work is accomplished, and the end in- 
tended brought about; for in the death of Christ he 
* finished the transgression and made an end of sin, and 
made reconciliation for iniquity, and brought in everlasting 
righteousness ;* Dan. ix. 24. and of sinful man, God says, 
deliver him, ' for I have found a ransom ;' Job xxxiii. 24. 
Hence our reconciliation, justification, yea, our salvation, 
are in the Scripture spoken of, as things actually done and 
accomplished, in the death and bloodsaedding of Jesus 
Christ, not as though we were all then actually justified 
and saved, but upon the account of the certainty of the per- 
formance, and accomplishment of those things in their due 
time towards us, and upon us, are these things so delivered; 
for in reference to the undertaking of Christ in this cove- 
nant, is he called the second Adam, becoming a common 
head to his people, with this difference ; that Adam was a 
common head to all that came of him, necessarily, and as I 
may so say, naturally, and whether he would or no ; 'Christ 
is so to his, voluntarily, and by his own consent and under- 
taking, as hath been demonstrated ; now as we all die in 
Adam federally and meritoriously, yet the several indivi- 
duals are not in their persons actually dead in sin, and ob- 
noxious to eternal death, before they are by natural gene- 
ration united to Adam, their first head ; so, though all the 
elect be made alive, and saved federally and meritoriously, 
in the death of Christ, wherein also a certain foundation is 
laid of that efficacy, which works all these things in us, and 
for us, yet we are not viritim made partakers of the good 
things mentioned, before we are united to Christ, by the 
communication of his Spirit to us. 

And this, 1 say, is the covenant and compact, that was 

VOL. IX. i< 


between Father and Son, which is the great foundation of 
what hath been said, and shall farther be spoken, about the 
merit and satisfaction of Christ ; here lies the ground of the 
righteousness of the dispensation treated of; that Christ 
should undergo the piinishment due to us, it was done vo- 
luntarily of himself; and he did nothing but what he had 
power to do, and command from his Father to do ; 'I have 
power,' saith he, * to lay down my life, and power to take it 
again ; this command have I received of my Father ;' where- 
by the glory both of the love, and justice of God is exceed- 
ingly exalted. And, 

1. This stops the mouth of the Socinian clamour, con- 
cerning tlie unrighteousness of one man's suffering per- 
sonally, for another man's sin. It is true, it is so ; if these 
men be not in such relation to one another, that what one 
doth or suffereth, the other may be accounted to do or suf- 
fer ; but it is no unrighteousness, if the hand offend, that the 
head be smitten ; but Christ is our head, we are his mem- 
bers. It is true, if he that suffereth hath not power over 
that wherein he suffers ; but Christ had power to lay down 
his life, and take it again. It is true, if he that is to suffer, 
or he that is to punish, be not willing, or agreed to the com- 
mutation ; but here Father and Son as hath been manifested, 
were fully agreed upon the whole matter. It may be true, 
if he who suffers cannot possibly be made partaker of any 
good afterward, that shall balance, and overweigh all his 
suffering; not, where the cross is endured, and the shame 
despised, for the glory proposed, or set before him, that 
suffers ; not where he is made law for a season, that he may 
be crowned with dignity and honour. And, 

2. This is the foundation of the merit of Christ. The 
apostle tells us, Rom. iv. 4. what merit is ; it is such an 
adjunct of obedience, as whereby the reward is reckoned, 
not of grace, but of debt. God having proposed a law fo; 
obedience unto Christ, with promises of such and such re 
wards, upon condition of fulfilling the obedience requireo • 
he performing that obedience, the reward is reckoned to 
him of debt, or he righteously merited whatever was so pro- 
mised to him. Though the compact was of grace, yet the 
reward is of debt. Look then whatever God promised 
Christ, upon his undertaking to be a Saviour, that, upon 


the fulfilling of his will, he merited ; that himself should be 
exalted, that he should be the head of his church, that he 
should see his seed, that he should justify and save them, 
sanctify and glorify them, was all promised to him ; all me- 
rited by him. But of this more afterward. 

Having thus fully considered the threefold notion of the 
death of Christ, as it was a price, a sacrifice, and a punish- 
ment, and discovered the foundation of righteousness in all 
this ; proceed we now to manifest, what are the proper ef- 
fects of the death of Christ, under this threefold notion ; 
now these also answerably are three. 

1. Redemption as it is a price. 

2. Reconciliation as it is a sacrifice. 

3. Satisfaction as it is a punishment. Upon which foun- 
dation, union with Christ, vocation, justification, sanctifica- 
tion, and glory are built. 

CHAP, xxvin. 

Of redemption by the death of Christ, as it was a price or ransom. 

Having given before the general notions of the death of 
Christ, as it is in Scripture proposed, all tending to mani- 
fest the way and manner of the expiation of our sins, and 
our delivery from the guilt and punishment due to them, it 
remains, that an accommodation of those several notions of 
it, be made particularly, and respectively, to the business in 

The first consideration proposed of the death of Christ, 
was of it, as a price ; and the issue and eflfect thereof, is 
redemption. Hence Christ is spoken of in the Old Testa- 
ment as a redeemer. Job xix. 25. * I know that my Redeemer 
lives;' the word there used is bHU whose rise and use is 
commonly known. 

^Kjis 'vindicare redimere,' tTriXafji^dvea^ai in Greek which 
is commonly used for * suum vindicare ;' 6ti av rig KcicXr/jue- 
voc Vj KOt jurjScic fTTtXajSrjrat, mv ovt(o Tig Iviavrbv briovv kekXtj- 

fxivoig jUTj l^t<TT(i) TOiovTOV Kr{]fiaTog eTr/XajStcrSrat fxridtv 

amX^ovTog Iviavrov. Plato de Legib. 12. And that may be 

L 2 


the sense of the word ETrtXajStro, if not in the effect, yet in 
the cause; Heb. ii.l6. 

The rise and use of this word, in this business of our 
deliverance by Christ we have. Lev. xxv.25.' if any of his kin 
come to redeem it.' 3"ipn )bki ' redimens illud propinquus ;' 
the next who is goel too, [goel is to] redeem it, or vindicate 
the possession out of morgage. On this account Boaz tells 
Ruth, that in respect of the possession of Elimelech, he was 
goel; Ruth iii. 13. a redeemer, which we have translated, a 
' kinsman,' because he was to do that office by right of pro- 
pinquity of blood, or nearness of kin, as is evident from the 
law before-mentioned. Christ coming to vindicate us into 
liberty, by his own blood, is called by Job his goel; so also 
is he termed ; Isa. xli. 14. -j'pNJ thy ' redeemer,' or thy next 
kinsman ; and chap, xliv, 6. in that excellent description 
of Christ, ver. 24. chap. xlvi. 4. xlviii. 17. xlix. 26. liv.5. 
lix. 20. Ix. 16. Ixiii. 16. and in sundry other places; nei- 
ther is the church of God at all beholding to some late ex- 
positors, who, to shew their skill in the Hebrew doctors, 
would impose upon us their interpretations, and make those 
expressions to signify deliverance in general, and to be re- 
ferred to God the Father, seeing that the rise of the use of 
the word plainly restrains the redemption intended, to the 
paying of a price for it, which was done only by Jesus 
Christ ; so Jer. xxxii. 7, 8. Hence they that looked for the 
Messiah, according to the promise, are said to look for, or 
to wait for Xvrpwcnv, ' redemption in Israel ;' Luke ii. 28. 
and in the accomplishment of the promise ; the apostle tells 
us, that Christ by his blood obtained for us eternal redemp- 
tion; Heb. ix. 12. and he having so obtained it, we are jus- 
tified freely by the grace of God, Sm rrjc diroXvTpwaeujg rrjc Iv 
Ypi<T7(o 'It/(7ou, by the redemption that is in Jesus Christ, Iv 
for 8ia, ' in him,' for, ' by him,' or wrought by him ; and this 
being brought home to us, we have redemption through his 
blood, even the forgiveness of sin ; Eph. i, 7. Col. i. 14. 
whence he is said to be 'made unto us,' cnroXvTpuymg, or 're- 
demption ;' 1 Cor. i. 30. 

How this is done, will be made evident, by applying of 
what is now spoken, to what was spoken of the death of 
Christ, as a price ; Christ giving himself or his life Xvr^oi' 
and dvTiXvTpov, a price of redemption, as hath been shewed. 


a ransom ; those for whom he did it, become to have Xv- 
rpbicTiv and dTroXvrpwaiv, redemption thereby, or deliverance 
from the captivity wherein they were. And our Saviour 
expresses particularly, how this was done as to both parts, 
Matt. XX. 28. He came dovvaiTrjv -ipvxnv Xvrpov avrl TroXAwv, 
that is, he came to be andvTi(j>vxog, one to stand in the room 
of others, and to give his life for them. 

To make this the more evident and clear, I shall give a 
description of redemption properly so called, and make ap- 
plication of it in the several parts thereof, unto that under 

Redemption is the deliverance of any one from bondage 
or captivity, and the misery attending that condition, by 
the intervention or interposition of a price or ransom, paid 
by the redeemer, to him by whose authority he is detained, 
that being delivered, he may be in a state of liberty, at the 
disposal of the redeemer. 

And this will comprise the laws of this redemption, which 
are usually given. They are on the. part of the redeemer. 

1 . ' Propinquus esto/ * Let him be near of kin.' 

2. ' Consanguinitatis jure redimito,' ' Let him redeem by 
right of consanguinity.' 

3. ' Injusto possessor] praedam eripito ;' ' Let him deliver 
the prey from the unjust possessor.' 

4. 'Huic pretium nullum solvito ;' 'to him let no price 
be paid.' 

5. ' Sanguinem pro redemptionis pretio vero domino of- 
ferto ;' ' Let him offer, or give his blood to the true Lord for 
a ransom, or price of redemption.' 

2." On the part of the redeemed. 

1. * Libertatis jure felix gaudeto ;' ' Let him enjoy his 

2. 'Servitutis jugiim ne iterum sponte suscipito ;' ' Let 
him not again willingly take on him the yoke of bondage.' 

3. * Deinceps servum se exhibeto redemptori;' * Let him 
in liberty be a servant to his redeemer.' 

The general parts of this description of redemption, So- 
cinus himself consents unto ; for whereas Covel had a little 
inconveniently defined ' to redeem,' saying, * Redimere ali- 
quem est debitum solvere creditoris ejus nomine, qui solven- 
do n on erat, sicque satisfacere creditori ;' which is a proper 


description of the payment of another man's debt, and not 
of his redemption. Socinus, correcting this mistake, affirms, 
that, ' Rediraere aliquem, nihil aliud proprie significat, quam 
qaptivum e manibus illius qui eum detinet pretio illi dato 
liberare.' * To redeem any one properly, signifies nothing 
else, but to deliver him out of his hands that detained him 
captive, by a price given to him who detained him.' Which 
as to the general nature of redemption, contains as much 
as vi^hat was before given in for the description of it ; (So- 
cin. de Jes. Christo Servatore, lib. 1. part. 2. cap. 1.) With 
the accommodation, therefore, of that description to the re- 
demption which we have by the blood of Christ, I shall pro- 
ceed : desiring the reader to remember, that if I evince the 
redemption we have by Christ to be proper, and properly so 
called, the whole business of satisfaction is confessedly 

1. The general nature of it consists in deliverance ; 
thence Christ is called 6 /ouo^uevoc/ the deliverer;' Rom. xi. 26. 
as it is written, * there shall come out of Sionthe deliverer;' 
the word in the prophet, Isa. lix. 20. is ^KJ that we may 
know what kind of deliverer Christ is ; a deliverer by re- 
demption : he gave himself for our sin, ottwc l^iXryrai r]fiag. 
Gal i. 4. * that he might deliver us :' he delivered us ; but it 
is by giving himself for our sin ; 1 Thess. i. 10. ' To wait for 
his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead ;' 
'Itjo-owv Tov pvofJievov J^juac ottot^c opyrigTrig £p\Ofitv^g, 'Jesus, 
who delivered us from the wrath to come ;' so Luke i. 74. 
Rom. vii. 6. Heb. ii. 15. Col. i. 13. 

Now as redemption, because its general nature consists 
in deliverance, is often expressed thereby ; so deliverance, 
because it hath the effect of redemption, is, or may be called 
redemption, though it be not properly so, but agree in the 
end, and effect only : thence Moses is said to be XvTptoTrjg, 
Acts vii. 35. tovtov b Gcoc apxovra koX \vTp(i)Triv aTriareiXev' 
' Him did God send a prince, and a redeemer :' that is, a de- 
liverer ; one whom God used for the deliverance of his 
people. And because what he did, even the delivery of his 
people out of bondage, agreed with redemption in its end, 
the work itself it called redemption, and he is termed therein 
a redeemer, though it was not a direct redemption that he 
wrought ; no ransom being paid for delivery. 


It is pleaded, that God being said to redeem his people 
in sundry places in the Old Testament, which he could not 
possibly do, by a ransom, therefore the redemption men- 
tioned in the Scripture, is metaphorical ; a mere deliverance : 
and such is also that we have by Christ without the inter- 
vention of any price. 

2. Moses, who was a type of Christ and a redeemer, who 
is so often said to redeem the people, yet as it is known, did 
it without any ransom, by a mere deliverance ; therefore did 
Christ so also. 

Not to trouble the reader with repetition of words, this 
is the sum of what is pleaded by the Racovian catechism to 
prove our redemption by Christ, not to be proper, but meta- 
phorical, and so consequently that no satisfaction can be 
thence evinced. 

* E verbo redimendi non posse efRci satisfactionem banc 
hinc est planum, quod de ipso Deo in novo et in prisco 
fcedere scribitur, eum redimisse populum suum ex Egypto, 
eum fecisse redemptionem populo suo ; quod Moses fuerit 
redemptor, Act. vii. 35. Vox ideo redemptionis, simpli- 
citer liberationem denotat.' Rac. Catec. cap. 8. de Christo. 

And indeed what there they speak is the sum of the plea 
of Socinus as to this part of our description of redemption : 
* de Jesu Christo Servatore,' lib. i. part. 2. cap. 1,2, 3. 

To remove these difficulties (if they may be so called) I 
shall only tender the ensuing considerations. 

1. That because redemption is sometimes to betaken 
metaphorically for mere deliverance, when it is spoken of 
God without any mention of a price or ransom, in such cases 
as wherein it was impossible that a ransom should be paid, 
(as in the deliverance of the children of Israel from Epypt 
and Pharaoh), when it is expressly said to be done by* power, 
and outstretched arm, therefore it must be so understood, 
when it is spoken of Christ the Mediator, with express men- 
tion of a price or ransom, and when it was impossible but 
that a ransom must be paid, is a loose consequence, not de- 
serving any notice. 

2. That all the places of Scripture, where mention is 
made of God being a redeemer, and redeeming his people, 
may be referred unto these heads : 

a Deut.iv. 34. 


1. Such as call God the redeemer of his church in gene- 
ral, as the places before-mentioned ; and these are all to be 
referred immediately to the Son of God (the manner of his 
redemption being described in the New Testament), and so 
proper redemption is intended in them ; Isa. liv. 5, 6. with 
Eph. V. 25, 26. 

2. Such as mention some temporal deliverance, that was 
typical of the spiritual redemption, which we have by Jesus 
Christ ; and it it called redemption, not so much from the 
general nature of deliverance, as from its pointing out to us 
that real and proper redemption, that was typified by it. 
Such was God's redeeming his people out of Egypt. So 
there is no mention of redemption in the Scripture, but 
either it is proper, or receives that appellation from its re- 
lation to that which is so. 

3. This is indeed a very wretched and cursed way of 
interpreting Scripture, especially those passages of it which 
set out the grace of God, and the love of Christ to us ; 
namely, to do it by way of diminution, and lessening ; God 
takes and uses this word that is of use amongst men ; namely, 
of redemption : saith he, * Christ hath redeemed you with 
his own blood, he hath laid down a price for you :' for men 
to come and interpret this, and say he did it not properly, 
it was not a complete redemption, but metaphorical, a bare 
deliverance, is to blaspheme God and the work of his love 
and grace. It is a safe rule of interpreting Scripture, that 
in places mentioning the love and grace of God to us, the 
words are to be taken in their utmost significancy. It is a 
thing most unworthy a good and wise man, to set out his 
kindness and benefits with great swelling words, of mighty 
weight and importance, which when the things signified by 
them come to be considered, must be interpreted by way of 
minoration ; nor will any worthy man do so. Much less can 
it be once imagined, that God has expressed his love and 
kindness, and the fruits of it to us, in great and weighty 
words, that in their ordinary use and significancy contain a 
great deal more than really he hath done ; for any one so to 
interpret what he hath spoken, is an abomination into which 
I desire my soul may never enter. 

What the redemption of a captive is, and how it is 
brought about we know, God tells us, that Christ hath 


redeemed us, and that with his own blood. Is it not better 
to believe the Lord, and venture our souls upon it, than to 
go to God and say, * this thou hast said, indeed ; but it is an 
improper and metaphorical redemption, a deliverance that 
we have V The truth is, it is so far from truth, that God hath 
delivered the work of his grace, and our benefit thereby, in 
the death of Christ, in words too big in their proper signi- 
fication for the things themselves, that no words whatever 
are sufficient to express it and convey it to our understand- 

3. That Moses, who was a type of Christ in the work 
of redemption, and is called a redeemer, did redeem the 
people without the proper payment of a valuable ransom ; 
therefore Christ did so also ; to conclude thus, I say, is to 
say, that the type and things typified must in all things be 
alike ; yea, that a similitude between them in that wherein 
their relation consists, is not enough to maintain their rela- 
tion, but there must be such an identity as in truth over- 
throws it. Christ tells us, that the brazen serpent was a 
type of him; John iii. 14. ' As Moses lifted up the brazen 
serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be 
lifted up ;' now if a man should thence argue, that because 
the brazen serpent was only lifted up, not crucified, nor did 
shed his blood, therefore Christ was not crucified, nor shed 
his blood, would he be attended unto ? The like may be 
said of Jonas, who was alive in the belly of the whale, when 
he was a type of Christ, being dead in the earth ; in the ge- 
nei-al nature of deliverance from captivity, there was an 
agreement in the corporeal deliverance of Moses and the 
spiritual of Christ, and here was the one a type of the other ; 
in the manner of their accomplishment, the one did not re- 
present the other ; the one being said expressly to be done 
by power, the other by a ransom. 

2. It is the delivery of one in captivity ; till men consi- 
dered in the state of sin, and alienation from God, are in 
captivity. Hence they are said to be captives, and to be 
bound in prison ; Isa. Ixi. 1. and the work of Christ is to 
bring the prisoners out of prison, and them that sit in dark- 
ness (that is in the dungeon), out of the prison house ; Isa. 
xlii. 7. he saysto the prisoners 'go forth,' to them thatare in 
darkness, * shew yourselves ;'chap. xlix. 9. as it is eminently 


expressed ; Zech. ix. 11, 'As for thee also by the blood of 
the covenant I have sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit 
wherein there is no water.' Here are prisoners, prisoners 
belonging to the daughter of Sion, for unto them, the church, 
bespeaks, ver. 9. * Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Sion;' 
those other sheep of the fold of Christ not yet gathered 
when this promise was given, are spoken of. And they are 
in the pit wherein there is no water ; a pit for security to 
detain them, that they may not escape : and without water, 
that they may in it find no refreshment. How are these 
prisoners delivered ? By the blood of this covenant, of 
whom he speaks ; see ver. 9. ' Behold thy king cometh unto 
thee: he is just, and having salvation ; lowly, and riding 
upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.' It is a 
description of Christ when he rode to Jerusalem, to seal and 
confirm the covenant for the deliverance of the prisoners 
with his own blood ; which is therefore called the blood of 
the covenant, with which he was sanctified ; Heb. x. 29. 
Hence in the next verse, 'prisoners of hope' is a description 
of the elect; Zech. ix. 12. 

So also are they called captives expressly, Isa. xlix. 25. 
* Thus saith the Lord, even the captives of the mighty shall 
be taken away, and the prey of the terrible shall be delivered ;' 
those who were in their captivity a prey to Satan, that 
mighty and cruel one, shall be delivered ; and who shall do 
this ? ' The Lord thy Saviour, and thy Redeemer, the mighty 
one of Jacob;' ver. 26. He proclaims liberty to the captives ; 
Isa. Ixvii. 1. Luke iv. 18. And this is given in as the great 
fruit of the death of Christ, that upon his conquest of it 
he led 'captivity captive;' Psal. Ixviii. 18. Eph. iv. 8. that 
is, either captivity actively, Satan who held and detained 
his in captivity; or passively, those who were in captivity to 

Thus being both prisoners and captives, they are said to 
be in bondage ; Christ gives us liberty from that yoke of 
bondage ; Gal. v. 1. and men are in bondage by reason of 
death all their days; Heb. ii. 14. There is, indeed, nothing 
that the Scripture more abounds in, than this, that men in 
the state of sin are in prison, captivity, and bondage ; are 
captives, prisoners and slaves. 

Concerning this two things are considerable. 


1. The cause of men's bondage and captivity, deserving, 
or procuring it. 

2. The efficient principal cause cf it, to whom they are 
in captivity. 

For the first (as it is known) it is sin. To all this bond- 
age and captivity men are sold by sin. In this business sin 
is considered two ways. 

1. As a debt, whereof God is the creditor. Our Saviour 
hath taught us to pray for the forgiveness of our sins under 
that notion. Matt. vi. 12. a^tc vixiv to. 6(p£i\{]fiaTari/xwv, 'remit 
to us our debts ;' and in the parable of the Lord and his ser- 
vants. Matt, xviii. 27 — 29. he calls it, to davsiov, ver. 27. 
and TO o^u\6fiivov, ver. 30. ' due debt;' all which he ex- 
pounds by TrapaTTTWjuara, ver. 35. 'offences or transgressions.' 
Debt makes men liable to prison for non-payment, and so doth 
sin (without satisfaction made) to the prison of hell. So our 
Saviour expresses it. Matt. v. 25, 26. ' Agree quickly with 
thine adversary, whiles thou art in the way with him ; lest 
at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the 
judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. 
Verily I say unto thee, thou shalt by no means come out 
thence, till thou hast paid the utmost farthing.' On this ac- 
count, 1. Are men prisoners for sin: they are bound in 
the prison-house, because they have wasted the goods of 
their master, and contracted a debt that they are no way 
able to pay : and if it be not paid for them, there they must 
lie to eternity. All mankind was cast into prison, for that 
great debt they contracted in Adam, in their trustee ; being- 
there instead of making any earnings to pay the debt already 
upon them by the law, they contract more, and increase 
thousands of talents. But this use of the word debt and 
prison, applied to sin and punishment, is metaphorical. 

2. As a crime, rebellion, transgression against God, the 
great governor, and judge of all the world. The criminal- 
ness, rebellion, transgression, the disobedience that is in sin, 
is more or less expressed by all the words in the original, 
whereby any sins are signified and called : now for sin con- 
sidered as rebellion, are men cast into prison, captivity and 
bondage, by way of judicial process and punishment. 

2. For the principal cause of this captivity and imprison- 
ment, it is God : For, 


1. He is the creditor to whom these debts are due. Matt. vi. 
12. 'Our Father which art in heaven, forgive us our debts ;' 
it is to him that we stand indebted the ten thousand talents ; 
'against thee only have I sinned,' says David, Psal. li. 4. 
God hath intrusted us with all we have to sin by, or withal; 
he hath lent it us, to lay out for his glory, our spending of 
what we have received upon our lusts, is running into debt 
unto God ; though he doth not reap where he did not sow, 
yet he requires his principal with advantage. 

2. And properly, he is the great King, Judge, and Go- 
vernor of the world, who hath given his law, the rule of our 
obedience ; and every transgression thereof is a rebellion 
against him. Hence, to sin, is to rebel, and to transgress, 
and to be perverse, to turn aside from the way, to cast oiF 
the yoke of the Lord, as it is every where expressed. God 
is the law-giver, James iv. 12. ' who is able to kill and to de- 
stroy' for the transgression of it; it is his law which is broken, 
and upon the breach whereof, he says, 'cursed be every one 
that hath so done ;' Deut. xxix. 29. He is the judge of all 
the earth ; Gen. xviii. 25, 26. yea, ' the Lord is judge himself,' 
Psal, 1. 6. and we shall be judged by his law; James ii.lO — 12. 
and his judgment is, * that they that commit sin are worthy 
of death ;' Rom. i. 32. and he is the 'king for ever and ever.' 
Psal. X. 16. He reigneth and executeth judgment. Now who 
should commit the rebel that offends ? who should be the 
author of the captivity, and imprisonment of the delinquent, 
but he who is the king, judge, and law-maker? 

3. He doth actually do it; Rom. xi. 32. Svv£KX£t<TE oQeog 
TovQ rravTa^ eig aTTH^eiav' ' God hath shut up all under disobe- 
dience :' he hath laid them up close prisoners, for their dis- 
obedience : and they shall not go out, until satisfaction be 
made. In the parable. Matt, xviii. of the lord or master, 
and his servants, this is evident ; and Matt. v. 25. it is the 
judge, that delivers the man to the officer, to be cast into . 
prison. Look who it is that shall inflict the final punish- 
ment upon the captives, if a ransom be not paid for them ; 
he it is, by whose power and authority they are committed, 
and to whom principally they are prisoners and captives. 
Now this is God only, he can ' cast both body and soul into 
hell fire;' Matt. x. 28. and wicked men shall be destroyed 
from the terror of his presence, andthe power of his glory; 


2 Thess. i. 9. In brief, God is the judge, the law is the law 
of God, the sentence denounced is condemnation from God : 
the curse inflicted, is the curse of God ; the wrath where- 
with men are punished, is the wrath of God ; he that finds 
a ransom is God, and therefore it is properly and strictly he, 
to whom sinners are prisoners and captives ; 2. Pet. ii. 4. 

And therefore, when in the Scripture at any time, men are 
said to be in bondage to Satan : it is but as to the officer 
of a judge, or the jailor : to their sin, it is but as to their 
fetters, as shall be afterward more fully discovered. 

And this removes the first question and answer of the Ra- 
covians to this purpose. Socinus ' De Servatore,' expresses 
himself to the whole business of redemption, in three chap- 
ters, lib. 1. part. 2. cap. 1 — 3. the sum of which, the ca- 
techists have laboured to comprise in as many questions 
and answers. The first is, 

' Q. What*" dost thou answer to these testimonies which 
witness that we are redeemed of Christ ?' 

' A. It is hence evident, that satisfaction cannot be con- 
firmed from the word redeeming, because it is written of 
God himself, both in the Old and New Testament, that he 
redeemed his people out of Egypt, that he redeemed his peo- 
ple. 2. Because it is written that God redeemed Abraham 
and David, and that Moses was a redeemer, and that we are 
redeemed from our iniquities, and our vain conversation, 
and from the curse of the law ; for it is certain, that God 
made satisfaction to none, nor can it be said, that satisfac- 
tion is made either to our iniquities, or our vain conversa- 
tion, or to the law.' 

I say this whole plea is utterly removed by what hath 
been spoken: For 1. In what sense redemption is ascribed 
to God and Moses, without the least prejudice of that pro- 
per redemption that was made by the blood of Christ, hath 
been declared, and shall be farther manifested, when we 

•> Quid ad ca testimonia, quae nos a Christo testantur redemptos, respondes? — 
R. Everbo redimeiidi non posse effici satisfactionem banc, bine est planum, quod 
de ipso Deo et in novo, et in prisco foedere scribitur, eum rediniisse populum suura 
ex ^gypto; eum fecisse redemptionem populo suo ; deinde cum scriptum sit, quod 
Deus rederait Abrahamum et Davidem, et quod Moses fuerit redeniptor, et quod 
simus redempti e nostris iniquitatibiis, aut e vana conversatione nostra, et e male- 
dictione legis : certura autum est Deum nemini satisfecisse ; nee vero aut iniquita- 
tibus, aut conversationi vanw, aut Icgi satisfactura esse dici posse. 


come to demonstrate the price that was paid in this redemp- 

2. It is true, there is no satisfaction made to our sin 
and vain conversation, when we are redeemed : but satisfac- 
tion being made to him to whom it is due, we are delivered 
from them. But of this afterward. 

3. Satisfaction is properly made to the law, when the 
penalty which it threatens and prescribes, is undergone, as 
in the case insisted on it was. In the meantime, our cate- 
chists are sufficiently vain, in supposing our argument to lie 
in the word ' redimere ;' though something hath been spoken 
of the word in the original, yet our plea is from the thing 

This Socinus thus expresses. 

'*^There is also required he who held the captive, other- 
wise he is not a captive. To him in our deliverance, if we 
will consider the thing itself exactly, many things do an- 
swer, for many things do detain us captives ; now they are 
sin, the devil, and the world, and that which foUoweth sin, 
the guilt of eternal death, or the punishment of death ap- 
pointed to us.' 

Ans. A lawful captive is detained two ways ; directly, 
and that two ways also, legally, juridically, and authori- 
tatively : so is sinful man detained captive of God. The 
wrath of God abideth on him, John iii. 36. as hath been 

2. Instrumentally, in subservience to the authority of the 
other. So is man in bondage to Satan, and the law, and 
fear of 'death to come;' Heb. ii. 14, 15. 

3. Consequentially, and by accident; so a man is de- 
tained by his shackles, as in the filth of the prison : so is a 
man captive to sin, and the world ; nor are all these pro- 
perly the detainers of us in captivity, from which we are 
redeemed, any more than the gallows keeps a malefactor in 
prison, from which by a pardon and ransom he is delivered. 

To proceed with the description of redemption given ; it 

* Requiritur et is, qui captivum detineat : alioqui captivus non esset : huic in libe- 
ratione nostra, si exactius rem ipsam considerare velimus, respondent multa. Multa 
siquidem nos tanquara captives detinebant : ea autem sunt peccatuin, diabolus, 
mundus, et qui peccatuin consequuntur, mortis feternae reatus, seu mortis aeternffi 
nobis decretum suppiicium. De Servator. Lib. 1. Cap. 2. 


is the delivery of him who was captive from prison, or cap- 
tivity, and all the miseries attending that condition. 

1. What I mean by the prison, is easily gathered from 
what hatli been delivered concerning the prisoner or captive, 
and him that holds him captive. If the captive be a sinner 
as a sinner, and he who hold him captive be God, by his 
justice making him liable to punishment, his captivity must 
needs be his obnoxiousness unto the wrath of God on the 
account of his justice for sin. This are we delivered from 
by this redemption, that is in the blood of Jesus, Rom. iii. 
23 — 25. * For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of 
God: being justified freely by his grace, through the re- 
demption that is in Christ Jesus. Whom God hath set forth 
to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare 
his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, 
through the forbearance of God.' Ver. 23. is the description 
of the state of our captivity ; * having sinned we are come 
short of the glory of God ;' vaTspovvrai they fall short in 
their race, and are by no means able to come up to a parti- 
cipation of God ; our delivery and the means of it, is ex- 
pressed, ver. 24. Our delivery : we are 'justified freely by his 
grace ;' or delivered from that condition and state of sin, 
wherein it was impossible for us to reach and attain the 
glory of God. The procuring cause of which liberty is ex- 
pressed in the next words, Sia Trig awoXvTpwaEtog, by the re- 
demption or ransom paying that is in the blood of Jesus ; 
that is, the cause of our deliverance from that condition 
wherein we were : whence and how it is so, is expressed, 
ver. 25. God sent him forth, for that end, that we might 
have deliverance through 'faith in his blood,' or by faith be 
made partakers of the redemption that is in his blood, or 
purchased by it: and this to 'declare his righteousness;' we 
have it this way, that the righteousness of God may be de- 
clared, whereto satisfaction is made by the death of Christ : 
for that also is included in the word, ' propitiation,' as shall 
be afterward proved. 

Thus whilst men are in this captivity, the wrath of God 
abideth on them ; John iii. 36. and the full accomplishment 
of the execution of that wrath is called the ' wrath to come,' 
1 Thess. i. 10. which we are delivered from. 

In this sense are we said to 'have redemption;' Col. i. 14. 


in his blood, or to have deliverance from our captivity by 
the price he paid ; and by his death to be delivered from 
the fear of death, Heb. ii. 15. or our obnoxiousness thereto ; 
it being the justice or judgment of God, that they which 
commit sin, are worthy of death ; Rom. i. 32. Christ by un- 
dergoing it delivered us from it. 

Whence is that of the apostle; Rom. viii. 33, 34. 'Who 
shall lay any thing to their charge, who shall condemn them?' 
Who should but God? It is God against whom they have 
sinned, whose the law is, and who alone can pronounce sen- 
tence of condemnation on the offenders, and inflict penalty 
accordingly. Yea, but 'it is God that justifies :' that is, that 
frees men from their obnoxiousness to punishment for sin 
in the first sense of it, which is their captivity, as hath 
been declared ; but how comes this about? Why 'it is Christ 
that died ;' it is by the death of Christ that we have this re- 

2. From all the miseries that attend that state and con- 
dition. These are usually referred to three heads. 

1. The power of Satan. 2. Of sin. 3. Of the world : 
from all which we are said to be redeemed ; and these are 
well compared to the jailer, filth and fetters of the prison, 
wherein the captives are righteously detained. 

For the first. Col. i. 13, 14. 'Who hath delivered us from 
the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the king- 
dom of his dear Son, in whom we have redemption through 
his blood, even the forgiveness of sins.' The power of dark- 
ness, is the ' power of the prince of darkness, of Satan :' this 
God delivers us from, ver. 14. by the ' redemption that is in 
the blood of Christ.' And how ? Even as he who delivers a 
captive from the judge by a price, delivers him also from 
the jailer who kept him in prison. By his death, which as 
hath been shewed, was a price and a ransom, he deprived 
Satan of all his power over us, which is called his destroy- 
ing of him; Heb. ii. 14. that is, not the devil as to his essence 
and being, but as to his power and authority over those who 
are made partakers of his death. 

The words of Socinus to this purpose may be taken no- 
tice of. Lib. De Servat. 1. part. 2. cap. 2. 

'^Nothing is wanting in this deliverance, that it might 

^ Nihil in hac liberatione desideratur, ut oinnino verse redemptioni respondeat, nisi 


wholly answer a true redemption, but only that he who de- 
tained the captive should receive the price : although it 
seems to some that it may be said, that the devil received 
the price which intervened in our redemption, as the ancient 
divines, among whom was Ambrose and Augustine, made bold 
to speak, yet that ought to seem most absurd ; and it is true 
that this price was received by none. For on that account 
chiefly is our deliverance not a true, but a metaphorical re- 
demption, because in it there is none that should receive 
the price. For if that which is in the place of a price, be 
received (by him who delivers the captive), then not a meta- 
phorical, but a true price had intervened, and thereupon our 
redemption had been proper.' 

1. It is confessed, that nothing is wanting to constitute 
that we speak of to be a true, proper, and real redemption, 
but only that the price paid, be received of him that deli- 
vered the captives ; that this is God we proved, that the 
price is paid to him, we shall nextly prove. 

2.-The only reason given why the price is not paid to any, 
is, because it is not paid to the devil ; but was it the law of 
Satan we had transgressed? Was he the judge that cast us 
into prison? Was it to him whom we were indebted? Was 
it ever heard that the price of redemption was paid to the 
jailer ? Whether any of the ancients said so or no, I shall not 
now trouble myself to inquire, or in what sense they said it ; 
the thing in itself is ridiculous and blasphemous. 

2. Sin. ' He redeemed us from all iniquity ;' Tit. ii. 14. 
and we were ' redeemed by the precious blood of Christ from 
our vain conversation received by tradition from our fa- 
thers;' 1 Pet. i. 18, 19. This redeeming us from our sins, 
respects two things. 1. The guilt of them, that they should 
not condemn us ; and, 2. the power of them, that they should 
not rule in us. In the place mentioned, it is the latter that is 
principally intended, which is evident from what was op- 

ut is quicaptivum detinebat, pretium accipiat : quamvis autem quibusdam videatur, 
dici posse, diabolum, pretium quod in nostra liberatione intervenit, accepisse, quem- 
admodura antiquiores Theologi, interquos Ambrosius, et Augustinus ausi sunt dicere, 
tamen id perabsurdum videri debet, et recte est neminem id pretium accepisse affir- 
mare. Ea siquideni ratione potissimum, non vera sed metaphorica redemptio, libera 
tio nostra est; quocirca in ea nemo est, qui pretium accipiat, si enim id quod in ipso 
pretii loco est acceptum (ab eo scilicet qui captivum liomincm detinebat) fuisset, 
jamnon metaphor ic urn, sed verum pretium intervenisset, et propterea vera redcnijy 
tio esset. 



posed to the captivity under sia that is spoken of; in the 
one place, it is 'purchasing to himself a peculiar people, 
zealous of good works;' Tit. ii. 14. in the other, 'the purify- 
ing of our souls in obedience to the truth through the Spi- 
rit;' ver. 22. Now we are redeemed from the power of our 
sin, by the blood of Christ ; not immediately, but conse- 
quentially; as a captive is delivered from his fetters and 
filth upon the payment of his ransom. Christ's satisfying 
the justice of God, reconciling him to us by his death, hath 
also procured the gift of his Spirit for us, to deliver us from 
the power of our sin. The foundation of this being laid in 
the blood of Christ, and the price which thereby he paid, 
our delivery from our sins belongs to his redemption ; and 
we are therefore said to be redeemed by him from our vain 

And the great plea of our adversary, that this redemption 
is not proper, because we are * redeemed from our iniquities, 
and vain conversation,' to which no ransom can be paid, 
will then be freed from ridiculous folly, when they shall give 
an instance of a ransom being paid to the prisoner's fetters 
before his delivery ; whereunto our sins do rather answer, 
than to the judge. 

2. There is a redeeming of us from the guilt of sin, 
which hath a twofold expression. 1. Of redeeming us from 
the 'curse of the law;' Gal. iii. 13. and, 2. Of the 'redemp- 
tion of transgression ;' Heb. ix. 15. 

For the first, the curse of the law, is the curse due to 
sin ; Deut. xxvii. 29. that is, to the transgression of the law. 
This may be considered two ways. 1. In respect of its rise 
and fountain, or its ' terminus a quo :' 2. In respect of its 
end and effect, or its ' terminus ad quern.' 

For the first, or the rise of it; it is the justice of God, 
or the just and holy will of God, requiring punishment for 
sin ; as the vengeance that is inflicted actually for sin, is 
called the ' wrath of God;' Rom. i. 18. that is, his justice and 
indignation against sin. In this sense, to redeem us from 
the curse of the law, is to make satisfaction to the justice 
of God, from whence that curse doth arise, that it should 
not be inflicted on us, and thus it falls in with what was de- 
livered before, concerning our captivity by the justice of 
God. 2. As it is the penalty itself: so we are delivered 


from it, by this ransom paying of Christ, as the punishment 
which we should have undergone, had not he undertaken for 
us, and redeemed us. 

2. For the InroXvTpwrnq TrapojSacrEwv, Ileb. ix. 15. it can 
be nothing but making reparation for the injury done by 
transgression ; it is a singular phrase, but may receive some 
light from that of Heb. ii. 17. where Christ is said to be a 
high-priest, u£ to i\acni£(T^ai Tag a/^mpTiag tov Xaov, to recon- 
cile the sin of the people ; that is, to make reconciliation 
for them, of the sense whereof afterward. 3. He redeems 
from the world ; Gal. iv. 5. 

3. The third thing is, That this delivei'ance from cap- 
tivity be by the intervention of a price properly so called ; 
that Christ did pay such a price I proved before, which is 
the foundation of this discourse. 

The word XvTpov, and those arising from thence, were 
specially insisted on. The known use of the word is, 're- 
demptionis pretium ;' so among the best authors of the 
Greek tongue ^atvra AajSovrtc a^rjicav civiv Xurpwv, Zenoph. 
Hallen. 7. ' they took him away without paying his ransom,' 
or the price of his redemption; and dirtfixpe to. Awrparw 'Avvt(3a 
KOI Tovg aljxfxaXwTovg ttTreXajSe : says Plutarch, in Fabius : he 
sent their ransom to Hannibal, and received the prisoners ; 
and from thence Xvrpow is of the same import and significa- 
tion. So in the argument of the first book of the Iliads, 
speaking of Chrysis, that he came to the camp, fiovXaiiavog 
XvTQwcra^ai Tr)v ^vyuTepa, ' to pay a price for the redemption 
of his daughter.' And Arist. Ethic, lib. ix. cap. 2. disput- 
ing whether a benefit, or good turn, be not to be repaid, 
rather than a favour done to any other, gives an instance of 
a prisoner redeemed ; tw AvrpaiS'tirt Trapd Xjjotwi' ttotsoov tov 
Xvarafxevov avTiXvTpMTaov, &c. whether he who is redeemed 
by the payment of a ransom from a robber be to redeem 
him who redeemed him, if captive, &c. but this is so far 
confessed, that if it may be evinced, that this price is paid 
to any, it will not be denied, but that it is a proper price of 
redemption, as before was discovered. 

That the death of Christ is such a price, I proved abun- 
dantly, at the entrance of this discourse; it is so frequently 
and evidently expressed in the Scripture to be such, that it 
is not to be questioned ; I shall not farther insist upon it. 

M 2 


All that our adversaries have to object, is, as was said, 
that seeing this price is not paid to any, it cannot be a price 
properly so, called, for as for the nature of it, they confess, 
it may be a price : so Socinus acknov/ledgeth it. Saith he, 

* P understand the proper use of the word to redeem, to 
be, when a true price is given ; true price I call not only 
money, but whatever is given to him, that delivers the cap- 
tive, to satisfy him, although many things in the redemp- 
tion be metaphorical.' 

That God detains the captive, hath been proved ; that 
the price is paid to him, though it be not silver and gold, 
and that, that he might be satisfied, shall be farther evinced. 
So that we have redemption properly so called ; it remains 
then that we farther manifest, that the price was paid to 

Although enough hath been said already to evince the 
truth of this, yet I shall farther put it out of question by 
the ensuing observations and inferences. 

1. To the payment of a price or ransom properly so 
called, which as is acknowledged is not necessary that it 
should be money or the like, 1 Pet. i. 18. but any thing that 
may satisfy him that detains the captive, it is not required 
that it should be paid into the hand of him that is said to 
receive it ; but only, that it be some such thing as he re- 
quires as the condition of releasing the captive. It may 
consist in personal service, which is impossible to be pro- 
perly paid into the hand of any. For instance ; if a father 
be held captive, and he that holds him so requires that for 
the delivery of his father, the son undertake a difficult and 
hazardous warfare, wherein he is concerned, and he do it 
accordingly ; this son doth properly ransom his father, 
though no real price be paid into the hand of him that de- 
tained him. It is sufficient to prove that this ransom was 
paid by-Christ unto God, if it be proved, that upon the pre- 
scription of God, he did that, and underwent that which he 
esteemed, and was to him a valuable compensation, for the 
delivery of sinners, 

2. The propriety of paying a ransom to any, where it 

* Propriam enim verbi redimendi significationem intelligo, cum veruni pretium in- 
tervenit ; vermn autem ,pretiiim voco, non pecuniam tantum sed quicquid ut ei sa- 
tisfiat qui captivum detinet datur, licet alioqvii multa nietaphorica in ejusmodi re- 
demptione reperianfiir. Socin. dc Serv. lib. 1 part. 1. cap. 1. 


lies in undergoing the penalty that was due to the ransomed, 
coiisists in the voluntary consent of him to whom the ran- 
som is paid, and him that pays it, unto this commutation ; 
which in this business we have firmly evinced. And the 
price paid by Christ could be no other. For God was not 
our detainer in captivity as a sovereign conqueror, that came 
upon us by force and kept us prisoners, but as a just judge 
and lawgiver, who had seized on us for our transgressions. 
So that not his power and will was to be treated withal, but 
his law and justice, and so the ransom was properly paid 
to him, in the undergoing that penalty which his justice 

3. There must some differences be allowed between spi- 
ritual, eternal, and civil, corporeal, temporal deliverances, 
which yet doth not make spiritual redemption to be impro- 
per ; nay, rather the other is said to be improper wherein it 
agrees not thereunto ; the one is spiritual, the other tempo- 
ral, so that in every circumstance it is not expected that 
they should agree. 

4. There are two things distinctly in God to be consi- 
dered in this business. 

1. His love, his will, or purpose. 2. His justice, law, 
and truth. In respect of his love, his will, his purpose, or 
good-pleasure, God himself found out, appointed and pro- 
vided this ransom. The giving of Christ is ascribed to his 
love, will, and good pleasure; John iii. 16. Rom. v. 8. 
viii. 32. 1 Johniv.9, 10. as he had promised by his prophets 
of old ; Luke i. 67. But his law and truth and justice in 
their several considerations, required the ransom, and in re- 
spect of them he accepted it, as hath been shewed at large ; 
so that nothing in the world is more vain, than that of our 
adversaries ; that God procured and appointed this price, 
therefore, he did not accept it; that is, either God's love 
or his justice must be denied. Either he hath no justice 
against sin, or no love for sinners ; in the reconciliation of 
which two, the greatest and most intense hatred against sin, 
and the most inexpressible love to some sinners in the 
blood of his only son, lies the great mystery of the gospel 
which these men are unacquainted withal. 

5. That God may be said to receive this price, it was 


not necessary that any accession should be made to his 
riches by the ransom, but that he underwent no loss by our 
deliverance. This is the difference between a conqueror or 
a tyrant and a just ruler, in respect of their captives and 
prisoners. Says the tyrant or conqueror, Pay me so much 
whereby I may be enriched or 1 will not part with my pri- 
soner: says the just ruler and judge. Take care that my 
justice be not injured ; that my law be satisfied, and I will 
deliver the prisoners. It is enough to make good God's 
acceptance of the price, that his justice suffered not by the 
delivery of the prisoner; as it did not, Rom. iii. 25. yea, it 
was exalted and made glorious above all that it could have 
been, in the everlasting destruction of the sinner. 

These things being thus premised, it will not be difficult 
to establish the truth asserted ; namely, that this price or 
ransom was paid to God. For, 

1. A price of redemption, a ransom must be paid to 
some or other; the nature of the thing requires it. That 
the death of Christ was a price or ransom, properly so called, 
hath been shewed before; the ridiculous objection, that then 
it must be paid to Satan or our sin, hath also been suffi- 
ciently removed, so that God alone remains to whom it is to 
be paid. For unless to some it is paid, it is not a price or 

2. The price of redemption is to be paid to him who de- 
tains the captive by way of jurisdiction, right, and law 
power. That God is he who thus detained the captive, was 
also proved before. He is the great householder that calls 
his servants that do, or should serve him, to an account ; 
Matt, xviii. 23, 24. awapaL \6yov' and wicked men are 
KUTapag TiKva, 2 Pet. ii. 14. the children of his curse, obnoxi- 
ous to it. It is his judgment that they which commit sin 
are worthy of death ; Rom. i. 32. and Christ is a propitia- 
tion to 'declare his righteousness ;' Rom. iii. 25. And it is 
his wrath from whence we are delivered by this ransom ; Rom. 
ii. 5. 1 Thess. i. 10. the law was his to which Christ was 
made obnoxious ; Gal. iv. 4. the curse his which he was made; 
chap. iii. 13. it was his will he came to do and suffer; Heb. 
X. 5. it was his will that he should drink off the cup of his 
passion ; Matt. xxvi. it pleased him to bruise him : Isa. liii. 


he made all our iniquities to meet upon him; ver. 6. so 
that doubtless this ransom was paid to him ; we intend no 
more by it than what in those places is expressed. 

3. This ransom was also a sacrifice, as hath been de- 
clared. Look then to whom the sacrifice was offered, to him 
the ransom was paid. These are but several notions of the 
same thing. Now the sacrifice he offered to God ; Eph. v. 2. 
to him then also, and only, was this ransom paid. 

4. Christ paid this ransom as he was a mediator and 
surety : now he was the Mediator between God and man, 
and therefore he must pay this price to one of them, either 
God or man and it is not difiicult to determine whether : 1 
Tim. ii. 5, 6. gives us this fully. He is the Mediator, and 
as such he gave himself dvTiXvTpov, a price of redemption 
to God. 

From this description of redemption properly so called, 
and the application of it to the redemption made by Jesus 
Christ, we thus argue : 

He who by his own blood and death paid the price of 
our redemption to God, in that he underwent what was due 
to us, and procured our liberty and deliverance thereby, he 
made satisfaction properly for our sins ; but when we were 
captives for sin to the justice of God, and committed thereon 
to the power of sin and Satan, Christ by his death and blood 
paid the price of our redemption to God, and procured our 
deliverance thereby : therefore he made satisfaction to God 
for our sins. 

For the farther confirmation of what hath been delivered, 
some few of the most eminent testimonies given to this truth, 
are to be explained and vindicated, wherewith I shall close 
this discourse of our redemption by Christ. Out of the very 
many that may be insisted on, I shall choose out only those 
that follow. 

1. Rom. iii. 24, 25. ' Being justified freely by his grace, 
through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ ; whom God 
hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, 
to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that 
are past, through the forbearance of God.' Redemption in 
itself, in its effect, in respect of us, with all its causes is here 
expressed. Its effect in respect of us, is, that we are justified 


freely : StKatou/xevoi ^opedv, not brought easily, and with little 
labour to be righteous or honest, as some vainly imagine 
(Grot, in locum), but accepted freely with God, without 
the performance of the works of the law, whereby the Jews 
sought after righteousness. 2. The end on the part of God, 
is, the declaration of his righteousness. 3. The means pro- 
curing this end is, the blood of Christ : redemption by 
Christ, and in his blood. 

4. The means of communicating this effect on the part 
of God, is the setting forth Christ a propitiation : on our 
part, as to application, it is ' faith in his blood.' 

As to the effect of our justification, it shall afterward be 
considered. The manner, or rise of it rather (for both may 
be denoted) on the part of God, is doptdv, that is, freely : or 
as it is expounded in the next words, t7j avTov xdpiTi, ' by his 
grace.' Our redemption and the effects of it are free ;' 1. On 
the part of God, in respect of his purpose and decree, which 
is called iKkofr] xapirbg ; Rom. xi. 5. His great design, and 
contrivance of the work of our salvation and deliverance. 
This he did * according to the good pleasure of his will, to 
the praise of the glory of his grace ;' Eph. i. 5, 6, according 
* to his good pleasure which he had purposed in himself,' 
ver. 9. according ' to the purpose of him who worketh all 
things after the counsel of his own will ;' ver. 11, And it is 
free in regard of the love, from whence Christ was sent, John 
iii. 16. which also is ascribed rp X"P'^' 3"f ow ; Heb. ii. 9. and 
it is free in respect of us : we do not obtain it by the works 
of the law, Rom. iv. 6. neither can it be so attained, nor is 
that required of us ; and free on our part, in that nothing of 
us is required in way of satisfaction, recompense, or ran- 
som. ' He spared not his Son, but with him freely gives us 
all things;' Rom. viii. diKaiovfievoi dopmv, we are justified 
freely, that is, we are delivered from our bondage without 
any satisfaction made by us, or works performed by us, to 
attain it, God having freely designed this way of salvation, 
and sent Jesus Christ to do this work for us. 

' Ad justitiam vero perducuntur etiam sine labore qui ad 
minores virtutes, id est, philosophicas requiri solet fides 
enim ejus laboris compendium facit.' rwv ttovwv TrwXovmv, 
niXiv wavra t ayaSr' ot 0£Ot. Grot. in loc. 


' They are brought to righteousness, without that labour 
that is required for lesser, even philosophical virtues. Faith 
makes an abridgement of the work.' 

The irpwTov xpevdog of the great man, in the whole inter- 
pretation of that epistle, as of others of sundry sorts besides 
himself, is, that to be justified, is to be brought to righteous- 
ness by the practice of virtue and honesty (which answers 
to that the Scripture calls sanctification) with as gross a 
shutting out of light, as can befall any man in the world. 
This, with that notion which he hath of faith, is the bottom 
of this interpretation. But, 

2. Let him tell us freely, what instance he can give of 
this use of the word Sopeav, which here he imposeth on us ; 
that it should signify the facility of doing a thing. And 
withal, whether these words StKatou/xEvot Soptav, denote an 
act of God, or of them that are justified ? Whether being- 
justified freely by his grace, be his free justifying of us, as to 
what is actively denoted, or our easy performance of the 
works of righteousness ? That dopeav, in this place, should 
relate to our duties, and signify easily ; and not to the act 
of God accepting us, and import freely, is such a violence 
offered to the Scripture, as nothing could have compelled 
the learned man to venture on, but pure necessity of main- 
taining the Socinian justification. 

3. For the philosophical virtues, which the gods sold for 
labour, they were ' splendida peccata,' and no more. 

As to the part of the words, Socinus himself was not so 
far out of the way, as the annotator ; saith he, * Justificati 
gratis, sensus est, partam nobis esse peccatorum nostrorum 
absolutionem(id enim ut scis quod ad nos attinetreipsajus- 
tificari est) non quidem per legis opera, quibus illam com- 
meriti sumus, sed gratis per gratiam Dei.' De Servat. lib. 1. 
part. 2. cap. 2. 

2. The end on the part of God, is IvddZig SiKaioavvtic, 'the 
declaration of his righteousness;' StKaiocrvi'ij, is properly God's 
justice as he is a judge. It is true IDtl is often rendered by 
the seventy Sdcatoo-ui'jj, and by us from thence, ' righteous- 
ness;' which signifies indeed benignity, kindness, and good- 
ness : and so T^\>1'<£ which is ' righteousness,' is rendered by 
them sometimes aXeog ' mercy,' and the circumstances of the 
place may sometimes require that signification of the word; 


but firstly and properly, it is that property of God, whereby 
as a judge, he renders to every one according to their ways 
before him, rewarding those that obey him, and punishing 
transgressions. This I have^ elsewhere declared at large. 
Hence he is. pDi iDDlli? Psal. ix. 4. which as Paul speaks, 
2 Tim. iv. 8. is, 6 oiicatoc Kpmjg, the 'righteous judge,' so Rom. 
i.32. 2 Thess. i. 6. Rev. xv. 4. so Isa. lix. 16. 'And he saw 
that there was no man, and wondered that there was no in- 
tercessor, therefore his arm brought salvation unto him, and 
his righteousness it sustained him.' His righteousness sus- 
tained him in executing vengeance on the enemies of his 
church. This is the righteousness that God aimed to ma- 
nifest, and to declare in our redemption by Christ : that he 
might be just, as the words follow ; namely, that he might 
be known to be just and righteous, in taking such sore ven- 
geance of sin, in the flesh of Jesus Christ his Son ; Rom. 
viii. 3. Hence did God appear to be exceeding righteous, 
of purer eyes than to behold iniquity. He declared to all 
the world, what was due to sin, and what must be expected 
by men, if they are not partakers of the redemption which is 
in the blood of Jesus Christ; Rom. viii. 3. 

Grotius would have diKaioavvri here to signify ' goodness' 
and * bounty ;' which, as we deny not, but that in some places 
in the Old Testament where it is used by the LXX, it doth, 
or may do; so we say here, that sense can have no place, 
which nowhere is direct and proper: for the thing intended 
by it in that sense, is expressed before in those words Soptav 
ryxapiTi avrov, and is not consistent with that, that follows, 
tig TO HTai avTov ^iKaiov, which represents God, as he is, 
^iKaiog KjOtrjjCj as was spoken before. 

Socinus goes another way : says he, ' In Christo, Deus 
ut ostenderet se veracem et fidelem esse, quod significant 
verba ilia, justitise suae,' &,c. Referring it to God's righ- 
teousness of verity and fidelity, in fulfilling his promise of 
forgiveness of sins. But, says Grotius, righteousness can- 
not be here interpreted, ' de fide in promissis prjEStandis, 
quia hsec verba pertinent non ad Judseos tantum, sed ad 
Gentes etiam, quibus nulla promissio facta est.' ' Because 
Gentiles are spoken of, and not the Jews only, but to 
them there was no promise given.' A reason worthy the an- 

. f Diatrib. de Justit. Div. 


notations ; as though tlie promise was not made to Abraham, 
that he should be heir of the world, and to all his seed, not 
only according to the flesh ; and as though the learned man 
himself did not think the first promise to have been made, 
and always to have belonged to all and every man in the 
world. But yet neither will the sense of Socinus stand, for 
the reasons before given. 

But how are these ends brought about, that we should 
be SiKaiovjutyGi SopEo'v ; and yet there should be, Ivdd^ig St- 
Kaio(Tvvi]g ? 

3. Ans. The means procuring all this, is the blood of 
Christ; it is, Bia rrig cnroXvTpwa^ijjg Trjg er ^piario 'Ljcou, *by 
the redemption that is in Jesus Christ;' and how that re- 
demption is wrought, he expresseth, when he shews how we 
are made partakers of it, Sm Tr\Q Triarewg Iv rw avTov al/xari, 
' through faith in his blood.' The redemption wrought and 
procured by the blood of Christ, is the procuring cause of 
all this. The causa irQor^yovjjiivrh is the grace of God, of 
which before ; the causa irpoKarapKriKri, is this blood of Christ ; 
this redemption, as here, is called cnroXvrpojmg, Luke xxi. 28. 
Eph. i. 7. Col. i. 14. XvTpojaig, Luke i. 68. John ii. 38. Heb. ix. 
12. Xvrpov, Matt. XX. 28.x. 45. dvTiXvrpov, 1 Tim. ii. 6. and 
in respect of the effect, pxxjig Rom. iv. 24. xi. 26. Col. i. 13. 
1 Thess. i. 10. This is the procuring cause, as I said, of the 
whole effect of God's free grace here mentioned ; we are jus- 
tified freely, because we have redemption by the blood of 
Christ, he obtained it for us by the price of his blood. 

I rather abide on the former sense of Avrpov (from whence 
is aTToXvTpdyaig^ to be a price of redemption, than to inter- 
pret it by 'lustrum,' and so to refer it to the sacrifices of pu- 
rification, which belong to another consideration of the death 
of Christ; and yet the consideration of the blood of Christ, 
as a sacrifice, hath place here also, as shall be discovered. 
This is that which is here asserted ; we have forgiveness of 
sins >by the intervention of the blood of Christ, obtaining 
redemption for us, which is that we aim to prove from this 

Grotius gives this exposition of the words. ' Christus 
per obedientiam suam (maxime in morte) et preces ei acce- 
dentes, hoc a patre obtinuit, ne is humanum genus gravibus 
peccatis inimersum desereret, atque obduraret; sed viam 


illis daret ad justitiam perveniendi per Christum : etlibera- 
ret, nempe a necessitate moriendi in peccatis, viam patefa- 
ciendo per quam exire ista liceret.' * Christ by his obe- 
dience (especially in his death) and the prayers accompany- 
ing it, obtained this of his Father, that he should not forsake 
and harden mankind, drenched in grievous sins, but should 
give them away of coming to righteousness by Jesus Christ, 
and should deliver them from a necessity of dying in their 
sin, by revealing a way whereby they might escape it.' 

1. It is well it is granted, that the death of Christ re- 
spected God in the first place, and the obtaining somewhat 
of him, which the annotator's friends deny. 

2. That the purchase of Christ was not for all mankind, 
that they might be delivered, but for the elect, that they 
should be delivered, has elsewhere been declared. 

3. Christ by his death, did not obtain of his Father, that 
he should reveal or appoint that way of obtaining deliver- 
ance and salvation, which by him we have. This, as the 
giving of Christ himself, was of the free grace and love of 
God ; nor is the appointment of the way of salvation, ac- 
cording to the covenant of grace, any where assigned to the 
death of Christ ; but to the love of God, sending his Son, 
and appointing him to be a mediator; though the good 
things of the covenant be purchased by him. 

4. This is all the effect here assigned to the bloodshed- 
ding of Jesus Christ; this is the redemption we have there- 
by. ' He obtained of his Father, that a better way of com- 
ing to righteousness, than that of the law, or that of philo- 
sophy, might by declared to us.' The mystery of the whole 
is; Christ by his obedience to God, obtained this, that him- 
self should be exalted to give a new law, and teach a new 

doctrine, in obedience whereunto we misrht come to be rio-h- 


teous : which must needs be an excellent explication of 
these words, ' we have redemption by his blood ;' which 
plainly express the price he paid for us, and the effect that 
ensued thereon. 

Socinus goes another way : says he, 

'Thes intervention of the blood of Christ, though it 

8 Inlerventus sanguinis Christi, licet Deiim ad liberationem lianc a peccatoniiu 
nostroruin poena nobis concedendum movere nou potuerit, iiiovit lamen nos ad earn 
nobis oblatatn accipiendam, ct Cliristo fidem liabcndam, Socin, iibi sup. 


moved not God to grant us deliverance from the punishment 
of sin, yet it moved us to accept of it being offered, and to 
believe in Christ.' 

That is ; the blood of Christ, being paid as a price of our 
redemption, hath no effect in respect of him to whom it is 
paid, but only in respect of them for w^hom it is paid ; than 
which imagination nothing can be more ridiculous. 

4. The means of application of the redemption menti- 
tioned, or participation in respect of us, is faith : It is Sm 
TTicFTiwg Iv ainari avTov, of this we have no occasion to speak. 

5. The means of communication on the part of God, is 
in these words, ov TrpotS'ero 6 ^eoq IXaarnpiov; 'whom God 
hath set forth to be a propitiation.' God set him forth for 
this end and purpose ; the word irpoi^eTo, may design various 
acts of God : As, 

1. His purpose and determination, or decree of giving 
Christ ; whence our translators have in the margin rendered 
it 'fore-ordained,' as the word is used, Eph. i. 9. t/v irpoe^iro 
Iv avTto, 'which he fore-purposed in himself.' Or, 

2. God's proposal of him before-hand, in types and sa- 
crifices to the Jews ; the preposition ttjOo being often in com- 
position used in that sense in this epistle, chap, iii.9. xi. 35. 
XV. 4. Or, 

3. For the actual exhibition of him in the flesh, when 
God sent him into the world. Or, 

4. It may refer to the open exposition and publication of 
,him in the world by the gospel ; for as we shall afterward 
shew, the ensuing words hold out an allusion to the ark, 
which now in Christ the veil being rent, is exposed to the 
open view of believers : hence John tells us. Rev. xi. 19. 
when the temple was opened, 'there was seen in it the ark 
of the testament ;' which, as it was not at all in the second 
temple, the true ark being to be brought in, no more was it 
to be seen upon the opening of the temple in the first, where 
it was, being closed in the Holiest of Holies ; but now in 
the ordinances of the gospel, the ark is perspicuous ; be- 
cause ^eog TTpoi^tTo, God hath set it forth to believers. 

Now he was set forth iXaariipiov, ' a propitiation.' There 
is none but have observed, that this is the name of the co- 
vering of the ark, or the mercy-seat, that is applied to Christ; 
Heb. ix. 5. but the true reason and sense of it hath scarce 


been observed ; ours generally would prove from hence, that 
Christ did propitiate God by the sacrifice of himself, that 
may have something from the general notice of the word, re- 
, ferred to the * sacrificia' iXaaTiKu (whereof afterward) but not 
from the particular intimated. The mercy-seat did not atone 
God for the sins that were committed against the law that 
was in the ark, but declared him to be atoned and appeased. 
That this is the meaning of it, that, as the mercy-seat de- 
clared God to be atoned, so also is Christ set forth to declare, 
that God was atoned, not to atone him, Socinus contends at 
large, but to the utter confusion of his cause. For, 

1. If this declares God to be ' pacatus,' and 'placatus,' 
then God was provoked, and some way was used for his 
atonement. And, 

2. This is indeed the true import of that type, and the 
application of it here by our apostle. The mercy-seat de- 
clared God to be appeased ; but how ? By the blood of 
the sacrifice that was offered without, and brought into the 
holy place; the high-priest never went into that place, about 
the worship of God, but it was with the blood of that sa- 
crifice, which was expressly appointed to make atonement ; 
Lev. xvi. God would not have the mercy-seat once seen, nor 
any pledge of his being atoned, but by the blood of the pro- 
pitiatory sacrifice. So it is here ; God sets out Jesus Christ 
as a propitiation ; declares himself to be appeased and 're- 
conciled ; but how? by the blood of Christ ; by the sacrifice 
of himself; by the price of redemption which he paid. This 
is the intendment of the apostle ; Christ by his blood, and 
the price he paid thereby, with the sacrifice he made, hav- 
ing atoned God, or made atonement with him for us, God 
now sets him forth, the veil of the temple being rent, to the 
eye of all believers, as the mercy-seat wherein we may see 
God fully reconciled to us. And this may serve for the vin- 
dication of the testimony to the truth insisted on ; and this 
is the same with 2 Cor. iii. 17. 

It would be too long for me to insist in particular, on the 
full vindication of the other testimonies, that are used for 
the confirmation of this truth. I shall give them therefore 
together in such a way, as that their efiicacay to the pur- 
pose in hand, may be easily discerned. 

1 . We are bought by Christ, saith the apostle ; riyopa(T^r}T£, 


' ye are bought,' 1 Cor. vi. 20. but this buying may be taken 
metaphorically for a mere deliverance, as certainly it is, 2 Pet. 
ii. 1. denying the Lord that bought them: i. e. delivered 
them, for it is spoken of God the Father. It may be so, the 
word may be so used, and therefore to shew the propriety of 
it here, the apostle adds rrig Tt/xfjc, ' with a price ; ye are bought 
with a price. To be bought with a price, doth nowhere sig- 
nify to be barely delivered, but to be delivered with a valu- 
able compensation for our deliverance ; but what is this 
price wherewith we are bought? 1 Pet. i. 18. 'Not with 
silver or gold,' but tijiuo cufxaTL xpkttov ; with the 'precious 
honourable blood of Christ:' why rifiiov alfxa, 'the precious 
blood?' That we may know, that in this business it was va- 
lued at a sufficient rate for our redemption ; and it did that, 
which in temporal civil redemption is done by silver and 
gold, which are given, as a valuable consideration for the 
captive. But what kind of price is this blood of Christ? It 
is Xwrpov Matt. XX. 28. that is, a price of redemption; whence 
it is said, that ' he gave himself for us ;' tva XvrpuxrriTat v^ag. 
Tit. ii. 14. that he might 'fetch us off with a ransom :' but it 
may be that it is called Xvrpov, not that he put himself in our 
stead, and underwent what was due to us ; but that his death 
was as it were a price, because thereon we were delivered. 
Nay, but his life was Xvrpov properly, and therefore he calls 
it also iivTiXvTpov, 1 Tim. ii. 6. avrl in composition signifies 
either opposition, as 1 Pet. ii. 25. or substitution and com- 
mutation, Matt. ii. 22. in the first sense, here it cannot be 
taken, therefore it must be in the latter; he was avTiXvrpnv: 
that is, did so pay a ransom, that he himself became that 
which we should have been, as it is expressed. Gal. iii. 13. 
He 'redeemed us from the curse, being made a curse for us:' 
to whom he paid this price was before declared, and the apo- 
stle expresseth it, Eph. v. 2. What now is the issue of all 
this? we have redemption thereby ; i. 7. 'In whom we have 
aTToXvTpojatv dia. tov aifiaTog avTov, redemption by his blood ;' 
as it is again asserted in the same words. Col. i. 14. But how 
came we by this redemption ? He obtained it of God for us, 
he entered into heaven, alwviav Xvrpiomv ivpufxtvog, having 
'found, or obtained everlasting redemption for us ;' by the 
price of his blood he procured this deliverance at the hand 
of God. And that we may know that this effect of the death 


of Christ is properly towards God, what the immediate issue 
of this redemption is, is expressed. It is ' forgiveness of 
sins;' Eph. i. 7. Col. i. 13. Rom. iii. 24, 25. 

And this is as much as is needful to the first notion of 
the death of Christ, as a price and ransom, with the issues 
of it, and the confirmation of our first argument from thence 
for the satisfaction of Christ. 


Of reconciliation hy the death of Christ as it is a sacrifce. 

The next consideration of the death of Christ, is of it as a 
sacrifice ; and the proper effect thereof is reconciliation by 
his death as a sacrifice. 

1. Reconciliation in general, is the renewal of lost friend- 
ship and peace between persons at variance. To apply this 
to the matter treated of, the ensuing positions are to be pre- 

1 . There was at first in the state of innocency, friend- 
ship arjd peace between God and man. God had no enmity 
against his creature : he approved him to be good : and ap- 
pointed him to walk in peace, communion, confidence, and 
boldness with him ; Gen. iii. Nor had man, on whose heart 
the law and love of his Maker was written, any enmity against 
his Creator, God, and rewarder. 

2. That by sin there is division, separation and breach 
of peace and friendship introduced between God and the 
creature ; Isa. lix. 2. ' Your iniquities have separated be- 
tween you and your God, and your sins, have hid his face 
from you;' Isa. Ixiii. 10. 'They rebelled against him, there- 
fore he was turned to be their enemy and fought against 
them.' ' There is no peace to the wicked, saith my God;' Isa. 
xlviii. 22. and therefore it is that upon a delivery from this 
condition we are said (and not before) to 'have peace with 
God ;' Rom. v. 1. 

3. That by this breach of peace and friendship with God, 
God was alienated from the sinner, so as to be angry with 
him, and to renounce all peace and friendship with him, con- 
sidered as such, and in that condition. ' He that believeth not. 


the wrath of God abides on him ;' John iii. 36, And there- 
fore by nature, and in our natural condition, we are ' chil- 
dren of wrath;' Eph. ii. 3. that is, obnoxious to the wrath 
of God, that abides upon unbelievers; that is, unreconciled 

4. This enmity on the part of God, consists 

1. In the purity and holiness of his nature, whence he 
cannot admit a guilty defiled creature to have any commu- 
nion with him ; he is a God of purer eyes than to behold ini- 
quity ; Heb. i. 13, And sinners cannot serve him because 
he is a 'holy God, a jealous God, that will not forgive their 
transgressions nor their sins;' Josh. xxiv. 19. 

2. In his will of punishing for sin, Rom. i. 32. * It is the 
judgment of God, that they which commit sin are worthy 
of death;' and this from the righteousness of the thing it- 
self; 2 Thess. i. 6. ' It is a righteous thing with God to re- 
compense tribulations to sinners : he is not a God that hath 
pleasure in iniquity ;' Psal. v. 4 — 6. 

3. In the sentence of his law, in the establishing and 
execution whereof his truth and honour were engaged; ' In 
the day thou eatest thou shaltdie ;' Gen. ii. 17. * And cursed 
is every one thatcontinueth not,' &c. Deut. xxvii. 29. And 
of this enmity of God against sin and sinners, as I have 
elsewhere at large declared, there is an indelible persuasion 
abiding on the hearts of all the sons of men, however by the 
stirrings of lust and craft of Satan, it may be more or less 
blotted in them. Hence, 

4. As a fruit and evidence of this enmity, God abomi- 
nates their persons, Psal. i. 4 — 6. rejects and hates their 
duties and ways, Prov. xv. 8, 9. and prepares wrath and 
vengeance for them to be inflicted in his appointed time ; 
Horn. ii. 5. All which make up perfect enmity on the part 
of God. 

2. That man was at enmity with God as on his part, 1 
shall not need to prove ; because I am not treating of our 
reconciliation to God, but of his reconciliation to us. 

5. Where there is such an enmity as this, begun by of- 
fence on the one part, and continued by anger and purpose 
to punish on the other, to make reconciliation is properly to 
propitiate, and turn away the anger of the person offended, 
and thereby to bring the offender into favour with him 



again, and to an enjoyment of the same, or a friendship built 
on better conditions than the former. This description of 
reconciliation doth God himself give us. Job xlii. 7 — 9. 
* And it was so, that after the Lord had spoken these words 
unto Job, the Lord said unto Eliphaz the Temanite, My 
wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends : 
for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my 
servant Job hath. Therefore take unto you now seven bul- 
locks and seven rams, and go to my servant Job, and offer 
up for yourselves a burnt-offering, and my servant Job shall 
pray for you, for him will I accept, lest I deal with you af- 
ter your folly, in that you have not spoken of me the thing 
that is right, like my servant Job,' &c. The offenders are 
Eliphaz and his two friends ; the offence is their folly in 
not speaking aright of God. The issue of the breach is, 
that the wrath or anger of God was towards them ; recon- 
ciliation is the turning away of that wrath ; the means 
whereby this was to be done, appointed of God, is the sa- 
crifice of Job for atonement. 

This then is that which we ascribe to the death of Christ, 
when we say that as a sacrifice we were reconciled to God 
by it ; or that he made reconciliation for us. Having made 
God our enemy by sin (as before), Christ by his death 
turned away his anger, appeased his wrath, and brought us 
into favour again with God: before the proof of this, I 
must needs give one caution as to some terms of this dis- 
course, as also remove an objection that lies at the very 
entrance against the whole nature of that which is treat- 
ed of. 

For the first, when we speak of the anger of God, his 
wrath, and his being appeased towards us, we speak after the 
manner of men, but yet by the allowance of God himself; 
not that God is properly angry, and properly altered from 
that state and appeased, whereby he should properly be 
mutable and be actually changed ; but by the anger of God, 
which sometimes in Scripture signifyeth his justice from 
whence punishment proceeds, sometimes the effects of an- 
ger or punishment itself, the obstacles before-mentioned on 
the part of God, from his nature, justice, law, and truth are 
intended ; and his being appeased towards us, his being sa- 
tisfied as to all the bars so laid in the way from receiving 


US to favour, without the least alteration in him, his nature, 
will, or justice : and according to the analogy hereof, I desire 
that whatever is spoken of the anger of God, and his being 
appeased or altered, which is the language wherein he con- 
verseth with us, and instructs us to wisdom, may be mea- 
sured and interpreted. 

2. The objection I shall propose in the words of Crellius. 
' Si in eo sita est dilectio, quod Deus nos dilexerit et filium 
suum miserit <Xa<r|Uoi^ pro peccatis nostris, quoraodo Christus 
morte sua demum iram Dei adversus nos incensamplacarit? 
nam cum dilectio ilia Dei quse plane fuit summa, causa fuit 
cur Deus filium suum charissimum miserit, necesse est ut 
iram jam suam adversus nos deposuerit: nonne aliter eodem 
tempore et impense amabit, et non amabit? si Deus etiam 
tum potuit nobis irasci, cum filium suum charissimum su- 
premge nostree felicitatis causa morti acerbissimse objiceret, 
quod satis magnum argumentum erit, ex effectu ejus petitum, 
unde cognoscamus Deum nobis non irasci amplius.' Crell. 
Defen. Socin. con. Grot, part 6. 

To the same purpose Socinus himself. * Demonstravi non 
modo Christum Deo nos, non autem Deum nobis reconci- 
liasse, verum etiam Deum ipsum fuisse qui banc reconcilia- 
tionem fecerit.' Socin. de Servator. lib. 1. part. 1. cap. I. 

* If this be the chiefest and highest love of God, that he 
sent Christ his only Son to be a propitiation for our sins ; 
how then could Christ by his death appease the wrath of 
God, that was incensed against us ? For seeing that God's 
love was the cause of sending Christ, he must needs before 
that have laid aside his anger : for otherwise, should he not 
intensely love us, and not love us at the same time? And 
if God could then be angry with us, when he gave up his 
Son to bitter death for our everlasting happiness, what ar- 
gument or evidence at any time can we have from the effect 
of it, whence we may know, that God is not farther angry 
with us V 

To the same purpose is the plea of the catechist, cap. 8. 
* De Morte Christi.' Quest. 31, 32. 

Ans. The love wherewith God loved us, when he sent 
his Son to die for us, was the most intense and supreme in 
its own kind ; nor would admit of any hatred or enmity in 
God towards us, that stood in opposition thereunto. It is 

N 2 


every where set forth as the most intense love; John iii. 16. 
Rom. V. 7, 8. 1 John iv. 10. Now this love of God, is an 
eternal free act of his will: his purpose, Rom. ix. 11. ' his 
good pleasure,' his purpose that he purposed in himself, as it 
is called ; it is his irpo^eaig, Trpoyvwaig ; 1 Pet. i. 2. tvSoKia, 
as I have elsewhere distinctly declared ; a love that was to 
have an efficacy by means appointed : but for a love of 
friendship, approbation, acceptation, as to our persons and 
duties, God bears none unto us, but as considered in Christ, 
and for his sake. It is contrary to the whole design of the 
Scripture, and innumerable particular testimonies, once to 
fancy a love of friendship, and acceptation towards any in 
God, and not consequent to the death of Christ. 

2. This love of God's purpose and good pleasure, this 
* charitas ordinativa,' hath not the least inconsistency with 
those hinderances of peace and friendship, on the part of 
God, before-mentioned ; for though the holiness of God's 
nature, the justice of his government, the veracity of his 
word, will not allow that he take a sinner into friendship and 
communion with himself, without satisfaction made to him, 
yet this liinders not, but that in his sovereign good-will and 
pleasure, he might purpose to recover us from that condi- 
tion, by the holy means which he appointed. God did not 
love us, and not love us, or was angry with us, at the same 
time, and in the same respect. He loved us, in respect of 
the free purpose of his will, to send Christ to redeem us, and 
to satisfy for our sin ; he was angry with us, in respect of 
his violated law and provoked justice by sin. 

3. God loves our persons, as we are his creatures ; is an- 
gry with us, as we are his sinners. 

4. It is true, that we can have no greater evidence and 
argument of the love of God's good-will and pleasure in ge- 
neral, than in sending his Son to die for sinners ; and that 
he is not angry with them, with an anger of hatred, opposite 
to that love ; that is, with an eternal purpose to destroy 
them ; but for a love of friendship and acceptation, we have 
innumerable other pledges and evidences, as is known, and 
might be easily declared. 

These things being premised, the confirmation of what 
was proposed ensues. 

1. The use and sense of the words, whereby this doctrine 


of our reconciliation is expressed, evinces the truth con- 
tended for, iXacFKea^m, (caraXacro-tiv and diroKaToXacraHv, which 
are the words used in this business, are as much as 'iram 
avertere,' ' to turn away anger ;' so is ' reconciliare, propitiare,' 
and ' placare,' in Latin : ' Impius, ne audeto placare iram 
Deorum,' was a law of the Twelve Tables : iXa(ri>:o/xa<, * pro- 
pitior, placor,' iXaafiog, ' placio, exoratio ;' Gloss, vetus ; and 
in this sense is the word used ; oaa fiivroi irpoQ iXaa^ovg 
0fwv 17 opdrojv diroTpoTrag (nivrtyopevov oi fxavTHg. Plut. in 
Fabio : to ' appease their gods, and turn away the things they 
feared.' And the same author tells us of away taken, k^iXaa- 
^ai TO ny]vifxa ^eov, to ' appease the anger of God.' And 
Xenophon useth the word to the same purpose ; TroAXa jutv 
TTfjUTTWi/ dva^ijfxara \pvad vroXXa, Se dpyvpu TrofXTToXXa Ot S'uwi', 
l^iXaadfxr^v ttotI uvtov. And so also doth Livy use the word 
'reconcilio : non movit modo talis oratio regem, sed etiam 
reconciliavit Annibali. Bell. Macedon.' And many more in- 
stances might be given. God then being angry and averse 
from love of friendship with us, as hath been declared, and 
Christ being said thus to make reconciliation for us with 
God, he did fully turn away the wrath of God from us, as 
by the testimonies of it will appear. 

Before I produce our witnesses in this cause, I must give 
this one caution 5 it is not said any where expressly, that 
God is reconciled to us, but that we are reconciled to God. 
And the sole reason thereof is, because he is the party of- 
fended, and we are the parties offending. Now the party 
offending, is always said to be reconciled to the party offend- 
ed, and not on the contrary ; so Matt. v. 23, 24. * If thy 
brother have ought against thee, go and be reconciled to 
him;' the brother being the party offended, he that had 
offended, was to be reconciled to him by turning away his 
anger: and in common speech, when one hath justly pro- 
voked another, we bid him go and reconcile himself to him ; 
that is, do that which may appease him, and give an entrance 
into his favour again. So is it in the case under considera- 
tion ; being the parties offending, we are said to be recon- 
ciled to God, when his anger is turned away, and we are 
admitted into his favour. Let now the testimonies speak 
for themselves. 


Rom. V. 10. ' When we were enemies we were reconciled 
to God by the death of his Son;' KaTrrXXaynn^v ri^ Oec^, we 
were reconciled to God, or * brought again into his favour.' 
Amongst the many reasons that might be given to prove 
the intention of this expression to be, * that we were recon- 
ciled to God,' by the averting of his anger from us, and 
our accepting into favour ; I shall insist on some few from 
the context. 

1. It appears from the relation that this expression bears 
to that of ver. 8. ' whilst we were yet sinners Christ died for 
us;' with which this upon the matter is the same, 'we are 
reconciled to God by the death of his Son.' Now the intent 
of this expression, ' Christ died for us sinners,' is, he died 
to bring us sinners into the favour of God ; nor will it admit 
of any other sense ; so is our being reconciled to God by the 
death of his Son : and that this is the meaning of the ex- 
pression, ' Christ died for us,' is evident from the illustration 
given to it by the apostle; ver. 6, 7. ' Christ died for the 
ungodly.' How? as one man dieth for another; that is, to 
deliver him from death. 

2. From the description of the same thing in other words ; 
ver. 9. * being justified by his blood.' That it is the same 
thing upon the matter that is here intended, appears from 
the contexture of the apostle's speech, ' whilst we were yet 
enemies Christ died for us; much more being justified by 
his blood.' And, ' if when we were enemies we were 
reconciled to God ;' the apostle repeats what he had said 
before ; ' if when we were enemies Christ died for us,' and 
* we were justified by the blood of Christ;' that is, ' if when 
we were enemies we were reconciled to God.' Now to be 
justified, is God's reconciliation to us, his acceptation of us 
into favour, not our conversion to him, as is known and 

3. The reconciliation we have with God, is a thing ten- 
dered to us, and we do receive it ; ver. 1 1 . KaToXXayiiv IXd- 
j3ojLiei', ' we have received the reconciliation or atonement.' 
Now this cannot be spoken in reference to our reconciliation 
to God, as on our side, but of his to us, and our acceptation 
with him. Our reconciliation to God is our conversion; but 
we are not said to receive our conversion, or to have our 


conversion tendered to us; but to convert ourselves, or to be 

4. The state and condition from whence we are delivered 
by this reconciliation, is described in this, that we are called 
enemies, ' being enemies we were reconciled.' Now enemies 
in this place are the same with sinners. And the reconcilia- 
tion of sinners, that is, of those who had rebelled against 
God, provoked him, were obnoxious to wrath, is certainly 
the procuring of the favour of God for them. When you say, 
such a poor conquered rebel, that expected to be tortured 
and slain, is by means of such a one reconciled to his prince; 
what is it that you intend ? Is it that he begins to like and 
love his prince only, or that his prince lays down his wrath 
and pardons him? 

5. All the considerations before insisted on, declaring in 
what sense we are saved by the death of Christ, prove our 
reconciliation with God, to be our acceptation with him not 
our conversion to him. 

2 Cor. v. 18 — 21. Is a place of the same importance with 
that above-mentioned, wherein the reconciliation pleaded 
for is asserted, and the nature of it explained. ' And all 
things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Je- 
sus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconcilia- 
tion, to wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to 
himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them, and hath 
committed unto us the word of reconciliation. Now then we 
are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you 
by us, we pray you in Christ's stead be ye reconciled to 
God. For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no 
sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.' 

There is in the words a twofold reconciliation. 

1. Of God to man, ver. 18. 'God hath reconciled us to 
himself by Jesus Christ.' 

2. Our reconciliation to God, in the acceptance of that 
reconciliation, which we are exhorted to. 

The first is that inquired after; the reconciliation where- 
by the anger of God by Christ is turned away, and those 
for whom he died are brought into his favour ; which com- 
prises the satisfaction proposed to confirmation. For, 

1. Unless it be that God is so reconciled and atoned, 
whence is it that he is thus proclaimed to be a Father to- 


wards sinners as he is here expressed ? Out of Christ he is a 
consuming fire to sinners, and everlasting burnings, Isa. 
xxxiii. 14. ' Being of purer eyes than to behold inquity ;' Hab. 
i. 13. * Before whom no sinner shall appear or stand;' Psal. 
V. 4, 5. So that where there is no sacrifice for sin, there 
'remains nothing to sinners, but a certain fearful looking for 
of judgment and fiery indignation that shall consume the 
adversaries ;' Heb. x. 26, 27. How comes then this jealous 
God, this holy God, and just Judge, to command some to 
beseech sinners to be reconciled to him ? the reason is given 
before. It is because he reconciles us to himself by Christ, 
or in Christ. That is by Christ his anger is pacified, his 
justice satisfied and himself appeased, or reconciled to us. 

2. The reconciliation mentioned, is so expounded in the 
cause and effect of it, as not to admit of any other inter- 

1. The effect of God's being reconciled, or his reconcil- 
ing the world to himself, is in those words ; * Not imputing 
to them their trespasses.' God doth so reconcile us to him- 
self by Christ, as not to impute our trespasses to us. That 
is, not dealing with us according as justice required for our 
sins upon the account of Christ's remitting the penalty due 
to them; laying away his anger, and receiving us to favour. 
This is the immediate fruit of the reconciliation spoken of; 
if not, the reconciliation itself, non-imputation of sin, is not 
our conversion to God, 

2. The cause of it is expressed, ver. 21. 'He made him 
to be sin for us, who knew no sin.' How comes it to pass 
that God the righteous Judge doth thus reconcile us to him- 
self, and not impute to us our sins? It is because he hath 
made Christ to be sin for us ; that is, either a sacrifice for 
sin, or as sin, by the imputation of our sin to him. He was 
made sin for us, as we are made the righteousness of God 
in him. Now we are made the righteousness of God by the 
imputation of his righteousness to us. So was he made sin for 
us by the imputation of our sin to him. Now for God to re- 
concile us to himself by imputing our sin to Christ, and there- 
on not imputing them to us, can be nothing but his being ap- 
peased and atoned towards us, with his receiving us to his 
favour, by and upon the account of the death of Christ. 

3. This reconciling of us to himself, is the matter com- 


mitted to the preachers of the gospel, whereby, or by the 
declaration whereof, they should persuade us to be recon- 
ciled to God. He hath committed to us, tov \6yov rrig /ca- 
ToXXayiig' this doctrine concerning reconciliation mentioned ; 
'We therefore beseech you to be reconciled to God.' That 
which is the matter whereby we are persuaded to be recon- 
ciled to God, cannot be our conversion itself, as is pretended. 
The preachers of the gospel are to declare this word of God, 
viz. ' that he hath reconciled us to himself,' by the blood of 
Christ, the blood of the new testament that was shed for 
us, and thereon persuade us to accept of the tidings, or the 
subject of them, and to be at peace with God. Can the sense 
be, we are converted to God, therefore be ye converted ? 
This testimony then speaks clearly to the matter under 

3. The next place of the same import is, Eph. ii. 12 — 16. 
' That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from 
the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenant 
of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world. 
But now in Christ .Tesns ye who sometimes were far off, are 
made nigh by the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who 
hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall 
of partition between us. Having abolished in his flesh the 
enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordi- 
nances, for to make in himself of twain one new man, so 
making peace. And that he might reconcile both unto God 
in one body by the cross having slain the enmity thereby.' 

Here is mention of a twofold enmity. 

1. Of the Gentiles unto God. 

2. Of the Jews and Gentiles, among themselves. 

1. Of the Gentiles unto God ; ver. 12. Consider them as 
they are there described, and their enmity to God is suffi- 
ciently evident. And what in that estate was the respect of 
God unto them ? What is it towards such persons as there 
described? 'The wrath of God abideth on them;' John 
iii. 36. ' they are children of wrath ;' Eph. ii. 3. So are they 
there expressly called : ' he hateth all the workers of ini- 
quity ;' Psal. v. 5. and will by no means ' acquit the 
guilty ;' Exod. xxxiv. 7. Yea, he curseth those families that 
call not on his name. 

2. Of the Jews and Gentiles among themselves : which 


is expressed, both in the thing itself, and in the cause of it : 
it is called enmity, and said to arise from, or be occasioned 
and improved by, the law of commandments contained in 
ordinances; the occasion, improvement, and management 
of this enmity between them, see elsewhere. 

2. Here is mention of a twofold reconciliation. 

1. Of the Jews and Gentiles among themselves ; ver. 
14, 15. ' He is our peace, and hath made both one, slaying 
the enmity, so making peace.' 

2. Of both unto God ; ver. 16. * that he might reconcile 
both unto God.' 

3. The manner whereby this reconciliation was wrought; 
in his body by the cross. 

The reconciliation unto God is that aimed at : this re- 
conciliation is the reconciling of God unto us, on the ac- 
count of the blood of Christ, as hath been declared. The 
bringing of us into his favour, by the laying away of his 
wrath and enmity against us : which appears, 

1. From the cause of it expressed : that is, the body of 
Christ, by the cross ; or the death of Christ. Now the death 
of Christ was immediately for the forgiveness of sins. ' This 
is the blood of the new testament that was shed for many 
for the forgiveness of sins.' It is by shedding of his blood, 
that we have remission or forgiveness. That this is by an 
atoning of God, or our acceptance into favour, is confessed. 

2. From the expression itself: airoKaTaWa^y Iv Ivl (TwfjaTi 
Ti^ ^£(^. T(^ 3-£f^ denotes one party in the business of re- 
conciliation. He made peace between them both ; between 
the Gentiles on the one hand, and the Jews on the other ; 
and he made peace between them both, and God ; Jews and 
Gentiles on the one hand, and God on the other : so that 
God is a party in the business of reconciliation, and is therein 
reconciled to us ; for our reconciliation to him, is mentioned 
in our reconciliation together, which cannot be done without 
our conversion. 

3. From the description of the enmity given ver. 12. 
which plainly shews (as was manifested), that it was on both 
sides. Now this reconciliation unto God is by the removal 
of that enmity. And if so, God was thereby reconciled, and 
atoned, if he hath any anger or indignation against sin, or 


4. Because this reconciliation of both to God, is the 
great cause and means of their reconciliation among them- 
selves. God, through the blood of Christ, or on the account 
of his death, receiving both into favour, their mutual enmity- 
ceased, and without it never did, nor ever will. And this is 
the reconciliation accomplished by Christ. 

The same might be said of the other places ; Col. i. 
20, 21. But I shall not need to multiply testimonies to the 
same purpose. Thus we have reconciliation by Christ, in 
that he hath made atonement or satisfaction for our sins. 
The observations given On these texts, being suited to ob- 
viate the exceptions of Socinus treating of this subject, in 
his book ' de Servatore,' without troubling the reader with 
the repetition of his words. 

That which in the next place I thought to do, is to prove 
that we have this reconciliation by the death of Christ as a 
sacrifice. But because I cannot do this to my own satis- 
faction, without insisting, first, on the whole doctrine of sa- 
crifices in general ; secondly, on the institution, nature, end, 
and efficacy, of the sacrifices of the Aaronical priesthood ; 
thirdly, the respect and relation that was between them, 
and the sacrifice of Christ, both in general and in particular ; 
and from all these considerations at large deducing the con- 
clusion proposed ; and finding that this procedure would 
draw out this treatise to a length, utterly beyond my expec- 
tation, I shall not proceed in it ; but refer it to a peculiar 
discourse on that subject. 

That which I proposed to confirmation at the entrance of 
this discourse, was the satisfaction made by the blood of 
Christ. This being proposed under several considerations 
hath thus far been severally handled : that his death was a 
price, that we have redemption thereby properly so called, 
was first evinced. That truth standing, the satisfaction of 
Christ is sufficiently established, our adversaries themselves 
being judges. The sacrifice that he offered in his death hath 
also been manifested. Hereof is the reconciliation now de- 
livered, the fruit and effect. This also is no less destructive 
of the design of these men : what they have to object against 
that which hath been spoken, shall have the next place in 
our discourse. 

Thus then our catechiststo this business, in the 31st and 


32d questions of the 8th chapter, which is about the death 
of Christ. 

* Q. What'' say you then to those places, that affirm that he 
reconciled us to God ? 

* A. 1. That' the Scripture nowhere says, that God was re- 
conciled to us by Christ. But this only, that by Christ, or 
the death of Christ we are reconciled, or reconciled to God, 
as may appear from all those places, where reconciliation is 
treated of. Wherefore from those places, the satisfaction can- 
not be proved. 2. Because it is evident in the Scripture, 
that God reconciled us to himself, which evinceth the opi- 
nion of the adversaries, to be altogether false ; 2 Cor. v. 18. 
Col. i. 20. 22. 

Ans. 1. Whether there be any mention of such a recon- 
ciliation, as whereby the anger of God is turned away, and 
we received into favour, in the Scripture, the reader will 
judge from what hath b'een already proposed, and thither 
we appeal. It is not about words and syllables that we con- 
tend, but things themselves. The reconciliation of God to 
us by Christ, is so expressed, as the reconciliation of a 
judge to an offender, of a king to a rebel, may be expressed. 

2. If Christ made reconciliation for us, and for our sins 
an atonement, he made the satisfaction for us which we 
plead for. 

3. It is true, God is said to reconcile us to himself; but 
always by Christ, by the blood of Christ : proposing himself 
as reconciled thereby, and declaring to us the atonement, 
that we may turn imto him. 

They add. 

' Q. But' what thinkest thou of this reconciliation ? 

* A. That Jesus Christ shewed a way to us, who by 
reason of our sins were enemies to God, and alienated from 
him, how we ought to turn unto God, and by that means be 
reconciled to him.' 

h Ad hsec vero, quod nos Deo reconciliarit quid affersl — Priraum, nusquam 
scripturam asserere, Deura nobis a Christo reconciliatuni ; verum id tantum, quod 
nos per Christum aut mortem ejus, simus reconciliati, vel Deo reconciliati, ut ex 
omnibus locis, qute de hac reconciliatione agnnt, videre est. Quare nullo niodo ex 
lis omnibus locis ea satisfactio extrui potest, deinde vero quod aperte in Scripluris 
extat, Deum nos sibi reconciliasse, id opinionem adversariorum prorsus faisam esse 
evincit; 2 Cor. v. 18. Col. i. 20. 23. 

> Quid vero de hac reconciliatione sentis ? — Christum Jesum nobis, qui propter 
peccata nostra Dei inimici eramus, et ab eo abalienati, vjam ostendisse, quemadmo- 
dum nos ad Deum convert!, atque, ad eum modum ei reconciliari oporteat. 


Ans. I suppose there was never a more perverse de- 
scription of any thing, part, or parcel of the gospel, by any 
men fixed on. Some of the excellencies of it may be pointed 

1. Here is a reconciliation between two parties, and yet 
a reconciliation but of one; the other excluded. 

2. An enmity on one side only, between God and sin- 
ners, is supposed, and that on the part of the sinners ; when 
the Scriptures do much more abound in setting out the en- 
mity of God against them as such ; his wrath abiding on 
them, as some will find one day to their eternal sorrow. 

3. Reconciliation is made nothing but conversion, or 
conversion to God ; which yet are terms and things, in the 
Scriptures every where distinguished, 

4. We are said to be enemies to God, 'propter peccata 
nostra,' when the Scripture says every where, ' that God is 
an enemy to us,' 'propter peccata nostra.' He hateth and is 
angry with sinners, 'his judgment is that they which com- 
mit sin, are worthy of death."' 

5. Here is no mention of the death and blood of Christ, 
which in every place in the whole Scripture where this re- 
conciliation is spoken of, is expressly laid down as the 
cause of it; and necessarily denotes the reconciliation of 
God to us by the averting of his anger, as the effect of it. 

6. Did Christ by his death shew us a way, whereby we 
might come to be reconciled to God, or convert ourselves ? 
What was that way ? Is it, that God lays punishment, and 
affliction, and death, on them who are no way liable there- 
unto ? What else can we learn from the death of Christ, ac- 
cording to these men ? The truth is, they mention not his 
death, because they know not how to make their ends hang 

This is the sum, of what they say. We are reconciled to 
God, that is, we convert ourselves, by the death of Christ; 
that is, not by his death, but according to the doctrine he 
teacheth ; and this is the sum of the doctrine of reconcilia- 
tion, Christ teacheth us a way how we should convert our- 
selves to God. And so much for reconciliation. 

■' Rom. i. 32. 



The satisfaction of Christ, on the consideration of his death, being a punish- 
ment, farther evinced ; and vindicated from the exceptions of Smalcius. 

The third consideration of the death of Christ, was of it, as 
it was penal, as therein he underwent punishment for us, or 
that punishment, which for sin was due to us. Thence di- 
rectly is it said to be satisfactory. About the word itself, 
we do not contend ; nor do our adversaries except against 
it; if the thing itself be proved that is intended by that ex- 
pression, this controversy is at end. Farther to open the 
nature of satisfaction, then, by what is said before about 
bearing of sins, &c. I see no reason ; our aim in that word 
is known to all, and the sense of it obvious. This is made 
by some the general head of the whole business. I have 
placed it on the peculiar consideration of Christ's bearing 
our sins, and undergoing punishment for us. What our ca- 
techists say to the whole, I shall briefly consider. 

Having assigned some causes and effects of the death of 
Christ, partly true in their own place, partly false ; they 
ask, Q. 12. 

' Is'' there no other cause of the death of Christ? 

' A. None at all. As for that which Christians com- 
monly think, that Christ by his death, merited salvation for 
us, and satisfied fully for our sins, that opinion is false (or 
deceitful), erroneous, and very pernicious.' 

That the men of this persuasion are bold men, we are not 
now to learn. Only this assertion, that there is no other 
cause of the death of Christ, but what they have mentioned, 
is a new experiment thereof. 

If we must believe that these men know all things, and 
the whole mind of God, so that all is false and pernicious, 
that lies beyond their road and understanding, there may be 
some colour for this confidence. But the account we have 
already taken of them, will not allow us to grant them this 

a Non est etiam aliqua alia mortis Christ! causa ? — Nulla prorsus; etsi nunc vulgo 
Christiani sentiunt, Christum morte sua nobis salutem meruisse, et pro peccatis nos- 
tris plenarie satisfecisse, quae seiitentia fallax est et erronea, et admodum perDiciosa. 
Cat. Racov. de Mor. Christi cap. 8. q. I'i. 


2. Of the merit of Christ, I have spoken briefly before. 
His satisfaction is the thing opposed chiefly. What they 
have to say against it, shall now be considered ; as also 
how this imputation, or charge, on the common faith of 
Christians, about the satisfaction of Christ, to be false, er- 
roneous, and pernicious, will be managed. 

*Q. 13. How*^ is it false, or deceitful? 

'A, That it is false (or deceitful) and erroneous is hence 
evident ; that not only there is nothing of it extant in the 
Scripture, but also, that it is repugnant to the Scriptures and 
sound reason.' 

For the truth of this suggestion, that it is not extant in 
Scripture, I refer the reader to what hath been discoursed 
from the Scripture about it already. When they, or any for 
them, shall answer, or evade the testimonies that have been 
produced, or may yet be so (for I have yet mentioned none 
of those which immediately express the dying of Christ for 
us, nor his being our Mediator and surety in his death) they 
shall have liberty, for me, to boast in this manner. In the 
meantime we are not concerned in their wretched confi- 
dence. But let us see how they make good their assertion 
by instances. 

' Q. 14. Shew that in order? 

' A. That it is not in the Scripture, this is an argument, 
that the assertors of that opinion do never bring evident Scrip- 
tures for the proof of it ; but knit certain consequences, by 
which they endeavour to make good what they assert : which 
as it is meet to admit, when they are necessarily deduced 
from Scripture, so it is certain they have no force, when they 
are repugnant to the Scripture.' 

But what is it that we do not prove by express Scripture, 
and that in abundance ? That our iniquity was laid upon 
Christ ; that he * was bruised, grieved, wounded, killed for us ;' 
that he ' bare our iniquities,' and that in his ' own body on 
the tree,' that he was ' made sin for us,' and a curse; that we 

•> Qua ratione 1 — Quod ad id quod fallax sit et erronea, attinet, id hinc perspi- 
cuum est, quod non solum de ea nihil extet in scripturis, verum etiam Scripturis et 
sanfe rationi repugnat 1 

« Demoiistra id ordine ? — Id non haberi in Scripturis argumento est, quod istius 
opinionis assertores nunquam perspicuas scripturas afferunt, ad probandam istam 
opinionem : verum quasdam consecutiones nectunt, quibus quod asserunt efficere co- 
nantur ; quas ut admittere sequum est, cum ex Scripturis necessario adstruuntur, ita 
ubi Scripturis repuguantur, eas nulluui vim habere certum est. Quest. 15. 


deserved death, and he ' died for us ;' that he made * his soul 
an offering for sin, laid down his life a price and ransom for 
us/ or in our stead ; that we are thereby ' redeemed and re- 
conciled to God ;' that our ' iniquities being laid on him,' and 
he bearing them (that is the punishment due to them), * we 
have deliverance ;' God being atoned, and his wrath removed, 
we prove not by consequence, but by multitudes of express 
testimonies. If they mean that the word * satisfaction' is not 
found in Scripture in the business treated of, we tell them 
that £3ti»K, is, and Xvrpov, oVrtXwrpov, and Xvrpwmg, cittoXv- 
rpuxTig, KaToXXayri (all words of a cognate significancy there- 
to, and of the same importance as to the doctrine under con- 
sideration), are frequently used. It is indeed a hard task to 
find, satisfaction, the word, in the Hebrew of the Old Testa- 
ment, or the Greek of the New. But the thing itself is found 
expressly a hundred times over ; and their great master 
doth confess, that it is not the word, but the thing itself, 
that he opposeth. So that without any thanks to them at 
all, for granting, that consequences from Scripture may be 
allowed to prove matters of faith, we assure them our doc- 
trine is made good by innumerable express testimonies of 
the word of God, some whereof have been by us now insisted 
on ; and moreover, that if they and their companions did 
not wrest the Scriptui'es to strange and uncouth senses, never 
heard of before amongst men professing the name of Christ, 
we could willingly abstain wholly from any expression, that 
is not jorjTwc found in the word itself. But if by their re- 
bellion against the truth, and attempts to pervert all the ex- 
pressions of the word, the most clear and evident, to per- 
verse and horrid abominations, we are necessitated to them, 
they must bear them unless they can prove them not to be 

Let the reader observe, that they grant, that the conse- 
quences we gather from Scripture would evince that which 
we plead and contend for, were it not but that they are re- 
pugnant to other Scriptures. Let them then manifest the truth 
of their pretension by producing those other Scriptures, or 
confess that they are self-condemned. 

Wherefore they ask, 

* Q. How'' is it repugnant to the Scriptures ? 

<i Qui vero Scriptural repugnat ? — Ad eum niodura, quod Scripture passim, Deum 


* A. In this sort, that the Scriptures do every where testify, 
that God forgives sin freely ; 2 Cor. v. 19. Rom. iii. 24, 25. 
but principally under the new covenant; Eph. ii. 8. Matt. 
xviii.23. Now nothing is more opposite to free remission, than 
satisfaction ; so that if a creditor be satisfied, either by the 
debtor himself, or by any other in the name of the debtor, 
he cannot be said to forgive freely.* 

If this be all that our consequences are repugnant unto 
in the Scripture, we doubt not to make a speedy reconcilia- 
tion. Indeed there was never the least difference between them. 
Not to dwell long upon that which is of an easy despatch. 

1. This objection is stated solely to the consideration of 
sin as a debt, which is metaphorical. Sin properly is an 
offence, a rebellion, a transgression of the law, an injury done, 
not to a private person, but a governor in his government. 

2. The two first places mentioned, 2 Cor. v. 18 — 20. Rom. 
iii. 24, 25. do expressly mention the payment of this debt 
by Christ as the ground of God's forgiveness, remission, and 
pardon ; the payment of it, I say, not as considered meta- 
phorically, as a debt, but the making an atonement and re- 
conciliation for us, who had committed it, considered as a 
crime and rebellion, or transgression. 

3. We say, that God doth most freely forgive us, as Eph. 
ii. 8. Matt, xviii. 23. without requiring any of the debt at 
our hands, without requiring any price or ransom from us 
or any satisfaction at our hands ; but yet he forgives us for 
Christ's sake, setting forth him to be a propitiation through 
faith in his blood ; he laying down his life a ransom for us, 
God not sparing him, but giving him up to death for 
us all. 

4. The expression of another satisfying in the name of 
the debtor, intends either one procured by the debtor, and 
at his entreaty undertaking the work, or one graciously given, 
and assigned to be in his stead, by the creditor. In the first 
sense it hath an inconsistency with free remission, in the 
latter, not at all. 

The truth is, men that dream of an opposition between 

peccata hominibus gratiiito remittere, testentur, 2 Cor. v. 19. Rora. iii. 24, 25. po- 
tissimum vero sub N. Foedere, Eph. ii. 8. Matt, xviii. 23, &c. At reinissioni gra- 
tuitae nihil adversatur magis, quam satisfactio. Cui eniin creditori satisfit, vel ab 
ipso debitore, vel ab alio debitoris nomine, de eo dici non potest vere, eum debitum 
gratuito ex ipsa gratia remisisse. 



the satisfaction made by Christ, the surety, and Mediator 
of the new covenant, and free remission made to us, are ut- 
terly ignorant of the whole mystery of the gospel, nature of 
the covenant, and whole mediation of Christ ; advancing 
carnal imaginations against innumerable testimonies of the 
Scripture, witnessing the blessed conspiration between them, 
to tlie praise of the glorious grace of God. But they say, 

That it is contrary to® reason also, because it would hence 
follow, ' that Christ underwent eternal death, if lie satisfied 
God for our sins : seeing it is manifest, that the punishment 
we deserved by our sins, was eternal death. Also it would 
follow, that we should be more bound to Christ, than to God 
himself, as to him who had shewn us greater favour in satis- 
faction ; but God receiving satisfaction, afforded us no favour.' 

What, little relief this plea will afford our adversaries, 
will quickly appear. For, 

1. I have proved that Christ underwent that death that 
was due unto sinners, which was all that justice, law, or 
reason required. He underwent it, though it was impos- 
sible for him to be detained by it. 

2. If the Racovians do not think us obliged to God, for 
sending his Son out of his infinite and eternal love to die 
for us, causing all our iniquities to meet on him, justifying 
us freely (who could do nothing for our own delivery) through 
the redemption that is in the blood of Christ, we must tell 
them, that (we bless his holy name) we are not of that mind; 
but finding a daily fruit of his love and kindness, upon our 
souls, do know that we are bound unto him eternally, to love, 
praise, serve, honour, and glorify him, beyond what we shall 
ever be able to express. 

2. For the inquiry made, and comparison instituted, be- 
tween our obligation to the Father and the Son, or which of 
them we are most beholden to, we profess we cannot speak 
unto it. Our obligation to both, and either respectively, is 
such, that if our affections were extended immeasurably to 
what they are, yet the utmost and exactest height of them 

e Cedo qui istud rationi repngnef? — Idquidem hinc perspicuum est, qiiod seque- 
retur Cliiistuni aeternam raortcra subiisse, si Deo pro peccatis nostris satisfecisset : 
cum constet poenam quani homines peccatis nieruerant Eetcrnarn mortem esse : de- 
inde consequeretur, nos Christo, quam Deo ipsi devinctiores esse, quippe qui satis- 
factione multum gratiae nobis ostendisset ; Deus veto exacta satisfactione, nulla pror- 
sus gratia nos prosecutus fuisset. 


would be due to both, and each of them respectively. We 
are so bound to one, as we cannot be more to the other; be- 
cause to both in the absolutely highest degree. This we 
observe in the Scriptures, that in mentioning the work of re- 
demption, the rise, fountain, and spring of it is still assigned 
to be in the love of the Father : the carrying of it on in the 
love and obedience of the Son, and so w^e order our thoughts 
of faith towards them. The Father being not one whit the 
less free and gracious to us, by loving us upon the satisfac- 
tion of his Son, than if he had forgiven us (had it been pos- 
sible) without any satisfaction at all. 

And thus is this article of the Christian faitli, contrary 
to Scripture, thus to reason. They add, 

' Q. How'' also is it pernicious ? 

'A. In that it openeth a door unto men to sin, or at least 
incites them to sloth in following after holiness. But the 
Scripture witnesseth that this amongst others is an end of 
the death of Christ, that he might redeem us from our ini- 
quity and deliver us from this evil world that v/e might be 
redeemed from our vain conversation, and have our con- 
sciences purged from dead works, that we might serve the 
living God ; Tit. ii. 14. Gal. i. 4. 1 Pet. i. 18. Heb. ix. 14.' 

That the deliverance of us from the power and pollution 
of our sin, the purifying of our souls and consciences, the 
making of us a peculiar people of God, zealous of good works, 
that we might be holy and blameless before him in love, is 
one eminent end of the death of Christ, we grant. For this 
end by his death, did he procure the Spirit to quicken us, 
' who were dead in trespasses and sins/ sprinkling us with the 
pure water thereof, and giving us daily supplies of grace 
from him, that we might grow up in holiness before him, 
until we come to the measure in this life assigned to us in him. 

But that the consideration of the cross of Christ, and the 
satisfaction made thereby, should open a door of licentious- 
ness to sin, or encourage men to sloth in the ways of godli- 
ness, is fit only for them to assert, to whom the gospel is folly. 

•^ Cedo etiam, qui Iiebc opinio est perniciosa? — Ad eum niodtiiu, quod liominibus 
fenestram ad peccandi licentiam aperiat, aut certe ad socordiam in pietate colenda 
eos invitet. Scriptiira vero testatur, cum inter alios Christi mortis fincra esse, ut re- 
dimereraur ab omni iniquitatc, ex hoc seculo nequara eriperemur, et rcdimeremur esc 
vana conversatione a patribus tradita, et mundareniur conscientia a mortuis operibufi 
ad serviendura Deo viventi. Tit. ii. 14. Gal. i. 4. 1 Pet. i. 18. Heb. is, 14. 

o 2 


What is it, I pray, in the doctrine of the cross, that should 
thus dispose men to licentiousness and sloth? Is it that 
God is so provoked with every sin, that it is impossible, and 
against his nature to forgive it, without inflicting the punish- 
ment due thereto ? Or is it that God so loved us, that he 
gave his only Son to die for us, or that Christ loved us, and 
washed us in his own blood ? Or is it that God for Christ's 
sake doth freely forgive us ? Yea, but our adversaries say, 
that God freely forgives us ; yea, but they say it is without 
satisfaction. Is it then an encouragement to sin, to affirm 
that God forgives us freely for the satisfaction, of his Son? 
And not to say, that he forgives us freely without satisfac- 
tion ? Doth the adding of satisfaction, whereby God to the 
highest manifested his indignation and wrath against sin; doth 
that, I say, make the difference, and give the encouragement? 
Who could have discovered this but our catechists and their 
companions ? Were this a season for that purpose, I could 
easily demonsitrate that there is no powerful or effectual mo- 
tive to abstain from sin, no encouragement or incitation unto 
holiness, but what riseth from, or relateth unto, the satisfac- 
tion of Chirst. 

And this is that which they have to make good their 
charge against the common faith, that it is false, erroneous, 
and pernicious. Such worthy foundations have they of their 
great superstruction, ;or rather so great is their confidence, 
and so little is their strength for the pulling down of the 
church built upon the rock. 

They proceed to consider what testimonies and proofs 
(they say) we produce for the confirmation of the truth con- 
tended for. What (they say) we pretend from reason (though 
indeed it be from innumerable places of Scripture), I have vin- 
dicated not long since to the full in my book of the^ vindic- 
tive Justice of God, and answered all the exceptions given 
thereunto ; so that I shall not translate from thence what I 
have delivered to this purpose, but pass to what follows. 

Question twelve they make this inquiry. 

* Q. Which'' are the Scriptures out of which they endea- 
vour to confirm their opinion ? 

s De Justit. divin. Diatrib. 
'' Quae vero sunt Scripturaeequibusilliopinionemsuatn adstruere conantur? Eae, 
quae testantur Christum vel pro peccatis nostris mortuum, deinde, quod nos redeinit. 


*A. Those which testify that Christ died for us, or for our 
sins, also that he redeemed us, or that he gave himself or his 
life a redemption for many ; then, that he is our Mediator : 
moreover, that he reconciled us to God, and is a propitiation 
for our sin. Lastly, from those sacrifices, which as figures 
shadowed forth the death of Christ.' 

So do they huddle up together those very many express 
testimonies of the truth we plead for, which are recorded in 
the Scripture. Of which I may clearly say, that I know no 
one truth in the whole Scripture, that is so freely and fully 
delivered ; as being indeed of the greatest importance to oui 
souls. What they except in particular against any one of 
the testimonies that may be referred to the heads before re- 
counted (except those which have been already spoken to), 
shall be considered in the order wherein they proceed. 

They say then, 

* For' what belongeth unto those testimonies wherein it 
is contended that Christ died for us, it is manifest that sa- 
tisfaction cannot necessarily be therein asserted, because 
the Scripture witnesseth that we ought even to lay down 
our lives for the brethren; 1 John iii. 16. And Paul writes 
of himself. Col. i. 14. 'Now I rejoice in my affliction for 
you, and fill up the remainder of the affliction of Christ for 
his body which is the church.' But it is certain, that nei- 
ther do believers satisfy for any of the brethren ; nor did 
Paul make satisfaction to any for the church. 

*Q. 23. What then is the sense of these words, 'Christ 
died for us ? 

* That these words, ' for us,' do not signify in our place 

aut dedit semetipsum et aniinam suam redeiiiptionein pro miiltis : turn quod noster 
Mediator est. Porro quod nos rcconciliarit Deo, et sit propitiatio pro peccatis nos- 
tris ; Denique ex illis sacrificiis,quae raortura Christi,seufigur?e adumbraverunt. 

i Quod attinet ad ilia testimonia in quibus habetur Christum pro nobis mortuuni, 
ex lis satisfactionem adstrui necessario noa posse hinc manifestuni est, quod Scrip- 
tura testetur, etiara nos pro fratribus animas ponere debere, 1 John iii. 16. et Paulus 
de se scribat, Col. i. 24. nunc gaudeo &c. Certum autem est, nee fideles pro fratri- 
bus cuiquam satisfacere, neque Paulum cniquam pro ecclesia satisfecisse. 

At horum verborum, Christum pro nobis esse mortuura, qui sensus est.' — Is, quid 
haec verba [pro nobis] non significent loco vel vice nostri, varum propter nos, uti 
etiam Apostolus expresse loquitur, 1 Cor. viii. 11. Quod etiam similia verba indi- 
cant, cum Scriptura loquitur, pro peccatis nostris mortuuni esse Christum; quee 
verba eum sensum habere nequeunt, loco seu vice nostrorum peccatorura mortuum 
esse ; verum propter peccata nostra esse mortuum ; uti Rom. iv. 25. raanifeste Scrip- 
turn legiraus. Ea porro verba (Christum pro nobis mortuum esse) banc habent vim, 
eum idcirco mortuuni, utnos salutem aeternam, quam is nobis cajlitus attulit ampice- 
teretnur, et consequeraur, quod qua ratione fiat, paulo superius accepisti. 


or stead, but for us, as the apostle expressly speaks, 1 Cor. 
viii. 11. which also alike places do shew, where the Scrip- 
ture saith, that Christ died for our sins ; which word cannot 
have this sense, that Christ died instead of our sins, but 
that he died for our sins, as it is expressly written, Rom. 
iv. 25. Moreover these words, ' Christ died for us,' have 
this sense, that he therefore died, that we might em- 
brace and obtain that eternal salvation which he brought 
to us from heaven, which how it is done you heard be- 

A?is. Briefly to state the difference between us about 
the meaning of this expression ' Christ died for us,' I shall 
give one or two observations upon what they deliver, then 
confirm the common faith, and remove their exceptions 

1. Without any attempt of proof they oppose ' vice nos- 
tri,' and 'propter nos,' as contrary and inconsistent; and 
make this their argument, that Christ did not die ' vice nos- 
tri,' because he died ' propter nos.' When it is one argu- 
ment whereby we prove that Christ died in our stead, be- 
cause he died for us, in the sense mentioned, 1 Cor. viii. 11. 
where it is expressed by ^la, because we could no otherwise 
be brought to the end aimed at. 

2. Our sense of the expression is evident from what we 
insist upon, in the doctrine in hand. ' Christ died for vis ;' 
that is, he underwent the death and curse that was due to 
us, that we might be delivered therefrom. 

3. The last words of the catechists are those wherein 
they strive to hide the abomination of their hearts in refer- 
ence to this business. I shall a little lay it open. 

1. Christ, say they, 'brought us eternal salvation from 
heaven;' that is, 'he preached a doctrine in obedience 
whereunto, we may obtain salvation.' So did Paul. 

2. ' He died that we might receive it;' that is, rather than 
he would deny the truth which he preached, he suffered 
himself to be put to death. So did Paul; and yet he was 
not crucified for the church. 

3. It is not indeed the death of Christ, but his resurrec- 
tion that hath an influence into our receiving; of his doctrine, 
and so our obtaining salvation. And this is the sense of 
these words, 'Christ died for us.' 


For the confirmation of our faith from this expression, 
* Christ died for us,' we have, 

1. The common sense, and customary usage of human 
kind as to this expression. Whenever one is in danger, and 
another is said to come and die for him, that he may be de- 
livered, a substitution is still understood. The avrb^vxo'- of 
old, as Damon and Pythias, &c. make this manifest. 

2. The common usage of this expression in Scripture 
confirms the sense insisted on. So David wished that he 
had died for his son Absolora, that is, 'died in his stead,' that 
he might have lived ; 2 Sam, xviii. 33. And that supposal 
of Paul, Rom, i. 11. of one daring to die for a good man, 
relating (as by all expositors on the place is evinced) to the 
practice of some in former days, who to deliver others from 
death, had given themselves up to that whereunto they were 
obnoxious, confirms the same, 

3. The phrase itself, of airi^avi^ or cnriQaviv inrlp rifiCJv, 
which is used, Heb. ii. 9. 1 Pet. i, 2L Rom, v. 6-8. 2 Cor. 
V. 14, sufl[iciently proves our intention, compared with the 
use of the preposition in other places ; especially being far- 
ther explained by the use of the preposition dvri, which ever 
denotes a substitution, in the same sense and business. 
Matt. XX. 28, X. 45, 1 Tim. ii. that a substitution and 
commutation is always denoted by this preposition (if not 
an opposition which here can have no place); 1 Pet, iii, 9. 
Rom, xii. 14, Matt, v. 38. Luke xi. 13. Heb. xii. 16. 1 Cor. 
xi. 15, amongst other places are sufficient evidences. 

4. Christ is so said to die avrl ijjuwv, so as that he is said 
in his death to have ' our iniquities laid upon him/ to ' bear 
our sin in his own body on the tree,' to be made sin and a 
curse for us, to oflTer himself a ' sacrifice for us,' by his death, 
his blood, to pay a price or ransom for us, to redeem, to 
reconcile us to God, to do away our sins in his blood, to 
free us from wrath, and condemnation, and sin. Now whe- 
ther thus to ' die for us,' be not to die in our place and stead, 
let angels and men judge, 

5. But, say they, this is all that we have to say in this 
business, 'Yet we ought to lay down our lives for the bre- 
thren ;' and Paul saith, ' that he filled up the measure of the 
affliction of Christ, for his body's sake the church,' but nei- 


ther the one, nor the other did make satisfaction to God by 
their death, or affliction. But, 

1. If all we had to plead for the sense of this expression, 
' Christ died for us,' depended solely on the sense and use 
of that word virlp, then the exception would have this force 
in it. The word is once or twice used in another sense, 
in another business ; therefore the sense of it contended for 
in this business, cannot be such as you seek to maintain. 

1. This exception at best, in a cause of this importance, 
is most frivolous, and tends to the disturbance of all sober 
interpretation of Scripture. 

2. We are very far from making the single sense of the 
preposition, to be the medium, which in the argument from 
the whole expression we insist on. 

2. The passage in 1 John iii. 16. being a part of the apo- 
stles persuasive to love, charity, and the fruits of them, 
tending to the relief of the brethren, in poverty and distress, 
disclaims all intendment and possibility of a substitution or 
commutation, nor hath any intimation of undergoing that 
which was due to another, but only of being ready to the 
utmost to assist and relieve them. The same is the condi- 
tion of what is affirmed of Paul ; of the measure of affliction, 
which in the infinite wise providence, and fatherly care of 
God, is proportioned to the mystical body of Christ's 
church, Paul underwent his share for the good of the whole. 
But that Paul, that any believers were crucified for the 
church, or died for it, in the sense that Christ died for it, 
that they redeemed it to God by their own blood, it is noto- 
rious blasphemy once to imagine. The meaning of the 
phrase, * He died for our sins,' was before explained. Christ 
then dying for us, 'being made sin for us,' ' bearing our ini- 
quity,' and 'redeeming us by his blood,' died in our place 
and stead, and by his death made satisfaction to God for 
our sin. 

Also that Christ made satisfaction for our sin, appears 
from hence, that he was our Mediator. Concerning this, 
after their attempt against proper redemption by his 
blood, which we have already considered, Q. 28. they 


' Q. What*" say you to this, that Christ is the Mediator 
the new covenant between God and man ? and answer. 

* A. Seeing it is read, that Moses was a mediator. Gal. 
iii. 19. (namely of the old covenant between God and the 
people of Israel) and it is evident, that he no way made sa- 
tisfaction to God ; neither from hence, that Christ is the 
Mediator of God and man, can it be certainly gathered, that 
he made any satisfaction to God for our sin.' 

I shall take leave before I proceed, to make a return of 
this argument to them from whom it comes, by a mere change 
of the instance given. Christ, they say, our high-priest, of- 
fered himself to God in heaven. Now Aaron is expressly 
said to be a high-priest, and yet he did not offer himself in 
heaven, and therefore it cannot be certainly proved, that 
Christ offered himself in heaven, because he was a high- 
priest. Or thus : David was a king, and a type of Christ ; 
but David reigned at Jerusalem, and was a temporal king : 
it cannot therefore be proved, that Christ is a spiritual king 
from hence, that he is said to be a king. This argument I 
confess Faustus Socinus could not answer when it was urged 
against him by Sidelius. But for the former, I doubt not 
but Smalcius would quickly have answered, that it is true ; 
it cannot be necessarily proved, that Christ offereth himself 
in heaven, because he was a high-priest, which Aaron was 
also, but because he was such a high-priest, as entered into 
the heavens to appear personally in the presence of God for 
us, as he is described to be. Until he can give us a better 
answer to our argument, I hope he will be content with this 
of ours to his. It is true, it doth not appear, nor can be 
evinced necessarily, that Christ made satisfaction for us to 
God, because he was a mediator in general, for so Moses 
was who made no satisfaction; but because it is said, that 
he was such a mediator between God and man, as gave his 
life a price of redemption for them for whom with God he 
mediated, 1 Tim. ii, 6. it is most evident and undeniable ; 
and hereunto Smalcius is silent. 

What remains of this chapter in the catechists, hath been 

^ Quid ad hasc dicis, quod Christus sit Mediator inter Deuiu et homines, aut N. 
foederis? — Cum legatur Moses fuisse Mediator, Gal. iii. 19. (puta inter Deumet jio- 
pulum Israel aut prisci foederis) neque cum satisfecisse Deo ullo modo constet, ne 
hinc quidem quod mediator Dei et hominura Cbristus sit, colligi certo poterit, eum 
satisfactionem aliquani, qua Deo pro peccatls nostris satisfieret peregissc. 


already fully considered ; so to them and Mr. B. as to his 
12th chapter about the death of Christ, what hath been said 
may suffice. Many weighty considerations of the death of 
Christ in this whole discourse, I confess are omitted ; and 
yet more perhaps have been delivered, than by our adver- 
saries' occasion hath been administered unto. But this bu- 
siness is the very centre of the new covenant, and cannot 
sufficiently be weighed. God assisting, a farther attempt 
will ere long be made for the brief stating all the several 
concernments of it. 


Of election and universal grace : Of the resurrection of C/mst 
from the dead. 

Mr Biddle's intention in this 13th chapter, being to decry 
God's eternal election, finding himself destitute of any Scrip- 
ture that should to the least outward appearance speak to 
his purpose, he deserts the way and method of procedure 
imposed on himself, and in the very entrance falls into a dis- 
pute against it, with such arguments as the texts of Scrip- 
ture after-mentioned, give not the least colour or counte- 
nance unto. Not that from me he incurs any blame for using 
any arguments whereby he supposeth he may further or pro- 
mote his cause, is this spoken ; but having at the entrance 
professed against such a procedure, he ought not upon any 
necessity to have transgressed the law, which to himself he 
had prescribed. But as the matter stands, he is to be heard 
to the full, in what he hath to offer. Thus then he pro- 
ceeds : 

' Q. Those Scriptures which you have already alleged, 
when I enquired for whom Christ died, intimate the univer- 
sality of God's love to men : yet, forasmuch as this is a point 
of the greatest importance, without the knowledge and belief 
whereof, we cannot have any true and solid ground of 
coming unto God (because if he from eternity intended good 
only to a few, and those few are not set down in the Scrip- 
tures, which were written, that we through the comfort of 


them might have hope, no man can certainly, yea, probably 
infer, that he is in the number of those few, the contrary 
being ten thousand to one more likely) ; what other clear pas- 
sages of Scripture have you, which shew, that God, in send- 
ing Christ, and proposing the gospel, aimed not at the sal- 
vation of a certain elect number, but of men in general? 

'A. John iii. 16, 17. vi. 33. iv. 42. 1 John iv. 14. John 
xii. 46, 47. Mark xvi. 15, 16. Col. i. 22. i. 18. 1 Tim. ii. 1 
—3. 2 Pet. iii. 9. 2 Cor. v. 19. 1 Johnii. I, 2.' 

1. That God is good to all men, and bountiful, being a 
wise, powerful, liberal provider for the works of his hands, 
in and by innumerable dispensations, and various communi- 
cations of his goodness to them; and may in that regard, 
be said to have a universal love for them all, is granted. 
But that God loveth all, and every man alike, with that eter- 
nal love, which is the fountain of his giving Christ for them, 
and to them, and all good things with him, is not in the 
least intimated by any of those places of Scripture, where 
they are expressed for whom Christ died ; as elsewhere hath 
been abundantly manifested. 

2. It is confessed, that this is a point of the greatest im- 
portance (that is, of very great), without the knowledge and 
belief whereof we cannot have any true and solid ground of 
coming unto God; namely, of the love of God in Christ; but 
that to know the universality of his love is of such import- 
ance, cannot be proved, unless that can be numbered which 
is wanting, and that weighed in the balance which is not. 

3. We say not, that God from all eternity intended good 
only to a few. See. He intended much good to all, and 
every man in the world, and accordingly in abundance of 
variety accomplisheth that his intention towards them ; to 
some in a greater, to some in a lesser measure, according as 
seems good to his infinite wisdom and pleasure, for * which 
all things were made and created ;' Rev. iv. 11. And for that 
particular eminent good of salvation by Jesus Christ, for the 
praise of his glorious grace, we do not say that he intended 
that from eternity, for a few absolutely considered; for 
these will appear in the issue to be a * great multitude, 
which no man can number;' Rev. vii. 9. but that in compa- 
rison of them who shall everlastingly come short of liis 
glory, we say that they are but a ' little flock,' yea, ' few they 


are that are chosen/ as our Saviour expressly affirms, what- 
ever Mr. B. be pleased to tell us to the contrary. 

4. That the granting that they are but few that are 
chosen (though many be called), and that 'before the foun- 
dation of the v^^orld' some are chosen to be holy and un- 
blameable in love through Christ, having their ' names 
written in the book of life,' is a discouragement to any to 
come to God, Mr. B. shall persuade us, when he can evince 
that the secret and eternal purpose of God's discriminating 
between persons, as to their eternal conditions, is the great 
ground and bottom of our approach unto God ; and not the 
truth and faithfulness of the promises which he hath given, 
with his holy and righteous commands. The issue that lies 
before them who are commanded to draw nigh to God is, not 
whether they are elected or no, but whether they will believe 
or no, God having given them eternal and unchangeable 
rules; 'He that believes shall be saved, and he that belives 
not, shall be damned;' though no man's name be written in 
the Scripture, he that believes hath the faith of God's ve- 
racity, to assure him that he shall be saved. It is a most 
vain surmisal, that as to that obedience which God requires 
of us, there is any obstruction laid by this consideration, 
that they are but few which are chosen. 

5. This is indeed the only true and solid ground of coming 
unto God by Christ, that God hath infallibly conjoined faith 
and salvation, so that whosoever believes shall be saved ; 
neither doth the granting of the pretended universality of 
God's love, afford any other ground whatever ; and this is 
not in the least shaken or impaired by the effectual love and 
purpose of God for the salvation of some. And if Mr. B. 
hath any other true and solid ground of encouraging men to 
come to God by Christ, besides and beyond this which may 
not on one account or other, be educed from it or resolved 
into it(I mean of God's command and promise), I do here beg 
of him to acquaint me with it, and I shall give him more 
thanks for it, if I live to see it done, than as yet I can per- 
suade myself to do on the account of all his other labours 
which I have seen. 

6. We say, though God hath chosen some only to sal- 
vation by Christ, yet that the names of those some are not 
expressed in Scripture ; the doing whereof would have been 


destructive to the main end of the word, the nature of faith, 
and all the ordinances of the gospel ; yet God having de- 
clared that whosoever believeth shall be saved, there is suf- 
ficient ground for all and every man in the world, to whom 
the gospel is preached, to come to God by Christ, and other 
ground there is none, nor can be offered by the assertors of 
the pretended universality of God's love. Nor is this pro- 
position, ' he that believes shall be saved/ founded on the 
universality of love pleaded for, but the sufficiency of the 
means for the accomplishment of what is therein asserted : 
namely, the blood of Christ, who is believed on. 

Now because Mr. B. expresseth, that the end of his as- 
serting this universality of God's love, is to decry his eternal 
purpose of election ; it being confessed that between these 
two, there is an inconsistency : without entering far into 
that controversy, I shall briefly shew what the Scripture 
speaks to the latter, and how remote the places mentioned 
by Mr. B. are, from giving countenance to the former in the 
sense wherein by him who asserts it it is understood. 

For the first, methinks a little respect and reverence to 
that testimony of our Saviour, ' many are called, but few 
are chosen,' might have detained this gentleman from as- 
serting with so much confidence, that the persuasion of" 
God's choosing but a few, is an obstruction of men's coming 
unto God. Though he looks upon our blessed Saviour as 
a mere man, yet I hope, he takes him for a true man, and one 
that taught the way of God aright. But a little farther to 
clear this matter. 

1. Some are chosen from eternity, and are under the pur- 
pose of God, as to the good mentioned. 2. Those some, are 
some only, not all ; and therefore as to the good intended, 
there is not a universal love in God, us to the objects of it, 
but such a distinguishing one as is spoken against. Eph. i. 
4, 5. ' According as he hath chosen us in him before the 
foundation of the world, that we should be holy, and with- 
out blame before him in love : having predestinated us to the 
adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according 
to the good pleasure of his will.' Here are some chosen, and 
consequently an intention of God concerning them, express- 
ed ; and this from eternity, or before the foundation of the 
world; and this to the good of holiness, adoption, salvation; 


and this is only of some, and not of all the world, as the 
whole tenor of the discourse being referred to believers, 
doth abundantly manifest. 

Rom. viii. 28 — 30. * And we know, that all things work 
together for good, to them that are the called according to 
his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did pre- 
destinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he 
might be the firstborn amongst many brethren. Moreover, 
whom he did predestinate, them he also called : and whom 
he called, them he also justified : and whom he justified, 
them he also glorified.* The good here intended is glory, 
that the apostle closes withal ; ' whom he justified, them he 
also glorified.' The means of that end, consists in vocation 
and justification : the persons to be made partakers of this 
end, are not all the world, but the * called according to his 
purpose;' the designation of them so distinguished, to the 
end expressed, is from the purpose, foreknowledge, and pre- 
destination of God, that is, his everlasting intention. Were 
it another man, with whom we have to do, I should wonder 
that it came into his mind, to deny this eternal intention of 
God towards some for good ; but nothing is strange from the 
gentlemen of our present contest. They are but some which 
are ' ordained to eternal life ;' Acts xiii. 48. but some, that 
are ' given to Christ :' John xvii. 6. * A remnant according to 
election ;' Rom. xi. 5. one being chosen, when another was 
rejected, before * they were born, or had done either good or 
evil, that the purpose of God, according to election might 
stand;' Rom. ix. 11, 12. and those who attain salvation, are 
' chosen thereunto, through sanctification of the Spirit, and 
belief of the truth ;' 2 Thess. ii. 13. All that is intended by 
them, whom Mr. B. thinketh to load with the opinion he 
rejects, is but what in these and many other places of Scrip- 
ture, is abundantly revealed. God from all eternity, accord- 
ing to the purpose of his own will, or the purpose which is 
according to election, hath chosen some, and appointed 
them to the obtaining of life and salvation by Christ, to the 
praise of his glorious grace. For the number of these, be 
they few or more, in comparison of the rest of the w^orld, the 
event doth manifest. 

Yet farther to evidence that this purpose of God, or in- 
tention spoken of, is peculiar and distinguishing, there is ex- 


press mention of another sort of men, who are not thus 
chosen, but lie under the purpose of God, as to a contrary- 
lot and condition. ' The Lord hath made all things for him- 
self; yea, even the wicked for the day of evil;' Prov. xvi. 4. 
They are persons, 'whose names are not written in the 
Lamb's book of life ;' Rev. xiii. 8. ' Being of old ordained 
to condemnation;' Jude iv. being as 'natural brute beasts, 
made to be taken and destroyed ;' 2 Pet. ii. 12. And there- 
fore, the apostle distinguisheth all men into those who ' are 
appointed to wrath/ and those who are appointed to the 
obtaining of life by Jesus Christ; 1 Thess. v. 9. An in- 
stance of which eternally discriminating purpose of God, is 
given in Jacob and Esau, Rom. ix. 11, 12. which way and 
procedure therein of God, the apostle vindicates from all 
appearance of unrighteousness, and stops the mouths of all 
repiners against it, from the sovereignty and absolute li- 
berty of his will, in dealing with all the sons of men as he 
pleaseth ; ver. 14 — 21. Concluding that in opposition to 
them, whom God hath made ' vessels of mercy, prepared 
unto glory;' there are also * vessels of wrath fitted to destruc- 
tion ;' ver. 22, 23. 

Moreover, in all eminent effects and fruits of love, in all 
the issues and ways of it, for the good of, and towards the 
sons of men, God abundantly manifests, that his eternal 
love, that regards the everlasting good of men, as it was be- 
fore described, is peculiar, and not universally comprehen- 
sive of all, and every one of mankind. 

In the pursuit of that love, he gave his Son to die ; 'For 
God commendeth his love to us, in that whilst we were yet 
sinners, Christ died for us;' Rom. v. 8. ' Herein is love, not 
that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son 
to be the propitiation for our sins;' 1 John iv. 10. Now 
though he died not for the Jews only, but for all, for the 
whole world, or men throughout the whole world, yet that 
he died for some only of all sorts throughout the world, even 
those who are so chosen, as is before-mentioned, and not for 
them who are rejected, as was above declared, himself testi- 
fies; Johnxvii. 9. ' I pray for them, I pray not for the world, 
but for them which thou hast given me, thine they were, and 
thou gavest them me ;' ver. 6. ' And for their sakes I sanc- 
tify myself;' ver. 17. Even as he had said before, that he 


came to give his life * a ransom for many ;' Matt. xx. 28. 
which Paul afterward abundantly confirms ; affirming, that 
God * redeemed his church with his own blood ;' Acts xx. 
28. Not the world, as contradistinguished from his church, 
nor absolutely; but his church throughout the world. And 
to give us a clearer insight into his intendment, in naming 
the church in this business, he tells us, they are God's elect 
whom he means; Rom. viii. 32 — 34. 'He that spared not his 
Son, but delivered him up to death for us all, how shall he 
not with him, freely give us all things ? Who shall lay any 
thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth: 
Who is he that condemneth ? It is Christ that died, yea, ra- 
ther that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, 
who also maketh intercession for us.' They are the elect 
for whom God gave his Son, and that out of his love, which 
the apostle eminently sets out ver. 32. those to whom with 
his Son he gives all things, and who shall on that account 
never be separated from him. 

Farther, to manifest that this great fruit and effect of the 
love of God, which is extended to the whole object of that 
love, was not universal. 1. The promise of giving him was 
not so ; God promised Christ to all, for and to whom he 
giveth him. * The Lord God of Israel by him visited and 
redeemed his people, raising up a horn of salvation for them 
in the house of his servant David, as he spake by the mouth 
of his holy prophets, which have been since the world be- 
gan ;' Luke i. 68 — 70. In the very first promise of him, the 
seed of the serpent (as are all reprobate unbelievers) are ex- 
cluded from any interest therein; Gen. iii. 15. And it was 
renewed again, not to all the world, but to 'Abraham and 
his seed;' Gen. xii. 2, 3. Acts ii. 39. iii. 25. And for many 
ages, the promise was so appropriated to the ' seed of Abra- 
ham ;' Rom. ix. 5. with some few, that joined themselves to 
them, Isa. Ivi. 3 — 5. that the people of God prayed for a 
curse on the residue of the world, Jer. x. 25. as they which 
were ' strangers from the covenant of promise ;' Eph. ii. 12. 
they belonged not to them. So that God made not a promise 
of Christ to the universality of mankind ; which sufficiently 
evinceth, that it was not from a universal, but a peculiar 
love that he was given. Nor 

2. When Christ was exhibited in the flesh, according to 


the promise, was he given to all, but to the church; Isa. ix. 6. 
neither really as to their good ; nor ministerially for the pro- 
mulgation of the gospel to any, but to the Jews. And there- 
fore, when he came to his own, though his ' own received 
him not ;' John i. 11. yet, as to the ministry which he was to 
accomplish, he professed he was not ' sent but to the lost 
sheep of Israel ;' and gives order to them whom he sent forth 
to preach in his own lifetime, not to go into the ' way of the 
Gentiles, nor to enter into any city of the Samaritans ;' Matt. 
X. 5. yea, when he had been lifted up, to draw all men to him, 
John iii. 14. and chap. xii. 32. and being ascended had 
broken down the partition wall, and took away all distinc- 
tion of Jew and Gentile, circumcision and uncircumcision, 
having died not only for that nation of the Jews, (for the 
remnant of them according to the election of grace, Rom. xi.) 
but that he 'might gather together in one the children of 
God' that were scattered abroad ; John xi. 52. whence the 
language and expressions of the Scripture as to the people 
of God are changed, and instead of Judah and Israel, they 
are expressed by the ' world;' John iii. 16. the 'whole world,' 
1 John ii. 1, 2. and ' all men ;' 1 Tim. iv. 6. in opposition to 
the Jews only, some of all sorts being now taken into grace 
and favour with God ; yet neither then doth he do what did 
remain, for the full administration of the covenant of grace 
towards all ; namely, the pouring out of his Spirit with effi- 
cacy of power to bring them into subjection to him; but 
still carries on, though in a greater extent and latitude, a 
work of distinguishing love, taking some and refusing 
others. So that being 'exalted, and made a Prince and a 
Saviour,' he gives not repentance to all the world, but to 
them whom he redeemed to God by his blood, out of every 
* kindred and tongue and people and nation ;' Rev. v. 9. 

It appears then, from the consideration of this first most 
eminent effect of the love of God, in all the concernments of 
it, that that love, which is the foundation of all the grace 
and glory, of all the spiritual and eternal good things, 
whereof the sons of men are made partakers, is not universal, 
but peculiar and distinguishing. 

Mr. Biddle being to prove his former assertion of the 
universality of God's love, mei:tions sundry places, where 
God is said to love the world, and to send his Son to K- the 

VOL. IX. p 


Saviour, of the world ; John iii. 16, 17. vi. 33. iv. 42. 1 John 
iv. 14. Johnxii. 46,47. 1 John ii. 1, 2. The reason of which 
expression the reader was before acquainted with. The bene- 
fits of the death of Christ being now no more to be confined 
to one nation, but proraiscuouly to be imparted tb the 
children that were scattered abroad throughout the world in 
every kindred, tongue, and nation, under heaven, the word 
* world,' being used to signify men living in the world, some- 
times more, sometimes fewer, seldom or never, 'all' (unless a 
distribution of them into several sorts comprehensive of the 
universality of mankind be subjoined), that word is used to 
express them, who in the intention of God and Christ are to 
be made partakers of the benefits of his mediation. Men of all 
sorts throughout the world, being now admitted thereunto : 
as was before asserted. 

2. The benefit of redemption being thus grounded upon 
the principle of peculiar, not universal love, whom doth God 
reveal his will concerning it unto ? and whom doth he call 
to the participation thereof? If it be equally provided for all, 
out of the same love, it is all the reason in the world that all 
should equally be called to a participation thereof, or at 
least so be called, as to have it made known unto them. For 
a physician to pretend that he hath provided a sovereign re- 
medy for all the sick persons in a city, out of an equal love 
that he bears to them all, and when he hath done, takes care 
that some few know of it, whereby they may come and be 
healed, but leaves the rest in utter ignorance of any such 
provision that he hath made, will he be thought to deal sin- 
cerely in the profession that he makes of doing of this, out 
of an equal love to them all ? Now not only for the space of 
almost four thousand years did God suffer incomparably the 
greatest part of the whole world, to ' walk in their own ways, 
not calling them to repent,' Acts xiv. 16. winking at that long 
time of their ignorance, wherein they worshipped stocks, 
stones, and devils ; all that while making known his word 
unto Jacob, his statutes and judgments unto Israel, not deal- 
ing so with any nation, whereby they knew not his judg- 
ments ; Psal. cxlvii. 19, 20. so in the pursuit of his eternal 
love, calling a few only, in comparison, leaving the bulk of 
mankind in sin, without hope or God in the world ; Eph. ii. 
12. but even also since the giving out of a commission and 


express command, not to confine the preaching of the word, 
and calling of men, to Judea, but to go into all the world 
and to preach the gospel to every creature ; Mark xvi. 15. 
whereupon it is shortly after said, to be preached to every 
creature under heaven ; Col. i. 22. the apostle thereby 
' warning every man and teaching every man, that they 
might present every man to Jesus Christ ;' Col. i. 28. namely, 
of all those to whom he came and preached, not the Jews 
only, but of all sorts of men under heaven, and that on this 
ground, that God would have ' all men to be saved and come 
to the knowledge of the truth,' 1 Tim. ii. 3, 4. be they of what 
sort they will, kings, rulers, and all under authority ; yet 
even to this very day, njany whole nations, great and nume- 
rous sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, having 
neither in their own days, nor in the days of their forefathers, 
ever been made partakers of the glorious gospel of Jesus 
Christ, whereby alone life and immortality are brought to 
light, and men are made partakers of the love of God in them. 
So that yet we have not the least evidence of the universal 
love pleaded for. Yea, 

3. Whereas, to the effectual bringing of men ' dead in 
trespasses and sins' to a participation of any saving spiritual 
effect of the love of God in Christ, besides the promulgation 
of the gospel and the law thereof, which consisteth in the in- 
fallible connexion of faith and salvation according to the 
tenor of it; Matt. xvi. 16. 'He that believeth shall be 
saved ;' which is accompanied with God's command to be- 
lieve, wherein he declares his will for their salvation, upon 
the terms proposed, approving the obedience of faith, 
and giving assurance of salvation thereupon ; 1 Tim. ii. 
1 — 4. there is moreover required the operation of God by 
his Spirit with power ; to evince that all this dispensation is 
managed by peculiar distinguishing love, this is not granted 
to all, to whom the commanding and approving word doth 
come, but only to them who are the called according to his 
purpose; Rom. viii. 28. that is, to them who are predesti- 
nated; ver. 30. for them he calls, so as to justify and glorify 
them thereupon. 

4. Not then to insist on any other particular effects of 
the love of God, as sanctification, justification, glorifica- 
tion ; this in general may be affirmed, that there is not any 

p 2 


one good thing ?vhatsoever, that is proper and peculiar to 
the covenant of grace, but it proceeds from a distinguishing 
love, and an intention of God towards some only therein. 

5. It is true that God inviteth many to repentance, and 
earnestly inviteth them by the means of the word, which he 
affords them, to turn from their evil ways, of whom all the 
individuals are not converted, as he dealt with the house of 
Israel (not all the world, but), those who had his word and 
ordinances, Ezek. xviii. 31, 32. affirming that it is not for his 
pleasure, but for their sins, that they die ; but that this ma- 
nifests a universal love in God in the way spoken of, or 
any thing more than the connexion of repentance and accep- 
tation with God, with his legal approbation of turning from 
sin, there is no matter of proof to evince. 

6. Also, he is not willing that any should perish, but 
that all should come to repentance, 2 Pet. iii. 9. even all 
those towards whom he exercises patience and long-suffering 
for that end (which, as the apostle there informs, is to us- 
ward) that is, to believers, of whom he h speaking. To them 
also it is said, that he doth not ' afHict willingly nor grieve 
the children of men,' Lam. iii. 33. even his church, of which 
the prophet is speaking : although this also may be extended 
to all; God never afflicting or grieving men, but it is for 
some other reason and cause, than merely his own will; their 
destruction being of themselves. David indeed tells us, 
that the ' Lord is gracious, full of compassion ; slow to anger, 
and of great mercy : that the Lord is good to all, and his 
tender mercies are over all his works;' Psal. cxlv. 8, 9. But 
he tells us withal, whom he intends by the ' all' in this place, 
even the generation which ' praise his works and declare his 
mighty acts;' ver. 4. those who * abundantly utter the memory 
of his great goodness, and sing of his righteousness ;' ver. 7. 
or his saints, as he expressly calls them; ver. 10. The word 
he there mentions, is the word of the kingdom of Christ over 
all, wherein the tender mercies of God are spread abroad, in 
reference to them that do enjoy them. Not but that God is 
good to all, even to his whole creation, in the many unspeak- 
able blessings of his providence, wherein he abounds to- 
wards them in all goodness, but that is not here intended. 
So that Mr. B. hath fruitlessly from these texts of Scripture, 
endeavoured to prove a universality of love in God, incon- 


si stent with his peculiar love, purpose, and intention of doing 
good, in the sense declared to some only. 

And thus have 1 briefly gone through this chapter, and 
by the way taken into consideration all the texts of Scrip- 
ture, which he there wrests to confirm his figment, on the 
goodness of the nature of God, of the goodness and love to 
all, which he shews in great variety, and several degrees, in 
the dispensation of his providence throughout the world, of 
this universal love, and what it is in the sense of Mr. B. and 
his companions, of its inconsistency with the immutability, 
prescience, omnipotence, fidelity, love, mercy, and faithful- 
ness of God; this being not a controversy peculiar to them, 
with whom in this treatise I have to do, I shall not farther 

As I have in the preface to this discourse given an ac- 
count of the rise and present state of Socinianism, so I 
thought in this place to have given the reader an account of 
the present state of the controversy about grace, and free- 
will, and the death of Christ, with especial reference to the 
late management thereof amongst the Romanists, between 
the Molinists and Jesuits on the one side, with the Janse- 
nians, or Bayans on the other ; with the late ecclesiastical 
and political transactions in Italy, France, and Flanders, in 
reference thereunto, with an account of the books lately 
written on the one side and the other, and my thoughts of 
them ; but finding this treatise grown utterly beyond my in- 
tention, I shall defer the execution of that design to some 
other opportunity, if God think good to continue my por- 
tion any longer in the land of the living. 

The 14th chapter of the catechist, is about the resurrec- 
tion of Christ. What are the proper fruits of the resurrec- 
tion of Christ, and the benefits we receive thereby, and upon 
what account our justification is ascribed thereto, whether 
as the great and eminent confirmation of the doctrine he 
tauo-ht, or as the issue, pledge, and evidence of the accom- 
plishment of the work of our salvation by death, it being im- 
possible for him to be detained thereby, is not here dis- 
cussed ; that which the great design of this chapter appears 
to disprove, is, Christ's raising himself by his own power ; 
concerning which this is the question : 

' Did Christ rise by his own power; yea, did he raise him-> 


self at all ? or was he raised by the power of another ? and 
did another raise him? What is the perpetual tenor of the 
Scripture to this purpose ?' 

In answer hereunto, many texts of Scripture are re- 
hearsed, where it is said, that ' God raised him from the 
dead, and that he was raised by the power of God.' 

But we have manifested, that Mr. B. is to come to an- 
other reckoning, before he can make any work of this argu- 
ment; God raised him, therefore he did not raise himself: 
when he hath proved that he is not God, let him freely make 
such an inference and conclusion as this : in the meantime, 
we say, because *God raised him from the dead,' he raised 
himself; for he is 'God over all blessed for ever.' 

2. It is true, that Christ is said to be raised by God, 
taken personally for the Father, whose joint power, with his 
own, as that also of the Spirit, was put forth in this work of 
raising Christ from the dead. And for his own raising him- 
self, if Mr. B. will believe him, this business will be put to a 
short issue : he tells us, that ' he laid down his life, that he 
might take it up again. No man,' saith he, ' taketh it from me, 
I have power to lay it down of myself, and I have power to 
take it again ;' John x. 17, 18. And speaking of the temple 
of his body, he bade the Jews destroy it, and, 'that he would 
raise it again within three days :' which we believe he did, 
and if Mr. B. be otherwise minded, we cannot help it. 


Of justification and faith. 

This chapter, for the title and subject of it, would require a 
large and serious consideration ; but by Mr. Biddle's loose 
procedure in this business (whom only I shall now attend), 
we are absolved from any strict inquiry into the whole doc- 
trine that is concerned herein. Some brief animadversions 
upon his questions, and suiting of answers to them, will be 
all that I shall go forth unto. His first is, 

'Q. How many sorts of justification or righteousness are 

This question supposeth righteousness and justification 


to be the same : which is a gross notion for a Master of Arts. 
Righteousness is that which God requires of us, justification 
is his act concerning man, considered as vested or indued 
with that righteousness which he requires : righteousness is 
the qualification of the person to be justified; justification 
the act of him that justifies. A man's legal honesty in his 
trial, is not the sentence of the judge pronouncing him so to 
be, to all ends and purposes of that honesty. But to his 
question Mr. B. answers from Rom. x. 5. ' the righteousness 
which is of the law,' and Phil. iii. 9. ' the righteousness 
which is of God by faith,' 

It is true, there is this twofold righteousness that men 
maybe partakers of; a righteousness consisting in exact, 
perfect, and complete obedience yielded to the law, which 
God required of man under the covenant of works, and the 
righteousness which is of God by faith, of which afterward. 
Answerable hereunto there is, hath been, or may be, a two- 
fold justification: the one consisting in God's declaration 
of him, who performs all that he requires in the law, to be 
just and righteous, and his acceptation of him according to 
the promise of life, which he annexed to the obedience, 
which of man he did require ; and the other answers that 
righteousness which shall afterward be described. Now 
though these two righteousnesses agree in their general end, 
which is acceptation with God, and a reward from him, ac- 
cording to his promise; yet in their own natures, causes, and 
manner of attaining, they are altogether inconsistent and 
destructive of each other : so that it is utterly impossible 
they should ever meet in and upon the same person. 

For the description of the first, Mr. B. gives it in answer 
to this question. 

* How is the rihgteousness which is of the law described? 
' A. Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the 
law, that the man that doeth those things shall live by them ; 
Rom. X. 5.' 

This description is full and complete. * The doing of the 
things of the law,' or all the things the law requireth, to this 
end that a man may live by them, or a keeping of the com- 
mandments that we may enter into life, makes up this 
righteousness of the law. And whatsoever any man doth, 
or may do, that is required by the law of God (as believing, 


trusting: in him, and the like), to this end, that he may live 
thereby, that it may be his righteousness towards God, that 
thereupon he may be justified, it belongs to this righteous- 
ness of the law here described by Moses. I say, whatever is 
performed by man in obedience to any law of God to this 
end, that a man may live thereby, and that it may be the 
matter of his righteousness, it belongs to the righteousness 
here described : and of this we may have some use, in the 
consideration of Mr. B.'s ensuing queries. He adds, 

* Q. What speaketh the righteousness which is of faith ? 
'A. Rom. X. 8, 9. The word is nigh thee, even in thy 

mouth,'and in thy heart: that is, the word which we preach; 
that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, 
and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him 
from the dead, thou shalt be saved.' 

The object of justifying faith ; namely, Jesus Christ as 
dying and rising again from the dead to the obtaining of 
eternal redemption, and bringing in everlasting righteous- 
ness, is in these words described. And this is that which 
the righteousness of faith is said to speak; because Christ 
dying and rising is our righteousness. He is made so to 
us of God, and being under the consideration of his death 
and resurrection received of us by faith, we are justified. 

His next question is, 

* Q. In the justification of a believer is the righteousness 
of Christ imputed to him, or is his own faith counted for 
righteousness ? 

'A. Rom. iv. 5. His faith is counted for righteousness.' 
What Mr. B. intends by faith, and what by accounting 
of it for righteousness, we know full well. The justification 
he intends by these expressions is the plain old Pharisaical 
justification, and no other : as shall elsewhere be abundantly 
manifested. For the present, I shall only say, that Mr. 
Biddle doth most ignorantly oppose the imputing of the 
righteousness of Christ to us, and the accounting of our 
faith for righteousness, as inconsistent. It is the account- 
ing of our faith for righteousness, and the righteousness of 
works, that is opposed by the apostle. The righteousness 
of faith and the righteousness of Christ are every way one 
and the same ; the one denoting that whereby we receive it, 
and are made partakers of it, the other that which is re- 


ceived, and whereby we are justified. And indeed there is 
a perfect inconsistency between the apostle's intention in 
this expression, *to him that worketh not, but believeth on 
him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted to him 
for righteousness,' taken with his explication of it, that we 
are made 'partakers of the righteousness of Christ by faith,' 
and therein he is made 'righteousness to them that believe/ 
with Mr. B.'s interpretation of it, which is (as shall be far- 
ther manifested), ' to him that worketh and believes on him 
that justifies the righteous, his obedience is his righteous- 
ness.' But of this elsewhere. 

The next question and answer is about Abraham and his 
justification, which being but an instance exemplifying what 
was spoken before, I shall not need to insist thereon. Of 
his believing on God only, our believing on Christ, which is 
also mentioned, I have spoken already, and shall not trouble 
the reader with repetition thereof. 

But he farther argues : 

'Q. Doth not God justify men because of the full price 
Christ paid to him in their stead, so that he abated nothing 
of his right, in that one drop of Christ's blood was suffi- 
cient to satisfy for a thousand worlds ? If not, how are they 
saved ? 

'A. Being justified freely; Rom. iii. 24. Eph. i. 17.' 

That Christ did pay a full price or ransom for us, that he 
did stand in our stead, that he was not abated any jot of the 
penalty of the law that was due to sinners, that on this 
account we are fully acquitted, and that the forgiveness of 
our sins is by the redemption that is in his blood, hath 
been already fully and at large evinced. Let Mr. B. if he 
please, attempt to evert what hath been spoken to that 

The expression about ' one drop of Christ's blood,' is a 
fancy or imagination of idle monks, men ignorant of the 
righteousness of God, and the whole nature of the media- 
tion which our blessed Saviour undertook ; wherein thejr 
have not the least communion. The close of the chap- 
ter is, 

' Q. Did not Christ merit eternal life and purchase the 
kingdom of heaven for us ? 

' A. The gift of God is eternal life ; Rom, vi. 23. It is 


your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom ; 
Luke xii. 32.' 

Eternal life is the gift of God, in opposition to any merit 
of ours, and in respect of his designation of him, who is 
eternal life, to be our Mediator, and purchaser of it ; yet that 
Christ did not therefore obtain by his blood, for us 'eternal 
redemption ;' Heb. ix. 12. that he did not purchase us to 
himself; Tit. ii. 14. or that the merit of Christ for us, and 
the free grace of God unto us, are inconsistent, our catechist 
attempts not to prove. Of the reconciliation of God's pur- 
pose and good pleasure, mentioned, Luke xii. 32. with the 
satisfaction and merit of the Mediator, I have spoken also at 
large already. 

I have thus briefly passed through this chapter, although 
it treateth of one of the most important heads of our religion, 
because (the Lord assisting) I intend the full handling of 
the doctrine opposed in it, in a just treatise to that purpose. 


Of keeping the commandments of God: and of perfection of obedience^ 
how attainable in this life. 

The title of the 16th chapter in our catechist, is, of keeping 
the commandments, and having an eye to the reward, of per- 
fection in virtue and godliness to be attained ; and of de- 
parting from righteousness and faith. What the man hath 
to offer on these several heads, shall be considered in order. 
His first question is, 

* Q. Are the commandments possible to be kept? 

* A. His commandments are not grievous ; John v. 3. 
My yoke is easy, and my burden light ; Matt. xi. 30.' 

1. I presume it is evident to every one, at the first view, 
that there is very little relation between the question and 
the answer thereunto sugg;psted. The inquiry is of our 
strength and power : the answer speaks to the nature of the 
commands of God. It never xame sure into the mind of 
any living, that the meaning of this question, 'Are the com- 
mandments possible to be kept ?' is, ' Is there an absolute im- 
possibility from the nature of the commands of God them- 


selves that they cannot be kept by any V Nor did ever any 
man say so, or can without the greatest blasphemy against 
God. But the question is, what power there is in man to 
keep those commandments of God ; which certainly the 
texts insisted on by Mr. B. do not in the least give an an- 
swer unto. 

2. He tells us not, in what state or condition he supposes 
that person to be, concerning whom the inquiry is made, 
whether he can possibly keep the commandments of God or 
no : whether he speaks of all men in general, or any man 
indefinitely, or restrainedly of believers. Nor, 

3. Doth he inform us, what he intends by keeping the 
commands of God. Whether an exact, perfect, and every 
way complete keeping of them, up to the highest degree of 
all things, in all things, circumstances, and concernments of 
them : or whether the keeping of them in a universal sin- 
cerity, accepted before God, according to the tenor of the 
covenant of grace, be intended. Nor, 

4. What commandments they are, which he chiefly re- 
spects, and under what consideration : whether all the com- 
mands of the law of God as such ; or whether the gospel 
commands of faith and love, which the places from whence 
he answers do respect. Nor, 

5. What he means by the impossibility of keeping God's 
commands, which he intends to deny ; that which is abso- 
lutely so from the nature of the thing itself, or that which 
is so only in some respect, with reference to some certain 
state and condition of man. 

When we know in what sense the question is proposed, 
we shall be enabled to return an answer thereunto, which he 
that hath proposed it here, knew not how to do : in the 
meantime, to the thing itself intended, according to tlie 
light of the premised distinctions, we say that all the com- 
mandments of God, the whole law is excellent, precious, 
not grievous in itself, or its own nature, but admirably ex- 
pressing the goodness, and kindness, and holiness of him 
that gave it, in relation to them to whom it was given, and 
can by no means be said, as from itself and upon its own 
account, to be impossible to be kept. Yet, 

2. No unregenerate man can possibly keep, that is, hath 
in himself a power to keep any one of all the command- 


ments of God, as to the matter required, and the manner 
wherein it is required. This impossibility is not in the least 
relating to the nature of the law, but to the impotency, and 
corruption of the person lying under it. 

3. No man though regenerate, can fulfil the law of God 
perfectly, or keep all the commandments of God, according 
to the original tenor of the law, in all the parts and degrees 
of it ; nor ever any man did so, since sin entered into the 
world ; for it is impossible that any regenerate man should 
keep the commandments of God, as they are the tenor of 
the covenant of works. If this were otherwise, the law 
would not have been made weak by sin, that it should not 

4. That it is impossible, that any man though regenerate, 
should by his own strength fulfil any one of the commands 
of God, seeing ' without Christ we can do nothing,' and it 
is ' God who works in us to will and to do of his good plea- 

5. That to keep the commandments of God, not as the 
tenor of the covenantor works, nor in an absolute jjerfection 
of obedience and correspondency to the law ; but sincerely 
and uprightly, unto acceptation, according to the tenor of 
the covenant of grace, and the obedience it requires, through 
the assistance of the Spirit and grace of God, is not only a 
thing possible, but easy, pleasant, and delightful. 

Thus we say, 

1. That a person regenerate by the assistance of the Spi- 
rit and grace of God, may keep the commandments of God, 
in yielding to him, in answer to them, that sincere obedience, 
which in Jesus Christ, according to the tenor of the covenant 
of grace, is required : yea, it is to him an easy and pleasant 
thing so to do. 

2. That an unregenerate person should keep any one of 
God's commandments as he ought, is impossible, not from 
the nature of God's commands, but from his own state and 

3. That a person, though regenerate, yet being so but in 
part, and carrying about him a body of death, should keep • 
the commands of God, in a perfection of obedience, accord- 
ing to the law of the covenant of works, is impossible from 
the condition of a regenerate man, and not from the nature 


of God's commands. What is it now that Mr. B. opposes? 
Or what is that he asserts ? 

I suppose he declares his mind in his lesser catechism, 
chap. vii. Q. 1. where he proposes his question in the words 
ofthe ruler amongst the Jews ; ' What good shall a man do 
that he may have eternal life V An answer of it follows in 
that of our Saviour, Matt. xix. 17 — 19. * If thou wilt enter 
into life, keep the commandments. 

The intendment of this inquiry must be the same with 
his that made it, as his argument in the whole is ; or the 
answer of our Saviour, is no way suited thereunto. Now it 
is most evident, that the inquiry was made according to the 
principles of the Pharisees, who expected justification by 
the works of the law, according to the tenor of a covenant 
of works, to which presumption of theirs, our Saviour suits 
his answer: and seeing they sought to be justified, and 
saved, as it were, by the works of the law, to the law he sends 
them. This then being Mr. B.'s sense, wherein he affirms 
that it is possible to keep the commandments, so as for 
doing good, and keeping them, to enter into life, I shall only 
remit him, as our Saviour did the Pharisees to the law : but 
yet I shall withal pray, that our merciful Lord, would not 
leave him to the foolish choice of his own darkened heart, 
but in his due time, by the blood of the covenant, which yet 
he seems to despise, send him forth of the 'prison wherein is 
no water.' 

*Q. 2. But though it be possible to keep the command- 
ments, yet is it not enough, if we desire and endeavour to 
keep them ; although we actually keep them not ? And doth 
not God accept the will for the deed? 

'A. 1 Cor. vii. 19. Matt. vii. 21. 24. 26. James i. 25. 
Rom, ii. 10. John xiii. 17. Luke xi. 24. 2 Cor. v. 10. Matt, 
xvi. 27. Hev. xxii.21. Matt. xix. 18, 19. In all which places, 
there is mention of doing the will of God, of keeping the 
commandments of God.' 

The aim of this question, is to take advantage at what 
hath been delivered by some, not as an ordinary rule for all 
men to walk by, but as an extraordinary relief for some in 
distress. When poor souls, bowed down under the sense of 
their own weakness and insufficiency for obedience, and 
the exceeding unsuitableness of their best performances to 


the spiritual and exact perfection of the law of God (things 
which the proud Pharisees of the world are unacquainted 
withal), to support them under their distress, they have been 
by some directed to the consideration of the sincerity that 
was in their obedience, which they did yield, and guided to 
examine that, by their desires and endeavours. Now as this 
direction is not without a good foundation in the Scripture ; 
Nehemiah, describing the saints of God by this character, 
that they desire to fear the name of God ; Neh. i. 11. and 
David every where professing this, as an eminent property 
of a child of God, so they who gave it, were very far from 
understanding such desires, as may be pretended as a co- 
lour for sloth and negligence, to give countenance to the 
souls and consciences of men in a willing neglect of the per- 
formance of such duties, as they are to press after; but such 
they intend, as had adjoined to them, and accompanying of 
them, earnest, continual, sincere, endeavours (as Mr. B. ac- 
knowledge th)'to walk before God in all well-pleasing, though 
they could not attain to that perfection of obedience that is 
required. And in this case, though we make not application 
of the particular rule of accepting the will for the deed, to 
the general case, yet we fear not to say, that this is all the 
perfection which the best of the saints of God in this life 
attain to : and which, according to the tenor of that cove- 
nant wherein we now walk with God in Jesus Christ, is ac- 
cepted. This is all the doing or keeping of the command- 
ments that is intended in any of the places quoted by Mr. B. 
unless that last : wherein our Saviour sends that proud 
Pharisee, according to his own principles to the righteous- 
ness of the law which he followed after, but could not at- 
tain. But of this more afterward. He farther argues : 

' Q. Though it be not only possible but also necessary 
to keep the commandments, yet is it lawful so to do that we 
may have a right to eternal life, and the heavenly inherit- 
ance? May we seek for honour, and glory, and immortality, 
by well-doing? is it the tenor of the gospel that we should 
live uprightly in expectation of the hope hereafter? and 
finally, ought we to suffer for the kingdom of God, and not 
as some are pleased to mince that matter from the kingdom 
of God ? Where are the testimonies of Scripture to this 
purpose ? 


'A. Rev.xxii. 14. Rom. ii. 6— 8. Tit. ii. 11. 13. 2 Thess. 
i. 5.' 

Alls. 1. In what sense it is possible to keep the command- 
ments, in what not, hath been declared. 2. How it is ne- 
cessary, or in what sense, or for what end, Mr. B. hath not 
yet spoken, though he supposeth he hath ; but we will take 
it for granted that it is necessary for us so to do ; in that 
sense, and for that end and purpose, for which it is of us re- 
quired. 3. To allow then the gentleman the advantage of 
his captious procedure by a multiplication of entangled 
queries ; and to take them in that order wherein they lie. 

To the first, ' whether we may keep the commandments 
that we may have right to eternal life.' I say, 1. Keeping of 
the commandments in the sense acknowledged may be 
looked on in respect of eternal life, either as the cause pro- 
curing it, or as the means conducing to it. 2. A right to 
eternal life may be considered in respect of the rise and 
constitution of it, or of the present evidence and last en- 
joyment of it. There is a twofold right to the kingdom of 
heaven; a right of desert according to the tenor of the co- 
venant of works ; and a right of promise according to the 
tenor of the covenant of grace. I say, then, that it is not 
lawful, that is, it is not the way, rule, and tenor of the gos- 
pel, that we should do or keep the commandments, so 
that doing or keeping should be the cause procuring and 
obtaining an original right, as to the rise and constitution 
of it, or a right of desert to eternal life. This is the perfect 
tenor of the covenant of works and righteousness of the 
law, ' do this and live ; if a man do the work of the law he 
shall live thereby ;' and, ' if thou wilt enter into life, keep the 
commandments :' which if there be any gospel or new co- 
venant confirmed in the blood of Christ, is antiquated as 
to its efficacy, and was ever since the entrance of sin into 
the world ; as being ineffectual for the bringing of any soul 
unto God ; Rom. viii, 3. Heb. viii. 11, 12. This, if it were 
■ needful, I might confirm with innumerable texts of Scrip- 
ture, and the transcription of a good part of the epistles of 
Paul in particular. 3. The inheritance which is purchased 
for us by Christ, and is the gift of God, plainly excludes 
' all such confidence in keeping the commandments, as is 
pleaded for. For my part, I willingly ascribe to obedience 


any thing that hath a consistency (in reference to eternal 
life) with the full purchase of Christ, and the free donation 
of God; and therefore, I say, 4. As a means appointed of 
God, as the way wherein we ought to walk, for the coming 
to, and obtaining of, the inheritance so fully purchased and 
freely given, for the evidencing of the right given us thereto 
by the blood of Christ, and giving actual admission to the 
enjoyment of the purchase, and to testify our free accepta- 
tion with God, and adoption on that account, so we ought 
to do, and keep the commandments ; that is, walk in holi- 
ness, without which none shall see God. This is all that 
is intended, Rev. xxii. 14. Christ speaks not there to unbe 
lievers, shewing what they must do to be justified and saved ; 
but to redeemed, justified, and sanctified ones ; shewing 
them their way of admission and the means of it to the re- 
maining privileges of the purchase made by his blood. 

His next question is, ' May we seek for honour and 
glory and immortality by well-doing?' which words are 
taken from Rom. ii. 7, 8. 

I answer. The words there are used in a law sense, and 
are declarative of the righteousness of God, in rewarding 
the keepers of the law of nature, or the moral law, accord- 
ing to the law of the covenant of works. This is evident 
from the whole design of the apostle in that place, which 
is to convince all men, Jews and Gentiles, of sin against the 
law ; and the impossibility of the obtaining the glory of 
God thereby. So in particular from ver. 10. where salva- 
tion is annexed to works, in the very terms wherein the 
righteousness of the law is expressed by Mr. B, in the chap- 
ter of justification ; and in direct opposition whereunto, the 
apostle sets up the righteousness of the gospel; chap. i. 17. 
iii. and iv. But yet translate the words into a gospel sense, 
consider well-doing as the way appointed for us to walk in, 
for the obtaining of the end mentioned, and consider glory, 
honour, and immortality, as a reward of our obedience, pur- 
chased by Christ, and freely promised of God on that ac- 
count, and I say we may, we ought, 'by patient continuing in 
well-doing, to seek for glory, honour, and immortality;' that 
is, it is our duty to abide in the way, and use of the means 
prescribed^ for the obtaining of the inheritance purchased 
and promised: but yet this, with the limitations before in 

]N THIS LIFE. 217 

part mentioned : as l.That of ourselves we can do no good ; 
2 That the ability we have to do good, is purchased for us 
by Christ. 3. This is not so full in this life, as that we can 
perfectly, to all degrees of perfection, do good, or yield 
obedience to the law. 4. That which by grace we do yield 
and perform, is not the cause procuring or meriting of that 
inheritance : which 6. As the grace whereby we obey, is 
fully purchased for us by Christ, and freely bestowed upon 
us by God. 

His next is, ' Is it the tenor of the gospel that we should 
live uprightly in expectation of the hope hereafter V Doubt- 
less, neither shall I need to give any answer at all to this 
part of the inquiry but what lies in the words of the Scrip- 
ture, produced for the proof of our catechist's intention. 
'The grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to 
all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly 
lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in this 
present world ; looking for the blessed hope and a glorious 
appearance of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;' 
Tit. ii. 11 — 13. Christ the great God our Saviour, having 
promised an inheritance to us with himself, at his glorious 
appearance, raiseth up our hearts with a hope and expec- 
tation thereof; his grace or the doctrine of it, teacheth us 
to perform all manner of holiness and righteousness all 
our days ; and this is the tenor and law of the gospel, that 
so we do; but what this is to Mr. Biddle's purpose I 
know not. 

His last attempt is upon the exposition of some (I know 
not whom) who have minced the doctrine so small, it seems, 
that he can find no relish in it ; saith he, ' finally ought we 
to suffer for the kingdom of God, or from the kingdom of 
God V his answer is, 2 Thess. i. 5. ' That you may,be counted 
worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you also suffer.' 
I confess ' suffering from the kingdom of God,' is something 
an uncouth expression ; and those who have used it to the 
offence of this gentleman, might have more commodiously 
delivered what they did intend. But the ' kingdom of God' 
being sometimes taken for that rule of grace which Christ 
hath in the hearts of believers, and thereupon being said to 
be within us, and the word, ' from,' denoting the principle of 
obedience in suffering, there is a truth in the expression, 



and that very consistent with suffering for the kingdom of 
God, which here is opposed unto it. To suffer from the 
kingdom of God, is no more, than to be enabled to suffer 
from a principle of grace within us, by which Christ bears 
rule in our hearts ; and in this sense we say that no man 
can do or suffer any thing so, as it shall be acceptable unto 
God, but it must be from the kingdom of God : for they 
that are in the flesh cannot please God, even their sacri- 
fices are an abomination to him. This is so far from hin- 
dering us, as to suffering for the kingdom of God, that is, 
to endure persecution for the profession of the gospel (for 
in the place of the apostle cited denotes the procuring oc- 
casion, not final cause) that without it so we cannot do j 
and so the minced matter hath I hope a savoury relish reco- 
vered unto it again. 

His next questions are : 1. ' Have you any examples of 
keeping the commandments under the law ? what saith 
David of himself? Psal. xviii. 20—24. And, 

2. * Have you any example under the gospel ? 1 John 
iii. 10. Because we keep his commandments.' 

All this trouble is Mr. B. advantaged to make from the 
ambiguity of this expression of keeping the commandments. 
We know full well what David saith of his obedience, and 
what he said of his sins ; so that we know his keeping of 
the commandments was in respect of sincerity, as to all the 
commandments of God, and all the parts of them : but not 
as to his perfection in keeping all or any of them. And he 
who says * we keep his commandments,' says also, that ' if 
we say we have no sin, we lie and deceive ourselves, and 
the truth is not in us.' 

He adds, * Have you not examples of the choicest saints 
who obeyed God in hope of the reward both before, under, 
and after the law V Heb. xi. 8—10. 24—26. xii. 12. Tit. i. 1,2. 

To obey in hope of eternal life, is either to yield obe- 
dience, in hope of obtaining eternal life, as a reward pro- 
cured by, or proportioned to that obedience ; and so no 
saint of God since the fall of Adam, did yield obedience to 
God, or ought to have so done : or to obey in hope of eternal 
life, is to carry along with us, in our obedience, a hope of 
the enjoyment of the promised inheritance in due time, and 
to be encouraged and strengthened in obeying thereby. 


Thus the saints of God walk with God, in hope and obe- 
dience at this day ; and they always did so from the begin- 
ning. They have hope in and with their obedience, of that 
whereunto their obedience leads, which was purchased for 
them by Christ. 

' Q. Do not the Scriptures intimate that Christians may 
attain to perfection of virtue and godliness, and that it is the 
intention of God and Christ, and his ministers, to bring them 
to this pitch ? Rehearse the texts to this effect. 

'A. Eph. i.4.' 

Not to make long work of that, which is capable of a 
speedy despatch ; by virtue and godliness, Mr. B. under- 
stands that universal righteousness and holiness, which the 
law requires ; by perfection in it, an absolute, complete 
answerableness to the law, in that righteousness and holi- 
ness, both as to the matter wherein they consist, and the 
manner how they are to be performed; that Christians may 
attain, expresses a power that is reducible into act. So that 
the intention of God and the ministers^ is not that they should 
be pressing on towards perfection, which it is confessed, we 
are to do, whilst we live in this world, but actually in this 
life, to bring them to an enjoyment of it. In this sense, we 
deny that any man in this life, ' may attain to a perfection 
of virtue and godliness.' For, 

1. All our works are done out of faith; 1 Tim. i, 5. Gal. 
v. 6. now this faith is the faith of the forgiveness of sins by 
Christ, and ' that purifieth the heart ;' Acts xv. 8, 9. But the 
works that proceed from faith for the forgiveness of sins by 
Christ, cannot be perfect absolutely in themselves, because 
in the very rise of them, they expect perfection and com- 
pleteness from another. 

2. Such as is the cause, such is the effect; but the prin- 
ciple or cause of the saints obedience in this life is imper- 
fect ; so therefore is their obedience. That our sanctification 
is imperfect in this life, the apostle witnesseth ; 2 Cor. iv. 

16. 1 Cor. xiii. 9. 

3. Where there is flesh and spirit, there is not perfection : 
for the flesh is contrary to the Spirit, from whence our per- 
fection must proceed if we have any : but there is flesh and 
Spirit in all believers, whilst they live in this world; Gal. v. 

17. Rom. vii. 14. 



4. They that are not without sin, are not absolutely 
perfect ; for to be perfect, is to have no sin ; but the saints 
in this life are not without sin; 1 John i, 8. Matt. vi. 12. 
James iii, 2. Eccles. vii. 21. Isa. Ixiv. 6. but to what end 
should I multiply arguments or testimonies to this purpose? 
If all the saints of God have acknowledged themselves 
sinners all their days, always deprecated the justice of God, 
and appealed to mercy in their trial before God, if all our 
perfection by the blood of Christ, and we are justified not 
by the works of the law, but grace, this pharisaical figment 
may be rejected as the foolish imagination of men ignorant 
of the righteousness of God, and of him who is ' the end of 
the law for righteousness to them that do believe.' 

But take perfection as it is often used in the Scripture, 
and ascribed to men of whom yet many great and eminent 
failings are recorded (which certainly were inconsistent with 
perfection absolutely considered) and so itdenotes two things: 
1. Sincerity, in opposition to hypocrisy. And 2. Univer- 
sality, as to all the parts of obedience, in opposition to par- 
tiality, and halving with God. So we say, perfection is not 
only attainable by the saints of God, but is in every one of 
them ; but this is not such a perfection as consists in a 
point, which if it deflects from, it ceases to be perfection; 
but such a condition as admits of several degrees, all lying 
in a tendency to that perfection spoken of; and the men 
of this perfection, are said to be perfect or upright in the 
Scripture ; Psal. xxxvii. 14. cxix. 100, &c. 

Not then to insist on all the places mentioned by Mr. B. 
in particular, they may all be referred to four heads : 1. Such 
as mention an unblamableness before God in Christ, which 
argues a perfection in Christ, but only sincerity in us ; or 2. 
Such as mention a perfection in ' fieri,' but not in * facto esse,' 
as we speak ; a pressing towards perfection, but not a per- 
fection obtained, or here obtainable ; or 3. A comparative 
perfection in respect of others ; or a perfection of sincerity, 
accompanied with universality of obedience, consistent with 
indwelling sin and many transgressions. The application 
of the several places mentioned to these rules, is easy, and 
lies at hand, for any that will take the pains to consider 
them. He proceeds, 

' If works be so necessary to salvation, as you have before 


shewed from the Scripture, how conieth it to pass that 
Paul saith. We are justified by faith without works ? Meant 
he to exclude all good works whatsoever, or only those 
of the law? How doth he explain himself ? Rom. ii. 2. 28. 
We are justified by faith, without the works of the law.' 

Ans. 1. How, and in what sense works are necessary to sal- 
vation, hath been declared, and therefore I remit the reader 
to its proper place. 

2. A full handling of the doctrine of justification was 
waved before, and therefore I shall not here take it up, but 
content myself with a brief removal of Mr. B.'s attempts to 
deface it. I say then, 

3. That Paul is very troublesome to all the Pharisees of 
this age, who therefore turn themselves a thousand ways to 
escape the authority of the word and truth of God (by him 
fully declared and vindicated against their forefathers), la- 
bouring to fortify themselves with distinctions, which, as 
they suppose, but falsely, the-ir predecessors were ignorant 
of; Paul then, this Paul, denies all works, all works what- 
soever, to have any share in our justification before God, as 
the matter of our righteousness, or the cause of our justifi- 
cation. For, 

1. He excludes all works of the law, as is confessed. 
The works of the law are the works that the law requires. 
Now there is no work whatever that is good or acceptable 
to God, but it is required by the law ; so that in excluding 
works of the law, he excludes all works whatever. 

2. He expressly excludes all works done by virtue of 
grace, and after calling ; which, if any, should be exempted 
from being works of the law. For though the law requires 
them, yet they are not done from a principle, nor to an end 
of the law; these Paul excludes expressly ; Ephes. viii. 9, 
10. • By grace we are saved, not of works.' What works? 
Those which 'we are created unto in Christ Jesus.' 

3. All works, that are works, are excluded expressly, and 
set in opposition to grace in this business ; Rom. xi. 5, 6. ' If 
it be of grace, it is no more of works, otherwise grace is no 
more grace ; but if it be of works, it is no more grace, other- 
wise work is no more work ;' and Rom. iv. 3 — 5. 

4. All works are excluded that take off from the absolute 
freedom of the justification of sinners by the redemption 


that is in Christ ; Rom. iii. 17—27. Now this is not peculiar 
to any one sort of works, or to any one work, more than to 
another, as might be demonstrated ; but this is not a place 
for so great a work, as the thorough handling of this doc- 
trine requires. He adds, 

'Can you make it appear from elsewhere, that Paul in- 
tended to exclude from justification, only the perfect works 
of the law, which leave no place for either grace or faith, 
and not such works as include both, and that by a justifying 
faith he meant a working faith, and such a one as is ac- 
companied with righteousness ? 

'A. Eph. ii. 8—10. Rom. iv. 3—5. Rom. xi. 5, 6. iv. 14 
—16. Gal. V. 6. Rom. i. 17, 18.' 

Aris. 1 . Still Paul and his doctrine trouble the man as they 
did his predecessors. That Paul excluded all works of 
what sort soever, from our justification, as precedaneous 
causes or conditions thereof, was before declared. Mr. B. 
would only have it, that the perfect works of the law only 
are excluded, when if any works take place in our justifi- 
cation with God, those only may be admitted, for certainly, 
if we are justified or pronounced righteous for our works, 
it must be for the works that are perfect, or else the judgment 
of God is not according to truth. Those only it seems are 
excluded, that only may be accepted ; and imperfect works 
are substituted as the matter of a perfect righteousness ; 
without which, none shall stand in the presence of God. But, 

2. There is not one text of Scripture mentioned by Mr. B. 
whence he aims to evince his intention, but expressly denies 
what he asserts ; and sets all works whatever in opposition 
to grace, and excludes them all, from any place in our jus- 
tification before God. So that the man seems to have 
been infatuated by his pharisaisra, to give direction for his 
own condemnation. Let the places be considered by the 

3. The grace mentioned as the cause of our justification, 
is not the grace of God, bringing forth good works in us, 
which stand thereupon in opposition to the works of the law, 
as done in the strength of the law, but the free favour and 
srace of God towards us in Christ Jesus, which excludes all 
works of ours whatever, as is undeniably manifest; Rom, iv. 
4. xi. 5, 6. 


4. It is true, justifying faith is a living faith, purging 
the heart, working by love, and bringing forth fruits of obe- 
dience ; but that its fruits of love and good works have any 
causal influence into our justification, is most false. We are 
justified freely by grace, in opposition to all fruits of faith 
whatever, which God hath ordained us to bring forth. That 
faith whereby we are justified, will never be without works, 
yet we are not justified by the works of it, but freely by the 
blood of Christ ; how, and in what sense we are justified by 
faith itself, what part, office, and place, it hath in our justifi- 
cation, its consistency in its due place and office, with 
Christ's being our righteousness, and its receiving of re- 
mission of sins, which is said to be our blessedness, shall 
elsewhere, God assisting, be manifested. 

What then hath Mr. B. yet remaining to plead in this 
business? the old abused refuge of opposing James to Paul, 
is fixed on. This is the beaten plea of Papists, Socinians, 
and Arminians.' Saith he, 

•What answer then would you give to a man, who wrest- 
ing the words of Paul in certain places of his Epistles to the 
Romans and Galatians should bear you in hand, that all 
good works whatever, are excluded from justification and sal- 
vation, and that it is enough only to believe l James ii. 20 — 26.' 

j^ns. 1. He that shall exclude good works from salvation, 
so as not to be the way and means appointed of God, where-' 
in we ought to walk, who seek and expect salvation from 
God ; and afiirms that it is enough to believe, though a man 
bring forth no fruits of faith or good works; if he pretend 
to be of that persuasion, on the account of any thing de- 
livered by Paul, in the Epistles to the Romans or Galatians, 
doth wrest the words and sense of Paul, and is well confuted 
by that passage mentioned out of James. 

But he that excluding all works from justification in the 
sense declared, affirming that it is by faith only, without 
works; and affirms, that the truth and sincerity of that faith, 
with its efficacy in its own kind for our justification, is evinced 
by works, and the man's acceptation with God thereon justi- 
fied by them, doth not wrest the words nor sense of Paul, and 
speaks to the intendment of James. 

2. Paul instructs us at large, how sinners come to be 
justified before God, and this is his professed design in his 


Epistles to the Romans and Galatians. James professedly 
exhorting believers to good works, demands of them, how 
they will acquit themselves before God and man to be jus- 
tified ; and affirms that this cannot be done, but by works. 
Paul tells us what justification is ; James describes justify- 
ing faith by its effects ; but of this also elsewhere. To all 
this he subjoins : 

'I would knowof you, who is ajust or righteous man? Is 
it not such a one as apprehendeth, and applieth Christ's 
righteousness to himself, or at most desires to do righteously ; 
is not he accepted of God ? 

'A. 1 John iii. 7—10. 1 John ii. 29. Acts x.34,35. Ezek. 
xviii. 5 — 9.' 

Ans. 1. He to whom God imputes righteousness, is righte- 
ous. This he doth to him,'who works not, butbelievesonhim 
who justifies the ungodly;' Rom. iv.5 — 7. there is then a righ- 
teousness without the works of the law ; Phil. iii. 10. To 
apprehend and apply Christ's righteousness to ourselves, are 
expressions of believing unto justification, which the Scrip- 
ture will warrant; John i. 12. 2 Cor. i. 30. He that believeth, 
so as to have Christ made righteousness to him, to have 
righteousness imputed to him, to be freely justified by the 
redemption that is in the blood of Jesus, he is just : and this 
state and condition, as was said, is obtained by applying the 
righteousness of Christ to ourselves ; that is, by receiving 
him, and his righteousness by faith, as tendered unto us in 
the offer and promises of the gospel. 

Of desiring to do righteously, and what is intended by 
that expression, I have spoken before. But, 

2. There is a twofold righteousness, a righteousness im- 
puted whereby we are justified, and a righteousness inhe- 
rent, whereby we are sanctified. These Mr. B. would op- 
pose, and from the assertion of the one, argue to the destruc- 
tion of the other ; though they sweetly, and eminently com- 
ply in our communion with God. The other righteousness 
was before evinced. Even our sanctification also is called 
righteousness, and we are said to be just in that respect. 

1. Because our faith and interest in Christ is justified 
thereby to be true, and such as will abide the fiery trial. 

2. Because all the acts of it are fruits of righteousness ; 
Rom vi. 19.22. 


3. Because it stands in opposition to all unrighteousness, 
and he that doth not bring forth the fruit of it, is unrigh- 

4, With men, and before them it is all our righteousness ; 
and of this do the places mentioned by Mr. Biddle treat, 
without the least contradiction or colour of it, to the im- 
puted righteousness of Christ, wherewith we are righteous 
before' God. 

The intendment of the last query in this chapter, is to 
prove the apostacy of saints ; or that true believers may fall 
away totally and finally from grace. I suppose it will not be 
expected of me, that I should enter here into a particular 
consideration of the places by him produced, having lately 
at* large gone through the consideration of the whole doc- 
trine opposed ; wherein not only the texts here quoted by 
Mr. B. but many others, set off by the management of an 
able head, and dexterous hand, are at large considered; thi- 
ther therefore I refer the reader. 

It might perhaps have been expected, that having insisted 
so largely as I have done, upon some other heads of the doc- 
trine of the gospel corrupted by Mr. B. and his companions, 
that I should not thus briefly have passed over this impor- 
tant article of faith, concerning justification : but besides my 
weariness of the work before me, I have for a defensative 
farther to plead, that this doctrine is of late become the sub- 
ject of very many polemical discourses ; to what advantage 
of truth, time will shew, and 1 am not willing to add oil to 
that fire. 2. That if the Lord will, and I live, I intend to do 
something purposely, for the vindication and clearing of 
the whole doctrine itself; and therefore am not willing oc- 
casionally to anticipate here, what must in another order and 
method be insisted on; to which for a close, I add a desire, 
that if any be willing to contend with me about this matter, 
he would forbear exceptions against these extemporary ani- 
madversions, until the whole of my thoughts lie before him, 
unless he be of the persons principally concerned in this 
whole discourse, of whom I have no reason to desire that 
respect or candour. 

» Doctrine of the Saints' Perseverance Vindicated. 



Of prayer ; 

And whether Christ prescribed a form of prayer to he used hy believers: mid 
of praying unto hint, and in his name under the Old TestanieJtt ? 

The first question is, 

' Q. Is prayer a Christian duty ? , 
' A. Pray without ceasing ; 1 Thess. v. 17.' 
If by a Christian duty, a duty whereunto all Christians 
are obliged is understood, we grant it a Christian duty. The 
commands for it, encouragements to it, promises concerning 
it, are innumerable; and the use and benefit of it, in our 
communion with God, considering the state and condition 
of sin, emptiness, want, temptation, trials that here we live 
in, inestimable. If by a Christian duty it be intended that 
it is required only of them who are Christians, and is insti- 
tuted by something peculiar in Christian religion, it is de- 
nied. Prayer is a natural acknowledgement of God, that 
every man is everlastingly and indispensably obliged unto, 
by virtue of the law of his creation, though the matter of it 
be varied according to the several states and conditions 
whereunto we fall, or are brought. Every one that lives in 
dependancy on God, and hath his supplies from him, is by 
virtue of that dependance obliged to this duty, as much as 
he is to own God to be his God. He proceeds : 

' Q. How ought men to pray? A. Lifting up holy hands 
without wrath and doubting; 1 Tim. ii. 8.' 

The inquiry being made of the manner of acceptable 
prayer, the answer given respecting only one or two par- 
ticulars, is narrow and scanty. The qualification of the per- 
son praying, the means of access to God, the cause of ac- 
ceptation with him, the ground of our confidence in our sup- 
plications, the eflicacy of the Spirit of grace as promised, 
are either all omitted, or only tacitly intimated. But this, 
and many of the following questions, with the answers, being 
in their connexion capable of a good and fair interpretation, 
though all be not expressed that the Scripture gives, in an- 
swer to such questions, and the most material requisite of 


prayer in the Holy Ghost be omitted, yet drawing to a close 
I shall not farther insist upon them ; having yet that remain- 
ing, which requires a more full animadversion. 

* Q. Did not Christ prescribe a form of prayer to his dis- 
ciples, so that there remaineth no doubt touching the law- 
fulness of using a form? 
*A. Lukexi. 1— 4.' 

Alls. If Christ prescribed a form of prayer to his disci- 
ples, to be used as a form by the repetition of the same 
words ; I confess it will be out of question, that it is lawful 
to use a form : but that it is lawful not to use a form, or that 
a man may use any prayer but a form, on that supposition, 
will not be so easily determined. The words of Christ are, 
' When you pray, say. Our Father' Sec. If in this prescrip- 
tion, not the matter only, but the words also are intended, 
and that form of them which follows is prescribed to be used, 
by virtue of this command of Christ, it will be hard to dis- 
cover on what ground we may any otherwise pray, seeing 
our Saviour's command is positive, 'When you pray, say. 
Our Father,' 8cc. 

That which Mr. B. is to prove is, that our Saviour hath 
prescribed the repetition of the same words ensuing, and 
when he hath done so, if so he can do, his conclusion must 
be, that that form ought to be used, not at all that any else 
may. If our Saviour have prescribed us a form, how shall 
any man dare to prescribe another? Or can any man do it 
without casting on his form the reproach of imperfection 
and insufficiency? Our Saviour hath prescribed us a form 
of prayer to be used as a form by the repetition of the same 
words; therefore we may use-it, yea, we must, is an invin- 
cible argument, on supposition of the truth of the proposi- 
tion. But our Saviour hath prescribed us such a form, &,c. 
therefore we may use another, which he hath not prescribed, 
hath neither shew nor colour of reason in it. 

But how will Mr. B. prove that Christ doth not here in- 
struct his disciples in what they ought to pray for, and for 
what they ought in prayer to address themselves to God, and 
under what considerations they are to look on God in their 
approaches to him and the like, only, but also that he pre- 
scribes the words there mentioned by him to be repeated by 
them in their supplications. Luke xi. he bids them say, 


• Our Father/ &c. which at large Matt. vi. is, 'pray, after this 
manner :' ovtwq to this purpose. I do not think the prophet 
prescribes a form of words, to be used by the church when 
he says, ' Take with you words, and turn to the Lord, and say 
unto him, take away iniquity ;' Hos. xiv. 2. but rather calls 
them to fervent supplication for the pardon of sin, as God 
should enable them to deal with him. And though the apo- 
stles never prayed for any thing, but what they were for the 
substance directed to by this prayer of our Saviour, yet we 
do not find, that ever they repeated the very words here men- 
tioned, or once commanded or prescribed the use of them, 
to any of the saints in their days, whom they exhorted to 
pray so fervently and earnestly. Nor in any of the rules 
and directions, that are given for our praying, either in re- 
ference to ourselves, or him, by whom we have access to 
God, is the use of these words at any time in the least re- 
commended to us, or recalled to mind, as a matter of duty. 
Our Saviour says, ' When ye pray, say. Our Father ;' on 
supposition of the sense contended for, and that a form of 
words is prescribed, I ask whether we may at any time pray, 
and not say so; seeing he says, When you pray, say : whe- 
ther we may say any thing else, or use any other words ? 
Whether the saying of these words be a part of the worship 
of God ? Or whether any promise of acceptation be annexed 
to the saying so ? Whether the Spirit of grace and suppli- 
cation be not promised to all believers? And whether he be 
not given them to enable them to pray, both as to matter 
and manner? And if so, whether the repetition of the words 
mentioned by them, who have not the Spirit given them for 
the ends before mentioned, be available? And whether 
prayer by the Spirit where these words are not repeated, as 
to the letters and syllables, and order wherein they stand, 
be acceptable to God ? Whether the prescription of a form 
of words, and the gift of a spirit of prayer be consistent? 
Whether the form be prescribed because believers are not 
able to pray without it? Or because there is a peculiar ho- 
liness, force, and energy in the letters, words, and syllables, 
as they stand in that form? And whether to say the first of 
those be not derogatory to the glory of God, and efficacy of 
the Spirit, promised and given to believers ; and the second, 
to assert the using of a charm in the worship of God ? Whe- 


ther in that respect * Pater noster' be not as good as * Our 
Father?' Whether innumerable poor souls are not deluded 
and hardened by satisfying their consciences in, and with the 
use of this form never knowing what it is to pray in the 
Holy Ghost? And whether the asserting this form of 
words to be used, have not confirmed many in their atheis- 
tical blaspheming of the Holy Spirit of God, and his grace 
in the prayers of his people ? And whether the repetition of 
these words, after men have been long praying for the things 
contained in them, as the manner of some is, be not so remote 
from any pretence or colour of warrant in the Scipture, as 
that it is in plain terms ridiculous ? When Mr. Biddle, or 
any on his behalf, hath answered these questions, they may 
be supplied with more of the like nature and importance. 

Of our address with all our religious worship to the Fa- 
ther, by Jesus Christ the Mediator, how and in what manner 
we do so, and in what sense he is himself the ultimate object 
of divine worship, I have spoken before; and therefore 5 
shall not need to insist on his next question, which makes 
some inquiry thereabout. That which follows is all that 
in this chapter needs any animadversion. The words are 
these : 

*Q. Was it the custom during the time that Christ con- 
versed on the earth (much less before he came into the world) 
to pray unto God in the name of Christ, or through Christ ? 
Or did it begin to be used after the resurrection and exalta- 
tion of Christ? What saith Christ himself concerning this? 

'A. John xvi. 24— 26.' 

The time of the saints in this world are here distinguish- 
ed into different seasons: that before Christ's coming in the 
flesh, the time ofhis conversation on earth, andthe time fol- 
lowing his resurrection and exaltation. What was the cus- 
tom in these several seasons of praying to God in the name 
of Christ, or through him, is inquired after ; and as to the first 
and second it is denied, granted as to the latter, which is 
farther confirmed in the answer to the last question, from 
Heb. xiii. 20, 21. Some brief observations will disentangle 
Mr. B.'s catechumens, if they shall be pleased to attend unto 

1. It is not what was the custom of men to do, but what 
was the mind of God that they should do, that we inquire 


after. 2. That Jesus Christ, in respect of his divine nature, 
wherein he is one with his Father, was always worshipped 
and invocated, ever since God made any creatures to worship 
him, hath been formerly declared. 3. That there is a two- 
fold knowledge of Christ the Mediator : one in general, m 
thesi, of a Mediator, the Messiah promised, which was the 
knowledge of the saints under the Old Testament. 2. Par- 
ticular, in hypothesi, that Jesus of Nazareth was that Mes- 
siah, which also was known, and is to the saints under the 
New Testament. 4. That as to an explicit knowledge of 
the way and manner of salvation, which was to be wrought, 
accomplished, and brought about by the Messias, the pro- 
mised seed Jesus Christ, and the address of men unto God 
by him, it was much more evidently and clearly given after 
the resurrection and the ascension of Christ, than before : 
the Spirit of revelation being then poured out in a more 
abundant manner than before. 5. There is a twofold pray- 
ing unto God in the name of Christ. One in express words, 
clear and distinct intention of mind, insisting on his medi- 
ation, and our acceptance with God on his account. The 
other implied in all acts of faith, and dependance on God, 
wherein we rely on him, as the means of our access to God. 
I say, these things being premised, 1. That before 
Christ's coming into the world, the saints of the Old Testa- 
ment did pray, and were appointed of God to pray in the 
name of Jesus Christ, inasmuch as in all their addresses 
unto God they leaned on him (as promised to them), through 
whom they were to receive the blessing, and to be blessed ; 
believing that they should be accepted on his account. 
This was virtually prayer to God in the name of Christ, or 
through him. This is evident from the tenor of the cove- 
nant wherein- they walked with God ; in which they were 
called to look to the seed of the woman, to expect the bless- 
ing in the seed of Abraham : speaking of the seed as of 
one and not of many ; as also by all their types and sacri- 
fices wherein they had by God's institution respect to him, 
with Abraham, by faith even as we ; so that whether we con- 
sider the promise, on the account whereof they came to God, 
which was of Christ, and of blessing in him ; or the means 
whereby they came, which were sacrifices, and types of him; 
or the confidence wherein they came, which was of atone- 


ment and forgiveness of sin by him, it is evident, that all 
their prayers were made to God in the name of Christ, and 
not any upon any other account. And one of them is ex- 
press in terms to this purpose ; Dan. ix. 17. If they had any 
promise of him, if any covenant in him, if any types repre- 
senting him, if any light of him, if any longing after him, 
if any benefit by him or fruit of his mediation, all their 
worship of God was in him, and through him. 

2. For them who lived with him in the days of his flesh, 
their faith and worship was of the same size and measure 
with theirs that went before ; so was their address to God 
in the same manner, and on the same account ; only in this 
was their knowledge enlarged, that they believed, that, that 
individual person was he who was promised, and on whom 
their fathers believed. And therefore, they prayed to him 
for all mercies spiritual and temporal, whereof they stood 
in need, as to be saved in a storm, to have their faith in- 
creased, and the like, though they had not expressly, and 
clearly made mention of his name in their supplications. 
And that is the sense of our Saviour in the place of John 
insisted on, * Hitherto ye have asked nothing in my name ;' 
that is, expressly, and in direct application of the promises 
made in the Messiah unto him, though they had their ac- 
cess to God really and virtually, by and through him, in all 
the ways before expressed. And indeed, to evidence the 
glory of the presence of the Spirit, when poured forth upon 
them with a fulness of gifts and graces, such things are re- 
corded of their ignorance and darkness in the mysteries of 
the worship of God, that it is no great wonder, if they who 
were then also to be detained under the judaical pedagogue 
for a season, had not received as yet, such an improvement 
of faith, as to ask and pray in the name of Jesus Christ as 
exhibited, which was one of the great privileges reserved 
for the days of the gospel. And this is all that Mr. B. gives 
occasion unto in this chapter. 



Of the resurrection of the dead, and the stale of the wicked at the last day. 

In his last chapter, Mr. Biddle strives to make his friends 
amends for all the wrong he had done them in those fore- 
going. Having attempted to overthrow their faith, and to 
turn them aside from the simplicity of the gospel; he now 
informs them, that the worst that can happen to them, if 
they follow his counsel, is but to be annihilated, or utterly 
deprived of their being, body and soul, in the day of judg- 
ment. For that everlasting fire, those endless torments, 
wherewith tjiey have been so scared and terrified formerly 
by the catechisms and preachings of men that left and for- 
sook the Scripture, it is all but a fable, invented to affright 
fools and children. On this account he lets his followers 
know, that if rejecting the eternal Son of God, and his 
righteousness, they may not go to heaven, yet as to hell, or 
an everlasting abode in torments, they may be secure ; there 
is no such matter provided for them, nor any else. This is 
the main design in this_ chapter, whose title is, 'Of the re- 
surrection of the dead, and the last judgment, and what 
shall be the final condition of the righteous and wicked 

The first questions lead only to answers, that there shall 
be a resurrection of the dead in general ; that they shall be 
raised and judged by Christ, who hath received authority 
from God to that purpose, that being the last great work 
that he shall accomplish by virtue of his mediatory king- 
dom committed to him. Some snares seem to be laid in 
the way in his questions, being captiously proposed ; but 
they have been formerly broken in pieces in the chapters of- 
the Deity of Christ, and his person ; whither I remit the 
reader if he find himself entangled with them. 

I shall only say by the way, that if Mr. B. may be ex- 
pounded by his" masters, he will scarce be found to give so 

a Deinde negant resurrectionem carnis ; hoc est, hujus ipsius corporis, quod came 
ac sanguine praeditum est,etsi fateantur corpora esse resurrectura, h. e. ipsos homi- 
nes fideles; qui tunc novis corporibus calestibus induendi sunt. Conipendiolum 
Doctrin. Eccles. in Polon. 


clear an assent to the resurrection of the dead, as is here 
pretended ; that is to a raising again of the same individual 
body, for the substance, and all substantial parts. This his 
masters think not possible; and therefore reject it, though 
it be never so expressly affirmed in the Scripture. But Mr. 
Biddle is silent of this discovery made by his masters, and 
so shall I be also. 

That wherewith I am to deal he enters upon in this ques- 
tion. ' Shall not the wicked and unbelievers live for ever, 
though in torments, as well as the godly and faithful ? or is 
eternal life peculiar to the faithful ? A. John iii. 36.' 

The assertion herein couched is, that the'' wicked shall 
not live for ever in torments : and the proof of it is, because 
eternal life is promised only to the faithful ; yea, * he that 
hath not the Son shall never see life, but the wrath of God 
abideth on him;' John iii. 36. As to the assertion itself we 
shall attend farther unto it instantly. 

When"^ Socinus first broached this abomination, he did 
it with the greatest cunning and sleight that possibly he 
could use ; labouring to insinuate it insensibly into the 
minds of men ; knowing full well how full of scandal the 
very naming of it would prove ; but the man's success was 
in most things beyond his own imagination. 

For the proof insinuated, life, and eternal life in the 
gospel, as they are mentioned as the end and reward of our 
obedience, are not taken merely physically, nor do express 
only the abode, duration, and continuance of our being, but 
our continuance in a state and condition of blessedness and 
glory. This is so evident, that there is no one place, where 
life to come, or eternal life, are spoken of simply in the whole 

*> Itaque iiegant cruciatus impioruni et diabolorum duraturos esse in ffiternura, ve- 
riim ou;nes siiiuil penitus esse abolcndos ; adeo ut mors et infernus ipse dicantur 
conjiciendi in stagmini iliud ardens ; Ap. 10. Rationem adduiit, quod absurdum sit, 
Deuni irasci in Betcrnuni ; et peccata crcaturaruiii finita, poenis infinitis mulctare : 
prsBsertini cum hipc nulla ipsius gloria illustretur. Compen. Doct. Eccies. in Polon. 

•^ Nam quod ais, ea ibi, turn de Christianoruin resurrectione, turn de morte iin- 
piorum passim contineli, quse a niultis sine magna offensione, turn nostris turn aliis, 
legi non possint; scio equideni ea ibi coiitineri, sed meo judicio nee passim, nec 
ita aperte (cavi cnim islud quantum polui) ut quisquam vir pius facile offendi pos- 
sit, adeo ut quod nominatim attinet ad impioruni mortem, in quo dogmate majus est 
niulto offensionis periculum, ea potius ex iiscolligi possit,quiE ibi disputantur, quani 
exprcsse litoris consignala extet ; adeo ut lector, qui alioqui seiUentiam meam ad- 
t'crsus Puccium de mortaiitate primi liominis, quae toto libro agitatur, qua'que ob 
non paucos quos habet fautores parum aut nihil olFensionis parere potest, probandara 
censeat, prius sentiat doctrinam istain sibi jam persuasam esse, r[uam suaderi animad- 
vertat. Faust. Socin. Epist. ad Johan. Volkel. 6. p. 491. 



New Testament, but as they are a reward, and a blessed 
condition to be obtained by Jesus Christ. In this sense 
we confess the wicked and impenitent shall never see life, 
nor obtain eternal life, that is, they shall never come to a 
fruition of God to eternity ; but that therefore they shall 
not have a life or being, though in torments, is a wild in- 
ference. 1 desire to know of Mr. B. whether the evil angels 
shall be consumed or no, and have an utter end ? If he- 
say they shall, he gives us one new notion more : if not, I 
ask him whether they shall have eternal life or no ? If he 
says they shall not enjoy eternal life in the sense mentioned 
in the Scripture ; I shall desire him to consider, that men 
also may have their being preserved and yet not be par- 
takers of eternal life in that sense wherein it is promised. 

The proof insisted on by Mr. Biddle, says, that the wrath 
of God abides upon unbelievers, even then when they do 
not see life ; now if they abide not, how can the wrath of 
God abide on them? doth God execute his wrath upon that 
which is not ? if they abide under wrath, they do abide. 
Under wrath doth not diminish from their abiding, but de- 
scribes its condition. 

Death and life in Scripture, ever since the giving of the 
first law, and the mention made of them therein, as they 
express the condition of man in way of reward or punish- 
ment, are not opposed naturally, but morally ; not in re- 
spect of their being (if I may so say) and relation, as one is 
the privation of the other in the way of nature ; but in re- 
spect of the state and condition which is expressed by the 
one and the other, viz. of blessedness or misery. So that 
as there is an eternal life, which is as it were a second life, 
a life of glory following a life of grace, so there is an eter- 
nal death, which is the second death, a death of misery fol- 
lowing a death of sin. 

The death that is threatened and which is opposed to 
life, and eternal life, doth not any where denote annihilation, 
but only a deprivation and coming short of that blessedness 
which is promised with life, attended with all the evils which 
come under that name, and are in the first commination. 
Those who are dead in trespasses and sins, are not nothing, 
though they have no life of grace. Sut Mr. Biddle proceeds, 
and saith, 


'Though this passage which you have quoted seems 
clearly to prove that eternal life agreeth to no other men but 
the faithful, yet, since the contrary opinion is generally held 
among Christians, I would fain know of you whether you 
have any other places that affirm that the wicked die di- 
rectly, and that a second death, are destroyed and punished 
with everlasting destruction, are corrupted, burnt up, de- 
voured, slain, pass away, and perish ? 

'A. Rom. vi. 23. viii. 13. Rev. xxi. 6. 8. ii. 10, 11. 
1 Thess. V. 3. 2 Pet, iii. 7. 2 Thess. i. 7—9 .Gal. vi. 8. 2 Pet. 
ii. 12. 1 Cor. iii. 17. Heb. x. 39. Matt. iii. 12. Heb. x. 26, 
27. Luke xix. 27. 1 John ii. 17. 2 Cor. ii. 15, 16.' 

1. How well Mr. B. hath proved his intention by the place 
of Scripture before-mentioned, hath been in part discovered, 
and will in our process yet farther appear. The ambiguity 
of the word * life,' and ' eternal life' (which yet is not ambi- 
guous in the Scripture, being constantly used in one sense 
and signification, as to the purpose in hand), is all the pre- 
tence he hath for his assertion besides that, his proof that 
unbelievers do not abide, lies in this, that the wrath of God 
abides on them. 

2. This is common with this gentleman and his masters ; 
Christians generally think otherwise, but we say thus ; so 
slight do they make of the common faith which was once 
delivered to the saints. But he may be pleased to take no- 
tice, that not only Christians think so, but assuredly believe 
that it shall be so, having the express word of God to bottom 
that their faith upon. And*^ not only Christians believe it, 
but mankind generally in all ages consented to it; as might 
abundantly be evinced. 

3. But let the expressions wherewith Mr. B. endeavours 
to make good this his monstrous assertion of the anniliilation 
of the wicked and unbelievers at the last day, be particularly 
considered, that the strength of his conclusion, or rather 
the weakness of it, may be discovered. 

The first is that they are said to die, and that the second 
death; Rom. vi. 23. viii. 13. Rev. xxi. 6. 8. ii. 10, 11. but 
how now will Mr. B. prove that by dying is meant the 
annihilation of body and soul? There is mention of a natural 

"^ Ktil TO dva^iMTKirBai, not in t£v TeS'vioTaJV touj ^cUvrat; yiyvicr^ai xai raj tSiv ri^vsoruv 
■4'i>pfa? ETvai, Ktti TttK jM-EV aj/tt9tt~c afASivov sTvat, ra~g xanaTi; Kaxtov. Plato in Plinedo, 

K 2 


death in Scripture, which, though it be a dissolution of 
nature, as to its essential parts of body and soul, yet it is an 
annihilation of neither ; for the soul abides, and Mr. B. pro- 
fesses to believe that the body shall rise again. There is a 
spiritual death in sin also mentioned, which is not a de- 
struction of the dead person's being, but a moral condition 
wherein he is. And why must the last death be the annihi- 
lation pretended ? As to a coming short of that which is the 
proper life of the soul in the enjoyment of God, which is 
called life absolutely, and eternal life, it is a death. And as 
to any comfortable attendances of a being continued, it is a 
death. That it is a total deprivation of being, seeing those 
under it are to eternity to abide under torments (as shall be 
shewed), there is no colour. 

2. It is called * destruction;' and ' perdition,' and ' ever- 
lasting destruction;' 1 Thess. v. 3. 2 Pet. iii. 7. 2Thess.i. 
7 — 9. True, it is a destruction as to the utter casting men off 
all and every thing wherein they had any hope or depend- 
ance; a casting them eternally off from the happiness of 
rational cre'^tures, and the end which they ought to have 
aimed at ; that is, they shall be destroyed in a moral, not 
a natural sense ; to be cast for ever under the wrath of God, 
I think, is destruction, and therefore it is called 'everlasting 
destruction,' because of the punishment which in that de- 
struction abideth on them. To this are reduced the fol- 
lowing expressions of utterly perishing, and the like ; Gal. 
vi. 8. 2 Pet. ii. 12. 1 Cor. iii. 17. 2 Pet. iii. 16. 

3. ' Burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire,' is men- 
tioned. Matt. iii. 12. but if this burning of the chaff do 
consume it, pray what need it be done with ' fire that cannot 
be quenched V When it hath done its work, it will surely 
be put out. The expression is metaphorical, and the allusion 
is not in the consumption of chaff in the fire, but in the 
casting it into the fire ; or the setting fire unto it. So the 
fiery indignation is said, to * devour the adversaries;' not that 
they shall no more be,but that they shall never see happiness 
any more. All these expressions being metaphorical, and 
used to set out the greatness of the wrath and indignation of 
God against impenitent sinners, under which they shall lie 
for ever. The residue of the expressions collected are of 
the same importance. Christ's punishment of unbelievers 


at the last day, is compared to a king saying, ' bring hither 
mine enemies, and slay them before me;' Luke xix. 27. be- 
cause as a natural death is the utmost punishment that men 
are able to inflict, which cuts men off from hopes and enjoy- 
ments, as to their natural condition, so Christ will lay on 
them the utmost of his wrath, cutting them off from all hopes 
and enjoyments as to their spiritual and moral condition. It 
is said, the ' fashion of this world passeth away ;' 1 John ii. 
17. because it can give no abiding continuing refreshment to 
any of the sons of men; when he that doth the will of God 
hath an everlasting continuance in a good condition, not- 
withstanding the intervening of all troubles, which are in 
this life. But that wicked men have not thei'r being con- 
tinued to eternity, nothing is here expressed. 

A very few words will put an issue to this controversy, 
if our blessed Saviour rnay be accepted for an umpire ; saith 
he, Matt. xxv. 46. ' And these shall go away into everlasting- 
punishment, but the righteous into life eternal :' certainly 
he that shall be everlastingly punished, shall be everlast- 
ingly. His punishment shall not continue, when he is not. 
He that hath an end, cannot be everlastingly punished. 
Again, saith our Saviour, in hell the ' fire shall never be 
quenched ; where the worm dieth not, and the fire is not 
quenched;' Matt. ix. 43, 44. which he repeats again, ver. 
46. and, that Mr. B. may not cause any to hope the con- 
trary, again ver. 48. This adds to the former miracle, that 
men should be punished and yet not be ; that they shall be 
punished by the stings of a worm to torment them when 
they are not, and the burning of a (ire, when their whole es- 
sence is consumed. So also Isa. Ixvi. 24. their torments 
shall be endless, and the means of their torments continued 
for ever ; but for themselves, it seems, they shall have an 
end, as to their being ; and so nothing shall be punished 
with an everlasting worm, and a fire never to be quenched. 
Nay, which is more, there shall be amongst them ' weeping, 
and wailing, and gnashing of teeth;' Matt, viii, 12. the 
utmost sorrow and indignation expressible, yea, beyond ex- 
pression ; and yet they shall not be. God threatens men 
with death and destruction, and describes that death and 
destruction to consist in the abiding under his wrath in 
endless torments ; which inexpressible sorrow evidently 


shews that death is not a consumption of them as to the 
continuance of their being, but a deprivation of all the good 
of life natural, spiritual, and eternal ; with an infliction of 
the greatest evils that they can be capacitated to endure 
and undergo, called their destruction and perdition.* 

What hath been the intention and design of Mr. B. in 
this his catechism, which I have thus far considered, I shall 
not judge. There is one lawgiver, to whom both he and I 
must give an account of our labour, and endeavours in this 
business: That the tendency of the work itself is to increase 
infidelity and sin in the world, I dare aver. Let this chapter 
be an instance, and from the savour that it hath, let a taste 
be taken of the whole ; and its nature be thereby estimated. 
That the greatest part of them to whom the mind of God, as 
revealed in Scripture, is in some measure made known, are 
not won and prevailed upon by the grace, love, and mercy, 
proclaimed therein, and tendered through Christ, so as to 
give up themselves in all holy obedience unto God, I sup- 
pose will be granted. That these men are yet so overpowered 
by the terror of the Lord therein discovered, and the threats 
of the wrath to come, as not to dare to run out to the utmost, 
that the desperate thoughts of their own hearts, and the 
temptations of Satan meeting in conjunction, would carry 
them out unto, as it hath daily and manifold experiences to 
evince it ; so the examples of men so awed by conviction, 
mentioned in the Scripture, do abundantly manifest. Now 
what is it among all the considerations of the account that 
men are to make and the judgment which they are to undergo, 
which doth so amaze their souls, and fill them with horror 
and astonishment, so strike off their hands when they are 
ready to stretch them out to violence and uncleanness ; or 
so frequently makes their conception of sin abortive, as this 
of the eternity of their punishment, which impenitent sin- 
ners must undergo. Is not this that which makes bitter the 
otherwise sweet morsels that they roll under their tongues ; 

^ A. Ita jocaris, quasi ego dicam, eos esse miseros, qui nati non sunt, et non eos 
niiscros, qui mortui sunt. M. Esse ergo eos dicis. A. Immo, quia non sunt, cum 
fuerint, eos miseros esse M. Pugnantia te loqui non vides 1 quid enim tam pug- 
nat, quara non modo niiserum, sed omnino quidquam esse, qui non fit. A. Quoniam 
nie verbo premis, posthac non ita dicam, miseros esse, sed lantum, miseros, ob id 
ipsuni quia non sunt. M. Non dicis igitur, miser est. M. Crassus, sed miser Crassus. 
A. Ua plane. M. Quasi non necesse sit, qiiicquid isto modo pronunfies, id aut esse, 
aut non esse, antu dialccticis neimbutusquidemes, &c. Ciccr. Tuscul. Quest. Lib. 1. 


and is an adamantine chain to coerce and restrain them, 
when they break all other cords, and cast all other bonds 
behind them? yea, hath not this been from the creation of 
the world*^ the great engine of the providence of God for the 
preserving of mankind from the outrageousness and unmea- 
surableness of iniquity and wickedness, which would utterly 
ruin all human society, and work a degeneracy in mankind 
into a very near approximation unto the beasts that perish ; 
namely, by keeping alive in the generality of rational crea- 
tures, a prevailing conviction of an abiding condition of evil 
doers in a state of misery ? To undeceive the wretched 
world, and to set sinful man at liberty from this bondage 
and thraldom, to his own causeless fears, Mr. B. comes forth 
and assures them all that the eternity of torments is a fable, 
and everlasting punishment, a lie ; let them trouble them- 
selves no more, the worst of their misery may be past in a 
moment ; it is but annihilation, or rather perdition of soul 
and body, and they are for ever freed from the wrath of the 
Almighty. Will they not say, * Let us eat and drink for to- 
morrow we shall die?' Down we lie of a season. God, it 
seems, will see us once again and then farewell for ever. 
Whether ever there were a more compendious way of serving 
the design of Satan, or a more expedient engine to cast 
down and demolish the banks and bounds given to the bot- 
tomless lust and corruption of natural men, that they may 
overflow the world with a deluge of sin and confusion, con- 
sidering the depraved condition of all men by nature, and 
the rebellion of the most against the love and mercy of 
the gospel, I much doubt. But who is more fit to encou- 
rage wicked men to sin and disobedience, than he who la- 
bours also to pervert the righteous and obedient from their 

To close this whole discourse, I shall present Mr. Bid- 
die's catechumens with a shorter catechism than either of 
his, collected out of their master's questions, with some few 

' Hac Caesar disseruit, credo falsa existimans ea qua de infernis memorantur di- 
verse itinere nialos a bonis loca tetra, inculta, foeda atque formidolosa habere. Cato 
apud Salust. Bell. Catilin. 


inferences, naturally flowing from them ; and it is as fol- 

*Q. 1. What is God? 

* A. God is a Spirit, that hath a body, shape, eyes, ears, 
hands, feet, like to us. 

' Q. 2. Where is this God ? 

'A. In a certain place in heaven, upon a throne, where 
a man may see from his right hand to his left. 
' Q. 3. Doth he ever move out of that place ? 

* A. I cannot tell what he doth ordinarily, but he hath 
formerly come down sometimes upon the earth. 

'Q. 4. What doth he do there in that place? 

*A. Among other things, he conjectures at what men 
will do here below. 

' Q. 5. Doth he then not know what we do? 

' A. He doth what we have done, but not what we will 

* Q. 6. What frame is he in, upon his knowledge and 

*A. Sometimes he is afraid, sometimes grieved, some- 
times joyful, and sometimes troubled. 

' Q. 7. What peace and comfort can I have in committing 
myself to his providence, if he knows not what will befall me 
to-morrow ? 

* A. What is that to me, see you to that. 
' Q. 8. Is Jesus Christ God ? 

* A. He is dignified with the title of God, but he is not 

*Q. 9. Why then was he called the only begotten Son of 

' A. Because he was born of the Virgin Mary. 

' Q. 10. Was he Christ the Lord then when he was born? 

* A. No, he became the Lord afterward. 

*Q. 11. Hath he still in heaven a human body? 

*A. No, but he is made a Spirit, so that being not God 
but man, he was made a God ; and being made a God, he is 
a Spirit, and not a man. 

'Q. 12. What is the Holy Ghost ? 

*A. A principal angel. 

* Q. 13. Did death enter by sin, or was mortality actually 
caused by sin ? 


'A. No. 

' Q. 14. Why is Christ called a Saviour ? 

* A. Because at the resurrection he shall change our vile 

* Q. 15. On what other account ? 
'A. None that I know of. 

* Q. 16. How then shall I be saved from sin and wrath ? 

* A. Keep the commandments, that thou raayest have a 
right to eternal life. 

'Q. 17. Was Christ the eternal Son of God in his bosom, 
revealing his mind from thence, or was he taken up into 
heaven, and there taught the truths of God as Mahomet pre- 

' A. He ascended into heaven, and talked with'God, be- 
fore he came and shewed himself to the world. 

' Q. 18. What did Christ do as a prophet ? 

' A. He gave a new law. 

'Q. 19. Wherein? 

* A. He corrected the law of Moses. 

' Q. 20, Who was it that said of old, ' Thou shall love 
thy neighbour and hate thine enemy ? 

* A. God in the law of Moses, which Christ corrects. 

' Q. 21. Is Christ to be worshipped because he is God? 

* A. No, but because he redeemed us. 

* Q. 22. May one that is a mere creature be worshipped 
with divine or religious worship ? 

'A. Yes. 

*Q. 23. How can Christ being a mere man, and now so far 
removed from the earth, understand and hear all the prayers 
and desires of the hearts of men, that are put up to him all 
the world over ? 

* A. I cannot tell, for God himself doth not know that 
there are such actions, as our free actions are, but upon in- 

*Q. 24. Did Christ give himself for an offering and sacri- 
fice to God in his death ? 

* A. No, for he was not then a priest. 

' Q. 25. Did Christ by his death make reconciliation for 
our sins, the sins of his people, bear their iniquities that 
they might have peace with God ? 


' A. No, but only died that they might turn themselves 
to God. 

' Q. 26. Did he so undergo the curse of the law and was 
so made sin for us; were our iniquities so laid on him, that 
he made satisfaction to God for our sins ? 

' A. No, there is no such thing in the Scripture. 

' Q. 27. Did he merit or procure eternal life for us by his 
obedience and suffering? 

'A. No, this is a fiction of the generality of Christians. 

' Q. 28. Did he redeem us properly with the price of his 
blood, that we should be saved from wrath, death, and 

* A. No, there is no such use or fruit of his death and 

' Q. 29. If he neither suffered in our stead, nor underwent 
the curse of the law for us, nor satisfied justice by making- 
reconciliation for our sins, nor redeemed us by the price of 
his blood, what did he do for us ; on what account is he our 
Saviour ? 

' A. He taught us the way to heaven, and died to leave 
us an example. 

' Q. 30. How then did he save them, or was he their Sa- 
viour, who died before his teaching and dying ? 

' A. He did not save them, nor was their Saviour, nor did 
they ask any thing in his name, or received any thing on 
his account. 

* Q. 31. Did Christ raise himself according as he spake 
of the temple of his body, destroy this temple and the third 
day I will raise it again? 

' A. No, he raised not himself at all. 

' Q. 32. Hath God from eternity loved some even before 
they did any good, and elected them to life and salvation to 
be obtained by Jesus Christ? 

' A. No, but he loved all alike. 

'Q. 33. Did God in the sending of Christ aim at the sal- 
vation of a certain number of his elect ? 

' A. No, but at the salvation of men in general whether 
ever any be saved or no. 

' Q. 34. Are all those saved for whom Christ died ? 

* A. The least part of them are saved. 


* Q. 35. Is faith wrought in us by the Spirit of God, or 
are we converted by the eflacacy of his grace ? 

'A. No, but of ourselves we believe and are converted, 
and then we are made partakers of the Spirit and his grace. 

' Q. 36. Are all true believers preserved by the power of 
God unto salvation ? 

* A. No, many of them fall away and perish. 

' Q. 37. Is the righteousness of Christ imputed to us for 
our justification? 

' A. No, but our own faith and works. 

* Q. 38. Are we to receive or apprehend Christ and his 
righteousness by faith, that we may be justified through him? 

' A. No, but believe on him that raised him from the 
dead, and without that, it suffices. 

' Q. 39. Are we able to keep all God's coilimandments ? 
' A. Yes. 

* Q. 40. Perhaps in our sincere endeavours ; but can we 
do it absolutely and perfectly ? 

* A. Yes, we can keep them perfectly. 

' Q. 41. What need a man then to apprehend Christ's righ- 
teousness and apply it to himself by faith? 

'A. None at all, for there is no such thing required. 

' Q. 42. What shall become of wicked men after the re- 
rection ? 

' A. They shall be so consumed body and soul, as not at 
all to remain in torments.' 






Of this task I would complain if I durst ; but I know not 
how it may be taken ; and whether it may not occasion 
another apology. So are writings of this nature, as waves 
that thrust on one another. * Books, 'says one, * are like good 
turns ; they must be new covered, or it will rain through.' 
I was in some hope to have escaped this trouble. But 
^irovog TTovo) ttovov <^igH. And Chrysostom tells us, that 
^ TToXXijc "yifiu raga'^^r^i; y] ^wr}, koi Oopvftiov fiiarog 6 irapdv 
^log IcTTiv. I desire to be content with my portion, being 
better yet than that of *^Livius Drusius, who complained 
* uni sibi nee puero quidem unquam ferias contigisse ;' so it 
be in and about things of real use, and advantage to the 
souls of men, I can be content with any pains that I have 
strength to answer. But this is an evil, which every one 
who is not stark blind may see in polemical writings; almost 
their constant end, is \oy oiJ.a-)(la, TrepiavToXoyia, dnoXoyia, 
whence saith the apostle, yiverai (pOovog, tpig, (5\a(7(l)rifxiai, 
vTTovoiai TTovrjpai, 7rapa8iaTpij3at. Having through the provi- 
dence of God (whether on my part necessarily or wisely I 
know not ^ehg otSa), engaged in public, for the defence of 
some truths of the gospel (as I believej, I was never so 
foolish, ; s to expect an escape without opposition. He that 

* Sophocles. •» Chrysosl. Con. 1. •crEpi 'rrfovoiac. 

"^ Suetou. in vit. Tib. 


puts forth a book, sentences his reason to the gantelope : 
every one will strive to have a lash at it in its course, and 
he must be content to bear it. It may be said of books of 
this kind, as he said of children'' (things often compared), 
TO yivsa^ai iraTtpa iraidivv, AwTrrj, 0oj3oc, (fipovrlg. ' Anxiety, 
fear, and trouble, attend their authors.' For my own part, 
as I provoked no man causelessly in any of my writings, de- 
fended no other doctrine professedly but the common faith 
of the Protestant churches, of which I found the saints of 
God in possession, when I came first acquainted with them ; 
so 1 have from the beginning resolved, not to persist in any 
controversy, as to the public debate of it, when once it 
begins to degenerate into a strife of words, and personal 
reflections ; so much the more grievous is it to me, to en- 
gage in this now in hand, of the necessity whereof I shall 
give the reader a brief account. That as to the matter of 
the contest between Mr. B. and myself, Mr. B. is my wit- 
ness, that I gave not the occasion of it; so as to the manner 
of its handling, that I carried not on the provocation, I ap- 
peal to all that have read my treatise, which is now animad- 
verted on. The same person, ' et initium dedit, et modum 
abstulit.' Some freedom of expression, that perhaps I might 
righteously have made use of, to prevent future exacerbations 
I designedly forbore. 1 know that some men must have 
BvatTiva pijfjiara. Expressions^ concerning them, had need be 
fivpo(5pf:Xiig' or like the letters, that men print one of ano- 
ther, which are oftentimes answerable to that of Augustus 
to Maecenas ; ' vale mel gemmeum, medullise ebur ex Hetru- 
ria, lasera-rietinum, adamas supernas, Tiberinum margari- 
tum, cilniorum smaragde, jaspis figulorum, berille Porsennae, 
carbunculum Italiae,' koi 'Iva avvTijXM iravra, &c. I hoped 
therefore this business had been at an issue ; others also were 
of the same mind ; especially considering that he had almost 
professed against proceeding farther in this controversy in 
some other treatises and apologies. For my own part, I 
must profess my thoughts arose only from his long silence. 
The reason of this 1 knew could not be that of him in the 
poet, '^^tXa yap oKVHv Trpajfi aviip irpaaawv fxiya' seeing he 

^ Menander. * Tiiv KSvoSo^iav w? TEXEOTa~isv ;^iTaiva h 4'^%'' wsfuxEv imoTidta-bat. 

^ Sophocles. 


could have done it as speedily as have written so much paper. 
The expressions in his books seemed to me, as the fermen- 
tation of a spirit, that at one time or other would boil over. 
I confess I was something delivered from the fear of it, when 
not long before the publishing of his confession and apology, 
I met with him, and had occasion of much conference with 
him at London, even about justification ; and he made not 
the least mention of this confutation of me, which he hath 
now published ; but <j>iWiKo'ig evei^ev ofi^amv' but though this 
present contest might have been easily prevented (as the 
reader will instantly perceive), yet I presume the book was 
then wholly printed, and Mr. B. was not to lose his pains, 
nor the world the benefit thereof, nor the printer his ink and 
paper, for so slight a cause, as the preventing of the asper- 
sion of me for an Antinomian. 

But * jacta est alea,' now it is out, we must make the 
best of it; and I hope the reader will excuse me in what 
follows, wg ou^' vTrap')((ii}v aWa riintopoviuLEvoQ. 

But why must my arguments be answered, and myself 
confuted? Two reasons hereof are given. The first by very 
many insinuations ; namely, that I have delivered dangerous 
doctrines, such as subvert the foundation of the gospel, 
plain antinomianism ; and these two positions are laid down 
to be confuted, viz. first. That the elect are justified from 
eternity, or from the death of Christ, before they believe. 
Secondly, That justification by faith, is but in foro con- 
scientia, or in our own feeling, and terminated in consci- 
ence, and not in foro Dei: farther, then, conscience may be 
so called ; and my arguments for them are answered ; 
chap. viii. p. 189. But what should a man do in this case? 
1 have already published to Mr. B. and all the world, that I 
believe neither of these propositions ; must I take my oath 
of it, or get compurgators, or must we have no end of this 
quarrel ? Let Mr. B. prove any such thing, out of any thing 
I have written, and as Nonius says, out of Ngevius, ' ei dum 
vivebo, fidelis ero.' I am sure this minds me of that pas- 
sage in the Jewish liturgy, ' placeat tibi domine liberare me 
a lite difficili, et ab adversario difficili, sive is ad foedus tuum 
pertineat, sive non pertineat.' The following examination of 
the particulars excepted against by Mr. B. will make this 


evident, whence it will appear, thats jutKjoa Trpocpaaig ectti tow 
Trpa^ai kokwc" yea but. 

Secondly,'^ two or three reverend brethren told him, that 
to that part which he hath considered, it was necessary I 
should be confuted ; who these reverend brethren are I 
know not ; 1 presume they may be of those friends of Mr. 
B. that blame him for replying to Mr. Blake, but say for all 
the rest with whom he hath dealt (of whom I am forced to 
be one) that it is no matter, they deserved no better. 
Whoever they are, they might have had more mercy than 
not a little to pity poor men imder the strokes of a heavy 
hand. Nor do I know what are the reasons of the brethren, 
why my name must be brought on this stage ; nor perhaps 
is it meet they should be published. It may' be it is ne- 
cessary that Mr. Owen should be confuted among Antino- 
mians, and that ek rp'nro^og. But what if it should appear 
in the issue, that Mr. Owen hath deserved better at their 
hands, and that this advice of theirs might have been spared ? 
But not to complain of I know not whom, to those reve- 
rend advisers I shall only say, e'/Se irav e^ei KoXwg, to], 
rraiyvid), Sote Kpiorov, koI Travreg vfidg fura yapag, TroTnrvcraTi.' 
but if it appear in the issue, that I was charged with that 
which I never delivered, nor wrote, and that my arguments 
to one purpose, are answered in reference to another, and 
that this is the sum of Mr. B.'s discourse against me, 1 shall 
only recommend to them some verses of old Ennius, as I 
find them in Aus. Pop. 

Nam qui lepide postulat alterum frustrari 
Quern frustatur, frustra eurn dicit frustra esse, 
Nam qui sese frustrari quem frustra sentit. 
Qui frustatur is frustra est, si non, ille est frustra. 

What then shall I do ? I am imposed on to lay the foun- 
dation of all antinomianism (as Mr. Burgess is also), to 
maintain justification from eternity, or at least in the cross 
of Christ, of all that should believe; and justification by 
faith to be but the sense of it in our consciences (which last 
I know better and wiser men than myself that do, though I 
do not) and so reckoned amongst them that overthrow the 
whole gospel, and place the righteousness of Christ in the 

8 Menander. '' Mr, B.'s Preface. 


room of our own believing and repentance, rendering them 

Shall I undertake to confute Mr. B.'s book, at least 
wherein we differ, and so acquit myself both from Antino- 
mianism and Socinianism in the business in hand ? But, 
1. The things of this discourse are such, and the manner of 
handling them of that sort, that Mr. B. heartily in the close 
of his book,'' begs pardon for them, who have necessitated 
him to spend so much time to so little purpose; koL ravra 
7rpaacru)v (poaK avrjp ovdlv iroiCov. As I see not yet the neces- 
sity of his pains, s,o I desire his reverend advisers may thank 
him for this intercession, for 1 suppose myself (at least), not 
concerned therein. But this I can say, that I am so far from 
engaging into a long operose contest, in a matter of such 
importance and consequence, as the subject of that book is 
represented to be, that I would rather burn my pens and 
books also, than serve a provocation so far, as to spend half 
that time therein, which the confutation of it would require 
from so slow and dull a person as myself. 

2. He hath in his preface put such terrible conditions 
upon those that will answer him, that I know no man but 
must needs be affrighted with the thoughts of the attempt. 
He requires, that whoever undertake this work, be of a 
stronger judgment, and a more discerning head, than he ; 
that he be a better proficient in these studies than he ; that 
he be freer from prejudice than he ; that he have more illu- 
mination and grace than he : that is, that he be a better, 
wiser, more holy, and learned man, than Mr. B. Now if we 
may take Mr. B.'s character, by what he discourseth of his 
mortification and sincerity, his freedom from prejudice, 8cc. ; 
as there is no reason but that we should ; I profess 1 know 
not where to find his match, much less any to excel him, 
with whom I might intercede for his pains in the consider- 
ation of this treatise j for as for myself, I am seriously so far 
from entertaining any such thoughts, in reference to Mr. B. 
that I dare not do it in reference to any one godly minister 
that I know in the world ; yea, 1 am sure that I am not in 
respect of all the qualifications mentioned, put together, to 
be preferred before any one of them. If it be said, that it 
is not requisite that a man should know this of himself, but 

•^ Page 462. 


only that he be so indeed ; I must needs profess, that being 
told beforehand that such he must be, if he undertake this 
work, I am notable to discern how he should attempt it, and 
not proclaim himself, to have an opinion of his own qualifi- 
cations, answerable to that which is required of him. 

3. It is of some consideration, that a man that doth not 
know so much of him as I do, would by his writings take 
him to be immitis and immisericors a very Achilles, that 
will not pardon a man in his grave ; but will take him up, 
and cut him in a thousand pieces. I verily believe, that if 
a man (who had nothing else to do), should gather into one 
heap all the expressions, which in his late books, confes- 
sions, and apologies, have a lovely aspect towards himself, 
as to ability, diligence, sincerity, on the one hand, with all 
those which are full of reproach and contempt towards 
others, on the other, the view of them could not but a little 
startle a man of so great modesty, and of such eminency in 
the mortification of pride as Mr. B. is. But, 

'OvdlU ItD- avroZ fu x.aHa Fvvcipa, 

Had I not heard him profess how much he valued the 
peace of the church, and declare what his endeavours for it 
were, I could not but suppose upon evidences which I am 
unwilling to repeat together, that a humour of disputing 
and quarrelling, was very predominant in the man .-'however, 
though a profession may pass against all evidences of fact to 
the contrary whatever ; yet I dare say that he lives not at 

That he hath been able to discern the positions he opposes 
in the beginning of his eighth chapter to be contained in any 
writings of mine, as maixitained by me, I must impute to 
such a sharp sightedness, as was that of Caius Caligula; to 
whom, when he inquired of Viteilius whether he saw him not 
embracing the moon, it was replied, '' solis (domine) vobis 
diis licet invicem videre.' 

What shall I then do ? Shall I put forth a creed, or an 
apology, to make it appear that indeed I am not concerned 
in any of Mr. Baxter's contests ? But, 

1. I dare not look upon myself of any such consideration 
to the world, as to write books to give them an account of 

' Dio. 


myself (with whom they very little trouble their thoughts) ; 
to tell them my faith and belief, to acquaint them when I am 
well and when I am sick, what sin I have mortified most, 
what books I have read, how I have studied, how I go, and 
walk, and look, what one of my neighbours says of me, and 
what another, how I am praised by some and dispraised by 
others, what I do and what I would have others do, what 
diligence, impartiality, uprightness, I -use, what I think of 
other men : so dealing unmercifully with perishing paper, 
and making books by relating to myself, v^orthy, 

Deferri in vicum vendentem thus, et odores, 
Et piper, etquicquid chartls amicitur ineptis.'" 

And I should plainly shew myself aXaZovo)(^avvo(j)\vapoC' 

2. I know there is no need of any such thing ; for all that 
know me, or care to know me, know full well, that in and 
about the doctrine of justification by faith, I have no sin- 
gular opinion of my own, but embrace the common known 
doctrine of the reformed churches, which by God's good as- 
sistance in due time, I shall farther explicate and vindicate 
from Papists, Socinians, and Arminians ; I cannot complain, 
that "^eyu) tifii fxovog rwv rinCov l/xoe. I have companions and 
counsellors. And in truth it is very marvellous to some, 
that this learned person, who hath manifested so great a ten- 
derness on his own behalf, as to call their books monsters, 
and themselves liars, who charged his opinion about justifi- 
cation with a coincidence with that of the Papists, should 
himself so freely impute antinomianismto others; an opinion 
which he esteems as bad, if not every way worse than that 
of the Papists about justification ; but ' contenti simus hoc 
Catone ;' which is all I shall say, though some would add ; 

Homine iniperito nunquam quidquam injustius 
Qui nisi quod ipse facit nihil rectum putat. 

3. I must add, if for a defensative of myself, I should 
here transcribe and subscribe some creed already published, 
I must profess, it must not be that of Mr. B. (p. 12, 13.) 
which he calls the Worcestershire profession of faith ; and 
that as for other reasons, so especially for the way of deli- 
vering the doctrine of the Trinity, which but in one expres- 
sion at most differs from the known confession of the Soci- 
nians : and in sundry particulars, gives so great a counte- 

" Hor. Epis. ii. 1. 269. " Apollidorus. 


nance to their abominations. For instance, the first article 
of it is, ' I believe that there is one only God, the Father, 
infinite in being,' &c. which being carried on towards the end, 
and joined to the profession of consent, as it is called, in 
these words, * I do heartily take this one God, for my only 
God and chiefest good, and this Jesus Christ for my only 
Lord, Redeemer, and Saviour ;' evidently distinguishes the 
Lord Jesus Christ our Redeemer, as our Lord, from that one 
true God ; which not only directly answers that question of 
Mr. Biddle's, ' How many Lords of Christians are there in 
distinction from this one God V but in terms falls in with 
that which the Socinians profess to be the 'tessera' of their 
sect and churches, as they call them, which is, that they be- 
lieve in the ' one true living God the Father, and in his 
only Son Jesus Christ our Lord.' Nor am I at so great an 
indifferency in the business of the procession of the Holy 
Ghost, as to those expressions of 'from,' and 'by the Son,' as 
that confession is at ; knowing that there is much more de- 
pends on these expressions as to the doctrine of the Trinity, 
than all the confessionists can readily apprehend. But yet 
here, that we may not have occasion to say, AeTrroXoywi/ 
diroXoyiwv (ptv TrXri^og ! I do freely clear the subscribers of 
that confession from any sinister opinion of the Trinity, or 
the Deity of Jesus Christ, though as to myself I suppose 
my reasons abundantly sufficient to detain me from a sub- 
scription of it. But if this course be not to be insisted on, 
shall I, 

3. Run over all the confessions of faith, and common 
places which I have, or may have here at Oxford, and ma- 
nifest my consent with them in the matter under question? 
I confess this were a pretty easy way to make up a great 
book; but for many reasons it suits not with my judgment, 
although I could have the advantage of giving what they 
positively deliver in abundance as their main thesis and 
foundation, without cutting off discourses from their con- 
nexion and coherence, to give them a new face and appear- 
ance, which in their own proper place they had not, or to 
gather up their concessions to the adversaries to one pur- 
pose, and applying them to another: and therefore I shall 
wholly wave that way of procedure, although I might by it, 
perhaps, keep up some good reputation with the orthodox. 

s 2 


To have passed Over then this whole business in silence, 
would have seemed to me much the best course, had I not 
seen a man of so great integrity and impartiality, as Mr. B. 
(who so much complains of want of candour and truth in 
others) counting it so necessary to vindicate himself from 
imputations, as to multiply books and apologies to that end 
and purpose, and that under the chains of very strong im- 
portunities and entreaties, to turn the course of his studies 
and pains to things more useful; wherein his labours (as he 
says), have met with excessive estimation and praises. And 
may doubtless well do so, there being (as he informs us) 'too 
few divines that are diligently and impartially studious of 
truth ; and fewer that have strong judgments, that are able 
to discern it, though they do study it,' (Pref.) which, though 
Mr. B. arrogates not to himself, yet others may do well to 
ascribe to him. I hope then he will not be offended, if in 
this I follow his steps, though * baud passibus sequis :' and 
' longo post intervallo.' Only in this I shall desire to be 
excused, if seeing the things of myself are very inconsidera- 
ble, and whatever I can write on that account being like the 
discourses of men returning ' e lacu furnoque,' that I multi- 
ply not leaves to no purpose. I shall then desire, 

1. To enter my protest, that I do not engage with Mr. 
B. upon the terms and conditions by him prescribed in his 
preface ; as though I were wiser, or better, or more learned 
than he ; being fully assured, that a man more unlearned 
than either of us, and less studied, may reprove and con- 
vince us of errors ; and that we may deal so with them, who 
are much more learned than us both. 

2, To premise, that I do not deliver my thoughts and 
whole judgment in the business of the justification of a sin- 
ner : which to do, I have designed another opportunity, tl 
^£og ^eXei, Koi Krfrru), and shall not now prevent myself. 

These things being premised, I shall, 

1. Set down what I have delivered concerning the three 
heads, wherein it is pretended the difference lies between us. 

2. Pass through the consideration of the particular 
places, where Mr. B. is pleased to take notice of me and my 
judgment and arguments, as to the things of the contests, 
wherein he is engaged : and this course I am necessitated 
unto; because as Mr. B. states the controversies he pur- 


sues in the beginning of the eighth chapter, I profess my- 
self wholly unconcerned in them. 

The things then that I am traduced for the maintaining 
and giving countenance unto, are, 

1. The justification of the elect from eternity. 

2. Their justification at the death of Christ, as dying and 
suffering with him. 

3. Their absolution in heaven before their believing. 

4. That justification by faith, is nothing but a sense of 
it in the conscience. 

5. That Christ suffered the idem, which we should have 
done ; and not only tantundem. Of all which very briefly. 

1. For the first, I neither am, nor ever was of that judg- 
ment ; though, as it maybe explained, I know better, wiser, 
and more learned men than myself, that have been, and are. 
This I once before told Mr. B. and desired him to believe 
me : Of the death of Christ, p. 33. [Works, vol. v. p. 599.] if 
he will not yet do it, I cannot help it. 

2. As to the second, I have also entreated Mr. B. to be- 
lieve that it is not my judgment in that very book on which 
he animadverts; and hoped I might have obtained credit 
with him, he having no evidence to the contrary : ht the 
reader see what I deliver to this purpose, pp. 34, ob. [pp. 
601, 602.] In what sense I maintain that the 'elect died and 
rose with Christ,' see pp. 82—84. [pp. 638—640.] 

3. The third, or absolution in heaven before believfng. 
What I mean hereby I explain, pp. 77 — 79. [pp. 634, 635.] 
Let it be consulted. 

It was, on I know not what grounds, before by Mr. B. 
imposed on me, that I maintained justification upon the 
death of Christ before believing : which I did with some 
earnestness reject, and proved by sundry arguments, that 
we are not changed in our state and condition before we do 
believe. Certainly never was man more violently pressed to 
a. warfare, than I to this contest. 

4. That justification by faith is nothing but a sense of it 
in conscience, I never said, I never wrote, I never endea- 
voured to prove. What may a man expect from others who 
is so dealt withal by a man whose writings so praise him, 
as Mr. B.'s do ? 

5. For the last thing, what I affirm in it, what I believe 


in it, what I have proved, the preceding treatise will give an 
account to the reader. And for my judgment in these things, 
this little at present may suffice. Mr. B.'s animadversions, 
in the order wherein they lie, shall nextly be considered. 

The first express mention that I am honoured withal is 
towards the end of his preface, occasioned only by a passage 
in my brief proem to Mr. Eyres's book of justification. My 
words as by him transcribed are : ' For the present I shall 
only say, that there being too great evidence of a very wel- 
come entertainment and acceptation, given by many to an 
almost pure Socinian justification, and exposition of the co- 
venant of grace,' &c. To which Mr. B. subjoins : 'But to be 
almost an error, is to be a truth. There is but a thread be- 
tween truth and error, and that which is not near to that 
error, is not truth, but is liker to be another error, in the 
other extreme. For truth is one straight line, error is mani- 
fold, even all that swerves from that line in what space or 
degree soever.' 

'Malum omen!' and the worse because of choice; whether 
this proceed " nraga rrjv row l\iy)(Ov ayvoiav, or whether it be 
TO Ik arifxdov (dcrvWojKTTOv yap kuX tovto) it matters not ; but 
lam sure it is sophistical. The doctrine of justification, 
which I reflected on ; I did not say was near to error, or al- 
most an error, but near to Socinianism or almost Socinian : 
if Mr. B. takes error and Socinianism to be terms convert- 
ible, I must crave liberty to dissent. That which is almost 
error, is true : but that which is almost Socinianism may be 
quite an error, though not an error quite so bad, as that of 
the Socinians concerning the same matter. He that shall 
deny the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, and 
maintain that our performance of new obedience is the mat- 
ter of our justification before God, according to the tenor 
of the new covenant, and yet grant the satisfaction of Christ, 
and assign it a place (some or other) in the business of our 
justification, his doctrine is but almost Socinian, and yet in 
my judgment is altogether an error. And so the heat of this 
first conflict is allayed, 'Pulveris exigui jactu:' its founda- 
tion having been only a/iiiTpia av^oXKrig. 

But notwithstanding this seeming discharge, perhaps it 
maybe said, that indeed this was not a honest insinuation; 

" Arist llhet. lib. 2. cap. 26. 


there being no such doctrines abroad amongst us, as hold 
any blamable correspondency with the Socinian doctrine 
of justification; and it is not an ingenuous and candid way 
of proceeding, to seek to oppress truths, or at least opinions, 
that are managed with a fair and learned plea, with names 
of public abomination, with which indeed they have no 
communion. I confess this is an unworthy course, a path 
wherein I am not desirous to walk : I shall therefore, from 
their own writings, give the reader a brief summary in some 
few propositions, of the doctrine of the Socinians concern- 
ing justification, and then nakedly without deprecating his 
censure, leave him to judge of the necessity and candour of 
my forementioned expressions. They say then, that, 

1. Justifying faith, or that faith whereby we arejustified, 
is our receiving of Christ, as our Lord and Saviour, trusting 
in him, and yielding obedience to him. 

' Credere in Jesum Christum, nihil aliud est, quam Jesu 
Christo confidere, et idcirco ex ejus praescripto vitam insti- 
tuere. Socin. Justificat. Synop. 2. p. 17. Fides est fiducia 
per Deum in Christum, unde apparet, eam in Christo fidem 
duo comprehendere : unum, ut non solum Deo, verum et 
Christo confidamus : deinde ut Deo obtemperemus, &,c. Ca- 
tech. Racov. cap. 9. defideVolkel. de vera Religione, lib. 4. 
cap. 3. p. 179, 180. Smalc. refut. Thes. Franz, disput. 4. 
p. 103. et. disp. 6. p. 184. Credere in Christum nihil aliud 
est; quam illi confidere, hoc est, ipsi, sub spe promissionum, 
ab eo nobis factarum, obedire, &c. Smalc. Refut. Thes. Franz, 
disp. 7. p. 209. Fides in Christum, est, fiduciam in eum col- 
locare, et credere ilium esse omnibus obtemperantibus sibi 
aeternse salutis causam. Si proprie et stricte sumatur ab 
obedientia differt. Sed per metonymiam quandam synech- 
dochiam, saepe tam late sumitur, ut omnia pietatis et justitise 
opera comprehendat. Schlichting. Comment, in cap. 11. ad 
Heb. p. 519. Quid est credere in nomen Christi? Res. eum 
excipere, ejus dictis fidem habere, ei confidere, ei denique 
obtemperare. Dialog. Anon, de Justifi. p. 4. Ex his quee 
hactenus dicta sunt, satis intelligi potest, etiamsi verissi- 
mum sit, quemadmodum scriptura apertissiine testatur, nos 
per mortem Christi, perque sanguinis ejusfusionem servatos 
esse, nostraque peccata deleta fuisse, non tantum hoc ipsum 
credere, esse eam fidem in Christum, qua, ut Sacrce li terse 


docent,justificamur, id quod multi et olim putarunt, et hodie 
putant, adeoque similiter credunt : longe enim aliud est, istud 
credere, et sub spe vitse seternse ab ipso consequendsc, Christo 
obedire; quod necessario requiri ad jutificationem nostram, 
anteaa nobis demonstratum est. Fragment, de Justifi. Faust. 
Socin. Opusc. p. 115.' That, 

2. Faith in justifying is not to be considered as a hand 
whereby we lay hold on the righteousness of another, or as 
an instrument, as though righteousness were provided for 
us, and tendered unto us, which would overthrow all neces- 
sity of being righteous in ourselves. 

* Patet quam inepte Meisnerus fidem vocet causam instru- 
mentalem, qua justificationem (seu justitiain) apprehen- 
damus, seu recipiamus ; patet denique quam falso (qui error 
ex priore consequitur) fidem, qua virtus aut opus est, justi- 
ficare neget. Quid magis perversum, et Sacris literis adver- 
sum dici potuit? Parum nobis fuerat, omnes reliquas virtu- 
tes, et pia opera, a comparanda nobis salute excludere, nisi 
etiam ipsam in Deo fidem, virtutum omnium matrem et re- 
ginam, de suo solio deturbatam, tam fceda ignominia notas- 
set fidem perverse prorsus intelligitis, non enim tanquam 
conditionem adipiscendse justificationis consideratis, sed 
tanquam instrumentum vel manum, &c. Jo. Schlichting. dis- 
put. pro Faust. Socin. ad Meisner. p. 129 — 131. De eo quod 
homo justitiam accipiat, nihil legitur in Sacris Literis, et si 
id explicetur ex mente adversariorum, ridicula est fabula ; 
fides vero non est accurate loquendo causa instrumentalis, 
sed causa sine qua non (efficiens) justificationis nostras ; Smal. 
Refut. Thes. Franz, disp. 4. p. 103.' 

3. Nor yet doth faith, repentance, or obedience, procure 
our justification, or is the efficient or meritorious cause 

' Ut autem cavendum est, ne ut hodie plerique ; faciunt, 
vitse sanctimoniam atque innocentiam, effectum justifica- 
tionis nostrBB coram Deo esse dicamus ; sic diligenter cavere 
debemus, ne ipsam vitse sanctitatem atque innocentiam, jus- 
tificationem nostram coram Deo esse credamus, neve illam 
nostrse justificationis coram Deo causam efficientem, aut 
impulsivam esse affirmemus. Sed tantummodo, &c. Socin. 
Justifi. Synop. 2. p. 14. Fides justificationem non meretur, 
neque est ejus causa efficiens ; non ignoramus fidei nostrae 


nequaquam esse ea merita, quibus justificatio qua sem- 
piterna continetur felicitas, tanquam merces debita, sit tri- 
buenda. Hinc porro consequitur, fidem istam, quamvis 
obedientiam et pietatera in se coraprehendat, nequaquam 
tamen per se, et principaliter efficere, ut justificationis be- 
neficiura consequamur. Volkel. de vera Relig. lib. 4, cap. 3. 
p. ISl.Smal. Refut. Thes. Franz, disput. 4, 5. 7. obedientia 
nostra quam Christo prsestamus, nee efficiens, nee meritoria 
causa est nostrce justificationis. Socin. Thes. de Justif. p. 17. 
vide Anonym. Dialog, de Justif. p. 32.' 

4. But the true use of our faith and repentance, as to our 
justification before God, is, that they are the ' causa sine qua 
non,' or the condition whereby according to the appointment 
of God, we eome to be justified, and so is imputed to us. 

' Diligenter cavere debemus, ne vitse sanetitatem et inno- 
centiam, justificationem nostram coram Deo esse credamus, 
neve illam nostras coram Deo justificationis causam eflici- 
entem, aut impulsivani esse affirmemus, sed tantummodo 
causam sine qua eam justificationem nobis non contingere 
decrevit Deus. Socin. Synop. Justif. 2. p. 14. Id a nobis 
revera exegit, ut in Christum credamus, vitam emendaremus 
(quam conditionem salva sanctitate et majestate sua non 
poterat non exigere). Orel, de Causis mort. Cliristi. p. 5. 
Interim tamen s^i,c habendum est, cum Deus non nisi illis, 
qui fidem virtutemque pro sua virili parte colunt, vitam 
sempiternam designaverit, fiduciam istam ne quidem causam 
meritoriam, aut principaliter efiicientem, sed causam sine 
qua non (utloquuntur) justificationis nostrse esse. Volkel. de 
vera Relig. lib. 4. cap. 3. p. 181. Quod vero ad nos perti- 
net, non aliter reipsa justi coram Deo habemur, et delieto- 
rum nostrorum veniam ab ipso eonsequimur, quam si in Jes. 
Christ, credamus. Socin. Justif. Synop. 2. p. 11. 

* Itaque nemo justificatus est coram Deo, nisi prius 
Christo eonfidat, eique obediat. Quae obedientia sunt ilia 
opera ex quibus nos justificari Jacobus Apostolus afiirmat. 
Socin. Thes. de Justif. p. 14. Sunt enim opera nostra, id 
est, ut dictum fuit, obedientia, quam Christo prsestamus, 
licet nee efficiens nee meritoria, tamen causa (ut vocant) 
sine qua non justificationis coram Deo, atque seternae sa- 
lutis nostrae, id ibid, imputatur nobis a Deo id quod revera 
in nobis est, non aliquid quod a nobis absit, vel in alio sit, 


nempe quod firmiter in animo decreverimus nihil dubitantes 
de Dei promissionibus, neque considerantes nostram infir- 
mitatem nos propositum fidei certamen decurrere velle. 
Anonym. Dialog, de Justifi. p. 29. (heec vero corrigit Faus- 
tus Socin. Notse in Dial. p. 64. beatitatem et remissionem 
peccatorum nobis imputari asserens). Certum est ex Sa- 
cris Uteris requiri ad hoc, ut quis consequatur apud Deum 
remissionem peccatorum, et ita corum Deo justificetur, ut 
de illo merito dici possit, quod pactum Dei servet. Frag- 
ment, de Justif. Apparet Paulum absolute intelligere opera 
quzecunque tandem ilia sunt. Quod tamen non eam vim habet, 
utacausajustificationis nostra omnium qusecunque opera, et 
quocunque modo considerata, excludere velit. Sed sensus 
ipsius est, nulla esse opera quae tanti sint, ut propter ipso- 
rum meritum justificari possimus. Quando scilicet nemo 
est, qui perfectissime et integerrime per totam vitam, ea 
opera faciat, quse sub Vetere sive sub Novo Testament© prse- 
scripta sunt, id quod tamen omnino requiritur, sive requi- 
retur ad hoc, ut pro ipsa opera tanquam ejus rei aliquo 
modo meritoria, justificatio contingeret. Diximus autem 
aliquo modo meritoria, ut ab ipsis operibus excludamus, 
non modo absolutum et maxime proprium meritum, quod 
oritur ex ipsa operum prgestantia per se considerata. Sed 
etiam illud, quod minus proprie et respective meritum est, 
quod ex solo Dei promisso oritur ac proficiscitur, adeo ut 
nemo nee per illud, neque per hoc meritum, suorum operum 
justificationem, et absolutionem a peccatis suis, adipiscatur, 
&c. vid. Plu. fragm. de Justificat. Faust. Socin. p. 110. 
Cum Paulua negat nos ex operibus justificari, considerat 
opera tanquam meritoria, et sua ipsorum vi hominem justifi- 
cantia, et consequenter ejusmodi, quibus si ad Dei prsecep- 
tum examinentur, nihil prorsus desit; at Jacobus operum 
nomine eam obedieutiam intelligit ; sine qua Deus hominem 
sibi carum habere non vult ; seu mavis opera ejusmodi sine 
quibus dici nequeat, uUa ratione hominem Deo obedire : ex 
hac collatione ipsorum duorum Pauli et Jacobi locorum, et 
sententiarum, manifestum est, quemadmodum ad justifica- 
tionem nostram non requiritur necessario perfecta obedien- 
tia mandatorum Dei, sic ad eandem justificationem omnino 
requiri, ut Dei mandata ita conservaremus, ut merito dici 
possit nos Deo obedientes esse. Fragm. Faust, p. 221.' 


5. That our justification is our absolution from the guilt 
of sin, and freedom from obnoxiousness unto punishment 
for it, and nothing else. Our regeneration is the condition 
of our absolution, and in them both, in several respects is 
our righteousness. 

'Justificatio est cum nos Deus pro justis habet, quod ea 
ratione facit, cumnobisetpeccataremittit, et jus vitsedonat. 
Catech. Racov. cap. 11. de Justificat. Justificatio nihil 
aliud est, quam peccatorum remissio. Schlichting. contra 
Trinit. p. 147. Justificatio nostra coram Deo, ut uno verbo 
dicam, nihil aliud est quam a Deo pro justis haberi : hoc 
vero fit per absolutionem peccatorum. Socin. Synop. Jus- 
tif. 2. p. 11. Justificatio nihil aliud est, quam pro justo 
habere, itemque peccata remittere et condonare. Id. p. 13, 
14. Queero primum quid sit Justificatio? R. Peccatorum ab- 
solutio. Anon, (ni fallor Ostorod) dial, de Justifi. p. 2. 
Hie tacite continetur ea sententia, quam nos supra ab initio 
attigimus, etnon obscure refutavimus,justificationem, videl. 
a justo faciendo dici, et a justitia ac sanctitate qua quis sit 
prceditus ; cum tamen certissimum sit, justificationem in 
Sacris Uteris aliud nihil significare, quam justum pronun- 
tiare, sive ut justum tractare. Faust. Socin. notae in Dial, 
de Justif. p. 60. Sed manifestum est Paulum negare, non 
modo ex operibus legis, sed simpliciter, ex operibus nos 
justificari ^ itaque' alia ratione omnino est hie nodus sol- 
vendus, et dicendum, Paulum, operum nomine non quaelibet 
opera intelligere, nee quolibet modo accepto, sed quse sua 
vi hominem justum coram Deo reddere possunt, cum negat 
nos ex operibus justificari, qualis est absoluta et perpetua 
per totum vitse curriculum legis divinse observatio. Faust. 
Socin. notse in Dial, de Justif. p. 74. 

' Formalis itaque (ut ita ioquar) justificatio nostra coram 
Deo fuit, et semper erit, propter carnis nostras infirmitatem, 
remissio peccatorum nostrorum, non autem impletio divinge 
legis, quod Paulus operari vocat. Veruntamen nuUi re ipsa 
conceditur ista remissio, nisi Deo confisus fuerit, seque ipsi 
regendum et gubernandum tradiderit. Faust. Socin. Epist. 
ad Virum Clariss. de Fide et Operibus.' 

6. That the way whereby we come to obtain this abso- 
lution is this : Jesus Christ the only Son of God, being 
sent by him to reveal his love and grace to lost sinful man- 


kind, in that work yielding obedience unto God even unto 
death, M^as for a reward of that obedience exalted, and had 
divine authority over them for whom he died committed to 
him, to pardon and save them, which accordingly he doth, 
upon the performance of the condition of faith and obedi- 
ence by him prescribed to them, at once effecting a univer- 
sal conditional application of all : actually justifying every 
individual upon the performance of the condition. 

' Ipsi Jesu, tantam in ccelo et terra, tanquam obedientiae 
scilicet usque ad mortem crucis insigne prsemium, potesta- 
tem dedit, ut eis, &c. Socin. Synop. Justific. 1. p. 4. Inte- 
rea tarnen haudquaquam negamus, Christi mortem, condi- 
tionem quandam fuisse remissionis peccatorum nobis conce- 
dendsB : quatenus conditio fuit Christo imposita, sine qua 
potestatem obtinere ex Dei decreto non potuit, peccata no- 
bis remittendi, et nos ab seterno interitu vindicandi. Crel. 
de Cans. mort. Christ, p. 8. (Paulus ea a fide opera remo- 
vet, quse perpetuam perfectissimamque, per omneni vitoe 
cursum obedientiam continent. Jacobus ergo ea intelligit. 
Volkel de vera Relig. lib. 4. cap. 3. p. 180. ad 461.) vide 

' Quia nos Christus ab ajterna morte liberavit, et ut nos 
liberare posset, mortuus est, jure dicitur eum pro nobis, et 
pro peccatis nostris mortuum esse, et sanguinem ipsius nos 
emundare a peccatis : neque enim nos dicimus, Christum ob 
hoc vel solum vel principale obedivisse, ut nos ad seimitan- 
dum extimularet, sed constantissime affirmamus, ilium ideo 
parti suo obedientem, et pro nobis mortuum fuisse, ut po- 
testatem divinam, interveniente morte sua, consecutus, sa- 
lutem nostram administrare, et tandem reipsa perficere pos- 
set. Smal. Refut. Thes. Fran. disp. 4. p. 108. Quamvis au- 
tem certissimum ac testatissimum sit, Jesum Christum Dei 
filium sanguinem suura in reraissionem peccatorum nostro- 
rum fudisse : Tamen ipsa mors Christi per se sine Resurrec- 
tione, &c. Socin. Thes. de Justific. Thes. 3. vid. Fragm. de 
Justificat. p. 115.' 

7, That as to good works, and their place in this busi- 
ness, Paul speaks of the perfect works of the law, and legal 
manner of justifying, which leave no place for grace or par- 
don : James of gospel works of new obedience, which leave 
place for both. 


' Sola fides justificat, at non quatenus sola, praesertim si 
de plena et permanente justificatione loquamur, quatenus 
quibusvis bonis operibus opponitur. Hoc est pardcula ex- 
ciusiva sola, non qusevis opera, sed opera de quibus Aposto- 
lus loquitur, opera legis, opera plena, ob quae non secundum 
gratiam justificatio imputatur, sed secundum debitum tribu- 
itur, excludit. Non excludit autem ullo pacto opera ex fide 
provenientia, cum Jacobus expertissime doceat, hominera 
justificari ex operibus, non ex fide tantum : Schlichting. ad 
JVleisner. disput. pro Socin. pp. 290, 291. In iis locis, ubi 
Apostolus fidem operibus opponit, de operibus ejusmodi 
agit, quae et perfectam et perpetuam obedientiam continent, 
qualem sub lege Deus ab hominibus requirebat : verum 
non de iis operibus, quse obedientiam, quam Deus a nobis 
qui in Christum credidimus, requirat, comprehendunt. 
Racov. Catech. cap. 9. de Fide. Hinc jam demum intelligo 
non bona opera, quae Deus ipse prseparavit, sed legis opera a 
justificatione nostra excludi. Anonym. Dial, de Justif. p. 47/ 

8. That the denial of our faith and obedience to be the 
condition of our justification, or the asserting that we are 
justified by the obedience of Christ imputed to us, is the 
ready way to overthrow all obedience, and drive all holiness 
and righteousness out of the world. 

' Quod Christus factus sit nobis a Deo justitia. 1 Cor. i. 3. 
id minime eo sensu dici, quasi loco nostri legem impleverit, 
sic ut nobis deinceps ipsius justitia imputetur, &c. Schlich- 
ting. ad Meisn, disput. pro Socin. p. 277. Tertius error 
est, Deum imputare credentibus innocentiam et justitiam 
Christi. Non innocentiam, non justitiam Christi Deus im- 
putat credentibus, sed fidem illorum illis imputat pro justitia. 
Smal. refut. Thes. Franz, disput. 4. p. 104. alterum est extre- 
mum, quod vulgo receptum est, non sine summaanimarum 
pernicie ; videlicet, ad justificationem nostram nihil prorsus 
bona opera pertinere, nisi quatenus sunt ipsius justificationis 
efFecta. Ubi qui ita sentiunt, &c. idem.' 

9. That as the beginning, so the continuance of our jus- 
tification, depends on the condition of our faith, repentance, 
and obedience, which are not fruits consequent of it; but 
conditions antecedent to it. Socin. Thes, de Justificat. p. 18. 
Fragmenta de Justific. p. 113. And therefore in the first place 
we are to be solicitous about what is within us, about our 


sanctification, before our absolution or justification. Socin. 
Epist. ad Ch.MN. de Fide et Operibus. 'Sic tandem apparet 
vestigationeni nostram circa ea esse debere, quae in nobis 
invenientur, cum justificati sumus. — Quocirca diligenter pri- 
mum vestigare debemus an res istse, sive utraque, sive una 
tantum, et utra (si modo res diversee sint) ad nos justifican- 
dos pertineat, ac deinde quid sint, aut quales esse debeant, 
ne erremus, nobisque videamur iilas habere, cum tamen 
longe ab eis absimus. Quod enim ad misericordiam Dei 
attinet, Christique personam, una cum iis omnibus quae idem 
Christus pro nobis fecit, et facturus est, quamvis hse sunt 
veree, et prsecipuee causs justificationis nostrse, tamen aut 
jam illarum sumus, erimusve participes, antequam intra nos 
certum aliquid sit, et sic supervacaneum est de illis cogitare, 
quatenus per ea justificari velimus: aut illarum, nee jam su- 
mus, nee futuri erimus participes, nisi prius intra nos eertura 
aliquid sit, et sic de hoe accurate quserere debemus, id au- 
tem nihil est, prseter fidem et opera. Socin.' 

10. As to the death of Christ, our sins were the impul- 
sive cause of it, and it was undergone for the forgiveness of 
sins, and occasioned by them only, and is in some sense, the 
condition of our forgiveness. 

' Causa impulsiva externa sunt peccata nostra, quod iti- 
dem aperte sacrse literse doeent, dura aiunt, Christum prop- 
ter peccata nostra percussum, vulneratum, et traditum esse. 
Crel. de Caus. mort. Chris, p. 2.' 

' Q. What w&s the procuring cause of Christ's death? 

'A. He was delivered for offences;' Biddle's Cat. chap. 
12. p. 69. Though some (not of them) say, that his death 
was rather occasioned, than merited by sin ; as they speak 
sometimes. 'Finis ideo mortis Christi, ut Sacras Literae sat 
aperte doeent, est remissio peccatorum nostrorura, et vitae 
nostrse emendatio, ad quorum finem priorem vel solum, vel 
potissimum, illi loquendi modi referendi sunt : cum dicitur 
Christum mortuum esse pro peecatis nostris, seu pro nobis. 
Crel. de Caus. mort. Christ, p. 1.' 

11. That absolution and pardon of sin are by no means 
the immediate effects of the death of Christ. 

' Cum Sacrse Scripturse asserunt Christum aut pro pee- 
catis nostris, aut pro nobis esse mortuum, aut sanguinem 
ejus esse effusura in remissionem peccatorum, et siqua sint 


his similia, eorum verborum ea vis non est, ut significent 
omnino efFectum ilium, qui morti Christi in his locutionibus 
tribuitur, proxime fuisse ex ea consecutos. Crell. de Caus. 
mort. Christi. p. 35.' 

And now let the Christian reader judge, whether I had 
any just occasion for the expressions above-mentioned or 
no; if he be resolved that those words had better been 
omitted, I shall only profess myself in a very great readi- 
ness to pass by such mistakes in others, but leave myself to 
his censure. 

And with this touch by the way am I (as far as I have 
observed) dismissed to the eighth chapter ; where all that I 
am concerned in will receive an equally speedy despatch. 

In the entrance of that chapter, Mr. B. lays down two 
propositions that he rejects, and another that he intends to . 

Those he rejects were before mentioned, and my concern- 
ment in them spoken to. 

That which he proposes unto confirmation, is, 
' The justification by faith, so called in the Scripture, is 
not the knowledge or feeling of justification before given, or 
a justification in and by our own conscience, or terminated 
in conscience ; but is somewhat that goes before all such 
justification as this is, and is indeed a justification before 

There is but one expression in all this proposition that 
I am concerned in ; which the reader may easily discover to 
be plucked into the thesis by head and ears ; and that is, 
' terminated in conscience.' What it is I intend by that ex- 
pression, or what inconsistency it hath with that Mr. B. 
asserts in pretended opposition unto it, he doth not explain. 
Now I say, that in the sense, wherein I affirm that justifica- 
tion is terminated in conscience, I may yet also affirm, and 
that suitably to the utmost intention of mine in that ex- 
pression, that justification by faith is not a knowledge or 
feeling of justification before given, nor a justification in, or 
by our own consciences ; but somewhat that goes before all 
such justification as this is, and is a justification before 
God. I am then utterly unconcerned in all Mr. B.'s argu- 
ments ensuing, but only those that prove and evince that 
our justification before God is not terminated in our con- 


sciences : which when I can find them out, I will do my 
endeavour to answer them, or renounce my opinion. I find, 
indeed, in some of his following conclusions the words men- 
tioned 5 but I suppose he thought not himself that they were 
any way influenced from his premises. I know he will not 
ask, what I mean then ' by terminated in conscience;' seeing 
it would not be honourable for him to have answered a mat- 
ter before he understood it. But upon this expression chiefly 
is it, that I am enrolled into the troop of Antinomians. 

-'o Je 

opoiv rovg vo/xovi 

But that is in the matter of laws; these are but words. 
Now though I have just cause to abstain from calling in as- 
sociates in my judgment, lest I should bring them under 
the suspicion of Antinomianism ; though not of the ruder 
sort, p. 190. or at least of laying the foundation of antino- 
mianism, which Mr. Burgess after all his pains against them, 
is said to do ; (Prsef.) but the best is, that he does it super- 
ficially and without proof; (Prsef.) And although I cannot 
come up to the judgment of the man, whom I shall name ; 
yet, being he is deservedly of good esteem in the judgment 
of others, and particularly of Mr. B. for his opposition to 
the Antinomians, I will for once make use of his authority 
for my shield in this business ; and see if in this storm I can 
lie safe behind it. It is Mr. Rutherford, who in his learned ex- 
ercitations, De gratia. Exercit. 1. cap. 2. Tit. ' Quomodo jus- 
tificamur fide;' having treated of the matter of justification, 
p. 44. thus proceeds : ' Dicent ergo Arminiani, nos hie jus- 
tificationem sumere pro sensu et notitia justificationis : ideo- 
que homines fide justificantur, idem valet, ac homines turn 
demum justificantur, quando credunt, hoc est, sentiunt se 
justificari, cum antea essent justificati. Nugse et tricse si- 
culse! nam justificari est plus quam sentire se justificari: 
nam (1.) est actus Dei absolventis terminatus in conscientia 
hominis, citati et tracti ad tribunale tremendi judicis; qui 
actus ante hoc instans non terminabatur in conscientia,' &c. 
Now if this man be an Antinomian, I am sure he much mis- 
takes himself; and yet he says justification may be termi- 
nated in conscience, and yet not be a sense of an antece- 
dent justification, nor from eternity. 

But how it may fare with him, I cannot guess; Mr. 


Pemble and Dr.Twiss (quanta nomina), are in the next page 
recounted as the assertors of the position here opposed by 
Mr. B. and indeed as to some part of it they are ; but yet, if 
I durst say it, they were not Antinomians : but Mr. B. knows 
these things better than I. 

But what say I to the whole position? p. 190. 'One learn- 
ed man (so am 1 called, that the sacrifice may not fall with- 
out some flowers on its head ; which I professedly shake off, 
and dare not own my name amongst them who are or ought 
to be so styled) saith, that absolution in heaven, and justifi- 
cation differ as part and whole, and that justification is ter- 
minated in conscience, and so makes a longer work of jus- 
tification than they, that say it is simul and semel, or 
than I, whom Mr. Cr. blames for it; and so that whole be- 
gun in eternal absolution, or from Christ's death, and ended 
in conscience, should contain eminent and transient acts 
together, and no small number of our own, as there de- 

Aiis. Though I do not perfectly understand the coherence 
of these words, yet the intendment of them being more ob- 
vious (and being myself in great haste), I shall not stay to 
make any farther inquiry thereabout. 

What 1 mean by absolution in heaven, the reader if he 
please may see, chap. xii. pp. 75 — 78. [pp.633 — 635.) of that 
treatise, whence Mr. B. urges these expressions. It is neither 
eternal absolution, nor absolution from Christ's death (if 
from denote a simulty of time, and not a connexion in respect 
of causality, in which sense Mr. B. will not deny that absolu- 
tion is from Christ's death), but an absolution at the time of 
actual justification, when God gives Christ to us, and with 
him all things, that I intend. 

That by asserting this absolution in heaven, and justifi- 
cation to differ as part and whole, and justification to be ter- 
minated in conscience, I make longer work of it, than those, 
who say it is simul and semel, is said ; simul and semel, refer 
unto time, I expressly affirm, as Mr. B. knows (or ought to 
have known), that there is in these things an order of na- 
ture only. At the same time wherein God absolves us in 
heaven, the term of the stipulation for our deliverance being 
accomplished, by reckoning Christ to us, or in making him 
righteousness to us, he infuses a principle of life into our 



souls, whereby radically, and virtually the whole is accom- 

That actual justification should contain permanent and 
transient acts together, and that it is so by me described, is 
affirmed by a failure of Mr. B.'s memory. Having made this 
entrance and progress, adding the judgment of some, whom 
he calls most learned and judicious (as he is ' perspicax in- 
geniorum arbiter') ; he concludes his first section in these 
words : ' so that howsoever some by plausible words would 
put a better face on it, the sense of all seems to be the same, 
that justification by faith is the revelation of God in, and by 
the conscience, that we are formerly justified ; and so their 
justification by faith, is the same that we commonly call the 
assurance or knowledge of our justification, in some degrees 
at least, I prove the contrary :' and so falls he into his ar- 

That this is my sense, I profess I knew not before ; and 
should be sorry 1 should dwell so little at home, that Mr. B. 
should know me, and my mind, better than I do myself. T 
look upon him as my friend : and. 

To, TMV <ft'Ka:v Koiv', ov fAOVov ra x^phfiara, 
Kal vovq Se, xai <fp(wv>i<r£<»j Kotvmta, 

But yet he may possibly be mistaken ; for the present I 
will make bold to deny this to be my sense, and refer the 
reader for evidence to be given to my negation, unto that 
chapter of my book, whence Mr. B. gathers my sense and 
meaning. Let them then that are concerned look to his fol- 
lowing arguments (especially those two whom he affirms to 
have more wit than the rest, p. 204.) and woe be to them, 
if they find as many distinct mediums as there are figures 
hung up as signs of new arguments. For my own part, w^hat- 
ever my thoughts are to the whole business pleaded about, I 
shall not (be they as mean and base as can be imagined), 
cast them away in such a scambling chase as this. Only 
whereas p. 205. speaking to somebody (I know not whom), 
■whom he acknowledges to have some learning and wit, he 
says, ' that the act of the promise, law, or grant, constituting 
right, giving title, remitting the obligation to punishment, 
in itself, is totally distinct from the act of declaring this to 
ourselves, which is said to be terminated in conscience, and 
is before it, and may be without it,' 2vc. I shall, if it please him, 


desire that it may only with a little alteration be thus ren- 
dered ; The act of the promise (not that I approve that ex- 
pression, but at present it will serve the turn) giving right 
&c. is complete justification by faith, and is in itself totally 
distinct from, and in order of time before any act of God 
justifying terminated in our consciences, and proved with 
one clear testimony or argument speaking to the terms and 
sense of the proposition, and I shall confess myself, as to 
what I have as yet published of my judgment about this bu- 
siness, to be concerned in the discourse; and so passing- 
through the pikes of fifty-six arguments, I come to the ninth 
chapter, where I am again called to an account. Three things 
doth Mr. B. propose to confirmation in this chapter. 
*1. That the elect are not justified from eternity. 
'2. That they are not justified at Christ's death. 
*3. Not while they are infidels and impenitent.' 
Any man living would wonder how I should come to 
stand in his way in this chapter. But strong currents some- 
times pass their bounds in their courses, and bear all before 
them. Real, or reputed success gives great thoughts and 
pretexts for any thing, al -yap guTrpao ^lai Setvat (TvjKpv^pai koL 
avGKiaaaLToiavTa ovddr} (Demost. Olymp). In the very trea- 
tise which Mr. B. considers in these imputations, I have ex- 
pressly denied, (and in particular to Mr. B.) that I maintain 
any one of these ; if he should send but his servant, and tell 
me, that he is not to be found in such an opinion, I would 
believe him. But * quid verba audiat facta cum videat?' If 
I do maintain them indeed, must I be believed upon my de- 
nial? but, * en tabulas!' let my book traduced be consulted. 
I dispute as well as I can against justification from eternity^ 
and that I cannot do it like Mr. B. is my unhappiness, not 
my crime ; 1 hope every one must not be sentenced to be of 
an opinion which he cannot confute so learnedly, as another 
more learned man may. For justification at the death of 
Christ (though I must assure, the reader, that I have other 
thoughts of the great transaction of the business of our sal- 
vation in the person of our representative, than are consistent 
with Mr. B.'s principles, or than 1 have yet published, 
wherein I have the consent of persons as eminently insighted 
in the mystery of the gospel, as any I know in the world), I 
directly affirm, and endeavour to prove, that the elect are not 

T 2 


then actually justified; but notwithstanding what is done 
for them, until their own actual believing, they are obnoxious 
to the law, &c.as at large chap, xii.p.75. [p. 631.] ofthattrea 
tise, which includes the last particular also. 

But we must proceed, ' non qua eundum est sed qua 
itur;' in the entrance of his ninth chapter, Mr, B. attempts 
to prove, that the elect are not justified from eternity, and 
concludes his discourse : ' The words of one that writes this 
way are these. Here two things may be observed. 

1. ' What we ascribe to the merit of Christ, viz. the ac- 
complishment of the condition, which God required to make 
way, that the obligation which he had freely put upon him- 
self might be in actual force : and so much I leave to him- 
self to consider how rightly doth Mr.B. assign to our works ; 
Thes. 26. 

'And all know, that a condition as such, is no cause, but 
an antecedent, or ' causa sine qua non.' And is not the 
death of Christ here fairly advanced, and his merits well 
vindicated ? My constant affirmation is, and still was, that 
man's works are not in the least degree truly and properly 
meritorious, and that they are such mere conditions of our 
salvation (not of our first justification), as that they are no 
causes of any right we have (no not to a bit of bread, much 
less) to heaven. Do not these men well defend the honour 
of Christ's merits then, if they give no more to them, than 
I do to man's works ? that is, not to be the meritorious 
cause so much as of an hour's temporal mercy ; that is, to 
be properly no merit at all. It seems to me therefore that 
they do by their doctrine of eternal justification or pardon, 
not only destroy justification by faith, but also all the merits 
of Christ, and leave nothing for them to do, for the causing 
of our pardon or justification before God. Nay, whether this 
learned man can make Christ's sufferings, and obedience, so 
much as a bare condition, let them consider that read him 
affirming, that conditions properly must be uncertain, and 
nothing is so to God : therefore there can be no condition 
with God, therefore Christ's death could be no more.' 

En cor Zenodoti, en jecur Cratetis. 

What is most admirable in this discourse I know not. 
1 . I am suggested to maintain justification from eternity: 
I amone that write that way : I am one that by the doctrine 


of justification from eternity, overthrow justification by faith, 
and the merits of Christ. What I shall say more to this 
business I know not : the comoedian tells me all that I can 
say is in vain. 

Ne adinittam culpatu ego meo sum promus pectori 

Suspicio est in pectore alieno sita. 

Nam nunc ego te si surripuisse suspicer 

Jovi coronani de capite e capitolio 

Quod in culmine astat sumnio ; si non id feceris. 

Atque id tamen milii lubeat suspicarer, 

Qui tu id proliibere me potes ne suspicer ? Plaut. 

2. Methinks it had been equal, that Mr.B. who requires 
{deivwg) that men judge not anything in his aphorisms, but 
according as it is interpreted, in this his confession, should 
have interpreted this passage of mine, by the analogy of 
what I have written in the same book about the death of 
Christ and merit thereof. He would have found (and in these 
things doth my soul live) that all the mercy, grace, or privi- 
leges whatever, of what sort soever, that in this life we 
are made partakers of, all the glory, honour, and immorta- 
lity that we are begotten anew to a hope of, is by me every 
where ascribed to the death of Christ, and the merit thereof, 
as the sole causa TrpoKaTapTiKrj of them all. The making 
out of this takes up the greatest part of my writings and 
preaching. I can truly say, that I desire to know nothing 
but Christ, and him crucified. And I shall labour to make 
the honour, glory, exaltation, and triumph of the cross of 
Christ, the whole of my aim and business in this world. 
May I be convinced of speaking, uttering, writing, any one 
word to the derogation of the honour, efficacy, power of the 
death and merits of our dear Lord Jesus, I shall quickly lay 
my mouth in the dust, and give myself to be trampled on by 
the feet of men, which perhaps on other accounts I am only 
meet for. It is only that Christ may have the pre-eminence 
in all things, that I will voluntarily contend with any living. 
That as a king, and priest, and prophet, he may be only, and 
all in his church, is the design of my contesting. 

But is not this expression to the derogation of his me- 
rits ? 1 say if it be, I disavow it, condemn it, reject it. If 
the intendment of the expression be not, that the Lord Jesus 
Christ, by the performance of what was prescribed to him of 
his Father, that he might save us to the utmost, according 


to the compact between Father and Son, did merit, purchase, 
and procure for us all the grace, mercy, salvation, promised 
in the new covenant, I desire here to condemn it. But if 
that be the sense of it (as the words immediately going be- 
fore, with the whole tenor of the discourse, do undeniably 
evince), I would desire Mr. B. a little to reflect upon his 
dealings with other men, upon their pretended mistakes, in 
representing him and his judgment to the world. All the 
advantage that is given to this harangue is from the am- 
biguity of the word condition. It is evident that I take it 
here in a large sense for the whole prescription of obedience 
unto the Lord Jesus, whereupon the promise of all the good 
things, that are the fruits of his death, is made to him, which 
being grounded in voluntary compact, and laid thereby in 
due proportion, gives rise to merit properly and strictly so 
called. If the reader desire farther satisfaction herein, let 
him but read thatvery treatise which Mr. B. excepts against, 
where he will find abundantly enough for the clearing of my 
intendment. Or to him, that loses his time in perusing this 
appendix, I shall recommend the foregoing treatise, for the 
same purpose. * 

3. For what Mr. B. ascribes to our works, I shall not 
(for my part) much trouble myself whilst I live, being little 
or not at all concerned therein. He is not for me to deal 

TiKT£i Toi Kopog 'v(3piv OT ov TTokv oXjSoc fTnjTat. Theog. 

If I dispute in print any more (as I hope I shall not), it 
shall be with them, that understanding my meaning, will 
fairly, closely, and distinctly debate the thing in difference, 
and not insisting on words and expressions to no purpose 
(especially if their own haste allows them not oftentimes to 
speak congruously) shall press and drive the things them- 
selves to their issue. 

Dabitur ignis tarnenetsi ab inimicis petam. 

Mr. B. proceeds in his second section to prove, that all 
the elect are not justified at the death of Christ. In this 
passage one expression of mine, about the sense of Rom. 
iv. 5. is taken notice of; but that relates to a business of a 
greater importance than to be now mentioned. Something 
Mr. B. discourses about the state and condition of the elect 
in reference to the death of Christ : some texts to that pur- 


pose he considers ; but so jejunely, so much below the ma- 
jesty of the mystery of grace in this particular, that I shall 
not make his discourse an occasion of what maybe offered 
on that account. Something I have spoken in the former 
treatise, concerning the transaction of the compact and 
acrreement, that was between the Father and Son, about the 
salvation of the elect. Of their interest and concernment 
therein, with the state of his body, of those that were given 
him, on that account, God assisting, hereafter. 

But, p. 228. from words of mine, which from several 
places of my treatise are put together, he makes sundry in- 
ferences, and opposes to them all two conclusions of his 
own, p. 229. 

'This man(says he) seems to judge, that the name of com- 
plete justification is proper to that in conscience, and not to 
be given to any before : he seems also to judge, that justifi- 
cation hath degrees and parts at many hundred or thousand 
years distanced one from another ; or else absolution at least 
hath, which we have hitherto taken for the same thing with 
justification : for he calls that in conscience complete justi- 
fication : so saith he, absolution in heaven and justification 
differ as part and whole ;' so he : 

' Egregie Cordatus homo Catus Eliu' Sextus !' 

It seems Mr. B. knows not what my judgment is, by his 
repeating, that, 'it seems this is his judgment;' he might 
have staid from his confutation of it, until he had known it : 
it is not for his honour that he hath done otherwise. 

I deny that it is my judgment, that the name of complete 
justification is proper to that in conscience. Nor do I know 
of any proper or complete justification in conscience ; I only 
said, complete justification is terminated in conscience. If 
Mr. B. know not what I mean thereby, let him stay a little, 
and I shall explain myself. 

It is most false, that I judge justification to have degrees 
and parts at a hundred or thousand years distance ; unless 
under the name of justification you comprise all the causes 
and effects of it, and then it reaches from everlasting to ever- 

That absolution in heaven (as I call it) is before our ac- 
tual believing in order of time, I have nowhere said, but 


only in order of nature ; and that Mr. B. hath not dis- 

What Mr. B, thinks of absolution and justification to be 
the same, is no rule to us ; when he proves it, so it is : but 
to what I and others have said, Mr. B. opposes two conclu- 
sions, p. 229. whereof the first is, 

'1. We did neither really, nor in God's account die with 
Christ when he died, nor in him satisfy God's justice, nor 
fulfil the law.' The second, 

* 2. Though Christ was given for the elect more than for 
others, yet is he no more given to them than to others ; be- 
fore they are born, or before they have faith.' 

The first of these, he saith, (he means the first of them 
before-mentioned, which the first of these is set down in 
opposition unto), is of so great ' moment, and is the heart 
and root of so many errors, yea of the whole body of an- 
tinomianism, that I had rather write as great a volume as 
this,' &c. 

What it is that I intended by dying with Christ, Mr, 
Baxter does not know, nor guess near the matter. The con- 
sideration of God's giving the elect to Christ, of his consti- 
tution to be a common person, a Mediator and surety, of the 
whole compact and covenant between Father and Son, of 
his absolution as a common person, of the sealing, confirma- 
tion, and the establishment of the covenant of grace by his 
death, of the economy of the Holy Spirit founded therein, 
of the whole grant made upon his ascension, must precede 
the full and clear interpretation of that expression. For the 
present it may suffice ; I have not said that we did satisfy 
God's justice in him, or satisfy the law in him, so that we 
should be (personally considered), the principals of the sa- 
tisfaction or obedience ; nor that we so died in him, as to 
be justified, or absolved actually upon his death, before we 
are born ; so that I shall not be concerned at all if Mr. 
Baxter's thoughts should incline him to write a volume 
as big as this, about his confession, which is no small con- 
tent tome. 

For the second ; ' that Christ was given to the elect more 
than others,' I say not ; because I say, that he was not given, 
as a Mediator, price, and ransom, for any other at all. When 


the demonstrations that * Christ died for all,' which Mr. 
Baxter hath somewhile talked of, are published, I may per- 
haps find cause (if I see them) to change my mind : but as 
yet I do not suppose that I shall so do. That he is given to 
any before they are born, I have not said ; though they are 
given to him before they are born; or that he is given to 
them in order of time before they do believe ; but this I say, 
that faith and forgiveness of sin is given them for his sake : 
which, when Mr. Baxter disproves, or pretends so to do, 
I shall farther consider it, as being a matter of importance : 
with his strife of words (if I can choose) I shall no more 
trouble myself. 

This process being made ; sect. 3. Mr. Baxter lays down 
the conclusion as contrary to them before, which (as he in- 
forms me), are maintained by myself and others. 

' No man nowliving, was justified, pardoned, or absolved 
actually from the guilt of sin and obligation to death at the 
time of Christ's death or undertaking, or from eternity, or at 
any time before he was born, or did believe.' 

After I know not how many arguments brought forth to 
confirm this position, my arguments against it are produced 
and answered ; but what the learned man means I profess I 
know not: unless 'disputandi prurigine abreptus,' he cares 
not what he says, nor against whom, so he may multiply ar- 
guments and answers, and put forth books one upon another. 
In that very book of mine which he animadverts upon, I use 
sundry of those very arguments, which here he useth, to 
prove the same assertion for the substance of it, as Mr. Bax- 
ter hath here laid down. And this I had assured him, as to a 
former mistake of his. My words are, p. 33. [p. 599.J * as for 
evangelical justification, whereby a sinner is completely jus- 
tified, that it should precede believing, I have not only not 
asserted, but positively denied, and disproved by many ar- 
guments : to be now traduced as a patron of that opinion, 
and my reasons for it publicly answered, seems to me some- 
what uncouth.' Farther now to acquit myself from that, 
which nothing but self-fulness, oscitancy, and contempt of 
others, can possibly administer any suspicion of, I shall not 
turn aside. 

Yea, but I have said, 'that the elect upon the death of 
Christ, have aright to all the fruit of the death of Christ, to 


be enjoyed in the appointed season ;' because this is made 
the occasion of so many outcries of Antinomianism, and I 
know not what, I shall direct the reader to what I have af- 
firmed in this case, and leave it with some brief observa- 
tions to his judgment, having somewhat else to do, than to 
engage myself in a long wordy contest with Mr. Baxter ; 
who knowing not of any difference between himself and me 
would very fain make one, wherein he may possibly find 
his labour prevented hereafter, and a real difference stated 
between us, if any of his rare notions fall in my way. 

The discourse is, p. 69. lin. 23. unto p. 72. lin. 24. 

The sum of all is this ; upon the death of Christ, that is, 
on the consideration of the death of Christ; upon his un- 
dertaking (for surely I suppose it will be granted, that 
his death was no less effectual upon his undertaking to them 
who died before his incarnation, than afterward upon his 
actual accomplishment of that undertaking) to be a Media- 
tor and Redeemer, it becomes just, right, and equal, that all 
the good things which are the fruits of his death should be 
in a due and appointed season made out to them for whom 
he died, in their several generations. 

What says Mr. Baxter to this ? 1 . Suppose this be so, 
yet they are not actually absolved, but only have a right to 
it ; who said they were ? do I offer to make any such con- 
clusion ? do I dispute against Mr. Baxter's position, or for 
justification upon, or at the death of Christ, or his under- 
taking? 'homini homo quid interest?' 

But I say, there being such a right to these good things, 
they have a right to them. ' Crimen inauditum Caie Cae- 
sar !' Did I not also say how I understood that expression? 
though I used it to make out the thing I intended, yet did 
I not say directly, that that right was not subjectively in 
them ; that is, that it was not actionable as I expressed it ; 
that they could not plead it ; but it was as above ? Yea, but 
then this is no more but non injustum est this is false, as 
I have shewed. Many divines think, that this was the es- 
tate between God and sinners antecedently to the conside- 
ration of the death of Christ, or might have been without 
it, viz. that it was not unjust with God to pardon and save 
them : by the death of Christ there is a jus of another na- 
ture obtained ; even such as I have described in the treatise 


Mr. Baxter opposeth : but then God doth not give those 
good things to us upon condition ; I say he doth not, taking 
condition in its strict and proper sense in respect of God ; 
though he hath made one thing to be the condition of an- 
other. All graces are alike absolutely purchased for us ; 
but not alike absolutely received by us : the economy of the 
gospel requires another order : the first grace, Mr. Baxter 
confesseth, is bestowed upon us absolutely, and without 
condition; and this grace is the condition of the following 
privileges, as to the order of communication : and all the 
difference between us is about the sense of the word condi- 
tion in that place, which, when I have nothing else to do, 
I will write a volume as big as this is about. 

This is that 1 say, Christ hath purchased all good things 
for us ; these things are actually to be conferred upon us in 
the time and order by God's sovereign will determined and 
disposed. This order, as revealed in the gospel, is, that we 
believe and be justified, &,c. Faith whereby we believe is 
bestowed on us absolutely, always without condition, some- 
times without outward means. This faith, by the constitu- 
tion of God, is attended with the privileges contended about; 
which are no less purchased for us by Christ, than faith 
itself. Yea, the purchase of our justification or acceptation 
with God, is, in order of nature, antecedent in consideration 
to the purchase of faith for us : if Mr. Baxter hath a mind to 
oppose any thing of this (which is all that as yet to this bu- 
siness I have declared), let him do it when he pleaseth ; and 
if iihe tantide)n{Q.she speaketh), I shall give him a farther 
account of my thoughts about it : but he would know what 
I mean by Christ's undertaking for the elect ; let him con- 
sider what I have delivered about the covenant between the 
Father and Son in this business, and he will know at least 
what I intend thereby ; he will see how Christ, being then only 
God, did undertake the business to do it, not as God only ; 
and withal the wideness of that exception, that the pro- 
phecy of Isaiah was written a long time after, and could not 
give any such right as is pretended. A right is given there 
in respect of manifestation, not constitution. Isaiah, in that 
prophecy, speaks of things to come as past, ver. 5, 6. and 
of things past and present, as to come; it reveals, not con- 
stitutes, a covenant. But he saith, we use to distinguish be- 



tween the undertaking and accomplishment: divines use to 
say, that upon man's fall Christ undertook satisfaction, but 
it was in the fulness of time that he accomplished it ; how, 
therefore, he accomplished it in the undertaking, I do not 
well see. 2. But that he did perfectly accomplish what he 
undertook I easily grant. But how you learned divines 
distinguish I know not: this I know, that such poor men 
as myself do believe, that, as to the efficacy of satisfaction 
and merit, Christ's undertaking was attended with no less 
than his actual accomplishment of what he undertook ; or 
we know not how to grant salvation to the saints under the 
Old Testament : it was concerning their efficacy as to merit, 
not their distinction between themselves, that I spake. 

These things being premised, Mr. B. proceeds to answer 
my arguments, which were produced to prove, that upon 
the death of Christ, there was a right obtained for the elect 
to all the benefits of his d-eath ; this right residing in the 
justice of God, or in the equalling of these things by divine 
constitution (as I fully declared in the place by Mr. B. op- 
posed) : upon the interposing of some expressions in the pro- 
cess of my discourse, of the grant being made to the elect, 
and mentioning of their right, which in what sense they were 
to be taken I expressly declared, Mr. B, takes advantage 
to answer them all with this intendment put upon them, 
that they aimed to prove a subjective personal right, which 
at any time they may plead, when the utmost that my words 
can be extended unto is, that they have it ex fcedere not 
realiter : for the subject of it, I place elsewhere. Now if 
Mr. B. will send me word, that he supposes he hath an- 
swered my arguments, as they were proposed to my own 
purpose, I will promise, if I live, to return him an answer. In 
the mean time I shall have no itch to be scribbling to no 
purpose ; ' ego me, tua causa, ne erres, non rupturus sum ;' 
yet of the whole he may for the present be pleased to receive 
the ensuing account, both as to the nature of q.jus and its 

For the description of jus, Mr. B. relies on Grotius, and 
something also he mentions out of Sayrus. Grotius, in the 
first chapter of his book ' De jure Belli et Pacis,' in the sec 
tions transcribed (in part) by Mr. B. and some others, ex- 
presses (in his way) the distinction given at the beginning 


both of the Institutions and Digests ohontjns and those 
also which they handle under the head ' de statu.' So do 
all men commonly that write of that subject ; how exactly 
this is done by Grotius, those who are learned in the law 
will judge ; for my part, I am so far at liberty, as not to be 
concluded by his bare affirmation either as to law or gos- 
pel. Yet neither doth he exclude the right by me intended ; 
he tells us, indeed, ih^it fa cultas, which the lawyers call sui 
is that which properly and strictly he intends to call jus. 
But the other member of the distinction he terms o/>^i^Mc?o, 
which though in a natural sense it respects the subject im- 
mediately, yet he tells you, that in the sense of Michael 
Ephesius, which he contradicts not, it is but to irpi-rrov, ' id 
quod convenit,' which respects only the order of things 
among themselves. And though out of Aristotle he calls it 
also a^id, yet that word (as he also afterward expounds it 
•out of Cicero) is of much a lower signification than many 
imagine. This to Trpirrov, is that which I assert ; and Say- 
rus's definition of jus ad rem may also be allowed. 

But for others; jus, artificially is, ars honi et cequi ; 
Ponz. de lamiis num. 14. Tom. 11. jus Gregor. p. 2, and D. 
D. cap. 1. Celsus. though some dispute against this defini- 
tion, as Conanus, Comment. Jur. Civil, lib. 1. cap. 1. That 
which is (cquurn is the subject of it. So the Comedian, 
' quid cum illis agat, qui neque jus, neque bonum, neque 
sequumsciunt.' Terent. Heauton. all termessequipollent. And 
in this sense, one that is not born may have a jus, if it be 
in a thing that is profitable to him ; * quod dicimus eum qui 
nasci speratur pro superstite esse, tunc verum est, cum de 
ipsius jure quseritur, alias non prodest, nisi natus sit.' Pau- 
lus de verbor. significat. which one interpretation will over- 
bear with me a hundred modern exceptioners, if they should 
deny that a man may be said to have a right unless he him- 
self be the immediate subject of the right, as if it were a 
natural accident inherent in him: so is it in the case pro- 
posed by Cicero, in Secundo de Inventione. * Pater-fami- 
lias cum liberorum nihil haberet, uxorem autem haberet, in 
Testamento ita scripsit. Si mihi filius genitus fuerit unus, 
pluresve, hie mihi hgeres esto.' The father dies before the 
son is born ; a right accrues to him that is not born. Such 
a right I say there is, although this right is not immediately 


actionable. Gaius tells us, that ' actio est prosecutio juris 
sui.' This jus siium, is that which Grotius calls facultas, 
and is jus proprie et stride dictum. And this jms suum I did 
not intend, in that I said it was not actionable; and, 
therefore, whereas Conanus says, that 'nullum est jus, cui 
non sit aut a natura, aut a lege data qusedam obligatio, tan- 
quam comes etadjutrix,' Comment, juris Civil, lib. 2. cap. 1. 
which obligation is the foundation of action: it is evident, 
that he intends jus proprie et stricte dictum ; for Gaius dis- 
tinguisheth between Jms utendi,fruendi, and jus obligationis, 
D. lib. 1. 1. 8. which he could not do, if all and every 
right had an obligation attending it. And such is that right 
whereof we speak ; if any one thinks to plead it, he will 
be like him whom the lawyers call, * agentem sine ac- 
tione,' of whom they dispute, ' an liceat ei experiri,' and 
whether his plea be to be admitted ; concerning which the 
variety of cases and opinions are repeated by Menochius de 
Arbit. Judic. lib. 1. Qu. 16. 2. 

And such ajus as this, ariseth ' ex contractibus innomina- 
tis; for as * jus ex innominato contractu oritur, quum ex 
parte debentis, implere id quod convenerat, impletum est/ 
Ludovic. Roman. Consul. 86. p. 23. so ' ex contractu inno- 
minato, non transeunt actiones sine mandato,' as Bartholus 
tells us; for though the covenant between Father and Son, 
whence this right ariseth, be not in itself of the nature of a 
'contractus innominatus, do ut des/ yet to them it is of 
that import. Hence the Socinians, who are skilled in the 
law, though they wholly suspend the actual obtaining of 
remission of sins upon the fulfilling of the conditions re- 
quired, do yet grant, that a plenary ;ws or right of obtaining 
forgiveness of sins was given to all in the death of Christ ; 
*jam vero quidnam mediator foederis, ab una paciscentium 
parte legatus, et ipsius sponsor constitutus, ac quoddam ve- 
luti testamentum ejus nomine constituens, qua talis est, 
aliud prsestat, quam ut jus alteri parti, et jus quidem plenum 
largiatur, ad foederis hujus, aut testamenti promissa conse- 
quenda ; obstringit nimirum atque obligat promissorem qui 
ipsum obligaverat ad servandaToederum promissa, eaque rata 
prorsus habenda.' Crellius de causis mortis Christi, p. 9. 
So, in the common speech of the ancients, Budseus tells us, 
that 'bonum jus dicere,' is as much as that which is now 


vulgarly expressed, * requesta tua rationabilis est :' if there 
be an equity in the thing, there is a jus belonging to the 
person. Any thing that made it equitable that a man should 
be regarded, they called his jws; whence is his complaint 
in Plautus, finding himself every way unworthy ; ' sine mo- 
do et modestia sum, sine bono jure, atque honore :' Bachid. 
and Paulus, in lib. 3. fF. de servitut. urb. prced. 'Nejus sit 
vicino invitis nobis altius sedificare.' It were very facile, 
both from lawyers and most approved authors, to multiply 
instances of this large acceptation of the word jws, or right. 
And whether the grant of the Father, and purchase of the 
Mediator before mentioned, be not sufficient to constitute or 
denominate such a jus or right in them, for whom, and whose 
profit and benefit the grant is made, I question not. Again 
consider that of Paulus. lib. 11. ad Edict. D.D. de verb, 
signif. Tit. 16. 'Princeps bona concedendo, videtur etiam 
obligationem concedere ;' which adds a propriety to the 'jus' 
as was shewed before. Yet that it should be presently ac- 
tionable doth not follow : * Actio est jus persequendi in ju- 
dicio, quod sibi debetur ;' Institut. lib. 4. de action. Every 
*jus ad rem,' is not 'jus persequendi in judicio:' whence is 
the gloss of Aldobrondinus on that place : ' nee facias ma- 
gnam vim ibi : quia cum multas habeat significationes haec 
dictio jus, ut fF. de inst. et jus 1. p. et, si, hoc est unum de sig- 
nificatis ejus, utdicatur jus agendivel persequendi:' besides 
it must be, rjuod sibi debetur, that is actionable ; the obli- 
gation whence that dehitum arises, being, as the lawyers 
speak, mater actionis ; but yet even * debere' itself is of so 
large and various signification in the law, both in respect to 
things and persons, as will not admit of any determinate 
sense unless otherwise restrained, fF. de verbor. signif. b. 
pecuniae § 8. si. Yea, and on the other side, sometimes a plea 
may lie where there is no dehitum : ' quandoque ago etiam 
ad id quod mihi non debetur; R. de pact. 1. si pacto quo 
poenam ; nam ibi non ago ad id quod est debitum, sed ad id 
quod ex nudo pacto convenit :' that Mr. B. may know what 
to do with his schemes of actions, produced on the account 
of my assertions. 

This for the word, and my use of it ; I hope in the things 
of God about words, I shall not much contend. I had rather 
indeed insist on the propriety of words, in the originals, their 


use in the law, and amongst men, so all be regulated by the 
analogy of faith, than to square the things of God to the terms 
and rules of art and philosophy, to which, without doubt, 
they will not answer. Let any man living express any doc- 
trine of the gospel whatever, in the exactest manner, with 
artificial philosophical terms, and I will undertake to shew 
that in many things the truth is wrested and fettered there- 
by, and will not bear an exact correspondence with them ; 
yet hence are many of our learned strifes, which as they 
have little of learning in them, so for my part I value them 
not at a nutshell, properly so called. 

This being premised, his answers to my arguments may 
very briefly be considered. 

My first argument is. It is justum, that they should 
have the fruits of the death of Christ bestowed on them : 
therefore they have j«s unto them; for, 'jus est quod jus- 
tum est.' 

Mr. B. denies the consequence, and says, though it be 
•justum,' yet they may not be subjects of this jus : to this 
I have answered, by shewing what is jus in general, and 
what is their jMs and where fixed. 

2. He questions the antecedent ; for the confirmation 
whereof, and its vindication from his exceptions, I refer the 
reader to what I had written of the covenant, between the 
Father and the Son, some good while before I saw Mr. Bax- 
ter's animadversions, or that they were public. 

My second is. That which is procured for any one, there- 
unto he hath a right ; the thing that is obtained, is granted 
by him of whom it is obtained, and that to them, for whom 
it is obtained. To this is answered, 

1. In the margin ; ' That I should make great changes in 
England, if I could make all the lawyers believe this strange 
doctrine:' but of what the lawyers believe, or do not believe, 
Mr, B. is no competent judge, be it spoken without dispa- 
ragement, for the law is not his study. I v/ho (perhaps) have 
much less skill than himself, will be bound at any time to 
give him twenty cases, out of the civil and canon law, to make 
good this assertion ; which if he knows not that it may be 
done, he ought not to speak with such confidence of these 
things. Nay, amongst our own lawyers (whom perhaps he 
intends) I am sure he may be informed, that if a man inter- 


cede with another to settle his land by conveyance to a third 
person, giving him that conveyance to keep in trust, until 
the time come, that he should by the intention of the con- 
veyer enjoy the land, though he for whom it is granted, have 
not the least knowledge of it, yet he hath such a right unto 
the land thereby created, as cannot be disannulled. 

But 2. He says, 'That the fruits of the death of Christ, 
are procured for us, Jinaliter not subjective.' 

Ans. They are procured for us objective, are granted, ' ex 
ad sequatione rerum,' and may make us subjects of the right, 
though not of the things themselves, which it regards ; may, 
I say, though I do not say it doth. The following similitudes 
of my horse, and a king, have no correspondency with this 
business at all ; of the right of horses, there is nothing in 
the law: in the latter, there is nothing omitted in the com- 
parison, but merit, and purchase, which is all. 

3. All the fruits of the death of Christ are obtained and 
procured by his merit for them for whom he died. 

Mr. B. ' 1. Not all, not the same measure of sanctification 
for one as for another : not faith for all for whom he died, as 
for his elect. 

' 2. He procured it for us as the Jinis cui, not subjects of the 
present right.' 

Ans. 1 . The substance of the fruits of the death of Christ, 
and the ultimate end, belongs to his purchase : the measure 
and degrees of them to the Father's sovereign disposal, ad 
ornatum uiiiversi. 

2. It is most false, that Christ did not purchase faith for 
all, for whom he died. 

3. What our right is, hath been before delivered; the 
Jinis cui, and subject of a present right, are not very accu- 
rately opposed. 

4. The nature of merit infers an attendant right : Rom. 
iv. 4. 

Mr. B. ' If this be your debt, you may say. Lord I have 
merited salvation in Christ, therefore it is mine of debt. 
Christ hath of debt the right to pardon you, you have no 
debt, &c.' 

Ans. Very good ; but I use no forms of prayer of other 
men's composing; who said, it was our debt; who says our 
right is actionable. The whole here intended, is, that Christ 



meriting pardon of sins for the elect, it is just they should 
obtain it in the appointed season : such another prayer as that 
here mentioned, doth Mr. B. afterward compose in a suit- 
ableness as he supposes to my principles; but what may he 
not do, or say ? 

4. He for whom a ransom is paid, hath a right to his 
liberty by virtue of that payment. 

Mr. B. 'All unproved, and by me unbelieved. If you pay 
a sum to the Turk for a thousand slaves, thereby buying them 
absolutely into your own power, I do not believe that they 
have any more right to freedom, than they had before. If 
a prince pay a ransom for some traitors to the king his fa- 
ther, thereby purchasing to himself a dominion or a propriety 
over them, so that they are absolutely his, yet I think it gives 
them no more right than they had before.' 

Ans. 1 . I suppose it is not yet determined, that this busi- 
ness is to be regulated absolutely according to what Mr. B. 
thinks or believes. For I must needs say, that whether he 
believes it or no, I am still of the same mind that I was. 

He for whom a ransom is paid, hath a right to a deliver- 
ance ; as to him, to whom the ransom was paid : if Mr. B. 
believes not this, let him consult the civil lawyers, with whom 
he is so conversant : Tit. de pact. 

2. I say, that the law of redemption requires, that the 
redeemed be at the disposal of the redeemer, where he hath 
no plea jure pustiUminii ; and it is most certain, that Christ 
hath a dominion over his elect (for a propriety over them 
I understand not), yet, that dominion is the proximate end 
of the death of Christ, under the notion of a ransom, price, 
or purchase (which yet are of various considerations also), is 
the ttqCotov tpev^oQ of tliis discourse. 

Having given this specimen of Mr. B.'s answers to my 
instances, as an addition to the former explication given of 
my judgment in this business, I shall not farther trouble the 
reader with the consideration of what of that same kind 

To tell the whole truth, I expressed the effects of the 
death of Christ, in the manner above-mentioned, to obviate 
that stating of his satisfaction, and the use of it, which I had 
observed to be insisted on by the remonstrants in their apo- 
logy, and in other writings of theirs, but especially by Epis- 


copius. For some time, I met not with any great opposition 
made to the expressions of their imaginations in this busi- 
ness, but only what was briefly remarked by the Leyden pro- 
fessors in their ' specimina.' Of late 1 find Voetius reckoning 
it among the principal controversies, that we have with the 
enemies of the cross of Christ. I shall set down his words 
about it, and leave them to the consideration of them who 
may think themselves concerned in them. 

His words in his disputation, ' de merito Christi,' An. 
1650, are ; ' Secunda controversia capitalis, quae Christi- 
anismo cum quibusdam heterodoxis (Remonstrantibus sci- 
licet in Belgio, viris, si non Socinianse, saltem dubiae Theo- 
logise) intercedit, est de merito Christi pro nobis, hoc est, 
vice, et loco nostro, et sic in bonum nostrum actualiterprse- 
stito, seu de satisfactione plena ac proprie a Christo sponsore, 
loco nostro justitioe divinte prsestita : illi satisfactionem et 
meritum sic accipiunt, quasi nihil aliud sit, quam partis of- 
fensee talis placatio qua ofFenso hactenus satisfit, ut in gra- 
tiam redire velit cum eo qui offendit, et per quara Christus 
Deo Patri jus et voluntatem acquisiverit novum fcedus ine- 
undi cum hominibus.' So he. 

The expression of our dying with Christ is fallen upon 
again, p. 226. of which he desires leave to speak as confi- 
dently as myself; truly I thought he had not been to ask 
leave for that now. But why may he not use it without leave 
as well as others? Some perhaps will say, ' niira edepolsunt 
ni hie in ventrem, sumpsit confidentiam,' to consider what he 
hath written already. But with this leave he falls a conjec- 
turing at what I mean by that expression, to no purpose at 
all, as may be seen by what I have delivered concerning it. 
The like I may say to the passage by the way mentioned, of 
the right which ariseth from the decree of God. It seems 
to me, that what God hath decreed to do for any, that is, or 
may be, a real privilege to him; it is jus, ex just it la conde- 
centia, that in the appointed season, he should receive it. 
If Mr. Baxter be otherwise minded I cannot help it; ' habeo 
aliquid magis ex memet, et majus,' than that I should attend 
to the disputes thereabout; nor will 1 stand in his way if I 
can choose, for he seems to cry — * ad terram dabo, et denti- 
legos omnes mortales faciam quemque ofFendero.' 

After this 1 find not myself particularly smitten, until he 

u 2 


comes to the close of the chapter to talk of ' idem' and ' tau- 
tidem ;' unless it be in his passage, p. 274. That which 
makes me suspect that I am there intended, is, his former 
imputation of some such thing unto me ; namely, that I 
should say, that the deputation of Christ in our stead, is an 
act of pardon. But I suppose that I have so fully satisfied 
him as to that surmise, by shewing that not only my sense, 
but my expressions were, not, that the deputation of Christ 
was our pardon, but that the freedom of pardon did in part 
depend thereon, that I will not take myself in this place to 
be concerned ; because I cannot do it and prevent the re- 
turnal of a charge of some negligence on this person, whose 
writings seem sufficiently to free him from all just suspicion 
thereof. In the close of this discourse (with the method of 
a new line) Mr. Baxter falls upon the consideration of the 
payment made by Christ in our stead, or the penalty that he 
underwent for us ; and pleads, that it was not the idem that 
was due to us, but tantundem. Although some say this 
difference is not tantidem, as some speak, it seems, yet he is 
resolved of the contrary, and that this one assertion is the 
bottom of all Antinomianisni. Seeing I profess myself to be 
contrary minded, I suppose it will be expected that I should 
consider what is here to the purpose in hand insisted on by 
Mr. B. What I intend by paying the idem, or rather un- 
dergoing the ' idem,' that we should have done, I have so 
fully elsewhere expressed, that I shall not stay the reader 
with the repetition of it. But, says Mr. Baxter, this sub- 
verts the substance of religion : l^oh podog, Idov Tr/jSrjjua. 
Now you shall have the proofs of it; the idem, saith he, * is 
the perfect obedience, or the full punishment of the man him- 
self, and in case of personal disobedience, it is personal pu- 
nishment that the law requires; that is, supUcium ipsius delin- 

Ans. But, the idem that we should pay, or undergo, is 
perfect obedience to the law, and proportionable punishment 
by the God's [Divine] constitution, for disobedience. This 
Christ paid, and underwent ; that the man himself should un- 
dergo it is the law originally ; but the undergoing or doing 
of it, by another, is the undergoing of the idem, I think. 
It is personal punishment that the law originally requires ; 
but he that undergoes the punishment (though he be not 


personally disobedient), which the law judgeth to him that 
was personally disobedient, undergoes the idem that the law 

The idem is supphciam delinqueiiti debitum by who- 
ever it be undergone, not supplicium ipsiits delinquentis 

He proceeds : ' The law never threatened a surety, nor 
granteth any liberty of substitution : that was an act of God 
above the law ; therefore Christ did not undergo the idem.' 
I deny the consequence. Nor is the least shadow of proof 
made of it. The question is not whether Christ be the 
sinner, but whether he underwent that which was due to the 

He adds: * If therefore the thing due was paid, it was 
we ourselves morally or legally, that sufl'ered.' I know not 
well what is meant by morally ; but however I deny the 
consequence ; the thing itself was paid by another for us, 
and the punishment itself was undergone by another, in our 

That which follows, falls with that which went before, 
being built thereon. * It could not be ourselves legally,' saith 
he, 'because it was not ourselves naturally.' Though for the 
security of the hypothesis opposed, there is no need of it, 
yet I deny his proposition, also, if taken universally. A man 
may be accounted to do a thing legally by a sponsor, though 
he do it not in his own person. 

But he says, ' If it had been ourselves legally, the strictest 
justice could not have denied us a present deliverance, ' ipso 
facto,' being no justice can demand any more than the ' idem 
quod debitur' (as Mr. Baxter's printer speaks). But 1. It 
is supposed, that all legal performance of any thing, by any 
one, must be done in his own person. 

2. It supposes, that there is such an end as deliverance 
assigned, or assignable, to the offender's own undergoing 
of the penalty, which is false. 

3. The reasons and righteo»sness of our actual deliver- 
ance at the time, and in the manner prescribed by God, and 
as to the last revealed in the gospel, upon Christ's perform- 
ance of personal obedience, and undergoing the penalty due 
to us in our stead ; which are founded in (he economy of 
the Trinity, voluntarily engaged into for the accomplishing 


the salvation of the elect, I have elsewhere touched on, and 
may, if I find it necessary, hereafter handle at large. 

That which is feared in this business is, that if the ' idem' 
be paid, then according to the law, the obligation is dis- 
solved, and present deliverance follows. But if by the law, 
be meant the civil law, whence these terms are borrowed, it 
is most certain, that any thing, instead of that which is in the 
obligation, doth, according to the rules of the law dissolve 
the obligation ; and that whether it be paid by the principal 
debtor, or delinquent, or any for him. The beginning of that 
section, ' quibus modis toUitur obligatio,' lib. 3. Instit. 
will evince this sufficiently. The title of the section is, ' Si 
solvitur id quod debetur, vel aliud loco illius, consentiente 
creditore, omnis toUitur obligatio, turn rei principalis, quam 
fide-jussoris.' The words of the law itself are more full. 
* ToUitur autem omnis obligatio solutione ejus quod debetur; 
vel siquis consentiente creditore aliud pro alio solverit ; nee 
interest quis solverit, utrum ipse qui debet, an alius pro eo : 
liberatur enim et alio solvente, sive sciente, sive ignorante 
debitore, vel invito, et solutio fiat. Si fide-jussor solverit, 
non enim ipse solus liberatur, sed reus.' So that there is no 
difference in the law, whether ' solutio' be * ejusdem' or ' tan- 
tidem ;' and this is the case in the things that are ' ex ma- 
leficio, aut quasi ;' as may be seen at large in the commen- 
tators on that place. 

To caution all men against the poison of Antinomian 
doctrines, now so strenuously opposed by Mr. Baxter, and 
to deliver students from the unhappy model of theology, 
which the men of the preceding contests have entangled 
themselves and others withal, Mr. B. seriously advises them 
to keep in their minds, and carefully to distinguish between 
the will of God's purpose, and his precepts or law, his de- 
termining and commanding will, in the first place ; the igno- 
rance whereof it seems, confounded the theology of Doctor 
Twiss, Pemble, and others. 

Nextly, that they would carefully distinguish between 
the covenant between the Father and the Son about the work 
of his mediation, and the covenant of grace and mercy con- 
firmed to the elect in his blood. 

Now if these two distictions, as carefully heeded, and as 
warily observed as we are able, will prove such an antidote 


against the infection, for my part, in all probability, I shall 
be secure, having owned them ever since I learned my ca- 

Kai Tuvrci fABV Si ravra- 

And so am I dismissed. This may perhaps be the close 
of this controversy ; if otherwise, I am indifferent ; on the 
one side it will be so : I delight not in these troubled waters. 
If I must engage again in the like kind, I shall pray that he 
from whom are all my supplies, would give me a real humble 
frame of heart, that I may have no need with many pre- 
tences, and a multitude of good words, to make a cloak for 
a spirit breaking frequently through all with sad discoveries 
of pride and passion ; and to keep me from all magisterial 
insolence, pharisaical supercilious self-conceitedness, con- 
tempt of others, and every thing that is contrary to the rule 
whereby I ought to walk. 

If men be in haste to oppose what I have delivered about 
this business, let them (if they please, I have no authority to 
prescribe them their way) speak directly to the purpose, and 
oppose that which is affirmed, and answer my reasons in re- 
ference to that end only for which by me they are produced 
and insisted on. 

Because I see some men have a desire to be dealing with 
me, and yet know not well what to fix upon, that I may de- 
liver them from the vanity of contending with their own sur- 
mises, and if it be possible, to prevail with them to speak 
closely, clearly, and distinctly to the matter of their contests, 
and not mix heterogeneous things in the same discourse, I 
will briefly shrive myself for their satisfaction. 

First, then, I do not believe that any man is actually jus^ 
tified from eternity ; because of that of the apostle, Rom. 
viii. 28 — 30. but yet what is the state of things, in reference 
to the economy of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, engaged 
in from eternity for the salvation of sinners, with that foun- 
tain union, that is between Christ and his body in their pre- 
destination, 1 shall desire a little more time to deliver my- 
self unto. 

2. I do believe that there was a covenant, compact, or 
agreement between Father and Son for the salvation of the 
elect by his mediation, which, upon sin's entering into the 
world, had an efficacy and effect of the very same nature 


with that, which it hath when he hath actually accomplished 
what was on his part required for the end proposed to him ; 
and that therefore in the Old Testament his death is spoken 
of sometimes as past, Isa. liii. 4 — 6. and that to make this 
covenant in its constitution to be contemporary to its revela- 
tion, or the promises of it to be then made to Christ, when 
the church is acquainted that those promises are made, is a 
wide mistake. 

But under what consideration the elect lie unto God, 
upon the transaction of this original covenant with the Me- 
diator, I desire liberty for awhile as above. 

3. I do not believe that the elect, that live after the 
death of Christ, are all actually in their own persons justified 
and absolved at his death ; because ' the wrath of God abides 
on men that believe not ;' John iii. 36. But yet what to the 
advantage of the church is enwrapped in the discharge of 
their great representative, who died in their stead (for that 
1 believe also, and not only for their good) I desire respite 
for my thoughts as formerly. 

4. I do believe that Christ underwent the very same pu- 
nishment for us, for the nature and kind of it, which we 
were obnoxious unto, and should have undergone, had not 
he undertaken for us, and paid the idem that we should have 
done; 2 Cor. v. 12. Gal. iii. 13. 

5. I believe that upon the death of Christ, considering 
what hath been said before concerning the compact and 
agreement between God and the Mediator, about that matter, 
it became just and righteous, with reference to God's justice, 
as supreme Governor and moderator of the creatures, and 
all their concernments, that those for whom he died, should 
all be made partakers of all the good things, which Christ 
by his death procured for them, in the season appointed by 
the sovereign will of God. But that this right, though in- 
dissoluble, is so actually vested in them, as to be actionable 
in the gospel without faith, I believe not. 

6. I believe that all spiritual blessings, mercies, privi- 
leges whatever, are fruits of the death of Christ, and that not- 
withstanding the order wherein they stand one to another, 
they all depend immediately on its casuality ; though ' re 
spectu termini' they have not a natural immediation. 

7. I profess that we are absolved, pardoned, and justified 


for Christ's sake, and therefore that Christ is reckoned to 
us, or made righteousness to us, in order of nature antece- 
dently to all those things, which for his sake we do receive, 
and are made partakers of with and by him, &c. 

For a close of all, I must profess, that I will not con- 
tend with any man, who discovers in himself such a resolu- 
tion ^emv Sta^uAaVrtti', that if he be pressed, rather than let 
it go, he will go backward, and attempt aKtvrjra Kiveiv, and to 
question common received principles ; knowing the multi- 
tude of errors and abominations that the church of God 
hath been pestered withal by men of this principle and prac- 
tice. Hence are the beginnings of men modest, but their 
endings desperate : hence is Arminianism ended in Episco- 
pianism ; and Arianism in Socinianism, and in many, Soci- 
nianism in Mahoraetanism and Atheism. If I find this reso- 
lution and spirit in any man, he shall rather enjoy his own 
present conceits, than by me be precipitated into worse 
abominations. Nor shall I (the Lord assisting) be unmind- 
ful of that of the apostle, 1 Tim. vi. 3 — 5. Ei ng iTepoSidaa- 
koAeT, KOI jU)) TTpoaipy^iTai vyiaivovai \6yoig roig tov Kvpiov 
■t]f.Ui}v'\r\(TOv ')(jpLGrov, koi ry kut ivari^deiav oicaaKoXia, TeTVipwrai, 
jUTjSli/ iTTiaTaiatvoQ, dXXa voau)V TTtpt Zr}T{}(THg koX XoyojUa;)^tac, 
t^ S)v yivsrai (p^ovog, £pfC> jSAacr^rj/xtat, imovoiai TTOVipax, ira- 
()«Smrptj3ai, 8cc. as also that of the same apostle, Tit. iii. 9. 
MtDjOac Se (^riTi](TEig, koX yeveaXojiag, koX tpftc. koi fia^ag vo- 
mXag TrepucTTaao' elaX jap d\iw<f)£\£'ig koX fxaraioi. If I must 
contend with any, as I am resolved for the matter Trport/xav 
Tt)v d\i}^£iav, so for the manner of handling it, it shall not be 
my endeavour to cloud and darken things easy, trite, com- 
mon in themselves, with new, dark, artificial expressions, 
but rather to give plainness and perspicuity to things hard 
and difficult, confirming them with the authority of Scrip- 
ture, opened by the import of the words insisted on, and de- 
sign of the Holy Ghost in their contexture. Nor will I con- 
tend with any, whose motto is that of him in Piautus ; ' dicat 
quod quisque vult, ego de hac sententia non dimovebor :' or 
that hath thoughts of his own notions, like those of him in 
Nsevius, who cried out, ' primum quod dicebo recte, secun- 
dum quod dicebo eo melius.' And as my aim is to know 
Christ and him crucified, to exalt him, and ascribe to him 
the pre-eminence in all things, to discover the whole of our 


salvation, and glory of God thereby, centered in his person 
and mediation, with its emanation from thence, through the 
efficacy of the eternal Spirit, and all our obedience to re- 
ceive life, power, and vigour from thence only, knowing that 
it is the obedience of faith, and hath its foundation in blood 
and water ; so I equally abhor all doctrines that would take 
self out of the dust, make something of that which is worse 
than nothing, and spin out matter for a web of peace and con- 
solation from our own bowels, by resolving our acceptation 
with God into any thing in ourselves ; and those, that by 
any means would intercept the efficacy of the death and cross 
of Christ from its work of perpetual and constant mortifica- 
tion in the hearts of believers ; or cut off any obligation unto 
obedience or holiness, that by the discovery of the will of 
God, either in the law or gospel, is put upon the redeemed 
ones of the Lord. 

Tag dl fxu)pag Ka\ cnraidevTOvg titiTi'iaeig wapaiTOV, ddwg on 
-ytvvwfft fxa)(ag' 2 Tim. ii. 23. 









Having in my late defence of the doctrine of the gospel, 
from the corruptions of the Socinians, been occasioned to 
vindicate the testimonies given in the Scripture to the Deity 
of Christ, from their exceptions, and finding that Hugo Gro- 
tius, in his Annotations, had (for the most part) done the 
same things with them, as to that particular, and some other 
important articles of the Christian faith, that book of his 
being more frequent in the hands of students, than those of 
the Socinians, I thought it incumbent on me, to do the same 
work in reference to those Annotations, which it was my de- 
sign to perform towards the writings of Socinus, Smalcius, 
and their companions and followers. What I have been 
enabled to accomplish by that endeavour, with what service 
to the gospel hath been performed thereby, is left to the 
judgment of them who desire dXn^eveiv Iv dyairr]. Of my 
dealing with Grotius I gave a brief account in my epistle to 
the governors of the university, and that with reference to 
an apology made for him, not long before. This hath ob- 
tained a new apology under the name of a Second Defence 
of Hugo Grotius ; with what little advantage either to the 
repute of Grotius, as to the thing in question, or of the 
apologist himself, it is judged necessary to give the ensuing 
account : for which I took the first leisure hour I could ob- 
tain, having things of greater weight, daily incumbent on 
me. The only thing of importance by me charged on those 
Annotations of Grotius, was this ; that the texts of Scripture 
both in the Old Testament and New, bearing witness to the 
Deity and satisfaction of Christ, are in them wrested to 
other senses and significations, and the testimonies given to 
those grand truths, thereby eluded. Of those of the first 
kind I excepted one, yet with some doubt, lest his expres- 


sions therein, ought to be interpreted according to the ana- 
logy of what he had elsewhere delivered : of which afterward. 

Because that which concerns the satisfaction of Christ 
will admit of the easiest despatch, though taking up most 
room, I shall in the first place insist thereon. The words of 
my charge on the Annotations, as to this head of the doc- 
trine of the Scripture are these. The condition of these fa- 
mous Annotations as to the satisfaction of Christ is the same. 
Not one text in the whole Scripture, wherein testimony is 
given to that sacred truth, which is not wrested to another 
sense, or at least the doctrine in it, concealed and obscured 
by them. 

This being a matter of fact, and the words containing a 
crime charged on the Annotations, he that will make a de- 
fence of them, must either disprove the assertion by in- 
stances to the contrary, or else granting the matter of fact, 
evince it to be no crime. That which is objected in matter 
of fact, 'aut negandura est aut defendendum,' says Quin- 
tilian : lib. 5. cap. de Refut. and ' extra hsec in judiciis fere 
nihil est.' In other cases, ' patronus, neget, defendat, trans- 
ferat, excuset, deprecetur, molliat, minuat, avertat, despiciat, 
derideat;' but in matters of fact, the two first only have 
place. Aristotle allows more particulars for an apologist 
to divert unto, if the matter require it: he may say of what 
is objected, r} ojg ovk lariv, ?';, wg ov )3Aa|3fpov, ?'} ov tovtm, rj 
(jjg ov TriXiKOVTO, i] owk adiKov, ?'} ov fxiya, ?) ovk aia^pov, 77 ouic 
iX^v fiiytOoc. (Rhet. lib. iii. cap. 15.) all which in a plain 
matter of fact may be reduced to the former heads. That 
any other apology can or ought to take place in this, or any 
matter of the same importance, will not easily be proved. 
The present apologist takes another course. Such ordinary 
paths are not for him to walk in. He tells us of the excel- 
lent book that Grotius wrote * de Satisfactione Christi,' and 
the exposition of sundry places of Scripture, especially of 
divers verses of Isa. liii. given therein ; and then adds sundry 
inducements to persuade us, that he was of the same mind 
in his Annotations. And this is called a defence of Grotius. 
The apologist, I suppose, knows full well, what texts of 
Scripture they are, that are constantly pleaded for the sa- 
tisfaction of Christ, by them who do believe that doctrine. 
I shall also for once take it for granted, that he might with- 


out much difficulty, have obtained a sight of Grotius's An- 
notations ; to which I shall only add, that probably if he 
could from them have disproved the assertion before-men- 
tioned, by any considerable instances, he is not so tender 
of the prefacers credit, as to have concealed it on any such 
account. But the severals of his plea for the Annotations 
in this particular, I am persuaded are accounted by some, 
worthy consideration ; a brief view of them will suffice. 

The signal place of Isa liii. he tells us, he hath heard 
taken notice of by some (I thought it had been probable 
the apologist might have taken notice of it himself), as that 
wherein his Annotations are most suspected ; therefore on 
that he will fasten awhile. Who would not now expect that 
the apologist should have entered upon the consideration of 
those Annotations, and vindicated them from the imputations 
insinuated : but he knew a better way of procedure, and who 
shall prescribe to him, what suits his purpose and proposal ? 

This, I say, is the instance chosen to be insisted on ; and 
the vindication of the Annotations therein, by the interpre- 
tation given in their author's book ' de Satisfactione Christi' 
is proposed to consideration. That others, if not the apo- 
logist himself, may take notice of the emptiness of such pre- 
cipitate apologies, as are ready to be tumbled out, without 
due digestion or consideration, I shall not only compare the 
Annotations and that book as to the particular place pro- 
posed, and manifest the inconsistency of the one with the 
other ; but also to discover the extreme negligence and confi- 
dence, which lie at the bottom of his following attempt, to in- 
duce a persuasion, that the judgment of the man of whom we 
speak, was not altered (that is, as to the interpretation of the 
Scriptures relating to the satisfaction of Christ), nor is others 
[different] in his Annotations, than in that book ; I shall com- 
pare the one with the other, by sundry other instances, and 
let the world see how in the most important places contested 
about, he hath utterly deserted the interpretations given of 
them by himself in his book * de Satisfactione,' and directly 
taken up that which he did oppose. 

The apologist binds me in the first place to that of Isa. 
liii. which is ushered in by the 1 Pet. ii. 24. 

From 1 Pet. ii. 9A. (says the apologist) Grotius informs 


US, * that Christ so bare our sins, that he freed us from them, 
so that we are healed by his stripes.' 

This, thus crudely proposed, Socinus himself would grant 
it, is little more than barely repeating the words ; Grotius 
goes farther, and contends that dvi)vijK£v the word there 
used by the apostle, is to be interpreted, ' tulit sursum 
eundo, portavit,'and tells us that Socinus would render this 
word ' abstulit,' and so take away the force of the argument 
from this place. To disprove that insinuation, he urges 
sundry other places in the New Testament, where some 
words of the same importance are used, and are no way ca- 
pable of such a signification. And whereas Socinus urges 
to the contrary, Heb. ix. 28. where he says avr^vejKHv afxap- 
riaq signifies nothing but ' auferre peccata,' Grotius disproves 
that instance, and manifests that in that place also it is to be 
rendered by ' tulit,' and so relates to the death of Christ. 

That we may put this instance given us by the apologist, 
to vindicate the Annotations from the crime charged on them 
to an issue, I shall give the reader the words of his Annota- 
tions on that place : it is as follows : 

Oc Tag ajiapTLaq rjfxwv aitrog avr^veyKtv, &.C.] avijViyKtv ' hie 
est, abstulit, quod sequentia ostendunt, quomodo idem ver- 
bum sumi notavimus,' Heb. ix, 28. ' eodem sensu' aipsi afxap- 
Tiav, .Tolin i. 29. et ^W1 et ^no Isa. liii. 4. ' ubi Grseci' ^ipu' 
' vitia nostra ita interfecit, sicut qui cruci affiguntur interfici 
Solent. Simile loquendi genus. Col. ii. 14. vide Rom. vi. 6. 
Gal, ii. 20. 24. 'est autem hie /ufTaXrj^ptC ; non enim proprie 
Christus cum crucifigeretur, vitia nostra abstulit. Sed causas 
dedit per quas auferrerentur. Nam crux Christi fundamen- 
tum est praedicationis ; prcedicatio vero pcenitentiae, pceni- 
tentia vero aufert vitia.' 

How well the annotator abides here by his former inter- 
pretation of this place, the 'apologist may easily discover : 
1. There he contends that av/jvjyice is as much as 'tulit,' or 
* sursum tulit:' and objects out of Socinus, that it must be 
' abstulit,' which quite alters the sense of the testimony. 
Here he contends with him, that it must be ' abstulit.' 2. 
There, Heb. ix. 28. is of the same importance with this 
1 Pet. ii. 24. as there interpreted : here, as here; that is in 
a quite contrary sense, altogether inconsistent with the 


Other. 3. For company ^:id used Isa. liii. is called into 
the same signification, which in the book ' de Satisfactione,* 
he contends is never used in that sense, and that most truly. 
4. Upon this exposition of the words, he gives the very 
sense contended for by the Socinians ; ' non enim propria 
Christus cum crucifigeretur vitia nostra abstulit, sed causTis 
dedit per quas auferrerentur :' what are these causes ; he 
adds them immediately, ' Nam crux Christi fundamentum 
est prsedicationis, prffidicatio vero poenitentias, poenitentia 
vero aufert vitia.' He that sees not the whole Socinian poison 
wrapped up and proposed in this interpretation, is ignorant 
of the state of the difference as to that head, between them 
and Christians. 5. To make it a little more evident, how 
constant the annotator was to his first principles, which he 
insisted on in the management of his disputes with Socinus 
about the sense of this place, I shall add the words of So- 
cinus himself, which then he did oppose. ' Verum animad- 
vertere oportet prim am in Gre3eco, verbum, quod interpretes 
verterunt pertulit, est avr\vzyKHv, quod non pertulit sed ab- 
stulit vertendum erat, non secus ac factum fuerit in epistola 
ad Hebreeos, cap. ix. 28. ubi idem legend! modus habetur, 
unde constat av-nvtyKHv ai.iapTiag non perferre peccata, sed 
peccata tollere; sive auferre, significare.' Socin. de Jes. 
Christ. Serv. lib. 2. cap. 6. 

What difference there is between the design of the anno- 
tator, and that of Socinus, what compliance in the quotation 
of the parallel place of the Hebrews, what direct opposition 
and head is made in the Annotations against that book ' de 
Satisfactione,' and how clearly the cause contended for in 
the one, is given away in the other; needs no farther to be 
demonstrated. But if this instance makes not good the 
apologist's assertion, it may be supposed that that which 
follows, which k ushered in by this, will do it to the purpose; 
let then that come into consideration. 

This is that of Isa. liii. Somewhat of the sense which 
Grotius in his book * de Satisfactione' contends for in this 
place, is given us by the apologist. 

The eleventh verse of the chapter which he first considers 
(in my book)p. 14, he thus proposes and expounds: 'justi- 
ficabit servus mens Justus multos et iniquitates ipsorum ha- 
julabit, in Heb. est:' ';nD' «in Oniiyi vox autem pjr iniqui 



tatem eignificat, atque etiam iniquitatis pcenam, 2 Heg*. vii. 9. 
vox autera b2D est sustinere, bajulare, quoties autem baju- 
lare ponitur cum nomine peccati aut iniquitatis, id in omni 
lingua et maxime in Hebraismo significat posnas ferre,' with 
much more to this purpose. The whole design of the main 
dispute in that place, is, from that discourse of the prophet 
to prove, that Jesus Christ 'properly underwent the punish- 
ment due to our sins, and thereby made satisfaction to God 
for them.' 

To manifest his constancy to this doctrine, in his Anno- 
tations he gives such an exposition of that whole chapter of 
Isa. liii. as is manifestly and universally inconsistent with 
any such design in the words, as that which he intends to 
prove from them in his book 'de Satisfactione.' In parti- 
cular (to give one instance of this assertion) he contends 
here that ^2D, is as much as 'bajulare, portare,' and that 
joined with 'iniquity' (in all languages, especially in the He- 
brew), that phrase of' bearing iniquity,' signifies to undergo 
the punishment due to it ; in his Annotations on the place, 
as also in those on 1 Pet. ii. 24. he tells you the word signi- 
fies * auferre,' which with all his strength he had contended 
against. Not to draw out this particular instance into any 
greater length, I make bold to tell the apologist (what I 
suppose he knows not), that there is no one verse of the 
whole chapter, so interpreted in his Annotations, as that the 
sense given by him, is consistent with, nay is not repugnant 
to, that which from the same verses he pleads for in his 
book 'de Satisfactione Christi.' If notwithstanding this in- 
formation, the apologist be not satisfied, let him if he please 
consider what I have already animadverted on those Anno- 
tations, and undertake their vindication. These loose dis- 
courses are not at all to the purpose in hand, nor the ques- 
tion between us, which is solely, whether Grotius in his An- 
notations have not perverted the sense of those texts of 
Scripture, which are commonly and most righteously pleaded 
as testimonies given to the satisfaction of Christ. But as 
to this particular place of Isaiah, the apologist hath a farther 
plea, the sum whereof (not to trouble the reader with the re- 
petition of a discourse so little to the purpose) comes to this 
head ; that Grotius in his book ' de Satisfactione Christi,' 
gives the mystical sense of the chapter, under which consi- 


-deration, it belongs to Christ and his sufferings ; in his 
Annotations the literal, which had its immediate completion 
in Jeremiah, which was not so easily discoverable or vulgarly 
taken notice of. This is the sura of his first observation on 
this place, to acquit the annotator of the crime charged upon 
him. Whether he approve the application of the prophecy 
to Jeremiah or no, I know not. He says, Grotius so con- 
ceived. The design of the discourse seems to give approba- 
tion to that conception. How the literal sense of a place 
should come to be less easily discovered than the mystical, 
well I know not. Nor shall I speak of the thing itself con- 
cerning the literal and mystical sense supposed to be in the 
same place and words of Scripture, with the application of 
the distinction to those prophecies which have a double ac- 
complishment in the type and thing or person typified (which 
yet hath no soundness in it), but to keep to the matter now 
in hand, I shall make bold for the removal of this eno-ine 
applied by the apologist, for the preventing all possible mis- 
take, or controversy about the annotator's after-charge in 
this matter, to tell him, that the perverting of the first lite- 
ral sense of the chapter, or giving it a completion in any 
person whatsoever, in a first, second, or third sense, but the 
Son of God himself, is no less than blasphemy ; which the 
annotator is no otherwise freed from, but by his conceiving 
a sense to be in the words, contrary to their literal import- 
ance, and utterly exclusive of the concernment of Jesus 
Christ in them. If the apologist be otherwise minded, 1 
shall not invite him again to the consideration of what I have 
already written in the vindication of the whole prophecy 
from the wretched corrupt interpretation of the annotator 
(not hoping that he will be able to break through that dis- 
couragement he hath from looking into that treatise, by the 
prospect he hath taken of the whole by the epistle), but do 
express my earnest desire, that by an exposition of the se- 
verals of that chapter, and their application to any other 
(nor by loose discourses foreign to the question in hand), 
he would endeavour to evince the contrary ; if on second 
thoughts he find either his judgment or ability not ready or 
competent for such an attempt, I heartily wish he would be 
careful hereafter of ingenerating apprehensions of that na- 
ture in the minds of others, by any such discourses as this. 

X 2 


I cannot but suppose that I am already absolved from a ^ 
necessity of any farther procedure, as to the justifying my 
charge against the Annotations, having sufficiently foiled the 
instance produced by the apologist for the weakening of it. 
But yet lest any should think, that the present issue of this 
debate, is built upon some unhappiness of the apologist in 
the choice of the particulars insisted on ; which might have 
been prevented, or may yet be removed, by the production 
of other instances ; I shall for their farther satisfaction, pre- 
sent them with sundry other, the most important testimonies 
given to the satisfaction of Christ, wherein the annotator 
hath openly prevaricated, and doth embrace and propose 
those very interpretations, and that very sense, which in his 
book,*de SatisfactioneChristi,' he had strenuously opposed. 

Page 8, of his book ' de Satisfactione,' he pleads the sa- 
tisfaction of Christ, from Gal. ii. 21. laying weight on this, 
that the word dojpeav, signifies the want of an antecedent 
cause, on the supposition there made. In his Annotations 
he deserts this assertion, and takes up the sense of the place 
given by Socinus, ' de Servatore,' lib. 2. cap. 24. His departure 
into the tents of Socinus on Gal. iii. 13. is much more per- 
nicious, p. 25 — 27. urging that place and vindicating it from 
the exceptions of Socinus, he concludes, that the apostle 
said Ciirist was made a curse ; * quasi dixerit Christum fac- 
tum esse Tfo 9faJ liriKaTapaTov : hoc est pcense a Deo irro- 
o-atEB, et quidem ignominiosissimae obnoxium.' To make 
good this, in his Annotations, he thus expounds the words ; 
* duplex hie figura; nam et Karapa pro KardpaTog, quomodo 
circumcisio pro circumcisis : et subauditur a»c '■ nam Chris- 
tus ita cruciatus est, quasi esset Deo KaTaparog, quo nihil 
horaini pessimo in hac vita pejus evenire poterat;' which is 
the very interpretation of the words given by Socinus which 
he opposed ; and the same that Crellius insists upon in his 
vindication of Socinus against him. So uniform was the 
judgment of the annotator, with that of the author of the 
book ' de Satisfactione Christi.' 

Pages 32, 33, &c. are spent in the exposition and vindi- 
cation of Rom. iii. 25, 26. that expression hq tvdei^iv Trjg Si- 
Kaioavvnc avrov, manifesting the end of the suffering of 
Christ, is by him chiefly insisted on. Tiiat by diKaioavvr) is 
there intended that justice of God, v^hereby he punisheth 

OF HUGO G110TIU8. 301 

sin, he contends and proves from the nature of the thing 
itself, and comparing the expression with other parallel texts 
of Scripture ; Socinus had interpreted this of the righte- 
ousness of Christ's fidelity and veracity, lib. 2. 'de Servatore/ 
cap. 2. (ut ostenderet se veracem et fidelem esse) ;' but Crel- 
lius in his vindication of him, places it rather on the good- 
ness and liberality of God ; which is, saith he, the righteous- 
ness there intended. To make good his ground, the anno- 
tator thus expounds the meaning of the words; 'vocem 
StKotoo-uvr/c malim hie de bonitate interpretari, quam de fide 
in promissis preestandis, quia quge sequuntur non ad Judseos 
solos pertinent, sed etiam ad gentes, quibus promissio nulla 
facta erat.' He rather (he tells you) embraces the inter- 
pretation of Crellius than of Socinus ; but for that which 
himself had contended for, it is quite shut out of doors ; as 
I have elsewhere manifested at large. 

The same course he takes with Rom. v. 10. which he in- 
sists on p. 26. and 2 Cor. v. 18 — 21. concerning which he 
openly deserts his own former interpretation, and closes ex- 
pressly with that which he had opposed, as he doth in re- 
ference to all other places where any mention is made of 
reconciliation ; the substance of his annotations on those 
places, seeming to be taken- out of Socinus, Crellius, and 
some others of that party. 

That signal place of Heb. ii. 17. in this kind, deserves 
particularly to be taken notice of; cap. 7. p. 141. of his 
book * de Satisfactione,' he pleads the sense of that expres- 
sion, dg TO IXaaKtrr^ai Tag afxa^Tiag tov \aov, to be WaaKta^ai 
Qihv TTfpt Twv afxuQTiCov : and adds, * significat ergo ibi ex- 
piationem quce fit placando :' But Crellius's defence of Soci- 
nus had so possessed the man's mind before he came to 
write his Annotations, that on that place he gives us di- 
rectly his sense, and almost his words, in a full opposition to 
what he had before asserted : iXaaKia^ai a^apTiag, ' hoc qui- 
dem loco, ut ex sequentibus apparet, est auferre peccata, 
sive purgare a peccato, id est, efficere ne peccetur, vires sup- 
peditando pro modo tentationum.' So the annotator on that 
place ; endeavouring farther to prove his interpretation. 
From Rom. iv. last, cap. i. p. 47. of his book ' de Satisfac- 
tione,' he clearly proves the satisfaction of Christ ; and 
evinces that to be the sense of that expression, ' traditus 


propter peccata nostra ,' which he thus comments on in his 
Annotations; 'poterat dicere qui et mortuus est, et resur- 
rexit ut nos a peccatis justificaret, id est, liberaret. Sed 
amans dvriOtTa morti conjunxit peccata, quae sunt mors 
animi, resurrectioni autem adeptionem justitiae, quse est 
animi resuscitatio : mire nos et a peccatis retrahit etadjus- 
titiam ducit : quod videmus Christum mortem non formi- 
dasse pro doctrina sua peccatis contraria, et ad justitiamnos 
vocanti testinionio ; et a Deo suscitatum, ut eidera doctrina) 
summa conciliaretur authoritas.' He that sees not, not 
only that he directly closes in with what before he had op- 
posed, but also, that he hath here couched the whole doc- 
trine of the Socinians, about the mediation of Christ and 
our justification thereby, is utterly ignorant of the state of 
the controversy between them and Christians, 

I suppose it will not be thought necessary for me to pro- 
ceed with the comparison instituted. The several books are 
in the hands of most students, and that the case is generally 
the same in the other places pleaded for the satisfaction of 
Christ, they may easily satisfy themselves. Only because 
the apologist seems to put some difference between his An- 
notations on the Revelations (as having received their linea- 
ments and colours from his own pencil), and those on the 
Epistles which he had not so completed ; as I have already 
■manifested, that in his Annotations on that book, he hath 
treacherously tampered with, and corrupted the testimonies 
given to the Deity of our blessed Saviour, so shall I give one 
instance from them also, of his dealing no less unworthily 
with those that concern his satisfaction. 

Socinus in his second book against Covet, second part, 
and chap. 17. gives us this account of those words of the 
Holy Ghost, Rev. i. 5. ' who hath loved us, and washed us 
in his own blood : Johannes in Apocalyp. chap. i. 5. alia 
metaphora seu translatione (quse nihil aliud est quam com- 
pendiosa qusedam comparatio), utens, dixit de Christo et 
ejus morte, qui dilexit nos et lavit nos a peccatis in san- 
guine suoj nam quemadmodum aqua abluuntur sordes cor- 
poris, sic sanguine Chrisli, peccata, quae sordes animi sunt 
absterguntur. Absterguntur, inquam, quia animus noster 
ab ipsis mundatur,' &c. This interpretation is opposed and 
exploded by Grotius, lib. 'de Satis.' c. 10. pp. 208, 209. The 


substance of it being, that Christ washed us from our sins 
by his death, in that he confirmed his doctrine of repent- 
ance and newness of Hfe thereby, by which we are turned 
from our sins; as he manifests in the close of his discourse: 

* hoc saBpius urgendum est,' saith Socinus, ' Jesum Christum 
ea ratione peccata nostra abstulisse, quod efFecerit, ut a pec- 
cando desistamus.' This interpretation of Socinus, being 
reinforced by Crellius, the place falls again under the con- 
sideration of Grotius, in those Annotations on the Revela- 
tions ; which as the apologist tell us, received their very 
lineaments and colours from his own pencil. There then 
he gives us this account thereof, koX Xovcravn rj/xag aTrb rwv 
afxapTiCiv rifiMv Iv t(^ alfiaTL avrov' ' Sanguine suo, id est, morte 
tolerata, certos nos reddidit veritatis eorum quae docuerat, 
quse talia sunt, ut nihil sit aptius ad purgandos a vitiis ani- 
mos. Humidae naturae, sub qua est sanguis, proprium est 
lavare. Id vero peregregiam aXXrj-yoptav ad animum trans- 
fertur. Dicitur autem Christus suo sanguine nos lavisse, 
quia et ipse omnia praestitit quae ad id requirebantur et ap- 
paret secutum in plurimis efFectum.' I desire the. apologist 
to tell me what he thinks of this piece thus perfected, with 
all its lineaments and colours, by the pencil of that skilful 
man ; and what beautiful aspect he supposeth it to have. 
Let the reader, to prevent farther trouble in perusing tran- 
scriptions of this kind, consider Rev. xiii. 8. p. 114. Heb. 
ix. 25. to the end ; which he calls an illustrious place in the 
same page and forward ; 1 John ii. 2. p. 140. Rom. v. 10, 
11. p. 142, 143. Eph. ii. 16. p. 148, 149.^ Col. i. 20—22. Tit. 
14. p. 156. Heb. ix. 14, 15. p. 157, 158. Actsxx. 28. and many 
others ; and compare them with the Annotations on those 
places, and he will be farther enabled to judge of the defence 
made of the one, by the instance of the other ; I shall only de- 
sire that he who undertakes to givehisjudgment of this whole 
matter, be somewhat acquainted with the state of the differ- 
ence, about this point of the doctrine of the gospel, between 
the Socinians and us ; that he do not take ' auferre peccata,' 
to be ' ferre peccata;' 'nostri causa,' to be ' nostra vice,' and 

* nostro loco :' causa Trpotyovixivr], to be irpoTapKriKr] : * libe 
ratio a jugo peccati,' to be ' redemptio areatu peccati :' ' su 
hire poenas siraplicitur,' to be ' subire poenas nobis debitas : 
to be XvTpov, and DWH in respect of the event, to be so as to 


the proper nature of the thhig ; * ofFerre seipsum in coslo,' to ■ 
be as much as * offerre seipsum in cruce,' as to the work 
itself; that so he be not mistaken to think that, when the 
first are granted, that the latter are so also. For a close of 
the discourse relating to this head, a brief account may be 
added, why I said not positively, that he had wrested all the 
places of Scripture giving testimony to the satisfaction of 
Christ, to another sense ; but that he had either done so, or 
else concealed or obscured that sense in them. 

Though I might give instances from one or two places in 
his Annotations on the Gospels, giving occasion to this as- 
sertion, yet I shall insist only on some taken from the Epis- 
tle to the Hebrews, where is the great and eminent seat of 
the doctrine of Christ's satisfaction. Although in his An- 
notations on that Epistle, he doth openly corrupt the most 
clear testimonies given to this truth, yet there are some pas- 
sages in them, wherein he seems to dissent from the Soci- 
nians. In his Annotations on chap, v. 5. he hath these words; 
'Jesus cvjdem sacerdotale munus suum aliquo modo erat 
auspicatus ; • cum semet patri victimam offerret.' That 
Christ was a priest when he was on the earth, was wholly 
denied by Socinus, both in his book ' de Servatore,' and in 
his Epistle to Niemojevius, as I have shewed elsewhere. 
Smalcius seems to be of the same judgment in the Racovian 
catechism. Grotius says, ' Sacerdotale munus erat aliquo 
modo auspicatus ;' yet herein he goes not beyond Crellius, 
who tells us : ' mortem Christus subiit duplici ratione, par- 
tim quidem ut foederis mediator seu sponsor, partim quidem 
ut sacerdos, Deo ipsum oblaturus: de Causis mortis Christi,' 
p. 6. And so Volkelius, fully to the same purpose ; 'Partes' 
saith he, ' muneris sacerdotis, haec sunt potissimum ; mac- 
tatio victimee, in tabernaculum ad oblationem-peragendara, 
ingressio, et ex eodem egressio : Ac mactatio quidem mor- 
tem Christi, violentam sanguinis profusionem continet :' De 
Relig. lib. 3. cap. 47. p. 145. and again: * Hinc colligitur 
solam Christi mortem nequaquam illam perfectam absolu- 
tamque ipsius oblationem (de qua in Epistola ad Hebrseos 
agitur) fuisse, sed principium et praeparationem quandam 
ipsius sacerdotii in cselo demuni administrandi extitisse,' 
ibid. So that nothing is obtained by Grotius's 'munus 
sacerdotale aliquo modo erat auspicatus/ but what is granted 


by Crellius and Volkelius. But in the next words, ' cum 
semet ofFerret patri victimam/ he seems to leave them ; but 
he seems only so to do. For Volkelius acknowledgeth that 
he did slay the sacrifice in his death, though that was not 
his complete and perfect oblation, which is also afterward 
affirmed by Grotius ; and Crellius expressly affirms the 
same. Nor doth he seem to intend a proper, expiatory, and 
satisfactory sacrifice in that expression ; for if he had, he 
would not have been guilty of such an aKUjOoAo-yia, as to say, 
* semet obtulit patri.' Besides, though he do acknowledge 
elsewhere, that this ' victima' was Dli'K, and v-jrip ajuapriMv, 
yet he says in another place, (on ver. 3.) ' Sequitur Christum 
quoque obtulisse pro se virlp afxapriCjv'^ giving thereby such 
a sense to that expression, as is utterly inconsistent with a 
proper expiatory sacrifice for sin. And which is yet worse, 
on chap. ix. 14. he gives us such an account why expiation 
is ascribed to the blood of Christ, as is a key to his whole 
interpretation of that epistle : ' Sanguini,' saith he, ' purga- 
tio istatribuitur : quia per sanguinem, idjest, mortem Christi, 
secuta ejus excitatione et evectione, gignitur in nobis fides, 
quse deinde purgat corda.' And therefore, where Christ is 
said to offer himself by the eternal Spirit, he tells us, ' Obla- 
tio Christi hie intelligitur ilia, quae oblationi legali in adyto 
factse respondet, ea autem est, non oblatio in altari crucis 
facta, sed in adyto caslesti :' So that the purgation of sin is 
an eflTect of Christ's presenting himself in heaven only ; 
which how well it agrees with what the apostle says, chap, 
i. 3. the reader will easily judge. And to manifest that 
this was his constant sense, on those words, ver. 26. ug a^i- 
Ttjmv afiapriag, Sta Trig ^vaiag avrov, he thus comments : elg 
adhnaiv aixapriag' ' Ut peccatum in nobis extinguatur ; fit 
autem hoc per passionem Christi, quse fidem nobis ingenerat, 
quse corda purificat.' Christ confirming his doctrine by his 
death, begets faith in us, which doth the work. Of the 
28th verse of the same chapter, I have spoken before. The 
same he affirms again, more expressly, on chap. x. 3. and 
verses 9. 12. he interprets the oblation of Christ, whereby he 
took away sin, to be the oblation or offering himself in hea- 
ven, whereby sin is taken away by sanctification, as also in 
sundry other places, where the expiatory sacrifice of Chrisj^ 


on earth, and the taking away of the guilt of sin by satis- 
faction, is evidently intended. So that notwithstanding the 
concession mentioned, I cannot see the least reason to alter 
my thoughts of the Annotations, as to this business in hand. 
Not farther to abound m causa facili, in all the differences 
we have with the Socinians, about Christ's dying for us, 
concerning the nature of redemption, reconciliation, medi- 
ation, sacrifice, the meaning of all the phrases and expres- 
sions, which in those things are delivered to us, the anno- 
tator is generally on the apostate side throughout his Anno- 
tations ; and the truth is, I know no reason why our students 
should with so much diligence and charge, labour to get 
into their hands the books of Socinus, Crellius, Smalcius, 
and the rest of that crew, seeing these Annotations, as to the 
most important heads of Christian religion, about the Deity, 
sacrifice, priesthood, and satisfaction of Christ, original sin, 
free will, justification, &c. afford them the substance and 
marrow of what is spoken by them ; so that as to these heads, 
upon the matter, there is nothing peculiar to the annotator, 
but the secular learning which in his interpretations he hath 
curiously and gallantly interweaved. Plautus naakes sport 
in his Amphitruo with several persons, some real, some as- 
sumed, of such likeness one to another, that they could not 
discern themselves by any outward appearance ; which 
caused various contests and mistakes between them. The 
Poet's fancy raised not a greater similitude between Mercury 
and Sosia, being supposed to be different persons, than there 
is a dissimilitude between the author of the book ' de Sa- 
tisfactione Christi,' and of the Annotations, concerning which 
we have been discoursins;, being one and the same. Nor 
was the contest of those different persons so like one another, 
so irreconcilable, as are these of this single person, so unlike 
himself in the several treatises mentioned. And I cannot 
but think it strange, that the apologist could imagine no 
surer measure to be taken of Grotius's meaning in his Anno- 
tations than his treatise of the 'Satisfaction of Christ' doth 
afford, there being no two treatises that I know, of any dif- 
ferent persons whatever, about one and the same subject, 
that are more at variance. Whether now any will be per- 
suaded by the apologist to believe, that Grotius was constant 


in his Annotations to the doctrine delivered in that other 
treatise, I am not solicitous. 

For the reinforced plea of the apologist, that these An- 
notations were not finished by him, but only collections that 
he might after dispose of, I am not concerned in it; having 
to deal with that book of Annotations that goes under his 
name ; if they are none of his, it is neither on the one hand 
or other, of any concernment unto me. I say not this, as 
though the apologist had in the least made good his former 
plea, by his new exceptions to my evidence against it, from 
the printer's preface to the volume of Annotations on the 
Epistles. He says,' what was the opus integrum that was com- 
mended to to the care of 6 ^uvaV and answers himself, 'not 
that last part or volume of Annotations, but opus integrum, 
the whole volume or volumes that contained his aviK^ora 
adversaria on the New Testament.' For how ill this agrees 
with the intention and words of the prefacer, a slight in- 
spection will suffice to manifest. He tells us, that Grotius 
had himself published his Annotations on the Gospels, five 
years before : that at his departure from Paris, he left a 
great part of this volume (that is this on the Acts and Epistles) 
with a friend ; that the reason why he left not opus inte- 
grum that is, the whole volume, with him, was because the 
residue of it was not so written, as tliat an amanuensis could 
well understand it. That therefore in his going towards 
Sweden, he wrote that part again with his own hand, and 
sent it back to the same person (that had the former part of 
the volume committed to him) from Hamburgh. If the apo- 
logist read this preface, he ought, as I suppose to have de- 
sisted from the plea insisted on. If he did not, he thought 
assuredly he had much reason to despise them, with whom 
he had to do. But as I said, herein am I not concerned. 

The consideration of the charge on the Annotations, re- 
lating to their tampering with the testimonies given in the 
Scripture^ to the Deity of Christ, being another head of the 
whole, may now have place. 

The sum of what is to this purpose by me affirmed, is, that 
in the Annotations on the Old and New Testament, Grotius 
hath left but one place giving testimony clearly to the Deity 
of Christ. To this assertion I added both a limitation, and 
also an enlargement, in several respects. A limitation that 


I could not perceive he had spoken of himself, clearly on 
that one place. On supposition that he did so, I granted 
that perhaps one or two places more, might accordingly be 
interpreted. That this one place is John i. 1. I expressly af- 
firmed ; that is the one place wherein, as I say, he spake 
not home to the business. The defence of the apologist in 
the behalf of Grotius, consists of sundry discourses. First, 
to disprove that he hath left more than that one of John 
free from the corruption charged ; he instances in that one 
of John i. 1. wherein as he saith, he expressly asserts the 
Deity of Christ : but yet wisely foreseeing, that this instance 
would not evade the charge, having been expressly excepted 
(as to the present inquiry), and reserved to farther debate ; 
he adds the places quoted by Grotius in the exposition of 
that place ; as Prov. viii. 21—27. Isa. xlv. 12. xlviii. 13. 2 Pet. 
iii. 5. Col. i. 16. from all which he concludes, that the An- 
notations have left more testimonies to the Deity of Christ 
untampered withal and unperverted, than my assertion will 
allow ; reckoning them all up again, section the 10th, and 
concluding himself a successful advocate in this case, or at 
least under a despair of ever being so in any, if he acquit 
not himself clearly in this. If his failure herein be evinced 
by the course of his late writings, himself will appear to be 
most concerned ; I suppose, then, that on the view of this de- 
fence, men must needs suppose that in the Annotations on 
the places repeated, and mustered a second time by the apo- 
logist, Grotius does give their sense as bearing witness to 
the Deity of Christ. Others may be pleased to take it for 
granted without farther consideration; for my part being a 
little concerned to inquire, I shall take the pains to turn to 
the places, and give the reader a brief account of them. 

For Prov. viii. his first note on the wisdom there spoken 
of is ; * Hsec de ea sapientia quse in lege apparet exponunt 
Haebraei, et sane ei, si non soli, at praecipue hsec attributa 
conveniunt.' Now if the attributes here mentioned, asrree 
either solely or principally to the wisdom that shines in the 
law, how they can be the attributes of the person of the eter- 
nal Son of God, I see not. He adds no more to that pur- 
pose, until he comes to the 22d verse, the verse of old con- 
tested about with the Arians. His words on that are : 
' Greecum Aquilse, est, tKrlcraro fxt, ut et Symmachi et Theo- 


dosionis, respondetque, beneHsebrseo >33p, et Chaldseus habet 
n")3, etLXX. sKTiae, sensii non malo, si creare sumas pro facere 
ut appareat : vise Dei sunt operationes ipsius ; sensum hujus 
loci et sequentium non male exprimas cum Philone de Colo- 
liiis ; 6 Xoyot; 6 7rp£(Tj3urCjOoc tmv yivecnv £tAjj^d»rwv, ov Ku^uirep 
o'laKog £vaXj7jU£voc 6 riov oXwv yuj3£pi'/jrj7C 7reda\iov)(H rci avfi- 
iravTU, (cat ore tKoafxairXaarei \^r]aafXivoq bpyavi^ tovti^) irphg Trjv 
avvTraiTiov tCov aVoreXoyjUEVwv avaTacriv. 

On verse 27, he adds * aderam, id est, ^v irpbg tov Qebv, 
ut infra John Evang. i. 1/ What clear and evident tesimony 
by this exposition is left in this place to the Deity of Chi'ist, 
I profess myself as ignorant as I was before I received this 
direction by the apologist. He tells us, that >33p is rendered 
not amiss by the Chaldee m^, and the LXX. eKTias, though he 
knew that sense was pleaded by the Arians, and exploded 
by the ancient doctors of the church. To relieve this con- 
cession, he tells us that 'creare,' may be taken for 'facere 
ut appareat,' though there be no evidence of such a use of 
the word in Scripture, nor can he give any instance thereof. 
The whole interpretation runs on that wisdom that is a pro- 
perty of God, which he manifested in the works of creation : 
of the Son of God, the essential wisdom of God, sub- 
sisting with the Father, we have not one word : nor doth that 
quotation out of Philo relieve us in this business at all. We 
know in what sense he used the word 6 \6yog ; how far he 
and the Platonics, with whom in this expression he con- 
sented, were from understanding the only begotten Son of 
God, is known. If this of Philo has any aspect towards 
the opinion of any professing themselves Christians, it is 
towards that of the Arians, which seems to be expressed 
therein. And this is the place chosen by the apologist to 
disprove the assertion of none being left, under the sense 
given them by the Annotations, bearing clear testimony to 
the Deity of Christ ; his comparing >3N dW ibi ego, which 
the Vulgar renders ' aderam/ with rjv irpog tuv Qwv, seems 
rather to cast a suspicion on his intention in the expres- 
sion of that place of the Evangelist, than in the least to give 
testimony to the Deity of Christ in this. If any one be 
farther desirous to be satisfied, how many clear unquestion- 
able evidences of the Deity of Christ are slighted by these 
Annotations on this chapter, let him consult my vindication 


of the place in my late 'VindiciseEvangelicse/ where he will 
find something tendered to him to that purpose. What the 
apologist intended by adding these two places of Isaiah, 
chap. xlv. 12. and the xlviii. 13, (when in his Annotations 
on those places, Grotius not once mentions the Deity of 
Christ, nor any thing of him, nor hath occasion so to do, nor 
doth produce them in this^place to any such end or purpose, 
but only to shew that the Chaldee paraphrase doth sundry 
times, when things are said to be done by God, render it, 
that they were done by the word of 'God), as instances to 
the prejudice of my assertion, I cannot imagine. 

On that of Peter, 2 Epistle iii. 5. ti^ tgv Gtou Xoyw, he 
adds indeed, ' vide qu2G diximus ad initium Evangelii Jo- 
hannis :' but neither doth that place intend the natural Son 
of God, nor is it so interpreted by Grotius. 

To these he adds in the close; Col. i. 16. in the exposi- 
tion whereof in his Annotations, he expressly prevaricates, 
and goes of to the interpretation insisted on by Socinus and 
his companions, which the apologist well knew. Without 
farther search upon what hath been spoken, the apologist 
gives in his verdict concerning the falseness of my assertion 
before-mentioned, of the annotator's speaking clear and 
home to the Deity of Christ but in one, if in one place of his 
Annotations. But, 

1. What one other place hath he produced, whereby the 
contrary, to what I assert, is evinced ? Any man may make 
apologies at this rate as fast as he pleases. 

2. As to his not speaking clearly in that one, notwith- 
standing the improvement made of his expressions by the 
apologist, I am still of the same mind as formerly. For al- 
though he ascribes an eternity, no Xoyo^, and affirms all things 
to be made thereby ; yet considering how careful he is, of 
ascribing an vTroaraaiq, ti^ Xoyw, how many Platonic inter- 
pretations of that expression he interweaves in his exposi- 
tions, how he hath darkened the whole counsel of God in 
that place about the subsistence of the Word, its omnipotency 
and incarnation, so clearly asserted by the Holy Ghost 
therein, I see no reason to retract the assertion opposed. 
But yet as to the thing itself, about this place I will not 
contend : only it may not be amiss to observe, that not only 
the Arians, but even Photinus himself acknowledged that 


the world was made tm Qeov XoJyt^, that how little is obtained 
towards the confirmation of the Deity of Christ by that con- 
cession, may be discerned. 

I shall offer also only at present, that 6 Xoyog tov Qeov, 
is threefold, \6yog vTroaTaTiKog, Ivdid^erog, and irpocpopiKog. 
The \6yoQ virocrTciTiKOQ or ovmwSrjc is Christ, mentioned John 
i. 1. his personal or eternal subsistence, with his omnipo- 
tency, being- there asserted. Whether Christ be so called 
any where else in the New Testament may be disputed: 
Luke i. 2. (compared with 1 John i. 1.) 2 Pet. i 16. Acts 
XX. 32. Heb. iv. 12. are the most likely to give us that use 
of the word. Why Christ is so termed, I have shewed else- 
where. That he is called IDT Psal. xxxiii. 6. is to me also 
evident. n^D is better rendered piii/xa, or Xi^ig, than \6yog. 
Where that word is used, it denotes not' Christ : though 
2 Sam. xxiii. 2. where that word is, is urged by some to 
that purpose. He is also called 121 Hag. ii. 5. so perhaps 
in other places. Our present Quakers would have that ex- 
pression of the word of God, used nowhere in any other 
sense : so that destroying that, as they do, in the issue they 
may freely despise the Scripture, as that which they say is 
not the word of God, nor any where so called. Aoyog IvBia- 
^£Tog amongst men, is that which Aristotle calls, tov iao) 
Ao-yov* \6yog Iv vio XajUJSavo^Evoc? says Hesychius. Aoyog 
evBia^erog \s that which we speak in our hearts, says Dama- 
scen.de Orthod. Fid. lib. 1. cap. 18. So Psal. xiv. 1.^:33 IDK 
O^D. This as spoken in respect of God, is that egress of his 
power, whereby according to the eternal conception of his 
mind, he vvorketh any thing. So Gen. i. 2. ' God said. Let 
there be light, and there was light.' Of this word of God 
the Psalmist treats, cxlvii. ver. 18. 'he sendeth out nDT and 
melteth the ice,' and Psal. cxlviii. 8. the same word is used. In 
both which places the Septuagint renders it by 6 Xoyog. 
This is that which is called prifna rrig ^vvajiistjg, Heb. i. 3. 
xi. 3. where the apostle says, the heavens were made prifxari 
Geou, which is directly parallel to that place of 2 Pet. 
iii. 5. where it is expressed no tov Qeov \6yio : for though 
prifjia more properly denotes Xoyov TrpoipopiKov, yet in these 
places, it signifies plainly that egress of God's power for the 
production and preservation of things, being a pursuit of the 
eternal conception of his mind, M-hich is Xoyog evdia^erog. 


Now this infinite, wise, and eternal conception of the mind 
of God, exerting itself in power, wherein God s said to 
speak, * he said. Let there be light,' is that which the Plato- 
nics, and Philo with them, liarped on, never once dreaming 
of a co-essential and hypostatical word of God, though the 
word airoaTamt; occur amongst them. This they thought 
was unto God, as in us, \6jug IvdiaOerog or 6 ectw, irpbg vovv' 
and particularly it is termed by Philo, (piov^ rr^g diavolag ev- 
pvvofxivr]' de Agric. That this was his 6 Xoyoc is most evi- 
dent. Hence he tells us, ovdlv av erepov tnrot rbv vorjrtv 
ilvai Kogjiiov rj Oeov \6yov rjdi] KOcriiiOTroinvvog. ouSf "yojO ?j voijrrj 
iroXig iTSpov ti Icttiv, rj 6 tov ap-)^iTiKTOvog XoyKJfxog, i^Sr) Trjv 
voYiTTJv TToXiv KTiZ,£iv diavovfxivov. Mu}aiu)g yap to ^oyfia tovto, 
ouK Ifxov' de Mund. Opific. and a little after, tov Si aopuTov 
Koi vorjTov ^eiov \6yov, HKOva \iyH Qeov' koX TavTr\g UKOva tov 
vor\Tov ^u)g Ik£ivo, 6 ^tiov \6yov yiyovtv fjKwv tov diepfxrjvev- 
aavTog ty^v yiveaiv avTOv' et lariv virepovpaviog aaTi]p. The 
whole tendency of his discourse is, that the word of God, in 
his mind, in the creation of the world, was the image of him- 
self; and that the idea or image of the things to be made, 
but especially of light. And whereas (if I remember aright, 
for 1 cannot now find the place) I have said somewhere, that 
Christ was \6yog IvSiaOarog, though therein I have the con- 
sent of very many learned divines, and used it merely in op- 
position T(j) Trpo(j)opiKU) ; yet I desire to recall it : nor do I think 
there is any propriety in that expression of fjuc^uroc used of 
Christ, but only in those of vTroaTciTiKog and ouatwSrjc, which 
the Scripture (though not in the very terms) will make good. 
In this second acceptation, tov \6yov, Photinus himself 
granted that the world was made by the word of God. Now 
if it be thought necessary, that I should give an account of 
my fear that nothing but 6 X670C in this sense, decked with 
many platonical encomiums, was intended in the Annotations 
on John i. (though 1 confess much, from some quotations 
there used, may be said against it) I shall readily undertake 
the task ; but at present in this running course, I shall add 
no more. 

But now, as if all the matter in hand were fully des- 
patched, we have this triumphant close attending the former 
discourse and observations. 

'If one text acknowledged to assert Christ's eternal divi- 


nity* (which one was granted to do it, though not clearly), 
* will not suffice to conclude him no Socinian'/ which I said not 
he was, yea, expressly waved the management of any such 
charge); * if six verses in the Proverbs, two in Isaiah, one in 
St. Peter, one in St. Paul, added to many in the beginning of 
St. John' (in his Annotations, on all which he speaks not one 
word to the purpose), ' will not yet amount to above one text ; 
or lastly, if that one may be doubted of also, which is by him 
interpreted to affirm Christ's eternal subsistence with God 
before the creation of the world' (which he doth not so inter- 
pret, as to a personal subsistence), 'and that the whole world 
was created by him ; I shall despair of ever being a success- 
ful advocate for any man ;' from which condition I hope some 
little time will recover the apologist. 

This is the sum of what is pleaded in chief, for the de- 
fence of the Annotations: wherein what small cause he hath 
to acquiesce, who hath been put to the labour and trouble 
of vindicating near forty texts of Scripture, in the Old Tes- 
tament and New, giving express testimony to the Deity of 
Christ from the annotator's perverse interpretations, let the 
reader judge. In the 13th section of the apologist's dis- 
course, he adds some other considerations to confirm his 
former vindication of the Annotations. 

1. He tells us, that he ' professeth not to divine what 
places of the Old Testament, wherein the Deity of Christ is 
evidently testified unto, are corrupted by the learned man, 
nor will he upon the discouragement already received make 
any inquiry into my treatise.' 

But what need of divination ? The apologist cannot but 
remember at all times, some of the texts of the Old Testa- 
ment that are pleaded to that purpose ; and he hath at least 
as many encouragements to look into the Annotations, as 
discouragements from casting an eye upon that volume as 
he calls it, wherein they are called to an account. And if he 
suppose he can make a just defence for the several places so 
wrested and perverted, without once consulting of them, I 
know not how by me he might possibly be engaged into 
such an inquiry. And therefore I shall not name them again, 
having done somewhat more than name them already. 

But he hath two suppletory considerations, that will 



render any such inquiry or inspection needless. Of these 
the first is, 

' That the word of God being all and every part of it of 
equal truth, that doctrine which is founded on five places of 
divine writ, must by all Christians be acknowledged to be 
as irrefragably confirmed, as a hundred express places would 
be conceived to confirm it.' 

Alls. It is confessed, that not only five, but any one ex- 
press text of Scripture, is sufficient for the confirmation of 
any divine truth. But that five places have been produced 
put of the Annotations by the apologist for the confirmation 
of the great truth pleaded about, is but pretended, indeed 
there is no such thing. The charge on Grotius was, that he 
had depraved all but one : if that be no crime, the defence 
was at hand ; if it be, though that one should be acknow- 
ledged to be clear to that purpose, here is no defence against 
that which was charged, but a strife about that which was 
not. Let the places be consulted, if the assertion prove true, 
by an induction of instances, the crime is to be confessed, 
or else the charge denied to contain a crime. But, 

Secondly, he says, ' That this charge upon inquiry will be 
found in some degree, if not equally, chargeable on the learn- 
edest and most valuable of the first reformers, particularly 
upon Mr. Calvin himself, who hath been as bitterly and un- 
justly accused and reviled upon this account (witness the 
book intitled ' Calvino Turcismus') as ever Erasmus was by 
Bellarmine and Beza, or as probably Grotius maybe.' 

Though this at the best be but a diversion of the charge, 
and no defence, yet, not containing that truth which is need- 
ful to countenance it, for the end for which it is proposed ; 
I could not pass it by. It is denied (which in this case until 
farther proof must suffice) that any of the learnedest of the 
first reformers, and particularly Mr. Calvin, are equally 
chargeable, or in any degree of proportion with Grotius, as 
to the crime insisted on. Calvin being the man instanced 
in, I desire the apologist to prove that he hath in all his 
commentaries on the Scripture, corrupted the sense of any 
texts of the Old Testament or New, giving express testimony 
to the Deity of Christ, and commonly pleaded to that end 
and purpose. Although I deny not, but that he differs from 


the common judgment of most, in the interpretation of some 
few prophetical passages, judged by them to relate to Christ. 
I know what Genebrard and some others of that faction, 
raved against him ; but it was chiefly from some expressions 
in his institutions about the Trinity (wherein yet he is ac- 
quitted by the most learned of themselves) and not from his 
expositions of Scripture, for which they raised their cla- 
mours. For the book called 'Calvino Turcismus,' written by 
Reynolds and GifFard, the apologisthasforgotten the design 
of it. Calvin is no more concerned in it, than others of the 
first reformers ; nor is it from any doctrine about the Deity 
of Christ in particular, but from the whole of the reformed 
religion, with the apostacies of some of that profession, that 
they compare it with Turcism. Something indeed, in a chap- 
ter or two, they speak about the Trinity, from some expres- 
sions of Luther, Melancthon, Calvin, and others: but as to 
Calvin's expositions of Scripture, they insist not on them. 
Possibly the apologist may have seen Pareus's ' Calvinus 
Orthodoxus,' in answer to Hunnius's * Calvinus Judaizans;' 
if not, he may at any time have there an account of this ca- 

Having passed through the consideration of the two con- 
siderable heads of this discourse, in the method called for 
by the apologist (having only taken liberty to transpose 
them, as to first and last) I must profess myself as yet un- 
satisfied as to the necessity, or suitableness, of this kind of 
defence. The sum of that which I affirmed (which alone 
gives occasion to the defensative now under consideration) 
is, that to my observation, Grotius, in his Annotations had 
not left above one text of Scripture, if one, giving clear evi- 
dence to the Deity of Christ ; of his satisfaction I said in 
sura the same thing. Had the apologist been pleased to 
have produced instances of any evidence for the disprove- 
ment of my assertion, I should very gladly and readily have 
acknowledged my mistake and oversight. I am still also in 
the same resolution, as to the latitude of the expression, 
though I have already by an induction of particulars, mani- 
fested his corrupting and perverting of so many, both in re- 
spect of the one head and of the other, with his express com- 
pliance with the Socinians in his so doing, as that I cannot 
have the least thought of letting fall my charge, which, with 

Y 2 


the limitation expressed (of my own observation), contains 
the truth in this matter, and nothing but that which is so. 
It was indeed in my thoughts to have done somewhat 
more in reference to those Annotations, than thus occasion- 
ally to have animadverted on their corruption in general ; 
namely, to have proceeded in the vindication of the truths of 
the gospel from their captivity under the false glosses put upon 
them, by the interpretations of places of Scripture wherein 
they are delivered. But this work being fallen on an abler 
hand, viz. that of our learned professor of divinity, my de- 
sire is satisfied, and the necessity of my endeavour for that 
end removed. 

There are sundry other particulars insisted on by the 
apologist, and a great deal of rhetoric is laid out about 
them, which certainly deserves not the reader's trouble in 
the perusal of any other debate about them. If they did, it 
were an easy matter to discover his mistakes in them all 
along. The foundation of most of them, lies in that which 
he affirms, sect. 4. where he says, that ' I thus state the jea- 
lousies about H. G. as far as it is owned by me, viz. that being 
in doctrine a Socinian, he yet closed in many things with the 
Roman interest.' To which he replies, that * this does not so 
much as pretend that he was a Papist.' 

As though I undertake to prove Grotius to be a Papist, 
or did not expressly disown the management of the jealousy, 
stated as above ; or that I did at all own it, all which are 
otherwise ; yet I shall now say, whether he was in docti'ine a 
Socinian or no, let his Annotations before insisted on, deter- 
mine : and whether he closed with the Roman interest or no, 
besides what hath been observed by others, I desire the apo- 
logist to consider his observation on Rev. xii. 5. that book 
(himself being judge,) having received his last hand. But 
my business is not to accuse Grotius, or to charge his me- 
mory with anything but his prevarication in his Annotations 
on the Scripture.^ 

And as I shall not cease to press the general aphorism (as 
it is called), that no drunkard, 8lc. nor any person whatever 
not born of God or united to Christ the head, by the same 
Spirit that is in him, and in the sense thereof, perfecting ho- 

a Grotius ad nocentissimse ha?reseos atque efrenis licentiae 8cyllarn,iterunique ; ad 
tyrannidis charybdin declinavitfluctuans : Essen. 

OF HUGO GllOTlUS. 317 

liness in the fear of God, shall ever see his face in glory, so 
I fear not what conclusion can regularly in reference to any 
person living or dead, be thence deduced. 

It is of the Annotations whereof I have spoken, which I 
have my liberty to do : and I presume shall still continue, 
whilst I live in the same thoughts of them : though I should 
see a third defence of the learned Huo-o Grotius. 

The Epistles of Grotius to Crellius mentioned by the apolo- 
gist in his first defence of him, giving some light to what 
hath been insisted on, I thought it not unfit to communi- 
cate them to the reader, as they came to my hand, having 
not as yet been printed that I know of. 

Reverendo summaque eruditionis ac pietalis viro Domino 
Johanni Crellio jiastori liacov. H. G, S. 

' Libro tuo'' quo ad eum quem ego quondam scripseram (Eru- 
ditissime Crelli) respondisti, adeo offensus non fui, ut etiam 
gratias tunc intra animum meum egerim, nmic et hisce agam 
literis. Primo, quod non tantum humane, sed et valde of- 
ficiose mecum egeris, ita ut quaeri nihil possim, nisi quod in 
me prsedicando, modum interdumexcedis, deinde vero, quod 
multa me docueris, partini utilia, partim jucunda scitu, me- 
que exemplo tuo incitaveris ad penitius expendendum sensus 
sacrorum librorum. Bene autem in Epistola tua quae mihi 
longe gratissima advenit, de me judicas, non esse me eorum 
in numero qui ob sententias salva pietate dissidentes alieno 
a quoquam sim animo,aut boni alicujus amicitiam repudiem. 
Equidem in libro'' 'de veraReligione,' quemjampercurri, re- 
lecturus et posthac, multa invenio summo cumjudicio ob- 
servata. Illud vero seeculo gratulor, repertos homines qui 
neutiquam in controversiis subtilibus tantum ponunt, quan- 
tum in vera vitse emendatione, et quotidiano ad sanctitatem 
profectu. Utinam et mea scripta aliquid ad hoc studium in 
animis hominum excitanduni inflammandumque ; conferre 
possint : tunc enim non frustra me vixisse hactenus existi- 
raem. Liber ' de veritate Religionis Christianae' magis ut no- 
bis esset solatio, quam ut aliis documento scriptus, non video 

b This book of Crellius lay unansnered by Grotius above twenty years. For so 
long he lived after the jjublishing of it. It is since fully answered by Esscnius. 
« That is the body of Socinian divinity written by Crellius and Volkelius. 


quid post tot aliorum labores utilitatis afFevre possit, nisi ipsa 
forte brevitate. Siquid tamen in eo est, quod tibi tuiqufe 
similibus placeat, mihi supra evenit. Libris 'de jure Belli et 
Pacis' mihi prascipue propositum habui, ut feritatem illara, 
non Christianis tantum, sed ethominibus indignam, ad bella 
pro libitu suscipienda, pro libitu gerenda, quam gliscere tot 
populorum malo quotidie video, quantum in me est, sedarera. 
Gaudeo ad principum quorundam manus eos libros venisse, 
qui utinam partem eorum meliorem in suum animum admit- 
terent. NuUus enim mihi ex eo labore suavior fructus con- 
tingere possit. Te vero quod attinet, credas, rogo, si quid 
unquam facere possim tui,aut eorum quos singulariteramas, 
causa, experturum te, quantum te tuo merito faciam. Nunc 
quum aliud possim nihil, Dominum Jesum supplice animo 
veneror, ut tibi aliisque ; pietatem promoventibas propitius 

x.Maii.M. DC.XXVI. 
Tui nominis studiosissimus. H. G. 

Tam pro Epistola (vir Clarissime) quam pro transmisso libro, 
gratias ago maximas. Constitui et legere et relegere dili- 
genter qusecunque a te proficiscuntur, expertus quo cum 
fructu id antehac fecerim. Eo ipso tempore quo literas tuas 
accepi, versabar in lectione tuae interpretationis in'^Episto- 
1am ad Galatas. Quantum judicare possum et scripti oc- 
casionem et propositum, et totam seriem dictionis, ut mag- 
na cum cura indagasti, ita feliciter adniodum es assequutus. 
Quare Deum precor, ut et tibi et tui similibus, vitam det, et 
quae alia ad istiusmodi labores necessaria. Mihi ad juvan- 
dam communem Christianismi causam, utinam tam adessent 
vires, quam promptus est animus : quippe me, a prima aetate, 
per varia disciplinarum genera jactatum, nulla res magis de- 
lectavit, quam rerum sacrarum meditatio. Id in rebus pros- 
peris moderamen, id in adversis solamen sensi. Pacis con- 
silia et amavi semper et amo nunc quoque ; eoque doleo, 
quum video, tam pertinaeibus iris committi inter se eos, qui 
Christi se esse dicunt. Si recte rem putamus, quantillis de 

Januarii. M. DC. XXXII. Amstelodam. 

^ J.et the reader judge what annotations on that Epistle we are to expect from 
thi« man. 


















As the Publisher, in compliance with the wishes of many of the Subscribers to the 
Works of Dr. Owen, had resolved on printing the following Translation of his 
' Diatriba de Justicia Divina,' no place in the series appeared more suitable and con- 
venient than the present. The translation was made by a Mr. Hajiiltok. Mr. 
ORME.inhisMeinoirsof Dr. Owen, pronounces ittobe, 'onthe whole, well executed, 
but ratlier too literal.' I have retained the recommendatory Preface and the Trans- 
lator's Notes. — Editor. 


The numerous and valuable writings of Dr. Owen, 
have long ago, secured his praise in all the churches, 
as a first-rate writer upon theological subjects. 
Any recommendation, therefore, of the present work, 
seems unnecessary. As the Treatise, however, now 
offered to the public, has long been locked up in a 
dead language, it may not be improper to say, what 
will be granted by all competent judges, that the 
author discovers an uncommon acquaintance with 
his subject ; that he has clearly explained the na- 
ture of Divine Justice, and demonstrated it to be, 
not merely an arbitrary thing, depending upon the 
sovereign pleasure of the Supreme Lawgiver, but es- 
sential to the divine nature. In doing this, he has 
overthrown the arguments of the Socinians and 
others against the atonement of Christ, and proved, 
that a complete satisfaction to the law and justice 
of God was necessary, in order that sinners might 
be pardoned, justified, sanctified, and eternally 
saved, consistently with the honour of all the divine 

Whoever makes himself master of the doctor's 
reasoning in the following treatise, will be able to 
answer all the objections and cavils of the enemies 
of the truth therein contended for. It is therefore, 
earnestly recommended to the attention, and careful 
perusal of all, who wish to obtain right ideas of God, 


the nature and extent of the divine law, the horrid 
nature and demerit of sin, &c. but especially to the 
attention of young divines. The translation upon 
the whole, is faithful. If it have any fault, it is per- 
haps its being too literal. 

That it may meet with that reception which it 
justly merits from the public, and which the im- 
portance of the subject demands, is the earnest 
prayer of the servants in the gospel of Christ, 

J. RYLAND, sen. M. A. 



As perhaps, learned reader, you will think it strange, 
that I, who have such abundance of various and la- 
borious employment of another kind, should think 
of publishing such a work as this ; it may not be im- 
proper to lay before you a summary account of the 
reasons that induced me to this undertaking : and I 
do it the rather, that this little production may escape 
free from the injurious suspicions, which the manners 
of the times are but too apt to affix to works of this 
kind. It is now four months and upwards, since in 
the usual course of duty in defending certain theolo- 
gical theses in our university, it fell to my lot, to 
discourse and dispute on the vindicatory justice of 
God, and the necessity of its exercise, on the sup- 
position of the existence of sin. Although these ob- 
servations were directed to the best of my abilities 
immediately against the Socinians, yet, it being un- 
derstood that many very respectable theologians en- 
tertained sentiments on this subject very different 
from mine, and although the warmest opposers of 
what we then maintained were obliged to acknow- 
ledge that our arguments are quite decisive against 
the adversaries, yet there were not wanting some 
who not altogether agreeing with us, employed them- 
selves in strictures upon our opinion, and accused 
it of error, while others continued wavering, and in 
the diversity of opinions, knew not on which to fix. 
Much controversy ensuing in consequence of this, I 
agreed with some learned men to enter, both in writ- 
ings and conversation upon an orderly and deliberate 


investigation of the subject. And after the scruples 
of several had been removed by a more full consider- 
ation of our opinion (to effect which, the foUow^ing 
considerations chiefly contributed, viz. that they 
clearly saw this doctrine conduced to the establish- 
ment of the necessity of the satisfaction of Jesus 
Christ, a precious truth which these worthy and 
good men, partakers of the grace and gift of righte- 
ousness through means of the blood of Christ, not 
only warmly favoured, but dearly venerated as the 
most honourable treasure of the church, the seed of 
a blessed immortality, and the darling jewel of our 
religion), 1 was greatly encouraged in the confer- 
ences with these gentlemen to take a deeper view of 
the subject, and to examine it more closely for the 
future benefit of mankind. 

Besides several of those who had before examin- 
ed, and were acquainted with our sentiments, or to 
whom, in consequence of our short discourse in the 
university on the subject, they began to be more ac- 
ceptable ; and these too considerable both for their 
number and rank, ceased not to urge me to a more 
close consideration and accurate review of the con- 
troversy. For in that public dissertation, it being 
confined, according to the general custom of such 
exercises in universities, within the narrow limits of 
an hour, I could only slightly touch on the nature of 
vindicatory justice ; whereas the rules and limits of 
such exercises would not permit me to enter on the 
chief point, the great hinge of the controversy, viz. 
concerning the necessary exercise of that justice: 
this is the difficulty that requires the abilities of the 
most judicious and acute to investigate and solve. In 
this situation of matters, not only a more full view of 
the whole state of the controversy, but likewise of the 
weight of those arguments on which the truth of that 


side of the question which we have espoused de- 
pends, as also an explanation and confutation of cer- 
tain subtleties, whereby the opponents had embar- 
rassed the minds of some inquirers after truth, be- 
came objects of general request. And, indeed, such 
were the circumstances of this controversy, that any 
one might easily perceive that a scholastic disserta- 
tion on the subject must take a very different turn, 
and could bear no farther resemblance, and owe no- 
thing more to the former exercise than the having 
furnished an opportunity, or occasion, for its appear- 
ance in public. 

Although then I was more than sufficiently full 
of employment already, yet, being excited by the en- 
couragement of good men, and fully persuaded in my 
own mind, that the truth which we embrace, is so 
far from being of trivial consequence in our religion, 
that it is intimately connected with many, the most 
important articles of the Christian doctrine concern- 
ing the attributes of God, the satisfaction of Christ, 
and the nature of sin, and of our obedience ; and that 
it strikes its roots deep through almost the whole of 
theology, or the acknowledging of the truth, which 
is according to godliness ; fully persuaded, I say, of 
these facts, I prevailed with myself, rather than this 
doctrine should remain any longer neglected or bu- 
ried, and hardly even known by name ; or be held 
captive by the reasonings of some enslaving the minds 
of mankind, ' through philosophy and vain conceits,' 
to exert my best abilities in its declaration and de- 
fence. Several things, however, which, with your 
good leave, reader, I shall now mention, almost de- 
terred me from the task when begun : the first and 
chief was the great difficulty of the subject itself, 
which among the more abstruse points of truth, is by 
no means the least abstruse. For, as every divine 


truth has a peculiar majesty and reverence belong - 
mg to it, which debars from the spiritual knowledge 
of it (as it is in Christ), the ignorant and unstable ; 
that is, those who are not taught of God, or become 
subject to the truth ; so those points which dwell in 
more intimate recesses, and approach nearer its im- 
mense fountain, the 'Father of light,' darting brighter 
rays, by their excess of light, present a confounding 
darkness to the minds of the greatest men, and are as 
darkness to the eyes breaking forth amidst so great 
light. For what we call darkness in divine subjects, 
is nothing else than their celestial glory and splendour 
striking on the weak ball of our eyes, the rays of 
which we are not able, in this life, which ' is but a va- 
pour, and which shineth but for a little,' to bear. 
Hence God himself, who is ' light, and in whom there 
is no darkness at all, who dwelleth in light inacces- 
sible ; and who clotheth himself with light as with 
a garment ;' in respect of us, is said, * to have made 
darkness his pavilion.' 

Not, as the Roman Catholics say, that there is 
any reason that we should blasphemously accuse the 
Holy Scriptures of obscurity; 'for the law of the 
Lord is perfect, converting the soul : the testimony 
of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple. The 
statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart; 
the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening 
the eyes.' Nor is there reason to complain that any 
one part of the truth hath been too sparingly or ob- 
scurely revealed : for even the smallest portion of 
the divine word is, by the grace of the Holy Spirit 
assisting to dispose and frame the subject, or our 
hearts, so as to view the bright object of divine truth 
in its proper and spiritual light, sufficient to commu- 
nicate the knowledge of truths of the last importance: 
for, it is owing to the nature of the doctrines them- 


selves, and their exceeding splendour, that there are 
some things hard to be conceived and interpreted, 
and which surpass our capacity and comprehension. 
Whether this article of divine truth, which we are 
now inquiring into, be not akin to those which we 
have now mentioned, let the learned'' judge and de- 
termine. I have, therefore, determined to place my 
chief dependance on his aid, ' who giveth to all libe- 
rally and upbraideth none.' For those unhappy gen- 
tlemen only lose their labour, and may not improperly 
be compared to the artists, who used more than com- 
mon exertions in building Noah's'' ark, and who, like 
bees, work for others, and not for themselves, in the 
search of truth, who, relying on their own abilities 
and industry, use every effort to ascertain and com- 
prehend divine truths, while at the same time, they 
continue regardless, whether 'he who commanded 
the light to shine out of darkness, hath hitherto shone 
into their hearts, to give them the light of the know- 
ledge of his glory, in the face of Jesus Christ:' for, 
after all, they can accomplish nothing more, by their 
utmost efforts, but to discover their technical or ar- 
tificial ignorance. 

Setting aside then the consideration of some 
phrases, and even of some arguments; yet, as to 
what relates to the principal point of the contro- 
versy, I hold myself bound in conscience and in ho- 
nour, not even to imagine that I have attained a pro- 
per knowledge of any one article of truth, much less 
to publish it, unless through the Holy Spirit I have 
had such a taste of it, in its spiritual sense, as that I 
may be able, from the heart, to say, with the psalm- 
s' Especially those, says the autllor,^^ho shall reflect what a close connexion there 
is between it, and the whole doctrine concerning the nature of God, the satisfaction 
of Christ, the desert of sin, and every one of the dark and more abstruse heads of 
our religion. 

^ Thereby hastening their own destruction. 


ist, * I have believed, and therefore have I spoken.' 
He, who in the investigation of truth, makes it his 
chief care to have his mind and will rendered subject 
to the faith, and obedient to the Father of lights, and 
who with attention waits upon him, whose throne is 
in the heavens; he alone attains to true wisdom, 
the others walk in a vain shew. It has then been 
my principal object, in tracing the depths and secret 
nature of the subject in question, while I a poor worm 
contemplated the majesty and glory of him, concern- 
ing whose perfections I was treating, to attend and 
obey with all humility and reverence, what the 
great God, the Lord hath spoken in his word : not 
at all doubting, but that whatever way he should in- 
cline my heart by the power of his Spirit and truth, I 
should be enabled, in a dependance on his aid, to 
bear the contradictions of a false knowledge, and all 
human and philosophical arguments. 

And to say the truth, as I have adopted the opi- 
nion which I defend in this dissertation, from no re- 
gard to the arguments of either one or another 
learned man, and much less from any slavish attach- 
ment to authority, example, or traditionary preju- 
dices, and from no confidence in the opinion, or abi- 
lities of others ; but, as I hope, from a most humble 
contemplation of the holiness, purity, justice, right, 
dominion, wisdom, and mercy of God ; so by the 
guidance of his Spirit alone, and power of his heart- 
changing grace, filling my mind with all the fulness 
of truth, and striking me with a deep awe and admi- 
ration of it, I have been enabled to surmount the dif- 
ficulty of the research. Theology is the ' wisdom 
that is from above,' a habit of grace and spiritual gifts, 
the manifestation of the Spirit reporting what is con- 
ducive to happiness. It is not a science to be learned 
from the precepts of man, or from the rules of arts. 


or method of other sciences, as those represent it, 
who also maintain that a natural man may attain all 
that artificial and methodical theology, even though 
in the matters of God, and mysteries of the gospel, 
he be blinder than a mole. What a distinguished 
theologian must he be, ' whoreceiveth not the things 
of the Spirit of God !' 

But again, having sailed through this sea of trou- 
bles, and being ready to launch out upon the subject, 
that gigantic spectre, ' It is every where spoken 
against,' should have occasioned me no delay, had 
it not come forth inscribed with the mighty names 
of Augustine, Calvin, Musculus, Twiss, and Vossius. 
And although I could not but entertain for these 
divines that honour and respect which is due to such 
great names, yet, partly by considering myself as 
entitled to 'that freedom wherewith Christ hath 
made us free,' and partly by opposing to these, the 
names of other very learned theologians, viz. Parens, 
Piscator, Molineus, Lubertus, Rivetus, Cameron, 
Maccovius, Junius, and others, who, after the spread- 
ing of the poison of Socinianism, have with great ac- 
curacy and caution investigated and cleared up this 
truth, I easily got rid of any uneasiness from that 

Having thus surmounted these difficulties, and 
begun the undertaking by devoting to it a few leisure 
hours stolen from other engagements, the work pros- 
pered boyond all expectation ; and by the favour of 
the 'Father of lights, who worketh in us both to will 
and to do of his good pleasure,' in a few days it was 
brought to a conclusion. 

And now that the labour of composing was ended, I 
again entertained doubts, and continued for some time 
in suspense, whether, considering the manners of the 
times in which we live, it would not be more prudent 



to throw the papers, with some other kindred com- 
positions, on other subjects of divinity, into some 
secret coffers, there to be buried in eternal oblivion, 
than bring them forth to public discussion. 

For even all know, with what vain arrogance, 
malice, party-spirit, and eager lust of attacking the 
labours of others, the minds of many are corrupted 
and infected. Not only then was it necessary, that 
I should anticipate and digest in my mind the con- 
tempt and scoffings, which these bantering, saucy, 
dull-witted, self-sufficient despisers of others, or 
any of such a contemptible race, whose greatest 
pleasure it is to disparage all kinds of exertions, how- 
ever praiseworthy, might pour out against me ; but 
I likewise foresaw, that I should have to contend 
with the soured tempers and prejudiced opinions of 
others, who being carried away by party-zeal, and 
roused by the unexpected state and condition of 
public ^ affairs, and who thinking themselves to be 
the men, and that wisdom was born and will die 
with them, look down with contempt upon all who 
differ from them ; and not with these only, but I 
likewise knew, that I had a more severe scrutiny to 
undergo from some learned men, to whom, it was 
easy to conjecture this work, for many reasons would 
not be acceptable. For there are some by whom 
all labour employed in the search of any more ob- 
scure or difficult truth, is accounted as misemployed : 
nor do these want the ingenuity of assigning honour- 
able pretences for their indolence. I should how- 
ever be ashamed to enter into any serious argument 
with such, nor is it worth while to enter upon a re- 
view of their long declamations. And although 
these and many other things of such a kind, may ap- 
pear grievous and hard to be borne to your dainty 

'• This treatise was written in the time of the CoHJinomvealth. 


gentlemen, who eagerly court splendour and fame ; 
yet, ingenuously to say the truth, I am very fully 
persuaded, that no man can either think or speak of 
me and my works, with so much disregard and con- 
tempt, as I myself, from my soul both think and 
speak ; and having in no respect any other expecta- 
tion than that of contempt to myself and name, pro- 
vided divine truth be promoted, all these considera- 
tions had long ago become not only of small conse- 
quence to me, but appeared as the merest trifles. 
For why should we be anxious about what shall be- 
come either of ourselves or our names : if only we 
* commend our souls to God as to a faithful Creator in 
well-doing,' and by continuing in well-doing, * stop 
the mouth of ignorant bablers.' God careth for us : 
' Let us cast our burdens upon him, and he will sus- 
tain us.' Let but the truth triumph, vanquish, rout, 
and put to flight its enemies. ' Let the word of the 
cross have free course and be glorified.' Let wretch- 
ed sinners learn daily more and more ' of fellowship 
with Christ in his sufferings ;' of the necessity of sa- 
tisfaction for sins, by the blood of the Son of God, 
so ' that he who is white and ruddy, and the chiefest 
among ten thousand, may appear so to them, yea, 
altogether lovely ;' till being admitted into the cham- 
bers of the Church's husband, ' they drink love that 
is better than wine, and become a willing people in 
the day of his power, and in the beauty of holiness ;' 
and I shall very little regard, ' being judged of man's 

Since then, I not only have believed what I have 
spoken, but as both my own heart, and God who is 
greater than my heart, are witnesses, that I have en- 
gaged in this labour for the truth, under the influence 
of the most sacred regard and reverence, for the ma- 
jesty, purity, holiness, justice, grace, and mercy of 


God, from a detestation of that abominable thing 
which his soul hateth ; and with a heart inflamed 
with zeal for the honour and glory of our dearest Sa- 
viour Jesus Christ, who is fairer than the sons of 
men and altogether lovely, whom with my soul and 
all that is within me I worship, love, and adore, whose 
glorious coming I wish and long for ( 'come Lord 
Jesus, come quickly'), for ' whose sake I count all 
things but as loss and dung;' since, I say, I have en- 
gaged in this labour from these motives alone, I am 
under no anxiety or doubt, but it will meet with a 
favourable reception from impartial judges, from 
those acquainted with the terrors of the Lord, the 
curse of the law, the virtue of the cross, the power 
of the gospel, and the riches of the glory of divine 

There are, no doubt, many other portions and 
subjects of our religion, of that blessed trust com- 
mitted to us for our instruction, on which we might 
dwell with greater pleasure and satisfaction of mind. 
Such I mean as afford a more free and wider scope 
of ranging, through the most pleasant meads of the 
Holy Scripture, and contemplating in these the trans- 
parent fountains of life, and rivers of consolation : 
subjects which unencumbered by the thickets of 
scholastic terms and distinctions, unembarassed by 
the impediments and sophisms of an enslaving phi- 
losophy or false knowledge, sweetly and pleasantly 
lead into a pure, unmixed, and delightful fellowship 
with the Father and with his Son, shedding abroad 
in the heart, the inmost loves of our beloved, with 
the odour of his sweet ointment poured forth. 
- This truth likewise has its uses, and such as are 
of the greatest importance to those who are walking 
in the way of holiness and evangelical obedience. A 
brief specimen and abstract of them is added, for the 


benefit of the pious reader, in the end of the disser- 
tation, in order to excite his love towards our beloved 
High Priest and Chief Shepherd, and true fear to- 
wards God, ' who is a consuming fire,' and whom we 
cannot serve acceptably, unless with ' reverence and 
godly fear.' 

There can be no doubt, but that many points of 
doctrine still remain, on which the labours of the 
godly and learned may be usefully employed. For, 
although many reverend and learned divines, both 
of the present and former age, have composed from 
the Sacred Writings a synopsis, or methodical body 
of doctrine, or heavenly truth, and published their 
compositions under various titles ; and, although 
other theological writings, catechistical, dogmatical, 
exegetical, casuistical, and polemical, have increased 
to such a mass, that the * world can hardly contain 
the works that have been written ;' yet, such is the 
nature of divine truth, so deep and inexhaustible the 
fountain of the Sacred Scriptures, whence we draw 
it, so innumerable the salutary remedies and anti- 
dotes proposed in these to dispel all the poisons and 
temptations wherewith the adversary can ever at- 
tack either the minds of the pious, or the peace of 
the church, and the true doctrine, that serious and 
thinking men can entertain no doubt, but that we 
perform a service praiseworthy and profitable to 
the church of Christ, when, under the direction of 
* the Spirit of wisdom and revelation,' we bring for- 
ward, explain, and defend the most important and 
necessary articles of evangelical truth. 

But, to be more particular : how sparingly, for 
instance, yea, how obscurely, how confusedly, is the 
whole economy of the Spirit towards believers (one 
of the greatest mysteries of our religion; a most in- 
valuable portion of the salvation brought about for 


US by Christ), described by divines in general ? Or 
rather, by the most, is it not altogether neglected ? 
In their catechisms, common-place books, public and 
private theses, systems, compends, &c. and even, in 
their commentaries, harmonies, and expositions, con- 
cerning the indwelling, sealing testimony, unction, 
and consolation of the Spirit. Good God ! con- 
cerning this inestimable fruit of the death and resur- 
rection of Jesus Christ ! This invaluable treasure of 
the godly, though copiously revealed and explained 
in the Scriptures, there is almost a total silence. 
And, with regard to union and communion with 
Christ, and with his Father, and our Father, and 
some other doctrines respecting his person, as the 
husband and head of the church, the same obser- 
vation holds good. 

For almost, from the very period in which they 
were capable of judging even of the first princi- 
ples of religion, the orthodox have applied them- 
selves to clear up and explain those articles of the 
truth, which Satan, by his various artifices, hath 
endeavoured to darken, pervert, or undermine. But 
as there is no part of divine truth, which, since the 
eternal and sworn enmity took place between him 
and the seed of the woman, he hath not opposed 
with all his might, fury, and cunning ; so he hath 
not thought proper, wholly to entrust the success of 
his interest to instruments delegated from among 
mankind, though many of them seem to have disco- 
vered such a wonderful promptitude, alacrity, and 
zeal, in transacting his business, that one would 
think they had been formed and fashioned for the 
purpose ; but he hath reserved for that power which 
he hath over darkness and all kind of wickedness, a 
certain portion of his work to be administered in a 
peculiar manner by himself. And, as he has, in all 


ages, reaped an abundant crop of tares from that part 
of his Lordship which he hired out to be improved 
by man, though from the nature of human affairs, 
not without much noise, tumult, blood, and slaughter; 
so from that which he thought proper to manage 
himself, without any delegated assistance, he has 
received a more abundant and richer crop of infernal 

The exertions of Satan against the truth of the 
gospel may be distinguished into two divisions. In 
the first, as the god of this world, he endeavours 
to darken the minds of unbelievers, ' that the light 
of the glorious gospel of Christ may not shine into 
them.' With what success he exercises this soul- 
destroying employment we cannot pretend to say ; 
but there is reason to lament that he hath succeeded, 
and still succeeds, beyond his utmost hope. In the 
other, he carries on an implacable war, an unremit- 
ting strife, not as formerly with Michael about the 
body of Moses, but about the Spirit of Christ; about 
some of the more distinguished articles of the truth, 
and the application of each of them, in order to cul- 
tivate communion with God the Father and with his 
Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, against the hearts of the 
godly, and the new creature formed within them. 

In this situation of affairs, most Christian writers 
have made it their study to oppose that first effort of 
the devil, whereby, through means of his instruments, 
he openly endeavours to suppress the light, both na- 
tural and revealed ; but they have not been equally 
solicitous to succour the minds of believers, ' when 
wrestling, not against flesh and blood, but against 
principalities and powers, against the rulers of the 
darkness of this world, against spirits of wickedness 
in high places,' and almost ready to sink under the 
contest. Hence, I say, a very minute investigation 


hath been set on foot by many, of those articles of re- 
ligion which he has openly, through the instrumen- 
tality of the slaves of error and darkness, attacked, and 
the vindication of them made clear and plain. But 
those, which, both from their relation to practice, and 
a holy communion full of spiritual joy, to be cultivated 
with God, the old serpent hath reserved for his own 
attack in the hearts of believers, most writers, partly 
either because they were ignorant of his wiles, or partly 
because they saw not much evil publicly arising thence, 
and partly because the arguments of the adversary were 
not founded on any general principle, but only to be 
deduced from the private and particular state and case 
of individuals, have either passed over, or very slightly 
touched upon. 

As to what pertains to theology itself, or that * know- 
ledge of the truth which is according to godliness,' 
wherewith being filled, ' we ourselves become pure and 
perfected to every good work,' and fit ministers of the 
New Testament, ' not of the letter, but of the Spirit, 
apt to teach, rightly dividing the word of truth ;' that 
subject, I say, though a common and chief topic in the 
writings both of the schoolmen and others on religion, 
many have acknowledged to their fatal experience, 
when too late, is treated in too perplexed and intri- 
cate a manner to be of any real and general service. 

For while they are warmly employed in disputing, 
whether theology be an art or a science, and whether 
it be a speculative or practical art or science ? And 
while they attempt to measure it exactly by those rules, 
laws, and methods, which human reason has devised 
for other sciences, thus endeavouring to render it more 
plain and clear, they find themselves, to the grief and 
sorrow of many candidates for the truth, entangled 
in inextricable difficulties, and left in possession only 
of a human system of doctrines, having little or no 


connexion at all with true theology. I hope, therefore, 

* if I live and the Lord will,' to publish, but from no 
desire of gainsaying any one, some specimens of evan- 
gelical truth on the points before-mentioned, as well as 
on other subjects." 

As to the work that I have now in hand, the first 
part of the dissertation is, concerning the cause of the 
death of Christ ; and in the execution of which I have 
the greatest pleasure and satisfaction (though proudly 
defied by the adversaries, so conceited with themselves 
and their productions are they), because ' I have de- 
termined to know nothing but Jesus Christ and him 
crucified :' at least, nothing that could divert my at- 
tention from that subject. 

But now, learned reader, lest, as the saying is, 

* the gate should become wider than the city,' if you 
will bear with me, while I say a few things of myself, 
however little worthy of your notice, I shall immedi- 
ately conclude the preface. 

About two years ago, the parliament of the com- 
monwealth promoted me, while diligently employed, 
according to the measure of the gift of grace bestowed 
on me, in preaching the gospel, by their authority and 
influence, though with reluctance on my part, to a chair 
in the very celebrated university of Oxford. I mean 
not to relate what various employments fell to my lot 
from that period : what frequent journeys I became en- 
gaged in ; not, indeed, expeditions of pleasure, or on 
my own or private account ; but such as the unavoid- 
able necessities of the university, and the commands 
of superiors, whose authority was not to be gainsaid, 
imposed upon me. And now I clearly found, that I, 
who dreaded almost every academical employment, 
as being unequal to the task,*^ and at a time too when I 

^ See Owen on the Spirit. 
' ' For what/ sa^s our author, in a long parenthesis, ' could be expected from a 


had entertained hope, that through the goodness of 
God, in giving me leisure and retirement, and strength 
for study, that the deficiency of genius and penetration, 
might be made up by industry and diligence, was now 
so circumstanced that the career of my studies must be 
interrupted by more and greater impediments than ever 

For, to mention first, what certainly is most weighty 
and important, the task of lecturing in public was put 
upon me, which would strictly and properly require 
the whole time and attention even of the most grave 
and experienced divine ; and in the discharge of which, 
unless I had been greatly assisted and encouraged by 
the candour, piety, submission, and self-denial of the 
auditors ; and by their respect for the divine institution, 
and their love of the truth, with every kind of indul- 
gence and kind attention towards the earthen vessel, 
which distinguish most academicians of every rank, 
age, and description, beyond mankind in general; I 
had long lost all hope of discharging that province, 
either to the public advantage, or my own private sa- 
tisfaction and comfort. 

And as most of them are endowed with a pious 
disposition and Christian temper, and well furnished 
with superior gifts, and instructed in learning of every 
kind, which in the present imperfect and depraved 
state of human nature is apt to fill the minds of men 
with prejudices against ' the foolishness of preaching,' 
and to disapprove ' the simplicity that is in Christ,' I 
should be the most ungrateful of mankind, were I not 
to acknowledge that the humility, diligence, and ala- 
crity with which they attended to, and obeyed the words 

man not far advanced in years, who had for several years been very full of employ- 
ment, and accustomed only to the popular mode of speaking, who being altogether 
devoted to the investigation and explanation of the saving grace of God through 
Jesus Christ, had taken leave of all scholastic studies, whose genius is by no means 
quick, and who had even forgot, in some measure, the portion of polite learning that 
he might have formerly acquired.' 


of the cross, indulging neitlier pride of heart, nor ani- 
mosity of mind, or itching of ears, though dispensed by 
a most unworthy servant of God in the gospel of his 
Son, have given, and still give me great courage in the 
discharge of the diiferent duties of my office. 

However, then, the most merciful Father of all 
things shall, in his infinite wisdom and goodness dis- 
pose of the affairs of our university ; I could not but 
give such a public^ testimony, as a regard to truth and 
duty required from me, to these very respectable and 
learned men (however much these treacherous calum- 
niators and falsifying sycophants may rail, and shew 
their teeth upon the occasion), the heads of the colleges, 
who have merited so highly of the church, for their 
distinguished candour, great diligence, uncommon eru- 
dition, blameless politeness ; many of whom are zea- 
lously studious of every kind of literature, and many 
who by their conduct in the early period of their youth 
give the most promising hopes of future merit : so that 
I would venture to affirm, that no impartial and unpre- 
judiced judge will believe that our university hath 

S Here our author introduces the following observation in a very long parenthesis : 
' As reports are every where spread abroad, concerning the abolition and destruction 
of the colleges, and efforts for that purpose made by some who being entire 
strangers to every kind of literature, or at least ignorant of every thing of greater 
antiquity than what their own memory, or that of their fathers can reach, and re- 
gardless of the future, imagine the whole globe and bounds of human knowledge to 
be contained within the limits of their own little cabins, ignorant whether the sun 
ever shone beyond their own little island or not, neither knowing what they say, nor 
of whom they make their assertions; and by others who are deeply sunk in the 
basest of crimes, and who would therefore wish all light distinguishing between good 
and evil entirely extinguished. ' For evil doers hate the light, nor do they come to 
the light, lest their deeds should appear;' that they (mean lurchers hitherto) may 
fill up the measure of their iniquity with some kind of eclat ; to which also may be 
added those, who never having become candidates for literature themselves, yet, by 
pushing themselves forward, have unseasonably thrust themselves into such services 
and offices, as necessarily require knowledge and learning ; these, I say, like the fox 
who had lost his tail, would wish all the world deprived of the means of knowledge, 
lest their own shameful ignorance, despicable indolence, and total unfitness for the 
offices which they solicit or hold, should appear to all who have the least degree of 
understanding and sense ; and lastly too, by a despicable herd of prodigal idle 
fellows, eagerly gaping for the revenues of the university.' For these reasons, our 
author says, he could not but give the above character of the heads and other mem- 
bers of that venerable body : a character which both the truth of the case, and the 
duty of his office required. 


either been, for ages past, surpassed, or is now sur- 
passed, either in point of a proper respect and esteem 
for piety, for the saving knowledg*e of our Lord and 
Saviour Jesus Christ ; manners, orderly, and w^orthy of 
the Christian vocation; and for a due regard to doc- 
trines, arts, languages, and all sciences that can be or- 
namental to vv^ise, w^orthy, and good men, appointed 
for the public good, by any society of men in the 

Relying then on the humanity, piety, and candour 
of such men (' w^ho may be afflicted, but not straitened; 
persecuted, but not forsaken ; cast down, but shall not 
be lost;' who carry about with them the life and death 
of the Lord Jesus Christ), though destitute of all 
strength of my own, and devoting myself entirely to 
him, ' who furnisheth seed to the sower ; and who from 
the mouths of babes and sucklings ordaineth strength ;' 
who hath appointed Christ a perpetual source of help, 
and who furnishes a seasonable aid to every pious effort, 
I have, in conjunction with my very learned colleague," 
a very eminent man, and whose equal in the work of 
the gospel, if the parliament of the commonwealth had 
conjoined with him, they would have attended to the 
best interests of the university, continued in the dis- 
charge of the duties of this laborious and difficult pro- 

But not on this account alone, would I have been 
reluctant to return, after so long an interval of time, to 
this darling university. But another care, another 
office, and that by far the most weighty, was, by the 
concurring voice of the senate of the university ; and 
notwithstanding my most earnest requests to the con- 
trary, entrusted and assigned to me, and by the under- 
taking of which, I have knowingly and wittingly corn- 
's Mr. T. Goodwin. President of Magdalen College. 


pounded with the loss of my peace, and all my studious 

Such, candid reader, is the account of the author 
of the following little treatise, and of his situation 
when composing it : a man not wise in the estimation 
of others, in his own very foolish ; first called from 
rural retirement and the noise of arms to this univer- 
sity, and very lately again returned to it from excur- 
sions in the cause of the gospel, not only to the extre- 
mities of this island, but to coasts beyond the seas, and 
now again deeply engaged in the various and weighty 
duties of his station ; whether any thing exalted or re- 
fined can be expected from such a person, is easy for 
any one to determine. 

With regard to our manner of writing, or Latin 
diction, as some are wont to acquire great praise from 
their sublimity of expression, allow me but a word or 
two. Know then reader, that you have to do with a 
person, who provided his words, but clearly express 
the sentiments of his mind, entertains a fixed and abso- 
lute disregard for all elegance and ornaments of speech. 

Dicite Pontifices, in sacris quid facit aurum? 

Say Bishops, of what avail is glitter to sacred subjects ? 

In my opinion indeed, he, who in a theological 
contest should please himself with the idea of display- 
ing rhetorical flourishes, would derive no other advan- 
tage therefrom, but that his head, adorned with mag- 
nificent verbose garlands and pellets, would fall a richer 
victim to the criticisms of the learned. 

But whatever shall be the decision of the serious 
and judicious, with respect to this treatise, if I shall 
any how stir up an emulation in others, on whom the 

•> In the year 1651, Dr. Owen was settled in the deanery of Christ's College ; and 
in 1652 chosen vice-chancellor of that university. 


grace of God may have bestowed more excellent gifts, 
to bring forward to public utility their pure, solid, 
and learned labours, and shall excite them from their 
light, to confer light on the splendour of this univer- 
sity, I shall be abundantly gratified. Farewell, pious 
reader, and think not lightly of him, who hath used his 
most zealous endeavours to serve thy interest in the 
cause of the gospel. 







The introduction. The design of the work. Atheists. The prolepsis^ of 
divine justice general. The divisions of justice, according to Aristotle. 
The sentiments of the schoohnen respecting these. Another division. 
Justice considered absolutely. Then iti various respects. 

In this treatise, we are to discourse of God and of his jus- 
tice, the most illustrious of all the divine perfections; but 
especially of his'' vindicatory justice; of the certainty of 
which, I most firmly believe that all mankind will, one 
time or other, be made fully sensible, either by faith in it 
here, as revealed in the word ; or by feeling its effects, to 
their extreme misery, in the world hereafter. But as 
the human mind is blind to divine light, and as both our 
understandings and tongues are inadequate to conceive of 
God aright, and to declare him (hence, that common and 
just observation, that it is an arduous thing to speak of 
God aright), that we may handle so important a subject with 
that reverence and perspicuity wherewith it becomes it to be 
treated, we must chiefly depend on his aid, 'who was made 
the "^righteousness of God for us, God himself blessed for 
ever.' But whatever I have written, and whatever I have 
asserted, on this subject, whether I have written and assert- 
ed it with modesty, sobriety, judgment, and humility, must 
be left to the decision of such as are competent judges. 

• This word commonly means a previous and concise view of a subject, or, an an- 
ticipation of objections. In this treatise it means, a natural or innate conception of 
divine justice. 

b The word in the original means either to claim and assert a right, or to punish 
the violation of it: by vindicatory justice then, we are to understand that perfection 
of the Deity, which disposes him to vindicate his right by punishing its violators. It 
ought never to be translated vindictive,* or understood as meaning revengeful. 

<= Or justice. 

* But Dr. Owen thus designates this work ; ' My book of the Vindictive Justice 
of God ;' Works, vol. ix. p. 188. For the sense in which he uses the term 'vindic- 
tive,' see vol. vi. pp. 392, 393. vol. ix. 46, 47. vol. x. pp. 102, 103. Editor. 


We think proper to divide this dissertation into two 
parts. In the first part, which contains the body of our 
opinion, after having premised some general descriptions of 
divine justice, I maintain sin-punishing justice to be na- 
tural, and in its exercise necessary to God. The truth of 
this assertion forms a very distinguished part of natural 
theology. The defence of it, to the best of my abilities, 
both against Socinians, who bitterly oppose it, as well as 
against certain of our own countrymen, who, in defiance of 
all truth, under a specious pretext, support the same perni- 
cious scheme with them, shall be the subject of the latter part. 

In almost all ages, there have existed some, who have 
denied the being of a God, although but very few, and these 
the most abandoned. And as mankind, for the most part, 
have submitted to the evidence of a divine existence ; so 
there never has existed one, who has ever preferred an in- 
dictment of injustice against God, or who hath not de- 
clared him to be infinitely just. The despairing complaints 
of some in deep calamities; the unhallowed expostulations 
of others at the point of death, do not bespeak the real sen- 
timents of the man, but the misery of his situation. As for 
instance, that expostulation of Job x. 3. ' Is it good unto 
thee that thou shouldst oppress?' And among the Gentiles, 
that of Brutus, * O wretched virtue! how mere a nothing art 
thou, but a name.' And that furious exclamation of Titus, 
when dying, related by Suetonius, * who, pulling aside his 
curtains, and looking up to the heavens, complained, that 
his life was taken from him, undeservedly, and unjustly.' Of 
the same kind was that late dreadful epiphonema'' of a de- 
spairing Italian, related by Mersennus, who, speaking of 
God and the devil, in dread contempt of divine justice, ex- 
claimed, * Let the strongest take me.' 

But as * the judgments of God are unsearchable, and his 
ways past finding out,' those who have refused to submit to 
his absolute dominion and supreme jurisdiction (some mon- 
strous human characters), have been hardy enough to assert 
that there is no God, rather than venture to call him unjust. 
Hence that common couplet. 

Marraoreo tumulo Licinus jacet, at Cato parvo, 
Porapeius nullo, credimus esse deos ? 

'' A sudden uneonneeted exclamation. 


Licinus lies buried in a marble tomb ; Cato in a mean one; 
Pompey has none : can we believe that there are gods ? 

And hence Ulysses is introduced by Euripides, express- 
ing his horror of the gormandizing of the man-devouring 
Cyclops, in these verses :^ 

O, Jupiter, behold such violations of hospitality, for if thou regardest them not. 
Thou art in vain accounted Jupiter : for thou canst be no god. 

Beyond any doubt, the audacity of these abandoned 
triflers, who would wish to seem to act the mad part with a 
show of reason, is more akin to the madness of atheism, 
than to the folly of ascribing to the god whom they worship 
and acknowledge such attributes as would not only be un- 
worthy, but disgraceful to him. Protagoras, therefore, not 
comprehending the jv^tice of God, in respect of his govern- 
ment, hath written, ' With regard to the gods, I do not know 
whether they exist, or do not exist.' Yet, even among the 
Gentiles themselves, and those who were destitute of the 
true knowledge of the true God (for they, in some sense, 
were without God in the world), writers have not been want- 
ing,^ who have endeavoured, by serious and forcible argu- 
ments, to unravel the difficulty respecting the contrary lots 
of good and bad men in this life. Our first idea, therefore, 
of the Divine Being, and the natural conceptions of all men, 
demand and enforce the necessity of justice being ascribed 
to God. To be eloquent then in so easy a cause, or to 
triumph with arguments on a matter so universally acknow- 
ledged, we have neither leisure nor inclination. What, and 
of what kind the peculiar quality and nature of sin-punish- 
ing justice is, shall now be briefly explained. And that we 
may do this with the greater perspicuity and force of evi- 
dence, a few observations seem necessary to be premised 
concerning justice in general, and its more commonly re- 
ceived divisions. 

The philosopher, Aristotle, long ago, as is well known, 
hath divided justice into universal and particular. Concern- 
ing the former, he says, that he might compare it to the ce- 
lebrated saying, ' Injustice every virtue is summarily com- 
prehended.' And he affirms, that it in nowise differs from 

* Eurip. in Cyclop, ver. 350. 
f Tlie most distinguished were Seneca and Plutarch. 

VOL. IX. 2 A 


virtue in general, unless in respect of its relation to another 

But, he says, that particular justice is a synonimous part 
thereof, which he again distinguishes into distributive and 
commutative.s The schoolmen too agreeing with him, 
which is rather surprising, divide the divine justice into uni- 
versal and particular. For that excellence, say they, is 
spoken of God and man by way of analogy :^ nor is it like 
that bird mentioned by Homer, which goes by a double 
name ; by one among mortals, by another among the im- 
mortals ; 

The gods call it Chalcis, but men, Cuniindis. — Hom. 

But is understood as existing in God principally, as in 
the first analogized' being. Nor do later divines dissent 
from them : nay, all of them, who have made the divine 
attributes the subject of their contemplations, have, by their 
unanimous' voice, approved of this distinction, and given 
their suffrages in its favour. 

But farther they assert, that particular justice, in respect 
of its exercise, consists either in what is said, or in what is 
done. That which is displayed in things said, in commands, 
is equity ; in declarations, truth ; both which the Holy 
Scriptures'" do sometimes point out under the title of Divine 
Justice. But the justice which respects things done, is 
either that of government, or jurisdiction, or judgment: and 
this again they affirm to be either remunerative, or corrective; 
but that corrective is either castigatory, or vindicatory. 
With the last member of this last distinction, I begin this 
work: and yet, indeed, although the most learned of our 
divines, in later ages, have assented to this distribution of 
divine justice into these various significations, it seems pro- 
per to me to proceed in a manner somewhat different, and 
more suited to our purpose. 

I say then, that the justice of God may be considered in 
a twofold manner. 

s That which relates to fair exchange. 

*• Analogy means a resemblance between things with regard to some qualities or 
circumstances, properties or effects, though not in all. 

' That is, the first being whose perfections have been explained by analogy : or, 
by tracing a resemblance between these perfections and something like them in our- 
selves, in kind or sort, tliough differing infinitely with respect to manner and degree. 

^ Rom. i. 14. iii. 21. Ezra ix. 15. Neh. ix. 8, &c. &c. 


First, Absolutely, and in itself. 

Secondly, In respect of its egress and exercise. 

First. The justice of God, absolutely considered, is the 
universal rectitude and perfection of the divine nature : for 
such is the divine nature antecedent to all acts of his will, 
and suppositions of objects tow^ards which it might operate. 
This excellence is most universal : nor from its own nature, 
as an excellence, can it belong' to any other being. 

Secondly. It is to be viewed with respect to its egress 
and exercise. And thus, in the order of nature, it is consi- 
dered as consequent, or at least as concomitant to some 
acts of the divine will, assigning or appointing to it a proper 
object. Hence that rectitude, which in itself is an absolute 
property of the divine nature, is considered as a relative and 
hypothetical'" attribute, and has a certain habitude to its 
proper objects. 

That is to say, this rectitude, or universal justice, has 
certain egresses towards objects out of itself, in consequence 
of the divine will, and in a manner agreeable to the rule of 
his supreme right and wisdom, namely, when some object of 
justice is supposed and appointed (which object must ne- 
cessarily depend on the mere good pleasure of God, because 
it was possible it might never have existed at all; God not- 
withstanding continuing just and righteous to all eternity); 
and these egresses are twofold. 

1. They are absolute and perfectly free, viz. in words. 

2. They are necessary, viz. in actions. 

For the justice of God is neither altogether one of that 
kind of perfections, which create and constitute an object 
to themselves, as power and wisdom do : nor of that kind 
which not only require an object for their exercise, but one 
peculiarly affected and circumstanced, as mercy, patience 
and forbearance do ; but may be considered in both points 
of view, as shall be more fully demonstrated hereafter. 

1. For, first, it has absolute egresses in words (consti- 
tuting, and as it were creating an object to itself); as for 
instance, in words of legislation, and is then called equity ; 
or in words of declaration and narration, and is then called 
truth. Both these," I suppose for the present, to take place 

■■ Or, have a respect to any other being. ™ Conditional. 

" Viz. The egresses in worcis of legislation ; and in words of declaration and nar- 

2 A 2 


absolutely and freely. Whether God hath necessarily pre- 
scribed a law to his rational creatures, at least one accom- 
panied with threats and promises, is another consideration. 

2. There are respective egresses of this justice in deeds, 
and according to the distinctions above-mentioned ; that is 
to say, it is exercised either in the government of all 
things, according to what is due to them by the counsel and 
will of God ; or, in judgments rewarding, or punishing, 
according to the rule of his right and wisdom, which also 
is the rule of equity in legislation, and of truth in the de- 
clarations annexed. In respect of these, ° I call the egresses 
of the divine justice necessary, and such that they could not 
possibly be otherwise, which, by divine help, I shall prove 
hereafter. And this is the same as saying, that vindicatory 
justice is so natural to God, that sin being supposed, he 
cannot, according to the rule of his right, wisdom, and truth, 
but punish it. But antecedent to this whole exercise of the 
divine justice, I suppose a natural right, which indispensably 
requires the dependance and moral subjection of the rational 
creature, in God, all the egresses of whose justice, in words, 
contain an arrest of judgment till farther trial, in respect of 
the object.. 

It now then appears, that all these distinctions of divine 
justice, respect it not as considered in itself, but its egresses 
and exercise only ; to make which cleai', was the reason that 
I departed from the beaten track. Nay, perhaps, it would 
be a difficult matter to assign any virtue to God, but in the 
general, and not as haying any specific ratio p of any virtue; 
but that which answers to the ratio of any particular virtue 
in God, consists in the exercise of the same. For instance, 
mercy is properly attributed to God, so far as it denotes the 
highest perfection in the will of God ; the particular ratio 
or quality of which, viz. a disposition of assisting the mi- 
serable, with a compassion of their misery, is found not 
altogether as to some, as to others, altogether and only in 
the exercise of the above-mentioned perfection ;'' but it is 

" Viz. the egresses in the government of things according to wliat is due to 
Iheni, by the connsul of his will ; or, in jiulgiuents rewarding or punishing, accord- 
ing to the rule of his right and wisdom. 

P That is, any distinguishing sort or quality. 

1 In the general sparing mercy of God, the particular quality of mercy, viz. 
a disposition of assi^iting the miserable with a compassion of their misery, is not 


called a proper attribute of God, because, by means of it, 
some operation is performed agreeable to the nature of God, 
which, in respect of his other attributes, his will would not 
produce. This kind, therefore, of the divine attributes, 
because they have proper and formal objects, thence only 
derive their formal and specific ratios. But all these ob- 
servations upon justice must be briefly examined and ex- 
plained, that we may arrive at the point intended. 


The universal justice of God. The idle fancies of the schoolmen. The ar- 
guments of Durandus against commutative justice. Suarez's censure of 
the scholastic reasonings. His opinion of divine justice. The examina- 
tion of it. A description of uiiiversal justice from the sacred writings. 
A division of it in respect of its egress. Rectitude of government in God. 
What, and of what hind. Definitions of the philosophers and lawyers. 
Divisions of the justice of government. A caution respecting these- 
Vindicatory justice. The opiiiions of the partisans. An explication of 
the true opinion. Who the adversaries are. The state of the controversy 
farther considered. 

We are first then briefly to treat of the universal justice of 
God; or of his justice considered in itself, and absolutely, 
which contains in it all the divine excellencies. The 
schoolmen, treading in the steps of the philosophers, who 
have acknowledged no kind of justice which has not natu- 
rally some respect to another object, are for the most part 
silent concerning this justice. And once, by the way to 
take notice of these, on this as almost on every other sub- 
ject, they are strangely divided. Duns Scotus, Durandus, 
and Poludamus, deny that there is commutative justice in 

For the master of the sentences himself calls God an im- 
partial and just distributor, but says not a word of commu- 
tation. Thomas Aquinas,** and Cajetan, do the same ; though 
the latter says, 'that some degree of commutative justice is 

wholly found, because there are many of mankind towards whom this disposition 
of assisting is never effectually exerted ; but in the pardoning mercy of God to his 
people, it is fully and gloriously displayed. 

a Palud. on the Sent, book 4. distinct. 46. 

*> Thomas, first page of quest. 21. and Cajetan, 2. 2. qu. 61. A. 4. 


discernible.' So also Ferorariensis, on the same place : and 
Scotus, in the third book of his treatise, ' of Nature and 
Grace/ chap. vii. Durandus, in particular, contends, with 
many arguments, that this kind of justice ought not to be 
assigned to God. First, because that this justice observes 
an equality between the thing given and received, which 
cannot be the case between us and God. And, secondly, 
because that we cannot be of any service to him (which he 
proves from Rom. xi. 35, Job xxii. 3. and xxxv. 7. Luke xvii. 
10.), whereby he can be bound to make an equahty with us 
by virtue of commutation. And, thirdly, because that we 
cannot make an equal return to God for benefits received. 
And, finally, that as there is no proper commutative justice 
between a father and his children, according to Aristotle's'^ 
opinion, much less can it subsist between God and us. 

But the same Durandus likewise denies to God distribu- 
tive justice,*^ because he is not indebted to any one : he, how- 
ever, acknowledges some mode of distributive justice ; and 
Pesantius* follows his opinion. 

But Gabriel, on the same' distinction, asserts, commuta- 
tive justice to be inherent in God ; for there is a certain 
equality, as he says, between God and man, from the ac- 
ceptation of God the receiver. Proudly enough said indeed ! 
But what shall we say of these triflers ? They resemble those 
advocates in Terence, whose opinion, after Demipho, era- 
barassed by the cheats of Phormio the sycophant, had asked, 
he exclaims, * Well done, gentlemen, I am now in a greater 
uncertainty than before.' So intricate were their answers, 
and resembling the practices of the Andabatse.^ 

Hence Suarez himself, after he had reviewed the opinions 
of the schoolmen concerning the justice of God, bids adieu 
to them all, declaring, 'That the expressions of Scripture had 
greater weight with him than their philosophic human ar- 
guments.' But with much labour and prolixity, he insists 
that both distributive and commutative justice are to be as- 
cribed to God, that so he might pave the way for that rotten 
fiction concerning the merits of Roman Catholics with God j 
a doctrine which, were even all his suppositions granted, 

c Eth. b. 8. c. 8. <^ On dist. 46. 

* In. 2. 2. Thomas. ' A work to which he alludes. 

s A kind of fencers who fought on horseback hood- winked. 


appears not to follow, much less to be confirmed.'' This 
opinion of Suarez, concerning vindicatory justice, as it is 
deservedly famous in scholastic theology, we think proper 
to lay before you in few words. 

In his discourses concerning the justice of God,' he con- 
tends that the afFection*" of punishing, which he calls * a per- 
fection elicitive' of the act of punishing,' is properly and 
formally inherent in God ; and it is so, because it hath a 
proper object, viz. to punish the guilt of sin which is ho- 
nourable ; nor does it include any imperfection, and there- 
fore that some formal and proper divine attribute ought to 
correspond to that effect. 

He farther maintains, that this affection of punishing is 
neither commutative nor distributive justice. His conclu- 
sions here I do not oppose, though I cannot approve of 
many of his reasonings and arguments. In fine, he contends, 
that vindicatory justice in ' God' is the same with universal, 
or legal, or providential justice, which we call the justice of 
government. But he makes a dishonourable and base con- 
clusion, from a distinction about the persons punished, viz. 
into such as are merely passive sufferers, and such as spon- 
taneously submit themselves to punishment, that they may 
satisfy the punitory justice of God : reasoning in such a 
manner, that after he has forced the whole doctrine con- 
cerning the commutative and distributive justice of God, to 
become subservient to that sacrilegious and proud error, 
concerning the merits of man with God, and even of one 
from the supererogation of another ; he strenuously endea- 
vours to establish a consistency between this doctrine of 
vindicatory jvistice, and a fiction, not less impious and dis- 
graceful to the blood of Christ, 'which cleanseth us from all 
sin,' about penal satisfactions to be performed by such ways 
and means as God hath never prescribed, or even thought 

Desinat in piscera tnulier formosa superne. — Hon. 

Dismissing these bunglers (who know not the righteous- 
ness of God), then, from our dissertation, let us attend to 
the more sure word of prophecy. That word every where 

h Suarez's Lectures of the Justice of God. 'Sect. .5. "^ Or quality. 

' That is, inducing to, or drawing forth the act of punishing. 


asserts God to be just, and possessed of such justice as de- 
notes the universal rectitude, and perfection of his divine 
nature. His essence is most wise, "most perfect, most ex- 
cellent, most merciful, most blessed : that, in fine, is the 
justice of God, according to the Scriptures, viz. considei'ed 
absolutely, and in itself: nor would the Holy Scriptures 
have us to understand any thing else by divine justice, than 
the power and readiness of God to do all things rightly and 
becomingly, according to the rule of his wisdom, goodness, 
truth, mercy, and clemency. Hence the above-mentioned 
sophists agree, that justice, taken precisely, and in itself, 
and abstracting it from all human imperfections, simply 
means perfection without intrinsic imperfection : for it is 
not a virtue that rules the passions, but directs their opera- 

Hence it presides, as it were, in all the divine decrees, 
actions, works and words, of whatsoever kind they be : there 
is no egress of the divine will; no work or exercise of pro- 
vidence, though immediately and distinctly breathing cle- 
mency, mercy, anger, truth, or wisdom, but in respect 
thereof, God is eminently said to be just, and to execute 
justice. Hence, Isa. li. 6. He is said to be 'just, and 
bringing salvation;' Rom. iii. 25, 26. Just in pardoning 
sin; Psal. cxliii. 11. Justin avenging and punishing sin; 
Rom. iii. 5, 6. Just in all the exercises of his supreme right 
and dominion ; Job xxxiv. 12 — 14. Rom. ix. 8. 14, 15. He 
is just, in sparing according to his mercy. Just in pu- 
nishing according to his anger and wrath. In a word, what- 
soever by reason of his right, he doeth orworketh according 
* to the counsel of his will,' whatever proceeds from his 
faithfulness, mercy, grace, love, clemency, anger, and even 
from his fury, is said to be done by, through, and because of 
his justice, as the perfection inducing to, or, the cause ef- 
fecting and procuring such operations. It is evident then, 
that justice, universally taken, denotes the highest rectitude 
of the divine nature, and a power and promptitude of doing 
all things, in a manner becoming and agreeable to his wis- 
dom, goodness, and right. 

The more solemn egresses of this justice, to which all par- 
ticular acts may be easily reduced, have been already 
pointed out : but equity in legislation, fidelity and truth in 


declarations, and the promises annexed to them, in which 
God is often said to be just, and to execute justice, I think 
may be passed over, as being too remote from our purpose. 
But as it appears that some light may be thrown on this 
subject, which we are now treating of, from the consideration 
of the relation of rectitude and divine wisdom, that is, of 
universal justice to government and judgment, we must say 
a few words on that head. 

But rectitude of government, to which that justice ana- 
logically corresponds, is that which philosophers and civili- 
ans unanimously agree to be the highest excellence, though 
they have variously described it, Aristotle calls it ' a habit 
by which men are capable of doing just things, and by which 
they both will and do just things ;'"" attributing to it apti- 
tude, will, and action. Cicero" calls it * an affection of the 
mind, giving to every one his due;' understanding by affec- 
tion not any passion of the mind, but a habit. The civilians 
understand by it, * a constant and perpetual will, assigning 
to every one his due.' The propriety of their definition, 
we leave to themselves. That constant and perpetual will 
of theirs, is the same as the habit of the philosophers, which, 
whether it be the proper genus" of this virtue, let logicians 
determine. Again, as they constantly attribute three acts 
to right, which is the object of justice, viz. * to live honestly, 
to hurt nobody, and to give every one his due ;' how comes 
it to pass that they define justice by one act, when doubtless 
it respects all right : therefore it is, they say, that to give 
every one his due, is not of the same extent in the definition 
of justice, and in the description of the acts of right. 

But let them both unite in their sentiments as they please, 
neither the habit or affection of the philosophers, nor the 
living honestly, and hurting nobody, of the civilians, can 
be assigned to God. For in ascribing the perfection of 
excellencies to him, we exclude the ratio of habit or qua- 
lity, properly so called, and every material and imperfect 
mode of operation. He must be a mortal man, and subject 
to a law to whom these things apply. 

Moreover those (I speak of our own countrymen), who 
divide this justice of government into commutative and dis- 
tributive, rob God entirely of the commutative, which con- 

•" Ethics, book b. chap. 1. " De Finibus. <> Or class. 


sists in a mutual giving and receiving. ' For v^rho first hath 
given any thing to him?' Who made 'thee to differ from 
another? He giveth no account of his matters.' But dis- 
tributive, which belongs to him as the supreme governor of 
all things, who renders to every one his due, is proper to 
himself alone. This we have above asserted to be the 
justice of government, or judgment. Of this justice of 
government, frequent mention is made in the sacred writ- 
ings. It is that perfection of the Divine Being, whereby 
he directs all his actions in governing and administering 
created things, according to the rule of his rectitude and 
wisdom. But this excellence, or habitude for action, in no 
wise differs from universal justice, unless -in respect of its 
relation to another being. But what is a law to us in the 
administration of things, in God is his right, in conjunction 
with his most wise and just will. For God, as it is said, is 
a law unto himself. To this justice, are these passages to 
be referred, Zeph. iii. 5. 2 Chron. xii. 6. Psal, vii. 9. Jer. 
xii. 1, 2. Tim. iv. 8. with almost innumerable others. But 
in all the effects and egresses of this justice, God is justified, 
not from the reason of things, but from his dominion and 
supreme right. Thus, Job xiv. 14. xxxiii. 12, 13. xxxiv. 
12 — 14. And this is the first egress of the divine rectitude 
in works. 

The other egress of this justice is in judgment, the last 
member of the divisions of which above-mentioned, viz. that 
by which God punishes the crimes of rational beings, to 
whom a law hath been given, according to the rule of his 
right, is the vindicatory justice of which we are treating. 

Here again, reader, I would wish to put you in mind, 
that I by no means assert many species ot universal justice, 
or so to speak, particular or special justices, as distinct per- 
fections in God, which others seem to do ; but one only, viz. 
the universal and essential rectitude of the divine nature, 
and therefore I maintain, that this very vindicatory justice 
itself is the rectitude and perfection of the Deity variously 

Some of the schoolmen, however, agree with me in opi- 
nion ; for Cajetan'' upon Thomas grants, that vindicatory jus- 

P Quest, ii. 2. 


tice, in a public person, differs nothing from legal and univer- 
sal justice. Although he maintains that there is a peculiar 
species of justice in a private person; a position which, I 
confess, I do not understand, since punishment, considered 
as punishment, is not the right of a private person. God 
certainly does not punish us, as being injured, but as a ruler 
and judge. But again, concerning this justice, another 
question arises, whether it be natural to God, or, an essen- 
tial attribute of the divine nature ; that is to say, such that 
the existence of sin being admitted, God must necessarily 
exercise it, because it supposes in him a constant and im- 
mutable will to punish sin : so that while he acts consistent 
with his nature, he cannot do otherwise than punish and 
avenge it? Or, whether it be a free act of the divine will, 
which he may exercise at pleasure ? On this point theolo- 
gians are divided. We shall consider what has been deter- 
mined on the matter, by the most notorious enemies of di- 
vine truth, and especially by those of our own times. 

1. Then, they own, 'That such a kind of justice is appli- 
cable to God, which, were he always inclined to exercise, 
he might, consistent with right, destroy all sinners, without 
waiting for their repentance, and so let no sin pass unpu- 

2. 'That he will not pardon any sins, but those of the 

Nor do they deny, so far as I know, 

3. ' That God hath determined the punishment of sin, 
by the rule of his right and wisdom.' 

But they deny, 

1. That perfection by which God punishes sins, either 
to be his justice, or to be so called in Scripture ; but, only 
anger, fury, or fierce indignation, expressions, denoting in 
the clearest manner, the freedom of the divine will in the act 
of punishing. Although some of Socinus's followers, among 
whom is Crellius, have declared openly against him on this 

Again, they deny. 

2. That there is any such attribute in God as requires 
a satisfaction for sins, which he is willing to forgive ; but 
maintain, that he is entirely free ' to yield up his claim of 
right,' as they phrase it, at pleasure ; that therefore divine 


justice ought, by no means, to be reckoned among the 
causes of Christ's death ; nay more, say they, such a kind 
of justice may be found in the epistles of Iscariot to the 
Pharisees (they are the words of Gitichius), but is not to be 
found in the Holy Scriptures. 

Such are the opinions of those concerning whom we are 
disputing at this present day, whether they be heretics ; 
certainly they are not Christians. Between their sentiments 
and ours on this point, there is the widest difference : for 
we affirm, the justice by which God punishes sin, to be the 
very essential rectitude of Deity itself, exercised in the pu- 
nishment of sins, according to the rule of his wisdom, and 
which is in itself no more free, than the divine essence. 

This kind of justice Socinus opposes with all his might, 
in almost all his writings, but especially in his Theological 
Lectures of the Saviour, book i. chap. i. &.c. Moscorovius 
also on the Racovian catechism, chap. viii. quest. 19. Os- 
torodius, a most absurd heretic, in his Institutions, chap. 
xxxi. and in his Disputations to Tradelius Volkelius, of the 
true Religion, book v. chap. xxi. Also Crellius, the most 
acute and learned of all the adversaries, in that book which 
he wished to have prefixed to the Dissertations of Volkelius, 
chap, xxviii. and in his Vindications against Grotius, chap, i. 
In a little work also, entitled, * Of the Causes of the Death 
of Christ,' chap. xvi. He pursued the same object in almost 
all his other writings, both polemical and dogmatical, and 
likewise in his commentaries ; a very artful man, and one 
that employed very great diligence and learning in the worst 
of causes. Michael Gitichius has the same thing in view, in 
his writings against Parseus, and in his dispute with Ludo- 
vicus Lucius, in defence of his first argument, a most trifling 
sophist, a mere copyist of Socinus, and a servile follower of 
his master. Of mightier powers too rise up against us, Va- 
lentinus Smalcius against Franzius ; and, who is said to be 
still alive, the learned Jonas Schlichtingius. All these, with 
the rest of that herd, place all their hopes of overturning the 
doctrine of the satisfaction of Christ, in opposing this jus- 

But these are not the only adversaries we have to do 
with : there are others, pious, worthy, and very learned di- 
vines, who, respecting the point of Christ's satisfaction, are 


most strictly orthodox ; and who, though they cannot find in 
their hearts directly to deny that such an attribute or power 
is essential to God : yet maintain all its egresses, and its 
whole exercise, respecting sin, to be so free and dependant 
on the mere free motion and good pleasure of the divine will, 
that should not that oppose, God might by his nod, by his 
word, without any trouble, by other modes and ways, be- 
sides the satisfaction of Christ, if it only seemed proper to 
his wisdom, take away, pardon, and make an end of sin, 
without inflicting any penalty for the transgression of his 
law. And this, it is said, was the opinion of Augustine. 
By which, I will say, rash and daring assertion, be it spoken 
without offence, for they are truly great men, by their nod 
and breath they suspend and- disperse the very strongest ar- 
guments, by which the adversaries feel themselves most 
hardly pushed, and by which the belief of Christ's satisfac- 
tion is strongly supported ; and deliver up our most holy 
cause, I had almost said, defenceless, to be the sport of the 
Philistines. Nay, not very long ago, it has been discovered 
and lamented by the orthodox, that very considerable as- 
sistance has been imprudently given by a learned-country- 
man of our own, to these aliens, who defy the armies of the 
living God. ' For, if we could but get rid of this justice, 
even if we had no other proof,' says Socinus, * that human 
fiction of Christ's satisfaction would be thoroughly exposed, 
and would vanish.' Soc. of the Saviour, book iii. chap. 1, &,c. 
Of our own countrymen, the only one I know is Ru- 
therford, a Scotch divine, who roundly and boldly asserts, 
* Punitive justice to be a free act of the divine will :' nor is 
he content with the bare assertion, but supported chiefly by 
his arguments, to whom the schoolmen are so much in- 
debted, he defends the fallacy, against both Cameron and 
Voetius, those two thunderbolts of theological war; though, 
in my opinion, neither with a force of argument nor felicity 
of issue equal to his opponents. But both the one and the 
others grant, that God hath decreed to let no sin pass un- 
punished without a satisfaction : but that decree being sup- 
posed, with a law given, and a sanction of the same by threat- 
enings, that a satisfaction was necessary: but, that punitive 
justice necessarily requires the punishment of all sins, ac- 


cording to the rule of God's right and wisdom, this is what 
they deny, and endeavour to overturn. 

But to me, these arguments are altogether astonishing ; 
viz. 'that sin-punishing justice should be natural to God, and 
yet that God, sin being supposed to exist, mai/ either exer- 
cise it, or not exercise it' They may also say, and with as 
much propriety, that truth is natural to God ; but upon a 
supposition that he were to converse with man, he might 
either use it, or not : or, that omnipotence is natural to God ; 
but upon a supposition that he were inclined to do any work 
without himself, that it were free to him to act omnipotently, 
or not: or, finally, that sin-punishing justice is among the 
primary causes of the death of Christ, and that Christ was 
set forth as a propitiation, to declare his righteousness, and 
yet that, that justice required not the punishment of sin. 
For if it should require it, how is it possible that it should 
not necessarily require it, since God would be unjust, if he 
should not inflict punishment? Or farther, they might as 
well assert, that God willed that justice should be satisfied 
by so many and such great sufferings of his Son Christ, when 
that justice required no such thing ; nay more, that setting 
aside the free act of the divine will, sin mid no sin are the 
same with God, and that man's mortality hath not followed, 
chiefly as the consequence of sin, but of the will of God. 
These and such like difficulties. Heave to the authors of this 
opinion (for they are very learned men) to unravel. As to 
myself, they fill me with confusion and astonishment. 

But this I cannot forbear to mention, that these very di- 
vines, who oppose our opinion, when hard pushed by their 
adversaries, perpetually have recourse in their disputations 
to this justice, as to their sacred anchor ; and assert, that 
without a satisfaction, God could not pardon sin, consistent 
with his nature, justice, and truth. But as these are very 
great absurdities, it would have seemed strange to me, that 
any men of judgment and orthodoxy should have been so 
entangled in some of these sophisms, as to renounce the 
truth on their account, unless I had happened at one time 
myself to fall into the same snare ; which, to the praise and 
glory of that truth, of which I am now a servant, I freely 
confess to have been my case. 


But to avoid mistakes, as much as possible, in discussing 
the nature of this justice, we will make the following obser- 

1. There are some attributes of Deity which, in order 
to their exercise, require no determined object antecedent to 
their egress : of this kind are wisdom and power. These at- 
tributes, at least, as to their first exercise, must be entirely 
free, and dependant on the mere good pleasure of God only; 
so that antecedent to their acting, the divine will is so in- 
different as to every exercise of them, on objects without 
himself, that he might even will the opposite. But if we 
suppose that God wills to do any work without himself, he 
must act omnipotently and wisely. 

There are again, some attributes, which can, in nowise, 
have an egress, or be exercised without an object prede- 
termined, and, as it were, by some circumstances prepared 
for them : among these is punitive justice ; for the exercise 
of which there would be no ground, but upon the suppo- 
sition of the existence of a rational being, and its having 
sinned ; but these being supposed, this justice must neces- 
sarily act according to its own rule. 

2. But that rule is not any free act of the divine will, but 
a supreme, intrinsic, natural right of Deity, conjoined with 
wisdom, to which the entire exercise of this justice ought to 
be reduced. These men, entirely trifle then, who, devising 
certain absurd conclusions of their own, annex them to a 
supposition of the necessity of punitive justice as to its ex- 
ercise : as for instance, that God ought to punish sin to the 
full extent of his power, and that he ought to punish every 
sin with eternal punishment, and that therefore he must 
preserve every creature that sins to eternity, and that he 
cannot do otherwise, I say they trifle ; for God does not 
punish to the utmost extent of his power, but, so far as is 
just; and all modes and degrees of punishment are deter- 
mined by the standard of the divine right and wisdom. 

Whether that necessarily requires that every sin should 
be punished with eternal punishment, let those inquire who 
choose. ' Nobis non licet esse tarn disertis.' 

3. But the existence of a rational creature, and the moral 
dependance which it has, and must have upon God, being- 
supposed, the first egress of this justice is in the constitution 


of a penal law ; not as a law which, as was before observed, 
originates from the justice of government, but as a penal law. 
For if such a law were not made necessarily, it might be 
possible that God, should lose his natural right and domi- 
nion over his creatures, and thus he would not be God; or, 
that right being established, that the creature might not be 
subject to him, which implies a contradiction, not less, than 
if you were to say, that Abraham is the father of Isaac, but 
that, Isaac is not the son of Abraham. For, in case of a 
failure in point of obedience (a circumstance which might 
happen, and really hath happened), that dependance could 
be continued in no way, but through means of a vicarious 
punishment : and there must have been a penal law consti- 
tuted, necessarily requiring that punishment. Hence arises 
a secondary right of punishing, which extends to every am- 
plification of that penal law, in whatever manner made. But 
it has a second egress in the infliction of punishment. 

4. And here it is to be remarked, that this justice ne- 
cessarily respects punishment in general, as including in it 
the nature of punishment, and ordaining such a vindication 
of the divine honour, as God can acquiesce in : not the 
time, or degrees, or such like circumstances of punishment. 
Yea, not this, or that species of punishment ; for it respects 
only the preservation of God's natural right, and the vindi- 
cation of his glory ; both which may be done by punish- 
ment in general, however circumstanced. A dispensation, 
therefore, with punishment (especially temporary punish- 
ment) by a delay of time, an increase or diminution of the 
degree, by no means prejudiceth the necessity of the exer- 
cise of this justice, which only intends an infliction of pu- 
nishment in general. 

5. But again, though we determine the egresses of this 
justice to be necessary, we do not deny that God exercises 
it freely : for that necessity doth not exclude a concomitant 
liberty, but only an antecedent indifference. This only we 
deny, viz. that, supposing a sinful creature, the will of God 
can be indifferent (by virtue of the punitive justice inherent 
in it) to inflict, or not inflict punishment upon that creature, 
or to the volition of punishment, or its opposite. The 
whole of Scripture, indeed, loudly testifies against any 
such indifference ; nor is it consistent with God's supreme 


right over his creatures : neither do they who espouse a 
different side, contend with a single word brought from the 
Scriptures. But that God punishes sins with a concomitant 
liberty, because he is of all agents the most free, we have 
not a doubt. Thus his intellectual will is carried towards 
happiness by an essential inclination antecedent to liberty, 
and notwithstanding it wills happiness with a concomitant 
liberty : for to act freely is the very nature of the will; yea, 
it must necessarily '^.d fteely. 

Let our adversaries therefore dream as they please, that 
we determine God to be an absolutely necessary agent, 
when he is a most free one ; and that his will is so circum- 
scribed by some kind of justice, which we maintain, that 
he cannot will those things which, settino; the consideration 
of that justice aside, would be free to him. For, we ac- 
knowledge the Deity to be both a necessary and free agent : 
necessary in respect of all his actions, internally, or in re- 
spect of the persons in the godhead towards one another : 
the Father necessarily begets the Son and loves himself: as 
to these and such like actions, he is of all necessary agents 
the most necessary. But in respect of the acts of the divine 
will, which have their operations and effects upon external 
objects, he is an agent absolutely free, being one ' who 
worketh all things according to the counsel of his own will.' 
But of these acts there are two kinds; for some are abso- 
lute and admit no respect to any antecedent condition. 

Of this kind is his purpose of creating the world, and in 
it rational creatures, properly adapted to know and obey the 
creator, benefactor, and Lord of all. In works of this kind, 
God hath exercised the greatest liberty : his infinitely wise 
and infinitely free will is the fountain and origin of all 
things. Neither is there in God any kind of justice, or any 
other essential attribute, which could prescribe any limits 
or measure to the divine will. But this decree of creating 
being supposed, the divine will undergoes a double neces- 
sity, so to speak, both in respect of the event, and in re- 
spect of its manner of acting. For in respect of the event, 
it is necessary, from the immutability of God, that the world 
should be created : and in respect of the manner of doing it, 
that it should be done omnipotently, because God is esserj- 
tially omnipotent ; and it being once supposed that he wills 

VOL. IX. 2 B 


to do any work without himself, he must do it omnipotently. 
Yet, notwithstanding these considerations, in the creation of 
the world, God was entirely a free agent: he exercised will 
and understanding in acting, although the choice of acting 
or not acting, and of acting in one particular way or another, 
is taken away by his immutability and omnipotence. 

There is another kind of the acts of the divine will, 
which could have no possible existence but upon a condition 

This kind contains the egresses and exercise of those at- 
tributes which could not be exercised but upon a supposition 
of other antecedent acts ; of which we have treated before. 
Of this kind, are all the acts of the divine will, in which 
justice, mercy, &c. exert their energy. But these attributes 
of the divine nature are, either for the purpose of preserving 
or continuing to God what belongs to him of right, supposing 
that state of things which he hath freely appointed ; or for 
bestowing on his creatures some farther good. Of the 
former kind is vindicatory justice, which, as it cannot be 
exercised but upon the supposition of the existence of a 
rational being, and of its sin ; so, these being supposed, the 
supreme right and dominion of the Deity could not be pre- 
served entire, unless it were exercised. Of the latter kind 
is sparing mercy, by which God bestows an undeserved 
good on miserable creatures. For setting aside the consi- 
deration of their misery, this attribute cannot be exercised ; 
but that being supposed, if he be inclined to bestow any 
undeserved good on creatures wretched through their own 
transgression, he may exercise this mercy, if he will. But 
again, in the exercise of that justice, although if it were not 
to be exercised, according to our former hypothesis, God 
VKOuld cease from his right and dominion, and so would not 
be God, still he is a free, and not an absolutely necessary 
agent; for, he acts from will and understanding, and not 
from an impetus of nature only, as fire burns : and he freely 
willed that state and condition of things, which being sup- 
posed, that justice must necessarily be exercised. Therefore, 
in the exercise of it, he is not less free than in speaking; 
for, supposing, as I said before, that his will were to speak 
any thing, it is necessary that he speak the truth. These 
loud outcries, therefore, which the adversaries so unseason- 


ably make against our opinion, as if it determined God to 
be an absolutely necessary agent in his operations ad extra, 
entirely vanish and come to nought. But we will treat 
more fully of these things, when we come to answer ob- 

Finally, let it be observed, that the nature of mercy and 
justice are different in respect of their exercise; for, be- 
tween the act of mercy and its object, no natural obligation 
intervenes : for God is not bound to any one, to exercise 
any act of mercy, neither is he bound to reward obedience : 
for this is a debt due from his natural right, and from the 
moral dependence of the rational creature, and indispensably 
thence arising. But between the act of justice and its ob- 
ject, a natural obligation intervenes, arising from the indis- 
pensable subordination of the creature to God, which sup- 
posing disobedience or sin, could not otherwise be secured 
than by punishment. Nor is the liberty of the divine will 
diminished in any respect more by the necessary egresses of 
divine justice, than by the exercise of other attributes : for 
these necessary egresses are the consequence, not of an ab- 
solute, but of a conditional necessity ; viz. a rational crea- 
ture and its sin being supposed, and both existing freely in 
respect of God ; but the necessary suppositions being made, 
the exercise of other perfections is also necessary ; for it 
being supposed, that God were disposed to speak with man, 
he must necessarily speak according to truth. 

2 B 2 



A series of arguments in support of vindicatory justice. First, from the 
Scriptures. Three divisions of the passages of Scripture. The first, con- 
tains those which respect the purity and holiness of God. The second, 
those which respect God us the judge.' What it is to judge with justice. 
The third, those which respect the divine supreme right. A second argu- 
ment is taken from the general consent of mankind. A three-fold testi- 
mony of that conse7it. The first, from the Sci'iptures. Some testimonies 
of the heathens. The second, from the poiier of conscience. Testimonies 
concerning that power. The mark set upon Cain. The expression of the 
Emperor Adrinn, when at the point of death. The consternation of man- 
hind at prodigies. The horror of the wicked, whom even fictions terrify. 
Two conclusions. The third testimony, from the confession of all nations. 
A vindication of the argmnent against Rutherford. The regard paid 
to saci'ifices among the nations. Different kinds of the same. Propitia- 
tory sacrifices. Some instances of them. 

These preliminaries being thus laid down to facilitate our 
entrance on the subject, I proceed to demonstrate, by a va- 
riety of arguments, both against enemies, and against friends 
from whom I dissent, that this punitive justice is natural to 
God, and necessary as to its egresses respecting sin. But 
because, since the entrance of sin into the woi'ld, God hath 
either continued, or increased the knowledge of himself, or 
accommodated it to our capacities by four ways, namely, by 
the written word, by a rational conscience, by his works of 
providence ; and lastly, by the person of Jesus Christ his 
only-begotten Son, and by the mystery of godliness mani- 
fested in him ; we will shew, that by each of these modes 
of communication he hath revealed and made known to us 
this his justice. Our first argument then is taken from the 
testimony of the sacred writings, which in almost number- 
less places ascribe this vindicatory justice to God. 

The passages of Holy Scripture which ascribe this jus- 
tice to God, may be classed under three divisions. The first 
contains those which certify, ' that the purity and holiness 
of God, hostilely oppose and detest sin. Whether holiness 
or purity be an attribute natural to God, and immutably re- 
siding in him, has not yet been called in question by our 
adversaries. They have not yet arrived at such a pitch of 
madness. But this is that universal perfection of God, 


which, when he exercises in punishing the transgressions of 
his creatures, is called vindicatory justice. For whatever 
there be in God perpetually inherent, whatever excellence 
there be essential to his nature, which occasions his dis- 
pleasure with sin, and which necessarily occasions this dis- 
pleasure, this is that justice of which we are speaking. 

But here first occurs to us that celebrated passage of the 
prophet Habakkuk, chap. i. 15. ' Thou art of purer eyes 
than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity.' The 
prophet here ascribes to God the greatest detestation, and 
such an immortal hatred of sin, that he cannot look upon 
it; but, with a wrathful aversion of his countenance abomi- 
nates and dooms it to punishment. But perhaps God thus 
hates sin, because he wills it ; and by an act of his will, en- 
tirely free, though the state of things might be changed, 
without any injury to him, or diminution of his essential 
glory. But the Holy Spirit gives us a reason very different 
from this, viz. The purity of God's eyes : 'thou art of purer 
eyes than to behold evil.' But there is no one who can 
doubt that the prophet here intended the holiness of God : 
the incomprehensible, infinite, and most perfect holiness or 
purity of God, is the cause why he hates and detests all sin ; 
and, that justice and holiness are the same as to the com- 
mon and general notion of them, we have shewn before. 

Of the same import is the admonition of Joshua in his 
address to the people of Israel, chap. xxiv. 19. 'Ye cannot 
serve the Lord ;' (that is, he will not accept of a false and 
hypocritical worship from you) ' for he is a holy God ; he is 
a jealous God; he will not forgive your transgressions, nor 
your sins.' God then will not forgive transgressions, that 
is, he will most certainly punish them, because he is most 
holy. But this holiness is the universal perfection of God, 
which, when exercised in punishing the sins of the creatures, 
is called vindicatory justice; that is, in relation to its ex- 
ercise and eff'ects ; for in reality the holiness and justice of 
God are the same ; neither of which, considered in itself and 
absolutely, differs from the divine nature ; whence they are 
frequently used the one for the other. 

Moreover, it is manifest, that God meant this holiness in 
that promulgation of his glorious name, or of the essential 
properties of his divine nature, made face to face, to Moses, 


in Exod. xxxiv. 5. 7. which name he had also before de- 
clared; chap, xxiii. 7. That non-absolution or punishment 
denotes an external effect of the divine will, is granted : but 
when God proclaims this to be his name, ' The Lord, the 
Lord God, &,c. that will by no means clear the guilty,' he 
manifestly leads us to the contemplation of that excellence 
essentially inherent in his nature, which induces him to such 
an act : but that, by whatever name it be distinguished in 
condescension to our capacities, is the justice that we mean. 
That eulogium of divine justice by the psalmist, Psal. 
V. 54. 6. favours this opinion. 'For thou art not a God 
that hast pleasure in wickedness : neither shall evil dwell 
with thee : the foolish shall not stand in thy sight : thou 
hatest all the workers of iniquity : thou shalt destroy them 
that speak leasing : the Lord will abhor the bloody and de- 
ceitful man.' But those who deny this hatred of sin and 
sinners, and the disposition to punish them, to be perpetually, 
immutably, and habitually inherent in God, I am afraid have 
never strictly weighed in their thoughts the divine purity 
and holiness. 

To the second class may be referred those passages of 
Scripture which ascribe to God the office of a judge, and 
which affirm that he judges, and will judge, all things with 
justice. The first which occurs is that celebrated expression 
of Abraham, Gen, xviii. 25. * Shall not the Judge of all the 
earth do right?' These are not the words of one who doubts, 
but of one enforcing a truth acknowledged and confessed 
among all ; a truth upon which the intercession of this faith- 
ful friend of God, for the pious and just inhabitants of 
Sodom is founded : for Abraham here ascribes to God the 
power and office of a just judge ; in consequence of which 
character, he must necessarily exercise judgment according 
to the different merits of mankind. This, the words in the 
preceding clause of the verse, accompanied with a vehement 
rejection and detestation of every suspicion that might 
arise to the contrary, sufficiently demonstrate, 'that be far 
from thee to do, viz. to slay the righteous with the wicked.' 
God then is a judge and a just one : and it is impossible for 
him not to exercise right or judgment. But that justice 
Vv'herevvith he is now endowed, and by which he exerciseth 
right, is not a free act of his will (for who would entertain 


such contemptible thoughts even of an earthly judge) but a 
habit or excellence at all times inherent in his nature. 

But this supreme excellence and general idea which 
Abraham made mention of and enforced, the apostle again 
afterward supports and recommends, Rom. iii. 5, 6. ' Is 
God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? God forbid, for 
then how shall God judge the world V Unless he were just, 
how shall he judge the world ? Therefore this most righteous 
of all judges, exerciseth justice in judging the world 'be- 
cause he is just.' 

For why should God so often be said to judge the world 
justly and in justice, unless his justice were that perfection, 
whence this righteous and just judgment flows and is de- 
rived ; Acts xvii. 31. 'he hath appoiated a day, in the which 
he will judge the world in righteousness, by that man whom 
he hath ordained :' — and in Rom. ii. 5. the day of the last 
judgment is called, ' the day of wrath, and of the revelation 
of the righteous judgment of God.' 

But again, on this very account the justice of God is ce- 
lebi-ated, and he himself, in an especial manner, is said to be 
just, because he inflicts punishment, and exercises his judg- 
ments according to the demerits of sinners. Rev. xvi. 5, 6. 
' Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shalt 
be, because thou hast judged thus; for they have shed the 
blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood 
to drink ; for they are worthy.' 

But all retaliation for a crime proceeds from vindicatory 
justice; but that God exercises that justice, and is thence 
denominated just, is evident. The Holy Spirit establishes 
this truth in the plainest words, Psal. ix. 4, 5. where he 
gloriously vindicates this justice of God, — ' Thou hast main- 
tained my right and my cause,' says the psalmist, 'thou 
sattest on the throne judging right. Thou hast rebuked 
the heathen, thou hast destroyed the wicked, thou hast put 
out their name for ever and ever.' God exerciseth justice 
and determines causes, as he sits upon his throne, that is, as 
being endowed with supreme judiciary power, and that, as 
he is a judge of righteousness, ormost righteousjudge. Psal. 
cxix. 137. 'Righteous art thou, O Lord, and upright are thy 

It now remains, that we take a view of one or two of 


those passages of Scripture which, in consideration of this 
divine justice, assert the infliction of punishment for sin in 
itself, and as far as relates to the thing itself to be just. To 
this purpose is that of the apostle to the Rom. chap. i. 34. 
' Who knowing the judgment, or justice, of God, that they 
which commit such things are worthy of death.' Whatever, 
or of what kind soever that justice or right of God may be, 
of which the apostle is speaking, it seems evident that the 
three following properties belong to it. 

1. That it is universally acknowledged, nay, it is not un- 
known, even to the most abandoned of mankind, and to those 
schools of every kind of wickedness which the apostle is 
there describing. Whence they derive this knowledge of 
the divine law and justice, shall be made appear hereafter. 

2. Thatisthecause, source, and rule of all punishments, to 
be inflicted. For this is the right of God, ' that those who 
commit sin are worthy of death.' From this right of God it 
follows, ' that the wages of every sin is death.' 

3. That it is natural and essential to God. For although in 
respect of its exercise, it may have a handle, or occasion, 
from some things external to the Deity, and in respect of 
its effects may have a meritorious cause, yet in respect of its 
source and root, it respects himself, as its subject, if God be 
absolutely perfect : if belonging to any other being, it can- 
not agree to him. 

You will say that this right of God is free : but I deny, 
that any right of God, which respects his creatures, can, as 
a habit inherent in his nature, be free, though in the exercise 
of every right, God be absolutely free ; neither can any free 
act of the divine will towards creatures be called any right 
of Deity, it is only the exercise of some right. But an act 
is distinguished from its habit or root. 

And now it appears evident, that this right is not that 
supreme right or absolute dominion of God, which, under 
the primary notion of a Creator, must be necessarily as- 
cribed to him ; for it belongs not to the supreme Lord, as 
such to inflict punishment, but as ruler or judge. 

The supreme dominion and right of God over his crea- 
tures, no doubt, so far as it supposes dependence and obe- 
dience, necessarily requires that a vicarious punishment 
should be appointed, in case oftransgression or disobedience; 


but the very appointment of punishment, as well as the in- 
fliction of it, flows from his right as the governor ; which 
right, considered with respect to transgressions, is nothing 
else than vindicatory justice. The apostle therefore signi- 
fies that, that is, the justice always resident in God as a le- 
gislator, ruler, and judge of all things, which by common 
presumption, even the most abandoned of mankind acknow- 

To these may be added two other passages which occur 
in the writings of the same apostle; 2 Thess. i. 6. * Seeii^g 
it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation 
to them that trouble you ;' a recompense of tribulation is a 
real peculiar act of vindicatory justice ; but that belongs to 
God as he is just. Thence the punishment of sin is called 
in Heb. ii. 2. ' a just recompense of reward,' and by Jude 7. 
*the vengeance, or justice, of eternal fire.' Because, viz. 
it follows from that justice of God, that such crimes are 
justly recompensed by such a punishment. 

But we will not be farther troublesome in reciting par- 
ticular proofs ; from those already mentioned, and from 
others equally strong, we thus briefly argue; that to that 
being, whose property it is ' to render unto every one accord- 
ing to his works,' not to clear the guilty, to condemn sin- 
ners worthy of death, and to inflict the same upon them, to 
hate sin, and who will in no wise let sin pass unpunished, 
and all this, because he is just, and because his justice so 
requires, sin-punishing justice naturally belongs, and that 
he cannot act contrary to that justice. 

But the passages of Scripture just now mentioned, with 
many others, assert that all these properties above recounted, 
belong to and are proper to God, because he is just : there- 
fore, this justice belongs to God, and is natural to him. 

It matters not what we affirm of vindicatory justice ; 
whether that it be meant of God essentially, and not only 
denominatively, that it has an absolute name (for it is called 
holiness and purity) that we have it expressed both in the 
abstract and concrete ; for wheit is more than that, it is af- 
firmed expressly, directly, and particularly, oft-times in the 
passages above-mentioned, that it requires the punishment 
of sinners, that it implies a constant and immutable will of 


punishing every sin according to the rule of divine wisdom 
and right : impudent to a high degree indeed then must So- 
cinus have been, who hath maintained that, that perfection 
of Deity by which he punisheth sin, is not called justice, but 
always anger or fury. Anger indeed and fury, analogically 
and effectively, belong to justice. 

So much for our first argument. 

The universal consent of mankind furnishes us with a 
second ; from which we may reason in this manner : What 
common opinions and the innate conceptions of all assign 
to God, that is natural to God. But 'this corrective justice 
is so assigned to God; therefore this justice is natural to God. 

The major proposition is evident ; for what is not natural 
to God, neither exists in him by any mode of habit, or mode 
of affection, but is only a free act of the divine will ; and the 
knowledge of that can by no means be naturally implanted 
in creatures : for whence should there be a universal pre- 
vious conception of an act which might either take place, or 
never take place. No such thing was at the first engraven 
on the hearts of men, and the fabric of the world teaches us 
no such thing. 

But the minor proposition is established by a three-fold 
proof. 1. By the testimony of the Scripture. 2. By the 
testimony of every sinner's conscience. 3. And by that of 
the public consent of all nations. 

The Holy Scriptures testify that such an innate concep- 
tion is implanted by God in the minds of men. Thus the 
apostle to the Romans, chap.i. 32. ' who knowing the judg- 
ment of God, that they who do such things are worthy of 
death.' He is here speaking of those nations that were the 
most forsaken by God, and delivered over to a reprobate 
mind : yet even to these he ascribes some remaining know- 
ledge of this immutable right of God, which renders it ne- 
cessary, that 'every transgression should receive its just re- 
compense of reward,' and that sinners should be deserving 
of death in such a manner, that it would be unworthy of God 
not to inflict it ; that is to say, although the operations of 
this observing and acknowledging principle should often 
become very languid, and be even almost entirely over- 
whelmed, by abounding wickedness; for 'what they know 


naturally as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt them- 
selves/ yet, that mankind must cease to exist before they can 
altogether lose this innate sense of divine right and judg- 
ment. Hence the barbarians conclude against Paul, then a 
prisoner, and in bonds, seeing the viper hanging on one of 
his hands, that ' no doubt he was a murderer, whom, though 
he had escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffered not to live.' 
Here they argue, from the effect to the cause, which in mat- 
ters relating to moral good or evil, they could not, unless 
convinced in their consciences, that there is an inviolable 
connexion between sin and punishment, which thej^ here 
ascribe to justice. 

Evidences of God's justice, from Pagan writers. 

Justice among them, according to their fabulous theo- 
logy, which was particularly favoured by the bulk of the 
people, was the daughter of Jupiter, whom he set over the 
affairs of mortals, to avenge the injuries which they should 
do to one another, and to infljict condign punishment on all 
those who should impiously offend against the gods. 

Hence, Hesiod speaking of Jupiter, says. 

He married a second wife, the fair Themis, who brought forth the Hours, 

And Eunomia, and Justice, &c. 

Who should watch o'er the actions of mortal men. — Hesiod in Theog. 

Again, the same author says. 

Justice is a virgin, descended from Jupiter, 
Chaste, and houour'd by tlie heavenly deities J 
And when any one hath injur'd her, 
Indirectly committing the injury, &c. — Hesiod inOper. 

Also, Orpheus in the hymns, 

I sing the eye of Justice, who looketh behind her, and is fair. 
Who likewise sits upon the sacred throne of sovereign Jupiter, 
As the avenger of the unjust. 

Hence, these common sayings, 

God hath a just eye ; 

God hath found the transgressor. 

In all which, and in numberless other such passages, the 
wisest men in those times of ignorance, have announced their 
sense of this vindicatory justice. 

And among the Latins, the following passages prove their 
sense of the same. 

Aspiciunt oculis, &c. 

The gods above beheld the affairs of mortals with impartial eyes. 
Raro antecedentem, &c. 
Seldom hath punishment, through lameness of foot, left off pursuit of the wicked 
man, though he hath had the start of her. — Horace. 


Also, that celebrated response of the Delphic Oracle, re- 
corded by -^lian : 

But divine justice traces out the sources of crin.es, 

Nor can it be avoided even by the descendants of Jupiter ; 

But it liangs over the heads of the wicked themselves, and over the 

lieads of their 
Children ; and one disaster to their race is followed by another. 

All which assert this vindicatory justice. 

This then, as Plutarch says, is the ancient faith of man- 
kind ; or in the words of Aristotle, ' opinion concerning 
God,' which Dion Prusaeensis calls * a very strong and eternal 
persuasion, from time immemorial received, and still remain- 
ing among all nations.' 

Secondly, The consciences of all mankind concur to cor- 
robate this truth ; but the cause which has numberless wit- 
nesses to support it, cannot fail. Hence, not only the flight, 
hiding places, and fig-leaf aprons of our primogenitor, but 
every word of dire meaning and evil omen, as terror, horror, 
tremor, and whatever else harasses guilty mortals, have de- 
rived their origin. Conscious to themselves of their wick- 
edness, and convinced of the divine dominion over them, 
this idea, above all, dwells in their minds, that he with whom 
they have to do, is supremly just, and the avenger of all sin. 
From this consideration, even the people of God have been 
induced to believe, that death must inevitably be their por- 
tion, should they be but for once sisted in his presence. 
Not that the mass of the body is to us an obscure and dark 
prison (as the Platonists' dream), whence, when we obtain a 
view of divine things, being formerly enveloped by that 
mass, it is immediately suggested to the mind, that the bond 
of union between mind and body must be instantly dis- 

It must indeed be acknowledged, that through sin we 
have been transformed into worms, moles, bats, and owls; 
but the cause of this general fear and dismay is not to be 
derived from this source. 

The justice and, purity of God, on account of which he 
can bear nothing impure or filthy to come into his presence, 
occurs to sinners minds: wherefore, they think of nothing 
else, but of a present God, of punishment prepared, and of 
deserved penalties to be immediately inflicted. . The 
thought of the Deity bursting in upon the mind, imme- 


diately every sinner stands confessed a debtor, a guilty and 
self-condemned criminal. Fetters, prisons, rods, axes, and 
fire, without delay, and without end, j-ise to his view. Whence 
some have judged the mark set upon Cain to have been 
some horrible tremor, by which, being continually shaken 
and agitated, he was known to all. Hence too these follow- 
ing verses : 

Wliitherflyest thouEnceladus? Whatever coasts thou shalt arrive on. 
Thou wilt always be under the eye of Jupiter, 

And these, 

' As every one's conscience is, so in his heart he conceives 
hope or fear, according to his actions. 

' This is the firts^ punishment, that even in his own 

judgment, no guilty person is acquitted. 

' You may think that we have passed over those 

whom a guilty conscience holds abashed, and lashes with 
its inexorable scourge ; the mind, the executioner shaking 
the secret lash.' — See Voss. on Idol, book i. chap. 2. 

It is the saying of a certain author, that punishment is 
coeval with injustice; and, that the horror of natural con- 
science is not terminated by the limits of human life. 

Sunt aliquid manes : lethum non omnia fiiiit, 
Lucida que evictos eiFugit umbra rogos. 

The soul is something, denth ends not at ail, 

And the light spirit escapes the vanquished funeral pile. 

Hence tKe famous verses of Adrian, the Roman Empe- 
ror, spoken on his death-bed : 

Animula vagula, blandula, 
Hospes comesque corporis, 
Quae nunc abibis in loca? 
Pallidula, rigida, nudula. 
Nee (at soles) dabis joca. 

' Alas, my soul, thou pleasing companion of this body, 
thou fleeting thing, that art now deserting it ! Whither art 
thou flying? To what unknown scene "^ All trembling, fear- 
ful, and pensive ! What now is become of thy former wit 
and humour? Thou shalt jest and be gay no more.' 

Translated thus by Pope. 

Ah fleeting spirit; wandering fire. 

That lung hastwarra'd luy iciiuer breast, 

Must thou no mere this frame inspire? 
No more a pleasing cheerful guest I 

a Or, Chief. 


Whither, ah whither art thou flying ! 

To what dark undiscover'd shore ? 
Thou seem'st all trembling, shiv'ring, dying, 

And wit and humour are no more ! 

' That which is truly evil,' says Tertullian, ' not even 
those who are under its influence, dare defend as good. 
All evil fills nature with fear, or shame. Evil doers are glad 
to lie concealed ; they avoid making their appearance : they 
tremble when apprehended.' Hence the Heathens have re- 
presented Jove himself, when conscious of any crime, as not 
free from fear. We find Mercury thus speaking of him in 
Plautus : 

Etenim iile, &c. 

Even that Jupiter, by whose order 1 come hither. 

Dreads evil no less than any of us : 

Being himself descended from a human father and mother, 

There is no reason to wonder, that he should fear for himself. 

Hence too, mankind have a dread awe of every thing in 
nature that is grand, unusual, and strange; as thunders, 
lightenings, or eclipses of the heavenly bodies ; and trem- 
ble at every prodigy, spectre, or comet ; nay, even at the 
hob-goblins of the night, exclaiming, like the woman of 
Sarepta, upon the death of her son, 'What have I to do with 
thee? Art thou come to put me in remembrance of my ini- 
quities V Hence, even the most abandoned of men, when 
vengeance for their sins hangs over their heads, have con- 
fessed their sins, and acknowledged the divine justice. 

It is related by Suetonius, that Nero, that disgrace of 
human nature, just before his death, exclaimed, 'My wife, 
my mother, and my father, are forcing me to my end."* 
Most deservedly celebrated too is that expression of Mau- 
ricius the Capadocian, when slain by Phocas, 'Just art thou, 
O Lord, and thy judgments are righteous.' 

But moreover, while guilty man dreads the consequences 
of evil, which he knows he has really committed, he tor- 
ments and vexes himself even with fictitious fears and bug- 
bears : hence these verses of Horace ; 

<^ Somnia, terrores magicos, miracula, sagas, 
Nocturnos lemures, portenfaque Thessala fin.xit. [rides ?] 

*> His mother, Agrippa, had poisoned her last husband, the Emperor Claudius, 
to make way for his succession ; and Nero rewarded her, by causing her to be mur- 
dered. He likewise caused his' wife, Octavia, and his tutor, Seneca, to lose their 
lives; and was, in every respect, perhaps one of the greatest monsters of wickedr 
ness that ever disgraced human nature. 

" Hor. Epis. ii. 2. 208. 


Ideas for the most part ridiculous ; but as the old pro- 
verb says, ' 'Tis but reasonable that they should wear the 
fetters which themselves have forged.' Hence the guilty 
trembling mob is imposed upon, and cheated by impostors : 
by vagrant fortune-tellers and astrologers. If any illiterate 
juggler shall have foretold a year of darkness, alluding, viz. 
to the night-season of the year, the consternation is as great, 
as if Hannibal were at the gates of the city. The stings of 
conscience vex and goad them, and their minds have such 
presentiments of divine justice, that they look upon every 
new prodigy as final, or portentous of the final consumma- 
tion. I pass over observing, at present, that, if once a con- 
viction of the guilt of any sin be carried home to the mind, 
this solemn tribunal cannot thoroughly be dislodged from 
any man's bosom, either by dismal solitude, or by frequent 
company; by affluence of delicacies, or by habits of wick- 
edness and impiety ; nor, in fine, by any endeavours after 
the practice of innocence. The apostle in his Epistle to the 
Romans, chap.ii. enters more fully into this subject. Two 
things, then, are to be concluded from what has been said 
that mankind are guilty, and that they acknowledge. 

First. That God hates sin, as contrary to himself, and that 
therefore it is impossible for a sinner, with safety to appear 
before him. But if God hate sin, he does it either from his 
nature, or because he so wills it; but it cannot be because 
he wills it, for in that case he might not will it: a supposi- 
tion most absurd. And indeed, that assertion of Socinus, is 
every way barbarous, abominable, and most unworthy of 
God, wherein he says, ' I maintain that our damnation de- 
rives its origin, not from any justice of God, but from the 
free-will of God.' Socinus ' of the Saviour ;' chap. 8. p. 3. 
But if God hate sin by nature, then by nature he is just, and 
vindicatory justice is natural to him. 

Secondly. That our sins are debts, and therefore we shun 
the sight of our creditor. But I mean such a debt, as with 
relation to God's supreme dominion, implies in it a perpetual 
right of punishment ; and such is the second proof of the minor 
proposition of the second argument. The third remains. 

The public consent of all nations furnishes the third 
proof of this truth. There are writers indeed who have af- 
firmed, a thing by no means credible, that some nations have 


been so given up to a reprobate mind, that they acknow- 
ledge no Deity. Socinus hath written, that a certain Do- 
minican friar, a worthy honest man, had related this much 
to himself of the Brasilians, and other natives of America. 
But who can assure us that this friar has not falsified, ac- 
cording to the usual custom of travellers, or that Socinus 
himself has not invented this story (for he had a genius fer- 
tile in falsehoods), to answer his own ends ; but let this 
matter rest on the credit of Socinus, who was but little 
better than an infidel. But nobody, even by report, hath 
heard that there exist any who have acknowledged the being 
of a God, and who have not, at the same time, declared him 
to be just, to be displeased with sinners and sin, and that it 
is the duty of mankind to propitiate him, if they would enjoy 
his favour. 

But a respectable writer objects, viz. Rutherford on Pro- 
vidence, chap. 22. p. 355. That this argument, that, that 
which men know of God by the natural power of conscience, 
must be naturally inherent in God, is of no weight; * for,' 
says he, ' by the natural power of conscience, men know that 
God does many good things freely, without himself; as for 
instance, that he has created the world ; that the sun rises 
and gives light ; and yet in these operations God does not 
act from any necessity of nature.' 

But this learned man blunders miserably here, as often 
elsewhere, in his apprehension of the design and meaning of 
his opponents ; for they do not use this argument to prove 
that the egresses of divine justice are necessary, but that 
justice itself is necessary to God, which Socinians deny. 
What is his answer to these arguments? Mankind acknow- 
ledge many things, says he, which God does freely. To be 
sure they do, when he exhibits them before their eyes: but 
what follows from that ? so too they acknowledge that God 
pii/iishes sinj when he punishes it. But because all man- 
kind, fiom the works of God, and from the natural power of 
conscience, acknowledge God to be good and bountiful, we 
may, without hesitation, conclude goodness and bounty to 
be essential attributes of God; so likewise, because from the 
natural power of conscience, and the consideration of God's 
works of Providence, they conclude and agree that God is 
just : we contend, that justice is natural to God. 


But as mankind have testified this consent by other me- 
thods, so they have especially done it by sacrifices ; concern- 
ing which, Pliny says, 'That all the world have agreed in 
them, although enemies or strangers to one another.' But 
since these are plainly of a divine origin, and instituted to 
prefigure (so to speak) the true atonement by the blood of 
Christ, in which he hath been the Lamb slain from the 
foundation of the world ; that is, from the promise made of 
the seed of the woman, and from the sacrifice of Abel which 
followed, the use of them descended to all the posterity of 
Adam ; therefore, though afterward the whole plan and 
purpose of the institution was lost, among by far the greatest 
part of mankind, and even the true God himself, to whom 
alone they were due, was unknown ; and though no traces 
of the thing signified, namely, the promised seed remained, 
yet still the thing itself, and the general notion of appeasing 
the Deity by sacrifices, hath survived all the darkness, im- 
pieties, dreadful wickedness, punishments, migrations of 
nations, downfalls, and destructions of cities, states, and 
people, in which the world for these many ages hath been 
involved. For a consciousness of sin, and a sense of divine 
and avenging justice, have taken deeper root in the heart of 
man, than that they can by any means be eradicated. 

There were four kinds of sacrifices among the Gentiles. 
First, the propitiatory or peace-making sacrifices ; for by 
those, they thought they could render the gods propitious, 
or appease them; or avert the anger of the gods, and obtain 
peace with them: hence these verses on that undertaking of 
the Greeks in the exordium of Homer. 

But let some prophet, or some sacred sage, 

Explore the cause of great Apollo's rage : 

Or learn the wasteful vengeance to remove 

By mystic dreams ; for dreams descend from Jove. 

If broken vows this heavy curse Lave laid. 

Let altars smoke, and hecatombs be paid : 

So heaven atoned shall dying Greece restore. 

And Phffibus dart his burning shafts no more.— Pope's Homer. 

They were desirous of appeasing Apollo by sacrifices, 
who had inflicted on them a lamentable mortality. To the 
same purpose is that passage of Virgil, 

The prophet'' first with sacrifice adores 

The greater gods; their pardon then implores, &c, — Dryden's Virg. 

^ Viz. Helenus, yEneid, book 3. 
VOL. IX. 2 c 


Hence too that lamentation of the person in the Penalus of 
Plautus, who could not make satisfaction to his gods. 

' Unhappy man that I am,' says he, ' to-day I have sa- 
crificed six lambs to my much-incensed gods, and yet I have 
not been able to render Venus propitious to me : and as I 
could not appease her, I came instantly off.' 

And Suetonius, speaking of Otho, says, 'he endea- 
vours, by all kinds of piaculary sacrifices, to propitiate the 
manes of Galba, by whom he had seen himself thrust down 
and expelled.' And the same author affirms of Nero, * that 
he had been instructed that kings were wont to expiate the 
heavenly prodigies by the slaughter of some illustrious vic- 
tim, and to turn them from themselves upon the heads of 
their nobles.' Though this perhaps rather belongs to the 
second kind. But innumerable expressions to this purpose 
are extant, both among the Greek and Latin authors. 

The second kind were the expiatory or purifying sacri- 
fices, by which sins were said to be atoned, expiated, and 
cleansed, and sinners purified, purged,. and made desirous 
of peace, and the anger of the gods turned aside and averted. 
It would be tedious, and perhaps superfluous, to produce 
examples : the learned can easily trace them in great abun- 
dance. The other kinds were the eucharistical and pro- 
phetical, which have no relation to our present purpose. 

In this way of appeasing the Deity, mankind, I say, 
formerly agreed : whence it is evident, that an innate con- 
ception of this sin-avenging justice is natural to all ; and, 
therefore, that that justice is to be reckoned among the es- 
sential attributes of the divine nature, concerning which 
only, and not concerning the free acts of his will, mankind 
universally agree. 



The origin of human sacrifices. Their use among the Jews, Assyrians, 
Germans, Goths, the inluihitants of Marseilles, the Normans, the Francs, 
the Tyrians, the Egyptians, and the ancient Gauls. Testimonies of Ci- 
eero and Ccesar, that they were used among the Britons and Romans by 
the Druids. A fiction of Appio concerning the worship in the temple oj 
Jerusalem. The names of some persons sacrificed. The use cf human 
sacrifices among the Gentiles, proved from Clemens of Alexandria, Dio~ 
nysius of Halicarnassia, Porphyry, Philo, Eusebius, Tertidlian, Euripi- 
des. Instances of human sacrifices in the sacred Scriptures. The re- 
markable obedience of Abraham. What the neighbouring nations might 
have gatliered from that event. Why human sacrifices were not instituted 
by God. The story of Iphigenia. The history of Jephtha. Whether 
he put his daughter to death. The cause of the difficulty. The impious 
sacrifice of the king ofMoab. The abominable superstition of the Rugiani. 
The craftiness of the devil. Vindications of the argument. The same 

But it is strange to think what a stir was made, by the an- 
cient enemy of mankind, to prevent any ray of light respect- 
ing the true sacrifice, that was to be made in the fuhiess of 
time, from being communicated to the minds of men through 
means of this universal ceremony and custom of sacrificing. 
Hence, he influenced the most of the nations to the heinous, 
horrible, and detestable crime of offering human sacrifices, 
in order to make atonement for themselves, and render God 
propitious by such an abominable wickedness. 

But as it seems probable, that some light may be bor- 
rowed from the consideration of these sacrifices, in which, 
mankind, from the presumption of a future judgment, have 
so closely agreed, perhaps the learned reader will think it 
not foreign to our purpose to dwell a little on the subject, 
and to reckon up some examples. This abomination, pro- 
hibited by God, under the penalty of a total extermination, 
was divers times committed by the Jews, running headlong 
into forbidden wickedness, while urged on by the stings of 
conscience to this infernal remedy. They offered their 
children as burnt-sacrifices to Moloch, that is, to the Sa- 
turn of the Tyrians ; not to the planet of that name ; not to 
the Father of the Cretan Jupiter ; but to the Saturn of the 
Tyrians, that is, to Baal, or to the sun ; and not by making 

2 c 2 


them to pass between two fires for purification, as some 
think, but by burning them in the manner of a whole burnt- 
offering. Psal, cvi. 36 — 38. * And they served their idols 
which were a snare unto them : yea, they sacrificed their 
sons and their daughters unto devils, and shed innocent 
blood, even the blood of their sons and of their daughters, 
whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan, and the land 
was polluted with blood.' Almost the whole world, during 
the times of that ignorance which God winked at, paid 
court to the devil. Since then, it is abundantly evident, 
from these sacrifices, by what a sense of vindicatory justice, 
horror of punishment, and consciousness of sin, mankind 
are constrained : we must enlarge a little on the considera- 
tion of them. 

Tacitus speaking of the Germans, says, 'Of the gods, 
they chiefly worship Mercury, to whom, on certain days, 
they hold it as an article of religion and piety to sacrifice 
human victims : Mars, they have always been accustomed 
to appease by a most cruel worship ; for his victims were 
the deaths of the captives.' Jornandes aflSrms the same of 
the Goths. And thus Lucan writes in his siege of Mar- 
seilles ; 

' Here the sacred rites of the gods are barbarous 

in their manner; altars are built for deadly ceremonies, and 
every tree is purified by human blood.' 

And the same author, in the sixth book, from his Pre- 
cepts of Magic, has these verses. 

Vulnere si ventvis, &c. 

' If contrary to nature, the child be extracted through a 
wound in the belly, to be served up on the hot altars.' 

Virgil bears witness that such sacrifices were offered to 
Phoebus or the Sun. — ^neid x. 

Next Lycas fell ; who not like others born. 

Was from his wretched mother ripp'd and torn : 

Sacred, O Phoebus! from his birth to thee. — Dryden's Virgil. 

But Acosta asserts, that infants are sacrificed, even at 
this very time, to the Sun, in Cuscum, the capital of Peru. 

And thus the Scriptures testify, 2 Kings xvii. 29 — 31. 

'Howbeit, every nation made gods of their own, and put 
them in the houses of the high places, which the Samaritans 
|iad made, every nation in their cities wherein they dwelt. And 


the men of Babylon made Succoth-benoth, and the men of 
Cuth made Nergal, and the men of Hamath made Ashima ; 
and the Avites made Nibhazand Tartak, and the Sepharvites 
burnt their children in fire to Adrammelech and Anammelech 
the gods of Sepharvaim.' 

Ditmarus, in his first book, testifies, ' that the Normans 
and Danes sacrificed yearly, in the month of January, to 
their gods, ninety-nine human creatures, as many horses, be- 
sides dogs and cocks.' But what Procopius, on the Gothic 
war writes, is truly astonishing, viz. * that the Francs made 
use of human victims in his time, even though they then 
worshipped Christ.' Alas! for such a kind of Christianity. 
The practices of the Tyrians,^ Carthaginians, and Egyptians, 
in this respect, are known to every one. And Theodoret 
says, 'that in Rhodes, some person was sacrificed to Saturn, 
on the sixteenth of the calends of November, which, after 
having been for a long time observed, became a custom. 
And they used to reserve one of those who had been capi- 
tally condemned till the feast of Saturn.' 

Porphyry, * on Abstinence from Animals,' relates the 
customs of the Phoenicians concerning this matter. ' The 
Phoenicians,' says he, ' in great disasters, either by wars, or 
commotions, or pestilence, used to sacrifice one of their 
dearest friends, or relations, to Saturn, devoted to this fate 
by the common suffrages.' They were called Phoenicians, 
from the word <poivi^, which signifies a red colour ; cjioTvi^, 
according to Eustathius, is from ^ovoc, which signifies 
blood ; thence the colour called (^oivlKog, or the purple co- 
lour. Hence, the learned conjecture, that the Phoenicians 
were the descendants of Esau or Edom, whose name also 
signifies red, and from whom also the Red Sea was named. 
Edom, then (polviE, and IpvOpaiog, mean the same, viz. red. 
Why may we not then conjecture, that the Phoenicians or 
Idumeeans, were first led to this custom, from some corrupt 
tradition concerning the sacrificing of Isaac, the father of 
Esau, the leader and head of their nation. This, at least, 
makes for the conjecture, that while other nations sacrificed 
enemies or strangers. Porphyry bears witness that they sa- 
crificed one of their dearest friends or relations. But Isaac 

a Concerning the Tyrians, see Curtius, book fourlli ; and concerning (he Carlha- 
ginians, see Diodorus, book twentieth. 


was not to Abraham one of the dearest, but the only dear 
one. From such corrupt traditions as these, it is not to be 
wondered, that the consciences of men, struck with a fear of 
punishment, should have been encouraged to persevere in so 
cruel and superstitious a worship. 

Concerning the ancient Gauls, we have the most credi- 
table evidences, Cicero, and Julius Caesar ; the former of 
whom charges them with the practice of offering human sa- 
crifices, as a horrid crime, and certain evidence of their con- 
tempt of Deity. The other, however, commends them on 
this very account, on the score of a more severe religion. 
'If at any time induced by fear, they think it necessary that 
the gods should be appeased, they defile their altars and 
temples with human victims ; as if they could not practice 
religion, without first violating it by their wickedness. For 
who does not know, that even at this day, they retain that 
savage and barbarous custom of sacrificing human beings ; 
thinking that the immortal gods can be appeased by the 
blood and wickedness of man,' Cicero pro Fonteio. But 
Csesar, the conqueror of the Gauls, gives us a very different 
account of these kind of sacrifices ; ' this nation,' says he, 
* of all the Gauls, is most devoted to religious observances ; 
and for that reason, those who labour under any grievous 
distemper, or who are conversant in dangers and battles, 
either sacrifice human victims, or vow that they will sacri- 
fice them, and they employ the Druids as the conductors of 
such sacrifices ; for they have an opinion that, unless a hu- 
man life be given for a human life, the heavenly deities can- 
not be appeased.' These last words seem to me to acknow- 
ledge a persuasion that must have arisen from some ancient 
tradition about the substitution of the Son of Man, in the 
stead of sinners, as a propitiation for sin. 

No doubt can be entertained concerning the inhabitants 
of Britain, but that they were guilty of the same practices ; 
for from them came the Druids, the first promoters of that 
superstition, not only in the Gauls, but even in Italy, and in 
the city of Rome itself. ' The doctrine of the Druids,' says 
Caesar, 'is thought to have been found in Britain, and 
brought thence into Gaul : and now such as are desirous to 
examine more particularly into that matter, generally go 
thither for the sake of information.' Book vi. of the wars 


in Gaul. But Tacitus informs us with what kind of sacri- 
fices they performed their divine services there, in the four- 
teenth book of his annals. * When the island of Anglesea 
was conquered by Paulinus, a guard,' says he, ' was placed 
over the vanquished, and the groves devoted to cruel super- 
stitions were hewn down (the same was done by Cfesar in 
the siege of Marseilles; Lucan, book third); for it was an 
article of their religion to sacrifice their captives on the 
altars, and to consult their gods by human entrails.' 
Hence that verse in Horace. 

VJsam Britannos hospitibus feros. 

I will visit the Britons cruel to strangers. 

At which remote place,'' the Britons used to sacrifice their 
guests for victims ; yea, even in Rome itself, as Plutarch, 
in his life of Marcellus testifies, they buried, by order of the 
higli-priests, ' a man and woman of Gaul, and a man and 
woman of Greece,' alive in the cattle market, to avert some 
calamity by such a fatal sacrifice. Whether this was done 
yearly, as some think, I am rather inclined to doubt. 

Of the same kind was the religion of the Decii, devoting 
themselves for the safety of the city. Hence a suspicion 
arose, and was every where rumoured among the Gentiles 
concerning the sacred rites of the Jews, with which they 
were unacquainted, viz. that they were wont to be solem- 
nized with human sacrifices. For although after the destruc- 
tion of the temple, it was manifest that they worshipped the 
God of heaven only, yet so long as they celebrated the se- 
cret mysteries appointed them by God, Josephus against 
Appio bears witness, that they laboured under the infamy of 
that horrible crime, viz. of sacrificing human victims, among 
those who were unacquainted with the Jewish polity ; where 
he also recites, from the same Appio, a most ridiculous fic- 
tion about a young Greek captive, being delivered by An- 
tiochus,*when he impiously spoiled the temple, after having 
been fed there on a sumptuous diet for the space of a year, 
that he might make the fatter a victim. 

A custom that prevailed with some, not unlike this un- 
truth about the young Greek kept in the temple, seems to 
have given rise to it. For thus Diodorus, in book v. writes 
of the Druids, ' They fix up their malefactors upon poles, 

•> Viz, Anglesea. 


after having kept them five years (it seems they fattened 
much slower than at Jerusalem), and sacrifice them to their 
gods ; and with other first-fruits of the year, offer them on 
large funeral piles.' Theodoretalso mentions something of 
that kind concerning the Rhodians, in the first book ' of the 
Greek Affections ;' the words have been mentioned before. 
But that young Greek, destined for sacrifice, in Appio, 
has no name ; that is, there never was any such person. 

But, friend, discover faithful what I crave, 
Artful concealment ill becomes the brave ; 
Say what thy birth, and what the name you bore, 
Imposed by parents in the natal hour.- - 

Pope's*^ Homer's Odyssey, book viii. 

But after having prepared the plot, he ought not to have 
shunned the task of giving names to the actors. We have 
the name of a Persian sacrificed even among the Thracians, 
in Herodotus, book ix. 'The Thracians of Apsinthium,' 
says he, * having seized Oiobazus flying into Thrace, sacri- 
ficed him after their custom to Pleistorus, the god of the 

There is still remaining, if I rightly remember, the name 
of a Spanish soldier, a captive with other of his companions 
among the Mexicans, well known inhabitants of America, 
who being sacrificed on a very high altar to the gods of the 
country, when his heart was pulled out, if we can credit 
Peter Martyr, author of the History of the West Indies, 
tumbling down upon the sand, exclaimed, * O companions, 
they have murdered me.' Clemens of Alexandria makes 
mention of Theopompus, a king of the Lacedemonians, be- 
ing sacrificed by Aristomenes the Messenian. His words, 
which elegantly set forth this custom of all the nations, we 
shall beg leave to trouble the reader with : ' But now, when 
they had invaded all states and nations as plagues (he is 
speaking of dcemons) they demanded cruel sacrifices ; and 
one Aristomenes, a Messenian, slew three hundre'd in ho- 
nour of Ithometan Jupiter, thinking that he sacrificed so 
many hecatombs in due form, and of such a kind. Among 
these, too, was Theopompus, king of the Lacedemonians, an 
illustrious victim. But the inhabitants of Mount Taurus, 
who dwell about the Tauric Chersonese, instantly sacrifice 

= The words in the original apply much better to our author's meaning. See 
them, Odyss. lib. viii. v. 550. 


whatever shipwrecked strangers they find upon their coasts 
to Diana of Taurus.' ' Thence, ye inhospitable shores, Eu- 
ripides again and again bewails in his scenes these your sa- 
crifices.' — Clemens's Exhortations to the Greeks. 

But what he says concerning Euripides, has a reference 
to the story of Iphigenia among the inhabitants of Taurus :^ 
where, however, the poet signifies that she detested such 
kinds of sacrifices ; for he introduces Iphigenia, thep. 
priestess of Diana, thus bewailing her lot : 

'They have appointed me priestess in these temples, 
where Diana, the goddess of the festival, is delighted with 
such laws ; whose name alone is honourable : but I say no 
more, dreading the goddess. For I sacrifice (and it long 
hath been a custom of the state), every Grecian that arrives 
in this country.' — Eur. Iph. in Tauris. 

Thus far Clemens, who also demonstrates the same thing 
of the Thessalians, Lycians, Lesbians, Phocensians, and 
Romans, from Monimus, Antoclides, Pythocles, and Dema- 
ratus. That deed too of Agamemnon, alluded to by Virgil, 
furnishes another proof. 

Sanguine placastis ventos, et virgine caesa, &c. 

O, Grecians, wlien tiie Trojan shores you sought, 
Your passage with a virgin's blood was bought. 

Dryden's Virg. 

Tertullian also bears witness to this wickedness : * In 
Africa they openly sacrificed infants to Saturn, even down 
to the time of the proconsulate of Tiberius ; and what is 
surprising, even in that most religious city of the pious de- 
scendants of vEneas, there is a certain Jupiter, whom, at his 
games, they drench with human blood.' 

It is notoriously known, that in the sanguinary games of 
the Romans, they made atonement to the gods with human 
blood, namely, that of captives. But Eusebius* Pamphilus 
enters the most fully of any into this matter: for he shews 
from Porphyry, Philo, Clemens, Dionysius of Halicarnassia, 
and Diodorus Siculus, that this ceremony of offering human 
sacrifices was practised all over the world. Porphyry, in- 
deed, shews, at large, who instituted this kind of worship 

^ In the play of Euripides, called Iphigenia in Tauris. 

e Bishop of Caesarea, in Palestine, a very learned prelate, and one of the 
greatest writers of his time. 


in different places, and who put an end to it. Another very 
ingenious poet brings an accusation of extreme folly and 
madness, against this rite, in these verses. It is a Plebeian 
addressing Agamemnon : 

Tu quurn pro vitula, statuis dulcem Aullde natam, 
Ante aras, spargisque raola caput, Iniprobe, Salsa, 
Rectum aninii servas 1 

When your own child you to the altar led. 
And pour'd the salted meal upon her head ; 
When you beheld the lovely victim slain, ^ 
Unnatural Father ! were you sound of brain ? 

Agamemnon is introduced thus apologizing for himself, 
on account of the utility and necessity of the sacrifice. 

VeruiTi ego, ut haerentes adverso littore naves 
Eriperem, prudens placavi sanguine Divos. 

But I, wliile adverse winds tempestuous roar. 
To loose our fated navy from the shore. 
Wisely with blood the powers divine adore. 

Francis's Horace. 

The Plebeian again charges him with madness : 

Nempe tuo, furiose ? 
What! your own blood, you madman? 

But Philo, in his first book, relates that one Saturn 
(there were many illustrious persons of that name, as well 
as of the name of Hercules), when the enemies of his country 
were oppressing it, sacrificed at the altars his own daughter 
named Leudem, which among them, viz. the Tyrians, means 

I have little or no doubt but that this Saturn was Jeph- 
thah the Israelite ; that their Hercules was Joshua, the ce- 
lebrated Vossius has clearly proved. Book i. of Idol. 

But as we have made mention of Jephthah, it will not be 
foreign to our purpose, briefly to treat of these three famous 
examples of human sacrifices recorded in the sacred writings. 
The first is contained in that celebrated history concerning 
the trial of Abraham : an undertaking so wonderful and 
astonishing, that no age hath ever produced, or will pro- 
duce its like. It even exceeds every thing that fabulous 
Greece hath presumed in story. A most indulgent and af- 


fectionate father, weighed down with age/ is ordered to 
oflPer his only son, the pillar of his house and family, the 
trust of heaven, a son solemnly promised him by God, the 
foundation of the future church, in whom, according to the 
oracles of God, all the nations of the earth were to be 
blessed ; this most innocent, and most obedient son, he is 
ordered to offer as a burnt-offering : a dreadful kind of sacri- 
fice indeed ! which required, that the victim should be first 
slain, afterward cut in pieces, and lastly burnt by the hand 
of a father ! What though the purpose was not accom- 
plished, God having graciously so ordained it ; this obe- 
dience of the holy man is, notwithstanding, to be had in 
everlasting remembrance ! And forasmuch as he begun the 
task with a sincere heart and unfeigned faith, the Holy 
Spirit bears testimony to him, as if he had really offered his 
son. Heb. xi. 17. ' By faith Abraham, when he was tried, 
offered up Isaac : and he that had received the promises, 
offered up his only-begotten.' The fame of this transaction, 
no doubt, was spread, in ancient times, over many of the 
Eastern nations. But that those, who were altosethe riono- 
rant of the communion and friendship which Abraham cul- 
tivated with the Lord, and yet were convinced in their con- 
sciences, that a more noble sacrifice than all cattle, and a 
more precious victim was necessary to be offered to God 
(for if this persuasion had not been deeply impressed on 
their minds, the devil could not have induced them to that 
dreadful worship), assumed the courage of practising the 
same thing, from that event, there is not any room to doubt. 
And farther, if any report were spread abroad concerning 
the divine command and oracle which Abraham received, 
the eyes of all would be turned upon him as the wisest and 
holiest of men, and they would be led, perhaps, to conclude 
falsely that God might be propitiated by such kind of vic- 
tims. For they did not this, from any rivalship of Abraham, 
whom they respected as a wise and just man ; but being de- 
ceived by that action of his, and endeavouring at an expi- 
ation of their own crimes, they did the same thing that he 

f Abraham is now said to have been a hundred and thirty-three years of age: for 
some are of opinion that Isaac, at the time he was to have been sacrificed, was thirty- 
three years old : Josephus says, twenty-five. The Jews in Seder Olam, thirty-six. 
Nor is it any objection that he is called Naar, for so Benjamin, the father of many 
children is called. Gen. xliii. 


did, but with a very different end : for the offering up of Isaac 
was a type of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. 

But from that right and dominion, which God naturally 
hath over all the creatures, or from that superior excellence 
and eminence, wherewith he is endowed and constituted, he 
might, without any degree or suspicion of injustice or cruelty, 
exact victims as a tribute from man ; but he hath declared 
his will to the contrary ; Exod. xxxiv. 19, 20. ' But the 
firstlings of an ass thou shalt redeem with a lamb : and the 
first born of thy sons thou shalt redeem.' Partly, lest 
human blood, of which he has the highest care, should be- 
come of little account; but especially, because all mankind 
in general being polluted with iniquities, a type of his im- 
maculate son could not be taken from among them. 

But this history, the falsifying poets of the Greeks have 
corrupted, by that fable of theirs, concerning the sacrifice of 
Iphigenia, begun by her father Agamemnon, but who was 
liberated by the substitution of a doe :s hence, in Euripides, 
these words are falsely applied to the virgin, destined to be 
sacrificed, which (the proper changes being made), might 
with more propriety be spoken of Isaac, when acting in 
obedience to the command of God, and of his father. 

— — — a) waTEf 'TTa^liy.i troi, &C. &C. 

' O, father, I am here present, and I cheerfully deliver up 
my body, for my country, and for all Greece, to be sacrificed 
at the altar of the goddess, by those who now conduct me 
thither, if the oracle so require.' — Euripid. Iphigenia in 
Aulis, near the end. 

It is worth while to notice, by the way, the use of the 
word virlp ; the virgin to be sacrificed, declared, that she 
was willing to appease the anger of the gods, and suffer pu- 
nishment in behalf of, or, instead of her country and all 
Greece : and but a little before she is introduced, exulting 
in these words, 

EXis-itet' a|t*<f>i-vaov, &c. 

' Invoke to her temple, to her altar, Diana, queen Diana, 

g Agamemnon, as the story runs, had killed one of Diana's stags ; and the god- 
dess would be appeased on no other terms than by the sacrifice of his daughter : 
but after she was laid on the pile, Diana, pitying the virgin, put a doe in her room, 
and made Iphigenia her priestess. 


the blessed Diana: for if it shall be necessary, by my blood 
and sacrifice I will obliterate the oracle.' 

Justly celebrated too, in the second place, is the history 
of Jephthah's sacrificing his only daughter, related by the 
Holy Spirit, in these words. Judges xi. 30, 31. ' And Jeph- 
thah vowed a vow unto the Lord, and said, If thou shalt 
without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands ; 
then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors 
of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the 
children of Ammon, shall surely be the Lord's, and I will 
offer it up for a burnt-offering.' But when he returned, 'his 
daughter came out to meet him ; and at the end of two 
months, he did with her according to his vow.' If any pas- 
sage ever puzzled both Jewish and Christian interpreters, 
ancient and modern, as well as all your disputants upon, 
and patchers up of common- place difficulties, this one has. 
For on the one hand, here it is supposed, that all offering of 
human sacrifices is detested and abhorred by God; and to 
ascribe such a thing to a man of piety, and one celebrated 
by the Holy Spirit for his faith, many will not venture. But 
again, on the other hand, the words of the history, the cir- 
cumstances, the grief and lamentation of the father, seem 
hardly capable of admitting any other meaning. But to me 
these things are ambiguous.*' 

First, It is evident, that a gross ignorance of the law, 
either in making the vow, or in executing it, is by no means 
to be ascribed to Jephthah, who was, though a military man, 
a man of piety, a fearer of God, and well acquainted with 
the sacred writings. Now then, if he simply made a vow • 
that a compensation and redemption, accordino- to the valua- 
tion of the priests, ought to have been made, could not have 
escaped him ; and therefore there was no reason why he 
should so much bewail the event of a vow, by which he had 
engaged himself to the Lord, and to which he was bound : 
for he might both keep his faith, and free his daughter, ac- 
cording to the words of the law ; Lev. xxvii. 2L 31. 

Or if we should conjecture, that he was so o-rossly mis- 
taken, and entirely unacquainted with divine matters, was 
there no priest or scribe among all the people, who, during 

•> That is, the expressions relating to this subject are capable of more meanings 
than one ; and to ascertain the right one, is attended with difficulties. 


that time which he granted to his daughter, at her own re- 
quest, to bewail her virginity, could instruct this illustrious 
leader, who had lately merited so highly of the common- 
wealth, in the meaning of the law, so that he should neither 
vex himself, render his family extinct, nor worship God, to 
no purpose, by a vain superstition? I have no doubt then, 
but that Jephthah performed his duty in executing his vow, 
according to the precept of the law, however much he might 
have erred in his original conception of it. 

Nor is it less doubtful, in the second place, that Jeph- 
thah did not offer his daughter as a burnt-offering, as the 
words of the vow imply, according to the ceremony and in- 
stitution of that kind of sacrifice: for as these sacrifices 
could be performed by the priest only, by killing the victim, 
cutting it in pieces, and consuming it by fire upon the altar; 
offices, in which no priest would have ministered or assisted: 
so also, such kind of sacrifices are enumerated among the 
abominations to the Lord which he hateth ; Deut. xii. 31. 
'Thou shalt not do so unto the Lord thy God ; for every 
abomination to the Lord which he hateth, have they done 
unto their gods : for even their sons and their daughters 
have they burnt in the fire to their gods.' 

Nor does it seem probable that Jephthah had dedicated 
his daughter to God, that she should perpetually remain a 
virgin : for neither hath God instituted any such kind of 
worship ; nor could the forced virginity of the daughter by 
any means ever be reckoned to the account of the father, as 
any valuable consideration, in place of a victim. 

As then there were two kinds of things devoted to God : 
the first of which, was of the class' of those, which, as God 
did not order that they should be offered in sacrifice, it was 
made a statute, that they should be valued by the priest, at 
a fair valuation, and be redeemed, and so return again to 
common use. The law of these is delivered. Lev. xxvii.1,2. 
&,c. * And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying. Speak unto 
the children of Israel, and say unto them, when a man shall 
make a singular vow, the persons shall be for the Lord, by 
thy estimation. And thy estimation shall be, of the male 
from twenty years old, even unto sixty years old, even thy 
estimation shall be fifty shekels of silver, after the shekel of 
the sanctuary. And if it be a female, then thy estimation 


shall be thirty shekels,' &c. And ver. 8. ' But if he be 
poorer than thy estimation, then he shall present himself 
before the priest, and the priest shall value him : according 
to his ability that vowed shall the priest value him.' 

But the second kind of these were called Chccrem,^ con- 
cerning which it was not a simple vow, of which there was 
no redemption or estimation to be made by the priest : the 
law respecting these is given in the 28th and 29th verses 
of the same chapter. 'Notwithstanding, no devoted thing 
that a man shall devote unto the Lord, of all that he hath, 
both of man and beast, and of the field of his possession 
shall be sold or redeemed : every devoted thing is most holy 
unto the Lord. None devoted, which shall be devoted of 
men, shall be redeemed ; but shall surely be put to death.' 

The question to which of these two kinds the vow of 
Jephthah belonged, creates, if I mistake not, the whole diffi- 
culty of the passage. 

That it belonged not to the first is as clear as the day ; 
because if we suppose that it did, he might easily have ex- 
tricated himself and family from all grief on that account, 
by paying the estimation made by the priest. It was then a 
Chfdrem which, by his vow, Jephthah had vowed to the 
Lord, by no means to be redeemed, but accounted * most 
holy unto the Lord;' as in verses 27, 28. before-mentioned. 

But it is doubted, whether a rational creature could be 
made a Charem : but in fact there can hardly remain any 
room for doubt : to the person who considers the text itself, 
it will easily appear : the words are, ' every devoted thing is 
most holy unto the Lord : none devoted, which shall be de- 
voted of men, shall be redeemed, but shall surely be put to 
death.' It is evident from the foregoing verse, that the 
words * of men,' point not at the efficient cause, but the 
matter"" of the vow ; where, the same words, in the original, 
cannot be otherwise rendered than by ' of or ' touching man,' 
or by * out of or * from among mankind or men,' or * of the class 
of men.' And all those writers interpret the words in this 
sense (and there are not afewof them both among Jews and 
Christians) who are of opinion, that the passage ought to be 

' A thing or person so devojed as not to be redeemed, 
k That is, pointing not at the persons vowing, but at the object of their vow, or at 
the thing vowed or devoted by them. 


explained as relating to the enemies of God devoted to uni- 
versal slaughter and destruction. 

As Jephthah then had devoted his daughter as a Cliarem, 
it seems hardly to admit of a doubt that the cause of his 
consternation and sorrow at meeting her was, because, that 
according to the law he had slain her, having devoted her 
to God in such a manner as not to be redeemed. 

It would be foreign to our purpose to agitate this ques- 
tion any farther. We shall only say, then, that after having 
maturely weighed all the circumstances of the text, and of 
the thing itself, according to the measure of our abilities, 
we have gone into the opinion of those who maintain, that 
Jephthah gave up his daughter to death, she being devoted 
to God in such a manner, as according to the law not to be 
redeemed, that Supreme Being, who has the absolute right 
and power of life and death, so requiring' it. The theolo- 
gians of both nations,"* who espouse this side of the ques- 
tion, are both numerous and renowned. Peter Martyr tes- 
tifies, that almost all the more ancient Rabbins agreed in this 
opinion. Josephus in his Antiquities follows them, although 
he hath not determined Jephthah to be free of blame. Of 
the fathers, it is sufficient, for the matter is not to be deter- 
mined by votes, that Hieron in his epistle to Julian ; Am- 
brose on Virginity, book the third; Augustine on the book 
of Judges; and of those in later times, Peter Martyr in his 
commentary on the 1 1th of Judges ; and Ludovicus Capellus, 
in that excellent treatise of his concerning Jephthah's vow, 
have either approved, or at least have not dissented from 
this opinion. What Epiphanius" relates concerning the 
deification of Jephthah's daughter, favours this opinion : 'In 
Sebaste,' says he, 'which was formerly called Samaria, hav- 
ino" deified the daughter of Jephthah, they yearly celebrate 
a solemn festival in honour of her,' Yea, more, the most 
learned agree that the fame of this transaction was so spread 
among the Gentile nations, that thence Homer, Euripides, 
and others, seized the occasion of raising that fable about 

' The author here uses the words, ' at least interpretatively ,' before ' so requiring it :' 
meaning thereby, as I understand him, tliat tlie just and proper interpretation of the 
passage wherein this history is recorded, and of the others quoted, relating to vows, 
had clearly determined him to adopt this opinion. 

•» That is, both of the Jewish and Christian persuasion. 

" Patriarch of Constantinople in the year 520. 


Agamemnon's sacrificing his daughter; and that there never 
was any other Iphigenia than Jephthegenia, nor Iphianassa° 
than I^0tava(7<Ta,P or Jephtheauassa. 

But this was a kind of human sacrifice, by which, as God 
intended to shadow forth the true sacrifice of his Son; so, 
the enemy of the human race aping the Almighty, and tak- 
ing advantage of, and insulting the blindness, of mankind, 
and the horror of their troubled consciences arising from a 
sense of the guilt of sin, influenced and compelled them to 
the performance of ceremonies of a similar kind. 

There is no need that we should dwell on the third in- 
stance of this kind of sacrifices that occurs in the sacred 
writings ; viz. that of the king of Moab, during the siege 
of his city, offering up either his own son, or the king of 
Edom's upon the wall, as he was a heathen and a worship- 
per of Satan, according to the custom of the Phoenicians. 
Despairing of his situation, when it seemed to him that the 
city could no longer be defended ; and when he had no hope 
of breaking through, or of escaping, he offered his own son, in 
my opinion (for the king of Edom had no first-born to suc- 
ceed him in the government, being himself only a deputy 
king) as a sacrifice to the gods of his country, to procure a 
deliverance. The three kings then departed from the city 
which they were besieging, God so directing it, either hav- 
ing entered into an agreement to that purpose, or because 
of the war not being successfully ended (for the conjectures 
on this point are by no means satisfactory), some indig- 
nation having broke out among the troops of the Israelites, 
who also themselves were idolaters.*! See 2 Kings iii. 
26, 27. 

" Iphianassa, as story says, was daughter of Proetus, king of the Argives, who 
preferring herself in beauty to Juno, was struck with such a madness as to beheve 
lierself to be a cow : but was afterward cured by Melampus, a famous physician, to 
whom she was given in marriage. 

P Or, than the daughter of Jephthah : for Iphigenia, see note on p. 388. 

q Dr. Gill agrees with our author, that the king of Moab sacrified his own son; and 
thinks that he might be induced to offer him thus publicly on the wall, that it might 
be seen by the camp of Israel, and move their compassion ; but rather that he did it 
as a religious action to appease the Deity by a human sacrifice ; and that it was offered 
eitherto the true God, in imitation of Abraham, or to his idol Chemosh, the sun. It was 
usual with the heathens, particularly the Phoenicians, when in calamity and distress, 
to offer up what was most dear and valuable to them, see p. 381. Dr. Gill seems of 
opinion that the cause why the three kings broke up the siege was, that after this 
barbarous and shocking sacrifice, the Moabites became quite desperate, and that the 
kings, seeing them resolved to sell their lives so dear, and to hold out to the last 

VOL. IX. 2 D 


We shall conclude this train of testimonies with that 
noted account of the Rugiani, certain inhabitants of an 
island of Sclavonia, related by Albertus Crantzius, from 
which we may learn the dreadful judgment of God against 
a late superstition of Christians. 

' Some preachers of the gospel of Christ,' who and what 
they were the historian shews, ' converted the whole island of 
the Rugiani to the faith : then they built an oratory in ho- 
nour of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and in memory 
of St. Vitus, patron of Corveia. But after, by divine per- 
mission, matters were changed, and the Rugiani fell off from 
the faith, having instantly expelled the priests and Chris- 
tians, they converted their religion into superstition ;^ for 
they worship St. Vitus, whom we acknowledge as a martyr 
and servant of Christ, as God ; nor is there any barbarous 
people under heaven, that more dread Christians and priests : 
whence also, in peculiar honour of St. Vitus, they have been 
accustomed to sacrifice, yearly, any Christian that may ac- 
cidently fall into their hands.' A more horrible issue of Chris- 
tianity sinking into superstition, would, perhaps, be diffi- 
cult to be found. But we are now tired of dwelling; on such 
horrid rites and abominable sacrifices. Forasmuch, then, as 
we ourselves are the offspring of those who are wholly pol- 
luted with such sacrifices, and by nature not better or wiser 
than they; but only, through the rich, free, and unspeakable 
mercy of God, have been 'translated from the power of dark- 
ness, and the kingdom of Satan, into his marvellous light,' it 
is most evident, that by every tie we are bound to offer and 
devote ourselves wholly to Christ our deliverer, and most 
glorious Saviour, * who hath loved us; and who gave him- 
self for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and 
purify to himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.' 

Thus the prophecies concerning the oblation of Christ 

man, thought fit to raise the siege. A very natural explication of these words, ' and 
there was great indignation against Israel,' if the indignation be understood as ap- 
plicable only to the Moabites : but the concluding sentence of our author on this 
subject seems to imply it to be his opinion, that there were also dissensions and in- 
dignation in the allied army ; perhaps, between the Edomites, the idolatrous Israel- 
ites, and the worshippers of the true God, arising from the horrid spectacle they Lad 
witnessed. This is only ventured as a conjecture, that may better account for the 
sudden departure of tlie kings. 

"■ Their religion, at best, had been contaminated with the superstitions of the church 
of Rome. 


being but badly understood, mankind were seduced, through 
the instigation of the devil, to pollute themselves with these 
inhuman and accursed sacrifices. Perhaps too, that most 
artful seducer had it in view, by such sacrifices, to prejudice 
the more acute and intelligent part of mankind against that 
life-giving sacrifice, that was to be destructive of his king- 
dom : for, such now held these atrocious sacrifices and de- 
testable rites in abhorrence. However, to keep the minds 
of men in suspense, and in subjection to himself, he did not 
fail from another quarter, by words, obliquely, to spread 
abroad and send forth ambiguous oracles, as if such rites 
and sacrifices were of no avail for the expiation of sins : 
thence these verses in Cato's Distichs ; 

Cum sis ipse noccns moritur cur victima pro te? 
Stultitia est raorte alterius spcrare salutem. 

' Since it is thyself that art guilty, why need any victim 
die for thee? It is madness to expect salvation from the 
death of another.' 

I have no doubt but that this last verse is a diabolical 

By such deceitful practices the old serpent, inflamed 
with envy, and being himself for ever lost, because he could 
not eradicate every sense of avenging justice (which is as a 
curb to restrain the fury of the wicked) from the minds of 
men, wished to lead them into mazes, that he might still 
keep them the slaves of sin, and subject to his own do 

There have been, and still are, some of mankind, I con 
fess it, who, from indulging their vices, are seared in their 
consciences, and whose minds are become callous by the 
practice of iniquity ; who, flattering themselves to their own 
destruction, have falsely conceived, either that God does 
not trouble himself about such things, or that he can be 
easily appeased, and without any trouble. Hence that pro- 
fane wretch, introduced by Erasmus, after having settled 
matters with the Dominican commissaries, to a jolly com- 
panion of his own, when he asked him, 'Whether God 
would ratify the bargain?' answers, 'I fear rather lest the 
devil should not ratify it, for God by nature is easy to be 
appeased.' It is from the same idea, that many of the bar- 
barous natives of America idly fancying that there are two 

2 D 2 


gods, one good, and another evil, say, that there is no need 
to offer sacrifices to the good one, because being naturally 
good, he is not disposed to hurt or injure any one : but they 
use all possible care, both by words and actions, and every 
kind of horrible sacrifice, to please the evil one. Likewise 
those, who are called by Mersennus, Deists, exclaim, * that 
the bigots, or superstitiously religious, who believe in in- 
fernal punishments, are worse than Atheists who deny that, 
there is a God.' So too, some new masters among our own 
countrymen talk of nothing, in their discourses, but of the 
goodness of God : his supreme right, dominion, and vindica- 
tory justice, are of no account with them : but he himself 
knows how to preserve his glory and his truth pure and en- 
tire, in spite of the abilities, and without regard to the deli- 
cacy of these fashionable and dainty gentlemen. 

But Rutherford, on Providence, answers, that * the Gen- 
tiles formerly borrowed their purgations and lustrations* from 
the Jews, and not from the light of nature ;' but he must be 
a mere novice in the knowledge of these matters, into whose 
mind even the slightest thought of that kind could enter. 
For I believe there is no one who doubts the custom and 
ceremony of sacrificing among the Gentile nations to be 
much more ancient than the Mosaic institutions. Nor can 
any one imagine, that this universal custom among all na- 
tions, tribes and people, civilized and barbarous, unknown 
to one another, differently situated and scattered all over 
the world, could have first arisen and proceeded from the 
institutions of the Jews. 

* But,' says he, 'the light is dark, that a sinful creature 
could dream of being able to perform a satisfaction, and 
make propitiatory expiations to an infinite God incensed, 
and such too as would be satisfactory for sin :' yea, I say, 
that a sinful creature could perform this is false, and a pre- 
sumption only arising from that darkness which we are in 
by nature : but notwithstanding it is true, that God must be 
appeased by a propitiatory sacrifice, if we would that our 
sins should be forgiven us ; and this much he hath pointed 
out to all mankind by that light of nature, obscure indeed, 

' That is, their acts or ceremonies of cleansing or purifying themselves from guilt 
by sacrifice or otherwise ; the latter word more particularly means the operation of 
cleansing by water. 


but not dark. Nor is it necessary, in order to prove this, 
that we should have recourse to the fabulous antiquities of 
the Egyptians, the very modest writer of which, Manetho, 
the high-priest of Heliopolis, who lived in the time of Pto- 
lemy Philadelphus, and took his history from the Seriadic 
Hieroglyphical" obelisks, writes, that the Egyptian empire 
had endured to the time of Alexander the Great, through 
thirty-one dynasties,'' containing a period of five thousand 
three hundred and fifty-three years : this is the sum of the 
years according to that writer, as Scaliger collects it, to 
which Vossius has added two years. But other Egyptians 
have been, by no means, satisfied with this period of time. 
'For, from Isiris and Isis, to the reign of Alexander, who 
built a city of his own name in Egypt, they reckon more 
than ten thousand years; and as some write little less than 
thirteen thousand years,' says Diodorus ; during which pe- 
riod of time, they say that the sun had four times changed 
his course, for that he had twice risen in the west and set 
in the east: which things, though they may seem the dreams 
of madmen, strictly and properly understood ; yet some very 
learned men entertain a hope, by means of the distinction of 
the years which the Egyptians used, and the description of 
their festivals, of reconciling them with the truth of the 
Holy Scriptures. 

But passing over these things, it can hardly be doubted, 
that Jupiter Amnion, among the Egyptians, was no other 
than Cham, the son of Noah, and Bacchus, Noah himself; 
and that Vulcan, among other nations, was Tubal Cain ; to 
all whom, and to others, sacrifices were offered before the 
birth of Moses. What too do they say to this? that Job, 
among the Gentiles, offered burnt-offerings before the insti- 
tution of the Mosaic ceremonies : see chap. i. 5. xlii. 8. 
And Jethro, the priest of Midian, offered a burnt-offering 
and sacrifices to God, even in the very camp of the Israel- 
ites in the wilderness, Exod. viii. Either then the sacrifice 
of Cain and Abel, or that of Adam himself and Eve, con- 

" Hieroglypliics are emblems or pictures that were used in the first method of 
writing ; but after characters were introduced, they became generally unintelligible, 
and contributed much to promote idolatry. They were used by the Egyptian 
priests to conceal the mysteries of their religion from the vulgar, and were thence 
called hieroglyphics, i. e. sacred engravings or carvings. They were originally en- 
graven or carved on walls and obelisks. 

" A dynasty, in history, means a succession of kings in the same line. 


sisting of those beasts, of whose skins, coats were made to 
them by God,^ and by whose blood the covenant was rati- 
fied, which could not have been made with them after their 
fall without shedding of blood, gave the first occasion to 
mankind of discharging that persuasion, concerning the ne- 
cessity of appeasing the offended Deity, which hath arisen 
from the light of nature, through this channel of sacrificing. 
Yea, it is evident that this innate notion concerning vindi- 
catory justice, and the observation of its exercise and egress 
have given rise to all divine worship. Hence that expres- 
sion, * primus in orbe Deos fecit tlmor :' ' fear first created 
gods.' And hence these verses in Virgil, spoken by king 

Non haec solennia nobis, &c. 

' These rites, these altars, and this feast, O King I 

From no vain fears, or superstition spring ; 
Or blind devotion, or from blinder chance; 
Or heady zeal, or brutal ignorance : 
But sav'd from danger, with a grateful sense. 
The labours of a god we recompense. 

But I do not mention these things, as if it were my opi- 
nion that sacrifices are prescribed by the law of nature :* 
but, from the agreement of mankind in the ceremony of sa- 
crificing, I maintain, that they have possessed a constant 
sense of sin and vindicatory justice, discovering to them 
more and more of this rite, from its first commencement, by 
means of tradition. 

But to return from this digression : it appears, that such 
a presumption of corrective justice is implanted in all by 
nature, that it cannot by any means be eradicated ; but 
since these universal conceptions by no means relate to 
what may belong, or not belong to God at his free pleasure, 
it follows that sin-avenging justice is natural to God : the 
point that was to be proved. 

I shall only add, in one word, that an argument from the 
consent of all,'is by consent of all allowed to be very strong: 

y Gen. iii. 21. ' Unto Adam also, and to his wife, did the Lord God make coats 
of skins and clothed thera.' 

^ The most of the Romish clergy, says our author, maintain this opinion, that so 
they may pave the way for establishing the blasphemous sacrifice of the mass. Thus 
Less : ' on Justice and Right:' Saarez, book 2. however, is of a different opinion; 
' for,' says be, ' there is no natural precept, from which it can be sufficiently gathered 
that a determination to any particular mode of that worship is at all necessary to 
good morals.' In p. 3. of his Theol. on quest. 8. distinct. 71. sect. 8. 


For thus says the philosopher, ' what is admitted by all, 
we also admit ; but he who would destroy such faith can 
himself advance nothing more credible.' Aristotle, Nicom. 3. 
And Hesiod says, 

* That sentiment cannot be altogether groundless, which 
many people agree in publishing.' And 'when we discourse 
of the eternity of the soul,' says Seneca, ' the consent of 
mankind, is considered as a weighty argument; I content 
myself with this public persuasion.' Seneca. Ep. 117. 

And again, Aristotle says, 

* It is a very strong proof, if all shall agree in what we 
shall say.' And that observation another author concurs, 
* The things that are commonly agreed on are worthy of 
credit.' And here endeth the second argument. 


The third argument. This divine attribute demonstrated in the worhs of 
Providence. That passage of the apostle to the Romans, cbap. i. 18. 
considered. Anger, what it is. The definitions of the philosophers. 
The opinion of Lactantius concerning the anger of God. Anger often 
asci-ibed to God in the Hob/ Scriptures. In what sense this is done. The 
divine anger denotes, I. The effect of anger. 2. The will of punishing. 
What that will is in God. Why the justice of God is expressed hy 
ana-er. The manifestation of the divine anger, what it is. How it is 
revealed from heaven. The sum of the argument. The fourth argu- 
ment. Vindicatory justice revealed in the cross of Christ. The attributes 
of God. How displayed in Christ. Heads of other arguments. The con- 

It remains then, that we should now consider, in the third 
place, what testimony God has given, and is still giving to 
this essential attribute of his in the works of providence. 
This Paul takes notice of; Rom. i. 18. ' For the wrath of 
God,' says he, 'is revealed from heaven against all ungodli- 
ness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in un- 

The philosopher, Aristotle, says, that anger is, ' A desire 
of punishing on account of an apparent neglect.' ' A de- 

» Book vili. chap. 6. of his Topics. , 


finition, perhaps, not altogether accurate. Seneca says, that 
Aristotle's definition of anger, that it is * a desire of requiting 
pain,' differs but little from his own, viz. * That anger is a 
desire of inflicting punishment,' book i. of anger, chap. iii. 
where he discusses it with great elegance, according to the 
maxims of the Stoics. But Aristotle reckons aopyrfcnav^ 
among vices, or extremes in the 7th chapter of the 2d book 
of his Ethics to Nicomedes. But Phavorinus says, that 
' anger is a desire to punish the person appearing to have 
injured you, contrary to what is fit and proper.' But in 
whatever manner it be defined, it is beyond a doubt that it 
cannot, properly speaking, belong to God. Lactantius 
Firmianus, therefore, is lashed by the learned, who, in his 
book ' of the anger of God,' chap. iv. in refuting the Stoics, 
who contend, that anger ought not in any manner whatever 
to be ascribed to God, has ventured to ascribe to the Deity 
commotions and affections of mind, but such as are just and 
good. Suarez, however, excuses him, in his disputation 
* of the divine justice,' sect. 5. and contends, that the na- 
ture of anger is very specially preserved in the disposition 
of punishing offences. 

But however this matter be, certain it is, that God as- 
sumes no affection of our nature so often to himself, in 
Scripture, as this : and that too, in words, which for the 
most part, in the Old Testament, denotes the greatest com- 
motion of mind. Wrath, fury, the heat of great anger, in- 
dignation, hot anger, smoking anger, wrathful anger, anger 
appearing in the countenance, inflaming the nostrils, rousing 
the heart, flaming, and consuming, are often assigned to him, 
and in words too, which, among the Hebrews, express the 
parts of the body affected by such commotions.'^ 

In fine, there is no perturbation of the mind, no com- 
motion of the spirits, no change of the bodily parts, by 
which either the materiality, or formality*^ (as they phrase 
it) of anger is expressed, when we are most deeply affected 
thereby, which he has not assumed to himself. 

*♦ A deprivation of irascibility. 

c Numb. XXV. 4. Dent. xiii. 17. Josh. vii. 26. Psal. Ixxviii. 49. Isa. xiii. 9. 
Deut. xxix. 24. Judges ii. 14. Tsal, Ixxiv. ]. Ixix. 24. Isa. xxx. 30. Lam. ii. d.Ezek. 
V. 15. Isa. xxxiv. 2. 2 Cliron. xxviii. 11. Ezra x. 14. Hab. iii. 8. 12. 

<* The materiality of anger is, what is essentially necessary to constitute anger ; 
tlie formality means its external marks and characters. 


But since with God * there is no variableness, neither 
shadow of turning,' beyond all doubt it will be worth while 
strictly to examine what he means by this description of his 
most holy and unchangeable nature, so well accommodated 
to our weak capacities. Every material circumstance, such 
as, in us, is the commotion of the blood, and gall about the 
heart, and likewise those troublesome affections of sorrow 
and pain, with which it is accompanied, being entirely ex- 
cluded, we shall consider, what this anger of God means. 

First, Then it is manifest, that by the anger of God, the 
effects of anger are denoted. ' God is not unrighteous who 
taketh vengeance;' Kom. iii. 5. And it is said, Eph. v. 6. 
' Because of these things, the wrath of God cometh upon 
the children of disobedience.' That is, God will most as- 
suredly punish them. Hence the frequent mention of the 
wrath to come ; that is, the last and everlasting punishment. 
Thus, that great and terrible day, * in which God will judge 
the world by that man whom he hath ordained,' is called * the 
day of his wrath,' because it is the day of 'the revelation of 
the righteous judgment of God ;' Rom. ii. 5. And he is said 
to be slow to wrath, because he oftentimes proceeds slowly, 
as it seems to us, to inflict punishment, or recompense evil. 
But, perhaps, this difficulty is better obviated by Peter, who 
removes every idea of slowness from God, but ascribes to 
him patience and long-suffering in Christ towards the faith- 
ful ; and of this dispensation, even the whole world, in a 
secondary sense, are made partakers. ' The Lord is not slack,' 
says he, * concerning his promise (the promise, viz. of a 
future judgment), as some men count slackness, but is lono-- 
suffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but 
that all should come to repentance ;' 2 Pet. iii. 8, 9. 

Nay, the threatening of punishment is sometimes de- 
scribed by the words anger, fury, wrath, and fierce wrath. 
Thus, Jonah iii. 9. ' Who can tell if God will turn and 
repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish 
not;' that is, whether he may not, upon our humiliation and 
repentance, avert from us the grievous punishment denounced 
by the prophet. 

But, secondly. It denotes a constant and immutable will 
in God of avenging and punishing, by a just punishment, 
every injury, transgression, and sin. And hence that ex- 


pression, Rom. ix. 22. ' What if God willing to shew his 
anger ;' that is, his justice, or constant will of punishing 
sinners : for when any external operations of the Deity are 
described by a word denoting a human affection that is wont 
to produce such effects, the Holy Scripture means to point 
out to us some perfection perpetually resident in God, 
whence these operations flow, and which is their proper and 
next principle.* 

And what is that perfection but this justice, of which we 
are discoursing? For we must remove far from God every 
idea of anger, properly so called, which, in respect of its 
causes and effects, and of its own nature, supposes even the 
greatest perturbation, change, and inquietude of all the af- 
fections, in its subject ; and yet we are under the necessity 
of ascribing to him a nature adapted to effect those opera- 
tions, which are reckoned to belong to anger. But since 
the Scriptures testify, that God works these works, as he is 
just, and because he is just (and we have proved it above), 
it plainly appears that, that perfection of the Divine nature 
is nothing else but this vindicatory j ustice. Whence Thomas 
Aquinas asserts^, that anger is not said to be in God, in allu- 
sion to any passion of the mind, but to the judgment or de- 
cisions of his justice. Nay, that anger may not only be re- 
duced to justice, but that the words themselves are synoni- 
mous, and that they are taken so in Scripture, is certain. 
Psal. vii. 6. 9. ' Arise, O Lord, in thine anger, lift up thy- 
self because of the rage of mine enemies : and awake for me 
to the judgment that thou hast commanded. O let the wick- 
edness of the wicked come to an end ; but establish the 
just : for the righteous God trieth the heart and reins.' To 
judge in anger, or with justice, are phrases of the same im- 
port. Psal. Ivi. 7. ' Shall they escape by iniquity ? in thine 
anger cast down the people, O God.' Or, in justice, cast 
them down, because of their iniquity. Thus, when he justly 
destroyed the people of Israel by the king of Babylon, he 
says, it came to pass through his anger ; 2 Kings xxiv. 20. 
'For through the anger of the Lord, it came to pass in Jeru- 
salem and Judah, until he had cast them out from his pre- 
sence, that Zedekiah rebelled against the king of Babylon.' 

« That is, the principle from which tlicy iinmediately flow, 
f Quest. 47. article 1. 


But the apostle says, that this anger or punitory justice 
is ' revealed from heaven.' The apostle uses the same word 
here, that is translated ' revealed,' in the preceding verse, 
when speaking of the manifestation or revelation of the righ- 
teousness of faith in the gospel. Therefore, some have been 
of opinion, that the apostle here asserts, that this very anger 
of God is again and again made known and manifest, or 
openly declared in the gospel against unbelievers. But to 
what purpose, then, is there any mention made of heaven, 
whence that manifestation or revelation is said to have been 
made ? The apostle, therefore, uses the word in a different 
sense in the 18th verse from that which it is used in, in the 
preceding. There it means a manifestation by the preaching 
of the word ; here it signifies a declaration by examples ; 
and therefore a certain person hath, not improperly, trans- 
lated the word, * is laid open,' or * clearly appears ;' that is, 
is proved by numberless instances. Moreover, this verse is 
the principal of the arguments, by which the apostle proves 
the necessity of justification by faith in the remission of 
sins through the blood of Christ ; because that all have 
sinned, and thereby rendered God their open and avowed 

The apostle then affirms, that God hath taken care that 
his anger against sin, or that his justice should appear by in- 
numerable examples of punishments inflicted on mankind 
for their sins, in his providential government of the world ; 
and that it should appear in so clear a manner, that there 
should be no room left for conjectures about the matter. 
Not that punishment is always inflicted on the wicked and 
impious, while in this world, or at least that it appears to be 
so, for very many of them enjoy all the pleasures of a rich 
and flourishing outward estate; but besides, that he exercises 
his anger on their consciences, as we proved before ; and 
that the external good things of fortune, as they call them, 
are only a fattening of them for the day of slaughter ; even 
in this life he oft-times, in the middle of their career, exer- 
cises his severe judgments against the public enemies of 
heaven ; the monsters of the earth, the architects of wicked- 
ness, sunk in the mire and filth of their vices; and that too, 
even to the entire ruin and desolation both of whole nations, 
and of particular individuals, whom, by a remarkable pu- 


nishment, he thinks proper to make an example and spec- 
tacle of to the world, both to angels and to men. 

Therefore, although * God willing to shew his wrath, and 
to make his power known,' not in that way only, viz. by ex- 
ercising public punishments in this life, of which we are now 
speaking, ' endured with much long-suffering the vessels of 
wrath, fitted to destruction :' and though he should not in- 
stantly dart his lightnings against all, and every individiial 
of the abandoned and profane, yet mankind will easily dis- 
cerns what the mind and thoughts of God are, what his right 
and pleasure, and of what kind his anger and justice are 
with regard to every sin whatever. Therefore, the apostle 
affirms, that the anger of God, of which he gives only some 
instances, is by these judgments openly declared against all 
unrighteousness and ungodliness of men whatever ; whether 
they fail in the worship and duty which they owe to God, or 
in the duties which it is incumbent on them to perform to 
one another. Moreover, that the solemn revelation of this 
divine justice consists, not only in those judgments which 
sooner or later he hath exercised upon particular persons, 
but also in the whole series of his divine dispensations to- 
wards men, in which, as he gives testimony both to his good- 
ness and patience, inasmuch as ' he maketh his sun to shine 
on the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on the just, and 
the unjust,*" and leaves not himself without a witness, in that 
he doth good, and gives us rain from heaven, and fruitful 
seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness ;' so also 
he gives equally clear signs and testimonies of his anger, se- 
verity, and indignation, or of his punitory justice. Hence, 
on account of the efficacy of the divine anger, exercising its 
power and influence far and near, this visible world, as if the 
very fuel of the curse, is appointed as the seat and abode of 
all kinds of misery, grief, lamentation, cares, wrath, vanity, 
and inquietude. Why need I mention tempests, thunders, 
lightnings, deluges, pestilences, with many things more, by 
means of which, on account of the wickedness of man, uni- 
versal nature is struck with horror. All these, beyond a 
doubt, have a respect to the revelation of God's anger or 
justice, against the unrighteousness and ungodliness of men. 

S Viz. from those instances of punishment which he is pleased, in his wisdom, 
sometimes openly and awfully to inflict upon the wicked, 
h Man, V. 46. Acts xiv. 17. 


Moreover, the apostle testifies this revelation to be made 
from heaven. Even the most abandoned cannot but observe 
punishments of various kinds making havoc every where in 
the world, and innumerable evils brooding, as it were, over 
the very texture of the universe. But because they wish 
for and desire nothing more ardently, than either that there 
were no God, or that he paid no regard to human affairs, 
they either really ascribe, or pretend to ascribe all these 
things to chance, fortune, the revolutions of the stars and 
their influence, or finally, to natural causes. In order to 
free the minds of men from this pernicious deceit of athe- 
ism, the apostle affirms that all these things come to pass 
from heaven ; that is, under the direction of God, or, by a 
divine power and providence punishing the sins and wick- 
edness of men, and manifesting the justice of God. Thus, 
' The Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and 
fire from the Lord out of heaven ;' Gen. xix. 24. Which 
cities, by that punishment inflicted on them from heaven, he 
hath set up as an example, in every future age, to all those 
who should afterward persevere in the like impieties. To 
these considerations add, that the apostle, from this demon- 
stration of the divine anger from heaven against the sins of 
men, argues the necessity of appointing an atonement 
through the blood of Christ; ver. 23 — 25. which would by 
no means follow, but upon this supposition, that that anger 
of God was such that it could not be averted without the 
intervention of an atonement. 

But not to be tedious, it is evident that God, by the 
works of his providence, in the government of this world, 
gives a most copious testimony to his vindicatory justice, 
not inferior to that given to his goodness, or any other of 
his attributes; which testimony, concerning himself and 
his nature, he makes known, and openly exhibits to all by 
innumerable examples, constantly provided and appointed 
for that purpose. He then who shall deny this justice to 
be essential to God, may for the same reason reject his 
goodness and long-suffering patience. 

The fourth argument shall be taken from the revelation of 
that name, glory, and nature, which God hath exhibited to 
us in and through Christ; John i. 18. ' No man hath seen 
God at any time ; the only-begotten Son, who is in the bo- 
som of the Father, he hath declared him :' him who, though 


he be light itself, and dwelleth in light inaccessible, yet in 
respect of us, who, without Christ are naturally blinder than 
moles, is covered with darkness. In creation, in legislation, 
and in the works of providence, God indeed hath plainly 
marked out and discovered to us certain traces of his power, 
wisdom, goodness, justice, and long-sufFerance. But be- 
sides that, there are some attributes of his nature, the know- 
ledge of which could not reach the ears of sinners but by 
Christ ; such as his love to his peculiar people, his sparing 
mercy, his free and saving grace : and even others, which 
he hath made known to us in some measure, by the ways 
and means above-mentioned, we could have no clear or sav- 
ing knowledge of, unless in and through this same Christ ; 
' for in him are hid all the treasures of wisdom and know- 
ledge :' in him, God hath fully and clearly exhibited him- 
self to us to be loved, adored, and known ; and that not only 
in regard of his heavenly doctrine, ' in which he hath 
brought life and immortality to light through the gospel ;'' 
God finishing the revelation of himself to mankind, by the 
mission and ministry of his Son ; but also exhibiting both 
in the person of Christ, and in his mediatorial office, the 
brightness of his own glory, and the express image of his 
person, he glorified his own name, and manifested his na- 
ture, to all those at least, who being engrafted into Christ, 
and baptized into his Spirit, enjoy both the Father and 
the Son. But in the whole matter of salvation by the Me- 
diator, God-man, there is no excellence of God, no essential 
property, no attribute of his nature, the glory of which is 
the chief end of all his works, that he hath more clearly and 
eminently displayed than this punitory justice. 

It was for the display of his justice, that he set forth 
Christ as a propitiation through faith in his blood. He 
spared him not, but laid the punishment of us all upon him. 
It was for this that he was pleased to bruise him, to put 
him to grief, and to make his soul an offering for sin. 

The infinite wisdom of God, his inexpressible grace, 
free love, boundless mercy, goodness, and benevolence to 
men, in the constitution of such a Mediator, viz. a God-man, 
are not more illustriously displayed, to the astonishment of 
men and angels, in bi-inging sinful man from death, con- 
demnation, and a state of enmity, into a state of life, of sal- 

» 2 Tim. i. 10. 


vation, of glory, and of union and communion with himself, 
than is this punitory justice, for the satisfaction, manifes- 
tation, and glory of which, this whole scheme, pregnant with 
innumerable mysteries, was instituted. But that attribute, 
whose glory and manifestation God intended and accom- 
plished both in the appointment of his only-begotten Son 
to the office of mediator, and in his mission must be na- 
tural to him. And there is no need of arguments to prove, 
that this was his vindicatory justice. Yea, supposing this 
justice, and all regard to it entirely set aside, the glory of 
God's love in sending his son, and delivering him up to the 
death for us all, which the Scriptures so much extol, is ma- 
nifestly much obscured, if it do not rather totally disappear. 
For what kind of love can that be which God hath shewn, 
in doing what there was no occasion for him to do ? 

We will not at present enter fully into the consideration 
of other arguments by which the knowledge of this truth is 
supported ; among which that of the necessity of assigning 
to God (observing a just analogy) whatever perfections or 
excellencies are found among the creatures, is not of the 
least importance. These we pass : partly that we may not 
be tedious to the learned reader ; partly, because the truth 
flows in a channel, already sufficiently replenished with 
proofs. It would be easy, however, to shew that this justice 
denotes the highest perfection ; and by no means includes 
any imperfection ; on account of which it should be ex- 
cluded from the divine nature ; neither in the definition of 
it does one iota occur that can imply any imperfection; 
but all perfection, simple or formal, simply and formally is 
found in God. But when this perfection is employed in any 
operation respecting another being, and having for its ob- 
ject the common good, it necessarily acquires the nature of 

I shall not be farther troublesome to my readers; if what 
has been already said amount not to proof sufficient, I 
know not what is sufficient. I urge only one testimony more 
from Scripture and conclude. 

It is found in Heb. x. 26. ' For if we sin wilfully after 
that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there re- 
maineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful look- 
ing for of judgment, and fiery indignation.' But, perhaps 


God will pardon without any sacrifice ; the apostle is of 
a contrary opinion ; * where there is no sacrifice for sin,' he 
argues, that from the very nature of the thing, there must 
be *a looking for of judgment and fiery indignation ;' the 
very point that was to be proved. 

I could heartily wish that some sinner, whose conscience, 
the hand of the omnipotent God hath lately touched, ' whose 
sore ran in the night and ceased not,' and whose ' soul re- 
fused to be comforted,' v/hose ' grief is heavier than the sand 
of the sea,' in whom 'the arrows of the Almighty stick fast, 
the poison whereof drinketh up the Spirit,"' were to estimate 
and determine this difficult and doubtful dispute. Let us, 
I say, have recourse to a person, who being convinced by 
the Spirit, of his debts to God, is weighed down by their 
burden, while the sharp arrows of Christ are piercing the 
heart; Psal. xlv. 5. and let us inform him, that God, with 
the greatest ease by his nod, or by the light touch of his 
finger, so to speak, can blot out, hide, and forgive all his 
sins. Will he rest satisfied in such a thought? Will he im- 
mediately subscribe to it ? Will he not rather exclaim, * I 
have heard many such things, miserable comforters are ye 
all?^ nay, ye are preachers of lies, physicians of no value.' 
The terrors of the Lord which surround me, and beset me 
day and night, you feel not ; I have to do with the most 
just, the most holy, the supreme Judge of all, * who will do 
right, and will by no means clear the guilty.' Therefore 
* my days are consumed like smoke, and my bones are burnt 
as an hearth ; my heart is smitten and withered like grass ; 
so that T forget to eat my bread. By reason of the voice of 
my groaning, my bones cleave to my skin."™ I am afllicted 
and ready to die from my youth up ; while I suffer thy ter- 
rors, I am distracted. Thy fierce wrath goeth over me, thy 
terrors have cut me off;' I wish I were hid in the grave, yea, 
even in the pit, unless the judge himself, say to me, ' Deli- 
ver him from going down to the pit, I have found a ransom.*" 
Indeed, when the recollection of that very melancholy pe- 
riod comes into mind, when first God was pleased by his 
Spirit effectually to convince the heart of me, a poor sinner 
of sin, and when the whole of God's controversy with me 

k Job TU 2—4. 1 Job. vi. 2. "» Psal. cii. 3—5. 

"' Psal. Ixxxviii. 15, 16. ° Job xxxiii. 24. 


for sin is again presented to my view, I cannot sufficiently 
wonder what thoughts could possess those men, who have 
treated of the remission of sins, in so very slight, I had al- 
most said, contemptuous a manner. But these reflections 
are rather foreign to our present business. 


Another head of the first part of the dissertation. Arguments for the ne- 
cessary egress of vindicatory justice from the supposition of sin. The 
first argument. God's hatred of sin ; what. Whether God by nature 
hates si7i, or because he wills so to do. Testimonies from holy Scripture. 
Dr. Twiss's answer. The sum of it. The same obviated. The relation 
between obedience as to reward, and sin as to punishment, not the same. 
Justice and mercy, in respect of their exercise, different. The second ar- 
gument- The description of God in the Scriptures, in respect of si7i. In 
what sense he is culled a consuming fire. Twiss's nnsuwr refuted. The 
fallacies of the answer. 

We have sufficiently proved, if I he not mistaken, that sin- 
punishing justice is natural to God. The opposite arguments, 
more numerous than weighty, shall be considered hereafter. 
We are now to prove the second part of the question, viz. 
that the existence and sin of a rational creature being sup- 
posed, the exercise of this justice is necessary. And grant- 
ing what follows from what we have already said concerning 
the nature of justice, especially from the first argument, our 
proofs must necessarily be conclusive. The first is this : 

He who cannot but hate all sin, cannot but punish sin ; 
for to hate sin is, as to the affection, to will to punish it; 
and as to the effect, the punishment itself. And to be unable, 
not to will the punishment of sin, is the same with the ne- 
cessity of punishing it : for he who cannot but will to punish 
sin, cannot but punish it. ' For our God is in the heavens, 
he hath done whatsoever he pleaseth ;' Psal. cxv. 3. Now, 
when we say that God necessarily punishes sin, we mean, 
that on account of the rectitude and perfection of his nature, 
he cannot possess an indifference of will to punish. For it 
being supposed that God hates sin, he must hate it either by 
nature, or by choice ; if it be by nature, then we have gained 

VOL. IX. 2 E 


our point ; if by choice, or because he wills it, then it is 
possible for him not to hate it ; nay, he may even justly will 
the contrary, or exercise a contrary act about the same ob- 
ject : for those acts of the divine will are most free, viz. 
which have their foundation in the will only ; that is to say, 
that it is even possible for him to love sin ; for the divine 
will is not inclined to any object, but that if it should be in- 
clined to its contrary, that might, consistent with justice, 
be done. This reasoning Durandus agrees to, and this, Twiss 
urges as an argument : the conclusion then must be, that 
God may love sin, considered as sin : 

Credat Apella. 

The sons of circumcision may receive 

The wond'rous tale, wliich I shall ne'er believe. — Francis, Hohace. 

For, ' God hates all workers of iniquity ;' Psal. v. 5. * He 
calls it the abominable thing that he hateth ;' Jer. xliv. 4. 
Besides these, other passages of Scripture testify that God 
hates sin, and that he cannot but hate it. * Thou art of purer 
eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity ;' 
Hab. i. 13. On account of the purity of God's eyes, that is, 
of his holiness, an attribute which none hath ever ventured 
to 'deny, he cannot look on iniquity,' that is, he^ cannot but 
hate it. * Thou art not a God that hast pleasure in wicked- 
ness,' says the psalmist; Psal. v. 4, 5. that is, thou art a God 
who hatest all wickedness, for ' evil shall not dwell with 
thee, and the foolish shall not stand in thy sight, thou hatest 
all the workers of iniquity.' Is it a free act of the divine will 
that he here describes, which might or might not be exe- 
cuted without any injury to the holiness, purity, and justice 
of God ? or, the divine nature itself, as averse to, hating and 
punishing every sin? Why shall not the foolish stand in 
God's sight? Is it because he freely wills to punish them? 
or, because our God, to all workers of iniquity is a consum- 
ing fire ? Not that the nature of God can wax hot at the 
sight of sin, in a natural manner, as fire doth after the com- 
bustible materials have been applied to it ; but, that punish- 
ment as naturally follows sin, as its consequence, on account 
of the pressing demand of justice, as fire consumes the fuel 
that is applied to it. 

But it is not without good reason that God, who is love. 


SO often testifies in the Holy Scriptures his hatred and abomi- 
nation of sin, ' the wicked, and him that loveth violence, his 
soul hateth 5' Psal.xi. 5. Speaking of sinners. Lev. xxvi. 30. 
he says, ' and my soul shall abhor you.' He calls sin that 
abominable thing : there is nothing that God hates but sin, 
and because of sin only, other things are liable to his hatred. 
In what sense passions and affections are ascribed to God, 
and what he would have us to understand by such a descrip- 
tion of his nature and attributes, is known to_ every body. 
But of all the affections of human nature, hatred is i^.e most 
restless and turbulent, and to the person who is under its 
influence, and who can neither divest himself of it, nor s^ive 
a satisfactory vent to its motions, the most tormenting and 
vexatious. For as it takes its rise from a disagreement with 
and dislike of its object, so that object is always viewed as 
repugnant and offensive : no wonder then, that it should rouse 
the most vehement commotions and bitterest sensations. 
But God, who enjoys eternal and infinite happiness and 
glory, as he is far removed from any such perturbations, and 
placed far beyond all variableness or shadow of change, 
would not assume this affection so often, for our instruction, 
unless he meant clearly to point out to us this supreme, im- 
mutable, and constant purpose of punishing sin, as that mon- 
ster, whose property it is to be the object of God's hatred, 
that is, of the hatred of infinite goodness, to be natural and 
essential to him. 

The learned Twiss answers, ' I cannot agree, that God by 
nature equally punishes and hates sin, unless you mean that 
hatred in the Deity to respect his will as appointing a pu- 
nishment for sin : in which sense I acknowledge it to be 
true, that God equally, from nature and necessity, punishes 
and hates sin : but I deny it to be necessary that he should 
either so hate sin, or punish it ; if hatred be understood to 
mean God's displeasure, I maintain that it is not equally 
natural to God to punish sin, and to hate it ; for we main- 
tain it to be necessary that every sin should displease God ; 
but it is not necessary that God should punish every sin.* 
The sum of the answer is this ; God's hatred of sin is taken 
either for his will of punishing it, and so is not natural to 
God, or for his displeasure, on account of sin, and so is natural 
to him : but it does not thence follow, that God necessarily 

2 E 2 


punishes every sin, and that he can let no sin pass un- 

But, first. This learned gentleman denies what has been 
proved ; nor does he deign to advance a word to invalidate 
the proof. He denies that God naturally hates sin, hatred 
beino- taken for the will of punishing ; but this we have be- 
fore demonstrated both from Scripture and reason. It 
would be easy, indeed, to elude the force of any argumentin 
this manner. Afterward he acknowledges, that every sin 
must Kecessarily be displeasing to God ; this, then, depends 
not on the free-will of God, but on his nature; it belongs 
then immutably to God, and it is altogether impossible that 
it should not displease him. This, then, is supposed, that sin 
is always displeasing to God, but that God may or may not 
punish it, but pardon the sin, and cherish the sinner, though 
his sin eternally displease him ; for that depends upon his 
nature, which is eternally immutable. Nor is it possible, 
that what hath been sin, should ever be any thing but sin. 
From this natural displeasure, then, with sin, we may "with 
propriety argue to its necessary punishment ; otherwise, 
what meaneth that despairing exclam.ation of alarmed hypo- 
crites? 'Who among us shall dwell with the devouringfire? 
Who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings ?'* 

The learned doctor retorts ; ' Obedience must necessarily 
please God, but God is not bound by his justice necessarily 
to reward it.' But the learned gentleman will hardly main- 
tain, that the proportion between obedience as to reward, 
and disobedience as to punishment, is the same ; for God is 
bound to reward no man for obedience performed, for that 
is due to him by natural right; Luke xvii. 10. ' So likewise 
ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are com- 
manded you, say. We are unprofitable servants : we have 
done that which was our duty to do.' Psal. xvi. 2. ' My 
goodness extendeth not unto thee.' But every man owes to 
God obedience, or is obnoxious to a vicarious punishment; 
nor can the moral dependance of a rational creature on its 
Creator be otherwise preserved. ' The wages of sin is death ; 
but the gift of God is eternal life ;' Rom. vi. 23. 

Away, then, with all proud thoughts of equalling the pro- 
portion between obedience as to reward, and sin as to pu- 

* Isa. xxxiii. 14. 


nishment. ' Wlio hath first given to him, and it shall be re- 
compensed unto him again ? For of him, and through him, 
and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen ;' 
Rom. xi. 35, 36. ' What hast thou, O man, that thou hast 
not received? But if thou hast received it, why dost thou 
'glory, as if thou hadst not received it?' 1 Cor. iv. 7. God 
requireth nothing of us but what he hath formerly given us, 
and therefore he has every right to require it, although he 
were to bestow no rewards. What? Doth not God observe 
a just proportion in the infliction of punishments, so that the 
degrees of punishment, according to the rule of his justice 
should not exceed the demerit of the transgression ? * Shall 
not the judge of all the earth do right?' But beware. Dr. 
Twiss, of asserting. That there is any proportion between the 
eternal fruition of God, and the inexpressible participation 
of his glory, in which he hath been graciously pleased, that 
the reward of our obedience should consist, and the obedi- 
ence of an insignificant reptile, almost less than nothing. 
Whatever dignity or happiness we arrive at, we are still God's 

It is impossible, that he who is blessed forever and ever, 
and is so infinitely happy in his own essential glory, that he 
stands in no need of us, or of our services ; and who, in re- 
quiring all that we are, and all that we can do, only requires 
his own, can, by the receipt of it, become bound in any debt 
or obligation. For God, I say, from the beginning, stood in 
no need of our praise ; nor did he create us that he might 
have creatures to honour him, but that agreeable to his 
goodness he might conduct us to happiness. 

But he again retorts, and maintains, ' That God can 
punish where he does not hate ; and therefore, he may hate 
and not punish ; for he punished his most holy Son, whom 
God forbid, that we should say he ever hated,' But besides, 
that this mode of arguing, from opposites, hardly holds good 
in theology: though God hated not his Son when he pu- 
nished him, personally considered, he however hated the sins, 
on account of which he punished him (and even himself 
substitutively considered with respect to the effect of sin), no 
less than if they had been laid to any sinner : yea, and from 
this argument it follows, that God cannot hate sin, and not 
punish it ; for when he laid sins, which he hates, to the 


charge of his most holy Son, whom he loved with the high- 
est love, yet he could not but punish him. 

The representation or description of God, and of the Di- 
vine nature, in respect of its habitude^ to sin, which the 
Scriptures furnish us with, and the description of sin, with 
relation to God and his justice, supply us with a second ar- 
gument. They call God *a consuming fire, ''^ a God who 'will 
by no means clear the guilty.''* 

They represent sin as ' that abominable thing which he 
hateth,^ which he will destroy, as the fire devoureth the stub- 
ble, and the flame consumeth the chaff.' As then consuming 
fire cannot but burn and consume stubble, when applied to 
it, so neither can God do otherwise than punish sin, that abo- 
minable thing, which is consuming or destroying it, when- 
ever presented before him and his justice. 

But the very learned Twiss replies, * That God is a con- 
suming fire, but an intelligent and rational one, not a natural 
and insensible one ; and this,' says he, ' is manifest from this, 
that this fire once burnt something not^ consumable, namely, 
his own Son, in whom there was no sin; which,' says he, ' may 
serve as a proof, that this fire may not burn what is con- 
sumable, when applied to it.' 

But, in my opinion, this very learned man was never more 
unhappy in extricating himself: for first, he acknowledges 
God to be * a consuming fire,' though a rational and intelli- 
gent one, noT; a natural and insensible one ; but the compa- 
rison was made between the events of the operations, not 
the modes of operating. Nobody ever said that God acts 
without sense, or from absolute necessity and principles of 
nature, without any concomitant liberty ; but although he 

•> Habitude means the state of a person or a tiling, with relation to something 
else: the habitude of the divine nature with respect to sin, is a disposition to pu- 
nish it. 

<= Rom. xii. 29. Deut. iv. 24. Isa. siii. 13. 

^ Exod. xxxiv. 7. e jg^. xii v. 4. Isa. v. 24. 

* The word in the original is ' combustibile,' meaning something that is susceptible 
of, and consumable by fire. It must be evident to every one that the phrase is used 
in allusion to the metaphor, which represents God as a consuming fire. The Son of 
God then was not, strictly and properly speaking, consumable, or susceptible of this 
fire ; that is, he was by no means the object of divine anger, or punishment, consi- 
dered as the Son of God, and without any relation to mankind ; but on the contrary, 
was the beloved of his Father, with whom he was always well pleased : but he was 
liable to the effect of this fire, that is, of God's vindicatory justice, as our represen- 
tative and federal head. And every sinner is consumable by this fire, that is, is 
properly and naturally the object of divine wrath and punishment. 


acts by will and understanding, we have said that his nature 
as necessarily requires him to punish any sin committed, as 
natural and insensible fire burns the combustible matter that 
is applied to it. But the learned gentleman does not deny 
this, nay, he even confirms it, granting that, with respect to 
sin, God ' is a consuming fire,' though only an intelligent and 
rational one. 

I am sorry that this very learned author should have used 
the expression, ' that this fire burnt something not consum- 
able,' when he punished his most holy and well-beloved 
Son : for God did not punish Christ as his most holy Son, 
but as our Mediator, and the surety of the covenant, ' whom 
he made sin for us, though he knew no sin ;' surely, * he laid 
upon him our sins,' before ' the chastisement of our peace 
was upon him :' but in this sense he was very susceptible of 
the effects of this fire, viz. when considered as bearing the 
guilt of all our sins, and therefore it was that by fire the 
Lord did plead with him,s therefore, what this very learned 
man asserts, in the third place, falls to the ground ; for the 
conclusion from such a very false supposition, must neces- 
sarily be false. We go on to the third argument. 


The third argument. The non-punishment of sin is contrary to the glory 
of God's justice. Likewise of his holiness and dominion. A fourth argu- 
ment. The necessity of a satisfaction being made by the death ofVhrist. 
No necessary cause, or cogent reason for the death of Christ, according 
to the adversaries. The objection refuted. The use of sacrifices. The end 
of the first part of the dissertation. 

OuK third argument is this: It is absolutely necessary that 
God should preserve his glory entire to all eternity \ but sin 
being supposed, without any punishment due to it, he can- 
not preserve his glory free from violation ; therefore, it is 
necessary that he should punish it. Concerning the major 
proposition,* there is no dispute j for all acknowledge, not 

S Isa. Ixvi. 16. 
» Our author here speaks in the language, and reasons in the manner of logi- 
cians, the prevalent mode of reasoning at the time when he wrote : for the sake of 
those unacquainted with that art, it may not be improper to observe, that the above 
argument is what they call a syllogism ; and that a syllogism consists of three propo- 


only that it is necessaiy to God that he should preserve his 
glory, but that this is incumbent on him by a necessity of 
nature, for he cannot but love himself; he is Jehovah, and 
will not give his glory to another.'' The truth of the as- 
sumption is no less clear, for the very nature of the thing it- 
self proclaims, that the glory of justice, or of holiness and 
dominion, could not otherwise be preserved and secured, 
than by the punishment of sin. 

Forfirst, Theglory of Godis displayed in doing the things 
that are just; but in omitting these, it is impaired, not less 
than in doing the things that are contrary. ' He that justi- 
fieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they 
both are an abomination to the Lord.'*' ' Shall not the judge 
of all the earth do right?' or, what is just? But it is a righ- 
teous or just thing with God to recompense tribulation to 
the disobedient,'' and to punish those, who, on account of 
sin, are worthy of death. Suppose, then, that God should let 
the disobedient, whom it is a just thing for him to punish, 
go unpunished, and that those who are worthy of death 
should never be required to die, but that he should clear 
the guilty and the wicked, although he hath declared them 
to be an abomination to him ; where is the glory of his jus- 
tice ? That it is most evident, that God thus punishes, be- 
cause he is just, we have proved before. ' Is God unrigh- 
teous or unjust, who taketh vengeance? God forbid; for 
then, how shall God judge the world?' 'And he is righte- 
ous, or just, because he hath given them blood to drink, who 
were worthy of it ;''^ and would be so far unjust, were he 
not to inflict punishment on those deserving it. 

Secondly, A proper regard is not shewn to divine holi- 
ness, nor is its glory manifested, unless the punishment due 
to sin be inflicted. Holiness is opposed to sin, ' for God is 
of purer eyes than to behold evil, and cannot look on ini- 
quity;'^ and is the cause why he cannot let sin pass unpu- 

sitions: the first is called the major, the second tlic mii>or, and the third the coir- 
clusion. In the above argument the major proposition is, ' it is absolutely necessary 
that God should preserve his glory entire to ail eternity.' The minor is, ' but sia 
being supposed, without any punishment due to it, he cannot preserve his glory free 
from violation.' Tl.e, conclusion is, ' therefore it is necessary that he should punish 
it.' The minor is sometimes called the assumption, and sometimes the conclusion is 
so named. They are both included under this title by our author in the following 

b Isa.xlii. 8. e Prov. xvii. 15, ^ 2 Thess. i. 6. Rom. i. 32. 

^ Horn. iii. j. ilev. xvi, 5—7. f Hab. i. 13. 


nished, ' ye cannot serve the Lord ; for he is a holy God : 
he will not forgive your transgressions, nor your sins,'s said 
Joshua to the Israelites. For why? Can any thing impure 
and polluted stand before his holy Majesty ? He himself de- 
clares the contrary, ' that he is not a God that hath pleasure 
in wickedness;' that, 'evil shall not dwell with him;' that 
* the foolish shall not stand in his sight ;' that * he hateth all 
the workers of iniquity.' And that, * there shall in no wise 
enter into the New Jerusalem, any thing that defileth, neither 
whatsoever worketh abomination or maketh a lie.'^ Nor can 
Jesus Christ present his church to his Father,' till it be sanc- 
tified and cleansed, with the washing of water by the word, 
and made a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or 
any such thing ; but holy, and without blemish.'' And we 
are enjoined to be holy, because he is holy. ' But all things 
are to be purged with blood, and without shedding of blood, 
there is no remission."" 

Thirdly, We have sufficiently shewn above, that the na- 
tural dominion which God hath over rational creatures, and 
which, they by sin renounce, could not otherwise be preserv- 
ed, or continued, than by means of a vicarious punishment. 
And now let impartial judges decide, whether it be necessary 
to God, that he should preserve entire the glory of his jus- 
tice, holiness, and supreme dominion, or not? 

Fourthly, And which is a principal point to be considered 
on this subject, were the opinions of the adversaries to be 
admitted, and were we to suppose that God might will the 
salvation of any sinner, it will be difficult, if not impossible, 
to assign any sufficient and necessary cause of the death of 
Christ. For, let us suppose that God hath imposed on man- 
kind a law, ratified by a threatening of eternal death ; and 
that they, by a violation of that law, have deserved the pu- 
nishment threatened, and consequently are become liable to 
eternal death. Again, Let us suppose, that God in that 
threatening, did not expressly intend the death of the sin- 
ner ; but afterward declared what, and of what kind he willed 
that the guilt of sin should be, and what punishment he 
might justly inflict on the sinner, and what the sinner him- 
self ought to expect (all which things flow from the free de- 
termination of God), but that he might by his nod, word, 

B Josh. xxiv. 9. '>Psal.\'.4— 6. Rcv.xxi. 27. ' Eph. v. 26, 27. "^ Hcb. ix. 22. 


without any trouble, though no satisfaction were either made, 
or received, without the least diminution of his glory, and 
without any affront or dishonour to any attribute, or any in- 
jury or disgrace to himself, consistent with the preservation 
of his right, dominion, and justice, freely pardon the sins of 
those whom he might will to save ; what sufficient reason 
could be given, pray then, why he should lay those sins so 
easily remissible to the charge of his most holy Son, and on 
their account subject him to such dreadful sufferings? 

While Socinians do not acknowledge other ends of the 
whole of this dispensation and mystery, than those which 
they assign, they will be unable, to all eternity, to give any 
probable reason, why a most merciful and just God should 
expose a most innocent and holy man, who was his own 
Son, by way of eminence, and who was introduced by him- 
self into the world in a preternatural manner, as they them- 
selves acknowledge, to afflictions and sufferings of every 
kind, while among the living he pointed out to them the way 
of life ; and at last to a cruel, ignominious, and accursed death. 

I very well know that I cannot pretend to be either in- 
genious or quick-sighted ; but respecting this matter, I am 
not ashamed to confess my dulness to be such, that I cannot 
see that God, consistent with the preservation of his right 
and glory entire, could, without the intervention of a ransom, 
pardon sins, as if justice did not require their punishment, 
or that Christ had died in vain. For why? Hath not God 
set him forth to be a propitiation for the demonstration, or 
declaration of his sin-punishing justice? But how could 
that justice be demonstrated by an action which it did not 
require ? or, if the action might be omitted without any di- 
minution of it? If God would have been infinitely just to 
eternity, nor would have done any thing contrary and of- 
fensive to justice, though he had never inflicted punishment 
upon any sin ? Could any ruler become highly famed and 
celebrated on account of his justice, by doing those things, 
which, from the right of his dominion, he can do without in- 
justice, but to the performance of which he is no way obli- 
gated by the virtue of justice ? But if the adversaries sup- 
pose, that, when God freely made a law for his rational crea- 
tures, he freely appointed a punishment for transgression, 
freely substituted Christ in the room of transgressors : in 


fine, that God did all these things, and the like, because so 
it pleased him, and that therefore we are to acquiesce in that 
most wise and free-will of his disposing all things at his 
pleasure ; they should not find me opposing them ; unless 
God himself had taught us in his word, ' that sin is that abo- 
minable thing which his soul hateth,' which is affrontive to 
him, which entirely casteth off all regard to that glo^y, ho- 
nour, and reverence, which are due to him : and that to the 
sinner himself, it is something evil and bitter, ' for he shall 
eat of the fruit of his doings, and be filled with his own coun- 
sels ;' and that God, with respect to sinners, is a * consuming 
fire,' an everlasting burning, in which they shall dwell ; that 
' he will by no means clear the guilty,' that he judgeth^those 
who are worthy of death, and by his just judgment taketh 
vengeance on them ; and that, therefore, ' without the shed- 
ding of blood, there can be no remission ;' and that without 
a victim for sin, there remaineth to sinners, 'nothing but a 
fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, that 
shall consume the adversaries ;' and that he had appointed 
from the beginning, his only-begotten Son, for the declaration 
and satisfaction of his justice, and the recovery of his glory, 
to open the way to heaven, otherwise shut, and to remain 
shut for ever : if, I say, God had not instructed us in these 
and such-like truths from his word, I should not oppose 
them: but these being clearly laid down in the word, we 
solemnly declare our belief, that no sinner could obtain the 
remission of his sins, provided that we are disposed to ac- 
knowledge God to be just, without ^a price of redemption. 

Perhaps, some one will say, it doth not follow from the 
death of Christ, that God necessarily punisheth sin, for 
Christ himself, in his agony, placeth the passing away of 
the cup among things possible. * All things,' saith he, 
' Father, are possible with thee. Let this cup pass from me.* 

I answer, it is well known, that the word * impossibility* 
may be considered in a twofold point of view : the first is 
in itself absolute, which respects the absolute power of God, 
antecedent to any free act of the divine will : in this respect, 
it was not impossible that, that cup should pass from Christ. 
The second is conditional, which respects the power of God, 
as directed in a certain order, that is determined, and (if I 

' Or ransom. 


might so phrase it) circumscribed by some act of the divine 
will ; and in this sense it was impossible : that is to say, it 
being supposed, that God willed to pardon any sins to sin- 
ners, it could not be done without laying their punishment 
upon the surety ; but we do not pursue this argument farther 
at present, because we intend to resume it again in the con- 
sideration of the doctrine of Christ's satisfaction. 

There ar« yet many arguments very proper for establish- 
ing the truth on our side of the question, which we choose 
not to enter on largely and on set purpose, lest we should 
be tiresome to the reader; perhaps, however, it will be 
judged worth while briefly to sketch out some heads of them, 
and annex them to the former arguments concerning justice 
and the exercise thereof. The first is to this purport : 

A second act presupposes a first ; and a constant manner 
of operating proves a habit. A sign also expresses the 
thing signified. Because God doetli good to all, we believe 
him to be good and endowed with supreme goodness. For 
how could he so constantly and uniformly do good, unless 
he himself were good ? Yea, from second acts the Holy Scrip- 
tures sometimes teach the first; as for instance, that God 
is the living God, because he giveth life to all ; that he is 
good, because he doeth good : why may we not also say, 
and that he is just, endowed with that justice of which we 
are treating, because ' God perverteth not judgment; neither 
doth the Almighty pervert justice;' but ' the Lord is righ- 
teous, and upright are his judgments.'™ A constant, then, and 
uniform course of just operation in punishing sin, proves 
punitory justice to be essentially inherent in God. From 
his law, which is the sign" of the divine will, the same is 
evident. For the nature of the thing signified is, that it 
resembles the sign appointed for the purpose of expressing 
it. That the same thing may be said of the anger, fury, and 
severity of God hath been shewn above ; Rom. i. 8. 

A second. It is not the part of a just judge, of his mere 
good pleasure, to let the wicked pass unpunished : * he that 
justifieth the wicked is an abomination to the Lord,' and 
'woe to them that call evil good.' But God is a just judge : 
* but one, who is not liable to render a reason,' you will say, 

"' Job viii. 3. Psal. cxix. 137. 
" That is, which slicwcth what the divine will is. 


and ' who is by no means subject to a law.' But the nature 
of God is a law to itself: he cannot lie, because he himself 
is truth ; nor act unjustly, because he is just. Such as God 
is by nature, such is he in the acts of his will. 

A third. The argument, from, the immutable difference 
of things in themselves, is of very considerable weight. For 
that which is sin, because it destroys that subjection of the 
creature which is due to the Creator, cannot even, by the 
omnipotence of God, be made to be not sin. To hate the 
supreme good implies a contradiction. But if from the na- 
ture of the thing, sin be sin, in relation to the supreme per- 
fection of God, from the nature of the thing too it is its own 
punishment. Yea, God hath ordered children to obey their 
parents, because this is right." 

A fourth. The adversaries acknowledge, ' that God can- 
not save the impenitent and obstinately wicked, without in- 
jury to the glory, and holiness, and perfection, of his nature.' 
Wliy so? 'The justice of God,' say they, 'will not suffer it.' 
But what kind of justice is that, I ask, which can regard cer- 
tain modes and relations of ti-ansgression or sin, and will 
not regard the transgression or sin itself? 

A fifth, God punishes sin either because he simply wills 
it, or because it is just that sin should be punished. If be- 
cause he simply wills it, then the will of God is the alone 
cause of the perdition of a sinful creature. But he himself 
testifies to the contrary, viz. that man's ruin is of himself; 
*0 Israel^ thou hast destroyed thyself; but in me is thy 
help.' Again, justice does not require that the things which 
God doeth of his mere good pleasure should come to pass, 
more, than that they should not come to pass. But if it be 
not more just that sins should be punished, than that they 
should not be punished, it is certain that the non-punish- 
ment or free pardon of sin is more agreeable to the goodness, 
grace, love, and compassion of God, than the infliction of 
punishment ; how then comes it to pass, that disregarding 
these attributes, he should freely will that which no essen- 
tial property of his nature requires ? If then sin be sin, be- 
cause God wills it; if the transgression of the law deserve 
punishment because God wills it; and the punishment be at 
Length inflicted because God wills it; the order of things, 

o In tlie original, just. i' Hos. xiii. 9. 


or the condition which they are in by virtue of their respect 
and relation to the dominion and perfection of God, re- 
quiring no such thing, why pray, should we either hate or 
abhor sin, when the bare will of God alone is to be consi- 
dered, both in respect of the decree which supposes that 
there is nothing in sin, and which implies no change of the 
state of things, and also in respect of its execution ? But if 
God punish sin, because, by virtue of his natural justice it is 
just that it should be punished, then it is unjust not to pu- 
nish it. But is God unjust? God forbid. 

I am truly ashamed of those divines, who have nothing 
more commonly in their mouths, both in their disputations 
and discourses to the people, than ' that God might by other 
means have provided for the safety and honour of his jus- 
tice, but that, that way by the blood of his Son was more 
proper and becoming.' So said Augustine of old : but what 
then ? Of that absolute power, which they dream of, by 
which he might, without any intervening sacrifice, forgive 
sins, not the least syllable is mentioned in the whole sacred 
writings : nor am I afraid to affirm that a more convenient 
device to weaken our faith, love, and gratitude, cannot be in- 
vented. Away, then, with such speculations which teach 
that the mystery of the love of God the Father, of the blood 
of Jesus Christ, of the grace of the Holy Spirit are either 
indifferent, or at least were not necessary for procuring and 
bestowing salvation and eternal glory on miserable sinners. 
But it is manifest, that by such artifices Socinians endeavour 
to overthrow the whole healing and heavenly doctrine of 
the gospel : ' My soul, come not thou into their secret.' But 
that God should institute so many expiatory typical sacri- 
fices, and attended with so great labour and cost, with a 
sanction of severe punishments upon delinquents, with this 
view only to communicate instruction, and to serve to lead 
us to Christ, though they could in no wise take away the 
guilt of sin :^ that he should appoint his own Son, not only 
to death, but to a bloody, ignominious, accursed death, to 
be inflicted with such shame and disgrace as hath not been 
purged away through so many generations that have passed 
since that death, even to the present time ; that Jehovah 

•■ Heb. X. 1. There the apostle argues for the necessity of the satisfaction of 
Christ, which he could not, if the guilt of sin could have been taken away by any 
other way whatever. 


himself should have been pleased to bruise him, to put him 
to grief; that he made his own sword to awake against him, 
and forsook him f that God, I say, should have done these 
and such like' things, without being induced to it by any 
necessary cause, let those who can, comprehend and ex- 


Objections of the adversaries answered. The Racoviun catechism particu- 
larly considered. The force of the argument for the satisfaction of Christ, 
from punitory justice. The catcchists deny that justice to be inherent m 
God. And also sparing mercy. Their first argument weighed and re- 
futed. Justice and 7nercy are not opposite. Two kinds of the divine at- 
tributes. Their second and third arguments, with the answers annexed. 

It is now time to meet the objections of the adversaries, 
and so at length put an end to this dispute, as far as regards 
the subject matter of it, already drawn out to such a length, 
and yet farther to be continued. We must first then en- 
counter the Socinians themselves, on whose account we first 
engaged in this undertaking ; and afterward we shall com- 
pare notes with a few learned friends. But as Very lately 
the Kacovian catechism of these heretics hath been repeat- 
edly printed among us, we shall first consider what is to be 
met with there in opposition to the truth which we assert. 

The Socinians grant in that catechism of theirs, the ar- 
gument for the satisfaction of Christ, drawn from the nature 
of this punitory justice 'to be plausible in appearance ;' yea, 
they must necessarily acknowledge it to be such as that 
they cannot even in appearance oppose it, without being 
guilty of the dreadful sacrilege of robbing God of his essen- 
tial attributes; and therefore they deny either this justice 
or sparing mercy to be naturally inherent in God ; and they 
endeavour to defend the robbery by a three-fold argument. 
Their first is this : * as to mercy, that it is not inherent in 

' See Isa. liii. 10. 
'This treatise was published in Latin, in tiie year 1653. 


God in the manner that they think^b is evident from this 
consideration, that if it were naturally inherent in God, God 
would not wholly punish any sin ; as in like manrrer, if that 
justice were naturally inherent in God, as they think, God 
could forgive no sin : for God can never do any thing 
against what is naturally inherent in him. As for instance, 
as wisdom is naturally inherent in God, God never doeth 
any thing contrary to it, but whatsoever he doeth, he doeth 
all things wisely. But as it is manifest that God forgives 
and punishes sins when he will, it appears, that such a kind 
of mercy and justice as they think of, is not naturally inhe- 
rent in God, but is the effect of his own will.' 

I answer first, that we have laid it down as a fixed prin- 
ciple that mercy is essential to God, and that the nature of 
it in God is the same with justice we willingly grant. Ru- 
therford alone hath asserted that mercy is essential to God, 
but that this justice is a free act of the divine will. The 
falsity and folly of his assertion, let himself be answerable 
for ; the thing speaks for itself. To speak the truth, justice 
is attributed to God properly and by way of habit, mercy 
only analogically and by way of affection ; and in the first 
covenant God paved no way for the display of his mercy, 
but proceeded in that which led straight to the glory of his 
justice; nevertheless we maintain the one to be no less na- 
turally inherent in God than the other. ' But if it were na- 
turally inherent in God,' say the catechists, ' God would not 
punish any sin.' Why? I say; mention some plea. ' Be- 
cause,' say they, 'God cannot do any thing contrary to what 
is naturally inherent in him ; but it is manifest that God 
punishes sin.' But whose sins doth God punish? The sins 
of the impenitent, the unbelieving, the rebellious, for whose 
offences the justice of God hath never been satisfied. But, 
is not this contrary to mercy? Let every just judge then 
be called cruel ; the punishment of sin then is contrary to 
mercy, either in respect of the infliction of the punishment 
itself, or because it supposes in God a quality opposite to 
mercy ; the contrariety is not in respect of the infliction of 
punishment ; for between an external act of divine power 
and eternal attributes of Deity, no opposition can be sup- 

^ Let the reader remember that the compilers of the Racovian catechism are now 
speaking, and that the words 'they think' allude to the sentiments of the orthodox. 


posed ; nor can it be, because punishment supposes some 
quality in God opposite to mercy, for that which is oppo- 
site to mercy is cruelty; but God is free from every suspi- 
cion of cruelty, yet he punishes the sins of the impenitent, 
as the Socinians themselves acknowledge. 

But that punitory justice, say they, which you assign as 
the source of punishment, is opposite to mercy. How, I say, 
can that be ? Punitory justice, essentially considered, is the 
very perfection and rectitude of God itself, essentially con- 
sidered ; and the essence of mercy, so to speak, is the same. 
But the essei>ce of God, which is most simple, is not op- 
posed to itself; moreover, both have their actual egresses 
by means of the acts of the divine will, which is always one 
alone and self-consistent. Objectively considered, I ac- 
knowledge they have different, but not contrary, effects ; for 
to punish the impenitent guilty, for whom no satisfaction 
hath been made, is not contrary to the pardoning of those 
who believe and are penitent, through the blood of the Me- 
diator, which was shed for the remission of sins. In one 
word, it is not necessary, that, though actions be contrary, 
the essential principles should also be contrary. 

But they again urge, ' Wisdom is naturally inherent in 
God, and he never doeth any thing contrary to it ; for what- 
soever he doeth, he doeth all things wisely.' We answer. 
It hath been proved before that the punishment of sin is 
not contrary to mercy. But they urge something farther, 
and insinuate that God not only cannot act contrary to his 
wisdom, but that in every work he exerciseth it ; ' whatsoever 
he doeth,' say they, ' he doeth wisely.' But the nature of all 
the divine attributes, in respect of their exercise, is not the 
same ; for some create and constitute an object to them- 
selves, as power and wisdom, which God must necessarily 
exercise in all his works ; some require an object consti- 
tuted for their egress ; and for these it is sufficient, that no 
work be done that is opposite, or derogatory to their honour; 
of this kind are mercy and justice, as was said before. 

Thus far concerning mercy. 

The objections that they bring against justice are easily 
answered : ' If justice be naturally inherent in God,' say they, 
' then he could let no sin pass unpunished.' We readily 
grant that God passes by no sin unpunished, nor can do it. 

VOL. IX. 2 F 


He forgives our sins, but he doth not absolutely let them 
pass unpunished; every sin hath its just recompense of re- 
ward, either in the sinner, or the surety ; but to pardon sin 
for which jusuce hath been satisfied, is nowise contrary to 
justice; that the nature of justice and mercy, in respect of 
their relation to their object, is different, hath been shewn 
before. Such is their first argument ; the second follows, 
which is this : 

'That justice which the adversaries oppose to mercy,' 
say they, 'whereby God punisheth sins, the sacred Scriptures 
nowhere point out by the name of justice, but call it the 
anger and fury of God.' We answer, in the first place, that 
it is a very gross mistake, that we oppose justice to mercy. 
These catechists have need themselves to be catechized. 

In the second place ; Let those, who shall please to con- 
sult the passages formerly mentioned and explained on this 
head, determine, whether the Sacred Scriptures call this 
justice* by its own proper name or not? In the third place ; 
Anger or fury are, in reality, as to their effects, reducible to 
justice; hence that which is called 'wrath' or 'anger' in 
Rom. i. 18. in the thirty-first verse is called 'judgment.''' 
Such is their second, and now follows the third argument. 

'When God forgives sins, it is attributed in Scripture to 
his justice. '^If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just 
to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all iniquity. 
Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption 
that is in Jesus Christ, whom God hath set forth to be a pro- 
pitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righte- 
ousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the 
forbearance of God ; to declare, I say, at this time his righ- 
teousness; that he might be just, and the justifier of him 
that believeth in Jesus.' We answer ; that we have already 
shewn, at great length, that justice, universally taken, is the 
perfection and rectitude of God, and has various egresses 
both in words and in deeds, according to the constitution 
of the objects about which it may be employed : hence ef- 
fects distinct and in some measure different, are attributed 
to the same virtue. But the justice, on account of which, 
God is said to forgive sins, is the justice of faithfulness, 

» This point is treated, at great length, and clearly proved in 'tlie third chapter. 
^ Theoriginal word means a just sentence, or righteous judgment. 
<= 1 John i. 9. Rora. iii. 24—26. 


which has the foundation of its exercise in this punitory 
justice, to which, when satisfied, God, who cannot lie, pro- 
mises the forgiveness of sins through Jesus Christ, which 
promise beyond all doubt he will perform, because he is 
faithful and just. And thus vanishes in smoke all that 
these unhappy catechists have scraped together against this 
divine truth. 


Crellius taken to task. His first mistake. God doth not punish sins as behig 
endowed with supreme dominioti. The first argument of Crellius. The 
answer. The translation of punishment upon Christ, in what view made 
by God. Whether the remission of sins, without a satisfaction made, could 
take place, without injury to him to whom punishment belongs. Whether 
every one can resign his right. Right twofold. The right of debt, what: 
and what that of government. A natural and positive right. Positive 
right, what: a description also of natural right. Concessions of Crellius. 

Crellius treats this subject at great length, and with 
his usual artifice and acuteness, in his first book ' of the true 
Religion,' prefixed to the works of Volkelius, on the same 

First, then, he asserts, ' That God hath a power of in- 
flicting and of not inflicting punishment ; but that it is by 
no means repugnant to divine justice, to pardon the sinner 
whom by his right he might punish.' 

But here Crellius, which is a bad omen, as they say, 
stumbles in the very threshold ; supposing punishment to 
be competent to God, as he hath, oris endowed with an ab- 
solute and supreme dominion over the creatures. God never 
punisheth, or is said to punish, as using that power : it 
is the part of a governor or judge to inflict punishment, 
and the Scriptures furnish sufficient evidence that both 
these relations belong to him in the infliction of punish- 
ment. ^' There is one Lawgiver, who is able to save and to 
destroy. He raaintaineth right, and sitteth on his throne 
judging right. He is Judge of all the earth. He is the 
supreme Judge. He hath prepared his throne for judg- 

•1 Chap, xxiii. title, ' Of the Power of God ;' p. 181, &c. 
•> James iv, 12. Psal. ix. 4, 5. Gen. xviii. 2:5. Psal. 1. 6. ix. 8, 9. xciv. 2. Heb. 
xii. 23, &c. 

2 F 2 


ment, and he shall judge the world in righteousness : he shall 
minister judgment to the people in righteousness. He is 
Judge of the earth, who will render a reward to the proud. 
He is Jehovah, our Judge, our Lawgiver, and our King. And 
God the Judge of all.' In all the acts of his absolute do- 
minion and supreme power, God is most free, and this the 
apostle openly asserts with regard to his decrees making dis- 
tinctions among mankind, in respect of their last end, and 
the means thereto conducing, according to his mere good 
pleasure ; see Rom. ix. Moreover, in some operations and 
dispensations of providence concerning mankind, both the 
godly and ungodly, I acknowledge, that God frequently as- 
serts the equity and rectitude of his government, from that 
supreme right which he possesseth, and may exercise. 

*^ ' Behold, — God is greater than man. Why dost thou 
strive against him; for he giveth not an account of any of 
his matters.' 'Yea, surely, God will not do wickedly, neither 
will the Almighty pervert judgment. Who hath given him 
a charge over the earth ? or, who hath disposed the whole 
world? if he set his heart upon man, if he gather to himself 
his spirit and his breath ; all flesh shall perish together, and 
man shall return again unto dust.' 

But that God punishes omissions, and avenges trans- 
gressions, as the supreme ''Lord of all, and not as a Ruler of 
the universe and Judge of the world, is an opinion supported 
by no probable reason, and by no testimony of Scripture. 
But let us hear what Crellius himself has to say. He thus 
proceeds : 

' He injures none, whether he punish or do not punish ; 
if so be that the question is only respecting his right : for 
the punishment is not owing to the offending person, but he 
owes it; and he owes it to him upon whom the whole injury 
will ultimately redound, who in this matter is God ; but if 
you consider the matter in itself, every one has it in his 

<^ Job xxxiii. 12, 13. 
^ As supreme Lord of the universe, he exerciseth an uncontrolled dominion, dohig 
' in the armies of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth, whatsoever seem- 
eth good unto him.' But as the Ruler and Judge of the world, he distributeth im- 
partial justice, ' giving to every one according to his works.' The force of this argu- 
ment then is tJiis, tliatin viewing God, as punishing sin, we are not to consider him 
as supreme Lord, who may exercise an absolute and uncontrolled will ; but as a 
righteous Judge, bound by a law to administer justice, and by a law founded in his 
nature, necessarily requiring him so to do. 


power to prosecute his right, and likewise not to prosecute 
it, or to yield up of it as much as he pleases : for this is the 
nature of a proper and sovereign right. 

A71S. It is easy to be seen, that the former fallacy diffuses 
its fibres through the whole of this reasoning. For the right, 
a dispensation with which he maintains to be lawful, he af- 
firms to be a sovereign right, or the right of a lord and.master ; 
but this right is not the subject in question. It is a ruler and 
judge to whom punishmentbelongs, and who repays it; I would 
not, indeed, deny that God's supreme and sovereign right 
has a place in the matter of the satisfaction made by Christ 
in our stead : for although to inflict punishment be the oflSce 
of a ruler and judge,* yet the very translation of guilt from 
us upon Christ, constituting him sin for us, is a most free 
act, and an act of supreme power ; unless, perhaps, the ac- 
ceptance of the promise made by the surety, belong of right 
to him as ruler, and there be no other act to be assigned 
to God. 

But let us consider these arguments of Crellius severally. 

* He injures no one,' says he, 'whether he punish or not:' but 
an omission of the infliction of punishment, where it is due, 
cannot take place without injury to that justice on which it 
is incumbent to inflict the punishment. ' For he that jus- 
tifieth the wicked, is an abomination to the Lord.'*" And a 
heavy woe is pronounced on them ' that call evil good, and 
good evil.' It is true, that God neither injures nor can in- 
jure any one, either in what he hath done, or might do : 

* for who hath first given to him, and it shall be restored to 
him again.' Nor is it less true, that he will not, yea, that 
he cannot do injury to his own justice, which requireth the 
punishment of every sin. An earthly judge may oftentimes 
spare a guilty person without injury to another, but not 
without injustice in himself; yea, Crellius asserts, that God 
cannot forgive the sins of some sinners ; namely, the contu- 
macious, without injury to himself; for this, as he says, 
would be unworthy of God. But we are sure, that every sin, 
without exception, setting aside the consideration of the re- 

<^ That botli these relations, viz. of a Ruler and Judge, are (o be assigned to God 
the Scriptures anipl;^' testify. Sec p. 41, &lc. 

f Prov. xvii. 15. Isa. v, 20, 


demption by Christ, would be attended with contumacy for 
ever: were it not for that consideration then, it would be un- 
worthy of God to pardon the sins of any sinner. 

Crellius adds, 'Punishment is not owing to the sinner, 
but he owes it, and owes to him, on whom all the injury will 
ultimately redound, who is God.' But because punishment 
is not owing to the sinner, but he owes it to the ruler, it 
doth not follow, that the ruler may not inflict that punish- 
ment: punishment, indeed, is not so owing to the sinner that 
an injury would be done him, were it not inflicted : the debt 
of a sinner is not of such a kind, that he can ask or enforce 
the payment of it: and a debt, properly speaking, implies 
such a condition.^ But the sinner hath merited punishment 
in such a manner, that it is just he should suffer it: but 
again, the infliction of punishment belongs not to God, as 
injured; which Crellius signifies, but as he is the Ruler of 
all, and the Judge of sinners, to whom it belongs to preserve 
the good of the whole, and the dependance of his creatures 
on himself. 

He thus proceeds : ' But if you consider the thing in it- 
self, every one has it in his power to prosecute his right, and 
likewise not to prosecute it, or to yield up of it as much as 
he pleases.' 

Ans. As Socinus himself, in his third book 'of the Saviour,' 
chap. 2. hath aff"orded an opportunity to all our theologians 
who have opposed Socinianism, of discussing this foolish 
axiom, ' that every one may recede from his right ;' we shall 
answer but in few words to these positions of Crellius, and to 
the conclusions which he there draws, as flowing from them. 

There is then a double right : in the first place, that of 
a debt ; in the second place, that of government : what is 
purely a debt, may be forgiven ; for that only takes place 
in those things, which are of an indifferent right ; the pro- 
secution of which neither nature nor justice obliges. There 
is also a debt, though perhaps improperly so called, the right 
of which it is unlawful to renounce; but our sins, in respect 

K The debt of a sinner is not any valuable consideration due to him, as a debt is to 
a creditor; but due by him as a debt is by a debtor : and in consequence of the fail- 
ure of payment, punishment becomes due to liim, i. e. is or may be inflicted in vin- 
dication of violated justice ; but this is what he could not either claim, or would wish 
to receive. 


of God, are not debts only, nor properly, but metaphorically'' 
so called. 

The right of government, moreover, is either natural or 
positive ; the positive right of government, so to speak, is 
that which magistrates have over their subjects ; and he who 
affirms that they can recede wholly from this right, must be 
either a madman or a fool ; but this right, as far as pertains to 
its exercise in respect of the infliction of punishment, either 
tends to the good of the whole republic, as in ordinary cases ; 
or, as in some extraordinary cases, gives place, to its hurt : 
for it is possible that even the exaction of punishment, in a 
certain condition of a state, may be hurtful : in such a situa- 
tion of things, the ruler or magistrate has a power not to use 
his right of government, in respect of particular crimes ; or 
rather, he ought to use it in such a manner as is the most 
likely to attain the end : for he is bound to regard princi- 
pally the good of the whole ; and the safety of the people 
ought to be his supreme law. But he who affirms, that in 
ordinary cases a magistrate may renounce his right, when 
that renunciation cannot but turn out to the hurt of the pub- 
lic good, is a stranger to all right. The same person may 
also affirm, that parents may renounce their right over their 
children, so as not to take any care at all about them ; and 
that they might do so lawfully, that is, consistent with ho- 
nour and decency. Yea, this is not a cessation from the 
prosecution of right, but from the performance of a duty : 
for the right of government supposes a duty : ' for rulers are 
not a terror to good works, but to the evil : wilt thou then 
not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou 
shalt have praise of the same : for he is the minister of God 
to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be 
afraid, for he beareth not the sword in vain : for he is the 
minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that 
doeth evil.'' The question is not what magistrates do, but 
what as the guardians and protectors of the law they ought 
to do. See Psal. ci. 8. 

There is also a natural right of government : such is the 

•> Sin is most accurately defined by our Westminster divines, in that inimitable 
compendium of sound doctrine, the shorter catechism, to be 'any want of conformity 
unto, or transgression of the law of God.' 

'Rom. xiii. 3, 4. 


divine right over the creatures : the right, I say, of God over 
rational creatures is natural to him, therefore immutable, 
indispensable, and which cannot by any means be derogated. 
Thence too, the debt of our obedience is natural and indis- 
pensable, nor is there any other kind of obligation to pu- 
nishment. God, from the very nature of the thing, has do- 
minion over us, and our subjection to him, is either by obe- 
dience or a vicarious punishment, which succeeds in case 
of any omission or transgression on our part, as Crellius 
himself acknowledges. Those then who say, that it is free 
to God to use this right or not, as he pleaseth, may as well 
say, that it is free to God, to be our God and Lord or not. 
For the demand of obedience, and the exaction of punish- 
ment, equally belong to God. But the Judge of the universe 
exercises his right ; and his perpetual right, whence sinners 
are accounted worthy of death, he cannot but preserve un- 
impaired and entire. 

The remaining objections which are interspersed here 
and there in that book of his 'concerning God,' against the 
vindicatory justice of God, either fall in with those which 
have been mentioned from the ' Racovian catechism,' or shall 
be reduced to the order of those which follow. 

We think proper, by way of conclusion, to annex some 
concessions of Crellius. * There is,' says he, 'a certain regard 
to honour with which God himself cannot dispense."' Every 
transgression then of that regard hath a punishment coeval 
with itself, which, from the justice of God must necessarily 
be inflicted. ' Yea,' says he, * neither the holiness nor majesty 
of God permit that his commands should, in. any respect, be 
violated with impunity.^ But the holiness of God is natural 
to him : an essential, then, and necessary attribute of God re- 
quires the punishment of sinners : but he himself farther 
adds, 'it is unworthy of God to let the wickedness of obsti- 
nate sinners pass unpunished : for this is the first and per- 
petual eflfect of divine severity, not to pardon those who do 
not repent.'™ But we know for certain, that all sinners 
would continue obstinate to all eternity, unless God be 
pleased, for Christ's sake, to renew them by his omnipotent 
grace to repentance. Crellius then grants, that it is unwor- 

^ Book i. chap, xxiii. p. 1 80. • Of the true Religion.' " Book i. chap, xxviii. 
"' Chap. xxii. 186. and chap, xxviii. 


thy of God to let the sins of those pass unpunished, for whom 
Christ hath not made satisfaction. He again testifies also, 
that God hates and abhors all sin;° and grants that the mode 
of conducting the punishment of sin is derived from the di- 
vine justice." But the thing itself is from that same being, 
from whom the mode or manner of it is derived : if the mode 
of punishment be from divine justice, the punishment itself 
can flow from no other source. 


llie opinion of Socinius considered. What he thought of our present ques- 
tion,^ viz. that it is the hinye on which the whole controversy/, concerning 
the satisfaction of Christ turns. His vain boasting, as if having disproved 
this vindicatory justice, he had snatched the prize from his adversaries. 
Other clear proof s of the satisfaction of Christ. That it is our duty to 
acquiesce in the revealed will of God. The truth not to he forsaken, 
Mercy and justice not opposite. Vain distinctions of Socinus concerning 
divine justice. The consideration of these distinctioyis. His first argu- 
ment against vindicatory justice. The solution of it. The auger and se- 
verity of God, tvhat. Universal and particular justice, in what they 
agree. The false reasoning and vain boasting of the adversary. 

We come now to Socinus himself. In almost all his writ- 
ings he opposes this punitory justice. We shall consider 
what he hath written against Covetus, in that treatise of his 
entitled, * Of Jesus Christ the Saviour ;' and what he only 
repeats in other places, as occasion required. In the first 
book, and first chapter ; and also in the third book, and first 
chapter of that work, expressly, and of set purpose, he op- 
poses himself vehemently, and with all his might, to the 
truth on this point. But because he very well understood, 
that, by the establishment of this justice, a knife is put to 
the throat of his opinion, and that it cannot be defended 
(that is, that no reason can be given why Christ our Saviour 
is called Jesus Christ), he maintains that the whole contro- 
versy concerning the satisfactioi of ^Christ hinges on this 
very question. The reader will perceive from the argu- 
ments already used, that I am of the same opinion. For, it 
being granted that this justice belongs to God, not even So- 

" Chap. XXX. 3. 9. " Chap. i. p. 78. of his Answer to Grotius. 

■* Viz. Whether vindi