« PreviousContinue »
- . 3. . . . 252 of THE-NECEssITY of [Book 11:
woxIV. In like manner, the same apostle argues, Rom. iii. 19, £0, #1, #co. Where he lays it down as a fundamental truth, that the whole world is subject to condemnation before God. Whence he infers, that none can be justified by the works of the law. ... And from that concludes, that we can be justified no other way but by the blood of Christ, which is, doubtless, a very triling way of arguing, if God, by his mercy alone, by his bare nod, can take away sin, and adjudge 3. sinner to life. For the Jews would very readily answer, that there is another far more compendious way yjustification, in the infinite mercy of God, and in the most free act of his power, without exposing the Messiah to reproach. And, to mention it once more, we are not to have recourse to the
cause of this necessity. , For if the apostle makes any such supposition, there is an end of all further reasoning. He would have gained his point, just by mentioning that disposition....And if he does not suppose this, his argument is of 'no force. Which is far from being the case.o.o. o. o. oooXV. We must not here omit that expression of the apostle, by which he cuts off those who have sinned against the Holy Ghost: from all hope of salvation by this argument: because," having rejected Christ's expiation, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin, Heb. x. 26. For when he would intimate, that: there remained no more sacrifice, laying it down as an undoubted truth, that the offering of a sacrifice necessarily goes before
pardon. If this was not the case, why might not man, who' o
wanted a sacrifice, hope for pardon, without any satisfaction,
from the infinite mercy of God? . . . o.o. o.o.o. oxWI. To the same purpose is what the apostle says, Heb. vi. 6. “it is impossible to renew those again unto repentanco who crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and, .*. to an open shame.” Which last words are va. riously explained by divines. But doubtless are intended to
. . give a reason why those who have made the crucifixion of Christ of no use to, themselves, are excluded from all hopes
of salvation: because, without that, it is impossible to obtain salvation.” The very learned. Moses Amyraldus, in Desputat de peccata in spiritum sanctum, $ 40. thus expounds it; namely, since those apostates "ave no further interest in the sacrifice already offered, because they have rejected it, and therefore if they would be saved, they must look out for another. And because none could offer a true expiatory sacrifice, besides that of Christ alone; if they will be saved, it is necessary they give up Christ to be crucified afresh, and
. . . .
chap. VIII.] chnist's satisfaction, 253
again ex to open shame. But it is impious to design"
- ---error ---------------- ~~~~~~~ --~~~~~~~ -a-ror--- ~~~~ *::-- -------> -- - - - -- - .
municating himself to the sinner; not from his most free will; as God neither wills, nor can will anything but what tends to his glory, which requires his appearing as unlike the sinoner as possible. “Senece, spoke well, quest. Nat, lib. 1. God
is nothereby less free, or less powerful: For he is his own .
ity. , Nor does it derogate from the liberty of those actions of God, which, are colled ad extra, or without him. For though he is, by no necessity of nature, constrained to external operations, considered in the gross, or together: yet, supposing the existence of one, operation, without him, many others necessarily follow. For instance, God was at liberty to create a world out of nothing: but having, done it, it became necessary! that he should govern the same in a way agreeable to his justice, holiness, wisdom, and goodness. In like manner, here God was at liberty to permit sin; but then ...so it, his essential justice, requires it to be ished. He was also at liberty to save some sinners; yet,
saving declared his will with reject to this, there was a ne:
ocessity for a suitable satisfaction to intervene, on account of ... those immutable divine perfections, which he cannot in any of his actions: disavow. As little, does this derogate. from ... the wise counsel of God, in ordering the punishment of it, as to the time, the degree, and the persons. For though we do not think that God inflicts punishment from his nature in such a manner as fire burns (though even in this respect, he compares himself to fire, Isa. xxvii. 4. and Deut. iv. 24.) yet his nature is a strong reason why he orders and inflicts punishment in a most wise, manner. Now the nature of God requires, that he so display, the o of his justice, as he may likewise manifest the riches of his grace. Nor does it ; derogate from the infinite goodness of God, as if by that he could grant repentance to the sinner, and so receive him into favour without any satisfaction. For the bestowing of the Spirit of regeneration is an effectiof the highest love.... But that God should so much love a sinner, continuing still impenitent, without the consideration of a satisfaction, is a conduct *inconsistent with his other, perfections, as we have already so frequently; shewn. God cannot, but take his Spirit from thim; who maketh a mock of him. It is not becomingo to ... grant repentance by means of the same Spirit, without the intervention of the sacrifice of the priest, whereby sin may be expiated. . . - - * → ..., XX. Seeing therefore both the nature and actions of God, and the reasonings of the sacred writers, teach us the neces
:* -o- “” - ... .
* chAP. IX.] FOR WHOM CHRIST SATISFIED. 255
sity of a satisfaction; since by that doctrine the eminent perfections of God are placed in the most shining light to seeing the right observance thereof tends very much to promote piety: And as thereby there is no derogation made any of the * divine perfections, we conclude it is the safest course soberly to embrace it. ...” A. - 9 - > * : * : * ~ to oxx I. Yet we must observe, when speaking in general of the necessity of a satisfaction, or of such a punishment of sin, wherein the righteous and holy God may be justified and sanctified, we set no bounds to the time, the degree, or the special manner of the punishment. The history of the life and death of Christ, makes it very evident, o: dispensations, and mitigations, at least a compensation by an equivalent, took place here, and consequently could justly take place. And who will assert, or, if he should J. to say so, can plainly prove, that it was impossible that Christ, in order to make satisfaction, should undertake and submit to sufferings, fewer in number, shorter in duration, less intense in quantity, as to the parts of the body, and faculties of the soul, moments and periods of his life spent here upon earth? And here let that saying of Paul, Rom. xii. 8. be everes rule to us; “not to think more highly than we ought to think, but
I. We should have no certainty of all those things, which it is proper for us to know, for the glory of our Lord *Christ, and our own consolation, concerning thisosuretiship and satisfaction, did it not also appear; for whosii he satisfied according to his covenant-engagement.” The solution of this question is indeed of very great moment; but it does not appear so very difficult, if we only carefully attend to the "nature of Christ's suretiship and satisfaction, which we have "already explained, proved, and defended.” For since Christ did, by his engagement, undertake to cancel all the debt of those persons for whom he engaged; as if it was his don; by suffering what was meet, and to fulfil all righteousness in their room; and since he has most fully performed this by his satisfaction, as much as if the sinners themselves had en dured all the punishment due to their sins, and hāţaccomplished all righteousness: the consequence is, that he has en*, gaged and satisfied for those, and those only, who are actually saved from their sins; as is evident to reason. For Christ neither engaged, nor satisfied, but for those whose person he usumed.” which Amnius himself, Arco Pomon, p. 72.3 frankly owns. . Moreover, that any of those whose
person Christ sustained, and for whom he satisfied as their
Surety, should be obliged to satisfy for the same debt, by
ed the ruin of those that perished, whom yet, as God, he’. knew were reprobates, and for whom, as Mediator; he had
not engaged. Yet he submitted this human affection, commanded by the law, common to us and to Christ, to the di. vine, appointment, and restricted it to the purpose of the decreeing will of God; in this manner proving the holiness of his j, in the glorifying of the divine counsel, and in a due subjection thereunto. This appears from the tears, which Christ, as man, shed over the calamities that were coming upon that abandoned city, which had partly slain, and partly loaded with contempt and ignominy the prophets: npy, had been the only butchery in the whole world for them; and Was at io, by a most horrid parricide, to devote itself, with its unhappy posterity, to the lasting curse of God, Luke xix. 41.
IV. 3dly. The suretiship and satisfaction of Christ, have also been an occasion of much good, even to the reprobate. For it is owing to the death of Christ that the gospel is