Page images
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

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 because 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 together“ 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, HY NDI, 'ferens iniquitatem,' as also it is again repeated, Num. xiv. 18; in both which places we translate it 'forgiving,' forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin.' 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 metaphorically, is once or twice in another place used for to take away or to pardon, therefore 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 showed.

(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 becoming 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, Ps lxviii. 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 foun

dation of his giving of them, the effect and fruit being here expressed, the foundation and ground supposed. So also, “Mine ears hast thou bored," Ps. xl. 6, is rendered "A body hast thou prepared me," Heb. x. 5; because the end of the boring of the ears of Christ was, that he might offer his body a sacrifice to God So it is here in this place of Matthew. Christ's taking away the bodily distempers and sicknesses of men was an effect and an evidence of his taking away their sins, 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 accomplishment of what was foretold, but that it was so demonstrated in the effect and evidence of it. Nor do the Socinians themselves think that this was a full accomplishment of what is ten by the prophet, themselves insisting on another interpretation of the words. So that notwithstanding these exceptions, the word here may have its proper signification, 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 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 punishment” 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 bath been showed, 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, “ Who his own self bare our sins in his own 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 verse 24 and the beginning of verse 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.


[ocr errors]

How, then, did Christ bear our griefs? Why, in that “he bare our sins in his own body on the tree.'

I shall not insist on the precise signification of the word åvapipw, here used, as though it expressed the outward manner of that suffering of Christ for sin when he was lifted 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,” 1 Pet. iv. 1. He that did so bear our griefs, sins, 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 griefs the Holy Ghost doth thus manifest.

[2.] The manner how Christ bare them evidently manifesteth 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 griefs 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 griefs is assigned to be sin, “He was wounded for our transgressions;" as was shown 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 po other sense than that which is proper, and that is Sap: Verse 11, Sap! 837 onjiyi, —“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 ren properly signifies“ to lift,” to “ take up” that which a man may carry, so Sap signifies to “bear" and “undergo” the burden that is taken up, or that a man hath laid on his shoulders. And Matthew hath rendered this word by Baorálw, sàs vósous : Cáorage,—that is, “ bajulo, porto," to bear a thing as a man

,a 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: Lam. 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 un

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

der the punishment threatened and inflicted for their sins and our own.” Distinctly,–

(1.) Men are said to bear their own sin: Lev, xix. 8, “Every one that eateth it shall bear his iniquity;" that is, he shall be esteemed guilty, and be punished. Lev. xx. 17, “He shall bear his iniquity,"is the same with “ He shall be killed,” verse 16, and “He shall be cut off from among his people,” verse 18. For a man to “ bear his iniquity,” is, constantly, for him to answer for the guilt and undergo the punishment due to it.

(2.) So also of the sins of others: Num. xiv. 33, “And your children shall wander in the wilderness forty years, and bear your whoredoms." "Bear your wboredoms;" that is, "My anger for them, ”

” “ and the punishment due to them.” Num. xxx. 15, he that compels by his power and authority 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 sinneth, it shall die,”—“it shall be punished.” “The son shall not bear the

. iniquity of the father,” etc., —“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 the 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 annotations 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 particular verse, from the beginning to the end of this prophecy.

[ocr errors]


A digression concerning the 53d chapter of Isaiah, and the vindication of it from

the perverse interpretation of Hugo GROTIUS. This chapter is well by some termed “Carnificina Rabbinorum,”a place of Scripture that sets them on the rack, and makes them turn


themselves all ways possible to escape the torture which it 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. Theolog. Judaic. lib. i. part. ii. Dict. Sapp. de Tempor. Messiæ. Though I value not their boasting of their extricating themselves from the other prophecies, knowing that they are no less entangled with that of Daniel, chap. ix. (of which there is an eminent story in Franzius de Sacrificiis concerning his dispute with a learned Jew on that subject), yet it appears that by this they are confessedly intricated 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 Abrabanel'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 l’Empereur acquaints us in his preface to his refutation of it,' because 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 professors of the name of Jesus Christ, must the labours of Grotius needs be, who bath to the utmost of his power reached out his hand to relieve the poor blind creatures from their rack and torture, by applying, though successlessly, this whole prophecy to Jeremiah, casting himself into the same entanglements with them, not yielding them indeed the least relief, is easy to conjecture. And this is not a little aggravated, in that the Socinians, who are no less racked and tortured 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

I "Aliqui Judæi mihi confessi sunt, rabbinos suos ex propheticis scripturis facile se extricare potuisse, modo Esaias tacuisset.”

• Disput. decima, de sacrificiorum duratione, thes. 82-84, etc.

3“ Abrabinel tam avide a Judais passim conquiritur, ut vix tandem ejus compos fieri potuerim. Nam eum Christiani superiorem putant; qui solide eorum argumenta" eto.—Constant. l'Emper. prolog. ad lectorem, præfix. Com. Abrab. in cap. liii. Esa.

« PreviousContinue »