Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
law_n	flesh_n	likeness_n	sin_n	6,889	5	6.3561	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A79465	Anti-Socinianism, or, A brief explication of some places of holy Scripture, for the confutation of certain gross errours, and Socinian heresies, lately published by William Pynchion, Gent. in a dialogue of his, called, The meritorious price of our redemption, concerning 1. Christ's suffering the wrath of God due to the elect. 2. God's imputation of sin to Christ. 3. The nature of the true mediatorial obedience of Christ. 4. The justification of a sinner. Also a brief description of the lives, and a true relation of the death, of the authors, promoters, propagators, and chief disseminators of this Socinian heresie, how it sprung up, by what means it spread, and when and by whom it was first brought into England, that so we be not deceived by it. / By N. Chewney, M.A. and minister of God's Word.	Chewney, Nicholas, 1609 or 10-1685.	1656 (1656)	Wing C3804; Thomason E888_1; ESTC R207357	149,812	257

vain for they cannot shake us from our assured confidence herein being so strongly confirmed and maintained by the Scriptures as we find it is and that first partly by that which hath bin said already if Christ were not lyable to the Law in respect of himself which notwithstanding he truly fulfilled it is then most certain that he fulfilled the Law for others See what he spoke to Iohn the Baptist b Matt. 3.15 it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness So c Matt. 5.17 I am not come saith he to destroy the Law but to fulfill it Secondly also partly by the opinion of the Apostle d Rom. 8.3 for what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinfull flesh and for sin condemned sin in the flesh where the fulfilling of the Law is ascribed to the Son of God which was impossible to be performed by us that the righteousness of the Law should be fulfilled in us by faith that is in Christ Jesus Moreover we may peruse that of the Apostle e Rom. 5.18 and that to the Philipians cap. 3. vers 9. Thirdly from that Axiome of St. Paul to the Romanes Christ saith he is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth for what else is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the end of the Law but the complement and perfect fulfilling of the same But for whom hath he fulfilled the Law Not for himself but for us that believing in him who hath done this for us we might be justified Fourthly from the imputation of righteousness g Phil. 3 5. that I may be found in him saith the Apostle not having mine own righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the faith of Christ * Quam quia non habemus in nobis Deus nobis gratuitò donat Calvin in Gal. 3.6 the righteousness which is of God by faith Hence we argue If the righteousness of Christ be truly imputed to us it is necessary also that it should be employed and improved yea performed for us that is in our steed But it is truly imputed to us h Rom. 5.18 Therefore it is necessary it should be imployed improved and performed for us Lastly from the very end of Christs being subject to the Law from whence also we conclude If Christ of his own accord subjected himself to the Law that he might redeem us from the Law and that we might obtain the adoption of Sons it were requisite that Christ should compleat and fulfill the Law for us But the former is true Therefore the latter Thus then we see not for himself did Christ fulfill the Law of God as Socinus and our Dialogue considering him only as a godly Jew would have it but for us * Christus pro nobis est in carnatus pro nobis obedivit patri pro nobis baptizatus passus mortuus resuscitatus glorificatus Symphonia Cathol and in our steed did he compleat the same though they never so much oppose it And so we come to our question again Christ was either doing or suffering suffering or doing i Christus in vita habuit actionem passivam aut passionem activam even during the whole course of his life his triumph was upon the crosse a little before his death when he had procured deliverance from Hell and right and interest to Heaven then was the perfect consummation of his obedience For saith the Apostle k Heb. 9.15 by the death of the Mediator not his bodily death only as the Dialogue falsly and fainedly would have it but his whole sufferings both in soul and body the close and conclusion whereof was death do we receive the promise of an everlasting inheritance and notwithstanding he was about it and all things in the way of obedience which he either did or suffered conduced to it yet with one l Heb. 10.14 oblation upon the crosse did he perfect them that are sanctified Nor can they possibly be perfected but by the perfect obedience of Christ imputed to them And so we passe unto the other two Questions which are yet to be handled Secondly how Christ could obey being God and Quest 2 satisfy for us being man Answ Answ Christ must not be considered in the transaction of this great and weighty business either meerly as God or meerly as man but as God-man or man-God junctae juvant both together will do well but either alone will not serve the turn It is a grosse absurdity to say no more of which the Dialogue is guilty in this particular conceiving him no other no better for thirty years together then any other common though Godly Jew notwithstanding he had then the work and office of a Mediator imposed on him The two distinct natures of Christ Hypostatically united must not cannot be separated or divided without wrong or in ury to the person of the Mediator and his high and holy undertaking herein That the truth of this sacred mistery which seems folly unto some may the more cleerly be manifested unto all who desire to be instructed in it we will lay down these few ensuing arguments The first of which is taken from the Names and Apellations which are usually ascribed and given unto Christ being not only God or Man or the Son of God or the Son of man but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God-man as m 2 Sam. 7.19 Homo qui Deus Dominus est So according to the Original The Man which is the Lord God also n Isa 9.6 the Prophet telleth us of a Child puer natus a Child is born and yet in the same verse he is called the mighty God the everlasting Father Likewise the Prophet Jeremiah o Jer. 23.5 6. calls him the Branch of David and yet the Lord our Righteousness The second from the Prophesies of the old Testament concerning the Messiah in which as true God he is set before us and proposed to us as also his coming in the flesh as true man is described to us for the working out of our redemption The Psalmist notes him as true God in these words p Psal 45.6 Thy Throne O God is for ever and ever and vers 7. as true man in these words Thou art annointed with the Oyle of gladness above thy fellows Also q Psal 68.18 where is described his Ascension according to his humanity who is said as God vers 7. to go forth in his divinity before the people In like manner the Prophet Isaiah bringeth him in r Isa 49.16 as Jehova in respect of his Divine and yet sent by the Holy Ghost in respect of his humane nature The third from the most plain and evident Testimonies of the new Testament in which also as God and Man he is delivered and descyphered out unto us So the Evangelist St. John ſ Joh. 1. vers 1. 2 3 4.

our Surety and in our steed The whole work whereof may be called if you will Mediatorial from the office of the Perso● obeying Legal from the Rule which was obeyed This obedience as we have said is but one which y●● is constituted of these two parts First the perfect fulfilling of the Law Secondly the suffering of that punishment which the breaking thereof deserved The fulfilling of the Law is the first part of Christ● obedience by which he performed throughout t●● whole course of his life perfect obedience to the Law of God for us The enduring the punishment for our sins is the other part of his obedience taking upon him in our room that which we had justly merited by reaso● of our transgressions that so satisfying the severity of Gods Justice for us we might be freed from that obligation and penalty which was upon us so that Ursinus joyning both together saith * Quicquid fecit aut passus est Christus ad quod ipse tanquam justus Dei filius non fuit obligatus est satisfactio ejus quam nobis praestitit justitia quae nobis credentibus adeo gratis imputatur ea enim satisfactio aequiposset vel impletioni Legis per obedientiam velaeternae paenae propter peccatum ad quorum alterutrum Legi obligamur pag. 394. Here the Dialogue takes an occasion to what purpose I know not to quarrel with the Lutherans for an errour of theirs on the one hand unlesse it be that he may the better and sooner prevail with his over-confident Reader and so carry him into an errour on the other cunningly casting out one Devil by another and yet the latter more dangerous if not more desperate then the former For neither one drop of bloud as he chargeth them nor all the bodily sufferings of Christ as we charge him to say but the perfect fulfilling of the Law for us and the satisfying Divine Justice incensed against us even the whole obedience of Christ is that by which we are redeemed from and discharged of that debt and penalty to which we were lyable and for which we stood accountable The Dialogue auribum lupum tenet finding it too hard a matter to prove what he had undertaken that is That Christs natural or bodily death only is the meritorious price of our redemption falls strangly off and betakes himself unto an other matter For not being able to confirm by argument he will perplex with amazement his lesse attentive Reader telling him that the Jews and Romanes did not put Christ to death but that he himself seperated his soul from his body shed his own bloud and did as he expresses it actuate his own death contrary to the very letter of the Scriptures y Act. 2.23 where Peter in his Sermon chargeth them home with the cruel killing of Christ the Lord saying him have yea taken and by wicked hands have crucifyed and slain Again z Act. 3.15 and have killed the Prince of life What our blessed Saviour speaks in Iohn a Joh. 10.17 18. that he laid down his life no man taking it away from him sheweth his willingness to yeeld himself up into their hands who by the determinate councel and foreknowledge of God were to be instruments of his death We know that in respect of humane power no man could take away his life till he was willing to lay it down which he did by submitting to them when his hour was come for that very purpose We say Christ dyed willingly we cannot dare not say wilfully which he must needs do if the Language of the Dialogue may passe for currant that he shed his own bloud and did actuate his own death Christ offered himself to God his Father yet did he not kill himself The Jews killed him yet did they not offer him for indeed they could not The Priest is more worthy then the sacrifice yet here is one who was Priest Sacrifice and Altar too He was a Priest but not in respect of his Divine nature alone as the Dialogue labours to perswade For whatsoever Christ did or suffered in a Mediatorial way was done and suffered by the two natures b In exequendo Mediatoris officio utraque natura operatur rum communione alterius Leo ad Flavianum cap. 4. in him Hypostatically united and not by either alone Whole Christ is our Mediator Redeemer Priest and Prophet in both natures according to his Deity and humanity What the Dialogue would force upon our belief from that place of Iohn c Joh. 6.63 namely that the humanity of Christ which he understands by the word flesh doth not profit us is in the first place a meer contradiction to himself having altogether pleaded for the bodily sufferings of Christ hitherto then we averre that it is not to be found in or gathered from the words for the best Expositors tell us that by flesh there is meant any natural food and not the flesh of Christ giving this reason for it wheresoever say they Christ speaketh of his own flesh there is the Pronoune My added to it or else he expresseth it thus the flesh of the Son of man but there is neither the one nor the other and therefore cannot be meant of the flesh of Christ They are exceedingly mistaken says Scharpius d Errant qui hoc loco percarnis vocem humanitatem Christi distinctè consideratam Spiritum Deitatè significari volunt Syphonia in the sense and meaning of our Saviours Words who by flesh would have his humanity by Spirit his Deity to be signified or understood But should we let this passe for granted which must not be that the humanity of Christ doth not profit us must it therefore follow that his obedience to the Law doth not profit us nor his fulfilling of the same for us Did ever any that pretended the least knowledge in the Rudiments of Art fetch a conclusion so far wide of the premisses But what shall we say to these Socinians whom no rules of Art are able to keep within compasse of sound Reason nor texts of Scripture within the bounds of true Religion but that they break through and run over all to beguile us in the one and betray us in the other Plutarch makes report of a certain Woman named Phea who rob'd all passengers that came by her Pallace These these Socinians the Dialogue and his fellows are like unto her For none can escape their hands They rob God of his Justice mercy and wisdome Christ of his merit and satisfaction man of all sound and solid means of Salvation leaving him in a worse condition then the thieves left that poor man that went down from Hierusalem to Iericho not half but stark dead without any help or hope of recovery I shall bestow upon the Dialogue and his high admirers with the rest of the Socinian Brethren but this one argument and so I will conclude this part also with a friendly advice to all Christian

form be a righteousness then one righteousness enforms another and hereupon they set themselves against this Doctrine of imputation and cry out of a great absurdity in it We answer Answ for they can never stop our mouths * We still have Peliadae stomachum cedere nescij that here is vox praeterea nihil nothing but clamour and noise words without matter For we deny the consequence we deny what ever they say or can say against it there is no such necessity for that that the form must needs be a righteousness We affirm and that openly without juggling or imposture for we care not who know it for any absurdity there is to be found in it that the application of that righteousness is the form And therefore to set the saddle upon the right Horse 't is they that make and 't is they must beare the absurdity with the shame and reproach that followeth thereupon What need we any more words How slightly soever the Dialogue and his Socinians think or speak of this comfortable Doctrine of imputation we would have them know it was a truth before any of their cradles were made and will be a truth whether they will or no when their coffins shall be rotten yet if any indifferently disposed to truth do desire further satisfaction herein I shall refer them to Bishop Downames treatise of Justification h Lib. 4. 5. and to Bishop Davenants prelections de Justitia habituali i Quaest 3. gen de formiali causa justif which will sufficiently confirm them in this high and excellent truth We find in Scripture that Michael Davids Wife by the just judgment of God upon her for deriding the holy zeal of her Husband was made barren yet if we observe the course of the World shee may be said to have many Children among whom our Dialogue for one with the rest of his Socinian brethren who scorne and deride this necessary * Nullos pro justis approbat Deus nisi quos prius verè ac summè non in ipsis sed in Christo suo seu imputata Christi justitia justificat Bek in Rom. 4.25 and comfortable Doctrine of a sinners justification by the imputation of his Redeemers righteousness unto him having none of his own to trust to throwing dirt in the faces of those that to Gods glory and the comfort of poor souls who were otherwise utterly undone do assert and maintain the same But with what advantage to themselves or prejudice to us let the World judge by these ensuing arguments which me thinks make it so plain to every understanding Christian as if it were described and discovered by a ray of the Sun that there is none but may even run and read it The first argument then we take from the Words of the Apostle k Rom. 4.6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works Here is righteousness and righteousness in expresse terms said to be imputed What righteousness can in this place be understood other then the righteousness of Christ For either our own proper righteousness is imputed to us or else the righteousness of some other But not our own righteousness because works are wholly excluded from justification besides he which is justified is said to be ungodly in whom before justification there is no proper righteousness at all Therefore it must necessarily be understood of the righteousness of another that is Christ Secondly from the imputation of faith as the same Apostle in the same Epistle l Rom. 4.5 speaking concerning him that believeth expresseth it thus his faith is counted to him for righteousness not as it is a work for as we said but now all works are here excluded and faith imputed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without works and as it apprehendeth Christ and his righteousness by which alone we are constituted and made just as is further proved Rom. 5.19 concerning which we shall by Gods leave speak more annon Thirdly from that place of our Apostle to the Galatians m Gal. 3.6 c. Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness Know ye therefore saith our Apostle that they which are of faith the same are the Children of Abraham c. where is cleerly expressed what kind of faith it was * Quae habetur Christo vel quae Christo nititur Hoc enim addendum fuit ne quis existimaret fidem esse illud quod justificat quam sit duntaxat instrumentam quo Christum justitiam nostram apprehendimus Bez. that was imputed to Abraham for righteousness namely such a faith as had respect unto Christ as vers 13. is manifest Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law apprehending and applying his obedience even unto the death of the crosse by which he became a curse for us Fourthly from the Philippians 3.8 9. Yea doubtlesse saith St. Paul I account all things but losse and dung that I may win Christ and be found in him not having mine own righteousness which is of the ●aw but that which is through the faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God by faith Where to our righteousness is opposed the righteousness of ●aith in Christ which is no other way to be made ours but by imputation and is in the act of justification imputed to us So that we are justified not as having any proper righteousness of our own but as having by faith the righteousness of Christ by which we are found righteous in him Whence it is cleer that the righteousness of Christ which is apprehended by faith and applyed to our own particular interest is by the Apostles testimony that righteousness that very righteousness which is imputed to us Fiftly from that classick place n Rom. 5.18.19 As by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation Even so by the righteousness of one the free gifts came upon all men unto justification of life For as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners So by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous Whence we briefly argue thus If by the obedience of Christ only we are made just it is necessary not that our righteousness but the righteousness or obedience of Christ should be imputed to us for our justification But we are justified by the righteousness of Christ only Therefore it is necessary that it should be imputed to us Sixtly from those words of the Apostle o Rom. 8.3 4. for what the Law could not do in that it was weake through the flesh God sending his own Son in the similitude of sinfull flesh and for sin condemned sin in the flesh that the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us c. Whence the argument is this If the righteousness of the Law be fulfilled in us as Christ performed it which was impossible for us in like manner the fulfilling of the Law performed

3.13 expresseth himself Christ saith he hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law when he was made a curse for us For it is written cursed is every one that hangeth on a Tree that the blessing of Abraham c. Which words we take as an answer to an objection occasioned from the 10. verse thus If they be accursed that continue not in all things written in the Law to do them then all men are accursed and the Gentiles are not partakers of the blessing of Abraham as is before declared To this the Apostle applyeth these words Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law that is to them that believe there is full redemption from this curse of the Law to which they were lyable Christ himself having undergone the curse for them For the more cleer illustration of this answer the Apostle gives us a description of our Redemption in these three particulars 1. The Authour Christ hath redeemed us 2. The form or manner being made a curse for us 3. The end which is two-fold 1. More generally that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles 2. More particularly that we might receive the promise of the Spirit In the first and the last the Authour and the end we all agree the difference between us lyes in the manner or form of our Redemption expressed in these words Who was made a curse for us For the better understanding whereof these four things are to be enquired after First what this curse is Secondly how Christ is said to become a curse Thirdly in what nature Christ was accursed Lasty how far forth Christ was accursed First we will enquire what this curse is Here Socinus Gitichius Ostorodius Smalcius Muscorovius Crellius with all the rest do croud in and would fain be heard But let us hear the Dialogue and we hear them all who now lispeth not but expresly useth the same Language and to the very same intent and purpose with them which is that the Apostle speaks in this Chapter of a two-fold curse of the eternal curse vers 10. of the outward temporary curse vers 13. Namely such a curse as all men do suffer that are hanged upon a Tree which curse the Apostle brings in speaking in a Rhetorical manner only thus Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law namely from the eternal curse at the very self same time when he was made not that q Christus non nostram sed aliam quandam subiit execrationem Socinus de Christo Servatore curse but a curse for us according to that in Deut. 21.23 and thus the Dialogue with them endeavoureth fictis illudere verbis with a shadow to deprive us of the substance But to deal truly and uprightly with the Reader we are to know that the Apostle in the 10. vers Speaks of the eternal or moral curse and in the 13. vers both of the eternal and ceremonial in neither of which is there any need of Rhetorick or any Rhetorical expressions What a strange imaginary or illusory curse would these men frame to themselves if they might have their own wills and make others believe our Saviour under-went When as St. Paul tells us in plain terms he was made that very curse that they had deserved which continued not in all things written in the book of the Law to do them And this doth appear by that place forecited r Deut. 21.23 Cursed even with that moral curse is every one that hangeth upon a Tree Besides this is made more evident by proving that the person hanged upon a Tree and accursed was a Type of Christ For if the type bare the ceremonial 't is then manifest that the Anti-type bare the moral that is the eternal curse If not only the curse of every one that is hanged upon a Tree be signified but also Christs redemption of us from the curse of the Law by being made a curse for us * Deus Ideò suscepit carnem ut maledictum carnis peccatricis ab●lerot factus est pro nobis maledictum ut benedictio absorberet ma edictionem integritas peccatum c. Abrosius de Fuga seculi cap. 7. Maledictionem condemnationem cui obnoxii eramus assumpsit Christus ultroque in serecepit quae pati debucramus illa ipse pertulit Theodoras Abucara disput 15. c. 5. be both signified and fore-told in that place of Deuteronomie then that place hath not only a proper but a typical signification But not only the curse of every one that is hanged upon a Tree is signified and fore-told in that place Therefore that place hath not only a proper but a typical signification which typical signification being taken away namely Christs bearing the moral curse upon the Tree all the Hebrew Doctors whose judgment in other things our Dialogue doth so highly esteem and magnify are now at a non-plus to give a sufficient yea probable reason why hanging upon a Tree should so much defame or fasten this special curse upon the person hanged above all other capital sufferings whatsoever I suppose Mr. Norton in his answer to the Dialogue hath written very fully and satisfactorily to this purpose to which I referre the impar●i●l and judicious Reader that so we may proceed This curse saith Abrahamus Callovius ſ Nihil aliud est quàm damnatoria s ntentia de subcundis paenis peccatu debitis vel i●s● paena à sent nti● legis damnaturia dependens de Satisfact Christi Pastor of the Church of Wittenberg is nothing else but the condemning sentence of the Law whereby a man is adjudged to undergo such punishment as is due to the offence committed Or else it is the very pun shment it self depending upon that condemnatory sentence of the Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is according to Aretius t Ar●tius in Gal. 3.13 the due punishment of sin that is the wrath and high displeasure of God yea even eternal death due to the Elect by reason of their transgressions which he in a manner and in some kind u Qu● ad acerbitate● etsi non quoad durationem D● Prid. de redem may justly be said to suffer for them We come to the second namely how Christ is said to be a curse For answer He is not so by nature for he is the very natural Son of God but first by voluntary dispensation Secondly by mutual combination between the three Persons of the Deity Father Son and Holy Ghost Thirdly by manifest and apparent Ordination w 1 Pet. 1.20 and that before the foundation of the World was laid Fourthly by Divine obsignation x Iohn 6.27 Fiftly by a seasonable and timely consecration and that first by his Baptisme in which saith Mr. Perkins y Perkins on the Gal. he took upon him our guilt as we put off the same in ours and secondly by his bitter crosse and passion in which he underwent the punishment of our sin and thus

the Dialogue professe he knows not what kind of imputation it is and yet doth he thus reproach it We may easily know then what Spirit he is of Iude 10. Speaking evill of those ●hings which he knoweth not And 't is a sign he knows it not indeed otherwise he would not so severely censure it yea condemne and blaspheme it as he doth which most darkens the necessary Doctrine of a sinners justification let the indifferent Reader judge If he desire to know what it is let him search the Scriptures for they do abundantly testify of it To the Law and to the Testimony * Legimus passim apud Paulum nos justos fieri justificari p●r Christum per Christi mortem sanguinem redemptionem obedientiam justitiam illam justitiam imputari nobis à Deo absque operibus Noster Amesius Bell. enerva 10.4 pag. 137. and they which speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them The very term Impute taken for judicial laying of that to the charge of a person which is not properly his but yet justly laid to him and put truly upon his account is ten times used by the Apostle Paul in the 4th to the Romanes In which sense we affirm that sin is imputed to Christ or else he could not have suffered This we take to be and shall stick by as an infallible truth No man dyes as death is a privation of the life of the body unlesse it be for his own sin or the sin of some others imputed to him The Scriptures that confirm this are divers Gen. 2.17 In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye the death Rom. 6.23 The wages of sin is death 1 Cor. 15.56 The sting of death is sin Rom. 5.12 As by one man sin entred into the World and death by sin and so death passed over all men for that all have sinned from whence we collect that every man that dyes dyes for sin that is either for his own or the sin of some other made his by imputation Death is not natural to man as man For that which is natural to him as he is man was engraffed into him and appointed unto him of God but death is not planted or engraffed into him by God neither was he by him made lyable to it e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Man before his fall was free from death as after the last judgment he shall be likewise Besides death is an enemy to humane nature threatning the ruine and destruction thereof will any man then say that that is natural to him which doth destroy him Is that agreeable to the nature of man which above all other he abborreth being accompanied with that which brings nothing but trouble anguish and vexation to him whence we see that death is not natural to man as man but to man only as a sinner Now that Christ dyed the Devils themselves have not impudence enough to deny being themselves instrumentally engaged for the effecting of his death But let the Dialogue or any man else for him answer me in good sadness was it for his own sin or for the sin of others None can none dare openly though these black mouth'd Socinians do secretly mutter so much affirm for his own therefore it must necessarily be for the sin of others Sin may be said to be anothers properly or improperly either truly or after a certain manner those sins are truly anothers of which in no sort thou hast bin partaker and for which by no Law thou art bound to suffer but for those whereof thou hast bin partaker no reason can be produced to the contrary but thou shouldst suffer Christ doth in a manner partake of our sins f Isa 53.6 the Lord hath laid on him or hath made to meet on him the iniquities of us all yea Peter in the 2. Chapter of his first Epistle and the 24. vers saith plainly that his own self bare our sins in his own body on the Tree c. and so cannot especially offering himself and becoming our surety undertaking for us the penalty due to us but be every way lyable to the same Christ was not subject to any necessity of dying being as God immortal as man holy and immaculate without the least tincture of sin therefore no necessity in him no necessity for him but in respect of us and as our pledge and surety This is a proposition of an undoubted truth that where there is no Original corruption there is no actual transgression Christ being free from the one must needs be acquit of any suspition of the other therefore not for his own sins but for ours the guilt whereof being laid upon him and imputed to him did he suffer that misery those torments and that death that accursed death of which we have already so fully spoken Here the Dialogue that he may the more closely and covertly beguile the over-credulous Reader which I perceive is his great endeavour doth ignorantly if not wilfully corrupt some texts of Scripture wresting and wringing them about to make them speak in his sense and to his purpose namely that Christ did not bear as we say by imputation but did bear away our sins and our iniquities from us Having therefore already freed those places quoted out of the Prophesie of Isaiah g Isa 53.7 c. expounded as he saith by that of Matt. 8.16 and from which he draweth this false consequence that Christ bore our sins as he bore our sicknesses whereas indeed there is great difference in the manner of bearing h Hos enim abstulit non pertulit illa non pertulit illa pertulit abstulit simul Sibran Lub lib. 2. cap. 4. these he did not bear but bear away those he bore and bore away together We shall now do the best we can by Gods assistance to clear this of St. Peter also and free it from the like corrupt handling In this 1 Pet. 2.24 the place before cited the Apostle saith expresly that Christ did peccata nostra sursum tulisse carry our sins up with him upon the crosse If the Spirit of God by the Apostle had intended herein a bearing away he might have used as learned Grotius well observes i De Satisfactione Christi cap. 1. and more apt for that purpose the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which barely signifies to take away But for the greater Emphasis and more cleer expressing of his meaning he useth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is he took up which is so far from diminishing that it adds something to the signification thereof Now Socinus and his Ape the Dialogue that they may weaken if possible the strength of this place do tell us that this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie abstulit he bare away but quite contrary to the nature and use of the word For neither the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will admit of

singular eminent and notable matter and what can this be other then that God should inflict punishment upon a person who considered in and by himself did no way in the least measure ever deserve it It is God then that imputes the sin and himself inflicts the punishment thereof Not but that men yea and Devils to may be instruments for the execution but the punishment it self proceeds from Cod. For the Apostles when they apply the passion of Christ to us and would bring it home to our use and benefit have no respect at all to the actings of men in it or about it but only of God himself as Isa 53.10 It pleased the Lord to bruise him 't is he that hath put him to grief So that all the foul imputations of the Jews are nothing to this purpose Thus have we in some measure heard what the Scriptures say in this particular Now whether we should believe God or Man Prophet and Apostle or Socinus and the Dialogue judge ye good Readers Here the whole Socinian band do fire at once and to shew themselves doughty champions of the black guard do discharge a full volley of most horrid blasphemies even in the very face of the Almighty If God say they shall impute sin unto Christ his own innocent and harmlesse Son he is unjust * Ille agit injustè qui invitum pro altero punit sed qui illum qui se sponté pro alterò ad supplicium effort habet fui ipsiusque pro quo se offert liberandi potestatem pro altero púnit ille non agit injustè Sibrandus Lubbertus pag. 376. Thus though Christ have taken our sins upon him and hath engaged for us yet if God impute sin to Christ they will be so bold as to impute sin to God and charge him with injustice yea the Dialogue it self though he appear one of the last is none of the least among them For he confidently affirms that God cannot impute sin to our innocent Saviour but if he should do so he should be as unjust * Deus verè summè justus in sponsere nostro Bez. in Rom. 4.25 even as the wicked Jews what high presumption is it in these poor worms thus to reproach the living God and to charge him foolishly He that reproveth him let him answer it saith Iob o Iob 39.35 We may discover the ground of this errour though there be none for their blasphemy Here here is that ignis erraticus that causeth them to wonder namely a vain supposition that the works of God are no lesse subject to the Law of nature and the Law of Moses then the works of men and that the work of mans redemption published to us only by the Gospel is to be squared by and proportioned to the Law of nature engraffed in us or the Law of Moses set down as a Rule of life unto us This they endeavour to maintain by an argument taken from the equal obligation as well of God as of man to the same prefixed as a rule to both and to both a like beyond which as man so God himself cannot passe but they do as it were pull him by the sleeve tell him of it and charge him with injustice For say they God hath not ordained this Law for men only namely The Fathers shall not dye for their Children nor the Children for their Fathers but every one shall bear the punishment of his own sin But also did after a manner impose it upon himself speaking thus by the Prophet p Ezek. 18.20 the Son shall not bear the iniquity of the Father neither shall the Father bear the iniquity of the Son but the righteousness of the righteous c. This Socinian argument is patcht up with very groundlesse yea senselesse and fained suppositions the first of which is that God by Moses imposed the same Law upon himself which he had engraven in the hearts of the Gentiles and delivered to the Jews q Deut. 24.16 namely the Fathers shall not be put to death for the Children nor the Children for the Fathers That this is false may appear by the practise of Amaziah King of Judah who having respect unto this Law did not understand it as to extend it self so far as to God the most high and supream Law-giver but to be terminated and limitted in his vicegerents and therefore r 2 King 14.6 he slew not the Children of those that had murthered his Father Joash according to that which is written in the book of the Law of Moses We affirm then that God was not lyable neither can he possibly be subject to any external Law whatsoever the reason is plain because his own will is the prime and chiefest Rule of Justice who receiveth Laws from none but prescribeth Laws to all as being the cause and original of all just Laws engraven in the hearts of men or by writing committed to record and commended to posterity Wherefore as God will have no Law prescribed to his will which depends not upon the will of any other So seing his will is in it self holy and unchangeably just there is no need at all that he should prescribe a Law as a Rule of Justice unto himself The second supposition is that this Evangelical affirmation of God by which he declares his willingness that Christ by his appeasing death should satisfie the debt of our sins for us is altogether repugnant to that legal asseveration of his that he would not that the innocent Son should dye for the guilty Father or the innocent Father for the guilty Son Both which though in several respects are most true and certain First God would have Christ our Brother according to the flesh being justified by the Spirit and declared innocent by Pontius Pilate to be condemned and executed for us that were guilty because Christ by joynt consent with God his Father appointed himself ſ Aliud est alterum pro altero puniri invitum aliud puniri illum qui se sistit ipro altero vadem seu sposorem Christus hic hominem induit factum est peccatum execratio undèjustè solvit quod a nobis erat debitum Prideaux de Redemptione a propitiatory sacrifice for us from all eternity whence he is called t Ioh 1.29 Agnus Dei. the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the World A Lamb indeed without spot without blemish ordained for this very purpose even before the Foundations of the World were laid but in these latter times manifested to us whom he hath redeemed from sin by his most precious bloud as St. Peter expresseth it 1 Pet. 1.17 19 20. Secondly God would not that out of mankind either the Father should dye for the Son or the Son for the Father because he knew from all eternity that no Father or Son could possibly be guiltlesse proceeding from the corrupt masse of mankind or out of the loynes of sinfull and degenerate

especially the 9th Chapter setteth forth most cleerly So then though the Socinians cannot find this word Satisfaction in their Bibles yet they may find that which is equivalent to it and is put for it as when the hurt or damage done to any one either by sin or other trespasse is truly and fully recompenced this is satisfaction h See Grotius de Satisfact Christi cap. 7.8 9 10. That this was performed by Christ and the Justice of God hereby appeased which we had provoked by our transgressions is manifest by those Testimonies formerly recited and by such expressions as are in Scripture frequently used Yet lest any should go away unsatisfied in this point of satisfaction as it is impossible to satisfie all God in his just judgment having sent abroad a Spirit of delusion there being multitudes that will sooner comply with an upstart and erroneous opinion upon the appearance of one single and single sole argument then embrace and cleave to a truth though confirmed by many strong and sinewy demonstrations evident and apparent probations out of the holy Scriptures even as one stroke will carry a man farther with the tide then five against it And therefore I have the lesse hope to prevail with many yet to satisfy the ingenuous and leave the rest without excuse I shall propose these ensuing arguments to the serious consideration of the unbiassed Reader The first of which we take from the meritorious cause of Christ his death Christ suffered and dyed for our sins whence we argue thus He that taking upon him our nature hath therein undergone all the sufferings which were due to the offenders and such as were guilty whose persons he represents So that his chastisements have ceased in the pacification of the Imponent his Sacrifice bin the expiation of all the offences his stripes have brought health and deliverance to the delinquent He hath truly and fully made satisfaction for them But Christ Jesus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God-Man ha●h suffered and undergone all these things as hath bin sufficiently proved already by many texts of holy Scripture Therefore he hath made full and perfect satisfaction Secondly from the expiation of our sins and that reconciliation he hath wrought between God and us who were as the Prophet speaketh i Isa 59.2 separated the one from the other so that from hence we thus argue If Christ hath pacifyed the wrath of God towards us which was exceedingly incensed against us by reason of those sins and transgressions which were committed by us so that now though before we stood condemned there is no condemnation at all to us He must needs satisfy Divine Justice which otherwise could not be appeased towards us But the former is true as we have already proved Therefore the latter Thirdly and lastly from that redemption which we have by Christ Christ hath redeemed us by his death So that we thus conclude wheresoever there is true redemption k Heb. 9.15 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which a certain price is paid l Matt. 10.28 and Mar. 10.45 1 Tim. 2.6 so that they for whom the price is paid by reason and in consideration thereof be freed and discharged from deserved bonds or punishment there also is true satisfaction But such is our redemption by Christ the true prise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 interveniente being laid down and accepted Therefore there is true and real satisfaction Besides he that was made sin for us m 2 Cor. 5.21 that we might be made the righteousness of God yea was made a curse for us n Gal. 3.13 thereby freeing us from the same hath truly fully satisfied for us But this was performed by Christ our Surety in our steed Therefore he hath fully satisfied the Justice of his Father for us Otherwise the Law was published to no purpose sentence denounced in vain against the violaters o Gen. 2.17 morte morieris thereof contrary to the immutability and unchangableness of God yea and sin would also remain unpunished contrary to his essential Justice Thus thou seest good Reader whether these blind guides would lead thee and to what a miserable estate they endeavour to bring thee robbing thee of the means and hopes of thy Salvation and leaving thee burdened with the heavy weight of thy sins which thou canst not bear and lyable to the full measure of Gods wrath which thou art not able to undergo If this be so we are of all men most miserable and farewell all happiness after this life Men may sing if they have any heart to it in this sad and desperate condition that old Epicurean ditty ede bibe lude c. Oh what madness doth possesse the souls of these men were they not as good deny the very death of Christ as deny the vertue power and efficacy of his death May they not as well say he dyed not as say he dyed thus thus to no purpose leaving us in our sins and the Justice of God altogether unsatisfied for us These men men said I Yea monsters rather sub specie veritatis veritatem vulnerant wound Truth in her own coat under pretence of defending the Mercy of God they deny his Justice But let these stand or fall to their own Master and seing that we have proved that Christ hath done and suffered these things for us let not the good and benefit thereof fall beside us Let us look at that with thankfull admiration which these heretical Blasphemers do load with scorn and derision Christ suffered for us not only nostra causa for our sake or nostro bono for our good but also nostra vice in our steed and nostro loco in our place He representing our persons in the similitude of sinfull flesh stood in our room taking those stripes upon him which would have dashed us to pieces by the vertue whereof we have our healing The curse of St. Paul will surely light upon such as preach to the people any other Doctrine nor can they expect a blessing that are reduced by it when as in these dayes they shall attempt it Thirdly concerning the nature of the Mediatorial obedience of Christ or the meritorious price of our redemption THE Dialogue having hitherto denied Christs suffering the wrath of God due to the Elect for their sins by way of satisfaction to Divine Justice as also the imputation of their sin unto Christ as their Surety though very immethodically and out of place preferring the effect before the cause lest he should fall into another foul absurdity in his reasoning that is to deny the subject of the question doth present us with a new thing of nothing in the steed thereof And because he hath prevailed with some and they perhaps such as vvill not give their heads for the vvashing it may be Masters in Israel to comply vvith him he expects the l●ke of all and therefore vvould have us follovv all that he proposes to us making no

silly shift is to no purpose Would the Dialogue bu undresse his brames take off and lay a side these and such like phanatick toyes that gingle about his understanding God might receive more glory the Church more peace himself more comfort others more benefit by or from the study and practise of those Truths which lend directly and necessarily to edification and salvation For fear this will not be we will leave wishing and woulding and return to the prosecution of the matter we have in hand We are justified by the perfect and compleat righteousness of Christ by which the Law is fulfilled the justice of God satisfied and we delivered from that wrath which we had deserved * Communis omnium nostrorum sententia neque quòd ad rem attinet quisquam è nostris aliter scripsit aut sensit all which we will wind up upon this one bottome and comprehend in this one argument By that righteousness we are justified by which the Law is fully satisfied By the righteousness of Christ the Law is fully satisfied Therefore by the righteousness of Christ are we justified For the proof of the Proposition three things are to be granted First that whosoever is justified is made just by some righteousness For to think that a man should be justified without any Justice is as absurd as to imagine a man to be clothed without rayment Secondly that all true righteousness is a conformity to the Law of God which is the perfect Rule of righteousness insomuch that what is not conformable to that Law is called and that justly to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sin Thirdly that there can be no justification without the Law be fulfilled * Christus induens nostram carnem nostro nomine perfectè praestitit legem either by our selves or some other for us For our Saviour Christ protested when he came to justifie and redeem us that he came not to break but to fulfill the Law * Tum demum redderetur inanis si illi non satisficeret vel per nos vel nostro nominae per alium atqui id per Christum est satisfactum qui non venit solvere sed implere Tossa pag. 26. and that not one jot or title of the Law should passe away without its due and true accomplishment These things thus premised being taken for granted the proposition is firm and undeniable The assumption is that by the righteousness of Christ the Law is fully satisfied For the cleering whereof we are to understand that to the full satisfying of the Law since the fall of Adam two things are necessarily required the one hath respect to the penalty to the suffering vvhereof sin hath made us lyable the other to the precept it self to the performing and compleating whereof the Law it self doth oblige us The former to free us from Hell and damnation the other to intitle us to Heaven and eternall salvation according to the Sanction of the Law if thou doest not that which is commanded thou art thereby accursed but if thou do then thou shall be saved In respect of the former the Law cannot be satisfied in the behalf of him who hath once transgressed it but by eternal punishment or that at least which is equivalent thereunto in respect of the latter it is not satisfied but by a total perfect and perpetual obedience Now our Saviour Christ hath fully satisfied the Law for all them that truly believe in him in both respects For he hath super-abundantly satisfied the penalty of the Law for us by his sufferings and death he hath likewise perfectly fulfilled the Law for us by performing all r ghteousness ●hat it even to the uttermost either did or could require So that by them both we are freely and fully justified being freed from Hell that place of torment by the one and entitled to Heaven that place of happiness by the other God in Christ esteeming and accounting a sinner as just d Deus in Christo peccatorem estimat acsi ipse omnia singula peregisset perpessus esset quae Christus utraque illâ obedientiâ suâ peregit perpessus est Bradshaw de Justific as if he had performed and endured all and every thing which Christ himself both by his active and passive obedience performed and endured The form of a sinners justification is the imputation of the righteousness of Christ because by imputing it the Lord doth justifie which was also expressed in the definition And this doth necessarily follow upon that which hath bin already said of the matter For it cannot be imagined that we should be justified by that righteousness of Christ which is out of us and in him otherwise then by imputation For as we were made sinners by Adams personal disobedience e Rom. 5.19 So are we made righteous by the obedience of Christ But how could we either be made sinners by Adams disobedience or justified by the obedience of Christ either active or passive unlesse they were communicated to us And how could that be but by imputation Downame f De Justific lib. 1. cap. 3. makes it cleer by another action not unlike unto it As when Rebeccah clothed her Son Jacob in the raiment of Esau her elder Son the matter of this action was that which did cloth him that is Esau's garment the form of that action was the applying of it unto him and the putting of it upon him So the Lord justifieth us by putting upon us the precious raiment of our elder brother Christ his righteousness in which we obtain the blessing Thus doth St. Ambrose g De Jacob vita beata also use this action for illustration of the form of our justification with divers others It is not unknown how stifly Socinus and his followers oppose this namely that imputation is the formal cause of a sinners justification and how directly they conclude against it that no imputation whatsoever Object 1 can be the form of justification and they give this for a reason because it is no righteousness whereas a form of justification must of necessity be a righteousness Righteousness imputed say they and our Dialogue is not much behind them is a righteousness but the imputation of righteousness cannot be righteousness To which we answer 1. It is true Answ righteousness must be to make one righteous but that is the matter imputation of it or it imputed is the form the introduction of this which is imputation hath the place of a form And 2. this introduction giveth denomination it is the constitution of a man righteous by applying to him that which he hath not in or of himself that is the righteousness of another Again say they if the righteousness of Christ be Object 2 the matter as we have declared and imputation thereof the form as we do affirm then one righteousness must be the form of another because the form must needs be a righteousness if the matter and