Secondly, "Hence it follows, that the finite and impotent creature is more capable of extending mercy and forgiveness tlianthe infinite and omnipotent Creator."
Ans. 1. God being essentially holy and lighteous, having engaged his faithfulness in the sanction of the law, and being naturally and necessarily the governor and ruler of the world, the forgiving of sui without satisfaction would be no perfection in him, but an effect of impotency and imperfection, — a thing which God cannot do, as he cannot he, nor deny himself. 2. The direct contrary of what is in- sinuated is asserted by this doctrine; for, on the supposition of the satisfaction and atonement insisted on, not only doth God freely for- give, but that in such a way of righteousness and goodness, as no creature is able to conceive or express the glory and excellency of it. And to speak of the poor having pardons of private men, upon par- ticular offences against themselves, who are commanded so to do, and have no right nor authority to requke or exact punishment, nor is any due upon the mere account of tlieir own concernment, in com- parison with the forgiveness of God, ariseth out of a deep ignorance of the whole matter under consideration.
Thirdly. It is added by them, that hence it follows, " That God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son to save it; and yet that God stood off in high displeasure, and Christ gave himself as a com- pilete satisfaction to offended justice."
Ans. Something these men would say, if they knew what or how; for, — 1. That God so loved the world as to give his only Son to save it, is the expression of the Scripture, and the foundation oi the doctrine whose truth we contend for. 2. That Christ offered him- self to make atonement for sinners, and therein made satisfaction to the justice of God, is the doctrine itself which these men oppose, and not any consequent of it. 3. That God stood off in high displeasure, is an expression which neither the Scripture useth, nor those who declare this doctrine from thence, nor is suited unto divine perfections, or the manner of divine operations. That intended seems to be, that the righteousness and law of God required the punishment due to sin to be undergone, and thereby satisfaction to be made unto God; which is no consequent of the doctrine, but the doctrine itself
Fourthly. It is yet farther objected, " That if Christ made satis- faction for sin, then he did it either as God or as man, or as God and man."
Ans. 1. As God and man. Acts xx. 28, "God redeemed his
OF THE SATISFACTION OF CHRIST. 4:33
church with his own blood." 1 John iii. 1 6, " Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us." Heb. ix. 14. 2. This dilemma is proposed, as that which proceeds on a supposition of our own principles, that Christ is God and man in one person: which, indeed, makes the pretended difficulty to be vain, and a mere effect of ignorance ; for all the mediatory acts of Christ being the acts of his person, must of necessity be the acts of him as God and man. 8. There is yet another mistake in this inquiry; for satisfaction is in it looked on as a real act or operation of one or the other nature in Christ, when it is the ap)otelesma or effect of the actings, the doing and suffering of Christ — the dignity of what he did in reference unto the end for which he did it. For the two natures are so united in Christ as not to have a third compound principle of physical acts and operations thence arising; but each nature acts distinctly, according to its own being and properties, yet so as what is the immediate act of either nature is the act of him who is one in both ; from whence it hath its dignity. 4. The sum is, that in all the mediatory actions of Christ we are to consider, — (1.) The agent; and that is the person of Christ. (2.) The immediate principle by which and from Avhich the agent worketh; and that is the natures in the person. (3.) The ac- tions; which are the effectual operations of either nature. (4.) The effect or work with respect to God and us; and this relates unto the person of the agent, the Lord Christ, God and man. A blending of the natures into one common principle of operation, as the compound- ing of mediums unto one end, is ridiculously supposed in this matter.
But yet, again; it is pretended that sundry consequences, irreli- gious and irrational, do ensue upon a supposition of the satisfaction pleaded for. What, then, are they?
First. " That it is unlawful and impossible for God Almighty to be gracious and merciful, or to pardon transgressors."
A ns. The miserable, confused misapprehension of things which the proposal of this and the like consequences doth evidence, manifests sufficiently how unfit the makers of them are to manage controversies of this nature. For, — 1. It is supposed that for God to be gracious and merciful, or to pardon sinners, are the same ; which is to con- found the essential properties of his nature with the free acts of his will. 2. Lawful or unlawful, are terms that can with no tolerable sense be used concerning any properties of God, all which are natural and necessary unto his being ; as goodness, grace, and mercy, in par- ticular, are. 3. That it is impossible for God to pardon transgres- sor's, according to this doctrine, is a fond imagination; for it is only a declaration of the manner how he doth it. 4. As God is gracious and merciful, so also he is holy, and righteous, and true; and it be- came him, or was every way meet for him, in his way of exercising