And this will comprise the laws of this redemption, which are usu- ally given. They are, first. On the part of the redeemer: — 1. " Pro- pinquus esto;" — " Let him be near of kin." 2. " Consanguinitatis jure redimito ;" — " Let him redeem by right of consanguinity." 3. "Injusto possessori 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 offerto;" — " Let him offer or give his blood to the true Lord for a ransom, or price of redemption." Secondly, On the part of the redeemed: — 1. " Libertatis jure felix gaudeto;" — " Let him enjoy his liberty." 2. " Servitutis jugum 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 Socinus himself consents unto : for whereas Covet had a little inconveni- ently defined " to redeem," saying, " Redimere aliquem est debi- tum solvere creditoris ejus nomine, qui solvendo non erat, sicque satisfacere creditori," which is a proper description of the payment of another man's debts, and not of his redemption, Socinus, correct- ing this mistake, affirms that " redimere aliquem nihil aliud pro- prie significat quam captivum e manibus illius qui eum detinet pretio illi date 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 what was before given in for the description of it. With the accommodation, therefore, of that description to the redemption which we have by the blood of Christ, I shall proceed, desiring the reader to remem- ber that if I evince the redemption we have by Christ to be proper, and properly so called, the whole business of satisfaction is confess- edly evinced.
FiEST. The general nature of it consists in deliverance. Thence Christ is called ' O pu6/j,svog, " The deliverer :" Rom. xi. 26, "As it is writ- ten, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer." The word in the prophet, Isa. lix. 20, is ^'^iS, that we may know what kind of deliverer Christ is, — a deliverer by redemjition. "He gave himself for our sins S'TTug e^iXrirai r,ij,ag, that he might deliver us," Gal. i. 4. He de- livered us; but it was by giving himself for our sins. 1 Thess. i. 10, "To wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, ' Socin. de Jes. Chris. Serv. lib. i. part. ii. cap. i.
OF THE SATISFACTION OF CHRIST. 511
'lyiSouv, Tov puoij^ivov rifLai a'xh Trjg opyTJg rrjg ip^o/xsvrig, — JesUS, wllO deli- vered 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 deli- verance, 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 agrees in the end and effect only. Hence Moses is said to be XvrpojTrjg: Acts viL S5^ Tourov 6 &sog ap^ovra xai Xvrpairnv d-jTsffrsiXev, " Him did God send a prince and a redeemer;" that is, a deliverer, 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 is called redemption, and he is termed therein a redeemer, though it was not a direct redemption that he wrought, no ransom being paitl for delivery.
It is pleaded, First, " 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 mentioned in the Scripture is metaphorical, a mere deliverance; and such is also that we have by Christ, without the intervention of any price."
Secondly, " 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 ivithout 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 wdiat is pleaded by the Eacovian Catechism to prove our redemp- tion by Ciirist not to be proper, but metaphorical; and so, conse- quently, that no satisfaction can be thence evinced : —
" E verbo redimendi non posse effici satisfactionem banc hinc est planum, quod de ipso Deo in novo et in prisco foedere scribitur, eum redimisse populum suum ex ^gypto, eum fecisse rederaptionem populo suo; quod Moses fuerit redemptor. Act. vii. 35. Vox ideo redemptionis, simpliciter libei'ationem denotat." — Rac. Cat. cap. viii. de Christo.
And, indeed, what there they speak is the sum of the plea of So- cinus as to this part of our description of redemption, " De Jesu Christo Servatore," lib. i. part. ii. cap. i.-iii.
To remove these difficulties (if they may be so called), I shall only tender the ensuing considerations: —