Whence is that of the apostle, Rom. viii. 83, 34, " Who shall lay any thing to their charge? who shall condemn them?" Who should but God? It is God, against whom they have sinned, whose the law is, and who alone can pronounce sentence of condemnation on the offenders, and inflict penalty accordingly. Yea, but " it is God that justifieth ;" that is, that frees men from their obnoxiousness to punish- ment for sin in the first sense of it, which is their captivity, as hath been declared. But how comes this about? Why, " it is Christ that died." It is by the death of Christ that we have this redemption.
2, From all the miseries that attend that state and condition. These are usually referred to three heads: — (1.) The power of Satan ; (2.) Of sin ; (3.) Of the world ; from all which we are said to be redeemed. And these are well compared to the jailer, filth, and fetters of the prison wherein the captives are righteously de- tained.
(1.) For the first. Col. i. 18, 14, " Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son; in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins." The "power of dai-kness" is the power of the
OF THE SATISFACTION OF CHRIST. 519
prince of darkness, of Satan. This God delivers us from, by the redemption that is in the blood of Christ, verse 14. And how? Even as he who delivers a captive from the judge by a price delivers him also from the jailer who kept him in prison. By his death (which, as hath been showed, was a price and a ransom), he deprived Satan of all his power over us; which is called his destroying of him, Heb. ii, 14, — that is, not the devil as to his essence and being, but as to his power and authority over those who are made partakers of his death.
The words of Socinus to this purpose may be taken notice of, Lib. de Servat. lib. i. part. ii. cap. ii. : —
Nothing is wanting in this deliverance, that it might wholly answer a true re- demption, but only that he who detained the captive should receive the price. Although it seems to some that it may be said that the devil received the price which intervened in our redemption, as the ancient divines, among whom was Ambrosius and Augustine, made bold to speak, yet that ought to seem most ab- surd, and it is true that this price was received by none : for on that account chiefly is our deliverance not a true but a metaphorical redemption, because in it there is none that should receive the price ; for if that which is in the place of a price be received (by him who delivers the captive), then not a metaphorical but a true price had intervened, and thereupon our redemption had been proper. '
It is confessed that nothing is wanting to constitute that we speak of to be a true, proper, and real redemption, but only that the price paid be received of him that delivered the captives. That this is God we proved ; that the price is paid to him we shall nextly prove.
The only reason given why the price is not paid to any, is because it is not paid to the devil. But was it the law of Satan we had trans- gressed? was he the judge that cast us into prison? was it him to whom we were indebted ? was it ever heard that the price of re- demption was paid to the jailer? Whether any of the ancients said so or no I shall not now trouble myself to inquire, or in what sense they said it; the thing in itself is ridiculous and blasphemous.
(2.) Sin. "He redeemed us from all iniquity," Tit. ii. 14; and we were " redeemed by the precious blood of Christ from our vain conversation received by tradition from our fathers," 1 Pet. i. 18, 19. This redeeming us from our sins respects two things: — [1.] The guilt of them, that they should not condemn us; and, [2.] The poiver of them, that they should not rule in us. In the places mentioned it is
' " Nihil in hac liberatione dcsideratur, ut omniuo veroe redomptioni respondeat, nisi ut is qui captivum dctinebat pretium accipiat. Quamvis autem quibusdam vide- atur dici posse diabolum, pretium quod in nostra liberatione intcrvenit, acccpissc, quemadmodum antiquiores thcologi, inter quos Ambrosius et Augustinus, ausi sunt dicere, tamen id pcrabsurdum videri debet, et recte est ncminem id pretium accepisso afiBrmare. Ea siquidem rationo potissimum, non vera sed metaphorica redemptio, libei-atio nostra est, quocirca in ca nemo est qui pretium accipiat ; si cuim id quod in ipso pretii loco est acceptum (ab eo scilicet qui captivum hominem detinebat) fuisset, jam non metaphoricum sed verum pretium intervenisset, et propterca vera redemptio esset."
620 VINDTCI^ EVANGELIC^.
the latter that is principally intended ; which is evident from what is opposed to the captivity under sin that is spoken of. In the one place it is " purifying unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works," Tit. ii. 14; in the other, the " purifying of our souls in obe- dience to the truth through the Spirit," 1 Pet. i. 22. Now, we are redeemed from the power of our sins by the blood of Christ, not im- mediately, but consequentially, as a captive is delivered from his fetters and filth upon the payment of his ransom. Christ's satisfying the justice of God, reconciling him to us by his death, hath also pro- cured the gift of his Spirit for us, to deliver us from the power of our sins. The foundation of this being laid in the blood of Christ, and the price which thereby he paid, our delivery from our sins belongs to his redemption ; and we are therefore said to be redeemed by him from our vain conversation.