' " Qua ratione ? — Quod ad id quod fallax sit et erronea, attinet, id hinc perspi- cuum est, quod non solum de ea nihil extet in Scripturis, verum etiam Scripturis et BaniB rationi repugnat? "
2 " Demonstra id ordine ?— Id non haberi in Scripturis argumento est, quod istius opinionis assertores nunquam perspicuas scripturas aflferunt ad probandam istam opinionem, verum quasdam consecutioncs ncctunt quibus quod asscrunt cflBcere conan- tur; quas ut admitterc asquum est cum ex Scripturis nccessario adstruuntur, ita ubi Scripturis repugnant eas nullum vim habere certum est." — Ques. 15.
544 VINDICI^ EVANGELia-E.
thing itself is found expressly a hundred times over; and their great master doth confess that it is not the word, but the thing itself, that he opposeth. So that, without any thanks to them at all for granting that consequences from Scripture may be allowed to prove matters of faith, we assure them our doctrine is made good by innumerable express testimonies of the word of God, some whereof have been by us now insisted on ; and, moreover, that if they and their companions did not wrest the Scriptures to strange and uncouth senses, never heard of before amongst men professing the name of Christ, we could willingly abstain wholly from any expression that is not prirois, found in the Word itself. But if, by their rebellion against the truth, and attempts to pervert all the expressions of the Word, the most clear and evident, to perverse and horrid abominations, we are necessitated to them, they must bear them, unless they can prove them not to be true.
Let the reader observe, that they grant that the consequences we gather from Scripture would evince that which we plead and contend for, were it not that they are repugnant to other scriptures. Let them, then, manifest the truth of their pretension by producing those other scriptures, or confess that they are self-condemned.
Wherefore they ask, —
Q. How is it repugnant to the Scriptures ?
A. In this sort, that the Scriptures do everywhere testify that God forgives sin freely, 2 Cor. v. 19, Rom. iii. 24, 25; but principally under the new covenant, Eph. ii. 8, Matt, xviii. 23, etc. Now, nothing is more opposite to free remission than satisfaction; so that if a creditor be satisfied either by the debtor himself or by any other in the name of the debtor, he cannot be said to forgive freely.'
If this be all that our consequences are repugnant unto in the Scripture, we doubt not to make a speedy reconciliation; indeed there was never the least difference between them. Not to dwell long upon that which is of an easy despatch, —
1. This objection is stated solely to the consideration of sin as a debt, which is metaphorical. Sin properly is an offence, a rebellion, a transgression of the law, an injury done, not to a private person, but to a governor in his government.
2. The first two places mentioned, 2 Cor. v. 18-20, Rom. iii. 24, 25, do expressly mention the payment of this debt by Christ as the ground of God's forgiveness, remission, and pardon; the payment of it, I say, not as considered metaphorically as a debt, but the making an atonement and reconciliation for us who had committed it, considered as a crime and rebellion or transgression.
' " Qui vcro Scripturoe rcpugnat? — Ad eura modum, quod Scripturge passim Deum pcccata hominibus gratuito reniittere testentur, 2 Cor. v. 19, Eom. iii. 24, 25; potis- gimum veio sub novo foedcre, Eph. ii. 8, Matt, xviii. 23, etc. At remissioni gratuitee nihil advcrsatur niagis quam satisfactio. Cui cnim creditori satisfit vcl ab ipso dcbi- tore, vcl ab alio debitoris nomine, de co dici non potest vere eum debitum gratuito ex ipsa gratia remisisse."
OF THE SATISFACTION OF CHRIST. 545
3. We say that God doth most freely forgive us, as Eph. ii. 8, Matt, xviii. 23, etc., without requiring any of the debt at our hands, with- out requiring any price or ransom from us or any satisfaction at our hands; but yet he forgives us for Christ's sake, setting forth him to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, he laying down his life a ran- som for us, God not sparing him, but giving him up to death for us all.
4. The expression of another satisfying in the name of the debtor intends either one j^^ocured by the debtor, and at his entreaty un- dertaking the work, or one graciously given and assigned to be in his stead by the creditor. In the first sense it hath an inconsistency with free remission, in the latter not at all.
The truth is, men that dream of an opposition between the satis- faction made by Christ, the surety and mediator of the new cove- nant, and free remission made to us, are utterly ignorant of the whole mystery of the gospel, nature of the covenant, and whole mediation of Christ, advancing carnal imaginations against innumerable testi- monies of the Scripture, witnessing the blesseei conspiration between them, to the praise of the glorious grace of God. But they say, —
That it is contrary to reason also, because it would hence follow " that Christ underwent eternal death, if he satisfied God for our sins, seeing it is manifest that the punishment we deserved by our sins Avas eternal death. Also, it would follow that we should be more bound to Christ than to God himself, as to him who had shown us greater favour in satisfaction ; but God receiving satisfaction afforded us no favour."-^