-C H A P. 2. Chrift underr'etit the Curie of the t u'. 413 confideration of Chrifl's death was anterior to the difpenfing with the Law: whereas thecontrary is rather true , to wit , that the Lord's difpenfing with the Law , was anteriour to his fendiiigof Chritt, .be.caufe the Law properly - knowingg no mediator , and requiring none tofuffer the penalty for another, mutt fir(t, in order of nature , be confidered , as difpenfed with , before -Chrift be fubfìituted in the room of finners to undergo what they deferved. (6) If it was only a ground to God , whereupon to let fall , or.fufpend the execution of the penalty , then it feemeth , Chria's death lwas no full p'ayrnent , or Satisfaéion ; for a full Satisfa6tion requireth more than a fufpenfion of the execution of the punishment , even a full delivery the- re -from. Let us heere his reafon. Becaufe ( faith he ) the threatning if Curio of the Law was not 41 all,bent or intended againft the innocent or Righteous but againf tranfgreffours only. Therefore God in infl st ing death upon Chrift being Innocent and Righteous , did not follow the purport or ,ntent of the Law but in f faring cc for - bearing the tranfgre f fours ( who according to the tenor of the Law sbou!Shave bin pu- nished ) manifeftly difpenfeth with the Law, and doth not execute it. Anf. All this being granted , yet it will not follow , that the fentence & Curie cif the Law was not executed upon C,lirift in his death : for notwithttanding of this di(penfing with the Law ; as to the perfons ; Yet was there no Relaxation of the Law as to the punishment threatned ? Though the Law did not require, that the innocent should fuffer ; Yet the Supream Lord & Ruler dìfpenfing with his own Law fo far , as to fubffitute an innocent perfon , in the room & place of finners, the Law required , that that innocent perfon ,. taking on that penalty., and thereby making himfelfnocent,as to the penalty, should fuller the fame that was threatned , &confequently bear.the Curie, threat* med in the Law. As ( faith he further for explication) when Zaleucus ( the Locrian Law- giver ) caufed one of his own eyes to be put out , that one of his Eon's eyes might be (pared, who according both to the letter c intent of the Law , should ha'ooe loft botlr', be did not preci fel y execute the Law , but gave a f ujficiene account or eon fiderat ion, why it should for that tirne be dtf penfed with. Anf. This fpeaks not home to our cafe , wherein we pay not the half , nor no part of the penalty. But Chrift -payerh the whole, as fubtlitute in our room. if Zaleucus had fubftitured himfelf in the room of his fon , & fuffered both his own eyes to be put out, though the Law had been difpenfed with, as to the perfons., vet the penalty of the lofs of both eyes had been payed, & the fame punishment , which the Law required , had been exalted : And fo it is in bur cafe , _as is ma- nifeft. Yet hegranteth., that in tome fence , Chrift maybe faid to'have fuffered the penalty or Curie of the Law ; as t. It was the Cur fe or penalty of the Law (faith he) as now hanging over the head of the world, if ready to be executed upon all men for fin, that occafioned his fufferings. Anf. If this were all, all the beafts & fenfelefs creatures , may be as well faid to have fuffered the penalty & Curie of the Law;, & confequently to-have fuffered for man & to have born mans fin, in order to bis Redernption, as Chrift; for the fin, &pe- li à flaky ;r ï
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=