zqi An Expofition of the CxëP.jj, admire at it, theAngels defireto lòokinto it. What fhould be the caufe and reafon hereof ? why God fhould thus bruifehim, andput him togrief? This is worth our enquiry ; andvarious are the conceptions ofmen about it. The Socinians deny that his fufferings wereprenal, or that he died tomake fatisfaCtionforfin; but only that he did fo, toconfirm the Doetrine that he had taught, and to fet us an example to fuffer for the truth. But his Doctrine carried its own evidencewith it, that it was from God, and Was befides uncontrollably confirmedby the Miracles that he wrought. So Thathisfufriügs on that account might have been difpenfed withal]. And finely this great and fiupendousmatter ofthe dying oftheSon of God, is not to be refolved into a Keafon and Caufe that might fo tali!), bedifpenfed with. God would never have givenup his Son tò die, but only for fuch caufès and ends as could no otherwife have been fatisfied or accomplished. The like alfomaybe faid of the other caufe affrgned bq them, namely to fet us an example. I t is true, in his death he did fo, and ofgreat and fingular ufe unto its it is that fo he did. But yet neither was this from anyprecedent Law or Confiitution, nor from the nature of the thing it felf, nor from any property of God indifPenfihlyneceffary : God could byhis grace have carried us through fufrings, although he had not fet before us theexampleofhisSon ; fo he doth through other thingsno lets difficult, wherein the Lord Chritl could not in his own Perfon go be- foreus ; as in our converfton unto God, and mortification of ibdwelling fin, neither of which the Lord Chrift was capable of. We (hall leave them then, as thole whoac- knowledging the death ofChrift, donot yet acknowledge or own anyfuffeient caufe or reafon whyhe fhould die. ChriJiiansgenerally allow that thefu Brings ofChrift werepsna, and his death fa- tisfadtory for the fins of men ; but as to the caufe and reafonof his fo fuffering they differ. Some, followingAniline, refer thedeath ofChrift folely unto the Wildan and Sovereignty ofGod. God would have it fo, and therein are we to acquiefce. Other waysoffaving the Elect werepaffble, but this God chofe, becaufefo it feemed good unto him. Hence arofe that faying, That one drop of thebloodof Chrift wasfufcieni to redeem the whole world ; only it pleafed God that he fhould Puffer unto the utmoft. Andherein arewe to refs, that He bathfufferedfor us, and that God bath revealed. But this teems not to me any way to anfwer that which is here affirmed by the Apottle, namely that it becameGod, as the SupremeGovernour of all the world, fo to caufe Chrift to fuller; nordo I fee whatdemonffration of theglory of Justice can arife from the punifhingof an innocent Perfon, who might have been fpared, and yet all the ends ofhis being fo punifhed to have been otherwife brought about. And to fay, that one dropof Chrifis bloud was fufftcientto redeem the world, is derogatory unto the Goodnefs, Wifdom, and Righteoufnefsof God, in cantingnot onlythewhole to be Ihed, but alfo his Soul to be made an offeringfor fin, which was altogether needlefs if that were true. But how farthis whole Opinion is from truth, which leaves no neeeffary caufe of the deathofChrift, will afterwards appear. Others fay, that on fuppofition that God had appointed the Curie of the Law, and death tobe the penaltyof fin, his faithfulneff and Veracity were engagedfo far, that no fmner shouldgo free, or be made partaker ofglory but by the intervention offatisfaelion, And therefore on thefuppofition that God- would make Come menhis fops, and bring them to glory, it was necefarywith refpeétunto the engagement ofthe truth ofGod, that he fhould fuffer, die, and make fatisfa6hion for them. But all this they refer ori- ginallyunto a free conftitution, which might have been otherwife. God might have ordered things fo, withoutany derogation unto the glory öfhisJuftice or Hounds in the Government ofall things, asthat (inners mighthave beenfaved without the death of Chrift. For ifhe had not engagedhis Word, and declared that death fhould be the penalty of fin, he might have freely remitted it without the interventionof any fatisfa- eiion. And thus all this wholework ofdeath being the punifhment offin, andofthe fufferings ofChrift for finners, is refolved into a free purpofe and Decree ofGods Will, and not into the exigence of any effential property of hisNature; fo that it might have beenotherntifi in all the parts ofit, and yet the gloryof God preferved every w ay entire. Whether this beto or no, we (hall immediately enquire. Others grant many free Acts of the Mind and Will of God in this matter: as, t: TheCreation ofman in fuch a condition, as that he fhould have a moraldependance an Godin reference unto his utmoft end, was aneffeet of the Sovereign Pleafure Will andWifdom ofGod. But on fuppofition of this Decree and Conhitution, they fay, the Nature, Authority, and Holinefs of God required indiffenfibly, that man fhould yield
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=