The Foundation of God Standeth Sure, Chapter 7
CHAP. VII. The Doctrine of the satisfaction of Christ, the second person, of the real and glorious Trinity asserted and proved.
IF the doctrine of the ever glorious Trinity or three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost in one Godhead had been overthrown by W. P. or could be indeed shaken by the Sociniant, which with all the argument they can device, in vain, they do endeavour, if he or they could prove (which they never can) that there is but one person in the God-head; then it would follow that Christ could not be the eternal Son of God, the second person of this glorious Trinity (as W. P. most blasphemously, stileth him the second person of the imagin'd Trinity,) and by consequence the Doctrine of satisfaction depending upon this person, would fall to the ground, and might by invincible argument be refuted, it being impossible for any meer finite creature to make plenary satisfaction to the infinite Justice of God; But the Doctrine of the Trinity being established by Scripture Testimony, and the Lord Jesus Christ proved to be God equal with the Father, the Doctrine also of satisfaction dependent upon this second person of the real and ever glorious Trinity, will remain firm against all Quaker and Socinian attempts to overthrow it: and before I give answer unto the objections and cavils against this Doctrine. I shall breifly assert and prove the doctrine by the Word of Truth in the Holy Scripture.
W. P. in his title The impossibility of Gods pardoning offin, without a plenary satisfaction refuted, seemeth to infinuate that he denyeth onelyonly the impossibility of Gods pardoning sin without satisfaction; but whoever readeth his arguments shall finde them to be the very same, which the Socinians use against Satisfaction it self, and that he plainly denyeth the thing; therefore I shall not concern my self, to enquire what God could or might do, if he pleased; but what he hath decreed and determined to do, and declared in the Scripture to be his will; and here I affirm
1. That God never doth, nor will, nor can pardon any, sinner without satisfaction made to his offended Iustice for their sins. And that because his holiness, righteousness, and truth, obligeth him to take vengeance upon all that have transgressed his Law; the Lord is so Holy that he hateth all the workers of iniquity, Psal. 5. 5. and what is Gods hatred, but Percatum pro merito suo velle punire, as Bradsh. de Iust. his will to punish sin and sinners according to their desert? His Justice doth engage him by no means to clear the guilty, Exod. 34. 7. and his truth would be enfringed, if he should not curse every one that centinueth not in all things which are written in the Book of the Law to do them, Gal. 3. 10.
II. That no sinners themselves by any thing they can do or suffer in this life, can give satisfaction unto Gods Iustice for their sins. And the reason is because whatever good they do is no more than duty, wherein also they must have Divine help to enable them, and when they have done their duty, their works are but imperfect and they unprofitable servants, and this can make no compensation for their faults before, Luk. 17. 10. When have done all the things commanded, say we are unprofitable servants, &c. Our righteousnesses are as filthy raggs, Isa. 64. 6. And what ever sinners suffer in this life, it is infinitely short of what their sins have deserved; Gods Justice is infinite and requierth an infinite satisfaction; sinners are finite and therefore there is no porportion between any thing they can bring, and what Gods Justice doth require for satisfaction.
III. That Iesus Christ being foreign God and Man in one person, was onelyonly fit to make, and hath actually made satisfaction unto Gods infinite and offended Iustice for the sins of Men.
It was necessary that the person that should make satisfaction should be man, because none but a creature could suffer, and none but a man could be a fit High-Priest to offer up Sacrifice, and make reconciliation for the sins of Men, Heb. 2. 17. It was necessary he should be God, because none but God so neerly united, could strengthen the manhood, to bear up under such a pressure of wrath, and break thorow such sufferings as had taken hold on Christ for mans sins; and if he had not been God as well as man, the sufferings and satisfaction would have been but finite, and so no proportionable satisfaction, but through the infinite dignity of his person, the satisfaction is of infinite value. That Christ hath actually made satisfaction unto Gods Justice for the sins of men, is the great Doctrine which I shall prove from the Scripture.
1. We read in the Old Testament, of the many Sacrifices which were offered up unto God, for the appeasing of his wrath, and the procuring remission for mens sins, all which of themselves could not in the least attain that end, for the Apostle telleth us plainly, Heb. 10. 4. that it was not possible that the blood of Bulls and Goats should take away sin; but these Sacrifices did typically refer unto the Sacrifice, which Christ should offer of himself unto God, whereby satisfaction should be made unto God, and remission obtained for men.
2. In the New Testament, the Scriptures are plain which prove the satisfaction, which Christ made to Gods Justice, for mans sin by his death on the Cross.
Math. 20. 28. The Son of Man came to give his life a ransom for many. and 1. Tim. 2. 6. He gave himself a ransom, the price which Christ did pay for the ransom of men, doth evidently prove that it was for satisfaction; From what did Christ ransom many, if it were not from the vengeance of God, which their sins did expose them unto? and how could his giving his life ransom them, if he did not hereby give satisfaction unto the demands of Gods Justice?
Rom. 5. 6. In due time Christ died for the ungodly, and how did Christ die for the ungodly? was it onelyonly for their good, and so give them an example? was it not in their stead, and that by his death in their room he might satisfy offended justice? we are said to be reconciled to God by the death of his Son, v. 10. And could this be, if he died only for an example? Can we say that we are reconciled to God by the death of any Saints, whose death is exemplary? Was not Christ an innocent person? And would the Father have deliver'd him up unto death had it not been in the room of others? He died for sin indeed, not his own, he being perfectly free from sin, but for our sins.
1 Pet. 2. 24. Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the Tree: And how did he bare our sins, but by bearing the punishment due for them? He was wounded for our transgressions, &c. Isa. 53. 5. And wherefore did he bear the punishment of our sins, but that he might give satisfaction unto God's justice?
Rom. 3. 25. Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, &c. so 1 Iob. 1. 2. Christ was set forth to be a propitiation or propitiatory sacrifice, which doth plainly imply that God was angry with sinners, and that Christ by the propitiatory sacrifice of himself, did appease God's anger, by giving satisfaction here by unto his Justice. And therefore also Christ is called an offering and sacrifice. Eph. 5. 2. As Christ hath loved us, and given himself for us an offering unto God for a sweet smelling savour, and Heb. 9. 22. He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself, &c. How could Christ put away sin by this sacrifice, if this sacrifice were not for satisfaction?
Gal. 3. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law, being made a curse for us. How could Christ redeem us from the curse of the Law, and deliver us from the wrath to come, part of the curse due to us for sin, if he had not (by being made a curse for us, and thereby undergoing the punishment our sins deserved) made satisfaction unto Gods justice?
4. It is only through this satisfaction which Christ hath made, that remission of sins, and reconciliation unto God is attained, or attainable by any of the Children of men. The three former propositions are the reason of this last, which doth necessarily result from them, and in this the Scripture also is clear, Eph. 1. 7. In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace. So Col. 1. 14. and Verse 20. Having made peace by the blood of his Cross, by him to reconcile all things to himself. Rom. 5. 10. If when we were enemies we were reconciled unto God by the death of his Son. My small Tract will not permit inlargements in urging all the Scripture-arguments, which may be brought to prove this great Doctrine of Christs satisfaction, nor to vindicate the Scriptures that prove it from all Socinian exceptions. If any would read more largely this subject handled in answer to the Socinians, Dr. Owen his Mystery of the Gospel vindicated, and Socinianisme examined, I would commend to them as a Book of great worth and use in this day, when Socinians begin so much to put forth the head; as also for a lesser and later piece, I would commend to them, Mr. Ferguson's Iustification only upon a satisfaction. The Texts I have quoted and urged, may satisfie the sober and considering Christian, who I believe doth wonder at W. P's. confidence in asserting that there is nothing in the Scripture that doth look towards a satisfaction.