The Sufferings of Christ, Part 1 · Chapter 2
CHAP. II. The ſtating of the controverſie.
Dialogu I Hold that Jeſus Christ our Mediatour did pay the full price of our Redemption to his father by the merit of his mediatorial obedience, which according to Gods determinate counſell, was tried through ſufferings, inflicted upon his body as upon a Malefactor, by Satan and his Inſtruments.
Anſw. Neither the merit of Chriſt without his mediatorly obedience, nor his mediatorly obedience without his merit, but both conjoyned are the meritorious price: whence according to the language of the Orthodox the mediatorly obedience of Chriſt is the meritorious price of our redemption; but this manner of ſpeech the Dialogue declines, chuſing rather to expreſſe it ſelf by affected if not ambiguous terms, viz. [Chriſt payed the price of our redemption by the merit of his Mediatoriall obedience] the meaning of which Sibboleth we ſhall ſoon ſee.
The Queſtion between the Orthodox and the Dialogue is not whether the Mediatorly obedience of Chriſt be a meritorious price of redemption, but whether the Mediatorial obedience of Chriſt in the Dialogue be the Mediatorly obedience of Chriſt; So that hitherto you do but beg not ſtate the Queſtion, or rather boaſt of a queſtion begged, then ſtate a Queſtion to be diſputed. That part of the Controverſie which concerns Mediatorly obedience ſhall be truly ſtated in its due place.
It is very true that the Mediatorly obedience of Chriſt is the meritorious and full price of redemption, but moſt untrue in the ſenſe of your Mediatorial obedience for you leave out and reject from thence Chriſts obedience to the Law of works as God-man, his judiciall bearing of ſin, his ſuffering the puniſhment due for ſin, in way of ſatisfaction to divine juſtice,Suſtinent quidem, ſed non ita ut uſquam ſatisfaciant justitiae Dei Urſin. Ex. plic. Catech. par. 2. q. 17 and all this as the Surety of the elect, without which the Mediatorly obedience of Chriſt is inſufficient and uneffectuall, for we cannot bear ſin nor endure the puniſhment of ſin ſo as to ſatisfie the juſtice of God, nor can we perform legall obedience, yet all theſe muſt be ſuffered, Gen. 2.17. overcome, 1 Cor. 15.17. and done Lev. 18.5. otherwiſe no ſalvation, Gal. 3.10. otherwiſe ſin ſtill reigns, the curſe hath dominion, and juſtice remaineth in its full force to the execution of eternall death.
The Mediatorly obedience of Chriſt being by your leaving out theſe eſſentiall parts thereof made unſufficient, there can be no mediatorly ſacrifice, ſatisfaction, price, or any merit therein or therefrom.
The triall of Chriſts Mediatorly obedience lay in the greatneſſe of thoſe ſufferings, which as Mediator he was to undergo, and was ſo much greater in reſpect of God, then it was in reſpect of Satan and his inſtruments; as the ſufferings of the ſoul exceed the ſufferings of the body; the juſt charge of all the ſinnes of the elect, the unjuſt charges of men; and as the righteous wrath of God exceeded the unrighteous wrath of Satan and his agents.
Dialogu. I put as much worth and efficacy in Chriſts Mediatorial obedience ſo tried, as they do that pleade moſt for our redemption by his ſuffering Gods wrath for us.
Anſw. If you did not ſay ſo, your Reader might well dread hearkening to ſuch a Mediatoriall obedience which the Teacher thereof durſt not profeſſe to be ſaving.
Though you do ſay ſo, yet if you ſay not the truth, your ſo ſaying makes your doctrine never the more ſafe, but ſo much the more perilous as by ſuch ſpecious pretences it is rendred more apt to be received. Aarons Calf was never the leſſe an Idol notwithſtanding thoſe glorious words ſpoken of it, theſe are thy Gods that brought thee up out of the Land of Egypt, Exo. 32.8. the fictitious Mediatorial obedience of the Dialogue is no whit altered from it ſelf, howſoever guilded over with the falſly arrogated attributes of the obedience of Chriſt.
Dialogu. They place the price of our Redemption in his ſuffering Gods wrath for us in the full weight and meaſure, as it is due to our ſins by the Curſe of the Law: I place the price of our redemption in the merit of his Mediatorial obedience, whereof his Mediatoriall ſacrifice of Atonement was the Maſter-piece.
Anſw. We place it not only in Chriſts ſufferings, but both in Chriſts ſufferings and Gods acceptation; the worth of a thing and the price are to be diſtinguiſhed;Vid. Cham l. 9. p. 121. foreign Materialiter. Formaliter. Rhetorf. the full worth may be tendred by the buyer, but the worth is not a price without the acceptation of the ſeller. Ahab offers the worth of the vineyard, 1 Kin. 21.21. but it was not a price without Naboths conſent: though the obedience of Chriſt being the obedience of God-man, was of infinite vertue in it ſelf, yet it could not have obliged God to the acceptation thereof, nor make him a debtor thereunto without his conſent.
What to judge of your mediatoriall obedience we ſaw before, which being null, its merit, price and ſacrifice muſt needs periſh with it.
Dialogu. I agree with others in this, that divine wrath is fully ſatisfied for the ſins of the Elect, by the merit of Chriſts. Mediatoriall obedience; I differ from others in this, namely, in the manner of his ſatisfaction, I ſay, that Chriſt did not ſuffer Gods wrath for our ſins, by ſuffering the extremity of his wrath, neither did he ſuffer the torments of hell neither in his body, nor in his ſoul nor any degree of Gods wrath at all.
Anſw. No, no; you agree not with us in this, that divine wrath is fully ſatisfied; but deal therein like Epicurus, who in his diſputation concerning the Gods, abuſed the hearers with yeelding that verbally which he took away really; ſo while you yeeld verbally that divine wrath is fully ſatisfied, you ſteal away the truth from the leſſe wary Reader really; for in the very next line but one, you ſay, Chriſt did not ſatisfie Gods wrath for our ſins by ſuffering ſo much as any degree of Gods wrath at all.
And though you would ſeem to qualifie and hide your vaſt and ſad diff…rence from us, ſaying, you differ from us in reſpect of the manner, yet you cannot but know full well that you differ from us not only in the manner, but alſo in the matter of Chriſts ſatisfaction. Whileſt you deny and oppoſe what you know we affirm and defend, namely, Chriſts ſuffering of the wrath of God, and that in way of ſatisfaction to divine juſtice. For the confirmation whereof, give me leave upon this occaſion to inſert an argument, otherwiſe ſomewhat out of its place.
Such meritorious, mediatorly obedience as indebted to God in point of juſtice to remit the juſt puniſhment of ſin without any violation of juſtice, nay, with the eſtabliſhment of juſtice, muſt needs be done in ſuch a way of ſatisfaction unto juſtice, as includes alſo a ſuffering of juſtice. But the meritorious mediatorly obedience of Chriſt is ſuch meritorious mediatorly obedience, whereby God is indebted in point of juſtice to remit the juſt puniſhment of ſin: If we confeſſe our ſins he is faithfull and juſt to forgive us our ſins; 1 Joh. 1.9. without any violation of juſtice, that he might be juſt, and the juſtifier of him that beleeveth in Jeſus, Rom. 3.36. yea, with the eſtabliſhing of juſtice; Do we then make void the Law by faith? God forbid: Yea, we eſtabliſh the Law, ver. 31.
Therefore the meritorious mediatorly obedience of Chriſt was performed in ſuch a way of ſatisfaction unto juſtice, as included alſo a ſuffering of juſtice. You diſagree with the truth and us, and ſcarcely agree with your ſelf.
Dialogu Secondly, Though I ſay that Chriſt did not ſuffer his Fathers wrath neither in whole nor in part, yet I affirm that he ſuffered all things that his Father did appoint him to ſuffer, in all circumſtances, juſt according to the prediction of all the Prophets, even to the nodding of the head, and the ſpitting of the face, as theſe Scriptures do teſtifie.
1. Peter told the Jews that they had killed the Prince of Life, as God before had ſhewed by the mouth of all the Prophets, that Chriſt ſhould ſuffer, and he fullfilled it ſo. Act. 3.17, 18.
2. Chriſt did expreſly by his Diſciples tell, that he muſt go to Jeruſalem and ſuffer many things of the Elders and cheif Prieſts and Scribes, and be killed and raiſed again the third day, Mat. 16.21.
3. After his reſurrection he ſaid to the two Diſciples, O fools, and ſlow of heart to beleeve all that the Prophets have ſpoken: Ought not Chriſt to ſuffer theſe things and to enter into his glory? Luk. 24.25, 26. and in ver. 44.46. he ſaid thus to all his Diſciples; Theſe are the words which I speak unto you, that all things muſt be fullfilled which are written in the Law of Moſes, in the Prophets, and in the Pſalms concerning me, thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to ſuffer and riſe again from the dead on the third day.
4. Paul told the men of Antioch, that the Rulers of the Iews condemned him becauſe they knew not the voices of the Prophets concerning him, and therefore though they found no cauſe of death in him, yet they deſired Pilate that he ſhould be ſlain, and when they had fullfilled all things that were written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a ſepulchre, Act. 13.27, 28, 29. mark this phraſe, They fulfilled all things that were written of him; if they fulfilled all his ſufferings, then it was not Gods wrath but mans wrath that he ſuffered.
5. The Lord told Adam not only that the promiſed ſeed ſhould break the devils head-plot, but alſo that the devil ſhould crucifie him and pierce him in the footſole, Gen. 3.15. the devil did it by his inſtruments, the Scribes and Phariſees by Pilate and the Romane ſouldiers.
Anſw. He that ſaith, Though Chriſt did not ſuffer his Fathers wrath in whole, nor in part, yet he ſuffered all things that his Father appointed him to ſuffer, ſaith, that his Father did not appoint him to ſuffer his wrath either in whole or in part: That you ſay thus cannot be denied, but with what reaſon you ſo ſay, let the Reader judge by what follows. None of the Scriptures alledged by you confirm, though ſome of them alledged by you, deny what you affirm.
Chriſt ſheweth that he muſt ſuffer many things by the Elders, chief Prieſts, and Scribes, Matth. 16.21. true, yet he doth not there ſhew that he muſt not ſuffer the wrath of God. God fullfilled thoſe things which he had before ſhewed by the mouth of all his Prophets, that Chriſt ſhould ſuffer, Act. 3.18.foreign. according to this ſenſe the Greek Text is to be read, and not as you ſeem to miſtake it; this may include, but certainly excludes not the ſuffering of the wrath of God, Luke 24.25, 26. concludes that Chriſt was to ſuffer: the word All ver. 26. includes the ſuffering of divine juſtice: the word All Act. 13.27, 28, 29. is to be taken in a limited ſenſe, for all things that were written of him to be fullfilled by the Romanes, and the Jews, as the inſtruments thereof; not abſolutely for all things whatſoever he was to ſuffer from any.
They fullfilled all things that he was to ſuffer from them, true, but it doth not therfore follow that they fulfilled all things he was to ſuffer: The meaning of thoſe words, Thou ſhalt bruiſe his heel, Gen. 3.15. is, that Chriſt chiefly, and with him beleevers that live godlily; both which are the ſeed of Eve, ſhall ſuffer affliction and perſecution by Satan and his malignant agents, which are the ſeed of the Serpent.
Notwithſtanding what you have hitherto ſaid touching the ſtating of the matter controverted, that the Reader who ſhall be pleaſed to caſt his eye upon this poor paper may not be at a loſſe; but may with the more facility, clearneſſe, and diſtinctneſſe go along with us in the following diſcourſe: he is deſired here to take juſt and ſeaſonable notice, that the whole controverſie between you and us conſiſteth of four parts.
1 Concerning Chriſts ſuffering the wrath of God due to the elect for ſin.
2. Concerning Gods imputation of ſinne to Chriſt.
3. Concerning the nature of Mediatorly obedience, or the meritorious price of redemption.
4. Concerning the Juſtification of a ſinner.
The Dialogues method wherein (though in reſpect of the two firſt immethodical, for the ſecond ſhould have been firſt) the anſwer is conſtrained to obſerve; and accordingly to begin with the firſt, viz. Whether Chriſt ſuffered the wrath of God due to the Elect for their ſins; we aſſert the Affirmative, you endeavour to prove the Negative; and that firſt by diſproving the received interpretation of Certain Texts, alledged by the Orthodox for the proof of the Affirmative, which we are now (Chriſt aſſiſting) to conſider with you.