« PreviousContinue »
CHAP. ter itself seem to me so certain and solid, yea, and such fundamental mysteries of faith, that they ought to be uncontroverted among all the orthodox. It is not ours to contend concerning the niceties of words.
IX. HighIX. This exchange of persons Justin Marly extolled tyr extolled in lofty language in his Epistle to Diognetus. γι αλλο τας αμαρτίας ἡμῶν ηδυνήθη καλύψαι,
η εκείνου δικαι συνη; εν τη δικαιοθηναι δυνατον τους ανόμους δημίας και ασεβεῖς, η εν τω υιῶ του θεου; ὦ τη γλυκειας καταλλαγης, w της ανεξιχνιαστου, δημιουργίας, ὦ τῶν απροσδοκητών ευεργεσιῶν, ἵνα αν μια πολλών εν δικαιω ἕνι κρυβῆ, δικαιοσύνη δε ἕνας πολλους αν μους δικαίωση. What else could cover our sins, but his righteousness? In whom else could we the unjust and the impious be accounted righteous, but in the Son of God only? O THE SWEET EXCHANGE! O the unsearchable contrivance! O the unexpected benefits! that the iniquity of many should be hid in a righteous one, and that the righteousness of one should justify many who were unjust!
ed by Turretin.
X. These things are prosecuted excellently ly explain and at large by Turretin, on the truth of Christ's satisfaction, part II. section xxxiv. Neither do I think it will be disagreeable to a ny, if his words be here recited. "As we are said to be made righteousness in Christ, by imputation, because on account of the righteousness of Christ, apprehended by us through faith, and imputed by God, we are pronounced righteous before him; so in like manner, that the nature of the opposition may appear, he was made sin for us by imputa
tion, because our guilt, wherewith we were bound in the judgment of God, was laid upon him as our Surety, that he might suffer the punishment due to it. Augustine expres ses himself most excellently in his Enchiridion to Laurentius, chap. xli. He sin, and we righteousness: not our own, but God's: not in ourselves, but in him. As he was made sin; not bis own, but ours; not in himself, but in us. Thus, indeed, by a WONDERFUL EXCHANGE, he took our evils upon himself, that he might bestow his benefits upon us; received misery, that he might grant mercy; received the curse, that he might make us partakers of the blessing; received death, that he might confer life; received sin, that he might impart righteousness. This exchange on both sides agrees in the following things; first, that in both, something foreign is by the estimation of the Divine judgment transferred to a person: which translation is not an error of judgment, but a certain appointment, whereby on account of something done by another, something is assigned to thee, as if thou hadst been that very person from whom that action arose. On account of our sin, death was inflicted on Christ, as if he himself had sinned; and because of Christ's righteousness, life and the inheritance are conferred on us, as if we had been righteous, and had fulfilled the law. Further, that on both sides there behoved to be a connection between these persons: for our sins could not have
CHAP. been imputed to Christ, unless he had been united to us both by the bond of the same nature, and a voluntary suretiship: neither could his righteousness have been imputed to us unless we had become one body with him. Yet they differ far in this, that the imputation to Christ is according to justice, to us according to mercy. Sin was translated to him, but to be abolished; righteousness to us, but to be preserved; the curse to him, in order to be swallowed up; the blessing to us, with a view to be continued; pollutions to him, that they might be cast into the depths of the sea; the new robe of the first-born to us, that it might be put on. Hence it is, that we can be called truly righteous, and the sons of God; but Christ cannot therefore be called either a sinner, or a son of wrath: because he neither had sin of himself, nor did the wrath of God abide on him, but only passed over him." So far Turretin: to which things, expressed with equal solidity and elegance, I subscribe with heart
XI. Ap. proved by
XI. After I had thus written, conciliatory the English letters were sent me from London, wherein, to my great joy, I found things which I think highly calculated to restore harmony among brethren. Some had been justly offended with that inconsiderate assertion, that there is no exchange of persons between Christ and believers. That stumbling-block the reconcilers take out of the way by this declaration, "Since we conceive, that the doctrine of justification, and
of the satisfaction of Christ, upon which it de- CHAP. pends, cannot be duly explained and defended, if the exchange of persons between Christ and believers be denied; therefore we declare that we disapprove of that proposition in its general sense; and explain our mind as follows. It is clear, that there cannot be a PHYSICAL exchange, whereby Christ and believers are converted into one another, according to substance. Nor MORAL, whereby Christ becomes inherently wicked, and infected with the stain of sin, and believers become immediately innocent, harmless, and undefiled. But in reality we do not doubt, but there is an exchange of persons in a legal sense, so that Christ by virtue of the covenant between the Father and him, took upon him the PERSON, and came in the place and stead of sinners: not that he might repent and believe for them, which is required in the gospel, (although he obtained that the elect should at the appointed time be rendered fit for these things) but that for them he might satisfy the violated obligation of the law of works. He was made sin for them, although he had not known sin, that they might be made the righteousness of God in him. And what is repugnant to this exposition, we judge to be erroneous and false. Thus far the learned men; and what impartial person can desire more?
When the translation of sin to Christ, and his bearing it commenced and ended: and whether when carrying the sins of the Elect, he was separated from God, abominable to him, and abdicated by him.
1. The translation of sins considered either in the decree or in the execution. II. This began with the assumption of human nature, and ended in death. III. It is unhappily believed to have begun on the cross, and ended at the resurrection. IV. Whether Christ, when bearing our sins, was separated from God. V. That may be acknowledged in a sound sense. VI. Yet during the extremity of his sufferings he was refreshed with some comfortable sense of favour. VII. Whether Christ was abominable to God on account of the sins' which he had taken upon him. VIII. Calvin and some of the ancients say that he was damned. IX. It is better to confine ourselves to scripture phrases, than by using others, to multiply controversies. X. The form of concord. XI. Whether God the Father ever abdicated his Son. XII. Christ even in the extremity of his agonies acknowledged God as his Father. XIII. It is not taught in Acts xiii. 33. That Christ was again begotten in his resurrection from the dead. XIV. Anaanis signifies a recognizing, in opposition to abdication. XV. It was not necessary that Christ should undergo the same punishments precisely, which the damned shall suffer. XVI. There is a great difference be tween the one and the other. XVII. Which however derogates nothing from the satisfaction of Christ.
ET us now inquire in the third place, I. The whether the translation of sins to Christ, and