Section 3: Answers to Objections

Though there be a very large and particular Answer given to all the Parts of this Objection in those Sermons; particularly, Sermon the thirty-fifth, yet since it seems to carry some considerable Force in it, I would mention some Hints of Reply in this Place.

First, The great Design of our Saviour in his public Appearance and Ministry on Earth, was to prove himself to wear the true Characters of the Messiah, to deliver the Jews from many false Expositions and Glosses which the Scribes and Pharisees of that Day had given to several Parts of Scripture, to lead the World to a Conviction of their Sins, and thereby prepare them to receive the Doctrine of Salvation with more Zeal and Desire. Whereas the Salvation itself, and the Manner whereby it was accomplished, was but briefly mentioned in some few Texts, and the rest was left to be explained by his Apostles.

Second, The Doctrine of Christ's Atonement for Sin is, indeed, intimated in several Places of his own Ministrations (namely) Matthew 20:28. The Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and give his Life a Ransom for many. John 10:15. I lay down my Life for the Sheep. John 6:51. The Bread which I will give is my Flesh, which I will give for the Life of the World. And when he instituted the Holy Supper, Luke 22:19. He took Bread and brake it, saying, This is my Body which is given for you. And as in Saint Matthew's Gospel, This Cup is my Blood of the New Testament which is shed for many for the Remission of Sins.

Third, This Doctrine of Atonement for Sin by his Death, as a Sacrifice, and the Acceptance of it with God the Father, could not be so well preached in Public, before those very Facts were fulfilled, upon which this Doctrine is founded; for his Death was the Foundation of this Atonement; his Resurrection and Ascension to Heaven, were the Proofs of its being accepted with God. Now it might have appeared preposterous to our Saviour, who was divinely wise, to preach these Doctrines freely in Public to the Multitude, before these Events appeared in the World.

And even to his own Disciples he was not too free in the Communication of them, because, as John 16:12. He told them, he had many Things to teach them, but they could not bear them yet: It might have been the Means of raising some Prejudices in the Minds of his own Disciples; whereas he reserved some of these Things to be taught in those forty Days, while he continued with them after his Resurrection, and spake with them of the Things pertaining to the Kingdom of God. Acts 1:3.

And thence we may infer, that if we would learn the plainest and fullest Account of the Gospel of Christ, it is not enough for us to consult merely his public Sermons, or the Histories of his Life, which are called the Four Gospels, but we must read carefully the Writings of the Apostles, after he went to Heaven; in which they taught these Doctrines more completely, which they had learnt from the Converse of Christ, after his Resurrection, as well as by the pouring out of his own Spirit upon them in great Abundance, as he had promised.

But there is another Objection, which is borrowed from the Socinian Writings, which it may be proper to give some Reply to (namely) That it does not agree to the moral Perfections of God to punish Sin in a Surety; nor does it become the great God who is a Being of infinite Wisdom and Goodness and Equity, to appoint such a Way of Salvation for Men, as would necessitate an innocent Creature to be exposed to so many sharp Sufferings as Christ underwent, while the guilty Sinner suffers nothing of all these Terrors, but is delivered from the severest of them by the Death of Christ.

In Answer to this, I desire it may be considered, that this Doctrine of the Expiation and Atonement for Sin by Christ, is so plainly and expressly revealed and declared in the New Testament, by the Apostles Paul, Peter, and John, as has been already shown, and is so frequently repeated in many Forms of Speech in the Sacred Writings, that it seems a very bold Imagination to suppose, that that could not be agreeable to the moral Perfections of God, or that it could not become God to appoint that, which in so many repeated Scriptures, is expressly asserted to be done by Jesus Christ, and by the Appointment of the Father. Can it be ever imagined, that the Great God did not know what would become every one of his Perfections better than we little Insects, just crept out of the Earth, and returning thither again, could teach him? Can it be ever thought, that the Eternal Mind did not know what was decent for a just and a wise God to do, better than we can conceive or suggest?

I answer, in the second Place, that some of the very Expressions wherein this Doctrine is represented in Scripture are such as seem to be designed on purpose to obviate this very Objection, particularly Second Corinthians 5:21. God has made him to be Sin for us who knew no Sin, that we might be made the Righteousness of God in him, that is, he made him to be a Sacrifice for Sin for us, that we might be delivered from the Guilt of Sin, and accepted as righteous in the Sight of God. Again, First Peter 3:18. Christ also hath once suffered for Sins, the Just for the Unjust, that he might bring us to God. Again, First Peter 2:21, 22. Christ suffered for us, who did no Sin, neither was Guile found in his Mouth, who his own self bare our Sins in his own Body on the Tree. Again, First John 2:1, 2. Jesus Christ the Righteous: He is the Propitiation for our Sins. Thus you see all these Texts declare expressly the Innocence of Jesus Christ who suffered, and the Iniquities of those for whom he suffered: It is evident enough that a righteous Person died for the Guilty, and the Guilty were saved.

Answer Third. Let it be yet further considered, that the Man Christ Jesus, who had a natural Will which was distinct from the supreme Will of the Godhead, gave up himself to those Sufferings, and consented to it fully, Hebrews 10:5-10. In Burnt-offerings and Sacrifices of Beasts thou hadst no Pleasure; but a Body hast thou prepared me: Then I said, Lo, I come to do thy Will, O God. He had a Right given him by the Father to lay down his Life, and a Right to take it up again. John 10:18. And he had an additional Exaltation promised him on this Account, Hebrews 12:2, and actually bestowed on him for this Service: Philippians 2:9. Wherefore God hath highly exalted him, besides several other Events in the Divine Scheme of God's Government, for the Glory of God, and the Happiness of Men. All which are sufficient to make the Sufferings of Christ very consistent with the Equity and Justice of God, though the innocent Creature suffered and the Guilty was set free. So that I see no manner of inconsistency between this Transaction, and any of God's Moral Perfections; and therefore I can see nothing in it which was unbecoming for God to appoint, or for Christ to submit to.

To confirm this, let it be remembered, that it is expressly said, Hebrews 2:10. It became him for whom are all Things, and by whom are all Things, in bringing many Sons unto Glory, to make the Captain of their Salvation perfect through Sufferings, Teleiosai, which signifies to consecrate Jesus Christ to be an High-Priest by this Blood of Atonement, which Doctor Whitby proves at large in his Comment on this Text.

Nor is it at all strange, that those who borrow from the Socinian Writers may raise such Objections against the Atonement or Satisfaction of Christ for Sin: Since Socinus himself saith, Should there be found some Places of Scripture, where it should be expressly written, that God was made Man, or did assume human Flesh; they should not presently be taken according as the Words sound, since that is altogether repugnant to the Divine Majesty. So Socinus in his Disputations of Jesus Christ. And again: If not once only, but often it should be written in the sacred Scriptures, that Christ made Satisfaction to God for Sins; I would not therefore believe, that the Matter is so as you imagine. So Socinus on the Satisfaction. And again: Any, even the greatest Force is to be used with Words, rather than take them in the obvious Sense. So his Second Epistle to Balcerimicius.