TUREETTIN ATONEMENT OF CHRIST. TRANSLATED BY THE REV. JAMES Rf WILLSON, D. D. A NEW EDITION, CAREFULLY REVISED BY COLLATION WITH THE LAST EDITION OP THE LATIN ORIGINAL. Daniel ix. 26. iS pxi rrt?n m-p 'Oc Trapedodrj Sea ra Trapa7Tro)[j,aTa r\\idv, icai Tjyepdr] did, tt\v 6iicaiG)(7iv -fj/xoiv. — Romans it. 25. NEW Y'ORK: BOARD OF PUBLICATION OF THE REFORMED PROTESTANT DUTCH CHURCH, 61 FRANKLIN STREET. 1859. c* A «^** ^fe^ yt'/Fs^ 3^ v T ^ Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1859, by Rev. THOMAS C. STRONG, On behalf of the Board of Publication of the Reformed Protestant Dutch Church in North America, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Hosford & Co., Stationers and Printers, 67 and 59 William Street, N. Y. PKEFACE. The discussion contained in the following pages is a part of a much larger volume originally published in Philadel- phia in the year 1817, with the title: "A Historical Sketch of Opinions on the Atonement, interspersed with Biographical Notices of the leading Doc- tors, and Outlines of the Sections of the Church, from the Incarnation of Christ unto the present Time: with Transla- tions from Francis Turrettin on the Atonement. By James R. Willson, A.M." The volume was dedicated to the Rev. Dr. Alexander McLeod. Its nature is well described in the title. The author traced the varying progress and development of opinion on the atonement, from the beginning of the era down to his own immediate contemporaries. While scrupu- lously careful to represent all with impartiality, he made no pretence of "dealing gently with errorists." On the con- trary, he aimed to " speak out with boldness and candour," and at times even with " severity." His wdrk, extending over so large a field, could of course be nothing more than a comprehensive outline or summary of its subject. After subserving a useful purpose in the conflicts of the former part of this century, it seems to have fallen into compara- livc oblivion, and lias been for many years out of print. The In tier portion of the volume, being the translation which is here reproduced, contained the matter, which is found under ( 'Jur/stionesHL-XI'V ., in Locus Decimus Quartus (Do Officio Christ i Mediatorio) of the Institutio Theologize Blbncticjb of Francis Turrettin, with the insertion in one instance of a short extract from another portion of the Bame work. This part of Dr. Willson's work is apparently as much called for now as it was originally. The various PREFACE. questions relating to the atonement are still discussed with frequency and earnestness. The constant faith of the Church on the subject continues to be firmly held by the general body of the Reformed; but it is exposed to incessant attacks in every generation, generally from without, but sometimes from within, the pale of orthodox communions. And while contemporary authorship has furnished some admirable pre- sentations of the common faith on this important point, it is doubted whether any other work of the same compass pre- sents so clearly and forcibly the truth of God as to the Nature, Truth. Perfection, Matter, and Extent of the Satis- faction made by the blessed Saviour. The lucid arrange- ment of topics, compact argumentation, fairness of state- ment, and constant appeal to the law and the testimony, leave the careful reader little to desire. The translation as issued by Dr. Willson was iu the main faithful and accurate. In some cases, however, the learned divine, by an oversight, failed to express the exact sense of his author; while in many more the carelessness of the proof- reader did him great injustice. Tains have been taken to collate the vision line by line with the original, so as to amend any inaccuracies. Nothing i< claimed on the score of rhetorical finish or the niceties of verbal expression, but the work as now published is believed to present in simple and perspicuous English the exact line of thought and argu- ment presented by the great Genevan professor. It only remains to be added, that while the Board of Publication approves of the work as a whole, it is not to be considered responsible for every shade of opinion on minute points, or every interpretation of quoted Scripture. At the editor's special request, a pleasing biographical sketch of Dr. Willson has been furnished by a member of his family. That of Turrettin is a condensation of an article in the twentieth volume of the " Princeton Review." CONTENTS PAGE Biographical Sketch of Dr. Willson ix Biographical Sketch of Tcrrettin 1 CHAPTER I. THE NECESSITY OF THE ATONEMENT. Three Opinions on the Subject 14 Preliminary Remarks 15 1. As to the Nature of Sin *. 15 2. The Satisfaction required 15 3. The Relations of God to the Sinner 17 4. The Qualifications of the Substitute 20 and Conditions of Substitution 22 Arguments : ; 24 I. God's Vindicatory Justice 25 II. The Nature of Sin 25 III. The Sanction of the Law 26 IV. The Preaching of the Gospel 27 V. The Greatness of God's Love 29 VI. The Glory of the Divine Perfections 29 CHAPTER II. THE TRUTH OF THE ATONEMENT. Statement of the Question 31 Arguments: 33 I. Christ redeemed us with the Price of his Blood 33 II. He died in the Stead of his People 36 ill. He bore their Sins 38 IV. He offered Sacrifice on the Cross 44 Three Objections considered 46 V. II' 1 made Reconciliation with God 49 An ' Objection considered 50 Another " 52 VI Tin' Nature of his Death •. 53 VII. Th" Perfections of God 55 vi CONTENTS. PAGB Objections answered: 56 That the Word Satisfaction is not used in Scripture 56 That Christ's Sufferings were Exemplary 57 That Satisfaction and Remission are inconsistent with each other 57 That Christ makes Satisfaction to Himself 58 That he did not suffer eternal Death 59 That he did not suffer Despair 60 That the Death of One cannot answer for Many 60 That Atonemeni is opposed to Ezek. xviii. 20 62 And that it leads to carnal Ease 63 CHAPTER m. THE PERFECTION OF THE ATONEMENT. Statement of the Question 64 Against Romanists 64 Against Armiuians 67 In Itself 68 Arguments: 69 I. The Dignity of Christ's Person 69 II. The Oneness of his Offering 70 HI. The Approval of God the Judge 70 IV. Its Effects 72 Romish Dogma of supplementary Satisfactions 72 Arminiau Doctrine of a nominal Atonement 75 Objections answered: 75 That the Apostles suffered for the Church 76 That Paul completed Christ's Sufferings 76 That Sins are broken off by Repentance 77 That Believers still suffer in this Life 78 That they are liable to Death 81 That Judgment begins at the House of God 81 That Jewish Saints had to offer Sacrifices 82 That by Mercy and Truth Iniquity is purged 82 CONTENTS. CHAPTER IV. THE MATTER OF THE ATONEMENT. PAGB Statement of the Question 85 Preliminary Remarks 88 1. Christ's atoning Sufferings extended through his whole Life 88 2. They are to be distinguished as to Substance and Form. . 90 3. His Obedience has a twofold Efficacy 91 Socinus's Objection to this 95 4. The Law contains both Precepts and Sanctions 96 5. There is a threefold Subjection to the Law 96 Arguments for the Orthodox View 99 I. From Romans v. 9 99 H. From Philippians ii. 8 100 HI. From Romans viii. 3, 4 101 TV. From Christ's doing whatever was due from us 102 V. From Romans i. 17; iii. 21; v. 18 103 VI. From the Indivisibility of his Righteousness 104 Objections answered: 105 That our Redemption is ascribed to Christ's Death 105 That our Blessedness is attributed to Pardon 105 That the Obedience of Christ's Death was sufficient 106 That he owed Obedience for Himself 106 That if he obeyed for us, we are no longer bound to obey . . 108 That Christ's Death is a perfect Fulfilment of the Law 110 Quotations from Calvin's Institutes Ill Quotations from the Gallic Synods 113 CHAPTER V. THE EXTENT OF THE ATONEMENT. Opinion of the Pelagians 115 " of the Jesuits 116 " of the Lutherans 116 " of Arminians 117 " of Cameras, Testardus, ami Amyraut 119 Doctrine of the Reformed 122 Statement of the Question 123 [tdoesnol respect t In i Value of Christ's Death 123 Nor its Fruits 124 Nor whethi ]• it conveys Borne Blessings to Reprobates 124 CONTENTS. PAGE Arguments: 125 I. Christ's Death is restricted to a limited Number 125 Objections answered 126 Objection to Matt. i. 21 129 " to John x. 15; xv. 13 131 " to Ephes. v. 25; Tit. ii. 14 133 " to Matt. xx. 28; xxvi. 28; Heb. ix. 28. . . . 134 II. Christ was given to die only for those who were given to him by the Father 135 m. He Atoned only for those for whom he Intercedes 139 IT. The Connection between the Gift of Christ and that of the Holy Spirit 142 V. Christ's wonderful Love to his People 144 VI. The Nature of his Suretyship 145 VII. The limited Application of his Salvation 14C VHI. He did not purchase Faith and Repentance for All. . . 151 Doctrine of Amyraut 154 IX. The Completeness of his Expiation 159 X. The Absurdities of the opposite Doctrine 100 Objections answered: Id That Christ is said to have died for All 161 2 Cor. v. 15 161 2 Cor. v. 19 ! 162 Rom. v. 18, 19 162 Scripture Use of the Word "All" 164 1 Tim. ii. 6 1 i; "' That he died for the World, John iii. 16 W 1 John ii. 2 169 That he died for that which was Lost 171 For those who Perish 172 For those who deny Him 173 For those who profane the Blood of the Covenant 175 That Men are bound to believe that he died for them 177 Direct and Reflex Acts of Faith 179 Objections to this View 183 That unless he died for All, the Gospel Offer cannot be Sin- cere 191 Quotations from Deodatus and Tronchin 194 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE TRANSLATOR; JAMES R. WILLSON, D.D. James R. "Willson was born April 9th, 1780, in the Forks of Yough — the neck of land lying between the rivers Youghiogeny and Monongahela — about sixteen miles nearly south of Pittsburgh, Pa. His father, Zaccheus Willson, was a ruling elder in the Reformed Presbyterian Church. His mother, Mary McConnell, was connected, before her marriage, with the Associate Church. Their forefathers had emigrated from Rosstrevor, County Down, Ireland, in 1721, making their first settlement in the ueighbourhood of Back River, Delaware, Subsequently, they removed to Central Pennsylvania, lo- : t an early period in the Cove, a fine valley, about a mile and a half \vi«li'. lying west of Chambersburg, between the North Mount- ain and Bear Ridge. In 17C0 they crossed the intervening mount- ain- ;it thai lime a very arduous undertaking — and fixed their abode in v, lr.it was then an unbroken forest, now constituting the townships c>r Ro rtrevor ami Elizabeth. While in the Cove where they have left their memorial in the name of the Leading town, MoGonnellsburg— some incidents occurred, not void of interest, which have been handed down in (he traditions of the family. One of them it may he worth while to record. Situ- '> near the very outskirts oi" ei\ ili/.ation, tin; valley was, of lorn of the Indian, tribes, and somewhere about the middle of the Last century tiny actually entered without any warning ami ravaged il burning the dwellings, carrying oil' the property, ami taking the livet a] o of gome of the settlers. At this BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH time, the doctor's grandfather— so the writer thinks— was very aged, almost helpless, decrepit iu mind as well as in body, but of ripened and devoted piety. It was in the early part of summer. He dreamed that the Indians had come into the valley. He awoke; slept, and dreamed again as before. He woke; slept, and dreamed the same dream. It was then about daylight, He roused the family and told them what had occurred, and advised them to make the beet of their way over the mountain. They demurred, and especially insisted upon the fact that their horses had been turned out. and time- -per- haps a day or two — would be required to find them. Just then, the horses came up to the very dour. As this seemed to be a providen- tial interposition, the family yielded, and as soon as possible set Out. When they had reached the summit of the mountain, they saw. QD looking back, their houses in flames. The Indians were in fact wast- ing the upper part of the valley at the very hour when tin . parent had dreamed the dream that was instrumental— however we may account for it — in saving them. James was the eldest of a large family. Of course, at thai early day. his opportunities for acquiring an education in a rural district were not very favourable. In measure, however, this was made up by the advantages of intercourse with his father, a man of no ordinary intelligence' and reading, and with his mother, a woman of robust and masculine mind: both of them being sincerely de- vout, and living in the fear of God and in the faith of the GospeL Their house, moreover, was then orl of ministers of various denom- inations—particularly of those of the same religious connection. , wanting; and what there were, were read and studied with great care. Hence, the mind of the young' farmer was stored. long before he began his classical course, with an amount of useful knowledge rarely attained under similar circumstances. He was es- pecially eager for religious information. In his fourteenth year he led iu family worship during the absence of his lather. And when, as was the case very frequently, groups were gathered on the Sab- bath and other days of public worship, or at the meetings of church courts, discussing doctrinal points. James was sure, boy as he was, to make one of the number. He remained on the farm — labouring, and taking his part in the long journeys over the mountains with horses and pack-saddles, to Chainbersburg for family supplies, until he attained his majority. He then entered the grammar-school, established a short time pre- viously in Canuonsburg by Dr. McMillan, out of which soon grew OF THE REV. DR. WILLSON. Jefferson College. Here he remained between four and five years, and was graduated in 1806 with the first honours of his class. He pur- sued the study of theology, somewhat irregularly — a short time with the late Dr. McLeod, of New York, but mostly at home. In the mean time he married, and took charge, in the year 1809, of the Academy at Bedford, Pa., whence, in 1815, he removed, to continue the same occupation in the city of Philadelphia, where, besides his labours as Principal of a large classical school, and occasionally in preaching, he prepared and published a " History of the Doctrine of the Atonement, with Translations of Turrettin" on the same sub- ject. In 1817, having received a call to the pastoral charge of the Re- formed Presbyterian congregation of Coldenham. Orange County, N. Y., he accepted it, and was ordained in the fall of that year. A portion of his charge which was in Newburg received a considerable share of his attention, and in the course of a few years became a distinct congregation. His pastoral labours were thenceforth restrict- ed to Coldenham. During the years 1822-26 he edited " The Evan- gelical Witness," a monthly periodical; and also, as before and after- wards, superintended the theological studies of young men. With the exception of three years, during which he was pastor of a con- gregation of the same denomination in the city of Albany, Dr. Will-on remained in Coldenham until 1840, when he was called to be Senior Professor in the Theological Seminary of the church with which he was connected, in Allegheny, Pa.* Here he remained until 18 15. when, the location of the Seminary being changed, he removed to Cincinnati, Ohio. He continued to perform the duties of his chair until 1851, when, through debility which had been induced by a ^sun-stroke " in the summer of 1816, he became unable longer to attend to them. Ee survived, preaching occasionally, although with difficulty, until September 29th, 1853, when, his death being hastened by a severe full, he departed this life, in the sure hope of everlasting reel and peace. This rapid sketch presents but a faint outline of a life of active and unwearied industry in the discharge of most important duties. Hi- publications — chicly sermons and essays, besides those already mentioned were very numerous. He delivered very many public addresses, scientific, literary, and religious. His eloquence was at the * Ho had previously been Professor in an Eastern Seminary: in that year the Eastern and Western were united. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH. service of every call of philanthropy. While he set before him one grand object — the proclamation of Christ's salvation and glory — he ever took a deep interest in every matter of social and public con- cern. He had an especial delight in the training of candidates for the ministry of reconciliation; and at his decease, a large majority of the ministry of the Eeformed Presbyterian Church had received at least a part of their training under his inspection. In the division which took place in 1833, he held the most prominent position in maintain- ing the earlier views of the Church. His integrity was never ques- tioned. Into every subject to which he directed his attention, he entered with all the ardour of a great mind, impelled by deep and strong feeling. He had every qualification of the orator: capacious intellect; vast attainments in almost every department of human knowledge; a ready and retentive memory; lofty imagination, com- bined with unsurpassed powers of argument, and copiousness of lan- guage and illustration. He was eminently a man of prayer, and in whatever society he was thrown he never shunned to declare the counsel of God. Among Christians he ever urged the duty, and ex- cellence, and efficacy of prayer. His theology was of the old stamp. He gave no countenance to supposed modern improvement. Be dwelt much in his ministrations upon the glory of Christ and His claims to supremacy. He was the friend of man, and never faltered in the advocacy of the interests of human liberty. His physical appearance corresponded with his mental character. His stature, over mx feet; his frame well developed, muscular and active; his expanded and lofty forehead; deep-set. dark, and piercing eye; his nose slightly arched; his mouth compressed to a line; his en- tire aspect marked with the deep lines of thought;— gave indications that could not be mistaken of extraordinary mental power. His voice, not deep, but sonorous and strong, completed the list of his oratorical accomplishments. At his decease he left two sons — both in the ministry — James M. Willson, of Philadelphia, and R. Z. Willson, late of Craftsbury. Vt.; and three daughters, married to mink the same ecclesiastical connection. A monument has been erected to his memory, by his friends throughout the Church, and others, in the vicinity of the church in Coldenham where he so long ministered, and where repose his mortal remains. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF THE AUTHOR, FRANCIS TUKKETTIN The family of the Turrettins, or Turrettini, as it is still written and pronounced in Geneva, is of Italian origin. It belonged to the an- cient nobility of Lusca, and appears to have given a number of gonfalonieri and anziani to that republic. One of these gonfalonieri, or chief magistrates, was Regulus Turrettini, who about the year 1547 became the father of Francis, afterwards distinguished as the first Protestant member of the family. For the sake of his new faith, Francis renounced his home and prospects, and became a volun- tary exile. Alter being driven from place to place by adverse fortune, he finally settled in BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Geneva, where, in 1627, he received citizen- ship, and in 1628 was made one of the Sixty. Soon after he died, leaving behind him a large sum for public charities, a blameless reputation, and a number of children, the oldest of whom was the father of our author. Benedict Turrettini was born at Zurich, November 9, 1588. and died in March, 1631. He was a celebrated pastor and professor of theology. In 1620 he assisted at the Synod of Ales, of which Peter du Moulin was mod- erator. He was noted for his piety, his love of union, his resolution, his learning, his gen- tleness, and his eloquence. Pictet speaks of him as the glory of his church and school. No man of his day was more honoured, but his career was cut short just as he was entering middle life. He had six children, of whom the third in order was Francis Turrettini, the author of the pres- ent volume. He was born in 1623, the same year in which Mornay du Plessy, Father Paul, and Pope Gregory XV. died, and in which the great Synod of Charenton was held. From his earliest years young Turrettin gave tokens of OF FKAXCIS TURRETTIN. genius. When his father found himself dying, he caused Francis, then eight years old, to be brought to his bedside; and said, with faltering lips, "This child is marked with God's seal:" Hie sigillo Dei obsigrialus est. Francis greatly distinguished himself in his academic course, and seems to have been remarkable for the eagerness with which he attempted diversified branches of study. Upon devoting himself to the study of theology, he enjoyed the advan- tage of eminent instructors. The most noted of these was John Diodati, another Italian Protestant, who sat in the chair of Calvin and Beza. Diodati, whose biblical labours are well known, was prominent in the Synod of Dort and the Convention of Saumur; at the latter of which he so succeeded in pouring oil on the waters of controversy, that the Queen of France thanked him repeatedly. Another insl ructor of Turrettin was Theodore Tronchin, also ;i member of the Synod of Dort and a noble defender of the truth. He lived to a venerable age, and contributed much to the theological celebrity of Q-eneva. His family, originally from Provence, long continued to BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH be prominent in the little republic, where to this day it has its representatives, one of whom, the excellent Colonel Tronehin, is known far and wide among evangelical Christians. An- other celebrated instructor of Turrettin was Frederick Spanheim. After finishing his curriculum at home, Tur- rettin went to Leyden, then, and long after, a centre of learning and theology, where he maintained theses in the schools with great eclat. In Holland he enjoyed the lectures of such men as Polyander; the saintly Rivet, equally known by his voluminous works and Iry the record of his death; Salmasius, one of the most learned men of his age, although worsted in his unfortunate controversy with Milton; Heinsius, Trigland, Yoet, Hoornbeek, and Grolius, the linguist. At Utrecht he be- came acquainted with that prodigy of her age, Anna Maria Sclmreman. In 1G45 he pro- ceeded to Paris, where he resided under the roof of the immortal Daille'; met with Falcar, Drelincourt, Albertini, and Blondel; and pursued phj'sical and astronomical studies under Grassendi. Xext he visited Saumur, the OF FRANCIS TURRETTIN". little city on the Loire, famous for its Protes- tant university. There he heard Placseus, Anryraulcl, and Capellus; men whose learning, subtilty, and peculiar views in theology, are fully presented in the Theses Salmnrienses. He even went as far south as to Montauban, then, as now, the seat of a Protestant univer- sity, where Carolus and Garissol were at that time nourishing. Returning home in 1648, he became a pas- tor of the church of Geneva, and preacher to the Italian congregation, such a service being required by the great number of refugees from Italy who sought an asylum in Geneva. AVhen he began to preach, such were the flow of his discourse, the solidity of his matter, and the majestic gracefulness of his eloquence, that immense popularity attended him. In 1650, the chair of Philosophy was several times of- fered to him by the government. After the death of Aaron Moms at Leyclen, Turrettin was called to supply his place as pastor. He accepted the invitation, and remained at Ley- den ;il tout a year; but the Genevese would ao1 endure his altsonce longer. The venerable BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Tronchin having outlived his capacity for pub- lic service, Turrettin was called to fill his place. He complied with the call, and as- sumed the theological chair in 1653. As a public teacher he was faithful and undaunted, daily inflicting severe blows upon Popery, So- cinianism, and Arminianism. From the pulpit he thundered against prevailing immoralities, while with many tears he besought sinners to be reconciled to Christ. His eloquence was of the most persuasive and irresistible character. Pictet celebrates his benignity, his pity to the poor, his care of the widow and the or- phan, his hospitality, and his edifying dis- course. In the 3'ear 1GG1 he was summoned to a new service. The people of Geneva were un- able to bear the expense of fortifying their walls; they therefore appealed for aid to the States-General of Holland, and deputed Tur- rettin as their commissioner for this purpose. His father had been sent by them on a similar errand forty years before. Passing through Basle, he was received with honour by Wet- stein and others of the great men of the uni- OF FRANCIS TURRETTIN. versity there. In Holland he obtained great distinction, being complimented by the author- ities with a gold chain and medal. Earnest but fruitless efforts were made to detain him, both at Ley den and the Hague. On his way home, he passed through Paris and Charenton. At the latter place he first met Claude, and preached before the vast Protestant assembly there, of which Pictet speaks with singular admiration. After his return he renewed his labours with redoubled zeal. In the year 1664 he published against the Papists and in vindica- tion of the Reformed; and two years after- wards, his disquisitions concerning the satis- faction of Christ. In 1674 he published his sermons, which were received with great ap- plause. In the same year he issued his great work on Theology, Institutio Theologize Elenothle, from which the contents of the present volume have been extracted. It is said that he was very reluctant to give this work to the press, and finally did so only in compliance with numerous letters from the learned in all parts of Reformed Christendom. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH In 1687 he published oh the necessity of se- cession from Rome, and on other important points. In 1669 Turrettin was married to Isabella, daughter of John de Masse, lord of Sauvet, whose ancestors had held the Marquisate of Saluzzo. Four children were the fruit of this union, of whom only one survived, viz., John Alfonso Turrettin, who was born in 1671, and ordained to the ministry about the year 1694. He became a preacher of unusual power, held successively the chairs of Ecclesi- astical History and of Theology in Geneva, and was one of the greatest writers of the age upon natural religion and the external de- fences of Christianity. Inferior to his father in vigour, he was his superior in elegance; and his copious and classical diction gave a charm to his writings, which secured perusal and ap- plause beyond the pale of Calvinistic bodies. Turrettiivs later years were embittered by the distresses of his Reformed brethren in Piedmont and France. In the latter country, in consequence of the revocation of the Edict of Xantes, in 1685, hundreds of churches OF FRANCIS TURRETTIX. were demolished, and Protestantism was driven from the kingdom. But for these distresses of a sympathetic soul, he may be said to have had a happy old age, being scarcely ever ill except from a few attacks of acute disease. On the 24th of September, 1687, he was sud- denly seized with violent pains. To Professor Pictet he expressed his readiness to die; but said that the severity of his pain did not suf- fer him to pray as he would, yet he knew in whom he had believed. He repeated many passages of Scripture, among them the words from the 38th Psalm — "0 Lord, rebuke me not in thine anger" which he had a few days before expounded to the Italian congregation. Upon his only son he solemnly enjoined four things: the care of the Church, if he ever should be called to it; the love of truth; hu- mility; and charity. To his relative, Dr. Midiol Turrettin, Pastor and Professor, he declared his faith and hope, and committed the solemn care of the Church. His charges and exhortations were numerous. His coun- tenance was expressive rather of triumph than of death. When, as his agony increased, 10 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH some of those who stood by reminded him of his last sermon, on the words, Let us come boldly to the throne of grace, he cried, as if im- patient, Eamus, eamus ! Shortly after he slumbered, and so died without a struggle, at the age of sixty-four years. It is not necessary to dwell upon the char- acter of Francis Turrettin as a theologian. His adherence to the received doctrine of the Reformed Church is so uniform and strict, that there is no writer who has higher claims as an authority as to what that doctrine is. His distinguishing excellence is perspicuity and discrimination. His intellect was admira- bly fitted and trained for perceiving and stat- ing the real principles involved in theological questions; so that he was a remarkable illus- tration of the maxim, qui bene distinguit, bene docet. To this primary excellence he added an admirable judgment, which is evinced in the characteristic moderation of his opinions, and the general soundness of his arguments. His method is simple and logical. Under every head he begins with the Status Qucestionis, and, with discriminating accuracy, frees the OF FRAXCIS TURRETTIX. 11 subject in hand from all adventitious matter, and brings out the precise point to be consid- ered. Then follow his arguments in numeri- cal order, each distinct and in logical succes- sion, in support of the position which he ad- vocates. To this series of arguments succeeds the Fontes Solutionum, or answers to objec- tions, which often furnish examples of as pithy and discriminating replies as are any- where to be met with. There is scarcely a question which American divines have been discussing as discoveries, which the student will not find settled, or at least considered, in the perspicuous pages of Turrettin. The writer in the Princeton Review, (for •July, 1848,) from whom the present sketch has been extracted, concludes his article with these sentences, which are well worthy of re- production here: — "We were once told by Chief Justice Ewing [of New Jersey] that it was the uniform practice of Mr. Justice Washington to read through the whole of Blackstone's Commentaries once a year ; and that he did so to give consistency, method, and unity to all the otherwise scattered and 12 BIOGEAPHICAL SKETCH. heterogeneous acquisitions of the year. We entertain no doubt that a similar practice with regard to the equally logical and more commanding sj^stem of Turrettin, would do more for a masculine theology and an ener- getic pulpit, than cart-loads of religious jour- nals, epitomes from the German, and occa- sional sermons." TUKKETTIN ox THE ATONEMENT. CHAPTER I. ftlje Necessity of % Atonement. Torek Opinions ox this Subject. — Preliminary Remarks: — 1. As to the Nature of Six. — 2. The Satisfaction reqxjired. — 3. The Relations of God to the Sixxer. — 4. The Qualifications op the st listittte.and the conditions of substitution. arguments to trove tiii: Necessity of the Atonement: — I. God's Vindica- tory Justice. — II. The Nature of Six. — III. The Sanction of the Law.— IV. The Preaching of the Gospel. — V. The Great- OF God's Love. — VI. The Glory of the Divine Perfec- tions. The Priesthood of Christ, according to the Apostle Paul and the typos of the Jewish ritual, is divided into two parts: the atonement which he made to divine justice, and hie intercession in heaven, (1 John ii. 2. Beb. ix. 12.) The necessity of such an atonement, which is the foundation of all practical piety and all ( Ihristian hopes, must therefore be firmly established, 14 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. and defended against the fiery darts of Satan, with which it is attacked by innumerable adversaries. Upon this subject, the opinions of divines may be classed under three heads : 1 . That of the Socinians, who not only deny that an atonement was made, but affirm that it was not at all necessary, since God both could and would pardon sin, without any satisfaction made to his justice. 2. That of those who distinguish be- tween an absolute and a hypothetical necessity; and in opposition to the Socinians maintain the latter, while they deny the former. By a hypothetical neces- sity they mean that which flows from the divine decree. God has decreed that an atonement is to be made, therefore it is necessary. To this they also add a necessity of fitness; as the commands of God have been transgressed, it is fit that satisfaction should be made, that the transgressor may not pass with impu- nity. Yet they deny that it was absolutely necessary, as God, they say, might have devised some other way of pardon than through the medium of an atonement. This is the ground taken by Augustine in his book on the Trinity. Some of the reformers who wrote before the time of Socinus, adopt the opinions of that father. 3. That of those who maintain its absolute necessity; affirming that God neither has willed, nor could have willed to forgive sins, without a satisfaction made to his justice. This, the common opinion of the ortho- dox, is our opinion. ITS NECESSITY. 15 Various errors are maintained on this point, by our opponents. The removal of the grounds upon which they rest will throw light upon the whole subject. They err in their views of the nature of sin, for which a satisfaction is required; of the satisfaction itself; of the character of God to whom it is to be rendered; and of Christ by whom it is rendered. 1. Of sin, which renders us guilty, and binds us over to punishment as hated of God. It may be viewed as a debt which we are bound to pay to divine justice, in which sense the law is called " a hand-wri- ting," (Col. ii. 14:) as a principle of enmity, whereby we hate God and he becomes our enemy: as a crime against the government of the universe by which, before God. the supremo governor and judge, we be- come deserving of everlasting death and malediction. Whence, sinners are expressly called " debtors," (Matt, vi. 12); "enemies to God," both actively and pas- sively, (Col. i. 21); "and guilty before God," (Rom. iii. 19.) We, therefore, infer that three things were accessary in order to our redemption; the payment of the debt contracted by Bjn, the appeasing of the divine wrath, and the expiation of guilt. 2. From the preceding remarks, the nature of the satisfaction which Bin requires may be easily perceived. Thai which we are chiefly to attend to in sin being its criminality, satisfaction bas relation to the penalty enacted againsl it by the Supreme Judge. 16 TURRETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. But here we must attend to a twofold payment, which is noticed by jurists. One which, by the very deed of payment, sets at liberty the debtor, and annuls the obligation, whether the payment is made by the debtor in his own person, or by a surety in his name. An- other in which the bare fact of payment is not suffi- cient to liberate the debtor, because, the payment is not precisely that which is demanded in the obligation, but an equivalent. In this case, though the creditor lias a right to refuse the acceptance of such payment, yet if he admits it and esteems it a payment, it is a sat- isfaction. The former of these takes place in a pecu- niary, the latter in a penal debt. In a pecuniary trans- action, the fact of the payment of the sum due frees the debtor, by whomsoever the payment is made. Respect here is had, not to the person paying, but to the payment only. Whence, the creditor, having been paid the full amount due. is not said to have treated with indulgence the debtor, or to have forgiven the debt. But in penal matters the case is different. The debt regards not things, but persons; not what is paid, so much as him who pays; i. c., that the trans- gressor may be punished. For as the law demands individual personal obedience, so it demands indi- vidual personal suffering. In order that the guilty person may be released through an atonement matle by another in his stead, the governor or judge must pass a decree to that effect. That decree or act of the ITS NECESSITY. 17 judge is, in relation to the law. called relaxation, and in relation to the debtor or guilty person, pardon; for his personal suffering is dispensed with, and in its place a vicarious suffering accepted. But because, in the subject under discussion, sin has not a relation to debt only, but also to punishment, satisfaction is not of that kind, which by the act itself frees the debtor. To effect this there must be an act of pardon passed by the Supreme Judge, because that is not precisely paid, i. e., a personal enduring of the penalty, which the law demands, but a vicarious suffering only. • wo discover how perfectly accordant remission and satisfaction are with each other, notwithstanding the outcry made by the enemy respecting their sup- posed discrepancy. Christ made the satisfaction in his life and :it his death, and God, by accepting this '•linn, provides for remission. The satisfaction respects Christ, from whom God demandsa punishment, BOt numerically, but in kind, the same with that which we owed. Pardon respects believers, who are freed from punishment in their own persons, while a vica- mffering is accepted. Hence we see how admi- rably mercy is tempered with justice. Justice is ised againsl Bin, ami mercy towards the sinner; an atonement i- made to the divine justice by a surety, and < rod mercifully pardons as. 3. This reasoning is greatly fortified from a consid- eration of the relations in which God stands to the sinner. 13 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. He may be viewed in a threefold relation: as the creditor; as the Lord and party offended, and as the judge and ruler. But though both the former rela- tions must be attended to in this matter, yet the third is to be chiefly considered. God here is not merely a creditor, who may at pleasure remit what is his due, nor merely the party offended who may do as he will with his own claims without injury to any one; but he is also a judge and rcctoral governor, to whom alone pertains the infliction of punishment upon offenders, and the power of remitting the penal sanction of the law. This all jurists know belongs to the chief ma- gistrate alone. The creditor- may demand his debt, and the party offended reparation for the offence or indemnity for his loss; but the judge alone has the power to compel payment, or exact punishment. Here lies the capital error of our adversaries, who maintain that God is to 1»' considered merely in the light of a creditor, who is at liberty to exact or remit the pun- ishment at pleasure. It is however certain, that God sustains the character of judge and ruler of the world, who has the rights of sovereignty to maintain, and professes himself to be the guardian and avenger of his laws : and hence he possesses not only the claims of a creditor, which he might assert or remit at pleas- ure, but also the right of government and of punish- ment, which is naturally indispensable. We must, however, in the punishment itself, distinguish accu- ITS NECESSITY. 19 rately between the enforcing of the penalty, and the manner and circumstances under 'which it is enforced, as they are things widely different. Punishment may be viewed generally ; and in this respect the right of Heaven to inflict it is indispensable, being founded in the divine justice. If there be such an attribute as justice belonging to God, then sin must have its due, which is punishment. But as to the manner and cir- cumstances of the punishment, the case is altogether different. They are not essential to that attribute. They arc to be arranged according to his will and pleasure. It may seem fit to the goodness of God that there should be. in relation to time, a delay of punishment ; in relation to degree, a mitigation of it ; and in relation to persons, a substitution. For al- though the person sinning deserves punishment and might suffer it with the strictest justice, yet such pun- ishment is not necessarily indispensable. For rea- of great importance, it may be transferred to a surety. In this sense, it is said by divines that sin is of necessity punished impersonally, but every sinner i -• not therefore of necessity to be punished person- ally. Through the Bingular mercy of God some may empted from punishment, by the substitution of a surety in their Btead. Bu1 thai we may conceive it possible for God to do this, he musl not 1»" considered as an inferior judge Inted by law. An officer of that character can- 20 TUREETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. not remit anything of the rigour of the law by trans- ferring the punishment from the actual offender to another person. God must be viewed in his true char- acter, as a supreme judge who giveth account of none of his matters, who will satisfy his justice by the punish- ment of sin, and who, through his infinite wisdom and unspeakable mercy, determines to do this in such a way as shall relax somewhat of the extreme rigour of punishment, by admitting a substitute and letting the sinner go free. Hence we discover to whom the atonement is to be made : whether to the devil, (as Socinus, with a sneer, asks.) or to God. as sovereign judge. For as the devil is no more than the servant of God, the keeper of the prison, who has no power over sinners, unless by the just judgment of God, the atonement is not to be made to this executor of the divine vengeance, but to the Supreme Ruler, who pri- marily and principally holds them in durance. We may add, that it is a gratuitous and false supposition, that in the suffering of punishment, there must be some person to whom the punishment shall be ren- dered, as in a pecuniary debt. It is sufficient that there is a judge, who may exact it in order to support the majesty of the State, and maintain the order of the empire. 4. The person icho makes the atonement is here to be considered. As sin is to be viewed in the threefold light of debt, enmity, and crime ; and God in the ITS NECESSITY. 21 threefold light of creditor, party offended, and judge ; so Christ must put on a threefold relation correspond- ing to all these. He must sustain the character of a Surety, for the payment of the debt. He must be a Mediator, a peace-maker, to take away the enmity of the parties and reconcile us to God. He must he a Priest and victim, to substitute himself in our room, and make atonement, by enduring the penal sanction of the law. Again : that such an atonement may be made, two things are requisite: — 1. That the same nature which sins shall make restitution. 2. That the consideration given must possess infinite value, in order to the removal of the infinite demerit of sin. In Christ, two natures were necessary for the making of an atonement: a human nature, to suffer; and a divine nature, to give the requisite value to his sufferings. Moreover, we must demonstrate how it is possible, in consistency with justice, to substitute an innocent person, as Chrisl was. in our room; because such a substitution, at first view, appears to be not only unu- sual, but also unjust. Though a substitution, Which is common in a pecuniary debt, rarely occurs in penal transactions— nay, is sometimes prohibited, as was the among the Romans, because no one is master of his own life, and because the commonwealth would Buffer loss in such Cases -yet it was not unknown among tin- heathen. We have an example of it in Damon and Pythias; two intimate friends, one of whom I ■••- TURRET-TIN OX THE ATONEMENT. voluntarily entered himself bail for the other to Dio- nysius in a capital cause. Cur tins, Codrus, and Bru- tus devoted themselves for their country. The right of punishing hostages, when princes fail in their prom- ises, has been recognized by all nations. Hence host- ages ore called avrtyvxoL, substitutes. To this Paul alludes, when lie says, (Rom. v. 7.) "For a good man some would even dare to die."' The Holy Scrip- tures often give it support, not only from the impu- tation of sin, by which one bears the punishment due to another, but from the public use of sacrifices, in which the victim was substituted in the place of the sinner and suffered death in hi- stead. Hence the imposition of hands, and the confession of sins over the head of the victims. But, that such a substitution may be made without tie 1 .-lightest appearance of injustice, various condi- tions are requisite in the substitute or surety, all which are found in Christ. 1. A common nature, that sin may be punished in the same nature which is guilty, (Heb. ii. 14.) 2. The consent of the will, that he should voluntarily take the burden upon him- self. (Heli. x. 9,) — '" Lo, I come to do thy wiU." 3. Power over his own life, so that he may rightfully determine respecting it, (John. x. 18.) — "No one taketh away my life, but I lay it down of myself, for I j have power to lay it down, and take it up again." 4. The | power of bearing the punishment due to us. and of ITS NECESSITY. freeing both himself and us from the poorer of death ; because, if he himself could be holden of death, he could free no one from its dominion. That Christ possesses this power, no one doubts. 5. Holiness and immaculate purity, that, being polluted by no sin, he might not have to offer sacrifice for himself, but for us only, (Heb. vii. 26, 27.) Under these conditions, it was not unjust for Christ to substitute himself in our room, while he is right- eous and we unrighteous. By this act no injury is done to any one. Not to Christ, for he voluntarily took the punishment upon himself, and had the right to decide concerning his own life and death, and also power to raise himself from the dead. Not to God the judge, for he willed and commanded it ; nor to his natural justice, for the Surety satisfied this by suffer- ing the punishment which demanded it. Not to the empire of the universe, by depriving an innocent per- of life, for Christ, freed from death, lives for ever- more; or by the life of the surviving sinner injuring the kingdom of God, for he is converted and made holy by Christ. Not to the divine law, for its honour has been maintained by the perfect fulfilment of all mand8, through the righteousness of the Media- tor ; and, by our legal and mystical union, he becomes one with us, and we one with him. Hence he may justly take upon him our sin and sorrows, and impart to us his right) ousness and blessings. So there is no 24 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. abrogation of the law, no derogation from its claims ; as what we owed is transferred to the account of Christ, to be paid by him. These preliminary remarks we have thought neces- sary, in order to the lucid discussion of the question concerning the necessity of the atonement. We now proceed to inquire whether it was necessary that Christ should satisfy for us, as well absolutely, in re- lation to the divine justice, as hypothetical!)', on the ground of a divine decree : whether it was abso- lutely necessary, in order to our salvation, that an atonement should be made, God not having the power to pardon our Bins without a satisfaction, or whether it was rendered necessary only by the divine decree? The Socinians, indeed, admit no kind of aec< Some of the old divines, and some members of the Reformed Church, contend for a hypothetical sity only. They think it sufficient for the refutation of the heretic. But we, with the great body of the orthodox, contend for both. We do not urge a necessity simply natural, such as that of fire to burn, which is involuntary, and admit- of no modification in its exercise. It is a moral and rational necessity for which we plead ; one which, as it flows from the holiness and justice of God, and cannot be exer- cised any other way than freely and voluntarily, admits of various modifications, provided there is no ITS NECESSITY. 25 infringement of the natural rights of Deity. That there is such a necessity, is evinced by many argu- ments. I. The vindicatory justice of God. That such an attribute is natural and essential to God, has been proved at large elsewhere. This avenging justice belongs to God as a judge, and he can no more dis- pense with it than he can cease to be a judge or deny himself; though, at the same time, he exercises it freely. It does not consist in the exercise of a gra- tuitous power, like mercy, by which, whether it be exer- cised or not, injustice is done to no one. It is that attribute by which God gives to every one his due, and from the exercise of which, when proper objects are presented, he can no more abstain, than he can do what is unjust. This justice is the constant will of punishing sinners, which in God cannot be inefficient, as his majesty is supreme and his power infinite. Anil hence the infliction of punishment upon the transgressor or his surely is inevitable. No objection to this can be drawn from the liberty of God, for that ircised only in matters of positive enactment, not in such as are of natural right: nor from his mercy, because that, while it may free the sinner from punish- ment, does not demand thai sin shall not be pun- ished. II. The nature <>)' sin. which [s n moral evil and itially opposed to holiness, forms another argu- 26 TUKBETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. rnent. The connection between it and physical evil is natural and necessary. As physical or penal evil cannot exist without moral evil, cither personal or imputed, so there cannot be moral evil without pro- ducing natural evil. Moral and physical good, or holiness and happiness, are united together by the wis- dom, as well as by the goodness and justice of God; so that a good man must be happy, for goodness i ; a part of the divine image. The wicked must be miser- able, because God is just; and this the rather, because when God • ings to the righteous, he does ir of his own bounty, without any merit on their part; but when he punishes the sinner, he render- to him precisely what he has merited by his III. The sanction of the Law, which threatens death to the sinner. (Deut. xxvii. 29. Gen. ii. 17. Ez. xviii. 20. Rom. i. 18, 32, and vi. 2:;.) Since God is true and cannot lie. these threatenings mus rily be executed either upon the sinner, or upon some one in his stead. In vain do our opponents reply, that the threatening is hypothetical, not absolute, and ma; relaxed by repentance. This is a gratuitous supposi- tion. That such a condition is cither expressed or understood, neither has been nor can be proved. Nay, as the penal sanction of the law is a part of the law itself, which is natural and indispensable, this sanction must also be immutable. With the judicial threatenings of the law, we must not confound par- ITS NECESSITY. ticular and economical comminutions, or such as are paternal and evangelical, which are denounced against men to recal them to repentance. Such threatenings may be recalled in case of penitence. Of this kind were those denounced against Hezekiah, (Isaiah xxxviii.) and against Nineveh, (Jon. iii.) IV. The Preaching of the Gospel, which announces the violent and painful death of the Mediator and Surety on the cross, is another argument which power- fully confirms the necessity of that event. For we cannot believe that God would multiply sufferings unnecessarily. His goodness and wisdom do not per- mit us to harbour an idea that the Father could ex- pose his most innocent and beloved Son to an excru- ciating and ignominious death, without a necessity which admits of no relaxation. The only necessity which can be possibly imagined here, is that of making an atonement to the divine justice for our sins. Every one must perceive that it was absolutely neces- sary. I know that our opponents affect to produce various other reasons for the accursed death of the cross, such as to confirm Christ's doctrine, and to set ;ui example of all kinds of virtue, especially of charity and constancy! But since Christ had confirmed his doctrines by numerous stupendous miracles, and through his life had given the most illustrious exam- ple-- of every human virtue, win» could believe that God, for that one cause alone, would expose his only- 28 TURRETTIX ON THE ATONEMENT. begotten Son to such dire torments ? Therefore, with- out all doubt, there was another cause fur that dispen- sation, to wit: a regard for the honour of his justice. To this the Holy Spirit bears witness by the Apostle Paul. (Rom. iii. 5.) who affirms that " God hath set forth Christ to be a propitiation for our sins — etc tv6tti-tv rjjg diKaioovv?) avror—to declare /lis righteousness," which was inexorable, and did not suffer our sins to be pardoned on any oilier terms, than by the intervention of the death of Christ. Again: if God was able and willing by his word alone without any atonement to pardon our sins, why does the Apostle Paul .-o often and emphatically refer our justification and salvation to the blood of 01 " We are justified by the redemption which is in his blood" (Rom. iii. 24.) " We hare redemption through his blood; the remission of sins." (Eph. i. T.i " He hath reconciled all things to himself by the blood of Christ;' (Col. i. 20.) Xow there was do need that his blood should be shed if remission depended solely upon the divine will. On this supposition, the apostle would rashly and falsely affirm, what he often affirms, that the Mood f bulls and of goats, that is, the sacrifice-; under the law, could not take away sins; and that the oblation of Christ alone could. If there was no need of any purgation, but penitence alone was sufficient to take away sin, that is. the guilt of sin. without any sacrifice, the apostle's assertion is groundless. What could be taken away ITS NECESSITY. 29 without any sacrifice at all, could surely be removed by legal sacrifices. If the divine will alone is neces- sary, why is it that Paul never refers to it, but always ascends to the nature of things, as when he asserts that it was impossible for the blood of bulls to take away sins ? Surely it must be because sin is so hateful to God, that its stain can be washed away by nothing less than the blood of the Son of God. V. If there was no necessity that Christ should die, the greatness of God's love in not sparing his own Son, but delivering him up for us all, which the apostle commends, will be not a little diminished. If there was no obstacle on the part of justice, in the way of our salvation, it would indeed have been great grace in God to have forgiven our sins. But it would have fallen far short of that stupendous love which, though justice inexorable stood in the way, removed, by means found in the treasures of infinite wisdom, all impedi- ments to our redemption, displaying a most amiable harmony between justice and mercy. Nor can Christ be said to have appeased the wrath of God, if he, ■without demanding any satisfaction, could by a mere volition have laid aside his own wrath. VI. Finally,our opinion relative to the necessity of iin atonemenl does not, in the Least, derogate from any of the Divine Perfections. Not from God's absolute Power, because he can ueither deny himself nor any of 30 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. his attributes, nor can he act in such a way as to give the appearance of delighting in sin, by holding com- munion with the sinner. Not from the Freedom of his Will, because he can will nothing contrary to his justice and holiness, which would be injured should sin go unpunished. Not from his boundless Mercy, for this is exercised towards the sinner, though punishment is inflicted on the Surety. On the contrary, it makes a glorious display of the most illustrious of the divine perfections: of his Holiness, on account of which he can have no communion with the sinner, until, by an atone- ment, his guilt is removed and his pollution purged; of his Justice, which inexorably demands punishment of sin; of his Wisdom, in reconcilinu- the respective claims of justice and mercy; and of his Love, in not sparing his own Son in order that he might spare us. CHAPTER II. £!je Srutl] of tlje Atonement. Statement of tue Question. — Arguments for the Truth of the Atonement: — I. Christ is said to have redeemed his People at the Price of his Blood. — II. He died in their Place. — III. He bore their Sins. — IV. He offered a Sacrifice on the Cross. — V. He made Reconciliation vy t ith God. — VI. The Nature of his Death. — VII. The Perfections of God. — Objections an- swered:— That the Word Satisfaction is not used in Scrip- ture; — That Christ's Sufferings are exemplary; — That Satis- i A( Tiox and Remission are inconsistent with each other; — That on our supposition Christ must have made Satisfaction to Himself; — That he did nut suffer eternal Death ; — That he did NOT BCFFER Despair;— That the Death of One could not justly answer for the Death of Many;— That Atonement is opposed to Ezekielxviij. 20; and that it leads to Sin and carnal Ease. Having in the last chapter asserted the necessity of the atonement, we shall now endeavour to prove its truth, which the Sociniana not only call in question, but expressly deny. Though, in order to conceal their real views, they appear willing to retain the word satisfaction, and indeed often use it, yet it isinasense widely dififerenl from that of the orthodox divines; as will appear from the statement of the question. The Bubjecl in controversy is not, whether Christ, 32 TURRETTIX ON THE ATONEMENT. by a general satisfaction, has fulfilled all the conditions which the divine will imposed upon him. in order to procure our salvation; for our adversaries admit such a satisfaction, as Crellius professes in his book against Grotius. But we inquire whether the satisfaction made by Christ was strictly penal, and not only ful- filled the will of God, but also satisfied his justice: Christ having taken upon himself our sins. Our op- ponents deny; we affirm. The controversy does not respect a metaphorical satisfaction, which is effected by a nominal remission of sin; a satisfaction, which by supplication obtains, through the mere indulgence of God, some favour. This is admitted, and often spoken of by our adver- saries to deceive the simple. But they pertinaciously deny that Christ has made a true and proper satisfac- tion, by paying a full price, and by obtaining, through his merits, the acquittal of the -inner on the ground of justice. We maintain that this is the true scriptu- ral atonement. It is not whether the death of Christ is advantage- ous to us. and in various respects promotes our inter- ests; for this also they willingly admit. It is whether, by substituting himself in our place, he suffered the punishment due to us. We maintain that he did. It is not whether Christ is our Saviour, on account of his doctrine announcing to us the way of salvation; on account of the example of his life, in which by his ITS TRUTH. 33 virtues and miracles lie confirmed the truth; or on ac- count of his efficacious power, by which he will assur- edly bestow on us this salvation; for all this Socinus* grants to Christ. The great subject of debate is, whether Christ, by his satisfaction and merits, is our Saviour in the strictest sense of the word. Our oppo- nents have openly made the utmost exertions to over- turn this doctrine, which has been constantly held by the orthodox, and is proved by various solid and irre- sistible arguments. I. The first argument is drawn from those texts in which Christ is said to have redeemed us at the price of his blood; for the payment of a price properly so called and perfectly sufficient, shows that a satisfaction in its true and proper sense has been made, since price always has reference to distributive justice. These texts are various. i; Ye were redceemed by a price "\ " Ye were redeemed from your vain conversation, not by corruptible things such as silver and gold, but by the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without spot. v '\. " Christ gave himself for us, that he might redeem (purchase) us from a'l iniquity."^ " In whom we have redemption through his blood."\\ " The Son of man came that he might lay doicn his life a ransom for many — Xvrpov avn nokXcor — i.e., a price of payment, in the room of many. The name * Chap. 9, Book I. do Servatore, Chap. 5, C. f 1 Cor. vi. 20. flPet.i.19. § Tit. ii. 14. ||Eph.i.7. 34 TURBETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. Jesus was given to him, u because he saves his people from their sins.""' Though the word Redemption is sometimes used in Scripture to denote a mere deliverance, which is pro- cured without the payment of any price, as Moses is call- ed /'-our?]?, a deliverer:'!- and as God is said to have "redeemed Israel out of the house of bondage;" yet it does not follow that in this argumenl it is to be taken in that sense. Many things prove that in the business of man's salvation, the word is to be understood as signi- fying redemption by the payment of a price. 1. This is the primary import of the words Xvtqov, anokvrpov, and we may in no case give them any other, unless fop a very solid reason. This is not denied by Socinus himself.* " To redeem any one, properly signifies nothing else bul to free a captive, by paying a price to him who detains him." 2. The condition of man re- quires this: since he is a prisoner not only of Satan and death, but also of sin. both as to its guilt and its pollution, and therefore of the divine law and justice. He is condemned of God and a child of wrath, and can- not be released but by a satisfactory payment. 3. Such is the redemption procured by the price mentioned, (1 Cor. vi. 20.) Why should the apostle use hvrgov and ri[iri, price of redemption and punishment, if no price was * Matt. i. 21. t Acts, vii. 35. Deut. vii. 8. X Book xii. chap. i. ITS TRUTH. 35 paid ? The reply usually made to this is, that the term is used in a figurative sense, and denotes that we are freed from the power of sin. This is an assump- tion, which, as we do not grant it, our opponent is bound to prove. Nay, the contrary is evident. The price is compared to very precious earthly things, such as gold, silver, and jewels, which have always a rela- tion to price, strictly so called, (1 Pet. i. 18.) 4. We have not only the word Xvrpov, a price of redemption, but also the word avriXvrgov, applied to the suffering and death of Christ. Nothing can be more express than this word avrcAvrpov. It denotes not merely a price, but such a price as is perfectly equal to the debt which it pays; this is the force of the preposition avrl, which here expresses substitution. Aristotle uses the same word avnXvrpov, in the 9th book of his Ethics, and 2d chapter, to denote the redemption of a life, by substituting another in its room. Hence it appears that this redemption is not a mere manumission, such as that in which a master, without any price, sets free his slaves; nor is it simply an act of power, by which captives are rescued from the hand of an enemy; nor a bare exchange, such as that of prisoners of war. It is a real satisfaction, such as a surety makes by paying in full for the debtor] Our deliverance, indeed, is procured without any price paid on our part, and purely through the free grace and 36 TUBEETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. mercy of God* The divine power, too, is displayed gloriously in emancipating us from the tyrannical do- minion of Satan, over whom Christ obtains a victory and triumph.t There is also an exchange in respect of Christ, who was substituted in our place, and suf- fered the punishment due to us. Yet in relation to the justice of God there is a real and perfect satisfac- tion made. II. The truth of the atonement is also proved from those passages of Scripture, in which Chrisl is said to have dial not only for our advantage, but also in our shod, as a substitute. " For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly— in that while we were yet sinners, Christ dud for us"\ "For Christ also hath suffered for our sins, the just for the un- just ."§ Our reasons for understanding these phrases in this sense and none other, are: 1. This is the common import of the preposition vnep, (for.) which is used in texts, and which, when applied to persons, denotes among the Greeks substitution: as in Roumis, v. 7: - rcelv for a just man will one die," i. c.. in his place; and in Romans, xi. ?>. " avaOma vnep ade/.cpiov," " for or in the room of his brethren." 2. It is else- where expressed by avrl, in the room of, as in Matt. • Rom. iii. 24. Eph. ii. 8, t Col. »• 15. X Rom. v. C, 7. § 1 Pet iii. 18. ITS TRUTH. xx. 28, and by avrikv-pov, a price of redemption, as in 1 Tim. ii. 6. " Who gave himself a ransom (avriXvTQov) for all." Both of these import substitution ; life for life, as in the phrase " eye for (avri) eye"* 3. Christ is said to have died for us in a manner peculiar to himself — a manner in which neither Paul nor Peter could be said to die or be crucified for us.t Yet either of these might be said to die for our edification and confirmation in the faith. Hence the sufferings and death of Christ were vicarious ; and in their design entirely different from that of the apostles or mar- tyrs. Though the apostles may be said to have suffered for the Church, yet it does not follow from this, that the object of their death was the same with that of Christ's. They suffered as martyrs, to edify, confirm, and comfort the Church, by bearing testimony to the truth of the Christian system; as it is ex- pressed by the apostle: "W/iether we be afflicted, it is for your consolation ;"% but Christ alone laid down his life to redeem the Church. And if we are com- manded to lay down our lives for our brethren,! as Christ laid down Ids life for us, this means that we are qoI to refuse to undergo the danger of death, nay, to suffer with firmness even death itself, whenever the glory <>!' God, the good of our neighbour, or the edifi- ■ Matt, t 1 Cor. i. 13. .. LB. § 1 John. iii. i:;. 38 TUR'RETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. cation of the Church requires it, as was the case with the martyrs. Hence, indeed, we may infer that we should in this way imitate the example of Christ; hut it does not hence follow, that our death for our brcth- for the same purposes as Christ's death for us. We are u; a ransom for our brother, that we may free him from death, as the Psalmist expi it in Psalm xiix. 8 : nor by our death can we procure his reconciliation with God and purge him from sin— a lU. for his people by his death. Thus our be compared to that f ( fist, bu1 ] ■ Id relation to an example of love, a comparison may bul not in relation to the merit of s • The particle K aOo)g, as, denoti e, nut equality, as may he learned from its use in Matt. v. 48: "Be ye perfect, even as (/caflwc) your Father in heaven is perfect." HI. proof is derived from those Scrip- tures in which Christ is said to have, home our sins, and ou account of them to have been afflicted, to have been wounded, to have died. "He bore our sins in hit oxen body on the tree."* This passage i takeu by the apostle from the 53d chapter of Isaiah, in which the Chaldee Paraphrase and the ancient Je- * 1 Pet. ii. 2-1. ITS TRUTH. 39 tlic prophet as treating of Messiah. u He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows — he was wounded for our trans gressio7is, he . I for our iniquities — the chasti him — the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity (i. c. the punishment) of us all — fie shall ,. r sin." ■ texts, we rea- i ■ .'. '.■' : — 1. Fro:, i bearing our sins: — though to bear and -.wo sometimes figuratively put | for taking away and pardoning* yet there is no good j hould under.- lam] them in these here are most weighty reasons which forbid Q3 to depart from the and most common signification, according to which, us Sociniis .'• to bear sin, is the same thing : ! word king away - • . the won! '~!2D. which signi- -• of ;'. bur . is also f punish- • ■-.. .US IIS by the 1 «carer's being bruised and . also said to be upon him. could be - dd, I took upon himself and suffered the punishmenl in. 3. Chri fc ma f Praclec. cap. 21. 40 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. down his life an offering for sin, bore sin in the manner of a victim; nay, he made himself in reality a victim by suffering death and shedding his blood in the room of sinners. 4. All things which indicate a real satisfaction occur in this portion of Scripture: our sins as the moving, the meritorious cause. - fie was bruised for our iniquities," v. 4, 5. 6 : the suffering of punishment due to sin; "he hath borne our v;rie/s, and carried our sorrows," v. 4: the imputation of OUT sins to Christ by Cod as a judge ; -the Lord laid on all," v. 6: the voluntary under- taking of Christ as our surety; -he was oppressed and afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth." in complaining of his sufferings, or in refusing to hear them. v. expiation for sin ami a full payment of the debt ; "yet it pleased Hie Lord to bruise him: he hath put him l<> grief: '-hen thou sha'l make his soul on offer- for si n r ^. 8, LO. Now, with what propriety could all these thin-, he affirmed, if Christ laid down his life merely to exhibit an example \>f patience ami lpve, and not to make satisfaction for sin? In Matt. viii. IT. we are, indeed, informed that this prophecy of Isaiah was fulfilled, when Christ healed bodily diseases, which, properly speaking he did not bear, hut take away: yet we cannot infer from this, that the same thing may be affirmed of sins which are the diseases of the mind : lor the diseases of the body are to be viewed in a different light from those ITS TRUTH. 41 of the mind. In healing the former, it was not neces- Bary that Christ .should himself become sick; it was only necessary that he should exercise his power. Not so the latter. He must first take them upon himself before he could take them away from us. Hence he is held forth by the prophet as wounded and bruised, which were not necessary to the healing of bodily maladies, but to bearing those of the mind alone ; from which it is easy to infer what the mind of tlie Holy Spirit is in this prophecy, and how it is said to have been fulfilled when Christ healed corpo- ral diseases. Without doubt, it relates primarily to spiritual disease and debility, i. e., to sin, the pun- ishment of which was laid upon him, that he might Buffer its desert in our room. But bodily infirmities and pains are a part of the punishment of sin, and on this account, in a secondary and subordinate sense, it refer- to them; because Christ had a right to heal them. Thus, what the prophet declares in general concerning all disease^ Peter applies in particular to the diseases of the mind, and Matthew to the discuses of the body, not excluding, bu1 rather including, those of the mind. He demonstrates thai by removing the cause the effect was taken away. Spiritual and physical maladies are intimately connected with each other; the former draw after them the latter, while the latter presuppose the former. Christ is said to have borne both, lull in different ways, according to 42 TURRETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. their different natures. B fs he bore only icaciously taking them away, not by underc them in his own person ; but he bore spiritual . in two methods: by suffering them himself, and by taking- them away. Nor, if Matthew asserts that healed the sick, and thus fulfilled this prophe- cy, ma; ightly infer that the Spirit . to them alo ! known, that in the Script i be accomplished, not only when it is completely and ultimately fulfilled, also when a partial accomplishment of il La . re also are to I >red those Scriptures which assert that ( 1 hi ' de sin and a curse fdr said " to //arc been m<:- : an off : malediction which the law pro- eed,forhim he was most holy and supre d by his Father, but for us; unless it was ; istituted in our ■. and taking upon himself that curse which the law justly pronounces our sins, in order that he might bear it, and by take it awn}? Tims a made a bl uring Cor us the remis- sion of our sins and a right to eternal life. What reference is there here to an example of patience, or Gal. Oi. . viii. 9. ITS TRUTH. 43 to a confirmation of doctrine? Is it not most evident that there was a real substitution of Christ in our room; and that in consequence of this substitution, a real satisfaction, expiation or atonement has been made, and that this is the doctrine taught by these Scriptural phrases? The force of this argument can- not be evaded by objecting that Christ is said to have been a curse, not on account of having really borne the curse of the law, which could not have been laid on him, a perfectly blessed and holy person; but be- cause he suffered crucifixion, which, under the law, was denominated a curse. The very words of the apostle, and the redemption from the curse of the law, which Christ by his death procured for us, evince the futility of the objection. How can he be a curse, and that for the express purpose of delivering as fro 1 a the i, unless he took it upon himself? It is no solid objection to this reasoning, that he is the only-begot- ten Son, and the ever-blessed God; for he did not en- dure the cur e, in and for himself 'as the Son of God, br.l as our surety and on our behalf. I^encc as to his person, he is styled " blessed forever," and in his offi- cial cl our representative, he is said to have suffered the punishment due to our Hence we are enabled to understand the force of the expression, "he was d Iver or our offences."* . iv. 25. 44 TURBETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. Socinus contends, that all which is hero intended, is, that an occasion for the death of Christ was given by our offences, or that Christ died only with the view that he might, by his example, incline us to Leave olT the commission of sin. and render us certain of its pardon. All which is Incompatible with the Scri] quoted above, which teach us that the meritorious and moving cause, tor Christ's 1 > < ■ i 1 1 ^- delivered over to death, was our sins, that he might sutler the punish- ment due to them and take away their guilt. lie is Baid "to have b!' the offering, and over it making a confes- sion of sin. 3. From the threefold effect of the sacri- fice: in respeel to God.bythe propitiation of his wrath; in respeel to sin, by the expiation and removal of its guilt; in respect to man. by the pardon which followed from the propitiation of God and the expiation of sin. For a person cannot be freed and obtain pardon, with- out the substitution of a victim in his room; nor car God be app out the shedding of Mood: aor can sin be expiated withoul the suffering of punish- ment. The objections which Volkelius and others oppose to this reasoning, do not. in the least, weaken its force. 2* 46 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. They object: (1.) "That the propitiator did not all prefigure the sacrifice of Christ: but the annual sacrifice only, which i upon the great iation, and which contained no satisfaction; don could flow neither from tl offered up nor from the person of the chief pri The A idgment more depend- ence is to be placed than on that of our opponent», opposes not one | only, but all the sacrifi of Christ, and hem their ation.* Neither the perpetual sacrifice o wp daily, nor the other propitiatory offerings of winch were of a private nature, could refer to any- thing else than the oblation of the immaculate Lamb of God for us. it is no objection to this view, that they v d for individuals, and not for all in offered for the who] nilied that Christ was to make a propitiation for the sins of all his people, so those which were offered \" God the Father* who never makes satisfaction. \ et we cannot justly infer that this expiation is of the same nature with that of Christ; because, according to the different nature of the subjects to whom the expiation is attributed, it is to b<> differ- ently understood. For God the Father to expiate is to a.lmitofan expiation made by a priest, which is done by pardon and acceptance. Bui for a priesl and victim to expiate, is to effect reconciliation meritoriously by the shedding of blood and vicarious suffering. It is further objected that: (3.) "Sacrifices were offered up only for smaller offences, such as were com- mitted through ignorance or error: while for more aggravated, wilful transgressions, there were Q0 sacri- fices instituted: but that Christ died for all sins with- out distinction," This objection is grounded on an assumption which we do not admit. 11 is indeed ex- pressly contrary to Scripture. On the great day of annual atonement, the goal is said to bear all the ini- quities of the children of Israel. Sacrifices are else- where said to be offered up not for those sins only which are committed through error, but for those * Deut. xxi. 8. ITS TRUTH. which are committed willingly, and which are ex- pressed by ytP3, D^s, KC371, bra, and similar words.* And though the priest is said to have offered for the errors (ayvorjfiaTuv) of the people, t yet it does riot follow that wilful sins are excluded; for the word ayvorjfxa, which signifies properly an error of the mind, Lb used to denote every kind of sin, because every sin proceeds from an error of the mind. Hence wicked men arc called fools, avorp-oc. The Septuagint renders j?t?2 and £3WX by the Greek word ayvoia, and these Hebrew words signify wickedness and rebellion. For some aggravated crimes, such as murder, idolatry, adultery, etc., we do not read of any sacrifices having been particularly instituted; because God determined to punish them by die sword of the civil magistrate with capital punishment; and those who sinned thus hud no need of this remedy, as their death was a satis- faction to the public. V. Again, we argue for (Ik- doctrine of the atonc- nieiit. from mi,- /v com iliation with God, which Christ, by his death has procured for us. Since that reconcilia- tion rapposes the making up of the In-each winch sin had produced between God and his creatures, this could not be effected without the removal of a two- fold barrier, by a satisfaction. On the part of God, •Lev. xvi. 21, 22. fHeb. i.\. 6, 7. 50 TURRETTIX OX THE ATONEMENT. his justice must bo satisfied, and on the part of man, the guilt of sin must be removed by suffering the punishment due to it. The Apostle Paul, everywhere, teaches us that Christ procured for us such a recon- ciliation.""' The substance of the objections which our opponents offer against this argument is. that " this reconciliation is effected by our conversion to God. and not at all by appeasing the divine wrath, because God is not said reconciled to us, but we to God; nay. he is said to procure for us this reconciliation, which is not the part of an enemy, but of a friend." This capital error of our opponents is refuted by many powerful arguments. 1. The Scriptui of a double en- mity and reconciliation, not only on the pari of man, who by sin is become ahater of God,+ ao enemy in his mind by wicked works;t but also on the pari of God, by his wrath which is revealed from i. against all iniquity.§ Hence men are by nature chil- dren of wrath. God is said to be of purer eyes than to behold iniquity.1 He hates all work'.-- of ini- quity.** Now as there is an alienation on both so there must be on each side a reconciliation: on the part of God, by a turning away of his wrath; on the * Rom. t . 10. 2 Cor. v. 18, 19. Col. . 20, 21 ftc. f Rom. i 21. JCol. .21. § Rom. i 18. || Eph. ii. 5. r Hab. i. 13. Psalm v.5. T 'T:I. 51 part of man. by a conversion to God: all which the Apostle clearly teaches. (2 Cor., v. 18, 19.) In conse- quence of God's reconciling us to himself through Christ. Paul shows that the apostles, in the name of Christ, exhorted sinners to be reconciled to God. 2. If reconciliation were nothing but conversion, then it should rather be said to proceed from Christ's holy life, than from his bloody death. On this ground, no reason can be offered why the Apostle should propose sanctiJication as the end of our reconciliation * for nothing can be the medium and end of itself. This would be to say that the end of reconciliation was reconciliation. 3. It is such a reconciliation as is effected by not imputing to us our sins, on account of their having been imputed to Christ, who was made sin for us;t a reconciliation effected by the substitu- tion of Christ in our place, that he might die for us: collect from the comparison instituted between him and the man who would dare to die for a good : which implies a proper satisfaction, not a sim- ion. 4. This reconciliation is effected "by making peace tJirovgh the blobd of Ids cross ''^ and by an ato rifice, iXaopa, an offering; and many others of the same im- port, which we have mentioned above. As Christ sustains a twofold relation to believers- one in the character of their Surety, bound to satisfy justice in their behalf; the other in the character of their Head and Lord, operating in them by the ani- mating and directing influence of his Spirit — so he had a twofold 'end in his death and sufferings: one, the payment of a price of redemption for us to jus- tice; the other, to set before us an example worthy of imitation. Hence his sufferings may be viewed either as satisfactory or as exemplary. Though the Bufferings of Christ are proposed*" to us as an* exam- ple, and his death as that which we should imitate by dying for our brethren, at his command;! yet we arc not hence to infer thai by his death he made no real satisfaction; for the mentioning of the one end does mil exclude bill supposes the other. There is a wide difference between a payment made by a debtor in his own person, and a payment made by a surety. As to the reality of payment there is no . ii. 21. t 1 John, iii. 10. 58 TURRETTIX OX THE ATONEMENT. difference in the eye of the law, but in relation to grace there is a striking difference. When a debtor pays out of his own purse his debts, it cannot be said that the creditor iias forgiven him the dele, or shown him favour : but if the debt has been paid by another and that other has been found out by the creditor, then grace may be said to have been shown. - and remission are inconsistent with each other, when same thing, ■ ■Hi things. its object, remission man for its object. .- is made by Christ to God for man, and yet man is freely pardoned. Justice and mercy kiss each other* Justice is exerci puted t<» Christ, ami mercy, free and sovereign mercy, is shown ■■- ners. The pardon granted to us is entirely of •. while full satisfaction is demanded of the surety. Nothing i- demi . full payment having i ,. that he in in whi< makes the satisfaction ; in of God. notas i tri . Thus it is no in the same character nor in relation, tl and receh mediator, and n id the . It is indeed absurd to suppose thi person should make satisfaction to himself, when the ITS TRUTH. 59 . subject treated of is of a private nature, by which a ; private loss is compensated or money that is due paid, for in that case the person would take of his own and with it pay himself. But when we speak of a public j satisfaction, by which a public injury is repaired, it is j not absurd to say that a judge who has violated the j law, may make satisfaction to himself as judge by suf- j j. cither in his own person or in the person of j another, that punishment which the law denounces ; and thus it is in the work of Redemption. Christ did not suffer eternal death but a death of j days only, and yet he fully paid the debt of ever- i I punishment which we owed. His, which was one of finite duration, wa^ equivalent to an everlasting death suffered by us, because of the infinite dignity of his person. 1 1 is wer rings not of a mere man. but of the true God, who purchased the Church with . mce what was deficient in dura- supplied by the divinity of the sufferer, which infinite importance to a temporary passion. Y't ■ hence infer, that as the person a rop of his sufficientfor our redemption. The t of Christ might lue considered merely in relation to the infinite exaltation of liim \\ ho i offered ; ye1 death only . of 1 he judge by 60 TURRETTIX OX THE ATONEMENT. whose sentence it was inflicted. The dignity of the person increases the dignity of the punishment en- dured — the more exalted the person is, so much the heavier is the suffering which he undergoes : yet noth- ing but thai species of punishment which the law de- nounces! can satisfy its claims upon the guilty. Death and death alone could fulfil the demands of law and justice. It was not necessary, when Christ was suffering the punishment due to sin. that he should suffer that despair and gnashing of teeth, which are a part of the punishment of the damned ; for these are not essential to the punishment which the judge inflicts or which the surety mu I bear. They are mere circumstan- ces, which arise from the character of the persons of the damned, who, when they find that their tor- ments arc overwhelming and eternal, sink into utter despair and gnashing of teeth. This could not be so with Christ, who in the midst of his greatest agonies, had full assurance of deliverance and a resur- rection from the tomb, and hence when encompassed by tortures the most excruciating, always manifested his faith in God— " My God! My God!" are his words. Though a death of infinite value was due for every individual sinner, yet such a death as Christ's is quite sufficient for the redemption of the whole elect world. A penal satisfaction is not of the same nature with a ITS TRUTH. 61 pecuniary payment, which is valued only by the amount paid, without regard to the person who pays : and hence can be of avail to none but the individual for whom the payment is made. But penal satisfaction is estimated by the dignity of the person who makes it, and is increased in worth in proportion to his dignity, and hence avails for many as well as for one. Money paid by a king is indeed of no more avail in the dis- charge of a debt, than money paid by a slave : but the life of a king is of more value than the life of a vile slave, as the life of King David was thought of more worth than that of half the Israelitish army.* In this way Christ alone is more excellent than all men togeth- er. The dignity of an infinite person swallows up all the infinities of punishment due to us : they sink into it and are lost. Besides, it is no new thing that what i- necessary for one should be amply sufficient for many. One sun is necessary to the illumination of an individual, and yet the same sun illuminates the whole human family. One victim was sufficient for the priest and all the people, and yet it would have been requi- site for "lie. Although there were as many atone- :ii- necessary as there were Israelites, yet the one greal annual expiatory sacrifice atoned for the sins of all the people, because it was so offered for the whole congregation as that by divine appointment it availed * 2 Sam. xviii. 3. 62 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. for the case of each singly. On this subject the Scrip- tures are so express, that no one, unless he have the har- dihood to contradict the Holy Spirit, can deny it. " The Lord laid on him the iniquities of us all."" Jf one died for ail.f " By one offering of himself he hath forever perfected them that are sanctified. y X What do all these Scriptures teach, unless that one death of Christ is sufficient to make a full atonement for all the elect, in the same manner as the disobedience of Adam made many sin- ners?§ One cannot satisfy for many, when he and they are of the same rank. One plebeian cannot satisfy for many plebeians : but one prince may satisfy for many plebeians. If this is admitted among creatures who are all finite and mortal, how much more between creatures and the Creator, between whom there is an infinite distance ? The rule which is laid down in Ezekiel 18 : 20, " the soul that siiuuth. it shall die." cannot be understood as absolute and universal, for so all imputation of -in would be barred, which yet the Scriptures teach by many examples. It must be referred to the ordinary dispensations of Providence, and not to an extraor- dinary dispensation of grace. Or it may relate to a particular providence towards the Jews, to whom the Lord speaks in such a way as to close their mouth, * Isai. liii. 6. f 2 Cor. v. 14. $ Heb. x. 14. § Rom. v. 18, 19. i! ITS TRUTH. 63 and prevent them from complaining that they had un- deservedly suffered punishment on account of the sins of their fathers ; and not to the general government of men, in which God declares that he will visit the iniquities of the fathers upon the children until the third and fourth generation.* So far is the doctrine of the atonement from open- ing a door to impiety and spreading a couch on which spiritual sloth may repose in security, that it is the most efficacious means of holiness, and the death of sin itself, which is, among others, one of the ends that Christ assigns for his death — " that being dead unto sin, we may live unto righteousness ; that henceforth we may no more live unto ourselves, but to him who died for us and was raised again for our justification." Sec the 6th chapter of. Romans, for the manner in which the Apostle Paul reasons on this subject ; also Titus, ii. 14, and 1 Pet. ii. 24. * Ex. xx. 5. CHAPTER III. . % Acts ix. L6; 1 Pet. ii. 21; I'liil. i. 29. § Rom. viii. 18. TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. tliat Daniel* advise.»; Nebuchadnezzar to break off his sins. The Hebrew word pis, used by the prophet here, does not primarily Bignify to redeem, nor even to deliver; its primary sense is to tear away, or break off; and hence, as a collateral signification, to deliver. The prophet exhorts the king to repentance and a change of life, in order to make reparation to men, and not to God, for the injuries and oppressions which he had practised; and that thus, by breaking off his course oC Binning, he mighl be more prosper- ous, escape from the ruin which was hanging over him, and obtain a Longer continuance of peace in his empire. To the same purpose are all those places of* Scripture in which pardon of Bin is promised to repentance. The repentance is not a meritorious cause, hut a condition annexed, the medium through which pardon L8 obtained. Sufferings are of two kinds. In the one, they are exacted by a judge to make satisfaction to justice; in the other, they are inflicted for the correction of the offender. We admit that the latter species of offer- ing is often appointed to believers, not for vengeance, but for healing; not for destruction, but for correc- tion. God lays it upon them, qo! as a judge, but as a father; not out of hatred, but out of love. Cyprian says, "The Lord chastises the saints that he may advance * Dan. iv. 27. ITS PERFECTION. 79 their holiness, and he advances their holiness that he may save them." To the same purpose Thomas speaks:* "Befo?-e pardon, the sufferings of the elect are punish- ments for sin; after -pardon, they are exercises." Au- gustin happily explains the difference between the punishments of the wicked and the chastisements of the saints: "All, both good and evil, suffer the same afflictions; nor by their afflictions can we distinguish, between the righteous and the wicked; for all things happen alike to all: there is one lot to the righteous and to the wicked. There is, however, a distinction between the persons who suffer. All who are sub- jected to the same pains are not alike vicious or vir- tuous. In the same fire gold shines and stubble smokes; by the same fan the chaff is blown away and the wheat purged. Dregs must not be confounded with oil, because both are pressed in the same press. The very same afflictions which prove, purify, and re- fine the righteous, are a curse and destruction to the wicked. Hence, under the pressure of the same ca- lamities, the wicked detest and blaspheme God, while the righteous pray to him and praise him. Thus the difference is not in the nature of the punishiJRits, but in the character of those who suffer them."t The chastisements which the saints experience sometimes, indeed, retain the name punishments, but * III. Q. 96. t De Civ. Dei., lib. i. cap. 8. 80 TURRETTIX ON THE ATONEMENT. not in a strict sense. 1. Because punishments, in a strict sense, are inflicted by the Supreme Judge upon transgressors, on account of their violation of hie law. Hence, even after the state of a man is changed and lie becomes a saint, the pains and griefs which lie suffers are called by the same name, because, though not form- ally, they arematerially thesame. 2. Because there are many points of resemblance between them and punish- ments properly so called: like them, they are not joyous, but grievous to the flesh, which they are designed to subdue: they are dispensed to : by the will of a gracious < tod, with as much care and attention as he, in the character of an avenging judge, dispenses punishments: sin gii □ to both: both pro- duce in the mind the same apprehension thai God is an angry judge: and both serve as an example salu- tary to other offenders. But this grand difference still remain- — that, in the punishments of the wicked, is a judge, has in view satisfaction to his justice; while in the chastisements of his people, he, as a father, designs the correction and amendment of Ins disobedient children. The death of David's child, which affliction hap- pened to him after the pardon of his not a judicial punishment, but a fatherly chastisement; for his sin having been once pardoned, no punishment * 2 Sam. xii. 14. ITS PERFECTION. 81 could remain to be borne. The reason which God assigns for thus afflicting the King of Israel gives no countenance to the idea that the affliction was judicial and expiatory. By his sin, he had given occasion to the enemy to blaspheme the name of God, and thus the discipline of the house of God had been most basely violated. This breach of discipline must be healed by a salutary example. Nor can we infer that it was judicial, from David's deprecating it. It is the part of human nature to endeavour to escape what- ever is painful, just as a sick man deprecates the caus- tic powders, the pain of the amputating knife, and the bitterness of medicine; though nothing can be further from the nature of punishment than these. Though death cannot be inflicted upon us to guard gainst future transgression, nor for our amend- ment, yet it by no means follows that it is designed as an atonement for sin. There are many other weighty reasons, rendering it necessary that all should die: such as, that the remains of sin may be destroyed; that we may pass from a natural and terrestrial state to one spiritual and heavenly; that piety may be ex- ercised; that, Christian virtues may be displayed in lOSt brilliant manner; and finally, that we may have a mosl powerful excitement to amend our life, ami prepare for entering upon a better inher- itance. The judgment, which, tin' Apostle Peter tells w+, 82 TUBRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. must begin at the house of God * is not the legal judgment of avenging justice, which proceeds from God as a wrathful judge but a fatherly and evangeH- cal chastisement; not to punish and destroy, but to hold out a useful example, and to correct us, thai thus we may not be condemned with the world, as Paul Bays, il Cor. xi. 32.) The revenge mentioned 2 Cor. vii. 11, i- not properly a punishment inflicted by God in the character of judge; bul either an ecclesiasti- cal censure, such as excommunication, which is ad- judged by the Church for the removal of scandal; or it rather denotes tie- repentance and contrition in which a sinner is offended with himself, and, a- it were, takes vengeance on himself for his offences. Though those under the old Testament dispensa- tion, whose sin- were pardoned, had still to oiler sac- rifices for Bin, vet ;i wan-ant for attempting to make human atonements is not thence to he inferred. The sacrifices then offered were nut. properly Bpeaking, a satisfaction for sin: they were types of a future atone- ment to be made by Christ, through tin.' efficacy of which they procured pardon. When Solomon says,t that "by mercy and truth iniquity is purged" no countenance is given to the human satisfaction for which the Church of Rome contends. There are two opinions maintained re- * 1 Pet iv. 17. t Trov. xvi. 6. ITS PERFECTION. 83 specting this passage. One is, that by "mercy and truth" are meant, the mercy and truth of God: then the wise man would directly allude to and assert the atonement of Christ. The other opinion is, that the mercy and truth of man are intended: then the doctrine which the text teaches would be, that mercy and truth are a condition always required when sin is pardoned, (but not the cause for which the sentence of pardon is pronounced:) because, against the un- merciful, judgment without mercy will be exercised; while on the other hand, " the merciful shall obtain mercy"'" The Hebrew word iso, which is here translated " purged," does not properly signify expiatory purg- ing, but either covering and remission only, which God bestows on the believing and merciful; or else the removal of the power of sin, in which sense it is used by the Prophet Isaiah. + Then the passage would intimate that the exercise of mercy and sincere piety removes the contrary vices. The following clause of the verse confirms this interpretation of the word: -'By the fear of the Lord men depart from evil." Though nothing defded can enter into the New Jerusalem, yel there is no need of any satisfaction in this life, besides that of Christ, nor of a purgatory * Matt. v. 6. t Isu. xxviii. 18. 84 TUBBETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. in another, to purge away the pollutions of sin; for in the moment of death, when the soul is separated from the body, all the remains of sin are entirely removed by the Spirit of Christ. CHAPTER IV. Q>n tf)e illatter of tlje attornment. Statement of the Question. — Preliminary Remarks: — 1. Christ's atoning Sufferings extended through his whole Life. — 2. Thet are to be distinguished as to Substance and Form. — 3. His Obedience, has a twofold Efficact. — 4. The Law con- tains both Precepts and Sanctions. — 5. There is a threefold Subjection to the Law: Natural, Federal, and Penal. Arguments for the Orthodox View: — I. From Romans v. 9. — II. From Philip, ii. 8. — III. From Romans vm. 3, 4. — IV. From the Fact that Christ performed whatever was due on our Part.— V. From Rom. i. 17, in. 21, and v. 18.— VI. From the Indivisibility of his Righteousness. Objections answered: — That our Redemption is ascribed to Christ's Death;— That our Blessedness is attributed to Pardon;— That the Obedience of Christ's Death was suf- i k.'ient;— That Christ owed Obedience for Himself; — That ii He obeyed for us, we are no longer bound to obey; — That Christ's Death is a perfect Fulfilment of the Law.— Quota- tions from Calvin's Institutes;— From the Gallic Synods. Concerning the matter and parts of the satisfac- tion, various opinions have been embraced by divines. Some limit it to (he sufferings and punishments which In- endured for as. This opinion appears to have been first maintained by Cargius, a Lutheran minis- 86 TUBBBTTEN ON THE ATONEMENT. ter, and after him by Piscator, a Reformed professor at Herbornc. Some of the divines who embrace it, confine that righteousness by which we are justified to the death which he suffered; while others of them comprehend in it, also, all the sufferings of his life. This they call his passive righteousness. The obe- dience which he yielded to the precepts of the Law, they term his active, righteousness, which they sup- pose to have been necessary in the person of the Mediator to the performance of his mediatorial func- tions. They maintain, however, thai ii forms no part of his atonement, or his merits, which are imputed to us. The common opinion in our churches is, that the atonement made by Christ, which is imputed to us for righteousness before God, is not confined to the Buf- ferings which he endured cither in his life or at his death. bu1 extends also to the obedience of his whole life; to all those just and holy actions by which he • perfectly obeyed the law in our stead, from these two parts, his sufferings and his obedience, they maintain that the full and perfect price of our re- demption proc In order to ascertain precisely the state of the question, we remark, that the subject of controversy is not, whether Christ perfectly fulfilled both the general law binding him to serve God, and the spe- cial law commanding him to submit to death. Nor, ITS MATTEE. 87 whether the obedience of Christ's whole life was for the promotion of our interests, and necessary to pro- cure our salvation. Both are granted by our oppo- nents. They acknowledge that he fulfilled both laws, that the obedience of his life was necessary for him in the performance of his mediatorial duties, and in many respects profitable for us. We inquire whether this obedience forms a part <3f the satisfaction which he made to God for us; whether it was yielded in our stead. Again, the inquiry is not, whether the mere suffer- ings belong to the satisfaction. For those, whose opinion we controvert, acknowledge that no suffering can be of an atoning nature, unless it be of an active character, voluntarily endured. They also admit that, in order to its being acceptable to God, it must include an active obedience or voluntary oblation, which unites the highest love with the most perfect right- eousness and holiness. They even say that the observ- ance of the whole law was condensed into one action, that I»!' Christ's death. Cut the inquiry is, whether the obedience which Chrisl through his life yielded to the law, is to be joined to the Obedience which he yielded in his death and Bufferings, in order to constitute our justifying righteousness before God. We must distinguish be- tween what Christ did directly and immediately to make an atonement, and what only pertained as pre- 88 TUERETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. vious condition? to his making it. In this last we place the personal holiness of Christ. Hence the question is reduced to this point: is the atonement which Christ made for us restricted to his death alone, oral least to all those Bufferings which were either antecedent to his death or accompanied it ? Or does it compre- hend all which Chrisl did and suffered for us, from the beginning to the end of hi- life? The former is the opinion of Cargius, Piscator, and their followers; the latter is our opinion and that of our churches gener- ally. In order to set forth more clearly the doc- trine for which we contend, we make the following remark.-: 1. The atoning sufferings of Christ extend to all those which were inflicted upon him, not only in the gar' den of Gethsemane. but also during his whole life. Wo cannot approve of the hypothesis, which restricts the expiatory Bufferings of our Redeemer to the pains he Buffered during the three hours in which the sun was darkened, and he hung on the cross before hi- death ; while it excludes all the other sufferings of his life, as, at most, necessary only to vindicate the truth of < rod, and to accomplish the typical representations of Christ under the law. We admit, indeed, that the greatest aironies of Christ were those to which he was exposed during those hours of darkness. But it is abundantly evident that all his other sufferings were expii (1.) Because the Scripture nowhere restricts his expia- ITS MATTER. 89 tion to the three hours in which the sun was darken- ed, but refers it to his sufferings in general, without any limitation.* They even extend it to his whole humiliation.! (2.) Because the agonies which he en- dured in the garden, and which are expressed by the words grief, sorrow, agony, heaviness, amazement, and being exceeding sorrowful even unto death, on account of the tremendous weight of divine wrath and maledic- tion, were the chief sufferings which Christ had to endure in his soul for us. (3.) The contrary opinion wrests from many pious Christians one great means of consolation. In the sufferings of Christ's whole life, as expiatory, they find rest to their souls. This idle imagination of Cargius and Piscator would snatch from Christians all this solace, and deprive them of innumerable evidences of the divine love. The objection which is brought against this reason- ing from Zech. iii. 0: " I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day," is of no avail. That from these words of the Apostle, " We are sanctified through the of- fering of the body of Jesus once for all,"% is equally unsub- Btantial. The inference to be drawn from these texts LB ii'it that the sufferings of Christ, antecedent to those on the cross, are not expiatory; but only that the atone- menl was consummated on the cross. In consequence * Is& liii. 4, 5. 1 Pet. IL 21, and iii. 18. Matt. xvi. 21. He)), v. 7, and x. 8, 9. t PML ii. 6, 7. % Bfeb. x. 10. 90 TURBETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. of this consummation all the sins of all the elect were, in one day, blotted out. The reason why the Apostle, by a figure common in all languages, refers the expia- tion of our sins to the one offering of Christ, is. that his sufferings on the cross were the lasl and most |»ier- cing, without which all his antecedent sufferings would have been insufficient ; as the payment of the lasl Bir- thing completes the liquidation of thedebi and cancels the bond. Because he was inaugurated into his medi- atorial office, in the thirtieth year of his age, we may not thence infer, that previously to that time, he was neither a priest nor a victim : for by the same mode of reasoning, it would follow, that before thirty years of age he was not a Mediator. That Christ was in favour with God. that he was his well-beloved Son, nay, thai he was sometimes in his life glorified, does not prove that he did not then bear the divine wrath. These two are not at all incompatible with each other. Christ, viewed in himself, never ceased to be most clearly beloved of his Father, not even in hi- excrucia- ting tortures on the accursed tree, though, as our surety, he bore the load of the divine wrath, and was made a curse for us. Itwas not necessary that the pun- ishment which Christ underwent should be so intense, that it could admit of no intervals of alleviation by which he might l>e animated to encounter gloriously the dreadful contlict set before him. 2. In the actions and suffering's of Christ, two things I ITS MATTER. 91 are to be considered: their substance and their form. They are considered in relation to their substance, when we examine their nature and intensity. They are con- sidered formally, when they are examined as constitu- ting a righteousness to be sustained before the tribu- nal of God. In the former light the actions and suf- ferings are many and various. In the latter they are to be considered under one form only, that of a whole, composed of all his actions and passions — a one and perfect righteousness. Wherefore one action or pas- sion alone cannot be said to effect a full atonement, because it is necessary that a perfect obedience should be connected with it. Hence, although various de- grees and acts may be remarked in the obedience of Christ, which commenced at his birth, was continued through his life, and completed at his death, yet it is unique, as to the completion of the work of salvation and the righteousness which it accomplishes. 3. There is in the obedience of Christ a twofold efficacy. The one is expiatory, that by which we arc freed from those punishments to which we were liable «mi account of sin. The other is a meritorious efficacy, by which, through the remission of our sins, a title to eternal life mid salvation 1ms been acquired for us. For :i-- -in has brought upon us two evils — the loss of life, and exposure in death ; so redemption must pro- cure two lienefits — liberation from death, and a title to life: or, deliverance from hell and an introduction 92 TURKETTIX ON THE ATOXEMEXT. into heaven. There arc various passages of Scripture which clearly express these two benefits. " To make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in an everlasting righteousness."* " Christ hath redeemed us from, the law, being made a curse for us — that the blessing of Abra- ham might come on the Gentiles.''']' " God sent forth his Son — to redeem them thai were tender the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. "% "'We were recon- ciled to God by the death of his Son; much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life."§ " That they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified. "|| These two blessings, indeed, which flow from the obedience of Christ, are indissolubly connected in the covenant of grace, so that no one who obtains the pardon of sin can fail of acquiringa right to life. Yet they must be distinguished, and not confounded as if they were one and the same thing. It is one thing to free from death, another to introduce into life; one thing to deliver from hell, another to conduct into heaven; one thing to free from punishment, another to bestow rewards. Though it is true that no one is freed from death, who is not also made a partaker of life, yet it does not follow that a deliverance from the death which we deserve is not to be distinguished Dan. ix. 24. Rora. v. 10. f Gal. iii. 13, 14. II Acts xxvi. 18. % Ibid. iv. 4. ITS MATTER. 93 from the acquisition of glory. There are many grades of life as well as of holiness. The possession of life does, indeed, follow liberation from death, but it is not necessary that this life should be a happy and glo- rious one ; as liberty follows deliverance from prison, but it may be liberty without a throne and a diadem. Joseph might have been freed from prison and not set over the land of Egypt. Between death and life simply there is no medium, but between eternal death, and a life happy and glorious, there is a medium — the life of bondage in which man is now placed. The present life, in which man is bound to the performance of duty, is a state of pilgrimage, not of heavenly rest. While we believe it necessary to make distinctions such as these, we think it improper to inquire curi- ously, as some do, by what particular acts Christ made atonement, and by what he merited life for us. Those who make these too nice distinctions, attribute the atonement to his sufferings ; and the acquisition of a right to life, to his active obedience to the law. These distinctions receive no countenance from Scrip- ture, which nowhere distinguishes the obedience of Christ into parte, but, on the contrary, represents it as a thing unique, by which he hath done in our place everything which the law requires of us. As Christ, by the obedience of his life, has rendered to the law th:il which it required of us, and to which we were 4* 94 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. otherwise personally bound ; so by this obedience he lias satisfied the law, as to those demands which it makes upon us : aud hence his active obedience par- takes of the nature of satisfaction. Again, as his pas- sive obedience proceeded from unspeakable love to us, and as love is the fulfilling of the law, wecannol deny but it was meritorious, and of the nature of a price of redemption, by which a right to life has been acquired for us. Therefore, we should avoid those curious dis- tinctions, and consider liberation from death and our righl to life as flowing from all the mediatorial duties, which Christ performed during his humiliation, and which, considered as a whole, are called the obedience of Christ. Sin could not be expiated before the law was fulfilled, nor could a right to life be acquired, before the charges preferred against us on account of sin were blotted out. Chrisl merited by making atonement, and by meriting he made atonement. Herein lay the utmosl meril that he performed a mosl arduous work, impossible to all other beings and by no means obligatory upon himself, by his perfect obedience. This obedience was at once a great proof of love to us, an act of submission to the Father and a conformity to the special law of his own vocation. Yet it would have been of no avail to us, had it not been sealed and consummated by his death. The atonement is not to be ascribed merely to the external shedding of his blood, but also, and principally, to an ITS MATTER. 95 internal act — his spontaneous and unchangeable will to suffer even to the death of the cross for us. By this voluntary offering of himself, we are said to be sanc- tified.* It is to be ascribed to the payment not of the last farthing, but of the whole of the price of redemp- tion, which is Christ, delivering up and subjecting himself for us. The objection which Socinus offers against this is of no force. He says, that " atonement and merit are in- compatible with each other, for satisfaction or atone- ment is the payment of a just debt, whereas merit is effected by giving something not due on the score of justice." This is accurate when applied to a satisfac- tion or payment made by a debtor in his own person, but not when applied to a vicarious satisfaction, in which a surety, while making satisfaction, may have merit with both the debtor and the creditor : with the debtor, by paying, when under no obligation to do so, a debl for him, and thus graciously freeing him from all obligation to the creditor: with the creditor also, especially if a covenant lias been made, in which it is Stipulated thai upoi] making a specified payment, it shall be admitted not only as a satisfaction for sin, lmt as procuring a title to blessings not otherwise due. This is the case here, as appears from Isa. liii. 10; Heb. i.\. \'>] Col. i. 19, '20, ami similar passages. •Heb. x. 14. 96 TUREETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. 4. There are two things contained in the law. These are precepts, which prescribe duties; and sanc- tions, which ordain rewards to those who keep the law, and punishments to its transgressors. Man, who is under the obligation of the law, may be at the same time bound both to obedience and punishment. This, however, cannot lake place in a state of primitive rec- titude, but in a state of sin. For sinful man sustains a twofold relation to God — one the relation of a crea- ture, the other that of a sinful and condemned creature. In the former lie always owes obedience to God, and can never be freed from this obligation so long as he continues a creature, no matter how situated. In the latter he is obnoxious to punishment. Yet we cannot infer from this doctrine that man pays his debt twice to God. A penal debt is very different from a debt of obedience A penal debt arises from past trans- ions : a debt of obedience, from the indispensa- ble obligation of the creature to obey the Creator, which is coextensive with the whole term of its exist- ence, and neither is nor can be relaxed, even while the creature is suffering the punishment of its trans- gressions. 5. There is a threefold subjection to the law — a natural, a federal, and a penal subjection. The natural subjection arises from the law as a rule of holiness, and respects the creature as a creature. It is eternal and indispensable, because, in every situation, the crea- ITS MATTER. 97 ture is bound to be subject to God and to obey him. The federal subjection arises from the law as prescrib- ing a condition, upon the fulfilment of which a reward is to be attained; respects the creature as placed in a covenant state; and prescribes the performance of duty under the promise of rewards and punishments. The penal subjection respects the creature as placed in a state of sin and condemnation, and binds him to suffer the punishment which the law denounces. The first is absolute and immutable ; for as long as there is a creature and a Creator, the creature must be subject to the Creator. God can no more dispense with his claim of subjection upon the creature than he can deny himself. The second is economical and changeable, because, as it respects man not in a natural, but in a constituted state, it continues in force as long as man continues in that state, and no longer. So soon as he has finished his probation, and, by fulfilling the con- dition, lias obtained the reward, he is freed from his Bubjection. The third is necessary and inevitable, whenever the creature falls into sin, which is always followed by punishment. The first is founded in a righl essentia] to Cod; in his natural; underived, and necessary authority over the creature, and in the natural dependence of tin; creature upon him. The Becond is founded in the sovereign pleasure of God, whereby he has been pleased to enter into ;i covenant with his creature, and promise life under this or that 98 TUREETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. condition. The third is founded in the judicial au- thority and vindicatory justice of God, by which he avenges the transgressions of his creature. " Venge- ance is mine, and I will repay." All creatures, an- gels and men, arc under the natural subjection to the law. Adam, in a state of innocence, was under the federal subjection. Devils and reprobate men are under the penal subjection. In this third respect, it is easy to conceive how Christ was subjected to the law — "Made under the law" as the apostle expresses it: and whether he was subjected to the law for himself or for us. As a man, there is no doubt but he was subject to the law for himself as a rule of holiness* by a common and natural subjec- tion, under which angels and glorified saints arc in heaven, who are bound to love and serve God. But it does not follow from this thai he was Bubject to the * Witsius, the « legant author of the " Economy of the Covenants. - ' as well as Turrettin and President Edwards, takes this view of the obligations of Christ as a creature. But, as Turrettin Pays the hu- man nature of Christ is only an adjunct of his divine person, he couM owe no obedience for himself. It is a person only, who is the subject of the mural law, and the person of Christ is the second person of the Trinity, who is Lord of the law. His humility is everywhere in Scripture represented as voluntary. Had he been subject to the law for himself, he could not have performed an obedience for other». Those great divines rather express themselves loosely than errone- ously; not foreseeing the bad use which men of subtle and unsound mind would make of their inaccurate phrases. ITS MATTER. 99 law as to that which imposed the indispensable condi- tions of happiness. Nor that he was federally subject to it, so as to need to earn eternal life by obedience, for such life was his already by virtue of the hypo- statical union. Much less was he bound by a penal subjection, for he was most holy and absolutely free from all sin. So that when he undertook the twofold office of fulfilling the precepts of the law, and suffer- ing its sanction, all this was to be done in conse- quence of a voluntary arrangement, by which he, as Mediator, engaged to perform them for us. It result- ed from his covenant with his Father, to do and suffer as our surety all those things which the law claimed of us, and which were necessary to our redemption. These remarks being premised in order to an accu- rate understanding of the subject, we now proceed to offer proofs in support of our opinion. It is con- firmed from many passages of Scripture. I. The first we adduce is Rom. v. 19: "For as by thi' disobedience of one many were made sinners; so by the obedience of (inc. arc many made righteous. 11 Here the atonemenl ie referred to hie obedience, not to that of his death, but also that of his life. 1. Because the apostle treats of his whole obedience, withoul any limitation; hence this obedience musl be perfect, and continued from the beginning of his life to the end. 100 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. An incomplete obedience will not suit the language here used by the Spirit. 2. He treats concerning an obedience, which imports universal conformity to the law, not only with respect to the penal sanction, but also, and indeed chiefly, with respect to observing its precepts. 3. He treats of what is called, v. 17, the •• gift of righteousness," which cannot be applied to the sufferings of Christ. 4. lie speaks of an obedience which is opposed to, the disobedience of Adam; and as the disobedience of Adam was a violation of the whole law. so the obedience of Christ mast be a ful- filment of the whole law. 5. Of an obedience which was due from us, both as to precept and penalty. It will be of no avail to object, "that the obedience is nothing else than the one righteousness mentioned verse 18, and which is said to be to justification of life, and that the condemnation of sin under which we have fallen arose from one sinful act of Adam." The righteousness Bpoken of here does not intend one act of righteousness; it denotes a righteousness effected by a complete and perfect obedience. Nor, though the offence came upon all from one sin, can the right- eousness be derived to all from one act: because the least failure in performing the demands of the law is sin; whereas righteousness requires the fulfilment of the whole law. II. The obedience of Christ is said to have been ITS MATTER. 101 even to death* in which, not only its intensity as to degree is expressed, an intensity the greatest whicji can be rendered by any one; but also its extension and duration, from the begiuning of his life to its end. This appears from his obedience being referred to the whole of his humiliation, which appeared not in his death only, but in his whole life. In other portions of Scripture, the obedience of Christ is described by the writing of the law in his heart* t and his active observance of it.J Again, it is spoken of as a race which Christ had to run,§ and as a work which he had to perform. || These were not to be consummated by one act, but to be a constant tenor of obedience through his whole life. III. It behoved Christ to be made in the likeness of sinful flesh, that lie might supply what the law could not do, in that it was weak, and fulfil the claims of the law in us.1T This weakness of the law is not to be un- derstood subjectively, as if it were in the law, but objectively, in the sinner in relation to the law; on account of his inability to perforin any one of the duties which it commands. This law is said to be weak, not in relation to the infliction of punishment, but as to tin' observation of its precepts. Christ, therefore, by * ri.il. ii. 8. t PaaL xl. \ Ileb. x. 5. § Beb. .\ii. 1, 2. || John xvii. 4. " Rom. viii. 3, 4. 102 TUBRETTTN OX THE ATONEMENT. supplying what the law could not do in us, must fulfil all the law demanded of us, and work out what the apostle calls " righteousness," or the rights of the law, without doubt a right to life, obtained by doing what the law commands. This required not only a pas but also an active ohedience. For seeing the law and commands of God arc the same, punishments cannot be said to fulfil the law. or its commands. They satisfy its denunciations only. Who would say that a malefactor, wh<> had been capitally punished lor his crimes, had obeyed the king or the law? To act agreeably to law is a good and praiseworthy thing. which cannot he asserted respecting the suffering of punishment, per se, unless it will he asserted, that he ie to be applauded who suffers the punishmenta of hell. IV. We argue, in favour of extending the atone- ment to the active obedience of Christ, from his being hound to all that the law required of us, in order to acquire a title to life. To this, obedienceof life was mo less requisite than the suffering of death; because the sinful creature is bound to both these, and both were necessary to the obtaining of pardon and a right to life. In the law, life is not promised to him who suffers its penalties, hut to him who performs its duties. '• Do this and thou shalt live." Hence, to un- dergo the penalty by dying, was not sufficient, without ITS MATTER. 103 the obeying of the precepts. Let it not here be object- ed, " that there is a difference between evangelical and legal justification; that in the latter a perfect obedi- ence to the law is requisite, but not in the former." The difference of our justification now under the Gos- pel, from that under the covenant of works, is not placed in the thing itself, but in the manner in which we obtain it. Justification, whether legal or evangel- ical, must be founded on a righteousness, perfect, abso- lutely perfect, in all its parts; a righteousness which shall comply with all the conditions that the law im- poses for the purpose of obtaining eternal life; a righteousness which shall answer to the eternal and immutable claims of God upon the creature. These were qualities in that righteousness by which we were to be justified, that could not be dispensed with even in Christ; " for he came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil it."* The only difference of our justification lies in the manner in which it comes to us. What the law demanded of us as a perfect righteousness to be wrought out in our own persons, has been wrought by another, even by Christ, in our stead. V. We infer that the active obedience of Christ is comprehended in that atonement which he made for Bin, from the atonement's being founded in his right- * Matt. v. 17, and Rom. iii. 31. 104 TURRETHN ON THE ATONEMENT. eousness. as appears from various passages of Scripture* Whence justification is saidf to be effected by the im- putation of righteousness. But the righteousness of Christ does not consist in his suffering, but in his doing. The righteousness of the law is not obtained by suffering, but by doing, even as the sentence of con- demnation is pronounced for sinning. Christ testifies, that it '■ became him to fulfil all righteousness":;: by do- ing in everything the will of his Father; and Paul says, " that Christ was made sin for us, that wo might be made the righteousness of God in him."§ By which it is to be understood, thai, as those sins which violated the law were imputed to Christ, so his righteous actions, by which he fulfilled the law, are imputed to us for a justifying righteousness. A* I. The samedoctriue is established from 1 Cor.i. 13, where it is said, that Christ is not divided. Hence, we infer that his righteousness is not to be divided, but, as a whole and unique inheritance, is to be be- stowed on us. The paschal lamb was to be eaten whole: and. in like manner. Christ, who was typically represented by that lamb, is to be received by us in all his mediatorial fulness, both as to what he did and what he suffered. This view of the subject attributes * Rom. i. 17, and iii. 21. and v. 18. Phil. iii. 2. Dan. ii. 21. \ Rom. to. t Matt. xiii. 15. § 2 Cor. v. 21. ITS MATTER. 105 greater glory to Christ and presents richer fountains of consolation. This consolation is greatly diminish- ed by those who take away from the price of our redemption a part of his perfect righteousness and most holy obedience, and thus rend his seamless coat. We shall now proceed to the removal of objections. If our redemption and salvation are attributed to the death and blood of Christ, this is not done to the ex- clusion of the obedience of his life; for such a restric- tion is nowhere mentioned in Scripture. On the con- trary, the work of man's salvation is, in many places, as shown above, attributed to the obedience and righteousness of Christ. When the death or blood of Christ is mentioned alone, and our redemption ascribed to it, this is done by a synechdoche, a figure which puts a part for the whole. The reason is, that his death was the lowest degree of his humiliation and the completion of his obedience, that which supposes all the other parts, and without which they would have been of no avail. No righteousness merits anything unless it is persevered in to the last breath; a payment is never perfectly made, until the last farthing is paid and the bond cancelled. Though the Apostle Paul attributes* the blessedness of the saints to the remission of sin which flows from * Rum. iv. 7. 106 TURRETTIX ON THE ATONEMENT. the Mood of Christ, yet it does not follow from this, that all our righteousness and the whole of the satis- faction made by Christ, are founded in his passion. For the apostle docs not argue from the pardon of sin's being precisely equivalent to the imputation of righteousness and its proceeding precisely from the same thing in the atonement; but from the indissoluble connection among the blessings of the new covenant, a connection bo intimate, that every one who obtains pardon of sin. necessarily and immediately obtains a right to life and becomes an heir of the kingdom of heaven. In the same way Paul treats of love to oof neighbour, and the fulfilling of the whole law. as the same thing;* because, when love to our neighbour exists, all the other duties of the law will necessarily be performed. Though each obedience of Christ, as well that of his life as of his death, was perfect in its kind, yet nei- ther of them alone was a sufficient satisfaction, which required the observance of precepts as well as the suffering of punishments, that liberation from death and a right to life might be procured. One does not exclude the other; nay, they mutually include each other. What one person owes for himself, he cannot pay for another, if he be a private person. But nothing prevents such a payment, when the person is a public * Gal. v. 14 ITS MATTER. 107 character, who may act both in his own name and in the name of those whom he represents. He who pays what he owes for himself, cannot by the same thing- make a payment for others, unless he has voluntarily made himself a debtor for them, in which case he can. For, although he may be a debtor, yet this character arises from his own voluntary act — the debt which he has to pay for himself is a debt which, were it not for his own voluntary deed, he is not bound to pay, and hence, while he is paying for himself, he may, by the same act, pay for another. So Christ, who be- came man, not for his own sake, but for our sakes, was under obligation to fulfil the law in order to merit life, not for himself, but for us. Though Christ, as a creature, was naturally subject to the law, yet he was not under it by a covenant and economical subjec- tion, binding him to obtain life for himself, and stand as a surety in the room of sinners ; for this arose from a voluntary agreement entered into between him and his Father. In an economical sense, he owed nothing for himself, because he is the Son of God, and Lord of the law. As to his human nature, he was not thus bound cither absolutely or partially. Not absolutely, for his human nature was an adjunct of his divine person; and as this was not subject to the law. neither could the nature be which was assumed by it. Moreover, since the assumption of human na- ture w;is a part of his humiliation, the sume must he 108 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. true of all that results from that assumption. One of these results is the subjection to the law. Not relatively, because, as man, he was not bound by the old legal covenant, which belonged only to those whom Adam represented, and who were naturally de- scended from him. From all which I infer, that he had no need to perform the duties of the law to ac- quire for himself a right to life; which right, of neces- sity, results from the connection of his human nature with the Logos, the second person of the Trinity. Ib'iiec also I infer, that Christ owed all his covenant obedience for us, and this in the character of a surety who represented us. Though Christ obeyed God in our room, we cannot thence infer that we arc no longer bound to obedience in our own persons. It is indeed fairly to be inferred, that we are not bound to obey for the same end and from the same cause — to obtain life by the perform- ance of duties, to which we are bound by covenant obligation. Yet we may be, and are, in perfect con- sistency with the obedience of Christ for us, bound by a natural obligation to yield the same obedience to God, not that we may obtain life, but because we have obtained it; not that we may acquire a right to heaven, but that, having through Christ obtained a title, we may be prepared for entering upon its enjoy- ment. Hence, though Christ has died for us, we are still obnoxious to natural death; not, however, for a ITS MATTER. 109 punishment, but for a deliverance from the evils of this life and an introduction into heaven. We must distinguish between a righteousness of in- nocence, which takes place when one is accused of no fault, and a righteousness of perseverance, to which a reward is due for duties done. The pardon of sin produces the former kind of righteousness, by taking away every accusation on account of sins committed; but it does not of necessity so produce the latter, that he who obtains it must be forthwith adjudged to have performed all duties. It is one thing to free a person from the punishment which is due to the omission of duty; another to account him really righteous with the righteousness of perseverance to which life is promised, just as if he had omitted no duty and done no evil. The former of these is obtained in the day of pardon, but not the latter; which would be contrary to truth and the just judgment of God. Pardon does not remove sin, but prevents its imputa- tion. He who is pardoned may and does commit sin; but in consequence of the pardon which he has obtained, it shall not be imputed to him for condem- nation. Pardon takes away only the guilt of sin, and consequently its punishment, but not its pol- lution. Thus, to be viewed as having done no sin and as having omitted no duly, can lie understood in a twofold sense: 1. In relation to punishment — that we can no more be punished than if we had in reality 5 110 TUBBETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. committed no sin and omitted no duty; because we arc freed from all that punishment which is due to sin. 2. In relation to the obtaining of reward — that he who is esteemed to have performed all duty and avoided all sin, shall be judged by God to have done all things which are necessary to life. In this latter Bense, it is not true that he whose sins are remitted is to be esteemed free from all sin; for, as was remarked above, pardon takes away punishment; but God is not, by the sentence of pardon which he pronounces, bound to hold the sinner as free from all delinquency, as having fulfilled all his duty, and as a perfectly just person. This is not true in fact. The guilty is not to be esteemed righteous, because, through su] (plica- tion and confession, he has obtained pardon from the Judge. It cannot be said that God demands a double pay- ment of the same debt. For the law binds the sinner both to obedience and punishment, as is said above; and the actions and sufferings of Christ do not con- stitute a double payment, but both together consti- tute one payment; one unique righteousness, by which deliverance from death and a right to life have been acquired for us. A perfect fulfilment of the law cannot be said to have been condensed into the voluntary death of Christ. For the law demands perfect obedience to all its several precepts, and this not in degree only, ITS MATTER. Ill but in duration, from the beginning to the end of life; all whieh cannot be accomplished in one action. So fai^is the whole of Christ's righteousness, which is imputed to us, from being placed in his sufferings, that, strictly speaking, no righteousness is placed in Buffering, but in doing only. No one can be called righteous merely because he suffers, for misery is not virtue. Besides, sufferings yield no obedience to those commands of the law to which life is promised; they only satisfy its sanctions, and cannot be called, per se, righteousness. If there is any righteousness in punishment, it belongs to the person who inflicts the punishment, and not to him who is punished. Calvin, in many parts of his works, teaches the doctrine for which we contend. Take the following passages.* "When it is asked how. by the removal o!' sin, Christ hath taken away the enmity between God and us; and brought in a righteousness which hath made God our friend? It may be answered in general, that he lias done this by the whole course of his obedience. This is proved by the testimony of Paul, as by fhc transgression of one, many were made Burners, so by the obedience of. one, many were made right' i bus. Elsewhere, the ground of pardon, that whieh de- liver- a- from the curse of the law, the same apostle extends to the whole of Christ's life. 'Whentheful- 1 S, Bl C. •"'. 112 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. ness of time was come, Gqfl sent forth his Son, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law: Even in his baptism, God declares, Christ fulfilled a part of this righteousness, because he obeyed his Father's will. Finally, from the time that ' he took upon himself the form of a servant,' he began to pay the price of our redemption. Nevertheless, thai the Scripture may define more precisely the manner in which salvation is procured, it. ascribes peculiarly the price of redemp- tion to the death of Christ." He afterwards adds, "Yet the remaining part of his obedience which he per- formed during his life is not excluded; for the apostle comprehends the wh.de of his obedience from the be- ginning of his life to the cud. when he says, that ' he humbled himself and tr.uk upon him thejorm of a ser- vant, and was obedient to his Fat/u r on!» death, even the death of the cross.' Indeed, his death occupies the first grade in his voluntary subjection; because a sacrifice availed nothing, unless it was offered freely.'' Else- where, he remarks* that " acceptiug grace, is nothing else but his unmerited goodness, by which the Father embraces us in Christ, clothes us with his innocence, causing us to accept it. that on account of it. Ik 1 may esteem us holy, pure and innocent. It behooves the righteousness of Christ, which alone is perfect and will stand in the sight of God, to be presented for us, * Inst., book iii. cap. 14, ITS MATTER. 113 and as a righteousness offered by our surety, to Le set to our account in the judgment. Furnished with this, we, through faith, obtain perpetual remission of sin. By its immaculate purity, all our defilements are washed away: they are not laid to our account, but before the splendour of Immanuel's righteousness, are banished and flee away, never more to rise against us in judgment." The Gallic Synods, by repeated acts, have given their most explicit testimony in favour of the same truth.* '" Since man can find in himself, either before or after effectual calling, no righteousness by which he can stand before the tribunal of God, he cannot be justified unless in our Lord Jesus Christ, who was obedient to God the Father, even from his entrance into the world until his ignominious death on the cross. Jn his life and at his death, he fulfilled the whole law given to man and the command to suffer and lay down his life, a price of redemption for many. By this perfect obedience wo are rendered righteous; for through the goodness of God it is imputed to us and received by faith, which is the gift of God. We, by the meril of the whole of this obedience, obtain lor of our sins and are rendered worthy of eter- nal lil * Privatensif Svnodus, anno L612, and Tonninensis, anno lull. CHAPTER V. ©n tljc (Jrjrtcnt of tlje Atonement. Opinion of the Pelagians; of the Jesuits; of the Lithei: a\s; of Armtnianb; of Cameri a, Testardus and Amyraut.— Doctrine of the Reformed.— Statement of the Question.— Arguments;— I. Scripture restricts Christ's Death to certain Class General Objections to the Passages quoted.— Objections in Detail: to Matt. i. 21: to John x. 15; to Ephes. v. 25 and Tit. ii. 14; to Matt. xx. 2S and Dei?, ix. 28.— II. Christ was arm» TO DIE ONLY FOR THOSE WHO WERE GIVEN TO HIM BTTHE FATHER. TTT. Christ atoned only for those for whom he intercedes.— IV. The Connection between the Gift of Christ and that of the Holt Spirit.— V. Christ's wonderful Love to his People. —VI. The Nature of his Suretyship.— VII. The limited Ap- - plication of his Salvation.— VIII. He did not PORCH \src Faith and Repentance for All.— IX. The Completeness of his Expiation.— X. The Absurdities which flow from the con- trary Doctrine. Objections answered:— That Christ is said to have died for all Men: 2 Cor. V. 15, 19; Rom. v. is. I!); 1 Tim. ii. 6:— For the World: John hi. 16:— For those who perish: 1 Cor. viii. 11: — For those who deny Him: 2 Pet. ii. 1 :— For those who pro- fane the Blood of the Covenant: Deb. x. 29:— That all Men- are BOUND TO BELIEVE THAT He DIED FOR THEM: — THAT UNLESS He did die for All. the Gospel Offer cannot be Sincere. The controversy concerning 1 the extent or univer- sality of the atonement lias been, and still is, greatly ITS EXTENT. 115 agitated, which imposes upon us a necessity of hand- ling it, that nothing may be wanting to a clear eluci- dation of this all-important article of the Christian system. Among the ancients, the Pelagians and Semi-Pela- gians contended that Christ died for all men; hence Prosper, in his letter to Augustine, concerning the remains of the Pelagian heresy, says, " Those who embrace the Pelagian heresy profess to believe that Christ died for all men universally, and that none are excluded from the atonement and redemption which the blood of Christ has effected." And among those errors which they attribute to Augustine, they find this: " The Saviour was not crucified for the redemp- tion of the whole world." Faustus* says, " They wander far from the path of piety, who assert that Christ did not die for all." Hincmar, in his letter to Pope Nicholas,! recounts it as one of the errors of Gotteschalcus, that lie preached that Christ did not shed his blood, precious to God the Father, for the redemption and salvation of all men, but for those only who will be saved, or for the elect. To the Bame purpose are the anathemas of the pretended Council of Aries, recorded in a letter to Lucidus, written by Faustus, the standard-bearer of the Semi- Pelagians; a Council which Sirmundus does not deny * Bonk L, De Libero A.rbitrio. f Flodoardus, booh iii.. chap. 1 1. 116 TURRETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. to have been Semi-Pelagian. Augustine, in his age, opposed himself to these heretical innovations; so did his disciples. Prosper and Fulgcntius, and other preach- ers of the grace of Christ, who, travelling in their footsteps, boldly defended the truth. The same was afterwards asserted by Remigius, bishop of Leyden.* The controversy was afterwards renewed amongthe Roman Catholics, some of whom taught, like the Semi- Pelagians, the doctrine of universal atonement; while others, embracing the views of Augustine and his gen- uine disciples, restricted the atonement to the elect. This controversy was principally between the Jesuits and Jansenists. The Jesuits, a genuine branch of the Semi-Pelagian sectaries, warmly contend fora uni- versal atonement. The Jansenists with greal firmness contended that the atonement was restricted to the elect. In this they followed Jansenius, the founder of their order, who has examined this subject very large- ly, and with great solidity of arguments The controversy passed from the Romanists to the Protestants. The Lutherans follow the Jesuits, and contend for a universal satisfaction.^ The Arminians, however, called Remonstrants from the remonstrance * Liber de fcribusepistolis, et Concilio Valentino III. anno 855 habito. t In buo Augnstino, et in Apologia Jansenii, el in Catecbismo de Gratia. % Eckard. Faseicul. controv. c. 15. De Proedesti. q. 6. Brochmanus de gratia Dei. c. 2, q. 17, 18, 19, et alii. ITS EXTENT. 117 which they presented to the Synod of Dort, are its great champions. They have indirectly recalled Romanism, and have drawn the most of their errors from Molinus, Lessius, Suarezius, and other Jesuits. From such polluted fountains they have obtained their error concerning universal atonement, which is placed second among those that were rejected and con- demned by the Synod of Dort, as may be seen in the second chapter of their " Rejection of Errors concern- ing the Death of Christ." The doctrine on this subject for which the Armin- ians contended at the Synod of Dort, is expressed in this manner: — "The price of redemption which Christ offered to his Father, was not only in itself sufficient for the redemption of the whole human family, but even by the decree, will and grace of God the Father, was paid for all men and every man, so that no one is, by an antecedent decree of God, particularly excluded from a participation of its fruits. Christ, by the merits of his death, has so far reconciled God to the whole human family, that the Father on account of his merits, without any impeachment of his truth or jus- tice, can enter and wishes to enter into and confirm a new covenant of grace with sinful men exposed to damnation.*' 1. 1 fence tliey maintain, that according to the counsel of God, Chris! so died for all men that not only is his death, on account of its own intrinsic value, sufficienl for the redemption of all men, but that li 5* 118 TURRETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. agreeably to the will of God it was offered for that express purpose: that it was a death in the room of all men and for their good, by the intervention of which, God ever after willed to deal graciously with all men: and hence, that the death of Christ» was not a blessing promised in the covenant of grace, but the very foundation of it. 2. That by his own intention and that of his Father, he has obtained for all men, as well those who perish as those who arc saved, a restoration into a state of grace and salvation, so that no one, on account of original sin, is cither exposed to condemnation or will be condemned; but all are freed from the guilt of that -in. 3. That Christ, according to the counsel of liis Father, delivered himself up to death for all men. without any fixed purpose that any individual in particular should be saved; so that the ! uecessity and utility of the atonement made by the | death of Christ might be in every respect preserved, although the redemption obtained should not be actu- ally applied to one individual of the human family. 4. That Christ by his atonement merited faith and salvation for none, with such certainty, that the atone- ment must be applied to them for salvation: but mere- j ly acquired for God the Father a perfect will and power to treat with man upon a new footing, to enter into a covenant either of grace or of works with man. and to prescribe whatever conditions he chose; the performance of which conditions depends entirely on ITS EXTENT. 119 the free will of man, so that it became possible that either all or none should fulfil them. 5. That the procurement of salvation is more extensive than its application: as salvation was obtained for all but will be applied to very few. All these are clearly proved to be Arminian tenets, from the Collation published at the Hague, and from the expose of their sentiments in their remonstrance against the second article of the Synod of Dort. Those of our ministers, who defend the doctrine of universal grace, give great countenance to not a few of these Arminian tenets, nay, in a great measure adopt them as their own. That they may evince a philan- thropy, a love of God towards the whole human family, they maintain that Christ was sent into the world by the Father as a universal remedy, to procure salvation for all men under the condition of faith. They say that though the fruit and efficacy of Christ's death will be enjoyed by a few only, on whom God, by a special decree, has determined to bestow them, yet Christ died with an intention to save all, provided they would be- lieve.* In this manner, they teach that the decree of the death of Christ preceded the decree of election, that in sending Christ into the world, no special respect was had to the elect any more than to the rcp- * The opinion here unfolded is, with very little variation, that of the Eopkinsians,- Translator, 120 TURBETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. robatc, and that Christ was appointed to be equally the Saviour of all men. They even distinctly assert that salvation was not [ntended to be procured for any particular persons, but the possibility of salvation for all. This, they tell us, was effected by the removal of obstacles which justice placed in the way of man's sal- vation, which was done by rendering satisfaction to justice and thus opening a door of salvation, that God reconciled by the atonement might, in consistency with the claims of justice, think of entering into a aew covenant with man and of bestowing upon him salva- tion. But as God foresaw that on account of the wickedness of their hearts, none would believe in Christ, he. by another special decree, determined to bestow upon some faith, thus enabling them to accept of salvation and become partakers of it; while the rest of the human family would remain in unbelief, and on its account would be justly condemned, [n this they differ from the Arminians, and embrace in so far the truth of the atonement. Such views a-- these which we have Btated arc clearly contained in their writings. Cameras""" r-ays. " The death of Christ, under the con- dition of faith, belongs equally to all men." Testar- dus:t "The end of giving Christ for a propitiation in his blood was. that a new covenant might lie entered into with the whole human family, and that, without la Cap. 2. Epist. ad Heb. vet. 9. t la Ireai. The. 78, et 79. ITS EXTENT. 121 any impeachment of justice, their salvation might be rendered possible, and an offer of it made to them in the Gospel. In this sense, indeed, no one who believes the word of God can deny that Christ died for all men." Amyraut:* "The redemption purchased by Christ may be considered in two respects. 1. Abso- lutely, in relation to those who actually embrace it. 2. Conditionally, as offered on such terms, that if any one will accept it, he shall become a partaker of it. In the former respect it is limited, in the latter univer- sal. In like manner its destination is twofold: par- ticular, as having the decree to bestow faith connected with it; universal, when it is considered separately from this decree." This writer says expressly, t " Since the misery of the human family is equal and universal, and the desire which God has to free them from it by a Redeemer, proceeds from the mercy which lie exercises towards ivs as his creatures fallen into destruction, in which we are all' equal; the grace of redemption, which he has procured for us and offers to us, should be equal and universal, provided we are equally disposed to its reception," &c. Though all agree that Christ died for all men, yet they explain themselves differently in relation to the manner in which he died for nil. As appears from th" quotations given above, some say openly that * Di.<<. de Gratia Universal!, f Tr. do Prcetlest. cap. 7. 122 TUBRETTIN die for all before the elect were aeparated from the reprobate, he must have died for the elect and the reprobate in the same way. God decreed all things by one simple ad, though we have in conceive of the decree by parts: who, then, can be- lieve (hat in one Bimple act, Cud had two intentions bo diverse, do! i<» Bay contrary, (hat in one manner 12S TURRETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. Christ should die for all, and in another for some only? Nay, since Christ could not will to die abso* lutely for the elect, without involving, by the law of contraries, a will not to die for the reprobate, it is in- conceivable how in one act he should will both to die for the reprobate, and not to die tor them. (4.) An- other objection is. that "though these passages speak of the elect, yet they do not speak of them exclu- sively of all others: as. when Paul says that Christ was delivered for him. ho does not exclude others." To this 1 answer, that though those texts upon which I rely do not explicitly exclude all others, yet they contain, in their description of those for whom Christ died, certain circumstances which clearly exclude oth- er-. Though the blessing is promised to the seed of Abraham, without saying to the seed of Abraham atom, yet it is sufficiently clear that the blessing was strictly confined to Abraham's seed. The object of the passages quoted is to illustrate and magnify the love of Christ towards his sheep for whom he lays down his life; towards his Church and people for whom he delivered himself up to death. .But how will this exalt the love of Christ towards them, if they have no prerogative, no claims in his death above the reprobate? Why should the immense love of Christ, who lays down his life and sheds his blood, be applied specially to the people of God? The ex- ample of Paul does not strengthen the objection; for ITS EXTENT. 129 the apostle does not speak of this as a blessing pecu- liar to himself, but as one common to himself and the other elect or believers, to whom he proposes himself as an example, that they might be able to say the same thing of themselves because they were in the same state. But there are also particular objections to each of the passages we have quoted. To the words of the Evangelist Matthew, it is said, that " though Christ is called the Saviour of his -people, in a peculiar sense, on account of salvation's being actually bestowed upon them, yet there is no reason why he should not be the Saviour of others also, on account of having obtained salvation for them, though, in consequence of their unbelief, they will never be made partakers of it; and that, in refer- ence to this, Paul says that God is the Saviour of all men, especially of them that believe."* It is gratuitous to say that Christ is the Saviour of some, for whom he lias purchased salvation, but to whom it will never lie applied. It is to take for granted what ought to lir proved. The very expression, to save, denotes the actual communication of salvation. Christ is Jesus, not, only because he is willing and able to save, and because he removes all obstacles out of the way of salvation, but because he doe-; in reality save his peo- i Tim. iv. in. 130 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. pie, both by meritoriously acquiring salvation for them, and effectually applying it to them. That sueh was the intention of God in sending Christ, and the end of his mission, is clearly intimated by the imposi- tion of the name Jesus by the angel. The pa quoted from Paul's Epistle to Timothy does not show the contrary; for the word which is in that passage translated Saviour, in its most extensive sense denotes Preserver; and when it is said thai he is the Saviour of men, the meaning is thai he is the preserver of all men, that he upholds or preserves them in their present lit-'. It is taken in a more strict and limited sense when it is applied to believers, winch is denoted by the word especially. In what other sense than as tie' up- holder of all men, can he l>" said to be the Saviour of men who finally perish? To say that Christ, by his death, intended to save them, will not solve the diffi- culty, for we do not call a man a saviour who intends to save another, lad him who does it actually. Now Christ does actually uphold men in this life, for in him we live, and move, and have our being* In this the apostle alludes to a passage in the Psalms where God i- said to save man and beast. t Whence Chrysos- tom, CEcuinenius, Primasius, and Ambrose say "thai he is the Saviour of all in the present life, but of the faithful only as to eternal life." And Thomas, "he is the preserver of the present and future life, because he * Acts xvii. 2a t Paal. xxxvi. 7. ITS EXTENT. 131 saves all men with a bodily salvation, and thus he is called the Saviour of all men; he also saves the right- eous with both a bodily and spiritual salvation, and is hence said to be the Saviour especially of them that believe." To the passage from John's Gospel, it is objected, " that those sheep, for whom Christ is said to have laid down his life, are not said to be the elect only." The con- text proves incontrovertibly that it can apply to none but the elect. Christ is speaking concerning sheep who hear his voice and follow him, whom he has known and loves intensely, and whom he must bring into one fold under one shepherd, (v. 15, 16.) Those sheep for whom Christ lays down his life, shall be put in possession of eternal life, and no man shall be able to pluck them out of the Father's hand, which things can be affirmed of none but the elect, who are called sheep, both on account of their eternal destina- tion to life, and their actual and effectual calling in time. Nor let it be objected, " that he is said to have laid down his life for his sheep, because they alone shall enjoy the fruits of his death, whilst others, on account of their unbelief, receive no benefit, from his expiatory Bacrifice. Thus, to die for some, either sig- ihat death is suffered simply with an intention to profit some, which is true in respeel of nil: or, with an intention that they shall be profited in reality, which is true in relation to slurp only." For, in an- 132 TURRETTIX OX THE ATONEMENT. swer to this objection, consider that to lay down life for some, can no more be referred to the enjoyment of the fruits of Christ's death, than when it is said, that he gave himself a ransom for all. There is no solid mi- son why the former phrase should be referred both to the intention and to the effect, but the latter restrict ed to the intention of bestowing help. It cannot be conceived that there is any difference between these two. He who dies for any one that he may profit him, intends that he for whom he dies shall be profited in reality; and he will in reality profit him if he can. Now. can any one assign a reason why Christ gains "the object which he had in view, as to his sheep, but misses his aim as to the rest? Equally unsubstantial is the objection, " that Christ could not lay down Ins life for his Bheep as such; because, then they would have been his sheep before he died for them and pur- chased them lor his own: hence, he died for them merely as sinners, which character belongs to them in common With others, and that hence he must have laid down his life in this way for others." To this 1 reply, that though they were not actually his sheep, yet they wcre so by destination. They had been Lnvcn to Christ to be purchased and redeemed by him as the good shepherd who must shed his blood for their re- demption. By the decree of God they were given to him. before they were actually in his hands." 1 ' Nay, * Jolin xvii. 24. ITS EXTENT. ' ldi the mission of Christ is founded in that donation. " And this is the Father's will who hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose none, but should raise it up again at the last day."* Had there not been a fixed number contemplated by God when he appointed Christ to die, then the effects of Christ's death would have been uncertain, and the mystery of our redemption might have been rendered utterly vain and fruitless, by the perverseness of man in refusing to accept it. To Ephes. v. 25, and Tit. ii. 14, the objection is, that " although Christ is said to have given hiinself/or his people, for his Church, yet it is not expressly said that he gave himself for none others." We answer, that from the expressions used in these passages, and from the nature of the thing, it is clearly deducible that his offering of himself was so restricted. Because, the giving of himself, which the Apostle describes, arises from the love of Christ towards his Church as his spouse, and such a love necessarily excludes a similar love to others. In the preceding verse the Apostle gives this commandment, " Husbands, love your wives." Now, though he docs not add, " let your love of women be confined to your wives," yet all will acknowledge thai Bueh a restriction is necessarily implied in the Apostl<:'.H command. Who would hear, without indig- John \i. 89. 134 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. nation, the adulterer plead thus in vindication of his crime: "It is indeed said, husbands, lore your vires, hut it is not said, love those alone !" The giving of him- self which is here attributed to Christ, is one which has for its object the sanctification of his Church and its salvation: both the procuring and applying of sal- vation, which belong to the elect and to the elect only. Since he delivered himself up for none except for this end, how can he be said to have delivered himself for those who will not attain that end? It is objected to the passages Matt. xx. 28,x.\\ and Heb. ix. 28, that "many is not opposed to all, but to one or a few, as is don'- Rom. v. 11». and Daniel xii. 1, and that many is often put for all." But the "many" of which the apostle and the evangelisl treat, are described by Buch characters aa cannot be applied to all men of all nations. For, of the many hero spoken of, it is said, "that he gave himself a ransom,'' or actually substituted himself in their room, that he shed his blood for the remission of their sins, and " that he offered himself to bear their sins" i. •'.. that their -ins might be through his atoning sacrifice really taken away. Though many is sometime- opposed to one or a few, yet it is not necessary, on that account, to un- derstand it so in these passages, for it is often used when all cannot be included. Jerome, in his comment on Matthew xx., says, "The evangelist doe- nol say that Christ gave himself for all, but for many, i. e., for ITS EXTEXT. 135 all those who would believe," who are none other than the elect in whom God works both to will and to do. A gloss interlined on Jerome's book adds these words, '' for many, not for all; but for those who were pre- destinated to life." II. We further argue that the atonement was defi- nite, from the fact that Christ ivas destined to die for none but those icho were given him by the Father. All men universally were not given to Christ, but a limited number only. Since, in the council of the Father which regulated Christ's death and defined its object, there was a designation, not only of Christ as Media- tor, but also of those for whose redemption and salva- tion he was to suffer; it is plain that he could die for only who were in this sense given him. Here we may remark a twofold donation. One of Christ to men, another of men to Christ. Christ was given to men for the purpose of saving them, and men to Christ that through him they might be saved. The former is referred to in Isa. ix. 6, and xlix. 6, as well as in all those places in which he is said to be given and -'nt to us; the latter is alluded to in the places where mention is made of those given to Christ, as in •John xvii. 2, 6, 1_, and vi. 37. Seeing this twofold giving is reciprocal, each of diem musl be of the same extent: bo that Christ is given for none but those who are given to him, and all those are given to Christ for 136 TTJBRETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. whom lie is given. Now, it is abundantly plain that some men only, and not all men, were given to Christ. This is asserted in many texts of Scripture, where those who arc given to him are distinguished from other men. " Thou hast given him power over u\\ flesh, that he might give eternal life to as many as thou hast give!) him. I have manifested thy name unto the men whom thou hast given me out of the world; thine they were, and thougavest them me."'"" The Scripture des- ignates those whom the Father gave him by such phrases as these: the people whom lie foreknew;! heirs and children of promise;! the seed of Abraham, nol carnal, but spiritual, both of the Jews and Gentiles;§ his people, his body, the Church: vessels of mercy pre- pared to glory:" choseD in Christ, predestinated to the adoption of sons and to conformity to his image;** and the posterity of the second Adam, all of whom are to be quickened in Christ, in opposition to the poster- ity of the first Adam, in whom all die.ff From all which it appears, that Christ was qoI given for all of all nations, but for a limited number only. To no purpose will our opponents reply, that '"the giving of Christ was conditional, not absolute; that the condition was that all who would by faith receive * John xvii. 2, 6. t Rom. xi. 2. f Rom. ix. 8. § Rom. iv. 13. Gal. iii. 18. Heb. ii. 16. II Matt i. 21. Epli. v. 23. ' Rom. ix. 24. ** Rom. viii. 30. Eph. i. 4, 5. ft 1 Cor. xv. 22, 23. ITS EXTENT. 137 the offered salvation, should be made partakers of it; and since this was not to be the case with all, it is not surprising that they derive no advantage from it." This is a begging of the question; it is without foun- dation in Scripture, which nowhere mentions such a conditional giving of Christ. Though faith is pro- posed as a means and condition necessary to the re- ception of Christ, and the enjoyment of the blessings offered in the Gospel, yet it does not follow that it was a condition to the giving of Christ, since faith itself is a gift of grace and one of the fruits of Christ's being delivered up for sinners. Further, if the giving of Christ rested upon any condition, the condition must depend either upon God or upon man. The latter of these can bo affirmed by none but a Pelagian; if the former be affirmed, then it comes to this, that Christ is said to be given to us as a Saviour by God on these terms, that he will bestow him on us on condition of his working faith in us; which faith, however, he will not give, though he alone is able to give it. How glaring an absurdity! Our view is further confirmed by the connection of thai twofold relation to us, which Christ sustains: the relation of a Surety, and that of a Head. He is our surety, thai he may acquire salvation for us, by ren- dering to justice that satisfaction which it demands, lb- is our bead, in order to apply this Balvation to us, by working in \\~ faith and repentance, through the 138 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. effectual operation of his Holy Spirit upon our hearts. Hence, as he is not given as a head to all men, but to his members only, or, which is the same thing, to the elect, who arc actually to partake of sal- vation, he cannot be the surety or sponsor of any- other than these. Of whomsoever he is the surety, he is also tin 1 head. The one cannot be extended fur- ther than the other. This also appears from the con- nection between the death and resurrection of Christ, in which there is the same twofold relation. Since he died as surety, he must rise as head, as the reasons for his death and resurrection are the same; nor can any reason be given, why the ground of the one should be more extensive than that of the other. Hence it is, that the Apostle Paul speaks of these as being equal in efficacy and extent: " Christ died for our sins, and rose again for our justification."* "That he died for all, that they which live, should not live unto themselves, but unto him who died for them, and rose again. "t Hence it cannot be said that he died for any others than those for whom he rose, because no one will be a partaker of the fruits of Christ's death, unless by his resurrection. But that he did not rise as a head to confer salvation upon all, is self-evident. * Rom. it. 25. t 2 Cor. ir. 15. ITS EXTENT. 139 III. The same doctrine is established by the connec- tion between the atonement and the intercession of Christ. As they are both parts of his priestly office, they must be of the same extent; so that for all for whom he made satisfaction, he should also intercede, and not make atonement for those who will never have a place in his intercession. The object of his propitia- tion and of his appearance in the presence of God must be one, since the Apostles Paul and John repre- sent their connection as indissoluble.* That he does not intercede for all, but only for those who are given him by the Father, Christ himself expressly declares: " I pray not for the world, but for those whom thou hast given me out of the. world."f When it is so much more easy to pray for any one than to lay down life for them, will any one say that Christ would die for those for whom he would not pray? Will they say that at the very moment before his death he would refuse his prayers on behalf of those for whom he is just about to shed hi- blood? The objection which the Remonstrants or Arminians offer is frivolous: "that there is a twofold interccs- -ion of Christ: one universal, which is made for the whole world, of which intercession Isaiah speaks, liii. 1::. and agreeably to which ho is said to have prayed for his murderers;:{: another particular, which is made * ] John, ii. !. '-'. Bom. \iii. 34 t John xvii. 9. J Luke xxiii. 34. 140 TUBBETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. for believers only, which is spoken of, John ix. and Rom. viii." The objection rests not on any founda- tion, either in Scripture or reason. As Christ is al- ways heard and answered by the Father* if he prays for all, all will Vie saved. The doctrine of universal intercession is not taught by the Prophet Isaiah, whore ho says. " he made intercession for the trans- gressors; rj [ for it is not said that he made intercession for all, but for many avIioso character is delineated by tin 1 prophet, in a preceding verse, as those who shall be justified by Christ, it is not said, Luke xxiii. 4, that ho prayed for all those who crucified him, but for those who knew not what they did: and we are assured that these obtained pardon, no doubt the fruit of the prayer which Christ offered up on the cross to the Father.}: Nor if Christ, through the im- pulse of humane affections of love, prayed for those who perished, is it to be considered that the ini Bory prayers, which he offered as Mediator and in the discharge of his special office, are to be extended to others than the eleet given him by the Father. To the eleet Christ himself restricts Ids intercessory prayers. This argument will not be weakened by objecting that it is the world of unbelievers only, who are ex- cluded from the prayers of Christ, those who are * John ax 42. f Isa. xxiii. 12. X Acts ii. iii. ITS EXTENT. 141 guilty of rejecting the Gospel, and hate believers, (v. 14,) but not the world chosen by God, for the redemp- tion of which he has sent his Son." The object of Christ's intercessory prayers is to obtain for believers perseverance in grace. The world, for which Christ says he does not pray, is opposed to those given him by his Father in the decree of election; the world, then, of which he speaks must embrace all the repro- bate who were not given to Christ, and this antece- dently to their rejection of the offered salvation. They were passed by as sinners, whether their sins were want of faith in the Gospel, or merely viola- tions of the law of nature. As the act of God by which he chose to pass by a certain number of men and not appoint them to salvation, was done from eternity, there never existed a period when they, the world for whom Christ docs not pray, were viewed in any other light, than as excluded from the benefits of his mediation and intercession. It forms no objection to this, that God is said " to have so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth On him should not perish;" because, as will be made to appear in the proper place, this does not ex- tend to all men of all nations, but to the elect of t'very cation. Though he prays for the apostles who were theo believers, and asks for them perseverance, John 142 TUREETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. yet it does not follow that he prays for them us be- lievers only, and in consequence of their faith: for Christ (v.* 19, 23) prays for all who should after- wards believe. " That they may be sanctified through the truth and made perfect in one." Now, as this sanctification and attainment to perfection could not be effected without the instrumentality of faith, Christ must have prayed for faith to be given them. Hence, even that faith by which the Gospel is embraced, is given to believers in consequence of Christ's interces- sory prayers. Further, as Christ declares that he sanctifies himself for those who arc the objects of that intercessory prayer, that they may be sanctified through the truth; and as none are thus sanctified but the elect, the conclusion is irresistible, that Christ's intercessory prayers are extended to the elect only, those who shall lie saved with an everlast- ing salvation. IV. The inseparable connection between the gift of Christ and the gift of the Holy Spirit bears testimony the most conclusive to the definite atonement. As these two gifts, the most excellent which Cod has be- stowed on us, are always in Scripture joined together as cause and effect* they must be of equal extent and go together; so that the Son is not given * John xvi. 7. Gal. iv. 4, 6. Rom. viii. 9. 1 John iii. 24. ITS EXTENT. 143 to acquire salvation for any others, than those to whom the Spirit was given to apply the salvation procured. No reason can be assigned why the gift of the Son should be more extensive than the gift of the Holy Spirit. It is plain that the Holy Spirit is given to none but the elect. Hence, if there be any har- mony between the work of the Son and that of the Holy Spirit, in the economy of salvation, Christ was given to die for the elect, and for them only. Perti- nent to this purpose is the argument of the Apostle Paul, in which, from the giving of Christ, he infers the com- munication of every blessing. " He that spared not his own Son, but freely delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all tilings?"* The apostle reasons from the greater to the less. Surely he who gave his Son, which incon- trovcrtibly was the greater gift, will not refuse to give us faith and all other saving blessings, which are the less; and this the rather, because, as we shall ■iily prove, Christ, by delivering himself up, has merited for us, together with salvation, all those gifts. Whence the conclusion is inevitable: either all thpse blessings shall be given to the reprobate, if Christ died for them; or if they are not given them, which is granted by all, then Christ did not die for them, i. e., he did not die for all. This is not answered by alleg- * Rom. viii. 32. 144 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. ing that the apostle speaks of Christ's being- given in a special manner to the believers. For, as was said above, the supposition of a universal giving is gratui- tous, and nowhere countenanced in Scripture; and since faith is a fruit of Christ's death, it cannot be a condition antecedent to his death. Further, since, according to the order which is laid down by our learned opponents themselves, the decree concerning Christ's death was antecedent to the decree relative to bestowing faith; it is inconceivable how at one and the same time, and in the self-same simple act, Christ could be delivered up for all, and for some only. V. Another argument is, the superlative love of Christ towards those for whom he died, lie loved them with the most ardent affection. Greater love has no one, than that one should lay down his life for Ms friend.* In the same exalted strain docs the Apostle Paul extol the love of Christ:— he speaks of it as truly wonderful and unheard of among men. "Scarcely for a righteous man will one die, yet pel* adventure for a good man some would dare even to die. But God commendeth his love toward- us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. r t But this cannot be said of all men. and every man; for I presume that all men arc agreed, that Christ * John xv. 13. t Rom. ▼■ 7, 8. ITS EXTENT. 145 loved Peter more than Judas. It is inconceivable how Christ could love with ineffable ardour of affec- tion those whom, as an inexorable judge, he had already consigned, or had resolved by an irrevo- cable decree to consign, to mansions of endless woe and despair. It cannot with any colour of propriety be said that Christ and his apostle are treating of external acts of, love. For, besides that exter- nal acts of love presuppose those which are inter- nal; if Christ exercises to each and to all external acts of love so great that none can be greater, it follows that he has done, and still does so much for those who perish, that it is impossible for him to do more for the elect who shall be saved; than which nothing can be more absurd. Nor, if he loves some of the elect more than others, so far as regards the internal gifts of his Spirit, a diversity of which is necessary to the perfection of his mystical body, does it follow from this, that the disposition of his soul towards each of them as to the promotion of their good, is not supremely tender and affectionate. VI. The same doctrine is inferred from the nature of Christ's suretyship. For It imports the substitution of Chrisl in our room, so that In' died not only for OUT good, but in OUT place, as was said before, and proved against tin' disciples of Socinus. Hence, from the nature of his suretyship, he must assume to 146 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. himself all the debt of those whose persons he sus- tains; and liquidate it as perfectly as if they them- selves had done it in their own persons. Can it be conceived that those for whom he died and satisfied in this manner, may yet be subjected to eternal vengeance, and bound to suffer again deserved punish- ment? This question must be answered in the affirm- ative by all those who assert that Christ died for many who shall not be saved by his death; and yet to say bo is to impeach the justice and veracity of God. For if, in consequence of his suretyship, the debt has been transferred to Christ and by him discharged, every one maai see that it has been taken away from the primary debtors, so that payment cannot be de- manded from them. They must forever afterwards remain free, absolved from all obligation to punish- ment. Pertinent to this purpose are- all those pas- sages of Scripture which assert that our sins were so laid upon Christ, that the chastisement of our peace wae upou him, and that by his stripes we are healed* and those which declare that he was made a curse for us that we might be made the righteousness and bless- ing of God in him.t VII. Christ died for those only for whom he procured and to whom he applies salvation. As he procured and * Isa. liii. 5, C. t 2 Cor. v. 21. Gal. iii. 13. ITS EXTENT. 147 applies salvation to the elect only, hence for them only he died. That Christ did not die for any but those for whom he procured salvation, and to whom he will apply it, appears, first, from the divinely appointed object of his death, which was to procure salvation for us; and, secondly, from the fact that the procuring cannot be separated from the application; what other end can there be in procuring a thing, but that it may be applied? A thing is procured in vain, which is never applied. Hence it follows, that if salvation is procured for all, it will and must be applied to all. If it be not applied to all, but to the elect only, then it was not procured for all, but for the elect only. In vain it is objected, "that Christ's death was not intended so much to procure salvation, as to remove all the obstacles which justice threw in the way to prevent God from thinking of our salvation." From this view of the subject, Christ rather procured for us the possibility of being saved than salvation itself, and placed it in the power of the Father to enter into a new covenant with man; an Arminian error long since condemned by the Synod of Dort as an injury to Christ's cross and to the efficacy of his mediation. How can Chrisl be said to have given himself a ran- BOm, a price of redemption for us, to obtain for us eternal Balvation, to redeem us from all iniquity, and other things of the same kind, whieh denote not the possibility, but actual procuring of salvation, if, after 148 TURRETTIX OX THE ATONEMENT. all, lie only rendered it possible that we might be saved? Another objection equally futile is, that " redemp- tion was procured for all with a design that it should be applied to all. provided they would not reject it." This cannot be asserted with respect to an innumera- ble number, to whom Christ has never been offered, and Avho do not know him even in name. If it be alleged that Christ proposed to himself an object so vain and fruitless as a thing which was never to hap- pen, and which could not happen without his gift, which he determined not to give, what an indignity is offered to his wisdom ! It represents Christ as saying-, I wish to obtain salvation for all, to tin; end that it may lie applied to them, will they but believe; how- ever, I am resolved not to reveal this redemption to all and to refuse to innumerable multitudes to whom it is revealed, that condition which is the only means by which it can Ik- applied to them. Shall men make the infinitely wise and holy Jesus say, I de- sire that to come to pass, which I know neither will nor can take place; and I am even unwilling that it should, for I refuse to communicate the only means by which it can ever be brought to pass, and the granting of this means depends upon myself alone? What a shameful indignity does this offer to the wisdom of Immanuel ! It would be an insult to the understand- ing of frail man. Nor will the matter be amended ITS EXTENT. 149 by saying that the failure of the application is not to be attributed to Christ, but to the wickedness and un- belief of man. This is* not less injurious to the honour of Christ, for it represents him either as not foreseeing-, or as not capable of preventing those im- pediments, which obstruct the application of the sal- vation he obtained, and thus make it fruitless. They indeed allege that it was not in vain, though it fails of success; because, however men treat the salvation offered them, Christ will not miss the prime object which he had in view in his death; that is, to provide pardon and salvation for every, man if he will only believe and repent — a thing which before was pre- vented by the inexorable rigour of divine justice. All this does not remove the absurdity. The object in procuring salvation could be none other than its application; and it cannot but be in vain, if it fails to accomplish this object. Christ needed to die for men, not to procure for them pardon and salvation under a condition which it is impossible for them to comply with, but to obtain for them actual pardon and re- demption. This is confirmed from the manner in which Christ procured salvation; for if the procuring extended to all, it must be either absolute or conditional. The former will not be asserted, for then all men, univer- sally, would be saved. The latter is equally inad- missible; for, 1st. VYIki! is procured conditionally, is 150 TURRETTTN ON THE ATONEMENT. not, properly speaking, procured at all, but only a mere possibility of its being procured, provided the condition is complied with. • 2d. Christ has procured the condition itself either for all, or for some only. If he has acquired the condition for all, then all will assuredly be saved; for this condition could be obtain- ed for them in no other way than absolutely; unless, indeed, they would say that there is a condition of a condition, which is absurd, as tending to stretch out into an endless chain of conditions; yet even then all these conditional conditions will lie, on the present supposition, purchased by Christ. If the condition, by which the salvation is to be obtained, has been pro- cured for some only, then the salvation has not been fully procured for all. The procuring has been par- tial and defective in the most essential point. In this view, vain and delusive lias been the act by which sal- vation is said to have been provided; for the condition annexed to it is one with which the sinner is utterly unable to comply, which will never be performed, and which God not only foresaw would never be com- plied with, but also decreed not to give the power to fulfil, while he alone is able to give it. Finally, this subterfuge represents Christ as having had a double intention in his atonement: one condi- tional, in favour of all; the other absolute, in favour of the elect; a representation unsupported by reve- lation, and irreconcilable with the unity and sun- ITS EXTEXT. 151 plicity of the decree which appointed the death of Christ. VIII. Another argument is found in the fact that Christ did not purchase faith for all men. Christ suf- fered death for those only, for whom he merited sal- vation, and with salvation all the means necessary to put them in possession of it, especially faith and repent- ance, and the Holy Spirit, the author of both; with- out which salvation is unattainable. That he pur- chased faith, repentance, and the graces of the Holy Spirit, for all men universally, cannot be said; for then all men would necessarily be saved by his death. He procured them for the elect only; therefore for the elect only he died. This argument is irresistible, un- less it is denied that Christ purchased those means of salvation. But that Christ purchased faith for man, is proved by abundant scriptural testimony. 1. He is aaid to be* "the author and finisher of our faith." If he is the author of our faith, he must be its purchaser, for he bestows nothing on us, which he has not pro- cured for us by his merits. 2. Christ is the meritori- ous cause of salvation. To him and his merits we arc therefore indebted for every part of it, for everything which contributes to our salvation. But faith and Bpiritual life which he works and implants in us, are * Hub. xii. 2. Acta \. 81. 152 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. the chief part of our salvation. 3. Christ is the cause and foundation of all spiritual blessings:* " Who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in Christ." And of these faith is one of the greatest. Hence it is elsewhere said.t " It is given you on the part of Christ not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake." In what other sense can faith be said to be given us for Christ's sake, but because he purchased it for us? 4. Christ promised to send the Spirit; who therefore is poured out or distributed by him. Hence the Spirit is spoken of as one of the fruits of Christ's death.} All the gifts of the Spirit, especially faith, are therefore the fruits of Christ's purchase. Here we arc not to distinguish between the Spirit as sancti- fying and comforting, and the Spirit as imparting spiritual illumination: as if Christ had merited the former only, and not the latter. For as all the graces of the heart proceed from the same Spirit, he who acquired for us the Spirit, the author of these graces, must also have acquired with him all his gifts; and as faith is the principle and root of our sanctification, he who purchased the Spirit who sanctifies, must also have purchased "faith, which purifieth the heart." 5. Christ could not be a full and perfect Saviour, unless he had procured for us faith, without which it is impossi- ble to be made partakers of salvation. This doctrine * Eph. i. 3. t PW. i- 29 - t John xvi - '• ITS EXTENT. 153 has been uniformly taught in the Reformed Church. They maintained that Christ had not less procured for us faith, than salvation, and that he is the cause of all the gifts which the Father bestows upon us. Hence the venerable divines of the Synod of Dort, in their exhibition of the doctrines of truth, say* " Christ, by his death, purchased for us faith and all the other saving graces of the Spirit." And to the same purpose, in their " Rejection of Errors,"! they condemn " those who teach that Christ, by his satisfaction, did not merit salvation for any definite number, and also that faith by which his satisfaction is efficaciously applied for salvation, but that he purchased no more than a power and entire willingness for the Father to enter into a new covenant with man, and to prescribe what- ever conditions he might think fit; compliance with which conditions depended upon the free will of man; BO that either all, or none might fulfil them. Such teachers think too meanly of the death of Christ, are ignorant of its glorious fruits and blessings, and rccal from hell the Pelagian heresy." It is a vain distinction which some make here re- specting the decree. They say that " we must distin- guish between the decree to deliver Christ up to death," and his death itself, which took place in time; that the decree l<> deliver Christ up to die for sinners * Th. 8. t Tli. 3. 154 TURRETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. waa antecedent to the election of a definite number, but his death procured the decree of special elec- tion." Amyraut* speaking of Christ's death in time, says, "Redemption ought to be equal, that it may respect all, as the creatures of God equally sinful,' 1 <' redeemed, and who consequently will be kept by * Matt. t 1 John »• 10. - Pet. ii. I. 174 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. Christ and saved with an everlasting salvation, as the members of his body and his peculiar treasure. It is deliverance from error and idolatry of which Peter here speaks; a deliverance effected by an out- ward exhibition of the Gospel, and a setting^apart to the ministry, for which these false teachers were in a certain respect bought by Christ as Lord of the Church. Christ had acquired a peculiar title to them, as his own, by calling them into his Church, the house which he owns, as masters formerly bought servants for the discharge of domestic duties. That this is the intention of Peter is collected from the fol- lowing considerations:—!. He uses the word cWott/c, which signifies a master or an owner rather than a Saviour, to whom redemption properly so called be- longs. 2. The word ayopdfriv which the apostle here employs is generally used to express that kind of buy- ing which is practised in markets, and often denotes simple deliverance. 3. The kind of buying here con- templated, is that through which those bought are said - to have escaped the corruptions that are in the world, through the knowledge of God our Saviour,'' by which " they have known the way of righteous- ness." All these belong to deliverance from pagan errors and idolatries, and to a calling to the knowl- edge of the truth, from which, through apostacy and the introduction of most pernicious heresies, they make defection. Hence they are said to deny their Master ITS EXTENT. 175 who bought them and called them to the work of the ministry. [4. The denying of the Lord here mention- ed, is a sin which is spoken of as peculiarly aggrava- ted; and that which constitutes the peculiar aggrava- tion is, that they deny their Master who bought them. But if Peter intends by the purchase here mentioned, that atonement which Christ in his death made for sin, then there was nothing in the conduct of these teachers peculiarly wicked; the same thing might be affirmed of every man, upon the hypothesis of our opponents; for they maintain that he bought every man. On the supposition, however, that the buying here intended is the calling of these false teachers out of the darkness of heathen superstitions, to a knowledge of the glori- ous Gospel of God, and making them teachers of that Gospel; then their denial of a Master who had done such great tilings for them, was a crime aggravated by the foulest ingratitude. — Trans.] Sanctification by the blood of the covenant may be understood in a twofold sense. One internal, spir- itual and real, which belongs to those who are actually redeemed and regenerated by tin; blood of Christ; another external and apparent only, which consists in a profession of the truth. The former necessarily presupposes thai Ohrisl died for those who are thus sanctified. The latter kind of Banctification docs not presuppose this ;it nil. Many hypocrites obtain that cxtcriuil Banctification, by an external calling to mem- 176 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. bership in the Church, and the enjoyment of its privi- leges, especially baptism and the Lord's Supper; to whom, notwithstanding. Christ with his saving bene- fits does not belong; because they are destitute of jus- tifying faith. When Paul speaks of those who pro- fane the blood of the covenant wherewith they had been sanctified * we cannot suppose (upon the hypothe- sis of the Reformed churches) that he intends the in- ternal and real sanctification of which we have spoken. We must understand him to mean external sanctifica- tii »n. such as belongs to those who profess their adhe- rence to the Church and enjoy its ordinances, especially baptism, in which they are sanctified or set apart from the world by the sprinkling, of water which represents the blood of the covenant, and who renounce it by denying Christ ami apostatizing from his Gospel. In this manner, those who eat and drink unworthily, at the sacrament of the Supper, are said to be guilty of the body and blood of Christ.t Besides, the apostle Bpeaks hypothetic-ally, not absolutely. Be points out the connection between an antecedent and conse- quent. He shows what they who thus tra to expect. He asserts nothing more respecting those who are really redeemed and true believers, than what is elsewhere asserted respecting himself and angels from heaven4 " Though we or an angel from * Heb. x. 29. t 1 Cor. xi. 27, 29. t Gal. i. 8. ITS EXTENT. 177 heaven preach any other doctrine, let him be accursed." But no one will infer from this, that the apostle or an angel from heaven will be accursed. What every one is bound to believe absolutely and simply, directly and immediately, without anything previously supposed, we grant is true. But the case is different in relation to those things which one is bound to believe mediately, and in consequence of some acts supposed to be previously done. It is false, however, that all men are bound to believe that Christ died for them simply and absolutely. In the first place, those to whom the Gospel has never been preach- ed, to whom Christ has never been made known, are not surely bound to believe that Christ died for them. This can be affirmed of those only who are called in the Gospel. " How can they believe in him of whom they have not heard, and how can they hear without a preacher?"* Secondly, even all those who hear the Gospel arc not bound to believe directly and immedi- ately, thai Christ died for them, but mediately. The acts of faith and repentance are presupposed; they rnusl precede a belief that Christ died for one's self; for Christ's death belongs to those only who believe and repent. So far is i1 from being true that unbe- lievers are bound to believe thai Christ died for them, that he who persuades them so to believe mis- * Rom. .\. 1 1. 178 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. erably mocks them; since the wrath of God abides on them, and they are bound to believe themselves con- demned already.* Nor, if they are bound to believe that Christ has died for them, provided they repent and fly to him, docs it follow that this is simply and ab- solutely true whether they believe or not. Hence those who are bound to believe that Christ died for them, arc not simply and absolutely all men; it is all those only who are weary and heavy laden with their sins;t who thirst and sensibly feel their need of drink^ or who are penitent and feel their misery. It will not avail here to object, that " faith in Christ is demanded of all who hear the Gospel, and that not an undefined faith, but a faith true and justifying, which it cannot be unless il terminates on Christ as dy- ing; for them." For, although faith in Christ is so de- manded, and that a true and justifying faith, yet wc may not infer that it is required that all its acts are immediately and at the same time to be exercised; and especially its ultimate and special act, that of be- lieving in Christ as having died for me. For, al- though this is included in the acts of justifying faith, vet it is not its first act which is immediately and in the first instance demanded of the person called in the Gospel: it is its last, and presupposes others pre- ceding it. That this remark may be well understood, John iii. 3G. f Matt. xi. 28. t Isa. lxi. 1. ITS EXTENT. 179 I shall proceed to distinguish various acts of faith. First, one act of faith is direct, which has for its object the offer of the Gospel. By this act I fly to Christ and embrace his promises. Another act is reflex, and has for its object the direct act of faith. By this act I discover that I have indeed believed, and that the prom- ises of the Gospel belong to me. Again, the direct act of faith is twofold. One of its operations consists in the assent which it gives to the word of God and the promises of the Gospel, as true in relation to the giving of salvation to all who repent and by a living faith fly to Christ and embrace him. Another opera- tion of saving faith is its taking refuge and trusting in Christ, acknowledging him as the only sufficient Saviour. It is by this we fly to him, rest in him, and from him obtain pardon of our sins and salvation. Now, that faith which is commanded in the Gospel is commanded as to the first and second acts which arc direct, before it is commanded as to the third act which is in'' reflex, ana which necessarily supposes the two former; as it cannot exist unless preceded by them. Hence we are enabled clearly to detect the fallacy of the above objection. When the objection speaks of the faith commanded, it refers to that act by which the sinner lays hold of Christ; bnt when it speaks of the tiling believed, then it refers to the last, by which we believe from the evidence furnished by t he direct act iii our souls, thai Christ died for us. Christ is not 180 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. revealed in the Gospel as having died for me in partic- ular; but only as having died in general for those who believe and repent. Hence I reason from that faith and repentance which I find actually to exist in my heart, that Christ has, indeed, died for me in particu- lar. I know that he died for all who fly to him: 1 find that I have fled to him; hence I can and should infer that he died for me. That the faith commanded in the Gospel is not a direct and immediate belief that Christ died for me, appears from this consideration: thai when ii is enjoined either by Christ or his apos- tles, no mention is made of its being applied to this or that mam in particular. It is set forth only in a gen- eral relation to duty, or to blessings promised to those who believe: as in Matt. xvi. 16. Peter, in his cele- brated declaration of faith, professes no more than this: that he believes Jesus to be the Christ, the Son of the living God. John vi. 69: " We believe and are sure, that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.'' Paul demands no more of those who believe unto salvation, than ;i to confess with the mouth the Lord Jesus, and to believe with the heart that God rain,! him from the dead. - - Thus, when the saints are commanded to believe in the Son of God, they are bound indeed to believe that Christ is the true Mes- siah, and to fly to him as the only author of salvation, Rom. x. 9. ITS EXTENT. 181 to those who, through faith and repentance, betake themselves to him; and these acts must take place before they are bound to believe that Christ died for them. Hence it appears, that the command to believe in Christ, embraces many things before we come to the last consolatory act, by which we believe that he died for us. First, we are to believe what the Scripture reveals to us, relative to our miserable condition by nature and our utter inability to effect our own salva- tion. Whence arises a salutary despair of our own ex- ertions, and a knowledge of the necessity of a remedy. Secondly, those who thus despair of themselves, are commanded to believe that Christ, the Son of God, is the alone all-sufficient Saviour, given by God to men — that in him alone, they can obtain perfect salvation and remission of sin, who sincerely fly to him and repent with genuine repentance. Thirdly, those who are thus contrite and penitent and despairing in them- selves, are commanded to fly to Christ as the rock of sul ration; to embrace his merit as all-sufficient; to fall upon and sweetly rest upon it; and through it alone to expect remission of sin, righteousness and sal- vation. Fourthly and finally, those who perceive that they do repent, fly to Christ, and repose in him all their hopes of salvation, are bound to believe that Christ died for them, and that on account of his death their sins are pardoned. Prom all which, it is abun- 8 182 TURBETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. dantly plain, that faith iu Christ presupposes an afflicting sense of misery and a desire of deliverance; and that the command to believe does not respect all indiscriminately, but only all who feel their misery and desire deliverance from it, who hunger and thirst, who labour and are heavy laden, who are broken in spirit and contrite in heart.* Further, it appears that this Gospel command does not immediately and in the first instance, demand of us that act of faith, by which we believe that Christ died for us, but that by which we fly to Christ, embrace him, and rest on him, which is nothing else than the one by which the peni- tent sinner, dejected under a sense of his misery and awakened by the call of the Gospel, renouncing every other hope, flies to Christ as the rock of salvation, and with his whole heart desires and seeks the grace offered in the Gospel. To express it in a word, flic faith which the Gospel demands of these who hear it is, the flying of the sinner for r believe, that Christ is his Redeemer, who do.s nol believe that Chris! is the Son of God and the 184 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. Redeemer of men; nor should a man believe that Christ redeems him, while yet he does not believe that Christ is a Redeemer at all. But, when a man finds in him- self the preceding acts, which are the foundation of the last, then, and not till then, let him go on to exer- cise that last one also. Equally vain is the objection, (2.) " That as many as are commanded to believe in Christ, are com- manded to have justifying faith, as no other can be saving; but justifying faith necessarily imports that we believe not only that Christ died in common for men, but for us in particular; that other Avise, this faith would not differ from the mere historical faith of reprobates: nay, it would not differ from the faith of devils, who can believe the same thing." To this 1 reply, that the justifying faith which is commanded in the Gospd. docs indeed embrace the various acts of which we have spoken, but every one in its own order. First, the direct and formal act, which con- sists in the last judgment of the intellect, (or that by which the will is immediately impelled to volition,) concerning Christ, that he is the sole and perfect Redeemer of all those who believe, repent, and seri- ously fly to him. This is called justifying faith. In it the light let into the understanding powerfully impels the will, and the whole soul flics for refuge to Christ and finds rest. Secondly, the reflex and consolatory act, which follows of itself, when the first is per- ITS EXTEXT. 185 formed. From the time that I feel myself powerfully persuaded by the Gospel call and promises, seriously to fly to Christ, and expect life and righteousness from him alone, from that moment I can and should infer, that Christ has died for me; because, from the Gospel I learn, that he has died for all who -believe and repent. Hence the answer is easy to the argu- ment: Whosoever is bound to have justifying faith, is bound to believe that Christ died for him. I deny that this is true of the first act of faith. Of the sec- ond reflex act, I admit it to be true. Presuppose the first, then we are bound to believe that Christ died for us; exclude it, then I deny that any man is so bound. Nor is, therefore, the faith of believers like that of reprobates and devils. For, although repro- bates may believe theoretically that Christ is the Son of God and Saviour of men, yet they are never so truly persuaded by a fiducial assent to the word of God, that they fly to him and rest upon him for salva- tion. If they were truly persuaded that Christ is the only and perfect Saviour of all who believe and repent, and that out of him there is no salvation, it would be impossible for them not to fly to him and embrace him for salvation with their whole heart. This necessity arises from the will's always obeying the last dictate of the understanding, and from all creatures seeking their own happiness. Hence also it appears, that the faith of devils has nothing in 186 TUBUETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. common with that of the elect. For the devils know that Christ is .offered to men alone, and that they have no interest in him; and it is impossible for them to place any fiducial reliance upon him. Again, it is objected, (3.) "That no one can place his trust and reliance upon Christ, unless lie knows that Christ lias died for him and is his Saviour. For man always is anxious about his salvation, until he knows the intention of God and the will of Christ, and that by the purpose of God the death of Christ was destined for him." To this I reply, that there are two acts or parts in the fiducial reliance of the Christian. The one consists in his receiving and taking refuge in Christ; the other, in the rest and consolation which arise from a sense of having fled to and received Christ. The former is the act of faith, by which we fly to Christ as the only Saviour, cleave to him, and appropriate him to ourselves for salva- tion. The latter is the act by which, flying to Christ and resting on him, we trust that we have, and to eternity will have, communion with him in his death and its benefits; and joyfully repose in the firm per- suasion that he died for us, and by his death recon- ciled us to God. Some divines call the former faith on Christ, and the latter faith respecting Christ. This respects Christ as having died for us; not so the former; for no one can know that Christ has died for him, unless he has first believed on him. As Christ ITS EXTENT. 187 is promised to those only who believe and repent, I must first fly to him and embrace his merits with gen- uine repentance, before I can on good grounds decide that the death of Christ belongs to me by the decree of God and the intention of Christ. My faith, however, «Iocs not cause that Christ died for me; for his death was antecedent to any regard had to faith as its meri- torious cause, and the grace of faith is a fruit and effect of the death of Christ. But it is an evidence in all those who possess it, that Christ died for them. We infer the existence of the cause from the effect. And though I cannot yet assure myself that Christ has died for me, it does not follow that I must always remain in a state of doubt and anxiety, and that my faith must be weak and unstable. My faith may firmly rest upon the general promises of the Gospel to every believing and penitent sinner. Hence by certain consequence, when I find that I possess faith and repentance, I may assure myself that these prom- ises belong to me. Another objection is, (4.) " That, by our hypothesis, the foundation of the sinner's consolation is taken away, as we reason from a particular to a universal; thus. Christ died for some; therefore, he died for me. But by the rules of good reasoning, we should proceed from a universal to a particular; Christ died for each ami every man; therefore, he died for me." But it is gratuitous to say that we reason in this way, which 188 TURRETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. every one sees to be absurd. On the contrary, we reason from a universal to a particular, but in a cer- tain order. Christ died for all who believe and repent ; but I believe and repent; therefore, he died for me. Besides, it is false that any ground of consolation can be drawn from the absolute universality of Christ's death; for that which is common to the godly and ungodly, to those who shall bo saved and the multi- tudes who have been or shall be damned, can surely afford no solid comfort to any one. If it be supposed that Christ died for Judas and Pharaoh, who have perished notwithstanding, how can this free me from the fear of damnation? If you reply, that this fear may be taken away by faith, you admit that the atone- ment is not for all men, but for all believers. Your argument is: Christ died for all who believe; but I believe; therefore he died for me, and I shall be saved; "for whosoever belicveth on the Son shall not perish, but have everlasting life." This is exactly our mode of reasoning. Further, no solid peace can be extract- ed from that which is insufficient for salvation, which avails not, and of itself cannot avail, to prevent dam- nation. And such is that universal grace for which our opponents contend, a grace which is never effect- ually applied to the sinner. What will it avail the sinner to know that Christ died for all, while it is cer- tain that, without faith, no one will ever become a partaker of the fruits of his death? Since faith is not ITS EXTENT. 189 given to all, will lie not be always anxious to know whether he belongs to the number of those to whom it will be given? May not the same difficulties and scru- ples which can be urged against special grace and a special atonement, be also urged against a special decree of bestowing faith? If it be necessary to solid peace of conscience to hold that the mercy of the Father is to all and the redemption of the Son for all, it is equally necessary to hold that all are actually called and all experience the grace of the Spirit. If the sinner anxiously say, who knows whether Christ, since he has not died for all, had died for me ? may he not also say, who knows whether God will give me faith, and whether I am of the number of the elect or of the reprobate? Besides, all such scruples originate from a desire to know what it is not given to man to know, at least, not in the way in which these people seek to know it. It becomes no mortal to institute a scrutiny, a priori, into the secrets of the divine decree, relative to election and reprobation. In such inqui- ries a man should proceed a posteriori, by examining himself, in order to discover whether he has truly repented of his sins or not. If he has, he may, and Ought to assure himself of the grace of God and his own election. If he has not, he ought, without delay, to apply himself to the use of the means which God has appointed; he ought to hear, and read and ponder the Word, and pour out ardent prayers to God for the 190 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. gift of faith and repentance. Nor can any scruples occur on this subject, which our learned opponents are not as much bound to remove as we; unless, with the Arrninians, they maintain that every man has of him- self, through the universal grace of God, sufficient power to believe and repent. But those against whom we have reasoned in this chapter, have, through the grace of God, always thus far professed to reject this dogma, as evidently Pelagian. The foundation of con- solation, therefore, is to be sought, not from the uni- versality of the atonement, but from the universality of the promises to all who believe and repent. Although the reprobates who do not believe the Gospel will be deservedly condemned for their unbe- lief, yet it does not follow that they were commanded to believe that Christ died for them. There are vari- ous kinds of unbelief besides that of not believing that the atonement was made for them: such as, not believing that Jesus is the Son of God, and the Messiah sent by God, but that he was a false prophet and an impostor; or the not believing that faith in him is a condition necessary to salvation. All these are acts of unbelief, and that of a very criminal nature, though those who are guilty of them may never have thought of Christ's dying for them. That faith which Christ so often demands, and for the want of which he so severely reprehends the Jews, embraces in itself many things wlich must have preceded their belief ITS EXTENT. 191 feat Christ is their Saviour and Redeemer. This, indeed, is not a thing- which the Jew was immediately to believe. He must first have believed that salva- tion is not to be obtained by the law, either in its ceremonies or legal works; that it is to be sought only in the Messiah promised in the prophets; that Jesus of Nazareth is that Messiah; and that all will be saved who believe in him. All these general acts of faith must have preceded the belief that Christ had died for him. Nor can it be replied, that all these acts, and, above all, the special, appropriating act, are comprehended in the command to believe on Christ. As we have said above, though all these are commanded, yet it is in a certain order, and the latter are not commanded in any other way than as pre- ceded by the former; and, on the supposition of the first acts not having been performed, it is impossible that the latter should be. Though God, by the preaching of the Gospel, offers Christ to sinners, it does not follow that he must have died for all those to whom he is thus of- fered, or else the offer cannot be sincere. Because the offer is not absolute and simple, but it is made under the condition of faith and repentance. It is true, not in the way of an accurate historical statement, which, whether believed or not, always remains true; but in the way of promise, the truth of which is ascertained when its condition is complied with, as Camerus de- 192 TDBRETTIN OX THE ATONEMENT. clared. It does not say to the sinner, Christ has died for you. and you shall be saved on account of this death, whether you believe or not. But it in- forms him that salvation is procured by the death of Christ; that it is for all who believe; and that. by embracing it in faith, the sinner will find this to be a consolatory truth. From which it follows, that there is an indissoluble connection between faith and salva- tion; and that all who wish to enjoy Christ and his benefits, and who are called by the Gospel, are bound to exercise faith. But from this Gospel call, we by no means rightly infer that God, by his eternal and immutable decree, has destined Christ to be the Saviour of all who are called, or that he intended that Christ, by his death, should acquire salvation for each and every man. For the Gospel which is preached to those who are called, does not declare that, in the eternal decree of God, it has been or- dained that in Christ redemption has been procured for each and every man. It rather announces to sin- ners a divine command, with a promise annexed, and teaches what is the duty of those who wish to be made partakers of salvation. We must not suppose hence, that such an offer as this is adverse to the divine decree. Because, though it does not answer to the decree of election, yet it answers to the de- cree respecting the means of saving those who are elected. In the decree (de personis) of election, God ITS EXTENT. 193 ordained Christ as the Saviour of the elect, and his death as the price of their redemption; and deter- mined to bestow upon them that faith which should enable them to embrace the salvation procured by this death. Of this decree, the internal, saving oper- ations of the Spirit are the expression and execution. In the decree (de rebus) respecting the means of salva- tion, God was pleased to connect Christ and faith together, and to offer Christ to the hearers of the Gospel. The preaching of the Gospel corresponds with, and is the execution of, this decree. It is of this decree that Christ speaks, when he says, " And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one who seeth the Son and believeth on him, may have everlasting life."* Promises thus conditional, made to those who believe and repent, unfold the connec- tion which God has established between faith and salvation; and make known that those hearers only of the Gospel shall be saved who believe and repent. They, however, no more show that Christ died for all the hearers of the Gospel, than that they shall all believe and obtain pardon of sin. From the remis- sion which they obtain who believe and repent, it is proved that Christ died for them; and it would also be true, if others believed and repented, that Christ had died for them. But he who argues from this 194 TURRETTIN ON THE ATONEMENT. that Christ has died for all, on the condition that they would believe, reasons falsely: for, from hypo- thetical premises, he draws an absolute conclusion, contrary to all good rules of reasoning. Here let me crown this chapter by adding the judgment of Deodatus and Tronchin, the celebrated theologians dtputed to the Synod of Dort, who, in the nanrt of the whole Genevan Church, presented this to the venerable Synod, as the common faith of the Church, never to be given up. Be Univers. Gratia, Cap. II "Christ, out of the mere good pleasure of hia Father, was appointed and given to be the Mediator and Head of a certain number, who, by the election of God, were constituted his mystical body."— (Th. 1.) "For these, Christ, fully aware of the divine purpose, willed and decreed to die. and to add to the infinite merit of his death a special inten- tion to render it efficacious."— (Th. 2.) "The uni- versal propositions which are found in Scripture, do not mean that Christ, according to his Father's pur- pose and his own intention, died and made satisfac- j tion for all and singular of the race. But they are to be restricted to the totality of Christ's body; or else to be referred to that feature of the new Cove- nant, by which the Son receives for his inheritance all nations, without regard to external distinctions: that ITS EXTENT. 195 is, at his pleasure sends the ministry of the Word to all tribes and races indiscriminately, and out of them gathers his Church. This is the foundation of the general call of the Gospel."— (Th. 6.) THE END. 26 > r,v - '' ' ' '■'■ \ Deacidified using the Bookkeeper Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide Treatment Date: July 2005 PreservationTechnologies A WORLO LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION