I.

ESSAY exprefly the Innocence of Jefus Chrift who fuffer'd, and the Iniquities of those for whom he fuffer'd: It is evident enough that a righteous Perfon died for the Guilty, and the Guilty were faved.

Anfw. III. Let it be yet further confider'd, that the Man Chrift Jefus, who had a natural Will which was diftinct from the fupreme Will of the Godhead, gave up himself to thofe Sufferings, and confented to it fully, Heb. x. 5, IO. In Burnt-offerings and Sacrifices of Beafts thou hadst no Pleasure; but a Body haft thou prepared me: Then I faid, Lo, I come to do thy Will, O God. He had a Right given him by the Father to lay down his Life, and a Right to take it up again. John x. 18. And he had an additional Exaltation promised him on this Account, Heb. xii. 2. and actually beftow'd on him for this Service: Phil. ii. 9. Wherefore God hath highly exalted him, befides feveral other Events in the Divine Scheme of God's Government, for the Glory of God, and the Happinefs of Men. All which are fufficient to make the Sufferings of Chrift very confiftent with the Equity and Juftice of God, tho' the innocent Creature fuffer'd and the Guilty was fet free. So that I fee no manner of inconfiftency between this Tranfaction, and any of God's Moral Perfections; and therefore I can fee nothing in it which was un

becom

becoming for God to appoint, or for Chrift ESSAY

to submit to.

To confirm this, let it be remembred, that it is expressly faid, Heb. ii. 1o. It became him for whom are all Things, and by whom are all Things, in bringing many Sons unto Glory, to make the Captain of their Salvation perfect thro' Sufferings, TEXT, which fignifies to confecrate Jefus Chrift to be an High-Priest by this Blood of Atonement, which Dr. Whitby proves at large in his Comment on

this Text.

Nor is it all ftrange, that those who bor row from the Socinian Writers may raise fuch

* At the Time when this Effay was written, it was the common Cuftom of Writers to denominate Parties of Men, by the Name which belonged to one of the chief Leaders of that Party, as Dr. Whitby fpeaks of the Socinians, the Arians, and others, in the fame man

ner.

This Practice is not quite fo Cuftomary now-a-days, because the fame Errors are not always join'd in the fame Person, and therefore it may be proper to defcribe Opinions, Errors or Parties in general by fuch Names, but not particular Perfons. As for Inftance: The Socinians in the last Age, generally believed Chrift to be a mere Man, and deny'd his Satisfaction or proper Atonement for Sin; whereas in the prefent Age, moft Followers of that Party believe Jefus Chrift to be as glorious a Perfon as the Arians make him (viz.) more ancient than any of the Works of God, and his Agent in creating the World, and at the fame time they deny his proper Atonement for Sin.

D

You

1.

I.

ESSAY fuch Objections against the Atonement or Satisfaction of Chrift for Sin: Since Socinus himself faith, Should there be found fome Places of Scripture, where it should be exprefly written, that God was made Man, or did affume human Flesh; they should not presently be taken according as the Words found, fince that is altogether repugnant to the Divine Majefty. So Socinus in his Difputations of Jefus Chrift. And again: If not once only, but often it Should be written in the facred Scriptures, that Chrift made Satisfaction to God for Sins; I would not therefore believe, that the Matter is fo as you imagine. So Socinus on the Satiffaction. And again: Any, even the greatest Force is to be used with Words, rather than take them in the obvious Senfe. So his Second Epiftle to Balcerimicius.

You fee then a plain Reason why Errors may have the Names of their Leaders apply'd to them; but 'tis not proper to give the fame Denomination to all thofe particular Perfons who hold fome of their Errors, but whe deny the others,

ESSAY

(35)

ESSAY II

The FORM of the GOSPEL.

An Enquiry, Whether it be a New Law with Commands, Threatnings and Conditions in it? and, Whether the Duties of the Gospel are our justifying Righteousness?

A RECONCILING DISCOURSE.

SECT. I.

Is the Gospel a Conditional Promife?

TH

HE general Nature and Subftance of the Gospel is agreed on all Hands to be a Difcovery of Divine Grace to finful Man

thro' a Mediator: But feveral Parties of Chriftians have raised endless Debates about the particular Form of it (viz.) Whether it be a mere abfolute Promite, or a Conditional Covenant: Whether it contain in it Commands and Threatnings or no: Or whether it be a New Law.

It is my Opinion concerning many of the Debates about our Religion, that they may be fufficiently determined for the Peace and Practice of Chriftians, by finding out the va

ESSAY rious Ufe of Words in common Language, II. and efpecially the Sense of them in the holy Scriptures, and fubmitting our Judgments and Confciences to this Senfe of them, with a little reconciling Explication. And this noify Controverfy may, perhaps, come nearer to a Decifion, if we will but honeftly confult the Ways of speaking, that the Scripture useth in folving these three following Questions.

But before I propofe them, I would beg one Favour of my Readers, and that is, as they run over these Pages, they would fo far deny themselves of a common Custom, as not to examine and judge of this little Efay by any Systems of Orthodoxy in their Closet, or in their Head, but by the only System, out of which I have drawn it, the Holy Bible; for in the whole Compofure of this Difcourfe, I have not confulted one Author befides; and I would chufe to be read juft in the fame way in which I write, and to be judged by the fame Rule. I proceed now to name the three following Questions.

QUESTION I.

Whether the Gospel be an Abfolute or a Conditional Promife?

Anf. The Gospel in its moft general Senfe be defcribed as a Declaration of the

may

free