Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

have faid, that which is without measure, bounds, or limitation, and to which there can be no addition. Satisfaction is the answering to the full the demand of another, whether that demand be juft or unjust, finite or infinite. Juft demands, are fuch as are exactly proportionable to the damage or demerit of the offence, or to the merit of the thing rewarded, or to any other right of claim. Unjuft demands are fuch as are not thus proportionable, but are either greater or lefs than the damage or demerit of the offence, or the merit of the thing rewarded, &c. Finite demands are fuch as are limited, and are capable of being extended to a greater degree. Infinite demands are fuch as are without bounds, or limitation, and are uncapable of any extenfion or addition. From which it appears, that infinite fatisfaction fuppofes an infinite demand, and an infinite demand, if the demand be just, supposes an infinite crime, or an infinite merit, or fome other right of claim equally infinite. We will only confider this matter, as it relates to an infinite crime, because the cafe is the fame, when applied to infinite merit, or to any other right of claim. Now with relation to a crime, it is very uncertain whether there be any fuch thing as an infinite crime. For, firft, the committing a crime against an infinite being does not make that crime infinite; and this will appear, if we confider that the crimes which are committed against God, who is an infinite Being, do admit of degrees, fome are greater, fome are lefs, whereas in infinity there is no fuch thing as degrees. We read, 1 Kings xvi. 25. Omri wrought evil in the eyes of the Lord, and did worse than all that were before him. And, 2 Chron. xxxiii. 9. Manaf feb made Judah and the inhabitants of Jerufalem to err, and to do worse than the heathen whom the Lord had destroyed before the children of Ifrael. 2 Tim, $ 3

iii.

iii. 13. Evil men and feducers fhall (or will) wax worfe and worfe, &c. Secondly, It is a question, whether a finite being can be guilty of an infinite: crime, feeing the committing a crime against an infinite being does not make it fo? Thirdly, Suppofing that a finite being can be guilty of an infinite crime, yet it remains a queftion, whether there: has been any fuch infinite crime ever committed; because it is a thing above our faith and knowledge, whether the greateft crime that was ever committed, even the fin of the devil himfelf, was infinitely aggravated, and to which there could be no farther degree of aggravation added? For, that is properly an infinite crime, which is without bounds, or limitation, and to which there could be no degree of aggravation added, to make it yet more criminal. Seeing then that it is fo very. uncertain, whether there be any fuch thing as an infinite crime, it will follow, that it is equally uncertain, whether there be any fuch thing as an infinite demand, and confequently whether there be any fuch thing as an infinite fatisfaction.

Some farther OBSERVATIONS. Forafmuch as the juftice of God is often referr'd to, in certain controverfies, it may not be amiss here to observe some common mistakes relating thereto. First, that God is, in justice, abfolutely and neceffarily obliged to punish the breach of his laws either in the offender, or in fome other that fhall be substituted to fuffer in the place of the offender, Secondly, That he which is fubftituted to fuffer in the place of the offender, muft fo fuffer, in the his fuffering fhall be ftrictly, and in the nature of the thing, equal to the demerit of the crime. Thefe premises being taken for granted as true, from hence it hath been inferr'd, Thirdly, That he which fuffers, in the finner's behalf, muft be,

in all points, equal to, and the fame as the fupreme lawgiver; or elfe, fay they, he cannot fo fuffer as to fatisfy divine juftice, nor can the finner be discharg❜d upon his account. The foregoing premises being taken for granted to true, and the foregoing inference being fuppofed to be justly drawn from them, it has been farther concluded, Fourthly, That forafmuch as the finner is acquitted upon the account of the fufferings of Chrift, therefore Chrift is, in all points equal to, and the fame as the fupreme God the Father; for otherways, fay they, his fufferings would not have been fo fatisfactory, neither would the finner be dif charged upon their account.

But as the foregoing premises are erroneous, so are the conclufions too hafty, which are drawn from them. For fuppofing God is, in justice, obliged to punish for the breach of his laws, and fuppofing his juftice could not be fatisfied, except the fuffering was ftrictly equal to the demerit of the crime, which are both mistakes; because if God is obliged to punish for fin, yet this obligation arises not from his juftice, but from his truth and holiness, and because it lies wholly in the breast of the lawgiver, to demand what fatisfaction he pleases for the breach of his laws, provided the demand does not exceed the demerit of the crime. But, I fay, fuppofing the premises to be true; yet it does not follow from hence, that he which fuffers, in the finner's behalf, must be in all refpects the fame as the original lawgiver, but the contrary. For if God is obliged, by the laws of equity or justice, to act fo ftrictly in this cafe then it will follow, first, that the perfon fuffering must be neither fuperiour, nor inferiour, but exatly equal to, and in all refpects the fame as the offender, because the fufferer is fubftituted to fill up the the place of, or perfonate the offender and

S 4

not

not the offended. Secondly, The fuffering or pu nishment must be for kind, measure, and duration, neither greater nor lefs, but exactly equal to the demerit of the offence. Seeing then that it was man which tranfgreffed, it will follow, that he which is fubftituted to fuffer, in man's ftead, must be neither fuperiour, nor inferiour, but exactly equal to, and in all points the fame as man; or elfe his fufferings will not fatisfy divine juftice, neither will the finner be discharged upon their account. But the truth is, God is not obliged, from the principles of juftice, to make any of the forementioned demands, as has been made evident in the foregoing enquiry, concerning the juftice of God; but he may require, or may accept what punishment, or what fatisfaction he himself alone, in his infinite wisdom, shall think fit.

[ocr errors][merged small]

1.

AN

ENQUIRY

Concerning FAITH and MYSTERIES 3

OR,

A four-fold enquiry; first, what faith is; fecondly, what the object of faith is thirdly, what a mystery is; ; fourthly, whether a mystery is the object of faith.

F

IRST, What faith is? In order to anfwer this enquiry, it is to be observed, that as the understanding has truth for its ob

[ocr errors]

ject; fo alfo there are various ways by which truth is conveyed to the understanding; namely, firft, by our external fenfes, viz. feeing, hearing, feeling, tafting, and fmelling. For example, that honey is fweet, is a truth which is conveyed to the understanding by our external fenfe of tafting. Secondly, Truth is conveyed to the understanding by our internal fenfes, that is, by the reflections of the mind. For example, that there is a God, is a truth which is conveyed to our understandings by reflection. God is a Being which is immaterial, and fo is not the object of our external fenfes; therefore our external fenfes cannot convey that to our understandings, which comes not within their

reach;

« AnteriorContinuar »